By A.C. Thompson

For the past 18 months, the San Francisco Office of Citizen Complaints, the agency charged with monitoring police misconduct, has slacked off on one of its key duties.

The OCC is supposed to run an "early-warning system" aimed at identifying possible problem cops. But, in violation of city rules, that system is laying dormant, to the annoyance of city officials and local activists.

"The OCC is failing to do a lot of what they're supposed to be doing," said Mark Schlosberg, an expert on police practices with the northern California ACLU. "The early-warning system is critical, and they haven't run it for 18 months."

When the early-warning system is up and running, the OCC collects information on city police officers accused of misconduct and forwards the data to San Francisco Police Department brass on a weekly and quarterly basis. The quarterly reports focus on cops who've been the subject of three or more complaints from the public, a likely indicator of roguish behavior. A cop whose name repeatedly pops up in the system is supposed to have his or her job performance reviewed by a superior.

For the past year and a half, however, the OCC has failed to send the information to the SFPD, short-circuiting the whole operation.

At a June 22 meeting of the Police Commission – which oversees both the OCC and the police department – OCC boss Kevin Allen portrayed the screwup as a simple bureaucratic snafu. According to Allen, his agency quit compiling its early-warning reports after the OCC and the police department started discussing an overhaul of the system nearly two years ago.

That explanation didn't sit well with commissioner Gayle Orr-Smith, who noted that the early-warning system is mandated by an SFPD general order. "If the order has not been suspended, then the order is still in place, is that not correct?" she asked Allen.

"That is correct," Allen humbly replied.

Commissioner Teresa Sparks also sounded peeved. "I'm a little confused. It seems like someone should have been responsible for this," she griped.

Allen told the commission he accepted responsibility for the collapse of the system and would start sending reports to the SFPD again.

Speaking for the police department, which shares some blame for the situation, Lt. Charles Keohane got metaphysical. "The order has not been ignored," he told the commission. "It hasn't been followed by letter, but it has been followed in spirit."

This isn't the first time in recent years the department's internal processes have broken down. Around the time of the so-called Fajitagate indictments, in the spring of 2003, lawyers for the police department revealed that the SFPD was routinely failing to turn over information on officer misconduct to defense attorneys. The revelation prompted court officials to appoint a special master to review 3,000 criminal cases.

The SFPD has also had trouble completing investigations into incidents in which cops shoot civilians. An August 2004 Bay Guardian report uncovered a three-year backlog of unfinished investigations.

At the ACLU, Schlosberg faulted the OCC for the latest slipup and unleashed some fairly withering criticism. "I think there needs to be an audit of the OCC to see how the office is functioning," said Schlosberg, who's historically been a champion of the OCC and helped author Proposition H, a 2003 ballot measure strengthening agency. "They haven't put out an annual report since late director Mary Dunlap left," about two years ago.

In an interview, Allen sought to defuse the criticism, saying the OCC is aggressively investigating misbehavior, has prosecuted three misconduct cases in recent months, and is poised to release a report detailing its activities over the past two years.

Asked about the early-warning system, Allen described its abrupt shutdown as a misunderstanding. "I was under the impression that it was suspended," he said.

E-mail A.C. Thompson