City of Sacramento
Personnel and Public Employees Committee Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2025-00364 3/4/2025 Discussion Item 5.
City of Sacramento Community Police Review Commission 2024 Annual Report and 2025 Work Plan
File ID: 2025-00364
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Review and provide direction on the 2024 Annual Report and 2025 Workplan for the Community Police Review Commission (“Commission”) and pass aMotion either: 1) directing staff to forward the Annual Report and Workplan to the City Council for review; 2) directing staff to update the Annual Report and Workplan based on Personnel and Public Employee Committee recommendations and forward to the City Council for review; or 3) asking the Commission to update the Annual Report and Workplan based Personnel and Public Employee Committee recommendations and come back to the Personnel and Public Employee Committee for additional review.
Contact: Mindy Cuppy, City Clerk, (916) 808-5442, [email protected], Office of the City Clerk
Presenter: Manuel Buenrostro, Vice Chair, Sacramento Community Police Review Commission Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Annual Report
3-Work Plan
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: Advisory bodies of the City are required to provide an annual report and work plan for review by the Personnel and Public Employees (P&PE) Committee as outlined in the City Council Rules of Procedure, Chapter 17. The P&PE Committee shall review advisory body annual reports and give staff direction on those reports’ stated projects, priorities, and recommendations. Before forwarding the report to the City Council, the Committee may request supplemental information from staff or the advisory body.
The attached Annual Report and Workplan is being forwarded to the P&PE Committee for consideration.
File ID: 2025-00364 3/4/2025 Discussion Item 5.
Policy Considerations: Chapter 17 of the Council Rules of Procedure outlines the Advisory Body reporting process.
Economic Impacts: Not Applicable.
Environmental Considerations:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This action is not a project that is subject to CEQA because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines §15378(b)(5)).
Sustainability: Not Applicable.
Commission/Committee Action: On December 9, 2024, the Commission passed a motion forwarding their Annual Report and Workplan to the P&PE Committee for consideration.
Rationale for Recommendation: So that advisory bodies may effectively incorporate their important role, voice, and work to provide thoughtful community recommendations to the City Council on a consistent basis the P&PE Committee shall facilitate the process for advisory bodies to communicate their accomplishments, projects, priorities, and recommendations to the City Council.
Financial Considerations: Not Applicable.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not Applicable.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 1
Sacramento Community Police Review Commission
2024 Annual Report
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 2
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSIONERS
Keyan Bliss (Chair)
Manuel Buenrostro (Vice Chair)
Kim Carter Martinez
Graciela Castillo-Krings
Rick Griggs
John L. Johnson
Z. Wayne Johnson
Ramona Landeros
Xochimilco Espinoza Salazar
Jason Sample
Timothy Smith
CITY LIAISONS
Audreyell Anderson-White, Senior Deputy Attorney
Mindy Cuppy, City Clerk
Mario Lara, Assistant City Manager
City of Sacramento – Office of the City Clerk
915 I Street – Sacramento, CA 95814
[email protected]
(916) 808-7200
www.commissions.cityofsacramento.org
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 3
Sacramento Community Police Review Commission
The Sacramento Community Police Review Commission (SCPRC) was established to 1) provide community participation in reviewing and recommending police department policies, practices, and procedures; and 2) monitoring the implementation, evaluation, and sustainability of city policing initiatives and programs. (Sacramento City Code section 2.110.020).
Powers and Duties of the SCPRC
Subject to City Code Section 2.110.030 the Commission’s powers and duties are as follows:
A. To advise and make recommendations to the city council regarding police policy, procedures, and best practices, including those related to community relations, hiring, and training best practices.
B. To review quarterly reports prepared by the office of public safety accountability consistent with California Penal Code section 832.7(c), relating to the number, kind, and status of all citizen complaints filed against police department personnel, to determine whether there are patterns of misconduct that necessitate revisions to any police policy, practice, or procedure.
C. Annually, report to and make recommendations to the mayor and the city council regarding the activities of the Commission and the Sacramento Police Department’s efforts to strengthen bias-free policing and community-police relations. (Ord. 2024-0038 § 1)
To fulfill its responsibilities, the Commission monitors and evaluates the City’s policing initiatives and programs. The Commission meets publicly about 10 times a year with meetings usually ranging from one to three hours.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 4
Summary of SCPRC Activities in 2024
1. Civilian Oversight Engagement & Function
Per the request of the Mayor and City Council in 2023, the SCPRC agreed to participate in a joint workshop to address deficiencies identified by the City Auditor in 2021. Incorporating this joint workshop into its 2024 Work Plan, the SCPRC providing verbal and written feedback on its format and topics. In March, we met with the Mayor and Councilmembers to discuss staff ideas for implementing the City Auditor’s recommendations. The Mayor and City Council staff have not scheduled a date and time for the Joint Workshop between the Commission and the full Council that was agreed upon in October 2023.
Additionally, the Commission evaluated SPD responses to 2020 Recommendations and began evaluating SPD responses to our Military Equipment Use recommendations. To date, SPD has not provided written responses to SCPRC recommendations approved in 2021, 2022, and 2023.
On December 9, 2024, the Commission approved and submitted 5 recommendations to the City Council for improving civilian oversight generally and SCPRC functions specifically for 2025.
2. Military Equipment Use Review for 2024
Per City Council direction from 2022, the SCPRC continues to incorporate a review of SPD’s annual military equipment use report and Military Equipment Use (MEU) policy updates into the Commission’s annual work plan. In 2022, SCPRC issued 13 recommendations for SPD’s MEU policy. In 2023, SCPRC produced 9 recommendations based on community feedback from 3 community forums.
In 2024, the Commission collaborated with SPD to host one community forum in Oak Park.
After the forum, the Commission produced and approved 8 community-based recommendations for improving SPD’s MEU policy. As of 2024, the Commission has submitted a total of 30 recommendations to the City Council for improving transparency and ensuring compliance in SPD’s MEU policy. SCPRC presented its takeaways and recommendations to the City Council’s Law & Legislation Committee on August 20 and the full Council on August 27. The City Council provided new directions for SPD to continue collaboration in the review of MEU with SCPRC, but approved no changes to its MEU policy.
3. SPD Strategic Planning & Budget Management
The SCPRC first began researching SPD budget policies and practices through various ad hoc groups in 2021, which produced 9 recommendations for police budget management in 2021 and 2022. SCPRC continued its research to include SPD’s strategic planning and budget trends, with focus on SPD performance metrics, vacancies and overtime practices. Initial findings from SCPRC’s fiscal analysis found police spending is at an all-time high and warrants further study into how it allocates and prioritizes city resources. On December 9, 2024, the Commission approved and submitted 3 recommendations to the City Council for enhancing fiscal responsibility and transparency in SPD strategic planning and budget management, including an immediate audit of SPD’s overtime policies, practices, and spending in light of the City’s projected $77 million deficit.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 5
Civilian Oversight Engagement and Function
Since its inception in 2016, the SCPRC has issued over 178 recommendations to the City Council. These recommendations were approved by the SCPRC and presented to the City Council in four tranches in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. Since 2019, the City Council has discussed 7 SCPRC recommendations, but has not taken action or provided direction or guidance to the Commission on the remaining recommendations, which has led to rising tension between the Commission and city leadership.
