From happening, her having a stable decent place to live. Youre making a choice right now if you go that way towards police, youre choosing not to give mothers like her house opportunities for housing. You seen a woman earlier who got stabbed. What would have prevented that from happening was her having a safe and decent place to live for her family. What will have also helped out of 11yearold, Mental Health services. You guys are hearing about bad street behavior. Police arent going to address that. Behavioral health treatment. You have proposals in front of you that youre making a choice. Going there, or reducing from the Police Department. These are really clear decisions. I really strongly you to go deeper. Youre only talking about a couple million in overtime. You should be going higher than that. That way, you can do the thing that we all know you want to do. Thank you. Good afternoon. Im the Deputy Director of the centre on juvenile and criminal justice. I want to thank this board for leading San Francisco into true juvenile Justice Reform with ordinance to close the Juvenile Hall. To move the city forward towards goal of reform, i ask the j. P. D. Leave empty positions unfilled. I asked the j. P. D. Not develop or fill new positions. This would be the fiscally responsible next step for the city to take. J. P. D. Has increase payroll for administrative staff while reducing compensation for those providing direct services to include probation officers, counselors and social workers. This is not a responsible use of the citys funds under the name of public safety. The j. P. D. Budget should not increase. Thank you. Afternoon im kelly cutler. Im asking you to support the hespa budget. Also, when it comes to the criminalization, thats what i talk about here all the time. The thing with the tacessers, tasers research and data shows how horrible it is. The we have seen since the creation weve seen massive increase in enforcement in our city. I was in d. C. Talking with advocates across the country. They all know about San Francisco. You need to look whats going on there. Theyre not tracking people getting connected to linkages to services. Theyre not tracking that. Theyre tracking tents. Theyre tracking 311 calls. This is ridiculous. We have a housing and health chris crises. I get it. I totally get, i wish there was some place that people could go. In the meantime, were seeing city funding to be where theyre standing there, you need to move along. Last night, theyre going in doing sweeps. Theres Community Agreement thats off limits. Funding should in the go there. Supervisor fewer anymore Public Comment . Public comment is now closed. We will resume our Budget Discussion with the Police Department and i believe supervisor stefani is next. Supervisor stefani i wanted to respond to the b. L. A. I want to reiterate and state at least that i also want to see overtime controls improved. I think the chief has rightly prioritized reforms. Were starting to see those efforts bare fruit. Homicides are down, assaults down, we have reforms that being implemented necessary reforms. Officerinvolved shootings is down, body cameras are implemented, biased training has been deployed and staffing and deployment unit has been created to maximize use of staff. I have a few questions. The overtime. I have three questions. The overtime is not an additional cost, correct . The proposed overtime in our recommendation . Supervisor stefani the overtime is not an additional cost . It is an additional. It has to be funded. Its theyre saying its funded by salary savings. You can delete it. Supervisor stefani they are repurposing to meet the need for next year correct . They are repurposing existing salary and benefit funding to meet the need next year. Thats right. Thats right. Supervisor stefani last question. The overtime increase is just for one year until the classes and civilians can be brought on board . Correct. Supervisor stefani when you say they have chosen not to implement overtime control. You made it seem like they ignored this. We are putting pressure on them for foot beat. We have one highest rates of property crime. Were having hearings on drug dealing which needs to be addressed. We are asking for more motorcycle cops, more enforc enforcement. We have a crises on our streets with the methane opioid addiction crises. We are taxing our officers whether you like it. Police officers are necessary. This idea that the 1971 number has been certified or solid is first ive heard of it. Last i heard we were at 1887. For me, i sit here as a supervisor who is sworn to do a job. The city charter tells me how to do my job. I cannot look at this and say, i can ignore it when it says the minimum is 1971 full duty sworn officers. I cant ignore that, none of us could can. All officer and employees of the city and county are directed to take all necessary acts to implement the provisionings of provisions the section. It refers to section 16. 123. In the event that happens when we look at civilianization, it says the minimum staffing level set shall be reduce by the same number of positions if the controller and the chief of police jointly certify that the reduction will not decrease number Police Officers dedicated to neighborhood, community policing, patrol and investigations and are not substantially interfere with delivery of Police Services to protect the public. This is our city charter. I wont ignore it. You cant pick and choose what you want to follow out of our charter. Lastly, 25 years ago, this was passed. 