Board approves $86 million in supplemental appropriations to cover police and sheriff overtime after months of debate

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted 9–2 on May 6 to approve an ordinance (Item 25) that reallocates roughly $86 million to cover overtime expenses in the current fiscal year for the Police and Sheriff’s departments.

The ordinance directs about $61 million to police overtime and about $30 million to sheriff overtime, funded in part by an appropriation of approximately $5.4 million from the city’s general reserve and $311,000 in boarding-of-prisoners revenue; it also deappropriates roughly $86.3 million from salary and capital lines and shifts those funds to overtime. Supervisor Walton and Supervisor Fielder voted no; nine supervisors voted in favor.

Why it matters: Board members said the choice was stark: approve the supplemental to pay for hours already worked and preserve public-safety operations, or refuse and force the controller to restrict spending, which could freeze budgets and delay payments. Several supervisors and staff described structural problems — chronic understaffing, long-running recruitment shortfalls, and internal mismanagement of overtime and sick‑leave practices — that contributed to the request.

Oversight and disputed authority

Supervisor Walton pressed the Department of Human Resources (DHR) and SFPD leadership on whether DHR had authorized suspension of the MOU’s “10B” overtime-related provisions. Artis Graham, identified as a DHR representative, said DHR “tried not to limit any tools in [the department’s] toolbox” during the COVID emergency and was not aware of an authorization that covered the last fiscal year. Chief Lazar of the Police Department told the board that after consultations in fall 2021 the department “gave us permission to suspend the rule having to do with calling in sick twice over a 3 month period” during the pandemic and “we stayed with it all the way to this day.”

Controller’s office and implementation consequences

City Controller Greg Wagner explained what would happen if the supplemental failed: late in the fiscal year, the controller could limit non‑legal commitments such as capital projects, but he said such restrictions would not realistically offset the accumulated overtime in the time remaining in the fiscal year. Wagner said $5,739,000 of the requested amount would come from the general fund reserve and would need to be replenished.

Questions about caps and allocation

Board members asked whether the administrative code caps employee hours at 520 and whether the cap had been raised. DHR’s representative said the cap had been raised previously (to 1,000 hours, per his statement); the police department acknowledged individual officers had exceeded 1,000 overtime hours. Supervisors also noted that overtime is concentrated among a small share of officers; DHR staff and department representatives said overtime allocation is controlled within departments, with members volunteering for shifts.

Calls for accountability and reforms

Several supervisors who voted for the appropriation said they did so reluctantly and demanded stronger accountability measures, better reporting, and legislative changes to prevent future overspending. Supervisor Chen called the department’s overtime practices “mismanagement of funds” and said she would pursue legislative guardrails. Supervisor Melgar warned that while the board must choose between immediate public‑safety impacts and fiscal discipline, the city must develop actionable plans to reduce overtime through hiring and operational changes.

Vote and procedural notes

The roll call on the ordinance recorded 9 ayes, 2 nos (Supervisor Fielder and Supervisor Walton). Controller Wagner confirmed that hours already worked and paid via payroll would not be reversed by rejecting the appropriation; the vote concerned covering projected and accumulated overtime for the remainder of the fiscal year.

What’s next

Supervisors asked for additional audits and reporting and said the budget process this spring will be the venue for longer-term reforms around recruitment, overtime caps, and monitoring. Several members said they will pursue legislation to add reporting, tighter oversight, and clearer policy on 10B assignments and on how overtime is authorized and tracked.