Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission presses for details as SFMTA proposes to cover 87% of SFPD traffic costs
Summary
The Police Commission examined a proposed work order and MOU with the SFMTA that would shift most traffic-company costs (staff estimated $12.9M of ~$14.8M) to the agency and change day-to-day reporting lines; commissioners asked for a draft MOU and city-attorney advice before any vote.
City and SFPD officials presented a proposal to the Police Commission to formalize a work-order/MOU under which the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) would assume the bulk of the traffic company’s costs and responsibilities while police command authority on public-safety incidents would remain with SFPD.
Ken Bukowski, the department’s chief financial officer, summarized the fiscal analysis and described the MTA’s accounting: "MTA believes that approximately 87% of the functions the traffic company performs are transportation related and could be covered by MTA," and using that share the MTA-proposed work order would cover roughly $12.9 million of an estimated $14.8 million total traffic company cost for 2009–10 — about a $5 million increase over the previously budgeted work-order number.
Operationally, the proposal would place the traffic company captain under a deputy chief who is detailed to the SFMTA for day-to-day traffic operations while retaining SFPD authority for law enforcement decisions during incidents or demonstrations. Deputy Chief Antonio Perra, assigned to the SFMTA, said the change is meant to create a unified command for traffic functions and enable better coordination of sworn and non‑sworn resources across school safety, pedestrian and bicycle programs, special events and transit corridors.
Commissioners raised several concerns and asked for written clarifications before any formal approval. Key points they pressed include:
- Reporting and chain of command: Commissioners sought clarity on whether the deputy chief would report to the MTA director or the SFPD chief for routine operations and who would control captain or deputy chief appointments. Staff said positions would remain SFPD appointments, but that the MOU may include dispute-resolution language similar to the airport model.
- Scope and accounting of the 87% figure: Commissioners asked how the 87% allocation was derived and whether the percentage would be reviewed annually; staff said the percentage came from a functional breakdown provided by traffic company leadership and could be revisited in successive MOUs.
- Public-safety priority and special events: Commissioners insisted that public-safety needs must preempt traffic assignments during emergencies. Staff said event command structure would override routine reporting during incidents.
Director Bukowski and Deputy Chief Perra said the budget line item for the MTA was on the SFMTA agenda the following day; they proposed returning a draft MOU and a city-attorney opinion to the Police Commission for review before implementation. The proposal seeks an implementation date of July 1, subject to MOU negotiations and meet-and-confer with labor.
No final vote was taken; commissioners asked staff to provide a draft MOU, more specific functional accounting, and a legal opinion on whether the Police Commission must formally approve the MOU.
