>> is a good morning and welcome to the public safety meeting. my name is john avalos, the chair of the committee and i am joined by supervisor mar and we will be joined shortly by supervisor olague. madame clerk, can you share your announce with customer >> all persons attending the meeting are encouraged to turn off their electronic devices. if you submit material for the committee, please submit an extra copy for the file. if you wish to submit a speaker card, please do it by the container -- in the container by the real to your left.

supervisor avalos: thank you. we have three items on the agenda today. the first item is probably going to be the longest. what i want to do is hear the first two items -- here the other items before that one. if we could call item no. 2. >> item #2, authorizing the city and county of san francisco to access state and federal level criminal information by transmitting fingerprint information and related information to the department of justice to be transmitted to the federal bureau of investigation. supervisor avalos: it is interesting to have this item before us. >> on with the department of human-resources and i'm here on behalf of the human-resources director who is negotiating a labor contract this morning. if i could begin, the resolution before you this morning is intended to allow for the

expansion of the city's existing conviction history review program. currently, the city requires all new employees be fingerprinted in order to obtain a conviction history information from the california department of justice. this resolution expands the city's access to both the state of california's database as well as the national level summary of conviction history information for inclement purposes. part of the expansion of data collection we are proposing through your assistance in this resolution. the department of human resources will implement to, i think very significant important changes which we hope you will find somewhat progressive. we will eliminate the current requirement that all candidates or applicants self disclose their conviction and arrest history to the city as part of the selection process. instead, what we are proposing to do is move the fingerprinting process, which currently occurs

post-appointed to the pre- employment process for hiring. we think this is a progressive thing to do because of the unintended consequences of having applicants with convicted histories have to disclose that information as part of the selection process in the city. this is a direct response to our ongoing and collaborative discussions with all of us or none, one of the leading advocacy groups. we have spent a number of years working with his advocacy group, trying to ensure our hiring process is in relationship to conviction histories are well thought through and fair and equitable. the second thing we are proposing is the department of human resources wants to centralize all the conviction history information we received from either the multi-state or

california database within the department of human resources. our staff will make determinations based on pre- existing criteria when there is a position for which the person is applying. the intent is the department of human-resources will not pass on to the hiring manager that maybe once history is not determined to be a nexus to their ability to do the job. we have come a very long way since the days of having a box on the city's application requires applicants to say yes, i have a conviction history. a lot of that is because of the work we have been covered tivoli with special interest groups like all of us or not -- we have conducted with special- interest groups like all of us or nine.

>supervisor avalos: thank you for your presentation. there was an effort to ban the box and we're not asking for a criminal record on the application process. only after someone of a selection process that we get into the question about the history and background. >> exactly. it's gone further with this legislation tonight and require applicants to self-disclose at all. it -- in the past, has been self-disclosure and fingerprinting to database information. we believe it's a progressive move to rely on those datas and a present a history as opposed to pushing the information down to the departments. supervisor avalos: our city has

a policy that we do not do any collusion with homeland's security and immigration and customs enforcement agencies when it comes to city resources and information. in this case, there would be a firewall between any records and ice? >> absolutely. supervisor mar: i want to thank the department of human resources for working with groups like all of us or none. i appreciate the work of the activists for bringing issues to city hall. i appreciate the collaborative effort from the department of human services and grass-roots groups as well.

thank you for bringing this to us. supervisor avalos: if there are no other questions from the committee, we can go on to public comment. members of the public to like to comment on item number two, please come forward. >> thank you very much for the opportunity to testify about this pending legislation. i know mr. mar is familiar with bandbox, but i hope you will also benefit from a short background. legal services for prisoners with children is a 30-year-old agency that functions here in san francisco and has a nationwide impact advocate for prisoners with children. all of us or none is a civil rights group of formerly convicted people. we have a longstanding

relationship with the department of human resources regarding the use of conviction history and that is why we are here today. we formed as an organization in 2003 and held community summit throughout states, including in san francisco. as a result of those demands that surfaced about structural discrimination based on prior arrest activity, but eliminating discrimination based on that past became one of our main priorities. reducing the structural and lifelong conviction doesn't result in reduced crime, reduced recidivism and the possibility of stability through the communities targeted for mass incarceration. [tone] if i could continue, i have a few comments. supervisor avalos: you are

generally allowed a certain amount of time i will give you another moment to continue. >> thank you. san francisco did adopt as their hiring practice years ago and now over 35 cities and counties, including alameda county, oakland, and other cities and counties as well as the state of california have adopted hiring procedures in compliance with our recommendations. [tone] we want to emphasize that past convictions revealed by a local, state, or federal background check are not an indicator of job performance. the vast majority of crime does not occur at of it -- i work site or when a person is employed. we're not advocating for reduced use of conviction history information because we want to hide our backgrounds. when they decided to add background checks, they involved

in the discussion, which we deeply appreciate. we have initial objections based on the fbi history of accuracy, the delays in processing requests, the laying hiring decisions and cost. dhr has resolve these concerns to our satisfaction we are not opposing the legislation in front of you. we want to support the other changes planned as a result of this most recent examination of hiring procedures. we fully support the new, streamlined application processes that were removed and will centralized information about convictions that were not job relation. -- job-related. this has been key in protecting people's personal and confidential information, reducing stigma and prestigious -- prejudice in the workplace.