1994 was 25 years ago when we decided 1000 not we, but the voters deciding that the minimum we had to have. Our population was 730,000. Its now 900,000. We have a daytime population of 1. 5 million. We have more development. We have more neighborhoods. We have more calls for service. That 1971 number is even questionable. In my mind. Cutting the entire overtime thats repurposed for existing salaries to reduce the standards of services is absolutely out the question. Thats what i have to say on overtime. Thank you. Supervisor fewer thanks. Supervisor mandelman earlier it looked like the controller will Say Something about the staffing whether or not were meeting the charter standard. I have a little piece of paper that was texted to me that suggest that 2019 we had 1887 as the number of sworn officers in the department. I don full duty. Supervisor mandelman i dont know whether were meeting the target that we supposed to or not. We had some discussion in our revenue letter on page 24. I will say theres lot of theres Clear Elements of property and not Clear Elements it. We account for attrition and hiring over the course of the year. Should it occur, we could satisfied that 1941 would satisfy the charter requirement. This nuance answer about were meeting property in the first year or not, with that certification in year two, that nuance isnt necessary. The hiring Plan Suggested combined with the light Duty Officers that are out, plus hiring, plus the others indicates that we would get to the 1971 the second year. Supervisor mandelman i represent a district that i definitely had conversations with you focusing on your department about getting more response to both property crime and street conditions. I dont want to hamstring your ability to do that. Im hearing loud and clear from the b. L. A. Theres an overtime problem in the Police Department already. Theres little bit of discomfort for me in granting a significant increase in overtime when there are these recommendations i think its half a year. It would be good it know with some certainty kind of what is happening with those recommendations, how are we going to get away from the statistics that they are quoting around relatively small number of officers bearing a pretty significant overtime burden. To the extent we do grant additional overtime for this year its incumbent on us to ask you to really dig in on that problem and have an Actual Program how youre going to address it. Supervisor fewer actually, thank you very much. This has been a very long hearing. I want to say that i think that we all in this committee has strong feelings about things. I appreciate our chief and the work Police Officers do of course. This is not about that. Thank you for joining us supervisor yee. Supervisor yee is back. Thank you very much. Feel free to participate if you like. What i want to say is, weve been talking about this overtime budget. I think what i heard from you, chief and from others a be the foot beats is a deployment issue. It is not so much in overtime issue. It is really deployment issue. You yourself said when it gets really busy we have to take people off the beat. Even if you put 1. 2 million in foot beat, theres no guarantee you are going to do the 4500 hours or the 10,000 hours. You yourself said, if theres an emergency, you will pull people from these and deploy people from these. Theres not a line item in your budget for patrol foot beats. I want to very clear, we are not cutting your budget. Is that correct . Just answer me a yes or no. I know we had lot of discussions. Please just answer the question. Are we cutting your budget . With the overtime cuts, yes. Supervisor fewer your overall operating budget . Yes or no answer. Are we reducing your overall operating budget . Yes. With the recommended cuts, yes. Supervisor fewer you are getting an increase in the budget are you not . You asking reducing the budget . The increase is there. We laid out what the increases were. Supervisor fewer im just saying that you have a bigger budget this year than last year. Last year i believe it was 84 million increase in your budget. We have put two earnings tra Academy Classes through. We did that because we know that we need to get our staffing up. I think that what im hearing from people who are sending emails is a falsehood. They say youre cutting patrol. We wont have patrols. That is not true. With your budget, excuse me mr. Rose again, how much is the Overall Police budget . Members of the committee. I want to state on page 17 of the report, this right from the controller records. The budget analyst got this from the controller. Our recommended reduction total 3. 