>> i am going to thank you very much for joining us and bringing oreo today. and i am go >> chair fewer: the meeting will come to order. this is the march 20, 2019 meeting of the full budget and

finance committee. i am sandra fewer, chairman of the committee. i am joined by supervisors catherine stefani and raphael mandelman, he is on his way. a our clerk is miss wong. i would like to thank matthew ignau and michael balthazar and sfg sfgovtv for televising this meeting. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: please silence all cell phones and electronic devices. copies speaker cards and documents to be submitted --

includinged apart of the file -- included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. >> chair fewer: thank you. madam clerk, please call the first item. [agenda item read]. >> chair fewer: this budget is up on the website for members of the public to review if you'd like. at the first meeting in april, this committee will be presented with a five-year financial plan as well as a ten-year capital plan. each of the remaining meetings in april will be focused on hearings on the board's budget priorities where we will hear departmental presentations on the current funding levels, partners, and programs. the intention of each of these hearings is to deepen our

understanding of the current status and funding gaps for each priority articulated by the board. on may 8, there will be a fourth budget hearing on priorities identified by two or more members of the board through the but jelt and legislative analyst's service process. my office will be scheduling hearings for key departments in june. colleagues, please let me know if there are any particular departments you'd like to hear from in may. more details will be coming in terms of the june schedule, and my office will be updating the calendar periodically with more details. the calendar is available at sfbos.org. the link is budget information. colleagues, any discussion? if not, i'd like to turn this

over to dan gonchar from the b.l.a. >> hi. my name is don gonchar, and i will be presenting a brief overview on the budget's priorities. a total of 13 priority issues were identified by supervisors through an informal survey, and we will be researching and reporting on five of the areas, including public safety, housing, homelessness, mental health and substance abuse, and on this slide, you'll see that i believe that the schedule is for public safety to be heard on the 10th, housing and homelessness to be heard on the 17th, and mental health and

substance abuse to be heard on the 24. for public safety, supervisors have identified car break-ins, additional police officer positions, restraining orders, security for muni operators, prevention and response measures, multilingual community ambassadors and officers as well as block safety groups. for homelessness, the issues -- the subissues that have been identified by supervisors include capacity for bed and housing units, including supportsive housing, including accelerating shelter beds that have already been made. for shelters, the subareas, subdivision, antidisplacement measures, specialized housing for seniors, people with disabilities and veterans and workforce housing. and finally for mental health

and substance abuse, supervisors have identified the following subissues that they'd like the budget and legislative analysts to look at treatment beds, 5150 holds, and an increase in psychiatrists and intensive case managers. in addition to the issues that we will be presenting on in april, three issues were mentioned by two or more supervisors, including clean and green streets, minute make up organization funding to assist nonprofits and small business support. it is my understanding that a hearing is scheduled for may 8 to discuss these other policy priorities and potentially additional. so i also wanted to give a little more detail on what you'll be seeing on reports

from our office. we'll be researching data in the area, including the status of available programs, historical spending of these programs, performance measures to measure how successful we've been in addressing them, and identification of funding impact opportunities, and i want to go into little more detail on each of these. we're going to be providing background on appropriate programs across the city, including the department that oversee the programs, as well as the program's history, goals, and service populations. for example, for homelessness, last year, we provided a background on the department of homelessness and supportive housings two major pilot programs, the on-line pilot and navigation system and coordinated entry. we also provided information on the homeless veterans prams, emergency services and exit

from homelessness programs. we'll also provide an overview of relative spending with an emphasis on overview and spending and a breakdown whenever possible. regarding performance measures, we will collect and summarize relevant official performance measures as reported by the controller's city performance unit, which is housed in the city service auditor's division. nod to that, we'll be speaking with departments about other potential performance measures that they collect but that are not reported by the controller's office or that may not readily available. and now i'll quickly go over the performance measures that we have preliminarily identified for each of the policy areas. the question came up last week about these, so for public safety, we've preliminarily

identified crime rates including property versus violent crime rates, property crime by type, as well as investigation clearance rates, response times to calls for service and temporary restraining order service completion rates. for housing, we've preliminarily identified the bay area housing regional needs assessment. in addition to that we'll be looking at the goaled outlined in the mayor's office of housing and community development housing plan and strategic plan, such as number of units created by type. none of units preserved or maintained, increased affordability of rental housing, increased opportunity for sustainable home ownership, increased accessibility of rental and home ownership and

