the plight of united states of america and to the republic for which it stands. one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. vice president carter, i'd like to take roll, please. mr. walker. president mr. benedicto present. mr. yanez. present. commissioner byrne. here. commissioner yee here. vice president carter was done. you have a quorum also with us tonight, we have chief scott from the san francisco police department and diana rosenstein from the department of police accountability. could you please call the first item line item one weekly officer recognition certificate presentation of an officer who has gone above and beyond in the performance of their duties. officer michael grande star number 302, investigator bureau general work . good evening. lieutenant brian

greer, oic of the general work detail. i'd like to recognize officer michael grande for his dedication and professionalism of the general work detail. officer grande has over 18 years of service with the san francisco police department since the general work detail was reestablished in march of 2022. officer grande has been the sole video retrieval officer for and worked hundreds of complex cases as video evidence has become increasingly critical for successful prosecution of cases and is frequently the only evidence to identify perpetrators of crimes. this evidence is fleeting and is often retained for as little as one week due to data storage constraints of many systems. office ser grande has routinely made himself available at hours beyond his normal schedule to obtain his evidence in a timely manner. the officer grande is one of only five members of the sfpd to have completed an intensive week long course on forensic video retrieval and analysis through viva. in

addition to the technical expertise required to digitally retrieve footage and reliably testify in court, the ability to positively engage the stakeholders that own or manage the video equipment is essential . officer grande has an exceptional ability to positively interact with people of all backgrounds. he's familiar with the points of contact out of hundreds of businesses throughout the city. he's established relationship with these parties and is that's allowed for a more timely release of footage for investigations and to cite just one example of a case during fleet week of 2022, a merchant mariner from the pacific northwest was found unconscious in the north beach neighborhood . there were no witnesses present to explain the injuries . officers completed an initial report for the aided case, not knowing if a crime had occurred . that report was reviewed by sergeant spagnolo of general work, who suspected that the

mariner was possibly a victim of an assault officer grande was tasked with attempting to locate any possible surveillance footage. this required him to work well outside his normal work hours as most establishments in that neighborhood were evening venues unavailable during normal business hours. he worked for multiple days to track down video system managers of multiple businesses and retrieve footage that led him to believe an assault had taken place based on the multiple parties involved in varying directions of travel, he continued to coordinate with additional businesses for more footage. the victim's condition continued to deteriorate in the icu as the investigation continued, officer grande was able to put together images from multiple sources to cover the full sequence of events and identify a suspect and vehicle. sadly, the victim ultimately succumbed to his injuries. our homicide unit took over the investigation in utilizing the video evidence compiled by officer grande. eventually, an

arrest was made for the homicide due to officer grande's timely and diligent work on the case, bringing closure to that victim's family. officer grande works tirelessly to locate critical evidence of violent crimes. while doing so, he consistently forms positive relationships with merchants and residents of the city. he has a wealth of knowledge in his specialty and readily helps other members of the department with video retrieval. he's he's a great representative of the san francisco police department and exemplifies the best attributes of a san francisco cop. san francisco police department recognizes officer michael grande, star number three. oh two of the investigations bureau general work detail as officer of the week. in recognition of your dedication and professionalism, demonstrate

through outstanding community policing practices and inspiring greatness by exemplifying the ideals of police officers as guardians of our community. such an example of dedication is worthy of the highest esteem by the city and county of san francisco and the san francisco police department. thank you, officer grande. i just want to say on behalf of the police department, thank you for your work. i know a lot of what you do behind the scenes and the helping to put these investigations together and getting the evidence that we need to hold people accountable sometime goes unnoticed. and it it's an honor for your oic to honor you. and we really celebrate the work that you do because it goes unnoticed sometimes. i know you probably hear from your. squad, but i think the public should hear and

does hear all the great work that you do. so thank you very much. thank you so much, officer . grande, for your service to the city. on behalf of the whole commission. and like chief scott for your hard work that that doesn't always necessarily get the praise that it deserves or the attention that it deserves. i did want no pressure, but i did want to invite you if you wanted to, to say a few words. the microphone is certainly, certainly yours. if you'd like to say something. i'm not much of a talker, but i do want to say thank you. appreciate it very much. thanks. now shake your hands, sir. yes? i didn't meet you. yes. thank you for commissioner yee. thank you very much. there i just want to say to officer grande, congratulate us and thank you for your hard work and long hours and dedication in keeping us safe. thank you. commissioner walker. not to repeat it, but thank you

so much, officer grande, for your service. congratulation is . i'm sorry. the members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item one please approach the podium. and there is no public comment line item two general public comment at this time. the public is now welcome to address the commission for up to two minutes on items that do not appear on tonight's agenda, but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the police commission under police commission. rules of order during public comment. neither police or epa personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions by the public, but may provide a brief response. alternatively you may submit public comment on either the following ways. email the secretary of the police commission at sfpd commission at sf gov.org or written comments may be sent via us postal service to the public safety building located at 1245 third street, san francisco, california. 94158. if you'd like to make public comment, please approach the podium. all you're

doing. mad max is going to be a follow up from what i said this morning. a shift you saw me earlier is going to be important for you all. i'm serious. remember something. please never forget it. please. that you own yourself. you own yourself. if it's your private property so you don't touch any crap coming to your private property. okay it's important because it's your reason for being. it's. it's about your happiness. it works for you to write. it works for everybody. so you private your. your your. you protect your private property. so now is the time to do it even more than before because basically your private property is under attack . don't pretend you don't know

because it is the facts. so the police does his best. i guess according to the his field of activity. but basically it applies to all of us, right? you own yourself. so everything that comes you have to stay open. we have to stay open. we don't live on a deserted island. we live in society. so we stay open. but when you see that something is coming to you that is not working in your own best interest, you say, stop. that's it, right? everything is going to be fine. then. hello, my name is jennifer wagoner. i've been authorized on behalf of the league of women voters of san francisco to provide public comment for them tonight. you received an email

from our president, alison goh today, and it says, in january of this year, the police commission voted in favor of department general order 9.07, a comprehensive policy to prohibit racially biased traffic stops in san francisco. over seven months later, the policy is still in. meet and confer. so why is dgo 9.07 still in? meet and confer seven months later? each time the police commission meets and does not bring the policy back for final approval, it allows harm against communities of color to continue. meet and confer has been going on for months with plenty of time to reach agreement and move forward. the league of women voters of san francisco is asking you to bring dgo 9.07 back to the next police commission meeting. we'd like transparency and accountability. thank you. hi. i had no agenda to speak tonight except i would

actually like to speak to that. sb 50 just failed at and sb 50 is legislation done by legislators and that's who does legislating. so bringing back that dgo would be an end run against legislation and we are all mindful of these types of traffic stops and nobody is in agreement that racially motivated traffic stops should happen in. however, for example, i'm a clinical social worker and i know that there are multiple ways you can attack a problem. for example, if a certain demographic is being pulled over on a certain part of town and it is higher than any other demographic for broken tail lights, maybe we fix that situation. maybe it's economic, maybe there's not a place close by. i there are many ways to look at this. but it does need to be looked at. it's just not your place to do it. this you

are not legislators. and if it fails, sb 50 failed and that is where it was supposed to not fail. if it wasn't going to. so i would say i disagree with this person. i agree with her in spirit. i agree with the idea that we have to do something about it racially motivated stops. but i don't believe that's the answer. and i certainly don't believe this commission is authorized to override state legislation that has failed. thank you. good evening. thank you for the opportunity. i don't know if there are more effective channels for this proposal. if there are, i hope someone can direct me to them after i make my comment. but i'd like to propose that we try to bring more civility back to our public discourse. dis agreement, even wild disagreement is a part of life. but arguments can be

advanced using logic and discussion. and i'd love to see this commission set some basic guidelines to promote respectful discourse. so, for example, no screaming or swearing and i'd know people who don't live in san francisco. this is our community. these are our community meetings. that's that's what these commissions is. the board of supervisors is the committees. that's for the people of san francisco. this is our town hall. this is our opportunity to speak and be heard. and i and i do not think people from other jurisdictions should be weighing in on san francisco matters. so i'm sure there are other channels where this should be discussed. but i wanted to raise it. i want it on the record. i i am tired of attending meetings where there are people screaming and swearing. we need to try to have

civility. not that kind of treatment and disrespect. but thank you. okay. first, i'd like to say there is no such thing as a as a racially directed traffic traffic stop. police have to do their job. they they must investigate any kind of thing concerning the traffic and speeding and all that kind of stuff. they have a feeling and a hunch that something going on they have they have a lot of motivations. and believe me, police officers do not spend their precious time targeting racial groups is okay. police officers get up every morning. they put on their uniforms. they enter the world and spend maybe 10 to 12 hours, i guess, a day

fighting for us all. they do nothing but risk their lives every they're sitting ducks. and i do not think it's right for anybody. anybody to criticize a police officer. do you understand police officers live and die for us? do you hear me? okay sorry. anyway i have something else to say. real fast . oh, by the way, you do not have to pay attention to legislation that does not promote the general welfare of the preamble of the constitution . that means anything. prop 4757, anything you know, involving this and that. you do not have to pay attention to it, just overlook it. nobody can stop you because the police are have unlimited power is derived from the second amendment of the constitution, which says that the well-regulated militia and the in order to secure the blessing, the security of a free

state and the right of people to bear arms, that's to subject to the infringe. and that means that they shall not be limited. you have unlimited power, use it. and nobody can challenge it. but i'll make this very, very quick. you have. lots of letters. thank you. that was the end of the two minutes. that's the end of the two minutes. thank you. yeah, i knew i. good evening. and i do. there are some. not all police are bad, but there are some racially profiled. stopping so i don't agree with you. so. um, can i use the overhead? i also. i want to thank the chief and all of them for coming out for my son's

visual on the 14th. and the chief and sister alberta, an and who else? the robert raurica of the media department for coming out on that day. that really means a lot and thank you for doing it as often as you've been doing it. my son was murdered august 14th, 2006. that was it'll be 17 years in the 17th anniversary. i bring these names with me every time of the perpetrators who murdered who are caused the calls of murder. and my son, hannibal thomas, paris moffitt, andrew badoo, jason thompson. thomas anthony hunter and mark s morris carter. one of them are deceased. one is deceased. i'm not sure which one, but hannibal and paris moffitt are still out, probably

murdering more people. they were the two main people. so again, i just don't fight for my son. there's other unsolved homicides. i'm talking about all the unsolved homicides, and i'm still thinking if there is a way to pay tipsters. did were you able to hire anyone, a new person to come in and investigates all these homicides ? and this is me standing over my son. no mother wants to do this. this is what the perpetrators left me. a corpse, my beautiful son laying on a corpse on the table. i wish i had more time to talk. next item, please, sergeant. line item three, chief support discussion, weekly crime trends

and public safety concerns provide an overview of offenses, incidents or events occurring in san francisco have an impact on public safety commission discussion on unplanned events and activities. the chief describes will be limited to determining whether the calendar for future meeting chief scott. good afternoon, sergeant youngblood. present vice president and acting president carter overstone commission and public. i'll be brief with my report tonight. just starting off with an overview of the crime trends. the overall the we're down 3% in part one crimes and the split on that is 4% reduction in property crime. 3% increase in violent crime in terms of the homicide, the homicides year to date, we have a total of 40. we had two over the weekend. both shootings and no suspects in custody on those particular shootings. however, we are still doing well with our clearance rate. so our homicide

investigators are working very hard. we're in excess of 70% on the clearance rates with some cases that are close, hopefully to being cleared. in terms of the trends that we're seeing, street robberies is a trend that we're very concerned about. we're up a little bit over just under 300 robberies year to date , which is a 16% increase. and many of those robberies are armed robberies. we have had made some significant arrests with some very violent armed robbers, but much work needs to be done. there and in terms of gun violence, we're up 4% year to date. gun violence related to homicides. we are even with where we were this time last year and the seizure of guns continues to be one of our focus focus areas. and we are are a little below where we were this

time last year with the seizure of guns and a little bit below the ghost gun seizures. this time last year. but we'll continue to focus on that. a couple of i mentioned the homicides that were reported over the weekend. one that i want to talk about is on the unit block of james brenner in the tenderloin, right. right across the block here by un plaza. this happened on 917 at 1030. i'm sorry it happened at 916 at 9:15 p.m, but the victim unfortunately passed away. the next day at 10:43 a.m. the scenario was the subject walked up jones street from golden gate and fired two rounds at a group of individuals standing on the unit block of jones. one victim was struck in the chest and the second victim was struck in the leg. both victims were transported, one in critical condition. the victim in critical condition passed away from his injuries. we have not made an arrest on that

particular case. we are following up on leads and the homicide investigators will continue to work that case. and i'll keep the commission and the public posted on the development on that case. the other homicide over the weekend was. on nine over 17 at 200 and 3 a.m. this was in the twin peaks area. twin peaks, dew point, the victim was in a vehicle when a suspect pulled alongside the victim. the victim exited his vehicle and walked over toward the suspect, at which time he was shot. once in the upper body. suspect fled from the location in in his own vehicle and the victim was transported and died from his injuries. the following day at 2 p.m. no arrests have been made in that particular case as well. investigators are following up on leads to the public. if you have any information that will lead to the apprehension of the individual or individuals involved in these two homicides

or any other crimes for that matter, please call (415)!a575-4444. the information can be kept anonymous if you wish to do that. but we do need the public's help on those particular crimes. there were two shootings also in outside of those homicides, one in the 700 block of missouri and another on jones street in the tenderloin. and they both happened that same weekend. and we had some significant arrests that i want to talk about. one involved a robbery and serial auto burglary crew with firearms. this was on september 14th at 9:24 a.m. the incident happened on the 600 block of harrison, a robbery with a gun occurred on the 600 block of harrison, in which subjects pointed a gun at two victims demanding their belongings. the subject fled in a vehicle. a department wide email was issued with the description of the vehicle later in the day. multiple calls for service were broadcast in the

japantown area regarding a vehicle matching the description from the one in the earlier robbery and that same vehicle was seen casing, leaving to be casing to burglarized vehicles in the area of japantown. our plainclothes team officers conducted an auto burglary abatement slash robbery abatement and located the vehicle at 19th. and mission surveillance was was conducted in an attempt to coordinate a safe arrest. spike strips were deployed to deescalate the situation. however, the vehicle fled. san francisco sheriff's followed basically the suspects this turned into a pursuit. that's why the spike strips were deployed. the chp became involved. the vehicle became disabled and the pursuit terminated it on south bound 101 at vermont street, three suspects fled in unto the freeway and two of them were

located and taken into custody on deharo street. the third subject fled into the building at 17th and san bruno. a search was conducted and the third subject was located and taken into custody. also, a firearm was recovered from the vehicle as well as property belonging to the robbery victim from the earlier robbery. so this was a really good, coordinated effort. i really want to commend our our plainclothes units and our uniform officers that were involved in this chp sheriffs became involved and good collaboration in there. but these were some very violent individuals. they are in custody. and our folks did a good job in putting that case together and catching them before they hurt somebody else and robbed somebody else. the second arrest was a attempted robbery on 917 at 6:17 p.m. at the 900 block of market street central central district station, officers responded to a robbery in and an attempted robbery with a gun while dispatch was broadcast in the vehicle. description officers from the tenderloin night violence reduction unit team

that is the team commissioner burn that is actually 1 in 8. that's now working at night time to address the some of the issues in the tenderloin. at any rate, they observed the vehicle at eighth and natoma became engaged in a pursuit. the vehicle fled across the bay bridge with officers following once in oakland, all four suspects abandoned the vehicle and ran in different directions with the assistance of outside agencies, several outside agencies. two of the subjects, including a 17 year old, were located and taken into custody. an additional subject juvenile was taken into custody at an apartment complex in the city of oakland. one of the subjects remains outstanding, and that investigation is still ongoing. so, again, a really good observation by the patrol officers. these are the officers that we deployed a week, two weeks ago to deal with some of the nighttime issues that in the tenderloin. and it's great that they were in the right place at the right time to make this

multi arrest of armed robbers. we did not get the gun as of yet, but we did make the arrest . so let's see. just the last thing that i'll report. the efforts continue on the fentanyl seizures in the tenderloin and soma with our drug market coordination center since the inception on there have been over over 1100 arrests in total, the majority of those are for possession for sales. of those three, 92 were for either public use or public intoxication. but again, a lot of coordination working with multiple agencies and city entities. we still have our service providers on board in this in this column, aberration public health, public works, homelessness, supportive housing and the human services agency. so the work continues on

that. and the strategy will be to, of course, take as much fentanyl as we can off the streets, hold the account to account the drug dealers, and we have vastly increased the number of drug dealing arrests year to date over this time last year. so more to report as this continues to flush out. but we are still committed to changing the narrative of the open air drug market and the tenderloin, especially on the sales side. and that is my report for the week. thank you for the report, chief. just one question for me . i think it was a couple of weeks ago, my colleague, commissioner byrne, asked you about the officer who's alleged to have have sexual relationship with a confidential informant. and commissioner byrne asked if the department would make public the to basically the scope of the consequences of those allegations in terms of the number of cases as criminal

cases that have been affected. and i ask about this because there is a new article about that case published today and i just wanted to follow up to see if and when the department would be responding to that request. there are i haven't seen an article, commissioner, but there are some issues. i actually was in training last week, but i planned tonight to have a conversation with commissioner byrne about that. you know, we do have the information, but it is a part of that investigation which is still ongoing. so at this time i won't be able to release that information at and we'll have a private time if they want to have a romance with somebody, that's okay. well, advise the commissioner more on the details. all right. i look forward to that. advise me. and i certainly understand that the department could not turn over the facts that were part of an ongoing investigation. but at the same time, at least as i

understood the request, it was items that would not be part of the investigation, just the public consequences of cases that were affected. so that the public could have an understanding of the scope of the fallout. that's all not not anything confidential, but it sounds like the department is working on it. and we'll let us know. yes, thank you. thank you. commissioner yanez. thank you, vice president carter oberstein. good evening, chief and community. i do want to say happy latino independent or latino heritage month. and my question is, i'm just following up on some previous us requests for information. i believe the last time you were here, you were going to get some information regarding what it what it will take for those young people who were in the hill bomb and had their charges dropped to have their records cleared. and i don't believe the information was available last week. do you have that? so we

did follow up on that. so the juvenile records in which, you know, i think the public knows, but are highly protected by law in this case, the kids that were arrested on misdemeanor only cases were not id'd. they were not processed. there were no mug shots, no fingerprints. they were cited, however, and we have been in contact with juvenile probation. who has the responsibility to seal the records as required by law on misdemeanor cases? if and when it probably win more than if the records are sealed. sfpd is notified and takes the appropriate action to seal those records. however this sealing of the records is done and ordered by jpd. so we have been in touch with them and at this point it's really the ball is in jpds court in terms of sealing of the

records. and we'll we'll comply when those orders are given. and so there is no mechanism for the police department to refer move those records once they have been once those charges have been dropped. you're saying it's completely in the juvenile probation department's jurisdiction? my understanding is that then it is actually up to the individuals to petition the court to have those charges or those records removed through the clean slate program. and that's really an arduous process . it's unfortunate for those families because cause they will have to go through that process . yes. and we know that it's a time consuming and very you know, unfortunate consequence for young people who ultimately didn't even commit a crime. it sounds like. so that's that's really disappointing to hear. but i will follow up. i have a

meeting with the juvenile probation commission president in the next couple of weeks. so i want to i will follow up with her and bring a report to see if there's any way that the department itself can remove those records. because as far as i understand, that is not the procedure. for i was just and i think i said this was just to clarify, they were cited, you know, these kids, at least on the misdemeanors. so this information is not in any of their rap sheets because those cases have not been processed. those citations have not been processed and pushed forward by juvenile probation. so they may they juvenile probation made the announcement that these cases will not be pursued and so as far as the citation itself is not they're not going anywhere. so there's no rap sheet attached to those citations at all. great. great so then at that

point, those that do that were pursued. that is in the realm of the district attorney's office and the juvenile probation department on the felonies. yes. the district attorney's office, the misdemeanors are still in the realm of juvenile probation . i don't know. so if any of the misdemeanors are actually going forward, i know we do have some felonies that are going forward, but i don't believe that any of the misdemeanor are. got it. thank you. the other question was about the draft. you know, thank you for responding to an email i sent out to request that information in that email chain. i was told that the draft would be available on the 15th after some of the reorganization and i've still not received it. it's the 20th. is there a new update on that? i will follow up right now. i'll follow up right now. so we do owe you a draft and if you hadn't gotten it, i will follow up. great. thank you.

appreciate that. those are my questions. commissioner byrne. thank you. vice president carter overstone. chief in regards to the dolores hill, were the juveniles fingerprinted and no. so then they're they weren't, but then there was nothing to turn over to the california department of justice, right? the misdemeanors were not fingerprinted. there were there were some felony arrests, though, right. but as regards to misdemeanors. so those prints weren't turned over to the department of justice, hence they weren't turned over to the fbi. correct. so effectively, they're clean. correct. thank you. sergeant, could you take us to public comment? members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item three, the chief's report. please approach the podium. and

there is no public comment. line item four directors report discussion report on recent activities and announcements. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for future commission meeting. acting executive director rosenstein. this. time okay, sorry. good evening, vice president carter, oberstein commissioners chief scott. my name is diana rosenstein. i am the legal team manager at the department of police accountability and i'm sitting in on behalf of our executive director, paul henderson. i have some weekly trends to share with you with respect to what the dpa has been up to in the last several weeks since our cases continue to trend up. in other words, we currently have more cases open this year than we did

last year. we have cases that are our closure rate is down very slightly from 543 at the same time last year versus now. we do have more cases pending and we have sustained less than last year, nine less than last year at this time. we have had a number of cases mediate. and so our mediation program is going well and doing a very good job at getting cases, disposition favorable disposition in those cases. and we have fairly the same number of cases passed the 270 mark, which is the mark in the charter by which we are to let chief scott know if some of our cases will be sustained and may take longer for investigation. currently we have seven cases pending with you all, i believe one is in closed

session today and we have currently 86 cases pending with the chief at all different levels. whether we're requesting him to make a decision with respect to discipline or they are pending with the chief for purposes of the appellate process last week in terms of the type of cases we receive, 24, we received 13 cases last week. the number one allegation was neglect of duty, meaning that our civilian complainants have complained about officers failing to take some type of required action. and with respect to the second and third, most complained about conduct that tied for second place is conduct and becoming an officer. in other words, the officer behaved or spoke inappropriately and unwarranted action. the officer conducted an improper search or seizure. again these are just brand new allegations.

