>> good afternoon, everyone. my name is mustafa, and i moved here ten years ago and i started driving four years ago because it was the only way i could make enough money while going to city college. every year, it gets more expensive to live in the city. we've seen our rates go up over time, so in order to make the same amount of money, i need to work 70 to 80 hours a week, and that's not good for everyone and dangerous for everyone else on the road. i have to live with six other people in a studio apartment in the city, and lots of people have to live in their cars so they can save money and support their families while the c.e.o. of uber just purchased a $17

million mansion in san francisco just a couple of months ago. we shareholder the cost of gas, upkeep, and depreciation of our cars. uber employees are set to become millionaires and gain more work than they already have. next month, uber and other companies will make millions, but we still deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> -- i come to ride share driving after two years of recovery from a severe neck trauma. when i started, i could support my family and ride share looked promising. now it looks like these companies want to destroy protections put in place. these companies are trying to make a game out of people's livelihoods. uber and lyft workers are becoming millionaires while i'm struggling to make ends meet.

>> i'm jennie worley from a.f.t. 2121 at city college of san francisco. increasingly over the past ten years i've noticed my students moving farther and farther to the far east bay, commuting from places like antioch. the free city program has helped a lot, has let a lot of san francisco students go back to school at city college, but i'm still seeing students really struggling every week to pay their rent. last week, i had a student in my women's literature class who is a newly single mother who was struggling to get out of a dangerous housing situation. she couldn't move in with her mom because her mom had already had to move out of san francisco. she couldn't move in with her dad because he was living in a tiny apartment, driving for uber. so she was missing classes

every week. i had the student report to me hopeful going to another open house for an apartment, and had another applicant show up and give a year's rent in advance and get the apartment out from under them. our facility are commuting from far away, and despite a new contract that we got, thanks, supervisor mandelman, we're having trouble recruiting faculty? they'll research the housing costs in san francisco and decline the job. so we're hemorrhaging positions in departments like nursing and unfortunately, computer science. the college has been forced between offering a living wage and covering classes that the community wants and needs, and we're currently in the process of cutting classes across the curriculum. this can't go on.

we need to turn up a new generation -- >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm pretty good at numbers, and i did a thesis on the information through information that was placed newspapers during the time -- placed in nups during the time that ed -- newspapers during the time that ed lee was alive. i told them $217 billion of uncollected payroll taxes. i went to peskin's office and made a presentation in front of him. i told him you can't keep doing this because you're going to create a negative cash flow. the last seven months of ed lee's life, he told each and every department you have to cutback 10%, stop employing people in your department and cutback on your expenses because you had an $85 million

cash flow. and when you took over after his death, you still had an $88.5 million cash flow. when the president did his tax cuts and unnecessary tax regulations, all the big companies, multibillion dollar companies such as apple came back to the united states and started booming. apple brought back 500 billion to the united states. that's how you got your 11.5 in your budget. the tax figures that you presented today were disproved by ed lee. companies including twitter broke all the records yesterday, so your figures are not up to date because the record was just broke

yesterday. and about the tech boom, the tech boom starts with the races, justin herman plaza, when you started with the fillmore and displaced my people -- >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name's kathy burik. i'm a member of seiu 2121. i'm intersectionally here. this wasn't what i planned to say, but after i heard the student with uber speak, they have to be taxed. when he heard the -- when i heard the person talk about how the deals were made in 2012, why weren't community people or community organizations not at the table? why was it just deals with the

corporations and whose jobs were being lost? i'm sorry, it's like -- i won't go there because that wasn't what i planned to say. what i wanted to -- when i read this article about tech real estate agents from a firm called compass said, are we going to see a one bedroom condo worth less than $1 million in the next five years? probably not. and i'm not surprised because i saw condos built right across the street from where i live starting at $1.1 million. meanwhile, one of the supervisors had to move out of the neighborhood. she was sharing three bedrooms with five people, and she had to move because the rent jumped from 3,000 to 5,000.

