A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and ShotSpotter, Inc. to provide wide area gunshot detection, location, and forensic analysis service for the Denver Police Department. Approves a contract with ShotSpotter, Inc. for $4,700,000 and through 12-31-26 to provide wide area gunshot detection, location, and forensic analysis service for the Denver Police Department (POLIC-202161439). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 1-18-22. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-15-21.
Yes, council president. I move that council resolution 1514 be adopted. Thank you. Get a second, please. Okay. Oh, there we go. All right. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The 30 minute courtesy public hearing for Council Resolution 21, Dash 1514 is open, and we have Division Chief Ron Thomas here for the staff report. Oh. Good evening. Thank you. Madam President, the members of Council appreciate the opportunity to present on our request. And I'll get right to it here. So our request is to approve a contract with ShotSpotter, Inc for $4.7 million. That contract period would go from this period from now until the end of 2026, or to provide gunshot detection location services for the city of Denver. Denver Police Department. Two things that I think are important to point out here. The first is that this is not a request for additional funding. ShotSpotter is paid through general fund dollars that have already been approved by council through the annual budget process, supplemented by JACKRABBIT funding. Second thing is that we are asking for a the approval of a five year contract, and that is because ShotSpotter has offered significant savings for a longer term contract. Again. ShotSpotter is a tool that helps TPD respond quickly and accurately to incidents of gunfire in order to assist victims and also recover evidence. Currently, ShotSpotter covers 14 square miles throughout five different arrays across the city of Denver. And under this new agreement, there is an opportunity for a cost free expansion of about two square miles. In that expansion, as with all of our other arrays that we have already selected, would be done through a data driven analysis. So why is ShotSpotter important one for crime awareness? Gunfire is often reported, is also inaccurately reported. So often we get reports of gunfire. Those individuals that call really have no idea exactly where it came from, making it difficult for us to respond accurately. In addition to that, about 85% of alerts over the last three years had no correlating 911 calls. So these are opportunities where, you know, we otherwise would not have known to respond and recover evidence or attend to victims. Second, to safety with ShotSpotter, officers can swiftly respond to an accurate location where gunfire occurred more quickly, meeting community safety needs and attending to possible victims. I have a couple of examples of that. In October of this year, there was a victim who was shot multiple times in West Denver, unable to call 911. ShotSpotter Activation notified officers of the incident. The DPD did receive some subsequent calls, but the callers were not able to identify the location of the gunfire. But the ShotSpotter technology allows officers to properly locate the victim and render aid. Ambulance was called quickly applied to turn ticket saving the victim's life. And then a second incident. Also in October of this year, it was Denver. A victim was shot multiple times. There was no correlating 911 report for that particular incident. The officers responded to that alert. The victim was not even visible from the street. So it was based upon the GPS coordinates that those officers had that they were actually able to go to this exact location that was out of sight and find that victim and render aid. And then third, for investigations, when police receive an alert and quickly respond, they're more likely to recover. The firearm and shell casings and additional evidence can better support an investigation as well as corroborate. If a firearm has been used in additional crimes. We've got a couple of examples of that as well. September of this year in the far northeast, a victim was robbed and shot. He actually traveled quite a distance in order to contact 911. So he was not in the location where the incident occurred. But detectives were able to use ShotSpotter to identify the specific location where he was shot, recover evidence and actually recover surveillance video that was able to help solve that particular case. And then in another incident not far from here, actually, Civic Center Park, back in March of this year, there was a ShotSpotter alert that occurred, actually turned out to be a homicide victim was shot. We had a halo operator there, was able to quickly vector the camera to the specific location where that shot was fired, was able to see the suspect running from that location. The Halo operator was able to air that very specific description before that person was out of camera view. Officers converging in the area were able to locate that suspect quite a distance actually away from where the incident occurred and hold him accountable. And evidence of the crime was actually recovered on this person when he was when he was captured. So just a couple of points before I open it up for questions. One deputy does not use aggregate ShotSpotter data to justify his staff or contacts or saturate an area with police. Instead, we use alerts in real time so that we can respond quickly to assist victims or recover evidence. Second, as suggested in the Axios article, DPD does not use ShotSpotter alerts to prosecute individuals. Instead, we utilize the ability to quickly and accurately respond to a location so that valuable information, such as video surveillance and shell casings, other forensic evidence can be recovered that can be used toward a successful prosecution. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Division Chief Thomas. This evening, we have 24 individuals signed up to speak. And a reminder again, we have 30 minutes for the courtesy public hearing. Our first speaker is joining us online, Craig Collier. Yes. Canary. Yes. Great. I'll keep it quick when I got a lot of people. Good evening, counsel. I'm Craig Taylor. That's okay. Everyone, get down. I live in District ten of Denver, Colorado. I'm joining today's comments to pose several questions to the Council. Hopefully will be asked if before it is approved. But until then, I do do not support generally. So first of all, off on the heels of last week's tragedy and I want to thank counsel, thanks for the moment of silence earlier for the community's loss. But it would be well received if things like that were communicated as to whether or not ShotSpotter ShotSpotter identified any activity from that particular incident. It seems the Broadway location may be in the area, but that with some prior limited knowledge of the area being monitored, how extensive that goes. Um, also, I will generally keep my concerns with regard to transparency to the public, which ShotSpotter is meant to serve and keep safe. I believe that others may address those. Speaking after me, that is disproportionate effects that this puts on minority neighborhoods, which I generally agree with as well. But it seems it is little. Little data is available until DPD released anything really related to ShotSpotter. If this technology is so valuable, it should be considered pertinent that the public is notified with more immediacy than currently provided through other channels. Typically at deputies human discretion, the resolution indicates that the that Denver will have API licenses which will allow for real time notification has the officer indicate as well. And I believe that has just been expanded to a more general public. But to members of the community that may be may choose to receive notifications if this is not done, in my opinion, puts these lines of communications in line with the encrypted or inaccessible lines of communication by the public and should be addressed with Denver Police Department's communication access policy. This is defined in last year's Colorado. Legislation that revised Colorado based statute 20 46502, which I and other matters have requested multiple times from the police department and have not received any any information. I'd encourage the Council to inquire about that as well. Um, but I would like specifically to ask if, uh, DPD addresses Hot Shot spot notifications as part of the communications access policy for journalists and what they should be providing to a more real time. I think that there is a great benefit to our community community for potentially dangerous situation. That's the time we have allotted for each speaker. Gregory La Berge is joining us in chambers. Honorable Council members appreciate the opportunity to speak. My name is Gregory Le Bear's. L a b e rg. I live in Denver, Colorado, 1371 Cherokee Street. I just I just am some evidence division for the Denver Police Department. So the cases you mentioned earlier this week, we were active participants in the investigation of those tragic cases that happened in our city, as we are every night of the week and every day of the week. So I'm responsible for all crime scene operations, as well as all forensic science operations within the city and county of Denver . That includes DNA analysis, fingerprints, video processing on all of the different types of sciences that we use to help to try to investigate crime. We led the nation earlier in the decade, 2012 2013, in actively pursuing crime guns. You'll hear things called crime guns. And so we we took active steps with ATF to interdict and to trace crime guns to the best of our abilities in 2015, as is when we introduced ShotSpotter, when we introduced the concept of using ShotSpotter on a limited basis within the city of Denver. Since that time, 2015 to about the end of last year. We've seen a 262% increase in the number of shell casings we recovered. And just to give you context. Any shell casing that hits the streets of Denver that we know about and ShotSpotter plays an important part of that. We, within 24 to 48 hours will recover that shell casing and it will be included into a database which is searched across the city and the region, if necessary, to link shootings together. It's called NAEP and IBM, the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network. Also, since 2015, we've seen 133% increase in the number of recovered firearms within the city of Denver. Crime guns that are also test fired and their shell casings are compared to outstanding cases. So that can help us to identify potential suspects in crimes. Also, we've seen a 468% increase since 2015, mainly due to ShotSpotter in the number of matches we've seen on the database. That gives us investigative information. So all of these systems together feed into our workflow within the crime laboratory to help detectives and help investigators across the city and county of Denver do something about crime guns in a very timely manner. The program has been so successful that ATF has modeled our program across the nation, and I think later you will have someone from ATF speaking to that. But I would urge support for the continued use of ShotSpotter as as part of Denver's approach to limiting the impact of crime, guns in our community and the senseless loss of life. