Dotación de personal policial y jubilación diferida
¿Debería la Ciudad enmendar la Carta Constitucional para definir “agentes de policía juramentados a tiempo completo”; exigir que el Jefe de Policía prepare un informe y una recomendación sobre la futura dotación de agentes de policía juramentados a tiempo completo cada tres años en lugar de dos; exigir que la Comisión de Policía reporte anualmente al Consejo de Supervisores sobre la dotación de personal del Departamento de Policía; y crear un programa de cinco años con posibles renovaciones que permita a los agentes de policía seguir trabajando para el Departamento de Policía después de jubilarse, con pagos de pensión diferidos mientras trabajen?
Esta iniciativa de ley requiere 50%+1 de votos afirmativos para ser aprobada.
Resumen del Comité de Simplificación de la Boleta
Cómo es en la actualidad:
La Comisión de Policía (Comisión) supervisa al Departamento de Policía de San Francisco. La Carta Constitucional exige que el Jefe del Departamento (Jefe de Policía) presente un informe cada dos años a la Comisión. Este informe describe el número actual de agentes de policía juramentados con funciones plenas y recomienda los niveles adecuados de este tipo de agentes para los siguientes dos años siguientes. La Comisión debe considerar este informe y recomendación al momento de aprobar el presupuesto del Departamento.
La Carta Constitucional no define “agentes de policía juramentados a tiempo completo”.
El Sistema de Jubilación de Empleados de San Francisco (SFERS) es el sistema de jubilación y pensión para los empleados de la Ciudad. Según la Carta Constitucional, los agentes de policía son aptos para beneficios de jubilación, con pagos de pensión basados en su compensación, edad y tiempo de servicio. La Carta Constitucional no permite que los empleados de la Ciudad, incluidos los agentes de policía, continúen trabajando a tiempo completo para la Ciudad después de jubilarse. Pero la Ciudad puede volver a contratar a empleados de la Ciudad jubilados para que trabajen un número limitado de horas cada año mientras también cobran beneficios de jubilación.
La Propuesta:
La Propuesta F enmendaría la Carta Constitucional para definir a un “agente de policía juramentado a tiempo completo” como un agente con funciones plenas y jornada laboral de tiempo completo, con la excepción de aquellos con licencia a largo plazo, reclutas que están entrenando en la Academia de Policía y agentes asignados al Aeropuerto Internacional de San Francisco. Para reducir la carga administrativa, la iniciativa de ley exigiría que el Jefe de Policía proporcione un informe cada tres años, en lugar de dos, sobre los actuales agentes juramentados con funciones plenas, y que recomiende la futura dotación de personal policial a la Comisión. La Comisión informará cada año al Consejo de Supervisores (Consejo) sobre el progreso del Departamento en alcanzar sus objetivos de dotación de personal policial, incluyendo su objetivo de aumentar la representación de mujeres en el Departamento al 30% de los nuevos reclutas para 2030.
La Propuesta F establecería un Programa de Opción de Jubilación Diferida (DROP) para los agentes de policía que reúnan los requisitos. Los agentes de policía con los rangos de Oficial, Sargento e Inspector con funciones plenas, de 50 años en adelante y que tengan por lo menos 25 años de servicio idóneo con el Departamento u otra agencia del orden público, pueden participar. Los participantes continuarían trabajando a tiempo completo para el Departamento con sus actuales niveles de salario y beneficios. Los participantes deben aceptar realizar trabajo de patrullaje en los vecindarios o investigaciones, sin importar cuál haya sido su tarea anterior. Los participantes solo podrían participar hasta por cinco años. Los pagos de pensión que el participante hubiera cobrado al jubilarse se depositarían en una cuenta con impuestos diferidos y con intereses. Cuando el periodo de DROP acabe, los participantes deben dejar de trabajar para la Ciudad y recibirían sus pagos mensuales diferidos de pensión con intereses. El Consejo podría limitar el número de participantes en DROP.
La Propuesta F autoriza el programa DROP por un periodo inicial de cinco años. De ahí en adelante, el Consejo tendría la autoridad de continuar con el programa cada cinco años hasta que expire.
Un voto "SÍ" significa: si vota “sí”, usted quiere enmendar la Carta Constitucional para definir “agente de policía juramentado a tiempo completo”; exigir que el Jefe de Policía prepare un informe y una recomendación sobre la futura dotación de agentes de policía juramentados con funciones plenas cada tres años en lugar de dos; exigir que la Comisión reporte anualmente al Consejo sobre la dotación de personal del Departamento; y crear un programa de cinco años con posibles renovaciones que permita a los agentes de policía seguir trabajando para el Departamento de Policía después de jubilarse, con pagos de pensión diferidos mientras trabajen.
Un voto "NO" significa: si vota “no”, usted no quiere hacer estos cambios.
Declaración del Contralor sobre la Propuesta "F"
El Contralor de la Ciudad Greg Wagner ha emitido la siguiente declaración sobre el impacto fiscal de la Propuesta F:
Si la enmienda propuesta a la Carta Constitucional fuera aprobada por los electores, en mi opinión, tendría un impacto considerable en el costo de gobierno. Con base en las actuales suposiciones actuariales y políticas del Sistema de Jubilación, la enmienda ocasionaría un aumento en los costos a la Ciudad de entre $600,000 y $3 millones en el primer año. En los años subsiguientes, el impacto de costos podría variar de ahorrar aproximadamente $300,000 a costar hasta aproximadamente $3 millones anuales para el quinto año del programa.
La enmienda propuesta a la Carta Constitucional reestablecería un Programa de Opción de Jubilación Diferida (DROP). Los electores aprobaron una versión anterior de un DROP en febrero de 2008 (DROP 2008), que terminó en 2011 cuando el Consejo de Supervisores votó por no renovar DROP. Los participantes en DROP recibirán un salario y una cuenta de DROP en la que el Sistema de Jubilación de Empleados de San Francisco (SFERS) depositará pagos de pensión con una ganancia garantizada del 4%. Los participantes no serán aptos para ascensos. A diferencia del DROP 2008, esta enmienda a la Carta Constitucional especifica que los tenientes y capitanes no podrán participar, y los agentes que participen en DROP deben aceptar trabajo de campo o investigaciones. Esta enmienda a la Carta Constitucional también aclara que los agentes no pueden participar en DROP si solicitan y reciben una jubilación por discapacidad.
El costo exacto de DROP para la Ciudad dependerá de las decisiones de jubilación que tome cada agente de policía. Según las estimaciones de SFERS, si los agentes que siguen trabajando sin jubilarse optan por participar en DROP, DROP aumentaría los costos de la Ciudad en contribuciones a la pensión como empleador en $600,000 en el Año Fiscal 2025-26 y luego generaría ahorros de aproximadamente $200,000 a $400,000 al año entre el Año Fiscal 2026-27 y el Año Fiscal 2029-30. Por otro lado, si los agentes de policía ingresan a DROP en lugar de jubilarse cuando les corresponde, los costos de la Ciudad en contribuciones a la pensión como empleador aumentarían en $3 millones en el Año Fiscal 2025-26, se reducirían ligeramente a $2.6 millones en el Año Fiscal 2026-27 y el Año Fiscal 2027-28, y aumentarían nuevamente a aproximadamente $3 millones para el Año Fiscal 2029-30.
