of the committee and will also give an overview of the approach to that committee and when we will engage them and the information that we'll be seeking from those individuals as well based on the legislation that you had drafted and was passed. where we are currently is that committee just as an overview will be -- or the task force will be the touch stone for the methodologies that are developed by a contractor that will conduct the analysis. the task force will be a crucial part of the moving forward and both understanding the san francisco environment and policing in general to propose and help us develop the right methodology for san francisco and determine the right staffing

levels. >> supervisor yee: i appreciate the update. i don't know if the original idea was to have this activity take place probably a few months prior to where we're taking -- where it's going to take place. so the question becomes, you know, how useful sit for this budget or the next year's budget cycle in terms of just helping us understand how the board of supervisors and the mayor's office can support whatever staffing we need for this analysis. it seems like it's a little bit behind schedule for the new budget coming up. >> yes, sir. i believe -- and i know we didn't -- it's a little behind schedule in terms of your vision on it, but i do believe it still will be a value add to this process. just to put this in the context, the last real staffing analysis

that was done over 10 years ago took over two years. . we're moving, although it doesn't seem like it. it took two years to complete. we're moving at a fast pace. we had a lot of things converge all at once. we had the vla do their analysis. we're asking a controller to do an analysis. the mayor gave direction on. so we were doing a lot of things at once. a lot of that was this forming stage to sort out what we had to do and which ways would be most efficient to do that. moving forward, katherine -- or director mcguire has already -- we have names attached to the individuals that will be on this task force. we do think it's a value add. we do think we can do it in less time than we did it last time. the task force will be very

important to frame this work in another prism. so moving forward, i do think it's a valued aed -- add. we want to get it done as quickly as possible. anything to add? >> supervisor yee: thank you very much. >> supervisor cohen: spice sore stefani? >> supervisor stefani: i talk about this a lot at community meetings. i have a few questions just to see if i can get some clarity on how many sworn police officers do we actually have in total and how many are at the airport? also, do we have sworn personnel doing administrative jobs and not out on patrol? this is excluding nine sixty's that come back. i'm trying to see what those

numbers look like. >> so 330 sworn. that's airport, total. the airport staffing, i believe the number is 162 fill. i'm trying to remember all of your questions in order. you asked if we had -- i think where the confusion lies for a number of people is there's a difference in the numbers that are on full duty and deployable. the 1971 number comes from there. >> right. >> that number right now, we're

at 1898 full-duty employees. we're projected to be -- by june, 1953. that's based on who is in the academy, the graduation rate and the like. in terms of administrative assignments, yes, there are officers in administrative assignments. if i understand your question correctly, there are officers assigned to administrative assignments. if you're asking whether those officers were taken from patrol to do administrative assignments, for the most part, that answer would be no. there are times when officer get reassigned. they get injured. there's special details and those types of things, that's a constant ebb and flow, but we have made a lot of efforts this past year to return officers to the field. when we looked at our hiring for the last four or five years, as

we increase the size of the department, almost all of those officers went to the field. so that's our priority. it will continue to be our priority, but we have to keep in mind that there's also a need for those administrative assignments because you have to do the administrative work to run the department as well. so not to say that those assignments are not important, but our priorities are putting our officers, as we get them, in the field. >> supervisor stefani: okay. that definitely helps clarify some things for me. i was going to ask, also, if there are areas for proouchlt -- improvement for facilities. >> we've civilianized 50 positions. that sounds like a big number, but it is a big number. it helps. we've been asked by the board

and the mayor's office to continue to look at that. we're working on continuing to find ways to civilianize where we can and director mcguire is a part of that, as well as her staff. that is and will always be something that we have on the forefront. >> supervisor stefani: okay. and i asked this question in the budget finance committee. are the number of officers out at sfo included in that charter amendment number? >> no. >> supervisor stefani: i didn't think so. great. two more questions. i'm wondering if there are situation where is we can improve practices so we have the officers back on the streets. i'm thinking of two situations. for example, transporting suspects to 850 bryant after being arrested, i know that our deputy sheriffs used to transfer and pick up all custodies at all district stations. for years now, i believe patrol has had to take custodies to the county jail, thereby having one