In its 2021 Audit of the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission (Report# 2021/22- 06), the City Auditor conducted a performance audit to determine “whether the structure and authority of SCPRC was consistent with best practices in civilian oversight of law enforcement agencies.” The Auditor’s report identified three deficiencies in the SCPRC’s function, including:
● Lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities has led to confusion and frustration between the SCPRC, SPD, and Office of Public Safety Accountability (OPSA). ● Absence of resources and investment from the City prevented the SCPRC from effectively achieving its objectives.
● Lack of a formal review process to ensure SCPRC recommendations are documented, reviewed, presented to the City Council, and considered for adoption or rejection.
The Audit findings and recommendations corroborated many of SCPRC recommendations made in 2020. Since then, Commissioners have provided additional recommendations in 2022 and 2023 that also seek to address these deficiencies. However, to date neither the Commission’s nor Auditor’s recommendations have been adopted leading to continued inefficacy and frustration among Commissioners and city staffers in fulfilling their duties.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 6
Table 1. City Auditor’s Recommendations and corresponding SCPRC recommendations.
In an effort to improve the relationship between the Commission and City Council, Mayor Darrell Steinberg, Councilmember Katie Valenzuela, and Councilmember Rick Jennings submitted a letter on October 3, 2023, requesting a joint workshop between the full City Council and the SCPRC. The SCPRC formally agreed to the joint workshop on October 9, 2023.
The Commission incorporated this joint workshop into its approved 2024 Work Plan and provided verbal and written feedback to City Council during its January and June public meetings. A group of Commissioners also met with the Mayor and Councilmembers to discuss solutions for addressing the Auditor’s recommendations on March 19, 2024. Despite more than a year of good-faith efforts, the Commission has not received a timeline for when, or if, the Mayor and City Council will provide next steps.
Past SCPRC Recommendations from 2018 to 2023
When the City Auditor reviewed SCPRC another poignant criticism was that, “neither the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission (SCPRC) nor the Sacramento Police Department (SPD) have implemented a process to track and publicly report on the implementation status of the SCPRC recommendations. As a result, the SCPRC, the SPD, the City Council, and the public do not have access to track progress on whether recommendations have been implemented.
Despite the 2021 observations, neither the SCPRC nor the SPD have developed or implemented a consistent process to document, communicate, or monitor the implementation of recommendations after they are submitted to SPD and the City Council. As of May 2021, neither the SCPRC nor the SPD were able to show, in a centralized database or spreadsheet, the
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 7
implementation status of SCPRC recommendations. The lack of a defined tracking and follow up process has resulted in a glut of recommendations that have not been resolved.
While a formal tracking and reporting mechanism is still missing, SPD and the Commission have agreed on a standardized form that facilitates the collaboration between these two entities and makes communication flow easier. As of 2024, there are over 178 recommendations that await direction from the City Council.
Since 2021, the SCPRC has continued to provide additional recommendations with which neither SPD nor City Council have meaningfully engaged. This lack of action on the Commission’s work has undermined progress and partnership between SPD, city leadership, and the Commission.
The current SCPRC has intentionally focused this annual report and future work on the 2024 recommendations to build upon the extensive work by past and present Commissioners.
However, changes in state laws and revisions to city programs have led to changes in SPD policies and practices that have made several SCPRC recommendations outdated or obsolete.
Civilian Oversight Engagement and Function Recommendations In the interim, Commissioners also expressed a strong desire for the 2025 SCPRC to review and identify which recommendations from 2018-2023 remain relevant and should be prioritized for City Council consideration and implementation. Not only will this allow the 2025 SCPRC to dedicate time to the work its Commissioners find the most pressing, but will also reset the relationship between the SCPRC, City Council and SPD leading to a more functional and collaborative partnership.
The list of past SCPRC recommendations can be found in Appendix A. On December 9, 2024, the SCPRC approved 5 recommendations to the Mayor and City Council to improve civilian oversight, SCPRC engagement and function that can be found in Appendix C. 2024 Civilian Oversight Engagement & Function Recommendations Summary
1. Schedule a Joint Workshop to address the City Auditor's 2021 Audit of the Sacramento Community Police Review Commission between the full City Council and SCPRC Commissioners, within the first quarter of 2025 to provide guidance and direction to the Commission.
2. Direct City staff to agendize SCPRC 2024 recommendations for a vote at a City C ouncil meeting within the first quarter of the year, and direct SPD to provide written responses prior to the meeting on which 2024 recommendations should be implemented.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 8
3. Establish OPSA as a city charter office with expanded authority to review and recomm end disciplinary actions upon sustaining any police misconduct complaint or allegation by the Internal Affairs Division. Require SPD to statutorily formalize its internal investigations process to incorporate OPSA and account for its timeline for completing its reviews and issuing recommendations before issuing any disciplinary actions.
4. Propose a voter-approved City Charter Amendment to (a) establish OPSA as a civilian-led charter office and independent oversight entity of SPD, with full investigatory and subpoena powers, relevant to investigating police misconduct allegations and recommending disciplinary action, and (b) establish the SCPRC as a civilian-led advisory body, under the purview of OPSA and comprised of non-law enforcement appointees by the Mayor and City Council, with authority and resources to facilitate community participation in the review, recommendation, monitoring, and evaluation of city policing policies and procedures including hiring, resource management, and other best practices.
5. Direct SPD and City staff to invite SCPRC and OPSA representatives to any meeting where SPD is providing a presentation to City Council relevant to the Commission work plan or audits that OPSA has performed or is undertaking. City staff should provide timely notice to SCPRC or OPSA no later than one week after a presentation is scheduled with SPD.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 9
Military Equipment Use Review for 2024
The use of military equipment by civilian law enforcement agencies remains a controversial and divisive topic in Sacramento based on public sentiments. Per Assembly Bill 481’s requirements and City Council’s direction from September 12, 2022, the Commission has collaborated with SPD to facilitate community meetings that provide a better understanding of the mutual needs of community and police.
On July 22nd, 2024, a community engagement meeting was held at the Oak Park Community Center from 6-9pm. During this meeting, several critical issues were raised by community members related to the SPD’s MEU policy. These include:
● Police funding and civilian oversight. Some community members who attended expressed strong support for SPD’s current $250 million budget and use of military equipment. These community members disagreed with the reported concerns about the racial disparities in military equipment usage citing the level of crime in Black and brown neighborhoods. A few participants questioned the qualifications of civilians serving on the SCPRC making recommendations for how trained police officers should execute policies or procedures.
