Colorado Legislation Effecting Law Enforcement
Team Cobras
Lt. Bethany Solano
Lt. Jeremy Cardona
Sgt. Joseph LeMoine
National Command & Staff College, Session #30, 2025
Top Capstone Winner
Abstract
Since 2020, law enforcement in Colorado has experienced significant changes due to legislative actions and broader accountability measures. In response to these changes, bills have been enacted that impact law enforcement operations and procedures. Recidivism has increased, raising discussions about legislation effectiveness. Several Colorado House Bills, Senate Bills and Colorado Revised Statutes may need revisions to ensure standardized and effective law enforcement practices across the state. Law enforcement has struggled over the past five years with the mass exodus of veteran officers and the ability to recruit new ones because of this. The community has suffered as well due to changes in legislation that allow criminals to commit certain crimes and receive lower consequences for their actions. Leaders within law enforcement, the District Attorney’s Office, the community and the entire state needs to come together to help rectify the situation to make Colorado safer.
Introduction
Several House and Senate bills will be discussed throughout this project to include Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity SB 20-217, Regulation of restrictive housing in jails HB 21-1211, Bond Reform HB 19-1226 as well as several Colorado Revised Statutes that present the need for current reform. While law enforcement is forever changing legislation in Colorado moved in a direction that placed restrictions on law enforcement, the jail and the community. We have witnessed issues within these areas and will discuss statistics to support our argument.
Due to these progressive policy changes law enforcement has had to adapt to remain compliant with these constraints. This has been taxing on law enforcement in all agencies no matter the size. Legislation in Colorado has progressively become more lenient and jails have been forced to release those incarcerated on lower bonds back into the community. This has driven the recidivism rate within our counties and cities in Colorado. The pros and cons of these bills and laws will be addressed throughout the project as well as how they affect law enforcement. Leaders within law enforcement, the District Attorney’s Office, legislators and the community need to come together to effect deep change in order to rectify the current situation our state is in.
Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity SB 20-217
While there are positive and negative aspects of SB20-217 it has changed law enforcement in Colorado. The title of the bill includes enhancing law enforcement integrity. Many and most officers already possess integrity, or they would not be in this career. Law enforcement has suffered these types of sanctions due to someone else’s actions in another state (Public Safety Colorado, 2022). Bad apples are in every profession and law enforcement is often more scrutinized and publicized than others through the use of media. After George Floyd’s death in May of 2020, SB 20-217 was introduced on June 03, 2020, and signed June 19, 2020, in Colorado (Colorado General Assembly, 2021). Included in SB 20-217 it requires all local law enforcement to wear body cameras which started in July 2023, report all use of force by peace officers that result in death or serious bodily injury, all instances where a peace officer resigned during an investigation for violating department policy, all data (demographics, type of contact, duration, suspected crime, and the results) relating to contacts conducted by peace officers, prohibited law enforcement action in response to protests, eliminating choke holds, duty to intervene, specifications on officer involved shootings, and all data related to the use of unannounced entry by a peace officer. The reporting and collecting of all this information are required to be maintained by the Division of Criminal Justice in a statewide database and published annually. If any agency fails to meet the reporting requirements, they are subject to the suspension of funding. The bill also mandates the POST board to maintain a database containing information related to a peace officer’s untruthfulness, repeated failure to follow POST board training requirements, decertification by the POST board, and termination for cause. Because of all these mandates required in this bill that agencies must abide by it has caused an increase in staff and budget to maintain the required equipment and data.
While the cause to implement these restrictions on law enforcement was to provide more accountability it has in addition hindered us in some ways to do our job effectively and created a mass exodus of law enforcement in general. It has truly changed the mindset of cops. Veteran officers started leaving law enforcement in 2020 after Colorado passed Senate Bill 20- 217. A survey was conducted in 2022 by the Public Safety Colorado Coalition, The Colorado Fraternal Order of Police, the County Sheriffs of Colorado and the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police of law enforcement officers statewide that was eye opening. This was done at the request of lawmakers to gather information about recruitment and retention after the passing of SB 20-217, more than 200 law enforcement officers resigned or retired after the passing of this bill (Migoya, 2020).
The Public Safety Colorado Survey results included severe issues with recruitment and retention of law enforcement personnel at agencies across the state (Public Safety Colorado, 2022). The Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office used to see well over three hundred applicants for deputy positions and now see only about twenty to fifty applicants per testing sessions. New patrol deputies would never see the light of day on dayshift patrol for years however now we see deputies with less than a year of experience on dayshift. This has also created a significant change in leadership within the agencies as we are seeing more supervisors with less experience running the show. With the decrease of Veteran officers due to retirement and leaving the state due to poor legislation, you also lose knowledge within the agency. Budgets within each agency has suffered due to having to hire new officers to replace the veteran officers as well as train them.
Law enforcement is frustrated with legislators telling them how to do a job they have never done before. If there would be more effective communication about these bills across the board some of the issues within the bills could be addressed prior to being passed. Leaders should know how to ask people for their input (Long, 2017). Our legislators are all leaders of our community and need to do a better job gathering more facts and input prior to passing some of these bills. Law enforcement should have been involved with some of these legislative changes to create more buy within the law enforcement community. Based on professional experience when officer involved shootings occur there are many more boxes to check off during the investigative process to make sure the officers are complying with bill 20-217. This has created more of a liability for the officers criminally and civilly and more work for the agencies who respond as part of the critical incident response team. Watching one body camera video footage of the incident that is often shown to the public through media does not explain the entire incident and what the officer’s perception is at the time of the critical incident.
One of the other main concerns of law enforcement with the bill is the abolishment of qualified immunity. Section 13-21-131 (2)(b) of the new bill reads qualified immunity is not a defense to liability pursuant to this section. The new law creates legal liability for alleged victims of police civil rights violations to seek monetary relief through the courts. We are already seeing this within our state. Officers are leaving Colorado to be cops elsewhere because of this. They are concerned about themselves and their family’s wellbeing and financial stability. Officers are second guessing themselves in situations because they are afraid of getting sued.
Due to the implantation of SB20-217 law enforcement has seen officers hesitate to use force because they are fearful, they are going to get sued, fired, or charged criminally. This can cause serious safety concern when officers fail to make split minute decisions that can cost them their life or someone else’s. During the public safety survey law enforcement reportedly became more reluctant to use force or make contacts even when legally justified (Public Safety Survey, 2022). Within our own agencies we have talked with officers about certain situations where they were justified in using force or making stops; however, they failed to do so because they are second guessing themselves due to SB 20-217. The public often views law enforcement as the aggressor and not the ones committing crimes. Within the survey approximately 84% of the surveyors listed SB 20-217 as the top reason for law enforcement officers leaving their career (Public Safety Survey, 2022).
While body cameras were put in place to attempt to record all of law enforcements contacts and ensure accountability, they do not always capture everything the officer sees or the totality of the circumstance. Law enforcement has had to adjust to wearing and activating their body cameras during these contacts and on calls. Policy and procedures have been implemented and revised due to this bill. Having this mandated has also caused issues with officers not wanting to respond to calls due to forgetting their body cameras at the station/residence and going back to retrieve them prior to answering a call. This has significantly changed the mindset of some officers as they feel they cannot do their job without the body-worn camera because we are mandated by SB 20-217 to do so or be held liable. Often when officers have had issues with their body cameras not being activated during calls the district attorney has dismissed cases because of this essentially implying that our word is no longer good, and it did not happen if it was not recorded. Body cameras only show a small view of what the officers see. Some agencies are seeing issues with the jury not being able to see what the officers truly see, and it can significantly affect a criminal case because now everyone wants to see the whole thing.
On the positive side of body cameras they do assist when agencies receive complaints on officers. The body cameras have cleared more officers of wrongdoing than they have caught officers doing wrong. Body cameras also serve as great training aids during certain situation to be able to discuss what was done great and what could have been done better. Officers do have to spend more time reviewing their body cameras prior to writing reports to make sure what they are writing is accurate to what is on the body camera. While this bill has truly changed law enforcement in Colorado those of us who have continued to hold the line believe in what we do and will not stop doing it because of the constraints brought against us.
Bond Reform HB19-1226
Starting in 2019, Colorado presented House Bill 19-1226 which encompasses changes to release on bond and the development of pretrial screening process, and an administrative order for release without any monetary conditions. It required all counties and cities within Colorado to develop these plans by July 1, 2020. It instructs the courts to have specific considerations when determining what type of bond and the conditions of the release of an arrestee. The considerations outlined below, although specific, are not strict but very subjective of the courts.
Under current law, if a defendant is arrested for certain crimes and the court determines the public would be in significant peril if the accused is released, the defendant is not bailable. The bill removes from the list of crimes that are not bailable the crime of possession of a weapon by a previous offender and sex assault crimes (Colorado General Assembly, 2019).
In addition to the pretrial screening process, the bill requires the chief judge to develop an administrative order specifying criteria for the immediate release of certain defendants on a personal recognizance bond and with the least restrictive conditions as possible unless the defendant is of high risk to the community, will attempt to flee prosecution or will attempt to obstruct the criminal process.
When setting and selecting the type of bond and developing the criteria by each judicial district under C.R.S. 16-4-103, the administrative order of the chief judge of the judicial district should specify criteria allowing for the immediate release of certain detained persons on a summons or an unsecured personal recognizance bond after the pretrial assessment is completed and without initial hearing before the court. The criteria must be developed in conjunction with the district attorney’s office, the public defender’s office, the sheriff’s office, the pretrial services program, a victim’s advocate, the office of the state court administrator and input from at least one individual who has been incarcerated in that judicial district because of an inability to pay a monetary condition of bond (Colorado Department of Public Safety, 2019).
The court shall consider specific criteria when determining the type of bond and conditions of the defendant’s release. These considerations consist of the following circumstances of the individual in custody:
· Financial circumstances
· The nature and severity of the alleged offense
· Victim input
· All methods of release to avoid unnecessary pretrial incarceration
· The written criterial for pretrial release developed by the judicial district
· Their employment status and history of the person
· The nature and extent of family relationships
· Their past and present residences
· Their character and reputation
· The identity of persons who agree to assist them in attending court at the proper time
· Their likely sentence, especially if they are not likely to be sentenced to incarceration
· Their prior criminal record
· Any prior failures to appear that indicated their intent to flee or avoid prosecution
· Any facts to indicated that they are likely to intimidate or harass possible witnesses
· Any facts to show their ties to the community and not likely flee
· The results of an empirically developed and validation risk assessment instrument designed to improve pretrial release decisions by providing the court information that classifies a person in custody based upon the predicted level of risk of pretrial failure. Any results of a risk assessment provided to the court must include the risk category of the defendant along with the predicted success rates for each risk category. However, the court shall not use the results of the instrument as the sole basis for setting the type of bond and conditions of release (Colorado Department of Public Safety, 2019).
From the idea of this bill to the implementation, there has been a fight against it, not just due to the tax dollars associated with funding the change but the impact it will have on law enforcement investigations and safety of the community. Even though there are guidelines and criteria that should prevent the release of specific offenders, it has been a struggle for law enforcement officials to maintain a positive and productive outlook on conclusions of a case and arrests made within. This also has a huge impact on the trust the community has for the criminal justice system. The crimes committed may not be egregious but still effect the safety of every community. The use of the personal recognizance bond has been overused in many cases across Colorado jurisdictions, allowing these offenders to continue their criminal behavior or in some cases commit worse criminal acts.
