S.D. POLICE CHIEF HAS LIMITED TIME AS TOP COP

San Diego police Chief David Nisleit’s time as the city’s top cop is limited.

That’s because in June 2019 he signed onto the city’s deferred retirement option plan, better known as DROP, mean- ing he has no more than three and a half years left on the job as per conditions of the plan.

DROP allows city employees to collect pension in a retirement account if they agree to retire within five years of the date they enroll.

The program was introduced to keep veteran employees on the job but was later criticized as a costly form of double dipping, especially given that DROP members tend to retire with six-figure payouts or higher. DROP was discontinued for new employees in 2005.

The city has confirmed Nisleit signed up on June 29, 2019. As of Dec. 4, the chief had accumulated $368,700 in his DROP account.

Nisleit, though a spokesman, declined an interview unless The San Diego Union-tribune agreed not to report the financial information about his DROP account. The spokesman indicated in a statement that Nisleit did want to share “some information” with the community, but was concerned that disclosing the balance in his DROP account would affect his safety.

“In the past several months, Chief Nisleit has been a victim of doxing, having protestors stand in front of his home, not only causing fear to his immediate family but also to his neighbors,” the statement read. “Providing financial information could target the Chief and his family and jeopardize their safety.”

At least once in recent months protesters gathered outside Nisleit’s home — on Aug. 27, when they protested a July 9 fatal shooting by San Diego police officers.

Nisleit is a public employee whose salary and pension information are subject to public disclosure.

The U-T previously reported that Nisleit’s predecessor, Shelley Zimmerman, was projected to receive more than $898,000 after her retirement on top of her annual pension. Zimmerman, who was in the DROP program when she became police chief in 2014, retired in March 2018 after 35 years with the department.

She retired because she reached the five-year stipulation under DROP.

According to the San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System, or SDCERS, Nisleit was one of more than 900 city employees enrolled in DROP as of June.

His final DROP balance at the time he retires will depend on a variety of factors, including his pay scale, years with the department, pension plan and how he chooses to collect the payout — either in a lump sum or monthly after he retires. He has been with the San Diego Police Department more than 30 years.

DROP accounts also have a guaranteed rate of return, which are set annually by the SDCERS board based on publicly available indexes.

SDCERS data show Nisleit’s account totaled $257,700 after the first year and could grow at the same rate over the remaining four years.

Because Nisleit’s participation in the DROP program puts a limit on his time as chief, that could affect how the department responds over time to ongoing calls for policing reform. Over the summer, demonstrators took to the streets in San Diego — as they did in cities across the country — to protest the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police and to draw attention to systemic racism and inequities in criminal justice.

In the face of those protests, Nisleit, with then-mayor Kevin Faulconer’s support, was the first local law enforcement leader to announce an end to the department’s use of the carotid restraint, a controversial neck hold that critics say is harmful and is used disproportionally on people of color.

Some reformists had tried for years to get the department to stop using the hold.

Within a day or so, every other department in the county, including the Sheriff’s Department, announced that they, too, would stop using the carotid restraint.

On June 24, Nisleit announced the department had crafted two standalone policies — one that requires officers to use de-escalation techniques when safe and reasonable, and a second that calls on officers to intervene when another officer uses unreasonable force.

Since taking the helm nearly two years ago, Nisleit and the department have faced other controversies some critics say reflect a strained relationship between some of the communities it serves.

Less than three weeks after he took over as chief, he launched an internal investigation into a points-based reward system for officers who made drug-related arrests and issued citations at Southern Division — a program the department killed before it was implemented.

In recent months, the department launched three high-profile internal investigations, including in September after an officer allegedly mocked on social media a makeshift memorial for a man he fatally shot.

This month, the department confirmed it had launched an investigation after some officers circulated a video clip of a film about Adolf Hitler. The clip, which had subtitles added over the images, “negatively portrays the community and department leadership” and includes a homophobic comment about the city’s new mayor, Todd Gloria, a spokesman said.

“The department will not tolerate hateful speech of any kind,” the spokesman said. “If the video was created by a department member, Chief (David) Nisleit will take swift action. This is not who we are as a department. This is not who we are as San Diegans.”

The clip was circulated after officers were spotted around a table in a La Jolla café, violating health orders that prohibited on-site dining because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The video was an apparent response to the department’s investigation into the café incident.

Since last year, social justice activists have raised concerns about the city’s Smart Streetlights program, a network of 3,000 street lights fitted with cameras and sensors. The program was sold to the city and installed in 2016 as a way to upgrade LED lights to save money and energy. Later, it was revealed to the public that the Police Department had access to the cameras for certain investigations.

In September, Faulconer ordered that the cameras be turned off until the city crafts an ordinance to govern surveillance technology. The announcement came days after the city floated a plan to hand over the camera management exclusively to police — a plan that drew immediate pushback from some community members.

David Nisleit