[Proposal] Police Services Act / Police Services Board

[SafetyMoose]

Hello SAPD Members / ARPD Command

I come to you today with a proposition for a new system in regards to the way the SAPD is handled. I wish to bring forth the idea of a Police Services Board alongside new regulations and rights for all members of the SAPD. Please find below my document which I have been developing for many weeks now. Many of these new ideas / regulations are intended to enforce pre-existing regulations. The idea for this was drawn from the Police Standards that my own department uses and I looked through the handbook for regulation that would work in our virtual setting. Please provide opinion as to how this can be edited.

A copy has been privately forwarded to SAPD and ARPD command. This took a while to put together so I hope you find it interesting.

Argonath Police Standards Act
June 1st, 2012

Purpose

To clearly outline the conduct in which police services and their staff operate in the State of San Andreas, and to clearly mark the inter department duties, rights and freedoms of Law Enforcement Staff, The Police Services Review Board, and all other related organisations and persons within the San Andreas Police Department.

Contents

Part I - Responsibilities of Police Services

Part II - Police Officer and Other Police Staff

Part III - Complaints and Disciplinary Proceedings

Part IV - The Police Service Board

Part I - Responsibilities of Police Services

Police Services
(1) Every department to which this subsection applies shall provide adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs.

Core Police Services
(2)  Adequate and effective police services must include, at a minimum, all of the following police services:
1. Crime prevention.
2. Law enforcement.
3. Assistance to victims of crime.
4. Public order maintenance.
5. Emergency response.

Infrastructure for Police Services
(3)  In providing adequate and effective police services, a department shall be responsible for providing all the infrastructure and administration necessary for providing such services, including vehicles, boats, equipment, communication devices, buildings and supplies.

Part II - Police Officer and Other Police Staff

Duties of Chief of Police
(1)  The duties of a chief of police include,
(a) Administering the police force and overseeing its operation in accordance with the objectives, priorities and policies established by the police service board
(b) ensuring that members of the police force carry out their duties in accordance with this Act and the regulations and in a manner that reflects the needs of the community, and that discipline is maintained in the police force
(c) ensuring that the police force provides community-oriented police services
(d) administering the complaints system

Power to disclose personal information
(1.1)  Despite any other Act, a chief of police, or a person designated by him or her for the purpose of this subsection, may disclose personal information about an individual in accordance with the regulations below
Purpose of disclosure
(1.2)  Any disclosure made under subsection (1.1) shall be for one or more of the following purposes:
1. Protection of the public.
2. Protection of victims of crime.
3. Keeping victims of crime informed of the law enforcement, judicial or correctional processes relevant to the crime that affected them.
4. Law enforcement.
5. Correctional purposes.
6. Administration of justice.
7. Enforcement of and compliance with any federal or state Act, regulation or government program.


Duties of Police Officer
(1)  The duties of a police officer include,
(a) preserving the peace
(b) preventing crimes and other offences and providing assistance and encouragement to other persons in their prevention
(c) assisting victims of crime
(d) apprehending criminals and other offenders and others who may lawfully be taken into custody
(e) laying charges and participating in prosecutions
(f) executing warrants that are to be executed by police officers and performing related duties
(g) performing the lawful duties that the chief of police assigns
(h) completing the assigned training

Time for Completing Initial Training
(1) A Police Officer shall not be subject to initial cadet training lasting longer then 5 Months. All academy trainings must be completed in an efficient time frame that does not impose time restrictions on active officers.

Restrictions on secondary activities
(1)  A member of a police force shall not engage in any activity,
(a) that interferes with or influences adversely the performance of his or her duties as a member of a police force, or is likely to do so
(b) that places him or her in a position of conflict of interest, or is likely to do so
(c) that would otherwise constitute full-time employment for another person or
(d) in which he or she has an advantage derived from being a member of a police force.[/size]

Part III - Complaints and Disciplinary Proceedings

Publicly available
(1)  Procedural rules established by the Police Services Board shall be in writing and shall be made available to the public in a readily accessible manner.

Limitation, 2 Months
(1)  The Police Service Board may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if the complaint is made more than 2 months after the facts on which it is based occurred.

Complaints by Captain +
A Captain + of police may make a complaint under this section about the conduct of a police officer employed by his or her police force, and shall cause the complaint to be investigated and the investigation to be reported on in a written report by the Police Service Board

Complaint Offences
(1)  No person shall harass, coerce or intimidate, or attempt to harass, coerce or intimidate, any other person in relation to a complaint that is made under this Part.
(2)  No person shall intentionally hinder or obstruct or attempt to hinder or obstruct the Police Services Board or an investigator appointed by the Police Services Board in the performance of his or her duties under this Act, or furnish him or her with false information.

