To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

August 22, 2012

 

 

 

AUGUST 22, 2012 REGULAR MEETING

 

The Police Commission of the City and County of San Francisco met in Room 400, City Hall, #1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, at 5:35 p.m.

PRESENT: Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, Chan, Kingsley, Turman, Loftus

ABSENT: Commissioner DeJesus

Commissioner Mazzucco announced that items in regards to appointment of Assistant Patrol Specials be put over and asked the individuals to sign a waiver for the Commission to look at background packets for the candidates for Assistant Patrol Specials.

CONSENT CALENDAR

- Request of Captain David Lazar to accept gifts of a "give away bag," an 8x10 framed photo, and a "Swiss Army Knife," from the Business Recovery Managers Association, valued at approximately $30.00

RESOLUTION NO. 12-47

APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST OF CAPTAIN DAVID LAZAR TO ACCEPT GIFTS OF A "GIVE-AWAY BAG," AN 8X10 FRAMED PHOTO, AND A "SWISS ARMY KNIFE," FROM THE BUSINESS RECOVERY MANAGERS ASSOCIATION, VALUED AT APPROXIMATELY $30.00

RESOLVED, that the Police Commission hereby approves the request of Captain David Lazar to accept gifts of a "give-away bag," an 8x10 framed photo, and a "Swiss army knife," from the Business Recovery Managers Association, valued at approximately $30.00.

AYES: Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, Chan, Kingsley, Turman, Loftus

ABSENT: Commissioner DeJesus

- Police Commission Report of Disciplinary Actions, 3

rd Quarter 2012

 

- SFPD/OCC’s 2

nd Quarter Status Report on General Orders/Policy Proposals

 

Motion by Commissioner Kingsley, second by Commissioner Marshall. Approved 6-0.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Donna Park discussed concerns regarding being detained 5150 and allegations about Officer Abramson lying on the police report.

Emile Lawrence discussed concerns regarding live real time data from cameras in taxicabs.

REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

a. Chief’s Report

- Review of recent activities

- Presentation of the 2

nd Quarter 2012 FDRB Findings & Recommendations

 

- Presentation of the OIS Investigative Summary

Chief Suhr gave a brief update on crime statistics and went on to talk about ethnicity arrest reporting.

Sergeant Crudo presented the OIS Investigation Summary report. There is no 2

 

nd Quarter FDRB Findings and Recommendations as the FDRB did not convene in the second quarter.

 

b. OCC Director’s Report

- Review of recent activities

Director Hicks has no recent activities to report.

c. Commission Reports

- Commission President’s Report

- Commissioners’ Reports

Commissioner Mazzucco reported seeing the Marine Unit in action in helping the Coast Guards with the America’s Cup race. He went on to talk about the homicide rate

d. Commission Announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future Commission meetings

Sergeant Jusino announced that on the 29

 

th of August, the Commission will meet in the Central District, Gordon J. Law Elementary School, 950 Clay Street, starting at 6 p.m. Sergeant Jusino also announced that September 5th will be no meeting and back in session on September 12th.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

Emile Lawrence talked about items to be discussed and would like to see more special police in the city to help with the budget.

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT MOISES ROMERO AS ASSISTANT PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER CALVIN WILEY

Taken off calendar

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT DAVID RANDALL CABERA AS ASSISTANT PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER SCOTT HART

Taken off calendar

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT EDWARD YIM AS ASSISTANT PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER SCOTT HART

Taken off calendar

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ACCEPT, REJECT OR TAKE OTHER ACTION ON A STIPULATED DISPOSITION OF DISCIPLINARY CHARGES FILED AGAINST PATROL SPECIAL ELBERT TAYLOR (FILE NO. ALW C12-034)

Ms. Ashley Worsham, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of the Department.

Patrol Special Elbert Taylor appeared in person and represented himself.

In accordance to the agreement, Patrol Special Taylor agrees to retire and sell his beat.

Commissioner Mazzucco suggested setting a date to give Mr. Taylor reasonable time to sell his beat. He went on to thank Mr. Taylor for his work with the Patrol Special Program.

Chief Suhr also thanked Mr. Taylor for his service to the city.

