Supervisors hear experts and community calls for overhaul of SFPD use-of-force policies

San Francisco supervisors convened a wide-ranging hearing Jan. 21 to evaluate alternatives to police use of force after recent fatal encounters and to review SFPD General Orders 5.01 and 5.02, which the committee was told date in part to 1995. Supervisor Malia Cohen opened the session with a moment of silence for victims and framed the discussion around policy, training and culture change.

Experts and advocacy groups told the committee that policy updates alone are insufficient. Aaron Zisser, a former U.S. Department of Justice trial attorney, summarized national data showing racial disparities and a high rate of mental-health involvement in police encounters and urged a multi-system approach that links police reform to community mental-health services. "There has to be the involvement of advocates, the community, families, affected individuals," Zisser said, urging that affected groups be given "a seat at the table." He contrasted DOJ pattern-of-practice investigations, which enforce constitutional standards, with technical assistance and local consultant models, noting each approach’s trade-offs in scope, cost and enforcement.

The Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Task Force and its data collection subcommittee described efforts on grand-jury reform and body-camera protocols and recommended robust data collection to detect bias and monitor officer behavior. "Without data collection, accurate data collection, there’s no basis for analysis," Julie Tron said, describing lessons learned from Oakland and San Jose.

Joyce Hicks, director of the Office of Citizen Complaints, urged stronger and permanent changes to SFPD practice: written training analyses of officer-involved shootings, standardized finding categories (training failure, policy failure, supervision failure), and formalized crisis-intervention protocols. Hicks noted that some department guidance appears only as bulletins that expire after two years and recommended moving critical practices into permanent general orders.

SFPD training officials described immediate and planned changes. Captain Greg Gee, training division, said the department convened committees to revise General Orders 5.01 and 5.02 and has modified pistol qualifications to include de-escalation practice, added procedural-justice and implicit-bias train-the-trainer plans, and expanded scenario‑based training to emphasize slowing encounters through "time, distance, cover and rapport." Amari Molina, who coordinates the department’s CIT training, said roughly 383 officers had received CIT instruction to date, with more classes scheduled, and stressed that the program is community‑based and includes NAMI and other local partners.

Public commenters — family members, community groups and advocacy organizations — largely welcomed policy and training reforms but said those steps are not enough without transparent, independent investigation and real accountability. Multiple speakers criticized the Police Officers Association and SFPD leadership for what they described as a culture of impunity; others called for civilian response teams for mental‑health crises and opposed introducing tasers. "Without accountability, any change in policy is irrelevant," a community speaker said. Several speakers also asked whether officers involved in recent fatal incidents remain on paid duty.

Supervisors pressed for both near-term and systemic actions: better data collection and verification, explicit de‑escalation language in general orders, sentinel-event reviews that examine upstream causes, and clearer civilian‑oversight roles. Several supervisors referenced state and federal options, including independent criminal investigations and DOJ reviews, while noting the legal remedies and monitors tied to those processes can be costly and time‑consuming.

The committee did not adopt final policy changes at the hearing; it heard presentations, extensive public comment and SFPD responses and agreed to continue work. Chair John Avalos said the meeting was a step toward narrowing the gulf between community expectations and department practice.

The committee indicated it will pursue further briefings, better data-sharing and sustained community engagement as next steps; no final changes to the general orders were enacted at this session.