s.f. gov tv san francisco government television

good i'll have a little pen to the plan united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all present lines like take roll please commissioner clay president commissioner benedicto president commissioner janez commissioner years enroute vice president carter ober stone is also enroute present i ask you have a quorum also with us tonight we have chief scott from the san francisco police department and executive director paul henderson from the department of police accountability. >> thank you. welcome everyone. happy wednesday. welcome to our february 12th meeting. sergeant please call the first matter line item one weekly officer recognition certificate presentation of an officer who has gone above and beyond in the performance of their duties officer shere khan star number

2278 from the airport bureau. >> hello. welcome to carlos gutierrez. >> i'm a captain with the san francisco police department air force patrol division. thank you for giving me this opportunity to present officer shere khan who was selected by his patrol commanders to receive this recognition officer khan is an 18 year veteran of the police department, has worked at the san francisco international airport for the last ten years through his years at the airport. he has developed valuable professional connection with a number of stakeholders. officer khan has been commended by numerous airline administrators. fellow law enforcement agencies such as customs border protection, also known as cbp transports and security administration, tsa, san mateo

sheriff's department and most importantly by citizens from around the world. officer khan is one of our leaders on the minot watch. he's currently assigned to the people experiencing homelessness each car where he plays an active role in assisting those experiencing homelessness. connecting them with resources needed to find shelter or reconnect them with families because of these reasons i believe they often can embodies the values and excellence that this award represents. >> the san francisco police department recognizes officer khan airport bureau as the officer of the week. in recognition of the dedication and professionalism and demonstrated through outstanding community policing practices and inspiring greatness by exemplifying the ideals of the police officers as a guardians of our community

,such an example of dedication is worth obvious high esteem, high esteem by the city and county of san francisco or by the san francisco police department. >> hello officer khan, welcome. i want to give you an opportunity to say a few words if you will please, before we share our non important wisdom as there's a few people that know me, they know i'm a very quiet person sometimes right there. >> me too. yeah. um um but um, i do want to say that in order to do what i do takes great leadership and i'm very blessed to work for a bunch of them. captain gutierrez i think that acting chief during his back there. chief scott so i just want to thank them. they make it possible for me to do what i do. it's a blessing to work for pd. i wouldn't work for anywhere else. i love everything about this department. so thank you very much.

>> well, before we let you go. yeah. oh, did you think we were going to let you off that easy? oh, no, sir. no, sir. first and foremost, thank you. >> i think that you it just speaks volumes to i think you and your character that the first people you think are leadership when in actuality it's you that needs to be thanked because you're the one that gets up every day and goes out there. 18 years is a long time. i mean i am assuming you started when you were probably ten but ten years at the airport i think also speaks volumes because from what i understand that's not an easy assignment and there are a lot of challenges that i think that that i think district district or the airport division faces. so ten years i think is quite a feat. so i want to thank you for your service. i want to also thank your family because i know that they are probably making tons of

sacrifices in order for you to do what you do which is put your life on the line for our city and county so thank you so much for all that you do. chief, i'd like to turn over to you for a few minutes. >> thank you. president elias in africa and thank you for your work. you know, when people come into our city through the san francisco international airport, officers like you with first thing they see in the city and it's really, really important in all of our views that that the service that is provided for our our travelers at the airport is is exactly what you provide. i mean i can't tell you how many letters i've gotten, you know, from people who come to the city and for whatever reason they come in contact with our officers assigned to the airport and that experience that almost every time is. thank you. yes, sir. thank you sir. thank you for helping me is to thank you for just being being

there, being friendly, being available and that's what you exemplify. and then when people leave the city that's the last thing they see. so it's your work does not go unnoticed. so i just want to say thank you and thank you to acting deputy chief for drini and captain gutierrez for we're actually bringing this to the police commission because is that every day on sun work is what really makes this department in this city what it is. so thank you very much. >> and for the first time i think we've had an airport so thank you, captain gutierrez for flagging this for us because i think sometimes we forget that very vital district that that still yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. >> well, thank you commissioner clay thank you, madam president. i want to echo madam president the chief's words as it relates to you officer calling in really pointing out we i have been here for a very short period of time but i've never seen and we've had a person from the airport. it was wonderful to see that happen today and your presence

here and it's always especially wonderful to have you all there at that airport. it's a difficult place to be because you got people from all over the world and some people don't even understand what is happening but the surance of seeing yourselves and the uniforms and people doing that work they really appreciate that someone to go to that they feel comfortable going to and knowing that that they have that person there is really special it's special to see someone in yourself because you're amongst all these all stars that are part of your department and here today is your day in recognizing you for all the good things you do. so we really appreciate your service and thank you very much. thank you. thank you, chief. >> oh no, that's it for me. oh, no. i wanted to give you an opportunity. yeah. sergeant, at this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item one the weekly officer recognition if you would like to make public comment please approach the podium side.

i guess i see it's like jam packed the right over here are can come in regarding this one regarding this item. okay go ahead officer congratulations you're as close as we got to a foot patrol in san francisco. >> the airport detail is fantastic. >> there's 2000 cops in the city 1950 sworn about 200 a year for the airport officers have 1000 times more contact with the public than the cops in the city do i say get them out of the cars, get them on the full patrol beach. we've got a new mayor think he can make this staff play do that? >> i don't know but thanks an awful lot and bless your porch because you really do make us look good so very good.

yeah i forgot those points. that's why we have public comment they all right line item two general public comment at this time the public is welcome to address the commission for up to two minutes on items that do not appear on 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 personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions by the public but may provide a brief response. alternatively, you may submit public comment in either of the following ways email the secretary to the police commissioner as a pd the commission it as of course or written comments may be sent via a us postal service to the public safety building located at 1245 third street san francisco, california at 94158 if you would like to make public comment approach the podium and see if i can get five pounds of crab and a 1 pound bag two minutes i got two items. first, max, i agree that you should fight your removal in principle but there are three

or forums. i mean look at the charter changes breed bred triggered by your show of independence and honesty. >> now i'm or mayor removes you personally because you are the very face of progressive public safety advocacy real compliment oh left handed to the cheek but a compliment theme this is no country for young men okay the other half of life god is i'm applying for a press pass. i know you're all going to want to help me out there, mr. brown. >> how do i do this? >> just say can i use the overhead? can i use the overhead now? yeah, that's good. show my face because they've got that anybody wants a copy

and copies. i had a press pass about 25 years ago or something like that. >> i had a lot of conflict with the cops. i don't know why and i had a lot of good friends who are cops joe jerry's best cop i met in my life and i know him 30 years or something like that but applying for a press was the last time i did they took it away. that's 32nd. they took it away and they took away a bunch of other press passes and we had to end up having a big meeting before the borders. who were they took away the new york times parking places, the washington post and they said we're going to need those as there is a disaster. and so they after a big meeting and a hullabaloo get used to it, max. they gave everybody their press passes back except me. >> i'm applying again. >> good evening. i just wanted to say i was at

the board of supervisors on tuesday to bring awareness to the resolution that max carter over stony brook and implement it here at the at the police commission and it was passed so i gave it i went there and brought it up to matt darcy and he spoke about it and after that i you know, just i, i did my thing that i do here showing my son's pictures and showing them how mothers like myself are still suffering after years and years and years and years we raise our children to live we raise our children that they should be burying in us, not us burying them. >> i am i commend max carter over stone and dean dean preston for getting that name

over there up there on on grove street. i drive by there every day so i'm praying and i'm hoping that the board of supervisors passes that resolution that max quarter over stone implement it and and i am so waiting in there it sounds promising from what they're saying you know i asked district by supervisor he's a wilderness brown i'm not going to say yay or nay i don't want to tell you something and it don't happen. and i said well you know my you know that i'm here. >> he he said i see you all the time. so i plan on being there. i used to go to the board of supervisors often every tuesday just at their comment and i mean their stuff is lying it kind of late so i, i plan on being there more often now and until this resolution gets passed and i want to thank you again and i pray that he keeps you i don't even know if you're gonna are ready yet but i pray that he keeps you because you keep everybody on their toes

and i just thank you for that and thank you for what you've done for me for us. and that is the end of public comment line item three consent calendar receive and file action as speedy and epas document protocol report fourth quarter 2024 speeds 2025 traffic enforcement plan and speeds and epas sb 1421 and sb 16 monthly report for january 2025 motion to receive and file back thank you any member of the public would like to make public comment regarding the consent calendar please approach the podium. there is no public comment on the motion. commissioner clay how do you vote? yes commissioner clay is yes. mr. benedicto yes. mr. benedict it was yes. commissioner nunez yes. >> commissioner young yes. is yes. mr. yea yes commissioner. >> yes. yes. vice president carter bridgestone yes. vice president carter oberstar on his yes and present yes.

yes. present licenses yes. you have six yeses a line item for a chiefs report discussion weekly crime trends and public safety concerns provide an overview of offenses, incidents or events occurring in san francisco having an impact on public safety. chief scott thank you sergeant youngblood. good evening commissioners president elias vice president carter robert stone executive director henderson and the public start off today with just the overall crime trends for the week. again we are trending very well going into the second week of february there's a 36% overall reduction in part one crimes that is comprised of a 39% reduction in property crimes and a 13% reduction in violent crimes. we are slightly up in shooting incidents. there is a four percent increase in shooting victims non-fatal or homicide victims. there's a 67% reduction in

homicide victims killed by gunfire in terms of violent crimes or homicides, we have one for the year compared to three this time last year. so that is about a 300% reduction. but the numbers are very small . the real driver with our crime reduction is the continued reduction in car burglaries over the last year we are down 50 about 53%. so that's a really good sign and we continue to see those numbers being reduced. and the only other trend of note in terms of violent crimes, robberies, assaults and almost all categories except for shootings in the cells are down this year in terms of gun seizures, we are at 105 gun seizures compared to 93 this year and of those 105, 1313 of 105 or ghost guns we are at we

are at a really good place in terms of the continue reduction in shootings in the southeast part of the city just looking at what we have trended so far but as i said earlier overall we have a slight increase in shootings from year to date last year in terms of significant incidents we had an assault on an officer with a vehicle. this was on the 6th of february at 5:30 p.m. in ninth and southern officers located a stolen vehicle as a result of a block alpa notification the suspect took off in a stolen vehicle or fled from with the stolen vehicle and the car the subject's car collided with the patrol vehicle as the suspects were leaving the scene the officers were not injured. that case is still under investigation. no arrests at this time. >> there were a couple of traffic collisions six in a

toma with serious injuries where a driver struck a pedestrian in the crosswalk. that victim unfortunately did not survive. there was a identified i'm sorry fortunately did survive but there also was a fatal traffic collision on the 7th of february at 427 at jones in clay in central so low scooter crashed into a pole and that person was transported to the hospital and did not survive their injuries was a solo scooter and no one else is believed to be involved in it. there was a quite notable police pursuit that happened on sunday that culminated at 24th in van ness avenue in the mission district. they started with officers notified from a flock notification of a wanted vehicle vehicles wanted for felony grand theft in the city of berkeley. officers tried to initiate a stop on that car and that driver then did not stop and

that turned into a pursuit the driver the pursuit went from stone's town area and culminated or terminated at 24th street and south van ness where the suspect's vehicle hit a park occupied park and six people were injured. two of the six had pretty serious injuries. the other four ended up with minor injuries and there were some other sideswipe vehicles along the way with this incident. of course we are as we do with all pursuits reviewing this incident to determine the policy whether officers were within the police department's policy. i don't have any details to report as far as where that is. however, i will say this we have gotten a lot of public interest rightfully so on this incident and your heart goes out to the people that were struck our officers and our

supervisors are instructed to do everything that they can do to make sure that when we do go in pursuit that we use reasonableness, that we weigh the risks against what is at stake there. and that's those are the things that will be taken into consideration. i know this we invigorates the discussion about the pursuit policy and proposition e but i just want to say a couple of things in particularly to the public we will do everything we can to make sure that we do weigh the risk of pursuits to the officers who have to basically enact these policies and live by them. i want to make sure that they know if they're within the policy of the police department and they're doing those things that they will be supported. the last thing that we want to do is have your officers guessing about what they can and can't do. that's why we have policies. so those things will be looked

at. i know there's a bigger discussion about this issue that is a consent discussion and definitely invite that discussion. but as far as policy those are the things that we have to consider is what is mandated by this commission and by voters with property and in this situation it ended up with a bad outcome. but let's not draw any conclusions as to why those outcomes. the bottom line is the driver of that vehicle ran into that park that not the officers and that is the end of my report to thank you chief. i wanted to focus on the last incident you talked about which was that the collision with the lot that happened on sunday in the mission you said that the cameras determine that the vehicle had warrants out on it. >> is that correct? the vehicle was wanted for a

felony grant that would it be accurate to say that under our vehicle pursuit policy prior to changes mandated by prop e that learning that fact would not have been that necessarily justified a pursuit? >> not necessarily. that's correct. that's correct. okay. but then in the revisions made due to property, it was it was authorized. that's correct. it such pursuits could be authorized again, i know we were not stating whether or not this specific pursuit was in that of policy. do you know i know we added language in the revised vehicle pursuit policy about supervisors being able to to order discontinuation of a pursuit under certain circumstances. do you know if that was considered in this pursuit? >> i have not got the final conclusion of this pursuit so i don't know what the supervisor who was monitoring the pursuit or caught up to the pursuit considered so i don't i don't know.

