Tag: San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs

Unmasking Mayor London Breed’s Aggressive Defunding of San Francisco’s Sheriff’s Office

In the heart of San Francisco’s ever-shifting political landscape, a storm of controversy is brewing. The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office is facing a stark and troubling reality – a calculated series of budget cuts and policy shifts that paint a disturbing picture of Mayor London Breed’s unwavering campaign to defund law enforcement in the city. In this article, we’ll meticulously dissect the timeline of events that make a compelling and nuanced case for the Mayor’s relentless assault on the city’s law enforcement agencies.

A History of Radical Reform

Mayor London Breed’s political journey began as a member of the Board of Supervisors, and from the very beginning, she made it clear that she was on a mission to overhaul what she perceived as a deeply flawed criminal justice system. Her 2015 statement sent shockwaves through the city, as she passionately declared her intent to “tear down the system of mass incarceration.” This declaration was not a mere political posture; it was deeply personal, rooted in her familial ties to individuals behind bars.

 

San Francisco’s Unique Approach Scrutinized

San Francisco has long prided itself on its progressive approach to criminal justice, prioritizing rehabilitation over incarceration. The city’s history has been punctuated by numerous chances given to offenders, emphasizing diversion programs and alternatives to conventional incarceration. However, this progressive leniency took an unprecedented turn when the city began diverting criminals away from traditional imprisonment. This drastic shift triggered widespread public outrage, driven by the brazen open-air drug dealing and an alarming surge in drug overdose deaths.

Mayor Breed’s Inconsistent Stance

Amid mounting public pressure, Mayor Breed reluctantly increased the presence of law enforcement on the city’s streets. However, her efforts appeared lukewarm at best, and the city continued to prioritize rehabilitation over punitive measures. This approach left San Francisco with a troubling reputation – a city that wields the carrot without ever brandishing the stick. While the jail population did see a marginal increase from its lowest point two months prior, street-level crime continued unabated, further casting doubts on the city’s commitment to public safety.

The Mayor’s Bold 2020 Pro-Defunding Declaration

In 2020, Mayor Breed publicly embraced the nationwide call to defund the police, aligning herself with a movement that sought to reallocate funds away from law enforcement. This audacious proclamation heralded a seismic shift in the city’s approach to public safety and hinted at her intentions to fundamentally reshape the foundations of law enforcement in San Francisco.

Mixed Signals in 2022

However, as the year 2022 dawned, Mayor Breed deftly pivoted her public messaging to appear more pro-public safety, even as her actions told a different story. She imposed a nine-month freeze on deputy sheriff and police hiring, a decision that severely impacted staffing numbers, rendering the city more vulnerable to crime.

Budgetary Maneuvers Speak Volumes

Budget allocations often serve as a clear reflection of a leader’s priorities. In February 2021, as part of the budget process, Mayor Breed orchestrated a staggering redirection of $120 million from law enforcement to investments in the African American community. This financial maneuver underscored her commitment to resource reallocation.

In 2023, Mayor Breed’s office continued to raise eyebrows with significant slowdowns in the hiring process, a subtle but potent form of budget reduction. In April of the same year, she denied a longevity incentive designed to retain deputy sheriffs, despite a glaring shortage in the ranks. In July, she initially proposed a 5% budget cut to the Sheriff’s Office but ultimately executed a 2.5% reduction. And in September, it came to light that funding for crucial law enforcement tools like body cameras, tasers, and ammunition had been mercilessly slashed.

 

The Sheriff’s Office’s Apprehensive Response

In the face of relentless budget cuts and policy shifts, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office finds itself not only stunned but deeply concerned, particularly in the context of soaring crime rates plaguing the city. It appears that Mayor Breed’s actions are inextricably linked to her personal commitment to criminal justice reform, resulting in a reduction in law enforcement officers and an aggressive push for the civilianization of the police.

