|
By Alexandria Staubach
The Milwaukee Police Department’s executive staff fielded more than 60 questions over nearly three hours from members of the Milwaukee Common Council and its Finance and Personnel Committee last week regarding the MPD's $310 million proposed budget allocation. Department salaries alone cost $195 million. But the bulk of conversation wasn’t specific line items or costs. Rather, the conversation focused on what MPD is doing and the places council members saw room for improvement. The use of emerging technologies loomed large as did the department’s controversial use of facial recognition technology (FRT). Artificial intelligence "is a force multiplier,” Chief Jeffrey Norman said on more than one occasion as the conversation roamed around new and proposed tools. Not all council members were in lockstep around increased use of technology, especially when it came to additional surveillance. Alderman Peter Burgelis questioned whether placing more cameras at intersections would do any good without enforcement of the laws already on the books to identify the cars that cameras are designed to capture. Burgelis was referencing SB375/AB371, fast-moving legislation that would permit 75 red-light cameras to be placed across Milwaukee. Burgelis compared MPD’s low citation rate for failure to display plates—fewer than 200 citations in 2024—to the more than 12,000 tickets written by the Department of Public Works for the same offense. “We as a department can hold ourselves responsible for what we can enforce more,” said Norman in response to Burgelis. Facial recognition technology loomed large in the conversation. Several alderpersons shared concerns about the deployment of federal officers as close as Chicago. “It’s not just in California,” said Alderwoman Marina Dimitrijevic, who called out a letter she helped author to Norman earlier this year in which a supermajority of the council opposed the use of facial recognition technology by the department. (That opposition was shared by the Mayor’s Equal Rights Commission.) Norman compared use of FRT to his department’s use of police pursuits. You’re “damned if you do, damned if you don’t,” he said. Norman said his department is still interested in the technology and alluded to current use in only the direst and time-sensitive cases. But he also said the department was using the public-facing conversations with the Fire and Police Commission and Equal Rights Commission to “understand how do we use the proper bumper guards and rails.” Dimitrijevic reiterated her hope in the current climate “to at least pause,” while Alderman Scott Spiker said there has not been a “sober conversation” about this technology as a city. Other generative AI tools discussed included software called “Draft One,” developed by Axon, which produces initial drafts of police reports from the audio of body-worn camera footage. Spiker highlighted its use in Minnesota cities and proposed that its implementation could reduce some of the additional paperwork burden often cited by MPD as resulting from a legal settlement. Spiker suggested they might be able to have fewer “cops behind desks” with Draft One but acknowledged that staffing mandates imposed by Act 12 wouldn’t permit the reallocation of salary funds to pay for the technology. Assistant Chief of Police Craig Sarnow said the department had considered using Draft One, but rolling it out would likely involve a test period on felonies and would require buy-in of the district attorney. Sarnow also highlighted its hefty price tag. Another topic of conversation was that only 63% of sworn officers live in the city of Milwaukee. A recent Fire and Police Commission survey cited crime as a primary reason male officers live outside the city and education as the primary reason female officers live outside the city. Milwaukee police officers are required to live either within city limits or within 15 miles of the city’s boundary. Alderman José Pérez noted that while on paper crime is down, “people in my neighborhood don’t feel that.” “I think there’s a lot of criminal nuisance behavior that we’re not measuring,” he said. In its presentation, MPD highlighted its priority areas for 2026: sustained efforts to ensure compliance with Act 12 hiring mandates; community relations; youth engagement; enhancing public safety; AI integration “digital trust”; employment of drones as first responders; virtual academy training; vehicle pursuit mitigation; and identifying roles that can be transitioned from sworn to civilian. As for the amount of the proposed MPD budget, while that number is $4 million short of the department’s 2025 allocation, it still far exceeds allocations to every other department. The next largest sum goes to water works ($167 million).