>> yeah. okay. i'll let my fellow commissioners ask additional questions i think be other questions about this incident. >> i am i will note that as you said, i think this is an ongoing discussion that needs to be had and so i've asked that this be calendared for a full agenda item once more facts are known as well. >> i know this is three days old so we can get questions such as discontinuation and things like that are answered and i think in my request for the agenda item i would like obviously details on this particular pursuit because it's so notable. but i think in addition just in general other notable incidents that we feel like might have been like i want to focus on other incidents and pursuits that were potentially not would not have been authorized under our pre prop e policy but would not be authorized and if if there could be an assessment of the impacts of this new policy and whether there are other steps the commission needs to take i know member at least one member of the board of supervisors has issued a letter of inquiry on this pursuit as well as any materials provided to the board of supervisors on this incident to ask also be

sent to the commission as well. yes, absolutely. and let me just point out one other thing. this commission also adopted a general order on the serious incident review board. these type of incidents would now fall once we enact that policy. these type of incidents would also fall under the serious incident review board where the facts will be examined and considered and pursuits are there has to be a policy binding on all pursuits but i just want to point out that this process i mean that's why we went to the serious incident review board concept and these are one of the types of incidents that i think would benefit from that review from the serious incident review board. i don't remember what the date is that that policy will go into effect but that policy has been adopted by this commission so that will add some value to these types of incidents.

in terms of the review, the people who are reviewing which includes you know, the department of police accountability i believe a commissioner is assigned to that war. once we enact this or once we actually start doing this. so i just want to keep that in mind because that is not in that in the not too distant future what we will be doing a full review on these types of incidents do that process if by any chance anyone from the department knows if that policy is in effect already know it's been adopted and i look at the records because i don't know if we have the meet and confer process i believe is done with that is my memory. >> i think that's okay. >> well if you could provide so it's like this specific incident won't go before the new srb based on the timing right? i'm not so sure about that. okay. can you for next week's meeting? >> yeah, for next week's use report can you nail down those dates to see what the implementation it is to see if this would go as currently adopted srb yes i will. okay thanks.

>> that's all my questions. vice president carter we should thank you president elias chief just also wanted to pick up on where commissioner benedicto left off on the latest vehicle pursuit. i just want to clarify you mentioned that grand theft was what sparked the pursuit. i just want to be clear. so at the time that the pursuit was initiated, grand theft was the crime that the drivers were or the driver was suspected of. >> i ask because there were just varying reports in the newspapers that conflicted somewhat. >> so i just want to be clear. yeah the vehicle was wanted the the lock alert was for grand theft with messages to see if the vehicle was spotted to stop the vehicle and detain all occupants. >> and how long did the pursuit last for? >> i don't know. i went from stolen town to 24th in venice. i don't know exactly how long.

>> let me see if i actually had that answer. >> yeah, i found a friend i have commissioner you you look google map is about 15 minutes. 15 to 20 minutes. it depends how they do the give me one second. i think i have the actual data here or take your time did you if yeah they may have taken a different route while you're looking for that chief, can you say anything about the extent of the injuries i this is another point that where there is kind of different information based on the various media reports there is as i understand it six people injured including a mother and her child and two people were

in critical condition. >> is that correct? what i what we have is there were six people injured. two were serious injuries, non-life threatening and four were not serious injuries. so i don't know the extent of what those injuries were but non-life threatening injuries and then the newspaper report that i saw saying that two people were in critical condition. >> you're not sure if that's correct or not? my understanding there is nobody is in critical condition. >> okay. and were were drones ever deployed during this chase? no. and why not? i don't know why drones were not deployed at determination. the pursuit generally the types of drones that we have are not sufficient to keep up with a pursuit. drones have a limited range. they're great for determination. they're great for short pursuits of people are driving around in the same neighborhoods. there are drones out there that can keep up with the pursuit.

we don't have those yet but drones were not deployed now. >> now that's interesting because i remember one of the biggest selling points of property was that we were going to deploy drones in precisely these scenarios and it would avoid these types of outcomes. but i hear you saying now that we actually we don't have the types of drones that are capable of doing that. >> yeah, you hear me say the same thing i said during those discussions that exact same thing i said then and i say now some drones are good for terminations of pursuits. we don't have drones that can go fast enough to stay with a high speed pursuit nor do we have that type of capability. we have to be in visual line of sight. we have to be there and to fly a drone while you're in a car in a pursuit that's just not that's not really a feasible thing. what i said then and what i still say now there are drones out there. they will do that. we don't have them yet.

yeah. to be clear i'm not disagreeing in any way i remember looking at the outcome of the was it to vista actually doing a pilot program with the drones and it was i think evident from that that you needed a very specific expensive type of drone to be able to be effective in an active vehicle pursuit. i guess i'm just saying back when property was being debated i think the public was told that we would we would use drones in that fashion. >> i did. you happen to be all that find how long the pursuit lasted for the radio transmissions started at 302 and it looks like the pursuit terminated at three 329. >> okay and do we know are you

able to share any of the facts of the suspected grand theft of the outstanding warrant other than it happened in berkeley was the originating agency after the fact we learned some things about the two individuals that were arrested. they had a basically at least one of them had was wanted for several several felonies we didn't know at the time but we found that after the fact crimes ranging from across the north bay to southern california and the other person had also some some wants is my understanding. >> so can i just ask your policy view of course having nothing to do with weather again not having to do with whether what happened in this chase was within our current policy. but you know, at the time that property was being debated we were basically told, you know. well, we discovered a few things.

one, our policy at the time was which was drafted in 2003 by then chief sir and his command staff was roughly in line with nationally recognized best practices. it was slightly more permissive because we had a second bucket where you could chase for non felonies if there was an imminent threat to public safety. we also discovered through media reports that we had the lowest apprehension rate and highest collision rate of our chases of any law enforcement agency in california. and there was a real concern that if we liberalized our policy even further that we would have more collisions, more injuries to innocent members of the public. and that's what we got this week in a chase that as you acknowledged in response to commissioner benedict, those questions would not have been permissible under the legacy policy. it's early in his tenure.

do you think it's worth reconsidering whether we should whether this policy is is serving the public interest and public safety? i will say that the voters vote it when you have a policy we have to see kind of how this plays out and it's really not as simple as that because there is two sides to this. i think what got us to probably was situations where people were were being victimized in whatever way they were being victimized and they only to be told that hey, you know officers can't do anything with that once they get in the car and take off, there's really not going to be anything done. that's what got us there. so i do think that has to be a part of the conversation in

terms of the other side of this issue, this commission got letters and emails and i've received a number of them about that very issue. so the answer to your question is this whole thing is about balance. i mean pursuits are dangerous and accidents or collisions will happen whether you have a restrictive policy or not that's going to be really a fact of life whether or not the balance is you know, the trail of victims that we leave behind that because people know that hey, if i get in my car i'm gone and i'm going to get away with this in all likelihood i think that has to be a part of the calculus of how we weigh this. in the meantime, it's our responsibility to make sure that we do what we can to act with due regard for the safety of the public if not always predictable. we can't control what the driver who's trying to get away does and we also have to put some responsibility there and accountability there.

in this particular case the driver was charged with a number of felonies. some of that responsibility has to go there. our responsibility is abiding by the policies that are given to us, making sure that we are prudent in terms of the things that you just mentioned and making sure that officers are allowed to do that job. the bigger conversation about the of the whether it's worth it or not, that's what the supervisors and officers in the field have to weigh every day when they're doing this. but the policy is what it is. it's been voted on by the public. it's been it's been approved by this commission. and i just think we have to be very clear with our officers and the public what this is, what the risks are and on the police side of this is we're following the policies we have to support the officers so they're not twisted up wondering whether or not they're going to be supported for doing their jobs. then-chief, last question on this before poppy was announced ,commissioner benedicto and i had a closed door meeting with

a few dozen officers to solicit feedback on our pursuit policy. one thing that came out of that meeting and we've talked about this before a commission was an interest and desire to purchase star cheese which for members of the public is a device that allows you to essentially shoot a small object onto a suspect vehicle and it's a gps tracker so it's a way to have apprehension without pursuit. >> i've asked about this previously but i'm curious too if you have any views on whether this is something worth adopting. i know you've said several times that it's been evaluated ,it's being evaluated but i don't know if you have any update. >> we do. we have it in our hands. we're piloting star cheese. i think it's been deployed a couple of times with some some success we have before we even acquired this equipment we went

over to alameda county and spent a day with them because they've had it for quite a while and we actually got to test it and see it and see how it works and learn some lessons from them about the good and not good with chase. so when we took line level officers with us we took the evoque people with us so we do have it small small pilot but we have it in our hands and we actually will be able to report to the commission i it has not been used extensively but it has been used. >> well that's great to know. one other question not having to do with this i think it was in july that these you know, 9.7 became effective one one provision requires the department to publish on a quarterly basis the stop data that it sends to cal doj under state law requires to publish that data on its website is that is that on the department's website at this

time what would the stop data yes the repo data it should be and i'll get an answer right now or at least before we leave this commission but it should be okay. i appreciate it. that's all for me. thanks chief commissioner you thank you very much. >> there. >> president cindy ellison, chief, i just want to touch bases again on the drone are they manned 24 seven? >> no, you're not, commissioner. >> okay. so when you do need them, what's what's the lead time that you need to activate the drones or is it just during certain special events that's happening in the city that you can deploy them? >> yeah so we do we have we started the drone program with the real time investigation center and under acting captain tom mcguire and his team there

so they are they are working every day of the week. we will be expanding in the next couple of months to have drones in the hands of officers at the district station level. we've sent i think 5058 or so officers to get their 107 certification from the faa certification and so and we've already purchased those drones that was in this year's budget. so that will expand our capabilities immensely where we have drones at each district police station they may not still be 24 hours a day but definitely they'll cover most of the day hopefully seven days a week and it's going to give us more capability for a quicker response when those drones are needed. >> see that the drones can be operated remotely. can a few officers also be

trained to also activate the drones remotely? and these say, you know, like you have the capability now is going online to activate that drone because it has a certain address to it and and and i ask how many drones do we have currently i believe active jones we have six i believe that are in the field and we have a couple of i think two or so maybe more with with the tactical unit if all that's in our our reading of the report that we have to report how many we have having to purchase that current purchase i believe is 22 that will be the field drone kits in the district stations. so all that's been reported publicly through the okay ordnance are we put a i guess your report follow up report on how to chase went like you know

i wish the six people that was injure i guess a healthy recovery and thank you very much chief thank you commissioner benedicto just to follow up questions, chief, i know that in the conversation about drones that you had with the vice president we talked about the technical capabilities of more advanced drones. i know separately from that there's an faa waiver for the line of sight requirements. >> i know when i visited the drone unit they mentioned they were close to obtaining that. has that been obtained such that the only barriers are technical or do we still have the line of sight restriction on our drone? >> yeah, we still have it. the line of straight line of sight excuse me restrictions. so we're still in that process of trying to go or get the certification for beyond visual line of sight. okay. so that's in the works. >> we don't have it yet but i definitely will update when we have it. okay. so you're in the process of getting that waiver from the faa? yes. >> okay. and then second, i know that

start date was brought up i've added to my vehicle pursuit policy request that you provide an update on onstar chase at that time too, including the number of deployments and how they have been used. >> absolutely. thank you, commissioner clay thank you, madam president. chief judge just want to clarify a point first of all, i did enough drone cases in hearings. drones are not that easy. you can't just say get a drone. you have high speed chase. those are happening instantaneously. your drones got out positioning. you have to be all over everywhere to have a drone get in a high speed chase. i know the technology is moving along. you're going to station these things but it's not that simple. >> as i understand it, i've seen it. that's very that's very true. that's part of what i was saying earlier. it's it's a little bit more complicated than just putting the drone up and following the car. i mean there's there are restrictions. there is and it's just not practical. you don't have a you know, they have limits in terms of what they can do in terms of performance and know unless you have them deployed in the right areas for high speed chase