those are cases that we will be investigating and eventually coming to some sort of disposition, total allegations that came into our office this week is 29. in terms of outreach . we have a we are going forward with a mediation forum and we are going to have a full house. we're excited to share more about mediation an it is going to be on october third at 12 p.m. at 188 embarcadero. and in terms of audit for the misconduct audit has received the last round of independent review notes back from the comptroller's office. once we've addressed the notes and made the necessary edits. steve flaherty, who is in charge of our award winning audit department, paul, makes me say that we'll have a draft copy of the report for the police department for review and eventually for you all to review

today with me is senior investigator candace carpenter. she can help anybody that is in the audience that has any questions or concerns about dpa. as always, we can be reached by phone or via email or and our information is published on the world wide web. our website is sf gov. org backslash mta. or you can google us and our phone number. is (415)!a241-7711. and i'm free to answer any questions you may have. commissioner benedicto. yes, thank you, vice president carter humberstone. thank you for that report. director rosenstein, is there a reason why there have been. there was a significant jump in the cases mediated from last year to this year that you can identify. i believe that there were several complainants that had several cases that were very

similar in nature and finally agreed to participate in the mediation program. um, and, and because of that, there's been a bit of a jump. i think there's also been a robust outreach to the community and to our complaints. and i think we're doing a much better job of explaining the mediation program, not just to the complainants, but to the officers and the parties option is going up, which i think benefits everybody because of the nature of the mediation process. ma'am, perfect. thank you for that. i a lot of cases for the for the mediators to handle. and i know i've met with the mediators who are fantastic. so kudos to them for handling that increased caseload. and if you wanted commission participation at that mediation event you're holding, i'd be happy to attend. absolutely i will definitely make sure that they send you an invitation. perfect. thank you. seeing no

other names, sergeant, could you take us to public comment for members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item for the director's report, please approach the podium. and there is no public comment. line item five commission reports, discussion and possible action commission reports will be limited to a brief description of activities and announcements. commission commission discussion will be limited to determining whether the calendar, any of the issues raised for a future commission meeting commission president's report commissioners reports and commission announcements and schedule of items identified for consideration at a future commission meeting. commissioner walker. thank you. i just want to say i went to a town hall and the tenderloin that supervisor kaiser dorsey put together for to hear from the community in district six. and i think captain martin was there, the district attorney. the supervisor, several of the

departments and it was packed. it was the act theater was totally packed with folks and it was it was generally supportive of what we're doing in the tenderloin. so i just i want to say that the work that's happening down there is really making a difference. the issues are real. i just say i walked over there from my house, so i went up seventh street and walked by two different cpr delivery. it's a it's really a hard place over there. so the people are the public are are ready for real solutions. and i just want to thank the department for captain martin being there. it's really important to hear from folks and to really get the input about from the people who live in these districts where the issues are. so it can help us out on

the street. so that's kind of all i wanted to check in. and welcome back. i know you were at the sojourn trip, the sojourn trips that the chief just took, i think 70 people on this time or it was the largest one, are pretty amazing because they really do give you a sense of our history in a real way. and i went on it myself when i first got on the commission. and it it really it changed me. and i've seen it change, change. i think everybody that goes on that trip is really changed. and that's the kind of that's the kind of change we need. so thank you again for working on those. commissioner benedicto. thank you. vice president carter oberstein a couple of updates from me. last week i had the privilege of attending the 279th academy police academy graduation class, keeping my streak of all academy graduation

since i was appointed. um, it was. it was a tough ticket to get, but i'm happy that acting chief lozar got me there. it was held at the lake merced boathouse, which was a really nice, intimate venue. and allowed me to spend a bit of time getting to talk to the recruits after. so congratulations to that class and thank you for letting me attend. um this week i'll be meeting with gpas award winning audit team in my capacity as our our audit liaison. so look forward to updating my colleagues on how on updates from the audit team as that goes forward. um chief, i wanted to echo, i meant to put myself in the queue and chief supports, but i'll mention it here. i'll echo the same request that commissioner yanez had for an update on on 7.01. i know we had a really tremendous working group with some engaged community members. i see we have our our executive sponsor for that group here today. and deputy chief moran, my favorite executive sponsor. but and so i

think that for the commission and for the community, an update on that draft would be much appreciated. and finally, i, i spent some time this week looking at the public comments we received on the status of 9.07. i think is wagner and the league of women voters for raising that as well as mr. cox from the public defender's office, from raising its last week. um, you know, while the commission can't comment on things that are happening in terms of labor negotiations, know that the comments are being heard and the commission hears and appreciates them, i'd also note for members of the public that that for the first time, possibly in its history, the commission has been updating in its from closed session non privileged factual updates from the negotiations. so there's more transparency around this process than has been in the past. so i'm grateful for that. but do want to thank the members of the public who sent in

written comments who've come the last couple of weeks. we hear you, you know, this, the final version of this was adopted, unanimous by this commission, something of which i'm very proud and we all look forward to getting it over the finish line. thank you. commissioner yanez. thank you, vice president carter , ulverstone. quick report. uh, just coordinating calendars to try to get a meeting with the youth commission. we're in contact with them to try to see how they can support or what their thoughts are around the pre-booking program that we want to initiate, but also coordinating with, uh, supervisor ronan's office and the mayor's office to make sure that as many partners as possible are in support of this effort and as i mentioned, i will be meeting with the juvenile probation commission president margaret brodkin in the next couple of weeks to also figure out how the juvenile probation department can help us advance this effort. um, i we

had calendar use of force last week and the presentation was very different. chief but i did ask acting chief lazarre about the use of force number that had come up a few weeks ago in an article all around the increase in the disproportionate minority contacts in the fourth quarter of last year where it seems that there were, you know 25 to 1 increase use or up to 25 to 1 when it came to those use of force numbers. and i just wanted to see if you had any comments on what impacted or what contributed to that increase in use of force. we're talking about last year. this year or last year or last year's use of force numbers. over the previous year, it was the court is the fourth quarter. that was the quarter three increase from in

quarter three, it was 11 to 1 african american versus white people being who had use of force, alleged against them. and in quarter four, it went to 25 to 1 in the fourth quarter of last year. and when the information was presented to us that that graph was admitted and it was a little bit concerning that such an increase was not necessarily discussed or that that information wasn't provided to us so that we could digest it and try to figure out what the concern or what the issue is. yeah, i mean, i have some anecdotal insights in terms of the issues, but i would ask to actually come back with with more in-depth look at this. i mean, i know the use of force numbers are up over all because of the reporting changes. and most of those use of force is or were in that lower tier category . almost all of them actually were in that lower tier category. but that still doesn't explain totally the why behind

this. so i would like to go in more detail with that, but i'd love if we could agendize it and actually speak to that specific topic because like i said last time, it was agendized and it just went in a different direction, so that would be great. i also would you clarify for us how many sworn staff were at sojourn last week? 36. there were 36 sworn staff at sojourn. yeah, and i did. and i will put it in writing that i do want to have a conversation about how how we are measuring sojourn's impact. i mean we ask about every one of our efforts, right? whether it's policing in the tenderloin. and i know that sojourn has been going on for a couple of years. it's a major investment when we are not when we don't have 36 officers available. right. for a week, especially with the staffing shortages that we are experiencing. and so i'd like to get a better sense of the tangible impact that this is having on our department. especially consider some of the concerns with disproportionate use of force and minority

context. so i will be requesting that we have a good concentrated conversation on that. thank you. thank you. thank you, sergeant. members of the public would like to make public comment regarding the commission reports. please approach the podium. if you would like to make public comment regarding the commission reports, you may speak five seconds. i'm working with if you would like to make public comment, you need to approach the podium. you have two minutes to speak on line item five. i'm working with the fbi and the marshals to create, among other things, to create a task force for the police force to ensure that their supervised orders do not criticize them and hold them responsible for making mistakes when they are their human beings. the really angels from heaven, but they're in the human condition. and like all of us and we have to give them a break. we need a task force and in order to make the task force,

we have to have a police officer that i know, john van cole at. and definitely we need desperately we need chief scott and we need a one of the other agents who will represent the fbi based ethically. we have to create a system of checks and balances in order to not scare the public when we're asserting our power over the second amendment, power. so we create a checks and balances where each each agency watches over the other. and in order to have, for example, the fbi, in order to have the marshals, believe it or not, the fbi works for the marshals. they work for the marshals. so we have in order to make sure the marshals don't dominate either the police or the fbi, we need we need basically we need two of these agents to work along with the head of the marshals. so that's i took all my time. in other words, we desperately need a task force, okay? and we need chief scott to run the whole thing for a national a national

task force. please okay. will you do that? can somebody raise their hand and say, yes, we will do that? well, if you don't, i'm going to make it happen. okay thank you. yes, i like to comment on the on the sojourner trip as a advocate and a community person that trip changed my life. it's not even most of that stuff is not even in the history books. and it gave me a new respect on on nonviolence to with martin luther king and all of the damer family, all of that, how they got justice. it was intense and it was very emotional and i'd i would do it again. i would go on

that trip again in just to learn more. there's more to it than just what we went to the legacy museum and to the martin luther king, where the hotel where he was murdered and just all the other places. i am so glad that i wasn't alone and that, you know, it was it wasn't scary or anything. i think a lot of community people, apple and more police need to go on that trip to be culturally sensitive to what happened to us. and our ancestors back then, how they were kicked and beaten and water hosed. the children, four year old babies as this is happening today. so whatever we can do to teach people back from the past till now, they need to go on this trip. that's all i need to say. and that is the end of

public comment. sergeant, could we please call item eight out of order, please? line item eight discussion and possible action on police commission resolution. police commission interprets its general orders to permit the preemptive use of tire deflation devices, discussion and possible action. so a couple of weeks ago, we had a presentation from the department on ego 5.01 use of force and some proposed amendments which my colleagues ultimately endorsed unanimously. the amendments set forth, i think, some pretty reasonable and sensible guidelines on the preemptive use of spike strips. however, months ago the department made the unilateral decision to suspend the use the preemptive use of spike strips pending the amendments to our policy. and i don't agree with

with that decision. we heard from the department. we heard from lieutenant jonas about the incredible effectiveness of this law enforcement tool in the 15 months prior to its suspension. it was deployed 46 times, resulted in 82 arrests, 31 guns off of the street, roughly 360 cases closed. and the only downside was a single minor injury. so and not even part of those numbers, not even captured , is the fact that if officers can't deploy spike strips preemptively, then they might have to engage in a car chase, which poses pretty substantial risks to the public. and the officer. so tonight, the commission is going to vote on a resolution which would interpret its own policies to permit the preemptive use of spike strips. and so what this would do is just restore the status quo.

officers could continue to use spike strips preemptively as they had been using them before they were suspended by the department and during however long it takes to finish the amendments to the 5.1 through the meet and confer process and to train officers and so on. throughout all of that time, the officers will continue to be able to use spike strips as they always have been. i think that there are sometimes criticism of this commission that we unduly restrict what officers in the field can do. so i'll just say that i think that it's our duty to use evidence to make decisions and set policy. and in this case, the evidence is pretty overwhelming that preemptive use of spike strips is incredibly effective. tool that officers should be able to deploy and frankly, should have been able to deploy this entire time. i think in the future, if there is an issue like this, i

would love if the department didn't make a decision in a silo to suspend a law enforcement tool like this. they can always consult the city attorney if there is a legal question, they can always consult the commission. if there is a policy question, because i do think that this was in a large sense, avoidable. but with that, it's been i've appreciated working with the department and epa and my fellow commissioners on this , and i do appreciate that the department, i've been told, will be supporting this. so thank you , chief scott. thank you, commissioner. i just want to put on the record just a couple of things. first of all, the president of the commission was consulted on this and consulted and the department offers some recommendations of how to quickly remedy this issue. i know there's differences of opinion on whether the policy

actually allows for preemptive use of the spike strips. but i just want to the point here is that the president was consulted and ultimately after the department made some recommendations, she did assign commissioner benedicto to work with the department as well as epa to quickly offer the commission the changes that were eventually brought forth with 5.01. the other thing i will say is i definitely thank you for and the commission for quickly resolve at least the 5.15.01 and approving that. i know that still has to go through the process of meet and confer. but i want to thank the commission for that. there is no disagreement about the issue of whether this tool can is and can be a valuable tool to give us the ability to better deal with some of what we're facing with these car burglaries and the like. no disagreement with that . what i would ask this commission, if this passes and i

do support the use of this as quickly as we can do it. however i want to issue some guidance because as the policy is written, there is not guidance on preemptive use and that's part of the issue here. you know, we want to make sure that officers, when they use it, are protected. we've had some really good success in the in the ones that we have used, but there is no written guidance on this. so we want to make sure that our officers aren't left hanging out to dry. if the worst case scenario happens. and the results are not the outcomes that we desire. and that's where the guidance will come into play . it will be consistent with what the commission has already seen. it will be a department wide guidance. but i want to make sure that i'm transparent about that because a lot of the people in this room have worked on that. the language is already there. we just need to tell our officers generally what what what the guidance is on on how and when we can use this. so i

would ask the commission to formally okay. that but i think it's necessary. and i do think you, commissioner carter, riverstone, our vice president and the commission, for quickly trying to put these this this valuable tool back in our hands . great. thank you, chief. i certainly don't have any objection to the department issuing a additional guidance in the future. and if the commission needs to take up that issue to authorize it in the future, i certainly support that . commissioner benedicto, thank you. vice president carter overstone thank you, chief. i i as you stated after the department had paused its use, i was assigned to be the commissioner to help work on this and was is was glad to able to work on it was disappointed that i missed the vote but was happy to see my fellow commissioners vote unanimously and would have happily happily joined them. i do want to clarify at least from my perspective, i was assigned to be the commissioner to work on

the tire deflation devices after the department made the decision to pause the deployment and we worked through the summer on the revisions of 5.01. i'm glad that i was talking to the chief before this. i think this is a great example of not choosing one or the other, but both this commission, both acted decisively to adopt the revision to 5.01, but is also taking this additional step to ensure that there really is no delay and unnecessary delay in in providing this tool to our officers who have used it effectively for the last 18 months. i want to thank vice president carter auberson for this resolution. i think it's a it's a creative way to ensure that this tool is back in our officer's hands quickly and efficiently. and i'm glad to see the department supported like i said, i think this is a great a good example of working to ensure that the commission is providing evidence based tools that are effective to our officers. so thank you to vice president carter auberson and to

the department. i likewise would not object to any guidance being issued after in the wake of this resolution and so with that, i'll also move to adopt the resolution. commissioner walker . yeah, i just i have a question because i. i think it's your job to run the department. and when you run into issues, it's your job to do what you did. it is important that we communicate about this stuff. and i appreciate that you talked to the president and that we then initiated the process for amending. is it going to be a problem to have a deja vu that you've amended? and then we resolve to amend again? it seems i'm i'm just asking that question because i as i said last meeting, i went to the onboarding of the new policy writing group and we were going

over the dgo for writing dgos and it was head spinning. how contrary victory it was and how unclear it was about a lot of things. and i just i think part of the issue is that i'm hearing from officers, i'm hearing from the public that maybe officers don't act because they're turned around in circles by by this kind of stuff. so would it be your your preference to wait until we get the dgo properly reviewed and amended or as opposed to doing a resolution on top of your edit, on top of our dgo commissioner, i don't mean to confuse people. yeah, no, thank you. and that's a that's a really great question. i i would like to get this tool in the hands of officers as quickly as possible, but i don't want to confuse the officers. and the point is, the guidance that i'm

talking about would be consistent with with the procedures that the commission has already voted to approve, and not, if that makes sense to you. so basically, we're going back to the original dgo with the amended changes, you know, just guidance on because we don't have any written guidance on preemptive use. i see. so just and that's what the revisions in the dgo speak to is preemptive use. you know, not after a pursuit, but to prevent a pursuit. so we do have protocols laid out in that in the dgo that the commission approved and the thought and plan is to just make sure officers have the guidelines on how this can be used. so they are they are we stand behind them in the event that it doesn't go perfectly well. you know, i think one of the things that make officers hesitate is they want to know that i, as the chief of police and this commission will stand behind them if they do the job the way

they've been asked to do it. absolutely. i think that's a fair ask. yeah. so but if there's nothing there for them to latch on to, then they're kind of out there. so the, the, the director or the amendments that came are going forward and you're going to be using those in combination with this to retrain or reinforce, just make sure we have the training and the protocols in place. perfect that's helpful. thank you. thank you, commissioner. ye thank you very much. vice president carter . i just want to thank commissioner benedicto for working on this addition to the . 5.1 regarding the use of force and the data shows that this does this is one of the tools for officers to use to

de-escalate the situation, to apprehend suspects and actually, it's keeping us all safe, safer to so i want to thank the working group and the chief and the department for this. i will be supporting this. thank you. commissioner yanez. thank you. thank you. i mean, it's clear from the presentation and from the barrage of emails we've received that the department and staff are support this and the preemptive use has been proven to be successful. the only question i have then, chief, is it sounds like there are either training elements or bureau order elements that that also need to kind of come out to align with this in order for people to understand exactly what the direction is. would would a delay in implementation action be something that helps you make sure that those things are in place or is it just a

matter of rolling things out in a in a sequential manner? well, the bureau orders that touched upon this, although they weren't exactly the same as what the commission passed or expired 2003 when they were being used. you know, there was some training that took place, but there was no overall, you know, written guidance on the parameters as the revision of 5.01 will will have. so i don't think it would be some of the people that that that have been a part of this discussion. and the training when we were testing this out are very good at what they do. and i don't think it will be an issue for us to just mimic the same guidance that's in the general order. and let's get the business and that's the plan. i just want to make sure that we're we're supportive and the officers are supported. that's the main thing , because they are the ones out there taking the risks. so that's that's all. and it sounds

like we we're good there. yeah, it sounds i mean, it just seems like a tool that needs to be in place. so i'm definitely in support of it. and i hope that we move this forward. i did just want to quickly interject to clarify something. so the resolution tonight interprets the dgo that is currently on the books to allow the preemptive use of spike strips. that means if it were to pass tonight, officers could immediately start using spike strips preemptively without any further action by the department or this commission. now, separately tonight, chief has discussed the prospect of issue being further guidance to officers on how and when to use preemptive spike strips. so i certainly don't object to that, but that is an issue for another day. it's not being voted on right now. certainly seems reasonable and prudent. but i do want to make clear for officers and members of the public that this resolution is all that is necessary to restore the status

quo and for officers to begin using spike strips preemptively . commissioner byrne. thank you. vice president carter. chief when it was suspended in in may and you made the thing, were you relying on any legal advice for the suspension? we talked to our our in-house legal team and as well as our policy team on on this. so yes the and then and then then you went to president elias and asked for asked for the clarification or the amendment to the go. yes well, there were discussions, several discussions about how to proceed with this. all right. and then offered the department's from all the department people that had weighed in on this. we offer some recommendations on how we felt it could be resolved fairly quickly with 5.01 revisions. so yes, thank you. thank you. i

just want to be clear on what i'm asking for and thank you. heard understand that as of the passage of this resolution, we're good to go. the issue still for me is let's give our folks some guidance so if we put out a spike strip and we have a calamity that the officers at least have some guidelines to the parameters. and i think that's a fair process. so the ask is this commission, however, you all vote definitely would appreciate the use of these things. it won't take us, i believe, but a day or two to put out guidance to make sure that the department is on board with the usage of these things because otherwise we're still kind of running blind, even though we had a small contingency of officers who understood how to use this thing. we're talking about a department wide now usage of these spike strips and that's a

whole lot different from a small team that, you know, train and understood understood what the parameters are. so that's what the ask is. so okay, i just want to parse out the various moving pieces here. so we're all clear what it sounds like you're saying. chief is you would like and correct me if i have this wrong, you would like officers not to use spike strips preemptively until you've issued guidance. is that what you're saying? yes, i'm asking to issue guidance, which we will do immediately. all right. so i think this is how how that works with this commission do is doing today is passing a resolution saying there is nothing in our policies of this commission that would prohibit the preemptive use of spike strips as far as the commission is concerned, that that means no officer could be brought up on disciplinary charges solely. because she deployed spike strips preemptively. that becomes effective. the second we were to, we would pass this resolution. now chief, you're in

charge of deployment and personnel, even even though you're allowed to use spike strips as a matter of law. if you want to tell your officers not to use them, then that's your prerogative. but i do want to just make clear the delineation here. there's nothing as far as this commission's concerned after tonight. we've done everything within our power to give this tool back to officers. and if you would like to further delay that, then that's, you know, that the charter gives you that that power. i would just say we've we've been delaying this for months now. and the delay is not costless. there's suspects who got away. there's property that was not recovered that might have been recovered. there's people who got hurt. um, but as as a member of this commission, i certainly don't presume to be able to tell you how to handle personnel matters . but i do want to make clear to the commission has done after tonight, everything it can possibly do to return this tool

to officers and appreciate it and understood. and we will get it in their hands as quickly, within a matter of days. commissioner walker. so i mean, i, i. i don't want to get ahead of the department on this. so i wonder if we could put an amendment in there that accommodates that. that's the written directives will will because i, i feel like anything happens in the next two days it's going to be the commission against the department. and i, i think two days is a reasonable amount of time to delay, to allow the chief to be comfortable with this. i mean, it got to us in the first place because he was uncomfortable with what the directions were to staff. and so, i mean, i'm

totally supportive of supporting ng, reinforcing what the ego says. but i also want to accommodate the chief's concern about there not being adequate written directives in the dga. and that's our problem. as much as his. so i'm you know, is there a way to just put. a 48 hour allowance for the written directives to catch up to this is i just want to clarify because i think there's starting to be confusion here. there is no amendment necessary to accommodate the concern that commissioner walker just expressed. it's just that the commission and the chief have separate powers and duties as the commission is going to make clear. what has always been true and what officers have done for years, which is that under our policies, under 5.01 and 5.05,

officers may preemptively deploy spike strips. now, separate from that, the chief is in charge of personnel and the chief can direct his personnel to use or not use certain law enforcement tactics. and he does not require any special dispensation from this commission to do that. he has the charter authority to do that. so we have we have no authority to encroach on that. so if the chief wants to continue to delay it, he can do that. but what's happening tonight is that the commission is clarifying what again, has always been true, which is that 5.01 permits the preemptive use of spike strips. so to the extent commissioner walker, you have that concern, there's no need to amend the resolution to accommodate it. commissioner benedicto yes. to answer your question, commissioner walker. i agree with vice president carter robertson. i don't think we need to put any explicit like for whatever hours because the chief can choose to instruct the officers to begin deployment at

at his discretion as as the head of the department. so if he wants to if it's if the if directive is ready in a day or ready in three days, it's all of that is authorized. i think, by the resolution. chief scott, thank you. and again, i don't want to continue to go back and forth on this. i just want to be clear on what i'm asking and which i think you've already answered this question. just clear guidance and parameters. and i know policy is policy and i know there's different interpretations, but we also have to worry about it, not just discipline, but civil liability. you know, we have a policy that specific says the way we interpret that from the police department is that this device is to be used after a pursuit is initiated. there is supervisory responsibility and it goes on and on. what we are trying to do

is make sure that our officers are protect it. the commission has said, you know, charges will be filed. if anything goes wrong . we want to make sure that officers have the parameters of when these can be used for amply simple as that. i'm not trying to delay it. i and i won't delay it. that's fine. chief, again, we understand you're using the word that the chief is delaying it. i just want to protect this department and protect the officers and give them this tool as quickly as possible with some with some guidance. understood. all right. seeing no names in the queue, i will second the motion to adopt the resolution motion for members of the public who would like to make public comment regarding line item eight, please approach the podium. good evening, commissioners. vice chair chief, i wasn't planning on speaking tonight, but on this matter. but since i

am the executive director of fisherman's wharf community benefit district on behalf of my constituents, stakeholders, businesses, thank you for getting the spike strips into the chief's hands, which he can then deploy once he develops guidelines to put into his officer's hands. so thank you. see? no further comment on the motion. commissioner walker, how do you vote? yes mr. walker is yes. commissioner benedicto. yes commissioner benedicto is yes. commissioner yanez. yes. commissioner janez is. yes. commissioner byrne. yes. commissioner byrne is. yes commissioner yee yes. commissioner yee is yes. vice president carter overstone yes. vice president carter is yes. you have six yeses. line item six presentation and discussion on patrol specials at the request of the commission discussion on. i'm just going to introduce this this topic. thank

you for presenting from the department the president assigned sort of researching the patrol special program at the there was a lot of requests from the public to look at this, to look at the history of the patrol special program and sort of have a discussion about it. so there's no item to vote on. this is just bringing you up to speed on what we've been talking about so we can hopefully agree to move forward. so thank you so much for being here and presenting. thank you, commissioner. my name is lieutenant patrick mccormick. i'm the oic of staff services. fancy name for personnel chief and commissioners. thank you. this will be a fairly short presentation, but i'd like to point out i'd like to welcome our it may be our lone patrol special in the city. alan beard has also here the last remaining , last remaining. and i know we have a slide show. are we going to put it up? great.

