failure. it went nowhere. and so the scope that's been developed now and i suppose there could be more conversation in the next couple of weeks is calculated to work. when we took that as a community group and said this is the plan to build if your neighborhood to deliver tangible results after we begin with this kind of first flavor of this program, that gets people excited. so if you don't have this buildout, if you don't have the plan if you don't start doing the work and don't get it done, the plan is not calculated to succeed because if you don't have a local buildout there's no plan. this is what we're most excited about and we've been here on these two parallel tracks. we want to do this type of work, to have the local 3wil8dout. i'm sure you'll have these conversations with your local vendor. other than having these conversations with barbara

heal, well, the first one he blessed them with his hand. that's how this scope is formed. it's feedback. it's exciting. so we've got to have a plan for local buildout. it will's move forward to do that. and i think that's the decision for you. supervisor campos: thank you. is there any other member of the public? >> good afternoon, commissioners jeremiah dean, sierra club. i don't have much more to add to what my fellow advocates have said today. they pretty much laid out the plan why it's beneficial to the community, to california, to sacramento, to san francisco. everyone needs to know that clean power is the way to go. we need to get to renewables. i would love to see san francisco get to 100% as soon as possible. and not 100% green to just 70,000 customers.

i would like to see everybody in san francisco have the ability to have 100% clean renewable energy. and the way to get to that zpwole through this scope of work. we need that local buildout. it's going bring jobs. it's going to bring an amazing boom to green technology. we're going to see that if we get this scope to move forward. sierra club, san francisco would like to see the resolution today from ms. miller move forward. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you. is there any other member of the public that would like to speak? seeing nothing, public comment is closed? commissioner america rimmy? -- merkarimi. >> i'm supportive that we do this on an increment staff recommendation. based on the conversations that took place before public comment, you know, i think it's important as what we're buying

here. i've become accustomed to how they write and what they propose and what the product is based on what's been contracted. and so i'm very clear that what i think we invest in, we should be able to insist with high expectation with -- what that work product should be. when i see that the eight key points in their treatise in their percent speckive to us, one involving wholesale procurement. number two, data collection and analysis. number three program financial analysis. number five risk review. number five, regulatory and policy review. number six contract term sheets. number seven, development of

proposals. and number eight developing r.f.p. really none of this speaks to green jobs. and in this development proposal right now if that is one of the primary goals then there needs to be, i think a more robust expectation that that's something that we need to see spoken to. because i don't think the city does a very good job with green jobs whatsoever. and the reliances on this program to deliver green jobs then i would hope that that component be well applied to this particular contract or with another contractor. ms. miller? >> yeah, there is a co ponent of the development of green --

component of the development of green jobs that was submitted and is part of task seven and eight. so it's in the body of the -- of the document. it's not a separate line item. it wasn't separately numbered. >> but what i'm saying is it didn't wow me. it didn't wow me at all. we have gone through p.u.c. we've gone through recurrent energy. we've gone through the solar city contracts. we have gone through -- i cannot tell you how many dozens and dozens of hours of debate through the budget committee and board of supervisors and being with the understanding that this would yield green jobs. and i still don't think the city has come to scratching the surface of yielding jobs for disadvantaged communities. it's frankly underwhemming. so in this case what i read beyond the eight key points of this percent speck us to, same

thing. i don't see it, i don't feel it. so i want to make sure that if we invest in this, that we're getting something that we absolutely need and they absolutely can deliver on so that it is a quality prict. not just to satisfy but poll dicks or the advocacy because i feel the same need. and if it's local hiring, i mean, then, it's double, i think the standard since this is not a local company. it's not fran-based. so i would expect -- san francisco-based. so i would expect there would have to be double the expectations that gives us something that we hope that they deliver. since we're only talking to one company in this case, an a company that we're familiar with. then we should see a brokering

of what should come out in the final reporting. >> ok. we have a motion to continue. i don't know if it's been seconded. let me say that now that we have a full compliment of the commission. i was open to the idea of continuing but again i believe that it's important for us to move this forward. i appreciate the comments from the commissioner. i think it's important to be dealt with every penny that we spend and that we provide specificity in terms of the deliverables and that we don't spend anymore than we need to. to strike a balance in terms of moving forward with the understanding that we will not spend more than what is needed. and with the understanding that

it's been agreed that the p.u.c. will do this work. i would ask for a motion to accept staff's recommendation to aprove, give the executive officer approval or authority to enter into a contract up to an amount of 100,000 but that's not necessarily the amount that will be spent. so is there a motion? motion by commissioner avalos. is there a second. >> second by commissioner mikarimi. [voting] >> mr. chair, we have three ayes and one no. >> the motion passes.