The Civilianization of Law Enforcement: Aligning with the Extreme Left’s Agenda

One prominent shift that has sent shockwaves through the San Francisco law enforcement landscape is the introduction of street crisis teams composed of Urban Alchemy workers, who now act as first responders in select situations. This marked transition towards civilianization of certain aspects of law enforcement has not only raised eyebrows but also drawn attention to its alignment with the extreme left’s agenda for criminal justice reform.

It is no secret that progressive elements on the political spectrum have long advocated for the civilianization of law enforcement, viewing traditional policing as inherently flawed and overly punitive. San Francisco’s embrace of this approach reflects a broader ideological shift, where the emphasis on community-based solutions and de-escalation tactics takes precedence over traditional law enforcement methods.

However, all one has to do is look around San Francisco to see that this approach is not working. The city’s streets are marred by open-air drug dealing, rampant crime, and a palpable sense of insecurity among its residents. Critics argue that while civilianization may have noble intentions, it has resulted in a system ill-equipped to address the complex and persistent challenges of urban safety.

While proponents argue that civilianizing law enforcement can lead to more empathetic and community-oriented policing, critics express concerns about the potential ramifications on public safety and law enforcement effectiveness. The debate over the civilianization of law enforcement is emblematic of the larger struggle between reformist ideologies and the need for maintaining public safety—a battle that is currently playing out in San Francisco’s streets and city halls.

Conclusion: A Critical Crossroads

The mounting evidence leaves little room for doubt – Mayor London Breed’s relentless assault on the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office is not just a byproduct of her commitment to criminal justice reform; it’s a calculated and multifaceted agenda. As the city grapples with these complex issues, the delicate balance between reform and public safety teeters on a precipice. The choices made in the coming months will undoubtedly have profound and lasting consequences for the city and its residents, defining the future of criminal justice in San Francisco.

San Francisco Sheriff’s Office Takes Bold Action as Mayor Breed’s Strategies Fall Short in Drug Crisis

In a stunning turn of events, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office has emerged as the driving force in the fight against the escalating drug crisis, as Mayor London Breed’s strategies continue to fall short. With the city grappling with drug-related issues, Sheriff Paul Miyamoto has taken decisive action, unveiling a courageous plan to deploy 130 additional deputies to the troubled Tenderloin and South of Market (SoMa) neighborhoods.

SF Sheriff Tenderloin Initiative
SF Sheriff Tenderloin Initiative

While Mayor Breed’s approach has faced criticism for its ineffectiveness, Sheriff Miyamoto has stepped up to lead the charge in tackling the deep-rooted drug problem. With resolute determination, the Sheriff’s Office has presented a comprehensive strategy to address drug dealers and individuals openly using drugs in public. The deployment of additional deputies, starting this month, signifies a seismic shift in the battle against crime and substance abuse.

Sheriff Miyamoto, flanked by concerned citizens and law enforcement officials, announced this groundbreaking initiative outside City Hall. With unwavering resolve, he highlighted the urgent need for effective action in combating the city’s drug crisis. The Sheriff’s Office, guided by a steadfast commitment to public safety, is now taking the reins in the quest to find real solutions.

While the Sheriff’s Office courageously assumes a leading role, it is no secret that Mayor Breed’s strategies have fallen short of expectations. The current approach has been marred by limited success and persistent challenges. Public health experts have long decried the idea of relying on incarceration and criminalization as effective means to address substance abuse disorders.


However, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office’s proactive stance offers hope for a different path forward. By increasing law enforcement presence and targeting drug-related offenses, they aim to restore order and offer a helping hand to those struggling with addiction. The Sheriff’s Office’s unwavering dedication to the community’s well-being is a testament to their commitment to creating lasting change.

Nevertheless, significant hurdles remain in this uphill battle. Both the San Francisco Police Department and the Sheriff’s Office confront staffing shortages that hinder their ability to effectively address the city’s safety concerns. Police Chief Bill Scott emphasized the importance of receiving adequate funding and support from elected officials to overcome these challenges. The commitment of city leaders to address staffing issues will be crucial in achieving tangible progress.

