it more accessible and customer friendly, a wholeheartedly support that. supervisor chu: i understand there is no budget report, if there are no questions, what the three open items up for public comment? >> i am the director of the office of small business, a lot to commend the texas treasurer's office in afor working on this project. the commission supports this piece of legislation, and what we are doing. for many of the reasons that have already been stated, this is a direction that we want to go in. i want to us express the appreciation for the outreach they are doing to the business community to educate in form and

help them transition into the what annual billing cycle. and also responding to our requests for those businesses that might have difficulty paying the one-time fee, providing a mechanism for the pre-payment and moving into a facilitated communication with being able to pay on live in being able to communicate more with the city government through the electronic mecca as a. this year to make sure that we state that we really support this and this is one of the key objectives of streamlining the processes for small businesses. supervisor chu: other members of the public that wish to speak? public comment is closed. this item i think has unanimous support from the board. i do want to take the treasurer

who was not here today, but who had great leadership with helping to pull this all together. a lot to thank them for that, and thinking to the office of small business for being here. colleagues, given the presentation and public comment being held at the close, can we take this without objection is of the item for with recommendation? a queue. >> ordinance amid the deep tax regulation code by adding a section906.5 g 906.5 to establia payroll tax exclusion for those with a felony conviction. supervisor chu: would like to say a few words? supervisor mirkarimi: think you for waiting for this item to come up, thank you for your patience. a lot to recognize and the

juvenile probation chief, and the number of others from the department of the share of a adult probation reentry. and from the small business commission. this piece of legislation is crime prevention and public safety oriented. it is named to reducing the repeat offender rate which is in the range of 65%-70% for more than a decade. consistent studies have shown that recidivism rates for x offenders who have paid employment in the first six months of their release, half of those did not find employment. we're expecting to receive six of and 50 additional tax offenders into the probation program and the jails this year

2011-2012. the recidivism rate for this group is nearly at 78%. ever since copays $47,500 a year for prisoner and county jails. this legislation will give a $10,000 tax break per offender based on a formula to the city's payroll tax which is equivalent of 1.5%. the city collects $390 million in payroll taxes every year. cities like philadelphia have had some success in the past year with the $10,000 tax credit already. there are not many businesses that are clamoring to take advantage of this because the city of philadelphia has seen

that it has to do better marketing to a list of the private sector. but they are pleased with the results they have achieved so far. the ex-offender tax rate -- that this legislation does not provide a budget for that. we tried not to delve into city funding for this legislation. we are proud of the smallness commission gave unanimous support, and the san francisco chamber has also given its gesture of approval. there are a number of people in the advocate community dealing with sex offenders that are here that do the day-to-day job of trying to tackle the need for us to address in a very vigorous way, the growing recidivism rates in california and san francisco. the legislation has also been

adopted in its own form. illinois, maryland, iowa. i also have to mention for the critics, i'm not sure what side of the political structure -- the specter of the bis said, but it was held up by president george a blush. i would very much like to call up of a number of people both from city agencies and departments to speak to this. in the reason why that we have brought this legislation forward is that we have also picked it on a two-year sunset cycle. we want to be able to measure something that has never been in law before. it gives the city and county of san francisco the ability to refine if if necessary, and study what hasn't been able to

be studied already. considering the city and county jail population is one of the few where we experience under crowding, we will be tested with the consistent confrontation and the test of realignment. considering the shape that the state of california is in with the state budget situation, will be looking at how to manage a population that will grow in the jail system and in our version programs and reentry programs that eventually leave those programs that are responsible, helping them find access to and love that, access to housing, etc.. this is voluntary at his not impose or compel. it does not force the private sector to accept this, but

considering 7 cisco is grappling with an unemployment rate of 5% or 10% which is not dissimilar from other counties in the state of california were around the country, and a limit to rate a month at the vendors is that 50%. while the body from los $481 million to the said francisco police department budget, recognize that for every four people they arrest, three are now repeat offenders. if they are arresting the same people, the data is proven that if we are able to intervene during their custody in the region first six months, the reintegrate more to society in the listing the private sector where they had not been listed before the of the routine

strategy of getting them a construction job receives to be the lead a strategy for menial labor like a growth restore, we really aren't answering the larger problem. in to the question of public safety and crime prevention. a think it is worth experimenting in determining how we get access to employment for a population that lives it extremely difficult and one that continuously challenges the public safety concerns. questions,, why would we favor this population that is not politically popular as a population that would be a more deserving and are lawbreakers. it is a good question. i suggest -- i support the other populations like veterans,

