Proposition F | San Francisco Voter Information

Police Staffing and Deferred Retirement

Shall the City amend the Charter to define “full-duty sworn officer”; require the Police Chief to make a report and recommendation on future staffing of full-duty sworn officers to the Police Commission every three years instead of two; require the Police Commission to report annually to the Board of Supervisors on Police Department staffing; and create a five-year program with possible renewals allowing police officers to continue working for the Police Department after retiring, with pension payments deferred while they are working?

This measure requires 50%+1 affirmative votes to pass.

Digest by the Ballot Simplification Committee

The Way It Is Now:

The Police Commission (Commission) oversees the San Francisco Police Department (Department). The Charter requires the Chief of the Department (Police Chief) to submit a report every two years to the Commission. This report describes the current number of full-duty sworn officers and recommends adequate staffing levels of full-duty sworn officers for the next two years. The Commission must consider this report and recommendation when it approves the Department’s budget.

The Charter does not define “full-duty sworn officers.”

The San Francisco Employee Retirement System is the retirement and pension system for City employees. Under the Charter, police officers are eligible for retirement benefits, with pension payments based on their compensation, age and length of service. The Charter does not allow City employees, including police officers, to continue working full time for the City after retirement. But the City may rehire retired City employees to work a limited number of hours each year while they also collect retirement benefits.

The Proposal:

Proposition F would amend the Charter to define “full-duty sworn officer” to mean a full-time officer except those on long-term leaves of absence, recruits who are training at the Police Academy and officers assigned to the San Francisco International Airport. To reduce the administrative burden, the measure would require the Police Chief to provide a report every three years, instead of two, on current full-duty sworn officers and recommend future staffing to the Commission. The Commission would report annually to the Board of Supervisors (Board) on the Department’s progress on meeting its staffing goals, including its goal of increasing the representation of women in the Department to 30% of new recruits by 2030.

Proposition F would establish a Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) for eligible police officers. Full-duty police officers in the ranks of Officer, Sergeant and Inspector who are at least 50 years old and have at least 25 years of eligible service with the Department or another law enforcement agency could participate. Participants would continue to work full-time for the Department at their current salary and benefit levels. Participants must agree to perform neighborhood patrol work or conduct investigations, regardless of their previous assignment. Participants would only be allowed to participate for up to five years. The pension payments the participant would have collected upon retirement would be placed into a tax-deferred and interest-bearing account. When their DROP period ends, participants must stop work for the City and would receive their deferred monthly pension payments with interest. The Board could limit the number of DROP participants.

Proposition F authorizes the DROP program for an initial five-year period. Thereafter, the Board would have the authority to continue the program every five years until it expires.

A "YES" Vote Means: If you vote "yes," you want to amend the Charter to define “full-duty sworn officer”; require the Police Chief to make a report and recommend future staffing of full-duty sworn officers to the Police Commission every three years instead of two; require the Commission to report annually to the Board on Department staffing; and create a five-year program with possible renewals allowing police officers to continue working for the Department after retiring, with pension payments deferred while they are working.

A "NO" Vote Means: If you vote "no," you do not want to make these changes.

Controller's Statement on "F"

City Controller Greg Wagner has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition F:

Should the proposed Charter amendment be approved by the voters, in my opinion, it would have a significant impact on the cost of government. Based on the Retirement System’s current actuarial assumptions and policies, the amendment would result in increased costs to the City ranging from $600,000 to $3 million in the first year. In subsequent years, the cost impact would range from saving approximately $300,000 to costing up to approximately $3 million annually by the fifth year of the program.

The proposed Charter amendment would re-establish a Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP). The voters approved a prior version of a DROP in February 2008 (2008 DROP), which ended in 2011 when the Board of Supervisors voted to not renew the DROP. DROP participants will receive a salary and a DROP account in which San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System (SFERS) will deposit pension payments with a guaranteed 4% return. Participants will not be eligible for promotion. Unlike the 2008 DROP, this proposed Charter amendment specifies that lieutenants and captains will not be eligible and officers participating in DROP must agree to work in the field or in investigations. This Charter amendment also clarifies that officers may not participate in DROP if they apply for and receive a disability retirement.

