same, depending on the number of participants. supervisor mirkarimi: right, but i am trying to glean from the conversation, what with the reduction of that cost be? >> well, it would be the difference between what the duration of the latter class would be. we have some, in this case, where we had a middle sized class of 14. we have a variation of the training class which provides for a smaller number of four to 5, and there are academy classes based on the types of experiences they may have had, and they are significantly different -- different. supervisor mirkarimi: well, we

are really into the exact numbers here. >> supervisors, let me say that the officers that are doing the training are assigned to the academy, assigned to the police department. so it would really boil down, supervisor, when we talked up a $5 million. they look at the celery and on salary costs. the difference is if you are about filling 50 positions that are vacant, in you have already got that salary build in. with $5 million in class, in covering, the salary is going to be the big issue. it is not seven weeks or seven months. if you were to give me funding today to hire two or three academy classes, you would not see those officers until 2012. supervisor mirkarimi: i

understand that. but if you 0 n, with a truncated, we could look at it. it seems a little fuzzy, that is all. >> we will get better. chair chu: i believe the cost of the academy class is about $5 million, which includes salary for a 50-person sized glass, and then 1 million. >> correct. chair chu: ok. >> we will go back to the expenditures. when you look at the fiscal 2011, to of the " expenditures, you can see is broke down, other departments, materials, supplies, capital, and when you look at the salaries in french, it costs that to put them on the police department.

the largest proportion in salary and fringe. next slide. and then this is broken down again. it is not a pie chart, but it is $421 million in salaries and fringe, $14.3 million for services. $1.10 million for the capital. in this 2011-2012 budget, but this is a $14.50 million increase for contractual raises that the officers are due this fiscal year, and there is the retirement and health cost increases, and then we have it broken down by services of other departments, materials, supplies, and we're willing to talk abut any of those that you might have a question as to how we define this.

chair chu: salaries and fringe, i think he said the $14.50 million is the race for this year? >> yes. this is the 2011-2012, correct. chair chu: any update on that wage increase? >> no, no ma'am. chair chu: thank you. >> supervisor chu, is the question on whether there have been conversations about making adjustments so it is definitely a topic that has been on the table, continues to be on the table.

as you know, the contract is closed for the next two years. this would require agreement by both parties. there is also a current concession in place that was negotiated last year, so we do not have the authority to unilaterally alter the contract, but i think that is probably a discussion that needs to be on the table. i would be interested, and i know the mayor would be interested on the committee spots -- committees thought -- committee's thoughts. chair chu: supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: is there a possibility to recount for us what grant funding at the police department gets, federal and state grants, and what that

total has been and what it is expected to be? >> supervisor, looking at the budget for the next fiscal year, we have approximately $20 million in grants and special funding that we believe the department is going to recede. supervisor chiu: and do you know what the source of that is, or is it a variety of sources? >> it is a variety of sources. there is the california emergency management association.

i believe we have at least three grant from them. we have a grant from the department of justice. the community oriented policing services group, and i think our total is right now that we have 29 active grant. supervisor mirkarimi: who on behalf of sfpd are the hunters of the grants? >> there are others that the city is receding, and then the police department would partner with them, so there are a number of grants where we are not the lead agency. usually, the grain manager, wrote one person, working with another, they will create the

project, right to the proposal. if it is accepted, they were together with the granting agency to make sure that the funds are brought in and expend it. supervisor mirkarimi: so who is your designated grand person? >> her name isdana lang. the department does not have one specific grants person. it depends on the grant. for example, one would come through our traffic unit. we have one that is human trafficking right now, and that comes through investigation. it really depends. supervisor mirkarimi: and on a separate category, what about work orders could providing service or other departments? >> departed -- providing

services for other departments comet it is about $15 million for next year, and the missouri services on a specific basis, over and above the usual police activities offered. supervisor mirkarimi: does that include mta? >> i believe the enterprise numbers are being finalized this week, and we do not have any numbers. these are preliminary korea we are still talking with almost every single department about the level of service next year and what they are requesting. supervisor mirkarimi: do we have what a budget looks like on special events and officers being used for that activity could >> that budget is

approximately $1 million that we put in every year. there is really a huge variety in activities that come to the department through that program. so there is not a reliable number that we could put in at this point. i -- supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. chair chu: thank you. supervisor chiu? we spend about $1.90 million.

those are our internal personnel. we do not have a separated. this is when we come back to the board with the number of personnel. supervisor chiu: to the mayor's budget office, with regards to a work order. according.

