venmo.

pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands. one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. vice president carter, i'd like to take roll. commissioner walker, president. commissioner benedicto. present. commissioner yanez will be joining later. commissioner byrne here. commissioner yee here. president elias is in route. vice president carter overstone, you have a quorum. also with us tonight. we have chief scott from the san francisco police department and executive director paul henderson from the department of police accountability. all right. line item one. weekly officer recognition certificate. presentation of an officer who has gone above and beyond in the performance of their duties. sergeant kira delaney, star number 1320 from the homicide unit. good evening. president or

vice president? cornerstone commissioners. chief scott, director henderson. my name is kelvin sanders. i'm the lieutenant at the homicide detail this evening. i'd like to recognize and congratulate. sergeant kira delaney of our homicide detail for sergeant khiara. delaney has been working in homicide detail for 12 years and has been involved in investigating over 500 cases. sergeant delaney's years of dedicated service to the citizens of san francisco and members of san francisco police department are truly appreciated. i would like to thank sergeant delaney for her continued commitment, accomplishments and accomplishments, and tremendous success in bringing closure to so many families of homicide victims. tell you a little bit about sergeant delaney. sergeant delaney began her career with the san francisco police department april 2001. after graduating the police academy,

she worked at the tenderloin police station on ingleside station, mission station, taraval station, the police academy, vice crimes, and also at the robbery task force. sergeant delaney has been assigned to the homicide detail since march of 2012, and has been working hard, dedicated, noted and a valued investigator for sergeant delaney has been the lead investigator in over 100 cases that she personally was the lead for and has assisted her team members in the past 12 years with investigations. um, excuse me with investigating over 400 cases during her tenure in the homicide detail. these cases include homicide special. excuse me. suspicious deaths in custody , deaths, officer involved shootings and several cold cases . in 2016, sergeant delaney became the team leader, which consists of leading, directing and assisting members of investigate with their investigations. sergeant delaney

has also served on the board of directors for the california homicide investigators association. also known as cheers. since 2013. she recently obtained her bachelor of science degree in june of 2023, and is currently enrolled and attending the sherman block super advisory leadership institute. sli which is an eight month intense course offered by california post for sergeants, designed to stimulate personal growth, leadership and ethical decision making in california. law enforcement for front line supervisors. not only does she accomplish all this in the past 12 years, sergeant delaney is a single parent of two. mia 18, and dominic, 16. the primary caretaker for a mother and a great person to work with as you can tell by the number of previous and current colleagues here today, tonight to help congratulate sergeant delaney to receive this police commission award. so give you

sergeant delaney. i just want to say thank you. i'm honored to receive this award. um, being in the homicide detail has been the highlight of my career. i work with the absolute best people. um, and it's not always been easy, but it has been so worthwhile for me. and i did want to thank all my coworkers and friends. and i guess there actually kind of my family, because i spent way more time with them than anyone else. um, and i appreciate you guys support, and i really do appreciate this. it means a lot. and thank you. uh, sergeant, i just wanted to, uh, thank you so much for your service to the city. and, uh, being the investigator in 100 homicide investigations is obviously no small feat. um, as well as all

of your, uh, obligations outside of sfpd. and since it was mentioned in the opening remarks, single parents are are the real mvps out there. i was my dad, raised my sister, and i by himself. so i, uh, i complain a lot as a parent of a single child with a partner. so i don't know how single parents do it. so thank you so much for your service to the city and for everything that you do. uh, chief scott, thank you, vice president carter also, i just wanted to say thank you as well. i, i truly appreciate how hard not only you, but the whole team works. and to do that as a single parent with two is simply amazing. i mean, the on call, the interruptions in your life and the dedication and i don't know that the public can truly appreciate what it's like to work in a homicide unit, but it is a tremendous amount of, uh, pressure. it's a tremendous amount of work. it's a tremendous amount of disruption. and the dedication that you've shown over 12 years, you're one

of the best, one of our best, but one of the best. uh, so thank you. go ahead. larry. okay. thank you very much. uh, vice president carter oversaw, uh, again, i want to thank, uh, sergeant delancey for all your hard work. um, you're so invaluable to. for all your experience and all the lives you have touched and share those precious moments that, uh, some of these are some of those most difficult times for those families. so again, we want to thank you for all your hard work and continue, uh, all your great work, as the chief has mentioned. so again, we wish you, uh, a great future ahead. and uh, again, thank you, thank you, thank you, commissioner walker. thank you. um, vice president carter ulverstone. um,

congratulations. and thank you. and it is. i mean, on top of being a single mom, um, it's really amazing. and i think i want to correct the record. i think she was involved with 500 cases and lead on 100. and, i mean, that's pretty significant. and, you know, the city owes you. we want to thank you for your service. congratulations thank you very much. commissioner benedicto. thank you, mr. vice president. uh, congratulations again, sergeant. um, it's a real testament, like you said, um, that, uh, the number of your colleagues that have showed up, i think we really measure, you know, one way to measure, uh, the value of an organization is the impact you've had on those in it. and to see so many of your colleagues and to hear that respect is really tremendous. thank you for your work. we've had a lot of focus on our, our, um, patrol officers, but i think it's so important to recognize the work done from our many

tremendous divisions. i know, in particular our homicide division is exemplary and does tremendous work. and, um, it's thanks to the great work of you and your colleagues. so congratulations and thank you. for members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding line item one, the weekly officer recognition, please approach the podium. give me just give me just a moment to get my mask ready and, uh, i'm ready. uh, you can start the clock. hi, my name is michael petrelis, and i would like to ask that these commendations sections be moved to the end of the meeting. um, you have so much important work to do at every meeting. i feel that, um, it is, um, a detriment to public accountability. by starting the

meeting with these commendations , sometimes you have had 3 or 4 officers here to be, um, commended. as i see to my left, your staging a photo op. um, instead of taking care of business. now, if you're not going to move the commendations to the end of the meeting and get right into public comment, i would like equal time set aside as item two for the top two unsolved crimes. use the time here on sf gov tv. um after you have made the commendation to put out information often about an unsolved murder, um, a or other unsolved crimes and use this um, opportunity to ask the public for help. we really do not need each one of you weighing in saying basically the same thing. thank you. if you're

going to do that, also, um, start putting out the information on where the police need help to solve crimes. um, we will soon see in the chronicle a half page ad that appears every month. also thanking the officers, you have commended. and there is no there are plenty of opportunities, um, for copaganda. um, and i hope you will please move this item to the end of your meetings. thank you. president lyons. there is no further public comment. line item two general public comment at this time. the public is now welcome to address the commission for up to two minutes on items that do not appear on tonight's agenda, but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the police commission, under police commission. rules of order.

during public comment, neither police or epa personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions by the public, but may provide a brief response. alternatively, you may submit public comment in either of the following ways. email the secretary of the police commission at sfpd. commission at sf gov .org or written comments may be sent via us postal service to the public safety building, located at 1245 third street, san francisco, california, 94158. if you'd like to make public comment, please approach the podium. hi i'm ready. um sf gov tv i put in an item under. thank you. i would like to show a, um, tweet that went out recently from a billionaire named gary tan. um, he made threats against several members of the board of supervisors. um, he, um, says to die slow mofos. he's also made threats as you can see, if you are down with meaning, if you

support the people he doesn't like on the board of supervisors , he says, f you too. at the very end where he says, die slow , mofos. um is a direct threat. sf gov tb back to me please. um, i'm glad that um, chief scott has said that there will be an investigation into the, um, this tweet. um, we have suffered here in san francisco. um, the murder in this building of mayor george moscone and harvey milk. we need to take this threat set from gary chan. very seriously. um the second item i would like for you to bring to your attention is the metal barricade boards around the mission station on valencia street. need to come down. um, usually the barricade

boards are against the curb this week. the barricades are against the building. this is not healthy to. um. first of all, police, uh, police, community policing. this really sends a message that the station doesn't care about street vibrancy and, um, vibrancy in the mission. i am asking you to direct the, uh, mission station to remove the barricades. thank you. good evening. um, as usual, i like to use the overhead. um concerning my son, aubrey aberra kassa, who was murdered august 14th, 2006. to this day, his case is unsolved. i come here every wednesday. um bringing up the

same issues again. then i have all the names of the perpetrators who murdered my son , hannibal. thomas paris moffat and drew vadu. jason thompson, anthony hunter, marcus carter. they have all these names down at the homicide detail. i put this here because this is an article from gavin newsom. he said, i know i know who killed her son, gavin newsom said on on thursday. the da know who killed her son. the police know who killed her son. they can name addresses and everything. so why isn't this case solved? if you have all that? and why would he say that the former mayor at the

time, i come here with these pictures all the time. i'm of my son laying in a casket. my son, after an autopsy. body decaying. the body keeps the score. i live this every day. if you ever read that book, the body keeps the score. i believe you'll know how i'm feeling. just like war. people come back from the war that have killed people. and then they got to come back and see their children. and they've killed children the same way here. i didn't kill anyone but my son was murdered. and i'm just asking for justice. thank you. members of the public, if you have any information regarding the murder of aubrey abeckaser, you can call the anonymous 24 seven tip line at

(415) 575-4444 or. and there is no further public comment. yeah. taking eight. next item. yeah a couple of announcements. we are removing line item. we are removing line item 14 and 15 from tonight's agenda and will be rescheduled at a later time. and line item eight will be moved to the next presentation. line item eight presentation on the office of the controller's audit of sf safe in relation to their grant agreement with sfpd. discussion and possible action on. hello. welcome um, thank you . thank you so much for coming tonight. do you need the overhead? we have the slides up okay. great can begin with the

slides. uh, good evening, commissioners. uh, president elias, vice president carter, ormiston, members of the commission, chief scott, executive director henderson. mark de la rosa. director of audits for the controller's office. i'm joined today by amanda sobrepena, our lead audit manager. um, as well as selena wong, our senior auditor. uh, we'll be presenting to you very briefly, uh, a memo that we issued a few weeks ago on january 18th, 2024. uh, this review before you on agenda item eight is an assessment that was requested by the san francisco police department, the controller's office collaborated with the office of the city attorney as part of this assessment. um, we reviewed as, uh, we reviewed, uh, invoices from sf safe, uh, to sfpd as part of their grant agreement to provide crime prevention and education services. uh, the overarching objective of our

assessment was to determine whether grant expenditures were eligible and reasonable. uh, per the grant provisions, we reviewed a sample of transactions, uh, for a nine month period from july 2022 through march 2023. our memo itself contained one overarching, uh, finding with one recommendation, uh, which the sfpd concurs to implement. and as part of our usual process, we do follow up on all of our recommendations. every six months from the time of issuance. and i'll turn it over to, uh, amanda for the rest of her presentation. thank you. mark. good evening. um, this slide provides a brief overview of the services provided by sf safe under its grant agreement with the police department. the grant agreement in our review had a not to exceed amount totaling 5.3 million, and its terms was from july 2018 through march 2023. we did not review expenditures under the police

department's current grant agreement with sp safe. the assessment had two observations. first, we found that the police department did not regularly request or review supporting documentation provided by sf safe monthly as a result, it did not have documentation to support 3.8 million or 72% of grant funds spent by and reimbursed to sf safe. further, according to the police department, it reviews a sample of expenditures during annual monitoring site visits. however by the time of our review, it had not conducted monitoring since 2019 due to limited resources as mark mentioned, our scope was from july 22 through march 20th, 23, and we analyzed a sample of accounting records and invoices totaling 910,000 of grant funds spent for crime prevention education services. our review found that sf safe spent over 79,000, or 9% on an eligible and or excessive

expenses, as shown on the table on this slide. these expenses included 36,000 in luxury gift boxes that cost approximately $150 each, and that were purchased for community events such as black history month and lunar new year, as well as for the community police advisory board symposium, also of 14,000 spent related to a crime prevention training symposium at lake tahoe. a little over 12,000 was spent on excessive expenses, such as limousine services and lodging. sf safe also spent 21,000 on parking fees. this included recurring expenses for multiple parking spots at the sf safe location, monthly parking at the el cerrito bart station, and at a san leandro parking garage. parking expenses also included valet parking services or one time parking fees at various locations in san francisco. the other category of expenses were for ride hailing services such as lyft or uber. these included rides between the

former executive director's home in richmond and san francisco, rides to or from san francisco international airport, and rides outside of san francisco. finally, we identified. nearly $1,300 in personal or office expenses that are not consistent with the grant agreement, including recurring water delivery or membership fees for amazon prime and costco. our assessment included one recommendation to the police department to review all invoices submitted and to determine whether sf safe billed for expenses that are unallowable under the grant agreement, and to recover any amounts found to be incorrectly paid. that concludes our presentation on our team present today is happy to answer any questions. thank you. uh, thank. you, mr. de la rosa. and i'm sorry i didn't see amanda, um, for coming and. presenting to the commission. we do appreciate , uh, your time and your report. i just had a few questions, and i'm going to turn it over to my

colleagues. um, the first question i had is that i, um, you indicated that sfpd had requested that you conduct this audit. is that right? that's correct. and when did they make that request to the controller's office to from from our perspective, when we initiated this, uh, uh, this engagement back in september of 2023, uh, that was when we began working with the office of the, uh, the city attorney on this engagement. and then you concluded your audit, and then you prepared a memo for the police commission. is that correct? that's correct. and that's the one that, uh, is dated january 18th, right? that's correct. and um, when you can concluded your audit and provided the memo, um, i went back and looked at our did a search of our email and confirmed with the commission secretary that we didn't receive the memo, um, until i think it was the email that you had with vice president carter oberstein.

so do you know when this memo was provided to the commission to whom it was provided to? when did we issued it publicly? on on january 18th. it should have gone through the, uh, distribution, including the commission. yes. we used the commission secretary email address. that's online. okay. it's like a generic email address. okay. um and then. you indicated that your audit was just for a limited period of time. will you be conducting a complete audit for the entire grant period from 2018 to 2023? no, we have not been requested to do so. uh, we only looked at the short period of time as part of this assessment, but we don't have any ongoing audits or assessments in our division one. and is it, um, you indicated earlier that you did not review the current grant, the year extension? is that because no one's asked you to and no, it's more because of the timing. like we the existing the prior grant agreement was what was in place

at the time of our review, but by the time we issued the report, there was a new grant agreement in place. okay. and then the sort of sampling that you did to conduct the audit, why were those dates selected? was there any usually we usually we pick the most recent period. so the most recent and usually we'll do a full fiscal fiscal year. but only expenses were only paid through march 2023. and for request is made. then you would complete a full audit of the entire grant period. yes, but we would still usually sample all. okay. yeah. and then , um, you indicate on page two of your memo that, um, the audit, the brief audit that you did only focused on sort of the financials, not the deliverable program deliverables. um, can you do an audit to show whether or not the deliverables were, were, um, in fact, delivered? that's certainly something that we've been asked to do in the past. um, this is a limited scope assessment. but when we typically do a full on, uh, audit of a grant or a program,

we actually do look at the entire internal control environment, including finance and performance. so that would be something that we could certainly look at if asked. okay. so the commission could request that you, um, conduct an audit for the entire period with respect to the deliverables. correct? okay. and um. there are a few other questions, but i'm going to turn it over to my colleagues. commissioner walker, um, thank you. um, president elias, i just i have a question. um, is the sfpd the only, uh, department that was in this audit, or were there other departments involved? the only it was only sfpd's grant agreement with the subsafe. but they i think that the sf staff does work with other departments . correct? correct. okay um, so september of 2023 is when sort

of the request came in to do a just a review. so, um, at this and i mean, i think it's a really i want to just reiterate the question that president elias asked that that looking at the deliverables, i mean, i think we'll be discussing at some point. i think, you know, what we're going to do going forward. but, um, that's also an important aspect of this, not just the money out, but also what came forward. so that's it for now. thank you. question commissioner benedicto, thank you very much. and, um, for that presentation for your report. um, and if any of my questions are better situated to the chief, just let me know and we'll defer those to him. um, what is the comptroller's office understanding of the genesis of the audit? what what led the department to ask for that audit in september or the assessment? i'm sorry. in 2023. yeah, we

certainly defer to the department on the genesis of that. chief. thank you. uh, commissioner, a couple of things . um, let me just say the request was made in late june. uh, i don't know when the work started, but the request was made to the controller's office, and at the end of june to conduct this this audit, um, the second thing to your question, as far as what was it led to? what prompted it, exactly? yes two things. a couple of things actually limited staffing and resources is was a problem. and the second thing is, um, the department had gotten, uh, information that there may have been some non payments, um, by. ssa to, to vendors. and so the request was made to assist us in number one sorting this all out.