Off-duty conduct
(2)  A police officer shall not be found guilty of misconduct  if there is no connection between the conduct and either the occupational requirements for a police officer or the reputation of the police force




Disciplinary Action



Notice needed
(1) The chief of police or board, as the case may be, shall not impose the penalties of dismissal or demotion
(2) unless the notice of hearing or a subsequent notice served on the chief of police, deputy chief of police or other police officer indicated that they might be imposed if the complaint were proved on clear and convincing evidence.

Notice of decision
(1)  The chief of police or board, as the case may be, shall promptly give written notice of any penalty imposed or action taken
(a) to the chief of police, deputy chief of police or other police officer who is the subject of the complaint;
(b) in the case of a penalty imposed or action taken by a captain +, to the board; and
(c) in the case of a penalty imposed or action taken in respect of a complaint made by a member of the public, to the complainant.

Restriction on employment
(1)  No person who is dismissed, or who resigns following a direction of punishment, may be employed as a member of a police force unless 2 months have passed since the dismissal or resignation.

Decisions to be publicly available
(1)  The chief of police shall ensure that every decision made after a hearing regarding misconduct is made available to the public in the manner that he or she considers appropriate in the circumstances, and shall give a copy of every such decision to the Police Service Board

Powers at conclusion of hearing by chief of police, police services board
(1)  the chief of police, police services board may,
(a) dismiss the police officer from the police force;
(b) direct that the police officer be dismissed in seven days unless he or she resigns before that time;
(c) demote the police officer, specifying the manner and period of the demotion;
(d) suspend the police officer for a period not exceeding 30 days or 240 hours, as the case may be;

Suspension
(1)  If a police officer, other than a chief of police or deputy chief of police, is suspected of or charged with an offence under a law of Argonath or of a state or is suspected of misconduct, the chief of police may suspend him or her from duty
(2)  If a chief of police or deputy chief of police is suspected of or charged with an offence under a law of Argonath or of a state or is suspected of misconduct, the board may suspend him or her from duty.

Resignation of police officer
(1)  If at any time after a complaint about the conduct of a police officer is made under this Part and before the complaint is finally disposed of the police officer resigns, no further action shall be taken under this Part in respect of the complaint after the date of resignation.


Dispute Process

Appeal to Board
(1)  A police officer or complainant, if any, may, within 30 days of receiving notice of the decision , appeal the decision to the police Service Board by serving on the Board a written notice stating the grounds on which the appeal is based.

Board to hold hearing
(1)  The Board shall hold a hearing upon receiving a notice  from a police officer.

Board may hold a hearing
(1)  The board may hold a hearing, if it considers it appropriate, upon receiving the final decision of punishment, if said punishment is considered to be unjust.

Powers of Board
(1) After holding a hearing on an appeal, the Commission may,
(a) confirm, vary or revoke the decision being appealed;
(b) substitute its own decision for that of the chief of police or the board, as the case may be;
(c) order a new hearing before the board

Part IV - The Police Service Board

Responsibilities of the board
(1)  the board is responsible for the provision of adequate and effective police services in the state and shall,
(a) generally determine, after consultation with the chief of police, objectives and priorities with respect to police services in the municipality;
(b) establish policies for the effective management of the police force
(c) recruit and appoint the chief of police and any deputy chief of police, and annually determine their remuneration and working conditions, taking their submissions into account
(d) direct the chief of police and monitor his or her performance
(e) establish policies respecting the disclosure by chiefs of police of personal information about individuals
(f) receive regular reports from the chief of police on disclosures and decisions made
(g) establish guidelines for dealing with complaints
(h) review the chief of police’s administration of the complaints system
(i) respond to complaints and punishments on members of the police force
(j) review disputes submitted in regards to penalties and punishments on officers within the force

Members of the Board
(1)The Police Services Board is to be organized of six permanent members including
(a) The current ARPD commisioner
(b) five selected members of the police service whos ranks are no lower then Officer and no higher than Senior Officer

(2) Selected members of the board must
(a) remove any association with a specific police department
(b) maintain activity both in normal duty work and board work
(c) understand that their service within the board prevents them from promotion of higher then senior officer during theur service with the board.