okay. perfect we'll start with the first picture. there's a little bit of history, patrol specials. patrol specials date back to the gold rush era. as you know, between 1840 and 1850. the organization of patrol specials was to provide protection for merchants and citizens during a time when the city was experiencing tremendous growth and significant crime. this here is a picture of patrol specials. in 1895. it's a private special police force. they are not affiliated with the police department. they are a private security that was founded and is governed by city charter and under city charter slide. the charter gives the

police commission authority over patrol specials, and the authority is to appoint and suspend and dismiss patrol special officers. and let me add the caveat. we'll speak with regarding assistant patrol specials and patrol specials. patrol specials are what's in the charter. assistant patrol specials are are recommended by a patrol special to be hired under their under their tutelage. the commission regulates patrol specials by establishing requirements for and procedures to govern the position. and these requirements including provide the chief of police with the power to suspend a patrol special officer pending a hearing or charges as slide. currently, there are specific areas designed as patrol special beats in 1982 or around that time, there's a lot of the patrol special institutional

knowledge is way in the past. before my time, but we were able to dig some of it up at some point prior to 1982, the city was divided into 64 beats. if a patrol special believes that he or she needs additional staffing , the patrol special can identify a candidate to perform duties of an assistant patrol special. the commission may designate patrol specials as the owner of the certain beats or territories established or rescinded by again by the commission. the owners or their legal heirs or representatives may transfer their owned beats to a person or of good moral character. once that person is approved by the commission and eligible for appointment as a patrol special officer, these designated beats or territories shall not affect the ability of a private security company to provide an on site security service is on the inside or the entrance of any property located in the city. patrol specials have a unique ability to patrol

areas and beats as opposed to a standard security officer who would be pretty much assigned to a permanent position at a store or something like that. slide. a current patrol special officer must meet the minimum qualifications as number one. they they must be sponsored or nominated by by a patrol special assistant patrol. special must be nominated by a patrol. special applicants must be 21 years of age. good moral character as defined by post we utilize post because it's state guidance and it gives us a little bit of backing as far as regulation and criteria, a letter of nomination and sponsorship by a current patrol special officer like alan. a high school diploma or a ged test certificate. it complete private background investigation packet which they they do on their own they pay for and

applicant is required to submit to a fingerprint check to disclose criminal records to us which we take care of as a live scan again with minimum qualifications. the letter signed by a private physician certifying the candidate. i go slide to be free of any physical, emotional or mental condition which adversely affects the applicant for duty as an assistant patrol special. this is a kind of parallels what a police officer does when they apply for or a police applicant goes through when they apply, they complete a post basic 832 course, which is governed by the penal code. it's normally a 64 hour course and it has to be issued within the last three years. the certification is good for three years. that's why it talks to that valid exposed firearm permit, much like a guard card, a valid guard registration card, valid identification such as a california driver's license. us passport, a little bit of background. there's no hard

timeline for a patrol special background to be completed because just like police applicant, everybody is unique. so everybody has a varied life experience and it takes depending on that life experience. when a background investigation is complete, the background investigator will submit the background investigation packet to the chief of police for review and recommendation after the chief of police makes the their recommendation. the background investigation packet will be submitted to the police commission who will approve or disapprove the applicant. and in fact, i have three background packets. i'm ready to present to you. not an open forum. more of a personnel matter, but i could provide those background packets to you today with with the chief's recommendation. i'll drop that on. alan, you didn't know that. so and a little bit of training patrol. special officers are trained in the classroom and on police department range qualifications. they pay for their own bullets as officers patrol, special

officers attend a 24 hours of instruction each year, according to standards and topics set by the chief of police. a training occurs at the san francisco police academy regional training center or equivalent thereof, and patrol special officers have met medical standards of the police department and passed extensive police background investigation before being appointed to the commission. it's a little bit of the history of the patrol special program as where it is now for any questions, maybe what i can do is i can talk about the conversations we've been having and then we can we're both here and all of us are here for questions. when president elias assigned me, i started meeting with staff with chief scott and ac laser and some other staff, including mccarthy. i think he was. he's the patrol special. i'll call him a liaison liaison on and, you know, i did my own

research, so i, i located initially a 2010 comptroller's audit, which is so much bigger than your presentation. it's i'd be here all night if we talked about that. there's copies there. and the supervisor can get it essentially there were some issues with the program and i have to say that in reading and in discussing things, there was a kind of a lack of oversight and coordination on. i mean, the commission has the authority, but we're not going to do it. and each beat was its own thing. and so some of them worked and some of them didn't. and that's kind of outlined in this report. and the recommendation was to stop it. and so it didn't happen. i mean, we still have one, but it did slow down. there was resistance in the city family to the program just because of the issues that were happening and the inability to sort of reel it in. and what's true is that in

the conversation, we've really come to see that as a tool. this actually could be really helpful for some of the issues that we're having today. it would likely have to be totally revamped, which is what we've talked about doing about it really, because the issue of management and oversight, it's a private sector program. so our our our connection is a partnership that works to help really with crime prevention, not crime fighting. and that's really what the patrol specials does really well by being out there in community, by walking, they're allowed to go outside of the building, not just inside like private security, but it allows for things like walking employees home if they're on a late shift or walking them to their car or or going with health care or case managers into a home visit or, you know,

there's a the cat, the cat club issue that happened where there was a break in and the police respond, did and did what they needed to do and then went on to the next call and there was no one there and they got broken into again while a patrol special could actually patrol outside to make sure that the location was safe, there's a lot of benefit ofit to this program if it's working properly. so the conversation we started talking about the reality of what's out there today, you know, helping with our our business districts and the innovation of the business improvement districts, the community benefit districts that are present in many of our merchant corridors who partner with our economic development department, the arts commission for public art for performance venues out in the neighborhoods we partner with them through

that be the bids is what it's called the bids and i was actually approached by folks who are working on the citywide alliance of the bids who are who already have security infrastructure that they are making for all of their partner agencies, for all the partner cbds, et cetera. creating radio networks and using camera information. an i know that we already, the police department already gets video and whatnot from incidents and already work with that group of security folks. but the folks in including mister scott who's here in the audience, have really expressed an interest to partner with the city or talk about partnering with the city on this kind of program to actually see help create some

consistency across all of these different areas. and i mean, we've started talking about the possible of essentially shutting down the existing program rules and redraft eating the new one. and so it's going to take a lot of time to actually sit and work with the existing rules and update them. so before we went into that, i wanted to make sure that other commissioners could weigh in on this. i mean, i feel like it's i feel like it's a really important tool, especially with all of our existing partnerships out in the community that are willing to step up. i also want to acknowledge that we've gotten several hundred emails from your customers patrol special buyers. the last living, the last remaining patrol special and his customer base is really worried about not being covered. so we

hear you and i think that it's a real nice tool. i think if we can really make it work, i've i've approached the conversation with the with the chief that the way this works is if it's a real partnership where there's mutual trust for each party and then we also i mean, i will also say that one of the failings of the previous program was that we didn't necessarily get to look at any data and because of the infrastructure that's being built out there, we could require just data as needed to review how many calls, what kind of incidents, where did people get taken to? i mean, there's all of that information can be returned to us on a regular basis, just like our regular reports. so i think that the future discussions on this are really going to it's going to be important for all of you commissioners to sort of weigh in with questions and areas of concern so that we make sure

that we discuss it as we go forward. hopefully we, you know, we could come up with something more solid and more detailed than a couple of months with the partners working on this. so i mean, that's sort of a synopsis. so if there's any questions, chief, did you want to say anything you've been in chief scott was in several of the meetings that we had and then lazarus sort of taken over the meeting schedule. so thank you, commissioner walker. first, first of all, let me thank commissioner walker. thank you for your leadership on this. i know the patrol special program has been around a long time. and it definitely there's a lot of there there in terms of looking at ways to. to address some of the issues that from the past that maybe as this gets revitalized and we get more interest in the program to

address some of those issues. so thank you. i know there's been a lot of meetings, a lot of discussions, and, you know, i think we still have a long way to go. so i want to thank you. i want to thank acting captain mccormick as well, because there has been a lot of thought and work that's gone into to this and, you know, we'll see where this leads us. you know. commissioner benedicto, thank you. thank you very much. vice president carter overstone. and thank you, captain mccormick, for your presentation. i also want to thank our patrol special , mr. bayard, for being here for a lot of tremendous community feedback about you, too. so thank you. and that what we're here to discuss is the prospects of what this program would look like modernized and not anything specific about any of the of the individual patrol specials. but you know, at this meeting, commissioner walker provided our fellow commissioners with a copy

of the 2010 controllers report on the patrol specials that was issued. then she also going to provide i've checked with an electronic copy so that our commission staff can post it. this was around the time that the program was paused and began to wind down. i know that the recommendation of this report was at that time to discontinue the program. um, and while it wasn't fully discontinued, as evidenced by mr. bayard here, it was sort of face attrition after that, i think the report i've only gotten the moments between agenda items to read it. it's quite lengthy but it raises some, some very significant systemic concerns about the way the program was set up at the time. there are issues about patrol specials being private nature and how that would affect things like sovereign immunity or insurance or liability for the city. and being state actors. there were issues about confusion between patrol specials and sfpd confusion

about about oversight and other procedural questions. and so i'm very glad that we got to review this report. i think this will be the first of what will be a number of conversations. at a minimum, i'd like to be able to read this report cover to cover. and i think if we were to consider implementing this program, what we'd need to see, what i would what would need to see, at least speaking only for myself, is a comprehensive plan that addresses the serious concerns in this report to make sure that we we're doing this thoughtfully and addressing the concerns that our controller raised in this report. so i'm looking forward to reviewing the report. i mean, there are just a number of things in scrolling. you know, there's the patrol specials under the prior program have the authority to arrest. but aren't peace officers under california state law, there's all kinds of things that that struck me just in perusing the report. and so seeing as we

receive the report just as as the meeting started, i don't have any specific questions. i'm grateful to commissioner walker for her leadership and for bringing this to our fellow commissioner's attention. but it's definitely the first of many conversations. i think it's also important this commission has has repeatedly stressed the importance of feedback. when we undertook the revisions of. department general order 9.07, i believe there were between 10 and 15 community outreach events ranging from specific working groups to partners with the human rights commission. and i think the change in allowing the re the resuming of this program dwarfs sort of the normal scope of our policy changes, standing up really a whole other organizations. i think we need to have at least that level of community outreach. we had, i believe it was for officer town halls. i'd be really interested to hear what officers, particularly patrol officers and

their thoughts about having the a parallel private forest that has similar but not coextensive authority and different regulations and oversight. so i think that's important. i think the time will come that we're going to want to hear from our department of police accountability. so i think there's a lot of steps here. i'm glad that we're embarking on this because i think that i've often said that we're open to any and all ways to help with public safety. and this is certainly a tool that has been used in the past. and so i thank you for coming in and look forward to looking at this report and also for members of the public to see this report once it's posted on the commission website. so thank you , commissioner yi. thank you very much there. vice president carter. i just want to thank deborah walker for bringing this up. patrol special program has just been put back, like with one patrol special looking at

the new package or actually the new data that we just received here today. i guess to echo what commissioner benedict said is there's a lot of things we probably need to talk about in discussion with the community as well and the policies of the police department as well, and how you married both of them together. so there's a lot of work to be done on this, i believe. and looking forward to seeing more data on there, too, as well. thank you very much. thank you. sergeant, could you take us to public comment? members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item six. please approach the podium. commissioners chief, thank you for having this discussion in front of us here. when i became patrol special in 1977, it was

450 patrol specials. that was assistance and beat owners. you had approximately a little over 1600 regular police officers. and at that time there was 200 reserve officers. now you have about 1600 police officers, one patrol special, and just a few reserve officers. san francisco was very safe back then, and it was because of the police that that we intervened before for the crime became a crime that we were the eyes and ears of the communities. and it was the original community policing we've had. 26 liaison officers since 1970. we've had a few of them for a couple of days, a few for a couple of weeks, a few for a couple of months and a few for

a couple of years. talk about lack of oversight. most of them didn't care. they did give the oversight to the various sergeants at the district station level. and again, they were more concerned about their guys, the ones that created a lot of the problems. they're no longer here. so we're starting off brand new. and that's the way to do it. the big holdup that i see is a bottleneck called the applications and the post backgrounds. nothing in the rules and regulations say it has to be a post background. we were told that by then liaison and robert h. when theresa sparks was the police commissioner. so that's what has been done. but apparently sfpd doesn't accept our backgrounds and it's taken over a year just to review one.

that is the thing that has to change. who does? the backgrounds are they going to be post certified? my assistant that i have working for me, antoine tazewell. it took him 14 years to get appointed and he is the anything over a year is ridiculous. i was told the reason it's taken so long is because, sir, with respect, your two minutes of public comment have expired. thank you. hi good evening, commissioners. i'm a d2 resident. i'm a customer of alan , so i'm here to talk in support of the psp program and i hope that someone would approve the qualified candidates so the program can continue to, at least in the short term and then very interested to hear about how we might handle this in the

future and what plans that commissioner walker has presented sound really good to me. i believe we're at an all hands on deck situation in san francisco right now, with many residents feeling unsafe and identifying public safety as their top priority. it's hardly the time to terminate the psp, which has been in the city for a very long time. as we've discussed just in 2010, the worst thing that was happening in my neighborhood was someone opening car doors and rifling for change age. now i have armed gunmen committing violent crimes as i live near the palace of fine arts, i personally signed up for the program. i have to two teenage daughters at home and heard about alan and i. feel much better knowing that he can help them out if they're at home

alone at night. this gives me peace of mind. i think that a neighborhood psp officer can respond quickly to low level security incidents and it takes the pressure off of the police officers who are already stretched thin. right now, as we all well know, dealing with all kinds of serious crime. so anyway, thank you for listening. i'm in support of this program. good evening, commissioners. is i would urge you to adopt this program and move forward with the current qualified candidates as soon as possible, all depending on the report. one reads san francisco is 600 to 1000 officers short, but we are in an urgent situation with many residents feeling unsafe and identifying public safety as their top concern. we need to do

whatever we can to scaffold around our safety needs until we can build our police staffing back up now is not the time to terminate this and it has been recognized in the city charter since 1856 with with this officer shortage and more slated to retire the city should be looking to employ every available option to put qualified officers in our communities and on our streets. as these patrols are considered to represent community policing efforts because of their focus attention on the culture and personality of each district neighborhood which is exactly the time of type of policing that this commission says it wants. every district in the city should be able to enjoy these benefits of added community patrols. and if this commission blocks more officers

from being hired, the patrol located in the marina will be the end of the program. i ask the police commissioner to approve the three qualified candidates identified by the marina patrol and saved this program. thank you so much. good evening again, commissioners. again, my name is randall scott. i'm standing before you right now. my title. i have a couple of them is president and ceo of the san francisco benefit district alliance. and that is an alliance of all the dvds and bds in the city. we have our own organization, which represents a good swath, the major commercial corridors of the city. and we're also partners with the council district merchants association. so we've got a good read on the city. our lives, what we do in our neck of the woods, which is

part of our lovely city here, is public private partnership. that's what we're built on. that's what we do. that's how we how we operate. we partner with dpw. we partner with the mayor's office. we partner with sfpd, with camera systems. i mean, we this partnership already exists. the reason why i've been talking to commissioner walker about this is use us. we're here. we're we're another tool in the tool belt to, you know, hopefully move this forward. so i'm here representing the alliance as as well as fisherman's wharf, saying whatever we can do to help, we're here to help. we're here to help sfpd any way we can. and yeah, that's it. thank you. that is the end of public comment line item seven presentation and discussion on safe streets for all report second quarter 2023

discussion. all right. good evening, acting president carter. robert stone, acting director rosenstein, chief scott and commissioners. i'm commander nicole jones of the special operations bureau, mta traffic division and i'm here tonight to discuss the 2020 three quarter two safe streets for all report. next slide sfpd's ultimate goals are to support vision zero and to assist in the elimination of traffic fatalities, as well as to improve street safety overall for everyone. sfpd has utilized education as one method to achieve this. this slide shows

some of the quarter two traffic safety campaigns done by or in collaboration with sfpd. one notable example is valencia street, which had significant changes in traffic patterns and the traffic environment due to the installation of a center bike lane. we worked with mta to educate through social media channels as well as through educational enforcement in the infant stages of these changes, we did lots of traffic stops that resulted in advisements only to get the community oriented. i'd like to highlight that one of the educational methods we use are traffic stops that result in advisements or warnings only. and i think that sometimes this component gets missed. so we're really focused on changing the behavior and that is one method that we do that. next slide, please. sfpd also utilized enforcement, and this included directed enforcement, which are planned operations targeting specific issues. much of this directed enforcement comes as a result of community feedback, city agency

feedback and examination of our high injury corridors throughout the city. the traffic company itself did 164 directed operations between january and june of this year, 57% of those were focused on the five efforts, and 41% were focused on high injury corridor locations. next slide, please. in terms of enforcement, from january through june of this year, sfpd has issued 2751 citations. 6,060% of which were focused on the five violations. so that's 1655 of the 2751. just as a refresher, focus on the five violations include speeding red light violations, stop sign violations, failure to yield to a pedestrian at a crosswalk, and failure to yield while making a left or a u-turn. next slide, please. in terms of overall traffic citations citywide, we have issued 50% more citations in the first two quarters of

2023 than we did in the first two quarters of 2022. so that's 2751 citations versus 1839. at the same time last year. next slide, please. in terms of focus on the five, there is a 47% increase in 2023 from 2022. so we're definitely going in the right direction on this. next slide, please. in the first two quarters of 2023, we had 11 traffic fatalities. and i'd like to point out that there was a 12th death as well. but that individual experienced a medical issue, so they are not included in the vision zero count. next slide, please. the mode of transportation is identified in these graphs. and as you can see , the majority of the traffic fatalities were pedestrians. that's seven of the 11. we also had both vehicle driver and passenger victims, as well as one victim in transit on a standup powered device. and in this case, that was an electric

scooter. next slide, please. as you can see from this chart, we had fatalities in most age brackets. however, i think the salient point on this slide, at least for me, is that all of the deaths in the age brackets of 50 and over were pedestrian fatality his so that is definitely something that the traffic company will be focusing on in the coming months in terms of enforcement. next slide, please. in comparison to 2022, we have experienced a decrease in traffic fatalities during the same time period this year. fatalities have decreased 42% from 1918 and 2022 to 11in 2023. next slide, please. so this slide just provides a little more context for each of these traffic fatalities, including the locations, the collision types and the primary collision factors, which are basically the vehicle code violations that are deemed to have caused these crashes. as next slide, please. and this is the cheat sheet. if you need to identify what those

primary collision factors were. next slide, please. and with that, i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you, commander jones, for that incredible, succinct presentation. we love succinctness here. um so question about i think it was slide five, the, the year to date number at the bottom, that 2750 number, is that year to date as in up to today or is that first two quarters, first two quarters, sorry. okay. so so we're on track to issue to 5500 or so. no citations this year, but that's that's down tremendously. right from prior years. yes, i think we issued 27,000 in 2019, roughly. yes. so we're down about 80% from 2019 numbers. and i think the chronicle published a piece about a week ago saying that we

were down, i think, 97% from eight years ago. why? why are we down so much in our traffic enforcement so dramatically from every pre-pandemic year? yes, i think that it's a variety of factors. i think one that we point to is staffing. we're at a fraction of the number of motorcycle officers we have than we did a decade ago. similarly we're down tremendously, as we've talked about, sort of ad nauseam in the police department . but i think the pandemic absolutely played a role. but with the staffing shortages as well, i think what gets missed is that people are being pulled in different directions. so people are being asked to perform other duties and assignments because we have things that we need to get done when you have less officers, there's also less time for self-initiated activity. we're going from call to call to call in many instances, particularly now. that being said, we could

say all of these are contributing factors is increased administrative response abilities, body worn, camera, camera tracking and tagging. we have to do the stop data collection system. those are things that are a little bit different from before that have just made traffic stops a little bit longer. um, some technological issues. we're working through them. but overall, like i said, all our factors, but the bottom line is i think we can do better as a department in terms of traffic enforcement. so i think we need to go in a different direction up. i think i'm confident that if we put some of these systems in place that we can do that. i think we've been really successful with these directed operation efforts and really targeting why we want people to go to certain places, what issue that we're trying to address and then when resources are available, deploying them in that way. so thank you for that. i guess i just want to follow up on two things. you said you called out staffing and you also

called out data entry. i'm assuming you mean stop data entry around ripa. as for staffing, i don't have the numbers top of mind, but what i think we probably have lower staffing than we did in 2019, but not, you know, 80% lower. anything close to account for the kind of cratering of our citation rates? yes. so i understand our staffing is probably, i think, from memory, less than it was in 2019. is that your recollection? but not dramatically less, right? yeah so i will tell you to your point, and i think the point you're trying to make is that the decrease in staffing is not walking hand in hand with the decrease in traffic citations. they're not falling at the same rate. and you're absolutely correct. you know, so i think that those are all factors, but i don't think that they explain away the decrease in citations and i know that since i've been at the traffic company, i have been poring over the data to really try to understand land, what's happening here and what direction we need to go in and why do we think entry of a stop

data is a factor in the decrease in citations? i don't think it's i don't think it's that in and of itself. i think that that's one small component of increased administrative burdens is having to go back. traffic stops are just taking a little bit longer here. and i think mostly on the back end, you know, because they do the traffic stop, they issue the citation, then they have to go back and put the entries in the system later. they have to tag their body worn camera footage. and i'm not saying that that is a main factor in why citations have dropped off. i think it's just one contributing factor to that. it plays some role. to what extent i think we still need to look into that is there one big driving factor that jumps out? i appreciate that you've enumerated several, but is there because it doesn't seem to be staffing and it doesn't seem to be data entry necessarily. so is there something that you would call out? is this is the big mover that accounts for the reduction

in citations and stops at this time? no, but i like i said, i'm new in my role here at the traffic company. so what i would like to do is really try to dig into the data and understand more of the factors at play. great. i appreciate that. and i just want to be clear, chief, do you also agree that the entry of data is not substantial contributor to the reduction in citations? i don't believe it's a substantial contributor, but i do believe it's a contributor. you know, having lived through this when i was in patrol, when my former department started collecting stop data, it did slow things down. you know, there's more administrative work to do. there's and you would think that that it to the commander's point, commander jones's point, i don't think it's a you know hand in hand reciprocal change, but it does factor in, you know, as does body worn camera and some of the other things it factors in it slows things down. and if i

recall, all our obligations began at some point during the middle of 2018. does that sound right? 20 was it 2018? yeah, i think it was june or july of 20. that's my recollection to the statute sets out who had to go first. basically, the biggest departments had to start and i think it was middle of 2018 and my recollection is that citations actually went up from 2018 to 2019. and at a minimum, there wasn't any huge variance between those two years. so again, i would just question whether the entry of data could possibly be a factor if we didn't see that effect. if it was, you would see a big effect when repo was actually enacted and 2018 to 2019. but i don't think we see that. but correct me if i have that wrong. i was just going to add, i'm pretty sure it was 2018, we increased

our our motorcycle the size of our motorcycle unit back up to almost 50. and i believe that was 29, 2018 because i can remember some of the conversations that we had here in the commission and with the board of supervisors on that. and correct me on this, i think we're somewhere around the low 20s now. is that right? commander jones as far as the deployment of the solo unit in terms of i think that they haven't been replenished to any of the levels seen before. but i do think that there was there may have been an additional class added at that time. yeah, there was either 2018 and 2019, but i'm looking at the data and i see i'm looking at our data and 2018 to 2019 overall traffic violations did go down in 2019 from 2018, slightly from. yeah. what was the you want to give us the top line. 50,895 total citations issued. versus 42,971

in 2019. so slightly less so. it seems to come as a downward trend. there's obviously a precipitous drop between 2019 and 2020. but i so that's helpful. there was some drop but not but again, that that wouldn't explain the big dip that we're seeing now. yeah. and can i bring up one more point? yes so and this is something that i've noticed as well. so we're basing everything on citations. right? but there's also to my point earlier in the presentation, a number of stops that we do that don't result in citation. so that result in advisements and warning and traffic education. so one of the things that we're working on now is getting a better handle on understanding that because that's absolutely a part of this puzzle is that we are making stops that no, we're considering it a success if it's an arrest. but oftentimes it's also a success if there is behavior change and we would like to be

able to present that information as well. moving forward. great thanks so much, commissioner byrne. thank you. vice president . why richmond station? i mean, i get this question. a lot of the i mean, it's what, like three quarters or more of all the their given traffic company a run for their money. so we know we have work to do but so they have a couple of officers who are very well trained in lidar and they're really doing speed. it's so funny that you say that because jody medeiros from walk sf said to me, she's like, when can i meet the richmond station officer? because they're and i think 97% of richmond's violations are focused on the five violations. so they really are doing an incredibly tremendous job out there. um, i think that. but i don't want to cut you off, commissioner. i think i may have

