something and not because someone was there. the absence of crime is difficult to measure. just like any other security company out there, can make a difference at first glance? sure, but it is not to the benefit of the city itself in a measurable way. commissioner kingsley: thank you. president marshall: next commissioner? commissioner mazzucco? vice president mazzucco: thank you for the report. what you are saying is patrol specials can still exist, but not monitored by the police department and police commission but rather like other private security businesses. what are the other companies? >> i can give a few of the larger names. you have wells fargo, pinkerton. private security is a growing industry, and we don't dismiss that. we don't dismiss the notion that private security plays a role in our world today.

that is a basic fact. there is more of them than there are sworn law enforcement, so we don't dismiss their viability. what happens, whether, now you have this private firm that is under the city, and when we looked at what are the reasons why it needs to be under the city, we cannot find any. their biggest concern is if they don't concern issfpd, they don't get the respect with a meineke client, but for us that is not a compelling reason -- or they might not get a client, but for us that is not a compelling reason. security is a growing industry. i am sure they will have a fine livelihood outside the city, but there is nothing they are offering to do or that you could offer to them other than that the services you are now in this connection with the city and the sfpd. they can still help the citizenry, the private individual and private business. they just don't need to be under you.

vice president mazzucco: did you find anything about the rates that patrol specials sell to their clients? what are the rates they get? and does that compare differently from what private security businesses are getting. our patrol specials getting more because of this affiliation with the san francisco police department and the police commission? do they get an inflated rate because of that? >> the simple answer is, no, we did not get the information on exactly the rates. the patrol specials refused to give that to us and refused to give it to the commission. to do a great cost analysis for private businesses so that the look at the ancillary services we want for safety, and little bit is possible to do. i can give the range. there is a public web site that the patrol special supporters have that says between $20-$25. some others say $48. we have some correspondence from patrol specials that some might have been getting $75-$100 per

year. there is no consistency. what we had been asking for is give us the lowdown so we can understand if you are servicing this type of private client, what are they asking you to do. is it checking at night time when they're not there, checking a house when they're on vacation. they refused to do that, so we cannot provide the citizens with a good gauge of what private security costs and what patrol services cost. it is all over the board. it is anecdotal and we cannot give you anything definitive on that. vice president mazzucco: we as a commission have no control over the rates they are selling their services to the committee? and interestingly enough, you don't, where as in other areas you do. with cabs, the city regulates the cabs. every citizen knows when you get in the cap, the rates are on the back. that is defined. other regulatory boards in the

city have that liberty to place on people that have a cab at medallion -- that have a cab medallion. you don't have that. it could be anything. we don't know. vice president mazzucco: thank you. >> this is a difficult report for me and i see benefits to the patrol specials, looking at the report. it certainly paints a disturbing portrait regarding violations of the rules, oversight. the commission is not equipped to do oversight. and the liability. those are concerns. but let me ask you this, can you explain how the patrol specials can keep their business if they're not in the commission? >> we would suggest is something that goes a little against the rules. the rules state a patrol special cannot be secured a guard or have a security company at the

same time. one of the things we would suggest to the commission and the department is to have some type of transition time, where is the patrol special is interested in keeping their account that they can in fact apply for their guard card and obtain that while still being a patrol special. if it were to do that tomorrow, that would be against the rules and regulations, but you could put that into a transition plans to have time to inform their clients, which quite honestly, there is nothing that should prevent the client from hiring them unless they're telling them something that is not true. right now, they don't have powers of arrest unless it is a felony arrest, like any other private guard. the ability to carry a firearm, security guards are allowed to carry firearms, which there are specific laws about that. even though they're breaking the rule and not showing their

great step. and there are other ways that the city can use civilians. the government under justice has the volunteers in police services. that's been around since the 1990's, and that's a great service. the difference is, the police department enjoys the services of the volunteers, but then the police department can ask them to do certain things, which now you can't with the specials. commissioner dejesus: do you know how many reserve officers san francisco now has? is there a plan to increase reserves? >> i don't know the numbers now. i know there are been more added

recently. i'm sure someone from the police department can help me out. >> 42. >> it is growing as time goes on, and as this gets to be more the norm, and now it is growing. we do recommend that it is more. there are a lot of great reasons to use police reserve officers. sometimes you get folks at the end of their career and maybe they want to retire. sometimes people retire and they come back and they spend some time being a reserve. it is also a great recruiting route to get young folks involved in policing. and as reserves grow, there are more people working for the actual mission of the police department and can be deployed at the will of this police department to help out. commissioner dejesus: one of the things you mentioned, i remember you telling me is this unfairness. the city contracts for services.