this is a really low estimate of homeless students on ocean campus, 120 to 150 each semester. and those are only the students on ocean willing to go to apply to qualify. even at u.s.f., we have -- >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is danielle arribe. i'm an east bay native, and i've lived in district one for 20 years. and i've been personally affected just in the stress and worry that i might lose my rent controlled apartment. i've seen friends had to leave, and what i want to talk about is development without displacement because we need to take care of our local residents. all those people that are coming from all over the country and all over the world

to make $100,000 and more, what about also training locals, 10, 15, whatever percent, having -- putting pressure on these companies to train locals in the tech industry, however they can work in these industries, have a living wage with benefits and everything, whether it's uber or lyft or whatever companies there are? we need to take care of our local people so they don't have to move out, and also, that would impact housing. if you keep more people here, then, it'll help with housing costs and racial inequality, and it's just about time that the government takes action on this. thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. good afternoon. my name's kathrin kung. i'm here with just cause and also as a provide citizen.

i just recently made the move from tech to nonprofits, so that informs a lot of my perspective on this. we are talking about money that's insane, beyond what we can really comprehend. also, i think what we're not mentioning is there's a great amount of support for some kind of tax law on these companies for people who are -- i think that the working class people and the people who are being displaced and disenfranchised need to be at the forefront. however, there are people working at these companies who aren't going to get these cuts. they're living in these communities. they're also being squeezed out, but they're also seeing people that they care about and -- you know, being displaced, as well. there's a lot amount of support from folks that are not in the room today. there's this middle class of people that are also in great favor of san francisco standing

up and doing the right thing. they don't believe that the companies will do the right thing, so i guess it's someone else's job, and we're all looking to the city to do it. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i'm leslie with housing rights committee, also here as an individual who's been evicted twice in two years by costa hawkins and russell flynn was the last major evictor who's flipping the apartments in order to get in higher paying tech employees. this is actually happening everywhere. cities across the world look to us to see what we're doing tangibly because we handle it first? germany is handling it because they're saying hey, google, you can't have your office here. we need to get bold here, this is serious. i'm going to back up jobs with

justice and s.f. rising and their call to tax them. but we have to do more. we have to stop speculation right now. to do this, we need you to fight for rent control, for vacancy control. we need you to do something about the housing issue, starting with stopping the sweeps. the city is the evictor every day over and over and over for these people, many who used to be tenants, 21%, actually, when you were born and raised here. so we ask that you take a bold step and do something because these i.p.o. winnings are wage theft. they're making money overall of our data. folks growing up right now don't even know what this is. we need to do something bold and take a giant leap forward. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker. >> hi. my name is megan.

as we all know, we have a housing crisis here in san francisco. last week, the atlantic reported that -- more than 50% of properties purchased in san franciscos are purchased by -- san francisco are purchased by tech employees. two of the companies going public, lyft and uber, have never turned a profit. uber is valued at $120 billion. [inaudible] >> even outside of the social yo economic impact of these i.p.o.s, stress is being placed on the city because of them. when pinterest went public,

they landed at the bar at 10:00 a.m. it was complete chaos, i was told. the lack of completely responsibility impacts all of us who are not earning tech incomes. there should be a degree of response based on multibillion dollar corporations that go public and launch in the city. let's work towards addressing the rampant inequality that exist exists in san francisco. thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker. >> i'm here to share my story of the effects that the income inequality has had on myself and my peers. last year, i was homeless and it was because rent was too high. and as a student that's going to school full-time as well, i couldn't afford to live

anywhere here in the san francisco in the bay area. i couldn't move in with my parents because they're not here in the bay area. the experiences that i've had have been awful because if we're living in one of the richest cities, it's astonishing to me that there's not enough services for people that are placing displacement, facing all of these challenges by the injustices -- housing injustices we face here. i was looking at hearts at ccsf, and there i saw firsthand how my peers were suffering because they didn't have a place to live, couldn't afford a place to live. a lot of them were living in shelters. now i'm at causa justa, and