1 million, all which are onetime saving. These reductions would still allow an increase, this is from controller, a 62 million or 10 of the departments fiscal year 11920 budget. Supervisor fewer theres a lot of falsehood going on. I dont blame people. People want more police, they want more patrols. They would like to have a Police Officer in front of their house if they could. Im saying, your budget is increasing by 62 million. To say that we are cutting our budget i dont know who is telling people that were cutting your budget is not true. Were kes increasing your budget by 62 million. To stay we are not adding more Police Officers is not true. We have added 155 new deployed officers in this years budge. Were upping up to 205. And 250 in 2021. There is not been a proposal to cut any those Academy Classes in these discussions and Everybody Knows that. I dont know what emails you received. Supervisor fewer im not blaming you chief. I allowed you to speak. This is the first time ive been able to speak. Please may i finish my sentence or comments. We have been receiving emails. This is not a reduction in the Police Department. Youre getting the Police Department is receiving 62 million increase. This is not eliminating patrols. This is not eliminating foot beat. Lets be clear about that. That is simply not true. I know that people love to exaggerate and they love to expound on if you dont do this t then its doomsday. This is the trumpism of our society now. If you dont do this, then its all hell and were not going to have any Police Officers. That is not true. The truth is, i sat on this Committee Last year. The budget legislative analyst gave a recommendation that you should look at overtime protocols. We actually approved a very large budget last year. And still, there hasnt been protocols put in place. If you were sitting in my position, when we have 11yearold attempting suicide because they dont have a home and 500 million of ask from the community, the majority of people who are living on less than 50,000 a year and they say, i would say to them that we would allow 2. 4 million increase in overtime but not require any kind of protocol. You talk about the charter, you talk about morality, this is simply immoral. I understand that you have over 20 million overtime budget. This is not saying you dont have an overtime budget. This is saying you have 20 million overtime budget. Youre able to work within confines of your budgetary restrictions. Weve been able to actually achieve a lot. I think for those of us who look at these large budgets in the amount of overtime, i understand that they are repurposing money but it is a jurisdiction of this committee that sits here before you to determine how the salary savings are repurposed. That is why we are here today. It is you to bring up a proposal, it is for us to say whether or not this be the determined, this is how this money should be repurposed. Let us not fight about, this is my money, i own it because its my salary savings. Salary savings goes back into the general fund. Unless we decide as this committee here, who is the last firewall between the taxpayers and the government expenditures that we say whether or not this should be repurposed. Im not blaming you for what weve been hearing. I do blame others that are really spreading falsehoods. It is simply quite frankly not true. It is a 62 million increase in the budget. It is not true that your budget has been cut and cut. It makes it sound were taking away 62 million from you. These numbers are so big, even on this budget committee, we have 2. 2 billion budget. These numbers are so big. Image barely i can barely get my mind around it. Behind every dollar we spend, that is a dollar earned on the hard working backs of san franciscans. Today, i want to say, i am ready to repurpose the 1 million. Im happy to come to a compromise with you about the overtime. I will not release 2. 3 million of overtime to your department. Even though our wonderful harvey rose recommends that we sweep all of it. Im willing to come to a compromise. Im not willing for those of us in this room here to continue the lies about your budget being cut. It is not being cut. It is being increase by 62 million. I think that really shows that we also really appreciate Police Department, chief, i think youre going in the great direction. I would never want your job. I think it is incredibly hard. You being our chief of police is highly honorable work. Therefore, chief, i think it is time that we came to a compromise about our overtime. I think that you will see consensus on the board and we have heard from some folks here they are willing to cut the full overtime amount and sweep that into the general fund. However, i think theres some of us because this board is not 100 on board with that, we have people on this board that dont fully agree, im hoping we can come to a compromise because we work collectively, even though we will take a vote. We Work Together. I have to say if i been harsh, it is because of the misinformation. I think that as our chief, you need to set the record straight. Supervisor ronen do you have something to say . Supervisor ronen i have not chimed in on the overtime yet. I wanted to do that. You really appreciate chair fewers comment and agree with them almost all of them. I also have tremendous respect for you chief scott. When you say you need something, it holds a different weight because you are a straight shooter and you dont play games. I know that when you are seeking to do something, youre seeking to do what you say you will do. I think that we have an overtime issue in general in the Police Department thats been there forever way before your time, we havent gotten it under control to hear from the b. L. A. , what percentage of so many officers salary is from overtime, can you tell me what you were telling my on the side. Over 50 madam chair, supervisor ronen. We looked at overtime as a percentage of total salaries, if you take the top 20 Police Officers, the range of that percentage that is overtime to total salaries a low 69. 2 as i recall. I believe im correct to about 82. 