As the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office takes bold strides in confronting the drug crisis, it is evident that their approach stands in stark contrast to Mayor Breed’s faltering strategies. With their specialized training and unwavering dedication, the Sheriff’s Office deputies will fearlessly patrol the streets, tackling criminal elements head-on and extending a lifeline to those lost in the grips of addiction.

While the Sheriff’s Office shoulders the burden of this monumental task, it is vital for the community to rally behind them. Together, we can bring about meaningful change, ensuring a safer and healthier future for San Francisco. Let us unite in support of the determined men and women of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office as they lead the charge to reshape our city’s destiny in the face of a daunting drug crisis.

Mayor London Breed’s Covert Defunding Tactics: Undermining the Sheriff’s Department

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Mayor London Breed’s strategic defunding of the Sheriff’s Department in San Francisco has ignited concerns among law enforcement officials and citizens alike. Operating under the radar, these silent defunding measures, such as the denial of the longevity incentive proposal on May 15th, 2023, and disproportionate budget cuts, are adversely impacting the department’s staffing levels and compromising public safety. Let’s examine these covert actions and their potential ramifications on the Sheriff’s Department.

Denial of Longevity Incentive Proposal

One glaring example of Mayor Breed’s covert defunding strategy is the denial of the longevity incentive proposal. On May 15th, 2023, Mayor Breed rejected this proposal aimed at retaining experienced deputies eligible for retirement, and she also failed to come to the table with a counter proposal or offer any alternative ideas to address the issue. This lack of engagement and proactive effort from the mayor demonstrates a concerning disregard for the retention of deputy sheriffs and exacerbates the ongoing staffing crisis within the Sheriff’s Department. The loss of 50 to 110 deputies due to early retirement further strains the department, leading to increased workloads, reduced efficiency, and compromised public safety.

Budget Cuts and Disproportionate Allocation

Mayor Breed’s budget decisions further illustrate her covert defunding tactics. While slashing the Sheriff’s Department budget by 3%, the mayor simultaneously increased the budgets of other public safety departments, such as the police by 9% and the fire department by 3%. This disproportionate allocation sends a troubling message about the mayor’s priorities and undermines the Sheriff’s Department’s ability to effectively carry out its duties.

Unused Funds and Overtime Reduction

The mayor’s claim of utilizing unused funds from vacant positions and reducing overtime within the Sheriff’s Office raises questions about the allocation of resources. If these funds were available, they could have been redirected to support initiatives like the longevity incentive proposal, thereby mitigating staffing shortages and reducing the need for overtime. However, the failure to do so implies a disregard for the long-term sustainability of the department and places an unnecessary burden on the existing workforce.

Implications for Public Safety and Financial Efficiency

The consequences of Mayor Breed’s covert defunding tactics extend beyond understaffing. Insufficient staffing levels compromise response times, limit the department’s ability to proactively address emerging challenges, and hinder the delivery of essential services to the community. Moreover, the reliance on overtime to fill vacant positions not only strains the budget but also places an additional burden on the dedicated deputies who shoulder the increased workload.

A Call for Accountability and Transparency

In light of these concerning developments, it is crucial for concerned citizens, deputies, and community stakeholders to hold Mayor London Breed accountable for her silent defunding strategies. The Sheriff’s Department plays a vital role in maintaining public safety, and it deserves the necessary resources and support to fulfill its duties effectively.

Additionally, transparency and open dialogue are imperative in addressing these budgetary concerns. Citizens must demand clear explanations and justifications for the disproportionate budget cuts and the denial of proposals aimed at retaining experienced deputies. By fostering transparency, the community can actively participate in shaping a fair and effective criminal justice system that prioritizes public safety.

Mayor London Breed’s covert defunding tactics targeting the Sheriff’s Department in San Francisco have serious implications for public safety and the well-being of the community. The denial of the longevity incentive proposal on May 15th, 2023, without offering any alternative solutions, and the disproportionate budget cuts jeopardize the department’s staffing levels, hindering its ability to maintain law and order effectively. It is essential for citizens and stakeholders to voice their concerns, demand accountability, and advocate for the allocation of resources that align with the department’s needs. Only through open dialogue and collaborative efforts can we ensure a robust and secure future for the Sheriff’s Department and the community it serves. By holding Mayor Breed accountable for her silent defunding strategies, we can work towards a fair and effective criminal justice system that prioritizes public safety and upholds the principles of justice and equality.