● The necessity of military equipment. Several community members questioned the necessity and effectiveness of military equipment use in achieving safety for city residents that is equal to or greater than the safety achieved for SPD officers. A few participants cited concerns related to the lack of evidence supporting the need for the SPD to purchase or hold on to military equipment, as well as questioning the need for the proposed acquisitions SPD intends to request for Fiscal Year 2024/25. ● The approved situations and limits for deploying military equipment. Though the SPD provides significant improvements to the transparency in demographic usage data and reasons for using military equipment, several participants noted a step backwards in transparency concerning authorized usage of military equipment. ● The effectiveness and benefits of military equipment use. Some community members continued to question how SPD's military equipment will safeguard public welfare, civil rights, and civil liberties. Several participants noticed the persistent racial disparities in where this equipment is most being deployed and whom this equipment is used against, the over-representation of Black or African American residents in incidents involving the use of SPD’s military equipment.
● Lack of meaningful engagement by SPD and City Council. While the SPD participated in community engagement meetings as required by AB 481, several participants cited that SPD has yet to demonstrate meaningful engagement with community concerns regarding the harm caused by past misuse of military equipment.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 10
Such meaningful engagement can include responding directly to issues raised from past MEU reports and the July 2023 community engagement forums. ● SPD justifications for the cost of military equipment. Community members cited concerns with the financial burden of SPD’s military equipment upon city taxpayers and the lack of evidence demonstrating the need for SPD to purchase additional military equipment. Participants noted that SPD has never provided documentation demonstrating that it has explored reasonable alternatives prior to purchasing additional military equipment. This is despite, the City’s ongoing budget shortfall that requires significant cuts across many departments, except SPD’s
● Past policy compliance and misuses. There remain outstanding questions regarding SPD's compliance with its own policies on improper use of military weapons, particularly during the 2020 protests. While there are still pending lawsuits against SPD and the City, the SPD has yet to show how its MEU policy has fixed prior misuses raised by community members, civil rights attorneys, or other advocates.
SCPRC Analysis of SPD’s Military Equipment Use
The Commission appreciated the thoughtful consideration and significant efforts made by SPD’s Professional Standards Unit to improve its annual military equipment usage reporting compared with previous years, including:
● Removal of technical terms reducing legal jargon, and including definitions that increased the accessibility for community members.
● Changing the format making it easier for Commissioners and City Council to follow. ● Adding detailed demographic reporting that included (1) calls-for-service versus officer- initiated calls, (2) number of deployments versus use-of-force incidents, and (3) a detailed list of 210 incidents of where military equipment was used.
Despite the additional transparency in demographic data,SPD has yet to provide any objective evidence that might show the necessity of its military equipment inventory, nor has it provided an explanation for how civilians receive the same safety benefits as SPD officers when military equipment is utilized. Based on SCPRC analysis, SPD’s annual usage data would indicate the opposite – that SPD does not need much of this equipment and should rethink whether more is needed:
● Out of 205,537 calls for service and officer-initiated calls, SPD deployed military equipment for less than 1% (324 incidents) of these calls. These deployments resulted in 150 arrests, including 61 felony arrests for violent crimes.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 11
● Out of 210 military equipment use incidents where SPD identified a person, 53% (111 incidents) involved Black or African American residents. This racial disparity raises concerns since only 12% of the city’s population is comprised of Black or African American residents. Furthermore, most of these arrests appear to have resulted from officer-initiated calls involving search warrants or “combative” individuals. ● Youth between 14 and 24 years old were involved in 70 incidents of military equipment use (33%), with only one incident involving a rescue operation. Black or African American youth were overrepresented in 44 incidents (63%), primarily in SPD searches for wanted subjects or high-risk search warrants.
Table 2 shows the top reasons for SPD’s military equipment use by race from May 1, 2023 – April 31, 2024.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 12
Table 3 shows types of SPD military equipment used by race from May 1 2023 – April 31, 2024 Beyond justifying its current inventory, SPD has also not explained why it needs to purchase as much as $97,000 in additional military equipment. The SPD has never shown or explained what, if any, reasonable alternatives the department explored that might achieve the same safety objectives, or at minimum, prove more cost-effective such as using different models within its existing inventory. Their current inventory includes some of the following items:
● SPD currently owns 74 uncrewed aerial systems (UAS or drones), but is requesting an additional 9 units for over $55,000. SPD deployed drones in 302 incidents, several of which used multiple drones for a total of 484 uses. While drones by far had the most usage from 2023-2024, the 7 UAS units it’s requesting are among the most expensive brands in its inventory, costing $7,525 each.
● SPD owns over 1500 Less Lethal “Super Sock Bean Bag” shotgun rounds and is requesting 4000 more rounds for over $25,000. Across 9 incidents where less lethal shotguns were deployed, SPD reported using bean bag rounds only 31 times. ● SPD owns 120 rounds of .308 Armor-Piercing (AP) Rifle Ammunition and is requesting an additional 400 rounds for over $1,500. While smaller in cost compared with its other requests, the Department cannot name a single instance of using AP rounds in the last 10 years. In fact, SPD has only reported 2 incidents where assault rifles were fired which happened in 2022. .
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 13
Table 4 shows SPD’s military equipment use by type from May 1, 2023 – April 31, 2024.
Table 5 shows SPD’s military equipment inventory and usage compared with its proposed acquisitions for Fiscal Year 2024/25.
When community members and commissioners asked about these proposed acquisitions, SPD stated that these acquisitions “may or may not” be purchased in the current fiscal year, but wanted to make sure they had the authority. This reasoning would seem to violate at least one of AB 481’s minimum requirements for City Council to approve these purchases:
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 14
If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.
Outstanding Questions concerning SPD’s Military Equipment Use While SPD efforts to streamline its reporting continue to enhance basic transparency, significant obstacles remain for SPD to achieve full compliance with Assembly Bill 481. Several unanswered questions remain concerning the necessity and benefits of SPD’s military equipment policy that the SCPRC and community members have consistently asked in one form or another.
These include:
● What situations is the deployment or use of this military equipment necessary for keeping civilians and SPD officers safe?
● What reasonable alternatives has SPD explored which may achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety expected from military equipment use? ● How does the SPD’s MEU policy effectively protect the public’s safety and welfare while also safeguarding our civil rights and civil liberties? ● What legally enforceable sanctions are in place to deter or prevent MEU policy violations by SPD officers?
● Why is the proposed purchase or acquisition of military equipment necessary within the current budget cycle?
● What alternative equipment or practices has the Police Department explored which prove just as effective at achieving both officer and civilian safety while also being more cost-effective?
● Where have changes been made in this policy that fix past misuses, or at minimum address complaints alleged under previous military equipment use policies? How will these changes ensure future compliance?
AB 481 is a legal mandate for all law enforcement agencies and their governing bodies to follow and uphold. As the governing body for SPD, it is the City Council’s responsibility to get answers to the pertinent questions that would prompt SPD to sufficiently explain how it complies with the law’s requirements.