unit out of service in each district until the transfer is complete. is that something that's being looked at as well? and i have a follow-up after that. >> yes, ma'am, it has. that's a budget issue for the sheriff's department. we both have and it's a budgettary question as well as a logistical question. we have steps to get there. i won't speak for the sheriff. i think she and i are both on the same page that it can happen, but things have to happen in order to bring it to fruition. >> supervisor stefani: what about situations when a police officer has to stay with people at hospitals until they're medically cleared. i know this takes a while and prevents officers from being out on the street. is this something that the sheriff's office could possibly do? >> we have discussed that as

well. the sheriff has been gracious to help out where the sheriff's office can. but that is an ongoing thing that we try to work on. it does tie up personnel time when officers have to be assigned to the hospital details, but we have worked with the sheriffs. also, in some cases, we, as a matter of policy, encourage those situations where an individual can be released or feel released. we have to assess whether the danger to public safety and all, it's a process we go through. there are situation where is it just makes sense to release the person and not have them in the hospital. >> supervisor stefani: thank you. >> supervisor cohen: supervisor fewer?

>> supervisor fewer: thank you. there are 272 recommendations from the department of justice. how many have been completed? >> before the pulled out, we were -- in or recommendations that we had approved and about to submit to the doj, we were about 40% in. we signed an mou with the california department of justice to now reengage in this process. we have an independent agency, state agency basically validating the work we're doing. that process is ongoing. we just signed mou a little over a month ago. we're going to work with the doj and police commission and others in developing work plans and continuing to work. to answer your question, we're

about 40% in terms of the recommendations that we have documented, and we believe we've either met the mark or made significant process toward. >> supervisor fewer: 40% has been completed? >> when you say completed -- i will just give an example. some of this is not tangible. a good example of something that is tangible with the revision to the use of force policy. we still have it in place. there's processes. at the end of the day, this should all translate to a better service on the street. we want to make sure these changes we're making are working. that takes time. a recommendation was taser

consideration. it was considered. we have a taser policy adopted. it's a long way to go before implementation, but when i describe recommendation that's been completed, if i were to make an assessment on the taser recommendation, it's been completed in terms of the actual recommendation. i hope that makes sense to you. >> supervisor fewer: so you can't say 40% has been completed because even though it's been addressed, it's not been completed because of implementation? >> correct. >> supervisor fewer: i think we invested heavily in body cameras for police officers. there's been a serious incident where body cameras have not been on. what is that about, quite frankly, after we made the

investment in body cameras and when they're not being used all the time, how are we actually reaping the rewards of this type of investment in equipment? >> and that's a question about accountability. if our officers are, for whatever reason, not turning the body cameras on, the first part of that process is to do some sort of investigation to determine whether or not -- what's the reason behind that? was it a malfunction? the officer didn't do it for whatever reason? or didn't have time to do it. there's an investigation that take place. once that is done, depending on the findings of that investigation in determining what is appropriate, if it's misconduct, then that investigation will go to internal affairs for further investigation in adjudication. if it's malfunction, is this a

pervasive problem or a problem that we can resolve and how to resolve it. so there's a gamut of things that can happen. in those instances where we're not following policy, there needs to be accountability. >> supervisor fewer: and what had been the outcome? >> some of them have resulted in discipline and some have resulted in training. it depends on the situation. we're a year into this. i think we can expect some growth and some issues to happen at the onset of the implementation of a new program. it depends on the circumstances.