Cada cinco años, si no ocurre antes, la Ciudad tendría que evaluar el efecto del costo neto de DROP. Después de cinco años, el Consejo de Supervisores debe reautorizar o dar por terminado DROP. Dados los niveles actuales de dotación de personal policial y las tasas de contratación, DROP probablemente no reducirá a corto plazo el costo de contratación del SFPD.
En 2011, se estimó que DROP 2008 costaría a la Ciudad aproximadamente $6 millones al año debido a mayores contribuciones de la Ciudad como empleador a la pensión. Aunque esta enmienda aplicaría a menos empleados que la versión de 2008, esta experiencia histórica sugiere que es más probable que DROP genere nuevos costos a la Ciudad en lugar de tener un efecto neutral en cuanto a los costos o generar ahorros.
La enmienda propuesta también define quién es un “agente de policía juramentado a tiempo completo” y reduce la frecuencia con la que el Jefe de Policía tiene que informar de los niveles de dotación de personal policial a la Comisión de Policía de cada dos años a cada tres años. Esta frecuencia reducida puede generar ahorros mínimos al gobierno, pero a un nivel que no se puede estimar en este momento.
Cómo se incluyó la Propuesta "F" en la boleta
El 23 de julio de 2024, el Consejo de Supervisores votó 8 a 3 para incluir la Propuesta F en la boleta. Los Supervisores votaron de la siguiente manera:
Sí: Chan, Dorsey, Engardio, Mandelman, Melgar, Peskin, Safai, Stefani.
No: Preston, Ronen, Walton.
La declaración anterior es un análisis imparcial de esta iniciativa de ley. Los argumentos a favor y en contra de esta iniciativa de ley se presentan a continuación. El texto completo en inglés se puede encontrar en Texto Legal. Ciertas palabras utilizadas en el resumen se explican en Palabras que debe saber.
Los argumentos son las opiniones de sus autores y ninguna agencia oficial ha verificado su exactitud. Los argumentos se imprimen tal y como se presentaron. No se han corregido los errores de ortografía ni gramática de la versión en inglés.
Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition F
VOTE SÍ A LA PROPUESTA F: POR UN SFPD CON UNA DOTACIÓN COMPLETA DE PERSONAL POLICIAL
La Propuesta F reduce la pérdida constante de agentes de policía que estamos teniendo al crear un fuerte incentivo para que agentes de policía, inspectores y sargentos de primera línea del SFPD posterguen su jubilación por hasta cinco años para dedicarse al patrullaje de vecindarios y a las investigaciones.
El Departamento de Policía de San Francisco tiene una grave escasez de personal.
- Al SFPD le faltan más de 500 de los 2,074 agentes de policía con funciones plenas que se necesitan para mantener seguro a San Francisco.
- Cada año desde 2019, el SFPD ha perdido más agentes de los que puede reclutar. Lo que es incluso más alarmante es que casi 450 agentes más podrán jubilarse en 2030.
- El ritmo de las jubilaciones podría dejar al SFPD con una carencia de personal de casi 40% dentro de los próximos cinco años.
La escasez crónica de policías pone en peligro a la seguridad pública.
- Aumenta los tiempos de respuesta del 911 y afecta aún más la seguridad de nuestros habitantes, pequeñas empresas y turistas.
- Perpetúa la reputación de nuestra Ciudad como un lugar sin orden público donde abundan las organizaciones delictivas.
- Obliga a los contribuyentes a gastar mucho en horas extra de policías (casi el 20% del presupuesto para salarios del SFPD) para pagar más a unos cuantos agentes policiales con el fin de cubrir nuestras necesidades básicas de seguridad.
- Sobrecarga nuestro sistema de respuesta de emergencias, con el riesgo de agotamiento y un desgaste innecesario del bienestar físico y mental de los socorristas de nuestra Ciudad.
La Propuesta F ayudará a lograr un SFPD con una dotación completa de personal policial y mejorará la seguridad pública.
- La Propuesta F mejora los informes del SFPD para dar mejor seguimiento al reclutamiento de policías y cumplir con la promesa de San Francisco de reclutar un número considerablemente mayor de agentes mujeres para 2030.
- La Propuesta F es un plan rentable y de tiempo limitado para postergar las jubilaciones de los agentes de policía mientras San Francisco soluciona nuestra crisis de reclutamiento policial.
Más información en FullyStaffSFPD.org
Supervisor Matt Dorsey
Presidente del Consejo Aaron Peskin
Supervisora Catherine Stefani
Supervisora Myrna Melgar
Supervisor Rafael Mandelman
Supervisor Ahsha Safaí
Supervisora Connie Chan
Supervisor Joel Engardio
Rebuttal to Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition F
VOTE NO A LA PROPUESTA F: la doble percepción de pago no nos mantendrá seguros
Los proponentes están engañando a los electores. La mayor parte de sus argumentos no dicen nada sobre lo que hará en realidad la Propuesta F.
Dicen que el Departamento de Policía de San Francisco tiene una grave escasez de personal, pero la mayoría de los agentes se van después de 6 o 7 años. La Propuesta F solo se aplicaría a agentes de policía con más de 25 años de servicio.
Dicen que los contribuyentes tienen que pagar costos sumamente altos por horas extra, el 20% del presupuesto del SFPD, pero la Propuesta F obligará a los contribuyentes a pagar dos veces a los agentes de policía de mayor jerarquía porque podrán cobrar salarios y recibir depósitos bancarios de pagos de pensión al mismo tiempo. Esto permitirá que algunos agentes ganen hasta medio millón de dólares.
Lo que sabemos después de haber intentado este mismo programa entre 2008 y 2011 es que:
- Se promocionó que tendría un efecto neutral en cuanto a los costos, pero resultó ser sumamente caro.
- El Contralor emitió un informe que decía que el programa no ayudó a reclutar ni a retener agentes de policía.
- Los agentes de policía se estaban jubilando de manera anticipada para poder participar en este programa y estaban recibiendo en promedio más de $200,000 después de impuestos.
El SFPD dice que el número de reclutas está aumentando y que el tamaño de las clases ha regresado a los niveles de 2019.
Ayúdenos a protegernos de la información falsa e invertir en programas que de verdad nos mantengan seguros.
Vote no a la Propuesta F.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California
Chinese for Affirmative Action
Supervisora del Distrito 9 Hillary Ronen
Supervisor del Distrito 5 Dean Preston
Supervisor del Distrito 10 Shamann Walton
Defensor Público* Mano Raju
Comisionado de Policía* Jesus Yáñez
Excomisionado de Policía* Bill Ong Hing
*Únicamente con fines de identificación; el autor firma a título personal y no en nombre de una organización.
Opponent's Argument Against Proposition F
DIGA NO A LA PROPUESTA F: es derrochadora, ineficaz e injusta.
La Propuesta F es una repetición por parte de las personas arraigadas en el Ayuntamiento de una política que ya se intentó y que fue un fracaso enorme. Votar Sí a la Propuesta F sería un voto por un programa sumamente caro que los habitantes de San Francisco no pueden costear y que no nos mantendrá más seguros.
