2022 4th Qtr

Citizen Complaints against Officers
2022 4th Quarter

All citizen complaints against officers are documented and investigated by the department’s supervisors. Once the investigation is complete, it is reviewed by the Section Commander, Division Commander and then forwarded to the Office of the Chief where the decision is made as to the finding of the complaint. Complaints questioning the basis for a citation or arrest are not documented and those complainants are advised to go through the court system.

There are four different categories of complaint findings:

  • Sustained - The investigation produced a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did in fact occur and the action of the officer was improper.
  • Not Sustained - The investigation failed to produce a preponderance of evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation.
  • Exonerated - The allegation in fact did occur but the actions of the officer were legal, justified, proper, and in accordance with the law and the department’s policies and procedures.
  • Unfounded - The allegation in fact did not occur, based on the evidence.

During this quarter, there were five citizen’s complaint against officers. The findings for that complaint is as follows:

  1. On 10/25/2022, a citizen filed a complaint that their vehicle was towed by police and, after the citizen incurred impound fees, that the police should pay for it.  An investigation into the complaint was conducted.  Review of video and audio showed that the citizen requested the vehicle to be towed and officers did so on their behalf.  The citizen then failed to get the vehicle from the tow lot and incurred the fees.  This incident was unfounded.
  2. On 11/7/2022, a citizen filed a complaint of a lack of service from an Animal Control Officer (ACO).  An investigation was conducted into the incident.  A review of the incident showed that the ACO provided equipment to the citizen and spent 14 minutes helping the citizen try to locate the animal they’d called about.  The ACO was also polite and professional during the call for service.  This complaint is unfounded.
  3. On 11/16/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an Animal Control Officer (ACO) for being discourteous.  An investigation into the complaint was conducted.  The complaint in this case was not the citizen who the ACO spoke to, but rather their spouse.  A review of the audio / video from the call for service showed the ACO was responding to a barking dog call at the address.  They were professional and provided the standard information and warnings they do for anyone who has a complaint against them for a barking dog.  The complaint of discourteousness was unfounded.
  4. On 12/6/2022, a citizen filed a complaint against an officer for being rude and discourteous.  An investigation into the incident was conducted.  A review of the audio / video from all officers on scene showed that the officer was neither rude nor discourteous and attempted to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident with a citizen who was extremely erratic and uncooperative. The complaint was unfounded.
  5. On 12/7/22, a citizen filed a complaint that an officer was being unprofessional in their conduct.  An investigation into this incident was conducted.  The investigation showed that the officer was being unprofessional in their conduct.  This complaint was sustained.