Fully implemented so i think we might or the Mayors Office might want to change that because it has a matter of fact not been implemented. I think you agree and were in the process of implementing it. [inaudible] [off mic] thank you supervisor. We will take a look at that and continue to work with the board to monitor. Thank you mr. Cunningham. Deputy chief anything you. To add because i have more questions for you. No, would. In regards to the Drug Analysis Lab what is the status and what is the future as contemplated by the pd for that unit . Sorry do you have in front of you the recommendation number for that one . Sorry. I thought you were staring at it. If i could and i am going to the body of the civil grand jury report and the civil grand jury noted after the madison case after 2010 although they dont call it the madison case it remained shuttered, presumably the analysis functions were contracted out is my assumption but i thought there was a recommendation that it be reopened , and i can find that recommendation if you its rc3 so i wanted to make sure. Rc3, the drug analysis should be reestablished in the crime lab, yes. So we think it requires further analysis. Although in the analysis that is required is the plan of how we would do that. We do agree with the civil grand jurys conclusion that it serves the city better to have that function be in house in the crime lab. It allows staff to be developed for skill sets. It takes the as i just spoke to a while ago, the transfer of evidence through multiple places. It takes that element out and streamline the chain of evidence, your custody of evidence, and we have equipment that can do that. We have staff identified that can do the analysis. We would need a plan Going Forward of how we would bring on the appropriate level of staff, what that level of staff is based on the current the changes in the law that has reduced the number of these types of pieces of evidence coming in. We still have drug crimes though, so the analysis that is necessary and we would want the Forensic Service director that is selected to weigh in on this and what is the correct way and serves the city and the lab but you want to make sure you bring in the right people to do it; that you have the right oversight and supervision and includes plans as you know in the new crime lab and current crime lab for thats the crime lab that will get you out of 606 and into a new building in 2019 . Yes, so you have infrastructure that supports the proper custody of the samples, the tracks of the areas where theyre analyzed. All of that should be planned out and executed smartly, so deputy chief isnt that an agree but requires a plan . I mean were not disagreeing. Were actually saying [inaudible] i think were trying to we didnt want to come at this report and say you know and misstate what we have, so we agree and there needs to be a plan for developing how that goes forward. Perhaps it would have been a better response i think requires further analysis was our way of saying lets sit down and plan how this would support the overall structure and how we would get it done and lets know that one of the first things is getting the proper scientist in charge and develop a staffing and equipment plan to ensure that we do it the right way but i hear what youre saying. Insofar as let me give my theory about the civil grand jury and the reports. Some of them with the best of intentions no matter how well written they are end up on a shelf gathering dust. Some come at exactly the right time and directions to policy makers and implementers and the executive and legislative branches and their timing is superlative and while this one is half a dozen years after the fact. The recommendations i think are very helpful. Theyre being embraced by the department and the administration and the board is happy to see it, but its also kind of an indication of where weve all agreed we want to go and its a document that when this body as it does from time to time looks back at past reports to see what has been implemented, what has been forgotten because a lot of things are forgotten and requires further analysis is a pathway to forgotten compared to us looking at this in a year and saying deputy chief schmidt we thought we wanted we thought there was willful of agreement here but nothing has happened. At least an indicator to everybody its a historical record that we actually thought this recommendation was the right way to go albeit it requires planning, thinking, what have you. I mean this doesnt nothing in here binds you or us, just intellectually interesting policy recommendations but to the extent there is a public acknowledgment that we agree want we want to reopen it in the future and to the standards and what have you and this is a good place to say it if that makes any sense to you. I would agree with you. I will defer to my boss. Chief. No, i agree with that supervisor. Its one of the things weve always wanted but with the recommendation of requires further analysis i get what youre saying about the language and sometimes putting it on the back burner. Its not what we want to do. In reality we have to look at a lot of things and the narcotics arrests are off 90 when we had our own lab and look at that and the cost analysis on farm the cases out to other labs so bringing a director in that person would be suited to get this up and running. Were not putting this on the back burner and i believe its efficient to have these things in house because you dont have folks during trials driving across the bay bridge to a Golden Gate Bridge to get evidence or have people travel from great distances. I think doing it in house is definitely the way to go but again we want implementing one recommendation is going to impact other recommendations which is bringing a Forensic Service director and that person would be more suited to do what we want Going Forward so the infrastructure is in place and its not