COUNCIL AGENDA : 4/28/2026
FILE : 26-468
ITEM : 3.3
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND FROM: Toni J. Taber, MMC
CITY COUNCIL City Clerk
SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: April 17, 2026
SUBJECT: Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Audit Report
Recommendation
As recommendation by the Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support Committee on April 16, 2026, accept the follow-up report to the 2021 Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload audit report.
CEQA: Not a Project, File No. PP17-009, Staff Reports, Assessments, Annual Reports, and Informational Memos that involve no approvals of any City action. (Auditor) [Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support Committee referral 4/16/2026 - Item (d)2]
Office of the City Auditor
Report to the City Council
City of San José
POLICE STAFFING,
EXPENDITURES, AND
WORKLOAD FOLLOW-UP
REPORT
Report 26-02
April 2026
This page was intentionally left blank
200 E. Santa Clara Street, San José, CA 95113
Telephone: (408) 535-1250 Email: [email protected] Website: www.sanjoseca.gov/auditor/ Offic e of the City Auditor
Joe Rois, City Auditor
April 9, 2026
Honorable Mayor and Members
Of the City Council
200 East Santa Clara Street
San José, CA 95113
Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-Up Report This audit is a follow -up to the City Auditor’s 2021 audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload: Staffing Reductions Have Impacted Response Times and Led to High Overtime Costs. The objective of the 2021 audit was to review and compare the Police Department’s (SJPD) staffing, spending, and calls for service over time, including staff allocation by bureau or division, and use of overtime. It had 10 recommendations, including adding more sworn officers in the context of the City’s overall budget, improving management of overtime, optimizing the deployment of patrol staff by analyzing alternative shift schedules, tracking calls that could be diverted to non -sworn staff, and reassessing how Community Service Officers (CSOs) are deployed. At the time of this audit, 9 of the 10 recommendations had been implemented.
I
n FY 2024-25 , the SJPD had 1,742 budgeted sworn and non-sworn staff providing public safety services, up from 1,715 in FY 2020-21 as reported in the 2021 audit. Two-thirds of all Department positions were sworn staff, the majority of whom are dedicated to supporting patrol efforts across the city and responding to calls for service. Civilian staff who provide administrative support, staff the Communications Center, assist patrol through the CSO program, and other duties, account for the remainder.
Finding 1: The Department Is Using Multiple Strategies to Improve Response Times.
Although police responded to fewer calls for service in recent years, the Department continues
to struggle to meet its response time goals. We found:
• In F
Y 2024- 25, the average response time for
Priority 1 calls was 8.1 minutes, exceeding the 6-
minute target.
• Similar to the 2021 audit, calls for service and
response times varied across Police districts.
• The Department has initiated a redistricting effort
and piloted other efforts to improve performance.
• Current response time calculations include calls
downgraded to a lower priority, which may not
provide the most accurate indicator of performance.
Recommendations: To increase
transparency and improve response
time calculations, SJPD should:
→ Include outcomes from its
redistricting efforts in future
Increasing Community Safety focus
area reporting.
→ Update response time reporting to
exclude downgraded calls.
4 Finding 2: The Department Continues to Face Staffing Challenges and Relies on Overtime to Meet Operational Needs. Despite recent efforts to improve hiring and retention, the Department continues to face staffing challenges and relies on overtime to maintain operations. We found:
• Al
though the number of budgeted positions
increased from the prior audit, the Departmen t
h
ad fewer active sworn officers, driven by rising
separation rates among recruits and early -career
officers.
• In FY 2024 -25, overtime costs reached $ 72
mi
llion—a 53 percent increase over five years.
Patrol shifts were routinely staffed on overtime,
and overtime accounted for nearly one quarter of
all sworn hours worked.
• Re
cent changes to overtime controls provide new
gu
idance on report writing and follow -up oversight. Given that overtime continues to rise , t
he Department should monitor the process to ensure appropriate approval and supervision.
Finding 3: Community Service Officers Continue to Be a Valuable Resource for the Department. Since the 2021 audit, the Department restructured its CSO program to streamline reporting relationships, improve operational accountability and better integrate CSOs into patrol operations. We found:
• U
nlike other areas of Police operations, the
Department does not track performance metrics
to assess the CSO program’s effectiveness.
• Addressing inconsistencies between Duty Manual
designated CSO dispatchable call types and actual
field response can support more effective
deployment.
This report has eight recommendations. We plan to present this report at the April 16, 2026, meeting of the Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support Committee of the City Council. We would like to thank the San José Police Department for their time and insight during the audit process. The Administration has reviewed the information in this report, and their response is shown on the yellow pages.
Respectfully submitted,
Joe Rois
City Auditor
Audit staff: Gitanjali Mandrekar Michael O’Connell
Dilnoza Khudoyberganova Brittney Harvey
cc: Jennifer Maguire Paul Joseph Gina Tibaldi Susana Alcala Wood Jennifer Otani Nathaniel Bennett Jennifer Schembri Jim Shannon Bonny Duong Terra Chaffee Brian Mank Gabriel Orozco Silva This report is also available online at www.sanjoseca.gov/audits Recommendations: To increase
transparency of retention efforts and
better manage overtime, SJPD should:
→ Augment current reporting with
outcomes of current hiring and
retention efforts.
→ Develop a process to monitor
compliance with overtime
approvals.
Recommendations: To further
improve the CSO program, SJPD
should:
→ Develop and track performance
metrics for the CSO program.
→ Update the CSO-dispatchable call
list in the Duty Manual.
T able of Contents
Cover Letter ........................................................................................................... 3 Background ............................................................................................................. 7 Organization of the San José Police Department ........................................................... 7 Spending and Staffing .......................................................................................................... 10 Crime in San José................................................................................................................ 14 The City Administration Has Prioritized Community Safety ................................... 15 Finding 1
The Department Is Using Multiple Strategies to Improve
Response Times ................................................................................................. 17 The 2021 Police Staffing Audit Found Increased Calls for Service and Missed Response Time Goals ........................................................................................................ 17 Despite a Decline in Responses to Calls for Service, the Department Continues to Struggle to Consistently Meet Response Time Targets ................... 18 The Department Is Undertaking Multiple Initiatives to Improve Operations ...... 21 Finding 2
The Department Continues to Face Staffing Challenges and Relies on Overtime to Meet Operational Needs .............................................................. 25 The 2021 Police Staffing Audit Made Staffing and Overtime Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 25 The Police Department Continues to Face Staffing Challenges ............................... 26 SJPD Expenditures for Overtime Have Increased Significantly ................................ 30 Finding 3
Community Service Officers Continue to Be a Valuable Resource for the Department .............................................................................................. 39 The Previous 2021 Police Staffing Audit Noted Opportunities for Efficiencies in the CSO Program .......................................................................................................... 39 The Department Restructured the CSO Program to Improve Oversight............ 40 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 43 Appendix A
Audit Objective, Scope, and Methodology ...................................................... A-1 Administration’s Response ................................................................. yellow pages
T able of Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Organization of San José’s Police Districts ............................................ 9 Exhibit 2: Patrol Shift Schedule ................................................................................ 9 Exhibit 3: Personnel Costs Accounted for 90 Percent of Overall Expenditures in FY 2024-25 .................................................................................... 11 Exhibit 4: San José Police Department Budgeted Staffing Over Time .............. 12 Exhibit 5: Active Sworn Staff Available Over Twenty Years .............................. 13 Exhibit 6: Active Sworn Staff Available (Officers, FTOs, Sergeants, Lieutenants, and Captains) by Budget Program .................................................. 14 Exhibit 7: Staffing, Budget, Reported Crimes, and Population in Other California Jurisdictions ............................................................................................. 15 Exhibit 8: Distribution of Calls for Service Across the City in FY 2024-25 ........ 20 Exhibit 9: Police Response Times by District for Priority 1 Calls in Minutes (6-minute Target) ...................................................................................... 20 Exhibit 10: Calculating Response Timeliness Using Alternative Methodologies .......................................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 11: Number of Separations Exceeded Hires in Recent Years ................ 27 Exhibit 12: Recruit Separations Have Been Increasing ........................................ 28 Exhibit 13: Sworn staff with 5-10 Years of Experience Account for a Growing Share of Overall Separations .................................................................. 29 Exhibit 14: Overtime Hours Worked Have Increased in Recent Years ............ 31 Exhibit 15: Overtime Expenditures Exceeded the Budgeted Overtime Costs .......................................................................................................................... 31 Exhibit 16: Total Overtime Hours as Reported by Assignment Type ............... 34
7 Background
This report is a follow -up to the City Auditor’s 2021 audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload: Staffing Reductions Have Impacted Response Times and Led to High Overtime Costs .1 The objective of the 2021 audit was to review and compare the San José Police Department’s (SJPD) staffing, spending, and calls for service over time, including the allocation of staff by bureau or division, and use of overtime.
We are following up on the 2021 audit as the City Council has identified Increasing Community Safety as one of its five focus areas with the long-term goal that San José residents live in a community with responsive emergency services and safe streets and roads.
Since the previous audit, the Department has continued to face staffing challenges and has struggled to meet its goals on responding to calls for service. In addition, overtime costs have continued to increase. To address these issues, the Administration h as various initiatives underway to improve efficiency in police response.
Organization of the San José Police Department
In FY 2024-25, the SJPD consisted of 1,742 authorized full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. Two-thirds (1,172) of all Department positions were sworn staff and the remainder were civilian positions.
The Department is administered by a command staff that includes the Chief of Police, an Assistant Chief, four Deputy Chiefs, and a civilian Deputy Director.
Command staff manage four bureaus, the Division of Gaming, and the Office of the Chief Executive Officer. Department employees are assigned to one of four Bureaus comprised of 11 divisions with more than 70 specialized units and assignments.
The four Bureaus carry out the following functions:
• Bureau of Field Operations is the primary provider of police services, deploying sworn officers citywide to respond to calls, conduct visible patrols, provide initial investigation of crimes, recover property, and ensure public safety.
• Bureau of Investigations manages and coordinates criminal investigations, and houses the Real Time Intelligence Center.
1 https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument?id=70064.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 8 • Bureau of Administration oversees recruitment, selection, and screening programs; maintains Department personnel records; develops and delivers training programs; manages photo lab operations; and administers fiscal and property control systems.
• Bureau of Technical Services handles the Department’s technology and data systems, including communications systems for receiving calls, dispatching officers, storing and analyzing reports, and supporting crime analysis and body worn cameras.
In addition to the four Bureaus, the Office of the Chief Executive Officer oversees cannabis regulation, legal investigations, budgeting and personnel processes, permit facilitation, research and development initiatives, and the Secondary Employment Unit (SEU).
