>> yeah, i mean as someone who has, when i was -- i had cases that started as state cases. it wouldn't work like that. if the evidence is housed with sfpd there's no reason for an agency to stake that evidence. that's not how it works. most crimes don't have a federal nexus. a lot of crimes you charge locally, you wouldn't be able to charge federally. there are certain crimes where they have a federal nexus because there's something in the federal criminal statutes that would apply. but it really is dependent on the crime, particular time, and on a case by case basis, i know myself i have, you know, helped, there was a murder in oakland, a mother who lost her kid two days before christmas did not have the capacity to move forward with and that murder would never have been charged if i didn't charge it, not because of the

evidence but they didn't have the capacity to do that. so there are certain situations where the u.s. attorney's office, the f.b.i. will help when states need it. and that mother got some peace of mind that the person who killed killed her son was off the streets because of the involvement of the f.b.i. and the u.s. attorney's office. so it depends on the situation. >> folks, we are way off agenda. i got to be honest. all right. commissioner dejesus. >> something we talked about last week, commissioner elias and i were wondering, on this f.b.i. shooting, there were issues in the paper where the police department referred criminal charges to the department of justice for prosecution, and one of the questions we had is do we have policy on when the chief, maybe it can be agendized, does the department have a policy in place when a department itself will refer to the department of justice rather than our own

district attorney. if we don't have a policy, i want to agendize that and maybe we should have a policy. >> the same question, that was the same question. so there is not a policy. i've spoken to the commission about this issue. i personally believe, professionally believe, actually that the department should be given the latitude to use whatever options are available to do its job. and i think overrestrictive or any policy that overrestricts that impacts our ability to do that. so i'm welcome to have the discussion in front of the full commission, but there are some serious concerns with the possibility of not giving the department the discretion to take a case to the federal government, federal authorities if it's fitting to do that and if it's appropriate to do that. >> right. so i would like to put that on the agenda when it is fitting and when it is appropriate,

especially since you are not the prosecuting arm for you to select who is going to be the prosecuting arm might be something we should discuss. >> okay. thank you. next item. >> the police commission will hold a special meeting at a location other than city hall. the commission will meet at 55 sherwin street, san francisco, california, 94134 on wednesday, february 19, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. to hear comments from the public and ingleside station captain concerning public issues in the ingleside district. the public is invited to comment on items 2a through 2e. >> we are asking for public comment on the items we have discussed already, 2a through e.

many. >> good evening, commissioners, chief scott, director henderson. i am brian cox from the public defender's office. thank you for presenting on lead. as the presentation made clear, they have much to recommend it. in my view, the math of who gets to take that exit ramp remains concerning, just 36 percent of active participants are black and brown as the numbers indicate. you can't see the percentages. they are just the raw numbers but that's what the percentages add up to.

this echoes similar concerns raised more than a year ago at a lead policy committee meeting on january 28, 2019. the number of black and brown people referred to lead dropped in july through september 2018 from 73 percent to around 31 percent in october. >> we can't see that. >> sorry. it's just to indicate it came from the report. the next slide will show the numbers. this comes from that 2019 report. the presentation notes the selection bias of who is currently participating in lead is not due to strategic implementation by sfpd. that may be true but it may be beside the point because as we know, unconscious bias is implicit in our society. as an sf examiner article

published today made clear, they may have a degree of antiblack sentiment. how do we address the disparities? it's not enough for the department to say they don't mean to discriminate. we have proof of discriminatory effect. they should find ways to address the disparities. they should present a plan to address those disparities. >> thank you. any other public comment on the items we have discussed? all right. public comment is closed. next item. >> line item 3, discussion and possible action to approve proposed sfpd20/21 budget, discussion and possible action. >> good evening, president hirsch, vice president taylor, chief scott, director henderson. my name is patrik leon.

i'm the chief financial officer for the san francisco police department. in our prior meeting last month, we went over the budget process and tonight we are going to be going over our proposed budget for fiscal year 2021 through 2022. within the department's strategic plan, we have to find our strategic statement. we stand for safety with respect to all. we will engage in just transparent unbiased and responsive policing. we will do so in the spirit of dignity and in collaboration with the community. we will maintain and build trust and respect as the guardian of this constitutional and human right. further, within our strategic initiative, we've identified five areas to collaborate, to build strong partnerships with

the community and our city partners to address community-wide challenges, improving responsiveness to improve our ability to respond in a timely informed, unbiased and just way to work towards a collaborative resolution. measure and communicate to align on a shared vision and transparent way of measuring safety with respect in order to work better with each other and our community. strengthen the department to instill safety with respect in how we organize, evaluate performance, recruit, train, promote, reward, deploy and lead. and finally, defining the future, to plan it for the longer term so that we are in a position to meet the challenges of tomorrow. the mayor's office budget instructions, the instructions given by the mayor's office to each department is that each

department must reduce general fund support by 3.5 percent, to not add any new general fund supported positions or enhancements, to demonstrate the effective use of city funding, to define the goals for programs and initiatives, to consider community impact when proposing increases to fees or fines, to obtain public input in the budget process and to take independent reviews into consideration. during the prior meeting, we had identified the department budget priorities or the process to identify the budget priorities. the priorities for fiscal year 2021 are strengthening our staffing, investing in collaborative reform measures and maintaining our level of service.

i do want to go over budget items that are determined in the memorial phase, and there are certain budget items mentioned in this presentation that are not part of the department budget submission. these will be determined did you recall mayoral phase, and these items include technology projects, general fund capital planning projects and general fund equipment requests. the following table identifies the major fund categories in our department budget. we do have a budget submission of 747, possibly $747 million for fiscal year 2021. i do want to say there is a connection between the version that you have. there is a correction between category c and category e. there's a $1.5 million budget line item for city improvements,

that should have been classified under category c as general fund project base but is under category e for special revenues and grants. this table provides the budget summary for all of our department activities. a fund represents activities that are separated from other activities in the accounting system to more easily demonstrate compliance with either legal restrictions or accounting restrictions. and just to summarize, this pie graph representing a total uses across all funds. and what you can see is that personnel costs represents the majority of our budget at 86 percent, and it's roughly 6 had a million dollars of our budget. $645 million of our budget.

