and i will provide the clerk with this in writing. the permit team may not walk at one time more than eight dogs for consideration plus one dog owned by the dog walker, period. but dog owned by the dog walker must be visibly identified as such. it is what was recommended? >> i think that would follow along with the guidelines with eight dogs plus the one personal dog, clearly identified as the personal dog to the dog walker, and we can set those procedures. supervisor wiener: would you like to add anything?

>> i know there are concerns about the small businesses. if you do the math, seven dogs is a pretty significant amount. that, more than any of my employees may. it is still a pretty lucrative business proposition, and the number of dogs has to deal with the ability to clean up, to make sure that the dogs are not running out into the street, to make sure that there is not a pack mentality, so from an animal welfare -- welfare perspective, as well as a public safety perspective, i think once you get to nine dogs, you are pushing it, but i defer to the committee. supervisor wiener: thank you. ms. ballard, did you have

anything to add? anything further, calling this? supervisor cohen: given to what stabbed just said, let's start with something, and then we can come back and we can make changes. >> i appreciate that. i have to say, when i introduced the legislation and i stated seven dogs, one of my colleagues, who shall remain nameless came up to me and said, "seven dogs, that is too high," and i said, "it is currently in affinity." i think supervisor cohen's poin t is a good one. president chiu: should we adopt that? ok.

supervisor wiener: since we cannot do this today, i will say that we should move this to january. if somebody publicly commented today, my understanding is that they cannot comment on the ninth. is that right? present -- supervisor mar: our city attorney. >> because this is put for notice, you would have to allow people to comment at least on the fee aspect. supervisor wiener: so we have heard a lot, and unless you are feeling the burning need, i think this will be a shorter item next time, so thank you, everyone. supervisor mar: thank you. ms. miller, we are going to

supervisor mirkarimi: welcome to the public safety committee.

i am ross mirkarimi. joining me is supervisor campos. supervisor cohen is a way and will be excused. we have two items on the agenda. thank you to sfgtv for their ongoing excellence in coverage. first of all, why don't we take the excuse of supervisor cohen? supervisor campos: motion. supervisor mirkarimi: very good. please read item one. >> item 1, resolution authorizing the department of the district attorney of the city and county of san francisco to retroactively accept and expend a grant in the amount of $198,676 through the united states department justice, bureau of justice assistance, for a program entitled "intellectual property

crime enforcement program" for the grant period of october 1, 2011, through september 30, 2012. supervisor mirkarimi: if anyone would like to speak on this, please come forward. >> i am the grants and policy manager for the san francisco district attorney's office. funds awarded -- were awarded by the department of justice office of justice program bureau of justice assistance. these funds were made available through the prioritizing, resources, an organization for intellectual property crime act of 2008. the san francisco district attorney's office was awarded just under $200,000 for a single year grant award. our office will utilize these funds for two primary purposes. the first is to strengthen a multi-jurisdictional law enforcement to more effectively

battle copyright infringement and high-tech crime. the first goal is to develop capacity to successfully investigate and prosecute high- tech crime cases in this ever- changing landscape of technology. to complete these primary goals, the office will build a for an examination infrastructure for the investigation and prosecution of these crimes, conduct outreach, education, and training to raise awareness, and facilitate collaboration between local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. specifically, the grant will fund personnel for one senior investigator position, training, supplies, and consultation with industry experts. now, conrad rosario from the economic crimes unit will describe in detail the value of this grant to san francisco.

>> good afternoon, members of the board. i am and assistant district managing attorney. i oversee the high-tech crimes unit and was involved with the creation of this grant. the grant targets two specific areas, and that is the collaboration between federal agencies and san francisco district attorney's office as well as creating with and our office and infrastructure that permits us to successfully investigate and prosecute cases involving high technology crimes. high-technology crimes relates to anything from that the people's personal information that might be stored within a particular victim's company to more complex types of investigations, including network intrusions, hacking, and any type of theft of property that requires the use of high-

technology equipment. i welcome any questions from the board members if you have any, but specifically, there is a great demand in the city and county of san francisco for the use of investigative and prosecutorial resources in the area of high technology -- high- technology crimes. i have had vast experience in prosecuting and fielding investigations involving high technology, and in the city and county of san francisco, despite the fact that we are situated so close to the birthplace of high- technology innovation, san francisco, from a law enforcement investigative standpoint, does need ample resources to supplement and enhance current programs for investigations on high- technology crimes. we hope this grant specifically gives us the ability to work