and conducting an audit. um i know in the report it says that this is not an audit. as a non audit assessment. but yeah, that was the two reasons that this request was made. that's very helpful. and yes, i'll try to be accurate and call it an assessment. i'll also note that i had a helpful conversation with director deanna oliver earlier this week to discuss some of these questions. so some of these might be repetitive of our conversation, but i want to make sure that some of those details are presented to the public as well. um, so the from 2018 to 2023, the department reimbursed sf safe under that grant of 5.3 million. was that the only grant that sfpd had with sf, or were there overlapping additional grants and pools of money as well? i believe that was the only grant. okay um, president elias or commissioner walker mentioned that sf works with other agencies as well. in addition to sfpd, which were not the scope of this assessment. do you happen to know what the other agencies, the sort of large agencies they work with, are?

yes the office of economic and workforce development. okay um, you mentioned in your report that you'll be doing six month follow ups. uh following up on the assessment. and so will that start six months after the assessment issuance date of january? correct. and will that be assessing the department's or. i guess i'll ask a more open ended what what is included in that six month assessment? sure. typically what we do in the six month follow up process is that we ask the departments to provide us with a report on any corrective actions that they've taken since the issuance of the audit recommendation in. got it. um chief, based on this, uh, the assessment has, has the department made or plans to make any other requests of the comptroller's office to conduct a further assessments or, uh, a more comprehensive audit? so the

department is currently working with the comptroller's office, um, on these issues? um i believe we did actually make a request. i don't that has not been granted yet in those discussions, but also so the department is following the recommendations. it's just let me back up a step and say, you know, we take responsibility for this and we take it seriously. we take responsibility for it. and and we are working with the comptroller's office to basically we have a plan moving forward, a corrective action plan. there's still a lot of work to be done there. um, the other city department is also involved in this work as well. and there's still a lot of work to be done. but we are following the recommendation of the for this assessment, which basically calls for us to assess the previous years, uh, from 2018 to 2022. so we are doing that. and

following the recommendations, we agree with the recommendations. we agree with, um, the assessment. there are a few details there that i just, you know, would like to say, but we are following the assessment and the recommendations. so when that six months point comes, hopefully by then, uh, with this work that we're doing with the comptroller's office, uh, it will help us map out a corrective action plan. and we intend to recoup whatever ineligible expenses that are out there. okay um, is it your understanding, mr. delarosa, that if there were requests for more, uh, a more comprehensive audit that either included additional years or perhaps included, like, like you mentioned, a broader look at internal controls to assess whether or not the program deliverables were achieved. is it your understanding that that request could come either from the chief or from the commission ? that's correct. it's something that, um, every year when we do our work planning, we do, uh, get some suggestions from

various stakeholders throughout the city, including department heads, uh electeds and commissions. and if there were requests that came from the commission, uh, as well as from the chief, i assume the controller's office would sort of work to harmonize that if it moved forward into sort of a single request to avoid duplication of work or how would that process go? i typically what we do is it's actually around spring time, right before the end of the fiscal year, in preparation for the next fiscal year. uh, we, we gather all the ideas for various, uh, audits and assessments. uh, obviously we only have so much resources to devote. uh, so we do have to prioritize each year, uh, our growing body of work in the public integrity and nonprofit auditing is certainly one that we have prioritized over the last few years. um chief, uh, do you the, um, like the comptroller mentioned in the report that they did not include

a test of whether sf achieved program deliverables is. that something that you plan to ask the comptroller to look into, or something you would support the commission? um, in a request for broader audit to include that in any assessment? well that's something that we are working. we're working with the controller's office on a number of issues, and this these issues have not been settled yet in terms of what the path forward is. i mean, there have been a lot of discussion and meetings, but that is one of the things that is on our list of things to do is to determine whether those performance metrics are, have been, have been met. so yes, we welcome that. that's something that we hope that this collaboration with the controller's office that will will flush out. but that has not happened as of yet. okay. but it is something you intend to include in what you're asking them to, to look at which is whether or not sf achieved program deliverables. yes. it is

okay. uh, the controller's report noted that the department doesn't regularly request to review supporting documentation from sf safe to ensure that its invoices include only eligible expenses. um, in your remediation plan, where you plan to address that, would that apply to other non you know, other organizations or nonprofits that receive reimbursements from the department beyond just sf safe? uh, sf safe is the only grant agreement that we have with this nature. so okay. um, there are no others. okay. so there aren't any other nonprofit partners with the department that receive funding at this level? yeah, this is the only grant of this nature that we have. how long has, uh, sf safe been partnering with sfpd? uh, since 1976. and then it looks like this july 2018 to march 23rd, period of about 5 million. so it's about a million a year. it looks like about a million a year from 2023 to 2024. does that sound like, uh, if we were to go back, you know, five years further back from july 2018, does that feel fairly accurate in terms of the,

uh, amount of the grant that sf safe receives? you mean five years prior to 2018? um or was it was there an increase in that, in that period? i don't know if it's exactly the same. i do know that it did increase over over the last few years, but, um, i don't know that it's exactly the same for the previous five years. i'm not sure about that. okay. um i know that sf safe does a lot of work with the department, including, for example, the sf safe camera network. what is the status of that? now that operations are currently paused? well the camera project is not a part of the grant. so that was um, funded by a private donor and is not a part of our agreement or our grant agreement with ssa. so that is still not resolved as far as you know, what how that's going to look moving forward. but but it's not a part of the grant. yeah. i just meant as i understand it, they've currently paused all their operations. so is that camera network not being

in use right now or what is your understanding, uh, safe has ceased its operations so that is part of the conversation of how that will move forward. but it's not a part of it's not a part of the contract. i got it, but it's your understanding that right now how the camera network is not in operation. since they paused operations, the network is in operations. the management of the network, that's what sf safe was responsible for with their agreement with. the vendor and the donor. um as far as i know. okay. but but the network is still there. it's not being managed. okay. um, those are all my questions right now. thank you. it's not being managed by safe at the moment. do you know if it's being managed by someone else at the moment? i think all that's in process, in progress. and i don't have an answer for you right now. i just do know, as i said, that that's not a city contract. so we're trying to just help, but the city is trying to just help facilitate and resolve that. okay. thank you. chief commissioner. you

before i turn it over to you, i wanted to follow up on a question. i just want to be clear, because i'm, um, sf safe. so the cameras that are in the city, that record, my understanding is that sf safe collects the footage from that upon and upon request by the department. it provides that footage to the department right. um, pretty much. okay. and that, um, that money is from a private donor and not part of the grant. is that correct? correct. and. so now that sf safe has stopped, um, there's who is currently in place pulling the footage from those cameras and providing it to the department. right. well, that's what's being worked out okay. yeah. when you say being worked out, what do you mean? i guess my let me cut to the chase. who's going to pay for this? meaning, when if since sf safe has ceased, who's going to pay for a vendor to come in? pull the footage and provide it to the department when it

requests it? is it going to come out of the department's budget? no, because that is not a department agreed. so again, that that part is being worked out and the city is trying to help resolve that, but that is not a what do you mean worked out? i don't what does that mean? we're trying to get to an answer as far as how that's going to work, meaning who's going to pay for it and provide the service? uh, both. okay. but so currently you there's no is there a system in place for pulling the footage and providing it to the department right now? currently safe was responsible for managing that and safe as ceased operations for now. so right. but my question is right now who's doing that? is anyone doing that right now for the department? no no nobody's. doing. you seem hesitant. what does that mean? no. well, i'm trying to answer your question. so the camera system is still operational. the vendor is still operational. what's being worked out is the process to safe was managing,

which is was a private contract from a private funder. that's what needs resolution right now. so the footage is still there. um, if officers there's nobody managing it to pull it for you and provide it to you. exactly okay. so that's not happening, right now. and until you figure out who pays for it, is that where we're going to. is that what the current status is going to be? uh, it's so it's not it's not an sfpd agreement. so it's not an sfpd responsibility to pay for it. we're just trying to the city is trying to help resolve and move forward on this . i mean, it's important to the city and that's why we're working with, you know, other city partners to try to help resolve this. so we are not it's not in our budget to pay for it. there's no agreement for us to pay for it. when you say other city partners, who are you referring to? the controller's office is in this conversation and the office of pd. okay. and then the i'm i, i'm not sure if

i missed this, but it wasn't clear. are you asking the controller's office to do an audit? a financial audit of the entire for grant period? we are we have requested an audit. that's how this conversation started for the entire period. so where we are right now is in discussions about how to move this forward. um, what the controller's office is recommended in the report. you have before you is for the sfpd to. monitor to go back and monitor those years. um, and that's what we are in the process of doing right now. anything moving forward, we don't have a commitment or an agreement with the controller's office to do any of that work. as of now, we're following their recommendations from the report. but did you are you requesting a complete financial audit for the entire grant period from the controller's office? we have requested an audit and the

controller's office has not granted a full audit yet. and are you also going to request a full audit for the entire grant period for the deliverables? i don't so the delivery, the contract change this year or the grant change this year. so it's more of a performance. i think you have it as a part of it. i know the commission requested it. the deliverables are it's more of a performance based based on the number of meetings, the number of, uh, safety events . and so it's changed from the prior contract. so, so they can do both. so are you going to ask for both? the plan is yes. to ask for the deliverable deliverables to be measured. but that is not an agreement as of now okay. but you're asking for the deliverables for the entire grant period and the extension. correct. we're we're having discussions regularly on how to move forward. commissioner that's what i'm saying. and

these things have not been decided on yet. no. what i'm saying, did you ask for it? not yet. as far as the deliverables. okay. all right. and then one other question. i'm sorry that it came up and i forgot to ask on page four of your findings, you say that the police department did not have documentation to support 3.8 million. what do you mean by documentation? then maybe you can educate us on what that means. like receipts or like what documentation does the do the entities normally provide in order to be sufficient for this kind of situation? yes. so it would be monthly packets that usually get submitted by staff, usually to the finance team. um, it would include an invoice for the work performed, usually with like line items that match the budget of the grant. um, payroll registers. um from what we saw, there were also some program deliverables, but not the backup. just like a summary. um, and then uh, uh, actually that was, that was really it. so the police department from our review didn't have enough to actually review what was spent.

so they would just get like a total, like a one page, um, with , like, here's the total that was spent this month. um, sometimes they would have more support than others, but for the 3.8 million, they just didn't have enough support to like, know what was actually spent. and would it be normal or reasonable for someone who receives that invoice to ask, are there receipts that or an explanation for this total amount? yes. and i think departments differ on how much information they collect monthly and when they do. and the level of reviews. but yes, you would you could typically see like the backup for invoices and like time sheets to support payroll registers as well to support like time spent was actually to this grant agreement, for example. okay commissioner, you. thank you very much there. uh, president. uh, elias, i have a question on the. i guess we're supp safe. uh, since you look at their financials, do you know how much the remaining funds are available as of 124? that's certainly beyond the scope of

what we looked at. so we don't have that information. so i'm assume that there is, uh, should be funds still in place in their . is that, um, correct to assume again, that was not part of the scope of our assessment. so we cannot say. so um, so i did look at their 2021 financials and going back and similar, similar situation. and i think that um, i think 147,000 left in from, from the previous year. so, um, my second question is their cpa, did they have a cpa doing their financials to. we did not look into that. we solely looked at the expenses under the grant agreement. okay all right. uh thank you very much and great job. vice president carter. thank you, president elias. and

thank you to the members of the comptroller's office who graciously accepted our invitation to present, um, i wanted to ask you about the sampling. um, is there any reason to believe that this the sample that you took is representative of the 55. $3 million in total grants? i think it's, um, it's a good amount we picked from the. if you look at the summary table of the 5.3 million, the crime prevention education services is the most like the largest budget line item. so that's why we picked from that line item. sure. but, um, that's helpful. but but is there any reason to think so? you found that roughly 9% of the expenses, um, were spent in properly. right. is there any can do you think members of the public should look at that and say, well, probably roughly 9% of the whole 5.3 million was spent improperly? or do we just could it be radically different way more or way less? i think it

could be radically different. we didn't pick a statistically significant sample. we just picked the that one budget line item. great. and so there would need to be a thorough and complete audit to know the full extent of the malfeasance that took place here. correct. okay um, um, so you mentioned your report that there was no documentation whatsoever. the sfpd had no documentation whatsoever for 3.8 million of the 5.3 million in in disbursements for the remaining expenses for which the, i guess, 1.5 million for which there was documentation. do you know, if sfpd requested that or if, uh, sf safe simply voluntarily provided it? we don't know that information. we just know what was submitted by sf safe. um, for those periods. great um, and then and one part of the report, you call out a particular a particular party that sf safe

through where there was $228,000 spent on gift boxes. um, and i think sfpd reimbursed them for about 30,000 of that. um do we know where the rest? how the gift boxes were purchased? what were their funding sources otherwise, i'm actually going to pull selina. no, we don't know. i think we just know, um, what do we know. it was just a screenshot provided by sf safe. great. thank you. chief um, so i should say just a disclosure at the at the outset and maybe a couple disclosures. one that. chief, i know you already know this, obviously, but there's been a lot of public statements made about the department, public and private statements made about the department not being able to answer certain

questions. obviously, no question. you don't have to answer any question that we ask you tonight and you're free to simply you you tell us all the time you're not going to answer questions or hand over documents. i'm used to it. um, and this hearing is certainly no different. um, so i just wanted to make that clear. disclosure. um and i also just wanted to disclose that, um, director roche reached out to me and asked for some of my questions in advance, and i provided most of my questions to her in advance. um, and so i'll just i'll be asking most of what i ask will be what i, what i provided. um, so just wanted to touch on the exact relationship between sfpd and sf safe. um, in your answers to commissioner benedicto's questions, you acknowledge that sfpd founded sf safe in the mid 70s. um from the information that you provided about the grant totals, it looks like sfpd is provides nearly all

of sf safe's funding, at least from 2017 to 2022, is that is that a fair statement? the i asked, because the numbers i got from you were, um, san francisco fiscal year numbers, whereas the numbers that i looked up in sf safe's tax disclosures were calendar year. so doesn't match up exactly, but it looks like basically the money you gave them is all the money they had. um, i'm not sure that's an accurate statement. i know they have other funding sources other than sf, pd, the sfpd grant, um, private included. so i'm not sure that that's totally accurate, at least for the last 2 or 3 years. anyway but for years. but okay, let's say for 2018, 19, 2021, 22, they didn't have any other major source of funding to your knowledge which years i'm sorry, let's say 2017