3 high. Its a huge percentage of overtime pertaining to salary. If you look at the entire force, we estimated that approximately 26 of the sworn officers get 50 of their salaries in overtime. Their overtime is 50 of their base salary. Were not saying that we cannot document that any one hour of overtime is not justify. Were not making that representation. We are saying there are literally very few overtime controls as has been pointed out. The Police Department had stated they are in agreement they were going to implement some controls. Which never happened. Yes the overtime as a percentage of salary is high. As pointed out by the supervisors, when you work that much in overtime, thats got to affect to some extent. Your ability to provide services to citizens of city of San Francisco. Supervisor ronen this wasnt you, chief, someone put out there that were cutting your overtime. The implication is that if we dont support this request, if that were not foot beats arent important to us. I want to put out there that finding out how many foot beat officers we have in market. How many foot beat officers we have in union square, how many officers we have serving tourists areas of San Francisco compared to foot beat officers we have serving the neighborhoods. Morning rush hour and night time rush hour, foot beat in 16 park station where my constituents are getting assaulted on a daily basis and have been told that may or may not happen depending on this overtime. Thats not a fair position to put us in. Thats not whats happening here. I do have to say that weve been put in a bad position here. I hope that compromise can be reached. Im very skeptical about absorbing this money. We can Work Together to make the foot beats we need happen. Thank you supervisor. Supervisor fewer chief like to echo the fact that, were so appreciative that youre here. We know its not easy. We though we have problems. You want to say thank god youre here. Lets come to a compromise. I think that we have heard from every supervisor as you know. I will ask my colleagues, i think that we are in agreement we would repurpose to the general fund 1 million. Can i see a consensus there . I think that your other b. L. A. Recommendations you has agreed to. It is generous the b. L. A. To recommend all those positions. Now thats a big lift. I do those positions should be temporary. As you start to redact and get all that out of the way, it would seem as though you would need less and less. You said youre working on the retirees. I would imagine, im going to say also, i would put them as twoyear position myself. Is there appetite on this committee to put those positions on a twoyear you can always bring them back if you need that. We agree to that. Supervisor fewer okay. Were in agreement with those things. I think what is youre in agreement also with civilianization sort of five officers. That one. What were not in full agreement with now is overtime i believe. Also, the union square. I would say that i would ask you to work with our budget analyst around a compromise here. I want to say that i, myself, would probably sweep all that money. Were a 5member committee. No one opinion is more important than any other members committee. We have two people on our committee that are on. The fence. Were looking for a compromise. Other thing that we are having issue with is the patrol areas around union square. I understand that theres great need. I actually think that should not out of the general fund. I cannot vote for that. I have heard a little from supervisor ronen. We have not had consensus on that. Im going to leave that in case people would like to have more discussion about what the plan is. What are the measures for efficacy. How do we measure that . I know this is important to the mayor also. For the last item. Im not conclusive on that yet. Supervisor fewer lets do that. 700,000 going to a patrol of either retired officers or whatever. I think we dont have that consensus on that. Mr. Controller, have you been keeping track of where we have consensus and where we do not . Am i missing any of the points on any recommendation . I hope someone keeping notes here. I would say to mr. Controller that i think that it is intention of this committee to repurpose 1 million in tasers that were in reserve. It is to accept the b. L. A. Recommendations where there are agreements with the chief of this department and that you, the b. L. A. And the controller and whoever part of the beat, will come to a compromise about the 2. 4 million. Then, also, we will revisit the patrols out on the union square. Colleagues when we like to further that conversation . Would you like to be tomorrow . We are also going to be meet again on wednesday to actually do some more deciding. We can come back and vote on wednesday on that particular item also. Can i have clarification on the timing . If somebody supervisor fewer sure. Tomorrow ewill hear the housing bond. That is you president yee. Well hear from maybe were going to hear a presentation. We have seen budget proposals, one position here, two positions here. We actually dont have a handle on how many they actually have. How it impacting other stations. We could have discussion tomorrow. It may not give us enough time because actually it is almost 6 00 now and were convening back at 10 00 a. M. Monday well have full day of public testimony. Be prepared to be here late and get at good night sleep. Well be listening to lot of people. Well come back on wednesday, on wednesday we will hopefully discuss very few Department Budgets and then make a