Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Patrol Specials topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears mixed public views and a compliance report on patrol-special officers
Summary
Public commenters pushed for tighter oversight of patrol-special officers, with one calling the program unconstitutional; Lieutenant Ferrell reported stand-down orders for nonqualified patrol specials, one insurance noncompliance and an Internal Affairs referral.
The San Francisco Police Commission spent significant time May 4 hearing public frustration about the patrol-specials program and receiving a status report from department staff on compliance.
Several public commenters asked for greater oversight or proposed working groups. Ken Craig, who said he has worked with clients of patrol specials, urged a ‘‘public working group’’ combining commissioners, members of the public, SFPD officers and patrol-specials representatives to develop recommendations rather than relying on three-minute public comments. Another attendee called the patrol-specials program ‘‘unconstitutional’’ and alleged chronic noncompliance and corruption.
Lieutenant Ferrell gave the commission a compliance update: members of the patrol-special cohort who had not qualified at the range were placed on a stand-down order; two of the three nonqualifiers reported medical issues and were referred to seek clearance from physicians before returning to range qualification. Ferrell said, at the time of his report, one individual remained out of compliance on liability insurance and one had not provided an updated client list; he said he had submitted the matters to Internal Affairs for further investigation. He also recommended reestablishing a lieutenant liaison at each district station to brief captains on patrol-specials status.
Public commenters offered to work with the commission and lieutenant to close communication gaps between SFPD liaison offices and applicants. Commissioners praised offers to collaborate and pressed staff on enforcement of qualification and documentation requirements.
No formal policy change was adopted at the meeting; commissioners directed staff to continue compliance work and review any findings from Internal Affairs.
