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

June 13, 2023

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

June 6, 2023

Operant 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

San Francisco’s Escalating Crime Rates Linked to Misguided Jail Population Control

June 2, 2023

PRESS RELEASE

The alarming increase in crime rates throughout San Francisco can be directly attributed to Mayor London Breed’s misguided ideology of manipulating the jail population, resulting in a concerning number of bed vacancies. Recent revelations shed light on the concerning consequences of this flawed approach and the urgent need for change.

Despite the prevalence of crime in the city, San Francisco’s jails continue to exhibit a puzzling pattern of bed vacancies. On average, the jail population is being manipulated to maintain an artificially low average of 800 inmates per day, while a staggering 400 beds remain vacant. This raises serious questions about the city’s commitment to holding criminals accountable and ensuring public safety.

In light of the escalating crime rates, it is only reasonable to expect that the jails would be at full capacity. However, the deliberate manipulation of the jail population by Mayor London Breed’s administration demonstrates a disregard for the safety and well-being of San Francisco’s residents. The empty beds stand as a stark reminder of the failure to enforce consequences for criminal behavior.

San Francisco is facing a crisis that demands decisive action. The prioritization of reducing incarceration has resulted in a system that fails to provide adequate deterrence for criminals. This flawed approach not only undermines public safety but also sends a message that criminal activity will go unpunished.

The safety and security of the community should never be compromised in the pursuit of misguided ideologies. Mayor London Breed and city officials must recognize the urgent need for change and reassess their strategies. It is imperative to prioritize the protection of law-abiding citizens, restore accountability in the criminal justice system, and ensure that the jails serve their intended purpose of detaining those who pose a threat to society.

San Francisco deserves leadership that upholds the principles of justice, prioritizes public safety, and addresses the concerns of the community. It is time for Mayor London Breed and her administration to take immediate action to rectify the shortcomings in the management of the jail population and restore confidence in the city’s commitment to combating crime.

Media Contact:

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

Safeguarding Officer Safety and Crime Prevention: Assessing the Implications of Assembly Bill AB93

May 30, 2023

Assembly Bill AB93, introduced by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, has ignited concerns among law enforcement professionals due to its potential to heighten safety risks and contribute to increased crime rates. This blog post aims to shed light on these pressing issues, emphasizing the profound ramifications of AB93, which could jeopardize officer safety and impede effective crime prevention efforts.

Exacerbating Safety Risks: AB93, if enacted, could significantly amplify safety risks faced by law enforcement personnel. By imposing the requirement of a signed form prior to conducting searches, the bill introduces time-consuming administrative tasks that divert officers’ attention from immediate threats. This heightened safety risk could create hazardous situations where officers are vulnerable to physical attacks, the retrieval of weapons, or the destruction of critical evidence.
Escalating Crime Rates: One of the primary concerns surrounding AB93 pertains to its potential impact on crime rates. The mandated delays resulting from the form requirement may enable individuals involved in criminal activities to evade detection, remove evidence, or continue engaging in unlawful behavior. This could result in a surge in crime rates and pose a direct threat to the safety and well-being of communities.
Undermining Law Enforcement Effectiveness: The proposed provisions in AB93 have the potential to undermine the overall effectiveness of law enforcement efforts. The increased administrative burden imposed by the bill may redirect valuable resources and impede proactive crime prevention strategies. This, in turn, could compromise officers’ ability to respond swiftly and proactively to emerging criminal trends, thereby weakening their capacity to maintain public safety.
Balancing Accountability and Public Safety: While ensuring accountability within law enforcement is crucial, it is imperative to strike a balance that prioritizes public safety. AB93’s provisions must be critically evaluated to prevent unintended consequences that hinder law enforcement’s ability to protect communities and deter criminal activities. A comprehensive approach is vital, considering the potential impact on crime rates and the intensified safety risks posed to officers.

Assembly Bill AB93, introduced by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, poses significant implications by heightening safety risks for law enforcement officers and potentially escalating crime rates. The requirement of a signed form before conducting searches may jeopardize officer safety and impede effective crime prevention efforts. Striking a balance between accountability and public safety is paramount to safeguarding communities and ensuring the optimal functioning of law enforcement agencies. It is essential to carefully analyze the potential consequences of AB93 and seek comprehensive solutions that prioritize officer safety and effective crime prevention strategies.