The exact cost to the City of the DROP will depend on the retirement decisions of individual police officers. According to estimates from SFERS, if officers who would have continued to work, not retire, instead opt into the DROP, DROP would increase City pension employer contribution costs by $600,000 in FY 2025-26 and then generate savings of approximately $200,000 to $400,000 annually between FY 2026-27 and FY 2029-30. Conversely, if officers enter DROP when they would have otherwise retired, City pension employer contribution costs would increase by $3 million in FY2025-26, fall slightly to $2.6 million in FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28, and rise back to approximately $3 million by FY 2029-30.

Every five years, if not sooner, the City would be required to evaluate the net cost effect of the DROP. After five years, the Board of Supervisors must reauthorize or end the DROP. Given current police staffing levels and hiring rates, DROP will likely not reduce SFPD cost of hiring in the short term.

In 2011, it was estimated that the 2008 DROP would cost the City approximately $6 million annually in the form of higher City pension employer contributions. While this amendment would apply to fewer employees than the 2008 version, this historical experience suggests that the DROP is more likely to generate new costs to the City than it is to be cost neutral or generate savings.

The proposed amendment also defines a “Full-Duty Sworn Officer” and reduces the frequency of the Chief of Police’s required reporting on staffing levels to the Police Commission from every two years to every three years. This reduced frequency may generate minimal savings to government, but at a level that cannot be estimated at this time.

How "F" Got on the Ballot

On July 23, 2024, the Board of Supervisors voted 8 to 3 to place Proposition F on the ballot. The Supervisors voted as follows:

Yes: Chan, Dorsey, Engardio, Mandelman, Melgar, Peskin, Safai, Stefani.

No: Preston, Ronen, Walton.

The above statement is an impartial analysis of this measure. Arguments for and against this measure immediately follow. The full text can be found under Legal Text. Some of the words used in the ballot digest are explained in Words You Need to Know.

Arguments are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. Arguments are printed as submitted. Spelling and grammatical errors have not been corrected.

Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition F

VOTE YES ON F — FOR A FULLY STAFFED SFPD

Proposition F curbs our ongoing loss of police officers by creating a strong incentive for frontline SFPD officers, inspectors, and sergeants to postpone retirement for up to five years to focus on neighborhood patrol and investigations.

San Francisco’s Police Department is severely short-staffed.

SFPD is short more than 500 of the 2,074 full-duty officers needed to keep San Francisco safe.
Each year since 2019, SFPD has lost more officers than it can recruit. Even more alarming: nearly 450 more officers will become eligible for retirement by 2030.
The pace of retirements could leave SFPD short-staffed by nearly 40 percent within five years.

Chronic police understaffing endangers public safety.

It delays 911 response times and further impacts the safety of our residents, small businesses, and tourists.
It perpetuates our City's reputation of lawlessness full of criminal enterprises.
It forces taxpayers to spend heavily on police overtime — as much as nearly 20 percent of SFPD’s salary budget — to pay fewer officers more to meet our basic safety needs.
It overburdens our emergency response, risking burnout and taking a needless toll on the physical and mental well-being of our City’s first responders.

Prop F will help achieve a fully staffed SFPD and enhance public safety.

Prop F enhances SFPD reporting to better track police recruiting and fulfill San Francisco’s pledge to recruit significantly more women officers by 2030.
Prop F is a cost-effective and time-limited plan to postpone officer retirements while San Francisco fixes our police recruitment crisis.

Learn more at: FullyStaffSFPD.org

Supervisor Matt Dorsey

Board President Aaron Peskin

Supervisor Catherine Stefani

Supervisor Myrna Melgar

Supervisor Rafael Mandelman

Supervisor Ahsha Safaí

Supervisor Connie Chan

Supervisor Joel Engardio

Rebuttal to Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition F

VOTE NO ON F: Double-Dipping Won't Keep Us Safe

The proponents are misleading voters. Most of their argument says nothing about what Prop F will actually do.

