a module of training to address the issues that we have seen, including those issues that you just raised. in progress, the training is almost at a point where we are excited to -- pointed out. that is not just a result of this particular incident, but incidents that have happened since then. we saw a need to -- >> this is not the only training this is developed -- so there's been new offerings in training already that have been put out there in different places. cpt, you know, which is when officers recertify. there is training related to use of force policies in time and space and de-escalation and tactical communications. that has all been put in place. but the chief has been working with the training division to put together this more comprehensive training that will

include all these concepts with more of a state-of-the-art emphasis. >> when i have sat in on a firearm discharge review i do but against a particular incident, even if you find it an policy or not an policy, they will sometimes make recommendations for the particular officer. i sent them to the shooting range and i sent them to another class and i had them repeat this , and i don't see anything in here about the officers, having to review and get training on time and distance that was in place at the time. or crowd control, or, you know, waiting for a sergeant to arrive at the scene. my understanding was there was no sergeants. i'm wondering in this case, was there any follow-up training afterwards or anytime in between for these officers? >> the officers did have initial training immediately after.

but they haven't had the benefit of the new training. >> when you look at these, sometimes you see in the reports that the shooting was in policy but you find other things to be out of policy when he violated a d.g.o. or a bulletin. i'm wondering, did anyone review whether there was an out of policy and terms of the bulletin that was in place or anything like that? no? ok. not these officers. i take that back. >> just to remind everyone, the reason why it is here is to update or the report on whether the shooting was in or out of policy and getting into the discipline that runs the risk for the city. >> so, sometimes -- >> the concept that was expressed in the bulletin you are talking about which was titled lawful, but all full, was initially presented -- was

affiliated with policy, another bulletin that was issued in 2013 , with regards to time and space, with respect to subjects in a mental crisis who are armed and having a supervisor respond. in a situation that is static. the d.a. may have found, in their determination looking at video, they didn't feel that anyone was threatened. the question is, what was the perception of the officers? what was the action of the officers? the officers attempted to contain a subject of a violent assault. it is not all the all the oxen free. he does not get to leave. you don't get to walk out and go he stabs somebody.

several of the officers believe that he had killed someone. he was not allowed to leave. in an area that was highly congested by people. the officers used the concepts of time and space, it was determined, to the degree that they had time and space. but when the subject goes on in assault and is trying to leave the perimeter back exposing the public to greater risk, that becomes a problem. >> thank you for that. i guess, lets me back up. the officers had misinformation. nobody died. it is concerning. if 911 is giving improper or -- let me finish. you made me lose my train of thought. sorry. i'm sorry you interrupted me. you said there was misinformation and the fact that 25 bullets were shot with children standing half a block

away at the bus stop. these are concerning things. i don't know if those are part and parcel of the overall review looking at it. >> yes, ma'am. they are. one of the things that we look at is why each officer started the fire, why each officer fired and why each officer stopped firing when they stopped firing. what they responded to and what they reacted to. and if i give you the impression that they had misinformation from 911, they had the impression based on a couple of the officers that stated in subsequent interviews, they understood that the person had gone to the hospital had had expired. how they came to the conclusion was based on the nature of the injuries. it was a neck injury. >> the last question i have then -- i think we've talked about this before, chief, when officers fire at one time. or is this something we are still addressing in terms of looking into the psychological aspect of it and the training

aspect of it. i don't know how to do this. i think the chief told us one officer with a gun and one behind him with support or something. i don't know. the others -- yeah. they stand down unless they have to. have we address that? >> that speaks to some of the training that we want to evolve to get better at. and part of what you just read or asked about with some of the training that we are moving to, we hope to address some of those issues. we are revamping some of that training. >> this last sentence is forming arrested teams. what does that mean? i don't know what that means. >> a scene is -- we had a scene with officers, supervisor, it doesn't have to be a supervisor, but if you are making a tactical plan, often times you will assign officers to be the arrest team. if someone has to be handcuffed