For the month of May 2025, Pueblo County Courts has issued multiple personal recognizance bonds with 18 of them being municipal, 42 being traffic related, 65 misdemeanor charges and 25 felony charges. Recently, they have released two individuals on less restrictive bonds for attempted murder charges. In the same timeframe, Mesa County Courts issued 12 for municipal charges, 6 for county ordinances, 297 for misdemeanor offenses and 192 for felony offenses. Public Safety Colorado 2022 Survey concluded that bail bond reform was the #1 issue among Colorado FOP members (Public Safety Colorado, 2022). Based on professional experience we are releasing criminals who should not be released due to current charges and or history.
Regulation of Restrictive Housing in Jails HB 21-1211
Changes in legislation are affecting all parts of law enforcement including the county jails. Colorado House Bill 21-1211 focuses on regulating restrictive housing in local jails. The bill, effective July 1, 2022, prohibits jails with over four hundred beds from involuntarily placing individuals in restrictive housing if they meet certain conditions, such as having a serious mental illness, being pregnant, or being under 18 years old (Colorado General Assembly, 2021). With the majority of issues inside jails they are having to deal with the mentally ill inmates that are often caught up in the legal system. If found jails must monitor and document individuals to include notifying medical professionals, their legal representative and family within 12 hours with frequent welfare checks. While HB 21-1211 was enacted to improve conditions inside facilities around the state, once passed it faced many challenges that were overlooked during its drafting. These issues include but are not limited to areas of operations, officer safety, lack of resources and administrative difficulties.
Operationally, jails, specifically older facilities struggled to follow these new restrictions, when put into action, they lacked the capacity and ability to accommodate the strict guidelines. Particularly where alternative housing options were limited. In Pueblo County, the lack of bed space hindered the ability for the county to comply with the demand of bedspace for these offenders who were often violent to others. With only sixteen cells dedicated to mentally ill offenders, we had to adjust the way we housed other populations of inmates to accommodate this rising population. This meant putting some of the maximum-security inmates in an open space meant for those classified as medium security.
The safety concerns of both deputies and inmates arose when those offenders who had been classified as maximum-security inmates were rehoused in areas that were not equipped with the proper facilities, to allow for longer periods of out time. Compiled with the increased population of mentally ill inmates confined to one space, was a detriment to not only their well-being but that of the officers that worked those areas as well. Not only did inmate on inmate assaults rise but staff assaults were at an all-time high. According to reports pulled in the two years prior to HB 21-1211 coming into effect on July 1st, 2022, there were 19 total inmate assaults, and 3 staff assaults in the Pueblo County Jail. The two years after that number rose exponentially to 37 inmate assaults and 9 officer assaults. The following years after those numbers continued to climb, in 2025 so far there has already been 46 inmate assaults, and 17 staff assaults in the first half alone with most of those coming from the mentally ill populations HB 21-1211 was supposed to have helped.
With the addition for the extra attention needed to care for these individuals that is mandated by the state, there comes a strain on the initial resources needed to complete the mandated mental health, medical and added security needed when helping this population. County jails were already struggling with staffing, in an article written by Nam-Sonenstien and Sanders (2024) titled “Why jails and prisons can’t recruit their way out of the understaffing crisis.” They examined the current state of modern jails finding themselves in an ever-increasing staffing crisis. Compounded by the current legislation and the question issues outlined above, it is a wonder if jails will ever meet their needs when it comes to staffing. Some reports indicate to comply with the bill’s requirements, Sheriffs estimate it could cost up to two million more and require hiring more staff, which is already an issue for local agencies.
Finally, the legal aspect with this bill the state has mandated reporting on any offender placed into 23-hour lockdown, on top of the medical, mental health and security checks. When an offender has spent 15 days or more (non-consecutive) in a 30-day period, each agency has to petition a judge to keep an offender in lockdown. It is then up to the judge to decide based on incidents, behavior or compliance with mental health and medical if the detainee can remain in lockdown or needs to be removed. Again, this is time and resources taken from the jail to focus on one inmate.
Most agencies have already started looking towards the future. Currently the majority of county jails across the state have already started the Jail Bases Behavioral Health Services (JBBS) to provide mental health and substance use treatment to inmates, as well as increased funding for mental health centers to help when they get out of jail, in hopes of reducing the amount of mentally ill inmates that come back. Where we can further the progress is to continue with enhanced law enforcement training to help officers recognize a person with mental health issues and get them to resources that can help, as well as develop crisis stabilization units within the community, creating immediate care facilities where someone experiences a mental health crisis can be sent to help curve the crisis before it happens.
Along with above addressed bills we also believe there are some constraints within several Colorado Revised Statutes that affect the community and law enforcement.
Colorado Revised Statute Reconsiderations
While there are many statutes in Colorado that need to be revised to help combat crime, we will be discussing a few that we find extremely personal and important to include 18-18-405(2)(a)(III)(A) Unlawful distribution, manufacturing, dispensing, or sale, 18-3-102 Murder in the first degree, and 18-6-401 Child abuse. We are seeing issues with these statutes based on person and professional experiences.
CRS 18-18-405(2)(a)(III)(A) Distribution Resulting in Death
Currently, Colorado Revised Statute 18-18-405(2)(a)(III)(A) which outlines distribution of fentanyl, carfentanil, benzimidazole opiate (synthetic), or an analog thereof being the proximate cause of death of another person who used or consumed the material, compound or mixture. Meaning, if someone dies of an overdose and the drug found in their system does not contain the above-mentioned drugs then this charge is irrelevant. Even though fentanyl is widely seen as one of the worst narcotics to spread the country, it is not the only killer drug on the market. In 2024, fentanyl resulted in 48,422 deaths out of a total of 108,058 (Center for Disease Control, 2025). This is less than 50% of overdose deaths. Law enforcement agencies are still seeing overdose deaths from or complications from methamphetamine, cocaine, other opioids, and prescription drugs. This statute needs to have a broader view of all scheduled drugs and the distribution of such drugs resulting the death of another. All illegal narcotics are having an impact on our communities, including our children, families, friends and neighbors.
CRS 18-3-12 Murder in the first degree
Due to a recent death of a Colorado Parole Officer in Colorado Springs Colorado Revised Statutes needs to be revised to protect law enforcement from being murdered while working in the capacity of a law enforcement officer. Prior to her working for Parole she spent twelve years of her career at the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office. Colorado Springs Parole Officer Christine Guerin-Sandoval was killed while attempting to affect and arrest of a parolee who had a warrant for absconding. The suspect was a seventeen-time multi-state convicted felon. While Officer Guerin-Sandoval and two other Parole Officers were attempting to contact the suspect in his vehicle at a convenience store the suspect attempted to flee. While doing so as he was parked in the lot, he put the car in drive and reverse several times in attempt to flee from the officers. Two of the officers were knocked down by the vehicle including Officer Christine Guerin-Sandoval who was on the driver’s side. The suspect ran over her several other times and drove away with her stuck under his vehicle until he was in the street where she was dislodged from the vehicle and left to die. The other officer suffered a brain bleed however survived.
The suspect was charged with leaving the scene of an accident-causing death, vehicular homicide, and manslaughter. While arguments were made with the district attorney’s office about charging murder, they argued they could not prove the suspects intent as he thought he was being robbed. They also articulated issues with Parole not issuing Officer Christine Guerin-Sandoval a body camera which hindered the investigation. While there are many issues with the situation within the justice system and the parole agency the case went a certain way because of the lack of legislation protecting officers who are killed in the line of duty to include requirements of SB20-217 and believing everything must be recorded to seal the deal.
18-3-102 Murder in the first degree should include a subsection that specifies if a law enforcement officer is killed by any means in the line of duty by the offender while performing their lawful duties. The suspect in this case was sentenced to only forty-eight years in prison for taking the life of a law enforcement officer only because of the habitual offender statute which is currently being looked at to be appealed due to being unconstitutional. Colorado needs to start advocating for its law enforcement officers instead of against them as we are the ones holding the line and doing the job most do not want to do. We should not be murdered for doing the right thing.
18-6-401 Child abuse
Children are our true victims. No one should ever harm a child for any reason however many do. Over the past couple of years, we have seen an increase in child abuse cases involving beatings with belts in Pueblo County. We have had many kids severely beaten with belts and we are unable to get medical doctors to sign off on serious bodily injury forms to increase the penalties from a misdemeanor charge to a felony. We are failing our children and then in turn eventually placing them back in harm’s way for the parents or caretakers to commit the crime again when they get upset with their children because the penalties for the abuse are so low. We need to do better in protecting our youth. These vicious attacks will leave lifetime effects on the children while the parents will face minimal time in jail and possibly sentences of probation. A subsection needs to be added to the statute addressing that if the abuse leaves significant bruising to a child by use of any object it shall be considered a felony.
How To Effect Deep Change
In summary there needs to be a change in the way laws affecting law enforcement are drafted and approved in Colorado. Law enforcement needs to come together with legislators to help rewrite some things that are obviously wrong. Sheriffs and Police Chiefs within Colorado meet weekly with a lobbyist who presents issues with current legislation that is in effect, being passed, or needs to be changed. They all discuss ways to combat these legislative changes. Line level deputies and supervisors in specific areas throughout law enforcement see the need for change and need to effectively communicate the issues they are seeing to upper command to help address some of the legislative concerns they are seeing.
At the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office, the Sheriff and or Undersheriff meet monthly with line level officers to discuss how their areas are running effectively and what needs change. We need to start empowering our people to present ideas at the meetings that will help effect change within the jail, on patrol and in the courts. These bills have been passed throughout the years and law enforcement has had to abide by them. We have had to seek funding to equip our employees with the technology and staff our jails with the appropriate number of deputies to be able to meet the standards addressed. Not everything is perfect, and legislators need to understand there are ways to improve.
If we do not address the issues were are seeing with legislation, the state will continue to pass and standby their actions. Based on our professional experiences we have seen a drastic increase in crime with lesser consequences throughout the past several years. We need to be vocal and explain the impact these laws and legislation are having on our officers and within our community. This size of the agency does not matter as it affects even the smallest.
Within the law enforcement organizations in Colorado change has already occurred because of the progressive leadership. Law enforcement must continue to improve the safety margin (Harrington, 2017). By doing this as leaders we are shifting the paradigm and transforming our agency and community that is forever changing. This also includes paying attention to our people and their concerns as well as the community’s. Laws are always changing, and we must change with them.
There have been several amendments to the possession of a weapon by previous offender where they took away the ability the charge the crime for any felony and made it only specific to certain victim crimes. Leaders within law enforcement began to argue this as we have many suspects carrying firearms that should not be. Over the past couple of years several felony crimes had been re-added to the bill to include drug offense and motor vehicle theft. All are relevant issues in Colorado and by all the leaders stepping up and implementing an adaptive approach to understand, articulate and effect change in legislation shows we are moving in the right direction.
Conclusion
By leaving a legacy of leadership who can effectively communicate we can leave our law enforcement officers in a better position than we found them as well as our community. People follow people, not positions (Blankenship, 2017). Just because we are in a leadership position does not mean people are going to do what we say. We need to explain why we are doing what we are doing to create buy in from our people. Understanding the why will create a driving force for change within the agency and law enforcement communities to give a louder voice against legislation that negatively effects our profession. If we remain silent, we lose who we are. We can not let others write our narrative.
References
Blankenship, G. (2017). Leadership in practice legacy leadership. Learning area 3, Module 2.
National Command and Staff College.