program based uses represents 2 percent. services performed by other departments represents 8 percent at $62 million, equipment and capital is less than 1 percent at $3.5 million, nonpersonnel services are roughly 2 percent at $18.5 million and materials and supplies represents the remaining $5.7 million, and a little less than 1%. category a, general fund operating budget requests. this table represents the major categories within our general fund. personnel costs represents 86% of this portion of our budget. the components of the personnel, regular salaries is approximately $374 million for the next year. over time, is $18.7 million and benefits is $137 million. for professional service and

other payments, these costs represent non-city rent, contract services and for that, it's $16.5 million, materials and supplies, $5.5 million, and this represents uniform safety equipment, office supplying, equipment less than 1% represents patrol cars and safety equipment. the final item is services paid to other departments. this includes city rent and utilities, phone and network infrastructure, workers comp. there is one addition to -- or one item of note, within overtime, one of the primary differences within last year and this year, there is a late ad in 2019 for $615,000 related to overtime to address the city's settlement. >> i didn't hear that. >> i'm sorry.

the settlement. it relates to the no-bail decision. >> the buffin settlement is the name of the case. it deals with the bail issue and whether or not people who are arrested have to post cash money bail. and based on that, there has to be a large degree of work done up front to determine whether or not the individuals who were arrested are detainable. so it's really puts us in a situation where we have to have basically 24/7 staff to review these cases to get them to the court at the appropriate time. >> so that's how it's tied to overtime? >> it is being addressed through

overtime, because we don't have sufficient coverage to provide this, in order to ensure the reports are provided to the courts and to the district attorney within the time frame that they need. >> we'll hold questions. go ahead. >> department full time equivalent positions budget. this graph identifies what our full-time, what our budget is full time positions have been. and it's broken up between sworn and civilian. one of the major differences between the current year and next year, for the airport there's approximately 99 full-time equivalent positions that have been added. these are related to the airport's request to add two full-time equivalent lieutenants, 11 full-time equivalent sergeants and 86

full-time officers. in terms of the city's, we have an increase of 29 full-time officers and six full-time equivalent sergeants. this is related to lower anticipated attrition and through academy classes. for civilians, for the airport, the primary difference between 20 and '21 is related to additional police service aid to provide additional support. and for the city, there's approximately 35 full-time equivalent positions between -- or the difference between 20 and 21, these are two positions that were civilianized from last year and also additional positions that were -- that are identified to be civilian for this upcoming fiscal year. and i do want to make a

clarifying note that for counts, they don't always reflect the actual number of employees. if you have a position that you intend to fill, let's say, at the halfway point in a fiscal year, because that person is only working half that year, within the budget, it counts as a half f.t.e., because it's equivalent to a half, full-time equivalent position. in the previous slide we identified the increased full-time equivalents accounts that contributed to the salary budget within the airport fund. we did receive information from the airport staff that they are requesting a reduction in the number of f.t.e. positions. we are still working through what effect these changes would have within our budget. but we expect the changes will only affect airport-funded activities.

general fund project-based budget, guidance listed in this table represents enhancements and ongoing projects. the items highlighted in asterisks are budget items that were added as enhancement projects during last year's budget cycle. these items include the furniture and fixtures and equipment for the new facility building. this is the facility at 1995 evans that is going to house traffic company and the forensic services division. the other items that were enhancement projects from last year include the foundation network systems for crime data warehouse, the collaborative initiative and the last item was for the capital planning fund for facility improvements. the remaining items listed are represent ongoing projects that

we have m.o.u.s with the respective agencies. category d, service to other departments, this represents work orders. the largest item on this table is for the municipal transportation agency, and this line item, the m.t.a. funds 23 positions and includes overtime. this activities include the taxi commission operations for the enforcement of taxi and bus-only zones, training for m.t.a. traffic control staff, parking garage security for m.t.a. public garages, and nighttime response to blocked residential driveways. the other major category is for the port of san francisco, these funds free services that are all

with overtime. some of the others items include human service agency for the supplemental nutrition assistance program site, security for the library for the main and eureka valley branches, the department of children youth and their families work order that funds a position to pork on citywide violent intervention. and the smaller items include treasure island for gate security, convention center security and other smaller partnerships that make up the rest of the total. special revenue and grants. some of the major categories within this chart include the automated fingerprint. this is for the city's life span services. the traffic offender program,

joint powers authority for the security of the transit center. federal grant, state grants, private grants and some other miscellaneous revenue. and this total represents approximately 1% of our budget. just to summarize for our fiscal year 21 budget submission, the general fund operating budget will be for $616 million, the airport fund is for $102 million, general fund project based for $15 million. services to other departments, $6.7 million and special revenues and grants about $6.4 million for. there's an increase of 55 million $from last year to this year. the majority of those increases are attributeable to increases in personnel that the airport has requested and also some

additional positions that have been added to the budget for civilianization and for some academy classes. sources of funding. this chart represents where the sources of our budget come from. the general fund makes up the largest component at 75 percent. state revenue represents about e airport contributes 14 percent at $100 million. interdepartmental services, these are work orders, that represents 3% at approximately $19 million, grants and other revenues are less than 1% at $682,000. and the remaining amount is for local and state programs at approximately $10.6 million.

for fiscal year '21 capital project submissions, these are -- these projects represent items that are not within our department budget but is submitted through a separate process, and the actual projects that are funded, it will be determined within a memorial al phase. however, within our submissions, the major ones that we have submitted is a project to provide relocation costs for our new facility. this facility is supposed to house our property division. we have also submitted promptings for information technology improvements. and this includes our crime data warehouse software upgrade, the hall of justice relocation cost and the i.d. access management system. for our various facilities, we submitted projects to provide funding for painting, roofing,

electrical, hvac replacements, parking lot resurfacing, improvements at our range and stables and also security enhancements and cameras for our facilities. our project submissions to the committee on information technology, we submitted five projects. the document management system, our human resource management system platform modernization, it will take place in several phases. we are requestingquesting fund g for phase one. property and evidence replacement system. the collisions reporting and tracking system and then lastly, the personnel safety management system. equipment request submitted to the mayor. we submitted the following equipment requests to the mayor's office for

consideration. we are requesting for 100 patrol cars, equipment to assist our property unit move and also laboratory equipment to allow us to reopen our drug section over at our crime lab. i do want to go into a little bit of detail on our vehicle replacements. the following table represents the historical view of our -- of our vehicle replacements for each physician year. as -- each fiscal year. it varies from year to year and there's been a low of 30 and a high of 73. but there's quite a variance going from year to year on what we've actually received in funding to replace our vehicles. just a point, a note of point, in fiscal year 2009 through

fiscal year 2011, those vehicles were purchased through bond funds. this table shows the status of our fleet and there are a significant number of vehicles that are over ten years and over 20 years. it represents over half our fleet. and this is, our greatest area of need is within our marked patrol cars. they do experience the greatest level of usage, and they provide the most availability to the public. and it may play a role within our recruiting and retention efforts, because it shows that the department is committed and investing in resources that allows our members to perform their duties.