They say that San Francisco's Police Department is severely short-staffed, but the majority of officers are leaving after 6 or 7 years. Prop F would only apply to officers with 25+ years of service.

They say that taxpayers are on the hook for paying extremely high overtime costs, 20% of SFPD's salary budget, but Prop F will force taxpayers to pay senior police officers twice by letting them double-dip into salaries and banked pension payments at the same time, allowing some individual officers to make up to a half a million dollars.

What we know from trying this same program between 2008 and 2011 is that:

It was sold as cost-neutral, but was proven to be incredibly expensive.
The Controller issued a report saying that the program did not help recruit or retain police officers.
Police officers were retiring early so they could participate in this program, and were taking home $200,000+ on average.

SFPD says that recruitment numbers are rising and that class sizes are back to 2019 levels.

Help us protect against misinformation and invest in programs that actually keep us safe.

Vote no on Prop F.

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California

Chinese for Affirmative Action

District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen

District 5 Supervisor Dean Preston

District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton

Public Defender* Mano Raju

Police Commissioner* Jesus Yáñez

Former Police Commissioner* Bill Ong Hing

*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.

Opponent's Argument Against Proposition F

SAY NO TO PROP F: Wasteful, ineffective, and unfair.

Proposition F is a city-hall insider re-do of a policy that’s already been tried and was a massive failure. Voting Yes on F would be a vote for an extremely expensive program that San Franciscans cannot afford, that won’t keep us safer.

WASTEFUL: Proposition F would force taxpayers to pay some individual officers up to HALF A MILLION DOLLARS by allowing them to double dip into salaries and banked pension payments. It won’t add a single officer to the ranks of SFPD despite the widely known staffing shortage. Paying retiring officers twice—including those who retire while under investigation for misconduct—will not compensate for the hundreds more officers approaching retirement every year.
INEFFECTIVE: San Francisco tried this program in 2008 and rightfully abandoned it in 2011 because there was no evidence that it helped the city to retain or recruit officers. Proposition F provides no reason to turn back the clock and return to an expensive, ineffective idea, especially at a time when we’ve already approved the biggest retention plan in the City’s history and are giving senior officers retention premium pay to the tune of 17% of their salaries this year and 20% by 2026.
UNFAIR: None of San Francisco’s other public safety workers – Firefighters, social workers, 911 dispatchers – receive such large-scale retention benefits even when their workplaces are facing major staffing shortages.

With San Francisco facing a major budget deficit, every dollar we waste on Proposition F is a dollar we can’t use to address actual public safety concerns.

Vote NO on Proposition F.

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California

Asian Law Caucus

Chinese for Affirmative Action

District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen

District 5 Supervisor Dean Preston

District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton

Public Defender* Mano Raju

Police Commissioner* Jesus Yáñez

Former Police Commissioner* Bill Ong Hing

*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.

Rebuttal to Opponent’s Argument Against Proposition F

AS LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONALS, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK SAN FRANCISCANS TO JOIN US IN SUPPORTING PROP F

As San Francisco’s current and former police chiefs — writing in our personal capacities — together with the labor organization representing police officers sworn to protect our City, we urge San Franciscans to support Proposition F.

San Francisco currently requires 2,074 full-duty police officers to adequately protect public safety citywide, according to the independently developed workload-based methodology voters adopted in 2020. Unfortunately…

SFPD is right now more than 500 officers short of recommended staffing levels; and
SFPD will have nearly 450 retirement-eligible officers over the next five years.

Although SFPD is beginning to make real progress in recruiting new officers, an ambitious retention plan like Prop F is necessary to achieve the fully staffed police force San Franciscans deserve.

San Francisco isn’t unique among major cities competing to solve a once-in-a-generation police understaffing crisis nationwide. But in a City as economically dependent on being safe and welcoming to commuters, tourists, conventions and our own residents, San Francisco simply can’t afford an understaffed SFPD.