CCJJ: Pretrial Release Task Force (2019, June 11). HB19-1226 with amendments. https://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ccjj/Committees/PRTF/Handout/2019-06-11_HB19-1226_BondReform-wSenAmends.pdf
Center for Disease Dontrol. (2025, May 14). National center for health statistics. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2025/20250514.htm
Colorado General Assembly. (2019) HB19-1226. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb19-1226
Colorado General Assembly (2021). SB20-217. Retrieved June 10, 2025, from Colorado General Assembly |
Colorado General Assembly. (2021). House Bill 21-1211: Regulation of restrictive housing in jails. Retrieved from June 10, 2025, Colorado General Assembly
Long, L. (2017). Effective communication. Learning area 1, Module 7. National Command and Staff College.
Migoya, D. (2020). More than 200 Colorado cops retire. Retrieved June 10, 2025, from: https://www.police1.com/law-enforcement-policies/articles
Nam-Sonenstein, B., & Sanders, E. (2024, December 9). Prison Policy Initiative. Retrieved from Prison Policy Initiative June 10th, 2025. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2024/12/09/understaffing/
Public Safety Colorado Coalition (2022). Public safety Colorado survey, 1-17.
*******************
Wellness After Critical Incidents in Law Enforcement
Team Lions
Captain John Romo, Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office
Captain Shelley Bryant, Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office
Sergeant Amanda Simon, Mesa County Sheriff’s Office
National Command and Staff College
Session #30
June 10, 2025
Abstract
Wellness is an integral part of the law enforcement profession. Every day across the United States, law enforcement personnel deal with critical incidents which affect their emotional and mental well-being. Organizations should strive to implement ways to mitigate negative effects of these critical incidents on personnel’s mental and emotional well-being. An organization with healthy employees leads to positive relationships with the community as well as higher productivity and morale. Through this project, we will discuss how violence and critical incidents have increased over the years. We will look at how different generations in the law enforcement profession may be affected differently by critical incidents. We will discuss current practices on dealing with officer wellness related to critical incidents in addition to how legislation has affected these practices. We will address leadership responsibilities, how we as law enforcement leaders can adapt for the future, and available resources. Furthermore, we will discuss the wellness of law enforcement personnel’s effect on an organization and community.
Introduction
Research states law enforcement officers experience an average of 178 critical incidents over the span of their career while an average person experiences two or three critical incidents in their life (Jaeger, 2023). According to Jaeger (2023), law enforcement officers are two to four times more likely to suffer from PTSD compared to the general population, showing the need for more focus on the wellness of the involved officer(s) after a critical incident.
Law enforcement leaders need to understand the impact critical incidents have on law enforcement personnel and the importance of community support. Critical incidents can bring the law enforcement organization and community closer through transparency. Using media resources for transparency and communication with the public is imperative. Critical incidents tend to erode public trust unless the community understands the incident and the role of the law enforcement agency involved. Controlling the narrative for the community assists in a better understanding of what law enforcement does.
Law enforcement leadership must understand the importance of taking care of the law enforcement officer(s) as well as communicating with the officer(s) involved in a critical incident by identifying needs, involving peer support and other resources to support the officer(s). Critical incident debriefs, counseling services, and ongoing support from the agency are crucial in the care of employees.
Understanding how leadership styles impact supporting roles in critical incidents is crucial for leadership personnel. Leaders also need to stay current with new resources, funding opportunities and legislation to provide employees the opportunity for quality services. Taking care of the law enforcement officer will not only result in retaining the officer and supporting the wellness of the officer, but also changing the culture of the agency. Recognizing leadership styles which assist in officer wellness and promoting those styles along with resources, can have a positive impact on the agency and community.
History of Critical Incidents
When we talk about a critical incident in law enforcement, what exactly do we mean? According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police (2011), “a critical incident may be defined as any incident that is unusual, violent, and involves a perceived threat to, or actual loss of, human life. It is a significant emotional event and one that breaks through the individual’s normal coping mechanisms and causes extreme psychological distress.” Critical incidents often leave law enforcement officers with an overwhelming sense of vulnerability and lack of control. According to Mcnally and Solomon (1999), critical incidents in law enforcement can fall under several different types of incidents to include the following:
· Officer involved shootings
· Death
· Suicide
· Serious injury to co-workers
· Homicides
· Hostage situations
The FBI recognized a need for national crime statistics so they could track the nature and types of crime that are occurring in the United States. In the 1920’s, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) formed the Committee Uniform Crime Records (UCR) to develop a system of uniform crime statistics. After studying state criminal codes and making an evaluation of the record keeping practices in use, the committee completed a plan for crime reporting that became the foundation of the UCR Program in 1929. In the UCR program, there are eight main offense classifications known as Part 1 crimes. Part 1 crimes included the violent crimes of murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault and the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft and arson. Some of the Part 1 crimes listed often lead to or are considered a critical incident for law enforcement personnel. It is important to note officer involved shootings typically arise from one of the above-named offenses. The UCR program is still being used today in most law enforcement agencies.
Colorado Crime Statistics
Below are the crime statistics in Colorado between 2019 and 2023. Violent Crime: Violent Crime consists of Murder, Non-Consensual Sex Offenses, Aggravated Assault and Robbery. A total of 31,483 cases were accounted for.
(Colorado Crime Statistics, 2023)
Generations and Human Factors in Law Enforcement
Law enforcement officials/officers have a wide age difference and are comprised of several different generations. In today’s law enforcement community, there are four generations which are currently working in the field:
· Baby Boomers 1946 – 1964
· Generation X 1965 – 1980
· Millennials or Generation Y 1981 – 2000
· Generation Z 2001 – 2020
With different generations in law enforcement comes new challenges. According to Snyder (2017), baby boomers are widely associated with privilege. They tend to think of themselves as a special generation. Baby boomers are typically physically fit and are the first group to grow up expecting the world to improve. Baby boomers are known for their strong work ethic, self-discipline, and are self-assured.
Generation X is the technology generation where video games, cable television and digital technology were born (Snyder, 2017). This generation's world view is about change. Generation X is also known for their strong work ethic, resourcefulness, loyalty, resilience, and desire for work-life balance.
Millennials or Generation Y is a group that has increased the use of communications, media, and digital technology (Snyder, 2017). They have a high sense of community, confidence, desire work-life balance, are optimistic, and adaptable.
Generation Z is a group that is highly connected with technology, text messages, and has grown up with mobile phones (Snyder, 2017). This generation is self-driven, collaborative, diverse minded, and are independent thinkers.
Each generation is different, and each generation could respond differently if they are involved in a critical incident. Based on our personal and professional experiences, the way someone was raised by their parents, the training they receive in their department, and their past and present personal experiences can have an effect on how they would respond to a critical incident and the stress because of it. Harrington (2017) stated, “human factors are simply considering how our brain interacts with our body and decision-making abilities during stressful incidents.” The human factors to consider would be physical conditioning, effects of fatigue, and effects of stress. As leaders, it is important we understand generational and physical differences and the impact these differences make on how they handle and process critical incidents and stress management. We will now discuss how recruitment and retention are affected by an officer’s well-being.
Effects on Retention and Recruitment
Retention and recruitment in law enforcement is always something most agencies are trying to get ahead of. Through our conversations with other law enforcement personnel, we know most law enforcement agencies across the United States are suffering from staffing shortages. We believe the reason for the low number of officer(s) is due to a number of reasons, low pay, benefits, region, increased violence in society, etc. Officer(s) being involved in critical incidents can be a contributing factor as to why some agencies cannot retain officers. Anytime an officer is involved in a critical incident, there is some type of trauma that comes along with it. If an officer doesn’t deal with the trauma, this could lead to bigger problems which in some cases could cause an officer to resign.
To help deal with issues related to critical incidents, the agency should hold a critical incident debrief. During the debrief, officers are encouraged to speak freely about what happened and how they are feeling. Many agencies have a licensed therapist on site to help any officer(s) who need to talk to someone confidentially.
Harrington (2017) stated, “Even during situations where events may not seem critical, stress still has an effect on the body through anticipation and witnessing potentially horrific or hostile environments.” If the trauma and stress is not dealt with properly, this could lead to chronic illness and/or early retirement. Law enforcement agencies need to focus on getting the help officers need to deal with the stress that critical incidents bring during their tour of duty. A healthy law enforcement agency will have a positive impact on recruitment and will help with retention within the organization.
Community and Organizational Impact
When a critical incident occurs, there will be some sort of impact not only within the community but also within the agency that responded to the critical incident. Typically, when a critical incident occurs in a community, the investigating agency will activate their Critical Incident Response Team (CIRT). In the state of Colorado, all agencies must develop and maintain for supporting any peace officer involved in a fatal use of force or involved in a shooting (C.R.S. § 16-2.5-403). The investigating agency is usually a nearby agency, who was not involved in the critical incident where an officer was involved.
In most jurisdictions, once the CIRT team has been activated, the investigating agency will need to follow the Officer Involved Incident Protocol put forth by the judicial district. It is a common practice that the involved officer(s) will be separated from each other and will be assigned a “gatekeeper”. The gatekeeper is usually a supervisor which will ensure compliance with sequestration responsibilities, notify peer support for the involved officer, restrict access to the involved officer to prevent contamination of possible trace evidence and communication about the incident. The gatekeeper also restricts physical contact with the involved officer by all parties until evidence processing of the officer is completed by investigators. Family members, peer support team members and command staff officers may be present but shall have no physical contact with the officer until evidence processing is completed.
The CIRT protocols for all judicial districts are very detailed and have specific duties for all officers whether you are an officer involved in the critical incident, the supervisor on scene of the incident, the investigators, and the CIRT investigative supervisor. During the investigative process, each investigator has specific responsibilities they need to complete in order to ensure a sound investigation. Some of the responsibilities include: establishing venue, establishing control of the scene, broadcasting information (suspects, vehicles, and witnesses), rendering first aid, establishing incident command procedures, making the proper notifications, scene security, and processing of the scene. All of these procedures are very important in order to complete a thorough investigation and to remain transparent to the public/community where the incident occurred.
When a critical incident occurs, the impact it has on the community and the organization could be devastating. It is very important to interview anyone who witnessed the critical incident, to not only get the required information but also to identify anyone who may be struggling with what happened. It is not uncommon that law enforcement contact victims’ assistance programs, Community Organization for Victim’s Assistance (COVA), to assist members of the public who may need help with what they observed. COVA has several resources they can provide to assist members of the public. These programs are vital in maintaining positive relationships with our community members and ensure their mental and emotional well-being is also being addressed.
Leadership Roles and Responsibilities
Leaders within an organization have an impact on morale, organizational health, and officer wellness. Law enforcement personnel are consistently faced with stressful situations that in turn affect their overall mental and emotional wellness. As leaders, it is our job to provide enhanced support and resources to officers in order to contribute positively towards their mental and emotional well-being. Leaders within an organization play a crucial role in the wellness of law enforcement personnel during and after a critical incident. How leaders handle critical incidents directly impacts the emotional and mental wellness of officers. According to Lee (2024), “leaders should transition from an autocratic style of leadership to transformational, servant and situational leadership.” By doing so, leaders can better support their personnel and reduce their mental and emotional stress.
Servant Leadership
The term “servant leadership” can often be misunderstood as a soft approach or emotional approach to leadership. In law enforcement, many people are reluctant to display emotion or allow themselves to be vulnerable to those around them. This vulnerability is viewed as a weakness and in turn allows for negative effects on emotional and mental well-being. Servant leadership is a powerful leadership style that requires a leader to focus their attention on trust, communication, and empathy. International Institute for Management Development (2024) states, “this type of leadership is marked by humility, selflessness, and a dedication to fostering each team member’s growth and dedication.”
