december 14, 2022 please stand by.

>> i pledge allegiance to the

republic for which it stands, one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> roll. >> commissioner walker. >> present. >> commissioner benedicto. >> present. >> commissioner yanez. commissioner byrne. >> here. >> commissioner yee. >> here. >> we have a department police accountability. president ally as, director hender on if i can please take a minute to acknowledge staff. this year marks the 35th year working with the san francisco with the majority working in the police commission office. has dedicated career but to every single person, baby can dog she comes across.

because of risa that the commission officers organized and as efficient as it is. organizing examine training others to make the office more efficient. family to those who work closely with her. will make time the to talk to anyone who wants to talk. her calendar is full of birthday sxz her candy jar is full. auntie risa's office always has the most toys. a profession ar mixed with sadness of a pending goodbye that we use risa the happy retirement as she embarks on her next big adventure. >> thank you, sergeant and i would like, even though she is not present for her to know how valuable she is. she is part of the glue that keeps the operation together.

i remember when i first came into the commission office, she was my honorary lola and she would remind me of my filipino culture and heritage. if the garjt she was there to answer any questions. it's a huge loss to our office but we do have an exceptional back up teammate that is going to be filling her rather large shoes. so i'm very sad to see her leave but i wish her the best and i hope for fun she comes back to visit us. commissioner yanez.

>> even before i came here, she has been nothing short of ultimate professional kindhearted but one of the hardest workers that i meet that has not changed. i just want to say thank you teresa and all of her family, her, husbands also a retired, her son and wish her the best on her retirement. >> commissioner yee. >> thank you, madam president. we're going to miss risa, when i got over here, she has been very we'll miss her service and

hopefully in the future she comes back examine visit us. so thank her again and her family and happy holidays to everybody else. >> vice president carter-oberstone. >> i just want to thank risa, she has credit for detail and never takes credit for all of her hard work. and i think the public does not really get to see how hard this commission office works to make everything we do possible and risa was an indispensable member of the team. and i want to thank her for her service to this commission and our city and wish her the best in retirement. >> thank you.

>> and she can give public comment and sit with us, i will be willing to save her a seat in the front roll and all of 2023. >> we have extended to many who has left this commission. we will definitely extend it, so thank you. >> all right, sergeant let's get it going. >> next line 1, general public comment. for members of the public we're going to limit general public comment for 30 minutes and two minutes for every person and will continue the general public comment towards the end of the meeting after. >> at this time the public is now welcomed to address the commission for up to two minutes on items that do not appear on tonight's agenda.

under police commission rules of order during public comment, they're not required to respond but may provide a brief response. comments or opportunities to speak are available via phone by calling 415-6150001 and access code 24904205325. you may submit public comment in two of the following ways. or written comments may be sent via postal service, san francisco california 94158. if you would like to make public comment, please approach the podium or press star-3.

>> thank you very much, we have three minutes. >> he with solve the numerous problems. in addition we have the people to have the ability to add our point of view to the mix in order to resolve these issues. we applaud the police commission to giving people two minutes at the start of the meeting. this is a real benefit. real question is do you have the time with the concern to listen to our comments? one of the things that i think will come up numerous times and probably tonight, but we need to be cognizant how we change policy that is in opposition to the law. we need to change the law first. it is not the police commission standing to change the law. that is up to the legislative bodies. thank you so much. bye. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes.

>> speaker: hello i'm gene bridges and i volunteer in the black community. the following is a quote from following felicia jones. urgent i'm going to call this what it is, anti blackness and use of force, arrest and racial profiling via traffic stop. i've grown tired of talking to the board of supervisors. if the tables were turned and they represented white folks. i know there would be an urgently. when are you going to address the statistics. you took an oath to uphold the law, as i said i'm tired, not tired enough to quit however tired on requests falling on deaf ears. we sought help from southern general and his team, end quote. wealth and disparity and have become the issue in san

francisco since the december firing squad style execution of ma rio woods by sfpd in 2017 that's over 7 years working in injustices. provided in put during the doj9. meanwhile police officers are dominating the process. sfpd does not want this, sfpd is not reform nor on a path to reform. this commission has greatly mishandled this process. our valid criticisms are falling on deaf ears and commissioner ' police input is the office of community input. thank you.

>> good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> thank you. i wanted to add from the previous speaker, this commission is starting to completely over step your authority. by telling officers how and they should follow established law. if people don't like the law, let's go to the legislature, that's the adjudicater that's where the voice is heard and it's not your role and tell officers to uphold laws in the city. what i'm disappointed is you brag about how your out reach has been so broad but it's extremely limited, the constituentcy sxhz prop up the proposal. i want to send a message to the

san francisco police officers, don't let whatever happens tonight dis swayed you from following the law. or dis swayed you from following the traffic laws. this is the safety of citizens at stake and your safety as well. i urge the commission to step back, realize where its authority lies and get more input on controversial and dangerous proposals like the ones that have been proposed previously and tonight. thank you. >> caller as reminder djo9.9 is on the agenda, public comment are for items not on the agenda. i let that one slip but from now on, public comment cannot

be on items on the agenda. good evening caller, you have two minutes. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes. >> i'm susan buckman and i volunteer to the disparity of black community. the following is from felicia jones. i'm going to call it what it is, anti blackness in terms of use and racial profiling and traffic stops by sfpd. i've grown tired of talking to the commission. where is the urgency if the tables were turned and these statistics represented white folks, i know there would be an urgency. when are you going to address the statistics. you took the oath to uphold the law. as i said, i'm tired but not tired enough to quit but tired

of beating an old horse. since you're not allowing me to speak on tgno i'll make any comments more general. there is an attitude among the po a and among officers. officers are victims in the process of police reform. but the clear victims are not the officers. they are the black and brown community, who are the victims of bias, the victims of murder in some cases. so as you work on police reform, remember who the victims are and who the aggressors are. don't be fooled by scare mongering by the pla. remember that you are here not to help the police department but to protect the people of san francisco from the excesses of the police department.

thank you. >> president elias that's the end of public comment. >> thank you sergeant before we go to the next item i'm going to, i would like to say a few words. from the beginning of the process, we always said that we want to pass an evidence base policy that both protects public safety and combats the series and unacceptable levels and problems of racial disparity in the city. we heard great feedback since opening this item up for debate last week. members of the public, elected officials, our fellow commissioners and others have flooded our emails, our phones, and have contacted us about this process. we've collected information from the past 8 months on this

policy. we heard the calls and the requests for expanding parts of the poll sew, for changing parts of the policy and everything in between. last week, this policy was presented before this commission. and it was presented to the fellow commissioners who were unable to participate in the process of this d g.o. it also allowed the public to see a final version that we had been working on for months. after we published the final draft on that thursday, that monday, we had a three-four hour conversation with the chief both commissioners benedicto and vice president and myself. after the final draft of the poll sew was posted, i reached out to the mayor's office inviting them to the table to discuss this d g.o. along with the chief, that invitation was never accepted. when this matter was before the

commission last week, although i was not physically present i was able to participate and watch as the information and the policy unfolded. yesterday, i was personally attacked after leaving the board of supervisors meeting by several members of the body. without the ability to defend myself. i'm going to put my personal feelings aside about how i was treated and what was said. in order to do the right thing and what is right for our city and public safety. there are additional perspectives that must be considered before this policy is finalized and i want those perspectives to be heard examine an opportunity to finalize the edits that we received. i want to express my deepest gratitude to those members who supported me, i heard you. i want to thank the sfmta board

of directors and the mayor's office of disability who reached out to us on monday and we excuse me, and commissioner benedicto and vice president met with these two agencies and we had a robust conversation and they enlightened us on some of the concerns. we were also very happy with the feedback we received. we looked forward to incorporating the feedback and we planned to release a further revised policy when the commission returns next year. and because of all of those reasons, i'm pulling 901 from the calendar and i would like to move on to agenda item number 2. >> line item 2, data presentation and urban association, economic justice jacob denny discussion.

>> jacob, thank you the commission. i just want to briefly introduce you to commissioners. jacob is a policy director at spur association. jacob, leads research and advocacy to ensure that all people are economically secure. he worked across the country on issues related to the legal system that impact low income and working people. was the policy and research at the inside center economic justice organization. he has been a researcher focused on criminal legal systems at the charitable trust a researcher and advocate focused on fees and began his career in the massachusetts state senate. jacob received his masters from public policy from the private

policy of university of southern california and his bachelor's from university of massachusetts boston, jacob, thank you for joining us. >> thank you, i appreciate the to talk to you about some traffic stop data analysis that we've been working on on spur. again, my name is jacob denny and the policy director at spur. we're going to talk today, i'm going data analysis and go over some traffic stops in san francisco and then narrowly talk about the pretext on dg901, if you want to stop me, do. this is a lot of charts, quite a bit of data and i'm happy to talk about them, but any questions or concerns that come up, please let me know. so first tell you a little bit

about spur, spur a nonprofit organization focused on finding solutions on big city space, we're based on in san francisco, san jose and oakland and we work as commissioner charter, economic policy director. my background is justice research advocacy, focus on qualitative research. so this analysis uses the 2019 identity profiling act, it's the most resent year for what we have driver data that is normal because of the pandemic, behavior was incredibly abnormal. 2022 promises to be normal, the data that we've seen shows the drivers are return to go prepandemic behaviors and demographic is from the 2019 survey from the u.s. census.

so what we're first talking about is traffic stops in san francisco, california some of the expensive traffic citations in the u.staitsz. the high cost have a dis portion at affect on low income people. in 2019, there were 60,000, sfpd traffic stops. men are more likely to be than women are that's trou across the country and we see that in san francisco. and we see that racial groups

with white men being over represented based on the census data. so when we look at the per-capita, how many of them would be stopped by police? we see that black drivers are five times represented white drivers, to the tune of 2440 per 10,000 black residents. when we see the reasons for stop, vary from group, racial or ethnic group. other kinds of dangerous behaviors the things that we're concerned about. white drivers 75% and asian 74%. total is 65. black drivers are more likely to be stopped for what is quoted equipment violations as well as more non moving violations. and you see this continues and

you break it out by gender, black men in particular are more likely to be stopped for equipment violations but black women as well are over represented in equipment stops. so what happens after you've been stopped? this is looking solely as whether or not somebody was given a invitation or no citations. so some of these percentages don't add up to 100 or 99 because there are other possibilities because of address. black drivers are where a majority of stops do not result in a citation. 56% stopped by police are not given a ticket. white drivers, and asian 77% are given a traffic ticket when stopped by police. and this again, spells out by race and gender both black men and women a majority of those stops do not receive a traffic citation when stopped by police.

but, because of the high rate of stops we see that black drivers are more likely to receive a citation than white drivers. we see that black people are nearly 3 times as likely to receive a frask ticket than their white neighbors. so again, the impact are felt by the san francisco black community. so we look broadly by race and ethnicity. black drivers are three most common reason for stop, license and no registration, failed to stop or signal. base on signals and unsafe speeds. latinx is a local woman violation that's how it explains in the data it's a catch-all for san francisco as opposed to broader traffic codes. stop in the cross walk and stop

in a sign, local ordinance violation or unsafe speed. we see that black drivers are more likely to be stopped for what is quoted violations, those are two of the most common reasons for stops for black drivers. so this is a space analysis. this is a statistic a al tool that says we have this bounded your graphic area let's compare it to its neighbors and see who has more with which is in the red and who has less. so what we zoo is that the red areas, we have a statistically over representation of traffic stops that is in our neighborhood, mission downtown, and in some of our more residential neighbors, we have fewer traffic stops than we would expect to see.

we see that it makes sense, many of the areas that have i higher rate of traffic stops are denser neighbors, have a higher population rate, and also communities that are very diverse and many low income people living in them as well. >> do you want it finish? >> i'm going to go on for another 30 slides so i can finish or you can ask questions. >> i think, it may be more efficient if you wrap up his representation and we can ask questions. >> it's more about the data before the pretext.

i would rather get clear about the data before we go into. >> okay, great. go ahead. >> okay, thank you. just a couple of questions in looking at the result of traffic stops, i don't see a page number but it's. >> sure. >> it's the data that says that black drivers receive less tickets, does that mean they're warned or do we know? >> so they can be warning or no citation? so they're both lumped together, they could have had a warning. >> okay, and they were, they're more likely pulled over the number 1 is for mechanical violations. >> so the number one reason for all racial and ethnic groups is moving violations, the number one reason for black drivers is license plate affixed incorrectly. so related to having one license late no license plate,

license plate wrong. >> okay, i have a excuse me. >> great. >> i also wanted some clarity, the spacetial analysis, there are more traffic stops in the downtown area where there is more traffic, did you determine? >> yes. >> equitable numbers there? like, people don't necessarily drive a lot out in those other areas, especially all day long. >> so it compares to your nearest census track, this is the confusing part. it compares to the nearest neighbors, so it assumes that not everybody in the map is identical, it's going to instead, the analysis looks at the nearest census tracks so. when you see the representation , it's going to compare the west side to the west side. and i expect those places to be

geographically different. >> okay, that's it for now. thank you. >> great. >> i would like to have you finish, i have some. >> great. >> thank you, proposed stops and by the d g.o., many of them will have per-capita, but the number of stops was so low, because half a person per 10,000 things like that. there is also a search and analysis in here as well. and again only pretext on the california road. so we ban anything in the san francisco code. what we see, is labeled license plate in san francisco.

white drivers are dramatically under represented here. latinx are under represented including middle eastern pacific islander data as well and we've seen representation in both of those communities. so sheriff given the citation, just 22% of drivers stopped are ticketed by police despite making up a plurality of those stops. 45% of white drivers are given tickets, 32% latinx and 38% stop for this argument and ticket. per-capita stop rate. we see drivers are 16 times more likely to be stopped as their white neighbors in the city of san francisco. latinx drivers also about a little more than twice likely to be stopped as their white neighbors.

the per-capita citation rate, despite 22% being ticketed because of the cheer volume of stops made, we see drivers are nine times more likely compared to their white neighbors. a search plate, we see that black drivers are searched 22% of the time or they make up 27% of the searches, 4% asian, sorry, 18% of the is time they're searched, people black people again over represented in the search column. and for this particular, i'm sorry, i'm moving the wrong thing ahead. again contraband is a really big list of things, ranges from money to alcohol and things

like guns and other other concerns. less than one percent of the stop resulted in a discovery of a gun and one percent of stops resulted in arrest. what we see black drivers are over helped. 34% of all stops are expired registration are black drivers and latinx also represented 21%. white drivers 30% middle eastern pacific islander drivers over represented. when we look sheriff' citation, we see again that white and asian drivers are more likely to be given a citation than their neighbors of different racial demographic, black and latinx less likely to be given the citation than their white or asian neighbors.

per-capita stop rate, black people are ten times more likely to be stopped than their white neighbors for failing to show registration tags. and we see that, the per-capita citation rate, blacks drivers are more likely to be sited despite having a smaller citation rate. about point 7 percent of stops for expired registration resulted in an arrest.

25% of people are black drivers. dramatically over represented, latinx also dramatically represented. and middle eastern pacific island over helped as well. 20% of latinx drivers are sited when stopped. black people 6 times likely to be stopped for failing to have license plate. it's a very small number of stops.

without eliminated taillights, black drivers, and latinx also represented, 26% of all stops, white asian and pacific islanders are over represented. given a citation, asian 52. less likely to receive a citation. 23% of them are searched, for asian and latinx and 13% total.

two percent result in arrest. over represented, 30% white, latinx slightly over represented, middle eastern over represented in these stops. black drivers less likely than any other ethnic group, black drivers latinx 45% of the time. asians slightly more. slightly more than in the stop.

