Officers, that constitutes 9,000 line items request for each category that has to be cleared. So we get multiple requests, which we have gotten for different time periods, of 2200 officers, that turns into 20,000 requests. So a total of 114 requests that we have received, that is equal to 111,000 line item categories that have been to be cleared, because we have to tie the request to the requester to the officer, to the time period, to the particular thing the requester is requesting. We have requests for officerinvolved shootings that resulted in injury but not death, we have just a variety of requests that we have to respond to individually to what that person asked for. So in the prioritization, we have been looking at the order that we received them, the ability to search for the records, the number of requests received for the same officer or event and the ability of the requester to narrow. So if someone is able to ask for a specific event, we can go to that event. Its much harder for us to approve a negative. Its prove a negative. Its much harder to determine we have to do the same thing as the d. P. A. , go to the various places where data is kept, they are not all kept in the same place. The physical files, go through them, make a determination. Once we do that, then we can make an electronic finding that it was yes or no or if we need to go to the city attorney, we can mark it as pending, and we know that record has been accessed and reviewed. We dont have to rereview it. So how is the process working for the unit . Its very laborintensive. One of our Biggest Challenges is the tracking of the request. We have been working with our vendor to come up with a better system that allows us to attach multiple requesters to single officers. What we have to do is have a request with 2300 officers and that one request and another request that would be all, and another request that has 60 officers. And its not an efficient process. And we are getting ready to release records, we have to go through and review each request to see which requesters have requested those files and then provide them to the requester. So we have identified additional employees. And we have them in the background process. That will take several months. But we anticipate that once they come on board, well be able to speed up the process. We are working with different vendors with regards to technology to speed up some of those challenges as well. Once, as was mentioned earlier, we are able to have one clearinghouse for these files, and we are able to post them instead of uploading to each individual requester, that of course will save time as well. And it will make it so individual requesters dont have to get into this queue. The requests will be more easily accessible. And as far as the requests that weve received so far, which we have similar requests here to the sfpd and d. P. A. We have had 113 or 114 requests total. Weve closed 36 of them. Weve released 32 incidents that were responsive to 220 times. Because requesters may request multiple officers multiple times. So 32 incidents went out 220 times. We had release records regarding 98 members that were responsive records for 202 of them or determination letters that are categoryspecific that went out to 220 people for a total of 422. Can you slow down a little bit . Yeah im getting lost. The 32, can you say that part again. 36 closed. Go. The numbers on the paper. The hardest part about this is the Data Collection. So getting these numbers, like when you say come back quarterly to us, until we have the technology in place to you have that right now. Yes. These are just notes ive made. Its not an official printout. Can you answer Vice President taylor . Yes can you explain what that represents . Weve released 32 incidents. I believe 29 officerinvolved shootings and 40 g. B. I. Events. Those were involved in 220 different requests . Is that what you said . They were responses responses, documents with that 220 times for the various requests. Because they could be requests for officers. So if they requested we do officer, an officerinvolved shooting. We consider that to be two different categories. How many times would those 32 incidents . Whats that . Went out 229 times for the 32 incidents . Yes. 220 times, approximately. And the numbers change every week, obviously. One thing we do try to do is we do try to release documents every week on a schedule so we know that we have items in the queue, and we are on a schedule and we try to release them every week. So we have released documents regarding 98 members. As of last week. Its probably more this week. The responsive documents were 202 responses were sent out over the 32 incidents so that 94 members and determination negotiation letters for category categories of clearance categories were 220. So we may be able to clear that someone did not have an officerinvolved shooting. Thats the category they were able to search. Or they were able to clear they had not had a Sexual Assault or dishonesty. But we are not able to determine whether or not theyve had a use of force that resulted in Great Bodily Injury easily. So we have over 12,000 injuries regarding use of force in this system that dont differentiate the type of force or the type of injury. So each one of those, we have to go into, pull up the report, read the report, they have to drive to the hall of justice, check the photographs, see what we can do to determine if it did fall under Great Bodily Injury or not. So its pretty laborintensive to make a determination. And we dont have medical Records Associated with it. So we may not know the extent of the injuries. We dont know what happened that night. We interrupted you. You have more to present . Your time you have more questions . I feel like its better if you ask me questions and ill try to answer them. Let me put you on the spot, since your name is on the letter that the Public Defenders Office submitted to us. And you may have answered this already. Theres this production of 23rd letter extense. And i really dont know what to make of that. Can you help us understand whats going on there . Its to comply with public records