- DERROCHADORA: La Propuesta F obligaría a los contribuyentes a pagar a algunos agentes de policía hasta MEDIO MILLÓN DE DÓLARES porque les permite cobrar dos veces al recibir salarios y depósitos bancarios de pagos de pensión al mismo tiempo. No agregará ni un solo agente a las fuerzas del SFPD, a pesar de la muy conocida escasez de personal. Pagar dos veces a los agentes de policía que se están jubilando —incluidos aquellos que se jubilan mientras están siendo investigados por conducta indebida— no compensará los cientos de oficiales que se acercan a la jubilación cada año.
- INEFICAZ: San Francisco intentó este programa en 2008 y lo abandonó acertadamente en 2011 porque no había evidencia de que ayudaba a la ciudad a retener o reclutar agentes. La Propuesta F no ofrece ninguna razón para retroceder en el tiempo y regresar a una idea cara e ineficaz, especialmente en un momento en el que ya hemos aprobado el plan de retención más grande en la historia de la Ciudad y estamos dando a los agentes de policía de mayor jerarquía un pago adicional de retención que consiste en el 17% de sus salarios este año y el 20% para 2026.
- INJUSTA: ninguno de los otros trabajadores de seguridad pública de San Francisco –bomberos, trabajadores sociales, operadores del 911– reciben beneficios de retención a una escala tan grande, incluso cuando sus lugares de trabajo están enfrentando la misma escasez de personal.
Ahora que San Francisco está enfrentando un gran déficit presupuestario, cada dólar que desperdiciamos en la Propuesta F es un dólar que no podemos usar para atender las verdaderas inquietudes de seguridad pública.
Vote NO a la Propuesta F.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California
Asian Law Caucus
Chinese for Affirmative Action
Supervisora del Distrito 9 Hillary Ronen
Supervisor del Distrito 5 Dean Preston
Supervisor del Distrito 10 Shamann Walton
Defensor Público * Mano Raju
Comisionado de Policía* Jesus Yáñez
Excomisionado de Policía* Bill Ong Hing
*Únicamente con fines de identificación; el autor firma a título personal y no en nombre de una organización.
Rebuttal to Opponent’s Argument Against Proposition F
COMO PROFESIONALES DEL ORDEN PÚBLICO, PEDIMOS RESPETUOSAMENTE A LOS HABITANTES DE SAN FRANCISCO QUE SE NOS UNAN EN APOYO A LA PROPUESTA F
Como jefes actuales y anteriores de policía de San Francisco, escribiendo a título personal, juntos con la organización laboral que representa a los agentes de policía que han jurado proteger a nuestra Ciudad, exhortamos a los habitantes de San Francisco a apoyar la Propuesta F.
San Francisco necesita actualmente 2,074 agentes de policía con funciones plenas para proteger adecuadamente la seguridad pública en toda la ciudad, según la metodología con base en la carga de trabajo elaborada independientemente que los electores adoptaron en 2020. Lamentablemente...
- Actualmente, hacen falta más de 500 agentes en SFPD para cumplir con los niveles recomendados de dotación de personal; y
- El SFPD tendrá casi 450 agentes aptos para la jubilación en los próximos cinco años.
Aunque el SFPD está empezando a hacer verdaderos avances en el reclutamiento de nuevos agentes, se necesita un plan ambicioso de retención como la Propuesta F para tener la fuerza policial completa que los habitantes de San Francisco merecen.
San Francisco no es la única de las principales ciudades que compite por resolver una crisis nacional de escasez de personal policial que se produce una vez por generación. Pero en una ciudad que depende tanto de la seguridad y que recibe a viajeros cotidianos, turistas, convenciones y a nuestros propios habitantes, San Francisco simplemente no puede tener un SFPD sin el personal completo.
La Propuesta F es un plan elaborado cuidadosamente que ayudará a...
- incentivar a los agentes de policía experimentados para que posterguen sus jubilaciones por hasta cinco años;
- hacer hincapié en el patrullaje de vecindarios y las investigaciones;
- reducir al mínimo las costosas horas extra;
- mejorar la supervisión para reclutar a más agentes mujeres;
- ampliar los esfuerzos de conversión de puestos policiales que pueden ser ocupados por civiles; y
- cumplir la promesa de la reforma policial del siglo XXI.
Le exhortamos a votar Sí a la Propuesta F.
William Scott, Jefe de Policía*
Greg Suhr, ex jefe de Policía*
San Francisco Police Officers Association
*Únicamente con fines de identificación; el autor firma a título personal y no en nombre de una organización.
Paid Arguments in Favor of Proposition F
1
Vote sí a la Medida F.
La seguridad pública es primordial. San Francisco necesita más policías para proteger y servir a los residentes. Esta medida modificará los criterios para establecer los niveles recomendados de personal para oficiales juramentados y cambiará la frecuencia del informe sobre dotación de personal que el Jefe de Policía debe presentar, pasando de cada dos años a cada tres años.
Sin la aplicación de la ley y nuestro sistema de justicia penal, existe la posibilidad de caos descontrolado, violencia, robos y peligro en cada esquina de San Francisco. Los profesionales del orden pueden sentir orgullo y satisfacción en su trabajo de mantener a la sociedad segura y responsabilizar a quienes cometen delitos por sus acciones.
-La Propuesta F ayudará a mejorar la seguridad en los vecindarios y finalmente nos acercará a tener patrullas de barrio a pie.
-Es un plan rentable a cinco años para restablecer la dotación completa del Departamento de Policía de San Francisco (SFPD).
-Protegerá a las pequeñas empresas y finalmente pondrá oficiales de patrulla en nuestras calles.
Vote SÍ a la Medida F.
Coalition For San Francisco Neighborhoods
La(s) fuente(s) verdadera(s) de los fondos destinados a cubrir el costo de la impresión de este argumento: Coalition For San Francisco Neighborhoods.
2
Desde la pandemia, hemos tenido un problema masivo de personal para cubrir las posiciones vacantes en el SFPD. Nos faltan más de 500 oficiales para alcanzar el mínimo de dotación y no podemos graduar suficientes nuevos reclutas en nuestras academias de policía para ponernos al día. Entre los oficiales que se van a otras agencias de la ley y los que se jubilan, estamos perdiendo terreno en lugar de ganarlo en cuanto a la dotación completa.
La Propuesta F mantendrá a San Francisco más seguro al ayudar a frenar el flujo de jubilaciones, manteniendo a los oficiales experimentados en el trabajo y dándonos la oportunidad de recuperar terreno en la dotación mínima en los próximos años. Poner más oficiales en las calles ayuda a mantener a San Francisco más seguro mientras solucionamos el desequilibrio creado durante la pandemia.
Vote Sí a la Propuesta F.
Moe Jamil
Subprocurador de la Ciudad y Candidato a Supervisor, Distrito 3*
* Únicamente con fines de identificación; el autor firma a título personal y no en nombre de una organización.
La(s) fuente(s) verdadera(s) de los fondos destinados a cubrir el costo de la impresión de este argumento: Moe Jamil.
3
¡La seguridad pública no puede esperar! La Propuesta F hará una diferencia AHORA para aumentar y retener oficiales de policía en nuestros vecindarios.
El Departamento de Policía de San Francisco (SFPD) tiene una escasez de más de 500 oficiales para alcanzar el nivel mínimo de dotación de 2,074 oficiales “en servicio completo” requerido para mantener segura a nuestra ciudad. Es probable que esa escasez aumente a medida que cientos de oficiales de policía actuales sean elegibles para la jubilación pronto.