Last Updated, June 6th, 2012

[Daniel_Bradford]

This is your vision on how you wish to see how roll the SAPD, not the owners one. Also, there are some points you made as to get an advantage over them IMO, let me take an example:

Limitation, 2 Months
(1)  The Police Service Board may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if the complaint is made more than 2 months after the facts on which it is based occurred.

You are refering to a complaint that has been re-opened against you and the facts presents occured something like 3 months ago or so.  I could have quoted more but this one shows well how you want to get the things at your advantage.

[Cyril]

Members of the Board
(1)The Police Services Board is to be organized of six permanent members including
(a) The current ARPD commisioner
(b) five selected members of the police service whos ranks are no lower then Officer and no higher than Senior Officer

Permanent ? Who gonna select them ? What will be the requierement excepted ranks ? Why no lower than Officer and not higher than Snr Officer ?

[SafetyMoose]

This is your vision on how you wish to see how roll the SAPD, not the owners one. Also, there are some points you made as to get an advantage over them IMO, let me take an example:

Limitation, 2 Months
(1)  The Police Service Board may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if the complaint is made more than 2 months after the facts on which it is based occurred.

You are reffering on a complaint that has been re-opened against you and the facts presents occured something like 3 months ago or so.  I could have quoted more but this one shows well how you want to get the things at your advantage.

No, that section refers to people creating NEW reports on a member of SAPD and has no relation to re-opening closed reports. The entire purpose of the Police Services Board is to prevent re-opening reports on people. You are taking that specific statement incredibly out of context and I suggest you re-read it.

You also seem to have the mentality that people cannot suggest new ideas. This is a suggestion not some sort of "do it this way" thread. You are not the owners so do not speak for them


These regulations are drawn directly from real life police procedures that I follow everyday and have the handbook to reference from. Unless of course you are accusing me of going ahead and specifically putting thing in a real life police handbook for Argonath 

[SafetyMoose]

Members of the Board
(1)The Police Services Board is to be organized of six permanent members including
(a) The current ARPD commisioner
(b) five selected members of the police service whos ranks are no lower then Officer and no higher than Senior Officer

Permanent ? Who gonna select them ? What will be the requierement excepted ranks ? Why no lower than Officer and not higher than Snr Officer ?

ARPD Commisioner Jaaskaa would be in charge of selecting the members of thr services board. The reason only Officer to Senior officer would be selected is because we need to have board members who are absent from SAPD command to make them impartial to as little bias as possible in regard to command decision. SAPD command already has their job to do, the board needs to be members of the GENERAL SAPD staff to give them their own perspective on issues.

[Daniel_Bradford]

This is your vision on how you wish to see how roll the SAPD, not the owners one. Also, there are some points you made as to get an advantage over them IMO, let me take an example:

Limitation, 2 Months
(1)  The Police Service Board may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if the complaint is made more than 2 months after the facts on which it is based occurred.

You are reffering on a complaint that has been re-opened against you and the facts presents occured something like 3 months ago or so.  I could have quoted more but this one shows well how you want to get the things at your advantage.

No, that section refers to people creating NEW reports on a member of SAPD and has no relation to re-opening closed reports. The entire purpose of the Police Services Board is to prevent re-opening reports on people. You are taking that specific statement incredibly out of context and I suggest you re-read it.

You also seem to have the mentality that people cannot suggest new ideas. This is a suggestion not some sort of "do it this way" thread. You are not the owners so do not speak for them

I come to you today with a proposition for a new system in regards to the way the SAPD is handled.

Coming with changes is fine and very nice to see people want to make the SAPD better, thus what do you know the way is the Upper Command handling the SAPD ? How can you come with some proposal without knowing how it rolls ..

[SafetyMoose]

This is your vision on how you wish to see how roll the SAPD, not the owners one. Also, there are some points you made as to get an advantage over them IMO, let me take an example:

Limitation, 2 Months
(1)  The Police Service Board may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if the complaint is made more than 2 months after the facts on which it is based occurred.

You are reffering on a complaint that has been re-opened against you and the facts presents occured something like 3 months ago or so.  I could have quoted more but this one shows well how you want to get the things at your advantage.

No, that section refers to people creating NEW reports on a member of SAPD and has no relation to re-opening closed reports. The entire purpose of the Police Services Board is to prevent re-opening reports on people. You are taking that specific statement incredibly out of context and I suggest you re-read it.

You also seem to have the mentality that people cannot suggest new ideas. This is a suggestion not some sort of "do it this way" thread. You are not the owners so do not speak for them

I come to you today with a proposition for a new system in regards to the way the SAPD is handled.