By demonstrating servant leadership, leaders can and will value their subordinates as human beings. Servant leaders form open lines of communication, making it easier for them to identify the needs of their employees. This leadership style creates a work environment which is centered around the overall well-being of the employees.
Servant leadership takes strong emotional intelligence through the ability to be self-aware, demonstrate empathy, and foster positive relationships. These positive relationships are crucial when navigating critical incidents and wellness of officer(s) after critical incidents. Goleman (2012) stated, “people look to the leader to set the tone.” As leaders, if we demonstrate empathy, vulnerability, and open communication others within the organization will be empowered to do the same. In turn, this will create a positive culture within an organization to proactively deal with emotional and mental wellness of officer(s) after critical incidents creating healthier personnel and community trust.
Authentic Leadership
Center of Creative Leadership (2025) states, “authentic leadership is the healthy alignment between a leader’s internal values and beliefs and their external behavior.” Deep personal values and convictions win the respect and trust of followers (Normore, 2017). Authenticity in leadership is essential when navigating critical incidents and an officer's emotional and mental well-being. Authentic leaders allow themselves to be vulnerable around their subordinates in order for them to better understand who they are as an individual. This vulnerability empowers followers to also be vulnerable with their leaders. When navigating critical incidents and wellness related to critical incidents, vulnerability is a necessity. Without vulnerability, one will not be able to communicate emotions, needs, or wants. Leaders must understand the needs and wants of their followers in order to effectively lead them to services and support them through the process.
As authentic leaders are genuine, they can assist their employees through critical incidents by sharing their experiences in a meaningful and impactful way. Just as servant leadership fosters positive relationships, so does authentic leadership. These positive relationships are imperative for developing open, honest, and trusting communication amongst leaders and their followers.
Change Agents
Increased violence is directly correlated to an increase in critical incidents officer(s) are involved in. Law enforcement culture over the years has proven to be reluctant to prioritize emotional and mental well-being. Over the years, officer(s) have sustained judgement and negative repercussions for struggling with mental and emotional wellness. This has in turn created a negative culture within law enforcement by officer(s) not seeking help, feeling alone, and suppressing their emotions in order to be viewed as resilient.
Leaders within an organization contribute to the overall health of an organization and the people within the organization. It is essential for leaders to promote an environment which emphasizes the importance of emotional and mental well-being amongst personnel. Understanding the barriers to asking for help is the first step in breaking them down (PowerDMS, 2023). Leaders are responsible for identifying and understanding the barriers within an organization which are preventing individuals from seeking the help they need. Lee (2024) states, “spending time with team members is the most effective way to identify those who are struggling.”
As leaders within an organization, it is essential to recognize those individuals in need and offer support and help. Leaders need to be the change agents in empowering employees to take control of their emotional and mental well-being without fear of negative repercussions or judgment. Leaders should normalize and support peer support services and other related wellness resources within an organization.
Adapting for the Future
Adapting for future needs for officer wellness after critical incidents is imperative for retention and wellness. Once leadership understands the changes needed in leadership styles and why the importance of the change is necessary for future wellness of law enforcement. Law enforcement agencies need to create a community of caring for officer(s). When officer’s wellness is considered, the community will benefit from the care by retaining law enforcement personnel and taking care of their wellness so they are productive and healthy when on duty.
Agencies need to implement officer wellness by leadership training and proactive communication. Effective communication is built on strong relationships and strong relationships are built on public trust. Nash (2017) stated, “it’s not what you say in your message but how you say it.” Individuals in leadership need to understand the relationship between the message they are relaying in correlation to how an officer processes information and moves through the mental and emotional wellness cycle. The future of healthy law enforcement is reliant on focusing efforts towards officer well-being. This also has to be communicated in the law enforcement agency and culturally considered the norm. Officers need to know the agency promotes and supports wellness through their words and actions.
Resources need to be readily available. Leadership needs to become agents of change by promoting and leading the way making everyone feel comfortable with wellness and the importance of it by normalizing mental health support. This will drive lasting change within an agency. Once the agency puts this in place it should measure and analyze results by tracking participation, outcomes and find what is working and what needs improvement.
After a critical incident takes place, group debriefs as well as individual peer support services are implemented. Peer support plays a large role in ensuring officer(s) have support throughout the process. Although peer support is a great asset, leaders within an organization should strive to implement creative ways to improve officer wellness. Oftentimes, law enforcement personnel think of peer support as the only outlet to participate in. Based on our professional experience, we know most law enforcement agencies, employees have access to the employee assistance program (EAP). The Employee Assistance Program (EAP) provides free therapy services to any employee who wishes to seek services. Agencies should also conduct debriefs of the incident. The debriefs are very important to have not only to talk about what went wrong in the incident but what went right. Agencies can implement equine therapy, group activities, educational sessions, and other events which are centered around the overall wellness of their employees.
Legislation
Legislation plays a key role in how peer support services are implemented across the country. Both federal and state employees have protections in relation to peer support communications and services. Federal employees have confidentiality protection regarding peer support services under 34 USC § 50901. This statute protects law enforcement personnel engaged in peer support services from being compelled to disclose information discussed under the peer support umbrella.
In Colorado, laws regarding peer support and confidentiality went into effect in 2005. Since 2005, there have been several amendments in order to better protect and support law enforcement personnel. The most significant change took place in 2024 as a result of members of the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office identifying what they believed was a dangerous loophole for a member in a group peer support setting to be compelled to testify to something they heard in a group debrief. Due to group debriefs being extremely beneficial to first responders involved in critical incidents, they wanted to close the loophole to avoid future repercussions.
Members of the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office in conjunction with Dr. Jack Digliani re-wrote the house bill and testified at the state capital. The house bill was successfully passed and went into effect. In addition to this house bill, an additional house bill was passed in 2025 preventing agencies from compelling any member of peer support to disclose anything to an agency about what was discussed in any peer support setting. Prior to this house bill, it was only agency policy that the agency agreed not to compel peer support members to disclose information.
Leaders in organizations must be proactive in identifying issues within legislation which negatively impact law enforcement personnel. By proactively identifying these issues, leaders can make a lasting impact on officer wellness for years to come and ensure officers involved in critical incidents are protected. These protections promote officer(s) willingness to seek support and services as they navigate overall mental and emotional wellness throughout their career. In order to support law enforcement personnel the organization must know and understand the resources and funding available to support their wellness efforts.
Funding and Resources
The Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act (LEMHWA) is federally funded and provides access to mental health services to law enforcement personnel.
C.R.S. 24-32-3501 Peace Officers behavior health support and community partnerships grant program. https://dlg.colorado.gov
Lighthouse Health and Wellness App is also designed for first responders and is also confidential and anonymous. This App is available at no cost to public safety agencies, giving resources and tools to first responders. This App is designed for employees and family members. It includes, agency resources, personal wellness, mental health, physical fitness and health, financial assistance, substance use and addition, self-assessments, peer support, finding a therapist, chaplains, other resources and training. www.lighthousehw.org
Code-4 Counseling supports the mental wellbeing of public safety professionals. The provide wellness training, critical incident de-briefs, counseling, wellness program development. https://www.code4counseling.com
Revital Colorado is an organization that supports mental health and wellness for first responders. They bring a proactive approach by utilizing Colorado outdoor activities that provide therapeutic benefits to include horseback riding, fishing, and rock climbing. It gives the first responder opportunities to find positive ways to deal with stress of the job. https://www.revitalcolorado.org
CSOC Colorado Sheriffs of Colorado has also been a resource for funding when critical incidents arise. https://www.coloradosheriffs.org
Responder Strong is a site that offers many resources and help for mental health support in Colorado. https://responderstrong.org
Colorado Peace Officer Standards and Training also has Officer Safety and Wellness that includes a COPLINE 1-800-267-5463 for support and resources. This site also has a publication for Mental Wellness after a Critical Incident. The publication is from the Department of Justice called Surviving the Storm. It gives advice including three things you can do to reduce negative impacts of stress. The three things you can do immediately are sleep, nutrition, and exercise. https://post.colorado.gov
Personal and Professional Experiences
Captain Shelley Bryant
I am on the Critical Incident Response Team and witness first-hand the impact of critical incidents on officers. I have witnessed the aftermath of officers being shot and the impact it has on them and their career. I have watched officers break down in court when having to testify about the incident they experienced. I have experienced many critical incidents, but to see first-hand how others experience them brings a new understanding of the importance of support and resources for these officers. We should never take for granted the risks and impact law enforcement has on the officers who serve.
Captain John Romo
When I was a younger deputy, my partner and I responded to an abandoned 911 call in a nicer sub-division in my jurisdiction. The call came in at approximately 5:00 am and the Communication Center couldn’t hear anything on the line.
When my partner and I arrived, we observed the front door open and the glass window next to the door completely broke out with a sledgehammer resting against the outer wall. After announcing, we entered the residence and observed a male holding a female at gunpoint telling us to get out. We set up a perimeter and began negotiating with the male to leave the female and come out with his hands up. While negotiating, SWAT was called to the scene along with trained negotiators. Negotiations continued for quite some time when we heard a gunshot. After hearing the gunshot, the female was heard screaming, saying she was ok and that he was going to kill her. Negotiations continued while a hostage rescue plan was being developed.
Soon after we heard another shot, and the team entered the residence immediately. When we entered, we observed the male suspect on the ground with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. The female was shaken up but was ok. When detectives executed a search warrant on the suspects residence, it was learned the suspect had marked on his calendar that day was the day he was going to kill his girlfriend.
This call was very stressful for everyone involved. I learned a lot from this call and have passed on my knowledge to younger deputies to help them if they were to handle a call similar to this one.
Sergeant Amanda Simon
I have worked at the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office since 2015. In my tenure at the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office, I have been afforded the opportunity to work within both detentions and operations. Although some may feel critical incidents only happen in the operations division, they also happen within the detentions division.
Over the years, I have witnessed and been directly impacted by both good and bad leadership in relation to handling critical incidents and officer well-being. Certain members of leadership at the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office prioritize officer well-being and peer support related services. As an agency, our culture has shifted and a larger emphasis on wellness has been executed. Currently, we offer yearly wellness checks for all employees in addition to easily accessible therapy services while on duty. The Mesa County Sheriff’s Office has collaborated with two licensed therapists who have office hours every week, free of charge to all employees who wish to take advantage of the services.
In addition to those services, our peer support group puts together small retreats and services to both employees and their families. Most recently, employees and their families were able to partake in a horseback ride. We have also sponsored educational opportunities related to stress management and relationship building. These programs have paid dividends for the overall wellness of employees and the organization.
As an agency, we proactively assign peer support members to individuals involved in any type of critical incident no matter the severity. If there is a significant critical incident, we conduct peer support debriefs in conjunction with dispatchers and other first responders as they are extremely beneficial for first responders when processing their emotions.
As a leader within my organization, I truly value the wellness of each of my team members. I routinely check in on them both on a personal and professional level to ensure they are being the best they can be both at work and away from work. I try my best to be understanding and accommodating within the guidelines of the organization and the needs of the community.