Field Patrol Comprises a Majority of Police Staffing Operations The Bureau of Field Operations is SJPD’s Patrol Division. Most sworn officers are housed within this bureau, which is tasked with responding to calls for service in the city. In FY 2024-25, 78 percent of all sworn staff were assigned to the Bureau of Field Operations. Two-thirds of all sworn staff served in patrol.
There are four geographical patrol divisions across the city—Central, Western, Foothill, and Southern. Within these divisions, the city is divided into 16 patrol districts with an additional district dedicated to the Airport. Patrol districts are divided further into smaller units of 83 beats across San José.
Background
9 Exhibit 1: Organization of San José’s Police Districts
Source: Auditor illustration of SJPD geographic boundaries.
As discussed further in Finding 1, the Department is currently undergoing a redistricting process, which would reduce the number of districts from 16 to 12 to better balance the distribution of calls for service across districts and provide for better supervision in the field.
Assignments and Shift Schedules
The Department deploys sworn staff through shift bids and assignments. There are three patrol shifts/watches to ensure service coverage around the clock.
Exhibit 2: Patrol Shift Schedule
Source: Auditor created based on internal documents for watches/shifts of sworn staff.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 10 The Community Service Officer Program Has Been Used to Support Police Services In 2014, the Department established the Community Service Officer (CSO) program to “assist in allowing patrol officers to remain in service and available to respond to higher priority and emergency calls.”
CSOs are assigned to calls in which the suspect is not present and that do not pose an immediate safety risk, such as abandoned vehicles and burglary reports. In FY 2024-25, there were 67 budgeted CSO positions, who generally worked during the day and swing shifts. A recent consultant report noted that SJPD has “one of the largest CSO programs the project team has encountered.”
Spending and Staffing
In FY 2024-25, the Department’s overall expenditures totaled $561 million. This is an increase from around $459 million in FY 2019-20 as was reported in the 2021 audit. The General Fund is the primary source of funding for the Department.
Personnel costs, including salaries, retirement costs, other benefits, and overtime, totaled $506 million in FY 2024-25, accounting for 90 percent of the Department’s expenditures. This percentage is similar to what was found in the 2021 audit, when personnel costs accounted for 92 percent of expenditures in FY 2019-20.
Following is a further breakdown of FY 2024-25 personnel costs:
• Salaries totaled roughly $245 million, or 44 percent of total expenditures.
This percentage is similar to what was found in the prior audit (45 percent of total expenditures).
• Though retirement costs grew from $127 million to $138 million from FY 2019-20 to FY 2024-25, they represent a smaller proportion of overall expenditures (dropping from 28 percent to 25 percent of overall expenditures).
• Overtime increased from $47 million in FY 2019 -20 to $72 million in FY 2024 -25 (increasing from 10 percent to 13 percent of total expenditures).
• Other benefits totaled about $51 million, accounting for 9 percent of overall expenditures. This percentage is similar to FY 2019 -20, while the dollar amount increased by $9 million.
Non-personal and other expenditures have increased from $38 million (8 percent of total expenditures) to $55 million (10 percent) since FY 2019-20.
As shown in Exhibit 3, the Department’s overall expenditures declined during the Great Recession until FY 2013-14 when expenses began increasing gradually.
Background
11 Exhibit 3: Personnel Costs Accounted for 90 Percent of Overall Expenditures in FY 2024-25
Source: Auditor analysis of the financial management system expenditure data (not adjusted for inflation).
Note: “Non-personal and Other” includes expenditures for supplies and materials, vehicle replacement and operating expenses, professional and consultant services, data processing, some capital expenses, and workers’ compensation.
The 2008-09 expenditures did not allocate workers’ compensation expenditures to the Police Department. These were added beginning in FY 2009-10.
Despite Increases in Personnel Costs, Budgeted Staffing Levels Are Lower than 20 Years Ago
Overall staffing is lower than it was before the Great Recession. In FY 2005 -06, the Department had 1,789 budgeted FTE, including 1,342 sworn officers. During the Great Recession, the City saw massive budget deficits that impacted service levels across the organization. Between FY 2007 -08 and FY 2011- 12, the Department saw a reduction of over 300 budgeted FTE.
Between FY 2012-13 and FY 2016-17, the Department’s budgeted staffing steadily increased, primarily due to additional non-sworn positions. Beginning in FY 2017- 18, sworn staffing grew from 1,107 to 1,173 in FY 2023- 24. In FY 2024-25, there were 1,172 budgeted sworn staff and 570 non-sworn staff. 44%
25%
13%
10%
$-
$100,000,000
$200,000,000
$300,000,000
$400,000,000
$500,000,000
$600,000,000
Other Fringe Benefits
Non-Personal and Other
Overtime
Retirement Contributions
Salaries (Full and Part-Time)
9%
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 12 Exhibit 4: San José Police Department Budgeted Staffing Over Time Source: Auditor summary of the Adopted Operating Budgets.
An Increase in Vacancies Has Exacerbated Staffing Challenges In addition to the decline in the number of FTEs budgeted for the Department, recent turnover has led to vacancies and an even greater decline in the number of active sworn officers. The number of active sworn staff hit a low in 2017 and then increased through 2022. Since then, it has declined again.
Despite having 1,172 sworn positions, only 998 were filled as of January 1, 2025, excluding recruits. However, this figure overstates the number of “street -ready” officers, as it includes 25 officers in the Field Training Program and officers on modified duty or on leave due to injury or other reasons. The total number of active police officers is the lowest since 2018.
1,342 1,172
447 570
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
Sworn Officers Non-sworn Staff
Background
13 Exhibit 5: Active Sworn Staff Available Over Twenty Years Source: Active staffing report by January 1 each year from the City’s human resource management system.
Note: This includes all officers, sergeants, lieutenants, and captains across the Department and does not include the Chief, Assistant Chief, or Deputy Chiefs. It also includes field training officers (FTOs) who have completed the police academy but does not include recruits.
Exhibit 6 provides more detail on actual sworn officers, sergeants, lieutenants, and captains by budget program for January 1 of each year for 2017-2025. Active sworn personnel reflect the number of available sworn staff, including FTOs, excluding recruits who have not yet become sworn officers.
0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400FTE
Police Captain
Police Lieutenant
Police Sergeant
Police Officer
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 14 Exhibit 6: Active Sworn Staff Available (Officers, FTOs, Sergeants, Lieutenants, and Captains) by Budget Program
Budget Program 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Bureau of Field
Operations 700 743 800 787 801 821 793 781 769
Bureau of
Investigations 126 127 152 166 169 173 166 150 147
Bureau of
Administration 32 35 39 39 41 38 36 36 37
Management 28 26 31 31 36 35 36 37 34
Bureau of Technical
Services
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4
Other 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Grand Total 887 937 1,028 1,029 1,053 1,073 1,037 1,010 992 Source: Auditor analysis based on data from the City’s human resource management system and Department data for active officers, sergeants, lieutenants, and captains for 2017 -2025. Data does not include the Chief, Assistant Chief, Deputy Chiefs, and recruits, but includes field training officers (FTOs).
Note: This data is based on actual active employees as reported in the City’s human resource management system and does not include vacant positions. Active staffing differs from total authorized staffing presented in the City’s Adopted Operating Budget because it reflects the number of available sworn staff in the Department. Data in this chart is point-in-time data, as of January 1 of each year.
Crime in San José
In 2024, there were nearly 16,400 crimes against persons. 2 This included 12,600 simple and aggravated assaults and almost 1,700 sex offenses, including rapes.
There were 37,400 crimes against property, with over a third including larceny or theft offenses. Additionally, in 2024, there were 5,400 crimes against society. This included 4,100 drug or narcotic offenses. In 2024, there were 27 homicides.3 There are a variety of factors that may be used to determine appropriate staffing for an agency, including minimum staffing, per capita, city growth, and workload.
Exhibit 7 shows a comparison of different police agencies in California.
2 2024 was the first complete year of data gathered using the new National Incident- Based Reporting System (NIBRS).
Complete prior year data for crimes against persons, crimes against property, or crimes against society was not available. 3 SJPD Crime Statistics and Maps. https://www.sjpd.org/records/crime-stats-maps.
Background
15 Exhibit 7: Staffing, Budget, Reported Crimes, and Population in Other California Jurisdictions4
Budgeted Staffing and Budget Reported Crime FBI UCR
2024
American Census
Data
Jurisdiction Sworn PD
Staff
Total PD
Staff
Department
Budget
Violent
Crime per
100,000
Property Crime
per 100,000
Estimated Population in
2024
Los Angeles 10,738 13,855 $1,981,610,477 715 1,468 3,878,704 San Francisco 2,290 2,982 $822,835,972 579 3,844 827,526 San Diego 2,044 2,692 $673,002,146 409 1,671 1,404,452 San José 1,172 1,742 $574,241,904 587 2,526 997,368
Fresno 926 1,330 $300,920,800 737 3,312 550,105
Sacramento 735 1,120 $250,856,650 744 2,569 535,798
Oakland 696 1,130 $360,894,797 1,888 7,117 443,554
Source: Adopted b udgets of various jurisdictions for FY 2024- 25, crime data from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, and American Community Survey data for 2024.
The City Administration Has Prioritized Community Safety The City has prioritized Increasing Community Safety as one of its five City Council focus areas. Improving emergency response is a key aspect of this focus area, and the Administration has various initiatives underway to address response times. As discussed in Findings 1 and 2, the Department is working on several staffing and deployment initiatives to improve its police response times. These include a redistricting project, piloting a 2-person car deployment and district-wide dispatch by eliminating beat boundaries, and creating a new classification for assisting with prisoner transport and hospital support.
In February 2024, the City Manager's Office, in response to Council direction, began exploring alternatives for 9-1-1 calls for service. Included among the eleven findings was expanding its current efforts around the 9-1- 1 to 9-8-8 call transfer program. Further, the Department also undertook a report transcription technology pilot to reduce officer report writing time and evaluat ed alternative response options. Though t he report transcription pilot was not successful, the Administration plans to continue to review different options.
4 We should note that the crime data reported in Exhibit 7 is from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program. The data does not reflect how crimes are categorized under the current National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).
In 2021, the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program mandated National Incident-Based Reporting (NIBRS) as the law enforcement crime data -reporting standard for the nation, while retiring the former Summary Reporting System (SRS). Under SRS, limited data on nine Part I crimes were collected, reporting only the most serious offense on a singular incident (the hierarchy rule). With NIBRS, incident specific data is captured for 52 different offense types and all crimes on a singular incident are reported.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 16 Prior Audits Related to Police Staffing and Overtime This Office has conducted multiple audits related to SJPD’s staffing and overtime in the past twenty years. These audits made various recommendations around establishing the Community Service Officer program, adding sworn staffing, adding civilian positions to assist with Police recruitment, establishing a retention bonus, establishing a law enforcement cadet program, and increasing oversight of overtime and setting limits on compensatory time.