there have been disciplinary actions taken on some of those cases. others, there are bound to be training issues and some equipment malfunctions. it just depends on the issue. >> supervisor fewer: this brings us to tasers. i understand this investment in tasers, how much do you think you're going to be investing? are you proposing to spend on tasers, the training, the equipment, et cetera? >> well, the equipment itself, i'm going to ask captain mcguire to talk about that. it's something we have looked at. >> we have included a $3.5 million request in the february 21st submission. eel be working with the -- we'll be working with the mayor's office to hone in on that number as we know more about current legislation that's out there and more about the policy that was just approved last night. so as we develop our

implementation plan after the policy has been set, we'll know more about what exactly the costs will be. for training, for instance, we've never done that, with the exception of use of force policy. we wanted to have a teaming approach, things like that. in this case, we're still sort of working out what the training will look like, and part of that is because the policy was not finished until last night. >> so is it the goal that everyone will be equipped with an electronic -- what are they called? >> electronic control weapon. >> supervisor fewer: electronic control weapon, is it a goal of the police department that everyone will be equipped with that? >> well, that's the part of the implementati implementation. to piggyback on director

mcguire, it fends on who is deployed. if a taser not needed, it may not be necessary the assign them. as the policy that was discussed right now stands, there are no restrictions on who the department can have them. of course, operations, field operations will have the priority because those are the officers in those situations most likely to require that equipment to be used. if somebody has been in an administrative assignment and they're basically doing office work, they will be trained, but does it make sense to actually have them assigned a taser? those are issues we still have to figure out as we device our implementation policy. we have to be smart about how we

do it. we have to be smart about it and proficient. >> supervisor fewer: this may be for captain mcguire. there's a litigation fund? >> correct. >> is it a one-time fund or replenished every year? how has it been used and what has it been used for? is the litigation fund taken out of your allocated budget. >> the city attorney draws from $1.6 million to make payment. >> supervisor fewer: this is out of your allotted budget? >> and police services. >> supervisor fewer: do we have the controller? >> ben rosen field, controller. on how litigation costs are

budgeted currently, the city maintains a litigation reserve in the general fund outside of department budgets for large loss cases. we do that -- our office estimates every year working with the city attorney's office and every year as part of the budget, the board authorizes depositing those large reserves. those tend to be bigger cases with payouts over a million dollars that we know are coming due, et cetera. and then there's a couple of small departments that maintain smaller budgets for more recurring smaller but still significant lit -- litigation that might be paid out. the department retains some reserve, but often a large loss case that might involve the police department, like all other large departments, will get paid out of the verb -- >> supervisor fewer: according to a report in 2017, it outlines

the cost of municipalities around the use of tasers. it says that actually it's documented at 172 million in publicly fund payouts to resolve litigation around tasers and absent, municipalities are pretty much left on their own because police were warned to avoid firing electrified darts at a person's chest and since then, taser has been a party to just one in five cases filed. so that really leaves us vulnerable in the case of liability. my question to you, chief, are you willing to, in your budget, absorb the cost of litigation around tasers should your officers be equipped with tasers in the future? >> well, supervisor, i think we have to follow the process just

described by mr. rosenfield. i've read that report as well. i've read the report as well, and there are some questions in my mind in terms of some of the issue raised in that report. however, in terms of police litigati litigation, we have to move forward on our training. to get to your prior training, are we following our policies? do we have a solid policy that will move forward? we have to try to mitigate those things. the advantage we have, being the last city to mitigate tasers, we have a lot of experience from other departments and lessons learned. thattive guess us somewhat of -- that gives us somewhat of an advantage over the pitfalls other departments have stepped in. i think there's an exposure to liability and risks. we have batons and spray.

all of those carry liabilities and risk. >> supervisor fewer: absolutely. >> i don't think it would be a prudent thing to do to assume we're going to have all these lawsuits with tasers because they're not unlike any of the other equipment officer carry. we need to make sure we have a solid poll i -- policy, that our officers follow it. that would mitigate some of what you read in that article. part of it -- i just want to add one more thing. in doing the resource we did in researching tasers, a lot of the departments that did lose money, it was those issues, either training wasn't being followed or the policies themselves are weak. those type issues, in my opinion, my professional opinion, increase exposure. i believe we have addressed this with the policy. the rest of it is management and oversight. i think we have that in place

