Finally, Oversight of Police – A Breakthrough and an Opportunity for Desperately Needed Change

Officers calling in sick to work private security have got even the most conservative supervisors skeptical of police management practices

This week’s hearing on police overtime abuse was a turning point. For the first time in recent history, all major media outlets covered the issue, and even the pro-police spending conservatives admitted that SFPD needs to rein in its spending. Supervisors Walton and Fielder deserve enormous credit for sponsoring this hearing, which may be the first real step toward breaking San Francisco’s addiction to wasteful police spending. 

Here’s how it usually works, and how we changed the course of this discussion: every year, police request tens of millions in additional funding and get it -- no questions asked. Why? Because politicians, astroturf political groups, police, and the media fully embrace the well-financed narrative that more police spending equals more public safety, and questioning that makes you “anti-public safety” or, laughably, “pro-crime.” 

When I was in office, the Board of Supervisors—over my objection—rubber-stamped the Mayor’s $25 million overtime supplemental to the police budget. In response, my office called for an audit of SFPD’s overtime. The results were delayed for nearly a year (conveniently during the mayoral election), but when it finally came out the findings were worse than we imagined. 

We took a lot of heat for calling for this audit, but the evidence proved overtime spending was out of control.

At the hearing, Supervisor Fielder drilled down on the disturbing use of police officers moonlighting for private security gigs. At a time when City leaders repeat ad nauseum that SFPD is “short 500 officers,” it makes little sense that a  program that takes officers off the streets and puts them at the direction of private corporations still exists. SFPD leadership even equated an officer guarding a Marina storefront on overtime with one walking a neighborhood beat. 

Make no mistake: when SFPD says it can’t respond to a 911 call, it’s partly because they’re prioritizing private gigs like Lululemon over public safety.

The hearing also showed a complete lack of understanding from the police brass on why the public would be so outraged that they’ve clocked thousands of hours of ineligible overtime to go work private security gigs. Assistant Chief Lazar, when pressed about officers doing ineligible overtime for private businesses, rather than acknowledging how problematic it was, stated, “I’m thankful we worked those hours.” 

Just as disturbing, and a point we raised repeatedly when the Board of Supervisors was asked to rubber stamp massive police budget giveaways, is that the SFPD’s deployment of overtime is not governed by any guiding principles, any equity considerations, or any performance measures. That’s how a $25 million budget increase, sold to the public as a response to crime in the Tenderloin, was actually spent on the Downtown “Safe Shopper” program, as the audit confirmed. 

Even reliable pro-police spending supervisors Dorsey, Mandelman, and Engardio admitted the department needs to do better. The old “we are understaffed” excuse the department has used to deflect any oversight seems to be wearing thin. 

While this hearing was the first time SFPD acknowledged widespread overtime abuse, noncompliance with their agreement with the City and the need for reform, the big question now is whether it will lead to any meaningful change. In response to our audit, the department claims to have implemented 85% of the recommendations, including launching a compliance unit and new oversight tools. Yet despite the audit’s findings, SFPD is still asking for $102 million in overtime this year, without any data to show it reduces crime. Police budgets continue to go up whether crime rates rise or fall, while the basic facts like calls for service being down are ignored. 

We made this point in 2022 and 2023 and were attacked for it, but we were right. People of the Tenderloin, Mission, SOMA, and Bayview should be furious. The plight of lower-income communities of color is used to win budget money that gets spent on tourists, rich neighborhoods, and backfilling private security shifts at luxury retail stores. 

Our city has been raked over the coals for the past few years on the issue of crime. The hysteria rises or crime is suddenly declared over – all fueled by wealthy political interests – while the crime statistics (and the staffing) stay largely the same. The one thing that never fails to increase is the budget for the SFPD. Exposing the waste is a key step. And with a massive budget deficit looming, maybe this time the Mayor and Board of Supervisors will finally say no to a budget increase.