landlords are converting their apartments for techies that will pay more rent. all the money that's being flushed in is only going to increase our rent, is only going to make the lives of people living here harder, and people are going to get d displaced. it's obvious that more demand for housing and a population that's willing to pay more is going to increase the rents, so i'm asking you to please -- >> supervisor mar: thank you. thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is tom hartford, and i'm here to speak for some of my members who are unable to live in the city that we

actually work and take pride in working. many of us have lived in the city from an early time and got apartments that are affordable, and they cannot move and will not move because it benefits them. the rest of us that are coming in as younger members have to travel from great distances, sometimes as far as vallejo to be able to live. those times and distances and the costs in our wages and our labor really affects how we can perform and be a part of this society and community in san francisco. we would much rather not living here and be a part of the city and a part of this.

on an annual basis, even though i belong to a union, if i take every show, i make $48,000. i ask that you consider making these changes to help all people, even the harder -- upper middle classes that are still within the poverty levels of san francisco. thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you, supervisor mar, for opening up this incredibly important conversation. as a young public policy student some decades ago, i remember very, very clearly when a professor made it clear that tax policy is not just fiscal policy, it's not just a fiscal issue, it's a moral and ethical issue. and today in san francisco, we

have a moral and ethical crisis on our hands, a good one. i'm not going to repeat all of the tales that my colleagues have said today that are heartbreaking, really truly heartbreaking and unconscionable. we need to do something quickly. the wealthy hold their money in property and in stocks. and we have something right now with looming i.p.o.s is a massive opportunity to actually address huge wealth opportunities in the city. we need to look to it towards an eye with not just fiscal efficiency, but an eye towards the people who need it most. you are who we look to in this city to make moral action on this issue, and just to repeat what one sister said earlier, please do the right thing.

thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is c.w. johnson. i'm coming here as a private citizen. this has created a lot of disconnect. i am so scared to go in the hospital. i have to go in the hospital to get an operation pretty soon. i work 40 hours a week. i've lived in the city for 37 years. the last seven years, i lived in an s.r.o. -- i mean, studio,

affordable studio. and i'm afraid to go into the hospital because i'm going to lose everything i have, and i'm going to be in had a wheel with chair, sleeping on the sidewalk, the one that you're sitting around, talking about what are you going to do with these people? i see so much disconnect in the community. people, places -- i got lost in the city that i call home for 37 years because i didn't recognize the neighborhood. that's ridiculous. we have to do better by our citizens, by our people. if these i.p.o.s are going to invest in us, we need to know about all of them, not just the actual bank accounts. thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. is there any other members of the public that wish to speak on this issue? seeing none, public comment is closed. i want to really thank all the diverse community members and workers and advocates for

sharing your experiences on the i.p.o. and tech earthquake that the city is facing for everyone that's not super wealthily. thank you for the informative presentations from the budget and legislative analysts. colleagues, i know we're going to be having much more discussions about these issues ahead. i actually have some closing remarks and an announcement to make in response to the information presented at the hearing, but i just wanted to see if you had any comments or remarks to make. >> supervisor fewer: i just wanted to say thank you for bringing this forward. i think today we all learned a lot, actually, and i think that this board has been looking for

ways to level the playing field a little, and it is our job as legislators to actually protect the most vulnerable here because this is the job of city government, quite frankly, too, and our job and responsibility. so i just want to say thanks to everyone who came out, and thank you for the wonderful b.l.a. report. and also, also to our econo economyists, and i think we will be in touch for deeper conversation about this. thank you. >> supervisor mar: thank you. any other comments? well, in closing, first of all, i did want to be clear. the conversations that we're having is not just about i.p.o.s and the tech sector, this is about who you are. we have the highest income gap and the highest housing costs in the nation. they didn't happen by accident.