Our most recent audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload: Staffing Reductions have Impacted Response Times and Led to High Overtime Costs had 10 recommendations, including adding more sworn officers in the context of the City’s overall budget; optimizing the deployment of patrol staff by analyzing alternative shift schedules, tracking calls that could be diverted to non-sworn staff, reassessing how CSOs are deployed; and better management of overtime. As of January 2026, one recommendation about analyzing alternative shift schedules as part of the Department’s redistricting work remains open. The Department plans to implement redistricting in November 2026.
17 Finding 1 The Department Is Using Multiple
Strategies to Improve Response
Times
Summary
Despite a decline in Police responses to calls for service in recent years, the Department continues to struggle to meet its response time goals. In addition, calls for service have continued to vary across Police districts, resulting in workload imbalances across districts. The Department has begun a redistricti ng effort to more efficiently deploy patrol resources. At the time of the audit, the Department was also piloting combined two -person cars and a district -wide response in certain areas of the city. The Department plans to provide quarterly updates on the r edistricting implementation to the City Council as part of its regular Increasing Community Safety Focus Area reporting. We recommend this reporting also include the outcomes from the redistricting process.
Further, the Department’s current reporting of response times may need modification because it includes downgraded calls, which can inflate the average response time calculation. Updating the response time reporting would enable a better assessment of the current pilots and response times generally and inform future deployment decisions.
The 2021 Police Staffing Audit Found Increased Calls for Service and Missed Response Time Goals
Our 2021 Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload audit noted that the Police Department had experienced an increase in officer responses to calls for service between FY 2016- 17 and FY 2019- 20 and struggled to meet its response time targets—particularly for high-priority incidents. The audit noted that SJPD had not met its Priority 1 response time goal in nearly all Police districts in FY 2019 -20.
Additionally, we noted that SJPD’s patrol district boundaries had not changed since 1999, and shift schedules remained largely the same since the early 2000s, despite multiple studies recommending updates. At the time of the 2021 audit, the Administration had allocated funding to begin a redistricting process.
In the audit, we recommended that within the constraints of the City’s overall budget, the Department add sworn officers to field patrol to improve its ability to meet its response time goals, analyze alternative shift schedules to optimize police staffing, improve how it tracks and manages emerging service demand (e.g., homelessness-related calls or other calls that could benefit from an alternative response), and develop a strategy for meeting community policing goals.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 18 Since the audit, the Administration developed a staffing plan , and in FY 2022- 23, increased the number of police officers from 907 in 2021-22 to 927. Additionally, in June 2022, the City Council approved the annual addition of 15 positions within the Department —a mix of both sworn and civilian roles and incorporated a commitment to fund these positions in future Five -Year General Fund forecasts.
However, this has been impacted by recent budget challenges. The Department has also begun tracking calls related to homeless ness concerns, mental health crises, and other calls to better inform service delivery, as well as finalized a community engagement strategy.
Despite a Decline in Responses to Calls for Service, the Department Continues to Struggle to Consistently Meet Response Time Targets
Since the audit in 2021, total responses to calls for service have declined. In FY 2024-25, SJPD responded to more than 260,000 calls , down from FY 2019- 20 when calls totaled more than 300,000.
In FY 2024 -25, there were roughly 175,000 Priority 1–4 calls and about 88,000 officer-initiated Priority 5–6 calls.5 Between FY 2019-20 and FY 2024-25:
• Priority 1 and 2 responses to incidents decreased from over 90,000 in FY 2019-20 to 85,000 in FY 2024-25.
• Priority 3 and 4 responses to incidents decreased from over 120,000 in FY 2019-20 to about 90,000 in FY 2024-25.
• Priority 5 and 6 officer-initiated responses decreased from over 110,000 in FY 2019-20 to about 88,000 in FY 2024-25.
Additional Requirements Have Added to Officer Workloads It should be noted that a decline in responses may not reflect a proportionate change in the Department’s workload. The Administration reports that new legislation, tactical conduct requirements, and requests for more services in certain areas have added to the Department’s workload since 2020.
Further, the Department noted that new laws have required additional paperwork and reporting when officers encounter specific types of cases. For example, according to the Department, new requirements for body worn cameras require
5 Priority 1 calls are where there is present or imminent danger to life or there is major damage to/loss of property (i.e., large-scale incident or cases where there is an in -progress or just occurred major felony). Priority 2 calls are where there is injury or property damage or potential for either to occur or the suspect is still in the area. All missing person reports for children under 12, or at-risk missing persons are Priority 2 calls as well. Priority 3 calls for service include calls where there is property damage or the potential for it to occur, or the suspect has most likely left the area.
Priority 4 calls include responses to non- violent crimes where there is no property damage and there is no longer a suspect at the scene. Priority 5 incidents are officer-initiated when an officer observes a crime in progress. Priority 6 incidents are all other officer-initiated vehicle and pedestrian stops.
Finding 1
19 staff to review, upload, and catalogue video footage. These new requirements may increase the amount of time spent on calls for service, sometimes significantly.
Despite the Decline, the Department Still Has Not Met Response Time Goals
Similar to the prior audit, in FY 2024-25, the Department did not meet its response time goals for either Priority 1 or Priority 2 calls for service. • For Priority 1 calls, the Department’s target is for an officer to arrive on scene within 6 minutes. The overall goal is to meet this target 60 percent of the time. In FY 2024-25, the Department reported the overall average response time for a Priority 1 call was 8.1 minutes, meeting the 6-minute target 45 percent of the time. As reported in the 2021 audit, the FY 2019- 20 average response time was 7.0 minutes, and the Department met the 6-minute target 58 percent of the time.
• For Priority 2 calls, the Department’s target is for an officer to arrive on scene within 11 minutes. The overall goal is to meet this target 40 percent of the time. In FY 2024-25, the Department reported the average response time for Priority 2 calls was 27.8 minutes. T he Department met the 11 - minute target 35 percent of the time. For FY 2019- 20, the average response time was 21 minutes, and the Department met the 11 -minute target 46 percent of the time.
The Department has not met its average response time targets for Priority 1 and 2 calls since at least FY 2010-11.
Calls for Service and Response Times Have Continued to Vary Across Districts
Similar to the 2021 audit, we found that responses to calls for service varied significantly across districts. In 2024-25, Districts L and R had the highest number of calls with 24,000 and 20,000 calls respectively, representing 9 and 8 percent of total call volume. Conversely, District W had about 11,000 calls (4 percent of total calls), or roughly half the number as District L.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 20 Exhibit 8: Distribution of Calls for Service Across the City in FY 2024-25
Source: Auditor analysis of police CAD system data for FY 2024-25.
Response Timeliness Varied Across Service Districts
In FY 2024-25, response times for Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls also varied across Police districts. For example, response times for Priority 1 calls ranged from 5.8 minutes in district E to 9.4 minutes in districts X and T. Only district E met the 6- minute target for Priority 1 average response times.
Exhibit 9: Police Response Times by District for Priority 1 Calls in Minutes (6-minute Target)
Source: Auditor review of CAD system data for FYs 2019-20 and 2024-25.
Note: Excluding District D, which is the Airport.
0.00 2.00
4.00 6.00
8.00 10.00
A C E F K L M N P R S T V W X Y
Minutes
2019-20 2024-25
Finding 1
21 The Department Is Undertaking Multiple Initiatives to Improve Operations In 2023, the Department engaged the Matrix Consulting Group to conduct a Comprehensive Redistricting Plan to:
• Provide a comprehensive analysis of the workload and staffing needs of the Bureau of Field Operations.
• Evaluate the feasibility and impacts of two-person patrol car deployment. • Identify strategies to enhance the efficiency of patrol resources and improve service levels.
• Assess the current geographic deployment structure and conduct a redistricting analysis to more efficiently deploy patrol resources. • Identify opportunities to implement new and innovative technologies to support operations and enhance the service provided to the public.
Similar to the 2021 audit, the 2024 Matrix Consulting Group’s Final Report on the Comprehensive Redistricting Plan identified that some police districts had severely uneven distribution of workload, resulting in lower service levels. The report also noted that SJPD had a lower probability of responding to calls in a timely manner compared to nearly all other large metropolitan police agencies included in the comparison, including such agencies as San Francisco, Los Angeles, Kansas City, Raleigh, Fort Worth, and Columbus.
The Report included 81 recommendations across different aspects of Police operations. In 2025, the Department reported its progress on the recommendations in an information memorandum,
6 noting that 29 had been
completed or were in progress and four others that would have significant impact and could be challenging to implement. As of March 2026, these four included:
1. Moving from a 16- district patrol structure to a 12 -district structure. 7 According to the Department, this work is underway and is expected to be implemented in November 2026 to redistribute calls more evenly across districts.
8 6 Police Department Redistricting Project Report Information Memorandum (March 24, 2025), https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/119714/638784142664770000. 7 The current distribution of district and beat boundaries was determined in 1999 and was primarily based on the distribution of calls for service across the city at that time. Prior studies, including a 2010 study by Corona Solutions and a 2016 report by the Matrix Consulting Group, also recommended improvements to the Department’s patrol deployment model through changing the district boundaries to redistribute calls more evenly. The 2010 study by Corona Solutions also recommended modifying shift schedules to “help reduce the impact of staff reductions with a better match between the demand profile and the on-duty staffing.”
8 Police Department Redistricting Project Update Information Memorandum (February 4, 2026 ). https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/128167.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 22 2. Creating a new Custody Transport Officer classification to focus on prisoner transport to keep patrol officers in the field to respond to calls for service and engage in proactive law enforcement activity. As of March 2026, the Department reports hiring is on hold pending the FY 2026 -27 budget process.
3. Transitioning to a district -based deployment system to reduce call response times. In 2025, Department conducted a single division district- wide dispatching pilot, removing district beat structures and assignments allowing officers to respond to calls for service across the district. Since then, the City has reached an agreement with the San Jose Police Officers’ Association to move to a citywide district -wide dispatching model in November 2026.
4. Continuing the practice of limited deployment of two-person patrol cars.
The Department reports it expanded its district -wide dispatch pilot combined with two-person patrol deployment in the Western division. As a result of this, the City reached an agreem ent with the San Jose Police Officers’ Association for mandatory two-person cars for all future hires.