44% of stops are black drivers, latinx, 32% examine middle eastern and pacific islander also likely over represented. likely to be stopped for this than white drivers. 9% asian but the total is very high.

23% white so again over representation of white drivers. the number one ethnic 28% of all stops asian under represented and pacific islanders, population also over represented. we see that 45% are searched by police compared to 9% white.

2% in a cover' of a gun and 2% in arrest. it will be about 10,000 fewer stops conducted in san francisco every year. 30,000 in fines and fees not administered that's just based on the stop where the ticket was issued. and it would eliminate the number one and three reasons why covered here. thank you for sitting through 50 charts of bar charts, not something anybody but myself look forward to. >> i'm going to give you a

minute to breathe and refresh, that was a lot and you did a phenomenal job and made it under time, so thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for being here. i'm going to work a little bit backwards. on the last slide you said that it would help produce racial despair pit. what would be the affect on the last community. it indicates that not only black communities are racially but there is also a huge racial disparity with respect to the latin community as well. latino drivers are stopped significant number of times for this offense, i think it's the most common reason that, i believe.

so the affect would also be significant, 100 fewer stops. >> can then i'm going to jump into the front of the presentation. and then you indicate moving examine non moving equipment. >> so it's equipment stop and also the report in those categories too. and it's usually something wrong with your car, there is something physically wrong with your car. taillight out things unrelated to the cars actual driving behavior. >> can then on the following slide you indicate the traffic stop by race examine ethnicity. and you had indicated that with respect to the citation, do we know why the, the individuals

don't receive a traffic citation but are stopped? >> so it's just recorded as a warning and no citation. so i have not done this research but somebody can go in there and say i'm going to pull out everybody and compare it to a search rate and then maybe see if there is a reason there. but we don't totally understand why, based on the data we and why it stopped in on a ticket. it could be a number of things. but the sheer volume means that there is a difference. >> you know, one of the things that comes to mind is the argument that i've heard. officers will pull perhaps one of the reasons there is a large number of people of color being stopped is because officers are being giving them a break. and even though there is a violation, i'm going to let them go versus there was not a reason to stop them and that's

why they're being let go. >> tt pretty impossible to differential between the two groups. i think that the really high low rate of citations for black and latinx drivers as opposed to white there is something else motivating. why aren't police giving breaks to people in san francisco because they live in a variety of economic circumstances. so we're not seeing that same break given. and tied to the disproportion ality in the stops we're seeing that they're being used in a different way. >> that's a great point. i love this chart by the way. >> good, i'm glad. on the left, you say local ordinance violation, what does that mean?

>> so that's how the data, for the first part of the present abesing, it's used a state level data. reports their data up to the state, the state then normalized the data across all departments that report ripa data, any law that is a san francisco specific law that is not in the california criminal code, gets tagged as violation. if we went back and just aggregated by using the u.s. pd, we would probably see that drop out of the number one stop or top three stop for many groups and we would see other stops move up. >> can you give us some example? >> i'm trying to, i'm sure the specifics, we can get the specific one is sleeping in

your car is a san francisco one as well. blocking a bus lane, there is a variety of behaviors that can get caught in that. >> and i noticed that the data and analysis from the 2019, river report and i'm sure that you're aware that the new data from the ripa reports, 2021 specifically the first i think the first quarter of 2022 indicates that the racial disparities are higher. so even though you're giving us the 2022 data, it's even worse now, is that fair? >> yeah, i think that it's fair based on what i've seen. the real value is track iting one more time. and for kind of inform policy, and not just looking at a shot that reflects the reality.

we see that reality is strong and continues these trends and data are here they're not aboritions >> and it provides how we as a city combine other jurisdictions can we're not necessarily doing, i mean we're not doing well. spur looked at seven different stops. and san francisco is not performing well among the black population, compared to other ripping agencies, san francisco is one of the worse. i have not checked today, i don't think san francisco is the worse in racial but one of the worse among the analysis

that we did. >> given the fact that the block population here in san francisco is less than 5%. >> yeah, and in the bay area, it's only 4% so we're talking about a small population that are dramatically over populated in stops. >> do you know why? >> there is a lot of decisions, i think there are decisions around where we send people to enforce traffic laws that has consequences. there is a lot of reasons why. but it is worse here.

i like the 4122 but then you say 6% but i'm like what's the number. we'll have to figure out the math on that later. >> but yeah happy to send any anything, supplementary that has pure numbers. >> all right, i'm going to turn it over to my fellow colleagues. thank you so much, very informative. commissioner yee. >> thank you very much, there president cindy elias. thank you jacob denny. spur has been doing a lot of great work here in the city. i think over 110 years, there abouts.

also, just had some questions, you know, you totally hit it on the ratio of disparity along black drivers. we see it per-capita. but i had a few questions on there and in regards to citation issues. so if you look in there, we're at 58%. so for 100 drivers, curious has the highest? >> it seems to citation was

necessary or justified in the stop. so it could be for reason for somebody and then we see the low citation rate. they've actually broken the law to an extent and then they feel it's necessary. >> so that's what the display on both license plates. >> same thing on expirations, asian are on the top of the list. they're given a ticket. >> and because we don't have a same level of geographic, there may be on what decisions officers make in different neighborhoods that inform that. so maybe the asian living in the west side may be more likely to get a ticket than black drivers stopped on the east side.

>> so i'm also looking at the last one, again shares of stop site given citations. so, the asians are at 60%. it's percentage that i'm looking at. and this is the vej tracing extrasing? >> it's the time thing i'm just curious if there is anything to that. the tags were so expired where they decide today site. so it begs the question again.

which means the people who are stopped are probably being stopped because they don't have any and then they're getting a ticket. >> so just out of curiosity if you would know the data, i know a great portion of the asians community lives on the west side. and the district was off the charts. maybe we can talk about that later. >> yes, so they support location data for all of their stops and levels should be able to present that data to you and map out where stops are happening by category and then present that to you. the data there is we have it, it's just better toim for us to

begin. but i grow, i think asking questions about how enforcement varies by community is an important part of understanding traffic enforcement. >> again, i want to thank spur for this report, they do an outstanding job, i really really appreciate them. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you so much i just want to join you in putting this together. i was worried when i saw the number of slides but you came in under time which is really impressive. so thank you for that. i want to make a quick comment, i like how you break out pacific islanders, you see that they have a different

experience and are treated desperately are stopped, and just want to encourage the department when it does its 96 a report. the you know, we have the data obviously, it's part of the data but in our, we generally just want them in with asian, i think it would be helpful to sew, they're having a different experience. i think number of my colleagues asked me about this. i just want to turn to this subject of citation rate. so if a racial group is stopped at a disproportionate lehigher group but sited at a lower traffic that indicates dha the traffic infraction was not the motivation for making the stop in the first instance, is that correct? >> i think that's a reasonable assumption based on the data. is the infraction was not the

hole motivater. of course there is high rates of warning that everybody gets but we see again when some groups are getting 50% of the time and other groups are getting 10% of the time there is some other motivater. >> examine converse low if a racial group is stopped at a disproportionately low rate, but they stop into citation, that may suggest that the standard for stopping them is much higher such that the people who did get stop probably violated the infraction in a agrecious way, is that fair? >> i think that's a vair statement and assumption i make. >> thank you.

general black people and white people are more likely to be stopped for moving violations. is that generally correct? >> so, black people are more likely than any other racial ethnic group to be stopped for equipment violations. and less likely to be stopped for moving violations. but a majority are stopped for moving violations still make up the majority of traffic stops. but what we see, the reason for stop is those high levels of moving voylations are rather equipment violations means that black drivers are more likely to have their top five reasons to stop the equipment of non moving violations where white drivers are top five are almost all safety related or speeding

ignoring stop signs. >> and for members of the public, moving violations tend to pose a risk to public safety. >> yes, it's what i'm concerned about. ?o. when white folks get pulled over, it's most likely for stuff that poses a risk where as for black people they're more likely to be stopped for things that don't pose a threat. >> 70% stop for which a violation that is you're to go something with the car that against the rules which is dangerous and can harm a lot of people. where black drivers the smallest among all racial or ethnic groups are stopped for moving violations. >> great, okay. and you, you went through at light speed, every infraction, that is called out in our current draft d g.o. and it was

more or less the same story for each one. i just wanted to paws on one of them which i think is the second most common thing that black folks get stopped for which is registration tag. so, there is 4,086 stops. plaque people and white people were stopped a a rate of 34, i want to pause there and put it in slightly different terms. so that means plaque folk are stopped at roughly a rate of 1-30, 32 examine white folk can have a 1 and 300 chance of getting stopped.

so that means that for 4,000, roughly 4100 stops a little bit less, that would be 29 arrest. that means that out of 4086 stops, 5057, there was no arrest, no criminality found that was sufficiently serious to make a custodial arrest. one thing that we hear sometimes from our friends who, don't support regulating pretax stops, they say these low level don't host a roadway but they're indicators of that some other criminal activity is afoot. so for this stop just like all the other ones on the list, we

only have 29 arrests out of 400 stops. from your analysis, is that fair to say that the arrest rate is an unoccasion of, you know the rate of which there are some type of somewhat criminal active at this time discovered in the worse of the stop? >> i mean, i think if you're using expired registration tags, it's a way it identify dangerous illegal behavior. it's not a very god tool based on the arrest rate. 47% reducing such a small number of these stops resulting in arrests which is indicative of something more serious going on. that is not an affective tool for that purpose, i don't know if the intent is to used in that way or not. >> great, thank you. and last question, your last slide said that the policy would result in 10,000 fewer stops. but yuft want to be clear that

that's assuming everything else is stays static. so it's possible that if we make fewer stops for license plates and registration, we could be making more stops on side things show and things like that. so we could have a scenario where we have more stops, stopping for dangerous stuff, is that right? >> yes, 10,000 of these stops and i believe the enforcement officers would continue to enforce laws and may find other folks to enforce those stops. >> great, those are all my questions. thank you so much again for putting this report together, it was really illuminating, thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner benedicto. >> thank you so much president elias, thank you for that excellent presentation. i would echo vice carter that

was a record per slides a minute there for the presentation. i think a lot of questions were asked by vice president carter ober ?nd stone, i've been work withing spur since before i was on the commission. tt an organization that has been involved in the civic life of the city and reform more generally and this is tremendous work. you note that this is the, the third or fourth in a series of data driven present aces that before this policy and they run the gamut where they had the equity with national data and there was some calls from the commission and we had the institute of california can there was curiosity about local data and we've seen now, in a both department present aces

from presentation and community organizes and now from organizes like spur, we have now seen this local data. so i think we've seen the comprehensive data analysis before this commission adopted a policy in its commission policy. you know, vice president oberstone looked at the arrest data and the percentage of resulting in gun, and i think that's really interesting data. if you lock at the all the offenses that spur looked at, the spras majority was 1% or lower for finding a gun, many were 0 or under one percent as the highest may have been 2 or 3 percent. and this is locking at 10,000 stops worth of data. so the data really speaks for itself, you would luke to challenge, interested members of the public to look at this

this data is posted on the commission website. tt not as fun as a single tweet or point. i challenge people to look at the data present a that's we've had and look at the recommendations that wove had from subject matter experts and from organization that's have done analysis of this, of this type of work done across the country. i think that's where, you'll see data pointing in the same conclusion. i would like to thank spir for adding to this commission as it considers this general order and thank you jacob for that presentation. >> thank you. >> i'm glad there is a thick tank whatever the other data says. >> well we're also going to challenge the department when they tell us they can't meet the time limit, we're going to bring you back and show them

how it's done. and with that, chief scott, would you like to tell him something. >> that was a great job. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. denny for you and your colleagues. i do have a couple of questions and one is in line with what vice president oberstone carter asked. when i read it, i don't want to read more into it than what is meant to be read. is it of the 10,000 stops that, you believe would be fewer, is there an assumption that most are all of those are actually pretext upsets? that's what i heard when you explained it to the commission. >> the assumption is that all of those stops listed, the pretext stops that would be disallowed would meet the circumstances of the d g.o. requires so it could not be an

investigation under the crime or changing lanes. there is the 10,000 number is probably too high, tt just ten thousand of those stops that we had less. >> the reason i had asked that question is is do you have any, maybe i'll research but i'll ask the question, is there anything that would be indicative if curtailing the actual pretext stop itself would yield similar politic set. not banning enforcement if wore to believe that most are pretext. banning the pretext stop. >> so yeah, the difference between saying you can't make any of these stops saying that you can't make pretext. i can only look at the data that we have, we don't have a pretext data flag. i cannot say if the pretext it

could have on the data because just unfortunately it's not indicated in the data set whether or not it's one on the purpose of pretext tool. >> but in the event that it did, i want to be careful, i know this is part of the discussion can we get at this at a different way. in the event that it did prohibit an officer from making the stop, because the officer is going to investigate, something else other than the traffic violation, do you think that would have some other affects? >> i'm sure that if we ban, follow the rules to stop pretext you would see a decline on some of the common stops. the two highest number of stops, you would see a decline there, that's ubl you would see a decline. >> thank you. and i know, tt hard to research

if you don't have the data flt two other questions, quick low. with the equipment violation, tell breaks, rake breaks and ob sekts in the mirror. the way the proposed poll sew current low reads, there would be some continues where that those with each is brake lights and tail poi. all of the direct lights can taillights would have to be. is there any assumption of the data that we have whether all the lights were out or whether it be it a partially. >> so that's not record in the data yet so we assume it was perfect for all them, we cannot show whether one of them would be reported in the fout.

if the department desued to or maybe captions some of the >> so the assumption is almost 1100 stops that there is a partially and would not be enforcement under the proposed poll zoo? >> yes. >> the sighations would not have increase thed likelihood of some injury or death causing death. >> so because of limitations the best way to look at the data and present it. we don't have that definitely of dough tail currently available to us. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner yanez.