that legislation should also be considered, too. as an outgoing supervisor ed hatcher of the elector, i try to look ahead to see what we do with this increased population that we are not going to be able to incarcerate for probably more than one to two years, they go out and post custody, adult probation does not have the tools that they need. we need to start looking ahead at what the game plan is in a more comprehensive way. we need to a list of the business sector in the private sector to make it happen. in our contact with the states of maryland, illinois, and i was, they consistently said that within the cities, there are red cities, he might lose states, but conservative cities the realize they have to deal with the aftermath of the

incarceration. but i look at the anti- recidivism programs, one of the weak links in have francisco, one of the weak links is the question of reintegration of in the jobs in the housing. i think that the arithmetic is self evident. at nearly a cost of $50,000 a year, a davis is a strategy for us to save money, ultimately, and apply the dollars saved for more effective services in the intervention. let's use this strategy as a two-year texas to develop how we might be able to do it better in the event that we need to. a neighbor of of the public defender and the chief, also of

folks from the sheriff's department, adult probation, and i will call a number of other folks. supervisor chu: i want to welcome the third graders from the elementary school, we hope you are allot at city hall and you have a lot of fun. >> i am here to support this legislation. the problem that we're trying to address here is how to ensure that people coming out of the criminal justice system do not come back. that is the one clear that everybody in the criminal- justice system tries to strive for. working as a public defender in the criminal-justice system, the

one thing that i can say with certainty is that unemployment is probably the number-one factor that determines if a person who does come back. most of them are crimes that stem from poverty, necessity, stealing to survive. if you talk about crimes like petty theft, drug dealing, it is a vast majority of the crimes we see on a day-to-day basis and the people are imprisoned for. the reality is, in this difficult economic time, everybody wants jobs. it is ec-wide priority. this simply provides a tool

whereby one of population of individuals that are in need of employment have an equal opportunity to compete. the resolution and for the interventions surveys. these are national surveys as well as state surveys. it shows that employers are extremely reluctant to have much less likely to hire a person that has been convicted of any crime. as the the the car becomes more serious or becomes substantially related -- is extremely unlikely that the person is either considered for employment. we have done a number of things to try and provide greater

opportunities. we have the bonding program that provides employers with the opportunity to seek local as well as federal bonding form of insurance that provides the guarantee of that if there are any issues related to liability, those issues will be covered by either federal or local law been measures. we have also worked in my office to assist individuals that wish to clear the records. we help over 2000 people and year expunge their records. in other words, clear their records of her prior misdemeanor or felony conviction. this is certainly a and warned

his that clearing one's records. today, almost anyone can get access to records that have expunged through the internet. there were a number of services are operating outside the state of california, and even though a person might clear the record, it will still be used against them and will restrict employment opportunities even more. the programs around the country that have been successful have three components. one is bonding, to is a training program, and the third thing is a tax credit. the federal government provides a tax credit and it encourages employers to hire ex-offenders

by reducing their federal income-tax liability by as much as $2,400 per qualified worker. this is a program the has been very successful. to address the concern that this is going to exclude people who don't have felony convictions or don't have criminal histories, that hasn't been borne out by other cities and states that have lamented this program. i believe in pennsylvania, they have had this on the books for quite a few years, the last six months they have actually put some teeth into it and try to reach out to employers. they provided 50 jobs for individuals over the past six months. this is not program that is going to create thousands of

jobs to the exclusion of others who do not have a history. i would also point out that the legislation from lawyers hiring a person with a criminal history that would exclude a person or result of the termination of a person that does not have a criminal history, it is included in this legislation. i do think that this program who deserves an opportunity to see if over the next two years and can be used as an effective tool. it is not going to solve the problem, but it can be used if we work with agencies, nonprofits, religious to based organizations, to help them implement the overall goal of helping individuals find work.

