replace something under the street, it is costly. i would only do it in special places. open sidewalks. there was money available for rainwater. the mission gets flooded a lot, so we started opening up sidewalks. we also wanted to get to the news stands. we got those new news racks, and we purposely put them up against the building's. that frees up the sidewalk, so that you can open it and put in plantings and make it look nicer. with merchants, this was the bench of the city original design, we took our planters, and we work with our merchants to create seating areas. first of all, it has to be clean, and then you can create little public spaces like this

for people to hang out, and we have done it around coffeeshops. these are some of the photographs from the events we hold. once you put in the public space and make it beautiful, something that people want to hang around, the next thing is to activate that public space. this is where the public-private partnership comes through. this is sponsored by a bunch of realtors. so this was a midsummer's celebration called summer solstice. the noe valley harvest festival, we do that in partnership with the noe valley farmer's market. this year, we have done a holiday celebration on 24th

street. with the cbd did was enable us to create an infrastructure that was clean and beautiful and green. in doing so, it brought people together locally as well as organizations in the neighborhood together. so you have merchants working with the farmers' market, friends with noe valley, in ways that they did not six years ago. but because we have a beautiful space, we can do all of these things, and businesses also contribute to these events, and it has become very successful. thank you for your time. supervisor mar: supervisor chu. supervisor chu: the benches with the planter boxes, they look great. the question on logistics. was that on the property owner's property, did it require encroachment? >> no, nick from dpw to care of

it. it did not encroach on their property at all, but we asked. supervisor chu: in terms of annual cost, are you paying an encroachment feet? >> sure. are you kidding? nick is very good. who is the person i work with on trees? i am planning on her name. carla shorts. we love her. supervisor chu: we are exploring in our own areas where, if you can put in a bench, it might be a place for people to gather. you have to convince people that it is worth putting in. there is an annual increase in fee, it becomes a hindrance for a lot of folks. >> it is $300 a year, which is not a lot of money, and not only

do you have to install it, you have to maintain it. people graffiti on them, they carve in there, and they take plants. you need an infrastructure in place, which is why cbd is so great. >> with the street trees, you have that issue. some of the property owners were afraid of taken on the liability. cbd got a permit for the entire length of the district, and that allows them to plant trees and pay for the insurance, take on the liability. cbd's can do things on a street-wide level when property owners or businesses are concerned on an individual level, so they can allow more of a selective approach to this project which takes the stress

off of the individual. >> a public-private partnership is what a cbd is. no property owner has said that we could not do it. they have said no to treat because they did not understand how it worked. supervisor maxwell: once they find out how it works? >> yes. it was difficult to get the cbd through. it took a long time. 176 properties on six blocks. it is a difficult selling proposition because it is not easy to understand what it is, why the city does not do this, why it is good for the property owner or merchant to do this. there are a number of target audiences to convince. but now they loved it. -- they love it.

they have to see it. conceptually when you tell them that it is $900 in taxes, that is still an assessment. supervisor mar: what a great model of how a committee business district can bring out the best of a community. this makes me want to come out to the entertainment -- hayrides, cable cars, a menorah lighting. it is a variety of great things. >> i am part time. i am not pay full-time executive director. i live in the neighborhood, i wanted to look great, but this is a volunteer organization, and merchants. they contributed money and sponsored it. supervisor mar: there are a ton

of the events in this short period of time. thank you. any other questions? is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? walter paulson. >> government audit and oversight. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. somewhere down the road our roads are going to cross again somewhere down the road i know that part of yours will come to see that noe valley takes the lead supervisor mar: very nice. 9q5t<

to be packaged. we found over a third of the on the clubs had either not been sealed properly with tape or were not signed off on by two officers, as is required.

the envelops book like this. on the back, they have stance that say initial, verify officer, currency. we also found the property evidence tracking system itself is an older mainframe system with some limitations, the biggest of which is the system does not allow the police to update the dollar value field. if part of the evidence gets removed properly, they cannot update that. so as a result, if you look at their system and look at how much total money they have been evidence, you will not have the right number. some system security measures are outdated. for instance, access of a

tracking system. in some cases, it depends on the terminal you are using. and you do not have to identify who is using the terminal. that is a week is we identified. there are no job description to define each employee's roles and responsibilities in handling the monetary evidence authorization. we recommend the proper segregation of duties. last, the departments holding and purging procedures were not always followed, so the system showed envelops that exceeded the 15-month holding notice, and we found $5,200 that had been held longer than 15 months. according to police department procedure, that money should be deposited into the general fund

if it has not been released. supervisor chu: given your findings, what is the department's response to address them? >> i think it is a fluid response in which we took a reaction. as far as the daily book no evidence, that is contingent upon the direct supervision. we looked at different security measures, as signatures. we have the right of first refusal. we did not accept the booking of evidence until it was done correctly, so station personnel were held accountable. since that change, it has been fairly successful. as far as holds, we have put together a team of three part- time personnel, one with