>> thank you, vice president--president elias. >> and thank you for the presentation, it's helpful to visualize and attach numbers to them and the fact that you just owned this is great. you should teach a class for some of us. and i'm going to, some of the similar line of questions that commissioner oberstone carter was asking. but the aggregate total quilt and non moving voylations, i summarize was, there were 50% for african americans, 40% for latinos that specifically solely for equipment and non moving vie layings. and these are the ones that you break down in dough tail and add actual numbers to the hanging and the license mrit. >> yeah, those are some of

them, there are other moving staff that i'm asked in the can filipino droifrz and 50% i just wanteded to make sure that i heard this cc low the out those 50% and now moving voylations, 56% of those resulted in some citation whatsoever. >> so 56% of awe traffic are not given the citation. so this is beyond giving, it's 56% of all traffic stops. >> is there a summary just specifically for summary and not moving violations. >> i can do that for you. >> that would be helpful if you have the numbers, just because when i lock at the number for

latino, it says they received for the equipment and non move pg. >> yes, we have that none, tt very akable. we can find that very quickly. >> it would be great to a dpra witness with this. was there any analysis of the north of time spent on either the once that received citations or the one that did not. >> i did not we to have that data and i know that can be useful for measuring pesh's stop time and impact on them. so we have that data but i didn't do it. >> that's something that i have been interested in.

how many tomb and energy is invested.

breaks out kind of heritage or ancestry so we can find out how many of puerto rican and how many are mexican and sal va dorian and cuban in that way because that data does not cross back to race.

hispanic is the term that census uses. similar among the asian population we're very limited in the data. the census is trying to catch up to the 21st century but it struggles to do that. >> i've been on that website. >> yes, so it's more difficult to break it out. i'm sure there are other cities who have done the best they can to identify kind of racial and ethnic group beyond the census but we're not limit in the data. it also means that people can be miss identified many number of times and it makes it more difficult to have in greater detail because of an officer can't identify or chinese heritage they're going to flag them as maybe the wrong ethnic group.

plus other groups that we tried to report others that we tried to record but then the census does not reflect it back. the reality so we're not able to assess it in the way that we should. but we have work to do. >> yes. >> last question, i'm not the best at math either, but one percent out of the 4,000 stops lead to a gun. in my head, it was about total 87 if i use the one percent as a solid one. out of the 8,000 or whatever were accounted for. >> i don't have the actual number in front of me but we can find that out, it's recorded in the set.

and this again only kaegd for the primary reason for stop. i think the percentage is if you do the math, you'll dot number. >> thank you very much. >> no thank you. >> thank you, director henderson. >> couple of things that i just wanted to point out, before i address the presentations, i do feel like this is, probably one of the most robust and detailed conversations that we've had pending a policy and it's not lost in me, so i want to acknowledge the reason that we were able to have the discussion like this. it's because of the data. and the data that is then made available from the department,

the data that's been reviewed and evaluated by the commissioners as well as what's been passed on, i keep coming back to this being a confirmed part of the solution to moving forward, we cannot have a discussion about reform, let alone accountability without the data. the data being collected and analyzed and data being made transparent and so, it's a big part of the solution, every single time and i didn't want it lost how we're having this conversation is different than how we've had conversationed in the past where it's not antidotal, it moves no an evidence base and fact driven conversation. not just analyzing the data but for also being so clear and specific about race. and i think the intention alt

about race is really important and it's one of the conversations that, often times especially in this context, it's a harder conversation to have. but, we appreciate the intentionality there to address communities of color and the impact that policing has in terms of us moving forward and making the best policy. it's part of a dressing pretext text, it's important to look at the numbers, i heard that african americans are 93% times more likely to receive citation. i think it's facts like that that are based on evidence and data that is given to you that i think is rell' important examine my question, that was a long way to get to the question but my question, was aside from

the proposed d g.o. and the analysis that you gave us, thank you information. is there anything regarding your thoughts ideas or suggestions and how to directly address the race pretext data. is there anything that you've seen or thought about in looking at the data that either was omitted or could be added to the analysis that you did? >> well first, thank you for very kind words and also to echo ripa data and requirement to collect data has dramatically changed and make evidence base policy. and i would encourage everybody to use more data. >> oh we will. >> yeah, i talked to people across the country. about traffic enforcement and

california is the current gold standard but we have a lot further to go. i think there are racial disproportion ality in our traffic stop and the rate of stops and in the citation rate. i think that for me, traffic enforcement is, racial justice issue and economic issue as well, very large proportioned cannot afford the ticket because they're upset by the california code. so the penalty is $25 but the cost of the ticket is $263. so the added fees overtime have disproportion at impact. i would encourage this commission and any body to look at ways to reduce the cost of citations.

this is an impact questions. there are fines and fees that the county can opt into or opt out of and i would encourage opt out of. to reduce the impact of citation and other fines and fees. california has been going through a reckoning in reducing their fines and fees and we've seen a lot of successes but we've got a lot further to go especially the traffic enforcement which is the number one where people interact with the criminal system t.costs billions of year, and that impacts low income and people. while maintaining road safety is one of the big goals that i have and i would hope that this commission has as.

there are many other areas of en poserment that hit communities of color more than healthier communities and i think the department has spoken about emphasizing stops related to safety as opposed to stops related to other areas of enforcement and i think continuing on that path where you focus on road safety as opposed to the minor violation that's can result in hundreds if not thousands of dollars of debt that many are not able to afford. the bottom 40% in the city, makes an average of 6,000 a year. so $500 traffic ticket represents a huge portion of the income examine renders many poem to meet their basic needs. >> that's a great point, because i think we talk about

race examine we talk about other things but we don't talk about the other component which is the socio economic i am pack. just like the impact $500 and then the fees start incurring can for hard working family, that's food or rent on the taib. you made really great point, thank you for reminding us of that. >> commissioner byrne. >> thank you president elias. when thank you for the presentation. do you have statistics as to where like african americans are or latinx people are pulled over? >> i don't have that on me but the police department has that data. but every traffic stop made

includes in your section or an address and you can map that and it also includes indicator of that person's ethnicity. >> so with the racial disparity involving the african population, did you note in spacetial analysis did you notice anything unusual? >> yes, the place where we had the highest number of traffic stops, right the disproportionate number but not our blackest neighborhood. >> right, that yeah. and do you have any explaination as to any theory why? because the data seems to suggest, that in in the bay view hunters area, and what they now call nopa but what we called the we shall edition and in, in sunny, again what we used to call invitation valley, we're, we're where there are

large numbers of african-americans, doesn't appear to be what you would expect, which is an oranger color on your map. >> yes, more people are stopped in the denser neighborhoods in downtown, the mission and soma and other parts. so i think we're coming down to enforcement decisions as the department is making. and why they make the decisions, i think, the department is going to have to answer. >> and you get to my next point about the mission. because it's only part of the mission where it seems to be, and again that's not reflective of the latinx community in san francisco. and yeah, i mean. >> so i think, it means, you know, what i would, i think that, the geography is not

indicative of officer behavior based on that data and then the data analysis. so where you drive, who you are and where you're driving, maybe where where you're driving may matter less than where you are in the data is where you would derive. >> say that again. >> who you are matters more than where you're driving. >> right. but the western side of the city, the western side of the city. >> yeah, so i think. >> you would expect it to widen out and then and then it's blue to it seems to be, a place to get away if i can be. i think the traffic is that we're doing a lot of

enforcement in very dense places that have highway off-ramp and on-ramp and the ideal outcome, right you want traffic enforcement where people can be harmed. but for most of the city the vas majority of the city, traffic stops you expect to have there. and then my next point. so the presumption is if there are lower stops, it will lower the racial disparity. >> i believe if there are fewer of these specific stops it will lower racial disparity. >> are you familiar with the commonwealth in virginia where

they banned stops--there was no there was no racial disparity at least that's what the presentation was. and are you familiar with that? >> i'm not familiar with that presentation or the analysis done bit center and policing equity. i think what we see is the disparity where they're driven bit expired or no registration and license place affix incorrectly. so you would see a decline, the disproportion ality are still there. but you would see a decline unless officer behavior changed and they then started pulling

people over for different reason. >> i would grew with you and that's why i'm having trouble with virginia. >> it could be again that officers made different decisions. that's possible, it can be that there is a multiple reasons so they switched to the sektd reason instead of the first. there is just a lot of outcomes. >> thank you, thank you again. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioner walker. >> the question is how do we get better? so one of the things that i would like to know.

is there a time of day? >> >> also, one of the issues that we are dealing with too is whatever solution we come up with, what are the consequences on traffic accidents, detail as well as pedestrian safety all of that is there a way to is there data available to be able to look at that especially as we i know l.a. is doing their version and awareness in pulling people over. >> yeah, so sf cta releases a

vision zero analysis every year. and they include the primary collision factor as well as the california code. none of these stops are included in any of the primary reasons for a will ising factor from those analysis. stops are not popping up. >> and that's a challenge to me because i walk everywhere in the city and i've witnessed, you know, people being hit by, you know, no signals right turn. it's not clear that we're collecting that data anywhere. >> it may be these agencies are not capturing the right data, these are also reflected in police report. but based on the data that we

which the city publishes it's not a factor. >> it would be interesting especially as we go forward to make sure that we're collecting especially around shared sidewalks. >> absolutely. >> i don't have to go overall, i'm sure all of us have been affected by scooters and bikes on the sidewalk, those are things that are concerning and that i heard most about from folks. this question, i wonder if i can ask a question to you chief about the difference, i mean, the data that seems to indicate more, black drivers are pulled over for violations but not cited do you have any sense about that? that's an interesting part of data. >> antidotally as mr. denny said, until we understand which

stops are truly pretext and try to determine that and which ones are not. the officers and discussions about this. depending on what is going on. it's hard to bet because there is no data that we can put our hands-on. i to know that it happens. and then we have the issue of, pretext stops to investigate other things that may cause a warning on the traffic enforcement itself. that leads into some other type of investigation. we do appreciate the comments that we need to dig deeper into this because i do think we do.

to really understand it. the to reiterate what paul was saying. especially, i mean obviously determining what the issues are that is important but also determining if our solutions are required detailed data that includes all of this. and you know, so designing the data and the future and making sure a system examine our training captures that is really a big part of what we need to talk about. >> okay, that is correct. and to note to answer the question, there is proposed investigating questions on traffic stops that i do believe will help us what a pretext. and as misstated, i do think given the ability with body worn camera we're in a better

place to what is pretext and what is not with some of the language. >> and i think l.a. is doing most of their solutions based on that, on sort of a protocol about what people are suppose to do when they pull somebody over i think it would be good to see what those cities are doing specifically to see if we can learn from them. >> carter-oberstone? >> i checked this with vice president carter and i he gave me an opportunity to ask an additional question, are we capturing a justification for why those are not being cited currently?

>> >> in the cat system if you give somebody a warning, i think you need harder ways to collect and report on this data that is more accurate examine more reliable. >> to be able to create parameters for that, so i thought that's an interesting plan and something we should look further into. thank you. >> if i may add. the department does have is year make and model of vehicles because of privacy concerns.

you can frack behavior and outcome based on that, it's not a perfect proxy it exist but it's not perfect, it's very rich people drive very bad cars. but it is data that could be used. ?ment thank you for your comments. black people are stopped disproportionately but stops are not in neighborhood that have disproportionately back residents. one thing that we hear sometimes is that racial

disparities are driven not necessarily by deployment, sometimes you hear oh we're sending more officers to bad neighborhood. given that stops are not concentrated in black neighbors, would you agree that that fact undermines deployment that we hear sometime? >> i think what it shows is that the black neighborhood are not high number of traffic stops which means enforcement are very different than enforcement decisions in other neighborhoods. so i worked with a number of students and then conducted a number of qualitative interviews and what many of those interviews yielded was a sense of impact poem examine community leaders and others,

was that, enforcement changed based on who you are and neighborhood. so there were places examine neighborhood where poem felt as they were trying to be driven out by enforcement actions. so i think that there is an indicator there that could be in some places things specifically of an interview from somebody in l.a., that we feel black people are not allowed here. it's a commonly reported experience and review. >> can i connect the dots. raising an issue because when we talked about virginia as one of the criticisms one of the things that we didn't talk about but is really important it did result in a massive reduction in black and brown communities.

i want to make sure that we're connecting the dots, we're not valuing specifically and clearly, of what the affects are even when there is no police enforcement and even when there is no contraband taken. the cost on community of color is, part of what we're discussing even though that is is the inverse of the negative repercussion. >> i was not going to address virginia because it's not jermaine to the presentation. we discussed last week why virginia policy is not comparable to what we're doing here. so i'll spare jacob. >> it does not include accountability. >> one of the many differences. just one follow-up jacob which

is you an ebbsing with commissioner walker, i just want to be clear that none of the infractions on the band list were identified as a primary factor. >> all right, are you tired of us yet? >> i'm glad, i'm glad that you're having fun that i'm going to ask that you come back. >> all right, next item. actually, sorry, forgot that part. i'm gone for one week and look, i don't know how to act. sergeant, i'm going to let you take this over.

>> please approach the podium or press star-3. >> i want to commend the commissioners on the question and useful study. more training is needed and if you reduce the financial harm examine the fines, our position is to reduce the financial harm and do better training, don't reduce stops. i would also mention that there is a chicago study where they reduce stops and they increase traffic cameras and disparities, racial disparities increase, you're probably familiar with that. i also think it's a good

question to ask is how, they, this study how do you think that disparities, how do you think is determined by the officer who is making the traffic stop? those of you who have been on drive alongs, i imagine you know it's very difficult to do that. there was allusion to daylight versus night time stops, it's virtually impossible to distinguish which race from at night and some other studies have shown the disparities are not like this. it does not change a lot. finally we talked about downtown area, that's where, if we had data on whether these are stops are of people of drivers coming from the east bay. and going downtown, that's

population to look at not the population of the residents since we had more employees in san francisco than residents. finally i could urge a sud'. >> thank you, sir. >> ripa gives guidance on how they should be collecting that data and in fact often times, latino populations are misrepresented in the data because they're kaegd in the category of white rather than latino. and so there is that issue and chief was there anything else to add?

because we track data and the day we're required to report it, it throws a lot of things off. much broader discussion that the department of technology and all the stakeholders have been involved in, i hope we get to a better place and we're headed in that direction but we're not there yet. >> great news, because that's the last of the dog recommendations and you went to the board of supervisors to ak for money to be able to anti indicate the system to address those issues. i also suggest that we add commissioner yanez which ads communication of latino and hispanic ethnicities as well. >> just to reiterate it's not

just the sfpd it's the system that relies on this data, so we cannot make the changes in a vacuum. >> i have faith. >> next item sergeant? >> good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> director, good evening, commissioners and coalition, thank you for jacob denny for the thorough analysis. this presentation as well as previous one of traffic stops reveal the heart breaking reality of structural racism and policing in san francisco and across the country. similar to tonight's present ition, included sfpd officers required less suspicious to search latinx and white drivers and evidence of discrimination.

sfpd and supports this conclusion. this treatment is not a resent phenomena that is not going to end on its own but this body has the authority to do so. other jurisdictions have implemented policy that pretext as well as no negative implications for public safety including in virginia explained last wednesday's meeting. this does not need more data and you do not need more time. we expect each of you will help ensure that further perpetuation, other cities and counties and states have demos ated --demonstrated and public

safety. thank you. >> good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> good evening commissioners, my name is carolyn and i'm calling as a member of coalition to end--and long time city employee and resident of san francisco public school mother and member of the queer community. i want to appreciate jacob denny spur which is a very for extremely thorough presentation and for sharing that this campaign to end this racial supported by over 500 organizations and evidence base research. i just want to repeat some of the numbers that were shared that really proof beyond a reason doubt that racial are fishing expeditions, do not result in and just lead to harm, generational trauma and a

waste of our taxpayer. if you are black, there is a 1/32 chance of being stopped. if you're white, 1 in 300. this is not a change being proposed. tt very limited and very reasonable and focusing on the lowest level. the types of stocks that are least related to public safety. san francisco has a to end traffic stops and nothing in the policy impacts visual zero in any way. instead as mentioned in the presentation, the policy will address the fact that clearly our black latino and pacific islanders residents and family and friends are stopped for reasons other than traffic violation that's is a prefix.

they're not sited for traffic safety issues. i appreciate the questions being asked here but i really urge. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes. >> speaker: thank you. a lot of people talked about this evidence per data and how accurate it is, there is a lot of assumptions as even commissioners have admitted. this is one year, i would ask that this data would be four years old soon and you see what happens in 2020 and then you make your decisions. in terms of assumptions, there is a lot of assumptions why the african americans are pulled over the most but have the least amount of citations given to them. a lot of assumptions made, the data does not show that. this is why. perhaps it's because police officer are not empathetic. perhaps, police officers don't want to be accused of racial

profiling or discrimination so they let the citation go with a warning. broader picture is there is no data of socio economic levels and maybe there is racist in lower socio levels that are under represented and they cannot afford to pay for registration or repairs. unless you do that, maybe socio economic levels are being pulled over more. and finally to the police officers who are going to have enforce these ridiculous restrictions, i would ask you of course to put down race or ethnicity, put mix it's accurate. don't put yourself in a position where you'll continue to be khal endsing about profiling and racial discrimination, just put mix and let it fall where it may.