you're not going to get them there because those things happen so quickly they may be over and everything stopped right? >> so you're not going to be able to do that in all these cases? yeah, that is correct. you know if you if you're if you're you know, fortunate because some pursuits go around in circles and if you have a drone up and it's that situation it can be very useful but it's not going to be an everyday stop. that's correct. yes, sir. >> sure. yes. yes. thank you, president elias chief, just a couple of follow up questions on the incident when we wereondeng, youxg , the changes that we were going to have and the impact they may have on our on the safety of our community and the street. one of the considerations since was the fact that san francisco's density and the topography is so challenging to navigate and this incident, you know, covered traverse from the avenues, you know, through a couple of neighborhoods into the mission one of the most densely kind of populated

neighborhoods in san francisco in your experience is it normal for a chase to go on 20 plus minutes when you are, you know, maneuvering that many different districts? >> it really depends on the conditions. >> you know, i've for better or for worse been involved in a lot of pursuits. >> it really depends on the conditions and if it's a let's say it's a day where there's a lot of pedestrian traffic and you got you know, people in the streets you you know it's going to be a different decision even during broad daylight if it's you know, light traffic with not a whole lot of pedestrian traffic. so it really depends on the situation and those are things that officers and supervisors have to evaluate. but and there's no one size fits all on this and it depends on, you know, what the the reason that you're in pursuit. you know if this if this person

is for instance, you know, on a killing spree, you know there is more risks to allow that person to to to to go if you will. so those are those factors are things that have to be considered. but to answer your question, there's no there's no one way to do it. but what i will say is this if the conditions are too dangerous and the risks are too high, then the expectation is to terminate. correct. and i mean this was super bowl sunday and this was the mission where normally there are you know and there's an influx of people in the neighborhood to, you know, watch the super bowl at the bars. and this is one of those places where people gather in your experience word or in your understanding of the incident, were there opportunities for a supervisor there to have ended that chase at some point prior to the impact? well, i mean that's a question that at the everything is being

evaluated. i think we'll have a better sense of the supervisor who's monitoring pursuit. you know those questions like what's the speed? those questions are being or were asked and should always be asked. the officers have to see what's going on around them, you know, so i can't say whether you know at this point what that outcome is, what i can say is there's an expectation that those those factors are always considered and should always be taken in consideration. so i know your question is whether or not the supervisor should or could or would have terminated. >> but you know, it'd be unfair to say that at this point and i wasn't asking whether it should have or could have. i'm asking whether there was an opportunity to have ended that chase before the incident and the crash. >> i mean there's always an opportunity to to end the chase. the question is should you in or or it's best part of the equation of whether or not the

risks or the conditions or outweigh what you gain if you capture this person considering those risks. so i mean there's out like i've seen some supervisors in my career before i got here because l.a. had a whole lot more pursuits in san francisco that would kill a pursuit without even asking those questions. that's not always the right answer either. so you know, again, the reason that we give the officers and supervisors some discretion is because they have to weigh the balance of what i was talking about earlier. you know, when you victimize is the last thing you want to hear is when you see the person that just broke into your business driving off is can't do anything. >> sorry. you know i think the better answer is if it's reasonable to chase you know, then that should be considered. but we have to have our due

diligence to make sure that we're not putting lives unnecessarily at risk. >> right. and part of that due diligence is this process right, of identifying whether we were within policy of asking all the questions necessary so that the public understands that there are constraints, there are parameters and there is a process for evaluating and determining whether people have adhered to policy and you know, i appreciate your your ability to enter into those conversations and ensure and reassure both the officers and the public that, you know, we don't take these incidents lightly and i do hope that those families that were impacted will recover will be safe and that this doesn't, you know, have long term impacts in their life. >> i do want to move on to another incident that i read maybe yesterday or the day before. there have been a series of attacks on officers apparently i know that one was cut you

know, with some glass apparently and somebody else was wielding a knife, you know, during a an encampment arrest i believe. >> i really wish that those officers are well. do you have anything to report to inform the public about their well-being at this point? >> yeah. thank you for bringing that up and thank you for bringing it up. commissioner you yes, yes. the all the officers that they thankfully none of the injuries were were serious. the attacks were everything from just totally random. the two officers were in their patrol car last week person just opened the door and start wailing on on the officers and then the other officer when when they she went in to intervene she also got attacked. so i mean it's just a random act of violence. other officers were going to cause of such as the one with the knife wielding person of a

fight and they go to you know do their jobs and break up the fight and make sure nobody is hurt and then they get attacked. so i mean these are kind of just random acts. thankfully none of the officers injuries were serious. nobody had you were several of them were transported but nobody had to be admitted to the hospital overnight. so we're very fortunate in that regard. so you know, that's fortunately that also is a part of the job. we just it's unacceptable. you know, nobody should be attacking officers or anybody for that matter. but you know, it is things that we have to deal with on a pretty regular basis unfortunately. well, thank you for the update and i really please convey my well-wishes to those officers and their families and it is it's a tough job you you know, in a tough position every day and i really thank those officers for putting their lives on the line, you know, for creating trying to create a better san francisco for everyone. >> thank you, sir. >> sergeant, if any member of the public would like to make

public comment regarding line item for the chiefs report please approach the podium. >> commission chief h. brown public the problem is here that i want to give this chief this one if he's elected about ten times the power that he's got he can't do anything. >> you know he's got the as of play is the best union in the united states of america. they get half million dollars a year for officers who are over the hill. who are the people you want to get rid of now that's a good union. but what else they did was they got us out of the air when i got here 45 years away the helicopters flying all over. they got us off the ground. we don't have any foot patrols anymore. too dangerous. we used to have kiosk at all the barred stops. there was a cop there 24 seven you know, two dangerous as a here you got a boat, you got him there. >> the cops are tied.

they're stuck in their cars. i mean give me a break. you could cover this whole town continuously with four drones within the next five years it's going to be all in your face. what you need is a chief who can act and the way that you get there is you have them run for office and show the plank cheap how you like to be able to tell the mayor and the posse to go pound sand that you made a decision and that's what was going to happen. it wouldn't be too bad the situation would you? we got 500,000 voters out there who like to do it. i god near had peskin going for it but he wanted to know what was going to do. >> these people talked to me during the election and all that you know i'm a i got a masters in special ed i was a reform school teacher. i've been all over every court and dealt with every whatever in town for the last 40 years anyway elect a police chief, you can do it. give us ten guys with a variety of planks and all of them will

have foot patrols. let's get back in the air and back on the ground. >> thank you. >> but the evening and i like to use the overhead i hear about my son aubrey advocacy who was murdered august 14th, 2006 i am still asking for justice and and for the people that murdered my child. >> i have the names of all the people that were there that were involved with my son's case and thomas hannibal, our hannibal thomas however it go back or forth paris moffat and you i jason thomas andy hunter and marc marcus carter these

are all the people that were there. >> the two people that are the main ones is paris moffat and hannibal thomas were the ones that were there that day. they were all there that day. >> we talked about all the all solve homicides which i mentioned earlier about how to solve them. i see that and i bring these pictures with me every day because i need people to see what i'm going through. this is me standing over my son. no mother wants this to be standing over her child wishing he was still alive, wishing he was still here. i think about this every day that my son is not here with me and his family and his sister, his siblings. no mother wants to go through this have you may have children and you have children mothers

that worry about you when you leave the door. this is what the perpetrators do. all the names left me my son on a gurney. i am not afraid to show these pictures. >> i think about emmett till's mom, how she showed her son's body something needs to happen . >> thank you. any member of the public has any information regarding the murder of aubrey abbott arkansas you can call the anonymous 24 seven tip line at (415) 575-4444. >> there is no further public comment line item 5dp directors report discussion report on recent activities and announcements so keep director henderson thank you. we just want to announce our director of audits that steve flaherty will be co-presenting on the topic of police audits, accountability mechanisms and approaches for effective oversight.

that presentation is going to be taking place at the association of local government auditors and there are 2025 annual conference in may. it's a huge honor and a big deal for us. >> it's reflective of the four award winning audits that have been done and the hard work that's gone into those audits. so we're looking forward to that and i'll have updates for you about it when it comes up. >> i think they invite the commissioners to those if not you i'll make sure you guys get the at least the invite for them. >> figure out what city it's in. i'll find out our legal investigative teams tomorrow or attending the human factors course develop from the award winning field tactics unit from california post the force options that's going to be on tomorrow morning. this is the final course and accepted and announced all of them before but this is the final one and as a pds use of force training we appreciate the department for hosting this

course and allowing us to participate. it really makes the investigations a lot easier for us to have an understanding and to know and see what the training is like for these programs. our policy director jermaine jones who is here this evening as well is also preparing for the 2025 dgo updates. i know the department is presenting on the item number eight but as part of that preparation mr. jones is attending the various cpd trainings to observe how recruits and officers are trained on the various policies and have that be reflected directly in that summary that you guys will get from us at this week. well since the last time we met our investigator unit has opened up 14 new cases and has closed 15 cases since the last commission meeting. the top allegation is four cases that came into the office this week was again for neglect of duty. also the summaries are going to

be an annual report as well so you don't have to track them. you'll be able to see them in the charts that we provide on these allegations as they come into the office. again, these are the allegations, not actual investigations and outcomes from the allegations which report which we report on separately. we currently have 19 investigations that have been open for more than 270 days. and of those 19 six of 16 of them are told cases that have outside influences totaling the cases. we currently have 103 cases that are pending with the chief's office and there are four cases still pending with the police commission. we have in the audience today a senior investigator in case issues come up during this meeting where we can be helpful if folks want to contact our office directly, the contact information, the phone number for dpa is (415) 241-7711.

we can also be contacted online at gov dawg ford slash dpa. i'll conclude my remarks and reserve comments for subsequent agenda items as they come up throughout the meeting. that concludes my report for the week. >> thank you sergeant. if any member of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item five dp director support please approach the podium and there is no public comment. >> one quick announcement before we move on line item nine d geo 1011 will be moved up after line item six commission reports on six commission reports discussion and possible action. commission presents report commissioners reports and commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at a future commission meeting. >> commissioner benedicto thank you president elias. just a couple of quick items

for my report. one is that we had what is expected to be our second to last working group meeting for dg of 6.16 on regarding sexual assaults. i see that the acp the working group facilitator touched bases in the audience. thank you for facilitating what has been a very collaborative and productive working group process. additionally i want to thank the community groups on 7.01 we received the department's written feedback and hope to bring that back to the commission soon and that concludes my report. >> commissioner clay yes. thank you madam president. so i'm going to give you a we're going to have a presentation by the chief financial officers of the police department on the budget but since i've been charged by madam president to sit in that all those meetings i'm going to give you sort of a little primer before they start. so the public in us we all know

what this budget process is all about. you know here the commission were advisory as it relates to the budget. we're going to the department has to submit the budget to the mayor. >> commissioner kelly did you want to do this when we begin the presentation for this? oh, you want me to do it? let's do it that way. yeah, i think because that way that way we get it. >> okay. it doesn't get lost in other commissioners updates. oh, let them do that and then we'll do it for you before that. >> okay? yeah, i think we're going to do body on camera and then budget and then i'll turn it over to you. >> okay? thanks, commissioner. yes, thank you, president ladies, quick report on my end regarding the pre-booking diversion program juvenile probation department commission president margaret brodkin and i met with judge chan, the presiding judge juvenile and had a very productive conversation with him about his thoughts and support of the program and i believe he reached out to the chief to see if we can have a follow up

conversation because he made a really great suggestion that i believe will have, you know, positive impact on the flow of cases over at the traffic division apparently he recommended that we include some traffic violations in our pre-booking program. do you have any thoughts on that recommendation at this point, chief? yeah, definitely open to that and he mentioned that when director lacy and i went and met with him but whatever month that was i think december. so definitely open with that to that and we do plan to sit down with him and explore that further. but i think that can work and i think it will be good for this program actually. >> would that delay or prolong our timeline for launching this pre-booking effort? >> no, i don't think so. i mean i think if there is agreement that that's the direction that we're going to

go, i don't see a delay from that perfect one date and question there was you know, some feedback provided by a group of community members for digital 701i know that you responded and the grid and the department took some of those considerations or recommendations and to consideration is there a red line version of that document that could be made available so that people can reflect on before we vote or move to that vote? yeah, we sent a grid. we took all the recommendations from the i don't know who wrote that. we took all the recommendations . we put them in the grid so we didn't put them in a realigned version of the deo. >> i didn't ask us for the ones that were accepted which were a number of them. >> if we could see a draft of what that would look like in the flow video just for the ones that i follow up i don't know if we have if the ones that were accepted from the group yeah yeah exactly. >> yeah like because they were responses that the ones on the grid that were actually

accepted some were fully accepted and that's kind of what we want to see the language at this point. >> so we have we have the red line up to that feedback. i don't we haven't done a document with the feedback from the groups so a collective group if that's what you asked and what's the turn around on that? >> do you expect to be asked? i mean i'm not sure. we just have to you know put put the ones i think can you see anything that we generate that we already agree with? >> correct. go ahead and put those in a document. okay. i'll i'll ask then i'm going to make a i'll ask and let me get back to you on that. >> there were some references made to learning domain 11 and the response was that some of the recommendations were already covered in learning domain 11 most people do not know what learning domain 11 is. would that be something that we can take a look at? >> sure. great. thank you very much, chief. that's my report. thank you, vice president carter over seven.