Conclusion
It is imperative that leaders within a law enforcement organization demonstrate authentic and servant leadership in order to maintain positive organizational health and promote officer wellness after critical incidents. Understanding generational differences is also essential for leaders to effectively communicate and support their subordinates through the journey of wellness after critical incidents. Leaders must be proactive in identifying legislation issues as well as formulating creative solutions to improving wellness after critical incidents within their organizations. Officer emotional and mental well-being is essential in retaining employees as well as recruiting new employees in an organization. Additionally, officer wellness plays a key role in community trust and must be taken seriously within any organization.
References
Center for Creative Leadership (2025). What is authentic leadership, and why does it matter?
Retrieved June 10, 2025 from https://www.ccl.org/articles/leading-effectively-articles/
authenticity-1-idea-3-facts-5-tips/
Colorado Crime Statistics (2023). Violent crime 2023. Retrieved June 10, 2025 from
https://coloradocrimestats.state.co.us/tops/report/violent-crimes/colorado/2023
Colorado Revised Statutes, § Peace officer - involved shooting or fatal use of force
policy16-2.5-403. (2024).
Goleman, D. (2012). Daniel Goleman on the importance of emotional intelligence [Video].
Retrieved June 10, 2025 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uQs1NxluKE.
Harrington, R. (2017). Human factors and leadership. Learning Area 3: Module #1. National
Command and Staff College.
International Association of Chiefs of Police (2011). Critical incident stress management.
Retrieved June 10, 2025 from https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/all/c/CriticalInc
identStressPaper.pdf
International Institute for Management Development (2024). Understanding servant leadership
and how to implement it in 9 steps. Retrieved June 10, 2025 from https://www.imd.org/
blog/leadership/servant-leadership/
Jaeger, S. (2023). Perspective: the impact of life experiences on police officers. Retrieved
June 10, 2025 from https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/perspective/perspective-the-impact
-of-life-experiences-on-police-officers
Lee, J (2024). Crisis point: a wake-up call for police leaders on officers’ mental health and
wellness. Retrieved June 10, 2025 from https://www.police1.com/what-cops-want/crisis
-point-a-wake-up-call-for-police-leaders-on-officers-mental-health-and-wellness
Mcnally, V. J. & Solomon, R. M. (1999). FBI’s critical incident stress management program.
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 68(2), 20-26.
Nash, R. (2017). Proactive communication. Learning Area 4, Module #3. National Command
and College.
Normore, A. (2017). Leadership in practice: authentic leadership. Learning Area 3, Module #3.
National Command and Staff College.
PowerDMS. (2023). Breaking down barriers to support law enforcement wellness. Retrieved
June 10, 2025 from https://www.powerdms.com/policy-learning-center/breaking-down-
barriers-support-law-enforcement-wellness
Snyder, L. (2017). Generations. Learning Area 2, Module #1. National Command and Staff
College.
*******************
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Considerations for Law Enforcement
Team Wolves
Lieutenant Jesse Alcantara, Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office
Lieutenant Dante Guadagnoli, Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office
Sergeant Craig Bowen, Mesa County Sheriff’s Office
National Command and Staff College
Session #30
June 12, 2025
Abstract
Artificial intelligence is a strong and timely topic that is having an increased presence in our societal daily lives and is playing a much larger role in the field of law enforcement at the local, state, and federal levels. Facial recognition, license plate recognition, AI powered crime analysis, police report generation, and gunshot detection are now available and becoming a normal tool for law enforcement to increase efficiency and expand our capabilities. As these technologies and tools increase, we, as law enforcement professionals need to be aware of how this can impact our profession. Through this project, we will discuss how artificial intelligence can be used as a tool to assist law enforcement agencies, and ultimately better the communities we serve. We will look at how artificial intelligence affects our investigative capabilities from basic report writing to predictive policing. We will also address the potential negative impacts and legal considerations artificial intelligence may have on officers and agencies. Further we will argue when artificial intelligence when used responsibly and appropriately, it can be a powerful tool in the field of law enforcement.
Introduction
Artificial intelligence is becoming more and more prevalent in the field of law enforcement and its use is enhancing crime solving capabilities. Law enforcement agencies have continually turned towards modern technology to aid in carrying out their public safety missions and the utilization of artificial intelligence is no exception. In recent years, law enforcement agencies have utilized AI to enhance their investigative capabilities, as AI systems can process large amounts of information quickly, allowing agencies to uncover patterns, identify suspects, and prevent crimes. For example, AI can analyze historical data to identify patterns and trends allowing agencies to allocate resources strategically.
Artificial intelligence technology available to law enforcement includes, facial recognition, license plate recognition, social media monitoring, gunshot detection, report generation, and weapons detection to name a few. Law enforcement agencies across the country are adopting technology equipped with AI and are quickly realizing that incorporating AI can increase efficiency and expand their capabilities.
As AI use is rapidly developing, policies are being developed that promote responsible use for law enforcement agencies. AI governance is still in its infancy, however state legislatures in 30 states have considered over 150 bills relating to the governmental use of AI in 2024 (Ezeh, N., Widgery, A., Canda, C., 2025, para 9.). States like Colorado have already enacted legislation to regulate law enforcements use of this technology such as facial recognition. In 2022 Colorado enacted legislation requiring an accountability report, data management, security protocols, training and testing for government entities using this technology (Ezeh, N., Widgery, A., Canda, C., 2025, para 10.).
AI technology also presents challenges and ethical considerations. For instance, one primary concern is the potential for bias in AI algorithms, which may result in discriminatory outcomes. Further, privacy is another ethical concern with AI when technologies like facial recognition and social media monitoring are utilized, therefore regular review of ethical implications are essential for law enforcement agencies (Epstein, B., Emerson, J., 2024, para 9.).
As AI technology continues to grow, government policies regarding privacy, transparency, and legal implications will continue to evolve, therefore ongoing training to keep officers aware of the latest advancements, risks, and ethical considerations is essential.
History of Artificial Intelligence
The term "artificial intelligence" was coined by John McCarthy in 1956. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been marked by periods of rapid progress and setbacks, with the technology formally being established in 1956 at a Dartmouth workshop. The Dartmouth Summer Research Project in 1956, is widely considered the birthplace of AI research. This research project, was aimed to explore, “how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans and improve themselves” (McCarthy, 1956, cited in McCarthy, Minsky, Rochester, et al., 2006). Early AI focused on symbolic reasoning and expert systems, where the focus was on creating machines that could reason, solve problems, and learn, similar to humans. Later advancements centered on machine learning and deep learning, fueled by computational power and large datasets. This involved exploring symbolic AI, where computers would manipulate symbols to replicate abstract thought.
During the 1970s and 1980s the initial enthusiasm for AI diminished as researchers faced challenges in achieving their goals, particularly in handling complex, real-world problems. Lack of funding and unmet expectations led to a period of decreased interest known as the “AI Winter".
Between 1990 and 2010 advances in computing power and data availability spurred the development of machine learning algorithms. Deep learning, which leverages artificial neural networks, emerged as a powerful technique for solving complex problems in areas like image and speech recognition. Significant breakthroughs in machine learning led to a renewed interest in AI and a new era of development.
Beginning in 2010 we witnessed the development of large language models and the emergence of generative AI. Generative AI (Gen AI) is a type of artificial intelligence that focuses on creating new data, like text, images, videos, or audio, based on existing data. The 2020s have witnessed a boom in generative AI and its societal impact, sparking discussions about ethics and regulations. As mentioned above, the AI boom has raised ethical concerns about the potential impact of AI on society, including bias and discrimination, job displacement, privacy, and the potential for misuse.
The ideas and goals of AI, established over six decades ago, continue to be actively explored in the field of AI today.
Current Applications of AI in Law Enforcement
There are many applications to consider for law enforcement professionals to include criminal justice, homeland security, and transportation security. Facial recognition technology
can be utilized to identify suspects through video footage or by pictures found on the internet. Recognition can be obtained from cameras hundreds of meters away from the suspect,
in low light and off angles, and from a face partially obscured (“History of NIJ support for face recognition technology, 2020). Since 2020, 18 states have introduced legislation regarding the use of facial recognition for law enforcement officers (Ezeh et al., 2025). In 2022, Colorado passed Senate Bill 22-113 which requires agencies to complete periodic training, publish an annual accountability report on their use of facial recognition as investigative tool, and requires human review of any actions that result in legal effects on case suspects (Hansen, 2022). This bill also created a task force consisting of 15 individuals with backgrounds ranging from elected officials to representatives of disproportionately impacted communities.
Agencies are also utilizing AI for real time crime detection. Gunshot detection, such as ShotSpotter, used by the city of Pueblo, Colorado, uses sound wave technology to triangulate gunshots and provides location details to responding officers (Hicks, 2024). This technology assisted this agency, during an active shooter incident occurring here in Pueblo Colorado. Another technology which aids law enforcement in apprehending criminals is the use of automated license plate readers (ALPR). This allows officers to compare the gathered information and compare it to a list of stolen vehicles or to locate cars driven by suspects of criminal activity. Currently, ALPR’s are utilized on all marked patrol vehicles at the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office, and we have had good success in recovering numerous stolen vehicles.
Another facet of AI available for law enforcement use is assisting in incident report writing. Products such as Axon’s Draft One application produces initial draft narratives based on the video and audio evidence collected during officer’s interaction with witnesses and suspects. Axon’s goal is to reduce the amount of time an officer spends on report writing which will allow them to be more productive in police work (Axon, 2025).
Public Perception and Trust
United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) published a report exploring global public perceptions of AI in law enforcement. It is based on a survey conducted with 670 respondents across six continents over a period of eight months. The findings have revealed cautious optimism about AI’s potential in policing especially when investigating serious crimes. However, significant ethical concerns persist, particularly regarding privacy, discrimination, and real-time decision making (UNICRI, 2025). This report highlights the importance of collaboration, between law enforcement, policymakers, and the public to ensure AI use aligns with justice, fairness, and societal values (UNICRI, 2025). Public perception of law enforcements use of artificial intelligence is complex, as some see AI as a tool for enhancing public safety and improving the way we police our communities, while others worry about potential biases, privacy concerns, and lack of accountability.
We cannot control public perception or how the media decides to portray law enforcements use of AI, however we can control and address errors which will lead to an overall better portrayal. Technology such as artificial intelligence, will require new ways of thinking amongst law enforcement agencies and the community. Law enforcements work environment is constantly changing therefore law enforcement leaders must have the mindset and ability to adapt to these changes (Spain, 2017).
AI Considerations and Leadership
Leaders in law enforcement must be fully aware of all aspects of AI as it becomes more integrated into our daily duties. They will be expected to exercise expert power when training young officers on how to utilize the technology (Long, 2020). These leaders must know the
legal standards of their jurisdiction such as the accountability reporting required by Colorado law and how the use of AI must be approved by court order in some instances. Changes in legislature and the best practices used by fellow agencies must be tracked to ensure legal compliance. Periodic trainings must be offered to keep all team members up to date in their skills.
The use of AI by officers may be met with reluctance to change or with fear of learning a new skill. Leaders must embrace these changes in technology to help integrate the new practices into the organization. As Normore (2017) states, “they go first, they don’t sit on the sidelines, they don’t tell others to do what they are unwilling to do themselves, instead they lead by example”. Any reluctance or negativity to the new procedures in using AI by leaders will be mirrored by their subordinates and will create a failure in the organizational change process.
AI offers many advantages to both officers and their leadership, but care must be taken to ensure that human audit is present with use of the technology. The use of AI to assist in report writing must be verified to ensure that the true intent and content of the report is not summarized in error. Small details must be verified so that the official report matches the available footage. Any discrepancy may lead to loss in criminal proceedings.