0 Comments
 Community members fill the room at the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting on Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025. Photograph by Amanda Merkwae. By Alexandria Staubach Almost three dozen members of the public turned up at a Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting last week to discuss an item nowhere on the agenda. The FPC wanted to talk about its procedure for public comment at meetings and had invited representatives from Black Leaders Organizing for Communities, the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, and others to publicly comment on FPC file 212211, a communication from the commission regarding public comment at meetings. While some community members highlighted suggestions for improving communication between the FPC and the public, most instead used their time to discuss the volume of high-speed pursuits that have resulted in innocent bystander fatalities this year. A crash the day before Thursday’s meeting killed a mother and her two children at North 35th Street and West Vliet Street. Nine people have lost their lives from high-speed police chases this year—six of them innocent bystanders. What was actually on the agenda: a change in the FPC’s public comment policy. For years, items that were not formally noticed on the commission’s agenda were not up for discussion and could not be commented on by members of the FPC. While the public comment policy is still evolving, members of the public who register in advance will be given five minutes to speak, up from the previous two-minute limit. Also, FPC members will be allowed to address the topics raised, even if they were not on the agenda. FPC Executive Director Leon Todd said the “potential” improvements to the public comment policy came from considering recommendations in the Milwaukee Turners’ 2024 white paper. The Turners issued the white paper after observing the commission’s meetings over the course of a year. Nothing legally prevented the FPC from having such a policy in the past. Todd said “there is no legal prohibition” addressing nonagenda public comments at a meeting, “so long as they take no official action” and keep the discussion to the public comment section of the proceedings. In addition to using the new policy on comment time and topics at Thursday’s meeting, the commission rolled out a new website for community members to register in advance for future meetings. The website encourages people to “be clear and respectful,” advises them to avoid sharing confidential information, and instructs that testimony should relate “to the FPC’s role in oversight, policy, recruitment, discipline, or accountability” of the Milwaukee Police Department, Milwaukee Fire Department, or Department of Emergency Communications. Most attendees seemed receptive of change, but some highlighted that expanded time alone would not fix the communications dynamics at FPC meetings. “I see you all engaging earnestly,” said community advocate and FPC meeting regular Ron Jansen. “The structure undermines the effort,” he continued, because the public comment would still occur at the top of a meeting. “We all give our comment and show all our cards, and then the police come up here and call us liars over and over again,” Jansen said. The format “doesn’t give us a fighting chance to adjust our message,” he said. Following the FPC meeting, WJI spoke with BLOC member J. Robinson by phone about how community members co-opted the meeting time to discuss their priority issue of police pursuits. Robinson said although they had originally intended to speak on the public comment agenda item, the “reckless driving issue was more important,” and MPD’s pursuit policy was “doing more harm than good.” About the changes in communication policy, Robinson told WJI “it was better to be able to speak to the issues.” According to the FPC's 2024 vehicle pursuit report, 71% of Milwaukee police chases in 2024 reached speeds in excess of 75 miles per hour, up from 66% in 2023. A decade ago, the percentage was just 22%. Even during the height of COVID, which is widely regarded as exacerbating reckless driving, the percentage was 58%. Police most frequently engage in high-speed pursuits in response to reckless driving. The circumstances permitting police pursuits are found in MPD’s Standard Operating Procedure 660. Public outcry about pursuits that resulted in injury resulted in a restricted policy that took effect in 2010. That policy brought pursuit numbers to their all-time low of just 50 pursuits in 2012. In 2017, though, the MPD expanded officers’ ability to pursue vehicles in response to reckless driving. That policy remains in effect today, with a modification last year that limits when they can initiate a chase over drug activity. “As it stands, SOP 660 does not benefit this community,” said Milwaukee Alliance representative Kayla Patterson at Thursday’s meeting. “The last few months highlight gross incompetence” and a “general shameful agenda prioritizing property over lives,” Patterson said. She cautioned that “if the turnout in the room is any indication, the community is getting restless.” Antoher speaker, Tiffany Stark, said her child’s father became paralyzed from the neck down as an innocent bystander to a police pursuit. “We want to blame the criminal, but we have a policy that is harming innocent people," she said. Janaisa Rhodes lost her partner as an innocent bystander to a pursuit earlier this year. She appeared for public comment with her 2-year-old son. “You guys are supposed to be serving and protecting us, but you’re doing a lot of the damage,” she said. Public comment was not just criticism. Some speakers offered suggestions and potential solutions. “Property crimes should not qualify for pursuit,” suggested community member Brian Verdin, who also talked about using darts, meaning tracker technology shot at cars to apprehend suspects without pursuit. Concerned citizen Alex Larson referenced the 2024 vehicle pursuit report to highlight that the apprehension rate from a police chase is only 49%. “It’s a coin flip” that lives are being lost over, he said. Larson asked whether the FPC knew how much tax money had been paid by the city to settle innocent bystander claims over the years. Knowing the taxpayer impact and the lives SOP 660 has cost over the years could have a significant impact, he suggested. The FPC did not know the answer to Larson’s question. However, under the new comment policy Todd was able to say it would be good data, which he intended to look into. Per the 2024 vehicle pursuit report, the actual number of pursuits was down just slightly from 2023 (957 compared to 1,081), but maximum speeds were up, and a slightly greater percentage of pursuits resulted in crashes.  Figure from the 2024 City of Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission Vehicle Pursuit Report. In 2024, 26 pursuits resulted in an injury to an officer, 52 pursuits resulted in an injury to an innocent bystander or third party, and 164 pursuits resulted in an injury to the person being pursued—each a slight increase from 2023. WJI discussed the FPC's 2023 vehicle pursuit report here.  