>> does director henderson submit his report prior to the commission meeting. i'm not seeing it. i'm confused. i don't have the numbers. >> you should have the numbers. they are normally in the packet. >> thank you, i must be overlooking. thank you. that's it, thank you. >> next item. >> 2c, commission reports. commission report will be limit to brief description of activity and announcement.

>> i see no hands. next item. >> was the calendar of future meetings? >> i think it was everything right? was it difficult? >> i called everything, yes. >> i'm going to ask that we schedule donte' king here present at the commission bias is an extremely important topic which addresses the bias in policing. this revision and all the hard work we did means nothing if we're not willing to address issues of bias, racism and anti-black sentiments within the

department. when the allegations came to light back in february 2020, i asked that this matter be agendized so we can speak get directly to mr. king and address these troubling allegations. our request was made to investigate the allegations. however, that's not d.p.a.'s responsibility or their jurisdiction. as the policy making body of the san francisco police department, it is incumbent upon us to find out the truth of the allegations and address them. last week i did ask to agendize this item. i believe that what was agendized was a report by d.p.a. with respect to the investigation or what they have done thus far. we must have mr. king appear before the commission to discuss the matter openly and allow

fellow commissioners to ask questions and to really examine these allegations. these allegations are very serious. i assume that the chief would also want these allegations addressed given all of the hard work that he has done with respect to the bias policing and his commitment to bias-free policing. we're allowing the issue to continue to fester. it's my understanding that d.p.a. will be presenting their findings thus far on this matter on december 16th. i spoken with mr. king. he is available december 16th. i'm asking to have mr. king appear before the commission to address the issues that were raised in the article and these

allegations. i'm moving to make a motion to agendize to have mr. king appear before the commission december 16, 2020 to address the issue raised in the exami examir >> there needs to be a motion or second. i will ask to see if mr. king is available and present when we have commission on december 16th. i have not spoken to him. i try not to bias myself with these things until it's before me. if he's available that's great. i asked young blood to make that part of the agenda.

>> i think we can still have a motion just so that it records the commission's intention. this has been going on for a number of months. i raised this and requested it to be put on four months ago. i was told the same thing at that time. i spoke with mr. king. i think it's go gotten to a stae where we're looking slightly ridiculous we're keep asking to have it put on and it never gets put on. i would second commissioner elias's motion.

>> i take offense to this characterization. i've been trying to put this on the agenda. the idea that the commission may be stymied not having it on the agenda, it's salt and wrong. whatever. we can take a motion and we will all vote for it. sergeant, please call -- [indiscernible] >> members of the public that like to make comment on 2c regarding to the motion to agendize dante king november 16 meeting. please call 415-655-0001. press pound and then pound again. members of the public already on webex and like to make a public comment regarding motion of donte' king, please press star 3

now. we have two public comments. you have two minutes. >> i'm sorry, i had my hand up wrong. sorry, i've taken it down. >> good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> i'm calling to support this motion. i live in district 7. i wanted to encourage you all, i know also including statistics, racial bias in the officer-involved shootings in other officer violence. those numbers are important to look at and telling. the question is why is this happening? thank you.

>> on the motion to agendize dante king -- [roll call vote] >> the motion passes. next item. there was one other thing. sorry. >> commissioner elias: the other question was agendize for vote for commission.

i like confirmation on that if not i can make a motion. >> vice president taylor: it won't be held for the 16th. we have a meeting with the working group on the 14th and the public needs to have access before we put it on. we can put it on the meeting after that. first meeting in january. whatever that meeting in january is. >> commissioner elias: thank you. >> the public is welcome to make public comment on line item 2. please call 415-655-0001.

good evening are you making comment on 2? >> yes, i guess so. i'm not sure what line i'm supposed to be on. i'm calling concerning my son. i recently given everyone a -- [indiscernible] concerning my son being in a gang. i was asking earlier to have everyone to respectfully rite a letter to the fed to ask him to repass that. lot of our children are being murdered here in san francisco

and labeled and i gave that to stacy youngblood to give to all of you and called in back again to ask again if you can do it individually or as a group to the feds about recanting their story. they have no facts. i don't know you can respond to that, i will continue to keep asking as long as you guys are here, as much as i've been coming to the police commission. i been around everyone all these years concerning my son. there was never any allegation set for someone want to get a case done or to get their case on someone else but they're using my child. i'm still asking the commission

to write a letter to the feds asking them to recant their story. i'[background noise] >> vice president taylor: i'm hearing lot of background noise. everyone mute them. were you finished? >> yes, i guess i am. >> commissioner hamasaki: thank you for sending that along. i took a look at it. i think the challenge for us, i can speak for myself, i don't have the facts to make any

decision -- i completely understand and support your position. for us to make a statement like that as a commission, we would have to basically see the facts in that. [indiscernible]. i believe commissioner taylor was involved in the case. it kind of puts in a position that's not really -- i think everybody here is extremely sympathetic and i don't know if there's another way to support you outside making a factual determination. we're happy and willing.

that request probably going to be pretty difficult. >> you can look at the facts. it's in the paperwork. it's all in there. it's been like for years. you wait 10 years to say that my son is in a gang, i did speak commissioner taylor. it was almost -- she knows, almost in way not going against her. just leave it plan. i can't leave it alone. there's factual facts that my son wasn't in there. it was supposed to be presented but it wasn't. the paperwork that i gave you is all there. if anyone read it and understood how it went, they're railroading them and it's not fair. it's not fair to me either. all i've been asking, i wouldn't

be doing this all the years -- if my son was in something, i wouldn't be asking you. if there's facts that my son wasn't. that's all i'm asking for that. i've been fighting too hard for my son. too hard for him and to allow this to happen it's not fair. even the person in there, said that, we're not complicating your son. the name that you gave me, the name commissioner taylor gave me. he said my son wasn't in a gang. you're accusing him to be in a gang. please, i'm asking this not as a mother, just a mother too, i've been coming to you guys for years and no one has ever given allegation that my son i was ina gang. this is not fair. doing black lives matter, doing all everything that's going on

with our african-american being killed by the police and all this for this to happen, it's not fair to me as a parent and as my son is a african-american young boy. i did everything for my son. i don't understand -- when i gotten support from the other commissioners that were on the board and the other person that passed the president away. they have written letters for me concerning my son. >> vice president taylor: ms. br own. i can't be involved in this for the reasons that the commissioner hamasaki just stated. what i heard you said that the fbi told you that the government did not engage that your son was in -- allege that your son was in the gang. i don't know if those are the facts.

