Board of Supervisors Special Meeting on Police Staffing and DROP Charter Amendment - July 23, 2024
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Board of Supervisors Special Meeting – July 23, 2024
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors held a special meeting on Tuesday, July 23, 2024, at 5:30 PM UTC, to consider a charter amendment proposing a new Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) for sworn police officers and modifications to staffing reporting requirements. After extensive debate and public comment, the board voted 8-3 to continue the item as a committee report to the regular Board of Supervisors meeting later that same day.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Rebecca Jackson (VP of Re-entry, Community Ford; co-chair of women's housing coalition) opposed the measure, citing recent budget cuts to essential services and layoffs at community organizations while the city considers doubling police salaries.
- Leslie Who (social worker and educator, SFUSD) opposed, noting 146 unfilled teacher positions, her own low pension, and the contrast with the high pay proposed for police.
- Efraim Barrera (Director, Latinal Task Force) opposed, calling the DROP a costly and ineffective retention bonus that would harm funding for violence prevention programs.
- Liam McGeever (District 5 resident) opposed, arguing that policing is a failed institution and that funds should go to supporting vulnerable populations like transgender people.
- Joel Haila (Director, Criminal Justice Program, ACLU of Northern California) opposed, stating the amendment does not solve the staffing crisis, adds to the deficit, and rewards officers with 25+ years while the highest attrition is at 6 years of service.
- Zach Dillon (Public Defender's Office) opposed, noting the lack of data before spending money and that DROP does not curb overtime.
- Renee Garcia (student, District 10) opposed, citing the 2008-2011 DROP failure that cost $52 million and urging investment in housing and mental health services.
- Maina Young (40-year resident, District 1) commented on police response times and road closures.
- Richard Correa (retired SFPD commander) supported the DROP, stating it is well-crafted and will slow retirements to allow time for recruitment.
Discussion Items
- Charter Amendment – Police Staffing and Voluntary Deferred Retirement Option Program (Item 1)
- Supervisor Ronin presented a detailed PowerPoint opposing the DROP. She highlighted that SFPD recruitment is improving (since June 2022 the board has approved approximately $270 million in investments including a $166 million MOU with the POA), that officers with 25 years already receive a 20% retention premium, and that the average officer leaving has 6.3 years of service—not 25. She cited the failed 2008 DROP which cost the city at least $52 million and provided data showing officers could earn over $200,000 extra annually through DROP. She urged colleagues to remove their names from the ballot measure.
- Supervisor Dorsey (author) argued that SFPD faces an unprecedented staffing crisis: from 2,182 needed full-duty officers (per Prop E), the number dropped to 1,583 in May 2024, with only 769 on patrol. He noted that separations have outpaced hires for four consecutive years, and projected 322 more retirements over five years. He emphasized the DROP is narrowly tailored: limited to sergeants and below engaged in frontline policing, a five-year term, with reforms to prevent abuse (e.g., pausing payments during long-term leave). He stated the Budget and Legislative Analyst (BLA) estimates the program could postpone 50 retirements in 2025, and the Controller estimated a cost of $0–$3 million per year.
- Supervisor Preston questioned the lack of data on why officers leave and criticized the board for approving hundreds of millions for police without evidence. He asked whether the measure could be amended to also cover teachers, 911 dispatchers, and Muni drivers. Supervisor Dorsey declined amendments.
- Supervisor Safai supported the DROP, noting the BLA projection of up to 130 deferred retirements over three years, which would buy time while recruitment academies produce fewer graduates (e.g., last class below 15).
- Supervisor Walton opposed, stating the DROP is fiscally irresponsible in a budget deficit year and does little to improve recruitment among younger people.
- Controller Greg Wagner explained the cost analysis: a high-cost scenario of $19 million in additional unfunded liability amortized over five years, leading to $3 million per year; a low-cost scenario of $5.4 million total ($0.6 million per year). He noted that previous DROP cost estimates assumed backfilling would stop, but this analysis assumed continued hiring.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to continue the item as a committee report to the July 23 regular Board of Supervisors meeting passed 8-3. Voting aye: Supervisors Chan, Dorsey, Engardio, Mandelman, Melgar, Peskin, Safai, Stephanie. Voting no: Supervisors Preston, Ronan, Walton.