madam clerk can you call item number five? >> item number five, executive officer's report. >> ms. miller? >> i have no report, thank you. >> but, i'm sorry, i do want to introduce -- i'm going to have jason interview our new intern. i just wanted to get the opportunity to introduce our intern for the summer. last summer, she had different tasks to do. she is currently going to u.c. davis and is looking to do green type work in her future. i just wanted to welcome her do our internship program. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> colleagues, any questions? is there any public comment on this item? any money -- body wanting to

speak? public comment is closed. madam, can you call item number six. it's within the jurisdiction of the commissioner. seeing none public bhick comment is closed. item seven? >> item number seven, future agenda items." >> colleagues any member of the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment was closed. >> just a quick question in terms oaf the join meeting with the -- of the joint meeting with the p.u.c., do you need specific dates for us. >> i want to know if you want to meet in august as well. a regular meeting is the fourth friday which is august 26th.

so i'll potentially try for a joint meeting on that date. >> so if people have any concerns if you can let ms. miller know. >> thank you. >> man clerk, final item. >> item number eight adjournment. thank you. meeting is adjourned. nice weekend.

supervisor mirkarimi: welcome to the public safety committee. to my right is malia cohen and to my left, david campos. joining us is president david chiu. please read the first item. >> item 1. resolution authorizing the san francisco department of public health to retroactively accept and expend a grant in the amount of $205,000 from department of justice to fund the project entitled "san francisco community justice center intensive outpatient program" 2010, through september 30, 2011. supervisor mirkarimi: is there anybody here that would like to present on that?

thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. the item before you is accept and expend in the amount of $205,000 to create some of infrastructure development in the it fold at the community justice center. department of public health was successful in applying a solicitation to the federal government to create a program on site at the community justice center. as a result of that application, we were invited to apply for a supplemental on one of money to use for development at the community justice center. these funds will greatly enhance our ability to develop and create and install a wide network connectivity in the facility, as well as workstation connectivity, as well as assist

us in accessing data with our criminal justice partners. if you have any questions, i am here to answer any that you may have. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. it said that years two and three are also part of the program. does the funding extend into those two years as well? >> because this is mostly infrastructure creation, the bulk of the expenses will be expense of all over the first fiscal year. and we have an additional amount with regards to maintenance, $47,000 in year two, $48,000 in year three. this is just a one time thing. supervisor mirkarimi: very good. colleagues, questions or

comments? supervisor campos: thank you for being here, everybody. just a question about the retroactivity of the item. i understand the grand award was awarded in november 2010. >> there were two parts to the grant application. the first part was submitted in september to the federal government. we were not technically invited to apply for a supplemental amount until later. for whatever reason, the fed's decided to include in the funding cycle, however, we did not received official notification that we had received this grant until mid- may. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. is there any member of the public that would like to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed.

colleagues, entertain a motion. supervisor campos: move forward with recommendations. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. item two. >> i did ttem 2. hearing on the status of the implementation of justis, a project to consolidate the city's criminal justice data. supervisor mirkarimi: i know that this is something that many of us were hoping to get an update on, given the and upgrade of the justice program. thank you for president to for facilitating this hearing today. >> i want to thank the members of the public and members of the aqaba to talk about the justis project. let me provide some background to our colleagues and the public. we have a number of presentations from folks about where exactly we are. today's hearing is about the

status of implementation of an i.t. project that has had a tortured history. the justice -- justis project began in 1941997. the project's purpose was to track cases and to allow for the sharing of data among various criminal justice departments. the current a antiquated system uses technology dating back to 1974. this is technology with numerous problems, including the inability to search for the case histories of the beds were to route -- reduce report quickly. the lack of any data into the system has tied the hands of our law enforcement agencies in difficult and significant ways. the justice system was supposed to be put in place by 2001. as we know, in 2000, there was a

victim of domestic violence, a murder. hurd beth was likely preventable, had a criminal history -- heard debt was likely preventable, had a history of her suspect been shared between departments. in 2002, the commission on the status of women produced a report that recommended a variety of improvements, including the development of this system. at the time, $6 million had been spent on the justis project. that was nine years ago. in 2007, the report that i am holding reviewed the project. that report slammed city government forbade the mismanaging this long and overdue project. among the findings, it found the

project lacked strong budget management, project management, or executive leadership of the mayor's office of criminal justice. in 2010, the justice project -- justis project had expanded. i have heard that we have spent about $22 million. i have yet to give precise figures. in the first in months of 2010, the project had four leaders at the department of technology, but we never were told when the end date on the project would happen. last year, we held a hearing in march, to ask for a status update. we were told that progress was being made and the project would be completed. obviously, it is now july of 2011. several months ago, the border supervisors approved an amendment that trend for the