>> he said he was affiliated with a gang. affiliation means you were in one. i lived in the neighborhood too. >> vice president taylor: we all obviously -- you know we all want your son's murder to be felt. i so want the person who killed your son to be brought to justice. i'm going to repeat this. if there's information, please call -- beyond that, there's nothing more that i can do ms. brown. as a commission, i can't speak for anyone else. we thank you, we support you coming here. we want the murderer of your son be brought to justice.

we're going to have to move on from this topic. commissioner dejesus i see you in the chat. i'll let you speak. i wanted to add my two cents. >> commissioner dejesus: i did talk to sergeant youngblood perhaps we can talk offline. >> please. >> vice president taylor: thank you ms. brown. >> there's no other public comment. >> good evening caller, you have two minutes. >> i'm calling to remind you all that when you're publicly picky

with each other, it really like very apparent to the public. franklyyo you look like jackass. in the case commissioner hamasaki every week, claiming credit for everything that happens on board or people very clearly this di leanuation those assigned by the mayor and those by the board of supervisors. it's ridiculous. it erodes public trust and it's just disgusting. it doesn't put any faith who you are, having a safe city and to make sure that police are held accountable when doing wrong.

you all so terribly dysfunctional. >> vice president taylor: thank you very much. next call per >> that is all the public comment. >> vice president taylor: thank you. next line item. >> presentation of the safe streets for all quarterly report, 3rd quarter 2020. >> good evening, i'm off mute. i started my video. i don't know. you can see it. you can pull up the slides for me. vice president taylor,

commissioners, chief scott, members of the public, watching online, good evening. i'm here to make a presentation for the 3rd quarter 2020 safe streets for all. reminder for everyone during this presentation, police department committed to the city's division zero strategy to eliminate deaths and reduce serious injury in san francisco by 2024. we prioritize focus on the file, traffic enforcement and high network corridor from it first slide and second image, that the representative of the number of corridors throughout the city.

these are streets which identified through statistical analysis by department of public health. location is where we have the most frequent occurrence of series injury collision and collision that result in unfortunately fatality. we partnered with the community stakeholders and city agencies to expand training and education for all. we promote traffic safety and educate the public. in terms of deployment in addition to working with our public information office throughout our patrol stations throughout the city to distribute information to community members about our efforts. we also use our social media

platform on twitter and facebook to now things like bicycle and pedestrian safety enforcement operation, then to the right of that image, another addressing parking rounds that were designated out in the district. other enforcement operations that we do to raise awareness and educate the public and hopefully change behavior. bottom of the slide you'll see advocacy groups we're engaged with.

this slide is representative of the statistics that we have through our 3rd quarter this year. the traffic enforcement efforts and the traffic company which are the officers assign to uniform patrol motorcycles. you'll see that the red bars indicate the total number of violations which is 11,743. blue bar indicate focus on the five violations and the third we're up to 6210. which is a department wise average of 53%.

below each station you'll see a percentage, which represent the percentage of focus on the five citations for violations that -- or drivers issued citations for a violation of one of the focus on the five categories. here we have two graph. these are traffic fatalities from january 1st. the circle graph to the left indicates the mode of transportation that an individual was engaged in during the collision that resulted in a fatality. pedestrians, unfortunately, are the largest percentage of the total, 19 victims who have died

and result being involved in a collision. to the right of that graph, the bar graph indicates the age of the victims, the two groups impacted the most are 30 to 39-year-olds and 50 to 59-year-old. vision zero traffic fatality from january to september, the red bars indicate the results from 2019 and the blue bars indicates the results for this year, 2020. for the first three quarters in 2019, there were 23 vision zero traffic fatalities for the same period this year, there has been 15, which is a decrease of 17%. in the next three slides are

corollated. that identifies the different locations throughout san francisco where individuals suffer a fatality as result of being involved in a collision. pedestrian accounted for the majority 42% of the 19. we have a network amount of the city, county of san francisco. those corridors are indicated by the blue marking on this map. which indicates the streets were the most serious injury and fatal collisions that occurred. you see the greatest conversation is within the area

of the tenderloin. the dots represents all the fatalities that in that network. on treasure island that was a fatality that occurred with a local collision. there were six of those total from the city. i know this is a concentrated map. there's lot of information there. if you go to the next slide. this slide lays out the locations of all of the dots in that high injury collision network map from the previous slide. it indicates the locations types of modes of transportation that were used, for example motorcycle vehicle and pedestrian. last column indicates the primary collision factor responsible for the collision

indicated by vehicle codes. you can see that there are many cases where a determination of primary collision factor has not been determined yet. that's the end of the powerpoint presentation that i have. are there any questions? >> commissioner hamasaki: thank you. good evening. we talked about this at the last presentation about the enforcement aspect showing the effectiveness of that. do you recall that discussion?

>> yes, i do. >> commissioner hamasaki: do you have anything to present on that? because it was a while ago. obviously, these numbers are not great. i guess it's a little surprising when we've been shut down for most of the year to have numbers comparable to last year, which was a normal crazy san francisco streets are filled. i don't know if that' that means people are driving more crazy. it's obviously not great to see almost 20 fatalities, looks like a pretty wide range vehicles. since we talked last, were you able to -- i guess have any

changes been made that will give us more hope that our pedestrians, our bicyclist, motorcyclist, skateboarders -- what can we look forward to really turn this around? this is not -- i think you addressed working with partners and collaborations. this is not an issue that is all on the department's accountability. these are drivers and there's no way to have an officer on every corner controlling every intersection and so forth. can you give us some hope? >> well, commissioner hamasaki, you do recall you asking the question and we had discussions

and one of the projects that we're examining now is -- you asked, do we know -- can we tell the public that our enforcement actions on the network corridors in the locations where the collisions are happening, are they having an impact? to that point, we're having that discussion. it will involve collaboration with the partners we work with the m.t.a. and department of public health. to answer your question about number of collision. in 2018 we had 30 fatalities and in year we this different stages

of shelter-in-place order which the service provided by m.t.a. with muni. that's been a reduction of public transit. there's also become a reduction in traffic on our roads. i can't point to a specific study that would give you numbers or percentage. i can tell you from reading articles on the internet, locally and listening to stories from members of the public about commute times and how commutes have been reduced. about a month ago, there was a discussion about the amount of traffic returning to 90% of pre-pandemic shelter-in-place orders. the traffic return to like well over 90%. i can't speak to how they came to that figure.

