April 2, 2003

By A.C. Thompson

THE MASSIVE ANTIWAR demonstrations of late March generated jaw-dropping overtime bills, in excess of 2,000 arrests, and more than a few allegations of abusive behavior on the part of the police.

While Mayor Willie Brown and acting chief Alex Fagan have nothing but praise for the San Francisco Police Department's response to the protests, Ishmael Tarikh of Bay Area Police Watch says he's gotten 70 to 80 phone calls from unhappy protesters, and the Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC), the city's police watchdog agency, is reportedly deluged with complaints.

Just how the San Francisco Police Commission, whose five members are appointed by the mayor, will deal with fallout from the protests is anybody's guess. But at this point it would be a surprise if the panel actually pressed for a full accounting of the overtime bills or sanctioned any cops who got out of line. The commission, which sets department policy and disciplines rogue cops, generally seems unwilling to ask the department tough questions and uninterested in hearing from the citizenry.

Take, for example, the illuminating comments offered by commission president Connie Perry during the panel's March 26 meeting. Leaning into the mic, a serious look on her face, Perry told the audience, "I don't think much of any substance is accomplished in a public hearing."

Understandably, the sentiment didn't play so well with the 50 or so people who'd showed up to share their criticisms of the SFPD with the five-member commission. "These are public servants who find the public distasteful," griped Tarikh, who stormed out of the meeting in frustration.

He's not the only one annoyed with the commission these days. Since late November the OCC has been trying to gather evidence connected to the Union Street brawl that started the scandal, but prosecutors and police are refusing to turn over any documents, saying to do so would jeopardize the criminal case now in court.

Last week when the OCC asked for assistance from the panel, commissioner Victor Makras didn't offer much help. In fact, he took it upon himself to grill OCC codirectors Jean Field, Samara Marion, and Donna Medley – rather than the SFPD.

A few more lowlights:

• When the Fajitagate indictments came down, the commission voted (in secret) to keep Chief Earl Sanders on the payroll, even though he'd been indicted. The charges against Sanders were later dropped, but the decision to leave Sanders in charge remains questionable.

• The Union Street scandal uncovered a widespread practice within the SFPD of failing to disclose relevant evidence to defense lawyers during criminal trials. Public Defender Jeff Adachi asked the commission to act on the issue. So far it's done nothing.

• In February the commission let Inspector James Zerga off easy after he was caught falsely imprisoning a frail 71-year-old female neighbor. Apparently angry with the woman, Zerga lied to his fellow cops, telling them a judge had issued an arrest warrant for the senior citizen. But Zerga got off with only a 45-day unpaid suspension.

• Six months after a controversial police raid on Thurgood Marshall High School involving more than 60 officers and numerous allegations of excessive force, the commission has yet to convene a hearing on the matter or demand an independent inquiry.

School board member Mark Sanchez faulted the commission – which is staffed by Wayne Friday, Sidney Chan, and Angelo Quaranta, in addition to Perry and Makras – for lagging on the Thurgood Marshall matter. "They should have called for an investigation from the start," an exasperated Sanchez told us. "That's their job. They can do that." The board is formally urging the commission to open a probe.

Reached at home, Perry said, "I don't have any comments I'd like to make to the press. None at all."

An earlier interview with the San Francisco Chronicle was no more enlightening. Perry was quoted as saying, "I don't think the commission needs any defense. We are what we are. Our critics will say whatever they want."

Makras and Chan also declined to comment for this story.

Last month the northern California chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union released a voluminous and heavily footnoted report examining the SFPD's accountability vacuum. The study points to seven problem areas, including the commission's general slackness: over the course of 2002, 17 commission meetings lasted less than half an hour each. "While the length of meetings clearly does not tell the whole story, it is a sign that the Commission is not fully exercising its oversight role," the report noted.

In an interview ACLU police practices expert Mark Schlosberg ripped the panel. "Part of this is an issue of political will. The commission has to want to hear issues of public concern and inject themselves into the debate," he said. "There's been an unwillingness to address issues brought forth by the community, and this really impedes the ability of the Police Commission to exercise oversight over the department."

Currently, the mayor appoints the police chief and the head of the OCC, as well as the police Commission. Schlosberg has suggested revamping the body by giving both the Board of Supervisors and the mayor the power to choose members – something that's already been done with other city commissions.

Supervisor and mayoral candidate Tom Ammiano is leaning toward such a shake-up, which would require a change to the city's charter, as part of a package of police reforms that may go on the ballot as soon as November.

Commission-watcher Kevyn Lutton, who lives in Bayview, has another idea: elect the members. "These people," she said, referring to the commissioners, "are just a shield for the police department."