too. >> supervisor fewer: so, chief, respectfully speaking, i just have the same question about body cameras. you gave me some of the answers of why they're not used, according to policies. some of those same issues pertain to tasers. i will just leave it at. that i know we have a difference in opinion, but i want to ask you about your narcotics unit. we see a lot of drug sales on the streets. i think we can all say that we have not never drug use like this on the streets ever in the history of san francisco. i am a fourth generation san franciscoen. i've never seen. this my husband was a police officer for 35 years. he was an undercover narcotics officer. he has never seen anything like this either. i want to ask you, how many units are in your narcotics unit and what are the impact of your narcotics unit? >> we have a narcotics unit.

it's not heavily staffed. i think we're under 10 in the narcotics unit. i will get a number for you before we leave here today. impact, the officers that we do have do a lot of good work. they make a lot of good arrests. they do a lot of search warrants. i can tell you that it's not enough. i can also tell you that this is a larger issue than narcotics enforcement because things that were enforceable in terms of penal consequences just a few years ago no longer have the same consequences. so it's a bigger -- in my opinion, a bigger issue than that. we really have to take where we are in society right now with the laws the way they are and work within that framework. enforcement that used to be effective in, at least, getting that problem off the street five or six years ago, it is no longer the issue. for instance, if somebody just

has a possession case, that may have been a felony five years ago. it's no longer a felony. now it's a citable offense. now when the officer makes the arrest, the person gets cited, and they're going to be back out on the street. that's just the law. we have to work within that and accept that. that's why it's so important to be collaborative. some of these issues are better suited in the hands of the department of public health. some of these issues are better suited in the hands of some of the other collaborative partners, but in terms of enforcement, we're doing that. to your point and to your question, sometimes it seems like it doesn't make a dent. they are making a lot of enforcement arrests. >> supervisor fewer: so if we could share that data, it would be great. also, about the car break-ins, i'm hearing that district attorney only receives 2% of the amount of car break-ins that are

referred to him. it seems like it's the police department's responsibility to bring that to the district attorney. what is being done around car break-ins? >> if there was a question -- what was the question? >> supervisor fewer: i think my question is: are we doing proper investigation around the car break-ins? i realize -- the narcotics question, was about sales. it's illegal to sell drugs on the streets. >> most is sales, the search warrants we're doing, they're all sales. i read the reports and the commendations. they're mostly sales. it's not that the officers are not working. i will freely admit that we've

got to find different solutions, but most of the ares are sales. >> supervisor fewer: and with the car break-ins? >> we made about 700 -- roughly 700 car break-in arrests last year. the 2% number that you mentioned, that is not uncommon for that type of crime. to say that that's a good thing, no. that's not a good thing. i spent 27 years in los angeles. numbers were similar. it is a very difficult crime to tackle, and here is why. most of the reports we get, a large number of them are on the internet. people are making reports. there's no evidence. there's nothing to follow up on. there's not a whole lot that can be done with those reports. those reports with follow-up information, we investigate them. we investigate them as thoroughly as we can, and we do

make arrests. so the work is being done, but we're looking for ways to be more effective with that particular crime. one of our priorities, as i mentioned, car break-ins is a huge priority because it plagues the city. we're working collaboratively with the district attorney office on that. including what happens to the arrest after being made, what happens in the court system? there's a lot of components to this dilemma that we're in. all we can do is our responsibility and work with the district attorney's office. we're working with it. we're seeing good results.

as of march 14th, we're down in car burglaries. we saw a decrease in car burglaries at the end of the year. that's a difficult challenge. that's not claiming victory by any stretch of the imagination, but it's better to be 18% down than 24% up like we ended last year. so we're making some progress on it. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, chief. i have a request about language access. as you know, i held a hearing on language access, and the police department had a very low number of officers that are bilingual certified. can you address how you're working on that? what are you implementing? >> the language certification is definitely something that we want to be better at in terms of making sure we work to allow the issues that have surfaced. we have a work group.