>> this is not separated out in the financial system. this is without going through and doing the work, but we have that data. we can make it available. supervisor chiu: great. thank you. >> supervisor mirkarimi and i have had a discussion. these are other issues that involve it and what we are getting or are not getting from them.

the san francisco police department in 2011 has email. supervisor chiu: i am still waiting for a list of all of the central station officers, so i am still waiting for that. this is around the rays. i know this will be covered in other parts of the presentation, but it seems to me if we're going to get anywhere close to where we target with where the mayor and i think all of us understand about 20% cuts across the board, that will require either layoffs, or unless we can figure out a way to work with poa to bring back these raises, and i, for one, hope that is the direction we go. we want to have more in your ranks at this time. i know we have a conversation

later on, but that is certainly my thought. chair chu: thank you, supervisor chiu. supervisor kim? supervisor kim: have we started to do some analysis on how many positions about officers that are assigned to positions that could be performed by civilians? >> supervisor kim, i think last year's report identified approximately 250 positions or more currently performed by

sworn staff that could be performed by civilians. i would be happy to get a copy of last year's report to members of the committee. >> that would be great. in that report, is there also analysis of the long-term benefits? a measly, we do not want to lay off officers, but as we have retirements, not worry about those positions in hiring civilians that are a little bit more affordable. >> there is financial information about it in the report with the wage of officer and a typical civilian. i think, and i will speak for myself, i think the chief has a more valuable perspective to add on this, but the benefits are probably two fold in the long term. number one, generally speaking,

it it would likely be less expensive to staff many of these positions with civilians. secondly, given the conversation about the expense of running an academy class and the time it takes to edit the we train an officer for that duty, at times, it is simpler and faster to hire a civilian, but i want to point out that hiring civilians is not an easy task either. then, third, frankly, in some cases, these are jobs where there are some you would want them to be provided by sworn police officers, other areas of professional. chair chu: what is the progress at responding to this report?

is there a timeline we are looking at? >> timeline wise, no, man. we are looking at what can be done by a civilian. it does not necessarily need to be done by a sworn officer, such as taking reports, dealing with things that are several days old, and in some instances, there are agencies across the country that use service representatives to go out and do that. it is customer base, and there is good feedback from citizens. we are looking at that. i know there are contractual issues, taking a sworn officer away. we have to talk to the poa. these are positions we will try to fill next year in terms of supplementing and that feeling. we can put something together for you. chair chu: it would be good to

see in terms of what some of our goals might be with us suppose a migration. i am having trouble with that word. thank you, supervisor kim. i would agree with your comments. i think it will be important in the long term. i think also to the extent that we're looking for creative ways to be able to return our officers back on to the street and provide extra manpower, wind power, that will be an important thing moving forward, as well. i do recognize that there are certain positions that get put into temporary, modified, or light duty work because people are not physically able to be on the street, so i think as you're talking about and providing information back to the committee, it would be helpful to say also how many positions

do we really need to accommodate for disability accommodative, temporary. if we are going to be paying a salary for someone who cannot be on full duty for whatever reason, we would like them to be active doing something, and hopefully that will be information you will be providing to us. >> yes. chair chu: supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: i also want to put my voice to that. an investigation assistant or something like that. in an -- an administrative aide

position. and i also know there are up front costs in civilianizing, so i am curious to how the program has gone in the cost impacts. >> supervisor, it is at the comptroller indicated, that is a balancing act with identifying positions that can be civilian ized and adding positions to the budget. we had an aggressive program years ago in better financial times, and we feel quite a number of positions, i think approximately 100, over a two- year period to move forward with a program to identify these.

some repositions, unfortunately, because of the budget constraints were eliminated. we have what classifications would be appropriate, and we way those in terms of establishing priorities for which could move forward and be filled. for example, we just hired 15 new community service police aides, and they started a special class this week to assist with the non peace officer duties, in particular looking at customer service out in the field, and that will eliminate some of the duties of the police officers so they can be better deployed.