expertise in evidence. they have been actively working and have gotten through many of the holds. there is one in the administrative component, two others going out and contacting the individuals as to what is secretary of the old. supervisor maxwell: are you talking about the last point of the evidence envelope, the $250,000? >> he mentioned a total amount of gold that had to be accounted for. there were a variety of factors that contributed to the gobi on the 18-month old period. we began to look at it at the 15-month mark. the problem is, you have transfers and somebody may think that the evidence is germane to their case. it is not just as simple as cutting it off. so we have to look at the criteria of making a hold last

that long. there are best practices that we look at where we need the congruence of the office and justices. maybe it was serialized money, maybe it had bloodstains on it. sometimes, money is simply money and we can release it and deposit into the general fund or another holding account. this team we have had, which has been working for two-thirds of the 900 hours, has been very successful. they have been depositing anywhere from $20,000 to a low of $10,000 a month. what we're looking at now is transitioning to a full-time person with investigatory experience in those roles, and it requires a lot of foot were to contact the individual departments and investigators to ask the status of the old. that is something that we try to expedite.

supervisor chu: with regard to the property evidence tracking system, some of the things that were mentioned have to do with the limitations of the old mainframe, the lack of effective security systems and controls. what are you doing there? >> that is a two fold issue. we are transitioning into a new computerized system. that is on hold. as far as access to these terminals, i believe lieutenant can explain that, but we did learn some information as to who had access to that. supervisor chu: what is the hold on new world? >> there are many some components to it. there is a writing system and an evidence system. we have not implemented that at this point, so we are fairly far behind. we have a new chief information

officer that is looking at that carefully and we are making a decision whether or not to proceed with them as a vendor supervisor chu: and you have hired a new cio? >> yes, we have. supervisor chu: is this related to justice? >> no. >> we have the recommendations, if you look at no. 10, it talks -- produces a list of the current locations -- supervisor mar: is there another copy of that? i do not think i have that document. >> well, they recommended that we identify all 28 terminals --

supervisor maxwell: yes, but could we have a copy? >> there were 19 recommendations from the comptroller's office. we concurred on just about all of them. since then, we have been completing those recommendations. a lot of it has to do with the new world system coming on board, and as the director stated, we wanted to wait until final audit, which hwill take place next week. basically, what he was talking about, there were terminals in the department that can be accessed through different individuals. all 28 terminals have been

identified, located, and removed. the only one that can access or modify anything in the property control office is the officers within that unit. anyone that is transferred or changed from the office, their passwords are taken away. so that is the safety measure that had been put in place. supervisor maxwell: recently? >> yes. supervisor mar: thank you. i know the comptroller's office was completing their report. then supervisor chiu asked for a response from the police department staff. i wonder if the comptroller's office wanted to finish their report? >> yes, thank you. moving on to the overtime audit, -- supervisor mar: question from

supervisor maxwell. supervisor maxwell: the pcu needs to clarify and expand its authoritative guidance. did the officers speak to that? that was point number two. i would like them to go point by point -- if you could let us know what was done on each bullet point on the summarized findings. , wanted to know about point number two -- i wanted to know about point number two.

>> [inaudible] that is a broad interpretation. some of the issues speak to certain checkpoints where it is important to receive evidence. we enacted some of those changes immediately -- supervisor maxwell: why don't we ask the comptroller to clarify that, and maybe it will be easier for you to do that. >> we could have stated that more specifically. that is a reference to how the evidence envelopes are handled. the fact that they need to be sealed with transparent tape, the fact that they need those stamps for the signatures, both initials' enstar numbers indicated for two officers. supervisor maxwell: when you talk about guidance, designee to be printed somewhere? >> it is printed but it needs to

be disseminated again. police department staff needs to be reminded of it, either through a department templeton or through another method. >> within a week of that we had a new department bolton is a fact. it is a new supervisor. riding the content of the bulletin, we specified, that if it was not approved, we would have first refusal. there was a bit of adjustment. we said we would not accept the evidence if it was not properly included in the envelope. it was a check and balance this thing. that was a rapid adjustment. supervisor maxwell: you talked about evidence tracking. the system does not contain accurate record data. that is bullet 3. the property evidence tracking system does not contain an

accurate data. >> i can speak to that. that results from the fact the dollar field cannot be updated. when an envelope -- when the amount changes, properly -- that cannot be fixed in the system. that is my understanding. >> there are the entries in the system when we obtained evidence, specifically money. two different lines on the computer. they both deal with money, but only one gets changed with the system. if someone comes in and we can release a partial, we can change part of it.

$50 has been released. in the second area, we cannot change that, due to the system. so when we have an audit, it is the full amount that shows, not the $50. supervisor maxwell: so are you going to change that? >> yes, we are open with the new system, that will be changed. supervisor chu: and that is currently on hold pending your ci 0's evaluation? >> correct. supervisor maxwell: the next one, should adopt a better segregation of duties. did you speak to that one? >>