Attorney for patrol specials asks commission to review client-list disclosure rule

Charles Bonner, representing the patrol-specials organization, addressed the commission about Rule 4.15, which requires patrol specials to submit lists of clients and schedules of rates. Bonner said many clients have asked that contractual and financial relationships not be disclosed and argued that forced disclosure without client consent could raise Fourth Amendment and related state-constitutional concerns. He asked the commission to forward the memorandum he submitted to the city attorney for legal review and to stay disciplinary action until the legality is resolved.

Commission leadership said the commission will forward the submission to the city attorney for review but noted that interim rules were adopted and, until any change is made, patrol specials are expected to comply and could face disciplinary consequences for noncompliance. Commissioners also clarified that the client-list requirement itself predates recent revisions and that the recently added schedule-of-rates element is the new component raised by the commenter's brief.

Members of the commission and staff said they would not disseminate private client information beyond the commission's regulatory file and emphasized the submission will be reviewed. The commission did not change Rule 4.15 at the meeting but agreed to seek legal guidance and consider a moratorium request if city legal counsel advises it.