they have representation from the department of police accountability. they have community members. that work, along with our personnel, i think they do a really good job at moving us forward. language is an -- an access to language is a big service for our delivery. we understand that. as you're well familiar with, we have a certification process, so the officers that actually get to use their language skills in their jobs have to be certified. we have a lot more officers that speak languages than are certified. so there are things we're trying to do to make sure we're as good as we can be, including recertification that has never been a part of our program, making sure people stay current

on their skills. it's a perishable skill. it's a big part of this city's fabric, that we need to be as good as we can be. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, chief. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> okay. i have some questions. you seem to be the man of the hour. >> poor guy. >> there's questions asked already that i was prepared to ask, so i'm going to move in a different direction. it's pretty much a straightforward question, but it relates to the electronic control weapons. i just want to know what the estimated budget impact is supposed to be? >> supervisor, as i mentioned, we're requesting $3.5 million. that consists of about half a million in technology integration. the devices, the weapon, depending on the vendor, is able

to connect to the body camera and turn the body camera on as soon as it's unholsters. that would integrate with our cad system. that's $3 million. and the other is for the purchase themselves. that will be phased over a number of -- it will be in not only the fiscal year of the budget. it's broken up. we don't expect to spend the full $3 million in that first year. >> supervisor cohen: does this allocation exist in your budget? >> if your february 21st submission. >> supervisor cohen: is there a training involved in your request for the electronic control weapons? >> $3.5 million, we think any -- the cost for engaging the vendor to come train the trainer is

minimal and something we can include in your existing budget. >> supervisor cohen: do you have an estimation of what that cost is? you describe it as minimal? is there a range or some kind of indication? >> we are actually using the budget and legislative analyst report submitted to this body a couple of months ago. i believe it was around 12 to $15,000. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you. the next question is about transit hub. you've been on the record talking about increasing staffing at transit hubs and that it's federally mandated, if i'm not mistaken? >> if you're talking about the airport, there are some federal mandat mandates. if that was your question? >> supervisor cohen:s that the question. question, the airport is considered a transit hub. bart are transit hubs. so i was just looking for a little bit more clarification.

outside of the airport, this federal funding, i understand that, but outside of the airport, are there federal dollars associated, for example, like the transbay terminal that's currently under construction, is that tied to federal dollars or a mandate? >> no, ma'am. so the policing of that, in terms of the sfpd policing, the board at the transbay authority has authorized $2.4 million for supplemental police services. so that money will pay for officers to be brought in on an overtime basis. that's going to be the funding for that. the funding source for that. >> that sounds like another conversation. we'll save that for another day. supervisor stefani had asked a series of questions about the number of active duty officers. i'm not going to ask that question.

i do have a little bit of a nuanced question, though. i've come to understand. i have not been able to determine whether this is fact or folklore, but i'm told there's the greatest number of police officers on duty on wednesdays. i believe that this is of a time past when people actually had to come in and pick up their checks. so i don't know if you can answer this question as to whether or not the highest staffing level is on wednesdays, and if so, perhaps we should change that or maybe move things around to consider friday, saturday, sunday, the weekend, when people are also coming into the city. i don't know if you can confirm that or not. >> payday is on tuesday. so maybe it used to be on

wednesdays. >> it's true, paydays are on tuesdays, but people requested to be on duty or assigned duty on a wednesday. so, like i said, i don't know if it's fact or fiction. just checking. and now we have electronic transfer, so, you know -- >> correct. correct. [laughter] >> that's part of what your staffing analysis is looking at. we're looking at everything. are we deploying efficiently? the controller's office is carrying that. it impacts operations more than anything. as far as the administrative units, it's usually business hours monday through friday, and then you have some administrative units that work on the weekends, depending on the need. in terms of field operations and the patrol, i don't know that that is particularly true. some units, there's heavy