increased rate of evictions. for home ownership we've identified the number of families receiving rental subsidy, the number of individuals leaving homelessness due to placement and permanent supportive housing. the number of individuals reunited with friends and family through home ward bound. the percent of case managed families in shelters that are placed in permanent or transitional housing, enter a treatment program or are reyouity intoed with family. the number of individuals some treatment or placement after one year, and the available of year-round single adult shelter beds and those used. for the last priority, mental health and substance abuse services. we've identified several targets and we'll be looking at them compared to what the

actual delivery has been, including the number of unique mental health clients in treatment, the percentage of new mental health clients that are homeless, total units of mental health services provided, mental health services patients under 19, the number of unique substance abuse clients in treatment, the percentage of homelessness clients among substance abuse treatment admissions, and the total units of substance abuse treatment services provided, and we'll also be looking at program measures, measures that are specific to programs, including crisis residential services, long-term care residential services and out patient services, and under substance abuse measures, we'll be looking at narcotic replacement treatment, residential services and outpatient services. and finally, in our reports, you'll be seeing identification of potential funding impact opportunities, and the way that

we're going to be going about this is we're going to be looking at high impact budget impact opportunities by soliciting ideas from department staff, reviewing recent audit recommendations that address these issues, and reviewing last year's budget priority reports for previously recommends enhancements that have not been under taken, and that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to take any questions or comments. >> chair fewer: yes, supervisor stefani. >> supervisor stefani: thank you, chair fewer. on the mental health and substance abuse slide, you said the following subissues have been identified by supervisors: outreach services, increased capacity of residential treatment beds for individuals under 5150 holds or who present a danger to themselves or others. and then, of course increase in psychiatrists and intensive case managers. i would like to add something else, which is not those -- not more beds for 5150 holds, but

beds like hummingbird place. how many more do we need? we had a hearing in public safety last week, focusing on what happened when people are no longer a danger to themselves or others under a 5150 hold, and a lot of times they're being released back onto the streets. we had a discussion of how many more beds we might get to help that population in a way that gets them the help that they need or gets them to the next level of services. so if we could focus on that, step-down beds like hummingbird place. and then, the other slide i was looking at, b.l.a. analysis, b.l.a. will conduct analysis on each priority, including status of established programs. and i'm wondering if you're going to look at an analysis with other counties. sometimes -- i don't know if you've done that before or if you do that when we ask you

specifically on certain subject matter. i think san francisco provides more units of supportive housing than any other city, really, i think. but maybe we can talk about that. i don't know if that would be helpful. i don't know -- i'd like to hear if my colleagues think that's helpful. and then, i had one more question. on the performance measures, on mental health substance abuse services, is last line, this total use of substance abuse treatment services provided, and i'm just wondering how many beds do we have for detox centers, and then, residential treatment and also s.l.e.s, sober living environments. i'm not sure -- there's a plethora of substance abuse treatment services here, and it would be really nice to know what we have in terms of all of that that targets substance

abuse. >> yes. so that and the other bullet points on this slide are roll ups of -- i believe they're roll ups of more detailed targets, and i don't have that in front of me right now, but i could provide that to you after the hearing. >> supervisor stefani: okay. thanks. that's all i have right now. thank you, chair fewer. >> chair fewer: thank you. supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you very much, and thank you for compiling all the analysis from the board of supervisors. i do have just a question on the housing slide. as we talked about the subissues that have been identified, and i know that some of these do address affordable housing, but there's not a bullet point or subissue that has been identified as strictly affordable housing. is there a reason for that or -- >> yeah, because i probably should have been a little bit

more descriptive in describing this priority area, but when we say housing, i think what we're really talking about is affordable housing. so we can refer to it as that going forward, but i think that all these fall under that umbrella. >> i think it's just very important to highlight so that we don't -- so that everyone knows and sees. >> thank you. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: yeah. i -- actually, i was going to make another point but i wanted to reiterate and echo what supervisor walton says housing could be how could we incentivize more treatment and production. i think that we really want to hone in on opportunities for subsidized housing, for stuff that is not necessarily the