i did read another article today on the west side international association of chief of police, they made information about law enforcement profession. one article was specific to the issue that you're asking about and it was in wisconsin and may have done a study that shown although traffic have been reduced, dealing with their shelter-in-place orders and latest of the pandemic, their fatal collisions risen 32%. one thing i can point -- i'm with you 100%. we have to educate people. m.t.a. is focused on engineering things like what's commonly

referred to like daylighting. lot of members of the public may have seen intersections or streets and cars right at the corner near the crosswalk. they've taken those parking spaces and removed them and painted the curbs. one thing that's common in all the fatalities here, there's a lot of -- i want to be respect respectful not criticized people

who made a mistake and died. there's a common thread when you look at the last slide, the primary collision factor in lot of the fatalities is speeding. we know has speed increase, the possibility that somebody will die as a result of collision, increases. it's hard -- somebody may get struck but they maybe able to survive injuries at the lower speed. reducing speeding, making sure that people give the right-of-way, pedestrians and crosswalk. when you're in the crosswalk, vehicle have so stop. if we can change that and change speeding and change people behavior if regards to racing through a red light, whatever term you want to use.

when the light turns yellow you should be on the brakes. we still have fatalities as a result. we're hoping to look at all of these locations and majority of our enforcement that we coordinate through m.t.a. is the about focus on the violations. we're trying to stop fatalities. that's the message that i relay to all the captains and the conversation that i have with the captain and motorcycle officers.

evaluation piece of it, we're working on. it's a big thing to get our hands around. it's going to require coordination with other city agencies so they can gather all this data and get into it and figure out the risk. >> commissioner hamasaki: is the san francisco bike coalition one of these partners? >> yes. i apologize if brian is watching, bria -- >> commissioner hamasaki: i have spoken to some of them. i know they have some ideas. as long as you folks are in communication, i'm glad to hear that. >> yes, sir.

>> vice president taylor: commis sioner cohen might be having connectivity issue. we were unable to hear you. i can hear you but i can't see you.

>> commissioner cohen: i turned off my camera to get a better connection. >> vice president taylor: you want to start over? we didn't hear anything. >> commissioner cohen: that's okay. i turned my camera off. commander, good evening. the second portion of my question is, i was wondering if the department or this coalition that you're working related to the topic, you guys are used successful strategies of other cities. are there other cities that have policies that are in place to bring down pedestrian fatalities? >> yes, commissioner. i have to tell you, that i'm sorry, i didn't hear the first part of your question. i can answer the second. >> commissioner cohen: commissio ner hamasaki answered my first

question. the answer is yes, you're talking to the bike coalition. that's important. second portion of it, are we reviewing other successful strategies in other cities to reduce pedestrian fatalities? for example, i don't know if we're looking at flashing markers in crosswalk or overhead flashing lights. i wanted to know are we on the cutting-edge what is being done and considered? >> i can tell you that i meet regularly i engaged in communication with my partners over at sfmta on a regular basis. this year, the discussion -- vision zero is an international sort of strategy it's certainly national strategy here in the united states. constantly assessment and evaluation in different areas how effective vision zero is and what measures are in place. the conversation this year over

the last six months has been about the use of cameras and there's been some significant discussion from partners of law enforcement like in other areas like in seattle and oregon about the role of law enforcement and traffic enforcement specifically how it relates to vision zero. it's multifaceted why conversation is occurring. couple of reasons -- largest reason is part of the discussion of equity and impact that traffic enforcement have on different groups. is it equitable, fair and biased. that's something that's been going on outside law enforcement profession as it relates to vision zero as well as within our own profession.

the second thing is that groups like m.t.a. and other cities, their m.t.a.s evaluate their vision zero engineering strategy. part of that use of cameras and signs and some of what you were referring or mentioning, use of lights and signs. i don't recall this is in seattle or oregon, there was a study they did. they had a specific area that was known for speeding. they increased the deployment of three signs to alert people to the speed limit, cautioning them to slow down in that area r they did this study over a specific period, they found slight reduction in speeding. they attributed that to the point of additional signage, educate motorist.

short answer to your question, we're looking at strategies being used in other places. the law enforcement piece of it is education and enforcement. enforcement that's focused and data-driven. >> commissioner cohen: thank you. appreciate that. >> vice president taylor: i don't see any other questions from my fellow commissioners. unless there's more, we'll call the next item. >> public comment. at this time, the public is now welcome to make public comment on line item 3 regarding the safe streets for all.

please call 415-655-0001. press pound and pound again. please press star 3 if you like to make public comment on line item 3. we have one comment. you have two minute. >> i called earlier from district 7. i'm calling -- i appreciate all the questions and his clear interest playing a good role in this effort. policing has no role in reducing fatalities on our streets. what works has nothing to do with traffic enforcement there's nothing bias that comes from it.

i strongly encourage you to look very strongly at this department and reorganize it to more useful endeavors. it's not working. it's okay, it's not your fault. this is not the thing that will change the fatalities in the street. it's okay to admit that and move on. thank you. >> vice president taylor: next funnel. >> presentation of the sfpd on general orders on policy roam, 3rd quarter between 20 discussion. >> vice president taylor: who is presenting? >> i am for sfpd. i'm happy to defer to the staff.

>> good evening, commissioners and members of the public. thank you for opportunity to d.p.a. to share the policy work we did in the 3rd quarter of 2020. i do want to point out that the bulk of this work was done by -- there have been progress made on the work that has been carried on by myself and sharon woo and other members of the d.p.a. policy team. i want to make sure that i gave credit where credit is due. with that, sergeant youngblood, you can advance to the next slide please. just highlights of our 3rd quarter policy work, we made recommendations to enhance officer-involved shooting protocol. we worked toward the adoption of sfpd procedures with deaf and hard of hearing individuals.

which was adopted by this commission in july 2020. in august of 2020, we published our 2019 annual language access report which addresses d.p.a. language access complaints and key d.p.a. language access projects and goals. we also collaborated with sfpd on the expanded use of force reporting and appropriate control technique in light of george floyd's death. we also recommended -- we made recommends with regard to revisions of the department of general order. as the commission is aware, there is a quick schedule of turnaround that the department trying to obtain in terms of revising many of the department's general orders. in the 3rd quarter, we made new recommendations for several

d.g.o.s. i want to talk about the process that happened. we were approached by the department with the list which was relatively ambitious of d.g.o. they wanted to provide. with input from the department was to separate the recommendations into tiers. there was one tier of d.g.o.s where d.p.a. agreed we were not going to make any recommendation. there were two other tier. one tier in which d.p.a. would make recommendation without getting draft from sfpd subject matter expert. another tier where would wait for the draft from the subject matter expert before we make recommendations. that tier dealt with recommendations where the d.g.o. was old that we didn't know how it was implemented. once we broke those into tiers,

then the work started and there are several d.g.o.s that we're working on. it was elias or hamasaki who requested that the department track where we are. we're at a point we're in terms of tracking to indicate our stride. there's lot of progress that's happening this these various tiers of d.g.o.s that we're working on. in 3rd quarter we made new recommendations with regard to d.g.o.s 3.05. the department weapon return panel. alcohol and drug use by members and investigations. [please stand by].