over the last decade, we have seen an incredible amount of wealth flood this city, wealth concentrated in the hands of too few, as our wages shrink and wealth grows. we rolled out the red carpet for these companies to tap up and grow here, and -- step up and grow here, and when they threatened to leave, we cut their taxes, gave them offices and luxury condos, and here we are. these companies have been incredibly successful, and i commend them, and i'm glad businesses find san francisco attractive, but success isn't theirs alone. it comes from the service workers, of the public sector.

while we need a diverse economy for success, that diversity in every record is threatened by this success and the run away inequality by these companies. we know that i.p.o.s did not cause income inequality but they have and will exacerbate it. so today i'm announcing a proposal to tax the i.p.o.s to fund programs to address income inequality. i've worked with a variety of community nonprofits to craft this, organizations representing workers, immigrant families, young people and communities who have already borne the brunt of extreme income inequality in san

francisco. with the more than $100 million raised by this corporate tax, we will establish the shared prosperity fund with the purpose to protect and stablize working families. this includes funding for affordable housing, programs for vulnerable youth and families, support for low and middle-income workers and stall business stablization. it's time we turn the page on trickle down concepts of the past. it's time to work towards a future where all people benefit from the prosperity that san francisco helped incubate, where the success experienced by many doesn't benefit the few. where corporations are responsible neighbors and where technology and innovation acts in a service to society instead of the other way around. it's time we asked wealthy corporations to start paying

their fair share. i look forward to working with my colleagues on the board in the coming weeks to put this on the ballot. i'll have more details to share soon and much more discussion to be had. we know what led us here, we know the crisis we face. the only question is what we're going to do about it. the i.p.o. tax won't solve all our problems, but i hope it will turn the tide towards a more just and equal future. thank you to chair fewer and the committee members for your time and consideration in this fairly long but very important hearing. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. mr. clerk, do we have any other business before us today? >> clerk: that completes the agenda for this morning. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. this meeting's adjourned.

[gavel]. >> chair fewer: good afternoon, everyone. the meeting will come to order. this is the april 24, 2019 meeting of the budget and finance committee. i am chair sandra lee fewer. our clerk is miss linda wong,

and i would like to thank jason and samuel for sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read]. >> chair fewer: thank you very much, madam clerk. can you please call item one. >> clerk: item one is a meeting on key safety public strategies in the city budget identifying gaps and levels for future spending. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. today is the second hearing on matters of priority from members of the board of supervisors. next week, we'll have our

mental health and substance abuse budget hearing, and on may 8 is a budget hearing on secondary priorities including clean and green streets, funding for the minimum compensation ordinance for nonprofit workers and support for all businesses. i said this last week but as a reminder, the purpose of the board in identifying these initial priorities is to explore priority funding areas during the mayor's proposed budget, which will take place through the end of may. once the mayor submits her budget on june 1, we will be able to discuss priorities that may look different from what we're discussing now. because the wide variety of topics could have made for a very, very long hearing, my office has focused this to a

few key departments that i've mentioned earlier. there are other points that we could explore other topics that we could not get to today, including a hearing for incarceration spending that we are planning for may 22. with that, let's get into our presentations for today. i am going to ask each of my colleagues to wait until the end of the presentations for comments and questions. mad madam clerk, will you please set the timer at 20 minutes. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, chair fewer and members of the committee. dan goncher from the budget and legislative analyst's office. we're going to present on matters related to public safety and those including san

francisco police department staffing levels, including staffing classes and crime prevention and response by the police department, including vehicle break-ins, community approaches to public safety, gun violence, restraining orders, youth and vocational services, muni driver security, vision zero, narcotic arrests and convictions, and an update of the jails. i'm now going to turn it over to london berry to discuss the departments that she worked on. >> good afternoon, supervisors. as of a few days ago, the department has 1,886 full duty sworn officers. that's in compliance with the charter mandate of 1971. as you know, the department was funded for three classes of 50 cadets. they're in the academy with anticipated dates of graduation