something we will forget or we dont want to do because it benefits the city and county of the Police Department as a whole. Thank you chief. One more question relative to the timing of this which is the startling revelations of half a dozen years ago and you werent the chief back then. What in your view as given those revelations, has lead to six captains over this function in six years . I think its just a matter of personnel, just rotating of personnels. Weve you know, weve had a lot of push back and you know as a supervisor you rotate captains much to the chagrin that captain was in of the district and there are reasons why we rotated them around and we have taken a look at that and theres no ten to it other than the fact that as promotions occurred or moved into other positions and rotated out and why i think the recommendation is a solid one because you have somebody firmly in place and that is all they do. Its not a direct captain or a captain thinking about what their next assignment may be and again captain mar is a scientist and the best fit if we keep a sworn person in there and obviously were moving away from that but right now hes a perfect fit and i have bias and he was my partner in the mission and is a scientist and the best person to be in the position but eventually we want to civilize the position and someone to guide the lab and current with the policies nationwide that are best practices. Until we have that forensic scientist were going to keep captain mar in that position . Absolutely. Captain why dont we hear from you for a second about your science bona fidees. The scientist captain. Yes, sir. I have a bachelors in biological science and masters and the foundation of my scientific degree or my experience and education. And apparently youre going to be in charge of the crime lab until chief chaplin said you will be there until we get a person hired. I will get my orders. Congratulations and thank you for the oversight of that body. Supervisor yee. In light of this discussion i agree with you if it seems like were in a direction that were actually agreeing to the recommendations we should make a definitive statement that were agreeing. I think there are several things. You have you know a new chief in place whether i mean in the future, and it be clear when you bring in somebody thats a Forensic Service director then lets make it clear what direction were heading with this unit so that the person that comes in doesnt decide they have a better idea so for me if were in agreement i think we should just make that statement. I agree supervisor and i will say that now. We do agree with the finding just to put a period on it. Thank you chief. And let me say i also agree that relative to desolving the crime lab from the pd it does require further review. I agree with the mayor on that. I dont think thats a easy and cut dry one. I am delighted we all agree on step one and in the process of being implemented and lets see how this works and keep the report under our jurisdiction and lets continue to weigh in on it. There members of the public that would like to seek on items 1 and two. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. The civil grand jury requested that the board respond to two recommendations r a2 and rb1. R a2 is the one that we just talked about that the mayor should direct and the board of supervisors should approve and the controller should facilitate a transfer of budget facility, assets and personal management from the crime lab from the pd to the General Services agency and i think that we agree it requires further analysis which would bring us to a recommendation requiring further analysis with an explanation which i think which explanation is set forth in the mayors response and we discussed here this morning and the other one is Lab InformationManagement System which hasnt been fully implemented because it hasnt been fully implemented so supervisor yee. So let me see if i could make a motion with these two recommends so for r a2 i would like to make a motion that the board of supervisors continue this recommendation number two i mean r a2 for further analysis because the board requires the San FranciscoPolice Department and the General Service agency to formulate a proposal timeline and feasibility of how the transfer of budget facilities assets personnel and management would be handled. The board requests the proposal to be presented to the g ao committee by october 6. Okay. And then thats with regard to do you have one for the second one for rb1 . Yes. I would like to make a motion that the board of supervisors accepts the civil grand jurys recommendation number rb1 and reports that the recommendation has been implemented according to the response from the mayor, the Police Department and the city administrator to the civil grand jury saying that the laboratory Information Management system contract was finalized and the system purchased in the spring of 2016. It is currently being customized and implemented through interactions of the vendor and the crime lab. The system will be fully operational in spring of 2017 and will allow and improve operations of and Effective Communications for the Forensic Service division. Supervisor yee i completely agree with you on the first recommendation relative to r a2. With the next one i dont think we need to change the recommendation but i respectfully suggest rather than say it has been implemented insofar it want be fully implemented until next year. That we change it to the recommendation hant been fully implemented and in the process of being implemented and make that tweak to rb1 but with the same explanation i think that would do the trick. Okay. So you want to change it to the recommendation the recommendation has not yet been fully implemented but will be implemented in the future with a time frame for implementation. Okay. Thank you to the civil grand jury. Thank you to the pd. Thank you to the