thanks. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes. >> council on american relations, thank you for again for the presentation, you've heard from a number of community groups that are part of the over 100 community organizations that are in support of passing some legislation to end these biases stops. we heard from people who have experienced it themselves and the harm that it had caused to them and their families for something this is so minor. even to the point where people have been stopped with guns. i know one my friends was stopped because she had a beads hanging from her mirror and it

was a tense situation with the officers. and the only way that they got out of the situation was because they had a family member that was part of police force but not everybody has a family member to get them out of that situation. people should not be profiled at least, we need to end these biases stops. it does not mean that we're legalizing, these minor infractions are, it's just meaning that they should not be stopped, they should be stopped only if there is some harm that is going to be caused. so you know, i urge you to move this forward. tt been well over a year that we've been coming to and discussing this with you, we really need to get this whole thing started and be able to vote yes on it and get it over to the board. so i urge you to get this moving.

i know we have analysis to next year but let's not delay it any further. thank you so much. >> caller, you have two minutes. >> yeah, good evening commissioners. chief scott, executive director and this is deputy public defender. i think the presentation first was phenomenal and i think it paints a accurate picture of what we're seeing. and it leaves very little question as to what the solution should be. and that's been the policy as to reduce the racial disparities. and i think that has to be the goal moving forward and what is author on this policy is a measured reason approach to get us there, to actually reduce the disparities. and the second point, is that it really needs to focus our

conversation moving forward around this issue. the commissioners have a long time to digest the data, the briefing it's been estimated pointed out more than a year. we don't need more time or delay. the commission needs to vote on this. i think the public deserves that. and the people subject to these stops and experiencing the harms that talk about it, the voice thought the commission needs to listen to that and take that seriously. thank you. >> i live in district 6 and i volunteer with black communities. i do want to agree with brian cox that this has been a good presentation and with brian saver that there is a lot of misinformation going around.

and iert agree with it or disagree with it. so i do think tt a lost opportunity that you have not been able to educate the general public. but then i would say that the police department are pretty happy that you pulled in because it delays putting this forward. it's not hearing this information, they're not hearing it corrected. so i think that's a missed opportunity and probably delivery missed opportunity by certain people who push to have

this removed off the agenda. thank you. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes. >> we're always hearing the city talking about focusing on vision zero, no debt, especially immediately after somebody gets struck by a car or there is a, there is a big fatality like there was on caesar chavez the other day. but to propose to go get public safety by ignoring these violations of stop signs of running stop signs, stoplights, not driving with lights on even in the fog, how is this not going to cause any dlition? of course they will. the commissioner, i don't think they're authorized to change california law are they? do you think the city will not incur lawsuits during the california vehicle codes?

i see problems. i agree with the tonight's suggestion that tickets need to be lowered. but i think it's obvious the focus should be on officer training and accountability not on ignoring laws. i urge the commission to vote no on this. thank you. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes. >> commissioners, at the last presentation for some reason, i was left from giving public comment. what i feel about pretax and stop is we have to have a matrix that we follow.

that presentation was null and void. you look at it, looking at it. you have exception and in the area. so there again, you have to have a metric but you also to have standards.

presentation, again and again and again is like ba'ath a horse dead and reviving it, that's what is stopped. we need to move forward, we need a new policy and we need training and we need to revow. and that's what i got to say. don't waste our time. >> good evening, caller you have two minutes. >> you guys must be super busy tonight, i got to order, i want one extra large, pepperoni sausage, green onion and no anchovies but bell peppers,

canadian bacon, that's one and then the other one, i just want a medium pepperoni well done and ten-piece wings. >> thank you, callr. >> president elias, that is the end of public comment. >> thank you mr. costa, i appreciate you. >> is the pizza coming. >> chief, no it's consent. false alarm, chief, you have a few minutes. >> my timer is up. >> line item 3, consent calendar. and dp a, sp21 monthly report. >> can i get a motion. >> motion to receive. >> on the motion, commissioner walker, how do you vote. >> yes. >> commission walker yes. >> benedicto. >> yes. >> yanez. >> yes. >> commissioner byrne. >> yes.

>> commissioner byrne is yes. >> commissioner yee. >> yes. >> vice president. >> yes. >> and president elias. you have seven yeses. line item 4, chief report discussion and public safety concerns provide an overview of the fences incidents korean san francisco have an impact on public safety. unplanned events will be to determine for a future meeting, chief scott. >> chief, you have big shoes to fill, he did 50 slides within the time limit, you've got two pieces of paper. let's see. >> off and running, thank you president elias. vice president and sergeant young blood, thank you, director henderson, i'll start with this crime trends, violent crime leads with a 6% increase from this time last year. that's a difference of about

300 crimes property crimes, there is a 4% increase from this time last year, that's a difference of about 1600. in total we're up 4% on part one or serious crimes which is a difference of, just less than 2000 crimes. in terms of our property crimes, i'll break that down first, we're up as i said, 4%, burglaries are down 24% so we'll likely end a year with a double digit, overall larceny is up 10% which is trending downwards from where it was earlier in the year. auto burglary is down 4% which trended also earlier from year. violent crimes, homicide are up 2% and i'll give that detail in a second. robberies are up 5% and assaults 5%. human trafficking down, 47%.

as i said homicides are up, 2%. that's a total of 53 homicides compared to 52. our overall year to date, and terms of shooting beinger there is been a 172 shooting incidents resulting in a 195 victims of gun violence. 34 of our gun violence shooting victims have resulted in homicides where they were victims of homicides can there is been 161 non fatal shooting victims this year. our total homicides are down 15% year to date. and our shooting are down 4% these are non fatal shooting. 161 compared to 168 this time last year. with with a total reduction of 6%. 195 compared to 208 this time last year. weapon seize ours, we have a 1004 for the year, that's a 4%

decrease over this time last time. ghost guns account for, 163 which is 3 more than 2021. in terms of significant incidents, there were couple of several shootings over this past week, tenderloin, mission, southern, we had a stabbing so many side that resulted in an arrest over the period. one thing that i remember seated on, we've had multiple bomb threats and this has been an issue not only in our city but across the region, across

the country. these bomb threats have been made to schools and other public institutions elected officials and there is a lot of where the threats are coming from. in san francisco we have not solved that but we're work withing partners in the federal region because they're very disruptive and we have to take those threats seriously. i want to talk a little bit about, what we're doing for the poll day season. in terms of our public messaging on just being safe and vigilant, we're running what we've seen over the resent years with rampant thaet and

retail saebments. we made a number of arrest and presenting those cases to the district attorney's office. so we will, continue that through the holiday season and beyond and we'll have to adjust our staffing to sustain that. but we definitely want to let people know that those cries whether they're misdemeanor thaets or felony thefts are devastating and we'll work with the community of small and large business to see hold people accountable that's an on going strategy that i'm happy to report that we've had some success on.

and at 10:00 19 p.m. a vehicle hit a pedestrian witness report that the victim was standing in the middle of the island when the vehicle approached. the pedestrian was in front of the vehicle and was struck and unfortunately did not survive the injuries. the driver remained at scene and that investigation is now not believed to be criminal. significant arrest for the period that we had a robbery arrest that i would like to talk about. this was a robbery series on december 24, 2022, the employee of a store in the 1900 block of lumbar street was robbed at gun point. on december 7, another employee was robbed in the 2700 block. the subject involved matched

description, the investigation was a subject who was located in a vehicle in the northern district as officers attempted to stop the vehicle, the subject fled towards oakland where they were involved in a crash. the subject was interviewed and books for two counts of robby and several other charges. the subject had prior arrests for 10811 which is driving a stolen vehicle as well as well as narcotic arrests. investigation lead to the identification of a subject and on december 8 that subject was located and taken into custody by officer in the 900 block. subject was booked for homicide and commissioner that is my report.

i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, chief, vice president? >> thank you president elias thank you chief for this report. i want to talk about the operation center. while they're dis trin airy are being vad aouted and i think the article said that we spent 17 million on the officer salaries while they perform with sounds like ministerial type of duties. i just want to understand the operation center a bit better.

so, the department spokesperson in the article mentioned that folks get sent to the operation center for reasons other than discipline. the article says the article was 56, how many were not for discipline? and if you can provide some examples of reasons other than discipline that somebody may be sent there? >> thank you, commissioner for that question. so the first of all the department operation center, there are officers that are assigned there on reassignment and officers assigned there because they thought that assignment and there is the mixture of sworn and non sworn at the department operation center.

and including, personal reasons that some officers requests to work diva signment because of whatever is going on. so there are a number of those reasons that a person can be reassigned. and at the d o.c. there are variety of those issues that come to play. this motion of the department having rubber rooms which in my opinion is very disrespectful and derogatory term, we don't have rooms. the chief of police has the authority to reassign and make personnel decisions with the department and in the department and we have to abide by our m.o. u and legal process and labor laws when we make those, when i make those assignments. so it's a matter of

restrictions and the restrictions that cause a person to be assigned whether it's a request or another decision. how many are working on personnel. we have to assign these employees on some assignment and they're entitled to due process. i just want to be very clear because i think those types of stories are a waste of taxpayers money really ignore, the legal agreement. we have to be paid, there is a number of reasons but i don't want people working d o.c. to

be stigmatized where pe put employees that don't function, that's furthest from the truth and i want to make sure that the public understand that it's really disrespectful wrong. >> thank you, chief. yeah, i was wondering if you can just, it's sounds like you mostly address that but i did want you to give you an opportunity to say, i think the department spokesperson called it rubber room, inflammatory and defamatory. and i want you to explain why the department takes issue with that. >> rubber room, if you do search it refers to a person basically in a psychiatric facility that is putted in a

pad room for psychiatric reasons. and that term has moored throughout different industries. there was a material that frequently used to be used in the lawsuit of a rubber bomb squad, somebody who needed some help or they had something going on and the gun was, so this term is derogatory and if somebody has somebody that they care about in the mental health neither in a mental health or struggling from that, i think that is very offensive term. and i don't want that term associated with this police department because it's that and did thes demeaning to the employees that have working. >> thanks chief. and just to clarify, don't need to provide exact numbers, but just if you have a ballpark sense what proportion of the d

o.c., are sworn members that are there during the tendency of their discipline cases versus folks that are there for other reasons? >> it's less than half. less than half than the personnel. we have sworn and currently less than half. and that ads and closed depending on who is working the d o.c. and what assignments what people are reassigned to but it's less than half for the employees there or they're there for reasons because of restrictions or some matter that is pending where they have restricted duties. >> okay, great, thanks chief. a pretty big show, and i did

watch commander walsh's that he made to the media. my broad question, it sounded like there was some questions about why the department did not intervene while the side show was going on. just want to be clear this question, just want to be clear that well i guess, let me break this down to a two-part question. what efforts did the department make to apprehend the suspects after the side shows took place? i feel like folks maybe don't see this. what are the other things that folks do to try to apprehend folks after.

>> so with that particular incident, there were approximately 200 cars involved. if we have a slide show and refer to them as stunt driving response unity full-time. and there is also a sergeant assigned full-time. the rest of the response is dependent on who is on duty. so resources have to be rallied. we tried to break these shows up and flush people which we've

gotten pretty good at. but the issue that i think you're speaking of, the way we responded, if one or two officers responds to the nearest hundreds of cars, that's a situation that we don't commit officers to go in there and try to take action. and and it creates the situation that will lead to, the potential of officer involved shooting and other types of things when you are surrounded like that. a better response is to get the appropriate resources and break them up or flush them out. and when that happens, which is what happened with this particular event. wla they do, is the people involved they sprinter. what we do we follow them if we

know where they go and often times, it's one of the things places based on the inter section and terrain, we'll assign officers and often times that deters the others which is what happened that particular night. we were able to chase away people from setting up where we know they set up and after the fact, this swersz part of the question, we continued to investigate those cases. we try to identify the vehicle, if we have identifiable information, license plate, we have very good partnership with surrounding agencies who have the same issue and we have impounded a number of cars that when we can prove that they were in those side show events.

if we get evidence and that's been our response to work in legislation that our city passed that allowed for a 13 or 14 day. so our strategy is short-term to prevent them from sprintering and if we don't make a wrap we will follow-up and we have been doing that and i've had some success. >> let me just ask you, that number, and i don't mean this as a criticism at all, but that sounds like a small number relative to small numbers of cars involved in the side shows over the course of the year, you said there were 200 just tonight.

and maybe that makes sense, because we don't want to put officers in the risk. if that's a good number if we think that's room for improvement. i'm curious to get your thought on that. >> it's definitely progress. and word gets out, people know that san francisco is using that strategy, what makes this challenging is words goes out and many conceal their identity, they take their plates out and people mask up and all that. it does take some work to

identify the cars after the fact. in terms of apprehension, the practice is when we come, typically, people scatter in the four winds. our pursue policy is very very, exact on what officers are allowed to pursue and what they're not. so we don't, have some other tactic, we have used spike strips and certain situations when it's appropriate and it's basically using force. but we have to do that smartly. yes, do i want to see more? i want to see more but i want to make sure that we're thoughtful. these shows are dangerous, no if and buts about it.

>> thanks chief , that's it for me. >> thank you, president. i would like to start by discussing the article in the san francisco about the department operation center. i'm curious if the work of the department operation center can theoretically be done or tallied by civilian. and if so what percentage of those tasks would require a sworn officer? >> i believe a lot of the work can be completed by civilians task like being involved in investigative processes or better swerved. for instance there is a lost information that flows through that department operation center that will get the ball rolling.

i'm not here to say that some of those jobs cannot be civilian jobs, we do have some that work the d o.c. and that can be expanded and may very well expanded. there is some labor issues that have to go along with the discussions. >> some of them there is a possibility. >> you talked about vice president, carter aberstone. i know the article discussed transfers due to a chief's order. >> it could be inclusive of

both of those groups, let's say a, deputy chief of commander request, person to be assigned to within their unit or command, chief's order. another thing that we're trying to get away from, is the stigma of a chief order, that means that this employee has done something else. that's not the case all the time. that's another reason why i push hard on these labels of people being a place, we have to get away from that.