mid question. no, no, no. that was the question. yeah, but i mean the richmond is not the most dangerous part of san francisco. there would be other areas of the city where i'd be more, more concerned. one merely has to look at the map as to where the fatalities took place to realize they weren't taking place in the richmond yeah, they were taking place in near the downtown core. yeah and it would seem to me that that's where the that's where the enforcement should be because at the end of the day, um, just like the idea of, of dealing with the tenderloin because, you know, over two people a day are dying so that the resources be concentrated to provide the most

safety and, and it seems to me that where the fatalities take place is where you want the enforcement. but that's my opinion. thank you. yeah, absolutely. and i would also like to point out that our downtown stations have different levels of calls for service and different amounts of time for proactivity. and that's absolutely a factor. i think here and i agree with you, we need to be focusing our efforts for traffic enforcement in those high injury corridor networks and there are more concentrated in one part of the city, that part of the city also happens to be usually tremendously busy. chief, i see your next up. i do. can i interject with a question for you and maybe you can fold it into what what your comment was, which is it seems like there isn't one big smoking gun cause for why both stops and citations have taken a dip and a

big dip. and i'm just wondering if there's different deployment decisions we can make to invest more more in traffic and enforcement. obviously, every new assignment to a new task. you're taking someone off some someone something else. and so there is a risk and reward to everything. but at our investment in traffic enforcement has gotten so low and we're seeing such high rates of death and carnage on our roadways. you know, right now we have eight officers and a sergeant full time arresting drug users. everyone told us it wouldn't go well. it's not going well. i wonder if some of those officers could do traffic enforcement instead. and there's a number of you know, we could go through other decisions like that. but this is an important issue, you know, that doesn't necessarily distinguish it. you have a lot of important issues that you need to appropriately invest in. but i just think we've let this one go to a level

that's just not consistent with our vision. zero zero goals at a minimum. thank you, commissioner. yeah the slide that was up the last slide that was up. i am encouraged to see that the district stations are doing more traffic enforcement and i do think there as the commander jones spoke about, i do think there are other stops that are being made that don't result in citations. one of our objectives is to really get everybody back engaged in traffic enforcement, not just the traffic company. i know that the tradition have carried a big part of our traffic enforcement efforts, but they also have other responsibilities investigated lines of traffic collisions and the like. so really our challenge is to continue that trend. you saw on that slide, tenderloin had very few, but as was pointed out, you know, there's a very, very high call volume and they do get

pulled off in tenderloin for fixed posts and foot beats and other things like that to deal with. some of the other issues that you just mentioned. the bottom line on this is we've got to get everybody involved in track of traffic enforcement and encourage our officers to make sure that we do that with that is clarity in terms of what we're asking to do, but also there is there is there's that balance between handling the radio calls and the community engagement that we need. and asking officers, like in many district stations, to get out of their cars and walk foot beats and talk to the business owners and all that. so that balance is really what we're trying to find. but it is encouraging to see that at least most of the stations there was an increase and i think that will get us a long way. commissioner benedicto . thank you, vice president carter. overstone i was really intrigued about about the idea

that, you know, we're obviously there are stops that are advisements that are without citation and looking into that, you know, is that data that we could look at to see if that at least if i mean, obviously they won't explain all the decline, it will still look pretty precipitous. but it might you know is that data the department has available that it could compare. so we could sort of see that overlaid against just the stop data to see if that explains part of the of the drop off. yeah. so that's the data that i've requested from the professional standards team that i'm working on getting to make sure that we have moving forward as a talking point, i'm curious to see it as well. yeah. once you have it of analyze that data, i'd love for, for you to come back and ask that to be agendized. i think that's, that's an important piece. as to as to the question of the richmond, i think we've all hit the nail on the head that i think some of it is the level of calls for service around the downtown core. i know the last one of the recent ride alongs i did, i think i was there for

five hours. and it was all responding to calls. i don't think they were able to do anything proactive the whole time i was i was with them and it was like i'd asked them like, oh, do you want us to go? and i'm like, no, no. i just just asking what you were doing. and so it was i think that's that's a big part of it. you know, i think it's like vice president carter oberstein said the it's unacceptable that it should be unacceptable that since vision zero was announced, traffic deaths have only gone up. i think i read something recently that we were on track to tie our the most traffic fatalities. and it's the number of traffic deaths in this country and in san francisco are really reaching really unacceptable levels. and it's disappointing to see it start to take the character of gun violence where there's almost a fatalism to it among some policymakers. we're like, oh, well, some number of traffic deaths are are just happening. and i'm would like to see this commission, you know,

other commissions, the board of supervisors, really all of us committing to making this a priority because it's just such an unacceptable amount of death. and i know that we spent a lot of time in 2022 talking about 9.07. and one of the one of the things animating it, not the only thing animating, but one of the things animating it was the idea that it would free up resources to allow for more enforcement on focus on the five. you know, we i think i said that i said it from this room a million times that not a single offense on the 9.07 list was a focus on the five offense because we were really wanting to reiterate our commitment to that and to encourage that reallocation of resources. so you know, that's that is still in confer. but i just i would i know that i'm committed to using every tool at our disposal to make sure that we can make reducing traffic deaths a priority. so thank you for the presentation. thank you. commissioner walker. thank you. thank you for the report. it is

very fascinating and i do have a question. is there are i know that there were traffic cameras used and then we stopped using them. i mean, are we looking at at traffic cameras for some of these things? because i think especially with the new technology and the ability to identify movement in that type of thing, yeah. so i think you're referring to red light cameras. yes. yes. so we do have and they're not included. the red light camera violations are not included in these in these stats. but we do review red light camera violations. i believe that on the docket, there's eight more slated to be installed. so that will be a tremendous increase. also on the docket, or at least in terms of legislation at the state level, is speed cameras. so if speed cameras come into play, san francisco will be most likely one of the pilot cities, i believe, for that as well. so we asked we participate in the red light camera program in my office. i have an officer who is

dedicated to reviewing the violations and making those correlations and issuing the tickets and going to court. and so, yes, well, and i was looking at the discrepancy in it's i mean, i don't think we have it broken down by what what the actual ticket is for. but i mean i think that there's a lot of speed issues out in the richmond that there's less traffic and so people drive faster and but it's you know, i do think that the reporting factor takes time and it's important stuff to gain. but when you have the combination of extra administrative work in addition to less people doing patrols and you know it is it's a challenge. so thank you for taking this on . we look forward to more updates as as they come in. so thank you. thank you. commissioner yanez. thank you.

vice president carter overstone. thank you for the presentation you got some powerpoint skills there. quick question, just for my information on is there a difference between advisement and admonishment? i'm glad you're going to be bringing back those numbers, but is that just an interchangeable term, sort of interchangeable as it relates to this? okay but are they both captured in the same fashion? great. because i think that that is an important point. yeah. and i agree with vice president carter overstone that there you know, there's really only there's about a 25% difference, right in the number of staff. and let's get down to figure out how it is that we can increase and be more proactive about enforcement because i you know, i often see i live right around the corner from valencia street that whole fiasco as it was initiated, you know, was was obviously going to create some concerns and some additional obstacles as but i often can see

things myself and i see officers maybe they're on their way back into the station so they don't make the stop. but i really think that there needs to be a very forceful i'll command from leadership that they need to be more proactively addressing, whether it's the five or just in general, all of these traffic offenses. i do supervisors actually actually analyze like data or the time that it takes to document their citations or the ripa is there like do they categorize how much time is taken to generate these reports? i think it's based on estimates and one thing that i have shouted from the rooftops and the chief will attest to this is being able to account for administrative time a little bit more effectively in the police department. and that involves

tremendous culture change. and we're still going to work on it. but i think that right now it's an estimate. they can say that traffic citations have become have more administrative burdens attached to them than they did before. and sort of and you kind of have people all over the map. you have some very efficient officers and some brand new officers is going to take a lot more time than it would just because of the training components. but again, all our factors. but but to what extent, you know, we believe that this is a contributing factor. we don't believe it is the sole factor to president carter stone's point, having, you know, overseeing a lot of employees who actually do count every second and minute of their time . a time analysis is essential, right? there are some people who will take a little longer because it's not as laborious or energy consuming to write a report versus to be out there doing the work right. so i know that that if it's going to gain us a couple of minutes, a couple

of hours of actual enforcement, i think it's worth the effort to look at that time analysis and to get a range right. like we should not be condone owning someone, maybe taking an hour when it takes 15 minutes for another officer. yes, there's a learning curve. but i think that we should we should have standard, right? we need to have some kind of template that gives people some guidance. and i hope that we do get to that point at some point soon because is there is a lot of work to do. thank you. thank you. commissioner yee . thank you. thank you very much there. vice president carter. i, like the rest of the commission's, i guess looking at the richmond district. it's i guess i won't say an anomaly. it's a is a glaring issue of all the stops that's happening out there. i live in the richmond district myself and i thank the officer for keeping us safe out there. but again, you're looking at the rest of the districts.

um, i guess we could need some additional officer in those districts to keep us safe throughout the whole city. also, i noticed that if you're 50 and over chance of you getting hit, you know, or having one of those accidents that's 50% or plus 50. so we need to make sure that all of our residents throughout the ten stations prepared that, you know, you don't you don't see one district with all the solve . so the question is, again, how much use of manpower or actually workforce assigned to that district. so again, looking forward to more data to as well. thank you. thanks. i just have one comment. not not a question . just responding to what chief said earlier about trying to get everyone involved in traffic enforcement, i think that's

great. but i think it's also been a long time now that we haven't had any significant amount of traffic enforcement. and i think it's going to require more than just, you know, getting everyone involved. i think people are involved. and as much as they can possibly be consistent with the other duties and assignments and obligations that they're assigned. and i think that it's going to require some very tough deployment decisions to be made to decide what we can do less, what can we do less or do less with anything so that we can have traffic enforcement that actually deters injuries and deaths on our roadways. and again, in you know, every day we're sending nine sworn members out there to do nothing but arrest drug users , which is just contra indicated by every expert that everyone told us it wasn't going to work. it continues not to work. and people will are getting hurt on our roadways as a result of this misguided decision. this is this

is in part why i've asked to agendize a discussion on deployment. again, this this commission has no jurisdiction over the department's deployment practices. but i think it's a great public interest to understand how we're using our scarce law enforcement resources forces, because i think people are understandably, you know, have a lot of questions about some of the decisions we've made, seeing no other names in the queue. sergeant, could you take us to public comment, please, for members of the public, that would like to make public comment regarding line item seven, please approach the podium. and there is no public comment. line item nine discussion on sfpd stop data pursuant to unit order 20 1-01 at the request of the commission discussion. good evening, commissioners. vice president carter overstone commissioners

chief scott. acting director rosenstein. i'm catherine mcguire. i'm the executive director of the strategic management bureau, and i'm just appearing here to this evening mostly to answer any questions you have. about 2101 but i'll give some brief remarks to start . um so the professional standards and principal policing unit in concludes the staff inspections unit and sergeant huh. is here this evening to help answer any specific and detailed questions you might have. about 2101 and our stops review. as you may know, in 2021, icu issued that that unit order that specifies lies, among other things, to conduct periodic audits of data sets. on

a side note, i'll just mention that the term audit in icu and which is now right now a unit of one sergeant are not audits in the classic form, meaning they're not gaggi's compliant to the fullest extent, although sergeant ha makes valiant efforts to adhere to gaggi's guidance whenever possible. in particular around sampling and methods like that in in psp we refer to a big a audits and little a audits and so the work we do really are more appropriately named reviews or spot checks. and in particular when it comes to this portion of 2101, the unit order outlines an annual identification of inconsistent sdcs entries and i'll note that the unit order also indicates findings from

these recurring inspections do not regularly result in in a detailed report to the chief of police and instead are intended to and i'm now paraphrase, being intended to be remediated. so any findings or or issues with that spot in that spot check are remediated. and i can go into detail on how that works. but essentially, sergeant notifies the stations or units that with a provides them with a list of entries that are outstanding along with the names of officers who began the entry and in the notification, both the supervisor must acknowledge and the officer must acknowledge which indicates that the member has completed and submitted or deleted the entry where appropriate. if it was duplicated, duplicative or otherwise. so that is the extent

of what i prepared. but i'm happy i have lots of material here and i'm happy to answer any questions. great. thank you. director mcguire. could you just start by clarifying what exactly the audits are looking to detect ? so in this case, it's out in entries that were started but not submitted in the system. so there are the beginnings of a stop was conducted and they began their entry and didn't click the submit button. okay and is there anything else that these audits are designed to detect? not at this time. we have. hopes for the future and when sergeant ha can get a little help, we would expand and those reviews as as we can. and so the unit order is guidance for inconsistencies is not a very descriptive phrase. and the idea being that it allows for us

to ensure that we're we're capturing long at least those those data points that were intended to be in the system and at this time, we just don't have the capacity to go beyond that. but we want to and will great. that's helpful. so the audits are designed to detect one thing, which is entries that were started but not completed. now, when i agendize this, i asked the department if they could furnish the commission with the actual audits and i'd i believe the reply was there is no paper trail of the audits occurring. is that correct? that's correct. and these audits are not intended as the unit order says, the audits are not intended to generate a report, but rather to rather remediate the issue. and then there is this line in the order that says

finding of quarterly or annual audits regarding lawful, accurate and compliant data entries shall be tracked in an enumerated record mechanism such as a computerized spreadsheet to be safeguarded by seiu. the result results will be stored and for systemic analysis by icu. in an effort to continuously address deficient findings by developing and applying corrective measures. so as i read the order it does, i think pretty clearly state that there should be an audit that is stored or do i have that wrong? so we do store the records of the remediation. and i also but that's not what the sentence says. the sentence says the audits will be stored. so it sounds like that's not happening despite the order clearly saying the audits need to be themselves stored. so people can follow up and review what happened in the past. so what what we have is

the record that is the notification is the record of the outstanding items. we have that on file. it's all available . the other thing we have and i think sarge youngblood helped me out and came and grabbed the summary that we have. we do have a summary that shows each year of those findings and then the outcomes of the remediation. great. if you could provide the commission with the summaries, we would appreciate that. and apologies for not making the friday deadline. we were late. notice no worries. no worries at all. my other big question is just why was the audit designed just to check this one relatively insignificant ministerial thing? i mean, the unit order starts with this lofty language about the importance of ensuring the integrity of our data public, transparent and accountability, and then of all the things we could be auditing, we kind of

picked something that wasn't it probably not the most, i think you would agree, significant thing that we could be checking in the data, right? yeah so again, in the order ideally we know allows us for that expansion and contraction of scope as as we are able to absorb it. the the and yes the laudable goals at the very beginning of the unit order are something that we strive for. and so all of that said, there is a need in our department and the chief and i have talked about it on on several occasions. and i think i've been sort of, as commander jones said, singing it from the top of the rooftops, that we need some sort of data to review data audit and integrity unit kind of a thing. and that is something that we're hoping to pursue. all right. i guess, yeah, i guess

there just seems to be a big gap to me between what this unit order is directing the department to do and what was actually done. as i understand it, our audit practices are design and specifically not to detect what would be the most common ways to falsify my data. right. or to have the integrity of our data set called into question right. if someone's just making up entries, that wouldn't be detected if someone's falsified saying the race of a motorist, that wouldn't be detected as you know, there's now been allegations made that that occurred. someone's not making making a stop and not entering the data that wouldn't be detected. so why why was our audit process specifically designed not to detect any of

these kind of what we would think would be the most common way someone might falsify stop data? really, i think that it's not that it was designed not to detect. it was designed to meet the capacity of one sergeant who has a plate that is overly full. and so i think that's that's one aspect of it. the other aspect of it is that i think in a know that we have a cri update coming soon on that there are elements of the outstanding 27 recommendations that will capture the some of those things that that the sf standard talked about. right. so we're currently is it then your view that we're not in compliance with the cri recommendations requiring auditing of our stop data as, as , as it currently stands, at least i'm happy to look into that more closely and, and come back to the commission and talk about that. but really stuck to the focus of the unit order tonight. chief do you have any

comment on this? i know you didn't issue this unit order, but i do find it troubling that we're finding out from a newspaper who's taking the time to look through our stop data about alleged i'd i should emphasize alleged you know, misconduct that was if it is true extremely brazen and could have been caught immediately with even the most cursory review of our data. so this this is happening right under our nose and we have this 2021 unit order that's that's saying we need to have comprehensive audits of our stop data to make sure that you know, that our that our data, you know, to verify the integrity of our data . and to frame this the right way. the newspaper article that you're talking about is in reference to the ongoing investigation. i believe it

included the investigation, but it also included other other instances that are that are separate from the ongoing disciplinary case. yeah the you know, i know some of these types of things are more apparent than others that say, you mentioned false, false data in order for that to happen. i do believe that there's processes like reviewing body worn camera and things like that that we currently don't have in place. and that's was stated as to some of the reasons why. and i don't remember the word for word news article, but what i will say on this is that if we get the capacity and build the capacity to be more rigorous on some of these spot checks and audits, it may pick some of this up, but in order to guarantee me that this

doesn't happen, every record basically has to be looked at. so we need to build our capacity and, you know, do it within the policies in terms of reviewing body worn camera and things like that. but i do believe we can and will do better on on these things. but we do have to build the capacity in order to do that. you know, it does take a lot of personnel. right. but but with respect, this is not a capacity issue. right in the news article said for example, and i haven't looked at it in the weeks since it was published, but i think one un member had 11 or 1200 stops and all. but 5 or 6 of the people were white. so that's something that could be detected with an excel pivot table in seconds. so that's not a capacity issue. that's a decision that we made not to look for certain types of red flags in our own data. and i guess that's what i'm most concerned with. and i don't know the news article, but i mean,

may i ask you to clarify what you said? 1100 stops in 11 or 12 were five or all all all the people stopped were white except for 5 or 6 is my recollection of the what the article reported. yeah. and how did this reporter determine that they were white? i don't know, because i didn't read the news article word for word. but that's that's what the cdc data set. that's what the stop data set from one officer. my point is that detecting something like that, it doesn't take investment in resources. it can be detected quickly. we've just made the decision that we're not going to look for it. so if i hear you correctly, you're saying that we should look at because all but 11 were white. that should be a red flag. yes. that seems statistically highly improbable. right yeah, it could be. yes. yes, it could be. and i think to the director's point, you know, these audits are have to be

based on something more tangible than a hunch, i believe. and for instance, if you have a what whether you're using traffic data or some some database to determine what is in the norm. and that's part of what our hopefully when we get this dashboard up and running, we'll be able to better detect those things. but i'm not so sure that that is, you know, the measurement that needs to trigger an audit. you know, if an officer, let's say an officer's work in a certain assignment, gangs and they're dealing with primarily somebody from whatever ethnicity those gangs are comprised of, are we going to say, oh, you stopped? you know, no thousand. i'm sorry, that's a very separate issue than what i'm i'm i'm saying, are we even going to look in the first instance? yes, i guess i'll just leave it at this. i think the commission should re agendize this issue at a later time, right? yeah

because i do think we need to have a discussion with possible action agenda item where we discuss the possibility of directing as we discussed last week, directing dpa and an outside partner perhaps to do an audit. this issue is not unique to our department, as you know very well. chief you know the united states department of justice is investigating the connecticut state troopers over a stop data issue. and other jurisdictions have had similar allegations lodged against them. so i don't i think that we should be a leader on this issue and not and not be and be proactive about ensuring that our stop data is accurate and can be relied upon by the commission and to make policy and can be relied upon by the public. yeah. and i don't disagree with that at all, but i will say this and this kind of trails into our last conversation about traffic stops and officers engagement. the point that i'm trying to make with that example you gave with the newspaper is if we're using things like, oh, you stopped a thousand, you know, you name the

race, therefore we're going to assume that you're doing something various that is a deterrent for officers wanting wanting to get out there and do the job. and all i'm saying is whatever the audit process is, it needs to be clear. it needs to be fair, it needs to be above board in terms of not accusing an officer of misconduct out of something other than a good standard to trigger. why we are looking into that. officer that is a wet blanket in terms of officers wanting to get out there and do the job. and we're not saying don't hold officers accountable. that's not what i'm saying at all. what i'm saying is the process needs to be fair so people will believe that if i get out there and do what's being asked of me, i'm not going to be subject to some witch hunt type of audit. that's all i'm saying. okay. yeah, that's i don't think anyone can disagree with that. that's not what's being discussed. what's being discussed is are we going to do a real audit at all? and we're not doing that. we're using our resources on something else. instead commissioner yanez.

thank you. vice president carter oversaw and i do too, believe that we do need to agendize this with an action item. it's very clear that this the decisions that were made to staff a very essential element of our accountability measures were not , you know, the decisions were not made as far as investing the necessary resources. and if what our framework for, you know, auditing this data is solely to see if someone submitted a document after we've spent so much time saying that you know, filling out this report information is taking away from our officers actually, you know, being on the streets, it just sounds like, you know, we're not serious about accountability and transparency. and unfortunately , it's you know, overwhelmingly

people of color who are being impacted by these decisions. and it's just unfathomable to me to know that a sergeant allegedly stopped 1200 white people, only and that there were only six other people from some other ethnicity who committed some type of offense in front of that. sergeant and i say this with a smile because it is unbelievable to me that we have allowed, condoned, supported and almost uplifted this level of disregard, disregard for the transparency that this commission is expected to provide. and when that information is minimized and damaged and just improperly submitted. and we're not even looking to see whether there's a pattern of misconduct, i think we need to look at ourselves at the leadership level to see what we need to do differently. and

yes, we need an action item and we're going to need to probably look at all the stop data, reconcile all ethnicity. and i've said this before, i suspect that these things are happening , but not as brazenly as they seem to be. and obviously there's an investigation and this is one article, but i agree with vice president oberstar, carter that it shouldn't take an outside entity to comb through our records and find this out and expose us in this fashion. you know? so, yes, let's agendize this, please, for another day. commissioner walker . yes. you know, i agree with you, chief scott. i think it's a wonder that anybody pulls anybody over at all because i. i don't understand those numbers. and we don't know where they were, where they were looking at for the stop that indicated that there were such a predominant number of caucasian asian

drivers pulled over. for the direction in around traffic stops. is changing, or at least the messaging from this commission changes depending on sort of what we're working on. so it's again, one of the issues that i have is there are conflicting directions in different egos all over the place. and i have to say that if i was a police officer, i would kind of wonder what i'm supposed to do at any given point. i think it's time that we should actually make commissioner honors go through the academy and figure out how it is to be an officer because i just i think that i don't know. i mean, this just it sort of drives me crazy. and i'm sure that it's driving the officers crazy. so chief scott, thank you. vice

president carter. so i just want to just comment on the discussion. you know, the comment about and i know you meant no disrespect, commissioner yanez, but, you know, newspaper article unvalidated. yes, it deserves a look. but to make a statement as if that sergeant has done something wrong is part of the problem that we're dealing with based on a newspaper article. hey, if the investigator in vets that an and get it all bets are off but the point that i'm trying to make is this is on one hand we we're pushing go out there and write tickets go out there and do this, go out there and do this and then we read a newspaper article and basically you just you know, sir, you just painted this sergeant as if that sergeant has done something wrong with no validation, no proof. and i know you didn't mean it that way, but it's a problem because this is the very

thing that officers complain about. you ask us to do a job. what if that sergeant did nothing wrong? and. and we're basing this off a newspaper article. it's a real problem. and this the job that we're asking these officers to do, i think, is not too much to ask. hey, hold hold us accountable. all all the points that have been made about the auditing process. yeah, we need to do better. and all are all valid. but when you start talking about this sergeant who was a person and telling the public that this is suspect and this sergeant has done something that is not right in my opinion, and that does is discourage people from wanting to get out there and do the job that we're asking them to do. if i could respond, since you did respond directly to my comment. there isn't investigation on on one individual. there is a

statement in an article about information that that we would have liked to have come from the department itself if and when we have spent the last at least me , 18 months plus and this commission for years trying to get to the root of why there is a 25 to 1 discrepancy in use of force against african americans . and yet we don't see this as something essential to devote time and energy to and even if it is a suspicion allegation. and we will find out whether that sergeant actually pulled over 1200 white people versus, as you know, the six others that he claimed he pulled over. as far as the way the data is being reported, i, i can still and i will still say that that is something concerning and that if i was that individual's leader,