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is joining us online and it's Kimberly Morse. And Kim, if you could raise your hand, please. We have a name, but it's Jay. And so we want to make sure that it's you. We'll get you into the Q Kitchen and you can introduce yourself. Okay. Give me just one moment to pull up my notes. Good evening, counsel. I'm here to speak about the ShotSpotter contract as both a Denver resident and a volunteer with the task force to reimagine policing and public safety, though not on behalf of the task force. In June of 2020, this council proclaimed Racism is a public health crisis in response to the murder that brought about this proclamation. Residents from all across the city and across many demographics came together to reimagine what it would take to make Denver a city in which every person was safe. This community led task force developed a set of strategies and specific recommendations to help our city prevent, reduce and heal harm. And the strategy to minimize unnecessary interaction with law enforcement includes a recommendation specifically to remove electronic surveillance apps. And it. Active investigation. I prohibit future investments in electronic surveillance in overpoliced communities. Current shirts. Excuse me. Current ShotSpotter deployments occur in neighborhoods that have historically had the least investment in basic amenities, like nearby access to grocery stores, well-resourced neighborhood schools and clean air. But they've had the most investment in policing. Bessel van Dale Cook, a top clinician and researcher on trauma, says that behaviors of traumatized people are not the result of moral failings or a sign of bad character, but rather they're caused by actual changes in the brain once it has been traumatized and trauma is manifested as physical disease , mental illness, substance abuse, poverty and crime. And our current model of public safety makes us less safe because of its role in the cycle of trauma. A recent article highlighted Spd's own data showing that just 3% of ShotSpotter alerts resulted in arrest in 2020. Under the current contract, that's about $11,000 per arrest. Last year, John Hopkins University and York Academy of Medicine each released findings of their own respective ShotSpotter studies, concluding that the technology had no significant impact on gun related homicides or arrest outcomes. But it did increase the demand on police resources. One study even determined that it was policy, not technology, that was more cost effective for reducing urban gun violence. Last month, Councilwoman CdeBaca suggested several common sense adjustments to Denver's budget, in which 4.7 million would lead to better safety for all and deliver greater value to our community. Suggestions such as funding youth employment and job training and renovating a full service, mental health and substance abuse treatment facility would align with the task force recommendations and provide better return on our investment for our neighbors and our community. So whether it's finally, excuse me, fiscal responsibility or backing up this council's proclamation that racism is a public health crisis, I request that you vote no on this multiyear agreement. Denver does not need to ramp up policing in neighborhoods that are already overpoliced. Please work with the task force and the community at large to invest in resources that will heal the community and reduce violence. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker online is Jeffrey Russell. Hi. Good evening. My name is Jeffrey Russell. I'm a supervisory special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, otherwise known as ATF. I do apologize for my raspy voice. I'm just getting over being sick. I would like to point out that over the last decade or so, the Denver Police Department, the Denver Police Department , crime lab and ATF have led the way across the nation to a scientific and forensic approach to a violent gun crime. And certainly a ShotSpotter lies right at the heart of that process. I would like to draw attention to the fact that ShotSpotter is a forensic technology that is the foundation for a scientific chain of testing that occurs in the Denver nationally renowned Denver Police Department crime laboratory. Some of this testing, as stated earlier, is DNA, fingerprints and Niven, which is ballistic imaging. So what does this do? This ShotSpotter allows us. Sine scientific specificity in initiating our investigations, in carrying out our investigations in and in the culmination of our investigations. Every aspect of what we do is wrapped in science. The results are. Speak for themselves. We we have impactful results in violence, disruption. And we are able through this process and ShotSpotter that starts it out, are able to identify firearms traffickers that illegally and knowingly put firearms crime guns into the hands of violent offenders. I would also be remiss if I did not point out that this process and again, that ShotSpotter initiates and launches also exonerate people as wrongdoers. In summation, I would like to again reiterate that shot swatters, the technology that makes the entire scientific process and ensuing impactful community results possible. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have DeRay. And it looks like we don't have Dre with us. Okay Keith there's versus online. There's a small issue with the attendees names. DeRay would be listed as Elizabeth and I believe has raised his hand. There's three showing for that same link. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman CdeBaca. So, DeRay. Yes. There you go. They need. To. Are they under Elizabeth Epps? He? Yes, he just got advanced. He's in the queue right now. I'm here. Okay. Go ahead, please. Introduce yourself for the public record interview. I'm DeRay McKesson. I help lead Campaign Zero, a national advocacy organization focused on ending police violence. So what I want to talk about ShotSpotter. We have research, ShotSpotter across the country encouraging you to vote against this contract extension tonight. Remember that ShotSpotter is a piece of software that will not allow they will not allow the technology to be validated by a third party vendor. So when people have talked previously about this technology is actually recording gunshots. Remember that we have no proof that they actually can detect anything other than loud noises. They will not allow this technology to be validated by any third party. That's what our also assumes that every single alert sent to the police is a gunshot. The only way that we would ever know that it's not a gunshot is if the police in the city actually go into the spot. A tool and log. It is not a gunshot. We have not seen any public data about Denver's false positive rates. And that's important because in Chicago, there's a 22 month period where no Chicago police officer had noted that anything was not a gunshot. We know that not every alert sent through ShotSpotter is actually a gunshot. But the way the system is set up is that they are stupid at every single one is. And that's not true. When the issue of shell casings that was spoken about by a member of the police department for a minute, these shell casings are often unusable that they even the Denver's own data, these shell casings are not leading to an increase in arrests. They're not leading to any demonstrable decrease in guns on the street. That's not even data that they can provide. But we have police officers going to scenes after the shooter is already gone and collecting something that is not even being able to be used as evidence in court. And remember that there is research by Dennis Mares that shows that 911 is actually eight times more effective at finding found at crime incidents than ShotSpotter. So the request would be to invest this money in making that one better that you and I both know that anybody who is shooting a gun is now waiting for an alert to be sent to the police department by a technology that's never been validated. And they're not going to be there when the police actually arrives. This does not decrease gun violence. This doesn't actually help interrupt crime. And Denver's own data shows that it doesn't hold people who use guns in various ways accountable for their actions either. This really is a waste of money and again, technology that the company will not allow to be validated by a third party at any part of the process. In all that, we know for sure is that it detects loud noises. Remember that ShotSpotter doesn't even they they publicly know that they do not work on the 4th of July because they cannot differentiate between gunshots and fireworks. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Our next speaker joining us online is Keith Prior. Yeah. Hi, kids. Prior 2418 Champ Street. I think it's a valuable tool to have in the toolbox, and I don't think that it's an either or. I think that we should be investing in our youth and having a job opportunities. And I do believe that we should be investing in our mental health and having rehab and and getting the mental health situation under control. But we also have a skyrocketing gun violence issue in the city. We've had mass shootings just last week. And so we need to have this tool in the toolbox as well as invest in our mental health, as well as invest in our youth and as well as invest in our homeless. And so, you know, it's just a matter of priorities. And, you know, we definitely need to prioritize our public safety in all of the forms and and avenues that that takes place. And our Denver Police Department is key to that public safety. And giving them tools in which to be the most effective at keeping our community safe is essential. So I do want this to be supported, and I do want you to vote yes on actually enacting this contract so that the Denver Police Department can work as best as possible to keep our community safe. And I also want you to invest in mental health and also invest in housing solutions and invest in our youth. We can do all of it. It's not a matter of sitting there saying one does not have to exist with the other. So we need the tools, we need the police, we need safety. And that's going to basically help all of those other aspects to basically help keep our community safe so that others can get the help that they need. But this is critical and it is critical for having a safe community. And I really implore you to support this contract, because it does give us an additional tool to keep our community safe. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Brock Johnson. Hello. Thank you very much for having me. I won't take full 3 minutes. My name is Frank Johnson. I'm a constituent of Denver. I just want to express to you my strong opposition of the implementation of ShotSpotter. Independent peer reviewed studies have consistently indicated ShotSpotter does not reduce gun violence, but leads to increased unnecessary and potentially hazardous police interactions. This is due to the technology's inability to discern between a gun shot and a firework upon tire construction noise and things like that. Furthermore, by reviewing the city of Chicago's implementation of ShotSpotter, it becomes clear that it is most often deployed on a racially biased basis, further harming our communities of color. Thank you very much for your time and your work. I encourage you to vote no. Thank you. Our next speaker online is Kayla Frawley. Good evening, council members. My name is Kayla Frawley. I am a mom in Central Park and a resident of District eight. And at 79, 65, East 21st Avenue, I'm here to share my strong opposition to a 21 1514 resolution approving proposed agreement between the city and county of Denver and shortstop spotter. I remember hiding under my desk at my child's daycare center, calling 911 multiple times because of a shooting down the street or a lockdown we were in or lock in. Whether it's keeping my son home from school for fear of him being a statistic. The other week when. We had. A tick tock trend about school shooting or how I used to ask him to get away from the windows in our old apartment, I know my stress is likely shared with all of your constituents. All of us are impacted by gun violence, just as we saw the shooting last week when our community lost leaders and parents and vital historic community members in 2019, the Denver Metro had the third most mass shootings per capita in the country, and we are actually the fifth highest state when it comes to mass shootings of a million people. Residents are aware that we have to seek better solutions and invest in cost effective routes to reducing gun violence. And we have to take an equitable stance to community safety by reducing violence down onto our communities of color. Many people are aware of the Associated Press investigation of ShotSpotter. Like many of my colleagues and other constituents have mentioned already tonight and this investigation, they found pretty serious flaws based on thousands of documents and multiple interviews. They found the system to fire false alarms and fireworks car backfiring or quote. Loud sounds, unquote. And because of this, they found many judges actually would throw out ShotSpotter evidence in cases rightfully worried that the technology's results have mistakenly put innocent people in jail. We know that spot shelters are put in neighborhoods that are considered crime spots, which more often than not are disproportionately in communities of color. This is one way that ShotSpotter has already unfairly targets communities of color. And since implementing the Spire Charters Program in Denver, taxpayers have paid 6 million for the program since then, since 2015. At the same time, we have more gun violence since the program started and has sustained. It has also become apparent through a study published in the National Library of Medicine in April 2021 that implementing ShotSpotter had no significant impact on firearm related homicides or arrest outcomes. This program is not sufficient nor cost effective, and would put our communities of color in more danger by completely missing the mark on enhancing community safety and preventing gun violence. I strongly encourage and ask that you vote no on this tonight. We can come. Up with a better solution. We send a lot of provide the speaker electronically. Our next speaker is joining us online as well, Shannon Hoffman. Good evening, members of Council. My name is Shannon Hoffman and I live in District ten. I am here tonight to speak in opposition of the $4.7 million contract with ShotSpotter. Thank you for providing this hearing. So I and other community members can express our thoughts. Please vote no on this contract. On Monday, December 27. Sorry. At 5:15 p.m. I go to work, go pick up Robert. And as I did so many times over the last four years, I walked to the back of the shop, pulled around and walked out the back door at 5:20 p.m., two doors down from the shop where the supremacist terrorist shot and killed two indigenous community leaders who I love and admire and know. Approximately 5:25 p.m. that night. I share this with you reluctantly, because the trauma from this incident has spiraled throughout our community. But I share to say I am aware of how gun violence is affecting our community. And yes, we need to do something. We need to act. But we need to act in preventative ways. We need to act in generative and reciprocal ways. That is what my friend taught me. And that is what she taught her community. Do not use her death to support this anti-black and brown tool of violence. Surveillance is not generative. It does not promote the well-being of generations to come. To place these recording devices in the inverted L surveilling black and brown communities. This does not align with recommendations 53 and 55 from the Denver Task Force to re-imagine police and policing. But what might we do with $4.7 billion that is generative and inspiring? We could do, as was suggested during the budget hearings and apply these funds toward a facility that provides housing and mental health and substance abuse supports. We could provide multiple safe outdoor spaces and ask people and ask of people across the city during the rise go bond discussion. We could improve or provide sidewalks. We could add probably 30 miles of bike lanes. I have mentioned this to you before, but I think it's worth saying again that in 2021, DPD reported that they attribute 94 arrests to ShotSpotter and they attributed 68 arrest to it in 2018. So that's an average of 81 arrests per year. So this is a $940,000 contract per year divided by 81 average arrest. That's $11,000 per arrest. And that's just ShotSpotter. That doesn't include the cost of personnel or resources, nor does it take into account the costs when ShotSpotter incorrectly alerts an officer in the case of fireworks or a car backfire. And as we have heard, it is never ShotSpotter has never been tested against fireworks or car backfires. How easily at the. Time we have allotted for each speaker, our next speaker is Harmony Cummings. Hi. What if we could invest in proactive instead of reactive measures? I like bullet before it goes into my child. Or into your child. I want a bullet before it goes into a concertgoer. I want to prevent the bullet before it goes in to someone sitting in a movie theater. I want to prevent the bullet before it goes up in a King Soopers. And I want to prevent the where it goes into a mother and activist at a tattoo parlor and the tragedies that played out last week. How many gun tragedies will it take? What if we need to invest in much needed mental health care? What if we invested in afterschool programs? What if we expand it? Or every towns model for gun safety fun. And Moms Demand Action. Be Safe storage program. And other programs that promote gun safety. What if we could expand awareness and implementation around Colorado's Extreme Risk Protection orders, where authorities can remove guns from someone having a mental health break or someone who is posing threats on others like the shooter last week who wrote three self-published books detailing what he was going to do and how it's going to play out. Who was on police watch list from 2018? Bang, bang, bang. I want to prevent the bullet before it goes into my child. Your child or into your brain or mine. It's I just don't know what else it takes. Maybe the council should go back and watch the recordings from the height of Black Lives Matter, in which we made pledges to do better to our communities of color and see that policing them in this unfair manner doesn't work. Calling the police is terrifying for a lot of people. And I don't want cops charging in, anticipating gunfire that isn't real and causing more harm. Three months ago in Arvada, someone came in wanting to do a mass shooting and a local person that had a concealed carry weapon or a concealed carry permit shot the shooter before they killed scores of people to have the police come in and shoot them, killing the hero of our situation. I don't want these things to happen anymore, do you? Let's invest in things that are preventative instead of reactive, because by that point it's too late and people that you love and maybe you are dead. Let's do things better and more smart going forward. Thank you. That concludes our speakers this evening. That was our 30 minute courtesy public hearing. Thank you for the members of the public that spoke to us and that signed up in anticipation of questions from members of Council on Council Resolution 21 1514. Counsel pro tem twice. Thank you, Madam President. A few questions. I'm sorry I wasn't at committee to get a number of these answered, so some of it might feel repetitive from. I was looking at the PowerPoint that was presented in committee and you shared that 2020 saw 3093 ShotSpotter alerts 2021 as of early December, 3843, a nearly double from the 2018 number. When we started using using ShotSpotter, it was 2018. Was it the same geography that we have now? So it was actually 2015 when we started using ShotSpotter. But we have incrementally increased our coverage areas. So particularly from 2018 to 2021, there has been additional areas that have been added that have that have led to that dramatic increase. And it's 14 square miles of the city. That's where we ShotSpotter roughly. What did we start with? I don't remember the the square miles that we started with, but we started with an array in East Denver and then established an array in West Denver. And then I believe we added East Colfax, Montebello and then lower downtown. Got it. Okay. So can you give me a picture of what response looks like in West Denver? Obviously, some of the heavy activity that that that we see. There was a map that was in the PowerPoint of firearm related, I guess, crimes, but I'm not sure how that corresponds to ShotSpotter alerts. Can I can you give me a picture of what that looks like? Yes. And thank you for that question. So. So what happens is the the percussion, the, you know, the gunshot or quite honestly, of the firework or the backfire is is heard. It's caught by the sensors. However, there is some science that goes into reviewing that particular shot, looking at the sound waves and being able to identify specific to gunfire, being able to differentiate it because of its sound pattern from from a backfire or a firework. And so so that alert is actually listened to by individuals that that work for ShotSpotter. And they review the, you know, the scientific data, they listen to it, and then they make that determination. Is this gunfire that I forward on to DPD or is this something that I suppress because I strongly believe it to be something other than gunfire? So if they identify that it's believed to be gunfire, it is forwarded to our dispatch center. Our dispatch center notifies the officers. There's also a notification that goes to officers entities in their vehicles, as well as to their to their handheld devices, their cell phones, which allows them to specifically vector to that exact GPS coordinates so that they can be within 25 meters of the exact location where that where that gunshot occurred, which gives them that opportunity to recover that evidence and tend