>> by coincidence this same week that we saw some article there was some reporting out of los angeles about similar things going on there. and i think at that in los angeles, chief moore identified 69 officers in the lapd as having some form, he used credibility restriction that's otherwise restricted what rules they could be. i was wondering if there would be a similar analysis undertaking, that we can disclose because were the numbers and the people didn't know. people genuinely know this happens but not with a specificity. i'm wondering if that to be something that you can undertake to provide to the commission. >> yes, and i will say this.

those types of decisions personnel decisions, of course they're not to be released publicly, but they that's be the basis of those decisions. you know discipline is a different issue or other restriction that's cause people to have restricted environments or restricted conditions is another thing. >> i meant that in that 69 in l.a., that was inclusive as well as other categories that you're talking about. but if we can endeavor to provide to the public, now we know that in l.a. there are 69 officers that are operating in

some credibility restriction, without disclosing individual disciplinary or bill the rights what the status of restriction sxz how that affects operations. >> okay. >> the next topic i would like to talk about, i know we talked last week and i know there was a meeting scheduled between the department and d.a., is that still on calendar. >> it's still calendar and that will be followed with the meet ing with the judge and, the m.o. u got placed commission meeting is january 30 is the date that the m.o. u so we pushed it through the holidays. but the meetings will be within the next week and a half. >> as i understand it, the three steps that are still on going, there is a meeting with the d.a. and meeting with judge and final decision with the

accountability on the m.o. u. >> that's correct. >> i think we're in a recess until january 11, to hopefully we'll have by then, you know, a complete side deal and update for that. >> yes, hopefully we'll have very good news. >> that's it. >> thank you, president. just looking at the data for last week and this week. looking at it, the trend is going down. i want to thank the department in your staff, looking at it and for last weekend and for this week. i was wondering if there is any new program that you brought aboard. i don't want to say better than the niners, looking great. i'm just saying that.

there is crime that does happen and we still do it out there, but the moves i think you're doing. i hope it's, some stelt move that we have not seen yet but maybe more can come from the going forward in 2023. and i want to follow-up on the stunt driving there are a lost cars that are involved in this and my concern is the registration and license plate making sure that. i think the best follow-up is to trace it back to the registration and license plate. so that's will be my concern. i think in san jose they did a

block where they block them off and shut them down and cite them, is that something you consider? >> well i know about the san jose operation and they definitely had a tremendous amount of citations, i think over 500 they impounded 19 or so cars. our strategy has to be consistent in our response. that is a huge operation to put that many officers and i'm glad that they had some success.

you're not going to have that amount of personnel, often times when these things happen at 2:00 o'clock in the morning, you're not deployed unless it's a preplanned operation. we want to focus on the response, one of the complaints that we're getting, i think it's less than now when we started to do it this way. if there is not a coordinated effort of what happens next, we know they spinter, we know that that's one of the tactics, you end up with five or six side shows all over the city. and we know they go to another city and we communicate where ever they're going and vice versa. so really we're going to focus on the consistency because those operations are very very labor intensive. they're good when they happen so we've taken the slightly different approach. >> and i just want to thank the

sun driving team for keeping us safe too, it's a tough job. it's a huge huge huge safety issue, you've got a lot of people out there doing so many wild things, so i just want to thank the team as well for keeping us safe. thank you very much, chief scott. >> thank you. >> you set what category of crime went down. >> you can go from. >> are you talking the year to date? >> yes beinger those have increases. >> last week, in november 28. >> oh i see. >> sorry. >> so the previous week it dropped and it dropped again this week.

>> robberies down one but but any drop in crime is great for our community. >> chief i had a question about the deployment of officers to union area. i know what a strain on resources it is to divert officers to this location and expense particularly the overtime >> we are deployed to union square and that's on a daily

basis, our safe shopper and corridors as well. a lot of demand than we have. but that was a retail theft some of our hardest hit retailers in and around union square, we want to deploy and two friz ago and a good example of how that deployment pays dividends. there was a active crew of car burglars on the union square footprint. officers were there they observed it and ended up a following and you know, chased

them to the, it was not a pursuit, not chase them but people got away but they got on the bridge and left the city. that's a good piece of news. there was another arrest that was union square area looking for people to rob they were armed. we need to be in all of those places and we try to do as best we can but it dust cost a lot of money and we're using overtime to do it. including west hill which is the daily overtime, on duty and

overtime assignment but, we know when we're there things to tend to work a little better than when we're >> for members of the public that would like to make public comment, please press star-3. >> report on resent activity and announcement. discussion will be limited whether to any future meeting. and dp a monthly statistical report september and october. >> dr. henderson welcome. >> thank you. let me get you through on what dpa is to go right now. so far this year, we have

opened 659 cases and we have closed 752 cases. we currently have 242 case that's are open and pending on our docket. we sustained 55 cases so far this year. we had 23 cases who's investigation had gone on nine months. 21 of the cases legal action or somewhere else. with the commission, examine there are still 87 cases pending with the chief there is no change from that last week. in terms of the weekly trends what we've seen coming into the office beinger the top two

allegations of complaints at 20% each have been involving complaints and allegations that officers failed to take required action and officers behaving or speaking inappropriately to the public. in terms of precinct beinger the top precinct this week was in the tenderloin and the allegations and involved failing to make arrests and failing to or making inappropriate comments to the public. in terms of our month low trend, which i may, i think i missed them before and added them here, anything that anybody has missed these records are on our website available anytime. but in september, 33% of cases

in september involved allegations of allegations speaking on behavior inappropriately with the public. in october 38% of the allegations involved the same thing, is officer behaving or speaking to with the public inappropriate low. the full break down by specific allegation is reminding folks why i'm not reading all of the list of each allegation and only the top allegations. in terms of out reach, we participated on december 6th at the bay view station meeting and with our audit division on december 8, we provided sfpd with a draft copy of our annual audit and this is compliance as a reminder for folks this audit

also tested sfpds implementation of the 8 recommendations made in dpas prior report. we've also asked the department to provide a response to the draft report by december 22 and once received we'll issue the report publicly on the dpa website. so that will all be happening while we're on the holiday break and we have on going operations. dp a's has nothing to tonight's closed session but present in the room day is chief diana and senior investigator carpenter in case there are questions that come. and 241, i have input on some of the other agenda items but

i'll save my comments until those issues are called. >> thank you, director henderson, it's good to have you back. >> barely. thank you. >> and i wanted to congratulate and commend you on your audit last week. i was paying attention, the apparently the chair did not recognize any hand. it was a phenomenal job, i want to congratulate you and your staff and the way you presented it was i thought intention and thoughtful and well appreciated and i loved it. >> thank you, i actually do, every time we present the report as you know, and all of the other commissioners know, i do take the feedback and try to incorporate into the subsequent report so it audit and its

report it's a culmination is a many of the improvement in the weekly and annual report that we've gotten feedback on. so with more graph, more details, which is a culmination of the analysis being presented in new ways so it's not as difficult for a lay person or an individual to pick up our report and understand what is being reflected on the data. thank you for noticing that, a lot of work goes in the process. i want to thank my audit team especially steve flagetery for all the process. >> and i will be asking do agendize some of that audit as well as people's response. >> fantastic. >> we anticipate because this was a first in the series. >> that's correct and the reason is so it's more

digestable, i don't want to overwhelm either the department or commission with the whole slew of recommendations and this way i think it's more digestable, they're more related so they can be addressed completely and comprehensively by all of us. >> great. thank you. >> all right, sergeant. >> members of the public that would like to make a comment online item 5, please approach the podium or press star 3. president, there is no public comment. >> thank you. >> line item number 6, commission report will be limited to a brief description of activity and announcements to determine any of the issues raised for future commission meeting. commissioner and president and commissioner announcement and items identified in a future commission meeting. >> thank you, i'll start this

section off, it's been a pretty uneventful week for me. so what i have been working on is d g.o. 9.01 and we have been looking at all of the responses and thoughtful edit from thijz. i wanted to thank my fellow commissioners for their robust discussion. i was excited that i was able to present our d g.o. commissioners who were not able to participate in the process given the laws and brown act which prevent them from doing so because we're very careful of that and we don't want to be sued. so that is all i have to report. and i'm going to return it over to commissioner yanez.

>> thank you president elias and good evening, directer henderson and chief scott and the community at large, i do you know, we're working on the juvenile d g.o. revision and as a result of last week's presentation on the impact of policing under tenderloin and 25% on juvenile citations and arrest. >> i do want to a agenda eyes, we can use that as an opportunity to talk about the progress towards agendizing the d g.o. but in light of the fact that we're looking to closing the juvenile detention center at some point, it was really striking and alarming to

actually even here one of the statements from, i believe it's a difficult or sergeant from the to, if there is possession, they were arresting so i want to know whether that is trend is happening outside of soli, the tenderloin district. and at one point there was a juvenile division, would you be able to share why we don't have that consideration we're in a direction of closing the detention and we know the impact of policing and detention and pulling guns on young people can have destremental affects for a lifetime.

>> when investigation in the past were centralized there were officers that were assigned to investigation bureau and around 2009, 2010, investigation of bureau got decentralized and that's when the investigative team started. and a lot of investigators were assigned to their local stations which really shrank the investigation of investigation bureau, when i got here it was a lot smaller because of the need of being more efficient. so most of those have been reassigned to investigation

bureau was rereestablished the robbery detail as we know it today. and i do believe it needs to be essentially, we're not there yet because we cannot afford to do it. it's something that we would like to consider can then implement if we get the staffing for that. >> thank you for that, i think it would be important to have a browder conversation with the roll of the department in that area. the other item that i want to talk about and more than likely agendize unless you some questions. couple of years ago, we didn't talk about it last week, because we had so much going on.

and then pulled the to army and computers. the real challenge for me, was for me as a part of abc 41, we have a new expectation to detail and monitor and manage our arsenal weapons. and as we're moving away from the militaryization of departments i would hope, i want to understand better how it is outside of the robo cop situation how is it that we can identify 375 machine gbz at standard issue and what process took place and why we weren't necessarily a part of that conversation?

i still think that we should have a conversation moving forward. >> i think it requires a more than two-second response. it's a very important topic and i'm sure other commissioners have questions about that too. >> thank you. >> and also noting back to the committee so it will come out before the board, they didn't pull can and send it back to committee it's back before them too. >> thank you, that's my report. >> commissioner benedicto. >> thank you very much, president elas. a couple of items, my work is continuing on d g.o. 7.1, involving juveniles. we'll continue meeting

regularly on that and i'm glad that is moving forward. additionally as i noted last week, on d g.o. 5.16, the chief had a productive meeting with the d.a.'s office and we reached a point where it's ready for action so ask for that to be a agendized then. and there will be some that we can decide on as a body. since the that time the commission received letters from the mayor's department disability and aging services and mta board, today members of the commission met with both.

and we'll be meeting with them soon. when discussing our out reach on 9.01 there has not been a single request for that has not been granted whether it's from neighborhood groups or other agencies, at every, we received and made accommodations to meet at every juncture and our working group solicited any and all input so i'm glad to have that and i expect to have those over the next few weeks before we return in january. >> thank you. vice president carter-oberstone. >> thank you president. as commissioner benedicto mentioned, the mayor's office on disability and the

department of disability and aging reached out to commission. we met with both and appreciate lending some of their expertise to this process. we scrutinized to make sure that nothing in this policy, we were not banning stops on our roadways but, at the same time, disabled folks and elderly folks can be disproportionately impacted even if they're not significant collisions happening. and i want to say to the public that we're committed to making this policy work.

so just wanted to acknowledge the meeting and our intent. i did want to address a couple of d g.o.s that i've been assigned to. and just for background, they put together a presentation showing that there were about 25ish d g.o.s that were suppose to be in the division process directed by the department where the department had received dpe's recommendation for those revisions based on nationally recognized best practices. but those revisions were not happening examine those d g.o.s having language issuing for sometimes as long as two years. and in response, i'll now say the time, commissioners at the time critical of the department, i was one of those

commissioners but i also said at the time that this commission needed to accept a lot of responsibility for that because it's our job to ensure that these revisions happen in a timely fashion. and now that we passed, there is no longer ambiguity about what a timely fashion means. they set out a de tailed step by step process that needs to happen for every decision and sets out timelines and if dp a cannot meet a time line, there is only one way to extend it and that's to submit in writing a request to the the president ccing. and i want to and the first is

dgo first amendment. because it appears that a deadline has been missed, and chief, i reached out to you before the meeting, tlts my understand that there is not been a request in writing. they did ask for certain documents in order to put a documentation grid. those were not responded to as far as i understand. the initial email was sent on october 27, there was not any sponsor production of documents. and dpa even though it did not produce the documents. the department's response under 321 was due on department 6,

it's still not to its recommendation grid, as far as i know. before we go any further, i wanted you a chance to correct that if i misstated any of the facts. >> i'm not, yeah, i'm looking at some of the notes on a 10, from the notes don't know what was communicated from the notes. but i do know there is communication, for instance on 8/10 the 90-clock started. and dpa advise. on 11-20, that the commission directed a working group on this. my understanding is there were some communication back examine

forth on that issue. on 11-3, my understanding that we received it on the 6th and the deadline that was missed was the response to the recommendation grid. and this is one with the working group that will extend it from 90 day to 120-day. we hired our work group facilitator who started this monday for the community work group. so we have a better understanding of what our capability examine our timeline on the dto that require work groups. my understanding also although you don't have it, that our folks working on this have a recommendation or request for 30-day extension that has not gotten to the commission yet. so we own that, that's where we

are on a-10. >> right, okay i want to separate out a couple of things. so i understand there that there may be a separate discussion from the group. that's completely separate from this deadline which is well ahead of any working group may happen. this is just a response to the stage one recommendation grid. they're going to be a separate request when we get to the work group, the department can say, we have the resources and we can decide whether that's good cause but that's separate from this. i guess, i'm very concerned because we have a situation here where dp a sends their grid on time. they follow-up over email and get no response. the departments is well aware of its 3.1 deadline and things are getting ignored here and like i said, it's our job now to make sure that these ded lines are followed.

i'm just concerned that it appears to be. it i won be bringing this up if it slips and they said, sorry we'll get it to you tomorrow. this is a situation where folks are getting multiple emails and ignoring them, reminding that the ded line has slipped and no explanation, i know after i texted you today, you know, only after that they sent an email requesting an extension. and that email does not comply with 3.01 it does not say why there is good cause for extension. what is this commission suppose to do to make sure that the 3.10 ded lines are followed? >> so i do want to get back to you. my understanding is there is

been conversation between the dpa personnel and the department. >> but only recently not. >> it's not my understanding. >> okay, okay. >> you say there is no response, i do want to follow-up with that. >> okay. there is multiple components in 810 and the grid is definitely part of the process. there is also the other part that you talked about or i talked about. this is something that i stated from the start that we're going to do the best we can to make

these come to live when they're suppose to come to light. i do hear your point as far as the 12/6 deadline was missed. that deadline was missed. and there has been communication with dpa the specific email that you're referencing, i will get back to you. because my understanding there has not been communication. >> i appreciate that, the agree and extent of the communication is a bit beside the point, there was never, an attempt to request an extension which is the only and so, december 6 is a ded line. by december 5, hopefully earlier whether the commission

can decide, there needs to be something submitted. this is a violation of department policy, right? and, it's appears to be a willful violation of policy. and the way we enforce any other policy. it can't be the fact that we find out after the fact that there is a violation and we have to bring it up at this commission in order for things to get done. one thing that we do, is we impose discipline and i don't see, this poll sew is on equal standing with other policy in the books. i just want to say i'm very

troubled by what i say purposeful. and i do think that it's necessary to agendize this, this cannot be the way we do business, otherwise we'll be back where we started. i appreciate your forthrightness acknowledging that the deadline was passed and i know you were not personally involved, i do find it concerning that we just made a big effort to address this. >> other d g.o. that i've been assigned, my understanding is the 40 day clock elapses today, yesterday. i just got a calendar alert. so i think that means the commission should have it, but i don't have it, i have not seen at least, do you have an

update on that? >> yes, i do. >> i signed off today and this was a collaborative conversation. and was added so that policy is signed off, that's one that i hope to get the commission can agendize is done. >> that's great to hear, sounds like there is great job but again is it your understanding that that deadline is missed? and this is the 40-day clock is wrong. >> that deadline is missed. >> there was a meeting, that i

requested that happened on monday with commissioner to discuss this policy revision. >> the deadline was missed but the policy was done. >> so once again, i understand there could be good reasons why we cannot get down on the deadline but it can't be optional whether we're going to submit a written request. i just don't think we can do our jobs on this commission if we have to catch these things after the fact like this.

it finished. >> okay, thanks chief. >> thank you. >> director henderson. >> thank you for bringing that up commissioner. part of what is behind this movement just in general speaking back and forth, i just want to drill down and make it a little more specific and that was a fantastic example. but part of what the push is and making sure that we're following the rules and implementation is because dpa's specifically and i know where a lot of driver for a lot of these back and forth with the deadlines but because our obligations are at the level that they are with the weekly, monthly quarterly, annual reporting not to mention the obligations baked into the very precise process of our audit and reporting with audit, the

deadline have always had a dis promotion al affect on our work in informing not just the commission so i know this is, the process contain in the policy that we passed so that we stay on schedule more regularly is very important and to the chief's response, there is a lot of back and forth from the department with my department on a variety of different things. but on the very specific things we have not in the past drilled down at this level of focus to make sure all of these deadlines have been passed and i do blaoesh it's important and taking us some time to get there but the outcome is so important that we have to continue with the process like this and this was the whole reason that i wanted a commissioner assigned to some

of the specific project so we can have this level of detail beyond just, i know in the past it would just be, the commissioner asking me interest r there any deadlines are you missing anything? and would i try to remember the list of what we needed. but this process is getting better i believe and i foully believe that once we get up to speed where both sides are able to meet the deadlines, we'll be able to continue our efficiencies that we've seen in the most resent past with data being shared in the right way and allowing us to continue in the works that is important. i know this is all a little, uncomfortable back and forth but, i really do think that it's important for how we're all able to do our jobs. thank you for the hard conversations and the before we even have done it, the

continued agendizing, is that a word? the continued agendizing these internal that shape the work that we all have to do. the work has to come a long way. we're going to be a week late so understand examine own that. but the work itself has vasly improved between the two agencies. and i felt the need to say this and give a good example of what that looks like so there is an understanding. we have a foot pursuit policy that is coming that we've been

work withing dpa on. dpa sent on after our last meeting, sent back some recommended revisions to the language. and we've been trying schedule a meeting mostly because of my calendar for three weeks and i know that is meeting with some with frustration but i just can't work it in beinger that's a situation where we have to own making sure that the motel fickation are sent to the commission because that is not at all uncommon.