Stop these BAD IDEAS, VOTE THEM OUT!

Support Pro Public Safety Candidates and Ballot Measures in San Francisco

May 25, 2023

The San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association PAC plays a vital role in promoting the interests of public safety and law enforcement within our city. Our mission is to advocate for pro public safety candidates and ballot measures that will enhance the safety and security of our neighborhoods, protect our communities, and provide our brave deputy sheriffs with the resources they need to serve and protect.

Your generous contribution will make a significant impact on our ability to endorse and support candidates who share our vision of a safer San Francisco. By supporting these pro public safety individuals, we can ensure that our city’s law enforcement agencies have the necessary support, tools, and policies to effectively combat crime, respond to emergencies, and maintain peace and order.

Furthermore, your donation will allow us to back critical ballot measures that address key public safety issues, such as improving community policing efforts, investing in modern law enforcement technologies, and strengthening crime prevention programs. Together, we can shape the future of public safety in San Francisco and create a safer environment for all residents.

As a valued supporter, you have the opportunity to influence the direction of our city’s public safety policies and the well-being of our law enforcement officers. Your contribution to the San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association PAC will directly impact the success of our endorsed candidates and initiatives, fostering positive change within our community.

We invite you to join us in our mission to enhance public safety in San Francisco. Your generous donation of $25 will help us amplify our collective voice and bring about the necessary changes to protect our neighborhoods, families, and businesses.

To make a donation, please visit our secure online donation portal at https://fundly.com/san-francisco-deputy-sheriffs-association-pac Alternatively, you can mail your contribution or contact us directly at 415-696-2428 to discuss other giving options or answer any questions you may have.

Together, we can build a safer San Francisco for generations to come. We sincerely appreciate your consideration and support. Join us in our commitment to public safety and make a difference today.

Thank you for your unwavering support.

Sincerely,

Ken Lomba
SFDSA President
San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association PAC
P.O. Box 77590
San Francisco, CA 94107

Car break-ins are a major problem in San Francisco

March 4, 2023

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

SFPOA Makes Childish Attack on SFDSA

January 15, 2023

On January 14, 2023 at 8:12 PM, the San Francisco Police Officers Association (SFPOA) made a statement that was misleading and contained falsehoods. The SFPOA claimed that the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office (SFSO) cannot staff the jails, but this is not true. According to mandatory guidelines, SFSO Deputy Sheriffs are required to staff the jails. The SFSO staffs the jails on voluntary overtime or mandated overtime. The SFSO is working to increase recruitment and reduce overtime, and has made significant progress in recruiting new Deputy Sheriffs.

The SFPOA also claimed that the SFSO lacks the training required to perform their duties. This is also untrue. The SFSO has the same POST training certifications as police officers and more. The only additional training required by the California Peace Officers Standards of Training is an Aviation Security Training course, which is only a 40 hour course. The SFPOA is presenting this as a significant hurdle, but it is not. Additional training can be easily accomplished. See our current list of training in our article “San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs are highly trained individuals.”

The SFPOA also stated that the SFSO lacks the training to respond to a terrorist attack. The SFDSA strongly disagrees with this claim. In the event of a terrorist attack, the SFPD will turn to the SFSO for assistance. The SFSO has a long history of responding to large scale emergencies such as riots, the Loma Prieto Earthquake, and forest fires. The SFSO also responded to the recent COVID-19 pandemic and worked 24/7 to protect the public.

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office (SFSO) has a dedicated Emergency Services Unit (ESU) that includes a Special Response Team, a Crisis Negotiation Team, and a Radio Telephone Operator Team. These teams respond to emergencies within the Department, City, and County of San Francisco, as well as mutual aid requests from other jurisdictions. The ESU also includes a Mobile Field Force (MFF) that is trained to respond to major critical incidents, including Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) devices. The MFF is led by a Platoon Commander, an Executive Officer and is divided into four squads.