market and the ways in which the public sector can assist, so i think it is important to talk about affordable housing. on sort of -- i guess on both public safety and mental health and substance abuse, i think something i'm interested in, but i'm not sure it's a measure that you're going to be looking at is cycling. so folks who are cycling in and out of jail, who are getting 5150's and getting 5150'ed over time, so i would be looking at success measures and looking going forward at interventions that we could use that -- part of public safety is reducing the lyinglihood that someone else who has experience with the criminal justice system has that experience again, and we know that a lot of people are having experiences like that over and over again, and so what are the budgetary interventions we can do that. related to that, it's not

explicitly called that, but it's something we have to figure out what to do in lieu of the jail. and i think having those conversations are related. and then, i do want to also echo supervisor stefani's notion that we might -- that it could be useful to look at how other -- san francisco leads in a whole lot of areas, but i'm not sure that we've cornered the market on good ideas, so maybe checking out how other counties may be dealing with things differently would be useful. and on the 5150's for me, very much, i'm looking at ways to measure our success in reducing the number of times the same person gets 5150'ed. >> chair fewer: thank you. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thank you, chair fewer. yeah. i just had a few points and -- or questions about housing --

or the affordable housing priority area, as well. and more specifically around whether we can include the distribution of affordable housing projects and -- and -- and dollars among the different districts in san francisco as another subissue. and -- yeah, and performance evaluation. and i'm just raising this because the board recently had received reports from the -- first from the planning department around the housing balance that -- the housing balance report. then, also, more recently from the mayor's office of housing, the housing preference programs. i think within the discussion of those reports among the board, i think it was really highlighted how certain districts, particularly on the west side, have not received the same level of investment in affordable housing programs as other districts, and -- and

when it comes to housing preferences and -- and the -- we've created a preference for -- a neighborhood preference for access to affordable housing, that really means that residents in my district and district four and other -- and i think more specifically district one and district seven did not have access to the housing preference because there were no preferable affordable housing projects in our district. so i guess the question is can you also include -- >> yeah, we can include those. >> supervisor mar: okay. thank you. >> chair fewer: thank you. i was also going to say about geographic cal equity in district funds, but housing homeless funds. and then, i would like to go to public safety and follow up on our discussion that we had some depth last year about the

civilianization of police positions. so as we're talking about additional police officers' positions, i'd like a report back on how many of those positions that had been civilianized. we had a great discussion about that last time. and then under public safety, recently, we know that we had eight fatalities already on our streets, that i would like to add to public safety and vision zero and our sfpd traffic unit. i think that it's timely now. we are not going to meet our vision zero goals unless we see what kind of investments are going to be made. i'm assuming that public safety will not just be sfpd but it will also include our district attorney's office. is that correct? >> i -- i don't believe that we are reporting on anything at the moment on the district attorney. >> chair fewer: i just think it's related, when we talk about how many arrests are made but we don't talk about how

many convictions are secured. i think public safety has been on the minds of many of our residents has also been on the minds, narcotic sales and what measures and resources have been put to that. i think last time in budget, there were six people in the narcotics unit, so an update on that. another thing, when supervisor mandelman talked about those recycling in and out, could i have that data by race. thank you very much. >> we will try to follow up on that. >> chair fewer: okay. that would be great. it will give us an idea i think who are these people cycling in and out. yeah, then, i think that's it. i would say -- you know, we don't want to load up your to do list, and i know that everyone probably has -- after

we look at this and maybe talk to our colleagues or our staff that we may have more suggestions on maybe help us to dive a little deeper with information. is there a deadline that we should get this information to you by? >> ideally, it would be -- >> chair fewer: yesterday? that was a joke. >> maybe a couple weeks before the hearing. >> chair fewer: okay. that's great. >> so with public safety, that's coming up pretty soon. >> chair fewer: so we should get that in by the end of next week maybe. >> yeah, without seeing a calendar in front of me, yeah, i think so. >> chair fewer: okay. that's great. anything else? oh, yes, supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thanks, chair fewer, and i want to echo chair fewer's comments on the civilianization. i'm interested, as well, to continue that conversation. i'm interested if you could look at the number of retirements in the police department, as well. and also, the academy classes

that we funded, whether or not they're full and how many people have graduated and are graduating just so we get a sense of our investment and if we're able to fill those academy classes, and just retirement, how many people are leaving the police force, as well. thanks. >> supervisor fewer: and i'd like to piggyback also on what supervisor stefani just said, i see the multilingual community ambassadors and community officers. i'd like to know the rath and ethnic background of those officers and their language capablities. because i think that that has been brought before the board before that we should be prioritizing the skills of these officers. okay. supervisor mar? nothing? nothing to add onto the list?

okay. thank you very much. okay. so i would like to continue this item -- oh, public comment. are there any members of the public that would like to comment on this issue? seeing none, public comment is now closed. golf golf. >> chair fewer: i'd like to make a motion to continue this to the call of the chair. could i have a second, please? seconded by supervisor mandelman, and we can take that without objection, and madam clerk, is there any other business before us today? >> clerk: no other business. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. meeting's adjourned.