Obstacles for SPD Compliance and SCPRC Collaboration
SPD personnel Lieutenant Jeff Shiraishi and Captain Clayton Buchanan exemplify the commitment to transparency and accountability the public has long desired to see from SPD.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 15
While these individuals have made tremendous efforts, the SCPRC remains concerned that community input given through this annual process is not incorporated into MEU ordinance.
Without a clear explanation, community members feel their concerns and suggestions are not taken seriously.
Among the current obstacles to SCPRC collaboration with SPD through this annual process:
● Annual Timeline: The timeline for reporting and reviewing SPD's annual report and General Order is too short for proper assessment. This rush leads to the SCPRC, City Council, and the public having inadequate time to consider the impacts of SPD's military equipment use.
● Communication: Communication between SPD and the Commission is a recurring challenge. Delays in providing data and responding to MEU recommendations have hindered the SCPRC's ability to evaluate and provide timely feedback. ● Staffing and Resources: While the City has collaborated with SCPRC’s community engagement process for two years in a row, the Commission’s ability to raise awareness or meaningfully engage with a wide range of the public in this annual process is hindered without dedicated staffing to facilitate city processes and funding for public outreach. ● Recommendation Process: Without clear commitment or expectations for SPD to provide timely responses to recommendations, and for City Council to formally review and vote on SCPRC recommendations, it remains to be seen what, if anything, will come about of the Commission’s hard work.
● City Management Culture: Despite good-faith efforts among Commissioners and city staff, the culture and attitude exhibited by certain city charter officers continues to damage community trust in city leadership and discourage participation in SCPRC work.
This year saw multiple instances where the City Manager and Police Chief refused to comply with Council directions, and at times ordered SPD staff to disengage from the whole Commission, based on their personal prejudices and disagreements with certain commissioners’ First Amendment activities beyond the scope of their role or SCPRC work. This is the second year such retaliatory actions have disrupted the Commission’s annual work plan, inhibiting our function and prohibiting some commissioners from adequately fulfilling their duties.
Beyond the handful of dedicated individuals in SPD and the SCPRC engaging in good-faith through this annual process, it is most important for Sacramento City leadership to demonstrate its commitment to trust-building and collaboration. These questions are their responsibility to answer:
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 16
● Will the Mayor and City Council agendize this report for thoughtful consideration and discussion?
● What will come from the important work that volunteers for the Commission has produced for improving the policies, procedures, and practices of policing in Sacramento?
● How will the City Manager’s Office and SPD’s Office of the Chief demonstrate their desire to engage with the community in good faith and address the longstanding history of distrust between the Police Department and the diverse communities it serves?
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 17
Military Equipment Use Recommendations
Based on further analysis of current inventory totals and usage data, the Commission advises that City Council reject all proposed military equipment acquisitions for Fiscal Year 2024/2025.
On August 12, 2024, the SCPRC approved the following 8 recommendations for SPD’s MEU policy based on community input and Commissioner analysis of SPD’s annual report and updated policy drafts. A comprehensive list of these recommendations with detailed explanation and rationales for each recommendation is included with our report at the end of this document (Appendix B). To date, the SCPRC has submitted over 30 recommendations for improving SPD’s MEU policy that ensures transparency, oversight, and compliance with AB 481. 2024 Military Equipment Use Community Recommendations Summary
1. Reinstate language in the Purpose and Policy Sections, and restore the Philosophy section, in General Order 410.06 as previously approved by City Council in 2023.
2. Require SPD to list the current quantity and ongoing per units, approved situations for use, restrictions, total annual costs, and fiscal impact of each military equipment type in both General Order 410.06 and Annual Use Report. This includes annual costs of personnel time, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrades, and other ongoing costs in its calculation.
3. Add verbatim language of Assembly Bill 481 to specify the four minimum requirements for City Council to approve its military equipment use policy.
4. Add clear, accessible definitions for each type of military equipment in General Order 410.06, including “kinetic energy projectiles” and “chemical agents.”
5. Add verbatim language of Assembly Bill 48 to specify the clear limits and condition s for using kinetic energy projectiles (i.e., rubber bullets) and chemical agents (i.e., tear gas).
6. Mandate SPD to provide written justifications for any proposed purchase of military equipment, detailing why it is necessary in the current fiscal year, any alternatives considered, cost-effectiveness, and how it aligns with Assembly Bill 481’s minimum requirements. Written justifications should be included in a standalone section of its Annual Use Report and attached to any staff reports for the military equipment item that is submitted to City Council for final approval.
7. Require comparative reporting and measurable data analysis about military equipment usage trends and fiscal impacts alongside demographic reporting in all Annual Use Reports.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 18
8. Establish a clear timeline from December 1 through November 30 with specific dates the annual inventory, usage reporting, community engagement and approval process for SPD’s military equipment that flows with the calendar year. While the timeline will be subject to discussion with the City Attorney’s Office and SPD, the new timeline is recommended to begin as early as 2025.
SPD Strategic Planning and Budget Management
In 2021, SCPRC first began researching SPD budget policies and practices through various ad hoc groups. SCPRC produced seven (7) recommendations in 2021 and 2022. Although limited capacity from the deficiencies identified by the City Auditor has hindered this process, SCPRC continued its research into SPD budget management and strategic planning.
This year, our analysis focused specifically on certain areas, including fiscal trends of SPD budgets, performance metrics, vacancy rates, and overtime pay. In addition to reviewing several years of city budget documents and staff reports submitted to City Council during Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget Hearings, commissioners also reviewed several SPD policies that governed or referenced police overtime policies, practices, and procedures.
General Orders (GO)
GO 240.01 - Court Appearance
GO 240.06 - Legal Interview Requests
GO 252.01 - Time Charging
GO 252.02 - eCAPS Time Sheet Submittal and
Approval
GO 253.01 - Special Compensation
GO 255.09 - Modified Duty
GO 560.03 - Mutual Aid
Office of Operations Orders (OOO)
OOO 130.07 - Traffic Duties
OOO 253.01 - Overtime
OOO 510.03 - Procedure for Code 7
Office of Investigations Orders
(OOI)
OOI 510.01 - Unsupervised Field Investigations
SCPRC Analysis of SPD’s Budget Trends & Performance Measures Conversations about city spending on SPD’s budget have always been a difficult discussion between community members and city government, even between Councilmembers and the City Manager. It is no secret that police spending has increased significantly over the years. Despite this increased spending, overall feelings of safety have declined by 27% among residents since
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 19
2017 according to the latest National Community Survey from 2023, with Sacramento residents expressing lower satisfaction in the quality of city police services than other comparable cities.
Table 6. Results of 2023 National Community Survey related to safety and policing services for Sacramento.
While public safety was identified as a top priority among respondents to the City’s budget priority survey, residents also ranked the Police Department as the top priority for expense reductions survey. During three community meetings held to discuss city budget priorities, many residents questioned the city’s spending priorities and raised concerns about how much discretionary funding goes to salaries and benefits compared with spending for youth services, affordable housing and homelessness.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 20
Table 5. Results of City Survey ranking the top spending areas to priority for budget reductions, collected during 2024 Community Budget Workshops held in March 2024. Survey results based on feedback from 1,570 respondents.