thank you, president elias. this seems like a good meeting for me to issue some thank you's and some recognitions. there is so much good work that happens here at the commission and often the most spectacular contributions are made by people who don't ever get to really enter the public limelight or when they do they only do so infrequently. so just wanted to call out some groups and some people from sf pd and epa first i wanted to thank the commission staff who do an enormous amount of work that the public does not get to see and that even commissioners frankly don't get to see. everything just seems to magically happen perfectly. documents arrive, official proceedings go up, go off without a hitch. the commission i mean the staff

also oversees, you know, every single disciplinary case they plan awards ceremonies and it's just an enormous amount of work. and i just want to recognize christine singh, sergeant sandra reynolds, sergeant rachel shaw and of course our commission secretary sergeant stacy youngblood who is the captain of the ship stacy she is frankly just one of the most dedicated in high performing individuals i've ever had the opportunity to work with and really any capacity. he is totally unflappable under pressure and despite his very serious game face has an outstanding sense of humor. >> i also wanted to give a huge shout out to s.f. pd's cit team. i remember the first time i

read a city report and i assumed that there were 50 or 60 people in this group. they get called out to some of the most fraught and dangerous situations. they are in charge of training the entire department. they do trainings with outside stakeholders as well and despite this enormous burden of work and being chronically understaffed, they operate at an remarkable level of excellence and just wanted to acknowledge that team for that we're halfway there. want to issue a thank you and recognize director steve flaherty from dpa. we get to hear and we just heard an update today about all of the audit awards that steve wins for for thank you for that . >> all of his audits are meticulously researched,

analytically rigorous and beautifully presented and every one of his audits could be hung in the loop. steve is also the embodiment of professionalism his ethics are beyond reproach and everything he does reflects his deep commitment to serving the public. we're getting into the homestretch jermaine jones from dpa who is the swiss army knife of dpa excelling wearing a number of hats and excelling at policy, trying discipline cases and all manner of special and strategic initiatives that he always seems to be assigned on top of his normal workload. although i'm advised he doesn't get extra pay. looking at you paul, jermaine is sharp, insightful, pragmatic. he has a superhuman ability to build bridges and connect with anyone from any walk of life and produces beautiful work product. despite his crushing workload. lastly, i would like to

recognize janelle caywood before transitioning roles. janelle was dpp's policy director. she easily did the job of 5 to 10 people all by herself. she was principally responsible for reviewing researching and offering edits for every single degree being revised. her work product was always exceptional despite all the policy revisions that she was called upon to oversee for dpa . >> but that's not the most impressive thing about janelle . what stands out most is her commitment to public transparency and accountability. when sfp was allowing dozens of egos to stall for years in the revision process, janelle was the one who spoke up in highlighting the breadth of the problem and explained how this was precisely one of the practices that u.s. doj criticized sfp for in its 2016 report. >> when s.f. pd purported to issue policies on social media surveillance and plainclothes

units in violation of the city charter, janelle was the one who first alerted the commission. her devotion to accountability and upholding the rule of law didn't always make her popular among as deputies, command staff and as a result efforts were made to intimidate and pressure her into silence. >> faced with this kind of pressure, 99.9% of people would have backed down. but janelle is one of one. she never clipped her wings. she was fearless. she was relentless in her devotion to advancing the public interest. she still she still is. she represents the best of san francisco's public servants and we all owe her a debt of gratitude. >> that's it for me. thank you, president elias. thank you, sergeant. >> any member of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item six commissioner reports please approach the podium. >> and there is no public

comment line item nine discussion and possible action to approve revise department general order 1011. body worn cameras for the department to use in meeting and conferring with the affected bargaining units as required by law. discussion and possible action for members of the public the material for the following presentation was not posted along with side the agenda as they were not created after posting and were and were not available to the police commission. these materials have now been disseminated to the commission as a whole and were posted online for the public so that they as they were received. they are also copies on the document table by the front door. >> thank you. chief who from the department is the presenting of you? >> yes. oh, i'll start off the conversation and we have a number of people here. we have captain chris delgado from our policy development division manager agencies from policy development division attorney stephen betts. we also have i think that's it. oh, deputy chief i mean assistant acting assistant chief peter walsh and we all

are available to speak. but i just and i'm going to be brief in my comments. i just want to first of all thank everybody in the work group and the commissioners that have been involved intimately involved in this process. the policy that you have before you is the department's offering to the commission for consideration on the go 1011 there has been a lot of work and discussion that has gone into this from community from the bar association, from the public defender's office who's here now? audience and i think at the end of the day as in all policies we ended up with the policy that nobody got everything they wanted but i do think it's worth being offered up is is solid policy. there are some some points from the last commission meeting that were points of disagreement and definitely that's always welcome. they really stand around the exemptions that the department has offered or put in the policy for consideration as to

deactivation and the second thing is the language around officers obligations and the statements after an officer involved shooting. the third thing about recording in at the command post and then the newest thing that came up was an mou by between the department and the transportation security administration tsa for bwc at the airport which we have never had and hopefully once this policy gets approved we will be on our way to getting officers in the pieces working the airports body worn camera so on and their capabilities would be really good for a lot of our work there. so i'll just briefly take these point by point in terms of the exemptions what we have done with subsequent meetings with commissioner benedicto, the bar association, members of the department is narrowed this

down to basically eight areas from dg 08.01 critical incidents where we are asking for an exemption only in those limited situations and in during sensitive tactical discussions away from the public and that dpa has thankfully offer some language that i think we all are happy with and can live with that the highest ranking person usually that's the incident commander has to be the one to give that approval to deactivate in those tactical sensitive situations. this is a very very limited universe of situations. these are things that rarely happen but when they happen they are there are huge there was an add to the language about matters of national security such as presidential visits, presidents and

dignitaries of that nature ambassadors and the like from other countries. that is also in this video and that is what the department is asking the commission to consider and really for us it comes down to a matter of the safety of the public and safety of officers in terms of making decisions about very tactical issues like entries and things like that that we don't want to get out to the general public. you know why we go into this door or not that door or why we use a certain breaching equipment and that was the reason for the exemptions. most of our incidents that we have that will never be an issue but those exemptions are very limited. it's a very small universe and it has to be approved by supervisors. so we want to thank everybody who at least participated in that conversation because like i said, not everybody got what they wanted but i think it's a fair compromise and it's definitely something that i think meets the spirit of what the department was trying to

get after terms of the officer involved shootings. i have attorney batts here and i know commissioner lyons has some some language that we talked about today that i'm good with. but perhaps before we have mr. betts if we can put that language on the record and then then have the discussion and take questions about that. >> yes. although your your selling of this isn't going very well talking about how people are unhappy here. >> well but i think isn't that what they say the sign of a good negotiator isn't it the side of good negotiation is when everyone leaves unhappy? >> that's correct. all right. so before i turn it over to commissioner benedicto who has been spearheading this thing, i do also want to thank everyone for their valuable input and also just to point out that this matter has been amended several times over the last several months. we've had several discussions various versions of the audio have been posted for the

public. >> we also put it up for public review and input and comment and allowed the public to provide comment additions, edits, things of that sort. so this thing has been a a beast that has been on our agenda and that we have finally come to a point where i think it's ready to go. >> so i'm going to turn over to commissioner benedicto. >> thank you so much president elias and thank you for assigning me this video was really oh yes i do. i say thank you to you i think oh my gosh, i'm so sorry. yes, thank you. because i know this was not an easy feat and the amount of work that commissioner benedicto did on this gio was remarkable. it was beyond herding cats. >> so thank you so much for your work. >> thank you so much. president elias i do want to share the exact language of some of the final language changes that the chief and i have spoke about. >> but first i also want to share a few thank you's as well. this ego has been in the works

for over a year before this revision process for this ego is one that i've i've worked on this before i was on the commission on behalf of the bar association of san francisco and on behalf of the blue ribbon panel before that and i want to start by thanking all the members of the working group, both those who participated throughout the working group process and the ones that have remained involved after the working group process including ones that are present here in particular i want to call out julie tron and the bar association of san francisco's criminal justice task force. i want to call out brian cox at the public defender's office. i know the aclu of northern california also sat on the working group and provided invaluable feedback and a recent letter as well. so many of the working group members provided helpful feedback and i want to particularly call out some of our sfpd folks who were on that working group. lieutenant beauchamp, lieutenant meehan and officer pat woods all provided very

valuable feedback to that process as well. >> you know this digital and a lot of post work and good provisions. i want to thank the chief for working directly with me with with the red pen to work on this as well as the whole policy development team. captain delgado, mr. gibbs and mr. betts for the work on that as well. i think president elias for her work. and then also i absolutely want to thank vice president carter ober stone who at our december meeting when this was calendared combed painstakingly through working group versions of the grid and versions that meeting to make sure that certain pieces that were critical to this general order that were lost in the concurrence process and advocated fiercely for them and i think was able to move this into a substantially stronger dijo i'm immensely proud of the d joe we have in front of us. i think it's a lot better than the one that we had in front of

us in december and a lot of that is due to the people i thank but a lot of it is due to the advocacy of the vice president. so i thank you for that. >> i do want to go through the final changes in language. so commissioners the version that you received is the pagination that i'll be using. so starting on page three under 10.11 .05 b there are 14 circumstances that require activation with the chiefs agreement we are adding a 15th one so a number 15 will be added and it will read issuing commands and briefing while on scene during an active incident also to commission staff. i'll provide you a written version of this as well and so that is a new 15 circumstance that will be added issuing commands and briefing while on scene during an active incident . and i'll just go through the language changes and if any of my fellow commissioners have questions as to why then we can get into that. >> i won't hold this up if there are no questions on page

four 10.11 .06 the updated version commissioners have added those enumerated circumstances, the chief noted . so i'll just read those where after the sentence away from members of the public it now says the applicable major and critical incidents are limited to a riot an insurrection or potentially violent demonstration and explosion of a destructive device or found suspicious item requiring an eod response to the scene. an active attacker incident hostage slash barricaded suspect sniper officer involved shooting officer shot or critically injured while on duty or verified child abduction abduction and the rest the language of a number seven is unchanged. >> and then turning to page oh yes, i think you if i may just the beginning of that sentence. >> oh yes. the full revised language i think that was already posted online. but just to clarify that full

language number seven begins with under the direction of the highest ranking on scene member of the tactical company or the event commander during sergeant major of critical incidents when discussing sensitive tactical information away from members of the public. that new sentence i just read gets inserted after that followed by the sentence the member ordering the activation shall record resulting orders on bwc this specific language was in large part thanks to jermaine jones. >> so thank you for that. >> and the last changes are to section 10.11 point zero nine and begin on page seven. so number one, where has criminal investigations the language we revise to read members or persons involved in or witnesses to a covert incident may not review any bwc recording before being interviewed unless first authorized by the assigned criminal investigator. this restriction does not apply to recordings that have been

publicly released and in the final change under number two a initial interview it will now say the initial interview by the involved member shall describe the actions. so a change from summarize to describe describe the actions that the member was engaged in, the actions that required the use of force if the member used force and the member's response the member shall also describe their perceptions including what they saw or heard, felt, believed and experienced before, during and after the incident and those are the revisions. >> happy to take questions from my fellow commissioners that i got the march if there is just the one with the airport. >> oh yes and then that there's a change to 10.11 0.13 airport bureau operations. that section now reads airport bureau members and pieces shall follow this general order except as it conflicts with any federal law sfo policies or any other entities with which cpd has a memorandum of agreement

or understanding mou or mou. a airport bureau member shall also refer to the airport bureau order for bwc. there were some and i'm sorry this came in late but we after consultation just some modifications to that language. may i read it? sure, please. okay. it will read. there shall be a separate agreement in airport bureau order approved by the police commission for the use and sharing of bwc footage at the airport. members and psa shall follow this general order except to the extent it conflicts with any federal law or policy members shall follow the provisions in the approved agreement to the extent there is a conflict the more restrictive provisions so govern members and psa shall also refer to the airport bureau order for further instructions on use of bwc.

