SFDSA Files Lawsuit Against SF Sheriff

At some time prior to July 8, 2022, the City and County of San Francisco Sheriff’s Office decided to create a pilot program in County Jail #3 (“CJ3”) in housing unit 5. The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office had two employees evaluate the functionality of the program and identify any concerns they saw with the changes proposed by the Sheriff’s Office. These deputies found numerous safety concerns that made it difficult to perform the regular safety checks of the inmates in some cases and completely impossible in other cases.

Despite the safety concerns, on July 8, 2022, the changes were implemented.

CJ3 has multiple housing units that are the shape of a circle with inmate cells on the perimeter of the circle. This circle is divided into to sides, the A and B sides. Inmates from A cannot cross over to B and vice versa. On one side of the dividing line is a “Crow’s Nest” or a tower with windows that can look out over portions of both the A and B sides of the housing unit. This Crow’s Nest has previously not been used.

Prior to July 8, 2022, CJ 3 has always had 2 deputies working a general population housing unit. One each on the A and B sides. These deputies worked on the floor with the inmates.

Safety Checks are required to be done every hour. There are state laws, known as Title 15 rules, as well as a San Francisco Sheriff’s Office policy, CODM 4.04, which outline the minimum requirements for these safety checks. The purpose of the checks is to maintain safety and security in the jail for staff, visitors and the inmates. Some of the requirements of these checks include noting the skin color of the inmate, the rise and fall of the chest, movement that indicates life, looking for any signs of illness or distress, inspection of cell doors and windows and a search for any apparent contraband or hazards.

These safety checks were completed by the deputies working on the floor but walking up to each inmate cell door and observing the inmate, the cell and surrounding area. Sometimes, at night, a flashlight would be required to properly check the welfare of the inmates.

On July 8, 2022, this changed. No longer would there be any floor deputies. Now, only one deputy, instead of two, would monitor all the inmates by him/herself, from the Crow’s Nest. In the event of an emergency, the deputy in the Crow’s Nest was not to leave and assist an inmate having a medical emergency, being attacked, or attempting to harm himself, instead, the deputy is now required to call for help. Deputies who are roaming around the rest of the jail would then have to respond and handle the situation, wasting valuable time.

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office was unable to remedy all the safety concerns raised by the two employees who evaluated the new Crow’s Nest plan. The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office administration directed Crow’s Nest deputies to utilize binoculars to assist them in seeing the inmates better. While this may help with viewing some of the inmates when the lights are on, they do little to help at night and cannot solve the problem of the inability to see some of the cells at all, with or without binoculars.

The DSA sent a letter to the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office on July 18, 2022 and it was resent to the Director of Employee Relations, on July 22, 2022. This letter demanded that the new Crow’s Nest practice stop until the parties can meet and confer over the impacts and effects of it. Numerous impacts and effects were listed in this notice.

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office responded on July 26, 2022, refusing to maintain the status quo until the parties were able to meet and confer.

Within days of its implementation, a fight broke out in one of the cells in the evening and it was not discovered until the next morning. This is evidence of the lack of safety the DSA was concerned with when it demanded the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office cease and desist its new Crow’s Nest practice.

March 28, 2022 RFI.

On March 28, 2022, the DSA requested information necessary and relevant to ascertain the dates, times, and shifts that the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office fell below the minimum staffing required by the MOU. (Exhibit X) Arbitrator Alexander Cohen previously resolved a grievance filed by DSA when the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office previously violated the Minimum Staffing section of the MOU. Arbitrator Cohen issued his ruling in favor of the DSA in 2017 in favor of the DSA. In his decision, he awarded damages to be paid to those members who worked on shifts that were below the minimum staffing required by the MOU. Because the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office continued to fall below the minimum staffing, the DSA filed a new grievance on March 4, 2022. The RFI filed on March 28, 2022 was to gather necessary and relevant information to calculate the damages incurred by the DSA members as the result of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office’s current grievance for again violating the MOU. (Lomba Decl. ¶ 9)

The March 28, 2022 RFI was acknowledged received by the City Attorney’s office and forwarded to the Employee Relations Division (ERD) to respond. No response from ERD was ever received. (Howell Decl. ¶ 6 and 9; Exhibit 3) On May 2, 2022, the DSA followed up with ERD and the City Attorney’s office and demanded production of the RFI by May 9, 2022, which never came. (Howell Decl. ¶ 10 and 11; Exhibit 5)

On May 13, 2022, the DSA filed a First Amended Unfair Labor Practice Charge in PERB Case No. SF-CE-1794-M to have this matter added to that current litigation. On June 7, 2022, after filing the amendment to the PERB Charge, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office produced documents responsive to the March 28, 2022 RFI. Judge Cloughesy declined to amend the Charge and Complaint in that matter to include this RFI issue but gave leave to refile this matter with PERB.