The Department Reports on Significant Change Initiatives as part of the Administration’s Increasing Community Safety Focus Area Reporting
As noted in the Background, the City Council has prioritized Increasing Community Safety as one of its Council Focus Areas. The Administration has provided regular updates on initiatives and activities within this focus area. In March 2026, the Administration reported on multiple initiatives to improve service delivery in its focus area update to the City Council. This included:
• Results of a report transcription pilot to determine whether there was a technology solution to reduce o fficer time spent on report writing. As noted earlier, the Department determined that the technology was not mature enough to meet its needs and reported that it plans to vet additional products.
• Results of the district -wide dispatch pilot and two -person patrol deployments, noting agreements with the San Jose Police Officers’ Association for a citywide implementation.
• Updates on training and initial results for a 911-988 call transfer program to divert mental health or emotional crises calls that may be handled through alternative responses.
According to the Department, updates on implementation will be included in future Increasing Community Safety reporting. Because of the significance of the effort, outcomes from the redistricting effort, such as impacts on response times or call volume distribution, should be included in the reporting as well.
Lastly, because alternative scheduling options are closely tied to deployment structures and dispatching practices, the Department reports it will evaluate Finding 1
23 alternative shift schedule options in the context of the 12- district model and the results of the current pilots. This last element is the last open audit recommendation from the 2021 audit. In January 2026, the City reached a side - letter agreement with the San Jose Police Officers’ Association to continue discussions related to 12 -hour shift schedules, hybrid schedules and any other changes to improve the operational efficiency of the Department.
The Department Can Improve How It Reports Response Timeliness The current reporting of response timeliness may not accurately capture actual performance, as it includes calls where the priority was changed during the response. The Department current ly reports response times based on a call’s initial priority, even if that priority changes during the response. Including these calls can artificially increase the reported response time because it includes calls which were later downgraded to a lower priority.
The Department acknowledged the importance of updating the response time calculations for Priority 1 calls and noted that it was working to address this in the Department’s Adopted Operating Budget for the past two fiscal years. The Department’s Crime Analysis Unit has developed an internal dashboard to update its methodology. However, this has not yet been updated in the Adopted Budget or other public reporting.
We should note that updating the methodology can
have a measurable impact on the calculated response
times. In FY 2024-25, over 20 percent of Priority 1
calls were reclassified to lower priority levels during the response. These downgraded calls had an average
response time of 11.8 minutes. The average response
time for Priority 1 calls that remained Priority 1 throughout the call was around
7.0 minutes —closer to the Department’s target of 6 minutes and nearly five minutes shorter than response times for downgraded calls. The Department met the 6-minute target for these calls 57 percent of the time (rather than 45 percent of the time when downgraded calls were included).
Similarly, for Priority 2 calls, excluding downgraded calls result ed in an average response time of 23.9 minutes, compared to 27. 8 minutes when all calls were included. When isolating for P riority 2 calls that remained the same priority throughout the response, 37 percent of service requests met the 11-minute target (compared to 35 percent when downgraded calls were included).
Using Medians Versus Averages
As an alternative, using a median instead of an average response time could reduce the influence of outlier events. A meaningful difference between the two may also indicate whether such events are significant in the context of overall performance, and hel p the Department identify cases that warrant review . The 2024 Matrix Including downgraded
calls can increase the
reported average
response time.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 24 Comprehensive Redistricting Report used median response times to assess response times by Police district.
Using a median response calculation, the Department nearly met the 6 -minute timeliness target for Priority 1 call response and nearly met the 11- minute target for Priority 2 calls in FY 2024-25.
Exhibit 10: Calculating Response Timeliness Using Alternative Methodologies Priority Response Time
Targets
Average Response
Time (Current
methodology)
Average Response
time (Excluding calls
where initial priority
changed)
Median Response
Time (Excluding calls
where initial priority
changed)
1 < 6 minutes 8 .1 7.0 6.2
2 < 11 minutes 27.8 23.9 14.0
Source: Auditor analysis of CAD calls for service in FY 2024-25.
By aligning response timeliness metrics with call priority throughout the duration of the response, and/or by adopting median- based calculations, the Department can provide a more accurate assessment of its performance in meeting response time goals. This would allow the Department to more effectively measure response times, helping leadership better assess the current pilots, and future redistricting efforts and other deployment decisions.
Recommendations:
1: To increase transparency around operational changes to improve police services, the Police Department should include outcomes from its redistricting efforts, such as response times and call volume distribution, and if needed, an analysis of alternative shift schedules, into future Increasing Community Safety Focus Area reports.
2: To improve how response times are reported publicly or for internal purposes, the Police Department should update its methodology for calculating response times for Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls by:
a. Excluding calls that are downgraded to a lower priority during a response; and/or
b. Consider the use of median response times instead of average response times to reduce the impact of outliers.
25 Finding 2 The Department Continues to Face
Staffing Challenges and Relies on
Overtime to Meet Operational
Needs
Summary
Persistent staffing challenges have increased the Police Department’s reliance on overtime to meet operational needs. Despite recent efforts to improve hiring and retention, the Department continues to face staffing challenges. The Department had fewer active sworn officers in 2025 than in 2021 and has seen rising separation rates among recruits and early-career officers. These trends have contributed to driving up overtime use. In FY 2024- 25, overtime costs reached $72 million or a 53 percent increase since FY 2019 -20. 124 sworn staff worked over 1,000 overtime hours in FY 2024-25. This level of overtime raises concerns about sustainability and officer wellness, especially as patrol shifts are routinely staffed with overtime.
The Department has implemented new recruitment initiatives , and the City negotiated retention incentives through a recent labor agreement with the San Jose Police Officers’ Association. The Department has a goal of 40 hire s for each upcoming academy class. Additional reporting on recruit and sworn staff retention would provide a more complete picture around the outcomes of the Department ’s recruitment and retention efforts. In addition, ensuring compliance with overtime supervision expectations is important. At the time of the audit, o vertime hours were frequently spent on follow -up and report writing, often without the required documentation or appropriate supervisory approval. In February 2026, the Department issued new overtime controls guidelines. Developing a process to monitor compliance with these new guidelines is important.
The 2021 Police Staffing Audit Made Staffing and Overtime Recommendations The 2021 Police Staffing audit noted that the Department had experienced significant reductions in sworn staffing over the past two decades . Staffing declined from 1,358 sworn staff in FY 2000-01 to 1,157 in F Y 2020-21.
Although recruitment efforts reduced vacancies and the staffing levels began to recover, the Department’s sworn staff was less experienced overall—with approximately 35 percent of sworn staff having less than five years of experience in 2021.
The audit also highlighted that d ue to staffing shortages and increased workload, SJPD increasingly relied on overtime to maintain operations , and Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 26 overtime hours worked more than doubled between FY 2010-11 and FY 2019- 20—from under 200,000 to 470,000 hours. In FY 2019- 20 o vertime costs reached $47 million , which at that time were higher than previous years , accounting for 10 percent of total department spending. We also found that a growing share of overtime was used for activities not historically considered mandatory, such as report writing and follow -up work. We recommended that the Police Department strengthen oversight of overtime by enforcing limits on total hours and reassess ing which activities are considered mandatory.
Since the audit, the Department clarified what overtime would be considered mandatory and included measures to reduce compensatory time liabilities in the most recent agreement with the San Jose Police Officers ’ Association. In addition, the Department required Captains to submit quarterly overtime reports, created a dashboard for supervisors to review specific overtime details, and most recently has required the Chief’s approval for certain overtime categories.
The Police Department Continues to Face Staffing Challenges Persistent vacancies and a limited number of street-ready officers continue to drive the Department’s growing reliance on overtime. As noted in the prior audit, the number of sworn officers declined significantly between 2010 through 2017, before rising through 2021. Since then, as shown in Exhibit 5 in the Background, the number of active sworn officers has declined; as of January 2025, there were 992 active sworn staff, compared to 1,053 in 2021. 9 Overtime hours generally follow an inverse trend, getting higher when the number of active sworn officers decreases and vice versa. Between FY 2019- 20 and FY 2024- 25, overtime hours increased by 27 percent, going from roughly 470,000 to 596,000 hours as shown in Exhibit 14 later in this Finding.
Growing Sworn Staff Separations Undermines Department Hiring Efforts
Since the prior audit, more sworn staff have left the Department than have been hired, making it difficult to sustain staffing levels and build a pipeline of experienced officers. A 2024 report by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)
10 reported challenges in hiring, recruiting, and retention nationwide. In a survey of police agencies, the IACP noted that over 70 percent reported that recruitment has become more difficult compared to five years
9 This figure excludes recruits and senior command officers. It also does not reflect officers that may be on modified duty because of injury or other reasons.
10 International Association of Chiefs of Police, The State of Recruitment & Retention: A C ontinuing Crisis for Policing: 2024 Survey Results, (2024) ( https://www.theiacp.org/resources/research-st udy/2024-recruitment- retention-survey-results).
Finding 2
27 ago. Further, on average, agencies reported operating at 91 percent of their authorized staffing levels, indicating a nearly 10 percent deficit in workforce numbers.
Between FYs 2016 -17 and 2020 -21, sworn hires outpaced separations, allowing the Department to increase the number of active officers. However, separations have exceeded hires in recent years . As shown in Exhibit 11, between FY 2021-22 and FY 2024-25, the Department hired 406 sworn staff but had 482 sworn separations, resulting in a net loss of 76 sworn staff. In FY 2024-25, there were 115 hires and 121 separations.
Exhibit 11: Number of Separations Exceeded Hires in Recent Years Source: Auditor analysis of the City’s human resource management system.
Note: These separations include only the staff that left City employment. The analysis excludes staff who transferred to other civilian roles such as the Community Safety Officer program or later returned to City employment.
Recruit Separations Have Been Increasing
Recruit retention has become an increasing challenge for the Police Department. As shown in Exhibit 1 2, in FY 2024- 25, 39 percent of police recruits separated before becoming sworn officers. This is an increase from 11 percent in FY 2015-16. The IACP reports that retention of staff with fewer years of experience is a persistent problem among law enforcement agencies.
Per a surveyed respondent in a 2024 IACP report,
“Most retention issues occur within the first five years of employment. Sworn members either realize that this career isn’t for them, or they simply cannot effectively do the job.” As more recruits leave during the a cademy, fewer ultimately become sworn officers. This reduces the number of successful graduates from each academy class and narrows the pipeline of new hires.
0 40
80 120
160
200
Number of Staff
All Hires Separations (recruits included)
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 28 Exhibit 12: Recruit Separations Have Been Increasing Source: Auditor analysis of recruit separations from the City’s human resource management system.
Separations Among Officers with Less Experience Also Increased Separation rates have also increased among officers with between 5-10 years of experience. While in FY 2020-21, separations within this group represented 3 percent of sworn separations; by FY 2024 -25, they accounted for 24 percent.11 It should be noted that this may partially reflect that this cohort had become the largest segment of the overall sworn officer population.
