comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. meeting adjourned. (meeting adjourned).3

testing testing

>> what is being proposed now is what they consider the first phase which would be a 640-bed replacement jail. currently just 3 and 4 have 509 beds. so, it is a reduction. the estimated cost of this is 290 million. of that cost 30.7 million would be to purchase the land adjacent to the hall of justice. so, this current plan is consistent with an assessment

made by the controller, the county jails needs assessment. if they build a 640 height and bulk bed jail at the hall of justice, county wide there would be 220 beds, more than 2200 beds. this is expected to meet an average daily population, inmate population of 2 19 of 1900. there has to be additional beds to accommodate population days and also for what they call classification, which basically means beds need to be left vacant based on gender, type of crime and other factors. >> i want to note we have an overflow room in 263 if people are not able to find a seat in the chamber. thank you. >> so, the current proposal is 2250 beds. that is a.m. compared to the witing capacity of over 2,500 beds. ~ that's

so, what we looked at is the actual change in the jail population, and it has gone down significantly between 2008 and 2013. there's been about a 30% decrease. the average daily population, 2008, was 2015. in 2013 it's 1400, little over 1400. and part of that 1400 is the impact of public safety realignment. if you exclude the inmates that are there due to the public safety realignment, then the actual jail population would decrease as low as 1237. so, this shows sort of the arrest records in is itv. ~ san francisco. one of the main drivers of decrease in the main population of the jail is as supervisor campos referred to, this ictioner term changes in policy.

the arrest rate is way down in several areas. one of the main areas is drug offenses. this is due a little bit to changes in population, where the population isn't as young as it once was. a decline in the 18 to 34 age group. but i think more importantly to policies of the city has implemented, and the increased use of alternatives incarceration. i think this is a really important point to make in this because policies are under the control of the city and, you know, the impact it has under the jail population or under the control of the city. some of the policies are also state level but they're legislated policies. so, taking this new information in the lower population, the original forecast, the plans of the 640-bed jail was based on sort of historical data from 1996 to 2011. a lot changed between 2011 and 2013. so, we simply updated the forecast adding the next two

years and as you see from this, we have a lower population in 2000 going forward based on the lower average daily population over the last two years. so, the original calculation estimate was 1900, average daily population in 2019 [speaker not understood]. our estimate now based on mere recent data ask a little less than 1500 average daily population. and that does include the impact of public safety realignment. so, kind of using some of the same calculations to meet sort of what we call peek population, but also classification, we estimated a range of between 1600 ~ and 1700 jail beds county wide, less than the 2200 that would be -- that would result in the 640-bed jail.

so, if in fact you took this lower number, if you really could sort of say, yes, the need for additional beds due to peak population and classification would give you -- require 1600 beds a day, then you could potentially build a much smaller jail hall of justice and you could build a 384-bed jail rather than 640-bed jail, which we say the savings would be 96 million dollars in terms of project costs and it would not require the use of county jail 6, which i think is important. now, when we look at these numbers, one of the things i said we did look at different alternatives and i know some discussions came up about san bruno and transportation costs. so, in our report -- i don't have it in the slides here -- we actually decided the transportation costs of moving inmates from san bruno to the hall of justice in the security costs and holding cells were significantly high. at this point in time it's not feasible to build extra jail

beds at san bruno to accommodate the population. so, there is a replacement jail, what we saw was probably made more sense to build it next to the hall of justice. so, that's sort of a brief summary. we did look a little bit at alternatives to incarceration. i know there will be more discussion later. i think that number of offenders who are in this programs has increased. i think there are still some proposals out there. we estimate that maybe as many as 60 more could be incorporated in terms of reducing the jail population. but we didn't actually include that in our analysis because those are not numbers that are -- the programs haven't been implemented and those aren't known yet. our recommendation, then, is fairly straightforward. the city is about to go into environmental review on a 640-bed jail. that should begin early in 2014 with the completion date at the end of 2015.

the city at any point can decide to build a smaller jail or no jail at all without having to redo that environmental review, and then as supervisor campos said, the board will have options in 2015 to revisit this. >> thank you, ms. campbell. i especially want to highlight all the time and energy that you personally put into this to get this report out as quickly as possible. so, thank you very much for your excellent work. supervisor yee. >> yes, i have a few questions. thank you for the presentation and it's a very thorough report. the first question is really, when you look at the graph in page 2 of your report, if you had predicted or use the forecast for 2011, and right away you use the more current data.