in may and august 2019. one of the classes, they fell short of 50, and they are adding a lateral class in june to makeup for some of that shortfall. we were also asked to look at sworn separations. sworn separations peaked in fiscal 16-17, and then they declined in 17-18, and the 18-19 numbers are through february, but it's a total of 84. annualized, it would be a total of 126, so a 20% decrease over the prior year. the civilianization process, the department was budgeted 25 positions. funding for that was sort of staggered for 19 positions that was available on january 1, and

for the remaining six, it was just made available in april. so of those 25 positions, six have been filled, and the others are at separate stages of the process. currently, the controller's office is working on a civilianization study, and that was expected to be released shortly. we have a lot of performance metrics in the report and i'm not going to cover all of them in the interest of time, but i'm going to highlight two of them. priority a calls, and this is the resulting seconds. the department has a goal of responding to priority a calls in four minutes, which is 240 seconds. you can see over the past couple fiscal years, they've been over their stated goal every single year. i've talked to the department and that's due to an increase in 911 calls, especially

priority a calls, and congestion which hampers the ability to 91 -- of 911 to arrive at a situation quickly. fiscal year 2017-18, property increased by 36 per 100,000 population, so there's an increase in property crime even after you account for an increase in population. and this table or this chart here shows basically that the increase in property crime is driven by a significant increase in larceny, which is that top very large shaded blue bar there. larceny increased by 15% between 2012 and 2018, and it represents 82% of all reported crime in san francisco. current rates, those are the rates at which the department makes an arrest or identifies a suspect in a crime.

this is the property crime clearance rate. and i wanted to highlight this because it's been trending downward? it's decreased from 10.8% in 2008 to 5.9% in 2017 which was one-third of the national average. a news worthy component of property crime is oughty break-ins and -- auto break-ins and thefts from vehicles. so the annual thefts from vehicles from the city performance scorecards and police is shown here. they peaked in 2017 and there's actually been a decrease in 2018. however, in 2018, there's still an average of 67 vehicle break-ins per day. according to the district attorney's office, less than 2% of those led to an arrest. so the police department has piloted a couple of things to address theft from vehicles, but they're working on neighborhood crime units. they piloted that in two

district stations, mission and t taraval. they implemented an increased approach and beat officers. according to a report that they presented in january 2019, auto burglaries actually did decrease by 19% in the taraval district and by 4% in mission. separately, the department is implementing a new policy that assigns two officers to the crime prevention station. those officers are assigned to a different station each week to address a different incident in each district. moving along, community approaches to public safety is another area that we were asked to look at in our priority report? s.f. safe, which stands for safety awareness for everyone is the community engagement arm

of the san francisco police department. they work on crime prevention, education, and public safety services. and in particular, they manage the neighborhood watch program which are also known as block safety groups. these are groups of neighbors and community members who come together and meet regularly and they develop community preparedness plan and discuss crime activity and organize to cleanup parks and streets and have a sense of community public safety. the community ambassadors program was another area of interest that is run out of the city administrator's office. this trains residents to act as a safety presence in targeted neighborhoods and to engage and inform members of the public. the program typically has 30 or 35 ambassadors at any given times and they work in teams in the bayview and chinatown and tenderloin and the mission and in visitacion valley. and finally, the sfpd has increased the number of foot patrols since 2016. that is shown here. so this is a sort of three-year

span. you see down at the total there were 49 foot beats in 2016 and it increased up to 144 as of march 2019, so that has also represented a significant increase in the ratio of foot beats across sector patrol. so we were asked to look into the language ability and racial and ethnic background of community ambassadors and also of foot patrol officers. according to the police department foot beats, assignments change based on several factors, and as a result, the department was not able to provide the racial ethnic background and the language capablities of the officers assigned to the foot beats. however, they provided information for the current team as of march 2019 and also for all ambassadors in 2019. there's a variety of languages spoken and racial and eight 234ik backgrounds in the