?ment are very efficient in moving this forward. so i think of that process and what we built in is really helping and seeing some of the benefit. >> i agree thank you. >> public comment if you would like to make a public comment regarding line item 6 press star-3. no public comment. item 7 has been pulled from the agenda. line item 8, discussion and possible action recommendation discussion and possible action. >> who is presenting? >> yeah, commissioner i and the chief, met both of the cases that the chief wrote in the letter were disciplinary cases. one of them i'm sure the commissioner will remember from about a month ago.

given that outcome of the case, commissioner yee and i conquer with the chief's recommendation that the awards be presented to the officers. i'm not sure on both one of them involved the shooting in the barber shop out near jeniva and mission which was put in terrible situation. at the same time we have to consider the discipline, thank you. >> i need a motion and a second. >> i will make the motion. to follow the chief's recommendation that the awards be given to the officers listed in the letter. >> i'll second. >> on the motion to accept the

board sert tiff fickation. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> commissioner yanez. >> yes. >> commissioner byrne. >> yes. >> commissioner yee. >> yes. >> commission vice president. >> yes. >> and president elias. >> yes. >> you have seven yeses. >> for members of the public that would like to make a comment, please press star-3 or approach the podium. and there is no public comment, i apologize we need to take the vote one more time on the motion, commissioner walker. >> yes. >> benedicto. >> yes. >> yanez. >> yes. >> byrne. >> yes. >> yee. >> yes. >> vice. >> yes. >> president. >> yes. >> 7 yeses. >> line item 9 discussion and possible action grooming standard for the meet anding conferring with the san francisco association.

discussion and possible action. >> please. >> thank you, president elias so on this dgo, there was a lot of input from members of the department on this which actually started precovid. in all and i personally participated in all of these meeting with various members and including ofj and others. plus we had community meeting on this as well. and at least approximately 100 community members weighed on this.

in terms of practices on tatoos and facial hair and other grooming stands adser. standards so there are some changes from the prior policy which has not been updated. officers, who weighed in on this really believe that as long as there is professionalism in appearance, we should be measuring officers by their work, character and things that really matter and not hair styles and beards and those things as long as those are professional in the hair styles and beards. i urge the commission to move this policy forward to meet and confer with the police officer association and thanks for allowing me to present. >> sounds good. >> motion to approve. >> excuse me.

>> excuse me. >> your name was not. >> it may not apply to many officers for the san francisco police department, but the member of the sikh to wear his turban, it caused a, caused tremendous controversial in can dei know there is a big sikh population there that even the prime minister had to weigh in. if they're a practicing sikh they should be allowed to wear the turban instead of the hat that the san francisco police have.

and it's documented in canada. to be forced to do that when tt rather obvious, we want to be sensitive to all communities and we're a diversity, that was my only comment. >> just one thing, having these more modern grooming practices and specifically racially specific standards is a huge step in the right direction and absolutely impact part of the recruitment challenges that i think we've had here and i know some other departments have had. so i'm glad that we're having this discussion especially when it directs to race because i think it speaks to making the department in more diverse in a positive with everything that we deal with here.

>> thank you, chief are you willing to make that adjustment in the policy? >> yes, i am you're talking about, section g? >> there is an exception but, but, if the person is a practicing member of the sikh community, then they're going to wear the turban and the long hair underneath. the facial hair is recognized so that's not an issue. they would do their facial hair in a manner. but the regulation of police hat a member of the sikh community is not going to be able to put that hat on. and that caused tremendous controversy in canada so much that the prime minister got involved because the mounties have a particular hat that is distinctive.

>> i know that you don't like live edit and you like to see the public wow write. >> this is hay small one. >> there is an exception? how interesting. >> life is full of exceptions. >> can i offer this and it's a comment and a question for mr. byrne. and section 8 of hair style i know we talked about a turban and that. part of that is hair style part is not. when you look at 4 when required hair styles must allow for proper wearing ball hat or protective head gear. that applies to beards as well. >> the beards when i read it, i thought it was fine. it was, it was the regulation

hat and that is what reminded me of the controversy in canada with the sikh xhaoubt when they would not let members of the sikh community unless they were prepared to take it off. again it will not apply to many officers in san francisco but it speaks to the welcoming to acknowledge that the practicing sikh. >> what are you suggesting? >> can i i ask a clarifying question. in section g permit officers to sikh an exception for religious purposes, you're saying that section should reference sikh. >> right, because it's documented particularly in

canada, there is not any in san francisco but the it's the idea that something so obvious that they're going to seek an exception. >> i cannot think of any other religious but because of the precedence that happened in canada it would be appropriate to recognize it. >> can i quickly respond, so i agree with everything you said, substancetive that people who are sikh can serve in our department and comply with our grooming standards, i think it would pose a legal problem to

single out a single out specific religious under the religious clauses to say one religion and every other religious has to seek permission, for that reason i would oppose that change to this policy although substancetively i agree. >> yets, i can go with vice. i think it makes sense to have accommodations. i would hope those accommodations would not require the same thing in canada and having a exception for he explicitly for one religious.

if he wanted to pass that amendment and if it passes it would go that way otherwise we would have an alter to pass as written. >> right, if i may respond, i mean. the rc m.p. didn't have a problem in putting the exception in. i would venture to say that canadian freedom of religious is as free in this country. it's just, i cannot think and before i mention this tonight, i was trying to think of any other sort, the facial hair is allowed but that hat requirement is in.

if we were to take religious out of it and say if it interferes with a head gear of the police department, because of his religious belief, he would be exempted. then i would make a motion to have language to comply. >> ben debtos. >> benedicto. >> mia colpa. that we help the sikh community, so they don't have to say i'm a sikh, here's my turban, i cannot wear the hat.

i don't feel they need to jump through that haop which is the way it's written now. i conquer with you that language can be drafted so the sikh religious is is not mentioned but we can get the intent that the sikh community will not have to jump that extra tep. my sentiment can be done. >> i don't mean to cut you off, this was posted on friday. >> are you making a motion? >> yeah, i'm making a motion to change the language. >> i think the language is sufficient, i don't intend to second. >> motion fails for a lack of a second. >> next motion. >> to approve for the

department to meet and confer with the police officer association. >> second. >> members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding line item 9, please push the podium or press star-3 now. there is no public comment. on the motion commissioner walker. >> yes. >> benedicto. >> yes. >> yanez. >> yes. >> commissioner byrne. >> no. >> commissioner yee. >> yes. >> vice president. >> yes. >> and president >> yes. >> you have six yeses. >> next item. >> line item 10, discussion and possible action to adopt revised department general order 3.17 id cards discussion and possible discussion. >> i'll be very brief. this is procedure video regarding id cards. there is not a lot of, things

to really discuss. i urge the commission to move this forward. >> motion. >> so moved. >> second. >> second. >> for members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding item line number 10. please press star-3 or approach the podium. there is no public comment on commissioner walker. >> i didn'ts. >> benedicto. >> yes. >> commissioner yanez. >> yes. >> byrne. >> yes. >> commissioner yee. >> yes. >> vice president. >> yes. >> president. >> yes. >> 7 yeses. >> next item. >> line item 12 discussion and possible action to resend department order computer management committee discussion and possible action. >> xhaoef. chief. >> so this general order we ask

for approval to bring it to the commission. department includes language that should include definition and procedure al that are relevant and for for the reasons that i think we think it's outdated. computer management committee was published in august of 1994. d g.o. defines structure and responsibilities as it relates to the strategic plans regarding computers to handle making recommendations and use of computers with the department. the department does not believe it's necessary to have overall policy for this type of resources and it has actually department got away from practicing this.

i know we had not been asking we do now meet with the department of technology and department and our members of our command staff but we believe this general order, can really be handled by bureau order out of our technology division. this, this dgo can be done as an internal manage for the department. we do meet, we have a good process that includes the department of technology leonard drel and whoever she needs to bring to the meeting to make sure that our planning and budgetary request so we do have a process. >> great, thank you chief. commissioner benedicto. >> i'll make a motion to second. i just want to note that all dgos all date to the 90s which is a long term problem with the

department. so i'm glad that that's three fewer. i look forward to the day that date back to the 90 and with that i make a motion to resinned department order 10.09. >> second. >> to members of the public that would like to make public comment online item 12, please approach the podium or press star-3. >> commissioner walker. >> yes. >> benedicto. >> yes. >> commissioner yanez. >> yes. >> commissioner byrne. >> yes. >> yee. >> yes. >> commissioner byrne. >> yes. >>--vice president. >> yes. >> president. >> yes. >> you have 7 yeses. >> item 14, whether to hold 15 in closed session. if you would like to make public comment, please approach

the podium or press 3. >> no public comment. line item 18 vote to hold item 15 in closed. >> i make a motion to hold item 15 in closed session. >> second. >> walker. >> yes. >> benedicto. >> yes. >> commissioner yanez. >> yes. >> byrne. >> yes. >> yee. >> yes. >> commissioner vice. >> yes. >> president. >> yes. >> you have 7 yeses, we will go into closed session. [police commission in closed session]

. >> 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 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 yearararararararararararararar

>> i started the o was with a financing and had a business partner all ended up wanting to start the business and retire and i did was very important to me so i bought them oust and two weeks later the pandemic h-4 one of the moments i thought to myself we have to have the worse business in a lifetime or the best. >> we created the oasis out of a need basically so other people

bars and turning them into a space and when the last place we were performing wasn't used turned those buildings into condos so we decided to have a space. >> what the pandemic did for us is made us on of that we felt we had to do this immediately and created this. >> (unintelligible). >> where we would offer food delivery services with a curbside professionalism live music to bring spectacular to lives we are going through and as well as employ on the caterers and the performers and

drivers very for that i think also for everyone to do something. we had ordinary on the roof and life performances and with a restaurant to support the system where we are and even with that had terribly initiative and hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt had to pay our rent we decided to have an old-fashioned one we created club hours where you can watch to online and or be on the phone and raised over one quarter of a million dollar that of incredible and something that northbound thought we could do. >> we got ourselves back and

made me realize how for that people will show up if i was blown away but also had the courage but the commitment now i can't let anyone down i have to make the space serviceable so while this is a full process business it became much more about a space that was used by the community. and it became less about starting up a business and more about the heart of what we're doing. this building used to be a- and one of the first one we started working on had we came out what a mural to wrap the building and took a while but able to raise the money and pay 5 artists to make a design around many this to represent what is happening

on the side and also important this is who we are this is us putting it out there because satisfies other people we don't realize how much we affect the community around there when he i want to put that out there and show up and show ourselves outside of those walls more fabulous. and inspires other people to be more fabulous and everyone want to be more fabulous and less hatred and hostility and that is how we

>> hello everyone. welcome to the bayview bistro. >> it is just time to bring the community together by deliciousness. i am excited to be here today because nothing brings the community together like food. having amazing food options for and by the people of this community is critical to the success, the long-term success and stability of the bayview-hunters point community.

>> i am nima romney. this is a mobile cafe. we do soul food with a latin twist. i wanted to open a truck to son nor the soul food, my african heritage as well as mylas as my latindescent. >> i have been at this for 15 years. i have been cooking all my life pretty much, you know. i like cooking ribs, chicken, links. my favorite is oysters on the grill. >> i am the owner. it all started with banana pudding, the mother of them all. now what i do is take on

traditional desserts and pair them with pudding so that is my ultimate goal of the business. >> our goal with the bayview bristow is to bring in businesses so they can really use this as a launching off point to grow as a single business. we want to use this as the opportunity to support business owners of color and those who have contributed a lot to the community and are looking for opportunities to grow their business. >> these are the things that the san francisco public utilities commission is doing. they are doing it because they feel they have a responsibility to san franciscans and to people in this community. >> i had a grandmother who lived in bayview. she never moved, never wavered. it was a house of security

answer entity where we went for holidays. i was a part of bayview most of my life. i can't remember not being a part of bayview. >> i have been here for several years. this space used to be unoccupied. it was used as a dump. to repurpose it for something like this with the bistro to give an opportunity for the local vendors and food people to come out and showcase their work. that is a great way to give back to the community. >> this is a great example of a public-private community partnership. they have been supporting this including the san francisco public utilities commission and mayor's office of workforce department. >> working with the joint venture partners we got resources for the space, that the businesses were able to thrive because of all of the opportunities on the way to this

community. >> bayview has changed. it is growing. a lot of things is different from when i was a kid. you have the t train. you have a lot of new business. i am looking forward to being a business owner in my neighborhood. >> i love my city. you know, i went to city college and fourth and mission in san francisco under the chefs ria, marlene and betsy. they are proud of me. i don't want to leave them out of the journey. everyone works hard. they are very supportive and passionate about what they do, and they all have one goal in mind for the bayview to survive. >> all right. >> all right.

>> we are right now in outer richmond in the last business area of this city. this area of merchants is in the most western part of san francisco, continue blocks down the street they're going to fall into the pacific ocean. two blocks over you're going to have golden gate park. there is japanese, chinese, hamburgers, italian, you don't

have to cook. you can just walk up and down the street and you can get your cheese. i love it. but the a very multicultural place with people from everywhere. it's just a wonderful environment. i love the richmond district. >> and my wife and i own a café we have specialty coffee drinks, your typical lattes and mochas and cappuccinos, and for lunches, sandwiches and soup and salad. made fresh to order. we have something for everybody >> my shop is in a very cool part of the city but that's one of the reasons why we provide such warm and generous treats, both physically and emotionally (♪♪) >> it's an old-fashioned general store. they have coffee.

other than that what we sell is fishing equipment. go out and have a good time. >> one of my customers that has been coming here for years has always said this is my favorite store. when i get married i'm coming in your store. and then he in his wedding outfit and she in a beautiful dress came in here in between getting married at lands end and to the reception, unbelievable. (♪♪) >> the new public health order that we're announcing will require san franciscans to remain at home with exceptions only for essential outings.