we all contract for this particular service, and that it is unfair. can you eelaborate why you are concerned about that? >> sure. san francisco is one of the most low stress cities i've seen. so you have everything fair and open. so you set the rules and authority, but yet people cannot apply to you to be part of the patrol specials. then you have this advantage that -- you know, take a look at the patrol specials web site. they have pictures of the sfpd, pictures of the training academy. they have all this information that links them to the sfpd in really an unfair way. it makes folks think that this is part of the san francisco police department, and it is not . so that is an unfair advantage. the fact you are providing free

training for folks that have security guard level training is not fair. if i were to put my shoes in one of the other companies, maybe not one of the larger ones, but if i owned a small security guard company here in san francisco, i think i would be knocking on your door saying, how come i can't get free training? how come i can't listen to your police radio? all of those things are giving these individuals an advantage they shouldn't have. they shouldn't be on the system transmitting back and forth. commissioner dejesus: this commission has been struggling with the rules and san francisco being in violation of clets, so when you say they are not entitled, is that because they are police officers? >> yes, the california board has

done some things to safeguard itself by changing the call signs. a drill sergeant could call in with a call sign that could look very much like they were an officer so they could ask for something, like a plate number, or they could go up to a citizen and ask for identification. most people wouldn't know they weren't police. they could get that information and ask for information on that individual. they can secure sensitive information that is meant for law enforcement or the s.f.p.d. only to hear. if they want police or radios for their communication or they think it is a safety issue, they can have that. many other security companies do. when we looked at some otherans larry services across the country, many of those agencies

had their own radio. that's fine. they just shouldn't be on your radio. commissioner dejesus: do they have access to the police broad band? >> absolutely not. how they do it in other areas, in one city that we talked to, theans larry folks that -- the ancillary folks that were not members of the police department, they had a radio system that connected them to one another, and then if they saw something, their dispatch could call directly to the police dispamp. we thought that was a great use of radios. there was one company that hired security guards, and then they hired sworn personnel. instead of giving the security guard the police radio, the security guard give the police their radio. much better process. they are still connect today a

law enforcement service, but in a different way. they are providing the radio to the police department should something happen. makes good sense. >> i have two more questions. you talked about training. i think you called it 832 training. i have always been concerned about the amount of training. in terms of overall police training, can you give us a rough percentage of the training they get? is it a quarter of the training? if you know. if you don't know, that's fine. you made it sound like that's minimal training, and there is much more there that we are not providing. i would be krned about not giving all the proper education. >> we do have a list of the training, and i will give you where that is in -- you know what, i was told there is a liaison officer twho has that information. -- who has that information.

>> certainly who can say it quicker than i. but the basic course is four hours on fire arms and then 14 individual lessons that they get. >> if they are in the pie, is it a quarter of a training or half the training? does that increase our liability? >> i was thinking very minimally trained, but i would also like to say there are some patrol specials that have, on their own, gotten advanced training. i don't want to depist dismiss that. however the basic guidelines are minimal. it does not even meet the lowest reserve level in the state of california. commissioner dejesus: can you give me a percentage? yes, please. everyone wants to see you on quamra -- camera.

>> in the scheme of things, in terms of the overall police academy training, like a cadet coming up, you have an idea what the percentage is of that training that we are providing? >> if someone has a calculateor, i can give you the numbers. in terms of reskerve officers -- reserve officers, level one reserve officers receive the same as basic academy training, which is 990 hours of training. commissioner dejesus: 990? >> yes. they actually can work alone as peace officers. they all have sworn on-duty status. 41 have level-two status at this point. i pinn. ed officer tom.

he said there are applications for a september 11 test and there are 15 in back grounds at this point. >> i think what the commissioner would like to know is how much training do the reserves get and how much training got patrol specials get? >> the reserves will receive advanced officer training similarly the same as to what the sworn personnel as the sfpd duds. commissioner dejesus: 990 hours -- >> that's initial training. advanced officer training, the reserves receive the same advanced officer training as sfpd, sworn personnel, do everyone year. that 40 hours. at least 40 hours of advanced officer training. commissioner dejesus: so they get 40 hours training but to be alone you need 990 hours of training? >> if i could clarify.

there are three levels of reserve officers. levels one, two, and three. level one is the highest. to be at -- a level 1 reserve officer, you must complete the basic academy entry level training that sworn s.f.p.d. personnel also received. many attend other academies. and ca qualify to do so. there is an oornation in san francisco -- there is an orientation in san francisco for those officers. bi-annually they will also attend similar to what we do as sworn officers. >> i just have one quick question. >> if patrol specials are out on the streets, what type of training does the san francisco police officer have when he or she is out on the street. how many months do they spend in the police academy?