i would offer a couple of suggestions. i have reviewed the legislation from other states as well as the federal had a legislation. they have focused eligibility of individuals, and i will read the language here, someone who has been convicted of a felony and is tired of more than one year after the conviction or release from prison for that felony. we have targeted people that have been released from jail or prison in the last year or who have been convicted of a felony. in san francisco, i will -- i would suggest that we consider a three-year period. parole can differ. that way, we're not talking about anyone convicted of a

felony, we're talking about focusing on the population that would be a smaller population of individuals that were either convicted of a felony or released from prison or to roll or on probation for the past three years. with that, i would express not only by support of my willingness to work with all the other agencies to ensure that the ultimate goal is a matter, and that is reducing recidivism through love and opportunities. supervisor mirkarimi: from the sherriff'iff's office? chief zimmerman, please come up. thank you for your time. >> thank you, supervisors. chief juvenile probation

officer. i am here to offer testimony in support of any legislation that provides opportunities for individuals to adjust and reform their behavior and provide the city with an opportunity to participate in the true spirit of probation, the instances where the identity of probation and parole is somehow a morphed into this realignment supervision of defenders. the definition of probation and i would say also parole is the current of liberty based on the promise of reform. reform, reclamation, and redemption. based on my professional experience, i find that the employment of individuals that

have emerged from the juvenile and criminal justice system is the most promising impact of redemption and reform, it provides the community with a veil of security and public safety of like any other reform measure our program for individuals emerging from incarceration. it is my hope that this legislation advances and provides a stronger and larger pool of employment opportunities for our san francisco residents. i am hopeful that the individuals that are targeted for this program also included juvenile that have conviction on a felony level. i would offer my support in conjunction with others from the

public safety committee the here today. supervisor mirkarimi: chief, one trend we're keeping watchful of is the young offender adult populatioin. an -- population. >> absolutely. supervisor mirkarimi: the 16- 18 year old sectroor that this legislation seeks to, too. >> as we try to help individuals in their years as a juvenile, some of them graduate to the adult system, unfortunately. for those that we can provide opportunities and at an early age before the transfer to the adult system, the better off the community is.

>> i work for the sheriff's office. he spent his entire career building programs to help the public safety of lower recidivism. he has turned active vendors into productive members of society. some of these programs include the charter school, the education programs, career fairs, and more. these go beyond the violence prevention programs as the focus on preparing offenders to enter the workforce. we have had many success stories, and i will tell you about the hurdles of our work. and what has fallen short.

supervisor mirkarimi: can you put the microphone just a little bit closer? >> ex-offenders are ready, willing, and able to work. they are more than qualified for, but they do not get the jobs based on criminal history and the end up back in jail. the cycle and results are more than predictable. he can support himself and his loved ones. he gets frustrated and depressed, ending with his bathers that put him in jail in the first place. it hurts not only the ex offender, it hurts his family, costs are city of $50,000 a year for each failure had it does nothing to improve public safety. this legislation proposes to give a $10,000 tax break to any local business the buyers a tax offender and keeps them working. their 50% less likely to free of

fat, and that will save the city $50,000. it doesn't include -- the financial and emotional costs of the city goes well beyond the $50,000 to incarcerate an ex- offender. they can reduce recidivism, and strengthen communities and increase public safety. even at a 50% success rate, for every $20,000 in tax breaks, we get a return of 30,000-$80,000. it is postmarked in a fiscally responsible. i urge you to support it. supervisor mirkarimi: -- supervisor chu: with regard to

the $50,000 cost savings that was mentioned, i of the there is an estimate of 46,000. when you have the reduction of one inmate, we don't see the budget and go down by $50,000. you have a fixed budget. correct? >> true, but if this works, then we do see that savings. supervisor chu: you'd need a certain amount of folks to not be incarcerated to have an effective savings. but if it is a wonder to, there are fixed costs -- one or two, there ar fixed costs? >> i would say that there would be savings because they are saving the police from going out. supervisor chu: there are many other costs that are not

included, but in terms of the share of's -- sheriff's department costs, it might not go down by one in may. -- inamte. >> that's correct. -- inmate. >> that's correct. supervisor mirkarimi: adult probation, please. >> david cook, chief deputy adult probation officer. i regret that the chief can't be here personally, but she wants to extend her appreciation to supervisor mirkarimi for extending this ordinance to incentivize hiring people with conviction records. i am here in support of the proposal to establish a payroll expense tax. obtaining and retaining employment is critical for a

successful reentry. 100% of people released from prison are unemployed when they come to us, and another over 50% of the people under supervision of our department are unemployed. employment is very critical, this is why we build partnerships with the goodwill and other work force development partners to ensure that people under our supervision can act with the training and support they need to be competitive in the work force. we know that employment is critical to the success of people exiting the criminal justice system. we hope for a permanent exit, they too often see a cycle of recidivism. in some instances, it is as high as 78%. a criminal conviction last alive time no matter how well qualified someone is.