February 16, 2022 RFI.

On February 16, 2022, the DSA requested information necessary and relevant to ascertain the names, dates, and hours of Overtime Pay DSA members were denied. Information was also requested to ascertain the history, deliberation, changes, analysis and communications regarding Administrative Code section 18.13 involving the maximum permissible overtime. This information is necessary for the DSA to enforce the contract at a grievance proceeding and is unable to establish the damages or the individual DSA members affected, without the response to the RFI.

The February 16, 2022 RFI was acknowledge received by the City Attorney’s Office on February 22, 2022, via email. (EXHIBIT XX – email from KNS to Rapoport and back) Having received no responsive documents, the DSA’s counsel sent an email on August 2, 2022 to demand production. (Exhibit XX – Email KNS to)

 


 Contact:

Ken Lomba
SFDSA President
415-696-2428
San Francisco, CA

SF JAIL HEADED FOR DISASTER

San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs have the honor of having served under the only progressive sheriff in California, Michael Hennessy. Our goal was to promote restorative justice, assist offenders into adopting law abiding lives, reduce recidivism, and improve community life.

The current Sheriff’s Department is headed for disaster. Currently, staffing of deputy sheriff’s is at 70% of what is required, and the current Sheriff has slashed programs, increased lockups (prisoners face 23 hours a day in confinement); blown holes in his budget through mandatory overtime, while increasing administration staff, non-essential programs and taken resources away from our core mission, which is running the jails. Sheriff Miyamoto claims there are 176 vacant positions and as a result inmates receive no family visits, inmates are locked in cells for longer, and all regular programs have been cut leaving only a few video/correspondence programs. Even religious services have been cut. No more Catholic services, no more Protestant services, no more Jehovah services, no Muslim services. And addiction services such as AA have been cut.

As a result, the jail’s current policies of increased lock downs and reduced programs have increased the mental health issues of inmates, imperil deputy sheriffs’ safety due to inmates taking out their increased anxieties and tensions on deputies, and cause more staffing issues by encouraging retirements and deputies to leave their jobs.

In the meantime, the Sheriff faces two class action lawsuits because the jails, ignoring Title 24, provides no outdoor access to inmates, so inmates are housed under fluorescent lights, 24/7, 365, and the Sheriff faces accusations of violating inmates’ constitutional right to sleep by forcing breakfast to wake up between 4 am and 4:30 am for breakfast. These lawsuits have the possibility of large judgements against the Sheriff’s Department.

The new DA Brooke Jenkins’ promise to increase prosecution i.e., of fentanyl pushers, as stated in her press interviews, means an increase in incarceration and we don’t have the deputy staff to properly run the jail.

To meet the needs of San Francisco, the Mayor and the Sheriff must adequately staff deputy sheriff’s, at minimum increase the staffing to the 2019 level, with additional hiring of 82 more deputy sheriffs. Recruiting and retention should be a priority and it hasn’t been. A revolving door at the jail serves the needs of no one. Properly staff our jails. Return all programs, particularly addiction treatment and anger management programs.

PROOF:
Exhibit A – staffing report for June 2022 (606 deputies, 23 senior deputies = 629, and 71 sergeants) versus July 2019 (712 sheriff’s deputies and 49 senior deputies = 759, and 57 sergeants). This shows more expensive officers increase at the expense of the line deputies who do the work.
Exhibit B – Consultant staffing analysis: Deputy vacancies are even higher than what Sheriff Miyamoto claims

La Asociación de Alguaciles Adjuntos de San Francisco exige una investigación del Gran Jurado Civil contra la Oficina del Alguacil

El personal en las Cárceles de San Francisco se ha vuelto peligrosamente inseguro con reclusos que atacan a reclusos, enfermeras, ayudantes del alguacil y empleados civiles. La Oficina del Sheriff de San Francisco y la Ciudad y el Condado de San Francisco han faltado personal a las cárceles a un nivel peligrosamente bajo, no han priorizado la financiación para contratar agentes, ni siquiera han priorizado la retención de los agentes actuales.

En un correo electrónico del presidente de la Asociación de Alguaciles Adjuntos de San Francisco, Ken Lomba, al alguacil Miyamoto, el presidente Lomba declaró que la SFDSA ha estado abogando por la contratación y advirtiendo a la gerencia de la oficina del alguacil sobre los problemas de personal durante más de una década. Dos años y medio de los que Miyamoto fue Sheriff. El presidente Lomba dijo que el aumento de la carga de trabajo debido a la falta intencional de contratación se ha convertido en “trabajo de explotación”. La Asociación de Alguaciles Adjuntos de San Francisco ha presentado una Queja Civil ante el Gran Jurado exigiendo que se investigue a la Oficina del Alguacil y a la Ciudad y el Condado de San Francisco.

