and also i think that's bilingual officer contacts, we need a way to really capture those. i'm a little bit concerned just as one of the commissioners was that this is a little bit heavy on language line and i think it's easier to track. so i think there's an opportunity to get a clearer picture on statistics and when i look at community stats it begs the question. i also think that we should be careful about thinking that there aren't too many complaints from lep survivors, victims or perpetrators. because i think the language access issues themselves may prohibit people from making the kind of complaints in the numbers that we might see if they weren't lep. so i think every xlaipblt we know represents many and that we are going to keep working together to try to solve that.

and then i would also just say, you know, we're very interested in how we can work more closely, although we have made a lot of progress this year, on public service aids. we know that complaints involving (inaudible) do not go through occ so we want that to be something that the commission is at least able to look at and you have the mechanism for that. we don't have that. and then i really want to echo what commissioner melara said. i think the intersection of language access, arrested parents, domestic violence and sexual assault and child protective services is a huge intersection that a lot of our families are facing so i think we can just work together in the future to try to mitigate as much of that as we can. >> thank you. thanks for being here, thank you to the members of the group. commissioner melara will have a lot of exciting stuff to update us on. >> i look forward to working with the commissioner. thanks.

>> hi, larry eddmond, juicy (not speaking english) when i left arkansas i knew how to say it twice in spanish and. since i've been in san francisco i know there's many different international tongues here and just to adding with the youth, sometimes i feel that i've never been to jail, i never got in trouble, sometimes i think when we always concentrate just to the youth, we never think about the elderly. i think the police department should have special services and get together with people who are elderly because this is america. one thing i was talking to a guy the other day and he told me i only met 4

people from europe. he said europeans don't like to come to america because american politicians take the money, people are hungry they don't have jobs, they don't have houses and they should have it. that's a very good thing. but i think the women that i want to -- a lady -- i have a picture here. her name is shirley taft. this is her picture, she was a black college (inaudible) uapb and she was a lesbian. the police department mean a lot to me because in 77 i knew that a lady from helma, arkansas, deborah lewis, she was a police officer, lesbian police officer in san francisco. man, they have a lady from my town, i think she's passed now. but the ideal, i learned to be a community outreach worker from pat norman, she was the police chief -- not police chief, a commissioner. so what i'm saying, i still think that san francisco, yeah,

you are a great policemen and women in blue, but i often don't see, why don't we go make it a full circle? we just cannot say children and leave the elders out and we cannot, the bilingual, english second language esl we also need to have english first language. if we are going to learn esl, there's another place people in my building would love to speak english. that's where i learned to say so many words. (not speaking english) i found out when you get on the bus in the morning, it can scare a person until you learn to say good morning in their language. i love you all, i traveled 35 states and only y'all that could be this special because

this is san francisco. it sets up on the hill. that's why you are great. >> thank you, juicy any further public comment on this matter in particular? thank you. >> hello and good evening, my name is anna and i am with mojares i would like to say thanks to officer stokes for the presentation and i'm very excited to be part of the conversations that we have monthly on this very important matter. i will speak from the perspective of an advocate who works with the -- in particularly with the spanish speaking population every single day and hears the stories of lack of english access every single day. i give a workshop sometimes every quarter where i hear many of

these stories and in some cases it really illustrates what happens when an interpreter is not provided from the very beginning. it was mentioned before this is a safety issue and it's something where the lack of language access really has a very deep impact on someone's life. so we do have terrific resources like the training video that was created at the beginning of the year, which is an amazing training tool. but again it's a training tool. it's not a training. there's still room for improvement in the training to make it robust so that we all officers who are out there really know, really have command of these skills on how to interact with the lep population. so in order to strengthen the training i would like to extend also my offer to keep working together because it's important