to 2022. um some of those years are understanding is there were other sources of funding, but major sources, i mean, the department was what, 90? is it fair to say 90% at least of the funding? um, i don't think that's accurate. no i mean, i believe those records are public records in terms of the i think it's called form 990 or something like that. right. so i reviewed the nine 90s and but then the i asked the department for how much money the it granted to sf safe over those same years. but as i said, the numbers i got from you were fiscal year. so they you can't they're not apples to apples, but it looks like there's almost no gap between the money. sf safe reported on nine 90s and what you, uh, provide in terms of your disbursement, that's all. yeah. i don't know that that's accurate. um because i don't have the form in front of me, but okay. fair enough. um,

so one of the questions i submitted in advance was i provided a list of names of people that are listed as board members of sf safe on their at least latest public 990 that i saw from 2022 and asked you whether any of these folks have any current or former affiliation with the with sfpd. um are you able to say, um, with the names, some of them were former sfpd employees who have separated out three of them, i believe three of them. okay so there's and is there anyone else who had another affiliation other than prior employment? um affiliation? and what what type of affiliation? i'm just asking a broad question in case i've missed something. yeah. i mean, affiliation, like, that's a very broad terme, so i'm not. well, you interpret it how you say, you know, however, how do you

say how you interpret affiliation and then provide the answer? i mean, they're members of the board. so there would be some type of interaction with sfpd as board members. but i don't know personally know of affiliations. okay. so just to recap, sfpd founded sf safe. sfpd is, i think we would at least agree, the largest funder if not in most cases, the nearly sole funder. and it controls three of the eight board seats. the reason i raise this is because the public press releases that you've been issuing have really emphasized distancing yourself from sf safe , but sf safe in its nine 90s and its tax filings, calls itself an arm of sfpd. sfpd. would you agree with that? let me stop there. is sf safe an arm of sfpd or is that incorrect on its tax filings? uh, an arm of sfpd? no i don't agree with that. they are an independent nonprofit with their own

governing board of directors. okay. and how is it that three of the eight, um, directors was were former employees of sfpd? uh, does sfpd play any role into the selection of board directors ? i don't have an answer for you on that one. i their board makes they have bylaws. like any board, i think they're required to have bylaws. so i don't know how they pick the board members. so i just want to be clear. are you saying you just don't know or you or you know and you're not able to say tonight i don't i don't know, you don't know. so sfpd could could play a role in selecting board members? um, i don't it's possible. i don't know, i don't know. okay. um, okay. um so i think, you know, it's been publicly reported now that, um, kyra worthy was let go from her last job for, um, being accused of very similar financial malfeasance that she committed, um, with with sfpd.

and it's been publicly reported that the department has acknowledged that it was aware of this misconduct at the time that, um, miss worthy was hired. um, so it just wanted to ask, you know, what role did sfpd play in the hiring of miss worthy? um, the department is not responsible for the decision of whether to hire any of the sf employees. that's sf safe's responsibility and decision. so um, there was a member of the department on the hiring committee. um, but that person is not responsible. or was not responsible for hiring. that's that's the board's decision. that's a board decision. so i appreciate your answer to that question. it was a slightly different than the question i asked, though. so i understand as a legal matter, the board of a nonprofit is responsible for hiring its executive director. but what i asked was a little

bit different, which is did sfpd, other than the folks on the board who are affiliated with sfpd, but aside from that, did sfpd? did a member of sfpd leadership play any role in the decision to hire, uh, miss worthy? no, i mean, not that i know of. okay. and they were on the panel. the interview panel. mhm um, but it's the board decision is what i've been made aware of. right. and just so the reason i asked, just to be transparent is i think, i think the public is rightly asking the question how, you know, if you know, you or i were fired from our last job for committing financial fraud. uh, we probably wouldn't get hired three months later to do the exact same job somewhere else and be placed in that exact same position of public trust. right? so the, uh, that's that's why i'm asking this. so so the board members affiliated with sfpd, um, who as

you say, were responsible or, you know, part of the body responsible for hiring her. um that that's the extent of sfpd's role in the decision to bring her on to my understanding, yes. okay thank you. okay. um, wanted to ask you in response to a question earlier, you said, well, we heard from the comptroller that the audit request was september 2023, and chief, you noted that you believe that it was in june 2023. um, well, let me just ask the comptroller. do you do you know what where the difference of representation may be coming from? or maybe you're talking about slightly different things. the september um 2023 was when my division, which is audit division, became aware of it. i see so then, chief, you made a request to someone in the comptroller's office in june 2023? yes okay. um, and did you

said two factors played a role that it was, um, general staffing and also you became aware of, um, that that there might have been fraud committed against other entities? no, i just say that i said there were payments, uh, owed to people, money owed to people that we became aware of, that raised some concerns. okay thanks for the clarification. and so, so, um, it was also publicly reported that another, um, that an individual that made a large seven figure grant to sf safe became aware of financial wrongdoing in march of 2023. and so i'm just wondering, was there nothing before june that indicated to you that this may be a situation where we need to ask the comptroller to do an audit. and what's your question

again? i'm sorry, i'll rephrase it. so it's been publicly reported that an individual that made a seven figure grant to sf safe believe that the money was being misappropriated. and in march of 2023. so this is a private individual without all of the investigative tools of a police department that uncovered what what that individual believed was financial wrongdoing in march. and so now i'm asking you to was there anything before june that made you believe that as that the public's money was not being spent appropriately by sf safe? or was june the 1st time that you were apprized of anything? um that that could have indicated that, you know, sf safe is not spending our money the way they've been telling us? i just want to be clear. when you say financial wrongdoing are you saying becoming aware of some type of fraud or crime

because any like like as i said, anything that would indicate that sf safe was not spending the money the way they were representing they were going to spend the money, which is the heart of the auditor's, uh, i'm sorry, the comptroller's report, june is when i spoke to the comptroller's office after getting the information that i got. so so. and was there, i guess i, i appreciate that. i heard that earlier. my question is, was there other information that you received before june of 2023? that was a red flag that things were not that sf safe was not acting appropriately, was not spending the public's money the way they had represented. they were going to spend it. was there anything. there were some indications. that grew in terms

of the scope of what we what i was told anyway, in terms of payments not being made, and that was the extent of it. okay. so without telling me what the substance of those facts were, when, when did that occur? when were when were you apprized of facts that, um, that as you in your words, that that payments were not being made by sf safe. when was that that that time prior to june. um, for me the it was in june is when i had conversations was in june. okay. so then your answer is before june, you had no reason to suspect any of this was happening. my answer is in june is when i, i okay, i'm asking you can only speak for you now. i can only speak for. okay. so for you, chief scott, i just want to make sure we understand. i understand your answer. before june of 2023. you were not aware

of any facts that could have indicated that something was awry with sf safe. june of 2023 is when i was able to confirm to the point of. going to the comptroller's office to ask for help. okay so there so then there were facts. but you believe that they didn't rise to the level of reasonable suspicion, probable cause. even in june, there was not allegations of a crime being committed. okay so i just want to i just want to be clear on that. well, i didn't say crime. i just said that that things were awry, that they were not spending the public's money the way they represented it. so, so, so i guess let me just recap and you tell me if i have it right. there were facts before june. they. but in your estimation, it wasn't enough to go to the comptroller's office. that's what i'm hearing. no, that's not what you're hearing. so public's money was not the issue. what you're asking about, are you

brought up a news article or whatever was out in the media about a private donor? sure thing. that there was a misappropriation of private funds. so okay, that was the issue. so you were aware of that back in march when it was uncovered by that individual? well i spoke with okay. so, so the so what we're all learning now recently you knew back in march when it was happening contemporaneously. that's not no that's not that's not that's not what i said. okay then that's what i understood. that's yeah that's not what i said. i said in june is when i had a confirming conversation that led me one of the factors that led me to make the call to the comptroller. okay i think we'll just we'll move on. this is an area where you're just deciding not to respond, and that's that's perfectly within your right. um, just want to ask about the accounting controls. um i think it's surprising to members of the public, you know, sfpd obviously a core

responsibility of the agency is to identify financial wrongdoing . and yet the system it had set up with sf safe, was essentially guaranteed not to uncover financial wrongdoing if it were to occur. um, how. how is that possible? how is a system like that put in place that was set up to fail from the first day? you know, the issue of that was raised in this report is that we didn't monitor, we didn't have the documentation. and again, we take ownership of that, um, set up to fail is i don't think that's a characterization of what the report says. report says we fail to do the things that we needed to do, like have the proper documentation. let me ask you a question. i asked the comptroller 3.8 million of the 5.3. there was no documentation for the remaining 1.5. did you

ask for the documentation or was that just handed over voluntarily by sf safe? so the invoices are and perhaps. get director mcguire to come up and speak a little bit about this. the invoice is are based on the activities in the in the agreement community policing or whatever the activities are. bike registry. what the report speaks to and the comptroller's office can correct me if this is not correct, the supporting documentation to actually say that this invoice for whatever the amount for community policing, what what were those actual activities that documentation, that supporting documentation is one of the failures of that was identified here. so yes. so that i agree that's that's also have i

understood the report. but i'm asking 3.8 million in expenses. there was no documentation. so that means i presume that means for 1.5 million there was documentation in. my only question is did you ask for that? did you affirmatively tell sf safe for those 1.5 million? we. want to see the documentation. or did it just happen that they provided it to you voluntarily? we my understand is that the. the bulk of the contract amount is. for payroll expenses, um, salary and fringe. my understanding is that the payroll records did exist and there were shared with the department. um, the report. clearly indicates that we didn't have supporting documentation for a lot of those expenses, but the payroll records, my understanding is that we did have some of those payroll records. okay but you can't say

that. i guess whether. you asked for them or whether they were just voluntarily handed over, that was my only the only focus of my question. i don't i don't have an answer for that. okay. i do know that in the monitoring visit that we did in november, that request was made. okay. fair enough. i guess you asked, what do i mean by designed to fail? i think designed to fail is not even asking for any supporting documentation. that creates a situation where you just can't possibly know one way or the other, whether the public's funds are being spent appropriately. um, and i take it from your answer. oh, i'm sorry, director mcguire. did you want to supplement that answer? yes um. uh good evening, commissioners catherine mcguire, executive director of the strategic management bureau. um, what we had with sf safe, it was an agreed upon template for submission of invoices from them. and additional documentation. so for instance, for payroll, we, um, i guess

patrick came to an agreement, um, in which they were, were, uh, they were to submit the payroll register from the company that did the pay pay that ran their payroll for them. so so that was the register that we would, um, that was reviewed. all right. thank you. um. chief we were all made publicly aware that the district attorney is conducting a criminal investigation into this matter. um, i wanted to ask whether sfpd was also, can, you know, assisting the district attorney in its investigation or not? no and at any point, did sfpd conduct a criminal investigation into this? excuse me? sfpd took the initial report, and that

that investigative responsibility for the initial crime report was taken on by the district attorney and is that because, in your estimation, there's a conflict here. potentially it's we felt because of the relationship with safe that it's just cleaner to have an independent agency with the district attorney's office. uh take on this investigation. that was the basis of this request. and do you think that the district attorney is able to conduct a fair and independent investigation, given the district attorney's involvement with sf safe? yes i do okay. last year i received an invitation from you and the district attorney to attend an sf safe party for our black history month. i didn't attend, but i heard that it was about as lavish as the party that was detailed in the comptroller's office report, but, um, the event, i think it's fair to say,

was co-hosted by the district attorney, sfpd and sf safe. certainly you and the da were guests of honor. um there may or may not have been these elaborate gift boxes handed out where da employees were present. um, i, i heard that there were seven different mimosa bars, each serving a different flavor of mimosa. um, so sound like a fancy event. do you think that that cast any doubt whatsoever over on the district attorney's ability to conduct an independent investigation? i don't, and why not. community events are attended all the time. community but this isn't just attended. this is co-hosted . it's a community event. so i don't think that. signifies a conflict of interest. okay. do

you think that, um, it would be appropriate to ask either state. law enforcement or federal law enforcement to conduct a criminal investigation into this matter? i don't see a reason to do that unless there is a conflict. but that necessitates that. okay. and so you would not support that in this case if there is a conflict. yes i don't i don't see but your understanding is there isn't a conflict. that's your view. that's correct. okay thank you. those are all my questions, commissioner benedicto. thank you. just a few quick follow up questions. um where does that go ? here it is. um, to the comptroller. i know you described the process of how how comprehensive audits are requested and the way the comptroller's office decides how to allocate its scarce resources. is it? to the extent you can describe in general

terms, i guess, is it more likely that the comptroller would allocate those resources if a request was coming from multiple partners? so for example, a request i know that the chief mentioned, he's in conversations with the comptroller's office over the assessment and if that includes a request for audit, would would a request the sort of mirrored by the commission or pd or the latino task force or the board of supervisors? is that something the comptroller weighs as sort of like the amount of entities or partners that are asking for an audit? yeah, we certainly will take that into consideration, because i think the more stakeholders bring it up to our attention, we weigh that higher in terms of the risk areas that could be covered by that audit. so we certainly will consider that i know that that's the private individual who's the a significant donor to sf safe also requested um an audit is are those sort of requests made from private citizens also something the comptroller takes into account? no, the comptroller's office only audits activities and departments and

contractors that have city contracts. so it would be directly, um, if there you know, receiving funds from the city is basically where we, uh, we have authority to audit. okay and then my last question is at the end of your january 18th memo, where you indicate that the recipients. i'm just curious as to why there are a couple entities here that make sense to see the police commission on here. um, the board of supervisors, uh, what is the reason the civil grand jury was was copied on your assessment? that's that's typically a part of our normal list of distribution. okay. so all the assessments are copied and i assume that's the same then for the public library. that's right. okay um, those are all my questions. i would like at this time, since we have this agendized for discussion and action. um based on my discussion with the comptroller, i think it does make sense for the commission to request a comprehensive audit, even if the department ends up asking for one as well. and so i'd like to

make a motion to request the comptroller's office conduct a comprehensive audit of sf safe, expanding on its work done from this assessment to specifically include financial assessments and audit of the entire 2018 to 2023 grant period, and also include a test of internal controls at sf safe, and whether sf safe achieved program deliverables for the entire grant period. i'll second commissioner byrne. thank you, president elias. um, is i understand it. um the san francisco district attorney's office had no contract at all with san francisco safe. is that correct? don't think we. yes. that's correct, that's correct. i'm sorry. that's that's correct. the only other contract or grant we are aware of is the grant. i mentioned from the pwd department. i see, and obviously sfpd had a contract with san francisco state. yes. so i assume chief, that, um, at this

time, even though there was a party, there was no like a legal contract. so in my opinion, it'd be obvious that sfpd would not want to investigate as they're investigating themselves. and sometimes, as we know from past experience, it's best to have an outside agency do that. um yes. what was your question, though? i'm sorry, i'm sorry. i was wondering what the question was to. it was, i don't think the first time, chief. not the first time. i've, uh, been accused of that in other words, you made the distinction in questions that mr. carter, that vice president carter ulverstone asked you about, but that you didn't see, um, at this time, any conflict. uh, um, that would preclude the san francisco district attorney's office from making that investigation. and because you because the police department had a contract with

sf safe. it was. and your mind inappropriate for the san francisco pd to investigate a contract for which they were a party. yes. that is that is correct. and again, going back to earlier, one of the reasons to ask the comptroller's office to assist in this matter is to help sort some of these issues out. um, and, and we needed the help because of staffing. but it's just we i felt that it was much that was the appropriate way to do it. right. and the answer to the question is absence. more evidence comes out about the da's involvement, uh, with sf state, the san francisco district attorney would be inappropriate. um agency to investigate. uh, uh, the going

the goings on of sf safe. yes. because at this time they have no contract with them. that is my knowledge. i mean, that's what i believe. thank you. um, before we move to, uh, vote on the motion, i'm going to ask to amend the motion to include the extension as well as the initial period. yeah, i'll accept that friendly amendment, sergeant, for members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item eight. please approach the podium. okay i'm ready. hi michael petrelis again. i, um, am holding a sign that says sfpd equals unsafe. um and i came to city hall today to deliver this message to everyone who was watching on tv. i am greatly disappointed that, um, there is no remote public

comment allowed. um, at the police commission, i think that, um, the public should have been allowed to dial in and, um, weigh in on this issue. so, um, uh, so, so eroding trust in the police department and nonprofits continues here in seven here in san francisco. so under mayor london breed, the mayor has to take responsibility for what has happened here. she has been in control all of the money of the police department and, um, uh, the lack lack of enforcement, the lack of accountability of the nonprofit, the mayor's silence, um, is intolerable. so i would like to point out that, um, your staffing analysis that you've handed out today says

that between sworn and civilian staffing at the police department, there's just over 2000 thousand people full in the sfpd. over 2000 employees, and there isn't one person who who is monitoring a $5 million contract. mayor london breed, you have got to end your silence about this. this awful development, the misuse, appropriation of funds, everything goes back to the mayor. and there's no further public comment on the motion. commissioner walker, how do you vote? yes mr. walker is. yes. commissioner benedicto. yes. commissioner benedicto is. yes. commissioner burn. yes

commissioner. burn is yes. commissioner yee. yes. commissioner yee is. yes. vice president carter overstone. yes yes. vice president carter is. yes and president elias. yes. president. elias is. yes. you have six yeses. next item, please. line item three. consent. calendar. receive and file action. sfpd's. audit of electronic communication devices for bias. fourth quarter 2023. department general order 1102. secondary employment annual report 2023. sfpd 2022 limited english proficiency report and the semiannual sexual assault evidence kit, july 1st to july 31st, 2023. motion to receive and file second members of the director henderson. sorry, i just wanted to say that there's stuff in here that, uh, on uh, in case folks have specific questions about this, specifically with the bias. i think this is something that we've discussed quite a bit. uh, and there's information on these

