Relating to a legal justification for the use of force with a less-lethal force weapon by a correctional facility guard or a peace officer.

Contracts

• Training Vendors: Amend Master Services Agreements (MSAs) with third-party training providers. Require vendors to indemnify the organization if their curriculum is found legally insufficient or contrary to manufacturer specifications.
• Employment Agreements: Update codes of conduct to explicitly state that deviation from established training protocols regarding less-lethal weapons constitutes a breach of duty, strengthening the employer's position in liability disputes.

Hiring/Training

• Curriculum Alignment: Ensure the training curriculum matches the specific make and model of less-lethal weapons issued (e.g., specific Taser models or chemical agents). Generic "less-lethal" certification may not satisfy the "substantial compliance" statutory requirement.
• Recurrent Training: Move from "one-and-done" certifications to recurring cycles to ensure the employee's training is considered current by the courts.

Reporting & Record-Keeping

• Syllabus Retention: Retain the specific lesson plans and syllabi used at the time of the employee's training, not just completion certificates. You must be able to prove *what* the employee was taught to prove they complied with it.
• Incident Reports: Update Use of Force reporting forms to include a mandatory field validating that the force used was consistent with specific training modules.

Fees & Costs

• Budget Impact: Low direct fiscal impact. Anticipate minor operational costs associated with auditing training records and potentially re-certifying staff whose training is outdated prior to the September 1, 2025 deadline.