the current mileage of our fleet, this table kind of shows they're approximately half of our fleet have either -- sorry. 31 percent of our fleet have mileage between 100,000 and over 150,000, and there's 19 percent of our fleet between 50,000 miles and 100,000 miles and only half of our fleet has less than 50,000 miles. what that translates to within our actual maintenance and fuel costs, because of the age of our fleet, we've experienced deficits within our maintenance and fuel cost budget for fiscal year 17/18 we encountered $300,000 deaf fit for fiscal

year 18/19 the deficit was $681,000. for the current year, the estimate from administrative services is a projected $1.3 million deficit. and this was the estimate as of january. fleet analyzed maintenance repair costs per vehicle. this graph kind of shows graphically what the repair costs have been per vehicle. the under five years, the average cost to maintain and repair a vehicle per year was between 16$00 in fiscal year '16. this year the average has been about 956. for cars that are between or

between five and 10 years of age, the cost for fiscal year '16 was approximately $4,500, and that has pretty much remained consistent from fiscal year to fiscal year. the average cost currently for this fiscal year is $4,200. the middle line represents cars that are over ten years, and it's kind of in between, but it actually underrepresents the two maintenance and repair costs for some of the older vehicles we reached a point where it's not economically practical to fix the cars, and so we continue to use them until the asset is retireed. for the mayoral budget phase, between march and may, the memorial's office worked with departments to fund new projects and policies, and within this process, it includes the

addition of capital projects, committee on information technology project, equipment and vehicle request and also request to add new positions or to fund, project funds requested by departments. and some of these items we just went over. in terms of timeline, tonight we presented our department budget to the commission. february 21 is the due date for the department to submit the fiscal year 20/21 budget to the mayor's office. march and may is where enhancement requests would be presented to the mayor's office. and in june 2020 is when we provide an update to the commission on what the mayor's budget phase will be. and then in august of 2020 we can provide the commission with an update on what the actual

board-adopted budget will be. with that, that concludes the presentation. >> thank you. i have two quick questions, and i'll turn it over to the other commissioners. unless i'm missing something, i don't see that you are cutting the budget for the general fund by 3.5%. >> this is a conversation that we've had with the mayor's office, and it is a -- we do still need, it is a work in progress, and we are going to have additional discussions to identify what efficiencies can be gained and where the opportunities exist. we intend to work with the mayor's office in the coming months during the mayoral phase to determine what efficiencies can be gained and what reductions within the general fund support can be realized. >> okay. and then on page nine, i just want to understand these f. t. e. s. how can i relate any of these

numbers to the charter figure of 1971 uniformed officers. is there a way? >> so the 1971 number, the minimum threshold is really the city portion. so if you refer back to that chart, the number of positions currently is 203, and so -- 2203 so anything above that would be above the baseline. >> so anything above 1971? >> correct. >> by i hear we are still under, about 100 uniformed officers. does that mean many of these people are on leave? >> yes, there are, within the 1971 number what has to be added to it are positions that are, the 1971 represents full duty officers, so there's positions that need to be added for people

that are modified duty or that are on leave that would not be counted towards that 1971 number. so actually the correction would be, for the 2203 number, we would have to subtract the number of budgeted f. t.e.s that would account for people that would be on modified duty or for some other form of leave. >> all right. thank you. commissioner elias. >> thank you for presenting. the question that i have is why the airport budget is so high in terms of the fiscal year or current and the projected fiscal year. i mean, each category seems to be increased by a few thousand, but the airport is about $22,000 more. and i'm just trying to figure out why. especially given president yee's suggestion to have the sheriff's

department take that over to free up the officers so they can patrol the other districts that need their presence. >> so part of the difference is really the expectation of the airport is to try and add 99 additional sworn positions. the ability to reach that goal is partly dependent upon the ability of the police department to meet its recruiting goals and to fill all the academy classes in the event that the -- that we aren't able to fully fill the academy classes. the actual number of positions that would be, that they would experience, it wouldn't be to

the 332 number. so it's more of -- i'm not explaining it all that well. >> are you saying that the airport is requesting from the sfpd that 99 sworn officers be added to the airport patrol? it's contingent upon our ability to send additional officers to the airport. however, that is -- part of that equation is whether or not we fill the academy classes to be able to replace the officers that -- on the city side. for the airport, they have a dedicated -- >> i can answer the question more directly. yes, the airport is -- has requested to increase the staffing at the airport based on increases in the passenger load, which has gone up exponentially over the last several years.

there's the opening of a huge hotel there. so they have requested to increase the staffing at the airport. he stated, i believe they just reduced that or plan to reduce that request. >> are they providing you numbers to justify this request? because officers, you know what the communities could do with 100 officers on foot patrol? >> they are. >> and they want our officers to go to a hotel to monitor the hotel that's built by the airport? >> they are providing numbers, but let me just, if i can remind the commission that airport is a very, very high-value asset in terms of a lot of issues. i mean, if we have an incident there, number one, it's separated from the city, so it has to be staffed adequately. and the other thing in the terms

of list of high-value asset for attack, it's probably at the top of the list, because of what it is. so the number of people that come through there, we know what this can lead to. so they have made a request for that, and they justified or explained what that request was based on. that airport is like a city in and of itself. and i know we might think nothing ever happens at the airport. security at the airport is a big, big deal. it's a huge deal. and having the amount of staffing there commensurate to the need is really important. so we had many discussions about that. and as he stated, we don't have the capacity right now to fill all the request. so we are trying to work through that. >> commissioners, also keep in mind that the, strategic management bureau, keep in mind

that the airport submitting a two-year budget or we all do. so remember that the 2021 budget is a baseline number. so again as the chief mentioned, we've just gotten word that they are going to reduce that budget, which is more reflective of the less rosy picture than we had a couple of years ago or over a year ago, with respect to our recruitment and retention abilities. so, again, remember that those numbers reflect the ability to fund two to two and a half classes. but that was also contingent on our ability to fill two to two and a half airport classes, in addition to city classes. so the department, of course, is having to make decisions everywhere about where we need to put staffing and we're having that balancing act.