 

Media Contact:

Ken Lomba
President
San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association
415-696-2428

The Impact of Operant Conditioning on Criminal Mindsets: San Francisco’s Lenient Approach under Scrutiny

open-air-drug-marketOperant conditioning, a psychological concept that examines how behavior is influenced by consequences, has far-reaching implications in various aspects of our lives. In the realm of criminal justice, the application of operant conditioning principles can have profound effects on the mindset of offenders. This article delves into the concerning issue of San Francisco’s lenient approach to offenders who violate the conditions of their electronic monitoring and the San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project. By exploring the inadvertent reinforcement of wrong behavior through operant conditioning, we shed light on the significant impact this leniency has on the criminal mindset and its implications for public safety.

Operant Conditioning and Criminal Mindsets: Operant conditioning, as developed by psychologist B.F. Skinner, posits that behaviors are shaped and maintained by their consequences. In the context of criminal behavior, the principles of operant conditioning can play a pivotal role in reinforcing or discouraging criminal actions. When offenders consistently experience minimal consequences or repeated chances without facing severe repercussions, they inadvertently learn that their wrong behavior can go unpunished. This forms the foundation for the development of a criminal mindset, where individuals perceive that their actions have little accountability or deterrence.

Leniency in San Francisco’s Criminal Justice System: San Francisco’s lenient approach towards offenders who violate electronic monitoring and the San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project is a cause for concern. Instead of imposing substantial consequences for violations, offenders are granted multiple chances and minimal penalties. This leniency inadvertently reinforces the wrong behavior, undermining the principles of accountability and deterrence. As a result, offenders develop a distorted perception that their actions carry no significant consequences, contributing to a culture of impunity.

The Reinforcement of Wrong Behavior: The lenient application of operant conditioning in San Francisco’s criminal justice system inadvertently reinforces wrong behavior among offenders. By repeatedly granting chances and minimal penalties, the system fails to establish a strong connection between criminal actions and negative outcomes. Offenders perceive that their actions have little impact on their freedom or future, further entrenching the belief that criminal behavior can go unpunished. This reinforcement of wrong behavior creates a vicious cycle, leading to an increase in criminal activity and posing a threat to public safety.

Implications for Public Safety: The lenient approach driven by operant conditioning principles in San Francisco has significant implications for public safety. When offenders perceive that their actions have minimal consequences, it erodes the deterrent effect that a robust criminal justice system should have. The lack of accountability not only emboldens offenders but also sends a detrimental message to the community, instilling a sense of insecurity and a loss of trust in the justice system. As a result, crime rates escalate, innocent lives are shattered, and neighborhoods suffer the consequences of a flawed approach to rehabilitation.

Moving Towards a Balanced Approach: Recognizing the detrimental impact of operant conditioning on criminal mindsets, it is essential to adopt a more balanced approach in San Francisco’s criminal justice system. Striking a balance between rehabilitation and accountability is crucial. Implementing structured consequences that are proportionate to the severity of offenses can create a stronger deterrent effect. By ensuring that offenders face meaningful repercussions for their actions, we can break the cycle of wrong behavior and foster a greater sense of accountability and responsibility.