we support the leadership in increasing resources to centralize and protect the process of reviewing conviction history and it formation. we look forward to being of service to you and other supervisors regarding anti- discrimination initiatives that improve opportunity for the one in four people in san francisco and california have conviction history. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you and thank you for work in getting this legislation crafted. next speaker please. >> thank you. i'm a resident of san francisco since 1957 and i also practiced law for 18 years and have been convicted of marijuana conspiracy and served three years in prison. i want to let you know the legislation you are proposing contemplating and the work is

absolutely essential. someone with my background and skills and my familiarity with other context, i can vouch for the fact that it is not easy to re-enter. i've been working with the reentry council and i want to echo the dhr position that this is something we sorely need for residents of san francisco and i'm stepping forward in my work with the reentry council with all of us aboard none, and i am also a proud member and encourage you to continue this process. supervisor avalos: thank you. >> speaker please. >> i have lived in -- next speaker please. >> i have lived intemperances go and i want to speak in favor of this resolution. the department of human

resources from my experience for 20 years at san francisco general hospital needs improvement. something like this is a step in the right direction. we should be passing this resolution. i would also like to take this opportunity to say working with the fbi is not a bad thing that 99% of what they do is good. like any organization, there are few problems, so maybe this is a good step to reconcile the city of san francisco with the fbi. the first speaker made some very good points and i feel she is emphasizing that even when people have a past history, they should not be judged on their future job. from my experience, it seems like many superiors, especially in decision making capacities have a tendency to stigmatize certain employees and this type

of resolution will tell decisionmakers you have to give everyone a fair chance and just because of one or two mistakes doesn't mean they are going to do something similar in the future. i support the first speaker and this resolution should be passed thank you. >> are there any other members of the public would like to comment on this item? >> when i came to this country, i landed in san francisco and used to come to city hall and there is no security. but with a muslim security in the bay area is not comfortable with fbi being included. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you very much. if there are no other members of the public comment -- of the public who wish to comment, we will close a public comment.

i would like to thank dhr for putting together this list -- this legislation and all of us or none. thank you for your work on this measure as well. >> we will move at ford without objection. >> item #3, approval of the youth violence prevention initiative -- local action plan 2012 update. supervisor avalos: i do want to make the announcement that we have a translation from english to arabic, and if the person wants to come forth and make that announcement, the person who they could get the

headphones from is by the door. if you could make that announcement at the public podium here. >> good morning. [speaking arabic] >> i am the deputy director at the juvenile probation department and i am joined here by my colleagues. we are here today to present some information on our local action plan. i quickly wanted to give you a very brief history, to give you

a little context into the work that has been done over the last few years. the code requires a juvenile justice coordinating council to oversee juvenile justice fund at backs distributed by the state. every county must create a local action plan which oversees the expenditure of these funds, but mostly that develops a coordinated plan for adjusting violence prevention programs for youth. san francisco has had one since the it 1990's when the legislation was passed. what was once a viable and contentious group had deteriorated over the years to a few people rubber-stamp in the same plan year after year. the welfare an institution code requires the probation department to chair this group and it came to our attention

that the group was not what it could be in terms of its potential. the community did not participate and we recognized it as a wasted opportunity. we developed what is called the joint founder, which is a collaboration to create a coordinated and streamlined approach to funding violence prevention programming within the city. that was in 2008 and it has been an unprecedented partnership in filling gaps and eliminating administrative waste that when you have multiple departments doing the same thing -- we have been very successful so far and that partnership has served to strengthen us and where we had all of these businesses before, we have a group that meets quarterly and it is very engaged. we are not only overseeing am looking at the work of the

violence prevention community providers, but the juvenile justice system itself. we have expanded it and we have joint chairs, including the public defender's office and d.a.'s office to ensure we are putting together a coordinated approach and we are accountable and participating in the conversation. we have a presentation on the local action plan, but i want to point out this plan has been so important for us. we had 57 use and juvenile calls. i don't think it has ever been that low ever. while this effort is not the only reason, it's a huge part in terms of working together to make sure all the needs of our youth are being met and we are doing it in a way that is effective. >> thank you.

supervisor avalos: i have never had -- i have never heard of having 57 use. generally, 90 was a figure i could live with, but i was saying 120 or 130. >> it was 150 at one point which was a big crisis. it's a combination of internal policy changes we've made in terms of making sure kids were not detained in the first place and making sure the programming is appropriate for kids who are at risk. we are very proud of it. >> if you are detained at log cabin, what is the number there? >> we are only staff for 24 right now and we are really struggling with getting funds together to continue expanding that program. >> thank you very much. supervisor