Over dependance on technology is also a concern for law enforcement leaders. The physical manipulation of the devices may be a distraction during crisis incidents such as active shooters or high-speed chases. The use of AI must be seamless and practiced allowing officers to minimize distractions during these high liability incidents. Leaders must ensure their officers practice these skills to keep themselves and our communities safe.
Using Artificial Intelligence as an Investigative Tool
Artificial intelligence has emerged as an excellent tool in law enforcement investigations allowing agencies to work smarter, not harder, especially as agencies are seeing staffing shortages in part due to recruitment and retention problems. These staffing shortages have resulted in heavier workloads and longer shifts which may impact their well-being. AI can streamline complex processes, making time for officers to focus on interacting with their community. Predictive analytics can help agencies tackle crimes such as property crimes by identifying trends, hot spots, by deploying resources strategically, especially when staffing is limited. AI was instrumental in the investigation of a mass shooting in Oakland County, Michigan, in November 2021. The prosecutor’s office in this case used AI powered data analysis to uncover critical evidence, that may have taken weeks or months to uncover. This technology cross-referenced data from multiple digital sources which reconstructed the events leading up to the event (Police1, 2024). This assisted in implicating the suspects parents by showing what they knew, and when they knew it which helped build a strong case to be presented in front of a jury (Police1, 2024).
AI has been instrumental at detecting patterns in complex data sets, that would otherwise remain undiscovered. AI tools can link seemingly unrelated incidents providing law enforcement with insight to target broader criminal networks (Police1, 2024). When used appropriately, AI can be an asset in achieving operational efficiency and faster case resolution. AI will transform law enforcement, making it possible to tackle more complex criminal activities and protect communities more effectively than ever before (Police1, 2024).
Agency implementation of Artificial Intelligence
The impact that AI will bring to organizations is considerable. Much like the monumental change from handwriting reports to using computers to complete incident narratives, an agency change to the use of AI will need the focus of the entire organization. Leaders must prepare for the deep change by understanding the new way of thinking and behaving, understanding to size of scope, believing the change is irreversible, and know there is a certain level of risk involved. As Long (2017) states, “with vision, every member of an organization can be a chief executive officer and confront organizational structure in a constructive way. This reflects a bottom-up approach where subordinates provide the top with a perspective”.
After research and training, supervisors must provide effective communication to stakeholders affected by the switch to using AI in their duties. Long (2017) states, “communication is important because it is key for the organization and the individuals in that organization to have a reciprocal and positive relationship with their internal and external environment”. The communication must include the “why” behind the change and also any deadlines associated with the transition.
Leaders must be aware of project saboteurs to ensure they are confronted and educated on how the change will benefit them as well. This deep change should align with the values and vision of the organization. Deep change may be difficult to plan and execute, but by preparing and identifying saboteurs, it can be vital to overcoming the emerging issues facing law enforcement today.
The Negative Effects of Artificial Intelligence for Law Enforcement
AI in law enforcement, while promising, also presents challenges to include the potential for bias, lack of transparency, and erosion of public trust. These issues can lead to discriminatory
practices, undermine due process, and damage relationships between law enforcement and the
public. Additionally, the reliance on AI may lead to a decline in traditional policing skills and a
dependence on technology that could be exploited or misused. AI algorithms can amplify existing biases present in historical data used to train them. This can potentially lead to discriminatory policing practices, such as mistargeting certain communities or individuals
based on their race, ethnicity, or status.
In the context of AI fairness and bias (Ferrara, 2023), the Butterfly Effect highlights the potential for small biases or skewed data inputs at various stages of algorithm development to result in significant and unexpected unfair outcomes. (Ferrara, 2023). Transparency and accountability issues may arise as well. Predictive policing algorithms, often used by law enforcement, are proprietary and are hidden and difficult to discern, making it difficult for the public to understand how they work and why they make certain predictions. This lack of transparency can erode public trust and accountability as it makes it harder to challenge the accuracy and fairness of AI-driven decisions. Over policing and the deployment of AI surveillance technologies can erode public trust, especially in communities where there are already concerns about police misconduct and bias. AI-driven decisions, particularly those that lead to unjust outcomes, can further damage relationships between law enforcement and the public. AI systems can influence decisions that involve liberty interests, such as those related to arrest, bail, sentencing, and parole. If AI systems are not properly designed and implemented, they can undermine due process and create an uneven playing field in the criminal justice system. The potential for AI to be manipulated or misused also raises concerns about fairness and the integrity of the justice system. The reliance on AI could lead to a decline in traditional police skills and instincts, as officers may become overly dependent on technology. The complexity of AI systems also requires specialized knowledge, which could lead to skill gaps in police departments. This dependence on technology could make it difficult for law enforcement to adapt to unforeseen circumstances or handle situations that require human judgment and discretion.
It is possible AI can be used to create realistic fake evidence, which can be used to manipulate investigations, obstruct justice, or discredit law enforcement efforts. Further, AI-generated images and videos can also be used for identity theft and other criminal purposes. To address these concerns, it's crucial we implement rigorous oversight mechanisms, ensure transparency and accountability, and involve communities in the decision-making process. Additionally, law enforcement agencies should prioritize fairness and equity in the development and deployment of AI tools, actively working to mitigate biases and address algorithmic transparency. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also recommends that AI report-writing technology is too new, too untested, too unreliable, and too biased to be inserted into our criminal justice system (Stanley,2024).
Conclusion
Artificial intelligence is becoming more embedded in our daily lives and law enforcement careers. As we become increasingly reliant on AI as we perform our law enforcement duties, its use is more than likely here to stay. Judging by our current research, AI will become increasingly used as the primary tool used for solving crimes. Artificial intelligence use has rapidly developed in the recent years, and its use will most likely significantly increase in the years to come. Through our research, it is evident artificial intelligence is a great tool to assist law enforcement in their daily duties, which will ultimately have a great impact on our local communities and the citizens we serve. Although our research has detailed many benefits of AI, there are negative aspects associated with AI in policing as well. Potential for bias, lack of transparency, erosion of public trust can all lead to discriminatory practices, undermine due process, and damage relationships between law enforcement and the public, therefore it is important law enforcement professionals and executives are aware of the risks associated with AI, prior to diving in headfirst into its implementation.
Thus far AI has been instrumental in identifying stolen vehicles, locating criminals via the use of facial recognition, alerting law enforcement to potential gunshot victims via the use of sound wave technology thus saving lives, locating missing persons, and tracking crime data, to name a few. Although there are many positive aspects to AI, we are still navigating the unknown risks associated with AI which will ultimately determine how this technology is used in the future which will most likely be determined via legislation at the state and federal levels. As previously stated, at one point in time officers across the nation had to learn and become proficient at typing reports via computer, rather than handwriting their reports. There was a time when our dash camera video was recorded on VHS tapes, which recorded from the trunk of our vehicles, now digital evidence is automatically uploaded to the cloud. Bodyworn cameras were highly criticized by officers, and now they are relied upon. When a shooting would occur, law enforcement depended on a 911 call from a witness or victim, now law enforcement is automatically notified in some cases via the use of AI. In 5 to 10 years, is it possible we are not discussing AI anymore as it has become a normal unimpressive part of our lives, and is it possible the newest technology is comprised of something we currently don’t think is possible?
References
Axon. Draft One. (n.d.). Retrieved June 6, 2025, from https://www.axon.com/products/draftone.
Epstein, B., Emerson, J. (2024). Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use, Pitfalls, and Considerations for Executives. Retrieved June 6, 2025, from Navigating the Future of Policing – Police Chief Magazine.
Ezeh, N., Widgery, A., Canda, C. (2025). Artificial intelligence and law enforcement: the
federal and state landscape. Retrieved June 6, 2025, from Artificial Intelligence and Law Enforcement: The Federal and State Landscape
Ferrara, E. (2023). The butterfly effect in artificial intelligence systems: Implications for AI bias and fairness. Retrieved on June 12, 2025, from https://www.mdpi.com/2413-4155/6/1/3
Hansen, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence facial recognition. Colorado general assembly. Retrieved June 6, 2025, from https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb22-113
Hicks, B. (2024). Shotspotter and real time crime center assistance leads to arrest and conviction. Pueblo, CO. Retrieved June 6, 2025, from https://www.pueblo.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=4697
History of NIJ support for face recognition technology. National Institute of Justice. (2020, March 5). Retrieved June 6, 2025, from https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/history-nij- support-face-recognition-technology
Long, L. (2017). Deep change and positive emotional intelligence. Learning Area 3, Module 7. National Command and Staff College.
Long, L (2017). Leadership and power. Learning Area 2, Module 5. National Command and Staff College.
Long, L. (2017). Organizational communication. Learning Area 4, Module 2. National Command and Staff College.
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (2006). A proposal for the dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence, August 31, 1955. AI Magazine, 27(4), 12.
Normore, A. (2017). Leadership in practice: authentic leadership. Learning Area 3, Module 3. National Command and Staff College.
Police1. (2024, November 8). Empowering investigations: AI’s impact on law enforcement: enhancing efficiency and solving complex crimes. Retrieved June 7, 2024 from Empowering investigations: AI’s impact on law enforcement: Enhancing efficiency and solving complex crimes.
Spain, T. (2017). Adaptive leadership. Module #9, Week #5. National Command and Staff College.
Stanley, J. (2024). Senior Policy Analyst with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project.
United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (2025, May 7). Not just another tool. report on public perceptions of AI in law enforcement. Retrieved June 6, 2025, from “Not Just Another Tool" Report on Public Perceptions of AI in Law Enforcement, November 2024 | UNICRI :: United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute
*******************
Navigating the Complexities of Collective Bargaining for Colorado Sheriff’s Offices
Team Eagles
Captain Caitlin Garcia
Sergeant Brian Eldridge
Sergeant Justin Montover
National Command & Staff College
Session # 030
June 12, 2025
Abstract
Introduction
Collective Bargaining and Unionization for public employees in Colorado is a new concept in the infancy stages of development, implementation and cultural acceptance. However, the concept of public employees unionizing and coming to the collective bargaining table dates back to the late 1950’s when comprehensive public employee bargaining laws were first passed in Wisconsin (Seidman, 1971). Subsequent states such as New York, California, Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania trailed behind in similar legislation at the time but soon caught up in developing collective bargaining rights for the public employee sector. It wasn’t until 2022, sixty-three years later, that similar legislation allowing for collective bargaining rights for public employees encompassing ‘county’ employees specifically, was passed in legislation.
The result of Colorado’s legislative change was Senate Bill 22-230, signed on May 27th, 2022, which, among other things, allows public employees of a county with a population of 7,500 people or more (county employees) the right to: voluntarily organize, form or join an employee organization; engage in the collective bargaining process, fully participate in the political process and designate an exclusive representative for use during personnel disciplinary issues. This bill precludes actions by public employees such as strikes, work stoppages or behavior that disrupts governmental operations on a large scale (Colorado General Assembly, 2022).
Navigating the Complexities of Collective Bargaining for Colorado Sheriff’s Offices
Collective bargaining in law enforcement has long been a contentious issue across the United States. In Colorado, this debate has taken a unique shape with the passage of Senate Bill 22-230, which expanded collective bargaining rights to county-level public employees, including those in sheriff’s offices. While the law was intended to strengthen workers' voices and improve employment conditions, its implementation has raised complex legal, political, and operational challenges—particularly within sheriff’s offices, which are both law enforcement agencies and political offices led by elected officials.