Coming with changes is fine and very nice to see people want to make the SAPD better, thus what do you know the way is the Upper Command handling the SAPD ? How can you come with some proposal without knowing how it rolls ..

2 Reasons,

1) I have spent a lot of time as friends with command members in the last 3 years, I understand how they do things

2.) They have the ability to post their concerns regarding the proposal from their perspective just as you are doing. I could ask you the same questions frankly.

[Mash]

Instead of push his propsal in the dirt should you maybe highlight how SAPD roll today.

I haven't read it all, only few parts but most of the propsals I've read sounds reasonable. Well written but with the current activity of the required people I doubt this will be implented and overviewed in the nearest future.

[SafetyMoose]

Instead of push his propsal in the dirt should you maybe highlight how SAPD roll today.

I haven't read it all, only few parts but most of the propsals I've read sounds reasonable. Well written but with the current activity of the required people I doubt this will be implented and overviewed in the nearest future.

Indeed, these things take time to implement and I never expected some sort of speedy response to any of it. hell, this has been in development by me for months, the idea came to me over a year ago, I just never knew how to formulate it properly. This is just the public development stage anyway, feedback of all kinds is needed to iron out issues.

In regards to activity it is indeed true that many high up command members do not have the activity required to support such a grand proposition in a quick time period. One of the many positives of the proposal is its eventual self management that requires very little effort from outside parties.

[Cyril]

Well, I read it again and it raised my attention when I read "municipality".. I searched on google and found :

On your first part you said :

Police Services
(1) Every department to which this subsection applies shall provide adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs.

Core Police Services
(2)  Adequate and effective police services must include, at a minimum, all of the following police services:
1. Crime prevention.
2. Law enforcement.
3. Assistance to victims of crime.
4. Public order maintenance.
5. Emergency response.

Infrastructure for Police Services
(3)  In providing adequate and effective police services, a department shall be responsible for providing all the infrastructure and administration necessary for providing such services, including vehicles, boats, equipment, communication devices, buildings and supplies.

Little search on google and we obtain :

Municipalities

Police services in municipalities

4.  (1)  Every municipality to which this subsection applies shall provide adequate and effective police services in accordance with its needs. 1997, c. 8, s. 3.

Core police services

(2)  Adequate and effective police services must include, at a minimum, all of the following police services:
1. Crime prevention.
2. Law enforcement.
3. Assistance to victims of crime.
4. Public order maintenance.
5. Emergency response. 1997, c. 8, s. 3.

Infrastructure for police services

(3)  In providing adequate and effective police services, a municipality shall be responsible for providing all the infrastructure and administration necessary for providing such services, including vehicles, boats, equipment, communication devices, buildings and supplies. 1997, c. 8, s. 3.

Source : http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p15_e.htm#s4s1


Then I continue on.. (I didn't bother check all the part since I guess you did the same for everything) last part :

You said :

Part IV - The Police Service Board


Responsibilities of the board
(1)  the board is responsible for the provision of adequate and effective police services in the state and shall,
(a) generally determine, after consultation with the chief of police, objectives and priorities with respect to police services in the municipality;
(b) establish policies for the effective management of the police force
(c) recruit and appoint the chief of police and any deputy chief of police, and annually determine their remuneration and working conditions, taking their submissions into account
(d) direct the chief of police and monitor his or her performance
(e) establish policies respecting the disclosure by chiefs of police of personal information about individuals
(f) receive regular reports from the chief of police on disclosures and decisions made
(g) establish guidelines for dealing with complaints
(h) review the chief of police’s administration of the complaints system
(i) respond to complaints and punishments on members of the police force
(j) review disputes submitted in regards to penalties and punishments on officers within the force

I found on google :

Mandated Responsibilities of the Police Services Board:

Police Services Act

Section 31

Responsibilities of boards

31.(1) A board is responsible for the provision of adequate and effective police services in the
municipality and shall:
(a) appoint the members of the municipal police force;
(b) generally determine, after consultation with the chief of police, objectives and
priorities with respect to police services in the municipality;
(c) establish policies for the effective management of the police force;
(d) recruit and appoint the chief of police and any deputy chief of police, and
annually determine their remuneration and working conditions, taking their
submissions into account;
(e) direct the chief of police and monitor his or her performance;
(f) establish policies respecting the disclosure by chiefs of police of personal
information about individuals;
(g) receive regular reports from the chief of police on disclosures and decisions made
under section 49 (secondary activities); INTRODUCTION
Ottawa Police Services Board    7
Policy Manual
(h) establish guidelines with respect to the indemnification of members of the police
force for legal costs under section 50;
(i) establish guidelines for dealing with complaints made under Part V;
(j) review the chief of police’s administration of the complaints system under Part V
and receive regular reports from the chief of police on his or her administration of
the complaints system.