i would pull that person aside and figure out what is going on. and i believe i said this when i first started on this commission . i do not understand why we're not looking at these numbers individually per unit, per division, per station. and but these things obviously require time and energy and we have to have the right framework. i agree with you on that. it but why haven't we devoted the resources to it? why is there one person there trying to analyze this information and ensure that we're collecting it ? yeah thank you, chief. there are two people in the queue and i just want to get two people in order and. and i and i will say, i do feel like the or maybe you're talking past each other and the issues are being a little bit confused. this is not about any one officer. and i didn't take commissioner yanez's comments to be directed at, you know, whether the allegations

made in a newspaper are true or not. the only question on agenda today is it looks like sfpd is buried its head in the sand and decided that it's not going to even look in the first instance to know if there is a problem with the data. that's all we're talking about. do we even want to know the answer? do we want to know if our data is accurate and reliable, or do we want to just not even take the time to look at it at all? that's the only thing this discussion about. it's not about any particular officer. the. i'm sorry, acting director rosenstein. i'm sure if i may humbly suggest commissioner walker, maybe the patrol specialist, can go to the academy as well with you guys. if you go. might be a good idea. yeah but aside from that, what is most concerned about when it comes to this issue? i shouldn't say most, but one of the big

concerns we have is that the collaborative reform initiative of finding number 77 says that sfpd does not conduct routine ongoing organizational audits, even where such practices are established in policy. and the recommendation in which was number 77.2, was that sfpd should develop an auditing plan and schedule for both routine and risk audits within 90 days of issuance of this report, staffing resource and training need to be allocated to the process to ensure an active and robust auditing schedule and in response to this recommendation , an sfpd created unit order 2021 and submitted it to the i can't remember if it was hillard hines at the time or who it was since this was 2021, with a recommendation, with a request that they be found in substantial compliance with that

particular recommendation. so that and that the unit order would solve these issues. and based on that, the creation of that unit order and the way that it was worded, there was a decision made that the department of justice finds that sfpd is in substantial compliance with this recommendation. however sfpd should ensure that it adequately staffs icu to meet sfpd's auditing goals. so that's right . now, when this was flagged, i think this was one issue that dpa was concerned about is that this order was created in order to substantially comply with that recommendation. and in light of this presentation, we have concerns about whether it does or not. commissioner benedicto, thank you very much. vice president carter. i think there has been a little bit of talking past each other here, and i think it's important to

note that that setting aside whatever individual allegations might be in in reporter articles, that that's not what what we're here talking about and we're not here to prejudge any ongoing investigations and to the extent that that impression was given, i don't think any commissioner intended to do that. what and this is also not about and again, i want to make clear that it shouldn't be about exposing officers to the chief described as sort of witch hunts or as commissioner walker described. oh, if i do one thing, is this going to affect me? this is about looking for behavior that is was called out by the department of justice and behavior that is potentially so egregious that it is it is misconduct. and like the vice president said, this is not unique to this department in doing research. i think there are over half a dozen departments that are currently facing issues and whether from their their own civilian orders

and their commission equivalents or the department of justice or outside organizations about the their consistent use of stop data and whether or not there is there are issues of fraudulent reporting of data. and i think that's a concern, one that i know, chief you and this department have have expressed. you know, this strong commitment to making sure that we're leaders on reform and we're seeing, again, half a dozen or more departments that are showing that they have issues about this data collection. and i think it's incumbent on this department to assert that leadership that and lead on this because what we're talking about isn't, you know, oh, little mistakes or disparities that officers we're talking about potential fraudulent entry that is misconduct. and so i think it's important that we look lead on this because as i mentioned last week, the only way this commission can make policy is by looking at evidence and data. not a week goes by that one of

the of us is not talking about we need more data on this. we want more specific data on this. and we need to rely on that to make the important decisions that we make. and the risk that the data that we're looking at, it can be corrupted and that we're looking at that it undermines the foundations of our ability to make good policy. and so that's, i think, why this issue is important and should be agendized not because some specific thing was said in some specific newspaper article, not because of any specific behavior or ongoing investigations, but because we as a department, as a system, it's incumbent on us to make sure that we're vigilant against this sort of data collection fraud and that we're leading to make sure that we're being accountable. so i just wanted to make sure that that that that point was made great. sergeant, could you take us to public comment, please, for members of the public, they'd like to make public comment regarding line item nine, please approach the podium. and there

is no public comment. line item ten public comment on all matters pertaining to item 12 below closed session, including public comment on item 11 vote whether to hold item 12 in closed session. if you'd like to make public comment regarding closed session, please approach the podium. there is no public comment. line item 11 vote on whether to hold item 12 in closed session, including a vote on whether to assert the attorney client privilege with regard to item 12, san francisco administrative code. section 67.10 action motion to go into closed session and assert the attorney client privilege with regards to item 12 second, on the motion, commissioner walker, how do you vote? yes commissioner walker is yes. commissioner benedicto. yes. commissioner benedicto is yes. commissioner yanez. yes. commissioner janez is yes. commissioner byrne yes. commissioner byrne is yes. commissioner yee yes. commissioner yee is yes. vice president carter overstone yes. vice president robertson is yes. we vote to elect whether to

disclose any or all discussion on item 12 held in closed session, including a vote on whether to assert the attorney client privilege with regard to item 12, san francisco administrative code. section 67.10 action motion not to disclose any items in closed session. second. yeah. okay many members of the public, they'd like to make public comment regarding line item 13. please approach the podium. i'm seeing none on the motion. commissioner walker, how do you vote? yes mr. walker is. yes. commissioner benedicto? yes. mr. benedicto is. yes. commissioner yanez. yes. mr. yanez is. yes. commissioner burns. yes. commissioner burn is yes. commissioner yee. yes. commissioner yee is yes. you have five yeses. fine. item 14, an adjournment. all right. all right. are adjourned.

so as to not interrupt our proceedings here in the chamber , the board of supervisors and its committees are convening hybrid meetings that allow in-person attendance and public comment while still providing remote access and public comment via telephone. public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda. those attending in person will be allowed to speak first, and then we'll take those who are waiting on the telephone line for those watching remotely and streaming through. sfcv. tv.org. the public comment call-in number is streaming across the screen and when connected you will hear the meeting discussions, but you'll be muted and in listening mode only when your item of interest comes up in public. comment is called. those joining us in person should line up to speak and those on telephone should dial star three to be added to the speaker line. if you're on your telephone, please remember to turn down your tv and all listening devices may be using and each speaker will be allowed up to two minutes to speak unless otherwise stated. all alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways he mailed them to myself. the

budget and finance committee clerk at brant edgerly pr at sf j g overboard. if you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and also included as part of the official file. you may also send your written comments via us postal service to our office in city hall. that's one dr. carlton beagle place room 244, san francisco, california. 94102. and finally, madam chair, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of october 3rd, unless otherwise stated. madam chair. thank you, mr. clerk and before we call item number one, i would like to remind everyone that we have budget and legislative analyst reports for items three, ten and 11 on today's agenda for those items, we will have the department presentation first, followed by the budget and legislative analyst report. then we will take questions, then public comment. so with that, mr. clerk, please call item number one. yes, item number

one, is a resolution retroactive authorizing the department of public health to accept and expand a grant increase from the national institutes of health through oregon health and science university for participation in a program entitled western states node of the national drug abuse treatment clinical trials network in the amount of approximately 28,000 for the period of march 1st, 2023 through february 29th, 2024, for a total grant award amount of approximately $110,000 for the total period of june 1st, 2020 through february 29th, 2020. four. members of the public have joined us remotely and wish to comment. press star three to enter the speaker line. hey promptly indicate that you have raised your hand and when the system indicates you have been unmuted, that will be your signal to begin your comments. madam chair, thank you. and today we have philip kaufman, director of the center on substance use and health and

this is virtual. and if it's virtual and also, mr. kaufman, please also indicate why this item is retroactive. thank you. hi. so this is support for my time to participate in clinical trials, testing medications for substance use disorders. the focus at this point in time is on medication trial for cocaine use disorder and it is retroactive because it's been because the grant has been continued. so the ultimate amount of the grant has exceeded the $100,000 cut off. uh, would you like to just walk us through a little bit about what the, the program is about and participation? sure. so it's the national institute on drug abuse has a clinical trials network and the network has multiple nodes around the country and conducts clinical trials of various different medications for substance use disorders. and this is my participation within

that clinical trials network right now. my participation is focused on a trial called curb to that uses two different medications for treating cocaine use disorder. and we're currently running that trial in san francisco. thank you. looks like this is going to be through from from march 1st, 2023 of this year. that's the retroactive date through february 29th, 2024. is that correct? that sounds correct to me. thank you. i don't see any other name on the roster. vice chair mendelman. thank you. chair chan. good to see you, doctor. i'd like to be added as a co sponsor. great. thank you. and with that, mr. clerk, let's go to public comment. yes, madam chair, members of the public wish to speak on this site are

joining us in person. should line up now for those listening remotely, press star three to enter the speaker line and for those already in the queue, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that will be your signal to begin your comments. mr. phil, good morning. i think i said yesterday the key is going to become too sorry about that. uh, declare if any, conflict of interest. that's it. otherwise you can get transparency for anything you do. so you have to push this idea responsibly. so declare conflict of interest, if any. and there is automatically some. so thank you much for your comments. seeing no further speakers here in the chamber. and madam chair, we have no speakers in the queue. thank you. seeing no, no more public comment. public comment is now closed. and with that i would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and the roll call. please and on that motion to forward this

resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation. vice chair mandelman middleman. i member safai safai absent chair chan a chan. we have two eyes with member safai absent. thank you. the motion passes and item number two. item number two is a resolution approving the terms and conditions and authorizing the execution of the no cost project. specific maintenance agreement with the state of california department of transportation for san francisco public utilities commission on a commission ongoing maintenance of its proposed improvements at 18 location within caltrans right of way along a six mile section of state road 35 south of state road 92, in san mateo county for the southern skyline boulevard ridge trail extension project subject to board of supervisors approval. 100. the charter members of the public have joined us remotely and wish to comment. press star three to enter speaker line hey promptly indicate that your raised your hand and when the system

indicates you have been unmuted, there will be a signal to begin your comments. madam chair. thank you. and today we have mary deacon, project manager from sfpuc. good morning. good morning. board members. i am here today to advise you to recommend and approval of this maintenance agreement between the sfpuc and caltrans. it's a project specific no cost maintenance agreement between sfpuc, as i said, caltrans for the southern skyline boulevard ridge trail extension. i want to go to the next slide. this project is located in san mateo county, t on peninsula, the watershed property. it is the maintenance agreement applies to a portion of the project which is east of skyline boulevard, otherwise known as route 35. that is a portion of which a

portion of the project is will be constructed on the caltrans right of way. the project itself will construct six miles of multi-use trail south of route 92, as well as a universal access loop adjacent to the five field cahill trail, all north of 92. the project improvements include road construction of the two segment of trail, the portion north of 92, as well as the six mile south of 92, supporting infrastructure, including parking lots, bathrooms, a pedestrian bridge secured fencing say a pedestrian bridge and trailhead. amenities

some of those, that's all south of 92, north of 92. there are similar improvements, but this, as i said before, this maintenance agreement applies only to the approved the improvements south of 92 and adjacent to skyline boulevard. we have 18 locations within the caltrans right of way where we either have an access road or a vehicular gateway. segments of retaining wall, little bits of fencing, little bits of trail, one end of the pedestrian bridge that fall within the caltrans right of way in order to secure a encroachment permit for construction of the project at caltrans requires that we enter into a maintenance agreement

with them for the duration of the life of the asset. so for more than ten years, this agreement will not. it is really at no cost to the puc. we will maintain our the assets constructed under by the project as we have been for some of the existing assets like maintenance driveways that currently exist right. so the cost of maintaining those assets is, is part of the sfpuc water enterprises operations budget. so i'm here today. next slide to ask that you recommend this item to the full board for approval. thank you. we appreciate it. we understand that this is just this is a part of sfpuc ongoing capital improvements, maintenance cost inclusive in

that budget, which will probably see this coming budget year. now, supervisor saphi, thank you. so is there anyone here from caltrans? there is not. so who's going to be doing the majority of work? is it puc or you all or caltrans? the puc will construct the project. the vegetation management along within the right of way will continue to be caltrans responsibility. we and the puc will maintain pieces of asphalt gates and fences that are constructed as the assets constructed as part of the project. the reason that i ask is because a significant amount of my district has close hundred 80 parts of 101 and caltrans has not been a good partner in maintaining that area. they've

started to increase that more recently. we've really pushed them over the last year and a half. so i just wonder what your experience has been like with caltrans and are they do you believe they'll be able to fulfill that? i mean, it seems like there's no other option for you. the other option would be for them to pay you and have puc do the maintenance. is that something that you've considered ? um, no, no, it's not. and i do have john fournier from the natural resources and land management division here. his, his staff have have are responsible for the maintenance in that location. and he's the better person in to speak to the historic experience with caltrans and whether they're meeting their obligations to maintain their property. that would be good. is he in the audience? he is on the. oh, okay, great. let's yeah, why don't we hear from him? yes good

morning. can you hear me okay? we can hear you loud and clear. very good. yes. john fournier. i'm a water operations analyst with the puc. i support our our team on the peninsula watershed . um, as you're as you may be aware, caltrans has significant assets on the peninsula. watershed this particular stretch of highway 35 being one of them is and they're they're very active out there on their their easement on their right of way. they do perform vegetation management, litter erosion control, and they also work on their hardscapes out there, their guardrails. recently in the last 5 to 6 years have been improved. so, you know, we have every every confidence they'll continue with that same that same effort and we'll be able to he's been i mean we just had i was actually shocked at coming into work the other morning. they had caltrans had just

decided to cut down probably about ten trees along a stretch , which they said it was because of the apec conference. they said it was because of major staining, the branches falling into the bart right away. but those trees had been there for 30, 40 years. so i just want how are they dealing with tree maintenance in the area that that. yes so we can speak to that from 90 to south to our our property boundary. they do regular our hazard inspection tree hazard inspection and they do to ameliorate and remove or alter hazardous trees in that segment of right of way that abuts our property on the peninsula watershed. okay, great. just it's good to hear that you're having a better experience than we have here inside the boundaries of san francisco. so good to hear that you feel confident about it.

thank you. thank you, madam chair. thank you. seeing no more name on the roster, let's go to public comment. yes. members of the public wish to speak on item number two and are joining us in person. should line up now. and for those listening remotely, press star three to enter the speaker line and for those already in the queue, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that'll be your signal to begin your comment. mr. phil i'm going to have to repeat that several times. so no matter if the project is good or not, you must declare who pays you to do that. so basically declare if a conflict of interest. otherwise you are working in opacity, which means that you are in darkness so you can't achieve something with the vision that clear, like you know , positive. so i don't know. you must declare your conflict of interest. thank you much for your comments. seeing no further speakers here in the chamber. and madam chair, we have no speakers in the queue. thank

you. seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed and i would like to move this item to full board with recommendation. and with that, a roll call please. and on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with the positive recommendation. vice chair mandelman mandelman i member safai. i sapphire chair chan i chan i. we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes and mr. clerk, please call item number three. yes. item number three is a resolution reauthorizing the public utilities commission's cost for clean power participation in the joint powers authority, consisting of community choice aggregators with a not to exceed amount of approximately 4.7 million for a duration of 25 years from january 1st, 2024 through december 31st, 2048. members of the public have joined us remotely and wish to comment. press star three to enter the speaker line, he promptly indicate that you raised your hand and when the system indicates you have been unmuted, there will be a signal to begin your comments. madam chair. thank you and today we

have. oh, hi. michael himes from deputy assistant general manager for clean power from sfpuc. thanks for being here. thank you and good morning, supervisor myers. mike himes. i'm the deputy manager in the power enterprise of the sfpuc responsible for clean power sf thank you for the slides. i'm here today to seek your support for a resolution that would authorize clean power payment of its share of the general and administrative costs of the clean of the california community. power agency in 2021, the commission and the board of supervisors authorized clean power to join california community power, a new joint powers agency of community choice aggregators like clean power sf to be able to conduct joint procurement of energy resources and services. the resolution before you today would authorize clean power sf to pay for general and

administrative costs in the not to exceed amount of $100,000 per year. it would also authorize payment for a period of 25 years with a 5% annual escalator. the sfpuc commission approved this proposal on june 27th. next slide, please. california community power, known as cc power, was formed in 2021 to combined to combine community choice aggregators purchasing power to for renewable energy supply and related programs and services. clean power became a member in april of 2021, following approval from both the commission and the board of supervisors. cc power currently has nine member organizations representing over 3 million electricity customer accounts across almost 150 municipalities, spanning from humboldt county to santa barbara county. as a public agency. cc

power is subject to the brown act, with all of its board meetings open to the public and with agendas and meeting minutes posted to its website, which we've identified on the slide here. next slide. cc power membership provides clean power sf with the opportunity city, but not the obligation to participate in larger clean energy projects that it may not otherwise be possible to procure or be cost effective on its own member ship also allows for broader collaboration on initiatives that might benefit from a scaled or regional approach. membership does not commit clean power to participate in any specific projects or purchase any services from cc power. since joining cc power in 2021, clean power has of ratepayers have benefited from the joint procurement of new long lead time energy resource projects to date, with the approval of the

commission and the board clean power efforts participating in the purchase of energy and capacity from four projects. sites procured by cc power through competitive solicitations, and that includes two long duration energy storage projects, rps as well as two geothermal will provide acts together. these procure amounts will support clean power compliance with california public utilities commission orders to procure certain types and volumes of renewable energy . next slide the cc power board adopted a strategic business plan in december 2020 to focused on these key actions hiring a full time general general manager. this was completed earlier this year implementing committed projects and building organizational capacity for further collaboration among the membership. and for example, this includes conduct a build it right workshop with stakeholders

that is scheduled for this november. our staff will be participating in this workshop and will be advocating for principles as adopted by our commission and resolution 20 3-0138 in support of transparency, environmental accountability and labor standards. and lastly, the strategic plan also calls for adding to cc powers, a portfolio of projects, programs and services where and when beneficial to members. this includes continuing to assist members to meet current and future regulatory requirements and identifying opportunities for efficiency in providing customer programs. to implement the strategic business plan in the near term. cc power projects a total fiscal year 2324 budget of approximately $760,000. this

budget is comprised of staffing services and operations of. $585,000 and contribution to operating reserves. of $175,000. a clean power. have share of this year's $760,000 budget is about 85,000. the $100,000 not to exceed amount provides a little headroom for unexpected costs that may come up during the year. so the sfpuc is asking for your support to set clean power ups, not to exceed general and administrative payment to california community power at $100,000 per year with a 5% per year escalation for 25 years. the 25 year duration of this request is intended to align with clean power efforts excuse me, with clean power sfs commitments, project commitments that have already been made with cc power. the projects that i referred to earlier. next slide please. that concludes my

prepared remarks. i'm happy to take any questions you may have . okay. thank you. director hine . morning supervisors nick menard from the bla. item three is a resolution that approves clean power participation, participation costs with the california choice. sorry, the california community power joint powers authority. those costs are not to exceed approximately $4.8 million over 25 years, starting in january 2024, when the board approved that clean power is participation in the jpa in 2020. it also approved an underlying participation agreement which provided for the equal sharing of all the members of the administrative costs and also allowed approved approximately $50,000 per year as encounters 21, 22 and 23 for those administrative costs. so

this is essentially approving an increase in the annual spending from $50,000 to $100,000, plus an inflation escalator of 5% going forward for the next 25 years. we recommend approval. thank you, vice chair mendelman . thank you, chair chan, and thank you to all the folks at puc and on successive generations of board boards of supervisors who worked on clean power sf. i think it is something the city can be proud of. i think community choice aggregation is something that california can be proud of. i don't think this should be an orphan item, so i'm happy to put my name on as a as a sponsor. great. thank you. i do have a question. i both at the local agency formation commission as well as a puc commission, had a resolution particularly about the participation of community choice aggregation for clean

power sf to make sure that, you know, we encourage other counties to, to consider and adopt the labor and environmental justice framework for their procurement process. will we be continuing as we participating with with this conversation and be part of this coalition, which i appreciate and i think i am supportive of, but will we be continuing to make sure that time and time again we really bring this up with with the labor and environmental justice framework, with these procurement? yes. thank you for your question. chair chan and the answer is absolutely staff will be following the direction of our commission in the resolution i referred to before in all discussions we have at cc power and we're looking forward to a fruitful conversation with a variety of stakeholders at the november workshop i referred to that will be very much focused

on those issues. great. i look forward to hearing back and see how the progress is being made and which again i concur with. vice chair mandelman, thank you so much for all the work that you're doing. i look forward to seeing this up and down the state. and with that, i don't see any other names on the roster. let's go to public comment. yes, members of the public wish to speak on this resolution are joining us in person. should line up now. and for those listening remotely, press star three to enter the speaker line and please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted, that'll be your signal to begin your comments. mr. phil thank you. you know, my mission, generally speaking, because i've been speaking to the board for many times, again, okay, no clean power. hsf comes with a clean record first to have a clean, clean record, you need transparency. you need to define your objectives that is transparency means you need to declare if any conflict of interest. i'm going to lock the situation, guys, so you won't get away with it. i mean, nobody

you declare your conflict of interest. otherwise you don't want transparency. c it means that you a continue and promote the mess we are in today because of that, right? that's it. transparency means you declare if where are your conflicts of interest? that's it. thank you much for comments. seeing no further speakers here in the chamber. and madam chair, we have no speakers in the queue. thank you. seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed and with that, colleagues, i would like to move this item to full board with recommendation. and with that a roll call please. and on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with the positive recommendation . vice chair mandelman mandelman i member safai suffi church and i chan we have three eyes. thank you. the motion passes and next please, mr. clerk, call item four, five and six together. yes items four through six horror

resolutions retroactively authorizing the office of the district attorney for the following. item four is to accept and expand the grant in the amount of approximately 1 million from the california department of insurance for the workers compensation insurance fraud program for the grant period of july 1st, 2023 through june 30th, 2024. item five is to renew a current agreement with the california victim compensation board for a revolving fund in the amount of $75,000 to establish a process to pay expenses on an emergency basis when the claimant would suffer a substantial hardship if the payment was not made and when the payment would help the claimant with an immediate need for the period of july first, 2023, through june 30th, 2026, and item number six is to accept and expend a grant in the amount of approximately 92,000 for each of separate three annual periods of july. first 2023 through june 30th, 2024, 2024 to 2025, and 2025 through 2026 for a total

not to exceed amount of approximately 275,000 from the california victim compensation board for the grant period of july 1st, 2023 through june 30th, 2026, to continue the criminal restitution compact should the parties agree to an amendment as allowed under the provisions of the grant agreement. members of the public who have joined us remotely and wish to comment on these resolutions press star three to enter the speaker line. a prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand and when the system indicates you have been unmuted, that will be your signal to begin your comments. madam chair. thank you, mr. clerk. and today we have verbal presentation by tina nunez for item four. and then i think monifa willis for item five and six. and both are from the district attorney's office. welcome. the floor is yours. thank you. good morning. and thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. my name is tina nunez ober and i am the managing attorney for the economic crimes unit at the da's office. my team specializes in

the investigation and prosecution of various types of fraud. every year we apply for and ■we receive for our workers comp insurance fraud program, a grant from the california department of insurance, part of our grant process is that we obtain this resolution from the board. the grant funds primarily fund our salaries and benefits for da investigators and prosecutors assigned to these very often complex and litigation intensive cases. through this grant, we're able to fund two da investigators and partially fund the salaries of three days insurance fraud impacts every person who lives, works or owns a business in san francisco. as we've seen for consumers, the cost of products rise, the cost of premiums go up for employers, and insurance fraud. it affects the city because the city is self-insured. so we handle many

workers. comp fraud refers from the city in addition, workers comp fraud also creates an unfair and unlevel playing field for the honest business owners of san francisco who are paying their true premiums as it also hurts injured workers who unfortunately may not be receiving the medical care that they are entitled to under the workers comp system and that the system is intended to provide them. in addition to paying salaries and benefit outs for our staff, the fraud grants, also the grants go to pay for necessary training for us. without that money, we would not be able to attend the training that we that we attend throughout the year. fraud schemes. as anyone knows, who watches netflix and watches tv, these scams are constantly evolving and we need training throughout our calendar year to keep us informed of the current trends and with the goal of staying ahead of the fraudsters