The inadvertent reinforcement of wrong behavior through leniency in San Francisco’s criminal justice system, driven by operant conditioning principles, poses a significant challenge to public safety. The development of a criminal mindset, wherein offenders perceive little accountability or deterrence, perpetuates a cycle of wrongdoing. It is imperative for policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and community stakeholders to address this issue. By adopting a more balanced approach that incorporates accountability, proportional consequences, and a commitment

Mayor Breed’s budget worsens the unconstitutional conditions of San Francisco County Jails

PRESS RELEASE

Mayor Breed’s budget – released yesterday –worsens the unconstitutional conditions of San Francisco County Jails at San Bruno and at 7th Street for inmates’; conditions which cause long term chronic illness, and increases the lack of safety for both inmates and deputies. The City is currently being sued for these unconstitutional conditions. Both the San Bruno Jail (County Jail 3) and the 7th Street Jail (County Jail 2) are in violation of Building Code, Title 24, and cannot meet California Regulations. Staffing is already woefully short, forcing the jail to regularly lockdown all prisoners, denying inmates out of cell time, and creating in essence solitary confinement. This is all unconstitutional. Recently the Mayor denied a longevity proposal that would retain needed deputies that are now going to retire but gave longevity incentives to Police and Fire. Yet, Mayor Breed’s budget cuts another 3% off the Sheriff’s budget, while increasing the police budget by 9%. The increase in police hiring is to encourage new arrests. New arrests will increase the inmate population and any increased inmate population will only make the unconstitutional conditions at County Jails worse.

Right now, we have inmates who have been incarcerated for years. At least 60 inmates have been incarcerated for over 4 years. These jails have no outdoor facilities, and so all inmates are housed 24/7 under fluorescent lights. With lockdowns, inmates are forced inside their cell without exercise, without showers, without meaningful human interaction and contact, at times for 24 hours or more. Studies show that forced isolation is one of the worst things that can happen to inmates. Stressed out and mentally ill inmates are a danger to themselves and to deputies.

The lawsuit, Norbert v. CCSF , 3:19-cv-02724 is set for trial on August 8, 2023. San Francisco has no defense for why our jails violate the building code. And the plaintiffs in Norbert claim that denying human beings – long term – outdoor sunlight causes chronic illness, including diabetes. One of the plaintiffs, M. Brackens has developed diabetes while incarcerated in San Francisco County Jail.

The San Francisco Deputy Sheriff’s Association wants to do our job, and do it in a way that treats inmates humanely. The Sheriff’s Department Mission Statement says that the Sheriff is committed to the “constitutional detention” of inmates. The Mayor needs to allocate enough funding so that all inmates receive constitutional conditions of confinement.

We were forced to close 850 Bryant Street because it was so dilapidated that there were regular raw sewage spills in jail cells. That cost the City $2.1 million in a lawsuit.

San Francisco needs to provide jails that meet all building code and constitutional standards. And the Sheriff’s Department cannot do so, if the Mayor keeps cutting the Sheriff’s budget so there’s not enough staffing, and sufficient capital investment in the jails themselves so that the jails meet constitutional standards.

Ken Lomba
President
San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association
415-696-2428

How to Start a Neighborhood Watch Group Using Nextdoor App

Safety and security are important concerns for any community, and starting a neighborhood watch group can be an effective way to foster a sense of community vigilance and keep your neighborhood safe. With the advancement of technology, there are now online tools that can facilitate the organization and communication of a neighborhood watch group, such as the Nextdoor app. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to start a neighborhood watch group using the Nextdoor app.

Step 1: Create or Join a Nextdoor Account The first step in starting a neighborhood watch group using the Nextdoor app is to create an account on the Nextdoor platform, if you don’t have one already. Nextdoor is a social networking app that connects neighbors and allows them to communicate about various topics, including community safety. You can sign up using your email address or by linking your account to your Facebook profile. Once your account is set up, you can verify your address to join your neighborhood’s Nextdoor community.

Step 2: Get to Know Your Neighbors Building a neighborhood watch group starts with getting to know your neighbors. Take the time to introduce yourself to your neighbors and build relationships with them. This can be done through the Nextdoor app by sending messages or posting introductions in the neighborhood feed. Building a sense of community and trust among your neighbors is crucial for the success of your neighborhood watch group.

Step 3: Create a Neighborhood Watch Group Once you have established a rapport with your neighbors, you can start creating a neighborhood watch group on the Nextdoor app. You can create a group specifically for your neighborhood within the Nextdoor platform, and invite your neighbors to join. You can name your group something like “Neighborhood Watch” or “Safety Patrol,” and set the privacy settings to invite only or require approval to join for added security.

