Policy Approved For Police Body Cams

The police union won one change and fell short on another as the Board of Police Commissioners approved new general orders for the use of body cameras and cellular phones.

The commissioners voted Tuesday night to approve General Order 7.10, which pertains to all matters relating to the force wearing BWCs, aka body worn cameras, which all officers will soon wear on the job.

Commissioners also approved General Order 4.09 pertaining to officers being issued departmental cellular telephones, for officers’ personal use but also for use in tandem with the cameras.

Both votes were unanimous, yet not without tensions in the room on the third floor of police headquarters. Police union representatives charged the vote was rushed, questioned whether the haste to get the equipment out there, as the public is demanding ​‚might have caused the city to bargain in bad faith.

New Haven is joining departments across the region and across the country in equipping officers with the cameras, in response to both public demands for police accountability as well as to help officers rebut untrue allegations about their conduct. The department received a grant to purchase 800 Axon Body Worn Cameras. Including storage, they cost about $700,000. Each officer will be issued a ​“hot” camera, which is the camera in use during an officer’s shift, which may contain digital files; and a ​“cold” camera, which is a back-up stored on the dock during the shift.

While officers will of course follow the orders on Nov. 1, when the cameras’ training and roll out begin, Florencio Cotto of the New Haven Police Elm City Local said many matters remain unsettled.

”We’re going to weigh our options and discuss it with our [legal] representation,” Cotto said after the vote.

The union had asked that under the new policy, an officer to be able to mute the sound on his or her body worn video cam (although it still records video) during an incident – for example, when he or she consults a supervisor about what to charge an arrestee with.

However, the state law’s language on the matter, as well as transparency, require video and sound to be continuous during any contact with the public.

So city lawyers and the commission nixed that.

The union did prevail in seeking protection from supervisors using video to target an officer to settle a beef. The city inserted this language into the general order: ​“Supervisors shall not review recordings for the purpose of searching for instances of department members committing violations of law or policy, unless such reviews are related to a specific complaint.”

The body cam program was more than a year in the making, and the result of several pilots.

The new general order pertaining to the BWCs runs 16 pages. It covers matters ranging from purpose — strengthening transparency, improving evidence for investigations, and training— to dress: Each officer is to wear the camera ​“on his or her outmost garment positioned above the midline of his/her torso when in use.”

Under the order, officers are to make sure to have the camera on ​“at the inception of an interaction with the public in a law enforcement capacity.” Footage is to be retained ​“a minimum of 90 days unless reproduced for evidentiary purposes or otherwise required.” And officers should inform members of the public that they’re being video-recorded — if and when the officer is asked.

The document voted on by the commissioners borrows its model and language from that created by the Police Officer Standards and Training Council and adopted into Connecticut state law as part of Public Act. No. 15 – 4

The year-long negotiations between the union and the police team, led by Asst. Chief Racheal Cain and Deputy Corporation Counsel Michael Wolak, turned on on how much, if at all, union lawyers’ suggestions for the language of New Haven’s general order could depart from the statutory language of Public Act No. 15 – 4.

“You can’t waver from the substantial parts. You have to have the minimal in there. The statute is clear. You have to adhere to the model policy. It says adhere to it,” said Wolak.

“We believe we have to abide by the law. The union’s attorney says not necessarily by the language of it. We were hoping we and the union could come to an agreement. We did not come to an agreement” on everything, Cain added.

Wolak and Cain both said some of the union’s concerns were still addressed while still keeping faith with the statute.

However, other requests, were ruled out of bounds.Paraphrasing the statue and its implication, Wolak said, ​“It should run all the time, so the perception is nothing is being hidden.”

The order gives officers a chance to get up to speed: ​“While not exempting a police officer from the requirements of this General Order, there will be a ninety (90) day grace period from the completion of prescribed BWC training wherein no disciplinary action will be taken against the police officer for failure to activate the system except for repeated violations during the grace period.”

Commissioners expressed displeasure at having the review the exensive drafts of the orders after having been handed them only at the meeting. Commissioners said they were were also uncomfortable if their vote appeared to be against the union.

Commissioner Donald Walker asked if outstanding concerns can be solved soon..

Cain replied candidly: ​“No, not in the near future. This can linger six months to a year.”

“If it gets agreed to without substantial disagreement, what could happen?” Walker persisted in his line of questioning.

“They could take it to arbitration,” Chief Campbell replied.

Wolak counseled the corporation counsel bases its actions on a city law that states that ​“the city shall have the right to introduce new equipment.”

“My gut is to get the cameras out there. We have tasers, and we need cameras out there,” Walker said.

“I agree. We’ve worked on this for a long time,” said Campbell. ​“We’ve had disturbances on the Green [in the last months] and officer-involved shootings. And there’s a time when the public says, ​‘Enough talking.’ We have a good foundation in this general order. We need to get them out there.”

“Why don’t you go to arbitration now and [then] bring it [the agreed on general order] to us?” said Commissioner Kevin Diaz.

“That could be a long time,” Cain reiterated.

“And [approving] general orders is our responsibility,” added Chairman Anthony Dawson.

Cell Phones, Too

The vote on cell phones was more clear cut. Officers will be issued iPhones with the BWCs to view video from their cameras — though it will not be possible to alter it — and to ​“tag” the video for length of retention and evidentiary purposes if needed.

Officers can also use the phones to access department programs such as Shotspotter and to receive mug shots as soon as they are available.

In response to a concern from Dawson, Cain said she can ask the department’s IT staff to attach a message to each of the phones that in case of emergency, someone calling an officer’s individual phone (which the officer is not obliged to answer after hours) should call 911 or the other non-emergency numbers.

In the future the 400 to 450-officer force may needed fewer cameras, once the system can wirelessly upload files from a camera through a hot spot while the officer is in a cruiser, for example, or when he or she returns to headquarters, said Dell.