Formal complaint: De-escalation of potential force encounters, Assessment and de-escalation, Response to resistance, and other policy violations

OF
CITY
SUBTOT
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
ICMS #: 2021-1100
November 5, 2021
Complaint: The complainant alleges:
"I am including below an email previously sent to Austin City Council Members
regarding the events that unfolded in on . A full investigation into
each aspect is warranted.
Good afternoon,
On
I was having a 504 meeting with
when I received
notification of a large amount of police in my neighborhood following a potential shots
fired call. I asked
if they had been made aware and they confirmed they had and
would be in secure status. At this time, we weren't aware what was unfolding next door
and the situation developed throughout the day.
When driving past between
and my home, I saw multiple SWAT tanks driving
throughout the neighborhood and a large police and EMS presence. This prompted an
emotional response from me concerned about what was developing and, as is always a
concern, police handling of the situation. Hoping for a peaceful end, I drove home and
stayed there throughout the day. I checked on my neighbors and learned that code
enforcement and APD came to
to serve an administrative warrant
and mow the grass. The person within the home discharged a weapon and police did not
know if it was in the air or at the individual(s). One man prompted massive amounts of
police, SWAT, and other emergency responders. Several roads were closed off and we
were "encouraged" to stay inside with surrounding schools and daycare facilities on
secure status. The standoff lasted for more than 5 hours before
was shot as he
exited his home. I'm sure you're familiar with the incident but am sharing as a
resident. I am also somebody that has almost 20 years of professional experience with
consulting, management, and development of neighborhoods, condominiums,
commercial projects, and various types of associations. Among other things, I am
familiar with code, compliance, dedicatory instruments, working with the city, "self help"
measures and the concerns they bring, etc. In my personal life, I spend countless hours as
an advocate - for families, domestic violence, children, minorities, and our
communities. I believe my training and advocacy guides me and brings important
perspective to the discussion.
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
DATE
CUSTOM
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
I want to take a moment of your time to express my feelings about what has happened to
date and encourage the right thing(s) happen forward. I think this is important.
has had a few code complaints over the years for grass and the yard was force
mowed "without incident" at the end of
A fine of $596.42 was levied and the
property was promptly liened for this $596.42 fine. Another complaint came at the end of
and code was back out
to make good on their promise to force mow
again. That's pretty quick turnaround time for the city code compliance to come back out
here to
with enforcement, to mow this lawn. I can say with some certainty that
the $596.42 city of Austin lien was not helpful to de-escalating circumstances on this
follow up force mow. As an aside, $596.42 to mow a struggling citizen's yard doesn't, to
me, seem reasonable. So quickly liening somebody's property (their home) also seems
problematic to me.
I would like for you to take a look at a sampling of code compliance cases to review the
response and handling as well as looking at this one closely. Please also take a look at
,
a yard complaint called in approximately
(
was in
this same timeframe, for reference) This was not the first code violation for
In fact, they had a code violation just a month or two prior. The
complaint was
closed on
after coming into compliance on
The timeline alongside the
difference in handling these two complaints is interesting. As one small reference.
I would also like to point your attention to city owned/maintained property. Specifically,
we can discuss
,
many drainage ponds, surrounded by residential
houses. I lived one street over from one of these ponds
) for years.
Ponds that subjected my home and street to flooding, turtle friends misplaced into my
front yard, snakes, mosquito infestations, and more. The city is required to maintain the
ponds, but they simply don't. There are to be a minimum of 4 mows annually (additional
as needed) and it's a wonder if 1 or 2 mows happen, and it's a high effort exchange to
have even that happen if it does. The negligence of the city's responsibilities causes
flooding, snakes, wildlife, and other concerns - particularly given that these are
drainage ponds that have consistently been neglected by the city. There are drainage and
grading issues. I have spent years working, begging, and fighting with the city of Austin
(emails can be provided) seeking city of Austin remediate and maintain their
responsibilities. In my professional career, I have had many instances of many challenges
with the city of Austin maintaining their responsibilities - vacant lots, ROW, ponds, any
and every circumstance you can think of. I was motivated at
this morning to get my
infant in the car and drive a mile up the street from
to take photos of the pond that
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
CITY
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
plagued me for the years I lived in and managed
. It is peculiar,
to me, that the city of Austin can be SO aggressive with its residents while shirking it's
responsibilities.
Switching focus back to the incident that occurred
in
- The police have
shared in multiple public statements that they were aware there was possible mental
health and other concerns related to
I have not found any criminal
charges or anything in public records available to me to support this claim. This may
have been their opinion and it could have been unfounded but, nonetheless, they stated
they were previously concerned about mental health and possibly violence. Concerned
enough to escalate code enforcement actions beyond what is typical - to ensure this
force mow happened but no effort to attempt any appropriate actions to mitigate or help
this individual. Did he, or his actions or behaviors, simply bother or irritate (blind)
neighbors and code enforcement/APD to the point of this egregious response? That's a
question in my mind.
If we look at these circumstances openly I believe we will find some significant areas for
improvement. And this is important, for my neighborhood and for our society. We have
spent a significant amount of time discussing mental health and appropriate responses to
mental health circumstances. I am discouraged that we are still talking about talking
about mental health. Best practices certainly weren't followed in this instance. To be
clear, I am not stating that this was a mental health challenge, I am responding to the
police statements that there were prior concerns - about his well being, about his mental
health, and about potential violence. Were these "concerns" substantiated or were these
rumors from my
neighbors or opinions of those that didn't appreciate this resident
or his grass? Was code enforcement weaponized against one of my neighbors by another
of my neighbors? That's a valid concern. Is there anything to support this suspicion or is
it opinion of the code enforcement and/or police department? We don't know.
What's important here is that they have openly claimed to be aware of concerns and did
nothing to mitigate those concerns, instead escalated to the point of the occurrences on
in our residential neighborhood directly next to several
schools/preschools/daycare facilities that my children attend. I imagine this also cost our
city quite a bit of money which I do feel was entirely avoidable.
Another interesting piece is that
purchased his home in
when this was a
MUD and prior to annexation.
didn't agree to the covenants for the
homeowner's association when he purchased his home SO it is challenging if owners
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
CITY
RUSTIN
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
and/or the HOA are contacting the city code compliance based on perceived HOA
violations. Perhaps a city violation existed since the end of
when this grass was last
mowed but city violations are abundant and I question how "bad" it could have possibly
been. As a reference, I last mowed my own grass on
and didn't mow it again
until
. Aside from a patch of weeds at the corner of my property, the grass
hadn't grown and was short enough that I didn't receive even a warning letter from our
HOA.
I believe that an opportunity existed here to support in an appropriate way, and intervene
in an appropriate way if that must happen. Family outreach, social workers, and less
aggressive measures could and should have happened.
Moving beyond the measures that could have taken place from the time of the code
violation, the initial force mow, the egregious fine and lien, and to the aggressive actions
in the second attempted force mow, I would like to address the police response and
behaviors. We had a massive amount of law enforcement, swat, equipment, weapons, and
various first responders. I am not the most qualified to say with certainty that this was
inappropriate, but I question the level of response in this instance. There are claims that
he shot from within his residence around
.
I don't know with certainty if that was
ammunition going off in the fire, flash bangs from the front, or whatever method the
robot
used to enter the residence it didn't pick the lock. I don't know for certainty
what caused the fire and if
set the fire or if it was from flash bangs or the
robot's method of entrance into the building. I do believe, from police statements, that the
time of the fire coincides with the flash bangs and robot's entrance. I am also aware the
most significant fire damage is at the front entrance, the same location of aforementioned
police activity.