to have pre-test and a post-test for the training because you can show the video, again the video is a tool, but we really need to know whether the skills that are taught in the video are being acquired and we need to assess that. and also to make sure that the training is being played at all layers -- sorry, the video is being played at all layers of the training, every training to make sure everyone who needs to know this is actually watching the video. and last regarding the training the video again is a tool that needs to be accompanied by a curriculum in order to make sure that what's being offered at the training really has an impact and to make sure that there is learning actually happening at that training. so thank you so much. >> thank you so much. thank you for your on-going

participation. any final public comment on this matter? hello, welcome. >> hi good evening, my name is paula sosa, i am the latina programmer at woman, inc.. we serve people who have experience with domestic violence. in my program, in the latina program, we specifically serve spanish-speaking survivors of dv this lep work group has been a priority in our agency. we have been around the table for about 3 years meeting with the san francisco police department and i think it has been a great collaboration and we're very grateful that we have this opportunity to improve the services. i was reading the lao report

and it's great achievements in the past fiscal year. i noticed that at some point the report said that due to the low number of complaints regarding language access it will appear that the procedures that are in place are adequate in meeting the needs of the lep community. and i think this could be one interpretation of why there are, there is a low number of complaints. but working on a daily basis with survivors of domestic violence whose first language is not english, i can think of many other reasons why people may not file a complaint when they have a bad experience with the police department. many lep persons are coming from countries where people are afraid of the police. so they

wouldn't even think of filing a complaint, having negative interactions with the police is the norm. so they may not think that filing a complaint is an option. they may be thinking of the participants in the program i can think of many participants who have had bad experiences with the police but they also applying for a u visa or other immigration benefits and they need the police certification to support their cases. so they may feel that if they file a complaint, there may be negative repercussions. also some participants have had bad experiences with the police department, sadly, and they lose faith in the system and they don't think that a complaint may make any difference. they may fear

unintended consequences. they may lack information, they may not even know that that's an option or even if they know they could file a complaint, they don't know how to do it or they don't have the time. just thinking of the survivors of domestic violence they are usually isolated and they may be scared and it takes a lot of courage for them to go to the police department and make a police report or call 911 when there is a problem at home and if they have a bad interaction with the police they may give up and feel like there is nobody who is going to help them and support them. so i just wanted to make a comment about the low numbers of complaints doesn't necessarily mean we're meeting the needs of the community and i think we have done --. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is office.

>> also the office of citizens a complaints is represented in your working group. to the extent to which there's additional information where you can help us build a bridge to anyone who feels like they don't understand the system, i know the occ has a very robust advocacy system designed to make sure people don't not report because they don't know how. i would encourage you to work with samera and director hix to make sure we can reach people with that information. i'm sorry, your time is up. thank you. >> commissioners, i do have to say it was not until i talked to a patient advocate that i even heard about the occ, so, i mean, it may appear to be robust and what not but i've never heard of it until i actually was seeking assistance. and it took

probably 6 degrees to kevin bacon and also it took a couple of months for me to get courage enough to go through it because the web site was not --. >> this is public comment on lep. >> right, limited access and the low number that was that determined or where the comment was made that there was adequate access due to the low number of complaints, i support the last speaker's comments on it probably is a myriad of other reasons and not that there's adequate notification. thank you. >> any further public comment? >> hi, everyone, i am an add vocation of san francisco women against rape so i actually interact with folks on a

regular daily basis. we have a crisis line, we provide medical advocacy legal advocacy, social services add 0 kaetion. so, yes, i want to echo what everybody else said regarding the complaints regarding accessing language basics. add quaet services basically when somebody wants to file a police report, so if i heard correctly, there were 16 complaints filed regarding services in language and i want to say that from my experience, a lot of times people are in fear. not only are they under a lot of stress because maybe they have gone -- maybe because they have just survived a sexual assault but then there's also the fear of signing a complaint and having other issues come up for them. so we're talking about housing issues, and just being afraid and then basically initiating another additional long process. the other piece that i want to

emphasize is that a lot of times when the monolingual spanish speaking folks go to a station and interact with a psa, a lot of times folks don't know they need to keep track who they are talking to or if they have the option of filing a complaint or not. so, yeah, i just want to emphasize that because, yes, there is a low number regarding filing complaints doesn't mean it's no longer an issue or that we need to stop working on that. yeah, that's all i had to say. thank you. >> thank you so much for coming. okay, public comment is now closed. chief. >> the next presentation. >> update on body cameras.