i don't see any questions from the commissioners. vice president carter we're still okay. >> thank you president elias thank you commissioner benedicto for all of your hard work on this and also to chief and steve batts from my speedy and jermaine jones from dpa for these revisions. i think that diego is in a much better place than the last time was before the commission. i have to agree about that. >> i had a couple of questions about how some of this would would play out in real life and so chief, at the last hearing a lot of our debate was about why we both believed that sensitive information should be redacted it and the working group seemed to think it should be redacted after the fact by the bwc unit. you thought it should be redacted live in the field by turning off the camera during the incident itself and much of our discussion focused on the downsides of what happens when

if it's done in the field and it shouldn't have been turned off we've lost the footage forever. but i wanted to ask about the other the opposite problem which is it's a critical incident and it's about you know, stressful and high stakes and the member forgets to deactivate and sensitive tactical information is captured on bwc. >> what would happen there? would that just be handed over if there if there's you know, if a suspect is charged and information has to be handed over to the defense, what it what safeguards, if any are there? >> well then the options are yeah would have to be handed over in the discovery process if that person was arrested and that bwc would have to be handed over to your point in terms of what would have to happen from there is we would have to try to get that information, redact it. it's going to be handed over to

the defense. you know everything in terms of the penal code and evidence code rather to try not to have that document go public would then have to be triggered from from that point forward. but the ideal situation is we don't put ourselves in that situation. >> yeah. and so to be clear if that happened you would hand over the unredacted footage we would pretty much have to yeah. okay. so our our district attorney's office they want unredacted bwc and they have to turn it over my understanding they have to turn it over to the defense. so from if that were to happen of that mistake would it then it's up to the partment the da's to try to go to the judge to try to have redacted the things that we don't that we don't want to be made public and that that process would have to be i mean that would be

the option be okay if that mistake were made. >> okay. that's helpful. understood the wanted to ask about and commissioner benedicto feel free to to chime in as well here if you have specific views that on page three section five and then the number 15 that's being added my understanding was that folks wanted this to apply to what was being described as on scene command post and i gather from discussing with commissioner benedicto that this this language is supposed to substitute for that. but i just would love for there to be some public explanation for for why we're adopting this language instead of quote unquote in on scene command post the spirit of this i believe is if this who you name the range if a person is on the scene giving direction during

an active incident and this is for you know, the discussion in the last police commission meeting several discussions is the spirit of this is that those that direction be captured on bwc. i mean the whole conversation about officers saying that you know, they're giving direction and you know it's not documented and they're the ones out getting in trouble and all this stuff. so the spirit of this is that yeah, i think there's been some confusion about command or confusion about command post what a command post is, what actually happens in the field in an incident where you name the incident but when we're out on the scene let's say the captain shows up and they're given direction do this, do that pose that's going to be recorded. you know if it's a static command post three blocks away or two miles away, they're not giving direction to the field.

and i think the misconception is somebody sitting in a command post telling people when to pull the trigger that's just that's just not the way it works. those command post are usually there to support the operation so as not to go into the whole argument that i put forth the last time but i believe the spirit of it is is if you're out in the field given directions or given direction, we want to we want to record that. so that is the spirit behind this. i think there's a lot of confusion about command post and what happens in command post it i think it offers more confusion than what we're trying to get at with this deal which is give it direction. you're you're managing the incident. those things should be reported. you're in the field managing the incident. >> i think i'll add wasn't hundred percent i think this is broader than the initial acting command post because it would both apply to the circumstances we discussed where if you are a you know some sort of command post on scene but also apply if a member of a command staff is walking about the scene issuing

issuing directives. so i hope that it's broader in that sense. >> that's helpful. and last question sorry to toggle back and forth but back to the tactical deactivation, the last sentence that says the member ordering deactivation shall record resulting orders on bwc is it is it not likely or foreseeable that the tactical sensitive tactical information would be kind of inextricably intertwined with the order itself? i mean is it in the in the so in other words there's it's impossible to give the order without divulging sensitive tactical information. is that a scenario that you foresee happening ever or maybe or i don't i don't think i'm clear on the question. >> yeah so the the as currently drafted you're allowed to deactivate for sensitive tactical information but then

it says when you give the orders you have to turn your body worn camera back on and give the orders on camera correct. >> okay so now my question is what if the sensitive tactical information in the order are not sufficiently separate things where you could actually do that so i because this sensitive tactical information i don't know any sensitive tactical information as i sit here so it's hard for me to give a concrete example but i don't know let's let's just say we don't want people knowing that we go through the side door to execute a high risk warrant and the order is going to be go through this you know you know, break down the side door and enter the property like that would be a situation i this is a i'm sure terrible example that doesn't reflect real life but i'm just trying to give an example where it's you couldn't separate out the sensitive tactile information in the order and i'm just asking you is that something in

your view that might actually happen or not really? >> i don't know what i mean. the way i envision this the way this is written you're about to have a discussion about whatever the situation at hand is and it's it's really it's the way it's written is that person making the decision will record i'm directing that no vw cs are on during this this discussion it goes off you do what you got to do and then what's happening in the in the field like kick that door and those things are being recorded anyway the result of the tactics that are discussed are going to be recorded. it's the the thinking and the rationale behind these is in these very sensitive and limited situations is really what we're trying to protect. >> so i don't i don't see that as being a problem. i mean it's a it's going to be something new and like all new

things, we have to get used to these new policies and you have to develop muscle memory. i don't think officers have when they go in the station and they're prohibited from having them all. i know you may very i hadn't seen any situations where where that's a problem. so it's a matter of getting used to the policy and i think these situations are are very limited you the tactical team of some of our most disciplined when it comes to these type of incidents officers out there, they practice their training. you know, they're their when they're called on these type of situations. i just don't see that as being an issue that i'm concerned about. all right. thanks, chief. that's everything for me. thank you. >> can i get a motion to move? >> i move for the adopted great with the added language that commissioner benedicto has prerecord it right? >> yeah. and i guess second i'll second the motion to adopt dejo 10.11

with our labor relations resolution. >> thank you, sergeant. can we get public comment first just for clarification this is to go to meet and confer to approve to go to meet to vote yes or if any member of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item nine please approach the podium. >> good evening commissioners chief scott i'm just here to express my gratitude for all the hard work that went into this. did you pick it up as a better start again? brian cox from the public defender's office i just wanted to express my gratitude to all the commissioners for working really hard on this. the chief scott your leadership of wisdom on this i think you know, it's not always easy to make policy in public but i think it highlights the value of doing that. we can reason we can go back and forth, we can disagree and that we're going to be happy.

nobody's going to win everything. but it's a public process that i think is inherent to the authority and the commission. and so i just want to commend all of you for taking the time to really be serious about it. i also want to extend a special thank you to vice president carter roberson for actually champing this. i think you know but others have said before we wouldn't be at this moment if we didn't have that spirit in that fight. and so i thank all the commissioners for for their efforts here and look forward to more robust policy discussions like this. hi, julie trump from the bar association. i do want to express my thank you for all the hard work that went on during the working group and as the chief knows you know perf came out with a report in 2023 after this work had finished we you know we revised it. i want you to know there's a 2025 report that just came out

so we need to be looking at that. i did want to in addition to thanking everybody for all their hard work and for this ongoing engagement and process that we are all engaged in and the commitment that we've all made and especially this commission to make sure that we have the best and and and best practices and up to date general orders we've come a long way since 2016 when the department of justice became involved. i wanted to say something about redaction and about the district attorney's office because i did talk to the district attorney's office about this and you can send a redacted anything you want. it will be discovered as something that has been redacted and then the defense will make a motion to disclose and the burden would be and i know that commissioner clay knows this and commissioner elias knows this and and mr. henderson right over there he knows this to any of us who practice in the criminal court we know that these motions are

made. it's no different than a motion to disclose the identification of a confidential reliable informant. there's a judicial process for that and for the court to decide whether or not the potential exculpatory nature of the confidential information, you know, outweighs is the the need for the confidentiality. so there's a process for that. >> does a da want you to send redacted information now but would they be forced to accept it 100%? >> am i right? so anyways, i think that that process does exist. i personally think that's a better process to preserve rather than to lose it. but i'm okay with where we have landed here and i appreciate the conversation and that is the end of public comment on the motion. commissioner clay how do you vote yes mr. clay is yes. >> commissioner benedicto oh

yes mr. benedict it was just commissioner onions yes. >> mr. young yeses yes. commissioner yea yes commissioner. yes. yes. vice president carter we're still on. yes. vice president kind of over as soon as yes and present vice president elias is yes you have six yeses line item seven second presentation and continued discussion on speedy's budget fiscal year 2026 through 2027 discussion and possible action i going to believe us madam president that we to be to be continued by president carter thank you speech well we so much i think i you're following on what i was going to he's got to go. >> good evening commissioners. my name is catherine mcguire. i'm the executive director of the strategic management

bureau. and i'm hoping that our cfo walks through back through the door here any second and i can stall a little bit until she does. she'll be presenting the second presentation of the as a pd budget for f y 25, 2526 and f y 2627. >> oh yeah that would be good. yes. thank you. all right, so i got it signed by president elias to serve on this committee this valuable committee for both the one and to revisit here for the commission. so generally what what i glean for our commission and for the people to understand this is our this is our our budget, our wish, our wish list, our baseline budget and we're an advisory board. the mayor eventually we send it and the mayor is going to send it off. but what we're asking for in this budget that they're asking for is a minimum money allocations to operate the

department as you see to get in the read out 85% of this budget is personnel and so that's that's where the money spent. interesting enough as you kind of look at the tree arches and what we got in our reports we know by the nature of our population how many police officers we need for the department. we also know that we don't get that and what we do is we have an allocation we have a number of spots allocated for police officers for the department and and then that allocation although we get that as our budget that's our budget base we only have a certain number of officers to fill those slots . so at the end of the day we have certain for a full time employees that are left in the allocated amount because we don't have the bodies to do the work but that's what we're budgeted. and so when you look at it for instance let's say we need 2400 officers we don't get those we

get 1800 allocated out of that 18 and we only have 14 and if you look at as the example so we have 400 spots that are empty that 400 spots is actually funded at the beginning of the budget. but when you look at it because we need those people when there's a misnomer then from the public then they think we're using overtime, we're getting special allocation. it is that money is that money for for overtime if the 400 people slots that we're funded to and those officers men and women who put their selves out there and work that overtime to help fill those slots. so it's only a misnomer in the sense that you call it overtime there's actually money allocated for officers but we don't have them and these people replace them. so at the end of the day i've asked i have this question have they ever had a year where this happens every year where you have the number allocated but less officers available? have you ever had any of that money left over? that's never happened because you're always in such need for

officers. so that's that's what they come with. and when you take a look at this budget it is a baseline. we're sending it to the mayor's office. they will send it out once we approve it say to them they send it the mayor the mayor is going to do whatever the mayor decides are going to do. they're going to take a look at all the departments are going to send their budgets to the mayor. the mayor is going to take a look at it. then subsequently the mayor and his staff will determine what allocations will be for each department and what allocation will be each department line line item and they will send that to the board of supervisors and that board of supervisors. they will take a look at the mayor's budget and they'll decide whether or not what they want to fund and ultimately they're the last word. but there apparently there is a date i don't know if 48 hours or 72 hours that the mayor and the board of supervisors engage in the entire budget and those special projects and line items you want if you want to try to get them you can ask then the mayor can ask the board supervisor but we're not guaranteed that. but at the end of the day the mayor sends the budget border supervisor ultimately is the person or the people who are going to approve it and they

have the last word. so this is our this is our ask and this is all these these people these great people here have gone through the numbers and did everything they can. they're presented at us to move forward. so now you're here. >> i took your plea for a minute. now you can go do your thing. thank you. good evening, president elias vice president carter oberstar and commissioners executive director henderson and chief scott. i'm kimmy wu, the chief financial officer for the san francisco police department. >> tonight is the part two of our budget presentation and this first slide goes over the budget next steps with tonight's commission is to provide feedback review and take action on the budget presentation followed by the department phase where we will be submitting our budget on friday, february 21st and there will be technical no cost changes. >> then we will move on to the mayor's phase where we will