. >> so then -- there's a productive back and forth that happens during these meetings with ongoing recommendations or outstanding recommendations. and for the most part, we are able to resolve a lot of them. and speaking specifically with the hostage and barricaded suspects d.g.o. as an example, there were six recommendations, and at the end of the day, four that we ultimately agreed upon and two that we didn't agree upon, but we were persuaded by

the department after having that discussion. sergeant youngblood, if you could advance to the next slide. so this is the d.g.o. of what i talked about what the sparks report is, and this was the d.g.o., i believe, talked about prior to the thanksgiving holiday. in the column to the left most of the slide, it's the recommendation that was made, and then, there's a date that the recommendation was received by the department. then, there's sfpd's response, sf sf sfpd's recommendation and explanation. so in the sparks report, that explanation might be there, and then, it might be edited to show what our discussion is about, and so this is just a snapshot of what the process

looks like. and as i mentioned earlier in this presentation, i do think that we hit our stride in terms of being able to moving things along and really having meaningful conversations between the two agencies about our policy recommendations and our d.g.o. revision recommendations. next slide, please. that is it, and belieobviously happy to answer any questions that you have. [inaudible] >> vice president taylor: maybe, we'll have sfpd go next, and then we can address any questions we have. executive director, are you ready? >> yes. sergeant youngblood, if you can pull up my presentation. there are a few edits that i

made this evening, and i'll send it over to sergeant youngblood this evening, and all of the edits are in this presentation. there were a number of edits made related to that meeting. good evening, commissioners, vice president taylor, chief scott, members of the commission, and executive director henderson, i'm kathrin mcguire. i'm the executive director of the strategic management bureau in the department. the things i will be presenting are the third quarter 2020 sparks report, which includes the dates of july through october -- i'm sorry, july through september of 2020. so as a reminder, this really only covers that time period. we've made other progress since then, but in that quarter, we

issued 23 department bulletins and notices, and with one of those being a bulletin, and 22 of those being notices. we issued two general orders, as you all well know. the bias free policing policy and the interactions with deaf and hard of hearing individuals, and we issued one department manual, which was the community ambassador program manual, which you also saw at the time. as i go through these, i won't read through all of these slides. it is he a -- it's a lot of words, but in the interest of the public watching, we provide a brief description of what they do, and then, i'll talk through the items that have moved beyond the under revision portion of our process. as you know, d.g.o. 1.08, which was community policing, was

appropriated for meet-and-confer, so i expect that will be back in front of you fairly soon. department general order 2.07, which is the discipline process for sworn officers -- i'm sorry, that is also under revision as our peace officer rights and drug and alcohol use by members. the d.g.o. on personal use of social media is with a working group, so that is in an initial stage of revision, and as you know, the d.g.o. 3.09 is tabled for future police commission -- for a future police commission meeting, and d.g.o. 3.10, serious incident review board, i've corrected this item to reflect that this is in the early stages of revision, as well. the 5.03 investigative

detentions has been a topic tonight, and so it's up for further consideration with this body. 5.04, arrests by private persons, this was a change from the last presentation that was submitted because you all approved and adopted that item on -- at that meeting on the 18th. and then, working on a few more -- a few more general orders that are under -- in progress, rather, rights of onlookers, nonuniform officers obtaining search warrants, domestic violence, which you will see in the coming weeks, and psychological evaluation of adults. we are -- we also, as you know, adopted victims of violent crime notification, and that was adopted in quarter four on november 4 commission meeting. and then, we have working groups in progress for policies and procedures for juveniles

of -- sorry. policies and procedures for juveniles in detention, arrest, and custody, and then children of arrested parents, as well. for media relations, we will be beginning a working group soon. i'm working with matt dorsey on that particular d.g.o., and then, we will also be beginning a working group for guidelines for first amendment activities in the new year. and then, in this last slide of sort of general orders that are in progress, the d.g.o. 11.11, making some final revisions, and that will be in front of the commission soon, as well. so then, to give you a flavor of the kinds of recommendations

that we have incorporated into our -- our revisions of either manuals or d.g.o.s, i've -- excuse me, i've outlined some of those here. and so these are the -- these represent the d.g.o.s or manuals that were passed or issued to the department during quarter three, and so then, i'm rehashing what kind of what d.p.a. recommended for those particular policies. so d.p.a. was an integral part of the biofree policing policies and individuals in the form of a working group. and then, for the policy manual, the recommendations that were implemented or partially implemented related to d.p.a. recommending that the community ambassador manual require that the incident report writer include the incident report in the incident

report the name, contact information, and that the individual was acting in the role of community ambassador in the written or oral statement. so we included that in the manual. we also included a recommendation that the program coordinators duties upon being notified that a community ambassador engaged in misconduct was involved in a major incident or used force or took took enforcement action. so i believe we adjusted that to reflect that community ambassadors would not be taking enforcement action, and then finally -- i think there's a couple more here -- d.p.a. requested that the d.p.a.

include complaints, so reflecting d.p.a. as the recipient of complaints from the community and how those would be held by -- handled by community ambassadors -- for community ambassadors, rather. and then, d.p.a. also recommended that courses were required for maintaining ambassador skills, including for things like cmcr and 4th amendment training, that those things would be specified in the manual, as well. and then, that the notification to the community ambassador program coordinator regarding any uses of force action, we tabled this just because the language that's been added throughout the order are not

sworn employees and are not authorized to use force, which makes the recommendation -- i don't like using the term moot here, but it makes the recommendation unnecessary to include that language because they won't be conducting those activities. so that concludes my presentation this evening, and i'm happy to take any questions. >> vice president taylor: yes, commissioner elias. >> commissioner elias: thank you. thank you, director mcguire. when did you make the changes to your presentation that you just had on the screen? >> this evening, as i was prepping for the meeting. >> commissioner elias: well, i appreciate that because i have the november 18 version, which was posted two weeks ago to the public. >> right. >> commissioner elias: and again posted, again, this friday to the public, which has

a lot of errors in it. and while we appreciate you making those corrections on the eve of your presentation, that false information is out there in the public and posted on our website with those, and some of those items were things that commissioner taylor and i asked you to correct this before your presentation before the commissioner review board. next time you present, if you could make your changes before you present to the board. i was having a difficult timekeeping time keeping up, and i'm sure the public is, as well. it's important that we have accurate informationtor t for