deployment on wednesdays, but that's part of the analysis we're digging into. so it gets into other issues that we're looking at too, in terms of managing and being as efficient as we can in terms of scheduling. it's something we're looking into. >> you're looking into it. the budget legislative analysis, they're working on this for the police department in its entirety. we'll revisit the question once the report has been completed and we're hearing it in this committee. supervisor stefani has another question and then we'll be able to move on. >> supervisor stefani: a quick resis it to the number that was created in 1984, which seems like forever ago. i'm wondering whether or not -- i know you're undergoing a staffing audit, but if you have an idea of how many more officers you think you need above that to -- you know, the

chief just said we have a population of 1.5 million. do you have an idea if we're looking at 200 officers. we know we're down 73 from the number that was created in 1994. i'm trying to get a sense of what your budget is going to look like when we get it on june 1st. however officers above that do you think you're going to need? >> that's what we're working on, in terms of all these different staffing analysis that we're trying to bring together. i would ask or recommend that it may be better for those things to come together so we have a solid number in terms of your question. we often times refer back to the first study that was done ten years ago. there are some differences in policing from then until now, but even with that number, you know, it was north of 2000. i think it was 2,200 or

something like that. it was north of 2000. that was a study that, you know, was done over 10 years ago. we really want to be thoughtful in this. we're working with all the different entities that we're working with to really get a solid staffing analysis where when you ask that question, we can say based on research, based on some thoughtful analysis or based on subject matter, expertise, to really answer that question appropriately. we're moving forward in that process. we should have that hopefully shortly. >> just following up on that, i want to give a shout-out to -- we have the auto burglary crisis throughout the city. in d2, we have it near the palace of fine arts and quicken street. one of the first things he did was place an officer at the p

palace of arts for a week and there was zero break-ins, compared to at lo. it's a constant problem. i shows that police presence works. so i'm just very concerned that we don't have enough police officers on our streets right now, given this number. i'm looking forward to that analysis. i'm looking forward to seeing how many more we need. thank you. >> thank you for that. thank you for that. thank you for your concern and support. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. i believe that's all the questions that we have for you at this time. thank you, ms. mcguire. i would like to call on our next person, sheriff hennessy. good. you're still here. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm going to ask my chief financial officer to begin.

i will be here to answer any questions. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is christen hollins. i'm the cfo for sheriff hennessy. the first page is just an overview of the department high-level review. most of what we're known for is custody operations. we operate the four county jails, but beyond that, we have a robust field operations group where we provide law enforcement for the departments as well as the courts. we provide mutual aid such as the fire. we have custody and field ops. with custody, one of our greatest challenges is managing high rates of overtime because

we have been challenged with staffing, but we've made some progress. we'll get to that later on in the presentation. you know, but we need adequate levels of staffing for supervision for meeting title xv requirements. we've worked with the da's office. on top of court security, there are more trials as a result of fewer misdemeanor plea bargins, so that means longer jail time for those awaiting trials. we have a lot of transportation requirements with criminal trials being moved to the civil courthouse. we have transporting challenges.

moving on to community programs and training, we have a robust pre-trial diversion program. this is actually run by a community-based organization. although the budget sits in the sheriff's office, as done for 40 years, and we do a risk assessment to make sure we can release people into the community who are not a threat to the community. we're also expanding our electronic monitoring program in due to additional funding that we got last year. we also have quite a robust training program. the number of hours we put in training has increased significantly since sheriff hennessy came into office. the training includes gender

awareness, crisis intervention, as well as substance abuse and mental health training. a lot of people in jail have these issues. so with programs and a result of a lot of recommendations that came out of the task force, we continue to work on release assessments. we do that with pretrial -- with a lot of other agencies in the city. we're also expanding our electronic monitoring program. this has recently increased quite a bit as a result of

recent state court decisions. for reforms, we're working to professionalize our policy management. we've awarded a contract such that we'll be working with a company to do an comprehensive evaluation of policies and procedures the make sure they're in alignment with city law, state aligned. in the future, as these laws change, with regard to our information technology group, we received a controller's audit that recommends we move to civilianizing this group. this is something that the police department did recently. so now we're going to be starting to do that in our budget. the department request includes a position for the chief information officer as well as two civilian physicians. these are the only additional