Despite community feedback on spending priorities, the City Council approved a $28 million increase to SPD’s budget from $222 million to $250 million in Fiscal Year 2024/25. The Commission’s fiscal analysis found this maintained a status quo where SPD budget allocations have increased every year since 2014, far outpacing spending for all other city departments and programs. Over the last 5 years alone, SPD saw a 9% increase in general fund spending worth over $100 million.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 21
Table 6 shows Sacramento Police Department budgets from Fiscal Year 2004 to 2025.
In the current fiscal year, Sacramento’s public safety spending currently accounts for 74% of the city’s discretionary funds, with SPD receiving as much as 39% of general fund expenditures.
This amounts to as much as $477 per city resident for SPD police services and programs – the highest among all other departments. For example, city residents pay only $121 for the Department of Youth, Parks, and Community Enrichment (YPCE), despite consistent demand for more youth services funding and $1.4 billion in deferred city maintenance that includes critical maintenance needs to city park facilities. For the Department of Community Response (DCR), which was originally established as an alternative to police for mental health crisis response, city residents pay as little as $33 after the city cut its budget nearly $8 million since 2022.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 22
Table 7 shows SCPRC comparisons in total budget spending between Police and other Sacramento City departments based on City Budget data based on the number of residents in the City of Sacramento, April 2020: 524,943.
SCPRC Analysis of SPD Vacancies and Overtime Pay
Over the last two budget cycles, SPD leadership and City Manager Howard Chan have alleged a staffing shortage within the department and struggle to hire new officers into its ranks. The city has funded over 78 new full-time positions for SPD, and yet department leadership repeatedly cites the long-term impacts of the Great Recession of 2008 as affecting staff capacity. However, very little transparency in SPD’s staff vacancies or overtime pay and practices was provided publicly until this year.
Last February, SPD reported 175 vacancies among 1,131 authorized positions – 83 sworn positions and 92 civilian positions. On April 9, the City Manager’s Office presented to the City’s Budget & Audit Committee hundreds of tiered budget reductions that included cuts to SPD programs and staff positions. During this year’s budget hearings in May and June, this high vacancy rate was cited as necessitating a "mandatory minimum staffing policy" that allows SPD leadership to require police officers work longer shifts that accrue overtime pay in order to backfill certain programs and units.
According to SCPRC review of city management’s public statements and analysis of published budget documents, several observations were made about SPD vacancies:
● Among the tiered budget reductions proposed by SPD in Fiscal Year 2024/25, only 130 vacant positions (74 sworn positions, 56 civilian positions) were offered.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 23
Accounting for errors corrected in staff reports, SPD excluded 45 vacant positions out of 221 full-time staff positions offered in police budget reductions. ● Despite a high vacancy rate, SPD reductions included 91 full-time staff positions that were filled (56 sworn positions, 7 civilian positions). Had City Council approved tier 3 or tier 4 reductions, SPD would have made layoffs among key positions including Dispatchers and high-value police programs including Homicide Investigations, Human Trafficking, Problem-Oriented Policing, Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT), and Violent Crime Reduction.
● City taxpayers could have saved between $8.7 and $12.6 million in Fiscal Year 2024/25 from reducing all vacant positions offered by SPD. Not only were these potential savings not presented in an easily-accessible format for City Council to consider, it was reported during last June’s budget hearings that any SPD budget savings from vacant staff positions are automatically applied to police overtime expenditures.
Table 8 shows all proposed reductions in full-time equivalent hours for Sacramento Police Department across job classifications and sworn positions.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 24
Table 9 shows the potential savings from reducing Sacramento Police vacancies from Fiscal Year 2024/25 based on city budget documents.
Information requests from the City Council provided the Commission and the public the most comprehensive view of SPD overtime policies and spending figures to date. Based on public statements during last year’s budget cycle, there appears to be no consistency in oversight of police overtime pay or spending which has increased every year since 2011. It was also revealed that any police budget savings – from unfilled staff positions to program spending adjustments – are automatically allocated for overtime expenditures without Council approval.
According to SCPRC analysis, police overtime has increased as a percentage of overall budget every year since 2011. Among SPD’s top overtime expenditures for Fiscal Year 2023/24:
1. Complaint Desk-Backfill – $1,132,971
2. Court Appearance Time – $779,185
3. Impact Teams – $738,505
The Commission was surprised to learn how much overtime spending goes to covering obscure programs such as the Complaint Desk and Court Appearances. Typically, when employers “backfill” a vacant position, it is to limit the use of overtime among remaining staff that will pick up the slack for an employee who moves to another role, enters a leave of absence, or is terminated. Paradoxically, this resulted in the opposite effect for SPD and requires further study, especially given that OPSA has reported a backlog in SPD misconduct complaints exceeding 40% going back to 2020.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 25
Table 10 shows the top overtime expenses across Sacramento Police Department programs and details for Fiscal Year 2023/24.
Through continued analysis of public pay and benefits records, SCPRC observed concerning trends in how overtime pay is distributed across SPD’s workforce:
● The city has paid a total of $158 million in overtime pay alone to SPD from 2012 to 2024 – at least 81% of which was paid after 2016. In 2023 alone, SPD spent $23 million on overtime pay in 2023 – a ten–fold increase since 2011. ● At least 60 SPD employees reported overtime pay exceeding 70%, many exceeding 100%, of their base salaries. Despite the staffing shortage and minimum staffing policy in place, an estimated 70% of SPD employees appear to go under utilized having received no overtime pay or being assigned few enough overtime hours not to exceed 25% of their base salaries.
● Thirteen sworn police officers and sergeants reportedly doubled their base salaries using overtime pay at least two or more years in a row, receiving as much $4.6 million combined. None of these employees appear to be in organizational leadership, yet several SPD officers have earned more than the deputy chiefs every year since 2019.
At least 2 police officers were observed making more in overtime pay than they earned from regular pay since joining SPD’s workforce.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 26
Table 11 shows the trend of Sacramento Police Department overtime pay in proportion to base pay from 2012 to 2023.
Source: Transparent California Public Pay & Benefits Data for City of Sacramento
Table 12 shows the total overtime pay across all Sacramento Police Department employees Source: Transparent California Public Pay & Benefits Data for Sacramento City Rather than being dispersed across job positions, the Commission observed a pattern specific to police officers and sergeant positions whose jobs receive the lionshare of overtime pay across all SPD staff positions, several of whom exceeded 100% of their base salary for 2 or more years in a
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 27
row. While the number of staff receiving overtime is increasing, a shrinking portion of SPD employees are receiving overtime pay while a select number of police officers and sergeants have disproportionately benefited from excessive overtime spending year after year. In fact, at least two SPD officers have accumulated more total overtime pay than their total base salaries earned across a 5-year period.
Table 13 shows the average overtime per employee position between 2013 (left) and 2023 (right).