and taken into custody, you want a preplanned to know that may be these two officers or this one officer of these three officers will have that task. so when you assign tasks, it makes for a more coordinated operation. that is the f.b.i. deal. everyone should have that. sometimes you don't have time to do that. time allows and you have the presence to do that, you want to have a designated task to take care of whatever situation comes with that circumstance. >> thank you. >> director henderson. >> a lot of these issues that you're talking about are some of the things that we mentioned before in the sparks report when we presented changes that we want to see in the fdrb. but let's speak to some of the questions that where you -- that were you were raising. the chief and i have been meeting for the past month or two months. a little over a month, since the sparks report on a lot of the specific issues on expanding

both the scope and fdr b. and the broader collaboration, specifically with the d.p.a. ticket almost doesn't make sense to have us there adds in the room, merely asking questions when we have our own independent investigation going on about some of the same exact cases where we have either conflicting or collaborative evidence that we can be presenting as well. we are having conversations now starting immediately, both on how we can expand our role to present other information to that commission as they meet, and both to have better collaboration. one of the problems we are having in the past was that the review boards would come up and we either had completed an investigation, had not completed it or there was not collaboration in between the agencies. so i know that my chief and the chief's chief have been meeting to rule that out sooner rather than later. you will start seeing an update

on this process, sooner rather than later. i wanted to articulate that. >> have you ever witnessed don't have witnesses talk to your department and not talk to the internal affairs or the police department? >> yes. >> how do you reconcile that information not being in front of the fdrb at the time? >> we have not been able to reconcile its. that is exactly the reason why we want to be able to present our information as well as the information that the department is presenting to itself. i know that i've been there in the past with other members on the commission where we have -- again, we don't get to vote. we are allowed to ask questions. but we are expanding. by the way, i think someone mentioned it earlier. these are the specific recommendations that were made in the d.o.j. report as well. we are all trying to be consistent and move towards that model, but not waiting for outside input about what needs to be done and how it needs to be done. >> thank you.

>> you never know. i will aim for that. just a follow-up. i think that we said it. this was an incident, regardless of what is in policy are not in policy, whether it is criminal or not criminal, that it did not help the department to did not help the city. so i think what we are concerned about is the commission -- as a commission, is doing anything that we can to ensure it doesn't happen in the future. it sounds like the department has taken some steps. it sounds like the new d.g.o. is in effect and we have done some new training. can i ask, do you believe, under this new d.g.o., and all of the changes since then, that if this happened today, would this be in policy? >> i can't say. i don't know.

i don't like taking a hypothetical. >> is not hypothetical. it's a policy and a set of actions. >> i don't know. >> i'm sorry? >> i don't know. >> let me ask you this. as investigators as -- and as members of the department, would you be satisfied, after all these changes that have been made if you saw this happen again? >> no. >> nobody was satisfied that it happened at all. >> satisfied the department had done its best job that it does not happen again? >> again, nobody was satisfied. i understand what you are saying every o.i.s. is an opportunity to learn to get better. that one in particular, gave us a lot of pause and a lot to get better at. i think we have done some things to get better and i think

there's more we can do to get better. i think the chief has done some things recently that really are going to take us in another direction. you know, i couldn't possibly say i would be happy no matter what the outcome was. i grew up in this city. this affected the city i grew up in. no matter what, in policy, legal action, whatever. now, later, before. i would not be satisfied with that. >> thank you, sergeant. thank you for answering my questions. i know i was probing a little bit beyond the scope of the agenda.