decision. We have actually to wednesday. Chief, do you have a comment comment . We will be ready at the board if the committee wishes. Supervisor fewer i would say that i think that the issue about the union square thing may take longer than tomorrow morning. Why dont i make a suggestion we bring everybody back on wednesday, just to discuss that particular item. If youre ready to have a proposal with the b. L. A. By tomorrow, we can actually hear that through the b. L. A. You dont have to come again. You spent all day here. We can make that decision. Is there a consensus among the board around that schedule . Okay. That sounds good. Mr. Controller, have you taken note of the things that we have agreed on . I want to say to the chief and staff, thank you very much for this questioning. Thank you very much for answering all these indepth questions. All of us heard this and public and people in the audience. Really learned a lot about police operations. And nuances of deployments. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you for being so cooperate i and actually i think in this collaborative spirit, i think of this crazy sort of city budget process that we have. You have a nice night. Thank you karen. Now i think, i like to bring up the Fire Department. I think we have consensus here. Im really glad i about that. We love the Fire Department energy. Good afternoon supervisors. We worked behind the scenes little bit with the b. L. A. And we came to agreement with battalion chief position for our health and safety officer. We will be making up the difference between the funding between that position and what the civilian position would be. That was my understanding. Supervisor fewer b. L. A. Do we have consensus . Do we have agreement . Yes, we do. As the chief stated, were proposing to fund the position as an h40. Which is lower classification. Supervisor fewer sorry, president yee cant hear you. The salary benefit cost of the battalion chief position is about 265,000 a year. The difference between that position and the civilian position is about 53,000. In addition the department is proposing i believe assortment of areas attrition and cost of equipment to make up that 53,000. Supervisor fewer im so glad weve come to agreement. Chief, good luck on that. Thank you so much. Supervisor fewer lastly. Thank you chief nance for waiting so long. We all knew it would be a long night. I didnt think it would be so long. Thank you chair fewer. Supervisor fewer chief, could we have b. L. A. Report . Department proposed juvenile Probation Department proposed 42 million budget for fiscal year 1920. Departure proemed our recommended reductions, which is summarize on page 38 of the report and shown in more detail page 39 of the report. To the proposed budget total 372,537 in fiscal year 1920. Recommended reduction, all our are ongoing savings. We have full agreement with proposed recommendations. Good evening. Chief allen nance. I want to thank the mayors Budget Office and the b. L. A. We are in agreement with the budget and legislative Analyst Recommendations for the juvenile Probation Department. Supervisor ronen i wanted to thank and apologize chief nance for being here for so long today. Youre a trooper. Thanks for staying outwith us. I wanted to suggest to my colleague and you and our budget staff some additional judgments to adjustments to your budget. I believe its very problematic that weve had two thirds reduction in number of youth in Juvenile Hall. We closed down Log Cabin Ranch and yet we havent had corresponding decrease in the budget. We spoke last week about cutting 23 positions over the past five years. But that represents only 7 reduction of your staff. This reduction clearly hasnt matched the significant decrease in young people under this supervision of the department. Just last week, supervisors on this board made the decisioning to close down Juvenile Hall by december 2021. In order to do that effectively, we need to consistently look at the budget over the next 2 1 2 years to make smart decisions with regards to vacant positions and positions that are no longer required for daytoday operations. Im exited committed ensuring that workers at j. D. P. Not laid off and we find appropriate places for the staff. I dont believe that we should be expanding staff at j. P. D. At this time. I wanted make two recommendations to my colleagues today that i hope you will consider. The first is the chief nance came to us last weekend and informed us he has six vacant deputy probation officer positions that he has been actively hiring for but that continue to remain vacant. My office and budget and legislative analyst were inform by chief nance directly that two of these positions are to replace staff who left year ago. One was to reinflation on duty probation officer who redoored and other is to replace a deputy probation officer who was promoted supervisor in june 2018. This position was specifically to cover the Electronic Monitoring Program which right now the supervisor is doing on top of her new job. Im not suggesting we touch those two positions. The other four positions that are vacant are for new roles within the department and those are the particularly four positions that i think that we should consider eliminatings. Two of the positions are for deputy probation officers to be deployed middle school as schoolbased officers. Two of the positions will be assigned to facilitate cognitive behavior groups. Those are the four