Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Patrol Specials topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission presses patrol-specials audit after spotty paperwork, notes charter limits
Summary
Staff reported an audit of 25 patrol-specials showing mostly compliance on handgun qualifications and insurance but spotty paperwork; commissioners agreed to a June follow-up and reiterated the commission cannot eliminate patrol specials without a charter amendment.
The San Francisco Police Commission on May 1 received an update on compliance among patrol special officers and scheduled a follow-up audit after staff reported incomplete paperwork for some operators.
Officer Chang, serving as interim keeper of patrol-specials files, told the commission the department is auditing 25 patrol specialists and assistant patrol specialists and that "most of them have complied" with handgun qualification and proof-of-insurance requirements, though several applications had missing items and one individual was recorded as a no-show at a range qualification.
Commissioners and staff outlined next steps: Lieutenant Fatou (just assigned to the liaison role) will assist in completing the audit, and the commission asked staff to return with a clear chart showing compliance across categories (insurance, handgun qualification, uniform standards, client lists) at a June meeting. Commissioner Chan suggested a June 12 date for the follow-up.
Public commenters sharply criticized the pace of oversight, with one speaker asserting the department had done "0" since a 2010 controller report and alleging long-standing problems. Commissioners and staff responded by explaining legal limits: the patrol-specials program is governed by a charter amendment that can only be changed by voters, so the commission cannot unilaterally abolish the program. The commission said, however, it is working to improve compliance where it can, including ensuring qualifications and insurance are current.
Because the uniforms used by some patrol specials are visually similar to SFPD uniforms, the commission discussed proposed temporary rule changes to make the differences clearer (for example, light-blue epaulettes and a lighter stripe on pants) so citizens can more easily distinguish private patrol personnel from sworn officers.
The commission did not adopt new regulations at the meeting; it set a follow-up report and audit to verify compliance and asked the city attorney to help produce a chart that respects privacy concerns while giving commissioners a clear sense of who has outstanding items.