work with the mayor's office to discuss changes and our wish lists by may 31st the mayor will submit the balanced budget to the board of supervisors and that begins the board phase. >> okay our budget priorities which i have shared last week are to collaborate rate improve responsiveness, measure and communicate, strengthen the department and define the future. our strategic and budget priorities remain the same and the process for priority setting is to review with the command staff all encompassing list of potential priorities weighing in and voting by command staff and input from captains on their daily demands. we also do an annual internal budget requests which includes priorities communicated with

budget requests forms largest requests should align with our annual and department strategic priorities and other requests are determined possibly to ease of absorption into our annual operating budget. our cut target review includes the department will consider the effectiveness of programs where cuts may be necessary and reviewing contracts and purchase orders for possible savings. the department budget outlook ongoing salaries savings for from sworn vacancies as is used for overtime backfill and what that means again is we have a budgeted number of ftes per year and for all the vacancies the savings are then transferred with approval by the board to fund our overtime backfill and reductions directly impact our ability to

prioritize hiring academy recruit classes, ensuring public safety and keeping our streets safe including technology pilot projects, information driven operations center and lastly operational needs of the department at sustaining improvements to oversight, accountability and other reform themes policing infrastructure for records management and deployment and lastly newer vehicles contribute to recruitment and retention. this slide shows our general fund base budget and the total is 737 million which excludes the airport bureau personnel costs makes up 85% of our budget and sworn members 582 million and city civilian 44

million the services of other departments make up 11% and the top three are listed workers compensation department of technology and rent the remaining expenditure categories are each less than 2% and are listed on this slide . >> the department's budget wish list was submitted out to staff on the command staff in early december this year we received 180 requests totaling 31 million compared to last year in december. this is a significantly more number of response this we've received and the top priority ease of these requests are listed here additional staff is the top request totaling 14 million followed by equipment

and technology our general fund non personnel services budget for the past five fiscal years are listed at the top there. this represents less than 2% of general fund budget and the increase you see there from fiscal year 21 to 22 is for rent and the five category worries list shown below in the bar chart is a comparison of fiscal year 23 to fiscal year 24. we have not received an increase and it was slightly reduced and costs have increased for cpi and inflation yet rent has increased which is our top category. their software licensing has gone up by 73% vehicle increase

vehicle rentals increased by 47% which is directly tied to the low number of vehicle replacement budget we receive. training to outside vendors has increased 31% and system consulting increase of 64%. our materials and supplies budget make up less than 1% of general fund budget and the last five years we have remained the same allocation and the top four categories compared from fiscal year 23 to fiscal 24 shows that ordinance has decrease and that's due to less the less number of requisitions that were submitted. >> uniforms are the same. office supplies have increased by 14% and crime lab consumables by 37% since this

slide is our historical general fund vehicle replacements and we have received from a high of 73 vehicles and two most recent in fiscal year 2324 only 18 and so this is directly related to the increase in vehicle rentals up 47% in fiscal year 23 as well as our increase in actual costs for essential shops maintenance as you can see there in the past four fiscal years it has increased with the actual amount of increase at 21% from fiscal year 23 to fiscal year 24 and that 6.6 million was a deficit that we had to transfer funds to cover and the department is on a 20

year vehicle replacement plan when industry best practice is five years. >> the current average age of the fleet is 13 years old 50 2% of our vehicles are at least ten years old and 25% are at least 20 years old. and that is the last slide and i'll turn it over to director to go over the neighbors record management system. >> good evening will sanson mosher director of technology for the police department. as most of you know we've been going the last several years to try to get a new records management system that would be compliant with the national incident based record in national incident speed record system which is the new some new see just an fbi reporting requirement for crimes. >> so we have been doing that and we originally did an rfp

that solicited three vendors and the one vendor that won at the time was central square technologies. after many months that we've been dealing with them we have found that there were over 48 issues that we had with their system and 18 were critical that would not either benefit us or were just completely unacceptable to us that central square was not going to fix for us. so after many weeks and many meetings with the chief in command staff that was thoughtfully presented that the chief made the decision to cancel and terminate the contract for convenience when central square. >> now we could have easily at that point just dusted off the rfp from before and put it out there. but i think what we decided to do since we have the landscape has changed in the many years that we've been doing this and then prop e passed. so we have many more technologies now and the landscape is much more sophisticated. so what we're doing now is

we're at the at the final drafting processes of doing an ecosystem that integrates not only a records management system but a digital evidence management system, a video evidence management system and a real time crime center platform that will integrate all of these technologies to make us more efficient and reduce the duplicate entries that that that the officers need to do. and i think a lot of this you might question why we're adding body worn cameras here it has been over ten years now that we've been with axon with the body worn cameras there is changing landscape with body worn cameras out there and they're new artificial intelligence that can do a lot of the things because now that we're documenting a lot of things on the body cameras and not doing reports for those we need to be able to report on those and make sure that we identify those. so this will give us the best pricing for most things and it'll it'll change the landscape because we've been with our current antiquated legacy system for over 13 years

now and it hasn't really given anything efficient to the officers other than just being able to write an incident report. so this is very important that we're going to be laying the groundwork for another decade or longer. so we really need to have a strong foundation for that. like i said, we're finishing the draft now there are extra process is that we have to go through with the mayors the new mayors budget office and you know, looking at our fees and getting approvals to move forward on that and we're hoping to get the rfp hopefully posted by mid-march or earlier depending on the category and then we'll be able to know what the new timeline will be and go live in 2016 or early 27. that's the conclusion of the presentation will take any questions that you may have. >> thank you for the presentation. i just had one question for

chief which is something i asked last week but i didn't really have all of the facts in front of me which is last week we discovered that our asset feeds for projected overtime budget was going to go up in the kind of 3 to 4 years out from now or is projected to increase. but at the same time there was just two months ago an audit by san francisco's budget and legislative analyst showing that there's was abuse and lack of internal controls in asset pd's use of of overtime pay and so i was just wanted to get some clarity on how much i'm assuming we're taking steps to address the issues that the budget analyst identified and if we have a sense for how much our budget should decrease if we simply just implement some of the recommendations to reduce the two to put in

controls and that would hopefully reduce inappropriate use of of overtime. >> yeah. so vice president carter was telling me that some of what you say abuse and lack of a number one there are controls i'll give you an example of some of what we're facing. you know officers have thresholds that in a best world caps the amount of overtime that they work during a pay period. officers some officers quite frequently exceed that threshold. now to some that's been described as an abuse. i don't agree with that language. i think that's a broadly used word in this situation that really gives an impression that an officer who raises their hand to say you need somebody to work, i'll work but i'm at my threshold and of that gets

approved by a supervisor who is desperate for officers then we end up calling things like that abuse which you know i want to be clear i, i agree with you that's not what i'm talking about. let me just one second is just you know, one thing that was highlight is officers taking sick leave and then working a ten b assignment that that's that's something that was highlighted in the report. but i agree with you i'm not i don't mean to call what you just described abuse yeah so even that i mean there are rules with sick leave that are triggered if an officer takes a sick leave that's in a 40 hour week they they're not supposed to get, you know, time and a half if they haven't worked there for hours. however, nothing prevents them from working so some of this is intertwined in how the rules are are you know, sick leave a sick leave is a it's a negotiated benefit that if people are sick they're entitled to to take sick leave. the situation that we often

find ourselves in when officers don't show up for work for whatever reason is then we get left scrambling to fill those shifts and that's where some of this is generated in terms of whether it be extended in into watch you got people that are working hey, we need you to stay over four hours because three people call in sick. oh, i'm you know it gets back to the same issue. so let me just be clear. yes. are there things that we need to improve on? yes. but i think that, you know, this this broad brush description that you know, there's abuse and no control that's just not an accurate is the description we'll have our day in front of the board where we get to explain what we're doing, how we're doing it, what we need to improve on how much savings that's going to generate. that's an unknown because i don't in my opinion i don't i don't believe there's this, you know, broad abuse that you know, some of the headlines

after this report came out. but of course there are things that we can improve on. so to your question in terms of you know what the the ongoing these are, it's we're going to we're going to need overtime. i mean that's the bottom line just to bridge some of the gaps and i think the base budget is 33 million. >> i believe we for the current year is 41,000,041 million and that's where the salary savings come in because in order to 41 million doesn't get us enough officers to fill the gaps that we have. so that's where the salary savings will kick in. how this plays into that issue going back to your question how that plays into this issue when we're able to get better at the issues that we need to get better at there there probably will be some savings but the work is still going to be there and it's still going to require overtime.

>> so all right, thank you, chief. >> that's all i had. commissioner benedicto thank you, acting president. >> chief, just a couple of quick questions. one is, you know, since we're just seeing the the high level list we talked about like a pilot program for something like star chase. >> is there any provisions for expansions of that program in this budget requests? >> yeah. so we are right now in the process of deciding which technology that we want to, you know, make priorities also you know citywide there's been a direction to to cut the the budget by a certain percentage . >> star chase is not a very in the big scheme of things it's not very expensive but we we also have some bigger ticket items that we have to make some decisions on like the drone program expansion of the drone first responder program which is a larger infrastructure investment. so right now we're in the process of deciding what to go

forward with. we're running a few pilots which has saved us some money. we have some grants that allow for some equipment purchases which will be very, very helpful. but on the 21st we'll move forward at least with the with to the mayor's office with what those recommendations would be. one, just to cap it all off, you know really what our goal is is to use technologies and i think director sense and mosher said this that will make us more efficient. so our officers are you know the duplicate of do duplicative work that we do because of antiquated legacy systems and things like that. if technology will help us reduce some of that it amounts to more field time and so that's really where we're going to have our focus the ecosystem platform rather than patchwork is really important as well and officers have quickly adopted that. some of the technology that we've been approved to use and we don't want to lose that momentum because it's really making us a more effective police department. you know, hopefully you'll see

some clearance rates have been a topic of this commission many occasions and i think in the direction we're going we're catching people and solving cases that we would not have thought before. >> following up on a conversation you had with the acting president as part of the drone expansion, are you considering some of the drones with a more advanced capabilities that we've talked about that would potentially be able to play a greater role in something like vehicle pursuits so the drones that are i know there's the expansion to the district stations but those that are expansion to the same models we already have right now right? yeah not not in this coming year's budget. i mean those those technologies are out there. we've actually actually visited one of the drone manufacturers and saw, you know, some of the prototypes and videos of what these drones are capable of is definitely out there. i don't know of any two part police department right now that are that are deploying drones in that fashion.

>> maybe we will be the first. i don't know. but i think we had the chula vista pilot that i think we looked at. >> yeah, i don't i chula vista definitely they they're they're one of the leaders in deploying drones but i don't know that they have those drones yet the fixed wing drones that have the capability of staying with the pursuit and then to also follow up you know we discussed you discussed a little bit with the acting president, the there's still discussions to be had about the controllers report regarding overtime. >> nothing in this budget would preclude any changes that would be made to reduce issues involving overtime abuses. >> correct interrogation you if it turns out that after the dust is settled and changes if changes are needed are made in response to the controllers report to overtime practices of the department, those could still be made and nothing in this budget would prevent any of that correct?

>> yeah. you know that the operational or administration and oversight of you know overtime i don't see anything in this budget that would prevent us from implementing, you know, different or more improved protocols on that. it doesn't really affect the budget. it will help us you know, if we if we get some savings out of that. >> but no, i don't i don't see that being a factor. >> and as we i know we talked there was a presentation earlier this year about partnerships with the federal government and there was a new article today about the comptroller of the city of new york reporting that the federal government had clawed back funds that are already appropriated by the biden administration. i know there are grants. is there an estimate of how much in the budget, if any, relies on grants or disbursements from the federal government? >> so this presentation that only includes our general funds but we do have federal grants and those amounts have not been reduced or we don't have notification on that.

>> okay. did mr. obama had to make no commissioner, i was going to add that um a lot of those those grants are really programmatic. they're very specific to a specific program and so we'd have to evaluate how or whether we would be able to absorb those costs into the general fund. but if they were to be clawed back but we haven't gotten any kind of communication on those. >> i mean i think unfortunately that seems like a risk assessment. the department's going to have to take. it didn't sound like the city of new york had any warning either. and from what i've seen from reporting from their comptroller, it just sort of happened citywide that they sort of woke up to. so i think obviously we can't plan but this you know, san francisco is a target and so i think it's something that should be a risk assessment conducted that to potentially absorb those. >> that's all my questions. thank you commissioner ye thank you very much.