In 2025, most sworn staff had fewer than 10 years of experience. This marks a decline in overall experience levels compared to ten years ago when the largest group of sworn personnel had between 15 and 25 years of experience.
11 In its October 2025 report to the Public Safety, Finance, and Strategic Support Committee, the Department noted results of the exit interview process and reported that in FY 2024-25, of the 125 officers that separated from the City: 29 left because of service retirements, 22 resigned in-lieu of termination, 7 left for other agencies, 6 retired on a disability, 5 resigned for personal reasons, 4 were terminated, 3 transferred to another City position and 2 were deceased. The remaining 47 resigned for other reasons. 11% 6%
15% 13% 18% 16%
32% 31% 28%
39%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Finding 2
29 Exhibit 13: Sworn staff with 5-10 Years of Experience Account for a Growing Share of Overall Separations
Fiscal
Year
Separations for Officers with
5 - 10 Years Tenure % of the Overall Separations
2015-16 4 7%
2016-17 1 2%
2017-18 2 3%
2018-19 0 0%
2019-20 1 1%
2020-21 3 3%
2021-22 7 7%
2022-23 10 9%
2023-24 12 16%
2024-25 20 24%
Source: Auditor analysis of separation data from the City’s human resource management system.
Note: The overall sworn staff separations exclude recruit separations.
The Department Has Several Initiatives to Address Retention and Hiring Challenges
As described in the Department’s 2025 Recruitment and Hiring Activity Annual Report, the Department has undertaken various efforts to improve recruitment.12 These include streamlining the application process, enhancing advertising and outreach, providing free testing and mentorship opportunities, and others.
In addition, the most recent Memorandum of Agreement with the San Jos e Police Officers’ Association includes a new non -pensionable “Longevity Pay” provision for sworn employees who have completed eight years of service with the City. This is in addition to the 4 percent ongoing retention premium pay that was previously negotiated.
Under the Increasing Community Safety Council Focus Area, the Department has a goal of 40 hires for each academy class. Given the challenges in both hiring and retaining recruits, additional reporting on both recruit and sworn staff retention would provide a more complete picture around the outcomes from the City’s recruitment and retention efforts.
12 Police Department Recruitment and Hiring Activity, (September 26, 2025), https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=14848119&GUID=F7719D4C-30E9-4FFA-8903-8238FA350A14.
Presented to the City Council’s Public Safety, Finance, and Strategic Support Committee.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 30 Recommendation:
3: To measure progress around the Department’s hiring and retention efforts, the Police Department should:
a. Include recruit retention rates in the Increasing
Community Safety Focus Area updates to augment the
current recruitment reporting, and
b. Include overall retention results for sworn staff in the Department’s annual recruitment and hiring report to
the Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support
(PSFSS) Committee.
SJPD Expenditures for Overtime Have Increased Significantly Since the last audit in 2021, the City’s use of overtime has increased in both cost and hours. In FY 2024 -25, overtime expenditures totaled $72 million. 13 This is 53 percent more than the overtime expenditures in FY 2019- 20. As noted earlier, over this same period overtime hours rose by 27 percent, from 470,000 to 596,000 hours.
The total sworn staff hours are broken down by overtime for pay (47 percent) and overtime for compensatory time (53 percent), where employees “bank” compensatory hours earned at a rate of 1.5 times the number of hours worked, until (1) the individual uses comp time hours for time off, (2) the individual receives a monetary, compensatory time buy-out from the City, or (3) the total balance is paid out upon retirement or separation from the City.
13 Sworn staff work overtime for myriad reasons. These include overtime for report writing, court appearance, and call backs; backfill vacancies, specialized tasks (Airport patrol, downtown patrol), and overtime to staff events (protests, dignitary protection). Because the Department operates on a 24/7 basis with sworn personnel usually on 10-hour shifts, the Memoran dum of Agreement with the Police Officers’ Association defines overtime as work exceeding 10 hours in a 24-hour period or exceeding 40 hours in a week. Staff working overtime are generally paid at time and a half. In addition, for some calls staff can also choose to be paid in compensatory time (comp time), which are paid or taken as leave at a later date.
Finding 2
31 Exhibit 14: Overtime Hours Worked Have Increased in Recent Years
Source: Auditor analysis of overtime data from the City’s human resource management system.
Based on an overtime analysis by the City’s
Budget Office, overall hours worked by sworn
staff stayed relatively stable for the last four
years, but overtime now accounts for nearly a
quarter of total hours worked by sworn staff.
Exhibit 15 below shows the upward trend in overtime expenses in the past 15 years. According to the Budget Office, the Department has generally been able to use vacancy savings to pay for overtime costs exceeding what had been budgeted.
Exhibit 15: Overtime Expenditures Exceeded the Budgeted Overtime Costs Source: Auditor analysis of the financial management system expenditure data, and the adopted budget from the Adopted Operating Budget reports (not adjusted for inflation).
Overtime in FY 2024-25
accounted for 24
percent of total
hours worked by
sworn staff.
0 100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
Hours
OT Hours for Pay
OT Hours for Comp
$-
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80Millions
Actual Overtime Expenditure Adopted Budget
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 32 We should note that in addition to current costs, the City faces future liabilities from banked overtime hours (compensatory time). Employees may accrue compensatory time in lieu of immediate overtime pay, which is later paid out at the employee’s current rate. As of 2025, the City’s compensatory time liability had grown to $26.4 million from about $21 million in November 2020, with the balance of banked hours continuing to rise.14 The Department Relies on Overtime to Staff Patrol Shifts Because of vacancies in recent years, the Department has relied on overtime to staff shifts. In a two -week sample from July 2025, an average of seven of 88 patrol positions per shift were filled through overtime—equivalent to 21 positions daily, or 8 percent of all patrol shifts.
The Department determines a minimum number of positions required to staff each shift. When staffing falls below this level, the Department fills the gaps with overtime for either a full shift or part of a shift. Essentially, this means that without the use of overtime, the Department may fall below its minimum patrol staffing requirements.
As a result, in FY 2024-25, 38 percent of sworn staff exceeded 70 total hours worked in at least 26 separate weeks (or half a year). T his is equivalent to working 10-hour days, seven days a week, for at least half of a year . Per the Duty Manual:
[…] the total of on -duty hours and secondary employment hours, excluding court and mandatory overtime, shall not exceed 70 hours in a calendar week [emphasis added].
However, because overtime to staff regular shifts is mandatory, it is exempt from the 70-hour limit and more officers are working significant overtime.15 In FY 2024-25, 124 sworn staff worked over 1,000 overtime hours —twice as many as in FY 2019-20 as reported in the 2021 audit. This workload equates to roughly half of a full -time position per person and raises concerns about long-term sustainability and officer wellness.
14 As part of the effort to lower comp ensatory time balances, the Department established new limits on the compensatory time cap in the 2025 Memorandum of Agreement signed with the Police Officers ’ Association. The new limits lower the compensatory time cap from 480 to 440, and have the option to gradually lower to 360 hours per sworn staff by FY 2028-29.
15 The limits also exclude other mandatory overtime, the definition of which was clarified in an August 2024 memorandum from the Chief of Police: “mandatory overtime is limited to work that must be completed immediately and cannot be done during an employee’s regular work hours or their next work shift .” The definition of mandatory and discretionary overtime has evolved over time. For example, in a 2012 directive from the Chief, discretionary overtime was “overtime which is not immediately necessary for providing police services to the community” including the completion of reports and administrative work at end of shift, which could be considered mandatory currently.
Finding 2
33 According to the 2024 IACP report:
In understaffed agencies, officers often experienced burnout to the extent they would leave the agency or the profession, further exacerbating staffing challenges and resulting in an increased workload for the other officers still employed — thereby making those officers even more vulnerable to
burnout as well.
Some staff we talked to also expressed frustration about long hours and fatigue, citing the effects of mandatory overtime.
In March 2026, the Administration presented the City Council with Police Department cost reduction options that largely focused on redeploying sworn staff from other units and bureaus to field patrol and eliminating some services currently provided through overtime. These options were developed in response to the FY 2026 -27 budget instability and rising overtime costs in recent years. While the proposals included increased oversight of overtime use, most recommendations emphasized redeployment and service reductions. The Department expects $8 million reduction in costs from these actions.
There Has Been Significant Growth in Overtime for Follow-Up and Report Writing
Similar to our previous audit, follow- up and report writing accounted for a significant portion of overtime in FY 2024 -25. Follow -up accounted for 185,000 hours or 31 percent of all overtime hours —more than the hours spent on overtime categorized as “mandatory overtime and minimum staffing.”
16 Report writing also remains common. Staff logged 55,300 or 9 percent of all overtime hours for report writing.
16 “Mandatory overtime and minimum staffing” includes overtime for backfilling vacancies, court appearances, and holdovers.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 34 Exhibit 16: Total Overtime Hours as Reported by Assignment Type Source: Auditor analysis of overtime type codes in the City’s human resource management system.
Increase in the follow-up and report writing categories could be partly due to the Department’s efforts to track overtime hours more accurately. Previously, the Department had used the category “miscellaneous” for several types of overtime. In the past decade, “miscellaneous” overtime decreased significantly from 189,300 to 21,400 hours.
Increased Overtime Usage Underscores the Need for Stronger Oversight and Enforcement of Controls
At the time of our audit, we
found that the Department
could improve its oversight of
overtime for follow -up and
report writing by enforcing
existing policies . In 2024 the
Police Chief issued an overtime
controls memo randum that
required follow-up and report
writing overtime be approved
by a lieutenant or higher. Staff
were also required to justify
why such work must occur on
overtime and to document
supervisory approval in the
timekeeping system.
However, a review of about 450 timecard entries that noted overtime worked for follow-up and report writing from two days in July 2025 found that only 19 percent were approved at that level. Most entries —79 percent —were approved by sergeants, and eight entries had no documented approval. Also, Memo #2404-022: Overtime Controls
(August 2024)
Report writing and follow-up overtime must
be approved by a lieutenant or above and will
only be approved when the action cannot be
completed during an employee’s regular work
hours or their next shift. Staff must articulate
why work can only be done on overtime.
Department members will include the name
of the supervisor or manager who approved
the overtime and the reason for the overtime
in the comment section of the online
timesheet for all overtime worked.
Admin, Meetings,
and Training
Mandatory and
Minimum Staffing
Miscellaneous
Follow Up and
Report Writing
Specific Activity
and Event
0 40,000
80,000
120,000
160,000
200,000
240,000Hours
2021 Police
Staffing Audit
Finding 2
35 timecard comments did not document or explain why follow- up or report writing could not be completed during regular hours, as required by the Chief’s August 2024 Overtime Controls memorandum.