. uh, quarterly reports, both in our spark report and in the audit reports. the reason that i'm just bringing it up before we roll it into accepting the calendar as some of these audit recommendations are still ongoing in terms of issues with the bias reporting, uh, both with terms being over, over inclusive and with specific recommendations that have been made. uh, but i wanted to acknowledge that some of the recommendations have been made from that audit that are reducing the false positives and the inefficiencies that we previously discussed in the past. so i just wanted to acknowledge that, for the record, before we move on to the next issue. that's it. thank you. commissioner burn. um, as oh, excuse me. thank you. uh, president, as regards the annual report on secondary employment, uh, i guess. it's my understanding they just have to give the name of the employment and some of these are llcs that,

uh, we wouldn't have an idea of who and what they are. and, um, i would i would prefer to have more information. i mean, major league baseball is easy to figure out, but, um, a number of what we can do is before we it wasn't on the consent calendar. we actually had it agendized where they had to provide a report. so we can go back to that for this report. right so i, i would like to amend and accept everything, but this annual report, uh, because as i said, i think the public and, um , and, and myself certainly would like to know who some of these, uh, llcs are as to what a, what our police department is up. um, so, so i wish to amend the motion, uh, and exclude the annual report to the police commission. okay. well that's fine, i'll accept that amendment. okay so let's do that and then we'll agendize it and request that the department provide additional information specifically, uh, more

information on any llcs and secondary employment. yeah sergeant, members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item three. please approach the podium. there is no public comment on the motion. commissioner walker, how do you vote? i agree, yes, commissioner walker is. yes. commissioner benedicto. yes commissioner benedicto is. yes. commissioner. burn yes, commissioner. burn is yes. commissioner yee. yes. commissioner yee is yes. vice president. cobblestone. yes. vice president stone is yes. and president elias. yes. elias is. yes. you have six yeses on item four. adoption of minutes. action for the meetings of january 10th and january 17th, 2024. i get a motion. motion to motion to adopt the minutes. second, commissioner walker, i wasn't there. yeah you read it? yes. for members of the public who would like to make public comment regarding the line item four, please approach the podium. you're just upset there. seeing none on the motion.

commissioner walker, how do you vote? yes. commissioner walker is yes. commissioner benedicto. yes, commissioner benedicto is. yes. commissioner byrne. yes commissioner byrne is. yes. commissioner. yee. yes, commissioner yee is yes. vice president stone. yes. vice president. stone is yes. and president elias. yes. elias is. yes. you have six yeses. item five. chief's report. weekly crime trends and public safety concerns provide an overview of offenses, incidents, or events occurring in san francisco having an impact on public safety. commission discussion on unplanned events and activities the chief describes will be limited to determining whether to calendar for future meeting. chief scott, thank you, sergeant youngblut. i'll start off with a brief, uh, brief overview of the crime trends for this week. uh, good news, very good news in terms of the first month of the year, overall crime is down. part one. crime is down 40, which is, uh, significant for the first week of the year. um there's about 1900 fewer crimes, just less than 1900 fewer crimes than this time last year. in

terms of the breakdowns, uh, homicides are down 40. shootings are down 8. total gun violence down 17. uh, property crime is also down significantly. so, uh, the year is starting off like last year ended up, which is on a on a positive note in terms of crime reduction. um just before i move on, property crime is down of 40% in total. um, which is just short of 2000 crimes, fewer than this time last year. so a lot of good work being done by sfpd officers out there working with our partners, uh, both public and private and working with people in our community in terms of significant events this week, um , there was a. salt with a deadly weapon that occurred at 26 and venice in the mission district on the 30th, uh, at

4:30 p.m, the victim, who was in a wheelchair, said that they were on the sidewalk and was bitten by the dog. bitten by a dog. the owner of the dog pushed the victim and hit and then hit the victim with a stick. the victim was transported to the hospital that is still under investigation. no arrests have been made. um, there is an assault with serious injuries that occurred on the muni light rail uh, train at 1:39 p.m. on the 30th of january. officers found the victim bleeding. uh, at the saying that they were punched by a subject. the witnesses said that while they were on the light rail vehicle muni, they saw suspect or subject break into the panel on the light rail rail vehicle to charge an electrical device. when the subject saw the victim watching the suspect, the victim saw the subject had words with the subject and then punched the victim and the victim was injured and the subject was transported to the police station. but that case was not, uh, there was not enough

probable cause to make an arrest at this time. there was a hate crime at the unit block of turk street in the tenderloin. it involves, uh, terrorist threats. subject knocked on business office doors and began to yell at an employee inside. the employee closed the door on the subject, and the subject then made some derogatory, uh, racially motivated remarks and threatened to kill the victim. the victim feared for her life and fear for their life and their safety. uh in that case is being investigated. no arrests have been made at this time. a couple of other, uh, major incidents. there were three stabbings over this past week. one in the tenderloin on 100 block of jones, one in the 1900 block of ocean avenue in the taraval, and one at the unit block of dakota street in the bayview. uh, no arrests were made on any of those cases yet. they are all still under investigation in. there's a

fourth stabbing at eddy and high street in the tenderloin. and this was on the 3rd of february at 3 a.m. again no arrest on that case as well. that case is still under investigation as far as the drug market. uh, we are still in coordination with our local and state partners and federal partners there were 41 incidents that yielded 51 arrests this past week. there were 552g of narcotics seized last week or this past week in and year to date, there have been 5243g of fentanyl seized in the tenderloin. through the efforts of the work and the drug market agency coordination center. and that is my report for this week. uh, vice president carter, chief, thank you for the report. i saw last month, legislation passed, um, allowing the police department to acquire and install and use

400 automatic license plate readers. um just a couple questions for you about that. so that was was that through the 19 be process? uh, yes. yes. okay. so you were able to get technology that you wanted through the 19 b process? yes. okay. um what's the upfront cost of that? i'm sorry, what's the upfront cost of the 400 cameras? um, i don't have the breakdown, but it's a part of the organized retail theft grant that we receive from the state. i don't have the breakdown here with me tonight, but i can follow up with you. but ballpark understanding, like seven figures. i don't have that. i don't want to guess. are there ongoing maintenance costs? i'm pretty sure there are, but i can follow up with you for those questions. and are there costs associated with, um, you know, does the provider sell us, uh, software services, data analysis services that are ongoing, recurring costs to the to flock

the provider? um, pretty sure, but i prefer to just give you your information accurately, rather than roundabout. i couldn't i couldn't agree more. that sounds great. um, what will they be used for? mainly for criminal investigation. or will there be any traffic enforcement application? criminal investigations. so no traffic enforcement? okay. the technology includes license plate readers and, um, you say traffic enforcement if there's a stolen license plate or if there's a stolen vehicle in that investigation can take place, but not for speeding and those types of things. okay that that's helpful. thank you. um, how will the data be accessed at . so, um. do you want me to expound or. yes please. oh, sure. so i don't know what the, uh, user interface looks like for flock cameras, but i assume

there'll be a bunch of hits. geolocated to the where the camera was. um, who? let me just ask who an sfpd has access to this information in terms of the alerts. and, you know, i really would prefer i know this. i don't believe this is on the agenda to answer all your questions in a presentation because i don't want to give you inaccurate information and, um. if okay. so this is okay with that. we will. uh, okay. well, i'll just ask the i only have 1 or 2 more questions. if you don't know the answer now, then we can just chat about it another time. um how will the data be retained? how long will it be retained? indefinitely does it? is there a retention policy? um, for that data of that nature? there is a retention policy. but again, i would ask that this be agendized and we can give. okay. well as i understand it, this i'm totally

happy to agendize it. but i think that this is as i read it within the bounds of the chief's report. um, um, disclosure. yeah. so, um, my last question on this, and this is not a doesn't require you to know, i think a ton of specifics about flock. just 400 flock cameras is all the public cameras, the private cameras that the department now has access to with the consent of the owner. um, are we getting close to a point where we can track an individual or a car's movement throughout the entire city? um a car's movement. yeah. those cameras are able to do that. but again, i, i would ask that this be agendized. i think it is. it should be because it's a discussion that i think several commissioners would probably have questions on. and want to know more about. okay see, i saw i told everyone you don't you don't answer our questions. sometimes it's fine. um, okay,

next topic, then i'll move on. i'm eagerly awaiting agendizing the flock cameras. um, but but i'll restrain myself. um january 27th. i just read that there was a, um, vehicle pursuit that ended in a crash. uh, the police vehicle crashed into a muni bus. um, and it was reported that two people, two passengers on the bus, or actually, i think the driver and one passenger were, uh, injured, and went to the hospital. i just, well, want to make sure that i have those facts correct. and but then secondly, um, curious what what crime the suspects were being pursued for. um, again, i have to follow up with you on that, but this is, um. well, you would agree this is in the heartland of the chief's report, correct? you're not saying that this wasn't properly agendized? well, i'm saying i don't have that information so i can follow up with you. okay. fair enough. uh, those are all my questions, commissioner bird. uh thank you. personalized chief. i know it

was out, but since the last met, there was a mass shooting in the tenderloin. uh, i think there was one fatality. and what, 3 or 4 people wounded for, uh, for wounded and one fatality? yes uh, has the has anybody been arrested in this incident? um, not at this point. and can you tell the public a little bit more than what was in the press report releasing as obviously, you know, uh, it was a shooting and not a stabbing? um, yeah. well basically what i have at this point, multiple people shot and one did not survive. um, it is an ongoing homicide investigation, so i don't have a whole lot of details right now, but, um, when we're able to update, i will definitely provide an update. thank you. chief commissioner benedicto. thank you. chief, a couple of questions, ones. where are my notes? um what are the

department's plans for any activity after the super bowl? so, yes, the super bowl is this weekend and the department has. not called everybody off of their days off, but the majority of the department will be working. um, we will have our command and control structure in place. um, traditionally, they are places around the city where we have had celebrations that have ended up with property damage, uh, violence to the public and violence to officers. so we will be ready to have extra staffing in those places in particular and put, um, strategies in place to hopefully try to facilitate peaceful, um, celebrations. if, if, if, when, when the 40 niners win. so we're ready. you know, it's been 30 years since the 40 niners have won a super bowl. um, and i think there will be a lot of

excitement if, if 40 niners win. so we will be deployed accordingly. we're working with other city departments, the fire department, the department of emergency management, public works and mta to address whatever issues we face that night. um there was a news report about a an incident that took place at northern station, like a robbery or some sort of incident that took place at the station. can you provide any details about that incident? yeah yes. there was a person that entered the station, um, unauthorized and attempted to steal items from the station. that person was arrested and, um . that's pretty much it for that situation. so he was not able to steal anything. he was arrested by officers at the station. do we know how he was able to access a secure area of the station? um no. we believe that there was a breach in one of the doors. we don't know whether it was, uh, propped open or not. propped open. i'm sorry. didn't close fully, but but, um, we're

not absolutely sure if that's the case, but at any rate, uh, measures have been taken to make sure that those, uh, entry points are checked and make sure that they're working properly and make sure that they're locked out. thank you. chief, that's all. commissioner yee. uh. thank you very much there, president. uh, cindy elias, i have a you know, i saw on the news talking about on the high street pier. there was a assault. um, where one of the swimmers were, uh, i guess, uh, uh, physically assaulted and needed medical attention. his car was stolen. so 6 a.m. in the morning, i believe. um, this was on february 2nd. uh, is there any update on that? do you know, um, that there there's been good progress on that case. um we have identified subjects in that case. um and they have not been

arrested for that particular crime. but we do have, uh, other crimes that these people are associated with. so good progress. and we will keep you updated on how that's going. uh, thank you very much, chief. and, um. go. niners sergeant, for members of the public, they would like to make public comment regarding line item five, the chief's report. please approach the podium. good evening again. um i just want to bring awareness to last week. last week when i was here, when we talked about, uh, $0 of rewards for solving unsolved homicides and there has not been any for nearly a decade. this was that article that was in the newspaper. and i know that you guys were talking about agenda

agendizing for this month to find out how they can pay tipsters, reward money to solve unsolved cases, with mine included. so i was wondering. when is that going to happen so that i can be here and hear it. although i'll be here anyway, but i just want to make sure that that date, maybe i want to tell the other couple of other mothers to come too. so they can get some kind of information on their child's case, especially finding out that the tipsters can be paid, whether the case has been years ago or recently. so i'd like to know when will that be agendized? this month, which i was told last month. i mean, last week, the last time i was here that that would be agendized. and um, so i'm still

waiting for that. and i'm hoping that with that, that people can collaborate on how this can happen in other places or whoever done other things like this, please do this. you know, i, i ask last time, i'll ask again when i come back next week. if you're open here, i checked the website every third wednesday to make sure you're open so i can get here. um, please agendize it. thank you. and there is no further public comment. next item. line item six. director's report discussion report on recent epa activities and announcements. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to counter any of the issues raised for future commission meeting. executive director henderson. good evening. yes, sorry. my apologies, director henderson, please. thank you.