>> when the pandemic first hit we kind of saw the writing on the walls that potentially the city is going to shut all businesses down. >> it was scary because it was such an unknown of how things were going to pan out. i honestly thought that this might be the end of our business. we're just a small business and we still need daily customers. >> i think that everybody was on edge. nobody was untouched. it was very silent. >> as a business owner, you know, things don't just stop, right? you've still got your rent, and all of the overhead, it's still there. >> there's this underlying constant sense of dread and anxiety. it doesn't prevent you from going to work and doing your job, it doesn't stop you from

doing your normal routine. what it does is just make you feel extra exhausted. >> so we began to reopen one year later, and we will emerge stronger, we will emerge better as a city, because we are still here and we stand in solidarity with one another. >> this place has definitely been an anchor for us, it's home for us, and, again, we are part of this community and the community is part of us. >> one of the things that we strived for is making everyone in the community feel welcome and we have a sign that says "you're welcome." no matter who you are, no matter what your political views are, you're welcome here. and it's sort of the classic san francisco thing is that you work with folks. >> it is your duty to help

everybody in san francisco.

this meeting will come to order the december dwelve of left lane use and transportation committee of the board of supervisors. i'm supervisor melgar chair joined by vice chair dean preston and supervisor peskin. joining us remote low. the committee clerk today is erika major and i would like to acknowledge matthew out of sfgovtv for staffing the meeting.

thank you the board of supervisors and committees are convening hi prid meetingacellow public comment and providing remote access via phone. board recognize its is essential and take public comment as followless. first public comment on each item. attending in person speak first and then those on the call in line for watching 26, 28, 78, 99 or sfgov.org the call in number is streaming. the number is 415-655-0001 access code 3058248. and when connected you will hear discussions but in listening mode. when your item of interest come up and public comment is called those in person lineup to speak to the right and press star 3 to

enter the queue. >> we'll take from those in person first and the call in line. you may submit written comments to myself the land use and transportation clerk. e mail is erikamajor sfgov.org. if you snift i have e mail tell be forwarded to the supervisors part of the official file. you may 7 u.s. postal service to city hall 1 dr. carlton b. goodlett place room 244, san francisco, california 94102. items acts upon today will appear on the board of supervisor agenda of january next year. madam chair.

why thank you very much. in dam clerk. there is no audience. let's go to item 1. please >> a resolution landmark designation article 10 of the planning code of 1200 tarvalstreet the park side library in the sunset district. if you would like to provide public comment dial 415-655-0001. press story 3 to line up to speak the system will indicate you have raisedior hundred in confirmation. >> thank you very much. supervisor mar thank you so much for being here with us. i know this item is important to you. i'm glad we could accommodate

it. >> thank you for this opportunity to consider this resolution initiating historic landmark of the park side branch library and great to see we have a special guest today. thanks for making time the final meeting of lan use committee meeting of the year. and i'm really pleased to move this forward as my final legislation as district 4 to wrap up my work at d 4 supervisor. i want to acknowledge supervisor peskin's focus and leadership on historic preservation in our city and you know of the 300 designated historic landmarks the overwhelming majority are kongs traited in the northeast quadrant of the city and you know i think that reflects all supervisor peskin's focus on this important work over the years it is understandable that

historic preservation work has been focussed on the oldest makereds in the city. >> this proposed landmarking buildos efforts to expand the scope of preservation in our city to reflect the cultural history of all of our neighborhoods. and i'm really have this community lead effort on the west side i worked on request chair melgar. you know that lead to the landmarking of the club house in stearn grove and mother's building at the zoo. and i think i wanted to say i wanted acknowledge san francisco

heritage program heritage in the neighborhoods and back in 2020 they had a focus on the park side district and did a series of events highlighting the history of the park side district and promoting historic preservation in the neighborhood. and that directly lead to the communal initiated lead lan marking of the club house and in the for the park side library, this is followed that and come out of park side heritage work i ammed to say the park side library was has been the center of commune life in the park side district for generations of working class families for over 70 years. i seen it with my family, daughter grew up at the park

side library going to the children's activities and family story time. and the children's librarian did wonderful sing alongs playing guitar i was happy to present a commendation to her when she retired. i was there this weekend she has grownup there and -- we have -- i did want to acknowledge the work of -- the community and pushing forward this historic landmarking of the park side library. the work of sf heritage and the western neighborhood's project and who has been the people's history yen on the west side. and then also the neighborhood group that formed the park side folk nus 2020 park side heritage

including amazing neighborhood leaders natalie from the park neighborhood association. from speak and many other neighborhood leaders part of park side heritage working with on this lan marking effort. again, thank you, everyone. not guilty community and i want to thank planning staff and i know pillar who has been working on this as well as others has a presentation today are you with us remote? >> hi. yes, i am. >> i do have a couple of slides.

thank you. good afternoon, supervisors pillar with planning staff. park side branch library designed by appleton and woolford in 1951 the first of 8 branch libraries built during focused come pain for branch library expansion in san francisco between 1951 and 66. park side branch well received aclaim with publications architects and engineer and record noting as an excellent example of mid century modern design. and modern branch library design. the modern branch library

campaign and architect modern design. the historic preservation found in 2009 that the library may warranty consideration for individual lan mark designation. the building was urn going rehab at the time of this determination the commission directed the planning department it calendar increase of landmarking for consideration following completion of this work. the compresident tab rehab of the building completed in late 2010. left lane marking process after founder. the encouragement of community organizations, preservation and sf heritage and park side heritage planning moved forward with landmarking the park side library. through coordination with support from the library, rec park and supervisor mar's office planning with the community and the sister agencies to bring this initiation for lan mark designation.

we look forward to continuing the coordination throughout the marking process. thank you. >> thank you very much. any comments or questions? let's go to public comment. >> thank you. seeing we have no one in the chamber we will go to the remote line we have 4 listeners with low in the queue if you would like to press story 3. takes first caller you have 2 minutes. i'm kerry young from san francisco heritage. i really wanted to thank supervisor mar for spearheading this designation and i want to say that the p side library is a commune gem this has served the

neighborhood for over 70 years. it is provides great illustration of postwar architecture and the first of the libraries designed by woolford and set the pattern for the other branch library this is came after it. it is modern design is similar to a cozy style home and it fit this is welcoming commune space in the park side. and we are really thrilled this designation will build upon the w with the community group park side heritage and with supervisor mar to preserve historic resources in the park side neighborhood but on the west side of the city. and we also.ed take this opportunity to thank supervisor mar for all of his support of historic preservation in district 4 during his time as supervisor and thank park side heritage for championing preservation work in the park

side and san francisco heritage have been very happy to support the work of the group. and preservation in the district and fully support the item to the board and look forward to working with the park side community to support this designation moving forward. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. good afternoon i'm even rose and live in the park side district and a member of park side heritage i'm speak nothing support landmark for the library you know the architect and engineer magazine called at this time finest branch library in the country. to date the library has not been recognized with historical designation and protection. this lack of historical protection is the importance structures in park side which is a traditional low working class

neighborhood and has been over looked. we formed our group park side heritage to ensure we as the city maintain the character and quality of life in western neighborhoods and park side in particular. we began with seeking and achieving lan mark for the club house now lan mark for the park side library is the next important step in the process. there are many other significant structures that around warrant this. and you know at one time there were in the many job in san francisco and people came because they loved the city. and that is beginning to swing become and if people work for a

bay area company what attracts people to san francisco is the beauty and the character of neighborhoods which we must strife to protect and min tain. thank you, supervisors for your consideration in initiating landmark for the park side library. >> thank you. take the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. supervisors. chair melgar and supervisors preston, peskin and mar. i'm naur evermaureen the chief operating officer for the san francisco public library. i'm honored be here to offer our support for the lan mark designation for the library. we look forward to working with planning and the community on this landmark designation effort. thank you. >> thank you. the last caller in the queue can

you hear me? >> yes. proceed. >> great. daved pilpel in support of the initiating the landmark for the park side branch library. thank you. >> thank you so much and this completes the queue. >> thank you. madam clerk, public comment is closed. >> i would like to make a motion we sends this out with positive recommendation as a committee report. >> and on that motion supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye >> you have 3 aye's >> that motion pass. this is our last committee meeting of the year and my last day as chair i want to say thank you it has been a pleasure.

and i will miss you supervisor mar and thank you deputy city attorney and madam clerk for the wonderful work. >> wait! wait! why is it your left day as chair y. we have a new board next year, newark signments. >> but you could get the same assignment. >> do we have other matters before us today? >> that completes the queue. >> that completes the agenda. >> thank you. lovely holiday break to all my colleagues and staff. thank you. >> adjourned. television.

>> in 1948 swensen's ice cream used to make ice cream in the navy and decided to open up an ice cream shop it it takes time for the parent to put money down and diane one of the managers at zen citizen in arena hills open and serve old-fashioned ice cream. >> over 20 years. >> yeah. >> had my own business i was a firefighter and came in- in

1969 her dad had ice cream and left here still the owner but shortly after um, in here became the inc. maker the manager and lead and branded the store from day to day and in the late 90s- was obvious choice he sold it to him and he called us up one night and said i'm going to sell the ice cream store what you you talking about diane came and looked at the store and something we want to do and had a history of her dad here and growing up here at the ice cream store we decided to take that

business on. >> and have it in the family i didn't want to sell it. >> to keep it here in san francisco. >> and (unintelligible). >> share worked there and worked with all the people and a lot of customers come in. >> a round hill in the adjoining areas loved neither ice cream shop in this area and support russia hills and have clean up day and give them free ice cream because that is those are the people that keep us the opportunity to stick around here four so many years next generations have been coming her 20 er thirty or 40 years and we have the ingredients something it sold and, you know, her dad

said to treat the customers right and people will keep on coming back and 75 or 74 years, you know, that is quite an accomplishment i think of it as our first 75 years and like to see that, you know, going into the future um, that ice cream shop will be around used to be 4 hundred in the united states and all gone equipment for that one that is the first and last we're proud of that we're still standing and people people are you tell people it's been around in 50 years and don't plan on

>> thank you. good morning and welcome to the rules of committee of the san francisco board of supervisors for today, monday, november 28th. i'm the chair of the committee, aaron peskin joined by vice-chair mandelman and committee member supervisor connie chan. our clerk is mr. victor young, mr. young, do you have any announcements >> yes, the board of supervisors and its committees are having hybrid meetings for public comment and providing remote comment. the board recognizes the equitable public access is essential and taking public comment as follows. first public comment is taken on each item on the agenda. those attending in person will be allowed to speak first and we'll take those who are waiting on the telephone line. for those watching channel 26, 28, 78 or 99 and sfgovtv dot

org, the public comment call in line number is streaming across the stream. the number is 415-655-0001. the meeting id of 24885274429 and then press pound and pound again. when connected, you'll hear the meeting discussion but you'll be muted and listening mode only. when an item of interest come up, those joining in person should line up to speak and those on the telephone line should press star three to be added to the speaker line. if you're on the telephone, remember to turn down your television and other listening devices you may be using. we'll be taking public comment from those attending in person first and then we'll go to public comment telephone line. alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing, e-mail them to the committee clerk at victor dot

yong at sf gov dot org. it will be included in the file. send city hall one dr. carlton room 244 san francisco, california, 94102. that completes my comments. >> thank you, mr. young. could you please read the first of two items. >> yes, item no. one is a resolution updating the proposed designation of agencies qualified to participate in the 2022 annual joint fundraising drive for officers and employees of the city and county of san francisco. and i believe there's a request this matter is sent out as a committee report. >> that's correct. we will go to supervisor mandelman who is the sponsor of this item. supervisor? >> thank you, chair peskin. the city's heart of san francisco charity drive is an annual drive that provides a way for city

employees to contribute to the charities traffic choice by weekly payroll. it is outreach to city employees. it's a long city program to support philanthropic employees and we the board of supervisors approved a resolution for those charities as a part of the san francisco campaign. however, less than two weeks after this year's campaign was lunched on october 1st, we learned that among the many charities represented by the federation that partner with city, there are several that are appear to be anti-lgbtq groups. this was brought to my attention by city staff who expressed profound concern that city resources are spent amplifying those groups and although i understand this campaign includes a range of charities and provides city

employees to donate to any 501c3 of their choice, i and others have been troubled to have the city seemingly to be promoting lgbtq groups when using city resources. and we paused the campaign to consider next steps. the resolution before you today proposes a temporary solution that allows us to relaunch the campaign for this year with a much shorter and targeted list of participating chairs with a clear focus on supporting bay area, bay service provides and city employees will have the opportunity to write in the name of any charity or non-profit they would like to support but the list published by the city in support of the campaign will be shorter and focused on bay area based organizations. this is a temporary and imperfect solution that allows us to relaunch the campaign for this year in according to the admin code. we need to come up with a

more permanent solution and we need to consider a more comprehensive update to the language of the administrative code. i hope we do that early in the new year so we can make changes to lay the groundwork for future efforts. i want to thank our city administrator carmen chiu and sophie, the legislative and policy and public affairs director with the city administrator's office who have spent a lot of time and done a lot of brain damage trying to figure out what -- how this program should be structured going forward and what we should do about the current years program or and so i would like to, after my colleagues have a chance to speak, invite ms. heyward to come up and provide additional details on the proposal. >> thanks. ms. heyward, i appreciate your work although it

has implicated a larger conversation and maybe today is not the day but i thought we use this as an opportunity to discuss the combined charity programs and its utility, its history and its future in an age where donations facilitated by the internet have become a lot easier so i wanted to have broader -- i'm prepared to vote for this and appreciate supervisor mandelman and your office's work on this but also am questioning whether we want to devote what i understand to be more than a full-time equivalent staff, more like to an ongoing program in an environment where charitable giving by people in general and city employees in particular is,

has -- many less barriers these days. and so, i lean towards maybe starting a conversation to exercise this function from our government in total. maybe you want to comment on that as well as the specifics of the resolution before us. supervisor chan, sorry. i'm not looking at the screen. my apologies. >> no problem, thank you chair peskin. i concur with your sentiment about while this has been a long time tradition of san francisco, it is time to revent this program. i think that there are good example like, what sfpuc have been really working on like the social program they have established a data base for us to give and in partnership and then also i think that existing, actually, another program we

have like give to sf also need a revamp. perhaps it's time to start that conversation and what does that look like for the entire city, both as a government but also for our workers to give and i just want to thank supervisor mandelman for taking this on and would like to be added as a cosponsor. thank you. >> thank you, chair peskin. thank you, supervisor chan and of course, thank you supervisor mandelman. i do have a presentation today and with your comments in mind, i want to note the presentation gives an overview of the program and some of the history, so that mayday the groundwork for the broader conversation. i'm joined today virtually by deputy city administrator johnson and colleague, angela. angela has the presentation to share. i don't know how to make that happen but i'm hoping it will. >> good morning ms. yip and ms. johnson. >> hi. my name is sophie. i'm the director of legislation and

public affairs for city administrator carmen chiu. for the opportunity to present this morning. i'm be brief but give an overview. what i want to do is sort of set the perimeters of what exist in the administrative code. give you an idea of the process and how it works and the data to date. and then i do want to propose what we consider a temporary solution to allow us to relaunch the program for this year in accordance with the requirements of the admin code but plant the seed of ideas that we could act on potentially with your partnership early in the new year. going to slide one, please, administrative code section 16.93 defines the structure of the program. first and foremost, it requires that we have an annual campaign. that's why we're working quickly to come up with a way to relaunch it in an acceptable way for this year. the specific language says each year the city

and county of san francisco shall hold an annual joint fundraising drive. there's no may in there. it also defines which federations and federations are groups that represent a large group of charities. which federations can participate and here the language is clear. any federation that meets the criteria defined in the admin code may participate. those were created in 988 and updated -- 988 and updated in 19 -- 1988 and updated 1977. it defines the timeline. the mayor designate a champagne chair and the controller has backup for payroll deduction and processing any individual checks that employees gives and the city administrator reviews applications and make recommendations to the board of supervisors for approval which federation meet criteria. in addition to those named roles in the admin code the work of the campaign chairs is significant.