ambassadors. moving onto gun violence. gun violence restraining orders is a court order that prohibits an individual from purchasing a gun or other relates -- like, ammunition and magazines and orders an individual to surrender firearms to law enforcement. immediate family members and law enforcement are the only individuals who can have a judge for a gun restraining order. i talked to the sheriff's department and the police department who both stated they're working on implementing a policy related to gun violence restraining orders. secondly, relating to domestic violence restraining orders, the restraining party is required to surrender any guns that they have in their possession, and the sheriff district attorneys or police department tracks that. they'll follow up with an individual to ensure they surrender the firearm to

achieve compliance. youth and vocational services. these are provided significantly by oewd, rec park and children, youth, and their families. in the report, we have sort of an overview of all of the initiatives and programs and support for each vocational training that includes skill certifications and stem in other heidi manned industries like nursing and medical care. and we also have breakdowns of participants by supervisor district. driver safety. so the sfmta in their strategic plan has stated a goal to achieve a 5% decrease in accidents per month. m.t.a. has already completed the installation of operator enclosures on muni buses and they're currently working on

technology improvements that will allow the agency to remote in and view the bus in real-time. separately, there's the sfpd muni search program which is a work order with the police department where sfmta has uniformed police officers sort of ride muni buses at random to increase the public perception of law enforcement on muni. that's funded with a 1.3 million grant, i believe, from homeland security. moving to vision zero, which is san francisco's road safety policy that was adopt index 2014 -- adopted in 2014, the policy's goal is to reach zero fatalities by 2024. so there were six fatalities in march, and 10 fatalities in all of 2019, which represents a significant increase overall of laugh year. vision zero lists the goals

that the city is focusing onto achieve our goal. vie visibility enforcement from the sfpd traffic unit, and also education campaigns and communication. and vision zero stated that this is the area that's in need of additional resources and dedicated reliable funding sources. traffic company. so sfpd traffic company partners with vision zero to enforce the main causes of traffic collisions. these are motorcycle patrols. in 2018, there were five sergeants and 20 motorcycle officers, and that increased by five officers in 2019. recently, the department announced that 15 officers joined a training class in may to provide more targeted enforcement that i mentioned before. narcotics arrests and prosecutions. so narcotics arrests are

prosecuted by the general unit. there's not specifically a noorkts unit. the department stated in 2018, 5% of the incoming cases into misdemeanor were drugs related and 22% of the cases coming into the felony unit were drug related, and the department estimates it spends $22 million a year prosecuting drug cases. finally, our office is working on a report that will be

reported at neighborhood safety and public services, and i'm going to bring dan now to talk about the jails. >> thank you, lemon. so we received a request by this committee in march to include a brief summary update on the county jails in our budget priority report. it is our understanding as chair fewer mentioned a few minutes ago that a hearing is scheduled for may 22. >> chair fewer: that's correct. and so i'm wondering if perhaps we should leave this part of the presentation until may 22. >> yes. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> okay. sure. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> okay. so i'll just run through policy considerations that we included in our report grouped by department. so we had some upgrades regarding the civilianization study that the department is working onto ask the police department to share its plans to address the findings and

recommendations from that study. also for the department to address new areas of funding for the board. also, the board could ask the police department to identify potential causes and solutions to low and declaring clearance rates for property lanes and address solutions to reduce target times for priority calls. also pending input from the public safety neighborhood services committee scheduled for tomorrow, the board could also ask the police department and the sheriff's office to present the implementation

strategy for gun violence restraining orders to the board once it has been developed. the board could also ask the mayor to fund permanent staffing to provide funding for the sheriff's restraining orders. the board could also have the mayor's office to increase funding for youth services, skill services and early intervention program as an option to public safety. we have an option to request multiple departments to provide data on a number of programs by supervisorial district. and finally, we -- the board could ask the m.t.a. to report annually on a strategic plan to report on the 5% increase regarding incidents regarding