PUBLIC COMMENT

None

APPROVAL TO ACCEPT STIPULATED DISPOSITION IN THE MATTER OF PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER ELBERT TAYLOR, STAR NO. 2679 (FILE NO. ALW C12-034)

The hearing of Patrol Special Officer Elbert Taylor, Star No. 2679, was called it having been set for this date. Patrol Special Officer Taylor was charged,

in a properly verified complaint by Chief of Police Gregory P. Suhr in violating the Rules and Procedures, as follows:

SPECIFICATION NO. 1

Failure to Complete Mandatory Firearms Requalification (a violation of Rules 3.05(A) and 4.03 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants);

SPECIFICATION NO. 2

Failure to Answer Truthfully When Questioned About His Work Status (a violation of Rules 4.04 and 4.20 of the Interim Rules for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants).

Ms. Ashley Worsham, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of the San Francisco Police Department.

Patrol Special Officer Elbert Taylor was present and represented himself.

The stipulated agreement states as follows:

"You were recently served with formal commission charges in San Francisco Police Commission case number C12-036. Those commission charges allege that you failed to qualify at the Range, as required by Rule 3.05(A) of the Interim Rules for Patrol Specials, and as a result of your failure to qualify, you were prohibited from working your beats but continued to do so, despite lawful orders to cease that action. In addition to those allegations, it is further alleged that you failed to answer questions truthfully and without evasion when questioned about this matter. Although you have been a beat owner for several years and wish to continue your employment as a Patrol Special Officer, your failure to qualify at the Range prohibits the Department from allowing you to continue to operate your beats. As such, since April 2010, you have been under direct orders from the Department to cease any operation of your beats.

During a recent status conference regarding your upcoming commission trial, you expressed that your failure to qualify was solely related to a car accident involving your wife and the stress of that painful situation. You requested one last opportunity to demonstrate your ability to handle a firearm. Additionally, you stated that if you fail to meet the minimum passing score, determined by the Range Master, you would retire immediately, effective the ate of the range qualification test, from your employment as a Patrol Special Officer and begin the process of selling all of your betas.

Therefore, per your request, the Department has arranged for you to report to the Range on July 20, 2012 at 1300 hours in order to take the mandatory Range requalification examination. As previously agreed to, your failure to achieve the minimum passing score for the handgun requalification will result in your immediate retirement from the Patrol Specials Program, effective the date of the range qualification test.

Should you successfully complete your mandatory Range requalification, a status conference and or hearing date will be set to address Specification two of ALW C12-034.

Attached to this letter is an acknowledgement form that attests to the fact that you have read the contents of this letter and agree with the

matters stated herein. Please sign and date the acknowledgement form and return the form to the Department. You will not be permitted to take the qualifying test until the Department has received the signed acknowledgement form."

The acknowledgement form was signed by Patrol Special Officer Taylor on July 20, 2012.

The Commission took the matter under submission and the following resolution was adopted:

RESOLUTION NO. 12-48

DECISION – HEARING OF PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER ELBERT TAYLOR, STAR NO. 2679 (FILE NO. ALW C12-034)

WHEREAS, on February 8, 2012, Chief Gregory P. Suhr, Chief of Police of the San Francisco Police Department, made and served charges against Patrol Special Officer Elbert Taylor, as follows:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

(1) At all times herein mentioned Elbert Taylor, Star Number 2679, (hereinafter referred to as the "accused") was and is a Patrol Special Officer. The accused has been a Patrol Special Officer for more than 40 years and owns betas 33, 34, 75, 95, 101, and 105.

(2) A Patrol Special Officer is defined as "A private patrol person, appointed by the Commission, who contracts to perform security duties of a private nature for private persons or businesses within the geographical boundaries set forth by the Police Commission. A Patrol Special Officer is the owner of a beat."

(3) Patrol Specials and Assistant Patrol Specials are not members of the uniform ranks of the Police Department and they are not employees of the City and County of San Francisco. A Patrol Special Officer is responsible for knowing and obeying the rules and procedures of the Patrol Special Officers and Assistant Patrol Special Officers. (See the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, Adopted by the San Francisco Police Commission, December 10, 2008).