>> their vice president carter oliver so i have a questions on that on page i'm going to say ten this is general fund are vehicle replacement costs the maintenance costs for 20 fiscal year of 2024 is 6,003,000 now 6.6 million 603,257 and looking at the previous year this is a 21% increase in costs. so i'm just saying i'm just asking the question is maintaining the older fleet costing us more money than keeping them so that increasing includes the maintenance of all the old vehicles as well as any damage for repairs, major repairs would it be better and a wiser investment to invest in

newer vehicles where once your maintenance once your vehicles go down the officers are impacted on there so you don't have the coverage say instead of like i said, five vehicles out there you're going to have ten and then you had additional coverage on there and maybe you don't need that much overtime as well because the amount of vehicles that are deploy covers a certain area. so you know this scene if is a wiser investment to get new newer vehicles i think i have heard many officers and some of the stations say they have the i guess outdated vehicles that are like you said ten year plus and if you drive your vehicles that day to drive every day, i think it's probably maybe two shifts. >> so they're 16 hours or 20

hours that you're putting every day on these vehicles and it's a stress i can i can see you ready to you know, for vehicles going out and officers can't you know can't respond to so i'm just seeing if we can do something about that. so what's your thought, chief? yes, sir. i can respond to that. yes, there is definitely a downside to fleet when vehicles get a certain age and the maintenance costs skyrocket in some cases we've had to make technology adaptions because the older vehicles don't adapt to some of the technologies that we're putting in the newer car. >> so it's just it's a lot of downsize. it's not cost effective. we know this but we have to work with you know, the budget that were given know we've made our arguments as to why in a best case scenario we would have the appropriate fleet management if fleet replacement

in all that we have i don't know that we've ever been there you know there's been and it's only so much money to go around. we definitely understand that. but in an ideal situation we would be on a replacement schedule where we're not driving 20 year old police car that cost a lot to maintain they get outdated. technology is a problem but but we are there so we're going to we have to chip away at it a little bit at a time just based on our budget restraints. but there are many, many downsides and yes, it does affect our deployment when officers on a on a day like this week we get pretty much everybody working. there's not enough cars to have officers all in police cars like we would like them. so that causes some issues as well. >> so i'm look, i'm chief i'm looking at like you said 20 1819 vehicle purchase need

three so while and 20 2324 is 18 that's a reduction and close to three four times vehicles that's curious is there something we can do i guess i guess put it on the either the mayors or or or the board suits ? >> well, you know, we as you know, when we're going through the budget negotiation process oftentimes we're put in a situation as was stated tonight, personnel costs are 85% and so that's our highest cost by far a year in the year out. but oftentimes we're just in a situation where we have to choose and prioritize. you know, do we want this over here or do we want to cars and sometimes that priority has to go to this over here other than cars and you know that's the position that we're in so we try to make the best of it and

try to be consistent with our fleet management and our fleet manager to ask for we're not going to get everything we need in terms of replacing the vehicles. we understand that but again we just try to chip away at it and if we can have some consistency with a long term plan to turn over the fleet like we should, i mean we'll be in a better position. so i'm looking at $6 million 6,600,000 thereabouts. >> how many vehicles does that equates to i don't have that number with me for the repairs . oh, you're looking at, you know, roughly 100,000 maybe a little bit more i think for for police car suvs, maybe a little bit higher. and if it's a specialized like we need vehicles for the drone program, that's because more equipment it's a little bit more but that's fully equipped with all the police you know,

equipment and radios and electronics and technology. okay. thank you very much, chief. this is one of this is the second budget hearing. so thank you very much, commissioner young yes. >> thank you. acting vice president carter over stone chief and budget analyst couple questions how much is how much in salary savings do we project for this upcoming fiscal year? so as of the six month mark we are projecting a savings of between salaries majority in salaries and fringe 61 million which will be appropriated to cover the overtime and the baseline you said is about 41 that's already been allocated. yes. how many hours does that get us of officer you know boots on the ground the total amount of overtime so typically between a

close to 775,000 in overtime hours and when we are well because we know that's a finite number how are those then distributed chief when we are projecting for the next year, you know some of the major events and some of the activities that we know will be happening because oftentimes overtime as you said is you know it's in order to it's a backfill because we don't have the staffing but we do know when we will be having surges in certain activities and we could begin to plan and say well instead of waiting for this overtime to, you know, kind of be requested to be able to assign this so that we're more strategic in planning out that overtime, is there a plan of that sort? >> yes, absolutely. so major events we know they're coming we allocate for that. there are there are factors that sometimes come up that we cannot predict.

for instance, i'll give you two very one very recent what happened in new orleans on new year's day cause on every event that we've had since that new major events like the mayoral inaugural and coming up with this week with nba all stars the chinese lunar new year parade we were having to do extra things and put extra officers out that these events had not have happened with this event that we may not we probably would not be doing. it's on top of what we had planned for extra officers, extra squads, contingency plans, those types of things last year if you recall might have been two years ago now we had to happen bay mass shooting right at the beginning of the year. same thing. it caused a huge spike in deployment just because of fear and anxiety for the lunar new year parade. and you know this is one year we had i can't remember what the what the thing was right before the pride parade and it caused us to have to spike deployment so we plan for

baseline these i mean i won't say baseline we plan for when we're projecting what we need we plan for that when we have these extra things that happened that caused us to change usually higher our deployment plans than those things sometimes it's just hard to account for that and considering that it's been you know particularly challenging to recruit and retain and hire kind of officers post-covid, has there been any thought given into for let's say fiscal year 2627 taking some of this, you know, $60 million projected over time salaries, savings and maybe increasing salaries so that we can recruit more officers because we know, you know, quality a lot i mean, you know, cost of living in san francisco is astronomical and we know that one of the challenges is recruiting people because of the cost of living. so i mean obviously we do not have oversight over this, you know, budget. it is the board of supervisors was clearly detailed but we

could generate suggestions. we have some people here who have managed, you know, organizations and programs and i think that that would be something to look forward to thinking about as you're having this conversation with the chief i mean sorry with the mayor and with the board of supervisors. that's just one little suggestion. quick question is you know, i did a little bit of an analysis of the staffing. we have about 630, you know, leadership staff about four 1450 officers. >> there's about a 3 to 1 ratio. is that pretty much the industry standard? yeah, it depends on how we we're we're we're we're configured the way we're configured we like our investigators the sergeants so they're supervisors they have a supervisory rank but they are investigators some some departments they're investigators aren't supervisors. you know there's many departments in the area where the investigators are or police officers or they're detectives that don't have a supervisory status.

so it's a little bit misleading because of the way we are configured and there's a long story how we got here. but we're here where our investigators are all sergeants. so that's the supervisor we rank that's not if you want to look at a span of control it's about 1 in 8 in patrol. you know one sergeant for every eight investigations almost across the board everybody that's working there is basically of a supervisory rank. so it throws off those ratios industry standards, you know 1 in 8 in terms of span and control is pretty common. some departments are 1 in 10, some departments have and is different with investigations because you know the demands for what supervisors do are different. so i think in patrol we're about what the industry standards on average are but the way we're structured it really throws off if you were looking at the entire department it throws that off because of how we're configured with investigations. i mean considering the ongoing

demand from community and the board and i think some of us here on this commission, you know, having boots on the ground is what the preference is. we know that the only deterrent is if people know they will be caught for something. right. and we know that just based on my anecdotal experience everyday walking on 16th street and bart station when we have an officer there there's no street vending. there are people selling tamales which everybody's happy with because some people can't afford to buy a restaurant food but those are my some of my suggestions. i hope that we do look at that configuration and figure out how we can put more people on the ground and doing some of that work. obviously this is really intensive work. it requires, you know, support and i'm not in that field so that's your decision to make. but i think that there could be creative ways of getting people out in the field so that people feel a sense of increased foot

patrol. >> last question i know that we will be you know, we're being expected to reduce you know, costs are spending in areas that are not having impact. >> how much is soldier and costing us every year? >> um, i don't know the total costs of the that i sit here i'd asked that before and i would like what i do know with soldiering just to the the per head cost is about the same as the training that we send people to the say the international association of chiefs of police conference. we usually send about 30 people there every year. the total cost of soldier is about the same and with soldier and the meals are included in all of that with icp is not officers get you know per diem and all that so when we look at training and the value of training i mean i don't know what you're getting out of this question but those are the

types of things that we look at how much does the training cost? what does it cost compared to other types of training? what are we trying to get from this training and all that? i couldn't i can't tell you you know what any of these things cost but those numbers are there if we need them. >> well i'd love to know what that number is and i know that there's a big difference between training whether there is an outcome expected and we know that if we go through a training and there's a curriculum and we're expected to, you know, answer post-test questions, there's an outcome we have a tangible result when it comes to soldiers i haven't actually i haven't heard what that tangible result is. >> i haven't seen the impact and i just let me finish, please. >> you know, we are constantly short staffed. when i went to sojourn we went for five days. >> we have over 30 officers. that's 6000 hours 6000 hours in one week of people not being able to serve the community that comes not only at a cost as far as our budget but it

comes out of public safety cost and i really need to know what that answer is. >> i've asked it before it but commissioner, we don't have that information. >> so let me just say this we've had this discussion before in this commission not all training has an evaluation attached to it. as a matter of fact, most training doesn't where we're able to definitively say this is the result, this is the outcome you went to the soldier training you know exactly what we were trying to get after you know as a part of the the the reform initiative as a part of bonding with the community, as a part of the officers understanding where particularly people of color their experience with the police department and how and where that comes from and how we can get better at understanding that and be a better police department with when dealing with those you know exactly what we're trying to do a soldier right now we're in the process of trying to develop research to have more tangible measure outcomes that

far as what we're getting from that but just to be fair to your question, there is a lot of training that we go to that there's no evidence attached, there's no study to say this is exactly what you get with this training. so why are we picking on this particular training when you know exactly what we're trying to do? you are there you saw the impact that this had on officers and at the time you had very, very positive things to say about it. so i really don't understand where you're going with this. >> i'm not picking on this particular excursion. i am asking for the cost because we are having a budget conversation you asked for the costs but there's more to that question that you just laid out in front of your conversation. >> chief, i ask for the commissioner. >> here's the thing i'm not getting that there is a thing we have tons of training. why is it that soldier and right now is the issue when the training hours i understand

that. >> i understand that and every day we see in training round we send office to fly we send office to officers to all kind of training where that's what training is. if you're in training you're not going to be in the field. the question i believe that we try to get to training is why are we doing this training and what are we trying to get from it? you may disagree with it. that's fair and i respect that. i just think the way this was presented there is a message that you're trying to send with soldier to message and i'll just leave it there. >> we're supposed to be looking at program impact and i have yet to see what that outcome is when it comes to this program and i have asked the question before and i still don't have a number and that's my job. >> no questions. you're welcome to talk to the officers that have been there and ask them what the impact.

i tell you we had some of them shared with me we have and the impacts have been very early one and so i you know i, i respect that. >> thank you. those are my questions. all right. see no names in the queue. thank you for the presentation and commissioner clay, thank you as well for the presentation and for and for being the liaison on budget matters. sergeant, can we go to oh, i'm sorry. we need to this is a this is for possible action so do you want to make the motion? commissioner benedicto we talked about the prior public comment. well we all when we make a motion first okay yeah yeah i look at our prior the last three years of the commission action here and the motion is to is to get the exact language so we're consistent with our prior practice which is to forward to move their speeds proposed budget forward and i will make a motion to do that. >> i'll second it if any member

of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item seven the spd's budget please approach the podium. >> i like to i just heard about the show journal i was one of those participants and it made an impact on me and i heard this is the second time you brought this up that i heard and i really think that officers that came and community people like myself and other people enjoyed is not enjoyed. it was an impact on us you know we are losing our to to police violence to community violence and they need to see what is happening. they need to feel what what the past has done to us and if they go to these to these meetings there is very helpful and i really hate to hear you down it like that. it ain't about the money.

it's about what happened to us ,what happened to people, people of color. >> you went i don't understand why you don't understand this. >> i do hope i just ask when is it going to happen again? >> i know this budget issues but this needs to happen. this definitely needs to happen and i really am disappointed that you're downing this. you need to go back again and feel it again. maybe you didn't have time to understand what was going on. >> maybe you didn't visit all the places that happened. maybe you didn't but maybe you need to go back and maybe you heard from other officers. >> maybe they didn't want to be there but you should but but that's not but all the other officers wanted to be there. that's just a few not all of them. i've had them cry to me. i've seen them cry when they saw all the things that happened. >> this is a testimony that things need to change and i

don't like the fact that you're doing this. >> please stop this affect me too as a person of color and you a person of color and i don't mean to be pointing you out but i'm hearing you say this and it's disappointing. >> thank you. >> there's no other public comment on the motion. commissioner clay how do you vote? yes commissioner clay is yes. commissioner benedicto yes. commissioner benedicto is yes. commissioner young yes. yes. mr. jonas is yes commissioner yea yes. commissioner. yes. yes. and vice president carter oberstar yes i suppose as soon as yes you have five yeses line item eight presentation and discussion on septic community policy working group's proposal for calendar year 2025 discussion and possible action by daniel kitchell last and

then to take on all right to get i'll see what the break was that i see at the brain okay h h you and i don't mean just all what you have to do if you i'm just following the president. >> yes, sheriff there was no if you want to tweet. >> all right. good evening, everyone. my name is hit ish and as some of you may already know that i'm the community working group coordinator for the san francisco police department and today i'm here to present our department's proposal for the community working group list for calendar year 2025. so let's dive in and explore what we have been working on for this upcoming year. >> next slide please. >> so here are all the objectives for my presentation.