Step 4: Define the Purpose and Goals of Your Group Clearly define the purpose and goals of your neighborhood watch group on the Nextdoor app. What are the main objectives of your group? Is it to report suspicious activities, share safety tips, or organize neighborhood watch patrols? Clearly outlining the purpose and goals of your group will help members understand its focus and expectations.

Step 5: Establish Communication Protocols Communication is key for the success of any neighborhood watch group, and the Nextdoor app provides various tools to facilitate communication within your group. You can use the group’s chat feature or create specific discussion threads for different topics. Establish communication protocols, such as how and when to report suspicious activities, what information to include in reports, and how to handle emergency situations. Encourage active participation and engagement from all group members.

Step 6: Educate and Empower Group Members Empower your group members with knowledge and resources to be proactive in keeping their neighborhood safe. Share safety tips, crime prevention strategies, and information about local law enforcement agencies. Invite local law enforcement representatives to provide training sessions or participate in discussions on the Nextdoor app. Educate your group members about emergency protocols, including what to do in case of a fire, natural disaster, or other emergencies.

Step 7: Organize Neighborhood Watch Patrols One of the main activities of a neighborhood watch group is organizing patrols to monitor the neighborhood for suspicious activities. With the Nextdoor app, you can easily coordinate neighborhood watch patrols by creating events or discussion threads for members to sign up for patrol shifts. Encourage members to report any suspicious activities they observe during patrols or in their day-to-day activities.

Step 8: Collaborate with Local Law Enforcement Collaboration with local law enforcement is crucial for the success of a neighborhood watch group. Establish a positive relationship with your local law enforcement agencies and keep them informed about your neighborhood watch group’s activities. Invite law enforcement representatives to attend group meetings or participate in discussions on the Nextdoor app. Seek their guidance and support in organizing your neighborhood watch group, and work together to address safety concerns in your community. Remember, neighborhood watch groups are not meant to replace law enforcement, but to work in partnership with them to enhance community safety.

Step 9: Promote Community Engagement In addition to patrolling and reporting suspicious activities, a neighborhood watch group should also focus on promoting community engagement. Encourage members to participate in neighborhood events, socialize with one another, and look out for each other. A strong sense of community can deter crime and create a supportive environment where neighbors watch out for one another’s safety.

Step 10: Regularly Evaluate and Adjust Regularly evaluate and adjust the activities of your neighborhood watch group on the Nextdoor app. Review the effectiveness of your patrols, communication protocols, and engagement strategies. Seek feedback from group members and law enforcement partners to identify areas for improvement. Adjust your group’s activities and strategies accordingly to ensure that you are addressing the changing safety needs of your community.

In conclusion, starting a neighborhood watch group using the Nextdoor app can be a powerful way to promote community safety and security. By creating a group, defining its purpose and goals, establishing communication protocols, organizing patrols, collaborating with law enforcement, and promoting community engagement, you can build a proactive and vigilant neighborhood watch group. Remember, safety is a shared responsibility, and by working together as a community, you can create a safer and more secure neighborhood for everyone. Stay connected, stay vigilant, and keep your neighborhood safe with Nextdoor!

Car break-ins are a major problem in San Francisco

Car break-ins are a major problem in San Francisco, with thousands of incidents reported every year. In fact, San Francisco has one of the highest rates of car break-ins in the country. This can be a frustrating and costly experience for car owners. However, there is a solution that can help reduce the risk of break-ins – security window tinting.  Make it difficult for the thieves.

car break ins

Security window tinting is a type of window film that is designed to make your car’s windows stronger and more difficult to break. It works by adding an extra layer of protection to your car’s windows that makes it much harder for a thief to break in. Here are some of the ways that security window tinting can help reduce break-ins in San Francisco:

  1. Deterrent Effect

Thieves are often looking for easy targets – cars that they can break into quickly and without being noticed. By adding security window tinting to your car, you are making it more difficult and time-consuming for a thief to break in. This can act as a deterrent, making your car less attractive to potential thieves.

