Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Police Commission adopts consent calendar, presses to calendar pursuit and domestic-violence DGOs
Summary
The San Francisco Police Commission approved the consent calendar and urged the department to calendar outstanding Department General Orders, including DGO 5.05 on pursuits and DGO 6.09 on domestic violence; commissioners also requested updates on DNA testing and other pending policies.
Get email alerts on the Policy Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Francisco Police Commission voted to adopt the consent calendar on April 24, approving the Office of Citizen Complaints' first-quarter 2013 status report on Department General Orders (DGOs) and related policy proposals.
Commission members used the consent-item discussion to press the San Francisco Police Department to move several long-pending DGOs toward formal review. Commissioner Chan said the commission has repeatedly asked for DGO 5.05, "the pursuit and emergency response driving," to be calendared and asked when the department expected to schedule it for a hearing. "I just keep asking about this, and I want this to get calendared at some point, in the near future," Chan said.
Department staff told the commission the draft of DGO 5.05 has been circulated to the Police Officers Association and is in the concurrence process; staff said they will calendar the item once the POA responds. Commissioner Loftus praised progress on DGO 6.09, the domestic-violence DGO, and encouraged the department to finalize it. "I'm very pleased to see DGO 6.09 . . . making progress," Loftus said.
Commissioners also asked the department to provide clearer public information about case prioritization at front counters, saying some residents expect immediate investigations for property crimes but that solvability factors can limit investigative resources. The commission moved and adopted the consent calendar by voice vote; the motion to adopt was moved by the presiding commissioner and seconded by another commissioner (recorded as a voice vote).