>> you need the computer, commander? let me know when you're ready. >> president loftus, commissioners, chief sir, director hix, members of the public, good evening. my name is commander robert moser from the chief investigator bureau and i'm here to give you an update on san francisco department's body camera pilot program.

currently the pilot program calls for the issuance of 50 cameras. the cameras are the taser axon body cameras, a picture of which you see of the actual unit on the presentation. the cameras in initial implementation for the pilot program were funded via department of justice cops grant. the actual hardware of that camera unit itself costs $679 per unit. i think what's important to note beyond the cost of simply the camera itself there's additional costs that need to be taken into account. the camera itself is $679, but there's also accessories that go with the camera as well as a 4 year access to evidence.com

which evidence.com is the storage facility for the viewing and management of the videos. the additional costs that would be incurred in a pilot program and implementation of body cameras are significant. just to give you kind of an idea how it would break down for a pilot program of the 50 cameras and really with on a low end of officers recording, say, two hours of video a day, the quality of the video that the officers are recording at depends on how much storage we would actually have. this would be at a medium quality. so 50 hours -- 50 officers regarding two hours a day per officer when accounting the actual personal support costs in terms of the record management, which i'll get into

a little bit later on in the presentation, in the first year you are looking at approximately $449,000. as we go on in subsequent years that number would increase as the data storage costs would increase to ultimately after 4 years you would be looking at a pilot cost of about $1,166,000. what's important to note is that say at the end of a 4 year pilot program, if the cameras were to go dark and we were to stop using the cameras we would still incur data storage costs because that's evidence and as you know we have to maintain that evidence per the law per department policies and record retention policies. so the costs would incur beyond simply the pilot program. the pilot program calls for, again, 50 cameras, they would be issued to plain clothes

supervisors and primarily during entries of search. so search warrants, arrest warrants, consent searches. it's really designed to capture that interaction that's going on between the officer and the citizen. beyond the search or the entry the recording of the search obviously that would increase recording time and the amount of data that would be stored on the servers. concerns, cost i had mentioned was one concern. another concern that directly relates to cost is record retention. how long we keep data directly relates to cost. so if we are keeping data that's in connection with an arrest or an investigation, obviously that data storage retention time could be indefinitely. if it is attached to a police report

our data retention policy says 7 years now, so we would have to keep that as a piece of the police report almost like a statement for 7 years. for a non-routine, non-evidencary video we would be looking at approximately a year to keep that. another major concern would be the video management of the project. the video management would entail individuals that would be designated as a project administrator for the program who would have rights of access who could lockdown certain videos under certain circumstances, who would respond to discovery requests, who would respond to pra requests, which is an important factor of any kind of pilot program. the pra request, as

you can imagine, with a video is substantially different than with a police report. police report, an officer could look through it, read through, make the necessary redactions and send the report off. with a video you have to look through all those hours and hours of video to make sure that the proper redactions are made, make those redactions, have the skills to make the redactions and then distribute it. along with that of course is the privacy issues. privacy really, is really under two fronts. you have kind of the doj requirements of privacy that we have say in terms of child abuse investigations in terms of sexual assault investigations, in terms of investigations where we would be doing interviews within hospitals, those would all have to be considered.