right now, it's the sheriff's department and the airport and they work together to administer the program and then sprinkled throughout the city in every city department there's a campaign campaign who motivate staff and encourages them to participate. on the next slide, we have the specific criteria included in the admin code. it's the rule of our office, the city administrator's office to review applications from federation that apply to make sure they meet the criteria. but as you can see there's not an opportunity to screen for what types offer advices any -- any services that the participates charity support. are they a 501c and submitted audits statements and been in existence for a year and our little opening for changes this year, at least half of them have to be located in the bay area. in addition, i

want to stress and i will stress it several times today that in addition to the federations included in the campaign, city employees can always write in the name of any 501c3 nonprofit they wish to directly support through the donor's trust office. you're not limited to just the charities included through the federation. the next slide, i'm going to guess i can skip this. this is just the process by which the recommendations make their way here to the board of supervisors. federations do have to apply every year. city administrator's offices review those applications and we forward a recommendation to you. i want to give you a snapshot of the campaign and the city resources involved in administering it. 10% of city employees participate each year. they raised just over a million dollars last year. i think it was $1.2 million. and city staff

partner with the lead federations to administer the program much on the city side on the front end, the board of supervisors and the city administrator's office are involved in designating the participating federations and office of the controller establishes and implements payroll deductions and processes individual checks and then the sheriff's department, airport and then captains throughout departments citywide work on the ground game of motivating employees to join and participate. on the next slide, let's see here. yes. as you know, as supervisor mandelman noted, thank you, we had launched this year's campaign on october 1st as planned and then we paused the campaign on october 12th after receiving complaints from city employees but this prompted an evaluation of the whole program and bring us to where we are today. so, on the next slide, here we go. we

clearly have no mechanism by which to screen individual charities that can participate and i'm not sure that they would be possible or appropriate. in most circumstances, it's hard to make a clear distinction as to what charity city employee should or shouldn't support. so the resolution before you today proposes to strengthen the existing geographic requirement that is in the admin code by, instead of focusing on the fact that at least half of any med races charities be located -- federation charities be located in the bay area, we're expanding that or narrowing it, i guess, to say all participating charities should be based or located in the bay area and that any funds raised through the campaign be spent on services in the bay area. and then lastly, although it's not in the resolution, i also want to note that the federations themselves have opted to further require that any participating charity

sign onto a nondiscrimination pledge to be included in this campaign. and again, i will say that city employees would retain the ability to write in the name of any of their own preferred 501c3 to donate through the donor's choice option. next slide, the results. let's see. the number of participating federations is reduced from 4 to 3. so creating healthy communities, america's best local charities and earth share is the three federations we would partner with and i provided to you and the clerk, the updated charities a part of those federations and it's a shorter list than before. what this also means though is that the federation global impact, we lose because this is a federation that, as the name suggest, represented charities that's focused on international

activities and that's a loss. another item we distributed to you and i have given to the clerk is a separate appear from global impact to consider and if there's a way to loop them back in. and then, depending on how the resolution goes today, we can relaunch the campaign for the coming year much we will likely have to start payroll deductions slightly later because we need to give enough time for the controllers office to setup deductions but we can get it done by the end of this year. and then next slide, again, this is the temporary solution that i've just outlined. i wanted to plant the seed of what you can consider for amending the language of the admin code which would take an ordinance not a resolution so a little bit more time. so three options to consider, one, i think that you could certainly amend the criteria defined in

the admin code in any way you feel appropriate so that organizations could be screened a little bit more tightly. i would note that it's probably not the preferable solution from our end because i'm not exactly sure how or who screen all of the various charities and what kind of perimeters we would set up there. the next is you could consider an ordinance that limits participation and this touches on what supervisor chan was suggesting, to named funds that are already associated with the city. for example, give to sf and give employees, would have the ability to name any 501c3 they want to directly support. that would narrow the group that we, as a city amplify and if that's a concern, it could get to that. lastly to the point that perhaps chair peskin was making, you certainly have the opportunity to consider an ordinance that would eliminate the program entirely and that

could perhaps acknowledge that the universe of giving has certainly changed since 1988/1997. it's probably easier to setup reoccurring donations now than it was then. i will say another benefit of the program that i don't want to ignore is that some of these smaller charities do not have to spend dollars on direct outreach to reach the pool of 30,000 city employees. that concludes my overview presentation. i'm available for questions. you can see deputy city administrator johnson is available for questions. thank you! >> thank you, ms. heyward and that last slide display the universe. i have not come to any hard fast conclusions. i wanted to have that conversation. i mean, option number two also, i think, has merit as option number three. i guess my question would be, how -- what

are the next steps beyond what we're doing today and the board will presumably vote on tomorrow and i think time is our friend here because this -- any code changes that we make presumably would not be applicable until the next cycle, right? >> that's correct. time is kind of our friend but i went over the slide very quickly that had our campaign timeline and by march 1st of every year, the admin code requires that applications from federations is submitted and i believe it's a date in april whereby, may it is may 1st, the board is supposed to approve the participating federation. thinking through the legislation timeline, we can fix this for next year but we should hit the ground running in january. >> something would have to be introduced by the end of this year or early in january to be lawed by the march deadline.

>> we're happy to partner with you to make sure it happens. >> it's a conversation i'm happy to have -- i haven't have it with supervisor mandelman as long as both of us on the committee. i'm happy to follow someone's lead and options two or three are the right ones to explore. i would throw out there a couple of next steps suggestions. one is, how much does this cost us? and do we, i mean, don't get me wrong. sometimes i'm happy to spend money to make money, so i mean, that's -- it's a data point we should be interested in and two, and i don't want to create work for anybody but what does the universe of an approximately 3,000 people that take these think? i don't know if we have

a simple relative way of serving them but it might be of some utility. those are my two thoughts for the ongoing conversation. i'm happy to participate in whatever way is most expedient without stepping on anybody's toes? that's it for me. supervisor mandelman? >> >> thank you, chair peskin. can we look at the slide with the three options? >> sure. i don't know how to get it for you. >> ms. yep. >> in you could go to the option -- if you could go to the option slide, that would be great. >> well done. based on the comments of colleagues, it seems like, well, i haven't said anything but i agree that trying to keep the -- trying to sort of tinker with the current program and put guardrails on it going forward, that seems like a ton of brain damage and not worth

trying to do, so i'll be the third person on this body to say that option, that the first bullet on there seems like a non-starter and we shouldn't do that. in trying to understand and it seems like and i would share the sense that the third bullet may be the, certainly the simplest, concern i think for me about going with the third bullet rather than trying to at least explore the second bullet is there are these 3,000 people who use -- and wleefb -- -- and liking some aspect of the current program. so i'm wondering how much of that demand could be met for a second bullet. the other thing that's a peaking about the second bullet, i think it's good to encourage city employees to make charitable contributions and in

particularly to thing that's are priorities that the city is trying to advance and maybe some funds like give to sf if there's a relatively simple and cost effective and efficient way of making it easier for city employees to do that and if some number of those 3,000 folks would appreciate that option, i would be interested in trying to give it to them but not if it's going to mean a ton of work for a city administrator's office that we have a lot of other priorities for, so, i don't know. do you have any preliminary sense of that and just respond to chair peskin's question? do you have thoughts on how we would get feedback from city employees on this? >> i have two thoughts. to address the city employees who participate enthusiastically in the program, we did receive complaints this year but we received a lot of e-mails in support of the program so i do want to acknowledge that as well. and to your second point about cost and how to make this

efficient, the administrative code prescribed, i believe, a percentage of each donation that the city holds onto. we could look, i would say more comprehensively at the entire section of the admin code that deals with this section to build in ways to make it more efficient. perhaps, it is not efficient to accept individual checks rather just focus on the payroll deduction for example. i think that's probably the benefit to any charity anyway. that employees feel like they can give nor if you spread it over 26 pay periods and i would just have to guess that processing individual checks is more labor intensive for example. but that actually makes me think that there are probably other aspects of the admin code i didn't focus on today related to this program that could be overhaul through cost effectiveness and a lens.

>> well, you got three supervisors up here who are interested in this conversation. none of us probably feel particular ownership over this. it sounds like you all can do some work to come up with something, somewhere between bullet two and bullet three and any of us are happy to probably lead sponsor and the others would probably cosponsor. >> thank you for your patience and support through this. >> thank you for all your work on this. >> supervisor chan? >> ms. johnson, anything you want to add or subtract? >> no, thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? members of the public who wish to speak on this item and joining in person should line up to speak at this time, and those listening remotely, please call 415-655-0001 and enter the meeting id of 24885274429. press

pound and press pound again and press three to enter the speaker line. those in the queue, continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that's your queue to begin your public comment. no one in the room for public comment. and just checking online. there's nobody online for public comment on this matter. >> public comment is closed -- supervisor mandelman, would you like to make a motion. >> i recommend we move. >> to recommend the matter as a committee report, chan? >> aye. >> mandelman? >> aye. >> peskin? >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> next item, please. >> -- next on the agenda is item no. two,

ordinance amending the administrative code to permit members of the san francisco employees' retirement system (sfers) to designate special needs trusts as retirement beneficiaries in certain circumstances, and to specify requirements for those trusts. >> supervisor safai is the lead sponsor of this measure and a member of the retirement board. supervisor safai, welcome, good morning. >> thank you, chair. thank you, colleagues. colleagues, today i'm presenting legislation to change the administrative code to allow for special needs trust as retirement beneficiaries. i will give a brief overview of the legislation and turn it over to staff, the retirement system to elaborate further. as the president of the retirement system, we have a responsibility to our members to update the rules and regulations when it's necessary. last year, a member who was planning their estate pointed out they would not lead their survivor immunity to the surviving member unless it was

deposited in a special needs trust. this is because survivor immunity recovered by adults with disabilities can cause disastrous unintended consequences to their benefits that they are currently receiving. for individuals due to their disables of relying on public needs based benefits such as ssi, supplemental security, income, medi-cal and section 8, this could result in a loss of these benefits. this could mean a loss or barrier to affordable housing, healthcare, personal care, community supportive services for persons with develop mental disabilities and many more items and things. allowing for survivor a immunity to be placed in a trust or supplemental trust would often solve this problem. it is a form of trust that's recognized by both of social security administration and the department, california

department of healthcare services. as a vehicle for holding and managing funds for benefit of a person with disabilities where they are not, they would not interfere with their eligibility for other benefits. this has been done in the california state teacher retirement system and the u.s. department of defense and many other places around the country. in addition, and this is an important update as well, the code has not been changed since 1983. and does not reflect a general neutral terms that we used to. so, we would be making a much-needed change to the code to reflect the diverse city employees that we have in our workforce today. we have cecelia, karen, and our new ceo, cio, allyson to elaborate further on the legislation. before i hand it over to them, i

want to thank richard and annette, annette is a current beneficiary who have advocated on behalf of her family member, so that their son would be able to benefit from this in the future and so, thank you to them for bringing this to our attention. i'll hand it over, through the chair, i'll hand it over to the spurs representation here today. i think that's karen bortnick. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for inviting us here. i'm not sure i can add much more than what supervisor safai has already told you. but i can tell you how this proposed ordinance would work. when a member comes to retire, they do have an option to name an individual who can receive a monthly immunity after their -- anuity after their death. as supervisor safai told you, if they name a dependent adult child to receive

that monthly annuity, that may impact their ability to receive public benefits. this special needs trust will allow them to receive the benefits without losing their ability to get these benefits, these public benefits from the federal government and state government. so, the way it would work, someone would come into retirement, they would tell us that they wanted to select an option, that's what we call them. you have one of three options and they would want to name the trust rather than the dependent child. as it stands now, you cannot name a trust to receive a monthly benefit because there is a very fundamental retirement rule that a benefit must be definitely determinable. you have to know when it starts. you have to know when it ends. if you have a trust, it could in theory last forever and that would violate

the rule. in this particular case, as drafted as we understand it, it would put the burden of ensuring that the benefit will stop at the death of the recipient on the member and the trustee which simplifies things for spers because the other plans have a very difficult burden of tracking and making sure that -- that they learned about it, so they can cut off the benefit. as i said as drafted, it would impose all of those obligations on the member one to ensure the trust they are designating notes all of the legal requirements. we don't have to do any analysis. we don't have to ensure that it's a proper special needs trust and then again, at the time of the members death, the trustee steps in and again affirms that this is a proper trust at the death of recipient,

beneficiary, the trustee steps in again and has the obligation to inform us and the trust would have to reimburse us for overpayment. we can implement that. i can't tell you how, what the cost would be because it's really hard for us to estimate how many people would be qualified for this but i have to say i would think as drafted, it would be very small number of people and again because the principle burden is placed on the member and the trustee, there would -- there should not be anything but a minimal expense for spers and i'm happy to answer questions >> thank you for that presentation and thank you supervisor safai. this seems like a straightforward tweak and sensible. are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item no. two >> yes, members of the public who wish to speak on this item and joining us in person should line up to speak it a time. for

those listening remotely, call 415-655-0001. enter the meeting id of 24885274429. then press pound and pound again. once connected, you need to press star three to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, please continue to wait until the says -- the system indicates you have been unmuted. there's no one in the room for public comment at this time. double checking. there's nobody in line for public comment at this time. >> two for two. public comment is closed. supervisor mandelman? >> thank you, chair peskin. i want to thank supervisor -- supervisor safai on this. i set one up for my mother after my grandmother's death. and it's helpful when someone with significant disabilities has asked, has access to other

assets. and i think that this just does make sense. i would like to be added as cosponsor and happy to support it today. >> all right. with that -- supervisor safai? >> i want to thank nami, the national alliance of mental illness for writing their letter of support and pointing out the importance of this, so i want to thank ann fisher, the executive director for working with us. it has taken time. it has been a year since this has been setting so i want to thank the family and again, annette and her family and for their patience and i want to thank the staff at spurs, karen, allyson and team and our city attorney for working on this to get this right, so thank you very much. thank you, colleagues. >> thank you, supervisor. thank you to the retirement system and with that, i will make a motion to send this item to the full

board with a positive recommendation on that motion, mr. young, a roll call, please. >> yes. on the motion to recommend the matter, supervisor chan? >> aye. >> vice-chair mandelman? >> aye. >> chair peskin? >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. and we are adjourned. [gavel]

>> good morning and welcome to the ground breaking celebration of the hub. [applause] my name is axly hurst director of community life here at mercy housing california and the honor of leading the resident service team that provide program and support to sunnyvale and the greater visitation valley community. today we come together to celebrate the start of construction for the sunny dale community center and hurts recreation center. it is the heart of the revitalized neighborhood and provide faces and placing for young people to grow play and learn and excited to be here today. i have the honor comcing the event with friend community member star clark. [applause] >> good morning everyone. my name is star clark the club house director