chair chu: thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: what about economizing approved using other partners, like the sheriff's department, for example, since we have sworn personnel in the sheriff's department? stationed transfer unit, the serving of warrants, felony warrants, etc. it dollar for dollar, it is probably a little more savings on the efficiency of allowing another department to do some of the work that has some of the same credentials to do so. it what sort of assessment is there and perhaps dollars savings? >> i have not done any assessments. we can look at that income back. supervisor mirkarimi: with the controller like to opine on

that? >> suba, supervisor mirkarimi, we didn't look at certain functions last year, with the sheriff's department and the police department. i can recall the results of that review at this moment, but i will be happy to pass them to the committee. inmate transfer, warrant serving, fingerprinting function, and a couple of others. so i would be happy to pull the analysis. supervisor mirkarimi: that would be helpful. i was looking at how that was summarized in your current budget, and it was not clear that those recommendations were implemented, so i am curious if that is in line for the upcoming budget consideration. >> we can look into that. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. chair chu: thank you.

>> continue? chair chu: yes, please. >> with the grants, i do not think we do our best job in that. we need to actively seek out as many grants that we can get, and we are looking to do that. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you for bringing that up. to the comptroller's office or another, do we have, with best practices, an idea of what other municipalities do with the grant procurement for their police department? is there any way to about the way if we are on target or not? >> supervisor, it is a great question. i just confirmed with the comptroller that i do not think

either of us have an easy way to answer that question, but it would be worth looking into and see, like you say, compared to our peers, as we are bringing in. i do not have a sense on whether we are doing better or worse or the same, but i think you'd be worthwhile to say, and if we are not stacking of well, what services other folks are tapping into that we might look at. i think it is a good idea. chair chu: thank you. >> ok, when we go back to the slide, looking at the fringe. $4.40 million for dental and so on and so forth with the fringe broken down. the next slide talks about this goat 2011, 2012. if you look at the rays, it

goes up to $265 million, so it is an increase just in the hourly cost of the mobsters themselves. the good news, i have a good news slides, as you can see from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2007 projected and fiscal year 2012, especially in one, we decrease in overtime from the general fund, and how we do that is we are very more attendant for the overtime costs for court appearances, looking to see if we can use some of the grant funding to supplement the overtime costs. supervisor, i get an overtime report every two weeks. it is a real simple process. we do the math, and there is a certain amount of time they get to perform their function, and i look at it every two weeks to make sure we stay below, and we do a very good job of that.

fiscal 2011, 2012, this last slide it basically talks about the reduction we have already given back. the fiscal year was a need your reduction, and the reduced through attrition, retirements, those who have left the department, slight revenue increases, and some current-year savings, that comes out to about $11.30 million. if we were to give back another 10% or another $11 million -- i have got to jump in here and tell you that as chief of this department, i would be remiss if i did not tell you that i would like to have all of the money. this budget gets titans, in you and this board have to make decisions as to who gets this funding, i also understand that after-school programs, domestic violence programs, daycare programs, and all of the others

who will come up and talk about their budget, in order for the police department to be successful, they have to be successful, so i understand that the budget has to go around to the other departments. for us to give back the $11 million second 10%, $11.30 million contingency would be 79 officers. now, in order to deeply to those 79 officers, because most of those officers, especially those that have the latter was with the grant funded, we would then have to lay off the 50 officers that are grant funded. then we would have about a $6.10 million give back to the federal government because we laid off those 50 officers, even though i am sure we can negotiate with the federal government in reference to that. conceivably, worst-case scenario, we could lay off 17

per district or 171 officers. that is what the numbers would be. chair chu: could you explain this a little more proof for the additional $11 million contingency, which essentially represents another 10% reduction, what you are saying is what? >> first of all, the grand officers are not a savings. we get a grant for the first three years, so those 50 would go out the door first because they are not in our budget. they were hired from the grant funding. chair chu: so what i hear you are saying is that if you are to meet the additional 10% contingency, where you go would be a lay off, and the first officers to go would be the