The packed meeting of Milwaukee's Equal Rights Commission at Milwaukee City Hall on June 18, 2025, regarding Milwaukee Police Department's use of facial recognition technology. Photograph by Emilio De Torre. The Milwaukee Police Department claimed in a recent hearing that it is being transparent with the public about its plan to license facial recognition technology, but the department has been using the technology behind closed doors for more than two years. MPD has been borrowing the technology from neighboring police departments. Milwaukee’s Equal Rights Commission held a public hearing on June 18 regarding MPD’s proposal to acquire two licenses for facial recognition technology. MPD Chief of Staff Heather Hough began her remarks by telling ERC commissioners and the packed hearing room that “Post Act 12, the Milwaukee Police Department . . . does not have to be engaged in these conversations,” but said the department wanted to take the plan to the community. Hough likened the department’s use of the technology to date as sharing passwords on the streaming service Netflix. “We asked our neighbors for too many cups of sugar,” said at the hearing. MPD’s use of the technology currently operates without a standard operating procedure or oversight. While community members attending the ERC hearing held neon signs that stated “FRT is inherently biased,” Hough spun to a different aspect of bias. As though inspired by the phrase “guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” Hough said the technology is only biased when the user is biased. She insisted that the two individuals with sole access to the two licenses would not use it in a biased way. MPD showed slides noting more than a dozen instances of prior use of facial recognition technology to assist in apprehending a criminal suspect. The department also shared details of at least three cases when the information led to criminal charges. MPD Major Crimes Division Captain David Anderson described identification of one suspect using facial recognition technology. The results included three individuals who were a positive match rating 97%, 95% or 93%. The individual ultimately charged corresponded with the 93% match. ERC Commissioner (and WJI Policy Analyst) Alexandria Staubach replied that three matches for one individual rating 97%, 95% and 93% demonstrate the real bias issue and called the technology “notoriously inaccurate,” especially for Black and brown individuals. Staubach said MPD’s example shows that the results are “inherently unreliable.” ERC Vice Chair Jacqueline Cook shared Staubach’s concern and said that the facial recognition software on her phone permits her daughter to open it. Hough initially disclosed MPD’s use of the technology at a Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting in March. That meeting centered on MPD’s new drone program. FPC Commissioner Krissie Fung had posed a hypothetical in which MPD’s drones could be updated with facial recognition technology and asked Hough how MPD would deal with software updates they could not control. Hough responded then that the department was already using facial recognition technology on “a case-by-case basis,” but that the technology was a separate issue from the drones. Fung attended last week’s ERC hearing and spoke in opposition to MPD’s use of facial recognition technology. Fung highlighted that MPD has been using the technology “for years” and that “MPD did not choose to be transparent until they were forced to,” referencing Hough’s comments that the department could no longer borrow licenses from partner jurisdictions and now wanted to acquire their own. When asked at the ERC hearing whether MPD had formally brought their prior use to the attention of the Fire and Police Commission, FPC Executive Director Leon Todd said they had not. 2023 Wisconsin Act 12, mentioned by Hough as allowing MPD to purchase the facial recognition technology licenses without another body’s approval, largely gutted oversight of the MPD by the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission. Nevertheless, the statute says the FPC must “conduct at least once each year a policy review of all aspects of the operations of the police and fire departments of the city.” And Milwaukee’s Common Council can reverse any MPD policy or standard operating procedure with a two-thirds majority vote. While the common council has not altered any standard operating procedure since Act 12 took effect, ERC Commissioner Tony Snell shared at the hearing that several alders had in fact written to Chief of Police Jeffrery Norman opposing the department’s plan to obtain facial recognition technology.  Attendees and WJI Policy Analyst and commission member Alexandria Staubach at the Milwaukee Equal Rights Commission meeting at Milwaukee City Hall on June 18, 2025, about Milwaukee Police Department's plan to purchase facial recognition technology licenses. Photograph by Emilio De Torre. Criminal justice reform activist moves closer to seat on Milwaukee's Fire and Police Commission2/3/2025  Krissie Fung, nominated for a seat on the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission, speaking at a town hall meeting at Mitchell Library on Jan. 28, 2025. Photograph by Emilio De Torre. By Alexandria Staubach
The Milwaukee Common Council’s Public Health and Safety Committee last week unanimously recommended Krissie Fung for a seat on Milwaukee's Fire and Police Commission. Krissie Fung was nominated by Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson to fill an FPC vacancy. Her nomination now proceeds to the Common Council for confirmation. Fung is associate director of the Milwaukee Turners, the city’s oldest civic group. She works on projects like Zero Youth Corrections, which supports work on system change to prevent youth from entering the criminal legal system. She recently spearheaded an FPC monitoring program that ran from June to December 2024. Fung made the rounds last week, participating in a town hall event at Mitchell Library on Tuesday and then testifying in front of the Public Safety and Health Committee at its Thursday meeting. FPC Executive Director Leon Todd introduced Fung at the town hall meeting. “I believe that Ms. Fung is extremely well qualified to represent the public in this role,” he said. Fung told town hall attendees that she was inspired to seek the seat in part by her work monitoring the FPC. She expressed concern over a lack of civic engagement with the FPC after state legislation took away its rule-making authority. She said she wants to increase the commission’s transparency and increase the public’s trust of and access to the commission. At the committee meeting, Alderwoman Sharlen Moore championed Fung as a unique pick, saying it was “so important that our commissions and our boards are diverse and represent an array of