administration and implementation of the justice program from the department of technology to the city administrator's office and gave the minister direct control of oversight. it is my understanding that over the past six months we have had quite a bit of progress on this project, and i requested today's hearing so that we could understand how we arrived at where we are today, after 14 years and tens of millions of dollars over budget, as well as to learn about the progress and reject the hopefuls to completion. this is not just the budgetary issue. this is not just a law enforcement issue. this data system that we need to put in place we need to do so we can save lives. we have a number of folks who will present today. first, we will hear from linda young from the city administrator's office. she will be followed by eileen hurst, the justis co-

chair. i also know that we have representatives from the police department, d.a.'s office, and superior courts to answer questions. ms. young, please make your presentation. >> thank you for this opportunity to be before you today. i am the deputy city administrator. i ago a lot of the comments that the supervisors book about. this is an important project for the citizens to save lives. when this project was moved over, we convened a government council, and that that with each member of those departments. they are here in the audience. i want to acknowledge the team behind you, who is committed to moving this project forward. it is the city it this triggers office including the acting city it minister, the sheriff's department, the court +

executive officer is with us, the district attorney, adult probation public defender's office, department of status of women, police department, and the part of technology are here to answer any questions today. if you have any questions, please let me know. justis tracking information is justice. what it will do -- justis tracking information system will replace the 35-year old mainframe system. it is called the court management system. it will integrate all of the city and county criminal-justice agencies case management systems. it will allow each department to develop its own case management system, allow each department to gather and share information,

secure with each other automatically through a centralized hub, and result in a more efficient criminal justice information center. the program has had numerous changes of sponsorship and management. in the past, held that the mayor's office of criminal justice as well as the department of technology. in 2003, the program was reorganized with its own governance structure and the government's council and technical steering committee was formed. at the department level, we had multiple changes in either department heads or technical staff. the transfer function occurred in january 2011 when the mayor asked the board to amend the administrative code and the

board unanimously approved that in march. that gave city administrator direct control justis program and continue to ask for technical support from dt. from a program organization point of view, the yellow box here is the executive sponsor. we provide oversight and operational decisions. the justice governance council provides budget decision making. the green box here shows the members. the sheriff's department is a co-chair, adult probation department status of women, the attorney, the emergency management, to the provision, mayor's office, please come out of the tender, superior court, and the department technology as a non-voting member. weekly, the technical steering committee meets in we reviewed financial and technical issues. from a project manager point of

view, we have two people here to answer questions. i know this is a busy chart, but this is what the court management system is, the old, and acquitted mainframe system is causing all of this information. if you look at the little box, this is the kind of information it is housing right that it it has court case information, district attorney assignment and caseload. for the public defender, court calendars, court case information, public defenders assigned its and caseload. for the sheriff's, it tell them about the people and where they can the house, where they can be transported so they can appear before the court.

this system is now being replaced, and this is the justis program that if i could explain the coloring. green means it has been complete. yet no is in progress. red means it is pending. blue is face to, where we have not identified funding for those portions. when we talk about the case management system table, it is the screen box here. that is now connected to the hub and sharing information as that information is being connected, for example, to the sheriff's department. add green mind and it is connected to the hub and the share of is receiving and sending information through that hot as we speak. where we are focusing our efforts next are the yellow lines. the department working and case

management systems and the justice program needs to connect those departments to the hub so not only is the sheriff and district attorney's office getting information, so the public defender, adult probation, and all the apartments are hooked up. from a program point of view, after the transfer of functions, we move the budget and staff. staff is now in a secure location separate from other city staff, so they can emerge from this public safety issue with confidence. be completed two rounds of recruitment. this project was that to have eight members. when the project was transferred to us, we only have four. we have had two recruitment about one internal promotion of a very good staff person who has been working on the project since day one. we have also moved the new data

center without incident. the hub and mainframe is in production with no missed court calendars and data quality has improved. we will show you an example of that, when the sheriff's department talks about their programs. this is the look going forward. what we would like to do with the state department's corp. in the next six months is winning to increase the capacity for development and production. this is critical. we need to connect to the court system for testing to the hot by year's end. mike's team has been meeting with us weekly to make this happen. we also need to upgrade the sheriff's the jail management system, assist the district attorney's implementation of their subpoena module, connect the public defender's case to

the hub, assess the police department of support requests for their crime data warehouse. in the next six months, this is our commitment to getting the job done. over the next 12 months, we will focus on cordray with the police department to provide data on domestic violence crimes to the department of status of women. we will work with an adult probation and their vendor to connect their case management system and connected hub. finally, we want to create city- wide reports, which you mentioned. one of them would be using vacation data so that we confine the persistent offenders. i am here to answer any questions you have. aileen