fdes that we're requesting on our budget. last year, you awarded us money to start a pilot program with body-worn cameras. the pilot has been successful. we're working with them to expand this across the department. we're in the last stages of awarding that contract but this will help us get rid of strip searches once and for all. and then with regard to training, we have post-mandated training. all the staff is clear on expectations and, again, training has been a significant priority in the department for

the last year and a half, two years. we also have skills training, defensive tactics, range training, emergency vehicle operations, cpr, first aid. next slide. okay. so here's the budget summary. most of the growth is just related to -- the request involves $5 million over the base budget. about half of that has to do with salary infringed. the biggest chunk of that is about starting up a pilot program to do station transfers and emergency room coverage to help get more police officers onto the street. that program is still under review, but we've put that into the budget. we also have additional funds there for programs for pre-trial

for additional public safety assessment work. we have another roughly 750,000 to replace a grant in support of misdemeanor behavioral court and then we have another roughly 1.3 million for materials. most of that is offset by a grant, but some of that is projected costs for higher food standards. we are working on -- well, actually, we're at the tail end of a new contract for inmate food. we've been working with a center for good food purchasing which has standards around local purchasing for food, and we project that that may increase the cost slightly. the next slide shows how we have for the last two years, we've

had some pretty good hiring. although that follows five years where we were losing people roughly 70 to 80 people, but we have been making up for that in the last two years. however, we have a fairly -- it's a long process to bring people into the department and then to actually get them to count towards the required minimums for staffing. the training process itself is about nine months. so all of that additional staffing that you see here is not yet translated into deputies that count towards minimums. we reach our peak in overtime at the beginning of this fiscal year. we project it to come down further. >> can you explain that a little bit? context to why it's coming down, what changes have happened?

>> primarily, it's about people coming into the department. we have fixed staffing at the jail, the cbas we have. there's a fixed level of staffing. >> what is a cba? >> collective bargaining agreement. they come in on overtime. standard time with benefits is roughly the same cost as overtime. financially, we mandate a lot of overtime for our deputies. we want to bring it down. we've been running it around %

17%. we're down to 15%. we want to get it down to eight or nine percent. the very last one. actually, this one is not in your packet. i threw this in just because i like charts, but it shows how we peaked at the beginning of the year, the beginning of this fiscal year. the solid line shows how we have come down, and the dotted line shows how we project to come down. >> without compromising service levels? >> yes. this is about adding more people to the department so we can meet our requirement with regular staffing, not with overtime. >> okay. that's good because i don't know if you were in the chamber, but certainly the sheriff was in the chamber when the newly elected president of the deputy sheriff's association came in and was basically made a pitch for more ftes.

i sat down and met with him and explained to him that that is highly unlikely, but i'm sensitive to the concerns. i don't want your deputies to be overburdened with hours and the quality of their work be compromised because they're tired or the moral is low. do you want to talk about that? >> absolutely that's been a concern for me from when i started. as crispin said, we were minus 80 when i started -- minus 100, actually -- >> supervisor cohen: you mean deputies? >> sworn staff, we were minus 100 when i came on board two years ago. one of my first primary resolves was to get people hired. that's a long process too. that involves recruitment and testing and backgrounds and

making -- and people fall off during that process, and people stay during that process, but it's a long process. i think we've been extremely successful for our side of the department and the number of people we've hired. we've hired close to 200 sworn people in two years, which is a lot for a department of 1,000 people. in the meantime, we had a lot of people retire and leave the department because about 25 to 30 years ago, we did a huge hiring. i was here. i remember it. a lot of people have retired. so the point here is the money is pretty much the same, but the overtime has been excessively high. 18%, let's say. mandatory overtime for the people that are on the lowest rung of the seniority level. it's been very common. we've been dealing with people trying to circumvent that, putting in 15-minute off duty at the end of a watch so they