Source : http://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/serving_ottawa/services_board/pdf/board_policy_manual.pdf ; page 6.



Come back when you did something YOURSELF and not a copy/paste. Topic to be locked.
SA:MP and SAPD is not to be based on real-life things.

[SafetyMoose]

You do know I specifically stated I sourced this from my REAL police Handbook I use for work right? I did so because if they work in real life they obviously have been tried and tested enough to be proven as reliable procedures.

Correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure you dont have any real police experience to be critisising what I use from my real life as source material

I can timestamp my equipment with this book if you really dont trust me 

[Cyril]

You just made a disgusting copy/paste and come here saying you have "ideas"..
I mean, I can copy/paste French police structures and procedures and say "I've ideas how to improve SAPD!!"..
Come back when you REALLY think and work on new ideas.
Next time just give the link, it'll be faster.

And SAMP/SAPD is not to be a copy of Real Life.

[SafetyMoose]

You just made a disgusting copy/paste and come here saying you have "ideas"..
I mean, I can copy/paste French police structures and procedures and say "I've ideas how to improve SAPD!!"..
Come back when you REALLY think and work on new ideas.

You should remove all the SAPD codes and current procedures because they are identical to real life

use real logic please


Saying " herp depr this is used from real life" solves nothing. If you really say we should use nothing from real life then we should scrap SAPD all together, because 95 percent of it is ripped off from the LAPD or the NYPD. Just because I use real experiences and regulations does not make it wrong.

[SafetyMoose]

The idea for this was drawn from the Police Standards that my own department uses and I looked through the handbook for regulation that would work in our virtual setting.

As I said, I already stated this, learn to read

[Daniel_Bradford]

You do know I specifically stated I sourced this from my REAL police Handbook I use for work right? I did so because if they work in real life they obviously have been tried and tested enough to be proven as reliable procedures.

Correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure you dont have any real police experience to be critisising what I use from my real life as source material

I can timestamp my equipment with this book if you really dont trust me 

Has it something to do with your proposal ? I don't think so..

The idea for this was drawn from the Police Standards that my own department uses and I looked through the handbook for regulation that would work in our virtual setting.

As I said, I already stated this, learn to read

Drop this provokation.

[SafetyMoose]

You do know I specifically stated I sourced this from my REAL police Handbook I use for work right? I did so because if they work in real life they obviously have been tried and tested enough to be proven as reliable procedures.

Correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure you dont have any real police experience to be critisising what I use from my real life as source material

I can timestamp my equipment with this book if you really dont trust me 

Has it something to do with your proposal ? I don't think so..

The idea for this was drawn from the Police Standards that my own department uses and I looked through the handbook for regulation that would work in our virtual setting.

As I said, I already stated this, learn to read

Drop this provokation.

it has something to do with it because Cyril finds it amusing to point out the obvious and stated fact that im using my real life knowledge in this.

[Julio.]

Moose, you do not need to keep mentioning how these are 'real' regulations and how you work for a 'real' police force, as I am pretty sure the majority do not give a damn.

Someone had to say it straight, sad it had to be me.

You want to basically introduce more red tape for us to see, and thats not what we want in a game.

[SafetyMoose]

Moose, you do not need to keep mentioning how these are 'real' regulations and how you work for a 'real' police force, as I am pretty sure the majority do not give a damn.

Someone had to say it straight, sad it had to be me.

You want to basically introduce more red tape for us to see, and thats not what we want in a game.

And yet SAPD members are punished for simple things with no possible system of dispute. If this was trully treated like a game then I would agree with you, a system like this is not needed, however I have witnessed a lot of things that make me wonder if this really is treated as just a "game". if that was true then SAPD would have a sense of brotherhood and would not punish its members for things that even in the real world you would not be punished for.

This system makes it fair for everyone, no matter what your rank is. I only see this system as a necessary feature to make the game more fun in general without the fear of being fired simply because you treat it like a game.

[Cyril]

We have rules (Server rules and SAPD rules), if you don't follow them, you get punished. It's pretty simple.

[Huntsman]

Stop being hard on him serioulsy. He wants to give us his idea. If you have a problem with that then what are you even doing here? I never recall ideas being forbidden. If they are, we would be back to stalinism.