- working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world-class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - our 28,000 city and county employees play an important role in making san francisco what it is today. - we provide residents and visitors with a wide array of services, such as improving city streets and parks, keeping communities safe, and driving buses and cable cars. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco

gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco.

>> ladies and gentleman, the chair has called the meeting to order. turn off your electronic devices. can you please rise for the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to republic for which it stands. >> good evening, everybody, this is the march 202,019th meeting of the san francisco police commission. we have a heavy closed session so i'll limit public comment to two minutes and we are ready for the first item. >> commissioner, i would like to call role. >> pair operato(roll call).

also present is chief william scott of the san francisco police department and standing in for paul henderson is sandra hawkins from the department of police accountability. >> good evening, everybody. and we are ready now for the first item on our agenda. line 1a, reports to the commission, discussion. chief's report. weekly crime trends, provide an overview of offenses occurring in san francisco. significant incidents, chief's report limited to a brief description of the specific incidents. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether the calendar any commission. provide a summary of planned activity and events occurring since the previous meeting. this will include a brief

overview of any unplanned events or activities occurring in san francisco having an impact on public safety. commission discussion on unplanned events and activities, the chief describes women be wie limited tor a future meeting and presentation of early intervention system, eis, fourth quarter, 2018 report. >> good evening, chief. >> good evening, president and commission and chief of staff. sarah hawkins, sorry. good evening, everybody. i'll start off today with the crime statistics' update. please report again overall violent crimes down 17% and total violent crimes -- i'm sorry part one violate crimes down 17% and total violent crimes down 19% and homicides are down and we had eight this time last year as opposed to

five last year to date. our last homicide reported over a month ago. four out of five homicide cases have been cleared. and respect to gun violence, we have had a 25% reduction in gun violence, so shooting incidents, anyway, 2018 over 2017. our property crime is also down. we're 17% down and property crime and this includes burglaries, motor vehicle thefts, including auto burglaries and arsons. auto burglaries are down 22% in 202018 compared to 2017 and we'e focusing on that issue in terms of focusing on the hot spots around the city where auto burglaries occur accordingly. overall, the crime picture is looking very pleasing and we

will keep our eye on it and keep the strategies going that we deploy. i have one significant case, a fraud case to report to the commission and public. there may be other victims out there, but this is a case of what is known as a pigeon drop scam in which the suspects usually offer some type of financial incentive for the victim to mingle the suspect's money with the victim's money. under the guise of they're able to bank it or unable to the money in the bank. usually that's the fraud and basically -- usua usually they y on elderly person and once the victims the money in the bag, there's an exchange of the bag and the victim usually finds out that there's a shredded paper or the like in the bag so we've had 11 of those crimes recently and

we were able to make an arrest on the suspects. multiple counts were filed on this case, so if there are any other victims that fall prey to this scam, please give us a call and we do believe that they're particularly are other victims out there and again, people looking to scam vulnerable population including the elderly. so that investigation has not concluded yet. although we have enough to file on some of the cases that we made arrests on. we had a busy week in terms of traffic. i know i appealed to the public last week to please pay attention to your driving, your walking, your bicycling activities. we had six major injuries, traffic collisions over the past week and the most serious of which was a accident or collision at the 500 block of john mere drive and skyline where a mother and her

14-year-old daughter were both struck by a vehicle. the driver stayed at the scene, was just a really unfortunate incident and the 14-year-old young lady is in critical condition with life-threatening injuries. so she's still in the hospital and i don't believe at this point she's regained consciousness. again, appeal to the public to please pay attention to the rules of road, particularly if you're bicycling, walking, and driving. it's really important that everybody shares a road and we've had a busy couple of weeks with traffic collisions so we are out enforcing the traffic codes of the city and the state and we will be out there. so we also will be out there to educate. and to make sure people understand what infractions tend to get people in harm's way in tems of traffic violations. >> i'm sorry, how old was the person, the hit-and-run?

