HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.A. DWI Enforcement .
L
OSEMOU EXE'CUTIVE SU
CITY COUNCIL' 0
. . . 1
City Council Work Session: March 14, 2012
k
- A G ENDA ITEM: DWI Enforcement DA ECTION:
PREPARED BY: Gary D. Kalstabakken, Chief of P% ice • • - EN NO. /._.„A--,
ATTACHMENTS: None APPROVED BY:
. - - 0 o..)
,
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion
{
ISSUE ,
Representatives of four licensed liquor establishments attended the'Council Work Session on February 14,
2012. They expressed concern that aggressive and targeted DWI enforcement was resulting in a loss of
business to their establishments. More specific complaints included:
• Officers were fabricating reasons for conducting traffic stops, e.g. weaving or wide turn.
• Officers were making traffic stops for trivial "driving offenses, e.g. tail or brake light out, license
plate light out, and objects hanging from the rear -view mirror.
• Drivers are followed and /or stopped solely because the driver was observed leaving the parking lot
of one of the bars. This includes the stopping of employees , of the businesses.
r'
,• Officers routinely parkin bar or adjacent parking lots andnearby parking lots and intimidating
patrons of the establishments.
A review of squad video and other data has been undertaken to address the issues raised at the meeting.
Y
FINDINGS OF REVIEW
. ,
Review of Squad Video , , `
At`the February 14 Council Work Session, staff offered and was directed by the Councilto review squad
¢- video of traffic stops. Each squad car is equipped with video equipment: The video equipment is used for
gathering evidentiary recordings for DWI and other arrests, but it also is used to observe officer conduct '
and performance when complaints are received. While the system can be manually activated, it is
automatically activated anytime the squad's emergency lights are activated. r
Lieutenant Jewel Ericson reviewed the squad video of 333 traffic stops. This is a significant sampling of ,
the stops made by officers working the night shift but it is not a review of every stop made. The stops b
were made'during the months of December2011 and January and February 2012. Findings of the review , '
include: t
e
'
.^ 4
•• There was no indication that officers fabricated reasons for stops. i'
• Equipment violations were generally able to either be observed on the video, e.g. tail or brake light
4
out, or acknowledged by the driver during the stop, e.g. suspended object hanging from the rear-
vii
ew mirror.
• Moving violations could not always be readily observed on the video. For example, speeding is not
easily observed on video because the radar reading is not displayed. However, some violations
could be observed. Weaving in a traffic lane could often be observed as the vehicle's fires either
' touched or crossed either the center or fog line. As with equipment violations, in some cases the
driver admitted the driving violation when it was not observed on the video.
• Field sobriety tests were conducted on 35 of the traffic stops (-10 %).
'• DWI arrests were made in 26 of the cases when field sobriety tests were conducted.
• , - Officers were consistently courteous and professional during the traffic stops.
k
At the Work Session, both the American Legion and Carbone's representatives stated they would provide
police staff with specific dates, times and locations of specific traffic stops to be reviewed. Details on only
one specific incident were received following the meeting and that traffic stop is under review. Even
without specific'information being received, it is possible and even likely that the traffic stops that had
been referenced at the meeting were reviewed. by Lt. Ericson.
ff.
General information on the traffic stops viewed is included in this table. SFST refers to Standardized
Field Sobriety Testing. A Fix -it Tag requires the vehicle operator to provide proof of the noted equipment ;;
repair within 10 days.
STOP TYPE TOTAL STOPS ARREST - CITED FIX -IT TAG WARNED
Distracted Driver 1 v . 1 .
Domestic 1 1
Driving Complaint 2 2 •-, _
Expired Registration 3 3
Follow Too Close 1 1
Headlight 29 (2 SFST) 3 ; 2 24
Illegal Lane Use 46 (4 SFST) 6 1 4 39 '
Illegal U-Turn 1 , 1
License Plate Light 18 -(3 SFST) 2 :1 15 =
Litter 1 1 W
M isc. Traffic Stop 20 (1 STST) 1
19
Muffler , 4 (2 SFST) 1 1 -2
No License Plate /Permit 2 F ' 2
Obstructed View 28 (6 SFST) 3 1 r 24 , r.
,. Seatbelt 5 (2 SFST) -4 1
= Speed 73 (4 SFST) 2 22 1 48
Signal 7 (1 SFST) `" 2 5
Stoplight /Sign 23 (1 SFST) -1 5 17
F Suspended Object' . (1 SFST) 2 12
Suspicious Vehicle 6 1 5
Taillights /Rear Lights 38 (5 SFST) k 3. 1 34 6i
Tint * 10 (3 SFST) 1 ■ 9
f
TOTALS 333 (35 SFST) 27 39 2 265
. ,
I
, 2
i
r
.
9 r
6
Other Analysis
As part of the review additional information was gathered., A manual tabulation of all traffic stops made
during January and February was completed for the hours of 9:00;p.m..to 3:00 a.m.
A total of 476 traffic stops were made during those hours over the 60 day period. Further information on
the stops during the daily 6 hour period includes:
• 7.85 - Average number of daily traffic. stops -
• 1.31— Stops per hour on an average day
• 6 - Median number` of traffic stops per day Y
A
• 22 — Highest number of traffic stops (Saturday; February`4`'''— Traffic Safety Event)
•' 3.67 Stops per hour on highest stop day
• 20 — Second highest number of stops (Saturday, January 7th)
• ` - 1 — Lowest number of stops (Monday, January 2 " d ),
During the Work Session, the bar representatives made comments that officers were making traffic stops
P on the night shift for violations that go unenforced and ignored on day shifts. While the Department does
not track the details of warnings issued on traffic stops, some patrol officers on -some traffic stops do put a
,, notation in the Comment Field of the Event in the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) ¢ for a traffic stop.
The table below was created by"reviewing each traffic stop that did include comments and compiling that
information. While the table does not reflect the reason for the stop on all traffic stops made during
November, it does show that officers working day shifts do stop motorists for a variety of reasons -
including many of the same reasons for traffic stops made ' ori the night shift.
November Traffic Stops Between 0600 -1800 hrs
Violation Qty,.
Speed 47 ,
No Insurance 12
Suspended Object ° 9
Lane Use a ' 7 '
Expired Tabs i 5
Headlight Out 5 * -i
1 Equipment Violation 4
Current Address on Driver License 3
Taillight Out 3
Y . Semaphore 3
,
No Brake Lights 3 -
Expired Driver License 2 ' `
Warrant 2 t
Drive After Revocation or Suspension 4
Inattentive Driving - 2 ,
, No Seatbelt. 2 t
No Turn Signal - 2
Suspicious Vehicle 2
Ted Foss Law /Move Over for Emergency Vehicle 2
No Rear License Plate 1
3
k .
a
Cancel - IPS 1
-- Trespassing 1,
Improper Turn 1
t , No Front License Plate 1
1 Windows Frosted 1
Window Tint 1
Littering 1 .
Fail To Yield 1
Following Too Close 1,
No Trailer Lights - 1
4. ,Quality Control Measurements
Any arrest for DWI requires a court appearance for the offender. The case is subject to review by the
prosecuting attorney, the defendant and /or the defendant's attorney. The defendant always has the option
of requesting a trial. .. 4 ,
.
In 2007 a review of the Department's DWI arrests made °in 2007 `vas conducted internally by police staff.
This review - followed a significant increase in DWI arrests and was completed as a quality control measure.
At the time the review was completed, 162 cases had been resolved. 138 of the 162 (85.2 %) cases
reviewed resulted in a conviction for a DWI offense. According to MN Department of Public Safety —
Office of Traffic Safety's 2007 MN Impaired Driv Facts, the sta tewide conviction rate for DWI was 82.4%
and Dakota County the average was 7 Rosemount's conviction in 2007 exceeded both the
state and county averages.