Prop F is a carefully tailored plan that will help…

Incentivize experienced officers to postpone retirements for up to five years;
Emphasize neighborhood patrols and investigations;
Minimize costly overtime;
Improve oversight to recruit more women officers;
Expand civilianization efforts; and
Fulfill the promise of 21st century police reform.

We urge you to vote Yes on Prop F.

William Scott, Chief of Police*

Greg Suhr, Former Chief of Police*

San Francisco Police Officers Association

*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.

Paid Arguments in Favor of Proposition F

Vote yes on Measure F.

Public safety is paramount. SF needs more police to protect and serve residents. This measure will modify the criteria for establishing recommended staffing levels for sworn officers and changing the levels for the Chief of Police to submit a staffing report from every two years to every three years.

Without law enforcement and our criminal justice system, there is a possibility of rampant havoc, violence, theft, and danger everywhere San Francisco residents turn. Law enforcement professionals can take pride and satisfaction in their work to keep society safe and those responsible for crimes accountable for their actions.

-Prop F will help improve neighborhood safety and finally get us closer to having neighborhood Foot Patrols

-It's a cost effective, 5-year plan to restaff the SFPD

-It will protect small businesses and finally put beat cops on our streets

Vote YES on measure F.

Coalition For San Francisco Neighborhoods

The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Coalition For San Francisco Neighborhoods.

Since the pandemic, we have had a massive staffing problem filling open SFPD positions. We are over 500 officers short of minimum staffing and we cannot possibly graduate enough new recruits through our police academies to catch up. Between officers leaving for other law enforcement agencies and retirements, we are losing ground on full staffing, not gaining ground.

Prop F will keep San Francisco safer by helping stem the flow of retirements, keeping experienced officers on the job and give us a chance to make up ground on minimum staffing in the next few years. Putting more officers on the streets helps keep San Francisco safer until we can fix the imbalance created during the pandemic.

Vote Yes on Prop F.

Moe Jamil

Deputy City Attorney and Candidate for Supervisor, District 3*

*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.

The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Moe Jamil.

Public safety can’t wait! Prop F will make a difference NOW to increase and retain police officers in our neighborhoods.

The San Francisco Police Department is more than 500 officers short of the bare minimum 2,074-officer “full duty” staffing level required to keep our city safe. That shortfall will likely increase as hundreds of existing police officers are eligible for retirement soon.

The police shortage is felt across our city. From extended emergency response times and rampant open-air drug dealing, to delayed investigations of car break-ins, San Franciscans demand change. Fixing the police shortage cannot wait.

Prop F is a common-sense solution that puts officers on the streets, conducting investigations, walking through neighborhoods, and doing REAL police work.

Prop F will also reduce reliance on costly overtime. With current low staffing levels, our police officers are working excessive overtime.

By decreasing overtime, San Francisco will help avoid police burnout. That will lessen the possibility that overworked, stressed officers will get into tragic use-of-force incidents which can result in injury or death. This could save lives as well as save taxpayers millions in legal costs.

Vote yes on Prop F for safer streets and safer neighborhoods.

Stop Crime Action

The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Yes on F, San Franciscans for Full Police Staffing.

The sole contributor to the true source recipient committee: No on B, Stop the Cop Tax.

VOTE YES ON F - FOR A FULLY STAFFED SFPD

San Francisco can and should be the safest large city in America. Like all other major U.S. cities, however, we face a once-in-a-generation police staffing crisis. Nationwide, it's the most competitive environment for law enforcement hiring in modern history.

As Mayor, I've funded aggressive new strategies for police recruiting. We've made SFPD the best-paid major city in the region for starting sworn officers, and we're now seeing police academy classes full again. We've seen impressive results, too, with lateral hires from other law enforcement agencies.

But officer retention strategies are also needed to fully staff SFPD sooner.

That's why I urge you to join me in supporting Prop F!

Proposition F…

Includes a cost-effective, time-limited Deferred Retirement Option Program, or DROP, with key safeguards in place to enhance safety services and speed police response times.
Creates a strong incentive for frontline SFPD officers, inspectors, and sergeants to delay their retirements for up to five years — so long as they work in neighborhood patrols or investigations.
Enhances oversight on recruiting and civilianization efforts, while emphasizing our pledge to reach 30 percent women officers by 2030. And it will significantly reduce our reliance on mandatory overtime.