>> please call the next presentation. >> next we have a commander on the device. >> good evening. >> on the communication device

audit. >> good evening. commissioners, chief scott. director henderson. thank you for leaving during my presentation. [laughter] >> i am here to present the second quarter, 2018 bias audit which we do on electronic devices. first off, the audits are limited to devices that the department owns, not personal phones, computers, et cetera. we get that question a lot. we do pick up any transmissions that come from private devices onto department devices and vice versa. we can get one end of a conversation from a private device. all members of the department are aware of the communications policies and they fall under d.g.o. it guides the team that looks at these. there's three systems that are audited. level two which is california law.

there is a communication system. department e-mails and text messaging via department issued cell phones. i will explain how each one of these works. i know the report came out and i will briefly touch on the reports and try to head off any questions. there's a lot of spikes and i usually have to explain these. first, there was a program established that searches all entries made into the system using an established word list. the audit process is passive in nature and runs continuously. if a member uses one of the identified words, a hit is generated and automatically set to ied personnel via level two. each hit is printed, scans, and saved to a file and the analyse every hitch throughout the week. those determined to be potentially biased are immediately investigated.

for the second quarter results, specifically to the level two audit process, it has been fully operational since december 2016. there were 35 hits returned and analysed and then were determined to be potentially biased. the department e-mail system. all e-mails are sent and received internally and externally through the department server and are audited using an established word list. the audit process is also passive in nature. given e-mail contains one of the identified words on the list, it is generated and automated -- automatically sent via an e-mail address exclusively used for the audit process. those e-mails are saved and maintained on the server. the staff analyse is every hit, and those determined to be potentially biased are investigated. that is an immediate investigation. this is a little different than the other two.

their automatic hits. these are researched on a monthly basis going back and they are retained even farther back. every 30 days, a search is done of the text using the established word list. additional terms can be used as well. parameters allow staff to search department systems for historical texts if necessary. for data not available on local systems, a cellular provider will be contacted to determine if additional information access on their servers. the staff analyse this every hitch to determine context in which the term was used. those hits determined to be potentially biased are investigated. all false positives are saved by at&t in this particular. we had 70 hits returned and analysed big number determined. so to go over a couple of the numbers, if i can help clarify, generally, the level to, the way it works as it will pick out any set or string of words even if it is contained in another words

that is generally where we get hits. i usually use the example of the word stick, and sticker. if the word is derogatory as stick but sticker is just a word that everybody uses and you don't use it that way, if stick comes up, it hits, even though it is sticker. the word itself was not that bad as far as the department e-mail system, what we really have tried to do is actually look more in context pick so we have a lot more innocuous words in it innocuous words and e-mails, when they are in paragraphs and in sentences, we can delve a little farther. if we have a word that is in that case, innocuous but if i use it in a sentence toward someone or something, then we can obviously see that the word itself is not innocuous. the problem with this word, and we've had it twice as it is very common and is used by everybody

sitting at the day is at least 20 times a month and we look at that context and that is where we get a spike. also of note, without giving away the list, which we don't do , june happens to be pride month. so everything leading up into pride month, there are terms that people will probably not use in their everyday life but are used for the community during pride month to take back those words. when e-mails come in about events, they are on our e-mail servers and things pop up. lastly, the text is the biggest one we have. it is words that pop up and officers do have confidential informants. sometimes their informants use colourful language in reporting things and i'm using that as an example. the word is actually not a word we would use. however, it has not asked sending the word. we are getting it from a member

of the public. we have also had hate crimes where people have written in and that e-mail or text has travelled in with a graffiti word, et cetera. that explains why you see a lot of hits on some of these areas. and then i will make my offer because i always make it. if you want to see the list, we have had pra his and we do not give it out as an investigative technique. we don't want everybody taking guesses. they are probably pretty close. if you want to see how the system works, we can bring you to i.a. and show you the portals and things like that. >> i know that there were thieves hits and commander walsh does speak to me in advance and told me what that was. we don't want to give up that information for anybody to know but i have shared with the commissioners what those two words were. >> so i'm just looking, you have 5,611 hits in the second quarter and 4,963 was for one word? >> one word. >> ok.