The San Francisco Police Officers Association (SFPOA) has misleadingly claimed that it is not possible for Deputy Sheriffs to work at the airport. However, the SFPD arrest data at the airport is minimal, with an average of approximately 300 arrests per year, and approximately 130 SFPD officers (staffing data from 2020). Additionally, the SFPD has 27 Sergeants at the airport, which is an unusual ratio of 1 supervisor to every 5 police officers. It is clear that the level of arrests at the airport is low and it would be a misuse of City resources to have SFPD at the airport. We will provide updated data as it becomes available.

As stated on Twitter prior to the SFPOA’s misleading post, it is possible for the SFSO to staff the airport. First, we can grandfather in any PD Officer close to retirement. Second, a percentage of the police officers at the airport can return to SF to patrol. And third, the SFDSA will work with the Sheriff to create a functional staffing plan and assist with recruiting. This can be done in a phased approach, not overnight.

SFPOA Released False Info to the Public

January 15, 2023

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.

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.

SFDSA Files Lawsuit Against SF Sheriff

August 18, 2022

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

SFDSA Demands Civil Grand Jury Investigation Against the Sheriff’s Office

June 21, 2022

San Francisco, CA, June 21, 2022 – – Staffing in the San Francisco Jails has become dangerously unsafe with inmates attacking inmates, nurses, sheriff deputies and civilian employees. The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office and City and County of San Francisco have understaffed the jails to a dangerously low level, they have not prioritized funding to hire deputies, they have not even prioritized retention of current deputies.

In an email from SFDSA President Ken Lomba to Sheriff Miyamoto, President Lomba stated that the SFDSA has been advocating for hiring and warning Sheriff’s Office Management about the staffing problems for over a decade. Two and a half years of which Miyamoto was Sheriff. President Lomba said that the increased burden of work due to intentional lack of hiring has turned into “sweatshop labor.” The SFDSA has filed a Civil Grand Jury Complaint demanding the Sheriff’s Office and the City and County of San Francisco be investigated.

Since 2014 there have been 3 separate reports from the SF Civil Grand Jury warning about the effects of going below minimum staffing levels and to expedite hiring instead of forced overtime. There was even a warning of a possible violation of Title 15 in the future if nothing changes. Unfortunately, the Sheriff’s Office has failed to hire the proper number of deputies to create a safe working environment for both the deputies and inmates. The minimum staffing levels have gotten worse, and bottom line: the deputies are exhausted.

In the past reports, the Grand Jury found that because of the dwindling number of total deputies employed by the City and County of San Francisco, the excessive overtime and shortage of bodies did not allow for the important inmate programs in existence let alone increase the inmate programs that were recommended. Furthermore, the recommended training for deputies could not take place or was inadequate to deal with the mental health and substance abuse as well as many other issues the housed population experiences.

Ultimately, this Grand Jury recommended on three separate occasions in 2014, 2016, and 2017 to “expedite hiring to reduce overtime.” The Grand Jury’s recommendations have never been followed and the situation has become untenable as the number of deputies is lower now than it was when this Grand Jury made these strong recommendations.

CCSF JAILS ARE NOW FALLING BELOW MINIMUM STAFFING REGULARLY

Just days ago, on June 9, 2022, Sheriff Miyamoto issued a memo to all City and County of San Francisco jail staff identifying his intentions of – operating below minimum staffing – for a period of the next 8-9 months! The City and County of San Francisco has clearly recognized the futility of giving the appearance of reaching minimum staffing and has now admitted that it cannot exercise its duty to do so.

The City and County of San Francisco is in fierce competition with its neighboring counties, Alameda and San Mateo, for jail staff. Alameda has been under a consent decree to hire more jail staff. It would be a shame for the City and County of San Francisco to be under similar governmental oversight. The City and County of San Francisco can expedite the hiring of staff but has not made it a priority, at the expense of the overworked and exhausted jails staff.

The Civil Grand Jury Complaint against the Sheriff’s Office and the City and County of San Francisco was filed on June 20th, 2022. This Grand Jury should demand answers from the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office as to why it has failed to comply with its 3 separate recommendations since 2014.

View the complaint here, Civil Grand Jury Complaint Against SF Sheriff