to those victims. So in terms of the 3843 alerts, are those alerts that were confirmed, gunshot alerts versus. Yes. Noise? Yes. Okay. And then of those 308 3843 gunshot alerts, what's the timeframe between when ShotSpotter kind of marks the noise to when they send it to DPD to respond to? It's a very short time period, so a matter of seconds, 2 minutes. And one in a person like a operating center or something is listening to every single one. Of their. Yes, they have extensive staff that are listening to these and and, you know, being able to to pick up the percussion, you know, verify the science and then make that determination, whether it's actually gunfire or not, and then forward that alert. So and then what's the time frame between? Because I remember hearing in committee, I think somebody said every single one is responded to. That is correct. Do you guys at at DPD, maybe at the district level, keep a timing account of when we receive it and when officers arrived? Because I feel like for for West Denver, if we're heavy in alerts, officers are responding all the time. So ShotSpotter alerts are given a priority one. So our priorities go from 0 to 6. And so ShotSpotter alert is given a priority one designation. So that is something that that a dispatcher would send an officer to faster than they would send them to an auto theft or car accident or something like that. And so and so, yes, you are getting a more timely response to a ShotSpotter alert than some other event. And but just just like any other event where we have to, you know, identify a priority, we may there may not be an immediate response to a particular ShotSpotter alert because of the the sheer volume of not just ShotSpotter alerts, but other priority one calls that are occurring within the police district. Certainly corresponding 911 calls would would be helpful in in adjusting that priority and seeing that officers are dispatched even quicker. The other thing that I think is important to mention that I did discuss at the hearing that you were not able to attend, is that there's also additional follow up the next day and that serves to purposes in my mind. The first is that we're able to do an even more extensive search for evidence in the daylight. You know, so, you know, often things are difficult to find in the daylight. Maybe it's even snowed overnight. So it provides us that opportunity to do another search for evidence. The other thing that it does is it provides us that opportunity to to to knock on doors and and make sure that this community, who already may have a reluctance to to call the police. I think it demonstrates that we definitely do care, because I recognize there are some people who don't call the police when they hear the sound of gunshots because they think no one cares. Yeah. Okay. So it could be anywhere from minutes and hours to a day. No, no, no, no. So, I mean, I would say anywhere from from just a minute to several minutes, because there's there's a number of priority one calls that are occurring at one time, but certainly not a several hour or a next day situation. So so there is a proper response to these. These are considered to be high priority for us. Okay. How many? End up in officers responding and nobody's their lights are off. Nothing is happening at the at the home, at the property, on the block. How many feel inconclusive, I guess. Well, that's difficult to assess. So, I mean, I can tell you that over 600 of them, we recovered recovered evidence, whether that be a weapon or that be an opportunity to make an arrest or recover shell casings. We do. You know, if we if we talk to a neighbor and they say, oh, yeah, you know, the neighbor's car backfired, or we we find remnants of fireworks, for instance. We do report that back to ShotSpotter to let them know that that their diagnosis was incorrect. And we have an annual account review where we go over our data versus their data to to to make sure that they're meeting that that that mark of of accuracy. And what is that account review kind of deliver for you all in terms of a grade or. Um. So they, they're, they're, they're part of, of the agreement is that they will have an above 90% accuracy rate. And each time that we've reviewed the account with them, they have been able to demonstrate that they're that their accuracy is far above 90% and. In our numbers that we independently review are the same. What's what does it actually end up being? You know, it's roughly between 97, 94%, actually. Okay. Um. So back to that map that was in the presentation for committee. So it's not a map or ShotSpotter alerts, but a map of aggravated assault with a firearm. What's the association of showing that map when we're talking about ShotSpotter? We didn't see a map of ShotSpotter alerts. Correct. So we have not shown where the exact you know, it's sort of an investigative privilege, you know, to identify the specific boundaries of where the shot spotters are. But the purpose for showing that particular map of this persistently violent hotspot locations in those five locations in the city, that that make up for a large percentage of homicides in a large percentage of our aggravated assaults environment involving a firearm. That's just to demonstrate that we have the technology placed in the right locations, because that is where we are seeing the most persistent gun violence. Okay. And then my last question is around the history on the contracts. Since 2015, have these been three year or five year contract agreements? No. So actually up until this point, we have just renewed a one year contract. But in our contract negotiations with them, I think it's also maybe important to to say that we we originally began our relationship with ShotSpotter in 2015, and it was really kind of a single source situation. But because there have been more vendors that have entered the space, we felt it appropriate to send it out to RFP. We also thought we would do our due diligence given some of the negative publicity, the access article and such. So. So we did enter into an RFP process and they came to us with a number of proposals, one of which being the five year proposal, the five year contract proposal, which within that proposal comes some substantial savings, which is why we are opting for the five year contract. Okay. Just in terms of sharing data, sorry, that was not my last question. This is my last question. Just in terms of sharing data, even with council members, I have had exchanges with with district leadership and officers about results or, you know, what did ShotSpotter say about something that residents were online about last night? But I've never really seen a report of here's the activity in your council district. Here's what it's resulted in as any as a demonstration of effectiveness, because I think it is a tool for knowledge. But, you know, for West Denver, you know, we definitely want safety as an outcome and increased trust that, you know, their phone call is going to matter or that CPD is picking up on something that just happened. And to routinely I think we hear that, you know, gunfire, nobody cares. Nobody responded. And so just want to kind of marry some of those a little bit better into here's what we know about response rates or effectiveness rates when it comes to why this kind of software is useful to you. Sure. Sure, I appreciate that. So a couple of things. So, yes, we have identified the ability to to provide ShotSpotter data specific to Council District. We have historically done that specific to police district. And we've been able to provide reports to those police districts so that they so that they recognize the rate at which we're recovering evidence , the number of arrests that are made specific to ShotSpotter, the number of of, you know, guns recovered, evidence recovered and things like that. And we think that that's important because, you know, we have officers that are responding to these things every day. And we want to demonstrate to them that there are fruits to their to their efforts. But certainly we are able to I checked with our data folks just last week, and they are able to do a specific report that that that can identify all of those data points for you by council district. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, counsel pro tem Torres and Division Chief. Next, we're going to go online to Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you. I have a long list of questions. I was cataloging some of the ones asked by people who spoke tonight. So I'll start off with a couple of questions that came from speakers. Did ShotSpotter identify any activity in last week's shooting? Yes. So the I believe the the incident at 12 and Williams was picked up by ShotSpotter. Was that the one? The Broadway tattoo shop. No I believe that was the the the residence at 12th and Williams. So was there a911 call first or did the ShotSpotter alert you guys first? I don't recall the sequence of if the 911 call for service came first or if the ShotSpotter alert came first. But certainly they both were beneficial to us. How often do we assess which came first? You know, I'm not sure that it's that that we've identified that it's important which came first. I think that certainly we want community members to to call the police and let us know of criminal activity that's going on. However, we recognize that there are segments of the community where that's less likely to happen. And so I think it's important to have technology in place that can allow us to have that that information without that that corresponding call. That's a fair response. But given that we want to be data driven, I think it's critical that when we're spending millions of dollars, we are understanding which comes first, because if in a large amount of those cases, you recognize that the 911911 call came first, then it actually tells us we don't necessarily need the technology that we're paying for. So I would hope in the future that we're checking which comes first so that we can have that data in the future. Additionally. We heard from the speakers that these technologies have disproportionately been placed in historically black and brown communities. Will this contract move any of the current shark spotters or does it just expand on that? So there's no plans to move any of the current ShotSpotter arrays. Our data shows that the ShotSpotter arrays have been placed in the appropriate locations because of the persistent gun violence that occurs in those areas. There is an opportunity with this new contract to expand by two square miles and the placement of that is unknown. At this time. We would have to do sort of a deep dove into into the data to determine which is the best location to add those additional square miles. So I'm a little bit confused about that or those comments because you're saying that the technology is effective in decreasing current gun crime or historic gun crime. But you're saying that we have evidence to add more, which would technically mean that they haven't been effective if it's only within two miles. So what evidence that gun crime has decreased in the current coverage area. So that so what I'm saying is that clearly the locations that the arrays