you will take that word off the list now? >> we are. i think i looked at second quarter last year and it was our biggest spike. i think between pride and pride events and what we did similarly with this particular word, it was kind of the same time. last year and this year are kinda very similar. >> ok. that was all i had. thank you. >> anything further? thank you for heading this off and thank you for doing this. we don't want the officers to know what these words are. at the commission, you are free to go see what the words are. i think commander walsh has intellectual intellectual-property certificate for them. >> one other thing, we do constantly update these. when we don't see words, and as we grow older, i have made this statement before. we do use things like urban dictionary to keep up with words that we sometimes wouldn't know that would be pejorative his are

derogatory. the list is always evolving and things are on. we do save all the lists. there is a historical context so that we are not just using words from one we all watched archie bunker. [laughter] >> i was corrected by my kids. >> thank you. if i may just add, there are four department of justice recommendations that speak directly to this audit. so -- as we report on the progress of the department of justice recommendation, what we plan to start to do is point those things out to the commission on the public that we are actually putting a lot of these measures in place. is important for the public to know that. >> thank you. >> thank you, commander. >> thank you. >> next we have commander david

lazar he will talk about the state -- safe place initiative and then he has an update regarding the homeless initiative. before he speaks, i would like to point out again, when you get to the homeless initiative part and give us the update and the presentation, that speaks directly to for very involved d.o.j. recommendations, as it relates to how we address the whole homeless issue in the city i think commander lazar process presentation should give the commission and the public a lot of insight on how we are collaborating with our partners in government and city partnerships on the homeless issues. and we are really happy with the progress on these recommendations in this regard. >> thank you, keith. commissioners, members of the department, members of the public, i am from the community engagement division.

i have two presentations to make this evening. looking at the agenda, we will start with a safe place program. i will briefly go over what that is followed by what the chief is mentioning. our work with the healthy streets operation centre. if you will remember, several months ago, i came before the commission to talk about our work with a safe place program. back then, we were doing research and looking into what seattle was doing and trying to see how it would fit in our city , what the benefits are. thanks to the work of the acting captain and specifically the program manager, we have a solid plan that we are ready to put in place. within the next four weeks or so with your pocket and this powerpoint, i would skip over to the next page. just a reminder about this great program happening in seattle, which will soon happen here, in seattle, they have had a safe place program together by

seattle p.d., and basically it was focused on the lgbt community and giving the community, in seattle, an opportunity to have a safe place to go if they felt threatened or harassed or they needed somewhere to go where they needed police services. they could go in any business that had the sign, et cetera. looking at that, back in 2013, we implemented a very similar program. we had the design, as you see, similar to what seattle had. we had a department bulletin and essentially it was put up in police stations. sent a message to the community that as a person in the lgbt community, you can go to a police station, feel comfortable in doing so and report crime. we are there to help individuals that is really the concepts that we have had over the last five plus years. in terms of what we are looking at now with a safe place program and how it will work in san francisco, we will have a liaison officer of the community

engagement division who will monitor the program. restarting in a couple stations and moving at citywide. we will have a great messaging. we will market this out in as many ways as possible, through social media after the captain put just newsletters and press conferences and every way we could possibly can to the public to say, if you are travelling in san francisco and you see our sign, feel free to go into that business or school or establishment and they will help you and you can report crime. you can ask for the police. we will have a simple thanks to the work of lieutenant williams and her team who put together a great poster and a great design that you will see shortly. it is a u.v. sticker, and you be protected so does not get worn out from the sun. 4 inches by 6 inches to be put up on windows. the other part of this is training to make sure that not only every police officer is trained in the safe place program but our dispatchers are prepared to receive calls from

businesses you may identify themselves as a safe place location. we make sure the department of emergency management is up to speed as to what we are doing there peerk to be having few goals. the first goal i already briefly mentions. goal number 1 is for individuals , the person who feels like someone is following them pack or they are on the street and they don't feel safe for some reason, or they've had an altercation with an individual, it gives them a place to go and they know they can go there safely. we know there's been times where the public has walked into a business just to be told, no, not to your. you have to leave our business. in order to prevent that, that is our goal is to have a place people can go. number 2 is rolling this out. we will start at bayview and mission. we could easily roll this out. i think, citywide but we will want to make sure that our policy and our program and our procedures and our strategy is sound. by doing so, we will start at