(4) Encompassed in those rules is the directive that Patrol Specials and their Assistants shall obey all written orders of the Department that are not clearly inapplicable to their respective assignments. (See Rule 3.12(A) of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants.)

SPECIFICATION NO. 1

Failure to Complete Mandatory Firearms Requalification (a violation of Rules 3.05(A) and 4.03 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants);

(5) The allegations incorporated in paragraphs (1) through (4) are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.

(6) On or about April 7, 2010, the Accused responded to the Lake Merced Range for this required semi-annual requalification. The course of fire

consists of 48 rounds fired from various distances, strong hand, off hand, hip shooting, and barricade shooting. A score of 36 hits is the minimum passing score.

(7) On his first attempt at 1000 hours, the Accused scored 25 hits, which is 11 hits below the minimum passing score.

(8) The Accused returned to the Range and attempted to pass the course again at 1300 hours. On this attempt, the Accused scored 26 hits, which was 10 lower than the minimum passing score of 36 hits.

(9) At 1500 hours, the Accused returned for third attempt and on this occasion, he changed handguns. Shooting with his revolver, the Accused scored 26 hits. Of those 26 hits, five (5) would have been taken away due to the Accused’s failure to follow directions. However, without subtracting the five, the Accused’s score of 26 was still 10 short of the minimum required to pass the course.

(10) Range Master Sgt. Carrington stated that the Accused had great difficulty manipulating his weapon in a manner that demonstrated minimal proficiency. According to the Range Master, the Accused’s draw, aim, and loading and trigger control abilities were all greatly lacking.

(11) On this date, April 7, 2010, the Accused was informed that he was not authorized to carry a firearm until he demonstrated proficiency successfully at the Range and until he was reinstated by the Patrol Special Officer Liaison at the San Francisco Police Department.

(12) On April 7, 2010, the Accused signed and acknowledged a form attesting to the fact that he was not authorized to carry a pistol or revolver in the performance of his duties associated with his employment as a San Francisco Patrol Special Officer until he had successfully qualified at the Range and upon reinstatement by the SFPD Patrol Special Liaison.

(13) Range Master Sgt. Carrington also verbally advised the Accused that he was not authorized to carry a firearm until his proficiency with the firearm was proven.

(14) On April 7, 2010, Lt. Robert Yick #1264, who was the Patrol Special Liaison at the time, spoke with Range Master Carrington regarding the Accused’s failure to qualify during three different attempts at the Range. Range Master Carrington informed him that the Accused had great difficulty manipulating his firearm in a manner that demonstrates minimal proficiency.

(15) On April 12, 2010, at 0930 hours, Lt. Yick spoke with the Accused. At that time, the Accused stated that he was practicing at the Chabot Range in an effort to qualify. Lt. Yick informed the Accused that he was "ineligible to work until further notice." The Accused then requested if he could seek another chance at the Chabot Range. At 1040 hours, Lt. Yick spoke with John Maunder of the Chabot Gun Club and confirmed that the Accused was practicing at the Range. However, Mr. Maunder was hesitant to provide any proficiency documentation regarding the Accused.

(16) On April 20, 2010, Lt. Yick received an email from Sgt. Pollitt, who was present when the Accused was attempting to requalify with Sgt. Carrington. The email stated Sgt. Pollitt would not allow the Accused to

attempt to requalify again because the Accused no longer had the required skills to demonstrate proficiency.

(17) On April 20, 2010 at 1030 hours, Officer Lorie Brophy #1319 informed Lt. Yick that the Accused signed in to work on April 9, 2010, two days after being informed in person and in writing by Range Master Carrington that he could not work due to his failure to qualify at the Range.

(18) On April 20, 2010, Lt. Yick sent the Accused a letter which stated, "You shall not work as a Patrol Special Officer until further notice. Your radio (#717602) will also be turned off until your work status changes." The letter made reference to the Accused failure to qualify after three attempts at the Range on April 7, 2010.

(19) On Tuesday, May 11, 2010, at approximately 2300 hours, Officer Martinez #1208 and Officer Carrasco #1599 observed the Accused, dressed in uniform, patrolling the area w/b on Anza Street at 8

 

th Street. Both officers were aware that the Accused was not authorized to work as a Patrol Special Officer due to his failure to qualify at the Range.