Mayors Office and we have a motion that is before us and without objection that motion is adopted. [gavel] and we will send that to the full board with recommendation without objection. Madam clerk could you please read items 3 and four together. For clarity for item 2 is recommended as Committee Report and for item 1 will be continued to the call of the chair or im sorry continued to october 6. Right. Item number 1 we will continue to october 6. Item number 2 we will send as amended as a Committee Report with recommendation without objection. All right. Item number 3 and four is a hearing and resolution on the recently published 20152016 civil grand jury report entitled auto burglary in San Francisco. And i want to acknowledge that supervisor yee has held a number of hearings about a source of common concern throughout the city and county of San Francisco that is known to every resident and unfortunately to many visitors with regard to the controversy number of auto break ins and with that mr. Foreman. Again my name is Jay Cunningham and the foreperson of the civil grand jury and i would like to introduce michael scaihill ph. D who will speak on behalf of the auto burglary. Thank you mr. Foreman. Good morning. Supervisor yee, chairman peskin. Thank you very much. I appreciate this opportunity to speak before you today. Thank you doctor. I guess i would first like to introduce my colleague libby dodd who is sitting right next to me where i was sitting down. We spent over a year very much immeshsed in this project and we have learned a lot but what is ironic about it that jessie auto burglary has been a topic for over a year and i dont own a vehicle and libby has a car that is garaged and doesnt drive that often but speaks to the reason we chose this topic because it goes to the quality of life of the people in San Francisco whether or not you own a car. It really does, and so with that i would like to continue. What we would like to do is influence our action, and the reality of auto burglary in San Francisco is a significant issue that diminishes the life of all in San Francisco not just to own cars and affects us that ride muni and go to the bus stop and see broken glass from cars and all too often happens to tourists and its an unwelcomed surprise, catches them off guard and sometimes damages the reputation of the city, and were very concerned about that. The message that we wish for you to understand in a few minutes that we have with you today is that is also supported in detail in our report that is a rampant problem in San Francisco and persisting and growing and nearly unabated and its been going on for three years time now or maybe a little longer than that. And it is a quality of life issue that touches every person in San Francisco and in different ways and economic, Public Safety and time loss from work and family. Its an important issue. Our purpose isnt just to tell you about the problem though. Our purpose is to influence and motivate change, and we want you to understand the proportion of the problem to begin with and its so large that it is a detriment to the city, and in our view of problem as large as this in order to initiate change there needs to be commitment from the top, the leadership of the city really needs to stand up and say this is an issue of priority and to assign resources and commitment to that. Its a complex problem. Auto burglary is a complex problem. And in the Opening Statement what i will try to do is describe some of the attributes of the problem and discuss some of the key recommendations that we make, and then we also look forward to addressing some of the responses that we hear from different departments, so i did give a summary of the presentation today. Did you receive that, a handout that has charts on it . At the top there is a table that has actually my notes say 30 months but i added july to that so its 31 months of data to that, and in 2015 using data sf, the open Data Warehouse, the Public Safety data base, we determined there were 24826 reported incidents of auto burglary within the city. I know that varies. There are different estimates based upon who you talk to or how its calculated but thats the number that we come up with and not that much different from any of the other calculations but you can look it over the past 31 months its a very significant number and were on track this year to hit that 20,000 mark as well which is just and if you look at the next chart there which is a crime mapping from crime mapping work which the city subscribes to that service it plots each reported incident on to a map of the city, and its just covered with incident marks where you see numbers thats where the incidents occurred at more than one incident occurred in the same location. So how are the incident reports made . A great many of them are made online, and thats for convenience i guess, convenience of the people who need to make the report because they need to get their insurance reimbursement. Its to the convenience of the Police Department and commonly done around the country this way because auto burglary is a common crime that often out numbers resources, but it is grown significantly in this area. Other times people call 311 to make their incident report through 311. I heard of incidents where people walk into a station house and file a report and sometimes officers are called to the scene to do investigation on it but most of the incident reports are not investigated. So the majority of investigators for these cases are assigned to the precinct stations that investigate auto burglaries as well as other crimes in the area. The majority of incidents are conducted by career criminals and criminal street gang members who carry they have got it worked out. Its a craft. They know how to operate quickly. They know how to break into cars. They know where the prime parts of the city and know which cars to select where there is more likely of goods to