operated right down to data. and the total organization has changed. >> have there been other -- commissioner chan: have there been other studies? >> not that i'm aware of. there are logs of their activities, but the commission, to my knowledge, has never had a study specifically on the patrol specials. commissioner chan: i know you listed a cup -- couple other cities. what's the closest parallel to san francisco? >> interestingly enough, there is nothing quite like the patrol specials. there are some things like public-private partnerships. there is one in cincinnati ohio. that is dwindling.

i think they are down to two folks. they were under the auspices of the city but the chief himself had the authority to take a look at exactly where they were working. that's gone by the wayside. when you look at other cities. they are a security company. they will tell you they are a security company. they can only work on property that is privately owned. they can perform the services. portland, oregon, there was

portland, oregon, there was a service formed by former law enforcement personnel, and they wanted the ability to perform, and so the district hired additional security and is actually working with officers that the benefits district is paying for. they pay for three officers and the police department is paying for one. that's something you can ask for further clarification with the controllers, but you can't let your police department be subpoena planted. -- supplanted. there is no reason san francisco can't do some things that plndplnd -- port land does. now there are other cities have that gone out and hired security to perform functions for them. but they can -- did it in a way that is under the private

directionway that is under the private direction and control. they are working for the city through the bit process, and they address the issues that the patrol speshes -- specials -- that the police department asks them to do. here they do what the private company wants, not the police department. seattle has folks in distinctively different uniforms. teal, if i remember when i saw them. they are out on the street. they have a radio system that goes into their business district, and if something happens, they call on their radio, they call it over to the business district, and the business district gets in touch with the police. it is a very harmonious relationship.

there is no reason they can't have a good relationship, there is no reason they can't be doing some kind of scurt problem. again, it has to be open inform all security, -- open to all security, not just a select few. and if you are asking them to do a service for the city, if has to be a specific service. and you set the pay rate. they are not going under the table to noshte -- negotiate with a private company. there are many different models. there is nothing like san francisco's models with patrol specials, but there are things that will meet the needs of their clients.

this is a good service they are providing to their clients. they are not asking them to provide a service to the city, and you can't is ask them to. commissioner chan: you provided a list of recommendations as we decide what we will do next on pages 30 and 31. of this list, what do you or three would you prior ties? >> first and second would be the radios. then you need to know exactly where they are, when, and what they are doing. so their accountability. i guess along with that is to ensure that if they are carrying a firearm, that they have their premiums up to date. i would suggest that you check

that liability. those are first and foremost you can do immediately. the uniforms, kauai honestly, they should all have light -- quite honestly, they should have light-blue shorts. in this morning's newspaper, there is a picture of a patrol special with -- i don't care if you ask them what they would like to wear. it is not the color, it is that it is not the s.f.p.d. it is not the s.f.p.d. similar uniform. commissioner chan: so it -- >> i would suggest it doesn't like like the highway patrol and the sheriff's, but if they want white shirts and blure pants, whatever the scheme might be,

quite honestly, whatever they are comfortable with as long as it is not the sfpd look-alike uniform. >> thank you for all of the work that you have done. it is my understanding that there are 64 beats. patrol specials have dwid the city of san francisco into -- divided the city of san francisco into 64 areas. and that these beats can be sold among themselves similar to taxi medallions, and that means there are some may be 4 -- 42 beats or geographic areas of the city now that are not covered by pafrol specials. and if that understanding is

correct, then does that lead us to the point that some of the neighborhoods that have hadded benefit where police officers have to go to a particular location then those neighborhoods where the businesses can't afford police specials wouldn't have access to police specials are at a disadvantage for the lack of access? >> you talked about something really important. this negotiation of paying for police services -- this notion of paying for police services is not a system you want to be endorsing. people pay taxes. you have the police department. they breaux provide services

consistently. that's not a good thing to be happening in the city. if vings choose to have additional security, they are -- if vings choose to have additional scurt, they are welcome to it. you have this notion that t1 you have this notion that the sfp depfment isn't quite up to muster and you need to pay us in order for you to be safe. not something that is a good message to be spending to the community. if they want security, they can have it, but i don't think it is the position of the city to say they must have it. when you talk about this map, there is a plap they old, and when you measure this, tell me what's in that beat.