wouldn't get called for a mandatory overtime. it's a difficult thing. we imposed a process of overtime last year that we eventually had to stop doing, which kind of spread the overtime around to everybody. we had to do that because the union objected to it, but it did serve its purpose for the time we did it. now we're catching up. i'm hoping that we'll be able to continue to catch up. the cbas are based on -- or the collective bargaining agreement minimums, and that is the minimum. we cannot leave a post uncovered during any shift at any time, unless it's not operating, but most of the posts operate 24 hours a day seven days a week, and on weekends, visiting is an additional post. we would like to be able to do visits at night so people don't have to come in on weekends to visit the people in jail. so these are the things we're

trying to improve. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. thank you. m. holland? >> so we started the year at about 17,000 hours per pay period in overt. we're currently running around 14,000. i believe at the end of this week, we have 18 new recruits who will be -- who will finish up their nine-month training cycle, and then they will come in to join and be able to count towards minimum staffing requirements. that should bring it down to another 13,000. and then finally, the very last slide shows in custody and out of custody population that has overall run by about 17% since the beginning of 2015. the mix between incustody and out of -- in-custody and out of custody is about 50/50.

>> supervisor cohen: supervisor sheehy? >> do you want an explanation of that? >> supervisor sheehy: no. i know when i first started here, i would get the jail stats, and there would be almost 1,300 people every monday into tuesday. last year, people weren't sentenced to three or four nights in jail just being arrested on thursday or friday. so there hasn't been some impact on the in-custody population, in terms of smoothing out? >> i think it's had impact. some of the things have impacted. there's a court decision rece

recently. the humphrey decision is basically everyone gets bail, and the judges are required to find a bail amount that somebody can pay if somebody wants to be let out on bail. so what has happened now is in many instances, the court is -- even though the pretrial risk assessment may recommend do not release, and that is a recommendation to the trial judge, they may at that point, instead of offering bail, they may still release them, but now they're utilizing electronic monitoring more, and they're releasing them. so we do the electronic monitoring, and that's increased quite a bit in the last few weeks. the decision just came out towards the end of february. >> supervisor sheehy: so you're responsible for electronic monitoring? >> yes. >> supervisor sheehy: once they're supposed to -- like, for parole, then it egos -- goes to

adult probation? >> yes. and sometimes instead of getting new charges filed on a new offense, the district attorney is recommending new charges. there's a hearing recommended about the way everything works because i hear you talking about car break-ins. i have lived here all my life. that's certainly a concern. i hear about the number of people in jail and who's in jail and who's getting out. i think it's very important to have the full context of everything that's going on, including citations being issued versus the ones we issue while someone is in jail, versus what's happening to court cases, how they're being charged,

possibly and how long people are staying in our jails waiting. i have people in my jail for six or seven years waiting final adjudication. it's a county jail. those kinds of things, i think, all play into the bigger picture of the criminal justice system. >> supervisor sheehy: yeah. it would be happy to call a hearing on that. and maybe i can put morty in my office with you. >> right. >> supervisor sheehy: i also have concerns about resources because it's probably a different set of resources you need to really do effective electronic monitoring. >> well, actually, last year, the mayor's office did increase this. this is part of the reconditioning recommendation. they gave us four positions to help us with doing the electronic monitoring so we could do it 24 hours a day. we're getting ready to ramp that up in the next few weeks. in the meantime, we're finding a lot more people violating the

electronic monitoring, and we're bringing people back for this reason. >> supervisor sheehy: do you have the resources to do that? >> i think that this is something we're going to be looking at carefully as we go forward. it's not clear if the humphrey decision will stand. it's not clear how this will all play out yet. i think right now we're being conservative about our needs, but we do anticipate that if this does continue, we may need more resources, but right now, i think that we've got the amount of money in our budget that we can use for this. >> supervisor sheehy: great. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: colleagues, any other questions? supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: thank you. i want to thank you for participating in the purchasing policy. -- >> i'm sorry. i couldn't hear you. >> supervisor fewer: for the purchasing policy, for being wonderful partners in that, but i wanted