>> how many officers do we have? >> hang on. let's go by the -- >> my name is on the list. >> i know. >> discussions -- >> commissioner dejesus. [laughter] >> all right. so, and you are going to have to correct me if i'm wrong because budget is not my thing. but two things. we talked about the cars, we've always talked about the cars, it's a dangerous situation. and i don't really understand why the cars or why the cars aren't in the budget itself, because when you say the mayor's office, the budget phase of the mayor's office, i've always seen that, and i could be wrong, as a discretion their funding for you, she'll pick and choose what you get. not she but the mayor's office will do that. and i just think if it's so significant if it's your greatest need, i don't understand why it's not in the budget itself. >> go ahead. >> so part of the memorial al

phase is to identify what equipment projects are funded. the mayor's office has to prioritize all the equipment requests that have been submitted citywide from not just our department but from all the other departments. and so with what we would submit is our equipment request during the mayoral phase, the mayor's office would decide based on what their priorities are, based on what the needs are, based on what the available funding is to prioritize what actual equipment requests from department citywide actually gets elected and funded. >> so you're telling me there's some kind of internal rule that you have to do it this way? because the cars always suffer. they don't get enough carses and some years they don't get any. >> yes, and that is a priority of ours at the department, and we've made that known to the

mayor's office, the budget office, the last three years, as you see, we've gotten some support from the mayor's office consistently. we have a long way to go to get our fleet back to where it needs to be, but it has been a priority, and we have gotten support from the mayor's office. we haven't gotten everything we need, but we have made progress, and we are going to continue to make this a priority. >> the phase is one part of the budget process and the memorial al phase will occur from march -- the mayoral phase will occur from march to may. and during that time we would be working with the mayor's office with our enhancement requests and with other priorities to identify what items ultimately made it within the final city budget. >> so i have more questions. we've always suggested this.

i. t. is always on there. i. t. improvementses, -- improvementses or giving expertise on what we need. it is mind boggling that we are in silicon valley and we have all these rich people that we don't get somebody to grant us or volunteer, help us with this i. t.^ i guess i don't understand whether we have a program to solicit grants or sliss at this time these i. t. rich corporations in the bay area. >> we do actively look for grant opportunities. currently there aren't that many available that will fund strictly equipment requests for law enforcement agencies. there is one that we routinely are able to apply for and receive funding for, and that one is for the d.n.a. backlog

reduction and capacity enhancement grant. and that really helps out and allow usama bin laden to allow us -- that allows us to purchase equipment for our crime lab. >> one thing we have instituted is we have an i. t. committee, and we have invited the leadership from the city department of technology to sit on the committee meetings and basically what that does, i'm glad you asked that, is we had these discussions and all the department leadership was there and executive director mcguire is leading it, so it gives us the ability to be a lot more strategic on our needs and work with our city leadership and i. t., so it's, we've been doing this now for about eight months, i think. we've had several meetings but it provides an infrastructure to keep this on the forefront.

we have conducted a strategic, a gap analysis on some of some of our needs, that was one of the recommendations, and that is one of the guiding documents that will push this discussion further so it's a step in the right direction. we have a lot of i. t. needs. so we are in i. t. world. so hopefully as well. >> i remember one of the proposed budgets you had an item that consisted with tasers. is there a taser request in this particular budget? >> it is not included within our budget. >> commissioner hamasaki. >> thank you. help me understand the word a little bit better. so the airport is not in san francisco, is that correct? >> correct. >> it's in san mateo, right? it's under federal jurisdiction. >> it is counted as part of the

city and county of san francisco. >> i thought it went to san mateo. >> let me explain. the airport is in san mateo county but the city and county of san francisco owns that land. so we are responsible. we have jurisdiction of the actual physical land. the cases go to san mateo account in terms of anything that comes out of an arrest. they are filed in the san mateo county's d.a. office but we have patrol jurisdiction on the airport. the federal authority, t. s. a. and other authorities, customs and border patrol, they have jurisdiction in part of the airport as well. so it is a city in and of itself, very complicated in terms of all the parts that go to effectively policing an airport. >> so i thought from a previous meeting i was under the impression that our officers who are at the airport are being paid by another entity.

>> they are being paid by the airport. the airport funds the positions for that -- officers assigned to the parent are paid for with airport fund -- assigned to the airport are paid for with airport funding. >> okay. so we are assuming 100 potentially more officers to the airport this year? >> we need bodies. >> i think what's important to understand is for those 100 f. t. e. s, that is -- provides the authority to hire those positions. it doesn't mean that we are going to send 100 officers to the airport. if we are able to fill -- if we are able to fill all of our

ranks, and we have additional officers to send, then maybe a discussion with the airport. but those -- the positions that are within the budget, it allows them the authority to hire for those positions but doesn't necessarily mean that those will be filled. >> if i can further explain. so if the airport, the officers at the airport are funded by the airport, true, they don't work at the airport at the expense of the rest of the city. so in other words, if sophomore other entity were to take over that responsibility, those officers would not come to the city and be an additional deployment to the city. those officers would go away from the sfpd's books. so they are not put there at the expense of the metropolitan area of the city. they are additional because they are funded by the airport. so if they were to go away for whatever reason, they wouldn't be on our books.