act, we try to maintain contact with our requesters. So we do a production every week of the productions that we have done for the 98 officers, i think the public defender has gotten at least 73 of them. But in addition, because they have the 2300 officers, we just send out a letter saying we are still working on your request. We havent forgotten about you. Well be sending them records every week. We have this same issue of multiple attorneys asking for multiple officers. And we have asked them to narrow or prioritize. And they have not. So to your earlier question of what would make it easier for us to actually attempt to provide records related to cases that were current, if the attorneys could coordinate so only one person is asking, making a request and then not making multiple requests for the same officers, because we have to create a line item in our system, a tracking number, send a letter thats specific to that specific request, and just creates more work. Theres a redundancy there yes. Which doesnt make sense. The 23rd extension, that was for the 2300 officers. Thats for the big request for all the officers . I dont know which number that relates to. But i imagine they have gotten one to send every two weeks to let people know we are working on it. But we also release records every wednesday or thursday. So this covers all 2300. But you are constantly releasing information, but you are sending this letter out every two weeks because thats what you feel you are responsible to do . Yes. All right. I have a question about the public defender. And i encourage the public defender to sit down and work with the department. To me, when a request comes from the public defender, it comes from the p. D. s office. And they second request from a different person in that office is now redundant if it covers the same individual. How many times can we get a request for one individual from the same entity . Thats the question i would have. Yeah. Individually responsibilities to each of our clients so they have to be they need to coordinate that. Because the production is just one time. The documents will be the same, right . Right. It goes up on appeal and you didnt make that request as part of your case, it turns out late i see. You have to make the request. Theres a case that holds criminal Defense Attorneys personally liable if you dont ask for pictures or related information. So thats probably why each individual public defender is asking for that, because theres a horrible case [off mic] that helps explain this letter. We also have requests from private attorneys as well, which we are working on. Okay. Commissioner elias. I want to talk to you about the staffing. I know that im assuming theres two different staffing situations, one which is before you receive the money that was allocated to your department for 1421, because its my understanding that the Police Department receives more money than d. P. A. Did with respect to the 1421 budget. So i want to talk about how many staffing individuals you have in this department, because d. P. A. Has four attorneys, and they have fulltime jobs, so they are doing this on the side. Its my understanding the Police Department has certain staff that have, this is their fulltime job. So i want to know what those numbers are. We have two employees that are dedicated to this, but they also have other responsibilities. Eight are in the hiring process, and we are in the process of hiring an attorney. We are conducting interviews. So within six months we should have adequate staffing. Right now you have two civilians. Yes. That are processing the requests. You have the process of hiring eight more civilians . Yes and one attorney. So thats nine, in addition to the two . Yes. Okay. And then the other thing im going to ask is im going to ask also that you report quarterly as to the process or how many cases youve released with respect to the 1421. And im going to ask the next time you present that you present data so that we have numbers, because both the Commission Office and d. P. A. Indicate they have a master spreadsheet that allows them to track this data in terms all the requests that are coming in and what they are producing. Ive seen the Commission Office when, and its phenomenal. It really does track everything. And i think you should have something to that effect, because its very important to know all the requests that are coming in, because when i look at the public defenders presentation, and you have five percent sort of return on the requests that have been made, thats lower than d. P. A. , and i think you need to do better in terms of processing these requests and getting these requests out. So im going to ask that you go ahead and include those numbers. I did see the list of sort of logistical procedures that the s. F. P. D. Does in terms of once it gets the 1421 request all the way until the end in terms of when its released, and theres a lot of steps that sfpd has in there. Im not sure if theyre sort of beneficial or even required. And maybe you can look into that sort of list of procedures and try and see if you can streamline some of that, because some of it does seem to attribute to this delay that you are having. Okay, commissioner hamasaki thank you. So that was a little shocking. So you only had two civilian employees since the law was enacted to work on this . Yes. We released 32 incidents. I mean, considering you only had two people, that seems like a fair amount. But im just shocked at i didnt realize how underresourced the department was as well, in regards to s. B. 1421 resourcing. So im going to i was trying to understand this with commissioner taylor too. When you say you closed 36, does that mean that youve produced files in response to requests for 36 incidents . We dont have that necessarily specific to that. But one of our Data Collection problems is we are working with our vendor to create the system that we need to be able to push a button and spit out these numbers. We thought that it had taken place. We thought that we were moving forward with that system. And its held up somewhere in the budget process, because the way that money is