all right. uh, so, so far this year, we've opened 64 cases at the department of police accountability, and we've closed 32 cases. uh, our current case load is 344 cases. we've sustained and seven cases so far this year. uh, we have 28 cases. whose investigation have, uh, gone, uh, beyond, uh, 270 day period. again, that is not the final, uh, jurisdictional time for these cases, but there are cases who have longer investigations. and of those 28 cases, 19 of those cases are told cases. uh, there are still currently ten cases that are pending with this commission. uh, and there are still currently 91 cases which are still pending with the chief. uh, in the past few weeks or in just in last week, uh, since we last met, dpa received uh, 33 cases. uh, the highest percentage of those cases were

for allegation that's 13, uh, were for allegations regarding a neglect of duty. uh for allegations that an officer failed to take required action. um. that's 13% of the 48 allegations that came in. again, these are allegations, not investigations. uh, and all the full breakdown for 100% is, uh, online in, uh, in terms of the district breakdown, uh, the two, uh, districts that had the highest allegations from dpa this week are northern station and tenderloin, both tied at four. uh, that had had, uh, allegations that came in again with the allegations that i previously said as the highest allegation in terms of outreach. uh this week or last week, uh, our director of recruitment and staff attorney tanada thompson, uh, along with our pio to, uh,

carolyn wysinger, uh, appeared at the human rights hearing the dreaming forward convening. uh, the experience for students is based on the now award winning fellowship program at dpa that we've had for a while. i don't know if you heard that, but i said award winning. i just wanted to make sure we caught that. uh where we talked about, uh, what those experiences would be. and that's going to be the basis of what some of the other experiences would be for students interested in, for the campuses, interested in expand here in the bay area. uh, we also, uh, are now participating in the local media and newspaper opportunities to talk about. that, uh, outreach for the program. uh, and that's run through the city where information about dpa and the services and our programing will

appear. now in local communities, local community papers, uh, throughout the city. uh, we're particularly excited about that because a lot of these are the papers that are not published in english and are reaching many of the disenfranchized communities that may or may not reach or read a lot of the majority, uh, media that's available, uh, in terms of the audit, we have, uh, i just want to anticipate, i know last week, uh, commissioner overstone asked me about information on whether or not we had received, uh, the information or about what the delay was in receiving the information on the ongoing audit . uh, the department had coordinated has now coordinated with steve fleharty and extended that deadline for the initial stop data. information request. to be february 22nd. but just as a drill down, the reason behind that extension was for two

reasons. one, the us doj recommendations had a deadline of april first that the folks that were supposed to be providing information to us were scrambling. we're working on to get accomplished and then secondarily, that staff person that was assigned specifically for the dpa information, an as the point of contract, uh, was on leave in january as well. that said, uh, just to be clear, what we're asking for and what the information was is, uh, information like org charts, policies. informational change in terms of sfpd's processing for ensuring specifically stop data completeness. i just want to be clear on what the specific information was, um, separate from the data on the actual stops, the background information is needed for the audit in order to properly plan. uh the actual audit and to develop and finalize the scope. uh, in the meantime, time just so the public knows and the

commission knows dpa is continuing to move forward independently and is reviewing all of the publicly available stop data and stop data reports. we're also coordinating with sfpd, uh, to get an understanding of the completeness and accuracy of this data that's been provided independently of dpa. uh, separately from that, dpa and the controller's office have now completed their 36 month follow up on the sfpd's implementation of recommendations made from the 2020 use of force audit. um and that's regular part of the audit process. and so just as an update of that, reports 37 recommendations that were made, uh, we are now down to only four recommendations that remain open. um, a lot of the information that was shared in some of the recommendations that we made, and i alluded to this earlier, uh, have been met. and

so we're still tracking that, and you'll still get information that information will continue to be published, uh, on our website as well. we have no cases, uh, in closed session today, also present in the courtroom and the hearing room with us today, uh, are my chief of staff, sarah hawkins. uh senior investigator, candace carpenter, uh, our cfo, nicole armstrong. and we have a return. alumni are julius terman, fellow is back here today. karen turner . thank you. karen uh, that completes my, uh, report. i have commentary on some of the other agenda items, and i will reserve my comments for when we address those issues on the agenda. subsequent agenda. thank you. commissioner overstone. uh, thank you, director henderson, for the report on the receiving

data for your stop data audit. i just want to be clear. so february 22nd, sfpd represented that all of the requests for data would be provided on that date. did i understand that? uh, that is my understanding from mr. fleharty, uh, that. yes, that is correct. okay. and the initial request was made mid-december, right. that is my understanding. yes. okay and then just the other thing i could be horribly off base about this, but i seem to vaguely recall, uh, this summer, is it right that dpa said it was going to put together a report of some sort on the, um, dolores hill bomb incident? or am i just making that up? i know we've talked about it extensively. we the incident itself. i'll defer to my chief of staff, who

probably remembers it, but i just i remember the conversations, but i don't remember. well, i also don't remember. so okay. well, good evening, commissioners. we did discuss a review as a possible way of looking into that incident. however given the fact that there's an ongoing investigation ocean, we have not solidified plans to do a review. um, pending what the kind of investigation and investigative landscape looks like. part of the issue, um, has been access to juvenile records and the city attorney's office is working with us very diligently to help solve those issues. choose to go down the investigative path. and then from there, we'll kind of see where we are. when you say ongoing investigation, you're talking about discipline, correct? okay. yeah, i was just talking about i and so do i. am i remembering it right, that there was at one point a suggestion that there would be a report that's not directed at discipline, a public facing report. yes. but because of the complexities of the investigation part, we didn't kind of feel we could do a

thorough review because there's so much involved with the discipline side that it wasn't the type of incident at this stage that lends itself to that review. until that process has run its course. gotcha. thank you. i remember it now. uh, and part of the complication is the issue with the juvenile records, which is something that we're also working on separately and independent. as part of that, to streamline, because it's a reoccurring problem that we're trying to drill down on, in part because of this case, to fix. there's just been a lot of conversations about it, but there should be some broader solutions that implicate efficiencies internally for dpa and ongoing civilian oversight issues. that's one additional piece is that the crowd control dgo is currently in a working group to be evaluated. so there's issues from the hill bomb incident that are germane to that conversation. and that conversation is happening right now. sergeant members of the

public, they would like to make public comment regarding line item six, the dpa director's report. please approach the podium. and there is no public comment. line item seven commission reports discussion and possible action. commission president's report, commissioner's reports and commission announcements and schedule items identified for consideration at a future commission meeting. thank you. um, just briefly wanted to report that i was invited by assembly member ramos to conduct a year anniversary hearing on his legislation regarding the feather alert, which was, um, an alert that was, um, that is issued by the chp for native american and indigenous people missing persons, um, alert. it was very informative and refreshing to know that the assembly member, um, has taken a

vested interest in this topic, as well as shed light on the um, astonishing numbers when it comes to missing persons. with respect to the native american indigenous people, population. so i'm happy to report that sfpd has been working, um, to ensure that the any feather alerts that need to be issued and can and will be by the department, it's my understanding that, according to assemblyman ramos, his staff, that they would like to provide additional training to sfpd with respect to this alert and legislation. that's all i have to report. commissioner benedicto, thank you. president elias, a couple of things to report on. one on, uh, last wednesday, uh, january 31st, um, mr. walker and i attended the quarterly officer of the month ceremony with, i believe commissioner yee was also present in chief, and we, uh, where a number of officers were recognized. i wanted to note

that in addition to our weekly officer recognition, there is an officer of the month recognition as well. and so i wanted to extend, uh, the congratulations to officer howard brown from park station. officer dustin colclough. colclough from terra station, officer norman bobzilla and brian alston from richmond station, and sergeant richard guerrero and sergeant tre huang, who were all honored at that event. and it was nice to get to see that event and hear the stories of their work. uh, additionally, a number of months ago, i think it was late last year, there was, um, a report in, i believe it was in the chronicle about stolen cars getting ticketed through mta, uh, and was discussed here at commission. and the mayor also subsequently issued an executive order directing the departments to work together. uh, i had a helpful conversation on a number of weeks ago with, uh, director diana oliveros, as well as commander nicole jones at the mta unit to discuss the progress on that which which has been positive in the wake of that time. um, sfpd and mta, uh, were

able to reach, i think, an effective solution where they have access to the stolen what's called the stolen vehicle file and are able to check vehicles, uh, both to not inadvertently ticket them, but also to assist in their recovery, where if they're going to ticket a vehicle that shows a stolen, they can contact sfpd. and that process is being streamlined. so that sfpd can, um, go recover the vehicle that has an added benefit of sfpd's recoveries or at no charge to the victim as opposed to an mta rto. so you don't get that insult to injury of getting a ticket or getting a vehicle recovered that you have to pay the tow for. um, and i believe that this system has been rolled out so that the mta, uh, personnel have access to this database on their handheld readers. and the next step in integration is to roll it out to the mta license plate reader technology, which they have, um, on some of their little i don't know what their vehicles are called, um, but on their vehicles as well. um, some of

the, the, uh, took a little bit longer than expected because apec was in november, but i think that, uh, a lot of progress has been made. um, i think when i last spoke to commander jones in mid january, there have been between 18 and 20 recoveries of vehicles through this process. so that's that's a benefit. um, and to allow that recovery, uh, so based on that conversation, i'm going to withdraw my request that it be agendized separately, since i think that was satisfactory. and providing that update. now i'm staying in close contact with commander jones. uh, so that if there is an update that requires the commission's full attention, we can do so. um, but i do want to commend, uh, commander jones, director roach, as well as sean mccormack, sean mccormack at the department of public transportation for working swiftly to, uh, work across agencies to expedite this and led to at least 18 recoveries. so congratulations on that. and that is my report. thank you. thank you very much. there, uh,

president cindy eliza, i just want to echo what, uh, commissioner kevin benedicto said, uh, i was able to join the officer of the month award ceremony here at city hall. and the second floor, uh, by the mayor and also with chiefs chief scott there. uh, it's great to see many of the families there, the officers and, uh, i can see that, you know, you can see the i guess the enthusiasm and, um, i guess how you say it, um, it's a change of, uh, i guess i would say it's attitude toward the officers that do want to do more for the community. and, um, and hopefully that that's, uh, that's the right step going forward for the department. and talking about morale as a i think it's a great boost for it to also tend to, uh, on, uh, yesterday they had, uh, chinatown along with the chief, uh, regarding the upcoming chinese, uh, lunar lunar new year, which is february 10th.

and, uh, talking about the safety. and there's a little special treat there that the mayor mentioned was that parking at portsmouth square for the month of february is free for the first two hours. so please come down and shop and support the merchants. the community have fun. all right. thank you very much. thank you. commissioner yi. vice president carter overstone. i just want to update for me. i attended, um, a couple weeks ago, uh, working group session for uh, dgo 8.03 crowd control. i think we've got, uh, maybe 2 or 3 more left to go. so i'm looking forward to continuing that revision process . commissioner walker, thank you . um, a couple of things. uh, one, i'm really excited about at the public safety committee tomorrow at the board of supervisors. supervisor melgar has put an agenda item on about

women in policing. um, and, um, just supporting our commitment to 30, 30. um, i think that, um. denise flaherty, nicole jones, amy horowitz, we've all been discuss, um, ways to reach our goal of 30% women on our force by 2030. um. a couple of the conversations have revolved around lactation station improvements, which are underway and happening as we speak, but also, um, tying into a pilot program, um, for childcare for, for, um, the department working on a pilot program. san diego has a pilot program working with the state of california and i mentioned this to the governor's wife when i saw her at an event. and she's really excited about it. so i want to touch base because i think it would be great to tie into that pilot program. child care would be a really good addition to increase

our recruiting. um, so. that's on tomorrow's public safety committee at 10 a.m. is the committee, and i think it's expected to be on at about 11. um, so i'm really excited about that. um, ongoing conversation about patrol specials. i've been, um, trying to work on scheduling the next discussion at the commission. um, there's been a request from folks in the community, especially in the, um, the marina district where there's the active, um, client list. uh, there was a request to maybe start having our meetings out in public again in these neighborhoods. and this might be a good opportunity to have a one item meeting to discuss the ongoing discussions. we've been having about that historic program and, and how the what, what the future holds for it. um, and have a commission discussion and hear from the public on that. so i'm working with president elias to try and schedule that. um, and i think

that's it. i've i've been in discussion. i've had some, um, beginning discussions with the latino task force, um, about the alchemy. the ambassador group that is happening in the mission and trying to make sure that we don't miss a step on that. um i mean, there's a lot going on about coordinating all of these front end the non-police responses out in the street and, um, i think that that's going to be an exciting thing to work on this year as we sort of move forward. so that's it for me. thank you, sergeant, for members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding line item seven, commission reports, please approach the podium and there is no public comment. line item nine presentation on sfpd staffing and deployment. at the request of the commission. in discussion

. good evening. commissioners. president elias. uh, commissioners. uh dpa had paul henderson and chief scott. um, i am i'm commander. i just demoted myself. uh, deputy chief peter walsh of the administration bureau. so, um, next to me is tj chow. uh, tj works in the staffing and deployment unit and has worked tirelessly over many months to put the staffing and, uh, deployment report together. that's mandated. um, he's going to do the presentation on, and we'll both be here for question, but i cannot say enough about tj's work. um, he is the glue, the wheel, whatever adjective or metaphor you want to use that put this together. and if you've seen the actual report, it is a lot of work. um, so i will hand it over to tj. so tj put

together the powerpoint to absolutely. i can barely turn on a computer tj welcome. good morning commissioner or good evening commissioners. um one moment as i just pull up the powerpoint i thought it'd be ready for me. but i know good help is hard to find. huh? is it on here? it's on there. good. all right. so here, let me pull. uh, good evening, commissioners. uh, chief scott and members of the public. my name is tj chow. i'm the analytic supervisor of the staffing deployment unit at sfpd. and this evening, i'll be presenting the updated 2023 staffing analysis report for the san francisco police department. um, first, i'd like to go over

the background of the staffing analysis to provide a little bit of context. uh, in 2017, the board of supervisors adopted a resolution to establish a staffing task force to develop and determine the best methodologies to be used in the staffing analysis to determine sfpd staffing levels in a sorry, the staffing task force included members of the community, city partners, analysts, police, staffing experts, as well as members from the police commission. in 2019, sfpd hired an external company called matrix consulting group to collaborate with the staffing task force to develop these methodologies, as well as to conduct an independent analysis of sfpd staffing levels. in 2020, they released their analysis of sfpd staffing and that same year, in november of 2020, proposition e was passed by sf. voters require doing an

analysis to be done every odd calendar year. in 2021, the police commission adopted their resolution prescribing the methodologies to be used in the staffing analysis and in that year, sfpd conducted their first internal staffing analysis report. this past year, in 2023, we had updates that staffing report and updated the recommendations for both sworn and non-sworn personnel across the department. next, i'd like to go over the methodologies used in the staffing report. the first of which is the workload based methodology. we in our report, we use the calls for service as the primary data metric to determine police staffing levels for patrol officers. this workload based methodology is the industry's best practice and was used in previous analyzes, including the analysis done by the matrix consulting group. in 2020, the

controller's office analysis in 2018, as well as the analysis done by the police executive research forum in 2008. this slide here helps represent the breakdown of the work, workload based methodology. there's a bucket, uh, for responding for calls for service. as i mentioned, the calls for service is, uh, all calls for service that is generated by the public requesting for law enforcement services. it does not include any on view incidences. the second bucket is the administrative time. a percentage of time is devoted to administrative work for patrol officers. so time such as training, report writing, reviewing body cam footage, etc. and finally a percentage of time devoted for community engagement and proactive policing. this time includes any work that the police officers would do outside of responding to calls for service or an ministrative work. so this includes interacting with the youth, the merchants in

the city, visitors, and overall serving as a law enforcement presence out in the community. the target percentage for community engagement was set at 30, which again was used in previous analyzes and we had used it in our updated report. the other methodologies used in the report include the ratio based methodology, the fixed post methodology, and the non-scaling methodology. so the ratio based methodology is used when recommending staffing is based on the value of another metric or the value of something else. so for example, in patrol, the number of sergeants that is recommended is based on the value and the number of officers , and this is set at one sergeant to every six officers. for the fixed post methodology this is used when operational coverage is the consideration for recommending the staff. so for example, in our swat team for special operations bureau, we have to consider the coverage

of time of day and the days in the week as well as the number of officers based on officer safety for each team on our swat unit. and finally, the non-scaling methodology is used and recommended based on citywide objective and department priorities. and it's not based on any workload or other metric that is available. so an example here in this methodology is senior leadership positions in the department. next is the staffing results in our 2023 updated staffing report . we see that there is still a significant deficit for both sworn and non-sworn personnel throughout the department. but, um, on the bottom of the table, you can see the total recommendation for sworn is 2074 sworn members. and. 653 civilian professional staff that we had recommended. i do want to point out that the current figure here in this table is, as of june