closer with agencies that do have high-technology investigative resources, but it also gives the san francisco district attorney's office the ability to create its own forensic lab and dedicate an investigator from the district attorney's office who can be trained in conducting investigations and examinations on cases involving high technology. i think it is a great opportunity from our city because so many people are victimized by high-technology crimes, not just companies, but crimes like identity that can be a result of a network or -- network breach or intrusion. being able to track the suspects and being able to assist companies with how the data was breached -- this grant specifically gives us that capability. there are any questions, i would be glad to answer, but i think

at this point, that is how i would like to describe the grant. it does include not just equipment for being able to support an investigator, but it also requires us to do outreach to create communities aware -- community awareness, how big the companies can protect their data, how victims can protect their information, and it also gives us the ability to train vertically an investigator, specifically in the area of complex height-technology investigations. -- high-technology investigations. supervisor mirkarimi: how big is the cyber unit? >> the unit right now consists of one prosecutor, and that is me. we had an investigator who has been trained to do forensic analysis, but he is not a dedicated investigator. this grant gives us the ability of dedicating and hiring one investigator to be trained, specifically for the purpose of conducting investigations and

forensic analysis. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you very much. comments or questions? seeing none, any public comment on this item? step on up. >> ♪ slating down the city we are going to find you your high-tech and we are going to take it away secret agent high-tech man secret high-tech agent man they had given you a number it is the no. 198 and we are taking away your name we are going to find you, man secret high-tech agent man we have given you a number and i wish good luck to you ♪ supervisor mirkarimi: all right,

any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor campos: make a motion to move forward the recommendation. supervisor mirkarimi: very good. so move. please read item two, and i want to welcome supervisor mar. >> item two, resolution supporting adoption by the san francisco sheriff's department and the san francisco juvenile probation department of a policy restricting use of local funds to respond to civil immigration detainers. supervisor mar: thank you, chairman mirkarimi. i introduced last week a resolution that i hoped could be supported by the broad coalition of community activists, immigrant rights organizations, and criminal justice folks as well. it encourages and supports the sheriff's department and juvenile probation department in reducing entanglement between local law enforcement and immigration and customs

enforcement or i.c.e. entangled in harm's public safety and interferes with policing strategy by increasing fear in the community of coming forward to report crime and cooperate with local law enforcement -- entanglement harms public safety. contrary to the false impression about i.c.e., detainers are merely requests that local law enforcement advise the department of homeland security when an individual is due to be released from the local jail and that local law enforcement continue holding the individual be on the scheduled time of release for up to 48 hours for i.c.e. to assume custody. resolution addresses the problem

by insuring the san francisco county is under no obligation to use limited resources to enforce federal immigration law and enforcement of immigration laws is irresponsible of the federal government, not the local. -- responsible -- the responsibility of the federal government, not the local. colleagues, along with a coalition of many different organizations and immigrant communities, i urge your strong support. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. supervisor campos. supervisor campos: thank you. i want to thank supervisors mar -- supervisor mar, the author of this resolution, for bringing this forward. i also want to thank the

coalition. if i may, i am going to say a few words in spanish. [speaking spanish]

i just wanted to reiterate that i want to thank supervisors -- supervisor mar. i think this makes sense and is consistent with the fact that we are a sanctuary city. other jurisdictions -- my understanding is there are at least four other jurisdictions that are following this practice of not honoring i.c.e. holds. what i will say about the policy of making a clear distinction between local law enforcement and immigration enforcement is that it is something that makes all of us safer. i give the example of how if any sense franciscan is the victim of a crime and you have an undocumented person who is a witness to that crime, you want that person to come forward and report that -- if any san franciscan is the victim of a crime. that person will not come forward if people have a fear

that any entanglement, any connection with law enforcement could lead to deportation. that is why it is important to protect the entire public to make that distinction. with that, i want to thank everyone who is here. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i believe we are all on tight time constraints and we are only quorumed until 2:00. i know there are a number of people who may want to speak to this, so we will have to compress this as much as we can. >> [inaudible] supervisor mirkarimi: ok. >> [inaudible] supervisor mirkarimi: we will try to push it as much as we can until about 2:00. >> sounds good. i will just start. thank you for holding a hearing about this resolution today. special thanks to supervisor mar for authoring the

