In keeping with serving as the mouthpiece of City government and various public safety agencies, the SF Chronicle's gadfly political gossip writers Phil Maiter and Andy Ross recently reported on the cops providing motorcycle escorts for Chinatown political operative Rose Pak and the funeral of former SFPD chief Greg Suhr's mother, and they omitted the cost borne with taxpayer dollars. Source: http://blog.sfgate.com/matierandross/2016/05/24/rose-pak-make-royal-rolls-royce-return-to-sf/
The Chronicle was again too busy kissing butts to broach the subject of using City infrastructure, so I filed a public records request to get the facts.
Responsive records show there were a total of 73 such escorts from January through the first week of June, at a cumulative cost of $194,400 and the department is hiding behind security concerns in order to withhold a breakdown of cost for each escort.
On average, each of the 73 escorts so far this year carried an approximate price tag of $2,600. My gut says the Pak and Suhr escorts were higher than that and whatever the cost was, the bill should not have been footed with public dollars.
Below are excerpts from the reply the cops sent me outlining their policies of withholding fiscal information as allowing by state law:
"The San Francisco Police Department (“SFPD”) received your Immediate Disclosure request on June 6, 2016.
"On the same date, the SFPD informed you that your request was not simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable and it was considered a standard public records request that allows SFPD up to 10 days to respond.
"You requested '…All notes and correspondence and reports pertaining to motorcycle cops providing escorting services to drive Chinatown powerbroker Rose Pak from SFO to the City on May 22 or 23, 2016, and the funeral last week of former SFPD chief Greg Suhr's mother, and all other such police escorts since January 1, 2016, through today's date. For each escorting event, I am requesting the names of all officers providing the escorts, total staff time driving to, during the escorts and afterward heading back to regular duties, and total amount of pay to the officers.'
"The number of staff hours and amount paid to officers are not maintained in the manner sought, however, the Department is providing you with an estimate and in a composite manner due to security concerns.
"The SFPD declines to release information broken down by event pursuant to Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(f), which exempts from disclosure records of complaints to, investigations conducted by, intelligence information or security procedures of, and investigatory or security files compiled by local police agencies. The information you seek broken down by event would reveal security procedures, which if disclosed would compromise security. The SFPD compiles the information for law enforcement purposes. In addition, the SFPD also declines to disclose documents pertaining to the planning of escorting services pursuant to Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(f). Such information compromises SFPD's security procedures.
"As for your request regarding all other police escorts since January through June of 2016, below please find the composite number of escorting events by month:
JANUARY 2016: (5)
FEBRUARY 2016: (18)
MARCH 2016: (13)
APRIL 2016: (19)
MAY 2016: (14)
JUNE 2016: (4)"
No comments:
Post a Comment