then you have the other privacy concerns of just -- of opb an officer entering into a private residence conducting an investigation in accordance with their duties and making a recording of that interaction within that private residence and then having that subject to a public records request. so those are certainly some concerns we have to look at going forward. the next steps, we currently have a draft policy. that's in the meet and confer stages. there's issues that are being addressed within that policy and revisions being made as we speak. the staffing that's going to be necessary to support such a program has to be examined and implemented. as i mentioned, there's going to be a substantial staff that's going to be necessary to review video, to administer the

program, to respond to pra requests. i was just at the usf's leadership symposium on technology just over -- just on monday and there was a presentation on body cameras and oakland opd was present and of course they have had body cameras for a while now and they were saying that they were looking at adding another three to four full-time employees just to work on the pra requests and data management. and as i understand it i believe they have 3 or 4 full-time employees working now, so it's doubling their staff. training obviously we'd have to work with the academy to roll out the proper training for the officers and it's important to integrate that training throughout because the camera, much like any other piece of equipment that we use, is kind of a muscle memory thing. you really have to get used to using it and used to

turning it on in the proper circumstances. then of course it would be the issuance and then follow-up to address any issues that come up within the program and make proper corrections through the pilot program. at this point i will open it up to questions. >> do you have something you wanted to add, chief? >> yes, director merritt is in the back so she can answer any technical questions, but ballpark on the storage, susan correct me if i'm wrong, is approximately $100,000 a year for these 50 for two hours a day? right. so if you assume use of no more than two hours a day just on the -- at the threshold of the entry and during searches where we're not violating anybody's privacy would be about $100,000 a year for 50. and then, depending on

the record retention, a minimum of one year and a maximum of 7, so just to do this pilot, which was a $250,000 grant, we may go into somewhere in the neighborhood of at least that amount in general fund dollars to match record retention. so i believe personally that just like other departments will catch up to us and cell phones will be standard equipment some day for police officers as they are today in san francisco that some day body cameras will be standard equipment for all police officers, but right now the cost to put them on the 1600 officers that just got phones, you can see what the cost would be to run them 24 hours a day. >> okay, vice president turman. >> so, director, so $100,000

is the cost for two hours for the entire year? >> yes, doj does not allow us to store on the cloud so it has to be stored on a server. i'm looking for acknowledgement over here. >> (inaudible). >> i'm sorry, director merritt, could you --. >> good evening. >> good evening. >> why don't you say for everybody at home who you are again. >> susan merritt, chief information officer for the police department. it's very difficult to really capture costs without stating your assumptions, right? so because it depends on the quality of the video, how many hours per day the officers are going to record of video and how long you want to store the video. just to kind of make the math simple, and again this is going to get really technical, but

the way i characterize it is for about $1.50 a year you can store an hour of video. so doing the math, how many officers and hours and that's repeated each year. if you store 100 hours this year times $1.50, then you would add that to the storage next year. so it's a cumulative number. what we tried to do, we took into account what we actually have already purchased with taser, we have purchased some for the pilot program, and we did some cost estimates based on they gave us like a flat 34,000 gig of storage. if you take that into account it was $450,000 for year one, 239 for year 3 for a total of 1.1 million for the total pilot.

>> $1.50 or $150. >> $1.50 per year, every year. the math gets complicated so if you are confused, join the crowd. >> the reason lapd used taser international to outfit their officers, there is an aspect, my understanding is it was cloud storage. that is what distinguishes this particular product. it is stored on the cloud, it is secure. >> it is on the cloud and it is secure. taser is the one who gave us the quote of $1.50, medium resolution can give you about an hour of media storage. >> we're getting into gigs, tonight is the night. my colleague petra has a question. >> vice president turman.

>> thank you. all right, so i'm ?iing of this in terms of other organizations i've been involved with. cannot we craft a retention policy that we only need to store for 30 to 60 days until an incident request -- until there is an incident, which usually comes to light within 30 to 60 days and then only that portion which outlines the issue or records the issue or the incident has been stored will be forwarded, not -- i mean that's all we do in law firms. i know they can probably afford much more than a police department can, but we don't keep everything stored for, you know, 4 or 5 years. we have a policy that -- and once an incident is identified that becomes