Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Police Commission approves amended stipulation suspending Officer Hazelhofer, adds random drug and alcohol testing
Summary
The San Francisco Police Commission accepted a stipulated agreement with Officer Gary W. Hazelhofer for two misconduct specifications, amended to require random drug-and-alcohol testing during probation; the commission voted unanimously to approve a 90-day suspension with 30 days held in abeyance and three years in a departmental rehabilitation program.
The San Francisco Police Commission on Aug. 16 accepted an amended stipulated agreement resolving disciplinary charges against Officer Gary W. Hazelhofer, who admitted the factual allegations but reserved the right to withdraw the stipulation and proceed to trial if the commission rejected the terms.
Department counsel summarized two specifications: that Hazelhofer drove while under the influence on Dec. 28, 2002 (an intoxilyzer result of 0.10, above the California legal limit of 0.08) and that he carried a handgun while intoxicated. The chief recommended a 90-day suspension with 30 days held in abeyance for five years and three years of participation in the Department's Evaluation and Rehabilitation Program.
A commissioner moved to add random drug- and alcohol-testing as a condition of the probationary period attached to the stipulation. The motion was seconded and the amendment passed without objection. The commission then voted by roll call to approve the stipulated agreement as amended. Commission president Louise Rainey, Vice President David Campos, Commissioners Petra de Jesus, Theresa Sparks and Joe Veronese all voted "Aye." The commission's action orders Hazelhofer suspended for 90 days commencing immediately, with 30 of those days held in abeyance for five years, and requires compliance with the department's rehabilitation program for three years.
Officer Hazelhofer told the commission, "I do not contest the charges as stated," reflecting the stipulated nature of the disposition and his right to withdraw and seek trial if the commission declined the agreement.
Representatives at the hearing included department counsel Ellie O'Hara and a Police Officers Association spokesperson, Steve Johnson, who confirmed the officer's understanding of the stipulation. The commission also heard limited public comment and disposed of the matter after adjourning briefly into closed session to consider discipline.
The disciplinary files and statute references provided to the commission cite Government Code section 54957(b) and San Francisco Administrative Code section 67.1(b) for the closed-session authority under which personnel matters were discussed.
What happens next: the amended stipulated agreement takes effect immediately per the commission vote. The commission's chair said transcripts and materials related to disciplinary matters will be made available to defendants and counsel as appropriate. If Hazelhofer withdraws the stipulation, the matter can proceed to trial before the commission.
