Budget analysts outline civilian alternatives to some police roles; supervisors press for sequencing, data and pilots

The Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office presented an in‑depth report on May 12 exploring whether the city can transfer some duties now performed by sworn police and sheriff staff to civilian teams, other city agencies, or automated systems. Nick Menard summarized the office’s key findings and policy options and took questions from supervisors and departments.

Menard said police traffic stops were a major source of workload and racial disparity: about 18,620 stops in 2019 (roughly 29% of traffic stops) were for equipment, registration or local ordinance violations. The BLA estimated deprioritizing enforcement of those low‑level violations could free roughly 6.25 FTE of officer time, but warned the board that the public‑safety impacts of deprioritization require further study.

The analyst also examined calls for service and civilian responses. BLA data showed roughly 109,000 calls in 2019 were related to mental health, homelessness, wellness checks and noise complaints — about 15% of police calls that year. The office estimated a fully deployed street crisis response approach for many priority B “mentally disturbed person” calls could replace the equivalent of about 23 police FTEs (based on 2019 volumes), but noted that transition planning and careful measurement would be needed.

Menard proposed options the board could pursue: fund and expand civilian positions recommended by the Police Commission, reprioritize low‑impact traffic enforcement, explore automated tools such as red‑light cameras (and seek state law changes—assembly bill referenced in the report—to permit broader speed‑ or parking‑camera use), and develop plans for civilian responses to homeless‑ and wellness‑related 911 calls. He flagged that some changes would require state law changes or new administrative infrastructure and urged pilot testing with clear measures of success.

Policing leaders and department heads joined the hearing. SFPD Chief Bill Scott said the department supports civilian alternatives in principle but warned of operational sequencing: a shift of many calls to civilian teams must be matched by dispatch changes and backup arrangements because SFPD remains a 24/7 responder during the transition. DPH and Fire representatives described a proposed Street Wellness Response Team (community paramedic + EMT + homeless‑outreach specialist) to handle well‑being checks; the mayor’s office proposed five teams ramping to 10 for broader coverage. The departments discussed EMS capacity and backup arrangements if civilian teams are busy.

Supervisors pressed for specifics: how many teams and staff would be needed to cover 2019 call volumes, the timeline to ramp up, and how many police FTEs could be freed for foot patrols if civilian responses succeeded. Several members also pressed SFPD on racial disparities exposed in traffic‑stop data — the Department of Justice and state monitors have issued related recommendations — and asked for dashboards and case analyses to drive policy.

Public comment was lengthy and sharply polarized. Hundreds of callers used the one‑minute slots: many advocacy groups and residents urged fast divestment from police and reinvestment in community programs (including CART/CARDF proposals and expanded housing and mental‑health services), while other residents, business groups and hotel industry representatives argued for protecting or increasing SFPD staffing, foot patrols and police academies to restore public safety.

The committee voted to file the BLA hearing report for the record and directed further follow‑up analyses. Members asked BLA and departments for more granular data (Title VI/ridership analyses for the Muni item, and call‑type and staffing modeling for civilian responses) ahead of budget decisions later in the season.