 

(20) On Thursday, May 13, 2010, at the direction of then Captain Richard Corriea, Lt. Vivian Williams #1429, telephoned the Accused and advised him that he was prohibited from working his assigned Patrol Special beat in the Richmond District until he had the express permission of Captain Corriea to return to work. The Accused spontaneously stated that he had not successfully qualified at the Range. The Accused further acknowledged that he had received the messages regarding his work status and stated that he would not work until he was cleared to do so.

(21) On June 23, 2010, Lt. Yick sent the Accused a letter confirming their April 12, 2010 conversation and the fact that the Accused was now ineligible to work as a Patrol Special Office due to his failure to qualify at the Range. The letter also informed the Accused that he had until July 16, 2010 to secure a letter from an outside Range Master attesting to his proficiency with his firearm.

(22) The accused, by knowingly working as a Patrol Special Officer on April 9, 2010 and May 11, 2010, despite his failure to qualify at the Range and despite having been verbally informed on two separate occasions and once by written letter that he was prohibited from working as a Patrol Special Officer, engaged in conduct which brought discredit upon the Department in violation of Rules 3.05(A) and 4.03 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants. Any reasonable Patrol Special must know that such conduct is cause for discipline and/or revocation of his appointment. Rules 3.05(A) and 4.03 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, states:

Rule 3.05(A). TRAINING

"Patrol Specials and Assistant Patrol Specials shall participate in additional training as required by the Chief of Police. Costs for training provided by the San Francisco Police Department shall be paid for by the Patrol Specials and Assistant Patrol Specials prior to receiving such training at a rate commensurate with the rates charged to other private persons. Minimum annual training shall include:

A. Successful completion of the firearms qualification course twice each year on dates set by the Range Master at the San Francisco Police Range."

Rule 4.03. ORDERS OF POLICE OFFICERS

"Patrol Specials and Assistant Patrol Specials shall strictly obey and promptly execute the lawful orders of police officers."

SPECIFICATION NO. 2

Failure to Answer Truthfully When Questioned About His Work Status (a violation of Rules 4.04 and 4.20 of the Interim Rules for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants).

(23) The allegations incorporated in paragraphs (1) through (22) are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.

(24) On or about January 12, 2012, Sgt. Hector Jusino #1589 interviewed the Accused by telephone. The Accused stated that he has been a Patrol Special Officer for more than 40 years and own betas 33, 34, 75, 95, 101, and 105. The Accused confirmed that he had signed into Richmond Station and worked after he failed to satisfy his mandatory firearm requalification.

(25) The Accused was asked if he had been informed on April 12, 2010 by Lt. Yick that he was ineligible to work as a Patrol Special Officer. The Accused denied that Lt. Yick had told him he was ineligible to work as of April 12, 2010.

(26) The Accused admitted that he continued to work despite direct orders not to because he had clients that were good to him. He admitted that he has no set hours and works approximately two to three days a week for about 3 to 4 hours. The Accused also admitted that Police personnel would not allow him to sign in at the station having been made aware of his status. The Accused was reminded that he had been deemed ineligible to work due to his failure to qualify at the Range and the Accused responded by saying, "No, I don’t know anything about that. I got no gun or nothing. I have no radio which they turned off. I just put on my jacket, work 2 to 3 hours then go home …"

(27) Sgt. Jusino asked the Accused if Lt. Yick ever informed him that he was ineligible to work as of April 12, 2010 and the Accused replied, "No, No. He never told me I could not work."

(28) On January 26, 2012, the Accused also informed Sgt. Jusino that he does not wear his Patrol Special Officer uniform while working.

(29) The Accused, by failing to answer truthfully during his interview with Sgt. Jusino, and admitting that he worked his beats without his firearm and radio, and worked his beats on occasion while not in uniform, engaged in conduct which reflects discredit upon the Department in violation of Rules 4.04 and 4.20 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants. Any reasonable Assistant Patrol Special must know that such conduct is cause for discipline and/or revocation of his appointment. Rules 4.04 and 4.20 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, state:

"4.04. INVESTIGATIONS. Patrol Specials and Assistant Patrol Specials shall, when called upon by a police officer or by one specially assigned by

lawful authority to conduct an investigation involving a police matter, truthfully answer all questions propounded. All reports, statements and declarations made orally or in writing in the foregoing matters shall contain the truth without evasion."