have been placed are the right locations, given the fact that this is where the gun crime is currently occurring and has occurred since 2015, when we began our relationship with ShotSpotter. ShotSpotter, as part of the contract offer, has offered to allow us to add two square miles wherever we choose, but where we choose to, if we choose to take advantage of that opportunity so that that location will be based on on a data driven needs assessment. Can you give me the actual data points that you're using to as evidence that this technology is effective where it's at? What are the what what are the apples and apples that you're comparing? What's the data point that you're comparing? Well, I mean, I think if you if you look at the presentation earlier for the safety committee that shows the locations of our persistently violent gun crime, and that is where our ShotSpotter arrays are located. So that demonstrates to us that. Only correlation causation or so I'm confused about how we know we're decreasing gun crime in an area. If you're telling us that the gun crime has increased in the areas where ShotSpotter is currently at. Well, you know, unfortunately, gun crime is has increased everywhere. And and this is one tool among a number of tools and community partnerships that we are hoping to leverage going forward to address the gun crime issue. Interesting. Can you speak to a comment made about real time notification plans for the public? Is there a real time notification plan for the public when ShotSpotter gets an alert? I'm not exactly sure what that means. If that means notifying the community that there that there has been what is believed to be a gunshot heard in their neighborhood. I would say no. However, there is going to be a police response to every one of these ShotSpotter alerts in an opportunity for whether it's through neighborhood surveys or other contacts with officers in the area investigating gunfire to to communicate with community that there has been an incident of gunfire. So you mentioned that 75% of 911 in callers did not know a location from where shots were fired. Do you have raw numbers? Or. What was that? I don't think I'll let you finish your question, but the percentage that I mentioned was 85%, and that is that 85% of people not knowing where the word gunshots are coming from. That's 85% of shots, letters that didn't have a corresponding 911 call to it. We are also, though, aware of the fact that when we do have 911 calls relative to a shots fired incident, quite often they are unable to identify exactly where those gunshots came from. So, you know, they may hear or believe that it came from behind them or in front of them when really they they don't know. But the ShotSpotter technology is able to identify exactly where it came from and even vector officers in two locations that they couldn't see from the street. Okay. That's actually a good segway to the false positives conversation. I was a little bit confused about some of the numbers you mentioned. You stated that the false positive rate was between or that 94 to 97% of the alerts were for gunfire. But earlier, you had mentioned that 100% of alerts were gunfire. So can you tell me a little bit about our false positive rate and maybe just talk a little bit about false positives? And how is cite as a sound that's not a gunshot is logged. Yes. Thank you for that question. So as I said. So the the the sound is picked up by the censors. It's reviewed by a technician with ShotSpotter. If they determine based upon the science and based upon their their hearing of that particular sound, they forward it to DPD for a response. We respond, and we may not necessarily recover shell casings, but that could be because the shots were fired inside of a car. It could be that that a revolver was used where there is no shell casings to recover. However, there are instances where it would be reasonable to believe that it was in fact not gunfire, because we are able to at the location where we were directed to go, we find remnants of fireworks or we knock on doors and they say, Oh, no, that was my next door neighbor. When they have an old car, when they're pulling out of the driveway, I heard it backfire. And those are documented in an unfounded ShotSpotter go report and maintained by our data analysis unit. And then when we do the annual account review with ShotSpotter, we go over those instances. In fact, it's automatically reported to ShotSpotter when we believe that they were incorrect about a shot fired or what they reported to be a shot fired. So what is that rate? How often do we say that it's not gunfire? We say that we don't believe it to be gunfire less than 5% of the time. And then what data points tell us that this technology is effective at stopping or disrupting violence or solving crime. Are we simply using. Because you mentioned earlier one case where there was some assistance toward solving a crime. Can you tell me exactly how many shell casings have been used successfully in court cases? How many court cases? What percent of court cases? How many alerts resulted in a shooter being found? How many alerts are we getting versus 911 calls about shootings? Like, can you tell me a little bit about these metrics of effectiveness? So. So. Talked about the roughly 3800 alerts in 600 of those incidences. We actually recovered physical evidence in 120 of those situations. We recovered a gun and I'll have to identify my information specific to arrests. But we are also able to speak specifically to to the number of arrests. That are made specific to. So over 90 arrests just. Just this year. Specific to ShotSpotter. So. So I think that that demonstrates that that the tool is effective now in terms of reducing the incidence of gun violence. I just think, again, this is one. Tool. That we intend to continue to use, along with a number of other tools, as well as community partnerships to address gun violence. Before you jump through that, can you tell me of the 90 arrests? How many resulted in a conviction related to that? I can't. And that's only because it is very difficult for us to get court data. But I suppose that I could have someone undertake that exhaustive research and and identify how many of those specific arrests resulted in a conviction. Understanding, though, that some of those probably haven't even gone to trial yet. And Councilwoman CdeBaca, I'm going to go ahead and interject there. We've got two other members in the queue for questions as well. And so wanted to provide them some time. If you have a couple more questions, go ahead. But then I'm going to ask that we move along to Councilman Hines and Flynn. Just a couple more questions. Has a third party, some kind of neutral vendor, ever evaluated ShotSpotter as effectiveness? Yes. Yes. Appreciate that opportunity to address that. So I'm aware of at least three independent reviews that have been done. By who? One by Edgeworth Analytics, another by Project Safe Neighborhoods, and another measuring the effects of ShotSpotter on gunfire in Saint Louis County, Missouri. There's been a number of other third party reviews that have been done that have demonstrated not just the effectiveness of the system and being able to recover evidence, but also the benefit of being able to quickly locate a victim and get them to the hospital so that they can be treated further for their injuries. I think it also bears mentioning that of the departments across the country that have employed ShotSpotter technology, over 90% of them have renewed their their. Relationship with ShotSpotter. Of the counties or the cities like San Antonio, Charlotte and Los Angeles who have ended their contracts with ShotSpotter. Do you know why those contracts were terminated or not renewed? Okay. We're going to go ahead and move on. Councilwoman CdeBaca, if you'd like to get back into the queue. You can go ahead and do that. Councilman Hines. Thank you. Council President Chief Thomas, thank you for being in the hot seat and for answering our questions. So I see that, you know, the municipal government, one of our core charges is to further public health, safety and welfare. And I see that this is a conversation about whether ShotSpotter furthers public safety. And I hear that. So I just have a few kind of topics. The first is I hear from the community that ShotSpotter is placed in underserved communities. And so a couple of questions about that. You had mentioned that there are five hotspots in the city. I have you know, there was a press release about five hotspots in the city several months ago, and two of them are in my district civic center. And Colfax around the Gothic Cathedral. Are are those two of the five hotspots? Yes. Okay. So I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't just two random, you know, referrals to hot spots that that we were actually talking about the same things. I would say that District ten is inside the inverted L and, and so I'm not saying that that's, um, that there aren't ShotSpotter areas outside the inverted L, but I know that, you know, the public has made comments about how ShotSpotter was placed in, you know, historically black and brown communities and underserved communities. Um, district tennis. 82% white. So. Um. I also hear that ShotSpotter funding could be better placed elsewhere. I'm curious, though. So the Department of Justice, I think in one of your slides, you've mentioned that the DOJ is providing funding for some of ShotSpotter. Do you know how much the DOJ is contributing? I don't. So I will say and I think I have some some people come in to rescue me. So I'll just talk about. So for 2021, for this year, $835,000, roughly is coming from the general fund. And then $267,000, roughly, is coming from from jack rounds. You. I'm sorry. You said from Jack Reynolds. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. So. So now. So. So the total invoice amount for. For 2021 is $835,000 roughly. And then Jack Rand. So justice systems grants are paying for 267,000 of that total. So the this contract, the proposal is for $4.7 million. Would the DOJ pay for some of that 4.7 million and we would get some back or we would pay 4.7 million grant. Or. $4.7 million is the term of the contract. So that is the amount, the contracted amount and of that contracted amount, a percentage of that is being paid through a previously approved general funds and then another percentage of that is being paid by by grants. So those those percentages have already been worked out. To come to that $4.7 million total. Okay. So the city's contribution from our fund is $4.7 million? No, no. The total contract amount is 4.7 million. Do you know what the city's contribution is? Okay. So I'm being told that essentially of that $4.7 million, about 30% of that is being paid for through grant moneys. Okay. So, 1.3 million. I'm just doing napkin math, so. Okay. Okay. Got it. Um. And then I did do a quick Internet search of Project Safe Neighborhoods that seems to be a Department of Justice project that as I write or did I mean, I did that search 5 seconds. So maybe I was running the wrong. One. But it's through the Department of Justice. Correct. Correct. And then. And then there's other. I'm sorry. I'm just. I'm just referring to the other reviews that I mentioned as well. All right. Thank you. So another thing that I hear from the community is it's difficult for the public to determine the accuracy of ShotSpotter. So as I mentioned, the project Safe Neighborhoods, you mentioned to others, I didn't do a search on them because I knew I was next. Is it I think I know the answer to this, but I want to ask anyway, is it possible for the public to access the ShotSpotter data? Tell me what what data would you be wanting the public to have access to? I guess so. I'm trying to figure out how can I think that you have provided in your in your initial presentation, you provided some compelling statistics that make me want to, you know, want to to continue those statistics. I also hear from the community, you know, not only just in the public comment, but but, you know, I've gotten quite a few emails with what seems to be quite a bit of compelling research saying that ShotSpotter is not effective. And so what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to I'm trying to come up with some sort of third party way to validate. And, you know, you mentioned the three independent evaluators. I don't know any of them. And so I was thinking, what if the public can review it or, you know, like this is ultimately hardware and software, the hardware or the, you know, the microphones. The software is the the data that triangulate and pinpoints the information using technology. So if we could have a forensic analyst and a computer analyst come together and, you know, from a an objective third party, then I could slice through whose data is the right data and whose data is wrong. I mean, you know, like, I guess, how do I how do I determine that your data, the statistics that you provided are compelling and the published data is not the other way around. You see what I'm what I'm trying to get at? I do. But I think I would rely on ShotSpotter providing their data to the community, which they're not going to do. I mean, they you know, they're not going to sell that or provide that to anybody. They'll certainly review our data with us as we are reviewing our own data. During that, you know, during that that period where we reviewed the effect of this of their of their project or their annual account review. Yeah, well, I mean, if you rely on the wolf to count all the chickens, you know? Yeah. You know, I don't know if I want to rely on ShotSpotter to say that ShotSpotter is not effective. Well, or vice versa. I, I appreciate that viewpoint, but I think that the fact that we know that we are coming in contact with victims that we may otherwise not have been able to come in contact with before they succumb to their injuries and be able to get them to treatment. The the opportunities that we have had to actually recover the the weapons used in crimes, the opportunity to recover evidence that ultimately is able to lead to a prosecution, the opportunity to connect ShotSpotter alerts with video evidence that that ultimately leads to a prosecution. You know, that seems, you know, pretty compelling to show that that the technology works. Okay. Thank you. I might have more questions, but I don't want to waste time thinking through the questions. Thank you. Council president. All right. And thank you, chief. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Hines. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Chief. Is Denver's primary purpose for using ShotSpotter to respond to reports of gunfire that might not have otherwise been reported by the public and to recover whatever evidence may be found at that location. Yes, I couldn't say it better myself. So thank you. Thank you. That is our primary reason for our relationship with ShotSpotter is it gives us that opportunity to go to that exact location and recover evidence that is useful towards connecting other crimes, solving crimes, and being able to save lives. In your long experience in law enforcement, Chief, how typical is it for a person who fires a gun to remain on the scene long enough for a responding officer to show up, whether it's ShotSpotter or a citizen calling in 911? How often do you actually find the person? And you may not know this. But if you don't. Well, I mean, I think it's fair to say that's a rare event that I would think someone actually stays on the scene long enough for the police to get there and take them into custody. I think it's even a rare occasion that we have a Halo operator that is able to vector a camera into the location where the ShotSpotter alert has gone off and see a suspect running away. Certainly that has happened a number of times. However, again, the most effective use of this tool is to be able to get to that location and provide quick aid to any victim that we may encounter. And then again, to recover that evidence. Let me ask you, you said most gunshots don't generate 911 calls from a public. You said about 85%. Is that the number? Roughly, yes. Roughly. So about 15% of gunfire. And actually, now that I think about it, you said with the ShotSpotter arrays that we have covers, how much of the city. 14 square. Miles, 14 square miles out of 110, excluding that airport out in Kansas or wherever it is. So about 110 acres. 14% of that. So about, you know, maybe 15, 16 acres or percent, rather. Okay. So it's when you were asked how often does a911 call come in before the shot? Spotter report is not really relevant to about 85%. Of the calls. That occur and only 14% of the city landmass. That's a pretty that'd be a pretty. Insignificant data point, wouldn't it? Well, yeah, but I think I need to clarify, though, that that 85% of of I think we're I think we're talking about. Those those shot spotters that are within that array, those ShotSpotter alerts that are within those those five arrays within that 14 square mile coverage area, 85% of those do not have a correspondent. Exactly. And that's the only that's the only data you could derive, because there's no ShotSpotter in my district, for example, where I see people complaining a lot about hearing gunfire. We don't know if they actually did or if it's fireworks or whatever. So it doesn't even include that just the 14% of the city. And 85% of those reports are not called in by the public. Correct. Thank you. Has DPD ever in your data analysis. You ever compared shots fired calls. Within ShotSpotter areas to calls in areas that aren't covered by the public? In other words, do we have we obviously have many more reports of gunfire in the areas that ShotSpotter covers. We have, whatever, 85%. Divided by. 15% is. Have we ever done a comparison to see other areas of the city. How those. Reports compare? Well, certainly in those other areas outside of that 14 square mile area, the only way that we know that there has been gunfire in those locations is if there's a911 goal. So we have no way of knowing those instances where people chose not to call the police either because they didn't recognize it as gunfire or they they decided that maybe somebody else was probably going to call it because they heard it, too, or because they just didn't think the police cared. It's actually very. Rare, isn't it, for a police officer to personally witness gunfire erupting in front of them? Sure. It's okay that that did happen. And right outside my council office in in Harvey Park, you know, where an undercover unit was nearby with a running gun battle. Yeah, exactly. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Do you? Do you know what is the experience with evidence recovery and including shell casings in areas that are not covered by ShotSpotter? Maybe Gregg knows this. How successful are we when we respond outside the ShotSpotter areas to recovering evidence, including shell casings? Well, again, I don't I don't know that. That we could really identify our effectiveness there because again, we're only responding to 22911 calls that we receive. We recognize that there's some inaccuracy with with regard to location. So I can say that there are instances where we do go to where community members think that there's been gunshots and recover evidence. But I would say that the large majority of times we aren't able to find evidence because we just can't get to that specific location because it's just very, very difficult for someone who hears gunfire as they're, you know, inside of their home to identify exactly where it came from. It would be very hard to verify a false positive, wouldn't it? Certainly you're not there to hear the noise. You show up. Five, 10 minutes later. How the heck can you? I'm responding to the notion that we should be able to categorize easily a false positive. Well, there was no gunfire here because I didn't find a shell casing. But like you said, you might the person might have fired a revolver or it could have been the casing could have ejected inside a vehicle. And that's moving that sort of thing. You know, certainly. But I don't just want to I don't want to discount the value of community members calling in. Yes, there. That's what we prefer. We we wish we could. Thank you. Thank you, Chief Gregg, I just have two questions for you, I think. Yes. And how many do you know? How many shell casing profiles? Your fabulous crime lab. Which has, as was noted. Is is nationally renowned. How many shell casing profiles have we recorded in 1919 is the national. National Integrated Ballistic. Information. Network. It's correct. It's like. A fingerprint. File for bullets or for cases like I call it like a topographical analysis for a bullet. Like it looks at the topography, like looking at a topographical map. Same idea. 2020. We recovered 10,484. Yeah, 2021. It's an estimate because they don't have all of the data in yet. But it's 11,000 536, really. And that includes areas not covered by ShotSpotter. Do you know how that's not that's not just ShotSpotter, right? That's the city. Yeah. That's everything we took in. Okay. But, you know, your questions are scientifically based. They're good questions. The best way to answer them without doing a deep statistical analysis over time series, I have the background in statistics, so I heard what you guys are all saying. Actually, Councilwoman CdeBaca also look at the differences across the years, I think. You. What you could do is you could look at the differences across the years as it as it as it expanded in miles. Right. And you could almost figure out additions of each square mile, resulting in X number of increases and shell casings, for example. But it's a more what I'd call a multivariate problem, because concurrently with the advances, you've also had quite a bit of increases in in gun crimes, too, for various reasons. Right. There's different reasons for it, but it's all occurring concurrently. So trying to parse one cause from another is quite difficult. Action can be done with good experimental design. So what we're relying on is really the delta or the increases year on year. And what I presented to you was from 2015 when we had what I think it was one or two square miles up to now where we have 14. So you have the effect of having more coverage. Yes, right. But those are pretty dramatic increases. And the other one declines. Let