public, so if you could follow all of those recommendations, thank you. >> vice president taylor: thank you. commissioner hamasaki? >> commissioner hamasaki: thank you. we were provided this report before, and it may not even be related, but is the strategic plan that the department is supposed to be rolling out part of this policy work or is that on a separate track -- or is that not your wheel house? i'm sorry? >> no. my team helps facilitate the strategic planning process, and strategy 1.0 was really from professional standards, as well. so which strategic planning process or to which strategic planning process you're referring, i'm not entirely

clear. there is a bias strategic plan, there is a -- a community policing strategic plan. strategy 1.0 sits above all of those, but there's a recruitment and retention strategic plan, as well. so are you asking about one of those specifically or just generally? >> commissioner hamasaki: and thanks for the clarification. the strategic plan 1.0 is sort of the overarching strategic plan, and then, there's basically subplans for various working groups or topic areas. and so the strategic plan -- why is it 1.0? is there different iterations of it to follow or -- >> yeah, 1.0, we refer to it as 1.0 because it's the framework, and it sets the vision, and i

see the chief coming on here to talk a little bit here. and those other plans, really, are supposed to flush out 1.0. and then, so chief, if you want to -- i'll defer to you. >> yeah, catherine, and i think commissioner hamasaki answered it, as well -- or understood your answer, but i thought i would add to it. there are recommended multiple strategic plans that will fold into the framework of 1.0. it's hiring and retention strategic plan, community policing. there's a number of them, so they all would fall into that framework that would fit into 1.0 and the collaborative initiatives -- i mean, those five initiatives, strategic initiatives. so to answer your question, we have to do it kind of in pieces because there's so many of them, and they're in different work groups, and they'll fold

into the framework. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. is there a way that we can get -- and i don't know what format this would be in -- that we can get the overarching plans and the subplans? it doesn't have to be particularly detailed or anything, but just to know where they are in the process? >> sure, yes, we can provide that, and that's something that there's an ongoing -- the best way to articulate and get it to the commission and the public is there's ongoing discussion for us. it is in process, and many of them are in process. many of them have already been created, and some of them are in process. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. we'll follow up on that and have a presentation at some other point. >> yes, sir. >> vice president taylor: thank you. i don't see any other questions, so chief and

executive director mcguire, chief of staff hawkins, unless you havetion some, we c somethn move to the next item. okay. no one is saying anything else, so sergeant youngblood. >> clerk: okay. public comment on item 4. members of the public who wish to make comment comment, dial 415-655-0001. enter meeting i.d. 146-348-0406 press pound and pound again, then star, three to enter public comment on-line item 4. it looks like we have no public comment, commissioner. >> vice president taylor: okay. next item. >> clerk: item 5, discussion and possible objection to issue department bulletin 20-163,

grooming standards, modifying department general order 10.012, equipment. discussion and possible action. >> good evening, vice president taylor, commissioners, executive director henderson, chief scott, and members of the public. i'm bob mosier, chief of staff, and i'm here to present department bulletin 20-163. department bulletin 20-163 is being submitted modifying department general order 10.02. that seeks to amend the guidelines establishing the wearing of jewelry or ordnance. the section we wish to correct is within the current language of 10.02 speaks to what officers are allowed to wear, and it specifically speaks and

references gender in terms of the earrings and other jewelry or ornaments that officers are allowed to wear. this policy will amend the current language eliminating reference to gender and female officers specific, replacing the language with members. the public of the department bulletin is to align with current city policy relating to gender inclusion, as well as mayoral executive order 18.03. the pertinent sections of this department bulletin are found in the bulleted sections that you can see on the screen. i will not read the language that's in those sections, but basically, what they refer to are the types of items that officers may wear, wristwatch, rings, hair clips, earrings.

it delineates specifically what type of earring an officer may wear on duty, and then finally, it also prohibits the wearing of other facial jewelry, for example, nose, lip, eyebrow, ear gauges, or double hole piercings while in uniform. with that, i will open it up to any questions you might have regarding the department bulletin. >> vice president taylor: i don't see anything in the chat, and so unless a commissioner has a question, i think it's appropriate to have a motion. is there a motion? >> so moved. >> vice president taylor:

sergeant. open it up to public comment. >> clerk: for members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding line item 5 on department bulletin 20-163 on grooming standards, please dial 415-655-0001 and enter access code 146-348-0406. press pound, and pound again. for members already on, please press star, three to raise your hand. and we have no public comment, commissioner. >> vice president taylor: commissioner cohen, did you have a question? >> commissioner cohen: yes, i do. thank you. i'm curious, mosier, were members -- were officers consulted with this policy or members of the p.o.a. consulted on the creation of this policy? is. >> so this policy is going to be part of a larger revision to department general order 11.08,

which will accompany or which will actually fold in the wearing of earrings and jewelry, and during the creation of that general order, there was extensive conversations and consultation with members of the department as well as members of the p.o.a. that current department general order is going through the process, and i believe is currently with d.p.a. for review and should be submitted to you, the commission, soon. >> commissioner cohen: thank you. >> vice president taylor: okay. sergeant, do you want to call roll for the vote?

>> clerk: yes. so on the montion to adopt the department bulletin 20-163 -- [roll call] >> clerk: you have six yeses. >> vice president taylor: okay. the motion passes. next item. >> clerk: line item 6, general public comment. at this time, the public is welcome to address the commission for up to two minutes on items that do not appear on the agenda but are under the jurisdiction of the police commission. under rules of the commission, neither police nor members of the d.p.a. nor the commission may respond to comments made during public comment.

public comment may be made by calling 415-655-0001 and entering meeting i.d. 146-348-0406. press pound, and pound again. for those already logged on that would like to make general public comment, please press star, three now. so far, no public comment. >> vice president taylor: okay. next line item. >> clerk: next line item, line item 7. public comment on all matters pertaining to item 9 below, closed session, including public comment on item 8, vote

whether to hold item 9 in closed session. members of the public who would like to make public comment on-line item 7, please press star, three now. and there's no public comment, commissioner. >> vice president taylor: all right. next item. >> clerk: line item 8, vote on whether to hold item 9 in closed session, san francisco administrative code section 67.10, action. >> vice president taylor: is there a motion? >> commissioner hamasaki: so moved. >> commissioner elias: second. >> vice president taylor: okay. >> clerk: all right. on the motion to hold item 9 in closed session -- [roll call]

>> clerk: you have six yeses. i will take us into closed session. >> vice president taylor: great. >> clerk: commissioners, we are back in open session. line item 10, vote to elect whether to disclose any and all discussion on item 9 held in closed session, san francisco administrative code section 57.12 a, action. >> vice president taylor: can i have a motion? >> commissioner elias: motion. >> commissioner dejesus: second. >> clerk: all right. on the motion -- [roll call]

>> vice president taylor: do we need to make public comment on this, sergeant youngblood? >> clerk: yes, we do. members of the public who would like to make public comment, please press star, three if you'd like to make public comment, and we have no public comment. all right. [roll call] >> clerk: you have six yeses. >> vice president taylor: all right. the motion passes, and please call the final item. >> clerk: line item 11, adjournment. action item. >> vice president taylor: do i have a motion?