>> i believe it was six months at this point. >> and once they are out of the academy, how much time do they spend going through field training program. how many hours do they do in that program where they ride along with the training officer, and they are graded on a daily basis and they are graded for their termination or to keep in the police department. how many hours or months of field training do they have? >> i believe it is a rotation. it is going to be at least six months. >> we have eight months in the academy. during probationary status, are they also evaluated during the first year of their service? >> all of the sworn officers are evaluated by supervisors. >> we're talking about well over a year of full-time police training? >> the probationary period is a balance of 18 months of street time as well as the academy time. >> thank you. >> so either one of you can answer this. who set the training for the control specialist? is it the department?

is it in the charter? why is it just this one 40-hour course? >> the 40-hour course is for sworn personnel. the rules state that the patrol specials are to be offered at least 24 hours of training annually. what i did was select classes. commissioner dejesus: so it is our rule? >> yes. commissioner dejesus: i have one more question and then i see other commissioners have questions. for the commissioners to divest the patrol specials and let them move as a private entity, let's say that happens, do the patrol officers keep their beats? because beats are property

right. do they maintain those beats? if they were divested, would they be like regular security and just stay there? >> that's a great question. the city attorney's office could go through that with you, because that would be something they could handle and not us. yes, they do have property rights on that. i think you are getting into a very, very arduous area when you allow private citizens to act with authority on your streets. one of the problems with that is patrol specials are hired by private villages. the preist villages do not own the -- the private individuals do not own the street. the city owns the street. the city maintains the street.

this issue of patroling streets, is not a good one. why should they be patroling streets? they are not acting under the auspices of your law enforcement. when we looked at what happened, we saw patrol specials responding to calls for police service on the streets. in fact, one of them went down a one-way street the wrong way to answer that call. it is not a good idea to have folks not under your direction and patrol patroling your streets. it might have been good back in the day when there wasn't a san francisco police department. it is probably not the best idea for a contemporary city looking for contemporary policing sources to have anyone patroling streets unless they are under the direction and control of your police department.

commissioner dejesus: i have walked the streets, and i seen people in uniform moving along the street. i have been told, and there is no reason for me to doubt this, but when officer spinoza was shot, a lot of patrol specials took over and assisted in their district stations, and there were a lot of captains that rely on patrol specials and there are captains that have issues with them. they have been beneficial in that way. i wonder if there is anyway to coincide that benefit, because there is a benefit to the city. >> absolutely. one of the ideas we have is expansion to the city. and you have done that. and the numbers are higher than

whey anticipated the city being at at this point, with the numbers that have aapplied, the numbers penned, the numbers going through. that's your best bet for that additional help. commissioner dejesus: are you saying have them apply to be a reserve special? >> absolutely. there is nothing prohibiting from them to applying to be a reserve officer. they can apply like anyone else. nothing is stopping them from that. the best bet for the city and the best interest for the city is to certainly call upon your reserves. earlier i mentioned volunteers in police services. the city directs what they do. the community emergency response team, again, something that's recognized to mobilize citizens in a coordinated fashion. but quite honestly, if you ask someone that's been hired by someone else to come help you, you are getting into a gray area

there. who has the liability there. it is something that needs to be improved on the part of the police department to uniformly not have patrol specials engage in any form of police service. we know it has been past practice. it doesn't mean that it's been right. it is something that has to be corrected. >> i want to thank you. i haven't finished the report, but i have been brief, i have seen conclusion. there is a lot in the report, and i listened to your report, and there is a lot to digest here. i'm sure we'll have comments from other people, and this is a real struggle with that issue. president marshall: commissioner pan. commissioner pan: it looks like from my preliminary knowledge that the question before us is whether or not these issues that you have raised, lack of transparancy, the use of city

sources, the failure to follow a number of rules, and also the liability to the city, whether these costs, if it is worth our effort to address them. because it looks like there are number of these things that can be remedied. the question is, is it worth our time and resources to do that. i want to keep that question on the to hear from patrol the table because i want to hear from patrol specials. i want to hear from patrol specials what are the benefits to the community that you bring. i am hoping to hear from that and have the comment section. when it comes to speaking to the city, the more concrete you can be, the more helpful.

>> i was not the author of that. i do not know it intimately. it basically laid out steps the city could take for further community engagement. there were three studies on organization, boundaries, and foot patrol. there were several hundred recommend hundreds that came out of that. many of those p went into the pilot implementation of the reengineered tools for community engagement. they included, you know, greater networking with the community. they did community surveys. there are a lot of things that the police department has done to bring itself closer with the community. there were focus groups, and there was a lot of effort that went into those studies to change how the police department