- The charter amendment will be considered by the full board at the 2:00 PM meeting later that day, with the board's action likely to place it on the November 2024 ballot.
Meeting Transcript
Call to order the Tuesday, July 23rd, 2024 second special meeting. Madam Clerk, would you please call the role? Supervisor Chan. Chan present, Supervisor Dorsey. Dorsey present, Supervisor Ringardio, Engardeo present, Supervisor Mandelman, Mandelman present, Supervisor Milgar, Melgar not present, Supervisor Peskin. Present. Peskin present, Supervisor Preston. Preston present, Supervisor Ronin, Ronan Present, Supervisor Safai. Savaye present, Supervisor Stephanie, Stephanie present, and Supervisor Walton. Walton not present. Mr. President, you have a quorum. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Why don't we have a motion to excuse Supervisors Melgar and Walton made by Supervisor Mandelman, seconded by Supervisor Ronin. Without objection, those supervisors are hereby excused. Madam Clerk, would you please read item number one? Item number one. Well, do you have any communication? Mr. President, we do have the same communication from Supervisor Milgar asking to be excused from today's meeting, and I believe we have subsequently received a communication from uh Supervisor Walton asking to be excused as well. Okay. Uh and he is excused. And uh Madam Clerk, would you please read item number one? Item number one. This is a charter amendment second draft to amend the charter of the city and county of San Francisco to define the term full duty sworn officer to modify the criteria for establishing recommended staffing levels for sworn officers to change the requirement for the chief of police to submit a staffing report from every two years to every three years and to establish a new voluntary deferred retirement option program. And I will state that the president intends to entertain a motion to continue this item to the full board as a committee report for consideration of the regular Board of Supervisors meeting this afternoon at 2 p.m. July 23rd Supervisor Ronan. Thank you, colleagues. Um I've passed out a PowerPoint presentation, and uh it would mean a lot to me if you would follow along and listen because I put a lot of work into this, and I want to thank uh Alison Romano, Carol Eisen, and Greg Wagner and their staffs uh for their tremendous and quick work over the past few days. Uh I also want to thank uh my staff um uh who uh also worked extensively on this. Um, as we all know, and this is slide one. As we all know, uh this was a painful budget year that required cuts to many essential services, including violence prevention programs and programs serving children, transitional age youth, and families. After extensive advocacy and negotiations, thanks to our budget chair, Connie Chan. We were able to pass a budget that restored some of the cuts to these basic services to our residents, but not all of them. Initial plans included cutting OSEA community ambassadors, an incredibly successful violence prevention and community safety strategy that should be expanded, not even considered for the chopping block. We need more investments in programs that will prevent violence and support our families, and yet they are some of the first to go in a budget crunch. Next slide. SFPD recruitment is improving. As we all know, though, police recruitment plunged in 2020 due to social unrest across the country after the murder of George Floyd. Police suffered from an image crisis, and the profession became undesirable for young people. Our police department is keenly aware of the issues and has come to us for additional tools and resources to focus on recruitment, which we have approved at the board. Next slide, please. Since June 2022, the Board of Supervisors has consistently approved many significant financial investments supporting SFP SFPD, including two massive MOU commitments and budget supplementals. In the last two years, we've approved approximately $270 million worth of investments. In June 22, we approved $17 million. In June 202, we also improved, I'm sorry, in June 22, we approved wage restorations and increases in retention bonuses for officers at $17 million. In June 22, we also approved a $56 million departmental budget increase. In March 23, we approved a $25 million overtime pay increase. In April 23, and this one is the key one that I want you to concentrate on throughout this presentation. This board approved $166 million MOU with POA for wage increase and large retention bonuses, which I'll go over in detail over three years.
openpublica.com