La escasez de policías se siente en toda nuestra ciudad. Desde tiempos de respuesta prolongados en emergencias y el tráfico abierto de drogas, hasta las investigaciones demoradas de robos de automóviles, los residentes de San Francisco exigen un cambio. Solucionar la escasez de policías no puede esperar.
La Propuesta F es una solución de sentido común que pone a los oficiales en las calles, realizando investigaciones, caminando por los vecindarios y haciendo el trabajo policial REAL.
La Propuesta F también reducirá la dependencia de horas extras costosas. Con los niveles actuales de baja dotación de personal, nuestros oficiales de policía están trabajando horas extras excesivas.
Al disminuir las horas extras, San Francisco ayudará a evitar el agotamiento de los policías. Eso reducirá la posibilidad de que oficiales sobrecargados y estresados se involucren en incidentes trágicos de uso de la fuerza que podrían resultar en lesiones o muerte. Esto podría salvar vidas y también ahorrar millones a los contribuyentes en costos legales.
Vote sí a la Propuesta F para calles y vecindarios más seguros.
Stop Crime Action
La(s) fuente(s) verdadera(s) de los fondos destinados a cubrir el costo de la impresión de este argumento: Sí a la F, San Franciscans for Full Police Staffing.
El único donante al comité receptor de la fuente verdadera de los fondos: No a la B, Detén el Impuesto Policial.
4
VOTE SÍ A LA F — POR UN SFPD CON EL PERSONAL COMPLETO
San Francisco puede y debe ser la ciudad grande más segura de Estados Unidos. Sin embargo, como todas las demás ciudades importantes de EE. UU., enfrentamos una crisis de dotación de personal policial que solo ocurre una vez por generación. A nivel nacional, es el entorno más competitivo para la contratación en agencias de la ley en la historia moderna.
Como Alcaldesa, he financiado nuevas estrategias agresivas para el reclutamiento de policías. Hemos hecho que el SFPD sea la agencia de una gran ciudad mejor pagada en la región para oficiales juramentados que empiezan, y ahora estamos viendo clases de academias de policía llenas de nuevo. También hemos visto resultados impresionantes, con contrataciones laterales de otras agencias de la ley.
Pero también se necesitan estrategias de retención para lograr la dotación completa del SFPD más pronto.
¡Por eso les insto a unirse a mí en apoyar la Propuesta F!
La Propuesta F...
- Incluye un Programa de Opción de Jubilación Diferida (DROP) rentable y de tiempo limitado, con salvaguardias clave para mejorar los servicios de seguridad y acelerar los tiempos de respuesta policiales.
- Crea un fuerte incentivo para que los oficiales de primera línea del SFPD, inspectores y sargentos posterguen sus jubilaciones por hasta cinco años, siempre y cuando trabajen en patrullajes de vecindarios o investigaciones.
- Mejora la supervisión de los esfuerzos de reclutamiento y conversión a civiles, al tiempo que enfatiza nuestro compromiso de alcanzar un 30% de mujeres oficiales para 2030. Y reducirá significativamente nuestra dependencia de horas extras obligatorias.
Estoy comprometida a lograr que el SFPD vuelva a tener personal completo, para que podamos detener el tráfico de drogas y el robo, y proteger a los residentes, negocios y ancianos vulnerables. Si usted también lo está...
¡Vote SÍ a la Propuesta F!
Alcaldesa London Breed
La(s) fuente(s) verdadera(s) de los fondos destinados a cubrir el costo de la impresión de este argumento: Sí a la F, San Franciscans for Full Police Staffing.
El único donante al comité receptor de la fuente verdadera de los fondos: No a la B, Detén el Impuesto Policial.
5
LA PROPUESTA F ES EL ENFOQUE CORRECTO PARA SOLUCIONAR LOS DESAFÍOS DE FALTA DE PERSONAL
Como profesional de la seguridad pública por casi 30 años, puedo dar fe de los desafíos históricamente sin precedentes que enfrentan actualmente las agencias de la ley cuando se trata de reclutamiento y retención.
La Oficina del Sheriff de San Francisco enfrenta desafíos similares, y la supervisión mejorada y el Programa de Opción de Jubilación Diferida (DROP) que propone la Propuesta F para el SFPD es un enfoque valioso. Es un programa rentable, de tiempo limitado, estratégicamente adaptado, que incorpora salvaguardias clave para garantizar que los participantes del DROP ofrezcan servicios de seguridad pública en primera línea.
Seamos realistas: nadie se beneficia de agencias de seguridad pública crónicamente con falta de personal, y mucho menos los contribuyentes, que terminan pagando más dinero por costosas horas extras obligatorias. La falta de personal también puede tener un gran impacto en la moral, la salud y la seguridad del personal de la ley. Y niega a los residentes de San Francisco los servicios de seguridad pública de alta calidad que merecen.
La Propuesta F es un enfoque inteligente. Incentivará a nuestros profesionales de seguridad pública más experimentados para que pospongan sus jubilaciones mientras continúan sirviendo a nuestra Ciudad. Y su éxito podría ofrecer un modelo importante para otros servicios de emergencia y agencias de la ley, incluida la mía, para mejorar la seguridad pública en San Francisco.
Por favor, únase a mí en votar SÍ a la Propuesta F.
Sheriff Paul Miyamoto*
* Únicamente con fines de identificación; el autor firma a título personal y no en nombre de una organización.
La(s) fuente(s) verdadera(s) de los fondos destinados a cubrir el costo de la impresión de este argumento: Sí a la F, San Franciscans for Full Police Staffing.
El único donante al comité receptor de la fuente verdadera de los fondos: No a la B, Detén el Impuesto Policial.
6
¡DEAN PRESTON Y LOS OPONENTES OFICIALES DE LA PROPUESTA F SON EXTREMISTAS QUE QUIEREN DESFINANCIAR A LA POLICÍA!
La ideología de Dean Preston es peligrosa para San Francisco y hace que nuestra Ciudad sea insegura.
Como Supervisor del Distrito 5, Dean Preston ha apoyado gastar dólares de los contribuyentes en bonos y reservas presupuestarias por un total de casi $6 mil millones, incluyendo más de $1.8 mil millones en esta elección solamente. Y sin embargo, llama a un modesto plan de $3 millones por año para postergar jubilaciones de policías y lograr la dotación completa del SFPD “un programa extremadamente caro que los habitantes de San Francisco no pueden costear”.
No le crean a Dean ni a estos hipócritas.
Dean Preston está "comprometido con desfinanciar a la policía" —sus palabras— y él y sus aliados políticos que ahora se oponen a la Propuesta F son en gran medida responsables de los desafíos de reclutamiento policial en San Francisco.
¡VOTE SÍ A LA PROPUESTA F PARA UN SFPD CON EL PERSONAL COMPLETO!
Scotty Jacobs, Candidato a Supervisor, Distrito 5
La(s) fuente(s) verdadera(s) de los fondos destinados a cubrir el costo de la impresión de este argumento: Scotty Jacobs.