>> among this i just want to highlight the four objectives which is the proposed working group list and that's the key reason why we are here today to seek your approval as a body for our proposed working group list for calendar year 2025. >> but before we dive in to the proposal for calendar year 2025, i would like to highlight some major achievements and provide updates from our community working group unit. first i want to mention the 083 crowd control which was approved by the police commission last year and is now soon to be released. this working group was the first to be managed by a dedicated unit that was created solely to manage the working group phase of the policy development process within our department. the outcome achieved with this working group met our precise goals which was delivering a policy that was responsive to stakeholders needs. it was operationally efficient and concise and straightforward

to follow and i can proudly say that we successfully met all our objectives. >> next this past year we facilitated two different working groups the dio 520 community working group has already been completed and now the dg itself is open for public comments. in addition we are only one meeting away from completing the desired 616 working group meeting at this point. and since commissioner yanez you asked for a little, you know, in-depth update about did you have 520 community working group in one of your emails so i just had some update for you on that too and for the whole commission obviously not being biased. >> so the working group itself generated a total of 107 recommendations of which 72% of them were either completely or partially accepted. there was only a 3% of the recommendations that were not included in the draft or that

we put forward for public posting and the working group completed its meetings in 93 business days well below the maximum time that is allotted allotted by dg or 301 which is 120 business days. some major changes in the draft dg of 520 as a result of the working group included alignment with the recent amendments that are found in san francisco administrative code chapter 91 and california government code section 7290. and i know that that can be a foreign language. so really what we changed in alignment with these amendments is that we upgraded the definitions. we included some new definitions and dga 520 we added translation requests responsiveness requirement which was one of the few new requirements that was in the san francisco administrative code. we also added a section on digital media content translation. we also updated the section

that was related to signage and notification of language access services to ldp individuals. and we added also a mention of the ocr complaint process and know your rights brochure. >> in addition to all of that we also expanded the certification process for interpretation translation beyond just only getting certified by d h r which is department of human resources. >> we also absorbed department notice 2107 two and that provided guidance to identify ldp individuals within the dg of fy 20 as well. we also expanded tools for identifying primary languages and we clarified the order of preference for using interpreters which also specified the role of non-certified bilingual members which wasn't actually in the previous dpo or the current ngo . right. and we also updated the section on data collection. we clarified existing data reporting requirement for the

ldp report that submitted to the police commission. we added in new data points to be reported within the ldp report that will be submitted to the police commission that is still under review regarding its feasibility in alignment with proper. so i just want to throw it out there because you know the dg itself isn't in the public comment it's going to go to other stages of the dg development. so we still have some decisions to make. we also created consistent reporting time frame for ldp reports that are submitted to both oca and police commission as well. >> that said, as i just previously mentioned that we have several stages of digital updated update process to follow after the working group stage. currently the dg is in the public posting phase. next it will move to the concurrence phase and finally it will be reviewed by the chief of police. so consequently the draft bto that will be ultimately submitted to the police commission does have the potential to be changed and

might look a bit different from what the final working group draft looks like. finally i just want to move on to the third highlight which was average time to complete the working group meetings for both working groups over the past year. i know that we had only one meeting away from dg or 616 it's 97 business days which is significantly less than maximum allotted time of 420 business days per dg or 3 or 1. next slide please. thank you. >> next i just want to highlight that because of our successful discussions during the working groups we have developed policies that reflect recent law changes and are responsive to the evolving needs of the communities that we serve. these policies aim to provide improved services ultimately leading to better public safety outcomes which is the goal of all the work we have been doing. and finally i'm really proud of the successful collaboration we have established in the past

year with various entities. during last year's working group process more importantly, this collaborative effort has allowed me personally to develop a deep respect for the subject matter experts address of pd staff government agencies including but not limited to ocr and members of our community organizations and the community at large. i just want to mention that the passion that they have for improving outcomes for our communities is truly inspiring and it's truly been an honor working with so many dedicated individuals who deeply care about the impact of their daily work. so it's been an honor. >> thank you. moving on to some lessons learned from the previous year cycle of working group. i think the most significant insight that i have is that we need to improve our engagement and participation amongst san francisco community members who are traditionally not involved in the cpd policy development process. and what that looks like it

could include residents of the diverse neighborhoods small business owners, merchants and other community members. >> to address this i am really excited to announce that we have a new addition to our working group unit emily equalizer. >> it will be working alongside me to achieve this very goal that i talked about. emily is currently developing a plan to improve our outreach and engagement with local communities and build trust in partnerships and ultimately increase participation from community members who are usually not at the table to voice their opinions or input towards sfp policies. our goal is to create policies that are responsive to the needs of the community members that we serve. great. next slide please. moving on to calendar year 2025 and in accordance with video section 301 or 3 eight that's the list of details that already been approved by the chief of police and president elias for updates this year. next slide please. >> and in accordance with

section 301 all three c from the approved 2025 dga reveals that i just showed which as i mentioned previously has already been approved by the chief of police and president elias. we are proposing two deals for which our department would like to conduct a working group. these are digital 6 or 9. that is the one for domestic violence and digital 523 which is interactions where deaf and hard of hearing individuals. next i'll discuss the rationale behind our proposal for including these two details in the working group last for calendar year 2025. >> so for details 609 which is the domestic violence and bigo i think my main rationale to propose this particular dg or towards working group is because i really would like to engage stakeholders including but again not limited to but really we want to hear from domestic violence survivors. we want to hear from victim advocates as well as sfp

members to really ensure the alignment of this pto with prop e by making the policy more operationally efficient to enhance our department's ability to protect the victims of domestic violence. we also i'm assuming that this particular working group will generate some recommendations that may be more applicable to be included you know in the way of update of the domestic violence manual which we are also updating this year as well. so we want to make sure we can generate some of the recommendations for the domestic violence manual assuring it is concise and user focused. >> i do want to mention that bigo working group itself will not be you know, create will not include the update of the manual in that working group process. it's only for digital but we will definitely have some considerations that we can then utilize to update the manual later on whenever we aim to do that. >> we also want to ensure that

the policy allows for victim education regarding the investigative process, victim rights and resources. and i also would like to take that opportunity to run this working group to identify and address any common themes or citizen complaints that have been received by dpa on policy implementation and address any emerging training needs. >> moving on for digital 523 i think my main reason to propose this is because this particular digital just like 6 or 9 it has a direct impact on the community. >> we also want to utilize this opportunity to review any technology options as a resource to both officers and deaf and hard of hearing individuals. we would like to engage stakeholders including dpa and community members to address policy implementation gaps and or identify any new training needs going on. >> additionally, i just want to briefly discuss the rationale behind excluding the rest of egos from the approved 2025

digital review list from conducting a working group. and if you take a look these exclusions can be categorized into broadly two groups either some of these figures are administrative function videos which mean that they primarily address internal administer their functions and have minimal or no impact on the communities that we serve or some of these videos are either legally driven or procedural videos which means that they are driven by federal, state or local laws or are highly procedural in nature offering very limited opportunities for community impact input to impact the policy by focusing on videos that directly affect our communities and we are stakeholder input is crucial. we can ensure more meaningful and effective policy development. >> finally, if you approved a proposed working group list for calendar year 2025 today that's my planned order for conducting the working groups this year. we'll start with video 6 or 9

as any changes to the policy for digital 9th may impact the update to domestic violence manual which our division as i just said previously also plans to update this year. the sooner we update the policy better we can make informed changes to the manual based on policy updates and then the next working group will focus on this year will be digital 523 community working group. >> and with that i'll pass on to deepa before i can take any questions that you may have and i just want to note very briefly that the working group unit email is also listed on the slide for any further inquiries beyond the q&a that we will have at this presentation. >> thank you for your time and attention. >> yeah commissioners. jermaine jones from epa. i thought i was gone for the day but i'm back. i just want to let you know that we're very supportive of the two egos that sfp chose.

i just want to speak very highly of tasha's work and my interactions in the working groups lately. you know i think i've been on about five working groups at this point and for the last three they've been going great officers and members of the public come up to me after the working groups to talk about how positive the experience is and i can't speak more highly of this process. so i'm looking forward to working on these two egos if you approve them. i know we have great domestic violence advocates in the city and the deaf and hard of hearing community a great disability rights community so i hope you approve this. >> thank you. >> >> thank you for the presentation. it's it's always a pleasure working with you in the working groups and glad you're getting to take the helm at these commission presentations although you might be less enthusiastic about that i don't know.

>> emily welcome and thank you farai for joining the team. we could always use more help. >> i see no oh late breaking commissioner john yes, please. >> who just wants for clarification purposes prop e required public input at the district stations. the work group that i participated in was post property and i thought it was going to be in that fashion but it turned out that it wasn't. >> so are we talking about prop e working groups or we're just talking about department and department working groups? >> okay. i just want to make sure that was clarified. >> thank you. that's it for me. commissioner benedicto i commissioner i raise a good point with the prop e question. >> so for us this might be for the chiefs or for the working groups for the d goes on slide

ten that are either no low community impact or federal or state law driven. are those do you are those ones you in the grant waivers for under the property process chief yeah so that list of those it's on there to oh here we go so which ones are you referring to? >> so since these are not subject to working groups are we as the department can have to schedule separate community meetings for these are they under property or are they going to be subject to a property waiver? >> yeah i mean they're subject to property waiver if it meets the property language and most of these like uniform and equipment classes and those types of things i mean those i

don't believe or of great public interest anything that is outside of these that requires you know the community working group which by the way we do have a vendor now would fall under that property but as it has said they're not in this particular list. >> so i don't know if those there a separate list of those that are being worked on that are that will be subject to property community meetings as the proposition reads if if there's a new diego that's on the horizon that doesn't get the waiver, it has to go through the property process. >> got it. yeah. so i guess my first question is of these egos are these going to be subject to property waiver? yeah well the way it's we have it fashion now is when i get the package for indigo the waiver is is in the package okay and so that comes to the commission office and comes to the commission so it's an

automatic part of the process now. >> okay. so you don't anticipate that any of the ones identified on either of these two tables will have will have to meet the ten meeting requirement? okay. and then for the two that are going to be that are up for approval for working group 6.9 or 5.23 are you issuing a waiver such that the working group will stand in or will there have to be separate property community meetings for those two egos? >> you know, so 6.09 there has there doesn't need to be a separate part of the calculus on the waiver is if there is sufficient community yeah yeah and that gives cause for waiver or some of the egos mean you know die team did you know things like that yeah there's really not public interest in those so but that's part of the considerations if you will. okay and these will have a lot of community input. >> yeah. so so 6.9 and 5.23 because a lot of community input that they'll receive a waiver under prop yes and then for the remaining ones on the list on

page ten those will receive a waiver under the different versions of property because they don't impact the community. >> okay. so as you said here, you don't expect that any of the 2025 approved ego list will require the property meaning no, no. >> okay. that's all. thank you. and then with that i'll make a motion to what are we doing on this one approving. >> yeah. yeah. >> to approve the community working group proposal. thank you. all right. >> second, any member of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item eight the public work policy working groups please approach the podium. there is no public comment on the motion. commissioner clay how do you vote yes commissioner clay is yes. commissioner benedicto yes. mr. benedicto is yes commissioners yes commissioners is yes. >> commissioner. vice president carter i was done. yes i was. carter was on is yes you have four yeses line item ten discussion and possible action to approve department general order 5.13 diplomatic immunity for the department to use a meeting