  1. Reduced Visibility

Security window tinting also reduces the visibility into your car, making it harder for thieves to see what’s inside. This can help prevent smash-and-grab break-ins where a thief breaks a window and quickly grabs whatever they can see. With security window tinting, they are less likely to see anything valuable inside and may move on to an easier target.

  1. Increased Durability

Security window tinting is made of a strong, multi-layered film that is 4 mil. in thickness and designed to hold your car’s windows together even if they are shattered. This can help prevent a thief from gaining access to your car, and also reduces the risk of injury if the windows are broken during a break-in.

  1. Heat Reduction

In addition to its security benefits, window tinting can also help reduce the amount of heat that enters your car, making it more comfortable to drive and reducing the need for air conditioning. This can be particularly beneficial in San Francisco’s warm climate.

  1. UV Protection

Window tinting can also protect your car’s interior from the damaging effects of the sun’s UV rays, which can cause fading and cracking over time. This can help maintain the value of your car and keep it looking newer for longer.

Installing security window tinting on your car is a relatively quick and easy process that can be done by a professional. Once installed, the tinting requires little to no maintenance and can last for many years. It is also a cost-effective solution for reducing the risk of break-ins in San Francisco.  Here is an example of security window tint and some locations of installers https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/b00016706/

In conclusion, if you want to protect your car from break-ins in San Francisco, security window tinting is a smart investment. It can act as a deterrent, reduce visibility, increase durability, and provide additional benefits such as heat reduction and UV protection. By adding this extra layer of protection to your car’s windows, you can enjoy greater peace of mind and reduce the risk of becoming a victim of car break-ins.

Open Letter to SFO Director Ivar Satero

Dear Director Ivar Satero,

I am writing to you regarding the staffing of police officers at San Francisco International Airport (SFO). As you may be aware, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) is currently short-staffed, which means that there are fewer officers available to patrol the city and the airport. This has resulted in a flawed system where SFPD staffing at SFO is dependent on the staffing levels of police officers in the city. This has resulted in a situation where the airport is not receiving the level of police coverage it requires, which can compromise public safety.

It is clear that the current system is not working, and I would like to propose a solution that I believe will be more effective. I suggest that the airport should be patrolled by a combination of SFPD officers and San Francisco Sheriff’s Office deputy sheriffs. This would provide a more stable and reliable source of police coverage at the airport, as it would not be dependent on the staffing levels of the SFPD in the city.

To be specific, I propose that the airport be staffed 50% by SFPD officers and 50% by SFSO deputy sheriffs. This would ensure that the airport receives the necessary level of police coverage at all times, regardless of the staffing levels of the SFPD in the city. This would also enable the SFPD to better allocate their resources and focus on improving public safety in San Francisco.

I understand that this may require some changes in policies and procedures, but I believe that it is a necessary step to ensure public safety at the airport. I urge you to consider this proposal and take the necessary steps to make it a reality.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Ken Lomba
SFDSA President
415-696-2428

SFPOA Released False Info to the Public

On January 14, 2023 at 8:12 PM, the San Francisco Police Officers Association (SFPOA) released false information to the public, causing confusion and mistrust among the community. In a post on Twitter, the SFPOA attempted to dissuade the idea of Deputy Sheriffs filling police positions at the San Francisco International Airport (SFO), the Ports, and/or the Marine Unit by falsely stating that the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office (SFSO) is understaffed by 430 Deputy Sheriffs.  This is false, the Sheriffs Office is not understaffed by 430 Deputies.

SFPOA False Info to Public

The San Francisco Police Department is currently understaffed to the point where it has to send its investigators to patrol several days a week, this is a serious matter as it impacts public safety and criminal investigations (reported by Lou Barberini GBTBNews). The understaffing problem is a critical issue that needs to be addressed immediately.