resolution. resolution before you was thoughtfully written. the lead point is that we cannot have a community trust of law enforcement if we have the program secure communities operational in san francisco. san francisco has tried very hard to get out of the secure communities program, which recently leaks fingerprints taken by law enforcement to immigration, sending over 300 people in san francisco into deportation over the last year or so since it has been active. over 104,000 people nationally have been deported. in california, over 5000 have been deported. california had the highest number of people deported nationally compared to any other state. san francisco deportation numbers -- 430. of those, 79%, about 10% higher than the national number, do not have criminal records and were arrested on lesser sentences,

including traffic violations. we will hear today from people who have been the victims of crime who called the police for help and have ended up in deportation proceedings because of secure communities. the sheriff spoke with i.c.e. and ask them if he needed to respond to hold. i.c.e. acknowledged that he is very smart, a trained lawyer, and knows the right questions to ask. i have acknowledged that he does not need to respond to i.c.e. holds. this is the code of federal regulations that talks about i.c.e. detainers. it specifically says it is a request. on the i.c.e. hold form, it also says it is a request. it is requested, just to be very

clear about that. thank you very much and i hope you vote yes on the resolution. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. we appreciate it. >> thank you, supervisors. i am from the episcopal church of st. john the evangelist and a clergy leader in sfop. others have spoken about the legal and law enforcement applications, but i want to speak as a priest and tell you about the toll i see it taking on people's hearts and souls, their families and their most cherished relationships. i have spoken with parents who drop their kids off at school in the morning and say a prayer they will be around to pick them up at the end of the day. i met a woman in an abusive relationship afraid to call the police. these are not criminals. they are law-abiding people, working hard often under difficult circumstances to provide for their families. when kids here about laws and programs like scom, they begin

to ask, "is there something wrong with my family? why are we being tracked down like criminals?" when you are a kid, when you hear something, even if it is not true, if you hear it often enough, eventually, you can start to believe it and start to wonder if maybe there is something wrong with your family. the false message that their families are somehow criminal is institutionalized and implemented in programs like scom. it calls into question their dignity as families and their roots the confidence families need to have in order to raise their kids. i see the current implementation of scom is contributing to a profound spiritual crisis. the assumption behind it is mean-spirited. it stigmatizes families already experiencing economic stress. share of hennessey -- sheriff

hennessey is right in his assessment of it. this has no place in the city of st. francis. thank you. >> my name is juan carlos, and i am a liter at st. peter's church. i was really sad when i saw scom coming to communities. this law has the name that is supposedly to protect communities, the hard-working communities. they contribute with their taxes and with their families. we are the agent of the economy

that moves forward as a city, and this does not make sense. more than 400 people in san francisco -- because it was adopted in the city -- we would like to ask the board of supervisors to support it because of our families are being divided. not only families, but the kids born in this nation are being unjustly -- they are being ripped away from those rights. they are americans. what kind of message are you sending to the american kids that in the future will be the leaders of this nation? please, ask for the support of the supervisors to opt out of scom. it is devastating.

it is inhumane. it does not make economic sense. please, let's have a conscience and let's please take care of this issue. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you very much. next speaker please. >> my name is sergio gomez, and i am a youth coordinator. back in march, i had one of the parents of one of the youth give me a call early in the morning, saying her husband had been detained. i asked her why, and he says -- she said he had the day before tried to break up a dispute and came back home and seemed like everything was going good. in the morning, around 6:00 in the morning, he gets detained

from san francisco police department. when he was detained, it seemed like they took care of everything. some charges were pressed against him, which were then dropped, so he was ready to go home. he gets a call saying he was going to be held in jail because i.c.e. was going to go pick him up. this mother was really hurt. she was telling me her story, and i get to work with this youth, and i really saw the way the families are being hurt, split apart. all he was trying to do is be a good citizen. break up a dispute. there's also other cases, other stories i have heard in the community. as a youth coordinator, you get to find out the stories from the kids. the real stories that hurt them,

the heart that these kids have and do not understand why their parents are going through this. it is not only them. it is also the kids themselves. we need to opt out of scom and stop this. thank you. >> [speaking spanish] >> good afternoon. first of all, i want to thank you for this resolution. i am here in strong support of the resolution. i believe it will benefit our communities and there will be less kids spending time away from their families or having to

deal with separation these holidays. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you very much. next speaker please. >> [speaking spanish] >> good afternoon. i am here in support of this policy. i believe police should not be working with i.c.e. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you very much. next speaker please. >> [speaking spanish]

>> good afternoon. i am here today to support this proposal and asked you to support it. i believe that's i.c.e. should not be working with the police and hopefully with this proposal, i.c.e. will leave us alone -- i believe that's -- i believe that i.c.e. should not be working with the police. >> [speaking spanish]