, which is always very hard because they quickly adapt to our tactics and our methods of detecting their fraud. and with that, i welcome any questions and i thank the supervisors. thank you. quick question. what is the average workload per per deputy district attorney involving this case? and on my team, our caseloads actually are smaller because our cases are so complex. and so labor intensive. right now, i don't have the exact statistics on how many cases is my team members have because we'll have cases at various stages. they take their cases. we do what's called vertical prosecution. so we keep our cases from the very beginning. our investigators will investigate. the attorneys will work with the investigators , and we'll file our cases. and then they keep them all the way through to the very end till they're sentenced. so we can have cases at various stages. sure. look forward to learning more about that in terms of caseload, just averaging how

many cases that actually happening in san francisco about worker compensation and fraud on an annual basis. so either like the cases overall all just reported or perhaps caseload, but probably focused more on just reported cases. so much is going on. so we really appreciate all your work and we do have. thank you. and we do have all of those statistics. we report to the california department of insurance three times a year on our statistics. there's an internal audit that happens all the time in every 2 to 3 years. we're thoroughly audited by the department of insurance. and if the if the committee would like any of our stats, those will be available and we can make them available to madam chair, if you would like them. we would love it. assembly again. it's typically when things come through, we would have budget and legislative analysts to help us sort some of the information out . and in this case, just love to learn more about how it works. so so thank you so much. next,

we have monifa willis. good morning, everybody. thanks for giving me the time and space to address the floor. my name is monifa willis. i'm the chief of victim services with the district attorney's office. i will start by addressing item number five, which is the revolving fund agreement. victim services. we respond to every victim of violent crime in san francisco, whether the case is charged or uncharged, whether it has been reported to the police or not. we receive our cases by way of police departments sending referrals, walk ins from individuals and just community based organizations that may have learned of a victimization in respects to revolving funds. and it is a grant funded project that victim services division has held for 20 years. our division uses these funds to

expedite emergency funds that otherwise would be covered by calvcb. that's the california compensation board. these directly support the urgent financial needs of victims of violent crime. for example, all funeral and burial expenses is urgent. relocation needs and crime scene cleanups and medical care advocates assist victims with filling out the calvcb application while simultaneously requesting revolving funds from our office if needed. this speeds up the funds release by approximately two weeks to ensure that victims after a horrible, tragic event are then not further harmed financially. we calvcb then reimburses our office for funds paid out through the funding source within 30 days at just a small data within this fiscal year, we've paid out a little bit over $3,000 from our revolving fund to date. i'll pause for

questions on that item and then i'll move to number six. i don't see any name on the roster. i'm we're ready for the restitution . great. so item number six, the criminal restitution compact. our restitution efforts are a state required contract that currently spans three years. it covers the staff supporting restitution collection efforts pertaining nearly one fte staff member who solely works on restitution matters as it's currently budgeted, and our annual budget process and the way it actually works is that staff member looks at any calvcb claims that have been paid out and then he is dedicated to recuperating the funds paid out to victims by calvcb. so what that means is he ensures restitution hearings are calendared. he notifies the defense, he completes the legal forms along with the ada and any

follow up tracking that's required on restitution matters related to calvcb. in addition, we use him in our office as a huge resource around restitution marsy's rights in other words, the victims rights around restitution for training staff and currently we per 2023 calendar year, he has. $117,000 in calvcb rest stitution orders . at some point in the stage of recuperation. thank you. we see earlier this year we submitted a letter of inquiry to both the police department and also district attorney's office. we really appreciate all the responses that we receive from both the pd and the district attorney's and noted that the district attorney's office in. 2022 alone serve almost 10,000 victims across board. and this seems like different categories

as we will have a very specific hearing tomorrow. the public safety committee. i look forward to seeing you. hopefully you or someone from the district attorney's office to help us walk us through about again, victims compensation and restitution in but specifically for victims of gun violence. so in this case that like this when we are talking about just in general restitution in compact does that mean it's just like all crimes and all categories and just right here and that's what we're discussing? or is this like very specific? like. yeah, this is very specific. like these are crimes that qualify for calvcb compensation in calvcb compensation requirements are violent crimes only. yeah. and that's what it stands for, right? violent crime. okay, great. thank you. with that, i don't see any other

name on the roster. let's go to public comment. thank you. thank you. yes. members of the public wish to speak on these three items and are joining us in person. should line up now. and for those listening remotely, press star three to enter the speaker line and please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and they'll be signaled to begin your comments. mr. phillips i hope it's i'm no, i believe you are honest like you are really intend to do good. but again, you must declare if you have a conflict of interest, you can't avoid it if you don't look, it's a mess. i mean, come on, whatever. here you are dealing with something, but it's a mess. so that's because the thing is, in opacity, you have to be clear, transparent. you can't have an evolution. you can't see the end of the tunnel here. if you are not clear, it starts with declaring for anything. i declare not having any conflict

of interest. my mission is to make everybody happy. i just follow the orders from something that can't be stopped. so please, now join the party here because it's going to be beautiful after. but we must work step by step. we declare for whatever we do or conflict of interest because they are there, no question. otherwise we wouldn't be in such a mess. that forced me to have this mission. have a good day. i mean, i'll be back. thank you much for your comments. seeing no further speakers here in the chamber. and madam chair, we have no speakers in the queue. thank you. seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed and vice chair mendelman . thank you, madam chair. thanks to the folks in the da's office, i'd like to be added as a co-sponsor. fourth of six. great. all three items co-sponsored by vice chairman lowman and with that, we'd like to move all three items to full board with recommendation. a roll call, please. and on that motion to forward all three resolutions to the full board

with a positive recommendation. vice chair mandelman a mandelman i member safai safai church and i tonight we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes. thank you. and mr. clerk, please call item seven and eight and nine together. yes. item number seven through nine are resolutions authorizing the department of adult probation to accept and expand the following grants. both item number seven and nine is in the amount of 100,000 from the california emergency manager agency for probation specialized supervision program. federally funded through the violence against women act. item nine, retroactive for the period of october first, 2022 through september 30th, 2023, and item seven for the period of october first, 2023 through september 30th, 2024. item number eight is in the amount of approximately 500 and 7500 dollars from the board of state and community corrections for the mobile

probation service centers grant program funded through the budget act of 2022 for the period of may 1st, 2023 through september 30th, 2027. members of the public have joined us remotely and wish to comment. press star three to entered speaker line. a prompt will indicate that your raise your hand and when the system indicates you have been unmuted, there will be a signal to begin your comments. madam chair, thank you, mr. clerk. and today we have a verbal presenter by tara's madison, deputy director of finance and administration. thank you so much for being here. and the floor is yours. thank you. good morning, supervisors. tara's madison deputy director for the adult probation department. and we respectfully request your approval of these three resolutions. item seven and nine are similar resolutions, both are for the domestic violence grant funds, and it's about $100,000. it covers a portion of a deputy probation officer officer's salary about it

depends, but about 30% or so. these funds are used to enhance field supervision and also to do outreach to the domestic violence victims. this this is actually federally funded from the violence against women act. however it's administered through the california emergency management agency. so it comes through the state. it is actually already included in our the appropriation for this year for 23, 24, 24, 25, and also item nine, it was included in the appropriation at 22, 23 and 2324. however our cal, the emergency the state has recent notified us that they are now requesting separate board resolution. so it isn't enough just to be included in the aau anymore. and then the third resolution is a new grant in the amount of $507,000. this is a new program by the board of

state and community corrections and this program is to establish mobile probation service centers in different counties. the goal of this new grant is to make sure that we can assist probationers, particularly those that are unhoused, by bringing the services to them and then working, particularly with those who are unable to meet current probation requirements. and i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you. i do. and this is actually somewhat exciting to see that there's the new aspect of probation and with the mobile probation service that i see that with this grant, you're able to purchase vehicles and equipment and to allow you to have telecommunication lines. could you elaborate a little bit more about, you know, what what does that look like? is it just mobile, like just allowing probation officer driving around ? or what would that how would that mobile or the vehicles be

equipped, equipped with? yes, thank you for the question. so the goal is to purchase two vans and they're actually going to be mobile probation service centers . so basically what we would do in the office, we're bringing it out to the community and to those neighborhoods to actually work with probationers. so we'll set up a van. the technology or the it requester to have laptops so they can do everything that we would normally do. we have a request for supplies because it will be set up as an office. so it isn't necessarily driving around, but we will drive to the location. but it's actually to establish a probation center in different neighborhoods. and we will focus on those neighborhoods where our clients are primarily housed or unhoused. yeah, in the different area. i think it is the, the thing that i'm seeing the pandemic is bringing us is the reconcile recognition that we must embrace the technology of

telecommunications and recognizing that with this technology allows us to actually go to where people are and what they need. and be able to support them and bring along with the services with us. and instead of tracking them down and bringing them back in into the probation center and have them be seated or have them reported back in person. but this way we're able to find them and identify them where where they're located and making services a lot more accessible to the people who really need them. so i appreciate it. it's very excited to hear about this and look forward to learning more about individuals served with this new service and efficiency. hopefully that also ease the burden for the probation officers in terms of their caseload and tracking individuals. so thank you with that. thank you. and i don't see

any other name on the roster so let's go to public comment. yes madam chair, members of the public wish to speak on these three item and they're joining us in person to line up now. and for those listening remotely, press star three to enter the speaker line, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that'll be your signal to begin your comments. okay, so that's going to be the last one. maybe it's education what i'm talking about. basically it looks like very presumptuous from me to say it's education. so how to do good business and to produce positive, positive society, you need to declare why you do it. you need to declare if you have a conflict of interest. how can i make it more easy to understand otherwise you go nowhere. so it starts for you to take process slowly, but at some point push it because it's in your own best interest at the end of the day. otherwise you're going to be unhappy and now, you know, because i just told you

that it will be so. so stop. you are in darkness here. we are in dark ness, so we must rise. the declare your conflicts of interest. but that's it. thank you much for your comments. seeing no further speakers here in the chamber. and madam chair, we have no speakers in the queue . thank you. seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed and colleagues, i would like to move item seven, eight and nine to full board with recommends action and with that mr. clark a roll call, please. yes. on that motion to forward items seven, eight and nine to the full board with the positive recommendation of vice chair mandelman. madam an i member safai safai church. i chan i we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes. to us to all three. okay okay. noted members, i thank you. and with that and mr. clerk, please call item ten and 11 together.

yes item numbers ten and 11. her resolutions determining and declaring that the public interest and necessity demand the following and that a related costs are necessary or convenient for the foregoing purposes to be financed through the bonded indebtedness in an amount not exceed 300 million. hawthorne ising landlords to pass through 50% of the resulting property tax increase to residential tenants under the administrative code, providing for the levy and collection of taxes to pay both principal and interest on such bonds. affirm the determination under the california environmental quality act in finding that the proposed bonds are consistent with the general plan in the eight priority policies of the planning code. item number ten determines and declares that the public interest and necessity demand the construction reconstruction, development, acquisition improvement, rehabilitation, preservation and repair of rental affordable housing projects and the expansion of homeownership

opportunities through the down payment assistance loan program. and item 11 determines and declares that the public interest and necessity demand only the construction development, acquisition and or rehabilitation of rental affordable housing projects and the amount to be financed not to exceed 300 million is subject to independent citizen oversight and regular audits. as members of the public who have joined us remotely and wish to comment on these two resolutions, press star three to enter the speaker line. a prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand and when the system indicates you have been unmuted, that will be your signal to begin your comments. madam chair. thank you, mr. clark and colleagues, i just wanted to and i see that my apologies. i see that mr. tom paulino from the mayor's office is here. and so without any objection from him that it is my understanding, you know, the conversation is gone going around this housing bond. as we can see, there are two different items involving the very same

$300 million housing bond that we are going to continue these conversations nations and i'm going to continue these two items to you. october 25th. so that we can continue with with these different ideas and hopefully we can find an amicable solution that we can bring all different elements and together in one bond. so with that said, seeing no objection from mister paulo, no from me, from the mayor's office, and i would like to open this to public comment. yes, madam chair, members of the public who wish to speak on the continuance of these resolutions and are joining us in person to line up now for those listening remotely, press star three to enter the speaker line and for those already in the queue, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that will be your cue to begin your comments . mr. felt yes, this this seems like a big, big project, right?

it's like 300 million, even though it doesn't really matter. but. conflict of interest. so what's the goal? you get it, right? yeah but take your time. yeah. come on. it's just there is a need, i think, to sort of freeze stuff for now because mistakes are keep being made. so just slow down on and that's it. but think about that. please share the information. conflict of interest. promote responsibility. that is right. thank you much for your comments. seeing no further speakers here in the chamber. and madam chair, we have no speakers in the queue. thank you. seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed. and colleagues, i would like to move these two items to continue these two items till october 25th, which is. is that the correct date, mr. clerk?

just want to make sure. yes, madam chair. that is correct. thank you. to october 25th, our october 25th budget and finance committee. and with that, a roll call, please, on that motion to continue both these resolutions as to the october 25th meeting of this committee. vice chair mandelman i mandelman i member safai. sapphire chair chan and i, we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes. and with that, do we have any other business before us today? mr. clerk. madam chair, that concludes our business. thank you so much. and with that, the meeting is adjourned.

>> when o'shaughnessy dam opened 1923, there was a grand celebration that was an achievement of ensuring san francisco's new water supply but it was the beginning of a unique collaboration between the city of san francisco and yosemite national park. >> lands around the dam are critically important. we, along with the park service have a very common goal thereof protection of that watershed, both for national park values

and water supply values in yosemite is the cub tree's premiere national park visited by millions of visitors but the protection of our watershed and the city provides significant outside funding for the national park, over $8 million a year is for trail maintenance and wilderness education and park operations and security keeping the water safe and the park a haven. >> one hundred years ago when the dam was first built, there was a different view of the environment back then, than there is today. and the dam was part of changing that view across the nation. that brings an importance to our work here at o'shaughnessy dam, how we manage this dam and manage our releases and the environment downstream, it's very important to san francisco that we need that challenge. >> for 100 years, o'shaughnessy dam and the park service ensured the bay area has clean water,

along with ongoing stewardship much our precious natural resources. >> this o'shaughnessy >> the stewardship program is a (indiscernible) based program. we work with student kind r garten through 12 grade and work with scrks fusd and (indiscernible) focus on 5 themes. sense of place, plant adapation and animal adaptation, water soil or (indiscernible) depending on the grade level and accommodations the class may need the educators work to adapt the programming to be whatever works best for the class, so they can gain activities

(indiscernible) some don't, we try to meet students where they are at and get comfortable connecting in the space and feeling a sense of ownership and safety within their (indiscernible) >> the first component of a youth stewardship program trip will be a in clasds visit where we go to the school, we give a presentation on the natural history of san francisco, we talk about the concept of a habitat, so what does a habitat contain, understood, water, shelter, space. >> children at this age, they learn best through using their senses, having the real life experience and (indiscernible) students also learn about responsibility and it is a great message for student to learn, if you take care of environment, the environment will take care of you.

>> so, when we finally get the kids outside, we have two main components to the field trips. one is going to be the restoration component where we are working on the habitat and parks by pulling out (indiscernible) or maybe watering, and then the other side of our trip is going to be the educational component, which can range from a nature walk with a sensory theme where we are talking about what we smell and hear, to a focus on plant adaptation and animal adaptations. >> (indiscernible) >> just a great opportunity for students to learn more, connect with nature, and hopefully what they learn from the youth stewardship program they can take with them for the rest of their lives, and they will appreciate their

environment more. hopefully, when they appreciate it, they take care of it more every day. >> (indiscernible) >> so every year we open the application up in the fall. interested teachers can apply for a classroom visit and up to two field trips to the city park of their choice. field trips are 2 and a half hours long and like i said, they can happen in any city park (indiscernible)

>> good morning everyone. welcome to the september 26 meeting of the san francisco county transportation authority board. i'm supervisor mandelman. i want to thank jason from sfgovtv. our clerk elija saunders. mr. clerk, would you please call the roll? chan absent. commissioner dorsey. dorsey absent. commissioner engardio. engardio present. chair mandelman, present. vice chair melgar, present. commissioner peskin, present. commissioner preston,

present. commissioner ronan, present. commissioner safai, present. commissioner stefani, present. commissioner walton, present. chair, we have quorum. >> alright. thank you mr. clerk. i think you have a public comment announcement. >> i do. for members of the public interested in par ticipating we welcome. or watch cable channel 26 or 99 depending on your provider or stream live at www.sfgovtv.org. enter access code 2661, 6292260. and press pound and pound again. you will be able to listen to the meeting in real time. when public comment is called press star 3 to be added to the queue. do not press star 3 again or you will be unmuted.

the operator will advice you are allowed to speak. calls will be taken in the order received. best practice are speak slowly and clearly and turn down the volume. public comment will be taken first from members in attendance and afterwards from remote speaker on the telephone line. commissioner chan has entered and present. thank you. >> before calling our next item, i want to invoke rule 3.26 to limit total public comment to 30 minutes. each speaker has two minutes to speak on a given item unless i endicate otherwise at the start of that item. mr. clerk, will you please call our next item? >> item 2, chair's report. information item. >> thank you mr. clerk. colleagues, as you know, september is transit month. i want to thank the san francisco transit

riders. thanks to folks on the board who attended the kick off rally september 5 and participated in various activities throughout the month. it was a joy and delight to join vice chair melgar, commissioner dorsey and director chang this past weekday along with thousands of members at the caltrain event tour of the new electric trains that operate as the caltrain electrification project opening next fall, 2024. thank you vice chair melgar for speaking on behalf of this board as well as supervisor dorsey. high speed rail at sales force transit. the ta provided (4) 100-0000 in prop k and one bay area grant fund to support the electrification project which usher quite less

polluting and faster train service serving communities along the line including the southeast sector through potential new station in the bayview. thank you commissioner walton for serving as director on the caltrain jgb working with caltrain leaders on these exciting improvements. another recent development is the legislature approval of ab645, the speed safety camera pilot bill from assembly woman laura friedman that authorize implementation of speed safety cameras in six cal cities including san francisco. i focused on the need for sfpd to step enforcement of unsafe traffic behaviors and will hold a hearing on that at our pss committee at the board of supervisors this thursday september 28 beginning at 10 a.m. thank colleagues and community members for your support on the effort. i want to thank walk sf, bay area safe

streets, commissioner peskin and commissioner dorsey and broad state wide coalition that advocated to get this speed safety camera bill to the governor's desk for signature. we need this tool along with sfpd traffic enforcement and all the other tools to counter the sad disturbing increase in severe and fatal crashes, including the tragic death of a child and two seniors in the past month alone on our streets. i submitted to governor newsom [indiscernible] vision zero strategies implementing later on this morning agenda. finally, as many of you probably all of you know and experience yourselves, san francisco has seen a steady increase in self-driving cars and now the epicenter of driverless-the california public

utility commission approved expansion of driverless av permits in san francisco. we had advocated for more limited incremental expansion out of consideration for the continued emergency response conflicts among other concerns, crews and wamo can provide driverless service in san francisco 24/7 and no restriction on the size of the fleets. crews did reduce the fleet by half following a crash with responding sf fire department truck at the request of the california dmv. thanks to city attorney david chui and staff working with our city av team to file a motion to stay and rehear the cpuc decision on the av permits. i know lots share the concerns and have questions about this topic of av policy and note this has been a state wide and national

area of discussion within the disability and labor community as well. in particular, i want to thank commissioner peskin who has been very much taking the lead on sounding the alarm on these issues. i look forward to a robust discussion on national state and local regulatory policy at that time and with that, i will conclude my remarks and i see no comments or questions, so let's see if there is any public comment. anyone in the chamber has public comment, come forward and if not, see if there is remote public comment on item 2. >> checking for remote public comment on item 2. chair, there is no public comment. >> alright. public comment on item

2 is closed. mr. clerk, please call our next item. >> item 3, executive director report. this information item. >> good morning chair, commissioners. begin my report this morning with good news that san francisco has received three caltrans sustainable transportation planning grant awards in the recent months. it was really a pleasure to hear out of the entire state wide san francisco received $2.3 million including $474 thousand to caltrain joint powers authority for climate change vulnerability study to address the impact along the caltrain corridor. in addition, bart received $515 thousand for its embarcadero structure long-term adaptation project to look to see how they might adapt their infrastructure along that corridor and are then the sfmta together with port of san francisco received over $1.3 million for

embarcadero mobility resilience plan, so those will be coordinating along the embarcadero corridor. this is a great outcome and congratulate all four agencies. thank the staff for their investment helping make san francisco infrastructure these areas more resilient. turn to outreach. just wanted to note the bayview caltrain station location study has upcoming outreach. as you recall, this is study to advance a single preferred location of the two remaining options at oak dale and evans. since the closure of paul avenue back in 2005. so, we have been advancing work on the study including preliminary station design options. seeking community input. the team presented so far to the bayview hunter point and ship yard cac and host oorlth outreach at the hunter point ymca10:30

a.m. october 14. more information can be found at the project website, sfcta.org/bayview-caltr ain. also the planning team are working on brotherhood way safety circulation plan. outreach launch this month and into negative. connecting with community based neighborhoods organizations to introduce the outreach approach and are details about the first round of outreach which begins in november. this will focus on the transportation access needs and barriers. multimodal challenges in that high need and high area traffic area focus. including pedestrian and bike access. so will be incorporating these into subsequent coordination with the state as close to the interchange of highway 1 right in the southwest sector. next, just want to

highlight district 4 community shuttle outreach. this is a shuttle to look at a business case for serving the sunset area with potentially different kinds of on demand shuttles. this could be implemented perhaps in the next year or two following the study and we are right now in the process of serving the community about trade-offs in terms of different service attributes. also include focus group with merchant senior and community based organizations. encourage folks to look for the survey, both online and contact our planning team at the transportation authority as well. we have deputy director for planning who can help engage folks who may need access to that study. we also will hope to bring that report back to you all in early 2024. turning to project delivery.

the brada light rail vehicle overhaul is complete. the overhaul of the prior fleet of 149 light rail vehicles that is being used out and bringing on the scene to replace, about there are still some of them that need to be operating so thank you to sfmta overhauling the fleet. turning to school engineering. prop k funded school audits are complete. sfmta finished walk audit reports and improvements at five schools aptos middle school [indiscernible] loten elementary, mission prep and are paul revers in district 9. 95 potential improvements across all the 5 schools, 20 have been completed.

each school does have a budget of about $50 thousand for their near term improvements. staff implemented starting in september earlier summer of 23 and anticipate completing improvements winter of 24. just want to thank them again. this includes measures such as signs, curb paint, roadway paint and speed humps, raised cross walks and signal timing modifications. turning to additional traffic calming in the bayview. commissioner walton i think sfmta celebrated the completion of 8 new traffic calming devices along gilman avenue and [indiscernible] that is really great news. very much needed. this is near especially bret heart element. this project is funded by a prop k grant of $3 million. golden gate avenue and laguna street paving. that project is also substantially completed. happy to report it is

$3 million grant as well from the prop k program. this would be golden gate and laguna. van ness to divisadero and haight to golden gate and turk to pine street. this is about 36 blocks of pavement renovation, construction, retrofitting of 21 curb ramps and new sidewalk construction so thank you to sfmta for that work and public works. joyce alley district 3, the lighting improvement project a very small modest one, but very key to china town has been completed. this is is to help make the sidewalk inviting and safer near gordon elementary and cable car line and new subway station at rose pac. [indiscernible] the new lighting and ta provided $500 thousand in prop aa vehicle registration fee funds to support that project.

two more. the sfmta bike rack instillation around the city is making great progress. mta completed another traunch,ic about 1400 bike racks installed with funding from the transportation fund for clean air from the air district we administer for the air district. the board approved this round back in june, so want to take a moment to highlight the progress mta continues to make and appreciate that approximately 30 percent of the racks are in equity priority communities over the last few years. members of the public can continue to request instillation of new bike racks by visiting sfmta.com/gettingaround . fulton street safety project completed the last final piece. the speed radar sign on fulton at 16 and 39, these were the final elements of the fulton

street safety project in district 1 and funded by district 1 neighborhood and tip funds from the prop k sales tax and again this started with community driven process to identify safety imprubments along fulton and installed various other improvements including painted safety zones and intersection daylighting and with bike signals along with a new paved path to golden gate park at 22 avenue for cyclists. turning to a few admin updates, i was recently privileged to attend the its australia summit in melbourne as a member of the u.s. dot sponsored federal highway delegation. included panel and discussion with europe and asia on connected and autonomous vehicles and av regulation . ologist talks btd net zero transportation policy. honored to give short talks on both topics and was able to tour

the melbourne tunnel project at 9 kilometer 4 station subway under construction in the heart of melbourne and shared a lot of lessens learned from our tunnel projects as part of that exchange. the long time director of communication eric young departed after 10 years. he is now moving to the port of san francisco where we wish him all the best and so want to thank eric for his tenure and contributions and also note we are now recruiting for a successor director of communication and more information on that position is on the website, sfcta.orgment thank you so much. >> thank you director chang. let's open your report to public comment. if anyone in the chamber who would like to talk about item 3, come forward and if there is no one, let's see if we have remote public comment on item 3.