no one could. so when we asked for the list of the beats owned by patrol specials we found somewhere between 16 and 22 that have been owned? some that might not have to be baleds sold because -- from the list i'm not sure who rightly owns that. there is record of any time there is a transfer, that is one fee that the commission does get back it is this notion that this private person is selling private property, but the commission that overseas can't have a hand in it. so yeah, there are 64.

somewhere between 16 and 22 are owned by these patrol specials. others may be working or not being workled. it is impossible to tell what areas of the city have patrol specials. by and large, you have a few that are using them in an active way, warehouse building, private homes. >> but a point of clarification, are they not acceptable or not available to certain other areas of the city and the business yes in those areas, because the beat is -- perhaps we don't know who opens the beat, but the person who does own the beat has just

allowed it to become inactive. the special patrols that belong on the all-in-one beat can't provide services in a beat they don't own or what. >> they can share the beat, but it has to be authorized. >> by the beat owner? >> yes. >> if an area doesn't have an active beat or someone actively working in it, they can't call up an individual patrol special and ask them to come and be there person unless they have a guard card, and there are many other guard cards across the city. they can phone up and say, can you come and watch my building.

can you stand guard at my a.t.m.? they can get the services, but not the ones labeling themselves patrol specialists. >> can we have an exact number of patrol specials and patrol systems out there? whether we start thd whole progress back in 202009 and 2008, we couldn't get a straight answer as to the number of patrol specialist police officers there are. do you have that number today, or is it wish dwriy-washy. >> it is firm based on the information that's been provided to the liason. that is 13 patrol specials that just changed recently and nine assistant patrol specials. 18 and 9.

thank you. vice president mazzucco: so these inactive patrol specials are -- >> one of the things we're trying to be careful of is keeping up-to-date numbers, so it isn't always kept up to what the sarge has every day. vice president mazzucco: so there are two that are still on the board that have resigned, eight ineligible. those that were unable to qualify or provide documents and be able to work. included with those are two individuals that are not able to

work because you cannot supervisor a beat whether you live here or 90 miles away, and it is also because threff some limitations. at the san francisco police department, there is no joffer sight for patrol -- oversight for patrol specials. miss hicks, have you had patrol specials you have had to send back and do you have jurisdiction over them? >> in answer to your question, commissioner mazzucco, if we receive complaints, we would refer those back to the police department. because we do not have jurisdiction over patrol specials. under the city charlter, the

office of sfen citizen complaints only has jurisdiction over sworn san francisco police personnel, so police officers. >> thank you. commissioner dejesus: the question i think he asked is, how many beats are inactive. the inactive beats, are those also considered part of the nine active? the inactive beats, do they have owners? >> no, there are 24 beats for

active owners. there are seven beats for inactive owners. 25 beats for retired owners, and the remaining are unused. commissioner dejesus: how many are there? >> i know there is a discrepancy of 66 and 64. i have a map in the office, and i physically counted them. >> you said there are 10 beats -- force >> 10 are unused. >> is there anything in our rule that pribblets certain people 23r getting a certain number of beats? >> it is supposed to be free. however there were beat owners that were allowed to purchase or to be transferred additional

beats, and i believe the reasoning was that some of the beats were not as condenced either with businesses or residents. some of the deats were combined, and therefore you can call it more beats. however the geographical area was smaller. the bulk of the beats are on the east end of the city. commissioner dejesus: i appreciate that. i think i got it. commissioner chan: in general, when you look at the toe talt of the city -- totality of the city, and you have 818,000 people in your total population, and you think of the number businesses in the city, the security services provided to the patrool specials, while

important to their product clients is very limited when you think of the private security. it is a small number we are talking b not to diminish their importance, but it is a small number. commissioner dejesus: the benefit they are giving now is to private citizens, not to the city as a whole. when you say the patrol specials don't fit into the vision of the police department, is that what you are focusing on? >> sure. that part of it, indeed. but the bigger part is, in order to fit under the missions, visions, and values of the san francisco police department and the commission, they need to be part of it.