experiences.” Alderwoman Laressa Taylor asked Fung what unique contributions she would make on the FPC. Fung highlighted her work with many who are system impacted or formerly incarcerated and her own experiences with the justice system. She said she would give voice to those perspectives in civilian oversight. Alderman Scott Spiker asked Fung whether she would be able to demonstrate fairness in officer disciplinary hearings given the Turners’ history of advocacy regarding criminal justice reform and police. Fung said she desired to seek reform and that her ultimate goal of zero youth incarceration in Milwaukee will remain, but that she was committed “to work with the systems we have.” Alderperson Jose Perez asked Fung at the town hall meeting what she hoped people would say about her at the end of her term if confirmed. “I hope that folks would say I was fair in my careful consideration of everything that came before me,” Fung responded. By Alexandria Staubach A new Wisconsin Policy Forum report concludes that a dramatic decrease in arrests has not negatively impacted crime rates in Milwaukee. While the report does not provide a single explanation for the overall decrease in crime or arrests, it suggests that community-oriented solutions could be contributing to the decline. The report’s key findings were presented to Milwaukee’s Fire and Police Commission at a meeting last week. Milwaukee Police Department Chief of Staff Heather Hough suggested that instead of executing arrests, officers now have “more tools in their tool box for different outcomes.” She cited specifically the specialty task forces the department employs. Wisconsin Policy Forum’s Ari Brown highlighted at the same meeting that a decade ago among peer cities Milwaukee ranked number one in arrest rates and number seven in reported offenses. In 2023, though, the city ranked 10th among its 12 peers for both arrests and offenses, Brown said. Using Wisconsin Department of Justice data, the forum concluded in its report that MPD made fewer overall arrests year over year except in 2021. MPD made 51,175 arrests in 2012, falling to 9,061 in 2023, a decline of 82.3%. Traffic stops have also dramatically decreased, falling from 149,721 in 2015 to 27,715 in 2023. Reported instances of crime have declined in Milwaukee, helping to partially explain the arrest decline, the report said.  Graph from the Wisconsin Policy Forum report "Arresting Developments: How and Why Arrests and Citizen Contacts are Declining in Milwaukee." Whie violent crime rates, particularly homicides, remain elevated over numbers from the early 2010’s, they remain on a downward trend as well. The report indicates that MPD has focused more on combatting high-priority crime, which requires more significant officer resources. The report attributes some of the overall declining arrest rate to an increased focus on solving and addressing more violent crimes that “draw significant community and media interest.” Graph from the Wisconsin Policy Forum report "Arresting Developments: How and Why Arrests and Citizen Contacts are Declining in Milwaukee." The report points to no single cause for the arrest rate drop off. However, the combined effect of decreased reported offenses, amorphous national “societal factors” in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, decreased traffic stops, decreased staff competing with elevated serious crime levels, leadership changes at MPD, and a 2018 settlement in the Collins case have all played a significant role. The Collins settlement of a lawsuit against MPD in 2018 over its stop-and-frisk practices, for example, called on MPD to track several data points about every traffic stop it makes. The forum’s report concluded that “there be can be no doubt that the Settlement’s fundamental intent to eliminate unjustified stops has, indeed, been a contributor to the reductions in both stops and arrest.” The report points to changes in leadership at MPD since 2018 as another significant factor. Former MPD Chief Edward Flynn emphasized data to measure officer performance—better performance reviews for more arrest made. Neither subsequent Chief Alfonso Morales or current Chief Jeffrey Norman use such measures to gauge officer performance. Brown was careful to say he did not believe Milwaukee needs to be making more arrests, but he highlighted that the sharp declines are worth closer examination. He said anecdotal evidence gathered from interviews suggested that MPS patrol officers now spend significant amounts of time shuttling detainees to medical services and watching surveillance footage. Because Milwaukee is duty bound to allocate significant resources to the recruitment, training, and hiring of new law enforcement officers as a result of 2024 state legislation, figuring out how to better use officer time was a “worthwhile” endeavor moving forward, Brown said. By Alexandria Staubach Milwaukee police encounters involving an officer’s use of force in 2023 hit an all-time high since the current metrics for evaluating incidents were adopted in 2013, with nearly 80% of those use-of-force incidents occurring against Black people. The Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission shared the use-of-force data in an annual report presented at a meeting earlier this month. The Milwaukee Police Department recorded 2,285 incidents involving use of force in 2023. A total of 1,333 incidents involved the display or pointing of a firearm only, while an additional 952 involved “hands-on physical force or the discharge of a weapon” according to a presentation to the commission. An annual report a decade ago found 895 comparable uses of “hands-on” physical force or instances where a firearm was used. That number declined substantially in 2014, then remained generally constant until sharp drops in 2019 and 2020. The numbers rose significantly in 2021 and again in 2023, when incidents surpassed even 2013 numbers.  Slide shown by Barbara Cooley, research and policy analysist for the Fire and Police Commission, at the commission's Dec. 5 meeting, detailing those instances where physical force or the discharge of a weapon was involved over time. Black individuals accounted for 76% of all arrests and were the subjects of 80% of officers’ use of force. White individuals accounted for 10% of arrests and were the subject of 12% of the use of force incidents. According to current census data, Black and white Milwaukeeans command roughly equal shares of the city’s population. Per the report, a typical use-of-force encounter in 2023 involved a white male officer, 36 years old, with nine years of experience, on duty and in uniform. The person experiencing the use of force was typically unarmed, Black, male, 29 years old, and more likely than not resisting arrest.  Table taken from “An Analysis of Use of Force Incidents in the Milwaukee Police Department in 2023,” the annual report prepared for the commission by University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Professor Steven G. Brandl.