>> there is public comment. let me go to the caller. welcome caller, your two minutes begins now. >> good morning commissioners. i just want to share that i'm extremely excited about the director chang's visit to the melbourne project and i look forward hearing more about what she learned down there. in closing, i would like to echo a comment about eric young. i had the opportunity to interact with eric multiple times over the last 10 years. [indiscernible] launched the autonomous shuttles on the treasure island and as always eric was [indiscernible] he was knowledgeable and extremely helpful. i will miss him and wish him the best.

thank you. >> thank you caller. there is no additional public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 3 is closed. mr. clerk, please call item 4. >> item 4, approve the minutes of september 12, 2023 meeting. action item. >> any public comment on the minutes in the chambers? not seeing any. let's see if there is remote public comment on item 4? >> there is no remote public comment on item 4. >> okay. public comment item 4 is closed. motion to approve the minutes? moved by preston, seconded by dorsey. mr. clerk, please call the roll on item 4. [roll call]

>> there are 11 ayes, the minutes are approved. >> thank you mr. clerk. please call our consent aagenda items 5-9. >> 5-9 comprise consent. staff ist noplanning to present on these items, but available for questions. is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? >> moved by walton, seconded by melgar and think we can talk that same house same call without objection. the consent agenda is passed. >> i think we have jen wong, the sfmta

quick-build program manager. >> hello and good morning. jen wong. i am a transportation planner and also the vision zero quick-build program manager at san francisco mta. today i'll provide a update on various projbects of this program. as i was initially invited to by members of the cac. i'll begin with

valencia street. >> hold up. you have a slide show you are trying to show? >> yes. >> there we go.

>> do we want to take a couple minute break to-- >> sfgov, can you please share the slides? >> are we happy? we can see slides. it is not the ideal format, but do we want

to just go with it? that seems excellent. we had one moment of like--was exactly right. there you go. you got it. you are good.

success. take it away. quickly-- >> alright. great. want to make sure you got the visual here. so, i'll begin with valencia street. again, this pilot project was approved back in april and had been recently completed just last month. this was really a all hands on deck effort to install new protected center running bike ways on valencia street for the first time in the associated on-street parking and loading changes. the project involved a lot of new materials that were new for san francisco streets that were especially ordered just for this project that includes, the k71 balereds and black and white bus curbs. these are materials that are very new for us. and it seems there might be a delay.

i will say that, valencia has been in the spotlight for construction, we do have a couple other projects that were in construction or finished construction. so, we have the bay shore boulevard quick-build project that starts construction last month and now finishing up any day now and this project installed curb side protected bikeways and traffic calming between silver and oakdale. on lake merced, construction started at the top of this month and one of the longest corridors. our construction will be coming in at various phases and taken all together some of the really exciting elements of this project include a protected bikeway protected with concrete kirks, traffic calming and new bus boarding islands.

next up, we have the lincoln quick-build project. that is currently preparing for construction and this project nearly covers the entire southern boarder of golden gate park where we will install new cross walks, painted safety zones, left turn calming, treatments, signal up grades and timing improvements to help people cross the street. during the open house of this project, over 800 comments collected from over 550 respondents. also, waiting in the wings we have the quick-build project which had a open house in april and approved by mta board in july. this project involves protected bikeways and that serves as a valuable connection between the great highway and lake merced as mentioned earlier.

similar to lincoln street, lincoln way, engineers for the project are also in the process of preparing their implementation work orders. and then following slowly behind closely behind, we have a couple projects that hosted open house events earlier this year. the open house really is a major milestone for projects since it is a opportunity for the teams to collect feedback on the proposed designs and make adjustments in response before pursuing final approvals. hyde street is a project where two alternatives were shared during the open house period, and since then the team has been coming over on the feedback collected and they will be making their final recommendations to the mta board as soon as next month.

the 17 street project also held an open house earlier this year and are also preparing for mta board approval this fall, and scope of the project includes upgrading existing bike lanes to protected bike lanes and the team is also working very closely with major institutions along that corridor. so, the project i presented so far are meant to highlight fresh and major milestones and exciting news and recent news. there are many other corridor projects that are in the works so of particular note i wanted to call out these two. oak street and [indiscernible] well under way in design phase and conducting a lot of outreach. the oak street project takes place alongside the pan handle and southern street focus on the segments between market and polk street.

protected bikeways will be key elements for both of these projects. for these ongoing projects and for really any of our quick-build projects, i truly invite everyone to visit sfmta.com/quickbuild to find more information there. and lastly, i just wanted to also share with you all the quick-build pool kit project and this is a new initiative that we are undertaking, which is a effort to install proven core safety treatments on all remaining parts of the high injury network where we still have remaining work to do. based on the study completed we are implementing tools like pedestrian head-start timing and painted safety zones at targeted and specific locations and will be tracking our progress

with a mapping tool in order to visualize and quantify our progress of implementation. we expect this effort to be in the range of 5 to $6 million and we will be returning this fall with a funding allocation request for this effort specifically. i will say that our design work has begun. we currently have a team of 4 engineers who are assigned to complete designs. we are committed to carrying out this initiative along with completing our quick-build corridor projects funded and in progress. thanks to the support of this board and are thank you and that concludes my update. >> thank you. commissioner ronan. >> thank you so much. thank you for the

presentation. i just want to acknowledge very sadly that just last week a 80 year old man was hit and killed crossing valencia street and became the 14th pedestrian in the city. of the 14, 5 have been in district 9, so this is extremely important to me and moving quickly as in the name is extremely important to me. i do want to just clear up any concerns that the pedestrian death was not related to the bike lanes. the vehicle was turning left on valencia street, and the bike lanes were not involved in any way shape or form, so i want to make that clear.

the original quick-build plan was to finish all it the projects by december this year, by the end of this calendar year, and several of those that are underway are in district 9. are you on track to complete those projects by those timelines and if not, why and what do you need to get on track to meet that goal? or that commitment you made to san franciscans? >> i'll begin by reiterating our commitment to completing our quick-build projects by the end of 2024. for any specific projects, in district 9 or other districts really happy to connect you directly with the project team who will have a more detailed understanding of all the complexities and

design challenges or outreach efforts they have been conducting. qu know every quick-build project is very special and they do have a tailored process in terms of who they are reaching out to. the level of engagement and just based on its geography and location. there are very particular constraints and details they need to work with. i'm happy to look into the specific projects. >> sorry. did you say whether or not you are on track to complete all the projbects by thend of the year? >> yes. all of the projects, yes. >> okay. how are you communicating progress for each project? i know advocates have asked for a public dashboard, something where we could actually follow in real time where you are at with

each of the individual projects. >> yeah. the individual projects all have project teams assigned to them and do tailored communication to their stakeholders and to the community groups they are in touch with, so those all usually through e-mail updates. could be one on one stakeholder meetings joining on presentations and providing those updates. in terms of programatically, we do send monthly updates out to a e-mail subcription list where we have i think-in the hundreds of subcribers. we also will push those updates out on our quick-build landing page. again, that is smta.com/quickbuild. i know a lot of our quick-build is one segment of the work we do and a lot of that

information once completed does get rolled up into a higher level vision zero dashboard that quantifys the amount of treatments that we are installing. >> how many projects total are there? left to be completed? >> let's see--i believe there are currently 15 corridor projects remaining. these are the more complex sort of corridor redesign sort of efforts. >> so, the only way to find out and get updates on where each one of these 15 projects is at is to go on to the website and track down--there is no one area that we could go to that has all 15 projects and where they are in the completion process? >> there is. so, on that web page, we do have a monthly

table that we will update that summarizes the entirety of all the projects. >> okay. can you send that link to me so i can check that out and make sure that that's widely known and shared? >> certainly. >> okay, appreciate this. again, with 5 of the 14 pedestrian deaths this year in district 9, i feel more urgency then ever before. i don't know why we are moving backwards, but it is really concerning. let's hope that our governor signs the latest bill to reduce speed and get cameras up. we know that's by far one of the most effective ways of insuring that our drivers are driving safer, but these numbers are just awful. they are absolutely

awful, and we got to double down and are make sure we are moving forward and not backwards. thank you. >> thank you commissioner ronan. if you dont mind, i want to try asking that a little more or again because i think one thing that is confusing to me and maybe i just don't quite get how this is supposed to work, but at least as i understand it, it is more then 50 miles of quick-build work left to do in a year plus a few months, and i guess that works out to like a little more then 3 miles a month, and you are saying we are committed to it, but--am i thinking-that seems like quite a lift. is it quite a lift? is that realistic that you think you can get those 50 plus miles done in the next year? is that the wrong way to think about it?

can you maybe--i think the same question, but--if you could-the scale seems quite significant, but maybe is the scale consistent with the pace--i don't think it is consistent with the pace so far, but if it is--i am misunderstanding. >> i can add a little clarification to that. so, i think there's two concurrent efforts that we are undertaking. one effort is the more complex corridor style projects where we are redesigning streets from curb to curb. the second effort, which was the summary of my last slide is our quick-build tool kit project and we are really counting on the quick-build tool kit on maximizing our coverage and hitting all the locations of that 50 miles remaining.

again- >> you will switch them in some way? >> yes, we will. just making sure that they all have the core safety elements and more, so there are locations that we will evaluate for treatments that are little more specialized, such as turn calming treatments, painted safety zones and signalized upgrades. >> sorry, can we look at that slide with the basic tool kit touches?

>> please turn on the slides. thank you. >> i can also name the treatments displayed on that slide. that includes [indiscernible] daylight, continental crosswalks, signal retiming for pedestrian head starts, signal retiming for a slower walking speed. painted safety zones and also turn calming treatments. >> the notion is something in that neighborhood goes to each of these high

injury but the extent of it is to be determined? >> we'll evaluate all the remaining locations for all of these treatments. not just one. >> so it seems you might--is that a good call? because you are now trying to give some kind of coverage in lots and lots of places, but might not be done or close to done with that corridor. >> the goal is implementation. >> okay. i'm sure we'll hear from the advocacy community, their thoughts on that. vice chair melgar. >> thank you chair mandelman. so, i am so glad for this update. thank you very much for the presentation. i'm thrilled we are on pace to complete the quick-build on lake

merced boulevard. there have been two deaths on lake merced since i have been supervisor due to high speeds, and also to [indiscernible] which is right at the boarder of supervisor engardio and my district in front of the zoo which gets a lot of traffic and the way to the great highway. i am really glad about that. there is some things that were not in your presentation that i worry about quite a bit as well. i'm wondering if that will be on the website that you talked about or it f there is a way to figure out timeline. i'm specifically worried about frita callow [indiscernible] because we have had a committee of residents working on the ocean avenue stuff and the

mta did go to the residents about-which i totally support. the integration of that with everything else we are doing on ocean avenue is really important. in both [indiscernible] and freeda callow are in front of multiple schools. city college on one side. active construction and [indiscernible] and in the morning and in the afternoon in front of rearden there is all kinds of stuff in multiple parents dropping off, bicycle ists and kids walking, so i'm eager to understand the timing, when that will be done and especially before we add a bunch of new residents at the balboa reservoir which is going to happen. clarenden is on a hill, people go very very fast and at least once a week i get

complaints from folks in forest [indiscernible] midtown terrace about the high speeds and lack of safety, so also eager to hear about that. even though it is not at my district, forgive me supervisor ronan, but i do take the valencia bicycle lane every day, twice a day, and i do think despite my initial skepticism, i do think it is better then it was before, however, i am wondering if we are keeping track-in the presentation you talked about new materials and you know, getting used to handling them and wondering if there is a assessment of the new materials going forward? at least a third of the ballard are damages or down. i had people in cars like turn around in front of me on my bike and it is a very very

highly trafficked bike lane now. it is a main thoroughfare now, which is great, but i also think that people behave badly and the materials we use kind of enable it. i'm wondering if we are keeping track of that, revisiting it, giving feedback if there is data that we have attached to those new materials. that was a lot of questions. sorry. >> sure. i'll start with freeda callow. i just wanted to reassure that project is well underway and the project team has been having very direct discussions with city college and i think there are very close to presenting their final proposals and will be likely going to mta board soon. some time this fall.

for clarenden avenue, that corridor is also in the works. we have a project team assigned and they will be having discussions with elementary school. that project is also closely coordinated with repaving that will be done, so that-will be ready by the time public works is mobilizing their repaving crews, so those are tied together. for valencia materials, i know that once construction has significantly concluded in august, that kick-starts their evaluation period and i think that material selection or evaluation of the materials quality i think will be a piece of that. i know that for our projects our engineers do very careful selection of what they are using based on the urban context they are

working with, so sort of in contrast, lake merced is as you mentioned is fairly high speed and for that reason for that project they went with the concrete protection, so there is some consideration in terms of what is used. i think one of the great things about quick-build project is that it is meant to be iterative as a defined process and a lot of what we are installing in the first round could -does lend itself to be upgraded later on and modified and tweaked based on our evaluation. >> commissioner dorsey. >> thank you chair mandelman. first, i want to express my appreciation to everyone for the

excellent work done for the report and thank everybody from mta and sfcta who have been working diligently over the years on vision zero. it is appreciated. the report unsurprisingly notes district 6 is one of the city's most dangerous areas and identifies 21 projects for the district. on the high speed one way corridors the report suggest among other possibilities, road diets. i think given how dangerous the corridors are design review and robust improvements would be adviseable. is there a plan and timeline for those streets in particular harrison, bryant, 9th and 10th? those in my experience are the ones i think should be prioritized so curious if there is a timelibe timeline?

>> for several corridors where we have more travel lanes to work with, i think we'll be taking an even closer look for improvements beyond just the quick-build tool kit. the 8 items i had listed. like you refer to, i think road diets could be something we will evaluate for those three locations. >> okay. is there a set of criteria--can i ask how mta prioritize projects that are identified in the report? >> i think that is a great question. there's actually a number of factors that we try to balance and use for prioritization. i think some of the factors include whether we are establishing a

network connection say in the bicycle network for instance. there is also construction coordination opportunities such as upcoming sewer projects or repaving projects we might want to join in on their timelines. there are also other considerations such as schools, whether there are a history of advocacy that has been expressed to us through other projects. we also have maintained relationships through some stakeholders that we talked to for prior projects and they might indicate to us where there's additional need. also, we have equity priority communities where we might want to focus our work, and funding opportunities as well. these are all factors

that we try to balance. >> funding can i ask, given current resources, how many miles of projects do you think we could complete per month? in the time you identify? >> currently we are funded through a combination of tnc tax programs as well as our prop k or perhaps upcoming prop l half cent sales tax and all the corridor projects have been allocated funding through this board. come later this season in fall, my vision zero program manager will be coming back to submit a request in a range of 5 to $6 million for this quick-build tool kit effort, which is really meant to get us that

full coverage. >> thanks. >> commissioner stefani. >> thank you. just a few questions. i am just a bit confused about the report and the presentation. there have been three pedestrian deaths in district 2 this year, 23 percent of all throughout the city and i am looking at the cut sheets in the consultant's report. i'm just confused on how you are going to prioritize the 50 miles of quick-build. i know chair dorsey--commissioner dorsey was trying to get at that too in terms of prioritizing, but i would like to know and we can take this off-line, how you are planning for district 2, how i can communicate to my constituents what will be done and when.

more then half of the 160 touch sheets that had recommendations from the consultant for enhanced pedestrian safety treatments, i am not certain how it is being factored into the sfmta work plan and the $5 million--is everything contingent on that funding? if you can just provide some clarity around at least specific districts. don't expect you to do that right now, but i really would like to know so i can communicate to my constituents when these improvements are going to be made. >> yes. certainly. happy to is set up time and look more in depth of your specific district and look at the work that remains there. we are currently going through work-planning, but i think once we have some clarity about our shop capacity i will certainly get back to you. >> okay.

i just want clarity on what exactly you need to get this done on time. is it staffing or funding or political support? what do you need to get this done on time? >> i would say a combination of all of the above. i definitely think that we have already gathered quite a bit of support. we had a lot of support from advocates who are challenging us and really making sure that we are putting this effort at the forefront. i heard from my leadership that over the course of the year, our field operation crews, they do routine work and something like this will definitely rise to the top and take priority. >> thank you. >> thank you

commissioner stefani. commissioner preston. >> thank you chair mandelman and thank you for all the work on this to everyone involved. i just want to-i think these quick-builds are extremely important part of our strategy. also want to recognize despite some really positive work through the quick-build to date and many of the other strategies we have taken that we are still looking this far into vision zero at last year of 39 traffic related deaths, the highest i think since 2007 if not mistaken, so the more the better in my opinion, and encouraged to see some of the plans here i did want to just comment on a few things. one is, in the tenderloin in particular, to give credit for real progress around quick-builds that i think have been really important in the tenderloin, but i also want to emphasize commissioner dorsey's point around looking at road diet strategies to

especially some of these fast moving one way streets that continue to be a real problem in terms of injuries and deaths, so looking forward collaborating on that as well. i also wanted to comment on the polk street and thank you for highlighting that. the bike lane plan there and just really want to note that as modeled off the fell street parking protected bike lane as in my opinion really a model for how to go about some of these and just want to thank mta and fire department and neighbors and everyone with our office collaborating around pushing that forward, but also the data and making sure it wasn't negatively impacting first responders. it reduced speeds and been a really positive change on fell street and hopefully will move forward without delays on oak street, so

thank you for highlighting that one. i do want to ask about couple streets in my district that i did not see highlighted and are of concern. that is gough and franklin which continued to be very high speed and dangerous stretches both in my district and stretches into my colleague district in district 2 to the north. can you--is there a reason those are not highlighted more prominently here? >> sure. i can speak on franklin for a little bit. that project had been substantially completed earlier this year. however, we-since implementation, we conducted evaluation of that project and i believe the project team is now coming back to revisit some of the prior proposals that they had been

considering, and i think there are specific evaluation measures that they were looking into that came up a little short so i think that project team is in the spirit of quick-build, looking at how that can be adjusted and refined in order to further reduce speeds. so, it is a ongoing effort and again, iterative process for that project. >> thank you. anything planned on gough? >> for gough street, i am currently not aware of any efforts aside from the quick-build tool kit, but i can certainly check with my directors to see if there was anything planned and get back to you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you commissioner preston. i think colleagues if we don't have other comments or questions we should go to public

comment. let's do it. folks in the chamber who would like to come forward, line up on that side. >> good morning chair mandelman and this commission. my name is jody executive director of walk san francisco. i'm so grateful for all of you today to really highlight what is being heard and keep our city committed to vision zero. we need your focus, because this is a critical piece of how we are going to get and end the epidemic on our streets. i am so glad we actually have this report. these are your cut sheets. this is the marching orders for the agency and it does outline what needs to be done. i'm disappointed of the presentation and responses you heard today. i'm concerned about the

lack of detail. of when and how the sfmta will deliver the promise to complete the sizable project in a condensed amount of time. we need a plan. we also are asking for these additional enhanced pedestrian safety treatments like the left turn calming and no turn on red and pedestrian safety zones. they need to be added at the same time, because this is the bear minimum to keep us safe in the crosswalk. the report show where the road diets need to be had. bryant, harrison, 9th, 10th-we need redesign because we have to manage speed in the city. we all should be able to cross the street safely, especially our concern and seniors. and we are here today to ask you and invite you to encourage the

sfmta to make the improvements on the 900 intersections or 50 plus miles and complete on time by december 2024. thank you. >> good morning chair mandelman and commissioners. my name is [indiscernible] i live in north beach, district 3. going to keep this short because i'm angry about recent pedestrian deaths and what i really want to say would offend. i was hit by a car in the city barely survived and by god's grace here in front of all you now with and for those who are no longer able or no longer with us. vision zero needs more vision heroes. from where i stand they are here speaking truth before and after me requiring your

immediate attention. their demands should be yours. please listen, please act, this is your responsibility to be on the right side of saving lives. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning chair and commissioners. my name is [indiscernible] the advocacy manager for walk san francisco. people are being hit and killed cross the street. three people in six weeks, a four year old girl is included. meanwhile, 900 intersections on the high injury network have yet to get any basic pedestrian safety improvements. we applaud the sfmta getting a full assessment of what needed at the 900 dangerous intersections. but having the information is the

first step. today's presentation did not include a slide how the sfmta will deliver now it has details on the dangerous intersections. as you heard today, there is not a clear plan. but we need a public plan for how exactly the sfmta will deliver on the e promise to bring the safety improvements. accountability on this issue is a matter of life and death. it would be heart-breaking if a year from now the sfmta hasn't delivered at niece intersections. let's not look back on this moment with regret. the board must insist and receive a realistic achievable plan soon. thank you. >> anybody in the

chamber who wants to talk about item 10? come forward. >> chair, there is remote public comment. going to the first caller. hello caller, your two minutes begins now. >> good morning chair mandelman and commissioners. my name is [indiscernible] i live in district 6. first i want to restate the last 6 weeks three people have been killed simply crossing the street in our city, including a 4 year old child. i live near forth and king and this tragedy was a scary reminder it can easily happen to me too. i had several close calls across the city with drivers. the streets enable them to drive dangerously. this is not a acceptable state of repair frz a world class city like ours and we all agree the city should be designed for people not cars.

we need to make vision zero realty and urge sfmta to deliver the promise to redesign [indiscernible]. every intersection needs a no turn on red change. sfmta study on the tenderloin pilot showed reduction in close calls and cross walks [indiscernible] should extend city wide to prioritize pedestrian safety, rather then driver convenience. we need left turn calming and pedestrian safety zones. the city needs a strong commitment to the changes along with long-term funding and staff requirements [indiscernible] three people including a young child are dead in six weeks. [indiscernible] our city deserves accountability to insure this never happens again. thank you for your time. >> thank you caller.

>> i ride my bike to work in east mission every day and absolutely love it. it is life changing and want to recommend to more people but it is very scary to do. i thank you for the comments from supervisor ronan. p i appreciated your concern, but i want to make counter-points. the supervisor mentioned that they think this recent pedestrian death was not related to the bike lane, however i think we see from around the world, the way to make crossings as safe as possible is reduce the distance the pedestrian is exposed when crossing, so having the center bike lane increases the amount of time the pedestrian is exposed and makes less visible. the supervisor also mentioned hoping that we could get a state

law to reduce speed limits, but i wanted to say i think that design is much more important then signs. when you are out there as a person oen the street, you are not worried about the average or compliant driver, you are worried about the drivers who are not following signs, so the best way to reduce speeds is not a sign on the side of the road, but rather the street design like narrow lanes, and other calming measures to slow drivers down. thank you sfmta for the quick-build work and hope as we eterate this quick-build we can move to side bike lanes on valencia to make biking safer and the crossings safer. thank you. >> thank you caller. moving on to the next caller. high caller, your two minutes begins now.