Our interest in identifying, highlighting, discussing, and addressing the complexities of collective bargaining within Colorado Sheriff’s Offices is high due to its significant impact on labor relations, community engagement, departmental operations, organizational cultures, and community cultures. Addressing the complexities of collective bargaining in sheriff's offices involves navigating the delicate balance between protecting employee rights, maintaining accountability, and ensuring the delivery of effective public safety services. This requires a focus on collaboration, transparency, and data-driven decision-making to build trust and promote positive change.
Overall, navigating the complexities of collective bargaining in sheriff's offices requires careful consideration of various factors, including employee rights, public accountability, legal interpretations, and potential impacts on both the department and the community (State of Colorado, Division of Labor Standards and Statistics, 2025).
Complexities of Collective Bargaining for Colorado Sheriff’s Offices
Collective bargaining in Colorado sheriff's offices, particularly the Pueblo Sheriff's Office, Mesa County Sheriff’s Office, Douglas County Sheriff’s Office, and Boulder County Sheriff’s Office, face significant legal, practical, and even cultural challenges. These challenges include the question of whether sheriffs are subject to state laws requiring collective bargaining, potential limitations on the scope of bargaining, and concerns about how collective bargaining might impact accountability and the sheriff's ability to manage and lead their respective office.
Some sheriffs and county commissioners have actively opposed unionization efforts, arguing it could negatively impact public safety and create an additional bureaucratic layer. Many of the same opposed sheriffs also argue they are not covered by state collective bargaining laws, as they are separately elected and not part of the general county government. This argument is often based on the principle of sheriff autonomy in personnel matters.
Even if collective bargaining is applicable, there are debates about what issues can be bargained over. Some argue certain matters, like staffing decisions and pay, should be outside the scope of collective bargaining.
Concerns have been raised that collective bargaining agreements can limit the sheriff's ability to discipline or remove officers, potentially hindering efforts to address misconduct. On the same concerning topic, some studies suggest a potential link between collective bargaining rights and increased incidents of officer misconduct, particularly excessive use of force incidents. These studies suggest the presence of collective bargaining units in sheriff's offices can raise concerns about the potential for a "union subculture" which is perceived to be resistant to reform and hold up accountability efforts.
The concerns surrounding collective bargaining in law enforcement often revolve around the potential for it to undermine accountability and potentially impact public safety.
In Colorado, Douglas County has filed lawsuits challenging the application of the Colorado Collective Bargaining for County Employees Act (COBCA) to the sheriff's office, arguing it infringes on the sheriff's autonomy and the rights of local governments. Sheriff Darren Weekly and Douglas County Commissioners were found to have violated labor law by discouraging unionization efforts and making anti-union statements. The Colorado Department of Labor and Employment ordered them to stop such practices and distribute the determination letter to employees.
Douglas County Weekly has also filed a lawsuit challenging the COBCA, arguing it doesn't apply to the Sheriff's Office, that it's an unfunded mandate, and that collective bargaining cannot supersede other state laws regarding the Sheriff's authority.
In Pueblo County, Sheriff David Lucero has argued the COBCA doesn't apply to sheriffs as they are elected officials. He has filed a lawsuit against the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment and the union (IBPO Local 837), claiming they have violated his constitutional and statutory rights. The COBCA mandates employers and employee representatives negotiate in good faith over wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. COBCA does not take into account Colorado Sheriff’s statutory obligations as set forth within the provisions of Title 30 of the Colorado Revised Statutes. While facing these complexities, it is important for sheriffs offices to consider community engagement and relationships.
Community Engagement and Relationships
If sheriffs and their command members are unable to facilitate amicable relationships with their agency’s respective collective bargaining units, the communities they serve will inevitably become aware and the public may perceive a negative dynamic between law enforcement and unions, affecting public trust and confidence in the sheriff's office.
Many community members who do not have a deep understanding of the collective bargaining process can potentially view the overall process as being a drain on valuable resources and time which, in their minds, could be better used in community engagement initiatives.
The development and ongoing initiatives of collective bargaining units within sheriff’s offices can create internal tensions and potentially affect morale within the sheriff's office, leading to differing opinions, differing goals, and ultimately a decline in community engagement efforts. If the dynamic between sheriff’s and their agency’s collective bargaining units becomes adversarial, there is a significant possibility the result will be an increased struggle with building and maintaining genuine partnerships and collaborations within the community.
Collective bargaining units’ strong defense of employees accused of misconduct, even in public instances, can negatively impact public perception and foster a sense that they are indifferent to victims of police abuse. Collective bargaining agreements can also affect civilian oversight mechanisms, sometimes restricting the ability of civilians to file complaints or access disciplinary records.
Departmental Operations
Collective bargaining units and processes require sheriffs and their respective command staff to engage in good-faith negotiations with unions over wages, benefits, and working conditions. This process could lead to disputes and potential delays in resolving issues.
Collective bargaining agreements can potentially create barriers to holding officers accountable for misconduct. Some provisions found in these agreements may limit disciplinary actions, delay investigations, mandate the destruction of disciplinary records, or restrict civilian oversight.
Advocates of collective bargaining units argue these agreements are necessary to ensure officers' due process rights during internal investigations and to protect officers from unfair or politically motivated discipline. They contend these protections are essential due process rights for officers, ensuring that investigations and disciplinary actions follow established procedures.
A highlighted feature of collective bargaining agreements, binding arbitration, can allow sheriff’s office employees to challenge disciplinary decisions, with arbitrators potentially overturning decisions made by sheriff’s or their authorized designees. Some collective bargaining contracts require the purging of disciplinary records, limiting the information available to supervisors and hindering their ability to manage effectively (Colorado General Assembly, 2022).
Based on professional knowledge from the team, a glaring concern suggests collective bargaining protections may inadvertently lead to an increase in violent misconduct among officers, as the influence of the collective bargaining unit may make them feel shielded from disciplinary action.
Collective bargaining has been associated with increases in employee salaries and fringe benefits. This can impact departmental budgets and resource allocation. Collective bargaining units can advocate for adequate staffing levels to ensure officer safety and job satisfaction. Collective bargaining has also been linked to hiring more civilians in sheriffs offices, while arbitration may result in more employees in the departments. Collective bargaining agreements also have the potential to affect shift scheduling and overtime policies. Additionally, seniority rules negotiated in contracts can impact employee assignments, the allocation and deployment of resources, and overall staffing levels.
Organizational Cultures and Relationships
Based on our team’s same professional knowledge, the introduction of collective bargaining units and processes within sheriff’s offices can disrupt the established hierarchical structure of a sheriff's office and potentially alter the relationship between management and employees. This is often the result of management having the real or perceived fear of a loss of power and control over processes and their employees.
The collective bargaining process itself can be complex and time-consuming, with potential for disagreements and delays. Different interpretations of Collective Bargaining by County Employees Act (COBCA) and the law's application to sheriff's offices can further complicate negotiations.
Based on professional knowledge from the team, one of the most glaring arguments in support of collective bargaining units within sheriff’s offices is the collective bargaining unit’s ability to improve morale by providing employees with a voice in workplace decisions. On the other hand, others fear this same practice could lead to increased conflict and a more adversarial relationship between management and employees.
Community Cultures and Relationships
It's important to ensure the process of collective bargaining is transparent and inclusive, so the community can understand the process and have a say in the decisions which impact their safety and well-being. Some sheriffs and county officials have argued collective bargaining processes could negatively impact community safety by potentially making law enforcement less efficient and more bureaucratic. They have also suggested the added complexity of collective bargaining could hinder the sheriff's ability to effectively staff their office and set pay, which is a power granted to them by the state constitution.
County commissioners and their constituents also play a significant role in the collective bargaining process, as they control the budget and can influence decisions related to wages, benefits, and working conditions.
The Significance of Developing Leadership Pertaining to Collective Bargaining
In order to effectively implement a successful collective bargaining process within a sheriff’s office, there must be a shift from unilateral management to collaborative management.
Unilateral management refers to decision-making or actions taken by a single party without consulting or involving others, especially those who are affected. It can involve making decisions independently, controlling the situation, or influencing others without being influenced in return. In a leadership context, it can manifest as a mindset where individuals prioritize their own needs and assume they have all the necessary information, often leading to decisions made without transparency or accountability. These decisions in turn often result in only benefiting the one making the decision (Built In, 2024).
A collaborative management style focuses on shared decision-making and teamwork, where managers and employees work together to achieve common goals. It involves valuing employee contributions equally, sharing decision-making power, and coordinating efforts to achieve a collective outcome. Collaborative managers and employees participate in the decision-making process, ensuring diverse perspectives are considered. This decision-making process is formulated through collaboration where teams work together, valuing diverse perspectives and fostering a sense of unity. This process is also emphasized through the same managers and employees communicating openly, sharing information and ideas freely (Nestlé Professional, n.d.).
Overall, a collaborative environment is built on mutual respect and trust between managers and employees. This same environment fosters a culture where managers and employees collectively take responsibility for the overall success of the organization, success of any and all implemented initiatives, and ultimately the success of the services the organization provides to the community.
Collaborative leadership can lead to improved efficiency as diverse perspectives and innovative solutions are developed, and this process in turn fosters collaboration and trust, where teams can complete projects faster and with greater accuracy. Collaborative leadership also encourages employees to share ideas which can lead to innovative solutions and approaches to problem-solving (Nestlé Professional, n.d.).
Employees are more likely to be engaged when they feel their contributions are valued and they have a voice in the decision-making process. Building trust and respect between managers and employees can and will lead to stronger working relationships throughout the organization and across the community.
The change to, or implementation of collaborative leadership helps foster practices and an environment where everyone understands the overall direction and desired outcomes. This process also supports the art of delegation, which is a catalyst for empowering employees to take ownership of their work and contribute to the organization’s overall success. Employees operating within an organization which supports collaborative leadership, operate within what they perceive to be a safe and inclusive environment where employees feel comfortable sharing their ideas and concerns.
In essence, a collaborative management style promotes a more inclusive, democratic, and effective approach to managing organizations, leveraging the collective intelligence and expertise of all employees (Nestlé Professional, n.d.).
Through clear, consistent, and empathetic communication, leaders need to be able to articulate the sheriff’s office stance and position during negotiations, explain contract provisions to non-bargaining unit staff, and foster an understanding with collective bargaining leadership. They must also be skilled, active listeners who understand the concerns and priorities of the collective bargaining unit. A lack in any aspect of this communication, or even simply a miscommunication, can lead to grievances, low morale, or even litigation challenges.
Sheriffs and their respective command members must also have an in depth understanding of fiscal management, long-term financial planning, and negotiating sustainable agreements.
In order to maintain or more importantly, increase the level of morale and trust within the organization, sheriffs must collaboratively work with the collective bargaining units to ensure real and perceived support of positive working relationships, between management and employees, regardless of bargaining outcomes. Sheriffs and their command members must also demonstrate transparency, fairness, and genuine concern for their employee’s well-being, even when tough decisions regarding collective bargaining processes are made.
On the discipline and accountability side of these processes, sheriffs and their command members need to understand how to uphold standards of performance and address misconduct while adhering to due process rights outlined in the contract. Developing leaders who can effectively manage performance, maintain accountability, and adhere to standards, best practices, and legal parameters is paramount to the success of the organization (Nestlé Professional, n.d.).
Strong, collaborative leadership ensures the sheriff offices speak with a unified voice during negotiations and dealing with collective bargaining units. Externally, sheriffs will need to manage relationships with county commissioners, other county departments, and the public, explaining the rationale behind the agreements and the ongoing impacts of the collective bargaining processes.