the first two stations at bayview and mission. we will partner with a banking institution, but we also have support from target to help us financially with this. those recommendations will come before you for approval, financially. phase two is to do outreach in the community. c.b.o. his. phase three is to outreach to merchant groups. phase four is to the school district and phase five is to interfaith associations and faith-based organizations to make sure that everyone in the community has an opportunity to participate in the program. [please stand by]

just having a conference call doesn't really satisfy that on going collaboration and discuss about our issues in san

francisco. as you know, there's about 4,000 homeless individuals unsheltered that are throughout our city. we all know it's a poverty issue, a mental i will us in il. there are issues that cause the homelessness situation in our city. and so, with the chief's vision on us doing a better job, we had discussions around the holidays last year and based on our discussions, the vision of the mayor and which has been currently very supported by mayor breed, this continued effort we came up with healthy streets. on january 16th of this year, we started it off. i'll just give you a brief overview of what it means when we say healthy streets operation center or for short we call it h-shock. it was developed to better coordinate the many city agencies involved in addressing homelessness and the unhealthy streets behavior. it's structured as a unified

command and they direct, plan and coordinate responses to street behaviors and homelessness. if you think about that incident command system model that goes on nation wide, when you have an emergency, if you had a disaster or an earthquake or a major fire or major event in our city, it's standing up a command post real time and having face-to-face conversations with other partners to deal with that issue. so we start on the january 16th. and it really, in 2017, prior to the roll out of the hsoc, the mission had 268 encampments and we would meet for 10 or 10 minutes every morning to talk about the plan. that has something to do with how the january 16th roll out of hsoc happened. when we saw in 2016 this collaboration was working and

the decision was to make it department wide. this is where hsoc is based. the healthy streets operation center mission is to provide a unified and coordinated city services in response to unsheltered persons experiencing homelessness. our thought is we lead with compassion. we emphasize with the whole community. there's residents and businesses and merchants that have issues as to what is going on with the homelessness. we also have compassion for the homeless who need services and they need shelter and they need supportive housing, things of that nature. we believe that everyone can change and that safe and clean streets can be maintained. there are seven agencies that are involved in the healthy streets operation center. so you have the apartment of homelessness and support of housing at the table every day and them their homeless outreach team. we have the department of public-health and now we have a full-time department of public-health worker at hsoc coordinating individuals as we bring them names. they're working to get people

drug treatment and mental illness treatment, et cetera. the police department, the chief's vision is that the sfpd lead the effort at the healthy streets operation center. we're not the lead to deal with homelessness. we're the lead to be organized to get everyone together and to facilitate the daily meetings, things of that nature. public works for the clean up. the controllers' office is involved because they are measuring success. what is success and what are your goals and are you meeting your goals and what are the statistics and we have great success revamping 311 and they have been great in hosting us and both director cronnenburg and carole devoting staff to help us work together. in terms of 311, i just want to mention a couple of things. number one is there are 200 to

250 calls a day that come over 311 city wide regarding encampments throughout the city. between august 25th and august 31st, there were reported 1,285 calls for service people in encampments. the primary areas called are the mission and civic center. last week we trained our officers and loaded on their smart phones. now officers, the homeless outreach officers on patrol are clearing 311 complaints that are experiencing when they're cleaning up encampments from their phones. we're using technology to clean it up and what is exciting is not we have revamped the 311 system starting august 8th where all the encampment calls are coming to the healthy streets operation center and we're triaging them and making determinations who should respond. should it be public works or the police department and we're

working to have a better response time and be more responsive to the 311 complaints and i know the community quite often explains about them. >> i live near golden gate park. you don't get calls for golden gate park? they certainly have a lot of campers parked outside and a lot of homeless there? i'm just wondering? i'm surprised to hear submission and civic center. >> there are not a lot of calls from golden gate park and that surrounding area to 311 regarding encampments. some issues are r.v.s which we're addressing now. the overwhelming majority are mission, southern, tenderloin. >> are the 9-1-1 calls regarding this issue going to be forwarded to the 311 or are you going to give us a net to watch those as well? >> when we started hsoc, the disconnect we saw was that there were two paths to call in a homeless complaint. you can either call 9-1-1, which