Paid Arguments Against Proposition F
No se Presentaron Argumentos Pagados en Contra de la Propuesta F
Legal Text
Proposition “Police Staffing and Deferred Retirement”
Describing and setting forth a proposal to the voters at an election to be held on November 5, 2024, to amend the Charter of the City and County of San Francisco to define the term “Full-Duty Sworn Officer”; modify the criteria for establishing recommended staffing levels for sworn officers; change the requirement for the Chief of Police to submit a staffing report from every two years to every three years; and establish a new voluntary Deferred Retirement Option Program (“DROP”) for the period from July 2025 – July 2030, for eligible members of the Police Department (in the rank of officer, sergeant, or inspector) that allows those members to earn additional deferred compensation in the Retirement System for up to 60 months in exchange for agreeing to perform neighborhood patrol or investigative work.
Section 1. Findings.
(a) In the wake of an unprecedented global pandemic that strained emergency and public safety responder staffing everywhere — one of several factors leading to a nationwide decline in police recruitment numbers — cities like San Francisco struggle to recruit new officers and offset the unusually high number of retirements facing our Police Department.
(b) In testimony before the Board of Supervisors in 2023, a San Francisco Police Department (“SFPD” or “Police Department”) commander described the City’s police understaffing crisis as “catastrophic for the Department if we cannot balance the attrition,” warning that: “We are losing members at a far faster rate than we are hiring, and this pattern will continue, and that gap will continue to widen for the next few years — unless we are able to do something drastic.”
(c) Chronic police understaffing enables elevated levels of public disorder and public nuisance, which continue to overwhelm many parts of San Francisco. These problems include open-air drug scenes, brazen street-level drug dealing, deteriorating street conditions, vehicular and commercial smash-and-grabs, retail thefts and street-level fencing in stolen goods, graffiti and malicious vandalism, and myriad property crimes plaguing numerous San Francisco neighborhoods and tourist destinations. These conditions hinder San Francisco’s post-COVID-19 economic recovery and fuel a public health crisis in drug overdose fatalities.
(d) In March 2017, the Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution urging the Police Commission to form a Task Force, in collaboration with the Chief of Police, on Strategic Police Staffing for the purpose of determining the best methodology for establishing SFPD staffing levels. That Task Force endeavored to determine SFPD staffing levels using a workload methodology based on the demand for police services rather than utilizing other metrics such as population size.
(e) In 2020, San Francisco voters amended the Charter to require the Police Department to submit a report and recommendations to the Police Commission every two years using the workload methodology and directed the Police Commission to use the report to inform the approval of the Police Department’s budget.
(f) The workload-based process, developed in partnership with an outside independent consultant, produced an initially recommended SFPD staffing level of 2,176 full-duty sworn officers (in 2021), which was subsequently revised to 2,182 sworn officers (in 2022) and then to 2,074 sworn officers (in 2023).
(g) Although the City has made worthwhile progress in recent years to develop a workload-based methodology to calculate the number of full-duty officers required to meet San Francisco’s policing needs, SFPD’s full-duty staffing level has dropped precipitously — by more than 23% — since 2020. Given the added urgency presented by the impending retirement of many officers, adjusting the method for establishing recommended minimum SFPD staffing levels — together with incentives to defer looming retirements with a focus on increasing deployments for patrol work and investigations — is prudent public policy.
(h) The urgency of addressing San Francisco’s chronic police understaffing crisis is not limited to public safety imperatives. It is creating needlessly expensive and wasteful inefficiencies, requiring significant overtime to run a short-staffed Police Department. In recent fiscal years, overtime has accounted for as much as 20% of SFPD’s entire salary budget. The reliance on overtime also burdens an already-understaffed workforce, increasing the risk of officer burnout and taking a toll on the physical and mental well-being of officers and their families.
(i) The City has made strides in hiring by approving the most competitive entry-level wages for new officers in the entire Bay Area. Additionally, through April of 2024, SFPD has made notable progress in recruiting lateral hires from other law enforcement agencies, with nearly one-in-four sworn officer hires having prior experience and certification in policing.
(j) Because lateral hires require significantly less time than newly hired recruits to qualify for deployment, this Charter Amendment aims to incentivize additional lateral hiring. It does so by extending to lateral hires the opportunity to apply their prior service toward eligibility for a new voluntary Deferred Retirement Option Program (“DROP”), thereby enhancing the value of a program historically focused on retention to new recruits as well.
(k) In 2008, the voters approved a Charter Amendment establishing the original DROP for certain members of the SFPD who had served at least 25 years and who were at least 50 years old. A deferred retirement program, like DROP, is a program that allows an employee who is eligible to retire to continue working while simultaneously drawing a pension. In the original DROP, participating officers would continue working at their prior salary and benefits while the City placed their monthly pension into an interest-bearing account (at 4% annual interest) that the employee would receive at the end of their participation in the DROP. During their participation in the DROP, officers were ineligible for promotion and the additional time served would not count towards added pension benefits. The original DROP was discontinued in 2011.
(l) Drawing on lessons from the previous DROP as well as best practices from other jurisdictions across California, this proposal contains significant reforms that: (1) limit DROP eligibility to the frontline ranks of officer, sergeant and inspector, with supervisory ranks from lieutenant through chief ineligible for the program, (2) require DROP participants to perform neighborhood patrol or investigation work, and (3) require participants to remain actively working for SFPD during their participation to address certain abuses observed in other jurisdictions.
(m) This Charter Amendment aims to accelerate favorable public safety impacts and help San Francisco achieve full police staffing by (1) restoring police staffing levels to the Charter and carrying forward the spirit of the 2020 Charter Amendment by periodically updating this number based on a scientific workload analysis, and (2) establishing a voluntary DROP program that would be offered to eligible members of the Police Department, to attract and retain sworn officers who will be deployed to district stations for patrol or investigative work.
Section 2. The Board of Supervisors hereby submits to the qualified voters of the City and County, at an election to be held on November 5, 2024, a proposal to amend the Charter of the City and County by revising Sections 4.127 and replacing expired text in Sections A8.900 through A8.910 to read as follows:
NOTE: Unchanged Charter text is in plain font.
Additions are single-underline italics Times New Roman font.
Deletions are strike-through italics Times New Roman font.
Asterisks (* * * *) indicate the omission of unchanged Charter subsections.
SEC. 4.127. POLICE DEPARTMENT.
The Police Department shall preserve the public peace, prevent and detect crime, and protect the rights of persons and property by enforcing the laws of the United States, the State of California, and the City and County.
The Chief of Police may appoint and remove at pleasure special police officers.
The Chief of Police shall have all powers which are now or that may be conferred upon a sheriff by state law with respect to the suppression of any riot, public tumult, disturbance of the public peace, or organized resistance against the laws or public authority.
DISTRICT POLICE STATIONS. The Police Department shall maintain and operate district police stations. The Police Commission, subject to the approval by the Board of Supervisors, may establish additional district stations, abandon or relocate any district station, or consolidate any two or more district stations.
BUDGET. Monetary awards and settlements disbursed by the City and County as a result of police action or inaction shall be taken exclusively from a specific appropriation listed as a separate line item in the Police Department budget for that purpose.
POLICE STAFFING.