>> can you hear me? >> yes. go ahead. >> i'm steven bingum. my daughter was killed by [indiscernible] not in san francisco, but could have been there, and years ago. i have been every since a member of family for safe streets and i want to strongly endorse what jody said and the work that walk sf has been doing and i really appreciate the tenor of the questions of the supervisors. to staff it is clear there isn't a plan. there ought to be monthly plan with outcomes, specific outcomes. 900 intersections, there ought to be x number completed every month and the agency

should be brought in front of the board to concern that those have been done. disturbing listening to the agency put mta presentation is a little bit same old same old. we are all good safe and doing our best and get there, dont worry about it. it is not good for a public agency to be like that. too often things happen immediately as soon as someone gets killed. i remember emily [indiscernible] and all a sudden they put in the bike lane they promised months before. can't be like that folks. it is a question of life and death and i know it from personal experience. last thing unrelated but for everyone listening, please let the governor know to sign ab645, which gives the city a tool with- >> thank you caller.

>> speed camera. thank you. >> there is no more public comment for this item. >> public comment on item 10 is closed. could i get [indiscernible] can you talk about timing on gugairo? >> yes, we are targeting for a late spring implementation. >> okay. and so, we will have-you will come back to us it sounds like you may be asking us for money, but we are going to continue to have regular hearings on this. i guess the challenge in not having a-the challenge i experience as someone who is a funder and trying to provide oversight in that function is, it is very hard to measure

your progress if you won't tell us quhat you are trying to get done by when overall with this plan over the next year. i guess-i think this the concern is how would we know when you come back to us if you come back to us in november or if we have another follow up on this later this year or early next year, at what point would we know that you're not on track or do we not get to know that information until you are not on track if not on track next december? >> so, for our quick-build tool kit project we currently do have a dashboard where we can visualize the progress of implementation and we plan on making that go live prior to the upcoming vision zero quarter 3 update on october 3 and so that is one tool that the

public and everyone can look at. >> what is the metric for following progress that will be--is it miles, intersections, both? >> the main metric for that tool will be in miles. >> that will be when? >> miles by supervisor district. >> no, but that will go up you said this fall? >> in the coming days, so we do have a upcoming update on vision zero, including more information about this tool kit project, but along with other concurrent efforts such as the speed safety bill and multiple turn lanes, so more information on the over all vision zero program will be provided at the october three, sfmta board meeting that is happening next tuesday. prior to that meeting,

we will be making that dashboard live. >> thank you for your work. thank you for your presentation and mr. clerk, please call item 11. >> item 11 san francisco municipal transportation agency active communities plan update. this is information item. >> christopher kidd. >> good morning chair mandelman and rest thof commissioners. thank you for having us. my name is christopher kidd planner with complete streets. project manager for the active communities plan. we want to provide you an update today after a previous information update we provided this past april. so, as a refresher, reminder, the active community plan is going to be our first plan for rolling and

bicycling since the bike master plan. this is a project funded through caltrans planning grant as well as local match from the sfcta. when we have a final plan adopted hopefully in spring or summer of the coming year, it includes a 10 to 15 year investment plan to prioritize our work as a agency and the work across partner agencies at the city and expanded transportation network for active transportation, parking and facility recreation for bikes scooter and rolling devices and new supportive programs and policies to help overcome the barriers people experience to utilize participating in active transportation. project schedule we presented at the cta board in april. we have a 4 phase project over-spanning the 2023 calendar year where we spent the first half of this year engaging with different communities and understanding their

needs and challenges and values and we are now kind of closing out this second phase of outreach and are moving on to the development of a draft recommended network for the city. this will be something that we will be doing in partnership with our community partners and across neighborhoods across the city on the way to the development of a full draft plan this winter. as i mentioned, we have been doing outreach since january this year. we will do outreach past january next year and we are trying to focus two areas specifically, one is we want to be inclusive of all devices that can use the bike network. that includes scooters, power chairs, skateboard, roller blades. there is a broad away of emerging devices. we want to be proactive in the way we plan for this work so we can harness the benefits of the new devices while helping avoid problems that come with them.

but we also need to sener the needs of the vulnerable communities, which includes our black and brown residents, low income residents, service workers, peeping experiencing homelessness and people experiencing disabilities, youth, seniors [indiscernible] these are folks that bear the brunt of changes in transportation and transportation challenges and we need to insure we improve their mobility first and foremost. in terms of who we talked to so far, at this point we are closer to hundred city wide events then 82 listed here. engaging with over 5 thousand residents collecting input and surveys and responses from at this point probably over 3 thousand different residents, and series of public hearings including place s like today, but like the mayor's disability council, and we produced all of our project materials in

four languages. we tried to insure we reached people in a variety of ways, not relying on a single method that includes surveys, city wide events, places like sunday streets and other types of street festivals, farmers market. we have done targeted partnership work with community based organizations and equity priority communities included in language events as well as focus groups and webinars. lead community bike rides and partner with local organizations sometimes including members of this body right here. as well as convening a policy working group of different subject matter experts around the city, cultural district representatives, advocates, small merchants and technical advisory committee of other agency representatives. to put a spotlight on the work in the communities, contracted partnerships with 5 different organizations for targeted work in our equity communities where we know we need a special level of

emphasize and focus in the work we do to align our work with the needs and values and challenges these communities. the end result will be a community action plan for each neighborhood that will live within the larger active communities plan. partners include the new community leadership foundation in western addition fillmore, tenderloin community benefit district in the tenderloin, soma philippinea in soma, [indiscernible] in our mission outer mission and excelsior. bayview hunter point community advocates and working with [indiscernible] range of community partners to reach the chinese language communities that are spread throughout the city. to share some what we learned so far, through our polling work, our survey work, our in-person outreach work, we asked people to respond to the level of comfort they experience when trying to ride a bicycle or scooter on different types of streets. we want to insure when

we build streets, build projects we align with the type of streets people want to use. we hear people are very uncomfortable when asked to share the road with vehicles. when we add a regular painted bike lane on a calm street that comfort level goes up. we also see for many different forms of separation from vehicles there is a high level of comfort that is expressed by the public as well as a fairly high level of comfort the slow streets. to also share what we learned through polling work and data analysis, we know when we build the network people use it. and we also know things get safer. we know that 10 percent of respondents to our polling work, which was balanced for geography and demo draffics across the city, 10 percent of people use active transportation device every day. we also know that all most half of people in san francisco use a active transportation

device at least once a month. when we build quick-build, ridership goes up by over a quarter and collisions for all types of road users go down. but we also know people don't feel safe today, and this creates a undemocratic network in that the only people using the network are the people willing to accept the risk they experience. we know 80 percent of people that we polled want to use active transportation. they want to use the network. but only 23 percent feel comfortable and safe enough to use it today. that is a lower percentage in our equity priority communities. this is enormous opportunity gap for us that we neat to directly address in our work. we also know people are frustrated with the way our streets work and design today. we have a broad variety of different designs for the way our bike lanes and facilities are constructed and that creates a level

of confusion. they can sometimes not be intuitive and we see the impact of that with people on scooters riding on the sidewalk. people not understanding how to interact with infrastructure and see frustuation with people not following perceived rules of the road. we also see that with a prioritization of enforcement from the public in the survey responses we asked from people and we know that first and foremost that comes down to how the road is build and intuitive so people understand what is expected of them and how to operate within it. in terms of what is coming up next, we are working on the development of our draft network which we hope to bring to the public near the end of october. that will be paired with partnering for community events with our contracted community partners to do specific mapping within their communities to insure that the projects we bring are reflective

of their needs. we will be bringing a broad array of option tuesday the public and don't want to have something that appears to have been fully baked. we want to engage with the public directly on what works best for their communities, how we make sure we create a safe and connected network that also meets their needs. that will kind of-engage in a 3 month engagement period across the entire city with events in all districts during that time and in january coming back with a draft plan. revised proposed network that also all our proposed programs and policies help support rolling and bicycling that leads to a final plan document that is coming spring which we hope to have adopted at the mta board in the late spring, early summer that will unlock our ability to begin immediate implementation on the highest priorities of this plan and really start connecting the city and making active transportation

accessible to more people. thank you very much. >> thank you for the presentation. vice chair melgar. >> thank you chair mandelman. thank you so much for this presentation and all the work you put into this active communities plan. i am really excited to see that 80 percent of respondents were eager to use our infrastructure. i am one of those who take risks every day and willing to do it, but i know it is not for everyone and i totally respect that and i am so eager to have that not be our normal. one of the goals you stated is you know, centering on vulnerable communities and communities of color. i think that is great.

i wonder if you can talk about-one of the communities i think is vulnerable in our city regardless of race and income is young people. just because they tend to be smaller and most of them just don't have a choice. they are not driving age and so wondering if that was part of the focus group or survey you did. in district 7 we have a youth council and last year their entire year they spend working on transportation issues, so i love to turn over that data to you, because everything that you said they said and then even more from their perspective. i think young people on the west side are eager to have that be safer. couple weeks back i introduced a resolution urging you if we have the conversation to

include schools, because when i was talking to you and seeing the plan you presented, the thoroughfairs are not necessarily connected to the schools and heard the presentation about vision zero and rolling out 5 schools a year, which is very very slow, and i am eager to just make it safer for the kids to be able to walk. we have like a bike and roll to school day once a year, which is great. i love going there, but it should be every day. it should be a way for kids to get to school, not just good for us. tap on the back thinking this is great, but it really isn't a option for a lot of kids. i'm particularly worried about middle school and high schoolers because that is who i see riding the scooters on the sidewalk and also like many of them just dont have a choice.

i hope that we take that into account and make sure we are connecting schools to the network in a real way with infrastructure, not just putting it on the kids to be safe, know what they are doing. moving forward, i do hope that we have outreach representation responsiveness to the needs of kids and parents throughout the process. i want to make sure we support them as they navigate our very dangerous streets, but also have an option. i tallied up all my receipts and i ride my bike as a main mode of transportation. last year i spent $750 in the year on bicycle maintenance and supplies, which is cheaper then a clipper card, so i do-not that

i don't-transit month, into it too, but i do think for many people getting around on a bike, scooter or skateboard is the way to do it, because it is cheaper. cheaper then every other alternative and for low income people this is thing, so i want to sort of make sure that we do it in a meaningful productive way, because i think it's a real necessity. thank you. >> thank you commissioner. commissioner walton. >> thank you chair mandelman. i want to try to do this as respectfully as possible, but these slides are really a true dog and pony show in a attempt to mislead the board into thinking that equitable outreach was conducted. the survey for this plan is really a

concrete example of mta's plan to overtly mislead communities. the question asked throughout the survey was, are you comfortable with-without presenting the trade-offs, without presenting the realty of what people's comments or statements could lead to. i'm comfortable sitting next to trump, but i don't want to be next to him. you are asking people are they comfortable with something. i cant think of a more simplistic way to lead communities and to sit here and act like you've done some equitable outreach because you have gone to events and walked arounds certain areas of the community, no door to door, no really going into the inner-parts of community most isolated, that's not equitable outreach. we had this conversation again and it continues to happen, but most certainly

this survey is extremely misleading at the very least. it is set up to promote places that will further disconnect and keep people from access and i just can't believe that you touted this as responsible outreach to this body. i had a conversation with mta prior to this meeting, and i couldn't believe you still came in here presenting that you conducted equitable outreach. this has to stop. you have to go into community and have a real conversation about what the trade-offs are when you mention certain plans, certain policies and certain things that you are thinking about implementing and stop trying to lead people in to supporting things that promote inequity or further divide communities.

i want to make sure that this is on record that real equitable outreach was not conducted during this process and this is really an attempt to mislead this board of supervisors into thinking that the proper outreach has been or is being conducted and that we are talking to people in a manner they can completely comp rihand and understand what is at stake, because you are asking if they are comfortable and then force something on people and they will be like, i didn't ask for this. you just asked was i comfortable with it? people are comfortable with a lot of stuff but let's be direct and get real questions and get their real thoughts and opinions and do real outreach to know where people come from and see the things they want in their community, versus trying to mislead and misguide them with words like comfortable. that's ridiculous. >> thank you commissioner.

i appreciate your perspect ive and the survey work we had done is by no means the only work we have done and this is by no means the end of our engagement and outreach work and specifically the work we are planning for our upcoming community partner events in equity communities and events throughout the city for the rest of the year are truly focused on understanding those trade-offs and are express-- >> that's not good enough. you have to go back and do a survey that is real, that gets the real opinions of people, that dives deep into conversation, versus trying to gloss over and say we'll go back-no, you already misleading communities of people with your questioning and just to say you gloss over and let it go, that's a bunch of bs. you are not going to try to turn our communities into segregated streets like other areas of the city.

you will conduct the appropriate outreach. >> commissioner dorsey. >> thanks so much. i want to thank sfmta for their work on what i know is a big undertaking, the active communities plan is important to me as a regular user of the bicycle network city wide, but especially in district 6 and i had the opportunity actually to join mta staff and community stakeholders on a bike ride through my district back in august and it was a great opportunity to review the network and see where improvements are necessary. there is a narrow question that i have, one of the most frequent complaints i hear about mobility options that district 6 residents encounter has to do with scooters. not bikes, not skateboards, it is scooters on the sidewalk. my own observe egg

from this and interested to know if this is something that came out in the research or survey data or something we need to tease out with maybe a more detailed kind of survey like supervisor walton is talking about, focus groups. there is a lot of ways to do this and i think it is always good advisez to explore different kinds of options and trying to gauge public perspective on it. i'm sensitive to some of the sentiments that my colleague expressed. what i would be interested to know from people using scooters, my observation is that do we have surface condition issues that dont make life easy for people using scooters in bike lanes? i know one lane that i use a lot is folsom street where everything you can do to keep a bike upright on the potholes and things. i don't-wouldn't

recommend anybody take a scooter there. obviously they are not supposed to be on the sidewalks. is this something we are hearing from the people who use scooters that we need to do better to improve surface conditions, or is it possible this is a feature of people who use scooter jz they don't care? interested to know. it is remarkable to me how often i hear complaints about just scooters and very little about other things. >> so, scooters complaints is certainly a very large theme of a lot of our outreach and lot of what we have been hearing from the public and i think that there is a number of factors that contribute to that. pavement quality and condition is a significant factor. scooter wheels are much smaller then bike wheels so they feel

the jolts and bumps of poor pavement more thoroughly then people on a bike do. part of our plan and part of this effort is looking at taking a fresh look how we design our network facilities. trying to account for this broader range of users and what does that mean in terms of the way we treat pavement condition, the way we dewrine facilities, the width, how intersections work. we need to take a fresh look how to insure that these facilities are welcoming, inclusive and intuitive for the broad range of users, because certainly we hear especially in soma and plenty other places about the concerns people have, especially the seniors and residential with disabilities about the safety hazards and risks they experience when interacting with scooter riders on the sidewalk, and that is a problem we need to solve and there are tools we have through the micro mobility providers and permit we have with them to help

work on enforcement around those activities, but now we are seeing a growing number of privately owned scooters and i think that also looking at those type of devices, some of those can go very fast and we need to have better understanding and regulation within the city about which of those devices we expect and want to be using our bike lane facilities, because if a scooter can go 35 miles a hour, that is probably not a appropriate device for this network. >> commissioner preston. >> thank you chair mandelman and thank you for your work on this. i want to step back for a minute. this is a issue i have been pushing on this body and the board for i think since 2020 trying to get firm commitment to the

release of a draft city wide network. i think we made progress with some of the close street work during the pandemic, but prior to this effort, i think the commitments have not been that firm around timelines, so i want to recognize that i think it's and appreciate actually laying out and we met prior to this hearing to be briefed on this and i do think it is important that we have the timeline before us and i have said it before and will say it again, that a city wide network of safe streets is only as strong as its weakest link or weakest links and are i think that to approach it as we have often more through neighborhood block by block while those are very significant improvements they don't

resolve the gap you identified that commissioner melgar spoke of of the lack of safety [indiscernible] which can be 80 percent on great protected lanes and if you have 20 percent that is not, it feels like a nightmare and taking your life in your own hands and a lot of people and those can kids, it is those weak links that prevent people from using the network. i do think that it is important that the draft be a draft and be truly a draft and think you have spoken to that, but i want to emphasize this, because a lot of times in city plan, not specific to mta but often including mta and other departments drafts are rolled out, they are really what the department plans to do, and the draft and the community meetings and engagement is just to check a box and say you have done it. i do think some of

commissioner walton's comments get at that this feeling that is grounded i think very much in realty of how major initiatives are planned in the city. not exclusively mta, but certainly at times mta including that--i think the challenge here is staying on a timeline, but also making sure that when you put out a draft in october that gets adopted as a draft or not adopted, presented in january that those draft plans are draft plans that when community pushes back around a particular block or department whether fire department or puc has a plan for that major work in that area or whatever it is, that we are actually being flexible during that period of time. however many months that ends up being to getting what can really be a final plan that

hopefully has more community buy-in from different departments and actually enables us to move fl frward. i think you addressed that. i don't think you need to again. i just wanted to emphasize that i hope that a draft is meant to be a draft, not a fully baked product called a draft so we can check boxes. if you want to elaborate, feel free, but i think you addressed it. >> very shortly. yes. we do plan when we bring the draft network enoctober to focus and emphasize a broad array of options. we don't want this to be fighting whether this one project is the right one or not because that is the only we are offering. we want to give people a range of options of the right thing that works in their community while allowing us to connect the network in a way that is safe and connected and useful for a broad number of people. >> thank you. one other thing while i have the mic here, the

city has been through this before. in 2014 we adopted the green connections plan, which i don't know if you want to be glass half full that provided good groundwork for template for slow streets work and other thing we have done. glass half empty, it has been all most a decade since the planning department and others convened and put forward a city wide plan. what i wanted to ask you, how is this different from the green connection plan and specifically in terms of--i don't want--who ever is in the seat years down the road to be talking about the active community plan the way i talk about green connection plan as a think from a decade

ago that was never implemented, so what is different how you are approaching this that gets us to the finish line in a inclusive way on this timeframe? >> admittedly the green connection plan preceded my tenure. we have a very strong commitment, especially through the street partners towards implementation. we created a board presentation to the sfmta board two weeks ago on september 19 where we laid out some of the implementation strategy that we are building up behind this plan, which will include insuring concurrent proval of a traunch of protected bike lane quick-builds and slow street project in parallel with approval of the plan itself, so we have things that are ready to go and implement immediately. we also are working towards as part of the plan strongly identifying not just our funding needs and constraints, but also the staffing needs and

constraints as well as some of the procedural changes that we will need to make as a agency and city in order to deliver the type of projects at the scale we identified them at for the plan. there is a broad range of needs that exist across the spectrum in order to actually be accountable and deliver on these things. it is not just the money but we are working towards identifying those thing s within the plan document so there is a actionable path forward to resolving them. >> thank you. last thing on this point just in terms of actually getting there on this plan. appreciate before your time before my time in office certainly, but i think it is worth making sure we consult with the folks who were part of that process on green connections and what they ran into. my understanding is some of the-a number of reasons things didn't

come to fruition, but one is the some of the lack of interdepartmental coordination was a big part of it and i said this in response to the last agenda item when we were talking about vision zero and what did with fell street with early involvement with the fire department and monitoring of the data mta lead and really having everyone at least certainly both community and departments involved. i think it is crucial because if the plan comes out there and then and is fully baked and then we are learning a year from now that key route for a slow street is actually a key route for the fire department or the key block low the western addition is a block where people double park because they need to because they come in flaum east bay to go to church. we need to surface those things as early

as possible and i guess just the question on that is, i know all is a technical advisory group, and know some departments are represented, can you elaborate in terms of city departments who is at the table with the technical advisory group in the early stage? >> technical advisory committee has about 25 or so representatives on it, including the sfcta, department of public works and public health, police, fire. rec and park and a broad array of agency representatives within the sfmta because we have transit, livable streets. mayor office of disp ablt and regional representatives caltrans, mtc and others. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioner preston. thank you for your presentation and your work and we should open this item to public comment. if you are in the chamber and like to

make comment on item 11, come forward. >> i am carol, resident of san francisco district 2. i want to start with a story. when i was doing a long trip in italy, i tried to understand local customs. someone told me a joke that really helped a lot. in malan, traffic signals are instructions. in rome, they are

suggestions. in nap ali they are christmas decorations. in california we enacted the same transition but over time i say about 5 years we have gone from malan to naples and this community plan, this active community plan i really do like it. it focuses on bicycles,b and protected bike lanes benefit all the users of the street, but the diagram at the top of this, if you look at the diagram on the very nice report, it shows three types of non-car mobility. the last being a mobility scooter. so, i don't use bike lanes because i just don't go fast enough.

still like to have the bike lanes there. slow streets are my favorite way of getting around san francisco. on slow streets there is room for everyone to travel at their own pace. i use a slow street to get to the market for weekly shopping but i think they need to be upgraded. the napeal stale drivers come down a 4 lane street and hit a slow street and they have a tendency to ignore that decorative stop sign or paint on the ground, and i think street engineers could fix this. improve slow streets and that would be a great contribution to both vision zero and the active community plan. thank you very much. >> thank you. it looks like we don't have anymore public comment in the chambers so see if we have remote public comment on item 11. >> checking for remote public comment on item 11. there is no public

comment for this item. >> alright. thank you. public comment on item 11 is closed. mr. clerk, please call item 12. >> introduction of new items. >> i don't see anybody on the roster. mr. clerk, please call item 13. >> 13, public comment. >> anyone in the chamber who would like to speak under item 13, general public comment, please come forward. i do not see anyone. let's see if we have remote public comment on item 13. >> yes are, there is. let me go to the caller. welcome caller, your 2 minutes begins now. >> hello. good morning. all most good afternoon. this is barry toronto. i was very interested a lot of statements made today. the only thing is, you haven't talked about reducing the number of cars on the road, and rather then encouraging more use of tnc, it

would be great if you actually asked your state representatives to try and get legislation passed to allow the city to regulate the number of tnc allowed to use the road. a lot of these people do not live in san francisco or in the bay area, and they come to the city thinking they can drive the streets the same way they drive their rural communities and suburban community. i beg you to look at the number of tnc using the road. you have a more frequent report on the number of tnc trips out there, and the fact that the behavior is based upon trying to get as much trips in because of the low pay they get are many of the trips. asking you to provide more report on that and more regular basis. more enlightening and see behavior of--i can sit at a night club for a good half hour as a taxi driver and not

get one fare, even though my fare might be less or equal to their fare. also, the fact that some of the night clubs put out block parking lanes and block traffic lanes with their cones and it makes it a problem there. i think there should be [indiscernible] require [indiscernible] during busy nights so they can be easier pick up and drop off. last thing is, regarding gough street. look at gough street during most of the day. it is a parking lot from geary and o'farrel where they connect on the top of the hill--thank you. >> thank you. >> moving to the next caller. hi, caller, your two minutes begin noz a.

>> i got kicked of the queue for active community plan. first of all, i want to thank the mta representative for putting together this plan. i really really hope it gets implemented. as someone who doesn't own a car and gets around on transit mostly, i would love love love to take bikes around the city because i know it is the fastest way to get around the city, but unfortunately doing so would [indiscernible] the way people drive in san francisco. san francisco isn't unique, but you have-just not wanting to ringe risk my life so [indiscernible] fully connected. i think the plan will achieve that if everyone from the mta and on the board of supervisors is able to see the plan through unlike the previous plan from 2014. i like to say, i was really horrified by come comments and hopeful about other

comments, particularly in regards to segregation and the way that the bike plan would further that or not. i will say that the majority of people i see on bikes in the mission and bayview are delivery workers who are delivering on bikes and getting home on their bikes using bart. they are putting their life on the line for their jobs, so i really really would love to see their lives being considered and i think especially black and brown communities should be able to get around safely. the majority of people dying on our streets whether pedestrians or bike riders are actually vulnerable people from vulnerable communities, including elderly people. this is necessary and those who take transit or [indiscernible] use active mobility to get around we are doing the right thing and be safe doing the right thing.

the truth is-- >> there is no additional public comment for this item. >> alright. public comment on item 13 is closed. mr. clerk, please call our next item. >> 14. adjournment. >> we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned]