LRO recommends dialogue‑led crowd policing and standardized reporting; Columbus POPS cited as model

Nick Barclay of the Legislative Research Office presented a research brief on police responses to public gatherings and crowd management. He traced the historical shift from escalated‑force responses (mid‑20th century) through negotiated management and back to command‑and‑control models, then summarized the elaborated social identity model (ESIM) research showing that police tactics and communications shape crowd behavior.

Barclay highlighted Columbus, Ohio’s POPS (public order policing strategy) as a case study: a dialogue team working within crowds paired with an arrest/control (ACT) team staged nearby. He said that in a recent Columbus event the department reported no use of force, no injuries, and no arrests under POPS — in contrast to a prior command‑and‑control response — and that one event alone produced an estimated overtime‑hours savings of more than $70,000. Barclay urged the committee to consider options to secure funds to formalize dialogue‑team capabilities at MPD, adopt standardized reporting mechanisms (he cited Madison’s ordinance requiring after‑action reviews for certain uses of force), and explore academic partnerships to support evidence collection.

Council members asked detailed operational questions about whether dialogue teams are codified in policy, how departments ensure dialogue duties prevail over arrest authority in practice, and how multilayered responses are kept as last resorts; Barclay pointed to examples in Seattle and Columbus where policy and training emphasize dialogue duties but noted that many agencies assign dialogue roles as secondary responsibilities rather than full‑time units. The committee thanked LRO for the report and asked staff to consider options for structured reporting and review.