Policy Text
San Francisco Police Department 2.07
GENERAL ORDER Rev. 04/02/25
Eff. 06/ 05/25
Page 1 of 6
Discipline Process for Sworn Members
2.07.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this order is to set forth the Department’s disciplinary policies and procedures for
sworn members (member s) as established by the City Charter, San Francisco Administrative
Code, and Department General Orders . The policies and procedures outlined below apply to
disciplinary cases issued after the effective date of this General Order.
2.07.02 DEFINITIONS
A. Disciplinary Action – Any action that may lead to termination , suspension, or written
reprimand .
1. Admonishment - An advisory, corrective, or instructional action that does not
constitute formal discipline. It is a warning only but considered a step in the
disciplinary process.
2. Reprimand - Formal correspondence from the Chief of Police to the member that
describes the misconduct and admonishes the member that repeat offenses may result in more severe disciplinary action. The lowest form of disciplinary action.
3. Fine - A fine of an officer’s salary not to exceed one month’s pay for each
sustained offense.
4. Suspension - Compelled time off without pay. Not to exceed ninety (90) working
days for each violation.
5. Termination - Dismissal from the Department.
B. Chief’s L evel D iscipline – Disciplinary action including written reprimand or suspension
of ten (10) days or fewer .
C. Commission L evel D iscipline – Disciplinary action including suspension of eleven (11)
days or more up to and including termination.
D. Disciplinary Penalty and Referral Guidelines – To ensure discipline is imposed in a
fair, just, and equitable manner, disciplinary recommendations shall comply with procedures set forth in the Disciplinary Penalty and Referral Guidelines adopted by the Police Commission.
E. Investigative Dispositions – All investigations shall conclude with one of the following
dispositions :
1. Improper
Conduct - A preponderance of the evidence proves that the alleged
conduct occurred and that the conduct violated d epartment policy , procedure s,
applicable legal principles, or training .
DGO 2.07
Rev. 04/02/25
Eff. 06/ 05/25
Page 2 of 6
2. Insufficient Evidence - The evidence fails to prove or disprove that the alleged
conduct occurred.
3. Proper Conduct - The evidence proves that the alleged conduct occurred;
however, the conduct was justified, lawful, and proper.
4. Policy Failure - The evidence proves that the alleged conduct occurred but was
justified by department policy or procedures; however, the San Francisco Police
Department (“ SFPD ”) or Department of Police Accountability (“ DPA”)
recommends that the policy or procedure be changed or modified.
5. Supervision Failure - The evidence proves that the alleged conduct occurred and
was the result of inadequate supervision.
6. Training Failure - The evidence proves that the alleged conduct resulted from
inadequate or inappropriate training.
7. Unfounded - The evidence proves that the conduct alleged did not occur or that
the accused member was not involved.
8. Referral to Other Agency - The evidence proves that the alleged conduct did not
involve a member of the Department or that the complaint raised issues , not
within the scope of DPA or Internal Affairs Division (“ IAD”) . Referral to other
agency allegations are not counted as complaints against members of the Department.
9. Withdrawal
- The complainant failed to provide additional requested evidence, or
the complainant requested a withdrawal of the complaint.
10. Mediated - The complainant and member agreed to mediation as a non -
disciplinary resolution (DPA finding only).
F. Preponderance of the E vidence – The standard of proof in administrative
investigations. Preponderance of the evidence means “more than fifty percent” or “more likely than not.”
G. Just Cause – Permanent members may only be disciplined for just cause, which means
disciplinary action must be just and fair.
H. Progressive Discipline –The use of escalating penalties for policy violations is
considered progressive discipline. Some disciplinary offenses are so serious that
significant disciplinary sanctions , including termination, are justified for the first offense.
The Department shall apply principles of progressive discipline consistent with the Discipline Penalty and Referral Guidelines.
I. Double Jeopardy – Members formally disciplined by the Chief of Police or Police
Commission may not be subject to further disciplinary action for the same incident .
J. Statute of Limitations – The Department must notify a member by written notice o f its
intent to discipline within one year of the discovery of the misconduct as prescribed by
law unless a tolling provision applies . The notice must be personally served on the
member except where personal service is waived. This requirement applies to both
Chief’s level and Commission level discipline.
DGO 2.07
Rev. 04/02/25
Eff. 06/05/ 25
Page 3 of 6
K. Probationary Reversion – Members released during a promotive probationary period shall revert to a position in the class from which promoted. Where the release is predicated on grounds other than merit, the released member shall be entitled to Chief’s Hearing.
L. Command Staff Reversion - Members of the Command Staff serve at the discretion of the Chief of Police. Members released from the Command Staff shall revert to a position in the class