>> so moved. >> commissioner hamasaki: second. >> clerk: on the motion to adjourn -- [roll call] >> clerk: motion passes with six yeses. >> vice president taylor: all right. that does it for tonight. >> commissioner hamasaki: everyone have a great night. see you next time.

. >> president yee: of the 26 neighborhoods we have in west portal, it's probably the most unique in terms of a small little town. you can walk around here, and it feels different from the rest of san francisco. people know each other.

they shop here, they drink wine here. what makes it different is not only the people that live here, but the businesses, and without all these establishments, you wouldn't know one neighborhood from the other. el toreador is a unique restaurant. it's my favorite restaurant in san francisco, but when you look around, there's nowhere else that you'll see decorations like this, and it makes you feel like you're in a different world, which is very symbolic of west portal itself. >> well, the restaurant has been here since 1957, so we're going on 63 years in the neighborhood. my family came into it in 1987, with me coming in in 1988.

>> my husband was a designer, and he knew a lot about art, and he loved color, so that's what inspired him to do the decorati decorations. the few times we went to mexico, we tried to get as many things as we can, and we'd bring it in. even though we don't have no space, we try to make more space for everything else. >> president yee: juan of the reasons we came up with the legacy business concept, man eel businesses were closing down for a variety of reasons. it was a reaction to trying to keep our older businesses continuing in the city, and i think we've had some success, and i think this restaurant itself is probably proof that it works. >> having the legacy business

experience has helped us a lot, too because it makes it good for us because we have been in business so long and stayed here so long. >> we get to know people by name, and they bring their children, so we get to know them, also. it's a great experience to get to know them. supervisor yee comes to eat at the restaurant, so he's a wonderful customer, and he's very loyal to us. >> president yee: my favorite dish is the chile rellenos. i almost never from the same things. my owner's son comes out, you want the same thing again? >> well, we are known for our mole, and we do three different types of mole.

in the beginning, i wasn't too familiar with the whole legacy program, but san francisco, being committed to preserve a lot of the old-time businesses, it's important to preserve a lot of the old time flavor of these neighborhoods, and in that capacity, it was great to be recognized by the city and county of san francisco. >> i've been here 40 years, and i hope it will be another 40 yeararararararararararararararr

>> good afternoon, everyone. thank you so much for joining

us. last week when we announced some rollbacks around the restaurants and a number of other businesses, we did make it clear that we are sadly seeing an increase in the number of covid cases and in fact, last week our reproductive rate was at 1.2 and today it is at 1.3. just this past friday we have seen an increase in over 20 # o cases. our case as of today are 13,756 with 38 people who are hospitalized, 156 people who have lost their lives since the beginning of this pandemic in san francisco in particular and the positivity rate is at 1.87. dr. grant colfax is joining me to talk more specifically about the numbers and what they mean and where we are, the same way he did so last week. what we're seeing here and what we've seen all over the country

is what looks like to be a significant uptick, one that we have to pay i a tension to. and more importantly, one that has put san francisco which has been really a leader on fighting against this pandemic, it has put all of the incredible gains that we have made at jeopardy. effective tomorrow, we have been informed by the state of california, and we will be going from the yellow tier which we were so proud to be at to the red tier. and what that means is, sadly, a number of things will need to come off the table. one of the things that i have made clear from the very beginning is we are going to proceed with caution so that we can do everything we can to avoid a complete shutdown. and as of tomorrow, we will need to unfortunately roll back nonessential office space, making sure that people who are

nonessential, that have opened their office spaces will need to close them at this time. and unfortunately, the gyms will need to go from 25% down to 10%. these particular things were mostly chosen because under state law in red we have to follow those guidelines, but also we understand that there are certain things that put us more at risk of increasing the virus than other activities. and again, dr. grant colfax is joining me today and will explain some of the specifics around what this means for our city, especially in light of what we see happening. and we want to continue to make sure that we don't go backwards. and how do we do that? we don't go backwards by not getting comfortable, not getting complacent. the weather has been pretty nice even though it's been cold. but the sun has been shining.

people have been enjoying san francisco. i had an opportunity to walk around the city this weekend, and i saw so many people out and about enjoying the parks, doing -- walking, jogging, hanging out at the restaurants and other things. a lot of people were outdoors. and what we have to continue to do is not get comfortable because the fact is the virus is still out there. and we are still going to have to adjust to this so that we don't continue to see a significant spike in san francisco. what's happening next week, of course, is one of our favorite holidays, and that's thanksgiving. and so we know that so many people want to travel and then there's other family members that want to come visit. the department of public health has put out a travel advisory asking residents to avoid nonessential travel, but more importantly, we need to think about the folks that come to visit us as well, especially in

places where we are seeing higher case numbers. this year we're asking people to sacrifice because of thanksgiving when we get together and we see large family gathering, especially indoors, when those happen, we could be dealing with the impacts of those decisions by christmas with a significant increase in hospitalizations. so what we're asking people to do is sacrifice. sacrifice and put off the things that we all know and love especially during the holiday season. for the sole purpose of trying to get to a better place and for the sole purpose of making sure that people don't continue to catch this virus and so that folks aren't continuing to be hospitalized and that we don't see increased number of deaths as a result of wanting to come together for the holidays. this is where we are now. this is me sounding the alarm.

this is me asking san franciscans to do exactly what i have been asking this entire time, to make adjustments, to make sacrifices, and to do everything you can to remember that this virus exists and make sure that our behavior and what we do helps to avoid circulating the virus in the first place. we remember not too long ago the when we finally made the announcement that we would be opening gyms and hair salons and nail salons. just think about how good it felt to feel normal. to go and get your hair done or your nails done or to go and workout at the gym and enjoy your time there, but just think about how much more important it was to the people who were finally able to open their business, who were finally able to get a paycheck, who finally had some level of certainty in

their lives that they would be able to take care of themselves. now, think about what's happening now. i'm sure that so many of those people are scared. last week we told the restaurants that they would no longer be able to operate indoors. what that meant was not only layoffs, but it also meant that there was a lot of lost revenue because of the food that they no longer were able to use. when you think about some of the things and the sacrifices that people are making, that's what makes me continue as much as i want to be around people and i want to be around friends and family, it's why i choose to make sure that i am doing my part by keeping my distance and by avoiding large crowds and by not getting complacent. it's not just because i'm the mayor of the city and i am

asking you to do, but it's because i want to get our kids back in school. it pains me every time we have to make an announcement to close a business because i know what that means financially for that business. and it has been very, very difficult for so many people. we know that since the pandemic began, almost 300,000 san franciscans have filed for unemployment. and we know that people continue to suffer financially. and we also know that people are still in the hospital and people are nervous and concerned about their own personal health. we know that we disproportionately have seen a lot of infections in our latino community, and we made significant investments and we are seeing a real difference. i'm really proud of that work,

but there's more that needs to be done because when we look at the data, which has been the driving force behind every decision that we have made, we make good decisions. we make adjustments as it relates to the data. one of those such adjustments is moving soma location, a testing location, to the alamany farmer's market because we know in this community which touches the o.m.i., touches the bayview hunter's point, and it touches that whole region, we know there is a need for more access, more consistent testing. this location was doing over 500 tests a day, and in san francisco, we're going close to 5,000 tests a day. when i think about how far we've come, being able to provide people their test results anywhere between 24 and 48 hours, it is significant.