These disparities in overtime spending and distribution demand immediate attention and enhanced oversight from the Mayor and City Council, especially as the city grapples with significant fiscal challenges including a projected $77 million budget deficit for Fiscal Year 2025/26.
SCPRC Observation of Police Performance Metrics
Given the high spending and amount of overtime spent, the SCPRC wanted to understand how the city’s increased spending has influenced SPD performance. To determine this relationship, the Commission wanted to know:
1. How does the city measure success in policing services and outcomes?
2. How does SPD perform according to the city’s performance metrics?
3. What tangible public safety benefits do city residents gain from SPD programs? Last June, the City Manager’s Office provided a list of police performance measures it considers when preparing the city’s annual budgets which we confirm were shared across city budget reports going back to 2004.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 28
Table 6. Performance Measures for Fiscal Year 2024/25 reported in Supplemental Budget materials on June 5, 2024.
According to SPD, the measure of crime is an indicator of safety in a community. Crime statistics for the top 10 cities in California as a benchmark to measure their success in Sacramento which uses Part 1 Crimes totals for felony offenses published by the California Department of Justice felony offenses including homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, larceny-theft, and arson. Response times to calls for service appear to be used as a metric for determining SPD service effectiveness.
Although the staff reports that include them do not define how these measurements show such effectiveness, the SCPRC notes several observations based on these performance metrics and statements during FY 2024/25 budget hearings:
● Police performance measures are exclusive to internal staffing conditions and response times after 911 calls for service. While tracking response times and demographics among sworn police officers hired and retained by SPD is valuable, focusing only primarily on these metrics during budget time leaves significant gaps in meaningfully measuring how SPD performs to meet its stated goals and objectives from year to year.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 29
● Lack of consistency in police performance measures and reporting makes it difficult to assess progress toward SPD’s stated goals and objectives. Current crime data metrics appear to presume that policing has a direct or consistent impact on the rise and fall of crime, but these are both vague and anecdotal.
● While police budgets have steadily increased since 2011, SPD crime-solving has declined significantly during the same period. Absent 911 call data showing the types of 911 calls for service and measurable outcomes to SPD responses, the current data does not show a tangible correlation between SPD services or programs and objective outcomes relevant to public safety, such as crime reduction or prevention.
There is value in tracking the race, ethnicity, and gender demographics among sworn police officers hired and retained by SPD, especially given the overrepresentation of white men (50%) among 683 sworn officers. However, ensuring equitable policing and inclusive representation from the diverse communities the department requires more specificity than a percentage metric of sworn women or minority employees. It is also important to report the racial and ethnic identities under a consolidated “minority” category
There also may be a correlation between policing services and changes in local crime rates, such as extra money spent on policing results in extra money for other community-based programs that have a direct or tangible impact on crime. If crime metrics are to be used, they should be used as a floor and not a ceiling for community expectations about crime rates. However, using crime metrics presumes that policing has a direct impact on local crime rates. If this were the case, additional data – such as the total numbers and types of 911 calls for service or officer- initiated calls – might provide an explanation for how SPD contributed to crime reductions, or why more city funding is necessary for SPD programs and services to maintain such results.
Table 7 (top) and Table 8 (bottom) shows Sacramento Police Department Performance Measures for Fiscal Year 2024/25. Part 1 Crimes totals, as published by the California Department of Justice include: homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, larceny-theft, and arson.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 30
By their own metrics, crime has remained relatively stable and continues to decline, with a very small increase in 2022 despite an increasing budget. This trend was confirmed by SCPRC analysis of numbers reported to the California’s Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigations, as well as studies conducted by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice documenting crime and clearance rates reported by all California law enforcement agencies compared with law enforcement spending.
Crime rates reported by the Sacramento Police Department versus California crime rate average, 2003-2022. Table 9 (right) shows crime rates for all offenses. Table 10 (top left) shows crime rates for violent offenses. Table 11 (bottom left) shows crime rates for property offenses.
In its analysis, the SCPRC found no tangible correlation between SPD programs and service outcomes relevant to public safety, such as crime reduction or prevention. This finding is consistent with several recent studies of California law enforcement spending and crime clearances (felony arrests made by police for violent and property crimes) that presented evidence suggesting that as police spending has continued to increase since the 1990s, police crime-solving has consistently declined.
The Commission reviewed SPD’s crime clearances from 1985 to 2023 and observed startlingly trends in Sacramento crime-solving efforts:
● SPD made arrests in as few as 13% of the 19,678 crimes reported in Sacramento in 2023. This includes 4,237 violent crimes (39%) and 15,441 property crimes (6%) reported.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 31
● SPD crime-solving has declined as much as 26% for serious crimes while per capita spending has increased 12% since 2006. Despite budget increases that cost city residents $477 each, SPD now solves fewer than one in seven serious crimes. ● Despite steep declines in crime and record-setting police spending, fewer than half of city residents express satisfaction with city police services (40%) and even less with crime prevention (22%). While half of community residents expressed feeling safe from violent crime in the latest National Community Survey, only 4 in 10 residents felt safe from property crime – all of which is below-average compared with other cities.
Crime clearance rates reported by the Sacramento Police Department versus California crime clearance average, 2003-2022.
Table 12 (right) shows crime clearance rates for all offenses. Table 13 (top left) shows crime clearance rates for violent offenses.
Table 14 (bottom left) shows crime clearance rates for property offenses.
For current performance metrics to justify an exceedingly high police budget, as well as validate the premise that policing is having a direct impact on crime, SPD should be able to demonstrate that crime rates are dropping in the places where police spend the most time. Given how low the rates of arrest by SPD, it appears that crime rates are a poor means of measuring the effectiveness of policing.
Based on SPD leadership’s statements and its Office of Violence Prevention’s public strategy, we know that SPD often operates disproportionately in low-income neighborhoods where economic underinvestment and divestment is higher than higher-income neighborhoods. We also know that policing is historically targeted against certain populations more than others, given that three separate studies commissioned by SPD as far back as 2001 have consistently confirmed that Black residents are over-represented in every outcome of policing services
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 32
including traffic stops, pedestrian stops, use-of-force, and searches and seizures. These studies include:
● Howard P. Greenwald, Ph.D. (2001). Final Report on Police Vehicle Stops in Sacramento, California. School of Policy, Planning, and Development, University of Southern California.
● John C. Lamberth, Ph.D. (2008). Traffic Stop Data Analysis Project of the Sacramento Police Department. Lamberth Consulting.
● Center for Policing Equity (2021). Assessment of Sacramento Police Department. Justice Navigator, justicenavigator.org.
● Office of Public Safety Accountability (2023). External Audit: SPD Misconduct Complaint Cases – Improper Search & Seizure. City of Sacramento.
Further study is needed to better understand the efficiency of SPD programs and services compared with their impact on community feelings on public safety, especially when considering how much city funds are allocated for police spending. It would also be helpful for SPD to be open with the Council about how many of their constituents are engaging the department’s community programs from year to year, such as the Criminal Justice Academy, Police Cadet Program, and the Police Activities League.
While SPD does not currently provide more relevant data such as 911 call types or outcomes when SPD responds to such calls for services, the Mayor and City Council have the authority to demand greater data transparency from SPD that could measure police performance beyond crime rates, such as police outcomes related to arrests, traffic enforcement, pedestrian stops, and use-of-force incidents. In fact, the 2021 Center for Policing Equity’s study provides clear examples of data metrics that SPD already collects which could measure its performance in police service areas and outcomes.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 33
Examples of data that the Sacramento Police Department can provide to measure performance in policing service outcomes.
Table 11 (top) shows total traffic stops by SPD work units (right) and their outcomes by racial group (left) for 2019.
Table 12 (middle) shows non-traffic stops by SPD work units (right) and their outcomes by racial group (left) for 2019.
Table 13 (bottom) shows total use of force incidents from 2014 to 2019 (right) and incidents by SPD work units, separated by racial group, for 2019 (left). Source: The Center for Policing Equity’s Justice Navigator.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 34
Obstacles to Transparency and Accountability in Police Budget Management For several years, the Commission has issued data requests for city staff to provide a breakdown of SPD’s programmatic spending that have gone unanswered and required commissioners to find without support.
In 2021, the SCPRC received pushback from the City Manager’s Office when the Commission launched its first ad hoc committee to study SPD’s budget and to subsequent data requests for study. SPD also refused to collaborate with the Commission for a joint workshop with the Measure U Advisory Committee to discuss police programmatic spending, though the department did reveal that SPD does not track its own budget spending down to the programmatic level. This includes written copies of SPD’s mandatory minimum staffing policy, which has never been provided in writing for public review despite multiple requests by the City Council and the SCPRC.
Several outstanding questions regarding the strategic planning and management of the Sacramento Police Department’s budget, including:
1. What changes, if any, has the SPD and/or the City made to provide transparency in SPD’s budget management procedures and practices, such as tracking its total expenditures down to the programmatic level?
2. How many vacancies exist in each SPD job classification for FY 2024/25? How many vacancies exist under each Command Division (North, Central, South, East)?
3. What are the key performance indicators, strategic benchmarks, or other metrics does SPD use to measure success in service delivery, transparency efforts, and efficiency in departmental priorities and programs?
4. What is the purpose, justification, and procedures for the Mandatory Minimum Staffing policy?
5. How will the reduction in FTEs in SPD units involved in transparency impact the department’s efforts to expand transparency?
There is no indication that there is a lack of capacity in SPD nor the City Manager’s Office to provide budget transparency to the public and, in fact, is a responsibility that falls within their mandate as public servants. The bigger question is whether the Mayor and the City Council have the political will to engage in tough conversations about police performance and take on these questions before approving the annual budget.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 35
SPD Strategic Planning & Budget Management Recommendations The Commission believes further study is warranted based on our initial findings into SPD’s resource allocations and strategic priorities.
Based on the lack of oversight and growing irregularities in police overtime expenditures, the Commission advises an independent audit of SPD budget management, overtime policies and procedures, and vacancy rates be conducted immediately. In order to sufficiently assess whether SPD is meeting its strategic goals and the community’s public safety needs, the Commission also advises the Mayor and City Council to direct SPD to provide data regarding police service outcomes and program engagement in its annual budget proposals and presentations.
On December 9, 2024, the SCPRC approved 3 recommendations for enhancing SPD budget transparency and management which may expand based on further analysis in 2025.
SPD Strategic Planning & Budget Management Recommendations Summary
1. Conduct an immediate and complete audit of SPD Overtime policies, practices, and expenditures. This audit should be conducted by the City Auditor or an independent, non- law enforcement agency outside the City Manager's purview and not among the City's existing list of contractors. As part of the audit, investigators should review and make recommendations related to SPD’s minimum staffing policies, vacancy rates, existing limits of overtime hours, and key performance indicators.
2. Establish clear, specific key performance indicators for measuring SPD services & programs, including but not limited to the total numbers and types of 911 calls for service, officer- initiated calls, reported crimes, crime clearances or arrests, use-of-force incidents, traffic- related stops and their outcomes, and enrolled participants in SPD community programs.
Require SPD to publicly present this data as part of annual department operations reports and annual budget presentations to the City Council.
3. Require SPD to report its annual savings, or unspent SPD budget allocations, and annual overtime expenditures by program and job classification in all proposed budget documents every fiscal year. SPD budget documents presented to the City Council should provide programmatic details with specific budget allocations.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 36
Appendix A:
2018-2023 Recommendations
2018 Diversity Recommendations #1-25
2018 Use-Of-Force (UOF) Recommendations #1-2
2019 Body-Worn Camera (BWC) Recommendations #1-4
2019 Mental Health Recommendations #1-9
2019 Use-Of-Force (UOF) Recommendations #1-18
2020 Discipline & Accountability Recommendations #1-18
2020 Internal Ad Hoc Recommendations #1-11
2020 Mental Health Ad Hoc Recommendations #1-8
2021 Crowd & Riot Control Ad Hoc Recommendations #1-11
2021 Budget Ad Hoc Recommendations #1-2
2021 Community Engagement / Media Ad Hoc Recommendations #1-9 2021 Mental Health Alternative Response Ad Hoc Recommendations #1-4 2021 LGBTQ+ Ad Hoc Recommendations #1
2022 Budget Transparency Recommendations #1-5
2022 Surveillance Recommendations #1-6
2023 Search & Seizure Recommendations #1-12
2023 Accountability & Organizational Culture #1-3
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 37
Appendix B:
2024 Military Equipment Use
Community Recommendations
Approved on August 12, 2024
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT 2024 38
Appendix C:
2024 Recommendations
Civilian Oversight Recommendations #1-6
Strategic Planning & Budget Management #1-3
Approved on December 9, 2024
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION – 2025 WORK PLAN 1
Sacramento Community Police Review Commission
2025 Work Plan
The Sacramento Community Police Review Commission (SCPRC) meets publicly about ten times a year with meetings ranging from one to three hours. While these meetings are staffed by the City Clerk’s office, the SCPRC lacks formal day-to-day staffing. As such, it is up to the Commissioners to prioritize the policy items that will guide the work for each year.
For many aspects of this 2025 Work Plan and for each policy area of focus, the SCPRC will need commissioners to volunteer to conduct research on and analyze complex policy; and meet with the Sacramento Police Department (SPD), community stakeholders, academia, and other experts.
This will ensure that the deep policy analysis, which cannot be conducted in real-time during SCPRC meetings, is informed. Any information gathered and policy recommendations formulated will be brought to the full SCPRC for discussion, evaluation, and action.