MPD District 3 had the greatest share of use-of-force incidents, with 241 incidents—more than 50 incidents higher than the next district. District 3 also accounts for one of the largest shares of arrests annually (2,339 arrests), essentially tied with District 7 (2,343 arrests). District 3 has jurisdiction over the southern section of Milwaukee’s 53206 zip code. Although a 2019 University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee study found the claim that 53206 is the most incarcerated zip code in America to be exaggerated, that “should not obscure the reality that mass incarceration is an integral component in the ‘ecosystem’ of concentrated disadvantage that continues to weigh on this beleaguered neighborhood," the study said in its key findings. At last week’s commission meeting, Barbara Cooley, a research and policy analysist for the commission, noted the sunsetting of the requirement in the Sterling Brown settlement agreement that required officers to generate a detailed report for instances where they display or point a firearm. Because the requirement has ended, that data will not be included in tallies going forward. MPD Chief of Staff Heather Hough said the information would still be captured, just not included in annual reports like this one. Commissioner Dana World-Patterson noted that an officer pulling a gun is “threatening” and said it seemed like data the commission would like to have. World-Patterson asked Hough how the commission would see the data going forward, a question Hough could not answer. Despite the significant jump in numbers, questions about the report’s findings and for Hough were few. Commissioner Ramon Evans said, “it seems like we’re going backwards.” The annual report was prepared for the commission by University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Professor Steven G. Brandl. By Alexandria Staubach
The Milwaukee Police Department on Monday amended Standard Operating Procedure 660 governing police pursuits. The change narrows the conditions for officers to pursue a suspected “mobile drug dealer,” meaning a drug dealer operating out of a vehicle. The policy previously permitted pursuit whenever “occupant(s) of the vehicle are engaged in drug dealing proximate in time to the initiation of the vehicle pursuit.” Under the new version, pursuit is “limited to only incidents in which the observed drug dealing is directly related to a substantive drug investigation or long term investigation,” and then only when a suspect “flees while driving in a reckless manner” and after an attempted stop or a refusal to stop. Review of SOP 660 comes in response to the second-longest pursuit in 2023, which extended 49.9 miles, lasted 55 minutes, and resulted in recovery of a small quantity of narcotics, said MPD Assistant Chief Craig Sarnow during testimony before the Milwaukee Common Council’s Public Safety and Health Committee last week. “We continuously look at this to hone in because there is a risk to the community every time we engage in a pursuit” and “we have seen very tragic endings,” said MPD Chief of Staff Heather Hough at last week’s hearing. In 2010, following four incidents in which third parties were injured, MPD adopted “one of the most restrictive policies in the nation,” which “essentially handcuffed” MPD, said Sarnow. In 2017, at the direction of the Fire and Police Commission, the policy was relaxed to its current state following an uptick in reckless driving, Sarnow said. The 2017 changes “took the hand cuffs off,” and “pursuits have gone up significantly,” he said. MPD statistics show that 14% of all vehicle pursuits in 2023 resulted in crashes, up 30% from 2022. Hearing such policy updates is new for the council's committee and follows the Legislature’s adoption of Act 12 last summer. The act largely stripped the Fire and Police Commission of authority to set policies for the police and fire departments, transferring that power to each department’s chief. The Common Council has taken the position that it retains oversight authority and can veto policy by a two-thirds vote, although that position is under review by the city attorney’s office. “We’re the only game left,” said Public Safety and Health Committee Chair Ald. Scott Spiker. When questioning the change to SOP 660, Spiker seemed at odds with MPD. “Hands will be tied now in a way that they weren’t before,” said Spiker. “Has the world changed enough since (2017) that we should now make a different judgment?” he asked. “What we’re talking about is what officers may do,” said Leon Todd, executive director of the Fire and Police Commission, at the committee hearing. “It doesn’t mean they always can, always will, or always should.” The commission also considered the change to SOP 660 and was unanimous in finding it “reasonable and positive,” said Todd. According to MPD statistics, vehicle pursuits occur most frequently between 7:00 p.m. and 9:59 p.m. on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays. Densely populated MPD District 1, which encompasses a five-square-mile area of downtown and the East Side, saw an 83% increase in pursuits from 2022 to 2023. But District 6, on the far southside of Milwaukee, saw a 72% decrease in pursuits from 2022 to 2023. Most pursuits in 2023 occurred in District 7 on the northwest side of Milwaukee (262 pursuits, up 19% from 2022); District 2 on the near southside (253 pursuits, up 25%); and District 3 on the west side of Milwaukee (246 pursuits, up 54%). Milwaukee police sought no-knocks in two-thirds of home drug searches, Marquette investigation shows1/27/2022 First of three stories. Recent changes affecting the Milwaukee Police Department could severely limit the use of no-knock searches in the city – but won’t completely end the practice. That’s partly because state, federal and suburban cops conduct a lot of searches in Milwaukee on their own authority. And Milwaukee cops, in some instances, can still ask for no-knock warrants. Another factor is just how normalized no-knocks became in the War on Drugs, with police saying the element of surprise protects officers and evidence. As recently as 2019, Milwaukee police investigating drug dealing sought permission to use no-knocks in 77% of their searches, according to an investigation by Marquette University journalists. And Milwaukee County court commissioners and judges almost always granted those requests (92% approval rate), the research found. The year 2019 was chosen for this project because it was the most recent year unaffected by the coronavirus pandemic, which hampered law enforcement and court operations. No-knock applications presented by police sometimes pointed to strong evidence about suspects’ ties to firearms, violent histories, use of video surveillance, and use of guard dogs. In other cases, the evidence was more abstract, referring to the tendency of most drug suspects, but saying little or nothing about the specific suspect at issue. The Marquette review also found that:
Even before the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission acted last November to limit them, the number of no-knock requests had been declining for two years in Milwaukee. That in part is likely to be attributable to the pandemic, which slowed police activity of all sorts. And out in the field, the actual use of no-knocks in real life – as opposed to just having permission to use one –had fallen close to zero in 2021, according to the Milwaukee Police Department. The reality, however, is that the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission’s action in November 2021 didn’t completely ban no-knocks, even though the commission said it did.   City police officers working with multi-agency task forces, for example, can still help carry them out if they can convince top Police Department brass that announcing police presence before pushing inside is too dangerous or would harm evidence-gathering. It’s common for MPD officers and other local police to work on these task forces or special units.
