Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milwaukee Police codifies reckless-driving citations, adds victim-witness requirements; FPC reviews changes
Summary
At its Jan. 2 meeting the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission reviewed three Milwaukee Police Department standard operating procedure updates, including substantive changes to citation procedures and victim-witness protocols summarized by Assistant Chief Craig Sarno.
The Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission reviewed a communication from the Milwaukee Police Department on Jan. 2, 2025, describing updates to three department standard operating procedures: SOP 070 (citation procedures), SOP 665 (tire deflation devices) and SOP 710 (victim-witness rights and assistance). Assistant Chief Craig Sarno summarized the substantive changes for commissioners.
The changes to SOP 070 consolidate and clarify how officers handle several traffic-related matters, Sarno said. The department outlined five principal changes: a reminder that parking citations should not be sent to court administration; a directive to issue a citation for operating without a license (rather than charging operating after suspension) when an individual never held a driver’s license previously; added guidance for handling second or subsequent operating-without-a-license or criminal-traffic violations; codification that officers shall issue a reckless-driving citation when they observe reckless driving; and a new “reckless driving” envelope to ensure related paperwork reaches the courts.
“The biggest one to this, we included what we had previously described as just the directive from the chief. We actually codified it in the SOP now,” Assistant Chief Craig Sarno said, describing the reckless-driving citation change and the new envelope.
SOP 665, on tire deflation devices, was characterized by the commission’s research and policy analyst as technical or administrative in nature and received no substantive debate during the meeting.
SOP 710 adds requirements for how members respond to victims of crime. Sarno said members must explain the prosecution process in general terms, inform victims who will follow up on investigations and whether victims should expect future contact, and document in reports that victims received information about rights and referrals. The SOP requires officers to make reasonable efforts to connect victims needing additional services with appropriate service providers and to be attentive to victims’ special or cultural needs. The department also added required training for members on responding to crime victims and included a quick-reference guide linking officers to community partners and resources.
“We added that members must be attentive to crime victims with special needs and or be aware of the cultural needs for those crime victims,” Sarno said.
Commissioners asked whether the Milwaukee County district attorney’s office is aligned with pursuing criminal charges for operating without a license. An unidentified commissioner asked, “Is the district attorney’s office in line with issuing criminal charges for driving without a license?” Sarno replied that the DA’s office is aligned and that the department has exchanged emails with the prosecutor’s office to streamline processes related to reckless-driving documentation.
Commissioners also asked about officer discretion. Sarno said the citation procedures include a supervisor-approval requirement: if a member believes the totality of circumstances do not warrant an arrest, the member must seek supervisor approval to override the requirement to issue a citation for criminal operating without a license or for reckless driving.
Miss Cooley (role not specified) clarified the section of SOP 710 that requires officers to explain the prosecution process and the victim’s role. “This explanation should include the member informing the victim of the general direction that the investigation will take, how the department will proceed, who will be responsible for further follow-up and whether that victim should expect to be contacted,” she said, citing the new clause.
The commission’s research analyst characterized the citation and victim-witness SOP changes as substantive but noncontroversial. The communication was received and discussed; no formal FPC vote on the SOP updates was recorded during the meeting.
The commission held no public comment on the item, and commissioners signaled general acceptance of the department’s summary during the discussion.