2023, as that's when we had synthesized the data and developed the report. um and this is the same information that we had submitted in the report itself. another key takeaway from this slide is that the majority of recommendations for the sworn positions is concentrated in the field operations bureau. at the top of the table, uh, more specifically, the most recommendations is focused in the sector patrol area of the ten district station. now although there is a high need for sworn officers in patrol, there is still a need for resources in other specialized units such as our foot beats and for plainclothes as we compare the results to the previous analysis. analysis in 2021, we had recommended 108 fewer sworn members for the department, and this is simply due to the fact

that there were more calls for service in the data that we had analyzed, as well as additional civilianization opportunities that we had identified in our report. so in 2021, the report had recommended 2182 sworn members, whereas our updated report only recommends 2074. however although we did recommend less officers for the department, there is a greater need as you can see highlighted in red, the need was 485 sworn members as of june when we had developed the report. and this is because the staffing levels for the department continues to decline. um. what we'll go over some of the updated numbers as well in a future slide. um the other key takeaway for this slide is that we did recommend additional professional staff. um, as i mentioned, there was additional civilian civilian ization opportunities we had identified in the report, and

there were areas of additional administrative work that was identified, such as in policy development technology, as well as for analytical support, which is the reason for an increase in professional staffing recommendations in. here are some of the areas in which the department is currently working on some of the civilianization efforts. as i had mentioned, um, such as the background investigations, crime scene investigations, and for video retrieval. in this slide, we can see the recommendations for the ten district stations for sworn members, as well as the updated staffing numbers i had mentioned. so on the left hand side, we can see the staffing levels. as of june 2023, um, in which we had reported in our staffing analysis at 1022. and just this past month, in january of 2024, that number is now at 984. so. as you can see, the department is still declining

and facing challenges with staffing levels. and when we compare it to the recommendation of 1428 across the ten district stations, our need is at 444. as of january. here is a slide to show the separation trend. um, for the department across the past several years, which is one of the reasons why our staffing levels, um, is looking the way it is. um, you can see in 20 fiscal year 2022 had a significant impact in the number of separations that we had. and our current staffing levels. and this could be due to a multiple, it could be due to multiple factors such as as members who are eligible for retirement, as well as the covid 19 mandate that we had experienced a few years ago. so those could be some of the possible reasons. fortunately, though, the current fiscal year, we do have and we are seeing a lot less resignations from police officers in the department, however, we may still face a large number of retirements in

the coming years. on this last slide, you can see just the number of sworn members that we do have in the department who are currently eligible for retirement based on their age and years of service. so we have well over 400 members currently or as of january 2024, who are eligible to retire. um, and to finish off, i'd like to just say that the department does need to be able to hire and recruit as many officers into the department to surpass the number of members that are separating from the department, either due to resignations, retirement, or terminations. in order for us to either maintain or even increase our current staffing levels, i want to thank you for your time today, and i'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. commissioner byrne uh, thank you, president elias. um a number of questions. um um,

in, uh, on page eight of the of the presentation. well, first off, i want to start with the method ology. so the staffing levels are based on those three factors, as it calls to service community engagement and that sort of thing. they're not based on like serious crime. and a particular station. like i mean, i read it, but and i'm a lay person at the end of the day, but but shouldn't, shouldn't that come into account like how many homicides hides? how many, um, stabbings, serious violent felonies. and i didn't see it in the methodology. maybe i missed something. um, can i, uh, sorry, tj, let me. it would be in the overall methodology, what we do when we get to our level in deployments. commissioner when

you look at page or slide eight, which has the stations, you'll see the different numbers amongst those, um, i know that your question is going to should you hire more based on that as a specific subset, um, metric. but it's across the city and the calls for service, um, that come in is basically includes. those. so they're inclusionary on those calls for service. so if for instance, we have a shooting like you would want to know about the tenderloin, those factors go into it for the calls for service, not, um, at a separate line. you've had this many stabbings or shootings etc. so that's how the overall deployment goes and how we move around people and have different. if you look at the tenderloin specifically smallest as we know geographically, um, but the most, um, you know, calls for service. and then if we add in self-initiated activity and activities that are going on by, uh, different um,

orders or bureaus, uh, that's why you see staffing that high. i understand, and it's clear that the tenderloin, uh, has the most, uh, officers assigned to it, which is, uh, which quite frankly, is what i hoped. um, but getting to that, that slide then, um. i and i don't think i was alone. i. was led to believe that there was an increase in the number of officers assigned to the tenderloin in the last six months, and at least from this staffing level, there's actually been a decrease of five officers. um. i don't know. can can you explain this because that there was the issue, uh, that the chief had discussed about, um, the patrols and the swing shift, the plane, you know , and so i was led to believe that there had been an increased number of officers assigned at

and what this report shows is there's actually been a decline. um, yes. so several factors go go into the, uh, between june and january of 24, anything from promotion and other opportunities to transfer out everybody who is at a station is generally on the p one transfer list. so if i'm working at the tenderloin and i want to go to the central and my transfer comes up, that's where they that's where we move that person based on our mou and the way we transfer people, what is not shown here is all the other deployments that are going to the tenderloin, such as narcos six and other specialized units. so physically you do see that drop over those months, but they're actually staffed up. i would say more and especially operationally with directed operations in those areas. so yes, you did lose five people. and again, some of those could be from retirements etc. so we don't have any control day to

day over what that number is based on a myriad of different factors. i understand, um, what you're saying, that there are other units that that could have gone down so that the impression is that there is an increased, uh, police presence in the tenderloin. and that's what you're saying? uh, i'm saying that so when you look at these numbers, these are people who are actually assigned to tenderloin station patrol to the captain, staff, etc. the additional staff that that is being deployed to those areas does not show up. so these districts, these numbers would represent what what the metrics would dictate and how we best apply to those metrics. so the what the chief had spoke about was the increase in the number of officers on swing shift in the tenderloin in the last six months. um, my understand maybe of course, it wasn't explicitly said was that those officers

that had been assigned to attend tulane station? and are you saying that they weren't assigned to tenderloin station because what what we're seeing here is a decrease? no, i understand that you're seeing a decrease. but from the time and point, the question is asked. your question did the numbers go up? did we increase to this? if it's in that period, the answer can be yes. the chief of police gave of more officers to tenderloin on specific shifts, specific areas in between that if people leave between when your question was asked, which i don't know what the date is to now those numbers fluctuate. tomorrow we could be down at 120. that doesn't mean the chief didn't staff up the tenderloin. we're looking at two points in time. time of when things are staffed. so if the chief moved from 100 and um, 131 to 140, in, in, let's say september and we lost that number of people to

transfers, etc. to that number is going to be different in in january. and the report also indicates that, um, that park is overstaffed. that park is overstaffed. yeah. that the recommended um, um park is that park increased in staff? i'm sorry mayor culpa. um that park actually increased in staff. whereas every other station in san francisco went down. park was. and yet it's need. um based on the recommendation, based on the mythology is it needs the fewest number of officers by far . and at least, you know, from my point of view, wouldn't it be ideal to send some of those park people down to tenderloin, where are, you know, where are the serious issues affecting san francisco are occurring daily? i

can tell you that we can detail people. i can also tell you what you're not seeing here is all the shifts being filled by the officers at these stations on backfill ot these are stationary numbers assigned. it doesn't mean that these officers aren't moving. and i would also tell you that the fact that park only has 73 and was at 69, that that is a detriment to those officers who have to respond geographically at any given time to look to their right or left and not have staffing on either side to send them to another area. so that's where all our backfill ot and detailing comes from. i'm permanently a stationed at park. i'm off today. we can send you down to tenderloin on ot and that's where the fill is. so again, moving people permanently to a station doesn't necessarily mean that that that that those stations that you want them to go to are not being staffed even more than what's on this number.

thank you for that. excuse me. so like in the future, wouldn't it be better to when you do these staffing levels to give, uh, some sort of overview as to how many actual officers considering ot that you, you talked about in detail down that are on shifts covering the city because because what this does do you is it gives a snapshot of who's assigned and what's going on. but it doesn't give the reality of what a day to day, um, what a day to day camera shot of who's where and how many officers are where. and i thought, and again, i may be mistaken, that one of the purposes of getting these staffing levels figured out is so people can figure out, well, what's going on in a particular station, at least, you know, once a year when this report, uh , has to be presented. do you

follow or am i? no, i understand, but i think that we should, um, probably disassociate. um those two options the day to day operational need is not the staffing of a particular station , a unit or a bureau. what this is, is the recommendations that if we had everything we needed and we were fully staffed, these are where these numbers would be . that doesn't mean, for instance, let's um, just as as a global picture, let's look at super bowl sunday, super bowl sunday will be deployed from all stations throughout the city to certain areas that we've designate that maybe there's going to be issues or we know there's going to be fan fest, something like that. these numbers are for the day to day routine. uh, base lines. what you're asking is for what are we doing operationally every day that would have to be that's usually after the fact. so we

get our report on overtime. how many people work backfill at these stations over the last two weeks of the pay period? how many people do we deploy from narcotics down to the tenderloin? those are those are not. if i'm making sense, those are not the same things. this is what is your ground level? sfpd of each station or unit versus i understand and it's been an education for me so far. um, but i think that it would be appropriate to get that, that, you know, that level of detail. so that the citizens of san francisco know. yes there there's going to be this many number of policemen, um, uh, in, in the tenderloin or in the bay view or wherever in taraval, wherever ever. because it's important that, uh, that the particularly in the tenderloin that people get the confidence to be able to walk through that

to walk through the, the neighborhood and, um, uh, you know, particularly early evening hours, you know, you know, when dusk you know, um, because there's businesses there. i mean, the entertainment community between the theaters, all that and, um, this well, this report obviously doesn't do that. i learned that tonight. uh, but any. way, um, so i got it. you were doing it for one thing, and i was hoping it would do something else. right. this is completely just this is what the picture of the department is. what do you need in these units? are you plus or minus, etc? i totally understand, and we have. i won't say we don't. we have that granular of a look, but we do know how how much money we're spending on overtime for each station and issues like that to show that we are staffing. if you look at that far right need, that's where a lot of our overtime is going. i'm going to request. and that's

not fair tonight, but i'm going to request agendize. what are the actual average staffing levels at the stations in san francisco? uh, so that we have an idea how, uh, sfpd is deployed on any given on any given night. but thank you. thank you for vice president carter. thank you, president elias. um deputy chief walsh and i don't agree on everything, but we do agree that tony did an excellent job on this presentation often. um, and i know that i'm personally responsible for a lot of the additional work in the appendix. so many thanks. um tony, how long would you say sfpd has been understaffed for? for how many years? i would say that the staffing levels from the time i

started with sfpd have been on a downward trend for many years, and depending on the recommended baseline that you compare it to, the department has been understaffed for quite some time . um, and it's apparent, as we compare the previous report from 2021 to the most recent 1 in 2023. we had just updated that the need is increasing, the deficit is going up. um, and even though we're being objective with the recommendation of fewer sworn members based on the data, um, the need is, is great. that's helpful. and i mean, would it be fair to say we've been understaffed for, you know, at least five years? i would agree to that. okay. and chief, what would you say are the biggest things that, that you've done to address our staffing shortage? and, and let me just narrow that, you know, there's two things you can do. you can obviously hire more people. um

i'm not talking about that. um, you know, the other side of it is how do we, um, you know, deploy our scarce resources differently given the constraints that we don't have as many folks as we would like. um what would you say are the biggest initiatives that you've implemented to address that? that deployment aspect of addressing the staffing shortage ? it's really a matter of, uh, reallocating resources. i mean, we've cut down the size of almost across the board of many of our units. i mean, staffing analysis, this illustrates that, um, the efficiency of working better, collaborating more collaboratively with city departments. um, i it to me is paying off. for instance, our, our, um, just our narcotics effort, you know, with what we're doing with all the other

partner agencies, it actually gives leverages the people that we have are not narcotics unit is a fairly small unit. um, are are solo unit is about half of what it was five years ago. so trying to do what we need to with the unit, that's about half of what they used to be. it's really just a matter of trying to balance moving the resources around to where it makes sense. um, but basically comes down to what you said. it comes down to, can we hire more people? okay. that's helpful. um, one of the reasons i wanted to have this on the agenda is because because i think members of the public are understandably frustrated that they don't feel like they're getting the services that they want from the police department. um, and i think, you know, the reason that we often hear are we're understaffed, which is, of course, correct. the police commission has no, no control over deployment. of course. so

this is an informational hearing for the public. um but it also strikes me and there's a lot of ways that we deploy our resources that just are curious to me. so i'll just call out a few things. so, so foot beats i think this is an area where the research is clear how beneficial foot beats are in deterring crime, and also have the added benefit of allowing officers to develop relationships with the people who live and work. um, in the districts. and those have kind of important follow on benefits for community trust, for people coming forward and cooperating with the police when there is a crime. but we just don't do foot beats. there's five district stations with zero foot beats. there's three more with next to zero, um, to have four officers signed and one has five. um, so we've abandoned kind of what i would think of as

bread and butter policing that i think across the spectrum, folks believe is critical. another thing, traffic enforcement, we've had many hearings on this. the board's had hearings on this. our traffic enforcement has cratered, uh, since the pandemic. i think we're down 90 plus percent. and the traffic enforcement that we do, this is another, i think, core policing service that people kind of expect. but we don't do it. um. major crimes unit, i saw in the appendix is staffed at about two thirds of the recommended level, which is which is low, you know, even compared to other units that are understaffed. major crimes obviously does critical work for serious, you know, solving serious crimes. we just had a presentation from from cit and i learned a lot about just the vital work that they do for this department in terms of appearing, you know, on the scene to address extremely dangerous and volatile

circumstances. they're also expected to train the entire department. we give them. we learned at that hearing. we give them four officers. i just read that lapd's version of cit, they call it something different, has 84 officers and 50 clinicians assigned to it. now, lapd. is a bigger department of course, but , you know, that's just an example of another california department recognizing the vital role that cit plays. and yet we have a skeleton crew doing that work. okay. so those are just some of the things that jump out to me. the basic things that we don't staff, we don't prioritize means while chief, you and i go back and forth once a month about staffing, eight officers and a sergeant full time to doing nothing but arresting drug users, which has been a spectacular failure. and a tragic failure. and we were told

that it would be a tragic failure before we did it. we can find 100 plus officers to all descend on mission dolores park and do custodial arrests of a bunch of teenagers for skateboarding. i acknowledge a small handful committed serious crimes, but the rest did not and waited around for hours while they waited for transportation that never came. meanwhile all those resources were diverted away from district stations all across the city. we call times. i'm sure response times went down as a result. so what's your reaction to that? you know, we harp on you, harp on low staffing all the time. we just heard today staffing was a reason why we couldn't supervise the disbursement of public funds to s.f. safe. you've said staffing is the reason why you can't even upload to the website the department's own internal