so, you were -- not you personally. >> right. >> -- heard that the forecast for 2011 would have been way off. is that sort of an error that may happen either way as we move into the next year, for instance? >> i think whatever you're forecasting into the future, you have to make certain assumptions. i wouldn't call it guesswork exactly, but it's certainly not a known entity. and i know the controller will be presenting later because they also are redoing some projections. i think the trend line -- we kind of worked with the prior historical data. if you change the years in which you're looking, you're going to get a different trend. i think that sort of what we wanted to say out of all of this is not that our estimate of the bed need was the final estimate, but it certainly showed that the trend was

downward ~ and that by the time the board had to make a final decision on the jail, there's going to be two years more of data and it's going to give more certainty about that downward trend. as of december 2013, i believe the average daily jail population was 12 04. so, it keeps going down ~. the other point i want to make and sort of draw out is the capital plan already envisions a two-phase process. so, there's always that capacity to do something now with the understanding if the world changes, you could do something in addition at another date. >> yeah. the other question i have, and i didn't really see it in the report but it might be in here. you looked at -- in the analysis you made some assumptions and eventually said, well, maybe it's a good

idea to look into smaller replacement. my question is that -- and i think you answered part of this question in terms of the unused jail 6, the transportation costs might be prohibitive. but in terms of looking at jail 1 and 2, my understanding is that it's not being utilized -- or being under utilized and i'm not sure if it's ever going to be used to its capacity. did anybody look at whether you could remodel or [speaker not understood] building a new jail for jail 1 and 2 to make it a little bit more appropriate for current standards? >> i'd that's a fair question. jail 1 is used for booking and jail 2 is actually used for

housing. we only looked at jail 2 in the very beginning when we were trying to assess where it makes most sense to put our efforts. i think it's worth a further look for the purposes of this analysis we didn't look at it that closely ~. >> just looking at it for slightly -- do you know if -- whether or not if it it were to be remodeled you would probably need more space per cell in terms of the configuration. do you know he what the capacity may be if they were to remodel that to modernize it? >> i don't have that. >> do you think somebody will have it in the near future? >> i think actually probably somebody here today could give you that answer. >> okay, thank you very much. >> great, thank you. why don't we now -- i know that we have now in response to presentation by sheriff mirkarimi as well, and i think it's a combined presentation once the sheriff gives his

remarks by the sheriff's department, the capital planning committee, department of public works, and the controller's office. so, if i may turn it over to you and begin with our sheriff. thank you, sheriff mirkarimi, and thank you to your staff who accommodated so many of us who wanted to see this firsthand and who gave us very thorough tours. thank you for your cooperation. >> we absolutely welcome the discussion. just wanted to resequence this. i'm going to have brian strong go ahead and lead off, and i will then segue in. okay, thank you. >> mr. strong. >> thank you very much, and i will be brief. thank you very much. brian strong, i'm the director of capital planning. i appreciate the opportunity to come and address you today and talk about this issue. we do have a presentation here, and i'm going to sort of lead off and then i'm going to pass it to the sheriff, and then we're going to have colin

patterson who is with the controller's office to speak about the capacity numbers and the forecast that he's looked at. and then we're going to have jimoki a ken taylor who is the project manager for this project speak about some of the particulars ~. and i think supervisor yee, she can begin to address some of the questions about jails 1 and 2 and some of the other things we're looking at. and i know there are also various other folks here, chief freeman who did a lot of the tours with folks this year, and other people who can help answer questions. so, to get started, this has been a driving issue in our capital plans since 2006. we've really been concerned about -- about the jail, about the conditions in 3 and 4 and about the seismic vulnerability of the hall of justice. the capital plan has a lot of needs and we really look

overall city-wide and we look for the areas where we had the greatest amount of risk. and again, in an earthquake, the expectation is that the damage is going to be extremely severe. it's going to impose appreciable life hazard and it's likely to require that the building be vacated and that it will not be reoccupiable. the idea of having to relocate our -- the jail along with the other offices, along with our criminal -- the court justice system, so forth, is a big priority. that's why we focus so much effort on it. we really think just the temporary relocation of inmates alone would cost in the 10s of millions of dollars. and there's no guarantee that even if we needed after an earthquake we'd be able to relocate them somewhere close by. as we all know, the earthquake that's going to affect us is also going to affect marin and san mateo and alameda and so forth. so, that's part of the reason that we've been spending a lot

of time on this and that we've been actually reserving sort of our -- one of our most precious resources which is the use of certificates of participation to help fund this. that is something that we have limits in the capital plan. it's part of the city's financial policy. the only 3.25% of general fund revenue, general fund discretionary revenue can go toward cops, which is -- so t' reserved for very special projects and it's what we use for san bruno jail and the veterans retrofit. it's what we're proposing to use for this project. and finally, i just want to say before passing to the sheriff is that these are really capital dollars. we have a lot of capital needs. there is some i think misunderstanding that if we don't spend the money to fix up this jail it can then be taken and used for other types of services. the funds are different so it doesn't work that way. we have capitol