By no earlier than October 1 and no later than November 1 in 2025 and every odd-numbered third calendar year thereafter, the Chief of Police shall transmit to the Police Commission a report describing the Ddepartment’s current number of full-duty sworn officersFull-Duty Sworn Officers and recommending staffing levels of full-duty sworn officers Full-Duty Sworn Officers infor the subsequent two three fiscal years. Full-Duty Sworn Officers means full-time sworn members of the Department except those assigned to the San Francisco International Airport, those on long-term leaves of absence, and Police Academy recruits. The report shall include an assessment of the Police Department’s overall staffing, the workload handled by the dDepartment’s employees, the dDepartment’s public service objectives, the dDepartment’s legal duties, and other information the Chief of Police deems relevant to determining proper staffing levels of Full-Duty Sworn Officers full-duty sworn officers. The report shall evaluate and make recommendations regarding staffing levels at all district stations and in all types of jobs and services performed by full-duty sworn officers Full-Duty Sworn Officers. By no later than July 1 in 2028 and every odd-numberedthird calendar year thereafter, the Police Commission shall adopt a policy prescribing the methodologies that the Chief of Police may use in evaluating staffing levels, which may include consideration of factors such as workload metrics, the Department’s targets for levels of service, ratios between supervisory and non-supervisory positions in the Department, progress toward the Department’s “30 by 30 Pledge” to increase the representation of women in police academy recruit classes to 30% by 2030 and to ensure that police policies and culture intentionally support the success of women officers throughout their careers, whether particular services require a fixed number of hours, and other factors the Police Commission determines are best practices or otherwise relevant. The Chief of Police may, but is not required by this Section 4.127 to, submit staffing reports regarding full-duty sworn officers Full-Duty Sworn Officers to the Police Commission more frequently than every three even-numbered years.
Beginning in 2025, tThe Police Commission shall hold a public hearing regarding the Chief of Police’s staffing report by December 31 in every year in which the Chief of Police submits a staffing report between October 1 and November 1 odd-numberedcalendar year. The Police Commission shall consider the Chief of Police’s most recent report in its consideration and approval of the Police Department’s proposed budget every fiscal year, but the Commission shall not be required to accept or adopt any of the recommendations in the report.
The Board of Supervisors is empowered to adopt ordinances necessary to effectuate the purpose of this sSection 4.127 regarding staffing levels including but not limited to ordinances regulating the scheduling of police training classes.
Further, the Police Commission shall initiate an annual review and submit the following reports to the Board of Supervisors annually for the Board’s review: (1) a report on progress, obstacles, and additional needs, if any, for the successful recruitment and retention of Full-Duty Sworn Officers and to achieve and maintain the Department’s recommended staffing levels; (2) a report monitoring the progress toward the Department’s “30 by 30 Pledge,” as described above, including a description of the Department’s recruitment plan and an outline of milestones to achieve the pledge’s goals; and (3) a report on opportunities and plans to civilianize as many positions as possible and submit that report to the Board of Supervisors annually for review and approval. Beginning on January 1, 2030, the Board of Supervisors may by ordinance amend the reporting requirements in this paragraph.
PATROL SPECIAL POLICE OFFICERS. The Commission may appoint patrol special police officers and for cause may suspend or dismiss patrol special police officers after a hearing on charges duly filed with the Commission and after a fair and impartial trial. Patrol special police officers shall be regulated by the Police Commission, which may establish requirements for and procedures to govern the position, including the power of the Chief of Police to suspend a patrol special police officer pending a hearing on charges. Each patrol special police officer shall be at the time of appointment not less than 21 years of age and must possess such physical qualifications as may be required by the Commission.
Patrol special police officers may be designated by the Commission as the owners of a certain beat or territory which may be established or rescinded by the Commission. Patrol special police officers designated as the owners of a certain beat or territory or the legal heirs or representatives of the owners may dispose of their interest in the beat or territory to a person of good moral character, approved by the Police Commission and eligible for appointment as a patrol special police officer.
Commission designation of beats or territories shall not affect the ability of private security companies to provide on-site security services on the inside or at the entrance of any property located in the City and County.
POLICE DEPARTMENT DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION PROGRAM (“DROP”)
A8.900 PREAMBLE ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE OF PROGRAM.
(a) It is critical to the health, the safety, and economic vitality of the City and County of San Francisco, that the City be able to recruit new Police Officers, and retain veteran Police Officers. Recent experience has demonstrated that the City's Police Department has had difficulty recruiting qualified Police Officers, and, more significantly, has had difficulty retaining the services of veteran Police Officers.
(b) There is a highly competitive labor market for the services of Police Officers. Additionally, due to the historical hiring patterns in this Department, hundreds of Police Officers will become eligible for normal service retirement in the next three to five years. The City Police Department is already three hundred officers below the Charter mandated staffing level.
(c) In order to address this recruitment and this retention problem, through this measure the voters establish a voluntary Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) which would be offered to members of the Police Department in order to create an incentive for the retention of experienced Police Officers, and as well, to attract new Officers.
(d) Specifically, as well, the voters intend that this Charter provision, if adopted, shall be "cost neutral" to the City; that is, it shall not impose new costs upon the City as a consequence of the participation by Police Officers in the DROP.
(e) Finally, in order that the cost impact of the DROP may be assessed, this measure additionally provides that at the end of the third year after the implementation of the Program, the Board of Supervisors, pursuant to data provided by the Police Department along with an analysis by the Controller of the City and County and the consulting actuary of the Retirement Board, shall determine whether the Program has been cost-neutral, and whether in light of its achievement of the goals of the measure, it should be continued for an additional three year term, and thereafter, subject to similar evaluations.
(a) Establishment. Sections A8.900 through A8.910 of the Charter hereby establish a voluntary Deferred Retirement Option Program (“DROP”).
(b) Purpose. The purpose of the DROP is to facilitate the retention and recruitment of police officers, with the ultimate goal of having a fully-staffed police force.
A8.901 ELIGIBILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION PROGRAM.
(a) Sworn members of the Police Department occupying the rank of Police Officer (currentlyClassification Code Q2-Q4 as of 2024), Sergeant (currentlyClassification Code Q50-Q52 as of 2024), or Inspector (currentlyClassification Code 0380-0382 as of 2024) at their date of entry into the DROPProgram, shall be eligible to participate in the DROP for up to a maximum of 36 60 months from their date of entry into the DROPProgram, provided they otherwise meet the eligibility standards set forth in Section A8.901(cb). Sworn members of the Police Department occupying the ranks of Sergeant (currently Q50—Q52) and Inspector (currently 0380-0382) at their date of entry into the Program, shall be eligible to participate in the DROP of up to a maximum of 24 months from their date of entry into the Program, provided they otherwise meet the eligibility standards set forth in Section A8.901(c).
(b) Sworn members of the Police Department occupying the ranks of Lieutenant (currently Q60—Q62) and Captain (currently Q80—Q82) at their date of entry into the Program shall be eligible to participate in the Program for a maximum of 12 months from their date of entry into the Program, provided that they otherwise meet the eligibility standards set forth in Section A8.901(c). No sworn member of the Police Department occupying a rank above that of Captain shall be eligible to participate in the Program.