Further, in 2025, there were instances of overtime in timecards processed without any supervisory signature. The general Department practice is to request supervisor approval retroactively if needed. However, this does not always occur , and these approvals are not currently noted in timecards approvals are not currently noted in timecards. 17 Inconsistent approval practices weaken internal controls and increase the risk of unauthorized or excessive overtime. Without systematic enforcement of approval requirements, the Department has limited assurance that overtime hours are necessary, appropriately reviewed, or in line with policy.
During the audit, in February 2026, the Department issued direction (Overtime Controls Memorandum No. 2026-008) that updated the approval requirements for follow -up and report writing overtime. According to the Department, having lieutenants approve all such overtime as noted in the 2024 direction had not been feasible. Lieutenants will now be expected to approve report writing and follow -up overtime that is preplanned and sergeants will now approve all the unplanned end -of-shift report writing and follow -up overtime in employee timecards. In our opinion, the Department should also create a process to monitor that this direction is being followed.
Effective internal controls must be both practical and capable of achieving their intended objectives. Management should also regularly assess whether those controls are operating as designed. According to the United States Governmental Accountability Office’s Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government:
When evaluating the design of a control, management
determines whether the control individually and in
combination with other controls can address risks related to achieving an entity’s objectives. […] A control cannot be effectively implemented if it was not effectively designed.
The standards further note:
Changes in conditions affecting the entity and its environment often require changes to the entity’s internal control system, as existing controls may not be effective for meeting objectives or addressing risks under changed conditions. Once significant changes are identified, management uses its change
17 We reviewed a sample of 20 timecards to assess the Department’s practice of obtaining retroactive supervisory approval for overtime worked in 2025. Of the 20 timecards, 15 included supervisory approval either in the timecard or through a separate retroactive approval process, and 5 had no approval documented —either because no response was received from supervisors, or the request had not been sent.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 36 assessment process to identify and analyze the impact of risks related to the identified significant changes in the internal control system and responds by revising the system on a timely basis, when necessary, to maintain its effectiveness.
Reviewing the effectiveness of the updated overtime controls will be important to ensure the revised approval structure continues to mitigate risks and achieves its intended objectives.
Oversight of Secondary Employment Work and Adherence to Duty Manual Rules Can Be Improved
Oversight of secondary employment work can be improved by preventing staff from accepting assignments that conflict with regular shifts or violate Department policy.
18 In a limited sample of 50 individuals who worked
secondary employment assignments between July 13 and July 26, 2025, we identified two individuals working overlapping hours between their regular shift and secondary employment assignments.19
Although the number of violations were few, their nature suggests a potential control weakness. The Department uses a timekeeping software to schedule and track regular, overtime, and secondary employment hours. However, this software uses separate modules for regular/overtime and secondary employment hours and does not currently prevent secondary employment assignments from overlapping with regular or overtime shifts. While the system restricts sign -ups beyond the 16- hour daily limit, it does not block conflicts between regular/overtime and secondary employment assignments.
Establishing a software or supervisory review control can ensure that sworn staff do not sign up for and work overlapping assignments.
Recommendations:
4: To ensure adequate oversight and the effectiveness of existing controls, the Police Department should develop a process to monitor compliance with the Overtime Controls Memorandum No. 2026 -008, including requiring
documented justification for report -writing and follow- up overtime and ensuring approvals are consistent with the revised expectations for pre -planned and unplanned
overtime.
18 The Duty Manual defines the secondary employment activity as any work, employment or occupation performed by a Department member in addition to their City work activities including but not limited to law enforcement- related activities or businesses. Examples include assignments at special events, school districts, shopping centers, or City-related encampment cleanup activities.
19 We have provided this information to the Department for further investigation and follow-up.
Finding 2
37 5: To improve supervisory oversight, the Police Department should develop a process to follow up when retroactive
approval of overtime by sworn supervisors has not occurred. 6: To restrict sworn staff from signing up for secondary employment assignments that overlap with other shifts, the Police Department should evaluate whether its timekeeping software can be configured to prevent such occurrences.
Alternatively, implement a regular review process to ensure compliance with the Duty Manual restrictions on overlapping hours.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 38 This page was intentionally left blank
39 Finding 3 Community Service Officers Continue
to Be a Valuable Resource for the
Department
Summary
Since the prior audit, the Department restructured its CSO program to streamline reporting relationships and better integrate CSOs into patrol operations . While this change aimed to enhance communication and coordination with sworn officers, the Department does not currently track performance metrics for the CSO program, unlike other areas of police operations that are routinely assessed using performance indicators. Tracking this data can enhance the Department’s ability to evaluate recent changes, allocate resources strategically, and ensure efficient use of CSO staffing. Moreover, addressing inconsistencies between designated CSO dispatch call types and actual field responses can support more effective deployment across the city.
The Previous 2021 Police Staffing Audit Noted Opportunities for Efficiencies in the CSO Program
Our 2021 Police Staffing a udit noted that in FY 2019-20, CSOs responded to 60 percent of calls specifically identified in the Duty Manual as “Dispatchable Calls for CSOs” during their shifts. However, CSO responses for dispatchable events varied significantly across police districts, contributing to uneven workloads. In addition, CSOs handled incidents not explicitly listed in the Duty Manual such as “suspicious vehicle” and “expired registration.” The audit also highlighted opportunities to increase CSO involvement in community policing as outlined in the Duty Manual .
We noted that these gaps indicated that SJPD could further define the role of CSOs and expand the program to support sworn officers more effectively.
We recommended that the Department add more CSOs, as budget allows, develop clear guidelines to ensure CSO workloads were more equitably distributed across police districts, r eassess the list of CSO -dispatchable incidents , and clarify expectations for CSO involvement in community policing efforts.
Since that audit, the Department restructured the CSO program, and assigned a Community Service Officer to downtown to help serve in an "ambassador" role with their presence and visibility. More broadly , staff assignments of CSOs are reviewed every six months and are based on previous call data according to the Department. In April 2025, the Department piloted a change to CSO schedules to better align with patrol schedules.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 40 The Department Restructured the CSO Program to Improve Oversight In 2024-25, CSOs responded to about 19,700 calls for service.20 This included:
• About 12,040 calls for lower
priority call types specifically
identified in the Duty Manual as
“Dispatchable Calls for CSOs”.
These calls accounted for
roughly 14,100 hours on scene,
time that sworn staff would
have otherwise had to spend.
• About 7,620 calls for incidents
that were not identified as
“Dispatchable Calls for CSOs”
but fe ll within the broad
category of “duties and responsibilities regularly undertaken by CSOs” outlined in the Duty Manual. These include d such activities as evidence pickup, and assistance with road closures and traffic control duties at the scene of an accident.
21 CSOs may also self-initiate calls, such as for parking violations or engaging with citizen flag downs.
CSOs supplement patrol officers and reduce the number of low priority calls that sworn staff have to respond to. The 2024 Matrix Consulting Group’s Final Report noted that, “reducing patrol workload through an array of different approaches can free patrol officers’ time to focus on the types of activities that benefit most from their skill sets, such as proactive policing, responding to emergency calls for service, and engaging with the community.”
The Department Should Create Metrics to Monitor CSO Workload and Program Effectiveness
As noted earlier, since the prior audit, in FY 2024-25, the Department restructured the CSO program to streamline reporting relationships and improve operational accountability. This included eliminating the Supervising and Senior CSO roles, and placing all CSO I and CSO II staff under the direct supervision of patrol sergeants.
The Department routinely monitors a wide range of performance indicators for its services, such as response times to calls for service, and metrics related to secondary employment activities, community education, investigative services, and regulatory enforcement. These metrics support the Department’s ability to evaluate its service delivery and identify areas for improvement. Establishing
20 These incidents include all incidents CSOs responded to, regardless of priority, shift, or whether the call was considered dispatchable to a CSO.
21 These also included CSOs assisting with about 1,100 Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls, and all calls that fell outside of regularly scheduled work hours.
As outlined in the Duty Manual, the
primary goal of the CSO program is
to supplement patrol officers in the
Bureau of Field Operations by
responding to identified lower
priority calls for service, allowing
sworn staff to remain available to
respond to higher priority
emergency calls and provide more
time for proactive enforcement.
Finding 3
41 performance metrics for the CSO program would enable the Department to assess the effects of recent structural changes. Given staffing and resource constraints, this would also help the Department monitor CSO usage and optimize CSO operations.
Updating Dispatchable Call Types to Align with Actual Responses Can Ensure More Consistent CSO Usage
Similar to what was noted in the 2021 audit, actual CSO field responses do not always align with the list of calls outlined in Duty Manual Section A 3007 Dispatchable Calls for Service. Some calls in the list are routinely handled by sworn officers, while CSOs routinely respond to calls outside the list.
Keeping Call Types Current Can Help Align CSO Dispatch with Operational Needs While CSOs responded to some calls in the dispatchable call list at a high rate, CSOs rarely responded to others. In FY 2024-25, CSOs responded to 83 percent of all stolen vehicle report calls and 80 percent of burglary report calls. 22 Conversely, CSOs rarely responded to other call types, including:
• 0 percent of missing persons calls
• 3 percent of calls for vehicle accidents with property damage • 14 percent of calls for traffic hazards
Department staff stated that CSOs would not be dispatched to some call types because of the nature of the calls. For example, the Department would not assign a CSO to a missing person report, as such incidents generally require a sworn officer’s presence.
CSOs Respond to Calls Outside of the Dispatchable Call List CSOs responded to around 7,600 calls that were not listed in the Duty Manual’s dispatchable call list.23 This represents approximately 39 percent of all calls handled by CSOs in FY 2024-25. Some of the most common call types included:
• Evidence pickup (1,802 calls)
• Parking violations (934 calls)
• “Meet the citizen” calls (637 calls)
In total, these three call types accounted for approximately 4,900 hours on scene, including 3,900 hours dedicated to evidence pick up alone.
22 This only includes calls in the day and swing shifts. CSOs are generally not assigned to the night shift. 23 CSOs can respond to other calls that fall within their general duties and responsibilities outlined in another section of the Duty Manual.
Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 42 Aligning CSO Dispatchable Calls with the Duty Manual Can Clarify Expectations for CSO Use
CSOs are dispatched by Communications staff, assigned by field supervisors, or may self-assign to low-priority calls in coordination with a sergeant . According to Communications staff, it is standard practice to dispatch available CSOs to calls following the priority guidelines established in section A 3007 of the Duty Manual.
According to Duty Manual Section A 3007 Dispatchable Calls for Service:
CSOs shall be dispatched to select lower priority calls for service, where there is no suspect on scene and/or any identifiable suspect information or leads that can be immediately followed up upon [emphasis added].