>> they are not counted as part of the number that president hirsch was mentioning. so this is completely separate. so when everybody is complaining about we don't have officer, we don't have foot beats, the airport is completely separate in a way. i heard there's like a 500-person waiting list to go to the airport. >> there is a list to go to the airport. >> isn't it like 500 people? >> for some people it's a desirable. >> what i heard. >> i want to make sure we emphasize, it's really a forced assignment. >> i understand that. but i'm trying to figure out because we all here, any time i talk to anybody, there's not enough officers, we need more officers, that's why i brought it up at the hospital, that's why the homeless resolution was important to me. so i'm trying to figure out if this is a situation where we are losing officers on our streets

addressing the city's concerns to spend time at the airport. >> if the airport weren't funding those officers, we wouldn't have them to begin with. if they ever stop funding or some other entity is called onto police the airport, we lose all that. they don't come back to the city. >> they could, we would just have to budget for them >> that would be an additional budget expense in our general fund. >> so we could have more officers in the city if we wanted to budget if it weren't for the airport? >> if a number of officers is raised, it wouldn't have anything to do with the airport. because we would just be competing with whatever entity that's policing the airport. but it wouldn't be -- the elimination of us policing the airport wouldn't add additional officers to the city. >> it could. >> no, not because of that reason. if we raise the staffing levels of the police department in the

city, it's really a separate issue from what happens at the airport, because if we were not policing the airport, we would lose that anyway. >> but if people go over there, they could also come back. >> correct. >> okay. >> all right, commissioner brookter. >> i'm sorry. >> i was going to add that if we were, if for some reason, we were able to absorb the, well, bring back those officers to the city, that would create a 75 to $100 million deficit in the general fund. that would be news to everybody, and would require cuts in other departments. >> we profit off of it as a city? >> the airport? >> it is a cost control. they pay for themselves. that is correct. >> they are money isolated in a separate fund, and they pay for it and the city doesn't get to use that money except at the airport >> how would we lose money then? >> if we brought them back we

would have to pay for them. >> that's general fund money. >> i understand that. thank you. >> commissioner brookter. >> so this is what happens when we talk about budgets. i wanted to bring it back. i had a couple general questions or at least one of the things from a statement standpoint what i would like to see is what we actually spend. i spend most of my day looks at budgets so i think being able to see what we actually spend versus what we are asking for in budget would be great to see. i also wanted to kind of understand too, how often do you all meet as a financial team? like overall. monthly taking a look at the budget and what we are spending, what our burn rate is? >> we have a budget monitor report that is provided to members and distributed to the department every month. >> okay. and i ask because i think that would be something if we could see quarterly, i think it would

help us out if that's something we can actually take a look at. i'm also wondering too in terms of the budget itself. so we're asking for x amount of dollars to be fully staffed for the most part. but we haven't been there, we don't get there. so what happens to those funds, especially since the majority goes to salaries. is there an opportunity to do budget modifications where we can look at how much staffing we have and we can move it over to purchasing more vehicles versus having to go to the mayor? and excuse my ignorance for not necessarily understanding the entire budget process and how it works but are there strategic conversations that evolve around that? is there opportunity for that? >> commissioner, thank you for the question. there are certainly opportunities to learn lots more about our budget and how we -- there's the budget side, and there's the expenditure side and how we balance through the year.

so the actual that we are spending. that could be a very long meeting. and we'd be happy to come back and speak to some of those things any time. i'm happy to do the quarterly reporting as well. i think the thing that kind of just bear in mind is that we spend every dollar every year. and so where the buckets of money break down varies a little bit from year to year based on what's happened. often we will have to do salary transfers into a couple other locals depending on what's going on. but surplus, salary surplus, but we do have a budgeted negative number in our salary line for attrition and those sorts of things as well. >> so the current is actually the actual, isn't that right? that basically reflects the

actual expenditures? >> no, that's still the current year budget, but so things might shift among lines depending on, and we are authorized as a department to move money around up to 10%. and so that there might be a little bit of movement. >> commissioner brookter, we can see the actual. >> it would be good at some point, maybe before the budget is finalized in june or july. maybe to see what the actuals were for the fiscal year so that we can actually relate what you're asking for to what you did. >> we have this every year >> maybe offline, maker commissioner brookter. >> commissioners, as a reminder, we are coming back to you at the end of each phase. so meaning after the mayor has submitted her budget, we'll come back and give you an update as

to what's happened there. and then the expectation would be that in july, we would also give you an update or maybe early august, give you an update on how the final board phase went. >> how about actuals when you come back after the mayor, after meeting with the mayor's office? okay. >> thank you >> we need to vote on this. before we do that, i'll ask for public comment. is there any public comment on the budget proposal? public comment is closed. is there a motion on the budget? >> so moved. >> second >> move to adopt? >> yes. >> and a second. any discussion by the bithe commission. all in favor signal by saying aye. opposed? okay it passes. >> i had a question. >> you can ask it but we passed it. >> i know you passed but i did want to clarify something. i had a little note down here.

when you talked about asking for more money for the district attorney for the bail thing that you -- that decision. i guess i just got a little confused because i thought the district attorney has access to the same records you do like f.b.i., san francisco rap sheets, i was just wondering why they didn't just put it in their buttoning to review for bail hearing. why do we have to do it in ours. i don't understand that decision and why we have that responsibility. >> there are several elements to the buffin settlement the city had. and each department has its own role within the process. for the police department, the overtime money has been -- is the primary purpose for the overtime is to allow the department to provide incident reports or complete the incident reports and to have them

reviewed by sergeant and to give, to be able to give the reports to the district attorney and to the courts within, i can't remember the exact time frame, you want to say it's eight hours, so that portion of it is for the police department activities, and that's why it's within our budget rather than -- >> don't we do that anyway? no? >> i can speak a little bit more to the operational process behind it. so what buffin requires is that it puts time constraints upon when the report has to be completed and submitted to the o. r. project. where before, we did not have those time constraints. so that could, that has personnel challenges, in terms of the review process to make

sure that we are complying with those time constraints and that's what that overtime is designed to do to make sure we have those layers of review available to we are not missing, and we don't have time absent. that was the new decision that was put into place within, i believe it goes into place this month. >> is it a case? a law? >> it's a federal case, and i will double-check to see exactly where that settlement is in terms of the signage. i just realized it hasn't come to this commission but i'm happy to get the litigators which is city attorney's office involved but that particular court order was being directed certain pieces for the probable cause determination for sfpd to do it within a certain period of time that requires staffing, which is currently what the department doesn't have. so it affects overall all the city, not just sfpd, but that's

the piece that will affect us. >> so it's new. so i don't know about it. we don't know about it. >> i'm happy to put it on the calendar. >> that would be great. thank you so much. >> thank you. next line item. >> line item 4, general public comment. the public is now welcome to address the commission regarding items that do not appear on tonight's agenda but that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. speakers shall address the remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or d.p.a. personnel. under police commissions rule of order, during public comment, neither police or d.p.a. personell nor commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public but may provide a brief response. individual commissioners and police d.p.a. personnel should refrain from entering into any debates or discussion with speakers during public comment. >> my name is thomas bussy.