when i look at the maps of what shows us specifically where the areas which carry the higher infection rates and where the areas are that have testing both public and private, we have to make an adjustment. we had no choice. so tomorrow that location will be at the farmer's market. and i am really grateful to the department of public health and the work that was done in order to make the adjustment and to move the site to this specific location as well as the work that has been done to get us to this point where we are adjusting to the needs of the people of san francisco. this will continue to be a challenge, and it's hard to get up here and tell people that you're going to have to close your business. you're going to have to make some adjustments. can't see your grandmother who

is in a nursing facility. you can't hang out with your friends. children can't spend time with one another like they used to. it pains me. and so because of that, we need everyone's cooperation so that people's lives aren't impacted as a result of our decisions. we've come a long way, san francisco. we have been a leader on combatting this virus. we should be so proud that we've done an incredible job. and now i'm asking for more. and i know it's hard. i know it's hard every single day that you have to make that decision. i know it's hard, but i'm asking for more. as we come upon the holiday

season with different kind of flu and hopefully you got your flu shot, we know that this is going to be a next tough couple of months. so let's continue to do our part. let's continue to be creative and keep our distance. let's minimize the number of households and the people that we interact with. let's cutback on those holiday dinners with large families gathering on the inside. let's do what we can so that we can see the change. and as we see the change, that will put us in a better situation to begin to reopen our city and to put our economy back on track and to put our kids back in school and to look behind us and say because of everything we did, we are in a better place and we are so grateful for the sacrifices that we all made to get there. thank you, all, so much for your

cooperation, and at this time, i want to introduce dr. grant colfax to talk specifically about the data, where we are, what we need to continue to do, and information from the department of public health. dr. grant colfax.

good afternoon and thank you mayor breed. we are now experiencing on the national, state, and regional level. so let me be clear that san francisco is in the midst of the major surge of covid-19 cases. it is sobering that we have reached this point again. as you know, this is the third surge we have experienced and unfortunately, the virus is moving aggressively in our community. unlike the previous two surges, this surge is impacting every state in the nation. in the last two weeks, deaths

have increased and the c.d.c. cited a new record and as you can see on this slide, san francisco is trending behind the national average of cases per 100,000. and that is no reason for us to believe that we couldn't catch up to the average and catch up quickly. and in california, we are seeing the fastest growth in daily cases since the pandemic began. the rate of increase that we are seeing in california is faster and steeper than the summer surge. and here in san francisco we are seeing an explosion of new cases throughout is city becoming more widespread. we are now averaging 10 dayses

per 100,000 people in the red zone and you can see represented in the blue bars the sharp increases in cases we have had since october. and the black line represents the seven-day rolling average of new cases in our city. from october 10 to november 10, daily new covid cases jumped from an average of 29 cases a day with the additional perspective, let me share additional numbers. it took us 29 days to go from 11,000 to 12,000 total cases in san francisco. it took us 18 days to go from

12,000 to 13,000. and now we anticipate that it will take us just 12 days to go from 13,000 to 14,000 cases. let's go to the next slide. this slide shows the increase in cases in san francisco per 100,000. you see the rapid rise. this rate of rise is higher than ever before. right now the other health indicators remain stable. the hospitalizations remain stable at the green level. however, and unfortunately, we do expect to see an increase in hospitalizations. we currently have sufficient hospital beds in i.c.u. and intensive care unit capacity, but if the surge continues, we could exceed that capacity as,

unfortunately, we are seeing in certain regions and states across the country. and we continue to test more than 5800 people a day with the testing rate and contact tracing over 85% of cases. so let me take a moment to talk about the state tier changes. today the state announced they have seen an increase in cases and in most cases that increase has been dramatic. the state has placed them in the most restrictive purple tier. and we have moved from the least restrictive tier, yellow, to

where virus transmission is minimal to this red tier where virus transmission is substantial. that means instead of moving back to just one tier to orange as was previously anticipated under is state system, we have unfortunately moved back two tiers. this is indicative of how fast and due to the red tier designation, we will have to have people return to return to remote work and reduce gyms and indoor climbing walls to 10% capacity. i do not want to continue to move backwards. additional restrictions could be necessary if each of us does not take immediate action today to do our part to limit the spread

of the virus. so let's take a moment and think about that. let's think about how that relates to the upcoming holidays that i wish we could celebrate in the normal times. next week is thanksgiving. so as hard as it is to say this, please do not travel. please do not travel. stay at home with the immediate household. as hard as it might be, we must exercise caution and do our part. and please do not use testing to determine whether you can travel or not. we have seen the repeated failure, the repeated failure of this type of testing strategy across the country including in

washington, d.c. a negative test cannot be an excuse to put yourself or others at risk. remember, please remember, that people who test negative can still harbor the virus if they are early in their infection. that is why when people are exposed to the virus, they must quarantine for 14 days regardless of their test results. san francisco, once again, we simply must double down or triple down and do everything we can to stop the spread of the virus. we cannot be reckless or complacent and take everything precaution to protect ourselves, our family and the community. the choices we, the choices you, the choices i make in the next

two weeks will determine the remainder of the holiday season. we have the ability to bead back the third surge in other parts of the country. and we can choose by the actions we take this week and the upcoming week. the safest way to celebrate is to to not expose and i strongly recommend against it and strongly recommend against it keep it to no more than six people and keep the masks on, period. the best way is to give your

friends and family the gift of good health. as we have learned, the past months is we have learned that together we can beat it back. so we have done it twice and we can do it again. i know that everyone is tired and fatigued. and i know i can sound like a broken record. but covid 19 is not resting. and neither can we. remember, we know how to sol slow the spread of the virus. limit gatherings and wear your mask and let's be cautious, diligent and safe. let's make sure that we and our loved ones are here for that vaccine so that we can really celebrate big next year. thank you.

