Police commission presses Patrol Specials on insurance, training and uniforms after controller report

The San Francisco Police Commission moved a discussion of the Patrol Specials to the top of its April 13 meeting and used the public forum to press the privately funded force on insurance, training and uniform compliance.

Commission President Thomas Mazuko framed the hearing by saying the commission—ame to the issue because "the theme is compliance," citing concerns raised in a controller nd PSSG review that the similar appearance of Patrol Specials to SFPD officers and spotty recordkeeping create liability and oversight problems. Mazuko told the audience the commission—annot let rules "slide" and asked police staff to enforce existing requirements.

Lieutenant Henry Perra, the department nd Patrol Special liaison, told commissioners the unit recently completed range qualifications and is implementing a holster safety upgrade; he said roughly 27 patrol officers and 18 assistants are on the department rolls and that five client lists were on file with the department. Perra described a revised training outline — defensive tactics, basic firearms and first aid among modules — that totals roughly two dozen hours and said some schedule and cost-recovery questions remained.

Alan Byard, president of the San Francisco Patrol Special Police Officers Association, told the commission patrol specials and clients are trying to meet the new requirements. Byard said he had urged beat owners to raise liability limits "from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000" and supplied letters of neighborhood support, including from Supervisor Scott Wiener. "We are wanting to comply," Byard said, outlining plans to require higher reserve/post certifications for new applicants.

Public comments split along neighborhood lines. Supporters from the Castro and Rincon Hill said Patrol Specials provide timely service for lower-priority disturbances and supplement an overstretched SFPD; critics warned that similar uniforms and inconsistent enforcement can confuse residents, create unequal protection and expose the city to liability. A city official noted nine management-control complaints currently tied to the program.

After listening to testimony, commissioners focused on verifiable compliance. The chair ordered the Police Department and Patrol Specials to provide proof of insurance certificates to the department by Friday at 5:00 p.m. and directed staff to produce an exact audit of how many active Patrol Specials are working in the city by the following Wednesday. Commissioners also asked district lieutenants to resume start-of-watch uniform and vehicle inspections to ensure compliance with the commission dopted rules.

Commissioners emphasized that enforcing existing rules is the immediate priority, but they signaled additional options if compliance does not follow: regulatory changes, tighter oversight of fees and client lists, increased required training, or pursuing a charter amendment to alter the program—ntirely. The commission did not vote to end the program at the meeting.

Next steps: the department was ordered to report back with insurance certificates and an active-officer audit within the deadlines the commission set; the commission also said it would consider rule changes if those compliance steps are not completed.