policies and bureau orders, but yet we're not we're not doing the basic things, and we're prioritizing other services that seem less vital. what's your response to that? so my response is, um, every thing that you mentioned, for instance, let's start with foot beats. foot beats takes the resources to deploy foot beats. if you're you look at the numbers of you pick the station. um these stations that are 70 officers below where they should be. you have to have the resources to deploy foot beats. it's more labor intensive . i we all well, i in this department believes in foot beats. but you have to have the resources when you are severely short staffed. as i said before, it's a matter of trying to balance the needs. um, and, you know, you said we go back and

forth with the with the narcotics strategies that we have. i don't intend to do that, but it's another need. um the vending market that we're trying to disrupt. six officers deployed to that in the mission, seven days a week. um it takes officers to do that, and it's a huge, huge commitment for mission that's already severely understaffed. some of the retail, uh. theft operations that we do, it takes 6 to 10 officers to do those operations. so if they're doing those operations, they're not doing other things. it's just a matter of trying to balance the scales and i know it's, you know, simple mistake to say, oh, foot beats are great. so why don't you have them? you have to have the people to do that. and lapd is four times the size of the san francisco police department. 80 units for, for that type of work for lapd's probably par for the course we don't have the people to do that. and day in

and day out, our captains are struggling just to do the basic things because on top of the calls for service, all these demands that don't necessarily show up and calls for service are happening like the vending market, like the drug loitering, like all the things that we have to do that may not result in a radio call. and those are the things that i get not i we as a department get many, many public complaints about. they don't they're not necessarily going to show up in the calls for service statistic. but they're happening day in and day out and they have to be addressed. uh, major crimes we know they do fantastic work. we don't have enough investigators to fully deploy them. so we have to make a choice. if we fully deploy major crimes, something else is going to be under deployed. so that is the kind of world that we have to deal with. and until we get the number of people that the

workload analysis says that we need, um, we're going to have to keep trying to do the best we can to balance right. well, i certainly agree that it's you have to look at the opportunity cost, everything. every officer you assign to one task, it means they can't be assigned to a whole series of other tasks. and i guess my observation is we're kind of neglecting a lot of the most core functions or what people consider core functions of policing and favor of other things that are, i would say, less core. but let's let's talk about this because what are some i'm just going to suggest just some things and i would i would love to get your thoughts on this. so tony raised civilianization. um, i don't love that word because as sworn officers are also civilians. but civilianization is what folks call it. so we'll go with that. one thing i didn't see in the slides is, um. so if you don't have the exact number, that's fine, but but crime scene investigators, how many of those do we have employed at the

department? you know, ballpark. i want to i'd be guessing, but we are at like, minimum staffing. i think we just move. uh, maybe 1 or 2 people over to go to training. it's an application process within the department. um i don't have the number, but we are. we are severely limited. it is, though, a targeted. it is a it is a targeted area, though, to bring people over to another part of the slide. just to go to your point is backgrounds. we are in the middle of hiring and have offers out to five non-sworn brand new background investigators to pull what what we do have left, which is already at a minimum in backgrounds. so those numbers, um, are we are trying to do so i um, tj just handed it to me. uh, there's a total of 17, um, crime scene investigators, uh, three sergeants and 14 officers. okay. so they're all sworn, all 17 and

so why does that have to be done by sworn personnel? why why do you investigators have to be sworn? i don't think it does. and i think that's why we're making the transition. and other departments employ non-sworn. correct yes. okay. so we've been having we've had a staffing shortage for at least five years and we haven't we're talking about starting doing this now. the staffing shortage, if it's at, you know, it's severe. my question is why aren't we making the big changes that need to be made. so there's so we could have and it's obviously i think we can take as a given. it's easier to hire non-sworn personnel than sworn personnel, that the hiring process and the scope of people that are qualified is, is much greater. correct? yes. okay so if we started five years ago saying, hey, let's take the sworn people who were assigned to be crime scene investigators, maybe they could plug some holes in fill in the blank foot patrols and start

hiring. five years ago. so, um, non-sworn members to do this, we'd be in a different place now, right? that could be 17 slots right there. that would solve a huge chunk of our foot patrol problem. correct. um, i think that you're just going on a flat line that we're going to have a straight trajectory of hiring over those five years, but we didn't try. it sounds like we did. if i, commissioner, honest, we've had we've had numerous budget talks where we have long east academy classes. in those budget talks, we have not been able to fill them. so the trajectory between even hiring the civilian staff who we have, who we're losing and the amount of people we're getting into the academy, i can't answer your question. do i agree with you that we should be always looking to hire? yes, but it's not always up to the to the department on how much and how many we can hire, including non-sworn professional staff. it gets cut all the time. i agree that we should always be looking

forward and always building every year based on attrition, on, uh, transfers, whatever we want to retirements. okay let's move on to internal affairs. slide 25. i just want to make sure i'm reading this correctly. uh, we currently have 18 sworn in, sworn members in internal affairs. is that ia crim and ia admin. that's that's all of internal affairs. i have to go to the number, sir. yeah i'm just looking at slide 25, middle of the first chart. yeah. i believe that that is both units. it is not um, it is not the singular unit of i think it's both criminal and admin iterative. gotcha. okay. thank

you. so another question is there a reason why we have to have the entire ia or why do we need to have so many, um, folks in ia be sworn members? i mean, the district attorney's office has investigators that are not sworn, not attorneys, often public defender's office has folks who investigate crimes, who are not sworn. is there a reason why we have to have sworn members? in my experience, and having not only run those units, but been an investigator in both, uh, one obviously on the criminal side, yes. you absolutely need criminal investigators, sworn personnel to do that. um, and everything from excessive force cases to, uh, corruption, etc. as far as the administrative side, the officers and the sergeants that are in there are the same people who are, um, trained in all those policies, have used those policies and have investigative experience in it. and i would say that those ia investigations

are superior because of that, that they are a good product. but and so can you just clarify why you said you emphasized, especially on the crime side, it was necessary, given that other, you know, like the da, for example, has an investigators that are not sworn. why is it i'm not sure. i have no idea if, um, that it's news to me that they're usually da investigator are peace officers through the state of california. so it's unknown to me whether or not, uh, they have civilian investigators. okay, how about this? i googled this really quickly, and i found out that pittsburgh, for example, um, instead of having i and ia division, it has a central government agency that handles all internal complaints about of, uh, of internal complaints against city employees. so against police officers and, but also city employees from other non-law enforcement agencies. so they centralize it in a, in an

agency that does this. and so i imagine if they do that, you know, you could have a model like that, you could have, uh, you could outsource it. for example, is there a reason, in your view, why we can't do that? i would defer to the chief, but i think that the chief of police would want to have the control of knowing what's going on in his department to make not only staffing decisions, be they to transfer people for misconduct all the way up to taking them off the streets and disarming them, and to be able to be briefed on what those cases are, are going through as as they're moving forward. okay so okay. so it's a possibility, but maybe there's pros and cons how about our public relations department? i saw that we have four sworn officers in our public relations department. is there a reason why we need sworn officers to do our pr. that's also on slide 25. yeah. i don't think it's necessarily public relations. i think it's giving factual information to not only the community, but the news media. and i think that a lot of times

police officers, when they go to a scene, can get briefed up and understand what's going on in a professional manner in order to convey that message out. and so you think it's more important to have sworn officers in our i'm sorry, strategic communities stations with department, uh, then having those officers, for example, on a foot beat doing traffic stops, uh, being in the you know, your question was, you're asking me now if i think it's more let me ask chief, because chief brought up this trade off, is it more important to have those folks in the pr department? um, is it more important, i think, because, you know, you you framed this, i think, and i agree correctly, as a trade off. right? so is that trade off the right trade off given the staffing shortage, is it more important? i don't i can't answer it in that way. what i can tell you is i think it's necessary to have sworn people in the media relations unit. i think i for police department, and we do have

non-sworn people in that unit, but i just want to go back to something else earlier that you said in terms of we've never tried to consider it, uh, the csi issue has been on the map for quite a few years now. so, um, a couple of things have to happen process wise. is the classifications have to be created. um, it is a labor issue in terms of we just can't say, hey, you're sworn today. you're not sworn tomorrow. uh, there's a labor issue that goes along with that. and when you ask about initiatives in 2020, we had a whole list of positions that we felt that could be conveyed from sworn to non-sworn . um, and we did the labor part of that. and the city, uh, from the mayor's office hired a coordinator to implement those changes. and those changes are happening. not as fast as everybody would like, but they are happening. so you know, i

just want to make sure that perhaps you aren't weren't aware of that. but that's out there. no, i'm well aware of it. i'm but i'm, you're we're talking about things on a five year time span at least. right. you know it's been the understaffing is persistent for longer than that. so i'm just well we don't necessarily get to control all the pieces of this. and if we had it our way it would have been done a long time ago. but there are very complicated processes. uh labor requirements and the like, that we have to we have to go through and that list of that i talked about that was 2020. it's now 2024. it is progressing. there is some work. i mean it's not like we've forgotten about this as a department or city, but it's been a slow going process. right. and i guess my bottom line is just given the importance of the staffing issue, i just surprised that there haven't been bigger, bolder attempts to address it. it seems like we're doing things

at the margin, but we haven't done we haven't done a, you know, something on the scale of a wartime mobilization effort to really make sure we can address all the core functions of policing that that people out there are expecting. um, and i just think these are just a few among many examples i have more. i'll stop with that line, though . maybe i'll just ask one more thing. also, in 2020, since you brought up that year, i believe it was that year that the sheriff's department offered to take over, uh, sfo. oh, and i saw in the appendix that, um, you've got 100 sworn officers there. 100 sworn officers would, you know, redeployed, would solve a lot of our shortages in, in critical areas would easily solve the foot patrol issue, the traffic enforcement issue, um, and, you know, plenty more left over after that for other important things. so what's your view on that? that would be a big, bold thing to address the shortage. well it's not a sheriff's department decision.

it's a, it's a city decision. yes. with the airport commission and um. that is not something that should be taken lightly. that's a that's a long, a long process to begin with. but that's not a sheriff's department decision. i realize that they some of the people in the, in the sheriff's department were pushing for that. um is that the best way to police the airport? i don't know that i'm that i can say that, uh, because there are needs at that airport that, um, i think that we are able to fulfill that at least currently, the sheriff's department aren't able to. so that's a city decision. and um, that decision has not been made. okay. um, i'll just last question. what about command staff pitching in, pitching in to do what? let's say foot beats ? what about a four hour shift a

week for command staff to get out there? just half a day, four hours and do foot beats? that would actually that wouldn't get us back to the recommended levels. but it would actually help quite a bit. uh, that does happen from time to time. there's not a schedule of command staff, uh, that mandates that they go out and work foot beats, right? no, i know we're not doing it. i'm asking, what do you think? if we did do it, would that would that be would that be do you think a worthwhile, uh, pursuit? i think it does happen from time to time. i think again though, command staff, they have jobs too. so so. the work has to be done at all levels. and, you know, yes, i walk foot beats many times and i'm not alone in terms of going out and walking foot beats, um, but when i'm walking, the foot beat the things that that i need to do don't get done. so there's just it's a trade off. uh, commissioner. and um, i'm not saying that your ideas are not,

uh, i'd is that that that don't have possibility, but it's a trade off, and i don't believe it's as simple as you're making it. it's not as simple as you're making it. uh, because as everything has a consequence. thank you. chief thank you. uh, deputy chief walsh. and thank you, tony, so much. appreciate it. uh, commissioner benedicto, thank you very much, mr. vice president. i wanted to focus a little bit and follow up on some of the points that the vice president made. uh, primarily, primarily civilianization. i see that the there's a slide mentioning the areas background investigations, crime scene investigations and video retrieval. the vice president raised other areas that might be worth considering. um, for civilianization what, um, is there sort of any sort of concrete steps or timelines that can be shared on the progress for, for the civilianization efforts in those and either these areas or across the department that you could share?

um, i can't give you a concrete deadline or, or point, but again, i'll put out that we have hired or we've offered to hire and have actually accepted one who were training five, five civilian full time civilian, not nine 60s, part time, uh, retired officers to come in to backgrounds to help us with that. um, i can tell you that i've worked with director preston to get the psa's to hire more and to get the psa's out and to respond to, um, cold case, kind of burglaries, etc. the problem with that going to the chief's point about technicalities that's pulled in to dr. that is handled between dr. and seiu so that timeline is no longer under our control and how that is going to be hashed out. and director preston can speak to it better. so again these are our um objectives that we are moving towards. and again, not all in our control. well, there's nothing more that

we want to do. and then to get more officers out into the street and especially into patrol where it is the number one place that we come in contact with businesses, community, tourists, etc. so is there a, you know, appreciating that a lot of those factors are not under your control? is there a target that the department has for how many, you know, net positions it can gain through civilian ization by the end of the year? i couldn't give you that number. i know we've had discussions about about that again. um, i think one of the things that might be helpful that when we were we've met either with supervisors or with the mayor's office, is to show you just what a timeline looks like for an individual being hired. we've been focusing on officers, but it's almost the same process of recruiting people from either within the city itself. um, other agencies, or to go out and recruit. do backgrounds, bring them in. um, and so again, based on how what

the allocations are of any given budget for what those positions are, where we found the biggest help and the easiest to get through are nine 60s, and they are doing an immense they're the overwhelming majority again, because i'm overseeing backgrounds, i have firsthand knowledge. they're doing the overwhelming majority of the work. i believe we only have 2 or 3 sworn actually in backgrounds anymore, and that's mostly to supervise and handle laterals coming over. and what would you say? and i'll open this up to the chief as well, are the biggest obstacles to increase, increasing the pace and the output of the civilianization project. again, it's finding it's finding the candidates. um, you know, some of the people who find, for instance, that they, um, some time in the academy when we've already invested some money in, don't want to be police officers, they've transitioned to psa. it is it is the same, i think, finding police officers a little harder. but it is the

same issue. it is locating the talent pool and bringing it in. and then getting it through in an efficient manner and having them staff up those positions. can i just of course, also, um, there has to be a job classification given for the assignment. so there there are jobs that that we would like to civilianize and the classification currently does not exist. so that's a process and it can be done in in some cases we have taken that that on. but there has to be a classification in in the instances where we recommend that work is taken on by another department, then that's a labor process because the other department has to agree to take on the work and then the labor associations that are impacted by the police department have to agree. there has to be a labor discussion and negotiations. there and that is tricky as well. and as, uh, deputy chief

walsh says, that is actually ddrs responsibility. and so those have been some of the challenges. um and again, there is a map and a plan and there has been some progress, but there's a lot more work to be done. but those are some of the challenges. the other thing is you still got going back to what uh, deputy chief walsh had said a couple of times, we have to be able to hire the people and when we are submitting our budget requests, um, we have to get the authorization to hire a good example is our our technology division. you know, seven years ago, six years ago, had a lot more sworn people in. it and now i don't believe we have any sworn people in technology. so there has been progress made. um, if you look at our civilianization over the last, you know, ten years there has been progress made in that regard. so and we still have

positions that we are trying and have, you know, asked to be civilianized that that work that i just described still needs to be done. thank you. i think that makes sense. i mean, i think where i it's it seems to me that like you said, if you look at ten years, we've made incremental progress at civilianization, but it seems like the staffing crisis for sworn officers has become more acute. certainly in the last 4 or 5 years. and it feels like our, uh, that as that staffing crisis has been more acute, we should also sort of intensify the efforts on that. and it seems like we're continuing an incremental pace when you should see an accelerated pace to match the accelerated. what we're hearing about about about sworn staffing. thank you. that's all for me. oh i just spoke sorry. um. thank you. um i guess, you