allocated, that funding wasnt allocated, is my understanding. Oh, no, no, i understand. So that is one of the problems with our dataset. So the ones that was closed, some were duplicate requests. Some have been fulfilled. Some of them, they have been requests that for 1421 but didnt actually cover materials that we have requests for bias for instance, under 1421, which is not one of the categories. But overall, we have closed 36. Okay. And so you said the other number you gave was there was 32 incidents, 29 of them being officerinvolved shootings, and three of them being incidents involving Great Bodily Injury, is that accurate . Yes. Is there i guess is it that youve just come across o. I. S. And g. B. I. . Why hasnt there been categories involving sex and dishonesty that have been produced . Well, i dont believe that we have many currentlyemployed officers that would likely have those categories, so we havent come across them in the records that we have been searching. So o. I. S. , we are look for o. I. S. , and we had a request for 42 specific o. I. S. With the date, the case number, everything, so i can look and look for those. I havent had any requests for anything specific to those, but i can go look for. And i havent come across any that are responsive under 1421 to produce yet. Okay. So you actually, in your review of folders based on the requests youve received, none of them have actually contained sustained findings for Sexual Misconduct or dishonesty . Correct. Okay. So its not that you because i mean and i theres kind of a Conspiracy Theory going around, people are like oh, they are only releasing the ois and keeping out the juicy stuff, and i wanted you to clarify that you havent actually come across that as part of the files that youve reviewed . Correct. Okay. And then you said 12,000 use of force cases . So we have or allegations . No, thats knotts allegations. So we dont thats not allegations. We dont handle the excessive use force complaints. They go to d. P. A. What we have is our tenures of actually i think its 13 years of use of force records in our electronic system, which could be many things that dont result in even injury such as pointing of a firearm, but we have to go through each line item and determine whether or not injury resulted and if that injury actually met g. B. I. Okay. The other question is how long are you going back or how long do files exist for you to go back to response to these requests . They probably go back quite some time. So what im able to search in our electronic system, starts about 2006, there are some records that have been entered in there that are pre2006. They are just line items or what we call multiple code. But we also have typedup index cards, which is what we used prior to the electronic system, and those still exist in binders, so we check those, and we check the electronic system. And any place we can think of the information might be. So weve been focusing on the requests that we have gotten. But i really couldnt say how far back we go. You dont i mean you dont know how far back the department maintains these files . Correct. 1950 . 1990 . Anywhere in between . You dont know . I dont know. What i can actually put my hands on and go through, dont have anybody employed but well keep going back as far as we discover records. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner brookter. I had one statement and really just one question. I think one of the things, at least for me, that im hearing that seems to be consistent across the presentations, while im not a lawyer, also not an exist, im hearing theres an issue of supply and demand. Theres a demand coming in for requests. We dont have the resources or Human Capital to supply. That makes sense to me. And also conversations ive had with members of the public. So it understands, and it seems we are moving in the right direction. One of the questions that i had was for the folks from the Public Defenders Office. And you all didnt get to share your achieving goals as your last slide, but what i wanted to ask from the Public Defenders Office was while we know that there is that lack of resources and Human Capital to supply requests, and outside of the achieving of requests, is there a conversation around the process is what i want to hear. As the commissioner working with d. P. A. On s. B. 1421, i wanted to hear if there was a conversation around the actual process that you are utilizing and will be utilizing moving forward that you all have a nuance or a conversation or thoughts on . You have to come to the mic otherwise we are not getting you. So the question is you all have stated that the resources and the fact that we dont have individuals from d. P. A. To be able to Magnetic Resonance imaging you with the demand that you are asking for, and you are not receiveing requests quick enough, im asking, based off the presentations that youve seen, whats in the process, is there something that can be done . Im trying to get to a solution versus i think to commissioner taylors conversation that theres been the complaint im trying to figure out, is there solutions and conversations that we could have on the process currently, given the fact we know we are going to have, stated the facts im certainly open to any discussion or any suggestion that would come our way about how we could help speed up this process. I mean, if we look through our bulk requests and started making requests on every single case, we would quickly be in the very same position we are in. I get why superficially that is an appealing way to go, but the volume of cases, we represent over 20,000 people a year. So we would very quickly be in the same position, i think. What i think my suggestion would be that there be some soulsearching in each department be reallocateing staf until they get until and unless they get new staff. So these are we have an 11 million budget plus, and i cant remember how many hundreds of millions for the Police Department, and a lot of staff. So the question is what should be prioritized . And the public has a right to these records. And so what priority does that public right have . In my view, in 2