>> which one? the person driving the car? >> no, the person who is unconscious. >> 14 years old. so it's a really unfortunate situation. we have a developers conference and the estimated is 12,000 and we're deployed to the area there will b.there will be a rally byr bernie sanders and we'll be deployed to assist the federal park police on that. don't have an idea right now of how many are attending but it's getting a lot of activity on social media so probably a pretty good attendance for that event. and those are the highlights, commissioners, for this week. i believe the next item -- if

you have any questions before i move on? >> any questions from the commissioners? i don't see any. >> i will present the next item on the chief's report and that's ththe early intervention proceeding. >> good evening. commissioners, chief scott and mr. henderson, i'm the sergeant over the eis unit and i'll be doing an overview of the fourth quarter eis system. i believe you should have it in front of you. is that correct? >> yes. >> it's on page 2 and you'll see, basically, an overview of the ten indicators that we do track. >> can you use that microphone?

thank you. >> better? the ten indicators we use for thest is systethe eis system ant activates an eis aflir alert fre system. on page 3, you'll see a flow chart of how the eis system works. it's activated in the system and reviewed by the eis unit. we look forward to see if it's a valid alert. if it is a valid alert, it's sent to the stations to be administered to the officer. they determine if there's a pattern of at-risk behaviour. if they determine there isn't one, they go over the alert with the officer themselves going over each item, each indicater and they send it back with a recommendation to close it. my office goes true the eis alerts to see if we agree with it. if we agree we'll close the alert and if not, we'll send it back and we ask that the captain of the station go through the

alert themselves and open up an intervention on that officer. to the right, you'll see the associated factors. they are not tract and aim. it's something the sergeants administering the alerts to look through while going through alerts. on page 4, there's a break down of the types of alerts. so fourth quarter 2018, alerts by type, we had 95 alerts triggered from three uses of force and dpa in six months and 34 with five indicators of six or more and two are four dpe in a 12-month period and six for a total of 193. members receiving alerts, we had 137 members that received at least one alert, ten members received three, 36 received two and 91 received one.

page 5 we'll talk about the interventions. so in 2015 we opened nine interventions and in 2014, we opened four and 2017, three and in 2018, we opened five currently that are still active. the five that are open currently, two are for failure to appear in court and three of them are for tactile communication. for the court ones, we do a lot of mentoring where the supervisors are keeping track of the court dates for the officers. they make sure that the calendars are filled out, both for the supervisor and for the officer to make sure they do attend court. for the technical communication, we do utilize a post certified class which is an online class on tactile communication as well as we send them to the academy to work with the academy staff on lose force. on useless force. page 6, we're looking at the alert which is the actual paper

that goes out with all ten indicators on it. so this one here is a breakdown where you can compare fourth quarter 2017 to fourth quarter 2018. and in 2018, we had 193. so the alerts did go down from last year. on page 7, you have fourth quarter alerts by station, mission station receiving 40 and park station received three and graphed there for you on the right. page 8, fourth quarter alerts by unit and it's fun to remember that alerts go with the officer and don't go true the station and if anyone officer get injured to the medical liaison unit it shows they have on this paper they have three alerts and that's because officers that are transferred, the alerts follow them.

page 9, these are the alerts by station trailing for the last 12 months and you have an overview of every month for 2018. we had a total of 791 alerts for the ten district stations. and on page 10, we are now switching to indicators and now you're looking at the indicators which are the ten uses of force, civil suits, ia complaints, you're looking at 2016, at the top there, compared to 2017 and 2018 broken down by quarter. below that we have broken down how many officers, how many sworn officers we have. so a you can see 2018 further quarter, 2,330 officers total. and then in 2018, a total of 3,582 indicators. and an indicater such as a use of force, even though it looks like a high number, that indicater is a use of force that could involve multiple officers at the same time.