me ask you, Greg. The bottom line that I'm that I'm trying to understand is when when firearms are recovered by DPD. And turned over to. Your lab and you can test, fire them and compare the casings, how often are you able to link recovered guns. To. Other criminal incidents or other gunshot incidents? And then this is memory based, so it's about 25% of the time. How much? About 25% of the time. So about 25% of the firearms we recover. We can link to other incidents, which means that we can close more cases. Yes. And potentially charge more or or one of the. Yeah, I think one of the other benefits is if you if you if you have a responsible party with the firearm and it's the firearm is test fired and quickly compared to the database and you have several matches, it makes a more compelling court case with that individual right now, whether they were actually present at each one of those, they can answer that. But it makes a more compelling case in terms of bringing charges or remanding over in custody, in terms of isolating that person for a while and then allowing the case investigation to occur. So, you know, the other day I was trying to get back to a question you have, but I don't I know your it's your floor. I'm not. That's that. Those are all my questions. Thank you, Madam President. Okay. Let's introduce yourself for the public record. Okay. Dr. Gregory Lubbers, Le BRG, I'm director forensics and evidence division for the Denver Police Department. So that's crime scene and forensics. I'm at 1371 Cherokee Street in Denver. Great. Thank you. All right. We've got a few more council members in the queue and we've heard from CdeBaca and Haines. We'll go back to them, but we'll go ahead and go right now to Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, madam. Madam President. So my questions go back to some of the same questions that Councilman Flynn was asking. About. How we tie the ballistics to Taliban. And I wanted to just ask first, is that. Where that work takes place to to basically I.D. a shell casing, to a gun that it was shot from. Is it done out of our lab or is that done through an ATF facility? I know there's a direct tie in because part of that was sort of created within DPD. And it's something that ATF has has adopted and is using nationally now, right? That's correct. So ATF provides us funding for I think we have three or four people now that work in the crime lab that support the efforts of what you just said, which we call triaging or we're triaging shell casings and recovered firearms. All of the work, as you alluded to, does occur in our laboratory seven days a week, not 24 hours a day, but close. But we have personnel that work across the weekend, so there's no delay. So so would you argue that that is a direct or very clear difference between some of the other cities that are using this same technology? I would argue that it is. I mean, you're only as strong as the weakest link. So ShotSpotter is getting us certainly contributing to more shell casings. But what you do with them once you have the matters and it has to be fast, it has to be accurate and has to be put out to detectives and others in task forces to do something about it downstream. We've done that well as a business process. So you sat here through our earlier conversation about the legislation that we just passed. So in order for you to really link that shell casing to a particular gun, having that serial number is a critical part of that, is it not? It's a part of it. But if we have the gun in possession and then we took the gun from a party, save from a search warrant, we will still test fire that gun. And whether even if it doesn't have a serial number, we can still compare the parts of that gun that's made up of parts without a serial number to evidence that we collect around the city. So it doesn't impede our ability to do that without a serial number. It without having a serial number, we can't do a trace, which is a trace to try to find the originating owner or from. Where it was sold originally. Where it was originally sold doesn't mean that's the owner today. Right? But it could be a starting place when previously you would have none. Okay. Those are all the questions I have. Thank you so much for reading. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. We're going to go back online. Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you. Just two final questions in diving in a little bit to what ShotSpotter office offers or promises. They promise 90% detection, but not accuracy. Do you, Detective Thomas, have any numbers on accuracy that ShotSpotter has promised to you all? Bless you for telling us. And so so they are promising accuracy in location. So their promise isn't just that they will accurately detect gunfire, but they'll also located in a 25 meter location. What percent accuracy are they promising for detecting gunshots? I'm not sure I understand your question. So. So they are promising accuracy in the detection of gunfire. So when they forward us an alert. They are. That is actually the detection of gunfire. And there they're promising the accuracy of the location where it comes from within a 25 meter radius. So I think we're saying the same thing. But let me let me say it back to you there. They're promising that they will detect the sound. They're not actually promising that they will accurately identify the sound as gunfire. Oh, they will. They will they will accurately detect the sound or determine the sound to be gunfire. And they will direct us to the location of that gunfire within 25 meters. So that's not what they publish anywhere. Is that written in our contract that they're promising us 100% accuracy in detection, that is gunfire? I think we're staying away from the facts. I never said 100% detection. They are promising accuracy within a very high percentage that they will accurately detect the gunfire. So the alerts that they pick up that that that that is, in fact, gunfire and that the location where they determine that to be is within 25 meters of where it actually occurred. You said a very high percentage. Do you have a number for that percentage nineties? And that. Okay. I would love to see where they make that promise to us, if you could send that to us. Also, if this contract is approved, is DPD planning to hire a third party independent evaluator to assess its effectiveness for the next go round? That's certainly something that we can consider at this point in time. No. We are convinced of its effectiveness. We are also aware of a number of independent reviews that have been done across the country that tout its effectiveness. Awesome. Thank you. That's it for my questions. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines. Thank you. Council president. I wonder if Mr. Russell is still in the queue online. He was the the representative from ATF. I believe it was Jeffrey Russell. Correct? No, Mr. Labuschagne. May I ask you instead that this is a bit of a I'm asking you to represent ATF, so please, if you don't don't know the question or don't know the answer. Now don't make stuff up. Do you know what about Denver? He mentioned in his testimony that that Denver's program with ShotSpotter has become a model that the nation has used. You know what? What do we do? What? Why are we a model? Well, my team created it, so. Yes. And it's really comes down to to leveraging the resource, the crime lab resources and being timely with getting the shell casings from out in the world into the lab to get imaged. And then for other things like fingerprinting and DNA and other methodologies, most other places would do those things in order, like A, B, C, D. We do them all concurrently by cross-training our scientists to do both ballistic work, fingerprint work and DNA work, which sounds elementary. But actually in our world, they're highly specialized methods. But we've created what we call crossover analysts to do it. And we got federal grant money from the National Institute of Justice to do that pretty large amount. So really leveraging not only the laboratory part of it, but also the information that comes from the matches between the shell casings that are found out in the world as well as the shell casings that come from fire and firearms. We do that very quickly and put it together as a report and we get that out to law enforcement very quickly within 24 to 48 hours. So not only do we do the physical processing of the evidence quickly, we congeal or put a report together that puts the the information together that allows police officers to act very quickly on the street. So that's the whole program was built between those two major elements. And that's what the ATF helped us with really back as far as 2009. But really in 2012, late 2012, we worked very carefully with them and said, you know, we need resources very hard for us to get resources. And the government, the federal government came forth to support us, to have someone that they paid for in the lab to leverage that federal dollar, just like we were talking about BGA and and DOJ assistance before in terms of the JAG grants. They they still support us with personnel in the crime lab to do all of those activities that we just mentioned. Okay. Thank you. And that was one of the question. Thank you. Minimum or council president. Thank you, Councilman Hines. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Resolution 21, Dash 1514. Councilman Flynn. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. We've heard a lot of. Testimony and evidence tonight that, for instance, that ShotSpotter hasn't reduced gun crime. So we should get. Rid of it. Its purpose isn't to reduce gun crime. It's to detect gunfire. We've heard that it hasn't led. Necessarily to an increase in. Arrests. Again, its purpose is not to increase arrests. Is to provide a tool. To detect gunfire that may or may not lead to an arrest. We've heard that it hasn't reduce gun crime or I'm sorry, convictions. Its purpose is not to produce convictions. That's why we have a district attorney to use whatever evidence may be derived from this tool to assist her in prosecuting any of these crimes. Rejecting ShotSpotter for not doing something that it's not intended to do and for which we don't use it in the first place, is like. Me throwing out my refrigerator. Because I can't use it to cook my dinner. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this contract. And I look forward to having it possibly expanded into other areas where we are experiencing. Very high levels of gunfire so we can keep our community safer. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn. Councilmember CdeBaca. In you. I am obviously not in support of this contract tonight. We've heard from people that simply detecting a loud sound is not sufficient for such a large investment of scarce safe safety dollars, just simply detecting sounds. When we look at how many of those detections lead to arrests to even have a chance for a conviction, it's not substantial enough for us to continue investing in this way, especially since we've never taken the time to align with 911 calls to determine if 911 calls that came in sooner actually led us to the location sooner and an arrest. Ultimately, this is not an investment that the public is interested in making. According to our yearlong Community Re-imagining Policing Task Force. This was a topic discussed at length and there are actual recommendations that I hope council members have seen that recommend we no longer continue paying for these kind of surveillance technologies. And so for those reasons and all of the reasons stated by the speakers tonight, I will not support this contract and also would like to see if my if my colleagues pass this contract, I'd like to see an independent evaluator coming in to assess the effectiveness before we ever vote on this again. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman CdeBaca. Councilman Hines. Thank you. Council President, I. I still struggle with this. You know, regarding fireworks, I can't tell the difference between fireworks and guns. Gunshots either. I think some of my colleagues would would agree with that. But, you know, like I hear compelling statistics from the police department. I also hear compelling statistics from the public. And they don't they don't correlate. So I'm trying my best to reconcile that. And, you know, one way is to look at what other studies have done. And when I see articles online, I see that Chicago's 117 square miles of ShotSpotter has an uncertain future, and Charlotte and San Diego have ended their contracts. I also hear Chief Thomas has said more than 90% of ShotSpotter contracts have been renewed. So again, like in a in a tough spot of how to reconcile that. Um, another way is to have a third party review like a computer and forensic analysis of the software. Um, but I would, I would likely agree with Chief Thomas if I were ShotSpotter, I probably wouldn't give it, you know, the software out for public consumption or review. Um, another way is to provide narrow windows for review like we've done in the past for the one year contracts. But this is now a five year contract. Um, so I struggle with it not because I disagree that our city should provide safety to the public, because I believe that is a core charge of any city. But because I have trouble verifying that the $3.29 million, the 4.6 minus the 30% that the feds are chipping in. Um, I have trouble verifying that this $3.3 million through the people's funds will further test per excuse me best for their public safety through this purchase of additional ShotSpotter technology as opposed to using it in another way. So I will say that we have heard some testimony and I've certainly gotten emails about how this is disproportionately impacting black and brown communities. And I I'm not sure I agree with that because, again, two of the five Denver hotspots are in my district. So I still struggle with it. I just wanted to put that on record. And I would agree with Councilmember CdeBaca. If we do move this forward, I would strongly encourage a third party analysis of Denver's approach to ShotSpotter. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Hines. Councilor Council Pro-Tem Torres. Thank you so much, Madam President. And thank you to the APD and Dr. Lavers for for being here tonight. You know, one of the things that I know in District three we don't want are gunshots that have no response, period. And and that, I think, is a reality that that I've grown up with. And so I don't want to reverse course on a district that where there is a response. Now, whether it's verbally saying we can identify whether or not that's noise or if it is actually a gunshot. Where I'm uncomfortable is with broader outcomes. So ShotSpotter being there for evidence recovery, for identifying kind of when a gunshot is goes off. How does that translate into other things for a department is is where where I want to see kind of dots better connected in West Denver, particularly as we're seeing gun related crime increase. So I also struggle with, I think, the time frame and jumping to a five year period of time. And that may be my only reservation about this right now because those answers feel a little disconnected for me and be able to demonstrate to District three. Here is why this investment is is good, is solid, is helpful to Westwood, to Barnum, to Barnum West, where we see kind of the greatest density of that activity in the district. And and I don't know if that's true, but I also don't want to move back to many pieces where we're unable to find anything out about gunshots that were heard last night because nobody made a phone call. And and we know there are so many reasons why that happens. So I I'm also in that place of kind of struggle. What I would like to see is some of that data conversation. And that's not to, I think, expose where the arrays are at or what what kind of area of the city they're covering. But I also want to know that X number of those 3000. 800 alerts went off in my district and here was the response to that and be able to demonstrate to community that that this is what the outcome is. So no matter what the vote is tonight, that is something that I would like to to pursue with CPD. So thank you. Thank you. Counsel Pro Tem Torres. We're going to go to Councilwoman Sawyer online. Things that I'm president. I won't rehash everything that my fellow council members have said this evening. I think, you know, both sides of this are pretty clear and it's not an easy decision. That said, you know, District five is a little bit different than a lot of other districts in the city in that we regularly hear from our residents that they want more support from the police, that they want more whatever interventions to assist in in tackling this this incredible increase in crime that we have seen, unfortunately, resulting from COVID and in the last 18 months. So, you know, I certainly hear what some of the people who were speaking tonight said and agree with some of my council members on the concerns about the length of the contract and things like that. But at the end of the day, I think Councilman Flynn said it best. This isn't a this is not, you know, a silver bullet, this, so to speak. This is a tool. And in a time when our officers need every tool that they can get at their disposal to help fight crime because they are severely understaffed, because they are all exhausted and frustrated, as is everyone in the community with this uptick in crime that we're seeing. I think that, you know, it's really important that we provide the tools that our safety departments need in order to be able to do their jobs effectively. And this is one of those tools. Thanks, Senate President. Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer. Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to say that my Council District two has also been asking for more resources. And I remember meeting with my police commander the week after that. The police officer was found by using ShotSpotter. And had ShotSpotter not been activated in northwest Denver twice. I think two lives could have been drastically lost. And that is not something that I want. And although I do understand the concerns from the people, the public comment and the length of the contract and even the price of the contract, it is a lot of money when you think about $4 million and what you can do it with $4 million. When we have a public health crisis on our hands, we have a pandemic on our hands. We have kids who are going without. And yet, at the same time, I want to make sure that I am giving the police department the tools that are needed to make sure that they're doing their job. I think one thing that has gone with COVID is we all are doing more with less. And I think we're all tired of doing more with less. I hear the fatigue from the police officers. I hear the fatigue from the commander. And if the police department feels that this is what's needed to be able to help solve some of the crime that is happening. And I will just say it did solve two of the crimes that happened in Council District one. And I was shocked when I heard that there were shots fired and they were not able to find the police officer had they not had this technology and his life was spared. So with that, I do support this contract this evening. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Sandoval, we see nobody else in the Q. I'll go ahead and weigh in. You know, back in 2015, when I was first elected, listening to my constituents and listening to the community in District 11 and Division Chief Thomas, at that point in time was commander for the District five police department that covers Stapleton Montebello in Green Valley Ranch. And this was a tool that the community wanted. They actively those monthly, you know, DPD community group meetings. That was the question all the time was we hear shots fired. I don't feel comfortable calling at 2 a.m. in the morning waiting to get somebody. Is there some other tools out there? And that was, I think, when it was mostly covered at that point in time. And it has helped us in the community. You know, I'm all for getting more data on how we can do better and utilize the tool in a better way. But at the end of the day, I represent the constituents of District 11, and this is something that they asked for and that they have been very supportive of. And on a personal note, you know. If there would have been this technology on December 31st of 2014, my nephew Toshio Gillmor would still be alive today. He was shot in Loughery at some apartments. He went and tried to get help. He banged on doors. We had testimony that he banged on doors. Some kids opened a door, saw somebody who had been shot and slammed the door. Toshio didn't have any place to go. He found a couch. He laid down on the couch. He bled out and he froze to death. Toshio was an African-American man. If this technology would have been deployed at that point, it would have triangulated it. We would have had a squad car at least, at least of driven by to see if somebody was hurt. We have many parks. We have many rec centers. We have many school fields that shots are fired. And if we don't have this technology and nobody calls it in, somebody quite possibly could be dying. And so I am in full support of this tonight because I am listening to my community. And I want to make sure that if something violent happens, if there is a gunshot, if somebody illegally discharges a firearm in the city and county of Denver, I want our police department to know. Because that bullet has to come down somewhere. It's either going to come down in your house, on your car, and God forbid, it comes down to a person. And so I am in full support of this tonight. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Resolution 21, Dash 1514, please. CdeBaca. No. Sawyer. I. Torres. I. Clark. I. Flynn. I. Herndon. I. Hines. I. Question. Hi. Ortega. I. Sandoval. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce results. One May 10 hours. Ten I's Council Resolution 21 Dash 1514 has been adopted there being no further business before this body. This meeting is adjourned. Restaurant, a vaccine only restaurant night. I betcha you'll be full that night. 67% of the people in Jefferson County have told you they want to be protected. So businesses I don't I don't know. I'm not a business person, but it seems.