they need to be working with that entity. they need to be under that direction and control. so if you think of you know, some of the actions taken by patrol specials, and this is on videotape, so i will talk about it, right now in the city you do not have a -- you have other ordinances that the police can use. in a video there is a patrol special where individuals are sitting on the street and they said, it is too crowded here, you need to move along. so for right now, that is not keeping with the mission, vision, and values. san francisco police commission or the fm police department themselves. those are some of the things i'm talking about. they send out, unauthorized from the san francisco police department, because they pr saying that they are better suited to be conducting community policing activities than the san francisco police department. that obviously is not in keeping

than we have been very hard for the last three years with all of your studies. and of course, prior to that as well. those are the things we're talking about. the fact you have an entity again on video identifying themselves as police and saying you are under arrest. that is not in keeping with the mission, and values. the patrol specials cannot make an arrest unless it is a skens citizen arrest unless it is a state statue which has to be a felony. the san francisco police commission has this mission, vision, and values. you are working toward that collectively, but you have this piece of you that is not. that is not in concert with that. that doesn't mean they are doing the right thing for their private clients, it just means

that's not what the city is moving toward. commissioner dejesus: you talked about the oversight commission. if i read it right, there is no day-to-day oversight of the activities, but if we force the rules more, would that take care of it? what did you find in terms of what oversight this actually has? >> the state has given you oversight. the sticky part is when you try to do that, are you met with a lawsuit. your ability to do that has been something for everyone to consider. you try to have any type of overside, t -- oversight, it is

missed by a whole. you can try to control, but right now, some of the policies and procedures -- they are monitoring of their hours,. there is no monitoring of their activities. you can try to regulate it, but how do you know know? it does not take away the fact that in the end, they are not

working for you, and you cannot direct and control what they do. you can't move them and ask them to leave one client site to go to another client site. that is not in the best interest of you to have folks who are doing this function that you can't direct and control. the other thing is to provision. your police department there is a chain of command. there is supervision. you don't have that notion. someone might think, well, let's just put that in place. let's have more oversight. right now, if you think about the number of active professionals that you have, you have two complaints with sfpd.

>> the more oversight, someone makes that suggestion, we'll just have more oversight. what you are doing is going into another direction. you are taking away from what the sfpd sees as its way to be more engaging. they are exceeding our expectations sm -- expectations. there are opportunities for volunteers. have you more reserves now than you have patrol specials and the patrol specials can be free to go about their business. >> thank you. thank you very much. what struck me most of all is

the condition of liability. the cheefer -- president marshall: thank you. thank you very much. what struck me most of all is the condition of liability. we try to get our arms around all the issues here, and i think it was commissioner sparks that we need a study to know the facts. commissioner mass scow has also taken a front -- mazzucco has

also taken the lead on this. >> i did want to add one thing if i could. while i did add one individual patrol special out of uniform, i did want to point out that that is something that happens blatelantly and uniformly, the disregard for it. there are certain things they are allowed to do. we have had them come in uniform and they are not working at the time and they do have a firearm on, so we wanted to point out it wasn't just that one individual patrol special, but there has been a blanket disregard. and we looked through the stacks and stacks of the sign-in sheet from the district stations, and there is better conformans now to the interim rules but you still have patrol specials who

are fuse today adhere to that. i don't want you to think it was just that one individual. >> do you have sticks to show that -- statistics to show that people were shot at more? do you have crime stats for the city? that's one of the things we hear, and i want to know if there is anything to back that up. >> sure. days good question. we're pretty good in the policing profession. we can hon monitor how many officers have been shot or willed on duty. less when it comes to private security. we have not seen this varying difference. when you look at the studies done on color and perception, people see that the depark colors are reserved for those in authorities, and they feel the lighter color is more approachable.

there is one-on-one contact. there is not any evidence that someone wearing a lighter contact is could be -- your own california highway patrol wears a light color. the sheriffs here wear a light color. if anyone -- there is no evidence that points to a light color being somewhat more vullnerable to being injured. president marshall: thank you very much for all of your work here. we will take public comment on this now. if i can just, by a show much hands, how many people want to make comments on this. that's not too bad.