thank you. >> thank you, dr. colfax. and welcome, madam mayor, as we begin the q and a portion. the first question somes from should public schools continue to aim for a january 20 target

date? >> absolutely. it is essential to get our schools open as safely as possible and before the science makes it clear that the spread of covid amongst elementary and middle school students and is not the same as amongst adults and kids who are in high school. so we know what the data is. we know that educators and others are involved and we know that it's so critical that between now and january we do the work to prepare to safely open as quickly and possible. so we are hopeful to get to a better place. they have provided a significant amount of resources to continue the process so that we are

prepared to open as quickly and safely as possible. we now have a few health-related questions for director colfax. in terms of testing, is there an increase in demand or are they providing better access? as the major mentioned, we are to go to where the virus is now averaging 5800 tests a day,

higher than any other jurisdictions we are aware of. and from the beginning we focus on insuring that people have access to the testing to the essential workers who have symptoms and who have a high rf risk exposure and who do not have insurance. the city is also currently conducting 55% of the 5800 tests. with the probably testing and kaiser, for instance, has greatly eliminated many barriers in testing. any explanation on this? >> this reflects the overall surge from across the city and

is important to emphasize that the virus remains concentrated in the communities most impacted by the the the virus and it is important no matter where you are that everyone does their part to reduce the risk of the viral transmission. this is not a time to let up and not a time to socialize in close quarters with other people. keep activities outdoors and wear the masks. >> thank you, doctor. the last set of questions. is there any plan to reduce ak pan si at retail store or personal services such as salons? -- to reduce occupancy. and if san francisco were to drop to purple, what would that

mean for businesss? >> we are focussing on trying to keep from moving further backward which is why it is so important as the holiday season that we see the surge that everyone do their part. if we do into purple, we will need to take the steps that the state requires and purple require. right now we do not have any media plans to place further restrictions. as you know, indoor dining closed on saturday. this is with madam mayor for your time. there are no further questions and this concludes today's press conference. thank you.

>> the meeting will come to order. this is the december 2, 2020, rescheduled budget and finance committee meeting. i'm sandra lee fewer, joined by commissioner walton and commissioner mandelman. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> yes, to protect members and the public, the board of supervisors chamber and committee will be participating in the meeting remotely.

committee members will participate in the meeting through video conference and as if they are physically present. each speaker will be allowed 2 minutes to speak. you can call 415-655-0001. again, that's 415-655-0001. the meeting i.d.: 146-622-0460. then press pound twice. when connected you will hear the meeting discussions that you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or

radio. you can submit public comment in the following way, e-mail to myself at linda.wong@sfgov.org. you can submit public comments via e-mail and it will be e-mailed to the supervisors and part of the official file. >> thank you very much madam clerk. can you call items 1 and 2 together. >> yes. home detention electronic monitoring program rules and regulations and program administratorâ ™s evidence of financial responsibility - fy2020-2021 hearing - electronic monitoring in the interest of public safety.

members of the public who wish to provide public comment on these items should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d.: 146-622-0460. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comment. >> thank you very much madam clerk. so colleagues, item one has been before this committee for almost three months now and has continued five times as a result of many questions that have come regarding the use of electronic monitoring in san francisco. however, the questions that have extended far beyond the scope and scale of item number one and the sheriff's office. so in response to the last discussion from this committee, i introduced a hearing, which is item number two and have asked

that multiple city departments present and expand our scope of questions beyond the department and their contract. thank you to the departments for being here today. let's start with item number one and i am wondering if we shoushould have a review made quickly as a powerpoint that kristin presented at the first hearing just to reorient ourselves about our discussion. so would you mind presenting your powerpoint to us again? >> certainly, let me just bring it up. can everybody see that? >> yes. >> terrific. good morning chair fewer, good morning supervisors.

i'm the c.f.o. and i'm here to talk about the monitoring program when we started this, the reason we were there because electronic monitoring comes before this body on an annual basis because the california penal code requires that the board of supervisors review on an annual basis the electronic monitoring rules and regulations and liability and that was provided to you for review. also, over the last few months, we have talked about just the process and really the point today without going through this flowchart is that this is a process that involves multiple agencies that make up the criminal justice system and this flowchart shows that the decision points in this process, particularly the decision point that results in an individual

being assigned to an electronic monitoring is made by the courts. in this department, the sheriff's office runs that program for the most part. then i also have a slide showing the public safety assessment and the decision making framework to show how people end up with various relief conditions and as you can see from the data in this chart, high risk scores correlate with the higher risk of not appearing in court and higher risk of re-offending during this pretrial period. in the slide it states that the court use electronic monitoring as a tool to mitigate these risks as is illustrated by the next slide. so this next slide, which i

titled impact and effectiveness, each of these three boxes shows for a given date the total on how many of the people were in custody on the subject date. between september 2016 and 2019, the in custody population decreased by 5%, even though the total of involved population group grew by 27%. i can't speak for why the total population increased but the decrease correlates with an increase in court order e.m. as was noted in many of the other hearings. the population during this time grew threefold and today the courts have played 25% total involved population on electronic monitoring. we believe that has been very effective in reducing the jail population and assisting with

the closure. i also talked about who is on the electronic monitoring per request from this body. so we looked at it by the charges given to these people. we looked at the charge, splitting it into two buckets, part one for violent charges, part two for non-violent charges. most jurisdictions restrict the monitoring to part two charges, however san francisco being a leader in criminal justice reform expanded the use of e.m. to keep them out of custody and reduce the jail population and it's the part one population that account for the threefold increase rather than custody which has in turn played a critical role in increasing the

jail population. another way of looking at electronic monitoring, let's look at it demographically. this slide is one of the pie charts, broking down into two groups. it shows race and ethnicity, the demographics, these percentages are reflective of who was arrested in san francisco and the three pie charts on the bottom shows the score from the decision making framework. to reduce the decision making framework excludes demographic data, however for the purposes of this presentation, demographic data was added from other data sets, linked by a booking member, but in addition to showing scores by race, the bottom three charts highlight that the courts assign e.m. primarily for individuals whose decision making framework score results in a release, not recommended -- recommendation.

it allows for non-custodial release for individuals who may otherwise be held in custody. then we have one final slide showing demographic data on who is on electronic monitoring by housing status, gender, and age. that is really the end of this presentation, but before i conclude, i want to add again what i said the last time. there is a larger question of effectiveness of electronic monitoring in this office and the sheriff's office is interested in looking at that. if we just go back to the report on the closure, there was a recommendation that the city should review research on the effectiveness of the electronic monitoring and the impact on the population. this office is working with the california policy lab, an arm of