I'm committed to get SFPD back to full staffing, so we can stop drug dealing and theft, and protect residents, businesses, and vulnerable seniors. If you are, too...

Vote YES on Prop F!

Mayor London Breed

The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Yes on F, San Franciscans for Full Police Staffing.

The sole contributor to the true source recipient committee: No on B, Stop the Cop Tax.

PROP F IS THE RIGHT APPROACH TO FIX SHORT-STAFFING CHALLENGES.

As a public safety professional for nearly 30 years, I can attest to the historically unprecedented challenges law enforcement agencies currently face when it comes to recruiting and retention.

The San Francisco Sheriff's Office faces similar challenges, and the enhanced oversight and deferred retirement option program (or DROP) that Proposition F is proposing for SFPD is a worthwhile approach. It's a cost-effective, time-limited, strategically tailored program that builds in key safeguards to ensure that DROP participants deliver front-line public safety services.

Let's face it: no one benefits from chronically short-staffed public safety agencies — least of all taxpayers, who end up paying more money for costly mandatory overtime. Short-staffing can also take an enormous toll on the morale, health and safety of law enforcement personnel. And it denies San Franciscans the high-quality public safety services they deserve.

Prop F is a smart approach. It will incentivize our most experienced public safety professionals to postpone their retirements while they continue to serve our City. And its success could offer an important model for other emergency services and law enforcement agencies — including mine — to improve public safety in San Francisco.

Please join me in voting YES on Prop F.

Sheriff Paul Miyamoto*

*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.

The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Yes on F, San Franciscans for Full Police Staffing.

The sole contributor to the true source recipient committee: No on B, Stop the Cop Tax.

DEAN PRESTON AND PROP F'S OFFICIAL OPPONENTS ARE 'DEFUND-THE-POLICE' EXTREMISTS!

Dean Preston's ideology is dangerous for San Francisco and makes our City unsafe.

As District 5 Supervisor, Dean Preston has supported spending taxpayer dollars for bonds and budget set-asides totaling nearly $6 billion —including more than $1.8 billion in this election alone. And yet he calls a modest $3 million-per-year plan to postpone police retirements and achieve SFPD full staffing “an extremely expensive program that San Franciscans cannot afford”?

Don't believe Dean and these hypocrites.

Dean Preston is "committed to defunding the police" —his words — and he and his political allies now opposing Prop F are largely to blame for San Francisco's police recruiting challenges.

VOTE YES ON PROP F FOR A FULLY STAFFED SFPD!

Scotty Jacobs, Candidate for Supervisor, District 5

The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Scotty Jacobs.

Paid Arguments Against Proposition F

No Paid Arguments Against Proposition F Were Submitted

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 officers~~Full-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-numbered~~third 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 (~~currently~~Classification Code Q2-Q4 as of 2024), Sergeant (~~currently~~Classification Code Q50-Q52 as of 2024), or Inspector (~~currently~~Classification Code 0380-0382 as of 2024) at their date of entry into the DROP~~Program~~, shall be eligible to participate in the DROP for up to a maximum of 36 60 months from their date of entry into the DROP~~Program~~, 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 DROP~~Program~~; and ~~. Additionally, a member must~~ be either a “~~full duty sworn officer~~Full-Duty Sworn Officer” as that term is ~~used~~defined 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 must~~and shall further agree to ~~that they shall~~ terminate their employment with the City through retirement at the conclusion of their participation in the DROP~~Program~~.

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 ~~paragraph~~subsection (a), elect to receive a non-work related death benefit as specified in subsection~~paragraph~~ (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 their~~his 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 DROP~~Program~~, 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, ~~2008~~2025 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~~ DROP~~Program~~ 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 DROP~~Program~~ is not renewed by ordinance, those members then enrolled shall be permitted to complete their DROP~~Program~~ participation pursuant to the terms in effect when they entered into the DROP~~Program~~.

(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.