i wanted to plead they release an update into the murder investigation of brian ag. you might know him as the headless torso left in the fish tank on clara street. i seem to have done your job for you. i went down there, i knocked on doors, i rang doorbells, i spoke to witnesses, many of which who were relieved when i introduced myself as a journalist. i'm just a blogger. but it was more than the police did. and there was information that came out that was very disturbing about this case about military individuals roaming around the area for months in advance. the victim was personally known to the mayor who was in appear imminent domain action. he owned property that was valuable. his father was a army general in psychological warfare operations. on the third story of a

neighboring building in a condo lived the former district attorney and attorney general of california now sitting united states senator which i think is incredibly important to the case because who is she? a headless torso in a fish tank headed for a shark tank. this is clearly a cover-up that is deeply disturbing and i wish there were answers. thank you. >> thank you. any other general public comment? public comment is closed. next item, please. >> line item 5, public comment on all matters pertaining to item 7 below, closed session, including public comment on item 6 vote whether to hold item 8 in closed session. >> any public comment on our going into closed session? all right. public comment is closed. next item. >> line item 6, vote on whether to hold item 7 in closed session, san francisco administrative code seconds 67.10, action. >> is there a motion?

>> is there a second? we are going into closed session. we'll take a five-minute break, and we'll be back. [please stand by]

leave in march, that's five days

before my 86th birthday. i think that you ought to keep the show here. [laughter] yes, yes. give me a party here. but, ladies and gentlemen, let me present to you a woman who heads this city and who i think will have a long tenure of doing the kind of things that are reflective in this museum and, believe me, if you're the mayor, this is your museum. mayor breed, your museum. [applause] >> mayor london breed: thank you. first, of all, thank you, mayor brown, for that introduction. and thank you to everyone who is here today. tom campbell and the team here at the museum. they do an extraordinary job working to bring some of the most innovative exhibitions anywhere. i love coming here too and i know that so many of these exhibits wouldn't be possible if

not for this incredible woman, dee dee wilsey, who not only rolled up her sleeves to help to get the buildings built like the museum and the hospital at ucsf, and other places in san francisco, but she's committed to ensuring that we have real equity when we provide opportunities like a deyoung museum and the soul of the nation and what it represents is absolutely extraordinary. and the fact that miss wilsey has invested resources into making sure that there are days that are free to the public, to ensure access to such an incredible exhibit, is something that typically a corporation or a company usually does, but this lady single handedly did it for this incredible exhibit. and i want to thank you for your work and your commitment. [applause] this extraordinary exhibit, which spans over the course of

20 years during the most -- i think during the most critical transition of african americans anywhere, especially here in california, is just absolutely incredible. and i had an opportunity in december to tour the exhibit with the curator and to just really feel like i was stepping back in time and the commitment and how these revolutionary artists chose to take what they knew best in terms of what they created and turn it into something so extraordinary, it is mind blowing. and, up you know, i'm a big fanf the mayor and the work that he's done and his message is that you have to stare at his work for a very long time to really understand all of the pieces of the collage art work that he does to really just get a feel for how impactful at the time his work was and continues to be

to this continuing day. and mayor brown suggested that i used to be an executive director of the art complex and i wanted to put the african american culture complex on the map for performing and visual arts, but i wanted to make sure that larger institutions highlighted the african american artists, both past and present. and we developed an incredible working relationship with the museum hosting nights here at the museum when the current co-executive director and her sister melanie green served and worked at the center curating and doing everything under the sun and now they're running the place am so i'm really grateful that melora is here today with us to celebrate this milestone and how this incredible exhibit, which talks about everything

from the black panther movement which started right here in the bay area in oakland, to the riots in san francisco and the significance that the artists played during that time in communicating the message, really touched the hearts and lives of african americans. and it was not always, you know, appreciated and celebrated in main society. it was our way of coming together and it was our way of communicating muc. now it's the world's way of showing respect and appreciation for what artists did during that time, during such a significant movement that have led to an opportunity for even someone like me or mayor brown to serve as mayor of one of the most incredible cities in the world today. so i recognize the connection. i recognize using art as a vehicle for change and i'm also excited that we have two of our arts commissioners here, chuck

collins here today as well. and it is really great to have so many people who care about the opportunities that exist and using this story and this exhibit, soul of a nation, really digs deep into that. and i've got to tell you that if you walk around these halls and you hear about what this exhibit is about and you read what you see, it really will take you back. and it really will make you feel a certain kind of way about how artists and african americans in this country had to live and chose to put themselves and their lives on the line anyway for justice. and over the span of 20 years it gives you just a glimpse of that. that's why this is so powerful, and that's why we're all here today to see it, to experience it, and to take it in, and to also to share it with other people in the bay area so that they don't miss out on an opportunity to see what -- to

see what i think is one of the most extraordinary exhibits that the museum has had in a long time. so, again, i want to thank you all for being here today. i'm really excited about this. i've actually seen it and really spent quality time here exploring it. and i, again, we wanted more exhibits like this at the museum and more exhibits like there in san francisco. and i want to again thank dee dee for really shining a light on the need to provide diverse opportunities in arts here in san francisco. you have been just been a true treasure and we value you so much. and thank you to everyone who is joining us here today. now i'm going to turn the mike back over to tom campbell and i think that at that time that we'll go over a guided tour. >> can i also mention that we have one of the artists, mike

henderson, is with us this afternoon. [applause] so thank you all very much. lee, are you going to cro coreoh a photograph? a photograph? >> we are back in open session. we still have a quorum. line item 8, vote whether to elect any and all discussion on item 7 held in closed session. san francisco administration code 27.12a. >> is there a motion not to disclose? >> so moved

>> is there a second? all in favor. >> aye. >> adjournment. >> line item 9, adjournment >> is there a motion? >> so moved >> is there a second? >> all in favor? >> aye >> all opposed? >> i say no. [laughter] passed. 5-1 is. 1