Desde 2014 ha habido 3 informes separados del Gran Jurado Civil de San Francisco advirtiendo sobre los efectos de ir por debajo de los niveles mínimos de personal y acelerar la contratación en lugar de horas extras forzadas. Incluso hubo una advertencia de una posible violación del Título 15 en el futuro si nada cambia. Desafortunadamente, la Oficina del Sheriff no ha podido contratar a la cantidad adecuada de agentes para crear un entorno de trabajo seguro tanto para los agentes como para los reclusos. Los niveles mínimos de personal han empeorado y, en definitiva, los diputados están agotados.

En los informes anteriores, el Gran Jurado encontró que debido a la disminución del número total de agentes empleados por la Ciudad y el Condado de San Francisco, el exceso de horas extras y la escasez de cuerpos no permitieron que los importantes programas de reclusos existentes y mucho menos aumentaran el número de reclusos. programas recomendados. Además, la capacitación recomendada para los diputados no pudo llevarse a cabo o fue inadecuada para tratar la salud mental y el abuso de sustancias, así como muchos otros problemas que experimenta la población alojada.

En última instancia, este Gran Jurado recomendó en tres ocasiones distintas en 2014, 2016 y 2017 “acelerar la contratación para reducir las horas extra”. Las recomendaciones del Gran Jurado nunca se han seguido y la situación se ha vuelto insostenible ya que el número de diputados es menor ahora que cuando este Gran Jurado hizo estas fuertes recomendaciones.

LAS CÁRCELES DE CCSF ESTÁN AHORA CAYENDO POR DEBAJO DEL PERSONAL MÍNIMO REGULARMENTE

Hace solo unos días, el 9 de junio de 2022, el alguacil Miyamoto emitió un memorando a todo el personal de la cárcel de la ciudad y el condado de San Francisco identificando sus intenciones de operar por debajo del personal mínimo durante un período de los próximos 8 a 9 meses. La Ciudad y el Condado de San Francisco ha reconocido claramente la inutilidad de dar la apariencia de alcanzar la dotación mínima de personal y ahora ha admitido que no puede ejercer su deber de hacerlo.

La ciudad y el condado de San Francisco compiten ferozmente con los condados vecinos, Alameda y San Mateo, por el personal penitenciario. Alameda ha estado bajo un decreto de consentimiento para contratar más personal penitenciario. Sería una pena que la ciudad y el condado de San Francisco estuvieran bajo una supervisión gubernamental similar. La ciudad y el condado de San Francisco pueden acelerar la contratación de personal, pero no lo han convertido en una prioridad, a expensas del personal penitenciario exhausto y con exceso de trabajo.

La Queja del Gran Jurado Civil contra la Oficina del Alguacil y la Ciudad y el Condado de San Francisco se presentó el 20 de junio de 2022. Este Gran Jurado debe exigir respuestas de la Oficina del Alguacil de San Francisco sobre por qué no ha cumplido con sus 3 recomendaciones separadas desde 2014.

Vea la queja aquí, Queja del gran jurado civil contra el alguacil de SF

Contacto:

Ken Lomba, Presidente de SFDSA
415-696-2428
San Francisco, CA

Website: https://sanfranciscodsa.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SanFranciscoDSA
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SanFranciscoDeputySheriffsAssociation

San Francisco—Polling finds that a majority of voters support a new jail and opposes the outsourcing of our inmates to other counties.

For many years, replacing the seismically unsafe County Jail 4, a maximum-security jail housing inmates that are charged with violent and serious felonies, had been delayed.

“No one is proposing an additional jail.  It is clear that a replacement to the sub-standard and seismically unsafe County Jail 4 at 850 Bryant St must be built. As how we treat those who are incarcerated changes it is critical that we have facilities that include psychiatric care and rehabilitation,” said Ken Lomba, President of the San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association.

Once 850 Bryant St. was slated to close the agencies that moved out, moved to new buildings.

  • The Police Dept. had a new district station built, with parking and amenities.
  • District Attorneys Office moved to 350 Rhode Island and to an office on Brannan St. with parking and parking permits. 
  • Medical Examiners Office had a new office built, with parking and amenities.

But for our members and the inmates in the jail the City continues to ignore the need for a new maximum-security jail. This is critical to their safety and the safety of the inmates.

SF Voters Support New Jail

Our polling found that the majority support a New Jail and the majority Oppose outsourcing our inmates to other counties. Please see the details in the poll download here. [click here]