positions that we could consider cutting. At this point, so early in the reform process, i do not believe it is appropriate nor beneficial for j. P. D. Adding these roles without input. The Blue Ribbon Panel should determine whether to have probation officers. Already theres lot of skepticism among juvenile justice experts about these ideas. For example, Research Published by the annie e. Casey foundation in 2018 indicates that putting probation officers in middle schools will impact youth of color and will have a will not have a preventive impact and increase likelihood will end you in the system. Having p. O. In middle school is to feed school to prison pipeline. Riverside is facing a lawsuit filed by the aclu. Im hoping we can remove four deputy probation officer positions from the budget. If the blue Panel Recommends adding these position we can consider adding them next year in the budget. Second, the second change to j. P. D. That i would like colleagues to consider does not have any fiscal impact on the department. Ill start with the window and multipurpose room. That is a safety hazard. That room is being used routinely for young people and Juvenile Hall for visitation, for interviews with the attorneys and other social activities. That needs to continue to be a priority. That is an expense city would need to incur. I suggest we move forwarded with that. For the next 2 1 2 well have young people come drug the San Francisco Juvenile Hall. They should be given an opportunity that will have space thats safe that we would hope for the young people in custody. I think thats a reasonable expense. I dont know what the future for that facility will be. I think that notwithstanding the ordinance to close Juvenile Hall, those remain two important and valuable investments for the city. Supervisor ronen thank you. Im not suggesting then that we change the capital mean. That makes sense. I put before you and your consideration, cutting those four positions. Ill repeat, that are new roles for the j. P. D. That dont currently exist now. That we eliminate the authorize but unfunded position that will not have any impact on the budget. Supervisor mandelman i dont expect to have definitive response now. Thank you for question. The repurposing of existing Juvenile Hall position to provide cognitive behavioral intervention is consistent in line not only best practice for juvenile justice but it allows us to reframe the focus of probation officer visits with young people so that it isnt just about making sure that theyve not violated conditions of their probation. It is about building capacity of young people and building skills and making certain the needs are addressed through the referrals that probation officers making. Its consistent which allowed San Francisco to achieve incredible reduction in the juvenile Justice System. That could be problematic and cause numbers to increase. I completely agree with supervisor ronen that with the Blue Ribbon Panel and the work that group is doing and the reforms that they are seeking to achieve will certainly help form the future of our department and our work. I also recognize that we have an obligation to continue to operate the department effectively to continue to improve in the Service Delivery to young people and their family. To the extent that we are not able to do that by taking positions out of areas where they are no longer needed and augmenting services where we see gaps and our Service Delivery, i think that certainly could be problematic. With respect to the probation officer position that allow us to continue to engage young people in our middle schools and while i can submit that im not read the data, i can tell you that several years ago the Probation Department had a grant to have one probation officer assigned to a middle school here in San Francisco. One the middle school, one of the larger contributors to referrals for young people in those schools are our juvenile Justice System. The partnership we were able to create the groups that probation officers able to facilitate on the site and the work that we were able to do with the counselors in that environment, we were able to reduce the number of young people that were coming in our juvenile Justice System. As we reduce the number of youth in the juvenile Justice System, this is our opportunity to pivot to prevention. This is our opportunity to leverage the things that have worked, to maximize and expand upon those strategies in order to continue to drive down those numbers and to achieve additional benefit with respect to young people and families in the city. I would propose that we be allowed to continue in that regard, ultimately it is my belief whatever recommendation come from the Blue Ribbon Panel panel the city and department will need to reframe its priorities to meet those needs. What does school based probation officer in a mill school do . Several things officer can do is facilitate groups. Our capacity to be on site to work with the staff in the school to help problem solve to help young people and practitioners to understand the role of the juvenile Justice System and what the alternative options are. That is an incredibly valuable resource. We are not seeking to implement an informal probation or Supervision Program with young people in the schools. Its clear part mandate for the state is not only to respond young people who are arrested and refer to the
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.