Section A 3007 further identifies eligible dispatchable call types and establishes priority rankings for those calls. Updating the dispatchable call types to more closely align with the services CSOs routinely provide would support the diversion of lower-priority calls from sworn personnel. This may include removing call types for which CSO dispatch is not operationally appropriate and adding assignments (such as evidence pickup) that are more commonly handled by CSOs.
Recommendations:
7: To better assess performance of the Community Service Officer program, the Police Department should develop performance metrics to assess whether the program is meeting its intended purpose. This may include metrics such as the number and types of calls re sponded to, or the geographic distribution across districts, or other similar metrics.
8: To better align calls that Community Service Officers (CSOs) respond to with the Duty Manual dispatchable calls for service list, the Police Department should update the Duty Manual to:
a. Include call types not currently listed but which CSOs commonly handle, such as “evidence pick-up”, “meet the
citizen” and, “parking violations”,
b. Remove call types that CSOs would not normally handle.
43 Conclusion
Despite a decline in calls for service, the Department has continued to struggle to meet response time goals. The Department is undertaking a redistricting effort and has piloted other changes to improve operations. Adjusting its reporting methodology for response times can help the Department assess these efforts as well as performance generally. The Department also continues to face persistent staffing challenges driven by staffing shortages and retention difficulties among both recruits and ex isting sworn staff, resulting in a growing reliance on overtime to sustain operations. The Department should augment its reporting on hiring and retention efforts with outcomes from those efforts. It should also develop a process to monitor compliance with the new overtime controls. Lastly, CSOs continue to be a valuable resource for the Department. E nhancing performance metrics and expectations for the CSO program would provide greater accountability and support the effective deployment of CSOs.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Finding 1: The Department Is Using Multiple Strategies to Improve Response Times Recommendation #1: To increase transparency around operational changes to improve police services, the Police Department should include outcomes from its redistricting efforts, such as response times and call volume distribution, and if needed, an analysis of alternative shift schedules, into future Increasing Community Safety Focus Area reports.
Recommendation #2: To improve how response times are reported publicly or for internal purposes, the Police Department should update its methodology for calculating response times for Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls by:
a. Excluding calls that are downgraded to a lower priority during a response; and/or b. Consider the use of median response times instead of average response times to reduce the impact of outliers.
Finding 2: The Department Continues to Face Staffing Challenges and Relies on Overtime to Meet Operational Needs
Recommendation #3: To measure progress around the Department’s hiring and retention efforts, the Police Department should:
a. Include recruit retention rates in the Increasing Community Safety Focus Area updates to augment the current recruitment reporting, and
b. Include overall retention results for sworn staff in the Department’s annual recruitment and hiring report to the Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support (PSFSS) Committee.
Recommendation #4: To ensure adequate oversight and the effectiveness of existing controls, the Police Department should develop a process to monitor compliance with the Overtime Controls Memorandum No. 2026 -008, including requiring documented justification for report -writing and Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report 44 follow-up overtime and ensuring approvals are consistent with the revised expectations for pre - planned and unplanned overtime.
Recommendation #5: To improve supervisory oversight, the Police Department should develop a process to follow up when retroactive approval of overtime by sworn supervisors has not occurred.
Recommendation #6: To restrict sworn staff from signing up for secondary employment assignments that overlap with other shifts, the Police Department should evaluate whether its timekeeping software can be configured to prevent such occurrences. Alternatively, implement a regular review process to ensure compliance with the Duty Manual restrictions on overlapping hours.
Finding 3: Community Service Officers Continue to Be a Valuable Resource for the Department
Recommendation #7: To better assess performance of the Community Service Officer program, the Police Department should develop performance metrics to assess whether the program is meeting its intended purpose. This may include metrics such as the number and types of calls responded to, or the geographic distribution across districts, or other similar metrics.
Recommendation #8: To better align calls that Community Service Officers (CSOs) respond to with the Duty Manual dispatchable calls for service list, the Police Department should update the Duty Manual to:
a. Include call types not currently listed but which CSOs commonly handle, such as “evidence pick-up”, “meet the citizen” and, “parking violations”, b. Remove call types that CSOs would not normally handle.
A-1
APPENDIX A
Audit Objective, Scope, and Methodology
The mission of the City Auditor’s Office is to identify ways to increase the economy, efficiency, effectiveness, equity, and accountability of City government by independently assessing and reporting on City operations and services. The audit function is an essential element of San José’s public accountability, and our audits provide the City Council, City management, and the public with independent analysis, reliable information, and recommendations for improvement of City operations and services. In accordance with the City Auditor’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Audit Work Plan, we have completed a follow-up audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures and Workload.
We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
This audit is a follow -up to the City Auditor’s 2021 audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload :
Staffing Reductions Have Impacted Response Times and Led to High Overtime Costs. The objective of the 2021 audit was to review and compare the San José Police Department’s (SJPD) staffing, spending, and calls for service over time, including allocation of staff by bureau or division, vacancies, and use of overtime.
We sought to understand the relevant internal controls over staffing and expenditures , and have performed the following to achieve the audit objective:
• To understand deployment and staffing standards we reviewed relevant authoritative standards, policies, and procedures, including:
o San José City Charter and the San José Municipal Code o San Jose Police Officers’ Association Memorandum of Agreement o San José Police Department Duty Manual and relevant Chief of Police General Orders
o Relevant Police Department memoranda and presentations to the City Council o The 2024 Final Report on the Comprehensive Redistricting Plan by the Matrix Consulting Group
• Using the City’s financial management system, the human resources management system, and Police Department Adopted Budgets we reviewed the following:
o Adopted budgets between FY 2005-06 and FY 2024-25 and expenditures between FY 2008-09 and FY 2024-25
o Historical staffing, separations, vacancies, and tenure in the Department • Reviewed FY 2024- 25 Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) data to understand the Department’s workload and response times, including calls for service, officer-initiated calls, and Community Service Officer (CSO) responses across each of the 16 police districts.
A-2
• To understand police staffing challenges, we reviewed minimum patrol staffing and shifts covered using overtime in a two-week period from July 13, 2025, to July 26, 2025. The timeframe was judgmentally selected to represent a typical patrol schedule. However, results may not be representative of all patrol shifts. • To understand the controls over overtime usage and vacancies, we:
o Analyzed data from the City’s human resource management system for overtime usage by pay types (pay versus comp balance) and assignment type between FY 2015-16 and FY 2024-25
o Reviewed the Department’s oversight on overtime through its internal dashboard o Reviewed the supervisory approvals and retroactive approvals for overtime hours recorded in a sample of patrol timecards in 2025
o Interviewed sworn staff supervisors to understand overtime approval and monitoring processes; the Recruiting Unit to learn about its efforts on hiring and retention in the Department; and timekeeping staff to learn about the timecard approval process
o Interviewed staff in the City Manager’s Office to understand the Police Department’s staffing and expenditure history, overtime oversight, and operations including current patrol deployment pilots and alternative responses for mental health crisis calls
o Referenced survey results issued by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) on retention across U.S. police agencies
• To understand overtime controls over secondary employment, we conducted a limited sample review of secondary employment time reported in the Police Department’s timekeeping system and cross-checked it with timecard entries in the human resource management system, and the regular patrol shift schedules provided by the Department.
The Secondary Employment Unit sample timeframe was selected to align with the patrol schedule sample to represent a typical police schedule. • Participated in day shift ride-alongs with field patrol staff in September 2025. • Using the FBI’s UCR data, the American Census Survey, and recent Adopted Budgets we compared SJPD staffing, budget, population and crime data to other large California jurisdictions, including the cities of San Diego, Oakland, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Fresno, and the City and County of San Francisco.
• Used the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) to map police districts and distribution of calls for service.
We would like to thank the San José Police Department and the City Manager’s Office for their time and insight during the audit process.
TO: JOSEPH ROIS
CITY AUDITOR
FROM: PAUL JOSEPH
SUBJECT: See Below DATE: April 7, 2026
Approved Date: April 7, 2026
SUBJECT: R
esponse to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
BACKGR
OUND
This m
emorandum responds to the City Auditor’s follow-up report to the 2021 audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload. The objective of the 2021 audit was to review and compare the Police Department’s staffing, spending, and calls for service over time, including staff allocation by bureau or division and use of overtime.
The 2021 audit
included 10 recommendations focused on increasing sworn staffing in the context of the City’s overall budget, improving management of overtime, optimizing patrol deployment through alternative shift schedules, tracking calls that could be diverted to non-sworn staff, and reassessing the deployment of Community Service Officers. At the time of the follow-up report, nine of the 10 previous recommendations had been implemented.
In the
2026 follow-up report, the City Auditor made eight new recommendations related to staffing, response times, and operational practices. This memorandum provides the Department’s response to the recommendations contained in the Auditor’s follow-up report.
RECOM
MENDATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSES
Finding 1:
The Department Is Using Multiple Strategies to Improve Response Times
Recommendation #1: To increase transparency around operational changes to improve police services, the Police Department should include outcomes from its redistricting efforts, such as response times and call volume distribution, and if needed, an analysis of alternative shift schedules, into future Increasing Community Safety Focus Area reports.
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
Administration Response to Recommendation #1: The Police Department agrees with this recommendation.
Gr
een: The Police Department will work with the City Manager’s Office (CMO) to incorporate measurable outcomes from its redistricting efforts into future CMO Increasing Community Safety Focus Area reports. Implementation is dependent on the completion of redistricting efforts.
These out
comes are expected to include, as appropriate, response time data, call volume distribution across districts, and other relevant performance indicators. Analysis of alternative shift schedules is being conducted as part of redistricting and related staffing evaluations. The Department will also summarize key findings in these reports.
Tar
get Completion Date: January 31, 2028
Recommendation #2: To improve how response times are reported publicly or for internal purposes, the Police Department should update its methodology for calculating response times for Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls by:
a) Ex
cluding calls that are downgraded to a lower priority during a response; and/or b) Consider the use of median response times instead of average response times to reduce the impact of outliers.
Administration Response to Recommendation #2: The Police Department agrees with these recommendations.
Gr
een: Implementation is dependent on technical or system limitations within the current computer-aided dispatch and reporting platforms that affect the ability to modify historical data or automate revised calculations.
The Depar
tment will continue to coordinate with the Crime Analysis Unit and Bureau of Technical Services to assess system capabilities, determine appropriate methodological updates, and identify any system enhancements that may be required.
As
part of this effort, the Department will evaluate the feasibility of excluding calls that are downgraded during response from Priority 1 and Priority 2 response time calculations.