>> i went through a lot of struggles in my life, and i am blessed to be part of this. i am familiar with what people are going through to relate and empathy and compassion to their struggle so they can see i came out of the struggle, it gives them hope to come up and do something positive. ♪ ♪ i am a community ambassador.

we work a lot with homeless, visitors, a lot of people in the area. >> what i like doing is posting up at hotspots to let people see visibility. they ask you questions, ask you directions, they might have a question about what services are available. checking in, you guys. >> wellness check. we walk by to see any individual, you know may be sitting on the sidewalk, we make sure they are okay, alive. you never know. somebody might walk by and they are laying there for hours. you never know if they are alive. we let them know we are in the area and we are here to promote

safety, and if they have somebody that is, you know, hanging around that they don't want to call the police on, they don't have to call the police. they can call us. we can direct them to the services they might need. >> we do the three one one to keep the city neighborhoods clean. there are people dumping, waste on the ground and needles on the ground. it is unsafe for children and adults to commute through the streets. when we see them we take a picture dispatch to 311. they give us a tracking number and they come later on to pick it up. we take pride. when we come back later in the day and we see the loose trash or debris is picked up it makes you feel good about what you are doing. >> it makes you feel did about escorting kids and having them

feel safe walking to the play area and back. the stuff we do as ambassadors makes us feel proud to help keep the city clean, helping the residents. >> you can see the ambassadors. i used to be on the streets. i didn't think i could become a community ambassador. it was too far out there for me to grab, you know. doing this job makes me feel good. because i came from where a lot of them are, homeless and on the street, i feel like i can give them hope because i was once there. i am not afraid to tell them i used to be here. i used to be like this, you know. i have compassion for people that are on the streets like the homeless and people that are

caught up with their addiction because now, i feel like i can give them hope. it reminds you every day of where i used to be and where i am at now.

[gavel] >> good morning, everyone, the meeting will come to order. this is the february 12th, 2020, regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. i am sandra lee fewer, chair of the budget and finance committee. i'm joined by supervisors walton. i would like to thank those from s.f. gov. tv for broadcasting this. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. please silence all electronic devices.

and speaker cards and documents should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the february 25th board of supervisors' agenda unless otherwise stated. >> chairwoman: thank you very much. i apologie apologize for being . can you call item number one. >> clerk: item on one to increase the contract amount by $5.9 million not to exceed an amount of $15.8 million, with no change to the contract term to commence upon board approval. >> chairwoman: thank you very much. we have cathy widener here from the san francisco airport. >> good morning chair fewer, cathy widener with the san francisco international airport. the item before you seeks your approval for a modification to an existing contract with ceta information

networking computing u.s.a., for support services of the airport's shared-use passenger processing systems, which includes hardware, technical support, maintenance, system administration, system monitoring and supplies for equipment in our harvey milk terminal one, as well as in the international terminal. modification number one would increase the contract not to exceed amount by $5.9 million. this contract is the result of a 2018 competitive request for proposals process to support and maintain the airport's check-in and boarding systems, common use, self-serve kiosk and baggage reconciliation systems, information display systems, and pas passport control systems. the increase is for the additional equipment, coming on line in new gates and arriving and departing passenger processing fas facilities in

harvey milk terminal one when this went out in 2018. the cost of this contract and proposed modification is budgeted as part of the airport's operating budget. the budget andrew bell has analt recommends approval, and i would be happy to answer any questions. >> chairwoman: can we hear from the b.l.a.,? proceeding. good morning.i'll just sortf reiterate of what ms. widener had to say. the board is being asked to approve the modification with the airport agreement with ceta to display services in the international terminal and other domestic terminals. this contract increases close to $6 million, increasing it to $15.9 million. the increase is actually for the addition of services and equipment in

harvey milk terminal one that was added after the r.f.p. process in the original contract. table two, on page three of our report, shows the increases under the proposed modification. we actually have reviewed the details of the increases in the contract budget and consider them to be reasonable. and we're recommending approval. >> chairwoman: thank you very much. let's open this up for public comment. any members of the public like to comment on item number one. seeing none, complic commennone, publiccomment is no. any comments? >> ms. widener, i do have a question for you. this increase is for terminal one because it was not completed at the time when you did the contract. is that correct? >> yes. the $5.9 million proposed modification is for the new gates and some of the swing -- the ability for us to have a arriving

passengers come into terminal one. that was all in the planning stages when this was originally put out to bid in 2018. >> so the airport has how many terminals? >> three domestic and one international. >> so this is a contract for three domestic and one international terminal. is that correct? >> the whole contract? >> yes. >> yes, the equipment throughout the airport. yes, that's correct. >> it just seems disproportionate that it will be $6 million for one of the terminals, but -- >> i don't know the answer to that. i'll have to go back and look. my understanding is this is for new equipment. i believe partially what this contract does in the rest of the terminal is just maintain and operate the equipment, but this is to actually install the equipment that we need for our common use processing. >> okay. thank you very much. >> chairwoman: any comments or questions from our colleagues?

seeing none, i would like to move to the board with a positive recommendations. madam. >> authorizing public works to accept an grant in the amount of $15 million from the united states department of transportation for the fiscal year 2018, better utilizing development transportation, discretionary grant for the better market street phase one, for the period of june 2020 to june 2025. >> chairwoman: okay. better market street. is this escar quinn toia? >> yes. >> i'm a capital finance analyst with san francisco public works. the resolution before you authorizes them to acceptp accet

a $15 million grant for the better market streets phase one project. we were awarded this competitive grant in december 2018. this project will deliver transformative street scape, and transportation improvements along market street, between fifth street and eighth street, and go good repair and investments in our transportation infrastructure. the grant funds will be used for roadway work and traffic and pedestrian signal upgrades. as you might be aware, starting january 29th, market street -- most of market street became a car-free zone, and m.t.a. is currently placementing some of thimplementingsome imprd this will make the permanent and state of good repair investments as well. we are working with s.f.