(c) To be eligible to participate in the DROP, a sworn member occupying one of the eligible ranks must additionally be an active employee of the San Francisco Police Department, have at least 25 years of service credit as a sworn member of the Department, including any service as a member of the San Francisco Airport Police or service credit granted through a lateral transfer,; and be at least 50 years of age at the time of entry into the DROPProgram; and . Additionally, a member must be either a “full duty sworn officerFull-Duty Sworn Officer” as that term is useddefined in Charter Section 4.127 or a member currently assigned to the San Francisco International Airport. Reciprocity must be established prior to participation in the DROP and the member must exit the DROP and retire from the reciprocal plan concurrently. As a condition of participation in the DROP, a sworn member shall agree to be assigned to a district station within the Field Operations Bureau to perform neighborhood patrol work, or to the Investigative Bureau to conduct investigations, As a condition of participation the sworn member mustand shall further agree to that they shall terminate their employment with the City through retirement at the conclusion of their participation in the DROPProgram.
A8.902 EFFECT OF DISABILITY ON CONTINUED PARTICIPATION.
(a) If, after a member becomes a participant in the DROP, the member shall becomes incapacitated for the performance of duty by reason of any bodily injury received in or illness caused by the performance of duty, said member will be eligible to apply for a retirement for incapacity and be subject to the same eligibility requirements provided elsewhere in this Charter as though the participant was not enrolled in the DROP. If a member receives a retirement for this duty related incapacity, said retirement shall be in lieu of the benefits provided in accordance with these DROP provisions, and the participant shall be paid an industrial disability retirement benefit as if the participant had never entered the DROP. Participation in the DROP terminates on the date the Retirement Board approves a DROP participant's application for disability retirement, after which no DROP distribution(s) shall be made. The DROP participant shall be paid an industrial disability retirement allowance as if they had never entered the DROP.
(b) If, after a member becomes a participant in the DROP, the member shall becomes incapacitated for the performance of duty by reason of any bodily injury received or illness not related to the performance of duty, said member will be eligible to apply to terminate participation in the DROP in accordance with Section A8.906. The participant will be paid the balance credited in their DROP Account, and will begin to receive a monthly payment as determined under Section A8.903, including any cost of living adjustments to which the member would otherwise be entitled.
(c) In the event a member shall becomes temporarily incapacitated for the performance of duty while participating in the DROP, the member is entitled to disability benefits only as provided for in this Charter. The member is thus no longer a "full duty sworn officer," as defined in Section 4.127 eligible to participate in DROP under Section A8.901(cb), and therefore the member's service retirement payments will be suspended for the period during which disability benefits are received. The member's DROP enrollment shall be extended for the period during which disability benefits were received, provided that this extension may not exceed 30 months one-half of the permitted maximum participation period for the rank occupied by the member at the time of enrollment in the DROP.
(d) In the event a member who is participating in the DROP applies for a retirement for incapacity, and the application remains unresolved at the conclusion of their DROP participation period, that member must leave the DROP when their participation period concludes, but they shall be permitted to continue on disability status with the Department until such time as their application is finally determined. In no event, however, shall any such member receive the distribution of their DROP Account until their disability retirement status is finally determined.
(e) Members waive any right to apply for or be granted a disability pension once they have taken distribution of the funds in their DROP account.
A8.903 THE EFFECT OF PARTICIPATION IN THE DROP UPON PENSION BENEFIT CALCULATIONS.
Upon the voluntary entry of a qualified member into the DROP, that member's Retirement System benefits, including survivor benefits, shall be frozen, and shall not be increased as a result of any additional service time, increase in age or compensation earned by the member while they are participating in the DROP. During the period of a member's participation in the DROP, the monthly service pension payment described herein shall be increased by any cost of living adjustment to which the member would otherwise be entitled, if retired, during the period of their participation in the DROP, pursuant to the terms of the retirement plan which applies to the member.
A8.904 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DROP ACCOUNT.
(a) The DROP Account is an account established for book-keeping purposes within the Retirement System for each member who elects to enter the DROP.
(b) Commencing with the first pay period after the entry of a member into the DROP, and for each pay period thereafter so long as the member participates in the DROP, the service pension (including any Cost of Living Adjustments) to which the member would otherwise be entitled based on their compensation, age, and length of service as of their date of their entry into the Program, shall be credited monthly into a DROP Account established within the Retirement System for each individual participant.
(c) A participating member, to the extent permitted by law and regulations established by the Retirement Board and the Board of Supervisors, may direct the crediting into that member's DROP Account the dollar value of any compensatory time off, accrued unused vacation, or accrued Sick Pay, if any, to which the member may be entitled, in lieu of receiving a payout of those amounts upon the date of entry into the DROP.
(d) The DROP Account into which the member's monthly service pension is credited shall also be credited on a monthly basis with interest at an annual effective rate of 4%four percent throughout the period of the member's participation in the DROP.
A8.905 RIGHTS OF SURVIVING SPOUSE, DOMESTIC PARTNER, OR DEPENDENTS.
(a) If a member shall die by reason of an injury received in, or illness caused by the performance of duty during the period of their participation in the DROP, the member's qualified surviving spouse, qualified registered/certified domestic partner, or other qualified dependents provided for in this Charter shall receive a death allowance pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Charter as if the member had never elected to enter the DROP. Whichever of the member's qualified surviving spouse, qualified registered/certified domestic partner, or other qualified dependents provided for in this Charter is entitled to receive this allowance may, instead of receiving the benefit under this paragraphsubsection (a), elect to receive a non-work related death benefit as specified in subsectionparagraph (b) below.
(b) If a member shall die during the period of their participation in the DROP for non-work related causes, the surviving qualified spouse, qualified registered/certified domestic partner, or other qualified dependents provided for in this Charter, shall be entitled to a post-retirement continuation allowance, along with any amounts credited to the deceased member's DROP Account, determined as if the participant had elected to voluntarily withdraw from the DROP under Section A8.906 on the participant's date of death. Such payments shall be made on the basis of beneficiary elections made by the member at the time of theirhis or her entry into DROP, and updated from time to time, as set forth in Section A8.905(d).
(c) In order for a surviving spouse or registered/certified domestic partner to be qualified for the monthly allowance described in this sSection A8.905, the member must have been married, or have established a domestic partnership within the time limits specified by this Charter. In order for surviving dependents to be qualified for the monthly allowance described in this sSection, such dependents must satisfy the requirements of the retirement provisions of this Charter. In any circumstance where the eligibility requirements specify the member's date of retirement, those requirements must be met at the date of entry into the DROP.
(d) A member who elects to participate in the DROP may designate a beneficiary for the proceeds of the member’s DROP Account in writing, not later than the time of entry into the DROP. The member may change the designation at any time prior to the distribution of the DROP Account. If the designated beneficiary predeceases the participating member, and the member becomes deceased before designating a new beneficiary, any distribution of the proceeds of the DROP Account shall be made to the estate of the member, pursuant to law.
(e) Notwithstanding the above provisions, a member's designation of a DROP Account beneficiary shall be subject to community property obligations, if any, under applicable California law.
A8.906 TERMINATION OF PARTICIPATION IN THE DROP.
(a) A member's participation in the DROP shall be terminated, other than by death or disability, by the first occurrence of any of the following: (1) the member's completion of the applicable DROP participation period set forth in Section A8.901(a) or (b); (2) the member's voluntary termination of employment while a DROP participant; (3) involuntary termination of the member's employment; provided, however, that distribution of the member's DROP Account shall be deferred during the pendency of any hearing or appeal of the member's termination of employment. Should the member be reinstated to employment, the member may continue to participate in the DROP for the full duration of the member's original participation period. Any time during which the member was excluded from DROP participation shall not be deducted from the member's maximum participation period set forth in Section A8.901(a) or (b).