If
feasible, the Department will also assess incorporating median response times, in addition to or in place of average response times, to better reflect typical performance and reduce the impact of outliers. Approved revisions will be incorporated into future performance reporting.
Tar
get Completion Date: December 31, 2026
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
Finding 2: The Department Continues to Face Staffing Challenges and Relies on Overtime to Meet Operational Needs
Recommendation #3: To measure progress around the Department’s hiring and retention efforts, the Police Department should:
a) Incl
ude recruit retention rates in the Increasing Community Safety Focus Area updates to augment the current recruitment reporting, and b) Include overall retention results for sworn staff in the Department’s annual recruitment and hiring report to the Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support (PSFSS) Committee.
Administration Response to Recommendation #3: The Police Department agrees with these recommendations.
Green:
The Police Department will work to develop a standardized format for reporting annual recruit retention. The Department will provide this information to the CMO for inclusion in future Increasing Community Safety Focus Area updates.
The Depart
ment will develop a way to report retention results for sworn staff and present these results in the Department’s annual recruitment and hiring report presented to the Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support (PSFSS) Committee.
Target
Completion Date: December 31, 2026
Recommendation #4: To ensure adequate oversight and the effectiveness of existing controls, the Police Department should develop a process to monitor compliance with the Overtime Controls Memorandum No. 2026-008, including requiring documented justification for report-writing and follow-up overtime and ensuring approvals are consistent with the revised expectations for pre-planned and unplanned overtime.
Administration Response to Recommendation #4: The Police Department agrees with this recommendation.
Green:
Based on discussions with the Auditor’s Office during the audit review process, the Department was encouraged to enforce the requirements in the 2023 Overtime Control memo regarding the report writing and follow-up overtime approval and documentation process.
To address
this, on February 25, 2026, the Department replaced Overtime Control Memorandum 2024-022 with Overtime Control Memorandum 2026-008. The updated memorandum clarifies approval requirements and the reporting process for unplanned report writing and follow-up work, defines supervisory responsibilities for review and approval, and reinforces that all overtime must be accurately reported.
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
Specifically, the memorandum establishes that unplanned end-of-shift overtime related to report writing or follow-up will be reviewed and approved by a sergeant during the timesheet approval process. It also requires that all mandatory overtime include documented justification in the timecard comments, including an explanation of why the work could not be completed during regular hours and the name of the approving supervisor or manager.
Following this update, the Department was presented with a recommendation to develop a process to monitor compliance with the Overtime Control Memorandum. The Department believes that this updated recommendation has been implemented. The established timesheet review and approval process outlined in Memorandum No. 2026- 008 provides a structured and documented mechanism to monitor compliance with overtime controls. This process applies to both pre-planned and unplanned overtime and ensures appropriate supervisory oversight and accountability. The Department’s Fiscal Unit manager meets with bureau chiefs on a biweekly basis to discuss ongoing compliance with the requirements of the Overtime Control Memorandum.
Target Completion Date: February 25, 2026 (completed)
Recommendation #5: To improve supervisory oversight, the Police Department should develop a process to follow up when retroactive approval of overtime by sworn supervisors has not occurred.
Administration Response to Recommendation #5: The Police Department agrees with this recommendation.
Green: All overtime hours must be approved by a supervisor. This includes both pre- approved overtime and retroactive overtime requests. Supervisors are responsible for reviewing the necessity of the overtime, verifying the accuracy of the reported hours, and ensuring compliance with Department policy and applicable labor agreements prior to approval. If the supervisor does not agree with the accuracy of the timecard, the supervisor can direct the employee to complete a timesheet adjustment, and/or determine if the discrepancy warrants an internal investigation.
Retroactive overtime submissions require supervisory review and approval through the Department’s timekeeping and adjustment approval processes before payroll processing.
To strengthen oversight, the Department’s timekeeper developed a process to follow up when retroactive approval has not occurred. Upon submission of a request for retroactive approval, the timekeeper is allowing three days for supervisory response before escalating the request up the chain of command. If no response is received within one week, the request is escalated to the member’s captain.
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
To reinforce this requirement and clarify expectations regarding retroactive approvals, the Department incorporated this guidance into Overtime Control Memorandum 2026- 008.
Page four states, in part:
All timecards must be approved by the employee’s supervisor / designee. If a timecard is not approved on time by a supervisor / designee and the timekeeper approves it, the supervisor / designee must retroactively provide approval or denial to the timekeep er for the timecard and any overtime worked.
Consistent with legal requirements, the City is required to compensate employees for all time worked, including time not pre-approved by a supervisor.
Target Completion Date: March 31, 2026 (completed)
Recommendation #6: To restrict sworn staff from signing up for secondary employment assignments that overlap with other shifts, the Police Department should evaluate whether its timekeeping software can be configured to prevent such occurrences. Alternatively, implement a regular review process to ensure compliance with the Duty Manual restrictions on overlapping hours.
Administration Response to Recommendation #6: The Police Department agrees with this recommendation.
Green: The Police Department agrees with this recommendation and will continue to evaluate the feasibility of a new timecard system that would restrict sworn members from working assignments that overlap with other shifts. Implementation is contingent, in part, on budgetary considerations and system limitations.
During FY 2024–2025, the Department partnered with a vendor to test a new system; however, the system did not meet operational needs.
The Department will continue to work with the Information Technology Department, the City Manager’s Office of Employee Relations (OER), and Finance Department to assess alternative solutions. This effort will include evaluating system capabilities, operational needs, and associated costs. While a target date has been identified, implementation remains dependent on the availability of a suitable solution and necessary resources.
If a software solution is not feasible, the Department will evaluate existing manual review processes and, if necessary, implement new processes to ensure compliance.
Target Completion Date: December 31, 2026
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
Finding 3: Community Service Officers Continue to Be a Valuable Resource for the Department
Recommendation #7: To better assess performance of the Community Service Officer (CSO) program, the Police Department should develop performance metrics to assess whether the program is meeting its intended purpose. This may include metrics such as the number and types of calls responded to, or the geographic distribution across districts, or other similar metrics.
Administration Response to Recommendation #7: The Police Department agrees with this recommendation.
Green: The Police Department will work to develop annual performance metrics for the purpose of monitoring CSO workload and program effectiveness.
The Department’s CSO program was recently evaluated as part of the Department’s redistricting and staffing deployment analysis. During that process, call types, geographic workload distribution, and operational needs were assessed, and CSO schedules were adjusted accordingly in FY 2024–2025 to better align with service demands.
The Department will continue to monitor CSO activity through existing operational data, including call response types and district deployment.
Target Completion Date: May 31, 2027
Recommendation #8: To better align calls that CSOs respond to with the Duty Manual dispatchable calls for service list, the Police Department should update the Duty Manual to:
a) Include call types not currently listed but which CSOs commonly handle, such as “evidence pick-up”, “meet the citizen” and “parking violations”, and b) Remove call types that CSOs would not normally handle.
Administration Response to Recommendation #8a: The Police Department agrees with Recommendation 8a.
Green: To align policy language with current practice and improve clarity, the Department will consider formally adding call types “EVIDENCE (evidence collection),” “10-62 (meet with citizen),” and “22500 (parking violation)” to Duty Manual Section A 3007 as dispatchable calls for CSOs. Implementation may be contingent on labor agreements.
Evidence pick-up requests eligible for CSO dispatch are defined under Duty Manual Section A 3007 (call type FNDPRP). The section includes the collection of video
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
evidence related to previously reported incidents. Additionally, Training Bulletin #2022- 013 established call type “EVIDENCE” and outlines the parameters and procedures for CSO dispatch. CSOs are routinely dispatched to calls classified as “EVIDENCE” for the purpose of evidence collection.
Duty Manual Section A 3003 outlines overall CSO duties, including responding to resident inquiries and providing general assistance, commonly referred to as call type “10-62” (meet with citizen). Section A 3003 authorizes CSOs to issue parking citations when dispatched to an incident or when observing a violation, commonly referred to as call type “22500.”
While these duties and call types are operationally authorized and currently in use, they are not explicitly listed in Duty Manual Section A 3007 DISPATCHABLE CALLS FOR CSOS. Adding these call types to A 3007 would improve internal policy consistency.
Target Completion Date: July 31, 2027
Administration Response to Recommendation #8b: The Police Department partially agrees with Recommendation 8b.
Yellow: The audit report referenced missing persons reports (0 percent CSO response), vehicle accidents with property damage (3 percent CSO response) and traffic hazards (14 percent CSO response) as call types that CSOs rarely responded to.
It is important to retain these call types in the list of dispatchable calls for CSOs for the following reasons:
Missing Persons
Missing person reports are generally taken over the phone through a Telephone Reporting Automated Knowledge (TRAK) report unless the individual is deemed “at risk.” When a person is classified as at risk, a sworn officer is required to respond.
Maintaining this call type within the Duty Manual provides operational flexibility in the event a TRAK report is unavailable or circumstances change requiring an in-person response. This flexibility ensures the Department can respond appropriately based on situational needs.
Vehicle Accidents and Traffic Hazards
Retaining these call types within the Duty Manual preserves the Department’s discretion to deploy CSOs when appropriate based on workload, staffing levels, and field conditions.
Maintaining flexibility within the Duty Manual supports efficient resource allocation while ensuring the Department can adapt to operational demands as they arise.
JOE ROIS, CITY AUDITOR
April 7, 2026
Subject: Response to the City Auditor on the Audit of Police Staffing, Expenditures, and Workload Follow-up Report
In further discussions with the City Auditor’s Office, it was clarified that the intent of this recommendation was not to mandate the removal of any specific call types from the list of dispatchable call types. It was further clarified that the intent of the recommendation was for the Department to conduct a review of the CSO policy in section A 3007 to evaluate whether any call types should be removed, whether the prioritization order of call types in that section is valid or helpful, and whether the section’s use of the phrases “shall be dispatched” and “order of precedence shall be used” properly align with the Department’s intended and actual deployment of CSOs.
The Department agrees with these goals and will perform a review and possible revision of Duty Manual section A 3007 to achieve them.
Target Completion Date: October 31, 2026
COORDINATION
This memo was coordinated with the City Manager’s Office and the City Attorney’s Office.
CONCLUSION
The Police Department appreciates the City Auditor’s review of staffing, expenditures, and workload. As outlined above, the Department agrees or partially agrees with all recommendations and has either implemented or is in the process of implementing measures to address them, while maintaining necessary operational flexibility. The Department remains committed to improving response times, addressing staffing challenges, and effectively deploying CSOs as a valuable resource.
Paul Joseph
Chief of Police
For questions, please contact Lieutenant Nathaniel Bennett, Research and Development Unit, San Jose Police Department, at [email protected].