would get forwarded to the non emergency and the police would respond and we would respond in a silo or use 311 and that would go to public works and they would respond kind of in a sighh low and there could be the same complaint and both agency didn't know that both agencies had a call pending. that was the disconnect. the majority of calls went to public works but there was a person in the tent. there was issues with all of that. what we have been able to do from january 16th to the present is discourage the community from calling the police. having the dispatchers refer everyone who calls over to 311 and then we have that one list now starting in august where we get all of them city wide and we coordinate off that one list. it's really improved the way that we deliver service this is san francisco. as a result of thinking that through. it took us several months to think it through. the other thing i'd like to

mention is that in the healthy streets operation center with all of those agencies, you have a police dispatcher, public works and so that in real time that coordination is taking place. if you need a truck or you need an outreach worker, it's all happening together and then the officers that are dedicated to this program, are all on one radio channel working with one dispatcher and everything has been completely consolidated. >> will the homeless part of it do they have the list of -- i think they're developing a list of the people on the streets and it's the ones that need the most care? will they have the list with them? >> that communication happens daily. the public-health employee at the healthy streets operation center is compiling a list with the high e.m.s. users from and the officers when they come in they'll provide a list. so there's a full-time employee making a priority and because of

all the laws related to that it's one way. we give all the information to public-health and behind closed doors they work on ways to help people and figure out who needs the treatment and when. it's a long list but we're having the conversation every day. >> is glide also included in this conversation? or the felt on institute. when i was part the lead program, that was sort of the two main agencies that would a arrive on scene when the officers called and would connect immediately with the individual to engage them in services. find them housing and other opportunities so that they wouldn't be taken to jail. >> so the answer is yes. all the non profits and the providers the city that are related to homelessness are connected to us at the healthy streets operations center through the department of homelessness in support of

housing, which has the homeless outreach team and they're connected to the service providers. there's a whole set of other service providers through public-health. what we are moving towards now is to really figure out how we can connect with all the service providers in the fields in real time. so for example, glide or having the crisis intervention team through public-health walk with the homeless outreach officers in u.n. plaza or civic center or for example, we're working on a plan for the castro so that the homeless outreach team is partnered with the officer at night so that it interact with the homeless and provide services in lieu of enforcement. we're connected with everyone one way or another and have access to everyone. on this next slide, i mentioned the incident command system. essentially everyone has a role and responsibility. i service the incident commander. we have an operation section chief which is lieutenant sam

crist who is working on developing strategies. where do we need to be. where are we doing encampment clean ups. we have a planning section chief at 9:30 and 2:30 in the afternoon. we have an all-hands conversation about what is our mission for today. where do we need to be? what's our plan for the next few days? we have the break out meetings twice a day. we have operation support as public safety fire. operation suppose sort, we're just are developing an incident action plan every week for the monitoring of the cases. we have a district attorney assigned to us from the district attorney's office. knowing that prosecution is a last resort has been doing prosecution with the hopes that the prosecution results in services because we all agree that putting people in jail and leaving them there will not solve our homelessness issue.

we have to get people help. we're coming up with tools. we're happy about. d.a. office helping us. we have our public rep and a liaison officer that works with outside entities who want to visit and ask questions. we have three main goals. goal number one, so what are our goals for the healthy streets. the san francisco streets are safe and clean is goal number one. reducing incidents leading to service requests, drug related criminal activity, eliminating the encampments, et cetera. that's goal one. we have strategies based behind goal number one. goal two is to meet the shelter and service needs of individuals on the streets. because although we're cleaning up encampments is it's how we're helping people connect to the navigation center, to the shelter and how we can get an individual off our streets and into the supportive housing. it's the main goal for hsoc