Essentially, collective bargaining transforms the role of leadership in a sheriff’s office from primarily managerial to a more complex blend of diplomat, negotiator, strategist, and legal interpreter. Investing in leadership development is no longer just about operational efficiency; this investment is now about equipping the sheriff and command staff with the tools necessary to navigate a new highly formalized and often adversarial, employee relations environment while continuing to effectively serve the public.
Leadership Theories and Approaches for Navigating the Complexities of Collective Bargaining
In the ever-changing world of public safety, regardless of the implemented process, it is best to use a combination of leadership theories to successfully implement any and all processes.
Transformational leadership sets an overarching vision and inspires commitment to shared goals. It builds strong interpersonal connections necessary for good negotiations and ongoing collaboration (Personio, n.d.).
Adaptive leadership provides the framework for addressing the deep-seated challenges and required cultural shifts that collective bargaining introduces, empowering the entire organization to navigate its complexities (Michaels, 2023).
By integrating elements of these theories, a Sheriff and their leadership team can move beyond simply reacting to the demands of collective bargaining units to proactively shape a productive, collaborative and effective future for their office, their employees, and the communities they serve. In addition to the utilization of leadership approaches, sheriffs and other command members must also be mindful of the necessity to also incorporate versatility skills.
Versatility Skills
Versatility skills help develop your own style and become more responsive to individuals, teams and organizations (Anderson, 2017).
Recognizing and facilitating the five stages of development within organizations is essential for sheriffs to fully grasp and understand in regards to the implementation and continued processes surrounding the collective bargaining process. Understanding stages of development is beneficial to a leader because it enables the leaders to assess the stage at which a team or organization is currently functioning. This can address many issues while navigating through collective bargaining processes.
Leadership Approaches
Leadership is a process, it involves the influence of others, it happens in groups of people with a common goal. Leadership applies to all individuals not just the ones formally given authority by the organization (Normore, 2017). When Normore’s explanation is applied to the basis of power, the Sheriff’s Office and the sheriffs themselves represent legitimate power which is associated with having status or formal job authority. On the other hand, collective bargaining units would fall into referent power based on followers’ identification and liking of the unit’s leader, or even simply what the unit as a whole stands for and supports.
Succession Planning
Collective Bargaining Agreements can have a lasting organizational impact which affects the organization's subsystems, such as succession planning, crisis intervention, and progressive law enforcement. These agreements can be written or drafted in such a way that they limit the top-level leader’s ability to effectively intervene in a crisis in an effective or genuine capacity. Where a leader would have made decisions such as departmental moves, employment decisions, discipline decisions, or performance planning, they are now faced with restrictions, provisions, or preclusions based upon the contractual agreement or union intervention.
The importance and necessity of succession planning, especially within public safety organizations, was highlighted through a statement made by Wellington Scott during his 2017 National Command and Staff College lecture on Succession Planning. During his lecture, Scott stated, “Now, more than ever, it is essential for leaders to effect well planned change of leadership while maintaining organizational continuity and meeting or exceeding organizational goals” (2017).
Leaders are also now faced with succession planning obstacles in building out the future of the organization's leadership. If the organization faces a fracture or divide between the union staff and the command staff, it may see an unwillingness of staff wanting to promote into positions beyond the union threshold or a perception of us versus them that grows internally within the organization.
Organizational Change
Change is any part of the system which affects any portion of the system, or even the entire system as a whole. Organizations need to be asking themselves “who” questions and “why” questions.
Change and the ability of individuals and organizations to adapt to and implement it, is clearly important. However, through human nature we like to be comfortable, safe, and secure within our environments and this often means we as humans dislike change. The fear of change is both real and perceived, and in order to adapt to and effectively implement change, organizations must take significant strides to address every possible element concerning the fear and resistance to change. This concept was described very well by Rosalyn Harrington during her 2017 National Command and Staff College lecture on The Organizational Change Battle Plan. During her lecture, Harrington stated, “Some change strategies are cast out into the waters with no life vest, only to sink to the bottom of the organizational waters” (2017). Leaders looking to affect change must be very diligent in caring for both their employees and the change they wish to affect throughout the entire process.
To mitigate the real or perceived fear of change within an organization, effective communication, employee involvement, and fostering an overall supportive environment and culture are key aspects which cannot be overlooked by the change agents. Although change is a necessity and a very important function to public safety organizations, the mental well-being of the organization’s employees is equally important as they are the core of the organization and without them, there’s no one to affect and carry out the change.
In his 2017 National Command and Staff College lecture on Leadership and Change, Matt Tobia explained that change produces disequilibrium, and disequilibrium produces stress, and stress is usually perceived as a negative aspect. Tobia continued by explaining disequilibrium is a cognitive imbalance and in order to successfully affect change, change agents must be very cognizant to apply the right amount of pressure or disequilibrium at the right times. Too much disequilibrium will essentially result in a mental overload, and too little disequilibrium will not be enough to push the change through to a successful end- point (2017).
In an effort to combat and remedy the real or perceived fear of change within an organization, change agents should clearly communicate the who, what, where, when, why, and how of the change. In a sense, the organization’s change agents must clearly explain who is involved and being affected by the change. They must provide the details surrounding what the change is and explain within what portions of the organization the change is going to take place. Organizations and their respective change agents should continue by outlining the different timelines surrounding the change, and why the change is needed. Finally, organizations and their change agents must also explain the processes and steps of how the change is going to take place.
While moving through this process and consciously addressing these factors, organizations and their respective change agents should provide the necessary training and support to help their employees successfully adapt to the change. Additionally, organizational leaders should also openly acknowledge their employees’ real or perceived fear regarding the change, and allow their employees to voice their concerns as this practice will help reduce resistance, build trust, and pave a path for the successful implementation of the change.
Emotional Intelligence and Navigating the Complexities of Collective Bargaining
Deep change is harder to achieve, it involves personal change which requires someone to bring their thinking and behavior aligned with the organization (Long, 2017). When comparing this to collective bargaining and Sheriff Office’s, each group needs to remember they work for the citizens of the community they serve and need to have a common goal. Incremental change is step by step and rational while deep change is harder to achieve. Both parties need to work on deep change to have a unified front because both have the common goal of the people, and this deep change implementation can be achieved through collaborative leadership.
While deep change necessitates fundamental change, deep change alone is not simply implementing policies, procedures, strategies, and structures; it’s crucial to remember human factors are a key component in making these transformations and changes successful.
Human Factors
In the complex realm of collective bargaining within Colorado sheriff's offices, human factors play a crucial role in shaping the negotiation process and its outcomes. These factors encompass a range of psychological, social, and emotional aspects which influence how employees and management interact and engage during negotiations.
Human factors are how humans deal with stressful situations (Harrington, 2017). If leaders of Sheriff’s Offices and collective bargaining units integrate human factors this will allow better communication and help with stressful situations when collective bargaining.
By focusing on these human factors and implementing strategies to improve communication, build trust, and enhance employee well-being, sheriff's offices can navigate the complexities of collective bargaining more effectively, leading to outcomes which benefit the employees, the agency, and the communities they serve.
Conclusion
The expansion of collective bargaining rights to sheriff’s offices in Colorado has fostered a more empowered workforce, leading to improved morale and better public services. However, it has also introduced challenges, including legal disputes, strained relationships, and even general animosity between leadership and staff. The overall impact on community trust and departmental effectiveness continues to evolve as these dynamics unfold across the state.
This capstone illustrates the central tension that lie in balancing deputies’ rights to fair representation with a sheriff’s responsibility to maintain efficient, accountable law enforcement. The complications surrounding disciplinary authority, chain of command, and budgeting are not just administrative—they touch on long standing core issues of governance, public safety, and constitutional law.
Navigating these complexities will require more than compliance; this navigation demands collaboration and overwhelming teamwork with a futuristic focus. The success of relationships between sheriff’s offices and collective bargaining units depends on proactive engagement from all parties - sheriffs, county officials, collective bargaining units, and the communities they serve. With clearly defined roles, mutual respect, and a shared commitment to both public service and fair labor practices, Colorado Sheriffs can set a thoughtful example for how law enforcement and collective bargaining units can coexist, evolve, and best work together.
Navigating collective bargaining in Colorado sheriff’s offices requires a nuanced understanding of both legal frameworks and operational realities. The passage of Colorado Senate Bill 22-230, which granted county employees, including sheriff’s deputies—the right to collectively bargain, marked a significant shift in labor relations within public safety. This change presents both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, collective bargaining can foster improved communication, workplace protection, and morale among deputies. On the other, it necessitates that sheriffs and county administrators balance fiscal constraints, operational flexibility, and public accountability.
Effective navigation of these complexities hinges on preparation, collaboration, and transparency. Sheriff’s offices must develop strategic approaches to negotiation, grounded in clear policies, realistic financial projections, and a commitment to public safety outcomes. Legal counsel and human resources professionals should be integrally involved to ensure compliance with statutory obligations and to help mitigate potential disputes. Equally important is cultivating a culture of mutual respect and problem-solving between labor representatives and management, as adversarial relationships can hinder progress and community trust.
Ultimately, successful collective bargaining in sheriff’s offices is not merely a contractual process—it is a leadership exercise. It requires balancing the needs of the workforce with the mission of serving the public. By embracing negotiation as a tool for organizational improvement, rather than a hindrance, Colorado sheriff’s offices can turn a complex mandate into an opportunity for lasting, positive change.
References
Anderson, T. (2017). Versatility skills. Learning Area 2, Module 11. National Command and Staff College
Built In. (2024, November). 12 types of management styles and when to use them. Built In. https://builtin.com/articles/management-styles
CBS COLORADO. (n.d.-a). State Lawmakers Hear Collective Bargaining Bill. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dPIDbRMdSo
Colorado General Assembly. (2022). Senate Bill 22-230: Collective Bargaining by County EmployeesAct. https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022A/bills/2022a_230_enr.pdf
Harrington, R. (2017). Human factors and leadership. Learning Area 3, Module 1. National Command and Staff College.
Harrington, R. (2017). The organizational change battle plan. Learning Area 4, Module 8. National Command and Staff College.
Long, L. (2017). Deep change and positive emotional intelligence. Learning Area 3, Module 7. National Command and Staff College.
Michaels, G. (2023, July 5). Adaptive leadership: Principles and a framework for the future. Atlassian. https://www.atlassian.com/blog/leadership/adaptive-leadership
Nestlé Professional. (n.d.). The collaborative management style: Definition and pros & cons. Nestlé Professional. Retrieved June 11, 2025, from https://www.nestleprofessional.co.uk/news/insights/collaborative-management-style
Normore, A. (2017). Approaches to leadership. Learning Area 1, Module 2. National Command and Staff College.
Personio. (n.d.). What is transformational leadership? Benefits for businesses. Personio. Retrieved June 11, 2025, from https://www.personio.com/hr-lexicon/what-is-transformational-leadership/
Scott, W. (2017). Succession planning. Learning Area 4, Module 6. National Command and Staff College.
Seidman, J. (1971). State Legislation on Collective Bargaining by Public Employees. Labor Law Journal, 22(1), 13–13.
State of Colorado, Division of Labor Standards and Statistics. (2025). DLSS decisions. https://sites.google.com/state.co.us/dlssdecisions/home
Tobia, M. (2017). Leadership and change. Learning Area 1, Module 8. National Command and Staff College.