know, just in sort of response to all of the questions that have happened and, um, i think that what is true underlying all of this is that the, the, the current sort of pressure on police and it's, you know, occurred over the years and rightfully so around reforms and whatnot. but it's it also is tending to make people retire and it's going to lessen the numbers of people who are being recruited. i mean, we've seen some of our classes, 11 people, you know, nine people. i mean, we're not going to fill these holes even though the need is higher and the need is higher. so some of what we've we really need to do is just change the atmosphere here around things. and as much as we can be critical of all of our own work,

um, it's really important to do the things we're doing to lift up the department and the folks doing this hard work. so i just want to start from that, that point and, and in talking about the, the what is it called, civilization. no civilian civil civilianization. um, there are also some really good programs that have rolled out recently, the reserve program, the, the, the ambassadors of retired officers who are coming back, um, in many cases doing some of the conversations i've been involved with instead of talking about crime fighting, it's crime prevention. it's working in partnership with the alchemy groups and the ambassador groups. um, the patrol specials discussion we're having, um, a lot of that is, is going to take up some of the time that i know is involved with with the folks

out on the beats. i mean, a lot of us have done the ride alongs and people the, the officers are pulled in. so many different directions when they're out. but, you know, this concept of a foot beat and doing a foot patrol is a great idea. but when you're out there responding to people who might need an emergency health response and all of a sudden you have a robbery going down, a robbery call going, and you have to have a car, you're not going to be running there, probably. so i mean, it really is important. i think maybe not just for the command staff to do, you know, foot patrols and go out and do it. maybe the commissioners need to so that we understand sort of what we're talking about. um, i mean, that's s the reality of what's going on. policing has changed the, the availability of recruiting people. um, all of these things are part of the

solution that you're talking about. and i, i want to be supportive of all of what's going on instead of, you know, sort of hyper criticizing as if i know policing because i don't think any of us here have been on the beat. so so, um, i want to look at this, these numbers and realize that we are understaffed and doing the best we can in many cases to keep the stations open and also respond and immediately to the specific needs that change on a daily basis, neighborhood to neighborhood. so so, um, thank you for this report. i think it's really clear, i think it would be helpful to see a sort of a tandem report of how the overtime hours fit in, because that's that's important. and the shifting around whatever we call those reassigned agents or, uh, you know, to, to deal with special occasions on issues or specific the specific stations

that might need more assistance for a period of time. it would be great to have some of that in here, too. somehow. i don't know how we'd capture it in a way that made sense. but, um, i mean, ideally we see the numbers that are ideal for each station. that's what this is about. and obviously things change on a daily basis with the chief and the command staff have to respond to. so um, this is really helpful to look at. thank you. thank you. uh, president cindy elias, uh, you've been up here for quite a while, so i'm just going to keep it short. i'm just looking at the recruits. you have 45 for this coming year , i guess. uh, where's. when's their deployment to. i guess, uh , uh, to stations. anyway, um, we have three classes in right now. um, and you're welcome to come on february 29th to see

class 280, uh, graduate. uh, they are holding steady, i believe, at about 20 right now. class 281 is about the same number they are in may and then we just started another class. oh, great. um, that is, um, i believe september. um, and then we do have a class planned for may to start. and as of now, i can tell you that we have eight confirmed for that. and we have about another four. um, i want to say somewhere between 20 to 25 that are in that kind of final pipeline. um, and there's a lot of work going on with that. that's a whole nother presentation on. i think we've made some really good steps, especially probably in the last month or two, of making that a much more efficient process. and much more us reaching out to the people we're trying to hire, as opposed to being as so passive. so, uh, for the i guess, for the year, fiscal year for, uh, 2023

to 2024, you have approximate how many scheduled in. um, well, we should if you the going i think, uh, uh, vice president overstone pointed this like we work in fiscal years and then there's a calendar year. so the way that these classes go, they're roughly about nine months. so we've always shoot to have about 100 in a fiscal year. but that's beginning, end and ending depending on where they start. but these last three classes um, i'm not going to overpromise in may, but let's just say we stay on that steady path of 20 to 25. we would have we would be close to about, um, 90 that we got into the academy in those four classes. so to finish off the rest of 20, 24, 25 or 2024, is there a projection of how many officers you i, i don't know, like so you know, for instance, one class started at plus 30 and they're

down down to 20 pre graduation in february. so um again based on what number i give you at the beginning of each class, we're always in tune to, to be like roughly plus 100. um, but by the time graduation comes through and just attrition, um, for a myriad of reasons, um, you know, we'll be we'll be, i would say, going through may the start of that class, we should be close to that 90 plus officers. so the amount of slots available is that predicated on the amount of fundings available, or is it just the amount of headcount that's that needed or you just get the, uh, funding later? yeah. so the standard is roughly, um 3 to 4 classes a year, a fiscal year roughly. um, i might have that wrong. um, but what happens is we always shoot the target goal is always 50, which we have not achieved.

lived in a very long time. um, so the potential to fill those classes with those numbers is there. the question is, can you fill those those, um, classes. so i'm just looking on your page two of your, your, your background context 2020 the matrix release report. the voters approved prop e, which i guess removed the minimum required amount to the band, right. uh, proposition e was to remove the, um, uh, city charter number that was 1971, i believe, was the, um, mandated number of sworn personnel for sfpd at the time. and to instead do a staffing analysis every other year to determine the recommended levels, what part of property played on that? uh the impact of the i guess, the staffing level of the sworn officers was there any impact on

that? no, there's as compared to minimum requirement to none. okay. property itself did not have have that impact. it just changed how we would figure out what the best number in any given two year period would be based on the metrics that we use . thank you very much there. deputy chief walsh. thank you. that's all i have for members of the public. they would like to make public comment regarding line item nine, staffing and deployment. please approach the podium. good evening. um, i refer to the spirited, uh, dialog or indeed perhaps cross-examination involving the vice president and the chief involving the opportunity costs of policing, where you talked about the street. um street patrols and whatnot. but perhaps the commission has a role to

play here. there wasn't a lot of talk about the administrative time. 25 to 35, which is on the chart, except insofar as it involves taking some of the current tasks and making them civilian. but this commission has played a role in this in the last several years. you've adopted a number of dgos that have extensive record keeping requirements. granted, some of those may be, uh, required by state law, but some of these were imposed by you folks. and perhaps you should spend time or indeed ask the controller's office to go back and look at the dgos that you have adopted. uh, and they may individually be very meritorious insofar as the documentation requirement is concerned. but when you aggregate them, a lot of officer time is involved in in filling out paperwork. i'm informed that it takes about 25 minutes back at the station, often merely to document that, uh, a traffic

ticket, a traffic ticket. and i also understand that this might, in fact influence ice officers willingness to write a ticket, particularly when they have higher priority calls within a district or they're otherwise occupied. so i suggest that perhaps part of the internal analysis ought to be to determine whether some of the dgos perhaps should be modified, tried to reduce the record keeping burden upon officers. thank you, mr. allen. could i ask you a question about your public comment? certainly okay. thank you. that's very kind. did you know you brought up the issue of the potential increase in administrative burden from new police commission policies? were you aware that 99.9% of policies are drafted in the first instance by subject matter experts at the police department ? i am not aware of that

percentage. and so now that you know that, does it change your view, knowing that in while the commission approves those policies, that those suggestions for new policies that may or may not impose new administrative burdens were or were made by the subject matter expert, uh, who was a sworn officer in almost every case who drafted it. so are you saying that 99 point, was it 5 or 9? it it's you know, it's 90? i'm going to say i didn't do a complete review of the century long history. are you saying that 99% of the administrative of the record keeping burden associated with each of the dgos in the last, shall we say, five years were recommended by sfpd? i would say, don't take my word for it. look at that. that's my point. is that what you're saying? well, what i'm saying is, i would say, look at 3.01 and you'll see that for the way in the ordinary course, that any new dgos is written and

initiated and is the subject matter expert, who is a sworn officer and picked by command staff, is the one who takes primary drafting responsibility of the policy, and that is that is true for nearly every policy that you've been here and watched us adopt. uh, may i just make 1/32 comment? yes, please. i i will accept that if you say it, i will accept it. if it's true, even if it's true, i don't think that under cuts my position. i mean, i spent my life in the corporate world. if you had a circumstance where over a period of time, you had a radical mismatch between the demand for services and the supply for services, and you knew that it would take quite a period of time to increase that supply. i individuals to do the work. then the first thing you would do is ask yourself, is there a way that i can make my people more efficient to put more officer officers on the

street, have more street time, less admin restorative time, and if in fact you're correct that it was, uh, subject matter expert experts within the department, that i would say to them, as you have as your colloquy illustrated, we've been for we have for five years. we've been under staffed. we can't get out of this in the next two, 3 or 4 years. and so maybe we should go back and look at those administrative burdens. notwithstanding who the draftsman was, we agree on so much, mr. allen, thank you for your comment. thank you. that is the end of public comment line item ten discussion and possible action to approve the 2025 through 2026 fiscal year. sfpd budget discussion and possible action. um. jesse walsh is very

tall. good evening, commissioners. um, president elias, vice president carter overstone, chief uh, director henderson again, i'm catherine maguire, i'm the executive director of the strategic management bureau of the police department. and i'm here this afternoon. this evening, uh, to present to you. thank you. al. um, present to you the fiscal year 25 and 26. um second budget presentation. for those two fiscal years. first, i'd like to, uh, provide a reminder of the sort of big time frame phases of the budget process and specifically what happens and who does what for each phase. so the first phase is smashed

together. is department and commission together. so limit the budget for the department phase. and then uh, which proceeds in february to the mayor's phase, uh which runs through may and then um, then segues into the board of supervisors phase in the department phase, and specifically sfpd, our work is to incorporate the mayor's, uh, instruction, uh, the mayor's offices instructions, which which this year is, uh, meet target and orient around the mayor's priorities. we consider department priorities in meeting those mayor's offices and instructions, and we submit technical changes in our budget in february. three things that are the reclassification of positions, uh, to reflect adjustments that happen mid-year and, and grants that we know we're going to get, um, or we have gotten, uh, updating our

budget to reflect those grants. so the commission, uh, phase is we hope to get your feedback from a community perspective. and and, um, the commission is charged with taking action on the budget that last line in that slide and that, uh, column is. supposed to go in the mayor phase. so my apologies for that error. there and then, um, in the mayor phase, we have discussions on how how we would develop solutions to meet mayoral initiatives and we would adjust and discuss, uh, vehicles , other equipment, capital and kuwait's emissions with the mayor's office. we also talk through enhanced or realignment of funding to ensure, um, that we're sort of meeting those mayors and mayoral initiatives and also, um, addressing any sort of design adjustments in our budget from the police

department perspective, and then and also discuss positions and whether we need to realign things. and then finally, once we submit to the board of supervisors, uh, we provide and discuss the mayor, um, the mayor's submission with the budget and legislative analyst and members of the board of supervisors. next slide, please. so on the slide, you'll see you'll see. just a reminder of this is sort of the makeup of our budget. and um, the reminder being that, um, about 84% of our budget is personnel costs. and when you add in workers comp that comes to almost 87% of our budget. so so we're we're talking a very large portion of our general fund budget is people. so next slide please. so the mayor's office is instructions were to cut 10% of our general fund budget. um and which equates to in this case.

and i know the math doesn't work out, but i can talk about that more if you'd like. uh, 17.2 million is the official target cut. uh, this slide is really intended to provide you with information sort of that gives you a sense of what that 10% cut would look like. and and a full 10% cut. so for personnel, if we cut only personnel, uh, it's 85 officers or. 75 or 74 ish officers and eight sergeants. if and that is equivalent to a not not the smallest district station, as you heard earlier tonight. so that would be a pretty significant cut. the non personnel services uh budget that would represent 17.2 million would represent the entire non personnel services budget for the general fund which would the impact really would be something like all of our pre-employment exams, recruitment. um um analysis. it

sort of the, the licensed is that we pay for it infrastructure and whatnot. materials and supplies. that would be the entire the entire materials and supplies budget is less than one third of that $71.2 million target and includes things like uniforms, ammunition, less lethal equipment and then finally services of other departments. um, if we cut 25% across the board, if we could, um, that would mean that's that would get us to that target. but we really don't have a lot of control over those, uh, budgets because it's sort of determined by the department performing the service. that would be all of our workers comp funds or nearly all of it. and so anyway, it impacts facilities maintenance, fuel fleet workers comp, etc. next slide please. so uh, to review our or talk through how

we kind of talked uh, came to our what we think are the primary initiatives. we want to talk with the mayor's office a little bit more about is, um, this process that we go through every year. so you normally in november, we start our strategic priority setting process with the command staff and captains and this year we delayed a little bit and started in december just because apec was pretty all encompassing, all consuming. and then um, so we generate generally we generate command staff generally. um, sorry, comes up with an all encompassing list of possible priorities and then command staff sort of way and vote them, vote on them. and then we also have um, this is in reverse order, but input from the captains on what their daily demands are just to ensure that whatever our priorities are, are, are in line with reality.

and then moving into the um, so those would be the priorities for the department. and we then have internal budget requests that come in at the unit level, um, from various units around the department. and um, we identify those that align with our strategic priorities. and then in um, other requests are reviewed to determine whether or not they can be absorbed into the operational budget. captains and command staff discuss those requests. uh, fidelity to priorities. and all of this information forms the discussions with the mayor's office. and then the next slide. so um, president elias had asked for our wish list to give you a sense of what that looks like. and um, it's really, uh, the requests total out to $33 million. and there were 84 requests this year. the sum of

them are going to be kind of repackage into what i'm about to talk to, talk about. and then others, uh, will cover in our operational budget and then yet others may not be funded next year. so next slide please. so going back to our department priorities. you all saw this slide on our last presentation. but to give you a sense you know just a reminder this is what they are. they're improving safety in public spaces which really gets at street conditions violent crime and organized retail theft. it's about sustaining reform. this is making sure that we have the infrastructure in place to, you know, beyond april first, which is our deadline for crime that will be able to sustain the good work that we have done. and then finally, the staffing, wellness and deployment, as you heard, we're really need to ensure that the recruitment and retention efforts are, um, shored up and we're supplying what we need to

for that purpose and or those purposes. and then also this talks about operationalizing soren. so kind of getting at some of the civilian ization things. but it really goes to another level of civilianization and not that one for one, because we've gotten a lot, as the chief was mentioning, we've done a lot of that. there's, you know, couple of dozen maybe more positions that we could do a one for one on. but ultimately this is ensuring that the time that we have dedicated for, uh, sworn member here is dedicated to sworn functions and sworn activities. so if they need support on administrative, uh, administrative support or analytical support such that they can devote time more time to being a sworn officer, that's what. we would do. and then bring in the civilian support to help make them more efficient, essentially. so that's what that operationalizing sworn is about.

next slide please. and then you'll see we've got uh the initiatives by priority. so this is really uh focusing on technological. so i'm just going to go right to the next slide. but the next three slides then show the detail of what those initiatives are. um, so improving safety in public spaces is really talking through the possibility of pilot piloting technological tools to help, um, it does a couple of different things. it it is a force multiplier. so some of the, the creative ways in which we're trying to address staffing issues or include technology, um, or tools that are technological in nature and then a real time, a potential real time crime center, which would help break down silos across bureaus and agencies to, um, provide side information. um, and it would be a really a