so a use of force incident has multiple officers on scene. so that's multiple indicators. so that's why that number seems inflated. >> what page are you on? ten in. >> just went to page 11. we've got questions. where the numbers you were talking about on ten. >> you were saying some of the incidents, multiple officers and it's reflected with multiple reports and what exactly on the power point were you referring to. >> on page 10? so at the top on the left, you have 2016, 2017, 2018. so if you look at fourth quarter 2018, 742 indicators, that 742 indicators is not a scene or an incident. that is the number of indicators that were sent out. mission station had a big demonstration and force used by ten officers. that's one incident but that

would be ten indicaterrers. indicaters. so that's why you're seeing ten indicators from one incident. it could be an inflated number. >> let's just finish the report and we'll take all the questions. >> indicators over the three years for each indicater so you can see ois, o i.d. and all ten broken down for the last ten years and these are indicators, not incidents. so when you see 21 for 2018 and that's the number of officers involved and we had five ois in 2018 with 21 members involved in those five incidents. page 12, fourth quarter 20 indicators by station. >> you'll see central had 91 uses of forces, one iad

complaint for a total of 110 and then it's broken down by station underneath. page 13, indicators by station trailer forethe last 12 months. so this is the full month of 2018 for indicators by station. mission station having 475, park 122 and a total of 2,857. page 14, tout breaking down a little bit of the use of force. first quarter -- so at the top on the left, you have the use of force incidents for all four quarters. fourth quarter 2018, 301 incidents involving 505 members with the count of 354 subjects involved in the 301 incidents, for a total of 635 applications of force. and down below that, you're going to see it broken down with

fourth quarter for incidents, members, subjects and the applications of force and then we've compared it by total uses of force and then without pointing of a firearm. and then it's graphe graphed oue right for you. page 15 is applications of force for 2018. broken down by types of force, point of a firearm being 55% of the uses of force used at 1,489 spike strips at 13. and page 16 is a comparison by quarter. so if you look at pointing of a firearm for first quarter, there is 183 and the second quarter had 163 which is an 11% decrease and you look at the third quarter which is 144 which is a 12% decrease to the second quarter. and fourth quarter had 150, and

that's a 4% increase from the third quarter. that's how to read that slide. >> thank you. i have a couple of questions before i turn it over to other commissioners. i looked at this earlier today and there are numbers that just jump out at me and i'm wondering how the department deals with these numbers if you do it all. if you don't, i'd like to know why. page 6, we see that use of force is about 50% of all of the alerts. and on page 9, we see that the missing station has by far the most alerts for a station in a trailing 12-month period. i'm just wo wondering, what does the department do with numbers like this because they jump out at us. >> so mission station is usually the one that's always number one

because of their call lion. they have the most calls and based on the number of calls they're responding to equates over to the number of indicators that that station receives. >> so are the calls there, were they, for example, be twice bayview or twice the tenderloin to match pretty much the alerts? >> it varies allot. a lot. we did run the numbers comparing the stations as far as indicators this week and you just see a little bit of a scattered pattern no matter which station you're at. sometimes they're high, sometimes low and evens out to where this is your average. >> any way to analyze whether this is a cultural issue or are they inclined to use more force than one of the other stations? >> commissioner, so once we get the data, then it's what we do

with the data, so yes, there are things we look at in terms of the issues. the system won't tell us that, but you start to look at things like supervision and leadership and what the patterned an pattes are. there are multiple incidents where you have multiple officers which tends to spike the numbers a little bit. those are issues that we can draw down on and with d we do lt those things. it won't necessarily be something that will be apparent based on our system. but we can and we do look at those things. >> i would just think that any is report would trigger inquiry because it does raise numbers that you can't analyze or understand just on their face. >> right, exactly. you are absolutely right. and it's is incumbent upon us to take a look at what those

numbers mean in that context so there are cultural issues or maybe training issues that might impact these numbers one way or another in terms of doing business a different way or better way or more efficiently. that's up to the management or leadership to take this data in and take it to that next step. and i will add, too, that the commissioner, we are looking at other systems that give -- there are systems out there that gives additional capabilities to do a little bit more of that from a technical point of view than our system is capable of. so you have to human eyes on it but there are other systems out there we're considering and we just had a presentation today and we're going to follow up on that research to help us get better in this area. >> ok. vice president taylor. >> hi. i've got three questions.

first on slide ten, i'm looking at the able to the right. indicators per member. what is you does your zero reprt there? >> the number of officers that did not receive any type of indicators. so for instance, 2018, you're looking at fourth quarter, the bottom row. there were not 1,814 members out of the 2,330 that received no indicators at all. >> got it. >> then you have 370 that received one. >> ok, understood. now looking at slide 11, the next slide, there seems to be a pretty staggering increase in officer-involved shootings over the last three years. am i reading that correctly? so going from five in 2016 to -- or indicators. >> these are indicators. >> yes, i apologize been 21 in

2018. to what do you attribute that? >> so these are just the officers involved at the scene is what we're looking at here. so it's not a reflection of how many ois there were. >> ok. >> so for instance, there were five in 2018 and of those five, there were 21 officers involved in the five. >> where does it say there were five in 2018? it does not. i just know the numbers. so this is not an indication of the number of shootings. >> they are indicators for the purpose of eis and sending out alerts. >> do you know to fill in the blanks on in. >> you just know 2018? >> i know 2018. >> there were seven in 2017, commissioner, seven.

