Two officers allege they faced “discrimination, harassment, and retaliation” by the San Francisco Police Department because they had “disabled veterans” license plates on their personal vehicles despite being fully mobile.
A lawsuit filed Friday by officers Marc Plummer and Steven Oesterich stems from a scandal last year in which a group of officers who were military veterans had disabled license plates, which gave them parking privileges and other accommodations.
After SFPD leaders learned of this, they ordered officers to report their use of disabled placards. Officers were instructed to either notify the department that they are disabled and be assessed for fitness or give up their plates.
The special license plates are for drivers whose disabilities impair mobility. S0 the presence of one “suggests a sworn member’s ability to perform essential job functions may be impaired by a medical condition, or that performing essential peace officer duties may pose a substantial risk of harm to the sworn member or the public,” former SFPD Chief Bill Scott said at the time.
After the order was issued, at least five active-duty officers who are veterans with access to such license plates hired attorney Matthew McNicholas, who called his clients “heroes [who] shouldn’t face scrutiny for an honor earned.”
McNicholas said that while each of his clients has a 100% disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs, none are so impaired that they can’t work in the field. Multiple unrelated impairments, from tinnitus to migraines, can add up to a 100% rating, according to the VA’s classification system.
Plummer, who served in the military from 2011 to 2016, joined the SFPD in 2018. When he left the military, he was classified at 100% disabled but was never informed that such status would affect his ability to work full time as a police officer, according to the lawsuit.
Plummer, who is based at Park Station, claims that harassment and retaliation began in 2024, after he complained to his captain of vulgar and sexual language being used by supervisors. Plummer alleges that his captain took no action and says he was punished by losing his partner and being harassed about his license plate by a lieutenant.
According to the lawsuit, he received a 30-day suspension as discipline for having the disabled license plate.
After several internal affairs interviews, an unnamed department attorney told Plummer the punishment was what happens when you “poke the bear,” he alleges.
His suit, which seeks unspecified monetary damages, also alleges that the department requested verification from the VA that he was eligible for a disabled license before letting him return to work. Plummer believes the request was meant to find out how he was injured in the military.
Oesterich served in the military from 2008 to 2016 and became an SFPD officer in 2015. He also left the service with 100% disability.
After he notified the department about his disabled license, he was put on administrative leave despite providing a doctor’s note from the VA about his disability and ability to work.
His suit, which seeks unspecified damages, argues that he was not given accommodation for his unspecified disability and faced harassment and discrimination that caused emotional, psychological, and financial harm.
He has asked a judge to end discrimination and retaliation through new training for officers and supervisors. The lawsuit also asks that any officers who committed discrimination or reaction face discipline and that the department create a clear policy around reporting retaliation.
The SFPD did not respond to a request for comment. The city attorney’s office said in a statement that it will review the complaint and respond in court.
The Police Officers Association, which did not respond to a request for comment, downplayed the allegations late last year, saying that command staff should not waste time on such small matters and instead take up the matter of its officers’ disabled status with the VA.