Normally, law enforcement agencies work together and help each other to achieve the goal of public safety. However, it appears that the SFPOA is more interested in protecting their monopoly on law enforcement instead of keeping San Francisco safe. Public Safety does not appear to be a priority for the SFPOA, if it was, why are they working so hard to block Deputy Sheriffs from providing staffing relief at the SFO, Ports, or Marine Unit?

Allowing Deputy Sheriffs to take over those locations would allow the SFPD to redirect its police officers to the City to respond to emergencies and calls for service, thereby increasing public safety. It is essential that the SFPOA and the SFDSA work together to achieve the common goal of keeping San Francisco safe. The public deserves nothing less. The SFPOA must understand that their actions have consequences and they must be held accountable for their words and actions. The community deserves transparency and honesty from its law enforcement agencies. The SFPOA should be focused on finding solutions to improve public safety, rather than spreading false information and attacking their colleagues in law enforcement.

It is worth noting that SFDSA President Lomba, the man being attacked by the SFPOA, had spent Christmas Day with his family delivering hot meals to Deputy Sheriffs that spent their Christmas Holiday working to protect others. This shows the dedication and commitment of the SFDSA in ensuring public safety and the contrast with the SFPOA’s behavior.

San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs are Highly Trained Individuals

San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs are highly trained individuals who play a crucial role in maintaining law and order within the city. As 830.1 Peace officers, they have the same level of training and qualifications as a SFPD Police Officer.

The training process for a recruit deputy begins with a 6.5-month Post Certified Academy, which is currently held at the South Bay Regional Academy in San Mateo or Santa Rosa Junior College. Once the recruit graduates from the POST Academy, they must pass a four-week Board of State & Community Corrections Certified Jail Corrections Course.

SF Deputies

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office places a strong emphasis on ongoing training for their sworn staff. In addition to the 24 Hrs. of Certified POST training that must be completed biennially, all SFSO sworn staff attend an additional 24 Hrs. of certified Board of State and Community Corrections BSCC training annually. This means that San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs receive more mandated training than a police agency.

In addition to standard training, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office has trained their sworn staff on a 16 Hr. mandatory Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) which emphasizes de-escalation and situational awareness when dealing with individuals with mental disorders, developmental disabilities, and altered mental status. This training was conducted FY 2019-2020 and was again offered FY 2021-2022. Deputies also receive 4 Hrs. of Force Option Simulator Training which emphasizes situational awareness, de-escalation, and Use of Force decision making. All sworn personnel attended in FY 2019-2020 and recently attended 4 hrs. during the recent 2021-2022 cycle.

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office also has a POST certified Field Training Program (Like the SFPD) and was one of the first agencies to develop their manual to meet the new POST requirements.

In terms of investigations, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office has their own Criminal Investigations Unit staffed with trained investigators who receive the same POST Training as SFPD Investigators. All investigators have attended the 76 Hr. Robert Presley Institute of Criminal Investigation Training and 40 Hr. Behavioral Awareness Training Institute. They are trained and equipped to investigate all crimes that fall under the Sheriff’s Office jurisdiction, including non-custody felony crimes in the field.

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office also has an Emergency Services Unit (ESU) with 150 Sheriff’s Deputies assigned to it. All ESU staff are chosen after passing a written and physical exam and receive a 40-hour course that covers advanced firearms training, crowd control, building search, active shooter training, and medical rescue. ESU members receive an additional 40 Hrs. of training minimum.

San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs are highly trained individuals

The Special Response Team (SRT) is a highly trained unit within the ESU. To qualify, members must first be part of the ESU and pass a physical challenge, firearms proficiency exam, simulation exercise, written exam, and oral interview panel. Chosen members are then required to attend an 80 Hour SWAT school and receive additional monthly training.

Finally, the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office has a K-9 Unit, where a K-9 Team must attend a 40 hour dog handler course. A K-9 handler must partake in 16 Hrs. of monthly training minimum to meet POST standards to maintain basic patrol and/or detection proficiency.

In conclusion, San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs are well-trained and highly qualified individuals who play a vital role in maintaining law and order within the city. They undergo rigorous training and ongoing education to ensure they are equipped to handle any situation that arises.