In all of that, we had surrounding neighbors that were allowed to stand on the street
directly across from a "shots fired" and 5+ hour stand off apparently necessitating tanks
and a military scene in our typically quiet, albeit entitled,
Austin neighborhood. I
believe those two are contradictory
We need two SWAT tanks and more than half the
police force, but we don't need to clear neighbors to safety? I guess I am confused. I
believe that there was ample opportunity (and certainly ample responders) in the 5+ hours
to clear the surrounding homes to prepare for
to exit his home, as he was
being asked to do. I am surprised that we can potentially excuse away actions taken
claiming a danger to society and not take measures to protect them. In any scenario,
whether it's shots fired from within the home or
emerging and whatever we
might opine during those 5+ hours would unfold, people standing directly in front of, to
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
CITY
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
the side, and across from the home is going to be problematic for all. Perhaps they could,
and should, have alleviated the potential danger(s) to the neighbors as well as the
distraction SO they could more appropriately address the situation. Perhaps, had they done
so,
could have had the opportunity to exit his residence without being shot to
death. The account from the police department is that he emerged with his weapon, they
did not say he pointed the weapon or fired the weapon at that point. I imagine the excuse
is a fear that he would shoot the officers or endanger neighbors. We had SWAT tanks on
scene for the officers. The accounts I am hearing from my neighbors are of the police
standing around sharing information with neighbors lined up like they're waiting on
snocones at a
block party.
The police surrounded this house for hours yelling through a bull horn "we have you
surrounded, we aren't leaving " I am not the expert, but I don't think this is the most
appropriate message. The police deployed flash bangs (whatever their technical term is)
and breached the premises with a robot in some unknown manner at the same time as a
fire breaks out. We have a man possibly having a mental health emergency, that certainly
would have only exacerbated in these circumstances, surrounded by military style
weapons and equipment, who has been disoriented by flash bangs, fire, and smoke
inhalation and he exits his residence. It's reasonable to think that he was disoriented at
that point. It's also reasonable to think those two SWAT tanks might have helped to
protect our officers. We don't know if we could have peacefully taken
alive
because he was promptly shot dead upon attempting to exit his home. Even with weapon
in hand, if so, the police have not ever said he aimed or fired at them at that time. A valid
question here is does walking out holding a weapon (on your property in Texas) present
clear and present danger? We move to the next argument that he fired shots previously.
The police stated they did not know if he fired at others or fired within the home. We also
don't know if ammunition was later going off in a fire or (again) how that fire was set -
by the resident or police action. What I do feel like I know is that if somebody discharges
a weapon hours before and I see them later and shoot them dead, a DA is not likely to
accept that as self defense. Even given the circumstances, I believe there was an
opportunity to use less lethal force here and that there were many missteps. I also
question the handling of this (start to finish) and the response to this concern in an
affluent
Austin neighborhood VS incidents perhaps in other areas of town.
This is an extreme and unfortunate ending to alleged overgrown grass resulting in loss of
property, loss of life, and a lot of trauma - to the deceased's family and to the residents
in our neighborhood. Perhaps our responses and handling of the situation caused (and/or
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
DEAT
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
escalated) the situation at hand and that's a reality that we need to review. Somehow I
don't feel like we improved the circumstances for this man, this neighborhood, or the
community. I am concerned about the events that unfolded and the ways in which they
were handled, based on my information. I am also concerned that we don't have more
information and transparency that is necessary and required. This impacts me not only as
a
but as a citizen in Austin, Texas, USA. While there was quite a display
and chaos on
, it has been quiet since that time. I do not see teams busily
investigating the scene and I am confused as to why. The city was SO aggressive to
resolve a grass concern, we are now staring at a crumbling structure and crime scene.
Does the structure present a danger to the surrounding homes? I suppose that's a concern.