2025 Goals
During 2025, the SCPRC will focus on the following overarching goals:
1. Strengthen the SPRC and its working relationship with the SPD and the City Council, through a Joint Workshop proposed by City Council (or other comparable engagements) to address the City Auditor’s recommendations in October 2023. The Joint Workshop and other relevant conversations can address:
a. Clarifying the purpose, powers, and duties of the SCPRC by clarifying City Code to establish the SCPRC’s Purpose as a civilian oversight body with clear roles, powers, and duties.
b. Improving the inner workings of the SCPRC by identifying dedicated staffing and additional resources.
c. Improving the relationship and cooperation between the SCPRC, SPD, Office of Public Safety Accountability (OPSA), and the City Council. Over the past year, the relationship with the SPD has been inconsistent.
d. Establishing a suggested onboarding and professional learning plan for commissioners to better understand the SPD and relevant City of Sacramento departments and processes, which includes attending the citizen’s police academy, a ride along, conferences on relevant topics, and other opportunities identified in collaboration with SPD, OPSA, and the City Council.
2. Ensure timely responses to 2024 recommendations and address outstanding recommendations from previous years. The SCPRC seeks to build a clear and
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION – 2025 WORK PLAN 2
consistent process for timely response to all forthcoming recommendations alongside the SPD and City Council, starting with those put forth in the 2024 Annual Report. To do this, we propose the following timeline for the new 2024 recommendations.
a. Present 2024 SCPRC recommendations to the City Council by the end of the second quarter of 2025. The SPD will provide a complete response to 2024 recommendations by the end of the calendar year.
b. Work with the City Council to establish a clear and consistent process for reviewing SCPRC’s annual recommendations, moving forward.
For all outstanding previous year recommendations (from 2021, 2022, and 2023), the SCPRC will establish an Ad Hoc Committee to review, consult with community members, and decide on which recommendations, if any, to prioritize and/or update for City Council and SPD consideration, in order to clear up backlog (these recommendations will be elevated in the SCPRC’s 2026 Work Plan). In conducting this review, commissioners will consider the impact of changes in federal, state, and local legislation on the outstanding recommendations.
3. Engage the community by organizing up to three community engagement forums and stakeholder meetings related to relevant public safety topics, including:
a. Forum on SPD’s Military Equipment Use Policy, as mandated by Assembly Bill 481.
b. Forum on SPD’s traffic safety enforcement.
c. Forum on SPD’s Community Engagement Programs and Initiatives, with a focus on Drive Safe Sacramento, Homeless and Mental Health Outreach, LGBTQ+ Outreach, and Police Youth Services and Programs.
4. Evaluate SPD Resource Allocation & Efficiency at Impacting Public Safety. The SCPRC will request a presentation to better understand SPD’s annual goals and objectives, and conduct research into how the departments and commissions of other cities evaluate goals and metrics to evaluate public safety. This will allow the SCPRC to:
a. Review and evaluate SPD goals and key performance metrics to measure the impacts to public safety; and
b. Provide recommendations to the SCPRC, SPD, and the City Council for future actions and policy changes related to improving public safety.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION – 2025 WORK PLAN 3
2025 Policy Focus Areas
Connected to the 2025 Goals are the following three 2025 Policy Focus Areas.
Policy Focus Area A: SCPRC Engagement and Function (Standing Priority). Aligned to 2025 Goals #1 and #2.
Goals Research and Outreach
● Clarify the purpose, powers, and duties of
the SCPRC.
● Improve the inner workings of the
SCPRC.
● Improve the relationship and cooperation
between the SCPRC, SPD, OPSA, and the
City Council.
● Establish an onboarding and professional
learning plan for commissioners.
● Present 2024 SCPRC recommendations to
City Council by the end of the second
quarter of 2025.
● Work with the City Council to establish a
clear, consistent process for reviewing
SCPRC’s annual recommendations,
moving forward.
● Determine which outstanding previous year
recommendations (from 2021, 2022, and
2023) to prioritize and/or update for City
Council and SPD in 2026 Annual Report.
● Conduct research into civilian oversight
models, best practices, and effective
methods for community engagement in
Commission work
● Research and gain input on professional
learning opportunities for SPRC
commissioners.
● Monitor and evaluate implementation of
SCPRC recommendations.
● Consult with community members and
review outstanding previous year
recommendations.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION – 2025 WORK PLAN 4
Policy Focus Area B: Community Policing and Response Efficiency. Aligned to 2025 Goal #3.
Goals Research and Outreach
● Review SPD policies, training and
procedures related to community
engagement and public safety strategies,
focused on Drive Safe Sacramento,
Homeless and Mental Health Outreach,
LGBTQ+ Outreach, and Police Youth
Services and Programs.
● Review and evaluate the efficiency of
SPD's traffic safety enforcement
● Engage the community members by
holding up to three community engagement
forums, in collaboration with community-
based organizations, on the topics
delineated on 2025 Goal #3.
● Conduct research into best practices from
other cities as it relates to non-emergency
responses.
● Conduct research into best practices from
other cities as it relates to traffic safety.
Policy Focus Area C: SPD Resource Allocation & Efficiency at Impacting Public Safety.
Aligned to 2025 Goal #4.
Goals Research and Outreach
● Review and evaluate SPD goals and key
performance metrics to measure the
impacts to public safety.
● Provide recommendations to the SCPRC,
SPD, and the City Council for future
actions and policy changes related to
improving public safety.
● Request SPD to provide a presentation to
the SCPRC on SPD’s annual goals and
objectives, and key investments to meet
them.
● Conduct research into how other city
departments and commissions evaluate
goals and metrics to evaluate public safety.
● Conduct a current fiscal analysis (proposed
vs actual trends) of SPD budget spending.
SACRAMENTO COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION – 2025 WORK PLAN 5
For each of these Policy Focus Areas, the SCPRC will establish an ad hoc to complete the following:
➢ Propose and place items for discussion on the agenda;
➢ Deliver presentations to the SCPRC;
➢ Perform research;
➢ Organize and participate in stakeholder meetings and community forums; and
➢ Draft and synthesize proposed recommendations.
2025 SCPRC Meeting Calendar
The following 2025 SCPRC meeting calendar presents the key items that must be covered through each quarter. The aim is for additional items to be added by the 2025 SCPRC through its discussions during meetings in the first quarter and as part of the work of the Ad Hoc Committees covering each of the 2025 Policy Focus Areas.
● January - March: SCPRC Engagement & Function
○ Establishment of SCPRC Ad Hoc Committees
○ Joint Workshop with City Council
○ SCPRC Presentation of 2024 Annual Report & Recommendations
● April - June: Continuing Work by Ad Hoc Committees and Work Plan ○ Community Engagement (Traffic Safety Enforcement or Community Engagement Programs and Initiatives)
● July - September: Continuing Work by Ad Hoc Committees and Work Plan ○ Community Engagement on SPD Military Equipment Use (AB 481 mandated) ○ Community Engagement (Traffic Safety Enforcement or Community Engagement Programs and Initiatives)
● October - December: Close-Out 2025 Work Plan
○ Finalize 2025 recommendations
○ Draft 2025 Annual Report
○ Draft 2026 Work Plan
The 2025 work of the SCPC will culminate in the drafting of a 2026 Work Plan and Priorities before end of year.