Board hearing spotlights slow progress and public frustration over DOJ police‑reform recommendations

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors sat as a Committee of the Whole on Oct. 22 for a detailed update on the city’s implementation of 272 recommendations the U.S. Department of Justice and its partners issued after a multi‑year review of the San Francisco Police Department.

Police Chief William Scott told the board the department has submitted hundreds of work packets and that, as of mid‑October, 29 recommendations had been reviewed and found to be in substantial compliance by the external monitor. Scott said the department has reworked policies, expanded training and added new auditing and early‑intervention units, and cited an extended period with no on‑duty officer‑involved shootings as an outcome of that work.

“My mission is to continue to train because policy and training drive culture,” Chief Scott said during the presentation.

The outside technical assistance contractor, Hillard Hines, described its role as providing independent review and helping the department document compliance for the state attorney general’s office, which now oversees the local reform effort after the federal COPS office ended its direct assistance in 2017. Hillard Hines and SFPD staff emphasized the work is detailed: recommendations are accompanied by multiple compliance measures and supporting documentation before any item is marked substantially compliant.

But supervisors and a long line of public speakers said the pace and transparency remain inadequate. Supervisor Catherine Stefani and others asked for clearer timestamps on when recommendations are checked off; Supervisor Matt Haney and Supervisor Hillary Ronan pushed for more regular public reporting and questioned whether the California Department of Justice’s oversight is being communicated directly to the public.

Community advocates and family members of people killed by police — including Justice for Mario Woods representatives — used the hearing to press for faster action and for quarterly, public updates tied to measurable outcomes. Speakers asked for per‑capita reporting by race and age for use‑of‑force and arrest data, and for academic review of racial disparities. One speaker demanded the city ensure the work is not merely “checkbox” compliance but produces changes on patrol and in impacted neighborhoods.

The chief and the outside monitor said SFPD has reduced reported uses of force across racial and ethnic groups since 2016, that the department has revised its use‑of‑force policy (instituted in December 2016), added simulators and de‑escalation training, and is collaborating with academic partners to examine remaining disparities. Scott also said the department and the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office have a memorandum of understanding to have the DA’s office lead criminal investigations of officer‑involved shootings.

Public testimony was extensive and emotional. Advocates demanded stronger, independent oversight, faster completion of outstanding recommendations, and immediate steps to address racial disproportionality: “At this pace, they will complete in 2046,” said one speaker from Justice for Mario Woods, criticizing the timeline. Others urged new models for crisis response that reduce reliance on armed officers.

The board did not take a vote on policy changes during the hearing; the session was an informational update and an opportunity for public comment. Several supervisors said they will call follow‑up hearings when the phase‑two progress report is released and urged the department and Cal DOJ to increase public transparency in the weeks ahead.

Why it matters: The reform package aims to reduce use of force, improve bias and community‑police relations, and institutionalize data‑driven oversight. Community groups said continued delays and limited public access to monitoring materials undercut trust and the chances of meaningful change.

Votes or formal actions: none taken at this hearing; the session was an implementation update and public comment period.