There should be an investigation into the events leading up to these circumstances, a full,
appropriate investigation into the cause of the fire as well as the ongoing investigation
into the use of force. The bodycam videos need to be released and the public deserves
more information and oversight into what occurred on this day. If we can receive an
appropriate response and promise to adequately review all aspects of this, it alleviates
necessity to rally the neighborhood and community to call upon the city, APD, AFD, and
additional organizations to fairly and adequately investigate each aspect of these events.
I look forward to hearing from you."
This notice of formal complaint is a request for Internal Affairs to initiate an investigation to
determine if the employee conduct is within compliance of APD policy, Civil Service Rules, and
Municipal Civil Service Rules.
Recommended Administrative Policies to Review (to include but not limited to):
200.2 DE-ESCALATION OF POTENTIAL FORCE ENCOUNTERS
When safe and reasonable under the totality of circumstances, officers shall use de-escalation
techniques to reduce the likelihood for force and increase the likelihood of voluntary compliance.
Nothing in this de-escalation policy requires an officer to place themselves in harm's way to
attempt to de-escalate a situation. Recognizing that circumstances may rapidly change, officers
may need to abandon de-escalation efforts after they have commenced. Understanding that no
policy can realistically predict every situation an officer might encounter, the Department
recognizes that each officer must be entrusted with well-reasoned discretion in determining the
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
LUSTEM
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
reasonable de-escalation techniques to use in a situation. This de-escalation policy is intended to
complement, not replace or supersede, other portions of the APD Policy Manual or specific
officer training that addresses de-escalation.
200.2.1 ASSESSMENT AND DE-ESCALATION
As officers arrive on the scene, observe conditions, and interact with the persons there, they
should continue to gather additional relevant information and facts. These assessments, along
with reasonable inferences help to develop an understanding of the totality of the circumstances
of the incident.
200.3 RESPONSE TO RESISTANCE
While the type and extent of force may vary, it is the policy of this department that officers use
only that amount of objectively reasonable force which appears necessary under the
circumstances to successfully accomplish the legitimate law enforcement purpose in accordance
with this order.
200.3.1 DETERMINING THE OBJECTIVE REASONABLENESS OF FORCE
Any interpretation of objective reasonableness about the amount of force that reasonably appears
to be necessary in a particular situation must allow for the fact that police officers are often
forced to make split-second decisions in circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly
evolving, and the amount of time available to evaluate and respond to changing circumstances
may influence their decisions. The question is whether the officer's actions are "objectively
reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them.
211.6 LEVEL 1 AND IN-CUSTODY DEATH INQUIRY, REPORTING, AND REVIEW
REQUIREMENTS
Level 1 force incidents require an inquiry be conducted by SIU and may also concurrently be
investigated by IA. In-custody deaths occurring prior to or within 24 hours after booking require
concurrent inquiries conducted by SIU and IA, regardless of whether force was used on the
subject. The following sections explain the responsibilities in Level 1 force incidents and in-
custody deaths for:
(a) Supervisors,
(b) Special Investigations Unit (SIU),
(c) Lieutenants,
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access
to
communications will be provided upon request.
OF
CHILL
QUARTER
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
FOUNDED
NOTICE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT
(d) Chain-of-command, and
(e) Internal Affairs (IA).
412.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Hostage situations and barricaded suspects present unique problems for law enforcement. The
protection of the public and law enforcement personnel is of the utmost importance. Proper
planning and training will tend to reduce the risks involved with these incidents. The Critical
Incident Negotiation Team's (CINT) sole purpose is to facilitate the professional resolution of
hostage and/or barricaded subject incidents.
For purposes of this document, "professional resolution" means utilizing nationally recognized
law enforcement negotiation techniques which focus on saving human life during critical times
involving emotionally disturbed persons and/or criminal subjects. Professional resolution further
means recognizing the importance of safety and inter-unit communication and cooperation with
regard to the overall success of critical incident resolution.
Recommended Classification: The OPO is permitted to make a preliminary recommendation on
the classification of administrative cases.
The OPO recommends this complaint receive an A classification.
The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to
communications will be provided upon request.