sfmta employees. the board could request the police department to ensure new staffing resources are allocated to address the board's areas of priority which may include traffic company and targeted enforcement actions to achieve vision zero action strategy actions, and finally, the board could take actions tomorrow at the public safety and neighborhood services related to the open air drug dealing in the tenderloin and south of market neighborhoods. and that concludes my presentation. we're happy to answer any questions. >> chair fewer: colleagues, any questions? yes, tour stefani. >> supervisor stefani: i just wanted to ask with regard to the policy implementations, i just want to lead everybody know that i'm on top of that. i'm working with the city attorney's office to make sure

it happens in a timely fashion. it was signed by governor brown september 30, 2018. we are now in 2019, and it's been way too long. i'm working on getting those implemented as soon as possible. that one is checked off the list. >> chair fewer: thank you. any other comments? questions? supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you so much, chair fewer. just a quick question as i look ad slide 11. just -- at slide 11. just want to make sure i'm reading the data correctly for bayview and ingleside correctly for foot patrol. are we saying they have 39 patrols and foot sectors in bayview and 4 foot beat -- and we've got that directly from the police department? >> that's correct. >> supervisor walton: thank you.

>> chair fewer: supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: i'm just wondering, the rep from the controller's office, when we should expect the report on civilianization? >> peg stevenson. i'm the director the unit in the controller's office. we've been looking back, take a different perspective and look at success in filling positions. we need to reconcile what we heard from them with what was reported in the budget analyst's report, and then kathrin mcguire or somebody else from the police department can speak to this. they've had a working group to identify agencies with the civilian proposals now. we're doing some validation of that and comparing it to their overall org charts to look at how complete it is. [please stand by] >> in regards

soon, is there any indication, i think it's the 58 you were looking at. how many possibly would be recommended to be supervised. >> so there could be a couple of different lists at issue. the positioned you had funded and approved in last year's budget, so there's a progress report to be made on those.

there's a new list the police department will be coming forward with. there's no function on it there isn't a good candidate on it that isn't a good candidate for civilization and i think you'll concur in their recommendations to you. our process is to test how complete the work is. for example, if they've recommended to civilianized units and depend uniform supervision that's something we want to test and see if they can go further. that's why we've been looking at the refreshed org chart and having that conversation with them. i guess i can say with fair confidence that when you hear their proposal for civilianization in their upcoming budget we support the recommendation. >> commissioner: thank you. as indicated in this report, the national average seems to be way

higher in terms of civilianization versus the san francisco police department. i just glanced at it. was it 30% nationally and in san francisco it's 14% of the positions as civilianized. >> because the police department does not include 9-1-1 dispatch center or parking enforcement where other major metropolitan police departments may include them is probably why they're below but not the only reason. >> commissioner: that's some logic to where this is such a big difference. i'll meng it here. i don't know if it's going to come up. i don't see anywhere on the items but there's also an effort

two years ago to have the police department look at their staffing and what the staffing needs are. i was really hoping that the completion of that analysis would have been done for this budget cycle. it looks like we're not going to get it done. did you look at all at that piece? the projection is it's probably going to be done in the next budget cycle. it has such an impact in terms of us understanding more thoroughly what the final number we'd like to be supporting in terms of the best practices. has the b.l.a. looked at that piece at all? >> supervisor yee this nick

menace ard from -- menard from the budget office and we did an analysis of the patrol staff and function. at the time the police department was planning to do an analysis of their staffing for investigations but i'm not sure what the update is on that study. the different departments are here and if they could answer to this, the other thing the city administrators is take lead on is the whole justice project. in which the different justice

departments and the courts and d.a. and public defender and the social service and the police department have been for 15 years trying to figure out a way to better speak to each other in terms of electronically. if that ever occurs, again, it's probably too soon but hopefully get some efficiency that can impact the staffing and we can figure out where individuals are in the criminal justice system.

the audit mentioned scheduling and how we could increase the number on time. i noticed that wasn't in your report this time around but that's something i'm interested in looking at again and finding out what happened with the 2018 report but other than that i'm done. >> we'll be having more conversations in june about staffing. i also want to mention president yee ced