. 'According to the 2010 M I mpaired Dri report (the last year for which data is available) the
statewide conviction rate was 74% for DWI offenses and in Dakota County it was 64.9 %. A review of
Rosemount's 2011 DWI cases with dispositions at this time showed that 75 have been resolved and 62
(82.67 %) resulted in convictions for a DWI offense. Although 35 cases still are pending in the criminal ,
justice process, the conviction rate for Rosemount's most recent cases continues to show a rate`'
substantially above the state and county averages:'
Charges for DWI have both a criminal and civil component. The results noted above address the criminal..
court disposition of cases; the civil track is pertaining to driver license actions that result from. application
of the Implied Consent rules. This civil action results in'withdrawal Of driving privileges and challenges to
the actions, are handled by the MN Attorney General's Office. Implied Consent Hearings determine if
Probable Cause exists based on the actions of the police officer involved in -the arrest to support the action
taken against the offender's driving privileges. If probable cause is determined, to have been present, the
driver license withdrawal is upheld and enforced/ Contact was made with the AG's office to obtain
Rosemount's rate of upholding of Implied Consent actions. The AG's office will fry to provide data prior
to the Work Session. ;
t
Officer Training — Impaired Driver Detection - Standardized Field Sobriety Testing'
In the City of Rosemount, each. patrol officer completes a course on Standardized Field Sobriety Testing . ��
(SFST) within the first 12 months of empl Usually the training is completed within,.the first 6
months. This is nationally recognized on the detection ,of impaired drivers; sponsored and
supported. byNHTSA. The in training is 16 hours, during which the course curriculum guides the;
officer through the traffic stop,.face -to -face driver interview, SFST, report writing and court testimony. In
addition, officers comple another 6 hours-Of training covering "Drugs That Impair Driving" and 4 hours .-
on Occupant Protection and Usage Enforcement, i.e. seatbelts and child restraint seats. Officers complete
a 4 hour refresher course on SFST and DWI updates every 5 years. , ,
- 4 < S
4 4
,
y
m , a.
z
{
Officers should be alert for signs of alcohol or drug impairment at all tinies'and especially in - the night time
hours when alcololuse by drivers is more common. The coordinator of the SFST course from the MN t
State Patrol was contacted and asked about any set,proc'edures of interviewing drivers during traffic
stops. Asking drivers "Where are you coming from ?" and "How much have you had to drink ?" are
common practice for detecting impaired drivers. The questions are part of the process in DWI detection
and are-asked ? as part of the,officer's interview,with the driver when'it is suspected the driver haS been ,
drinking. Suspicion of drinking or impairment may be the result of driving conduct, the odor of an R '
alcoholic beverage, or other cues such as bloodshot /watery eyes,, slurred speech, poor motor skills, etc.
The detection of the odor of an alcoholic beverage or indicia of impairment is'sufficient to request the
- Standardized Field Sobriety Tests be performed by a driver of a motor vehicle based upon established case
law. ..
CONCLUSIONS
W .
The review of the squad,video and other data did not find any indication. that DWI enforcement by
' officers of the Rosemount Police Department is being conducted in an illegal or unethical manner. /
.. ; Officers were found to be consistently performing their duties in a courteous and professional manner.
.: Since the Work Session several discussions have been held within the Police Department about
this topic. These discussions have included the supervisory staff and the patrol officers who work the
-night shift. Through these discussions refinements to DWI enforcements have been made. These
refinements include: ..
• Officers are encouraged to continue to patrol'and make traffic stops away from the downtown bar
area. While stationary positioning Of squads to conduct speed and other traffic enforcement will
not be eliminated in and near the downtown bar area, for example in the Rosemount Saw and Tool
parking lot which was mentioned as a frequent site at the'prior meeting, officers should also
conduct stationary enforcement in areas away from the'downtown bars.
• Officers are encouraged to focus more on moving violations and on equipment violations that
have a more obvious safety element (headlight, brake, light, tail light out.) It is important to note
that an equipment violation is supported by case law as a specific, articulable and justifiable reason
to justify a traffic stop. . , `'
DWI is a criminal offense and the Department will continue to' enforce impaired driving violations.
Society's tolerance of drinking and driving has lessened significantly in the last decade. It is believed that
the community as a whole has an expectation that DWI will be enforced as a priority. Not every stop is
. expected to result in a DWI arrest; other traffic violations are also enforced as a matter of maintaining
public safety. In addition, traffic enforcement is proven to be effective in reducing other criminal activity
through the visibility of traffic stops and the increased probability of being stopped in a' community with a
Police Department active in traffic enforcement. Proactive patrolling does increase the police presence in
the community. It is hoped that the refinements will help' reduce the perception that certain' ' downtown
businesses are being targeted for enforcement. ,
3 ,
5
v
F r
is