(a) DROP participation shall be terminated by the first occurrence of any one of the following events:
(1) Upon the member's completion of the 60-month DROP participation period, or upon their voluntary exit from the DROP at any time during the participation period.
(2) Involuntary termination of employment. At the member’s request, distribution of the DROP account will be withheld while the appeal of the member’s termination is pending. Should the member be reinstated, the member may continue to participate in the DROP if the account has been withheld. The period of the DROP participation will continue under the terms of the original application.
(3) Death of the member.
(4) Approval of disability retirement benefits under the terms of this Charter.
(5) Voluntary termination of employment prior to the completion of the DROP participation period.
(b) No interest shall accrue after any one of the events set forth in subsection (a) terminating the DROP.
A8.907 EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF THE MEMBER DURING PARTICIPATION IN THE DROP.
(a) During the period of a member’s participation in the DROP, the member shall continue to receive the regular compensation attached to the rank occupied by the member at the time of enrollment in the DROPProgram, and the member shall have all of the rights, privileges, benefits, and obligations of employment, including health benefits, attached to said rank, and shall be subject to all of the other terms and conditions of active employment in their respective rank and assignment. No member shall be eligible for a promotion during the time of their participation in the DROP.
(b) Notwithstanding the continued receipt by a participating member of the regular compensation and benefits attached to the rank and assignment which they occupy during their time in the DROP, no participating member shall receive service credit or compensation credit for retirement purposes pursuant to this Charter on account of their participation in the DROP. The member shall be subject to the employee contribution, as required by this Charter for all other active members of the Police Department, into the Retirement System. The City and County need not continue to make its required contributions for any DROP participant. Member contributions made during a participation in the DROP shall be deemed a contribution to the general assets of the Retirement System, and shall not be a part of the member’s DROP Account.
A8.908 COMPLIANCE WITH TAX LAWSAND IMPLEMENTATION.
(a) It is the intent of the voters that the DROP shall not jeopardize in any way the tax qualified status of the Retirement System under Section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended from time to time, including, but not limited to, Section 415 of the Code, as amended.
(b) The Board of Supervisors shall adopt ordinances to implement the DROP, including to repeal or amend Administrative Code Sections 16.63 through 16.63-10 as necessary and appropriate to conform to revisions in the DROP as enacted at the November 5, 2024 election, and the Retirement Board shall adopt such rules as may be necessary to implement the DROP, regulate investment and distribution of the DROP contributions, establish forms and procedures for designating beneficiaries of the DROP Account, and all such other matters as may be necessary, in its discretion, to implement the Program, including the revisions as enacted at the November 5, 2024 election, by no later than July 1, 20082025 and to assure its tax-qualified character.
A8.909 DETERMINATION OF COST NEUTRALITY REAUTHORIZATION.
(a) The implementation of the DROP shall not result in any net increase in cost to the City. This determination shall take into account the costs associated with payroll, the expenditures associated with the recruitment and training of Police Officers, the costs of conducting academies for such recruits and trainees, the Field Training Officer costs, the retirement contributions made by members participating in the DROP, and the City, and the City's share of the return on the investment of the DROP funds, along with any other cost or savings elements related to the implementation of the Program. Notwithstanding this objective, the DROP shall be given a sufficient trial period to determine whether, as implemented, it is cost-neutral to the City as so defined. By no later than December 15 in the fifth year after the effective date of the DROP and every fifth year thereafter, the Board of Supervisors must act by motion to either reauthorize the DROP for an additional five-year period without amendment, or, if the reauthorization motion fails, allow it to expire.
(b) Not later than April 15, in the third year after the effective date of the DROP, a joint report prepared by the Controller of the City and the consulting actuary of the Retirement System documenting the net cost effect of the Program shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors, and the Board shall determine by majority vote whether, on the basis of said report, the Program shall be renewed for an additional period of time as specified by the Board, but in no event beyond an additional three years.
(bc) By no later than December 15 in the fifth year after the effective date of the DROP, the Board of Supervisors, pursuant to data provided by the Police Department along with an analysis by the Controller of the City and County and the consulting actuary of the Retirement Board, shall determine the cost of the DROP, and whether in light of its achievement of the goals of the measure, it should be continued for an additional five-year term, and thereafter, subject to similar evaluations. The net cost effect of the DROPProgram shall be similarly evaluated periodically thereafter, pursuant to a schedule established by ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors by majority vote; provided, however, that in no event may such an evaluation be conducted less often than every three five years after the initial evaluation.
(c) The Board of Supervisors may by ordinance reduce or cap the number of new DROP requisitions available for the upcoming fiscal year. In setting any limit on the number of new DROP requisitions, the Board of Supervisors may consider the number of Full-Duty Sworn Officers then employed by the Police Department.
(d) If the Board of Supervisors determines not to renew the DROPProgram is not renewed by ordinance, those members then enrolled shall be permitted to complete their DROPProgram participation pursuant to the terms in effect when they entered into the DROPProgram.
(e) Should the DROP expire under subsection (a) and following the completion of participation in the DROP under subsection (d), the City Attorney may cause Sections A8.900 through A8.910 to be removed from the Charter.
A8.910 WITHDRAWAL OR ROLLOVER OF DROP ACCOUNTS.
(a) Upon the termination or conclusion of a member's participation in the DROP, the member shall be paid a lump sum equal to the balance in the member’s DROP Account, or, pursuant to the member's instructions, that balance shall be paid as a direct rollover into a qualified retirement plan. The Retirement Board shall establish rules, and may develop such forms as may be appropriate, regarding distribution of the DROP Account proceeds, the rollover of such proceeds into a qualified retirement plan, and the time periods within such which distributions may be made.
(b) Upon the voluntary withdrawal of a member from the DROP, or the expiration of their participation period, the member shall be deemed to be retired on a service pension and shall then commence receiving directly the monthly service pension amount calculated pursuant to Section A8.903, including any cost of living adjustments to which the member would have been otherwise entitled during the time of their participation in the DROP, and shall, for all other purposes under this Charter and sState law be deemed to be a retired member of the Police Department.
Section 3. At the February 5, 2008 election, the voters approved the addition of Sections A8.900 through A8.910 to the Charter, thereby establishing the Police Department Deferred Retirement Option Program (“DROP”). It was a program with an initial three-year term, and would expire unless extended by the Board of Supervisors. In 2011, following its initial three-year term, the DROP was not renewed by the Board of Supervisors, and thus expired by operation of law. But Sections A8.900 through A8.910 have remained physically in the Charter, albeit without legal effect.
Notwithstanding the “NOTE” regarding fonts at the beginning of Section 2 of this measure, Sections A8.900-A8.910 of the Charter amendment have been prepared using fonts for existing text and amendments to existing text, merely as a convenience and in recognition that the prior language was never physically removed from the Charter. The net effect is that the words in Section A8.900-A8.910 designated according to the “NOTE” as in plain font for “unchanged Charter text” and in single-underline italics Times New Roman font for “additions” constitute the text being adopted by the voters at the November 5, 2024 election.