while we're cleaning things up. goal three is establishing a unified city response to homelessness and street behavior and we have strategies behind that as i mentioned about dispatch and our communications and our streamlining of 3-1-1. i do want to mention that seattle had something similar. the seed was planted last year when we heard that seattle had something similar to what we're doing here in san francisco. what i have since learned, after attending conferences and speaking with others in other agencies is that seattle has shut their operation down. los angeles has come to look at what we're doing in san francisco. last week i went to a conference. austin wants to look at what we're doing. portland wants to look at what we're doing. in our opinion right now, the healthy streets operation center concept is really a best practices in collaboration in dealing with this for the first time in as long as i can

remember us dealing with this particular topic. on the next page it's just something that reiterated what i talked about before in terms of 3-1-1 call versus a 9-1-1 call and everything is triage. we're triaging 250 calls every day. that's working very well. on the next slide, i just want to mention what the staffing looks like. in the san francisco police department, we have 40 homeless outreach officers assigned to the 10 district stations. when we started in january 16th, we've put a lot of resources into this effort. we started in january of 2016, with the healthy streets operation center we opened it from 7:00 to 3:00 monday through friday. we have a staff, a lieutenant and inspectors and couple of officers and some additional non sworn staff. we have back then they had a team of a sergeant and six officers that assist with encampment resolutions. we had a meeting with our

officers every wednesday and we triage calls. when we first started, we started soft. what we found quickly in discussions with the chief and as we evaluated this is that we do a lot of work on friday at 3:00 but then on monday morning, we start all over again. thanks to the chief, we opened this on january 28th to be seven days a week and it's now 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. seven days a week on going collaboration and we're making phone calls at 10:00 at night on a sunday saying som come out, let's resoe this issue and it's working. now we have four sergeant and 24 officers both assigned to the day shift and swing shift. we focus on encampment resolution. we meet with 60 police officers all homeless outreach officers city wide once a week on a

wednesday. we bring them into one room and give them training for 30 minutes. we tell our officers you are the resource to all the other officers in the department and so we're teaching them about encampment resolution, about mental illness, medical conditions, substance abuse treatment and yesterday we trained a group of officers on narcan because we're saving lives with narcan. 30 something saves already. we're giving our officers specialized training to deal with the homeless population in our city every week. >> i saw narcan officers using it at pride. >> yes. >> people collapsed on the street. >> we're using narcan. eighty dollars a bottle and we're arming it up with narcan and it's working and we're excited about that. we schedule one large operation a week and the other thing i want to mention to you that is really important is in terms of encampment resolution how we're

doing things differently is we have a larger encampment, instead of officers going out and forcing the law and taking the tent and having public works clean up, we collaborate with the department of homelessness in support of housing and say let's give it two weeks. send your team out. try to get people placed and get them in the shelter and the navigation center. and we turn to public-health and we say, can you please have a health fair? bring the health fair out, public works does a great job with the health fair and they get them early in the morning and help them with their drug overdoses and let everybody know in two weeks on this date and time we're coming. there's no secrets. just let them know we're coming and that works. for example, just today, at 15te people into navigation prior to cleaning up the area. within 24 hours of setting the plan, five people were put into navigation before we went there to clean up.

that is really working a little bit about statistics because we like to give you numbers. in august, the 24 officers assigned to the healthy streets operation center responded to 853 calls for service, they self-initiated 127 calls as well so that nearly 1,000 interactions with homeless individuals, 1,000 individuals, and as a result we had 17 arrests which is mainly for warrants. we issued 100 citations. we admonished 650 people. we referred 104 individuals to the hot team. we made 243 notifications to public works. we got 12 individuals into navigation and we made 28 referrals to public-health. that's the work just this august that we did this last month. the team assigned a healthy streets operation center. as i conclude just a couple more things i'd like to mention.