And suburban police investigating a drug crime that spills over into Milwaukee face no prohibition on requesting a no-knock for a Milwaukee residence unless their own communities have banned them. A suburban request came in Dec. 21 – after approval of the no-knock limits – when a police officer from Cudahy working with an FBI task force asked for and got judicial approval for a no-knock near W. Greenfield Ave. and S. 23rd St. in Milwaukee. The officer had evidence the alleged dealers would be armed. The search turned up heroin, cocaine, cash – and a gun, court records show. But otherwise in December the new no-knock policy made a difference: no MPD officer requested a no-knock. Milwaukee County Court Commissioner Barry Phillips approved the no-knock in that Cudahy/ FBI task force case, but he stood out in 2019 in a different way. Phillips in 2019 showed a willingness to turn down police no-knock requests, a rarity among the 33 judges or court commissioners asked to approve them that year, the Marquette review found. He declined about 20% while handling considerably more search warrant requests than most others. By contrast, in cases handled by other judges or commissioners, only 2% of requests were declined – just three cases in total. No-knock Future A national anti-no-knock movement flared in early 2020 after Louisville police killed Breonna Taylor during a botched drug raid. In Milwaukee, the debate over no-knocks also was influenced by the killing of Milwaukee Police Officer Matthew Rittner in 2019. He was shot while he and other officers were trying to enter a drug suspect’s home with a battering ram while carrying out a no-knock search. Some in law enforcement see problems with overuse of no-knocks and the dangers the element of surprise carries. One suburban police chief, South Milwaukee’s William Jessup, sees them fading away. He gives them extra scrutiny in South Milwaukee. That community, along with West Allis and Oak Creek, are the suburbs most involved in doing drug search warrants, based on the review of court records. “A no-knock doesn’t necessarily make the officer safer,” Jessup said. “There’s probably some benefit in reducing the amount of drugs that are flushed or hidden, but to me that’s negligible.” In low-level drug cases Jessup’s officers often do “knock and talks” instead of home searches when dealing is suspected. That can yield admissions of guilt, and an end to dealing, in exchange for avoiding imprisonment, he said. David Budde, a former Milwaukee Metropolitan Drug Unit member and District Attorney chief investigator, helped conduct many no-knock drug raids. “They’re dangerous – not just to the people inside, but they’re dangerous to us,” Budde said. Still, both men agreed with a position advanced by top Milwaukee police officials during Fire and Police Commission debate: no-knocks should be an option if risk of injury to police is too high. (Police found firearms or ammunition or both in 45% of drug search warrants in 2019 in the county, according to the Marquette review of 312 cases for which full data was available). Another former law enforcement official, former Milwaukee County prosecutor Hanna Kolberg, said no-knocks “should be used judiciously and carefully, but there are times where if you take the right tool away, things can happen and maybe worse or better.” In Madison, majority Republicans in the state Legislature are considering reversing Milwaukee’s ban on no-knocks.  By Gretchen Schuldt Complying with a federal court settlement to end race-based stops by Milwaukee police "seems an afterthought" to many city officials, including those at the top, according to the settlement monitor. "It is not integrated into the daily work, strategic planning, and service to the community for all of government," the monitor, the Crime and Justice Institute, said in its second annual report on the settlement. "Dedicated professionals" are seeking to implement the settlement, "and yet, they seem to toil without a citywide mandate or the highest-level leadership confirming that this work matters," the report said. "Up to this point," the report said, "we have not seen any leader organize all relevant agencies in a conversation that drives the Defendants toward compliance. Each agency seems left to its own to set a plan without oversight, coordination, or direction." "They seem to toil without a citywide mandate or the highest-level leadership confirming that this work matters." Neither Mayor Tom Barrett nor Common Council President Cavalier Johnson responded to requests for comment on the consultant's findings. "Unfortunately, too few seem focused on the path of hard work towards compliance," CJI said.. "Or even on the important, long-term reforms that compliance permits." Police traffic and pedestrian stops still show evidence of bias, CJI said, and the city remains out of compliance with many terms of the 2018 settlement. The settlement followed a federal court lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Wisconsin, the national ACLU and the law firm of Covington and Burling. The Police Department, the Fire and Police Commission, and the city agreed to undertake a number of reforms, including an end to race-based pedestrian and traffic stops. "Many reforms embedded in the agreement require substantial government involvement, following the notion that creating and living in a safe community should not just concern the public and police...." the report said. "Effective oversight is a responsibility of and should be a concern for all aspects of government." "Each agency seems left to its own to set a plan without oversight, coordination, or direction." The city's financial concerns may lead it to underfund compliance efforts.