>> are you able to identify patterns with officers? if you have the same officers involved year after year, are you able to track that? is that part of the work being done? >> we are able to track that, yes. every time an alert goes out, the system tracks. so it's there permanently. why it was triggered for that particular summer. officer. if they tri trigger again, we kw to look back to see what the patterns are and a lot of times they're just for that quarter or particular period so the supervisors that are called back and ask questions, we're able to relay, they're prior alerts were for failure to appear in court. while this next one was because of use of force so that way they get a broader picture ba the br.

>> are you responding that's consistent throughout the department? so if it's the same officer year after year involved in incidents like these, is the supervisor's response in the mission consistent with the response in park? can you give us a sense of what happens when you have the same officers given these alerts, giving off these alerts. >> are you asking do officers get alerts, alert and alert each time? >> i'm making the assumption some officers have gotten alerts more than once and i want to know what the response is and if that response is consistent across the department. >> they look at a full year. so we look at a 365 calendar year and myself, i get an alert because i have three uses of force in three months in march. so i'm going to get an alet. my captain will get an alert back to march of 2018. so they'll be looking at march 2018 to march 2019.

and all of my indicators are listed on there. whether it's my use -- all ten indicators. so they're looking at the entire year of what my work has been. that they're supposed to research everything on that year. they look at all of the uses of force, pull the use of force reports and review them and look at the body camera of the incident. we send them the torque claims and civil suits and also the dpa complaints so they have a whole package of something to go through. they go through each alert and each indicater and make a decision on that. they're not investigating but looking at a picture and looking for a pattern of that risk behaviour with what's on that alert. >> i guess what i'm getting at, is that decision of what to do, kind of dependent on the individual supervisor or the individual station? or are there guidelines or some consistency across the department as to how you respond when you have officers having multiple alerts? >> there are consistency.

the db lies out how to go through the eis indicators, what to do the next step and my name and my email and my phone number on that db to call me for any type of question that they might have. but yes, they go through it the same way at mission as part. >> you're keeping track of what the responses are? >> yes. >> this may be a rhetorical question but if you had to create an executive summary off of the 16 slides, what does this say? >> well, it's kind of saying that our alerts are going down at the moment.

why it's going down is kind of why we have the university the chicago. in 2016, we ruled out body camera and in 2016 we also at the same time required that the supervisors sit down with every officer and go through that alert so now you're seeing a pattern of how to gauge something that hasn't happened. they're sitting down and did that face to face talk stop some type of pattern or at-risk behaviour in the future? so it's hard to gauge that, but those two things happen the same year and now we're seeing a drop in the as alerts. >> and i know as we move forward and really, like i say, it's a rhetorical question working with the university of chicago, but ensuring there's that sort of language, some sort of executive summary in the beginning and/or at the end so that members of the public, they see the numbers as we see the numbers and to the

commissioner the numbers jump out because there are so many but if there are summaries that the indicators are dropping and that would be something to think about as we move forward. >> commission alias. >> i want to turn your attends to page 3, where it has the list of associated factors. and some of the factors that are listed, i'm wondering how those factors, sick pay not protected by federal or state laws, voluntary overtime work, how do those factors predict whether an officer will use force or not? >> it's not whether they use force for not but whether there's at-risk behaviour or something happening with that officer that needs to be addressed by the supervisor, not necessarily use of force. for instance, when the sergeant is looking at the training history or the number of vehicle

stops that officer does, if they're looking at the the number of vehicle stops, i stopped two vehicles a month and my partner stops 30, well, then, hi use of force probably is not my use of force won't be the equal of my partners so those are why they have those there. but it's looking at the totality of everything on that alert, not just the use of force of what they're looking at and what they're trying to accomplish. >> i understand that and some of the factors associated factors make sense but one was weather voluntary overtime worked and i'm not sure how those equate into that. >> well, overtime