t.a.staff, and the preparation of the construction mitigation plan, as you might remember back in december, when the t.a. approved the didie signdesign allocations mog forward. i'm joined by our project manager to answer any questions. >> chairwoman: any comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing none, can we have a b.l.a. report on this, please. >> the proposed resolution accepts the $15 million grant from the u.s. government for the better market street program. if you look at exhibit 3 on page nine of our report, the total budget for the program is $176.7 million at this time. that is improvements to market street, between fifth street and eighth street, largely. so the $15 million grant is part of the overall budget. if you look in exhibit 3, of the 176.7million, there

is about a $38 million funding gap that still needs to be identified for this project. however, the $15 million grant does meet the criteria, including the matching funldz, s funds, so we recommend approval. >> chairwoman: any comments on questions? supervisor mandelman? >> thank you, chair fewer. >> chairwoman: you're welcome. >> i can't say i'm new to this committee anymore, but i have a question about how to think about gaps on construction projects like this. and, um, if this is standard and what happens if you can't identify $38 million over the next couple of years? >> right now we're working with s.f. m.t.a., and also applying for other grant sources.

yesterday we submitted an application for the affordable housing and sustainable communities grant program. program, and it's such a large project, so we're looking at state funding, such as the local partnership program, which will call for projects in a couple of months. so it is all about timing and making sure that at the time of award of the contract we have a fully funded project. we're still a few months away. we're working with our partners to figure that out. >> and you believe you'll have that gap closed before you award the contract? >> yes. >> chairwoman: okay. let's open this up for public comment. any members of the public want to comment on this item? >> supervisors, first and foremost, we have to look at the projects that one of you kind of alluded to but it was not precise. if you look at the central subway, we know what happened to that. it started with $600

million, and now it is $2 billion. if you look at the van ness project, and i just walked certain parts of it, it is pathetic. it is really pathetic. now, we've been talking about market street for a long time. but before we even initiate -- we already initiated closing it down for the causeway and keeping it open for the bicyclists, we failed to do a needs assessment on the surface of market street. especially when it comes to the elderly, or somebody like me, who wears a brace, and there are potholes. we are not paying attention to the rails. we went -- some of the new guys who come in, they have no clue how all of the improvements that were

done to market street, and how businesses were impacted. so one of you all alluded to it in a general way. it failed to ask the real questions because, remember, you can get millions of dollars from the federal government, but as i see it, the planning department -- [buzzer] >> -- and all of the committee meetings that you have, there is no real input from the public. and the san francisco county transportation authority has kind of an advisory committee, but they're all over the place. we do have experts in san francisco. [buzzer] >> chairwoman: thank you very much. any other public comments? seeing none, public comment is now closed.

actually, i have a question, if you don't mind. i think the speaker brings up a pretty good point about the public input that we've done so far around this better market street project. and our small business people at the table. okay. >> i can speak to that. good morning, supervisors, i'm the better market street project manager. to date we've had five rounds of community outreach. these are large meetings held around market street to collect input from the community, not just residents, but also business owners, about the project itself and the impacts of construction. we're now starting to develop the construction mitigation plan. i think you might remember as part of the transportation

authority -- your role as part of the transportation authority board, i'll be giving the presentation in march about our construction mitigation plan and support for small businesses. so we are clearly aware of the impacts. our estimate is that construction will take two years. to do the first phase of market street, between fifth and eighth streets. and we're working closing with our project partners at the s.f. m.t.a., as well as o.e.w.d. to conduct a survey of the existing businesses and to understand their needs and their expectations during construction. we're also looking at what we can do to reduce the construction duration, or minimize construction duration, possibly building the north side first and impacting the north side businesses for a shorter amount of time. moving to the south side, and then doing the center

track way area, so that the impact to businesses is reduced by which side of the street you're on as well. >> chairwoman: so then i have one request: that when you come before us with the t.a., you would also include a proposed budget to help mitigate the negative effects on the small businesses. >> we probably won't have that in march, but we will have that as part of the plan. so in march, we're just giving you an outline, and then we give quarterly updates. so probably the next quarter will have more details and more of the budget. >> chairwoman: great. thank you very much. and then oscar, i'm wondering, i know that this is a grant from the united states department of transportation. why did we seek a grant for better market street

but was b.r.t. included also in the grant proposal? >> personally, i'm not aware of that. this application was in july 2018, so i'll have to check on how -- do you remember? >> i know the decision was made as a city, which project to propose. it was thought at the time that it would be very unlikely we would receive any federal funding through the build program, just giving the current administration. so i think the city, as a whole, led by the transportation authority, i think, determined that we would summit the bill grant for better market street, and i believe that was the only grant that the city submitted for this cycle of build. but build is part of the u.s. department of transportation, transportation funding, so there will be future cycles for other projects to apply. >> chairwoman: so is there a plan to apply for

these funds for the garry b.r.t.? >> i don't know. that would be a question for the transportation authority or for m.t.a. there are several cycles of build. it replaced tiger, and you may have heard of the tiger grant previously. in the past, i think the city has only received one tiger grant. so, therefore, it is for larger infrastructure projects. >> chairwoman: thank you. any comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing none, i would like to make a recommendation to move this to the board. a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. and i can take that without objection. thank you very much. can you please call iams number three and four. >> [item called]

>> chairwoman: thank you very much. is this mr. calvin healey? >> yes. >> chairwoman: great. you're from the san francisco p.o. c.? >> yes. good morning. i'm from the s.f. p.u.c. i'm here to request authoritauthorization to execute services for dams and reservoirs, and in particular for agreement

138aa, and agreement pro0138. the s.f. p.u.c. manages a very complex water system, stretching all the way to the city and county of san francisco. we manage dams, reservoirs, pipelines, tunnels, and treatment systems. in 2017, the oroville dam incident occurred. from 2017to 2018, the california division of safety of dams, the s.o.d., issued updated orders for dam reservoir owners. s.f. p.u.c. has a total of 18 dams and reservoirs under the jurisdiction. they have complied with the new s.o.d. requirements, performing condition assessments. they are proactively analyzing our damsp dams and reservoirs and has developed a capital

improvement program. they are proactively seeking contracts for professional energy firms for planning, design, and energy support of our improvements through the various reservoir facilities. the specialized energy and dam and reservoir services include hydrology and structural engineering. and to address this, the s.f. p.u.c. issued a request for proposals in 2019. and three agreements are to be awarded to the three highest-ranked proposals. each agreement will be for 11years, for an amount of $1 million. $11 million. they deemed the three highest scoring proposals. january 14, the san