"Achieving the reforms set forth by the settlement agreement, to which the defendants agreed, comes with some costs," the report said. Sufficient staffing, for example, is necessary, it said. Barrett has proposed a $300,000 budget for settlement implementation in 2021, the same amount as this year. The report said bluntly that Barrett and the Common Council should appoint new Fire and Police Commission members to fill two vacancies and the seat held by a commissioner whose term has expired. Commission members are appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the council. "The vacancies limit the roles for interested community members, and consequently also limit points of access for the community," the report said. "There are likely many qualified individuals in the city who would be interested in serving, so it is unclear why the vacancies remain....The settlement agreement envisions a more robust and effective FPC and the demands on the FPC will only expand with the work toward compliance." "It is imperative that the Mayor and Common Council act to fill these vacant positions," the report said.  Wanggaard By Gretchen Schuldt Municipalities would be required to maintain police funding at current levels or lose state aid, under a package of police-related bills to be introduced by Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine). The requirement would have a devastating impact on local governments that are under enormous economic stress because of revenue lost during the coronavirus pandemic. Gov. Tony Evers called the Legislature into session on Monday to consider his nine-bill police reform package. Wanggard responded Thursday by announcing eight police-related bills of his own. State Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) is a co-sponsor on all eight bills and Rep. Janel Brandtjen, (R-Menomonee Falls) is a co-sponsor of a bill dealing with the make-up and operation of Milwaukee and Madison fire and police commissions, according to the Racine County Eye. Below are the Legislative Reference Bureau's summaries of the Wanggaard bills. Bill 1: This bill creates an independent use of force review advisory board. Under the bill, the board conducts independent investigations of deaths and serious injuries to law enforcement officers and deaths and serious injuries to others resulting from an action or omission of a law enforcement officer. The board must recommend measures to reduce the probabilities of deaths and serious injuries from similar causes and must also review its previous recommendations to determine if they were implemented and evaluate their effectiveness. Under the bill, if the board conducts an investigation of an incident involving an officer that resulted in death or a serious injury, its investigation may begin only after any mandatory or criminal investigation concludes. The bill grants the board access to all complete criminal and administrative investigation case files, models or renderings used in an investigation, and evidence and also to the state crime laboratories. The board must acquire experts and use advisors as needed to perform its duties; the experts and advisors include a certified firearms instructor, a defensive and arrest tactics instructor, an expert in cultural competency, a master instructor in professional communications, a master instructor in tactical response, a victim advocate, and a mental health professional. When the board completes an investigation, it must prepare an advisory report to be made public and be submitted to the legislature, all law enforcement agencies, and the Law Enforcement Standards Board. The report must identify events or developments that led to the officer-involved death or serious injury and make recommendations to prevent similar incidents in the future. The report must provide demographic information about each incident, share best practices used by law enforcement officers, and recommend practices that the board learns when exercising its review. Note: The makeup of the board would be heavily weighted toward law enforcement and police unions. According to the bill, the board would include
 Bill 2: Current law requires each law enforcement agency to have a publicly available policy or standard regulating the use of force by law enforcement officers. This bill requires each such policy or standard to provide the instances in which a use of force must be reported, how to report a use of force, and a requirement that officers who engage in or observe a reportable use of force must report it. This bill also prohibits disciplining a law enforcement officer for reporting a violation of an agency's policy or standard regarding the use of force.  Bill 3: Current law requires each law enforcement agency to prepare a policy regarding the use of force by its law enforcement officers and to make the policy available for public scrutiny. This bill requires the law enforcement agency to post its policy on the law enforcement agency website or, if the agency does not have one, on a site maintained by the municipality over which the law enforcement agency has jurisdiction. Under the bill, if the policy is changed, the law enforcement agency must ensure that the updated policy is posted as soon as practically possible but no later than one year after the change is made. The bill also requires a law enforcement agency to prominently post a means to request a copy of the policy and to provide a copy of the current policy at no charge as soon as practically possible but no later than three business days after a request is made.  Bill 4: This bill makes a number of changes that affect the board of fire and police commissioners of a 1st class city (presently only Milwaukee), the board of police and fire commissioners of a 2nd class city with a population of 200,000 or more (presently only Madison) (jointly referred to as affected PFC boards), and the protective services departments of 1st class cities and 2nd class cities with a population of 200,000 or more (jointly, populous cities). The changes include altering the makeup of affected PFC boards, requiring certain training for affected PFC board members, establishing certain requirements related to hiring and oversight of chiefs of protective services departments in populous cities, creating an executive director or independent monitor position in populous cities, and altering the judicial review process for police and fire department disciplinary cases in a 1st class city. Under current law, the board of fire and police commissioners of a 1st class city consists of seven or nine members selected by the mayor. Boards of police and fire commissioners of other cities, including a 2nd class city, consist of five members selected by the mayor. Under this bill, a board of fire and police commissioners of a 1st class city consists of nine members selected by the mayor, and confirmed by the common council. The board of a police and fire commission of a 2nd class city with a population of 200,000 or more consists of seven members selected by the mayor. Each of these boards must contain at least one member selected from a list provided by each of 