"4.20. CONDUCT. Any conduct by a Patrol Special Officer or an Assistant while on patrol which constitutes a breach of peace or a failure to perform his or her contractual duties, or any conduct by a Patrol Special or Assistant Patrol Special while working which undermines his or her ability to discharge contractual duties which reflects discredit upon the Department (through such offense are not specifically defined or laid down in these rules and procedures) shall be considered misconduct subjecting the Patrol Special or Assistant Patrol Special to disciplinary action as herein set forth."

PENALTIES:

(30) If the Specifications are sustained after trial by the Police Commission, the Department may recommend that the Commission revoke the Accused’s appointment.

WHEREAS, a hearing on said charges was held before the Police Commission pursuant to Appendix A, Section A8.343 of the Charter of the City and County of San Francisco on August 22, 2012, where the matter was submitted to the Police Commission for decision; therefore be it

RESOLVED, that based on the stipulated agreement between the parties, consistent with the Commission’s duty to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and County of San Francisco and the public in general, and in order to promote efficiency and discipline in the San Francisco Police Department, the Police Commission orders Patrol Special Officer Elbert Taylor to retire immediately and to arrange the sale of his beats.

FURTHER RESOLVED, that Patrol Special Officer Elbert Taylor shall report back to the Commission in ninety (90) days regarding the status and the sale of his beats.

AYES: Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, Chan, Kingsley, Turman, Loftus

ABSENT: Commissioner DeJesus

PUBLIC COMMENT ON ALL MATTER PERTAINING TO CLOSED SESSION

None

VOTE ON WHETHER TO HOLD CLOSED SESSION

Motion by Commissioner Kingsley, second by Commissioner Chan. Approved

6-0.

CLOSED SESSION

(6:30 p.m. – 8:10 p.m.)

 

a. PERSONNEL EXCEPTION: Decision to return disciplinary charges filed in Case No. IAD 2011-01100to the Chief’s level per disposition agreed to by the Chief and the parties

(Present: Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, Chan, Kingsley, Loftus, Turman, Chief Suhr, Deputy City Attorney Blits, Captain McEachern, Inspector Monroe, Sgt. Jusino, Risa Tom, Attorney Alden, Attorney Stiglich, Mr. Steve Johnson, and officer involved) Resolution No. 12-49

(Taken in shorthand form by Ms. Anna Greenley, CSR., Roomian & Associates)

b. PUBLIC EXCEPTION: Discussion and possible action to sustain or not sustain disciplinary charges filed in Case No. JWA C11-194, and to decide penalty, if necessary

(Present: Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, Chan, Kingsley, Loftus, Turman, Chief Suhr, Deputy City Attorney Blits, Captain McEachern, Inspector Monroe, Sgt. Jusino, Risa Tom, Attorney Alden, Attorney Stiglich, Mr. Steve Johnson, and member involved)

(Taken in shorthand form by Ms. Anna Greenley, CSR., Roomian & Associates)

c. PERSONNEL EXCEPTION: Status and calendaring of pending disciplinary cases

(Present: Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, Chan, Kingsley, Loftus, Turman, Chief Suhr, Deputy City Attorney Blits, Captain McEachern, Inspector Monroe, Sgt. Jusino, Risa Tom)

OPEN SESSION

VOTE TO ELECT WHETHER TO DISCLOSED ANY OR ALL DISCUSSION HELD IN CLOSED SESSION

Motion by Commissioner Kingsley, second by Commissioner Marshall for non disclosure. Approved 6-0.

ADJOURNMENT

Motion by Commissioner Mazzucco, second by Commissioner Chan to adjourn the meeting in honor of Patrol Special Officer Elbert Taylor. Approved 6-0

Thereafter, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.

__________________________________________

Inspector John Monroe

Secretary

San Francisco Police Commission

Last updated: 12/3/2012 2:46:16 PM