i mentioned about the trainingment officers are receiving. great training on dealing with the homeless population. our rule is that you have to be crisis intervention team trained in order to be on these teams. the full 40 hours. we just added our 24 officers to our healthy streets and a few are not trained so they're in the next class and they are making these officers the top priority to get into the crisis intervention team training so we're excited about that. and then i may have mentioned customer service call backs. one of the things we're doing we've never done before is on every call for service we steve from the public if we have a name and a phone number we call them back. hi, this is san francisco police department and we want to let you know this is our plan and this is what our city strategy is is there more information you have, et cetera. the public has been grateful for getting the call backs from us.

a couple more things. so we're doing encampment resolutions and we're doing it for several reasons. our main reason is we're concerned about public safety and we're concerned about heath. san diego had a outbreak and we're concerned about that happening in our city. there's been sexual assaults, there's stolen property and a lot of issues happening with the encampments. we feel as a city, let's clean up the encampment and get someone into navigation and help them in a collaborative effort. we're work ong reencampment so, one of the things the chief point the out is we should have five zones. we have our whole city but let's focus initially on the castro and civic center. the mission, shell place square. for the last nine months, we've been working and focused into those areas and then we're finding now that as a result of some displacement, we've moved to other areas like in the

northern district and marine and other areas we're seeing individuals show up and we're extending help in that area as well. we're focused on zones and we're all over the city. and the last statistics i'd like to share with you is that two years ago there was 1200 encampments in san francisco. as of the end of june, we were down to 568. i would guess that we're below 500 at this point. we had 268 in the mission and we're down to 40 in the mission at this point. there are no encampments that have more than 15 people anymore. there are no more greater than 20 structures and back in june we had three that had between six and 19 tents. i would say now we would be hard-pressed to find more than one or two of those. that concludes my presentation.

>> thank you, very much, commander. i was on the commission when this started to formulate. we all recognize the need to be collaborative and many members of the public said the police department should not be responding to homeless calls. i agree. we're there for protection. we bolster these teams. i want to thank mayor breed and mayor lee for really taking this seriously. people are concerned about the quality of life in san francisco. it affects the business of tourism. we're all hearing the same thing. from the hotel owners to the merchants and yes, you have caused some of the hardcore homeless to spread out into other neighborhoods. hopefully there's a plan to handle those stragglers who don't want to deal with the services you are offering. those are important things. this is great. you've done a great job and you are the right person to do this. you never give up. again, i have seen a little bit

of a difference. i also think at some point i'm glad the d.a. is on board because i've talked to many folks, i mean, when the issue was bad when i was a d.a., we helped a lot of people with 11.550 because it put people off the street and into recovery because i know that the statute has changed a bit, but do we have officers that are 11.550 certified in the department that some people just need to be taken off the street to be cleaned up. do we have them? >> we do but more importantly, more specifically, we're grateful for our partnership with the department of public-health that has the lead program. the law enforcement assisted diversion program. in lieu of booking, we tell the person, go to the program and so your case doesn't get charged or if you don't go your case gets charged. >> are you successful with that? >> it's modeled after the seattle police department which was successful and has been

branching out through out ought states. in san francisco, we were given a three-year grant to do it. there were only 250 slots so after those slots had filled no other participants could participate in the program. it is a pilot program. hopefully the hope is it will be so successful like seattle, that we will we will be able to make it permanent and divert people into the program because there are only 250 slots for a three-year period which is not a lot when you think about it. and there are so many people out on the streets that are sort of being funneled through the jails because there aren't any other services available toe them. the public defenders office and the d.a. are all community members that have come to the table to make the program successful. >> that's great. thank you, i know you've been working on that. it's a delicate balance.

thank you for what you are doing and i appreciate it. >> thank you very much. >> i had two questions. and this is a great report and i agree it's a delicate issue because some people are saying we shouldn't be moving the camps. the fact we have a mobile command going out with the d.p.h. and the d.p.w. and even the d.a., i think that is commancommend able and it's impt for the police officers not to be the only first responders. i read in the paper today the appellate courts talked about and i wonder you i know more of the department and your partner per se and the hours and you guys midnight to 6:00 a.m. have you any issues