1) the employee association that represents nonsupervisory law enforcement officers and 2) the employee association that represents fire fighters. This bill provides a method for selecting members of affected PFC boards when the mayor fails to make an appointment to a vacant position. If the mayor fails to make an appointment within 120 days of the occurrence of a vacancy, the common council may make the appointment, except when the vacant position is one that must be filled from one of the lists described above. In this case, the association that provided the list may make the appointment without confirmation by the common council. In a 1st class city, a three-member panel of the board of fire and police commissioners may conduct and decide a trial to evaluate a complaint against a member of the police or fire department. This bill specifies that when a three-member panel conducts such a trial, at least one member of the panel must have professional law enforcement experience if the accused is a police officer, and at least one such member must have professional fire fighting experience if the accused is a fire fighter. The bill also requires each member of an affected PFC board to take a training class provided by the city in which it operates. The training class must cover the mission and role of the board, the procedures that apply to disciplinary hearings, the conduct policies of the police and fire departments, and use of force guidelines of the police department. A member may not participate in any action of the board until he or she completes the training class and any other training required by the city. The bill also creates the office of executive director in a 1st class city and the office of independent monitor in a 2nd class city with a population of 200,000 or more. Despite the different titles, these positions have the same duties and requirements. This person acts as the principal staff of an affected PFC board, reviews certain situations or investigations involving the police or fire department, evaluates police and fire department policies and practices, and issues periodic reports to the public relating to the status and outcome of complaints that have been filed. The executive director or independent monitor is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the common council and serves a four-year term, at the pleasure of the board. This bill also specifies the following related to affected PFC boards: 1. When an affected PFC board appoints a protective services chief, the board must meet in closed session with representatives of the employee association whose members will serve under the proposed chief. 2. When an affected PFC board appoints a protective services chief, the board must hold at least two public meetings to hear comments from residents of the city and other interested persons. 3. When a member is appointed to an affected PFC board, the common council must hold two public hearings that include public comment periods with regard to the appointments. 4. If an affected PFC board accepts an additional application for chief of police after the application period for accepting these applications has closed, the board must reopen the application period for an additional seven days. 5. If the common council adopts a resolution by a two-thirds majority to conduct a performance review of a protective services chief, an affected PFC board must conduct the review and provide a written report to the common council. 6. A PFC board member may not continue in office after the expiration of his or her term, unless reappointed and, in a 1st class city, confirmed. Currently, if a board of fire and police commissioners of a 1st class city discharges, suspends, or reduces in rank an officer or member of the police or fire department, the disciplined person may appeal that decision to a circuit court. This bill specifies the scope of review under which a court is to review an appeal of this sort. Under the bill, a court must review the evidence independently and without deference to the board's findings; must reverse the board's decision if it finds that fairness or correctness of the action has been impaired by material or procedural errors; and must set aside or modify the board's decision if it finds that the board erroneously interpreted a provision of law, or may remand the case to the board for further action that is consistent with current law. The bill also requires the court to reverse the board's decision if it finds that the board's exercise of discretion is outside of its delegated powers; is inconsistent with a board rule, policy, or practice, unless the board's deviation is adequately explained; or violates the constitution or the statutes. The bill also authorizes a court to take additional testimony, depositions, and interrogatories, and to grant requests for additional discovery.  Bill 5: This bill establishes a $600,000 grant program, administered by the Department of Justice, for cities with a population of 60,000 or more to fund community-oriented policing house programs.  Bill 6: Under this bill, if in any year a municipality decreases the amount of its municipal budget dedicated to hiring, training, and retaining law enforcement officers so that it is less than the amount dedicated to that purpose in the previous year, the municipality will receive a county and municipal aid payment that is reduced by the amount of that decrease. The bill provides that the amount of all such reductions will be distributed to the municipalities that did not reduce their law enforcement budgets in proportion to each municipality's share of the total amount of county and municipal aid payments. Furthermore, the amount of the reduced payment that the municipality receives becomes the amount of county and municipal aid that the municipality will receive in subsequent years. The reductions under the bill do not apply to a municipality that transfers responsibility for providing law enforcement to another local unit of government or that enters into a cooperative agreement to share law enforcement responsibilities with another local unit of government.  Bill 7: Current law requires law enforcement agencies to develop policies on the use of force by law enforcement officers in the performance of their duties. This bill provides that a law enforcement agency may not authorize in its use of force policy the use of choke holds by law enforcement officers, except in life threatening situations or in self-defense.  Bill 8: Current law requires the Department of Justice to collect certain information concerning criminal offenses committed in Wisconsin. This bill requires DOJ to collect data and publish an annual report on law enforcement use of force incidents, including incidents where there was a shooting, where a firearm was discharged in the direction of a person (even if there was no injury), and where other serious bodily harm resulted from the incident. The bill requires certain demographic information to be collected about each such incident, and reported annually by DOJ on its Internet site.  |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed