tv Police Commission SFGTV July 15, 2021 6:00am-10:01am PDT
. >> president cohen: you'd like to call this meeting to order. mr. clerk, please call the roll. >> clerk: [roll call] president cohen, you have a quorum. we also have chief scott from the san francisco police department and paul henderson from the police accountability. >> president cohen: that sounds wonderful. i appreciate that. let's go ahead and begin our meeting with the pledge of
allegiance. ladies and gentlemen, if you're physically anal, please stand and put your right hand over your heart and pledge. i pledge allegiance to that flag and to the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indid i divisible with liberty and justice for all. dj, it's good to have you back. i hope your vision is back with you. i would like sergeant youngblood to call the first item. >> clerk: line item one. general public comment. >> president cohen: all right. thank you. >> clerk: at this time, the public is now welcome to address the commission for up to two minutes that do not appear on tonight's agenda but within the subject under police commission. under police commission rules of order nor commissioners are required to respond to questions by the public, but
may provide a brief response. comments and opportunities to speak are available via phone by calling (415) 655-0001. access code 146 6 z6 6333. press pound and then pound again. dial star three to submit a comment. you may submit public comment in either of the following ways. e-mail the commission at sfgov.org. or the u.s. postal service located at 1235 sfranz, california, 9458. if you'd like to make a public comment at this time, please press star three. we have a number of public
comments. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hi, my name is ben paul, i volunteer with felecia jones. tonight we have a conversation about joel babs who brought allegations of racism at sfpd, allegations that were largely sustained by the d.h.r.. so we're asking the police commission what they can do in law enforcement. we don't want them to join with the police department and its delusions it's not racist when it's been shown racism over and over again and targeting whistle blowers. sfpd was ranked in the five most ranked police departments in the nation. reported its ninety-sixa, a black san franciscan is over ten times for likely as a white san francisco to be arrested and use of force and this
degree of anti-blackness continues unchanged since twoingt. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hi, good evening. my name is carolynn goosen and i'm with the public defender's office. thank you all for being here. i wanted to comment on the early intervention system, first quarter report that will be discussed tonight. as you know, this is a system that's created red flag alerts for officers who are exhibiting potential patterns of behavior that could lead them on a pads to misconduct including the use of force and the indicators that we use are three use of force incidents in three months or three d.p.a. complaints within six months and there are a few others as well. in the first quarter of 2021, there are 90 ei.s. alerts for officers. i hope we learn about the six
officers who each received three alerts in the first quarter and why it seems none of them had an intervention opened. i hope we learn about each of the officers had two alerts and why none of them seem to have any interventions opened. alert for the 22 administratively closed. why are these closed? and also, why is the mission station the one that had the motion officers that have "alert" next to their name. there needs to be interventions associated with the collection of this data, and so far it doesn't seem to be resulting in a high rate of interventions officers to avoid falling into the type of policing that the public has again and again objected to and that has caused harm in our communities. i hope we hear tonight about what kind of system is being considered to modify or replace c.i.s. so that the 25% of the
alerts aren't brushed aside and not detecting a pattern or coming too soon after a previous alert. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hi, my name is kit hodge. i'm also with the core team of wealth and disparities. tonight, we'll be discussing officer joel babs. back in 2016 we did a press conference with officer joel backs after he witnessed numerous racist incidents at sfpd and reported them. recapping some of the alarming allegations. human resources determined that that was being targeted by the police department for taking a stance against racism. has a long history of corruption and anti-black racism including towards his employees and felecia jones.
ms. jones works with the sheriff's department. today, officials objected no consequences and the recently proposed sheriff's department was approved but accountability measures related to the complaints by committee members as proposed budget. nationally and most racist in terms of arrest and use of force. what is the police commission going to do about this. such as that reported by joel pabs and allegations began. here we are seeing sfpd's claims about one officer addressing systemic racism throughout the department is reported by officer pabs. the police commission. please explain why the police commissioners never address allegations in 2017 about racism that impacts our entire city the second time the sfpd's allegations against the whistle blower in 2019.
thank you. >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minute. >> my name is susan buckman. i live in district 5 and work with a core team of wealth and disparities in the black community founded by at thelicia jones. we are working for justice and policing in san francisco since 2015. last month, there were more than several community voices invited to make recommendations for the police commission and how to create a more racial. they volunteered their valuable time to produce these recommendations because they were as incredibly important to them and to the people they represent. these presentations reveal the common theme as to what we are lacking in san francisco.
accountability and consequences. accountability in the form of regular reporting and audits and consequences in the form of appropriate punishment for unfit behavior. there's one officer still on the force and policing emissions who killed a black child. 15-year-old darius gains. he brutally beat another and later he shot a latino man in the back as he fled in the middle of a crowded street. this officer, joshua cavito is known as a brutalizer against black and brown in san francisco. who has racked up numerous complaints about racist violence, how can things ever improve. what is the time line for enacting the registers made to the police commission last month and both director henderson and jermaine jones noticed there's a pattern and having them disappear into a
black hole. do you have the will to finally break the pattern and take action? thank you. >> thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> good evening. my name is jean richer. officer babs made a whistle blower complaint about racism in 2017 which was supported by dh.r.. officer pabs' 2018 complaint can be found on the court website filed october 3rd, 2017. in that complaint regarding the d.o.j. community oriented policing reforms process, a
lieutenant told officers during an october 2016 morning lineup, the d.o.j. cannot say the police are racist. they have to acknowledge the problems in african american communities unquote and also quote, you are saying cops are racist, but maybe blacks are out of control. they are murdering people at a higher rate, unquote. and another, african american people commit more crimes, unquote. during that same morning lineup, slgt tom allegedly said, quote, the black people you're stopping are doing something wrong. babs complaint sites d.h.r. findings that sergeant did retaliate and the d.h.r. found that an officer subjected pabs to racist behavior in the workplace. the d.h.r. found that pabs complaints are valid. so where's the action on the part of the police commission
within sfpd or are sfpd and the police commission only interested in allegations against the whistle blower and not in the whistle blower report which in many respects has already been validated. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, caller. good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> i am with the corps team of wealth and disparities founded by felicia jones. tonight the police commission and san francisco police department will be discussing officer joel babs, a black officer who's been with the sfpd for over 27 years. after pabs witnessed numerous racist incidents and reported them. last month, we shared an alarming number of complaints. during a time when the federal department of justice had just come to investigate years of
racism and killings of primarily black and brown people of san francisco. pabs' story can be found on the sf supreme court website filed october 23rd, two thousand seventeen. one officer remarked about a black woman and i quote, she's got a great body, she's the only black woman i'd do, unquote. pabs was told about chases and beatings by black citizens who have done nothing wrong. that was just one tale told by lieutenant payne who boasted about chasing black citizens in his car while in the bayview and also bragged about punching a woman in the face, knocking out her tooth and breaking her finger and i quote, like a fucking twig, unquote. anti-black disparities and use of force, arrests and stops are
the same now as when the sfpd started reporting race back in 2015. we further demand the ongoing disparity made by joel pabs as an incider including and among the command staff be considered as racial findings. ongoing systemic black racism within the department, the type reported -- >> clerk: thank you, caller. president cohen, that is the end of public comment. >> president cohen: great. thank you. please call the next item. >> clerk: line item two, consent calendar. receive and file action. family code 6228 quarterly report. the items on the consent calendar are routine and considered consent only. please advise president cohen you would like to place them on the future agenda for future discussions. >> president cohen: all right.
any discussion on the consent calendar, colleagues? all right. we will continue moving forward. thank you. please call the next item. >> clerk: line item three reports to the commission. discussion. chief's report. weekly crime trends. provide an overview of the offenses occurring in san francisco. planned activities and events. this will include a brief overview of any unplanned events or activities occurring in san francisco. commission and discussion on unplanned events on activities the chief describes will be limited to determining whether the calendar for a future meeting. >> president cohen: thank you. >> commissioner brookter: president cohen, do we need public comment? >> president cohen: i believe we do. public comment on the previous item. >> clerk: for members of the public who would like to make public comment online item two,
please press star three now. president cohen, there is no public comment. >> president cohen: all right. great. thank you. we can move on. you've already called the item. so let's hear from the chief. welcome chief. >> thank you, president cohen. good evening commission and executive director henderson and members of the public and sergeant youngblood. i'll start this week's report with the crime trend for the week and year to date actually. violent crime, we are at a -5%. and homicides we are down -- or up i'm sorry two which is an 8%. 24 last year, 26 this year. rates were down by 21%. 116 last year versus 92. this year robberies down 12%. 1332.
1176 this year. we're up 4%. 1123 last year and 1165 this year. in terms of property crimes, the good news is we are continuing to tick down with our year-to-date burglaries. we're down to 2%. as you recall back in march, we were up over 50%. so that victimization is coming down. so we're happy to report that. that 1%. arson is up 14%. 159 last year compared to 182 this year. and overrule theft is down 5%. 4,630. 13,914 this year. within that theft category, auto burglaries which we are up 14% from this time last year when we compared that increase this year's increase to 2018
and 2018, we're done 3% from where we were in 2019. and we're down 31% from where we were in' 2018. >> you're muted, chief. chief, we can't hear you, chief. >> how about now? >> now we can. >> okay. i'll go back to the gun violence. we're up 92% year to date. we have 105 shooting victims this year compared to 15 last year. homicide gun related homicide were up 15 last year to 20 which is a 33% increase.
our total gun violence with consistent with shooting victims up 92% which is alarming and if there is any good news in this is that it is down percentage wise from where we were a few months ago. so we will continue to work on strategies that we have introduced to the commission and the public and we're hopeful we can bring this down. and tenderloin. most significantly, we have tenderloin and we each have 19 compared to 12 in bayview. 32 compared to 24. the rest of them are small increases, southern only had two where they were this time last year. northern only has four this time last year.
park, one above and angleside is 5 above. nonetheless, they are still increasing the shootings and they are a concern. a major significant incident. we have four shooting incidents in this reporting incident on the 5th of january. we had an incident at 6:05 in the morning. our victim was engaged in narcotics sales that led to a burglary. an argument basically and then escalated into a shooting. a victim suffered gunshot wounds to the abdomen and fingers and is expected to survive and is in stable condition at this time of the report. we do have followup information at this point in that case. on the 6th of july at 11:02 p.m., on treasure island at north point drive gateview avenue in the southern district
retrieved from the area of the bus and there are no suspects in custody at this time. our victim was transported and after the point of the report is in stable condition and is expected to survive. on july 9th at 8:45 p.m. mancel and visitation in the angleside district. an 18-year-old male when he heard a loud noise, he didn't notice he had been shot. he then transported to the hospital with a gunshot wound to his lower extremities. he is in stable condition and is expected to survive. the investigation has suspects. the victim didn't see just heard the noise and we are following up on that. on the 11th at 11:08 p.m. at 23rd and mission, in the mission district, a 33-year-old victim was on cap street parking his car when three subjects approached. one subject asked him, quote, where are you from? the suspect then shot the victim through the passenger side of the car and shot him in the lower extremity. the victim is transported and is in stable condition. that also still is under investigation with no suspects apprehended on that case. in terms of strategies, we are continuing our deployment in the bayview on 3rd street and that's increased by a few officers over the last week or
so. we actually had a fairly decent week reducing shootings over the 4th of july holiday and thanks to the help from the community, it was a good week and we want to continue that movement in a positive direction. so 3rd street has increased deployment. in the northern district, the officers are focusing on burglary operations with high visibility deployment in the square area. fine arts where we've been having car break-ins where deployment in those areas are deployed at union street, chestnut street and in the civic center and haze valley. those deployments are rotating, but it will be consistent. we just move officers around and hopefully so we're not predictable. in the richmond, we continue to investigate auto break-ins. focused on the park area in honor of ocean beach.
bicycle units have been deployed. high visibility particularly on the weekends in the golden gate park. and the district station also has to be deployed to village and gary boulevard. in the park district, advanced car break-ins have been the focus. we've also responded to stunt driving during the wi wee hours of the night. in the areas where these sites have been noted. with these are using heavy deployment. we also put a fixed post along hay street in the rose triangle where we've had some issues with car break-ins and other street level crimes. now back to firearms and just
to wrap up the report. ghost guns continue to be a problem for us. at 115. we only had 164 for the entirety of last year. so at this rate, we're going to exceed that. we've confiscated 550 guns year to date and the majority of those were in the metro division and actually the majority of those are in the golden gate division. we've had an increase in our overall seizure of 7% year to date. hate crimes for the week, we've had 35 total hate crimes and this is according to the uniform reporting hate crime which the crime is motivated by
prejudice. 35 incidents as of july 4th which was the closure of the reporting period for this report. 13 of those have been against asian americans. three against latino. six against jewish residents. four against lgbtq. i'm sorry one against lgbtq. one against a white resident in five where anti-nationality type of incident and four were anti-gay homophobic type of incidents. our community liaison unit for victims who suffer these types of crimes and we'll continue to be there as a resource. a couple of other significant
incidents, we had a prejudice based incident. the victim who was asian american was approached by a subject on a muni bus. the subject started yelling at the victim. the subject then removed the face mask and told him to go to china town and bumped him in his chest. the victim the investigation upon further interview of the victim and witnesses was determined to be prejudice base and will be listed as a hate crime. that investigation is still under investigation. and we had a victim at northern
and southern. a victim was walking inside a crosswalk when a vehicle actually bumped into the driver and he accelerated and made contact. there were the victim of leave had been motivated by prejudice or hate. that is still under investigation but it is being investigated with scrutiny. that was unprovocaled and those are the significant incidents as far as major events, the giants are out of town this week. all star break was the last couple of nights and stone grove is a good way to get out of the shelter-in-place with covid and those are every
sunday. we are deployed at the stone grove festival. have not had any issues, a lot of family fun, good music. there will also be live streaming options for those that want to watch from home and that has been coordinated by rec and parks. there's nothing to report as far as domestic terrorism and that will do it for my report this week. >> president cohen: thank you very much. thank you for the report out. vice chair elias has a question about the crimes that you presented tonight. >> vice president elias: thank you, sorry. i was muted. chief, i just wanted to ask, i know that when you're doing the crime stuff and you compare
them, you're comparing them to last year which is an anomaly year. what do the stats look like compared to 2019 or 2018 given that last year was the pandemic and unusual? >> therefore, the most part we've seen increases 2019. part of what we believe is this time last year, there just weren't as many people out. so we had fewer car break-ins and now we're up from last year, but when we look at a trend overtime, 2017, car break-ins was an all-time high for our city.
2018, 2019 when we look at burglaries, burglaries are up compared from 2019 to 2018. 2018 is 30% up. when we look at homicide, the trend is going back to 2016 we're pretty significantly below where we were this time 2016. 2018 and two thousand nineteen, we're up from those two years. so it's not a significant increase with homicides but we're up from where we were the last two years. slightly not significantly from last year. so when we go back four years, five years, we're actually not that far off from where we
were. thank you for asking the question. we looked at that overtime. i think it gives a much better perspective. assaults are down, robberies are down and even when we look at 2019 in those areas, we're doing better than we were than a couple of years ago. >> vice president elias: i have a followup question. my followup question is that within the fluctuations of the crime statistics, you reference 2017, 2016, so on and so forth. there's a lot of fluctuation. but the one thing that's been consistent has been our staffing level. so how do you rationale the
fluctuation in the data when the stat levels have been constant? >> well our stats level haven't been constant. we are as far as full duty, we are lower than we've been in several years. 2016 and 2017, we were going -- that was toward the in the midst of the accelerated hiring plan. 2017 before i was appointed but in 2014, our deployment went up for several years and now it's starting to go down. so staffing levels had actually gone down in terms of operation, we are lowest we've been in a year. now, we've moved things around to try to compensate for that. we sat down some units over the last couple of years and that's part of doing business and you have to make those adjustments but it has not been a constant.
some things where i think the crimes are really impacted the most by our ability to put officers out in areas where we're having issues on robberies. we saw in the tenderloin where we recently until about a month ago upped the staff. robberies have reduced almost 38%. i'm not saying that is the sole reason, but having those officers there during the peak hours. this is pretty tried and true when you put officerings out there and they're able to be up. people that are going to break into cars and eventually find cars to break into, it makes it hard. now's the time where people go elsewhere. you kind of keep people that are doing that activity off balance and you can mitigate
the number some and reduce the numbers. it does make it more difficult. our staffing has been sticking down in the last couple of years. hopefully we can stabilize it. >> president cohen: all right. i want to go back and follow up on the report you made last week regarding thefts in purses and items and neman marcus and after reviewing the reports on the incidents, it appears that the incidents may be part of an organized criminal activity and not just one off incident. the neman marcus incident was part of a media report where sfpd scott ryan quoted saying people seen in the video are organized criminals real real
in fashion style. and the california retail they reported that three of the top 10 cities for organized retail crime are in the state of california and los angeles ranks number one. san francisco ranks number five and sacramento ranks number ten. and i just wanted to just note for the public that assemblyman reggie jones sawyer from down in california has introduced a bill called ab 331 that would extend until january 1st, 2016, the california highway patrol task force on organized retail
crime. and the new promotion contains $5.5 million to fund on all retail organized crime. so i've got three questions. first, is sfpd participating in the chp organized retail crime task force? >> yes, we are, president cohen. >> president cohen: thank you. and without disclosing any investigation technique, can you report on the coordinated response on retail crime including on the ground intelligence? >> yeah. so we've had some good outcomes with the organized retail crime task force of approximately $10 million of stolen property. probably a little bit more than
that arrests have been made in large amounts of cash. stolen from merchandise and we've had some success. we have investigators in the task force. when the governor and his team put the task force together. so it definitely added to what we're doing. in one operation alone the task force seized over $8 million in property. and property from some of our big chain retailers, the ones that have been in the news lately target and that was one operation. warehouses, so definitely there's value there with the task force. so i'm very happy that the governor, the state assembly has pushed this bill forward because july 1st of this year, the funding ceased.
so whenever that bill gets signed. hopefully we can get the task force going. >> president cohen: question number three, does the department work with the retailers to rapidly post descriptions of the types of high-end retail items such as purses and handbags to online secondary sellers and to the public? >> the department does and the task force does as well. i think what gives me hope, i believe there's more we can do. their team of lost prevention and security experts. i've been to some of those meetings along with some of the people that actually do the work on the ground.
so we had to think of new ways to go about this. >> president cohen: that's good you already have a established relationship. online secondary sellers. to help with the investigation and ultimately the prosecution of the criminals. i have no other questions. thank you. colleagues, is there anyone else. commissioner brookter, are you nodding your head no? okay. commissioner yee. >> commissioner yee: no. >> president cohen: all right. we will move forward then. okay. sergeant youngblood it looks like we're going to hear the director's report from d.p.a. >> clerk: gem. just one more thing online item two, we still needed a motion in order to file. >> president cohen: a motion to file? okay. i make a motion to file is there a second.
>> commissioner brookter: second. >> president cohen: seconded by commissioner brookter. please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion to file family code 6228, [roll call] >> president cohen: thank you. and for item four -- i'm sorry. we don't need to take public comment, right. on its entirety. okay. i'm going to turn it back over to you. >> clerk: line item -- returning back to line item three, dpa and director's report. whether to calendar any of the issues raised for future commission meeting.
director henderson, you are muted. >> i know. i like to start off my report every week with that to make sure everyone's paying attention and leans in to hear what i have to say with these pearls of wisdom. all right. let me jump in again with my report. and i will try to get through this quickly. i know we have a lot on the agenda. we are currently at 413 cases that have been open so far this year and we have about 278 cases that are pending in terms of sustained cases. we are at 28 this time last year, we were at 21 cases whose investigations are still ongoing after nine months. there are 28 of those cases. this time last year, we had 33.
in terms of cases mediated, we've mediated 20 cases this time last year, we had 23 of the case that is are past nine months of open investigations, more than half of them have been pulled. i will anticipating a question that came in as a comparison not just from this year, but from the previous year as well. i'll talk about some of the increases and all of that information is also going to be available on our website as well week to week, month to month, quarterly to quarterly, and annually to annually as well so you can see the dip in trends across all of the statistics i'm giving this evening. in terms of since we last met, dpa's received 28 new cases with a total of 33 allegations. 13% of them involved officers
who spoke to or behaved inappropriately. 9% of them involved an officer driving properly. 9% involved officers who failed to take required action and 17% are new complaints with further investigation needed to determine the specific allegations. the annual report will appear later on in the agenda and will go more in depth as to what's gone on over the past year. in terms of outreach on the 7th of july, we worked with a joint presentation where the san francisco public defender's office intern joined our d.p.a. speaker series. our guest that day was the president of the board shaman walton who spoke about his career journey and specifically related to public safety provided in the bayview community highlighting things that have happened and taken place during the pandemic and
shifting focuses from his office. next day, july 8th, d.p.a. participated in the megablack open city discussions on the and also participated in a second commission meeting addressing employment opportunities for creative officers from disenfranchised communities. there are two cases from d.p.a. that are in closed session this evening. i think they're items 9a and on the agenda coming up later on in this meeting is the annual report and we have a presentation on the annual report as well. tonight, in case there are issues that come up involving d.p.a. is senior investigator.
folks can contact the agency directly through our website/d.p.a. and the phone number where we can be reach 24 hours a day is (415) 241-7711. and that concludes my presentation just for updates for the week. >> president cohen: thank you for that presentation. colleagues, do you have any questions for the director? all right. i have no questions either. no notes. no questions for you. colleagues there's a high level summary that the director sent over to go over the annual report.
>> yeah. >> president cohen: okay. that's it. thank you very much. appreciate it. >> clerk: continuing online item three. commission reports. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for any commission meetings. commissioner president's report, commission report and identified considerations. action. >> president cohen: thank you very much. just to reconsider i'd like to respond on sfpd's including the department future's plan to address organized retail crime. i'd like a report out about the organized retail crime, what's happening with the meeting with c.h.p. thank you.
are there any other commissioners? commissioner brookter, i see your name. >> commissioner brookter: yes. thank you, president cohen. mine's actually in line with what you and vice president elias were kind of alluding to earlier on she kind of felt this would be the place we could ask and talk about what it looks like. we want to look at staffing of the department overall especially as we kind of pout of covid and this new variant that's out there, but just thinking about what the structure of the come part to look at the actual structure of the department as it pertains to some of these various departments that we have on the ground. we'd love to get a report on that. we can work with president cohen on what that necessarily looks like, but just some sort of staff and what are our plans in terms of new academies
coming down the pipeline and recruitment as well too in the future. >> president cohen: sounds good. commissioners, any other commissioners? all right. seeing none. we will continue to move forward. the next item, please. we'll need to take public comment on this item and then we'll take action. >> clerk: public comment. for members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding line item three, please press star three now. president cohen, it appears there's no public comment. >> president cohen: thank you. let's call the next item. >> clerk: line item four. presentation of the early intervention system report. 1st quarter 2021 discussion.
>> good afternoon. can everyone hear me? okay. stacy, will you be able to put up the slides? >> clerk: yes. i'll put it up right now. >> i'll start while he's putting up the slides. good evening commissioners director. i am the captain of the risk management office and i am standing in for commander o'sullivan today for the presentation on the early intervention system 1st quarter report. switch to the next page, please.
so the early intervention system is a system that identifies members who are exhibiting potential at risk behavior and it's a tool provided to officers before they are involved in a problematic event. in this particular slide, i'd like to point out the second paragraph on this slide. i know the previous public comment, there is a comment about certain members that might be listed in this report and they're not listed by name and we are unable to release the names of those officers or the particulars of any investigation per police officer bill of rights and under 832.seven of the penal code. so i just want to point that out. next slide, please. luckily, the early intervention system, i have a great team. it's lieutenant perra, sergeant
tarwin navol. next paragraph. so so as i said previously, early intervention system identifies members who are exhibiting potential at risk behavior. provides officers with resources and tools and i also want to say supervisors and front line tools to help identify and assist officers for ensuring police what it's
it's generated when a certain member reaches a certain amount of indicated points within a period. we used our management tool which will alert our sergeant noval when alerts are produced. those alerts are then gathered by sergeant navol and they are released every other month and sent out to the appropriate district station or unit. next page so as you can see, indicators include things such as use of force. vehicle pursuits, on duty collisions indicators we use. they are part of a threshold system if you receive a certain
number within the time period it will create an alert. these are other associated factors where they can consider when they're revealing an alert with an officer, next slide. so the thresholds for that would trigger an alert is if an officer is involved in an officer-involved shooting, that's an automatic alert. there is three plus uses of force in a six month period and four d.p.a. complaints within a
twelve month period. next slide. this is a complicated flowchart in how an alert is activated. it could be formed or it could be administratively closed. it's a good representation of how our alerts go. next page. so for the first quarter, there was a total number of indicator reports from quarter 120, 21. there was a 32.8 decrease. twenty-one quarter one 2021.
total number use of force indicator points decrease 15.one% from quarter one 2020 to quarter 2020, to 2021. and the department of police accountability decrease from quarter one 2020 to quarter 2021. and this is a break down of types what has indicated alert its. so for example, when you have use of force in three months, there's about 37 of those. so we have a total of about 90 alerts for the first quarter of 2021. next slide. data from the members received alerts. this is the slide that i
referred to earlier that we want be able to get into what triggered these alerts, but we have forty-six members had one alert. and six members are three alerts in the first quarter. next slide. here's a break down of alerts by district station and i wanted to point out the .5, the reason why there's a .5 in some of these alerts, officers transferred from one station to another station. next slide, please. this is the same chart, but this is for specialized units. and so the disposition, 52
a twelve month period and so we have a list of violent crimes per district station and then alerts for district station and indicated points for district stations, but we don't do any analysis of correlation between violent crimes and alerts and indicator points. next slide, please. so, currently, for this quarter, we have one open intervention and then outside engage: so we have forty-four counseling. ten formal counseling and nine performance improvement plans and that's, you know, the site of e.i.s. alerts.
and that's my presentation. >> president cohen: all right. thank you very much. commissioner hamasaki. >> commissioner hamasaki: sorry. i was muted. thank you president cohen. good evening. so we had a pretty comprehensive hearing on this probably in the last year we had talked a lot about potential challenges with the system as it existed then. do you have a longer discussion? >> okay. so you're talking about thresholds versus data analysis. >> commissioner hamasaki: yeah. i mean, at the end of the discussion what we came up with
was that there was concern that wasn't really zeroing in on the behaviors and then setting up interventions that could help. i think at the time, the single intervention was for being late to work as opposed to general concern. obviously, we should all be on time to work. genuinely i think what we're more concerned about is by policing or things that really could impact the community and departments representation in the community and so we talked about i think there was a discussion because there was one there was like a system and sorry to dump this on you, but.
>> sorry, can you repeat that. >> yeah. who presented -- is there somebody who generally presents on this. >> commander o'sullivan. >> commissioner hamasaki: yeah and he talked about a more data driven system. >> yeah. so i'm happy to say that our i.t. division and our budget division is kind of like in the final stages of acquiring a system that will be a data driven system as opposed to a threshold system so i don't want to say the name just in case something goes haywire. so a data driven system will be able to take better information and anlz where an officer it
will take that data analysis and compare it to similar officers. we don't want to be in the business of comparing having a foot beat officer walking in west portal and hopefully this data analysis will be able to, this company will be able to provide that analysis for us and then hopefully this e.i.f. using this data analysis will be able to let us steer those officers to appropriate interventions such as, let's say like for example if we have a run on public courtesy, you
know, we could get to a certain place, we could get that officer to the appropriate training like through posts to attacks and communications class. but i'm hoping this system. >> commissioner hamasaki: yes. i think in our discussions before, we really kind of dug into the different systems. it seemed like that was a system that had kind of more acceptance or credibility. i figured we had some reports and studies on that. that's good to hear. that was kind of the hope was that we will be able to acquire one and it sounds like things are moving along. so that's very positive to hear. can you tell us if there's anything that we've learned or
take-aways you know, is coming up more or is it kind of. >> well, i kind of touched on it in my example, but it's a public courtesy. so that is something i was discussing with sergeant navol today during the presentation. public courtesy is something that's popping up more for alerts. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. and you're getting a lot of alerts but they're not necessarily -- they're being dealt with through informal counseling or how are they being dealt with? >> so the alerts would be to the e.i.f. not an investigation, but an e.i.f. review. an informal counseling would be something that's outside of an e.i.f. alert. e.i.s. is a great system, but
nothing takes the place of our front line sergeants and supervisors. so an informal counseling what should occur is if an officer has proper supervision and a sergeant sees that this officer is like using courtesy with taking at the front counter that sergeant should be taking that officer back having what's called informal counseling to get them to change, to, you know, change the pattern of behavior before it becomes very problematic. and the e.i.s. review, that means that officer has three complaints within the appropriate time period and sergeant an example would be or how i would do it conducting my review and i would put them on a performance agreement. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. do you know if there's anything
within the new system where it will be able to take into account the information. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. thank you. i appreciate the report. thank you, president cohen. >> commissioner brookter: if i may, president cohen. really to follow up on commissioner hamasaki's great point. captain cota, when do you think we can get a presentation or when do you all feel comfortable and will be able to have some dialog about this new system which i'm extremely happy to hear about. when we looked at the complicated flowchart. so it will be good to see a new system. so, yeah, is there some time line on that.
i know i'm happy to hear budget for it. president cohen has been very pressing about technology so good to hear it's in the works. >> i would hope september but, again, that relies on the approval there has to be integration with our current systems. i'm not the computer guy. luckily, i have a great team. so i couldn't give you a definite time line. we might be able to get a presentation with, you know, the presentation that the company made to us, but i don't know if you would prefer to have a presentation where we have actual data from us.
>> commissioner brookter: sure. no. even just hearing it in september. i'm not holding you to it. just to know that it is in the works. the system is currently a little bit wongy. so just good to hear that things are in place and that things are in the pipeline. i know that we get that thing in the pipeline, we can push it forward. >> president cohen: commissioner yee, commissioner byrne, do you have any questions? >> commissioner yee: yeah. my question is regards to the program that i guess you're air marking for. i guess you have tried out the
system is that correct? >> if i'm not mistaken d.p.a. might have dabbled in looking at it as well. >> commissioner yee: i guess my question it's, you know, how would you say it's universal where d.p.a. and also get into it or other agency. >> it's officer personnel records. >> commissioner yee: i guess, you know, city auditors can
take a look at it or challenge on there where it's transparent where we can say, yes, it works. i guess in the past it's just into san francisco police department and boom and to that specific provider and any upgrades, you paid a premium thereon. you know, where other companies and shows. so we don't get it's just a one shop deal. that's what i'm looking at see if it's flexible with other programs. >> right. i'm not with officer contract appropriations, but it's my understanding that it would be
for five years and then update it at the end, but don't quote me on that. >> commissioner yee: okay. i'm good with that. >> director: commissioners, can i say you raised an issue that we had talked both with the department and with the agency about predetermining what information is going to be shared and how it's going to be shared. this was also raised at the board of supervisors when they were talking about the budget d.p.a. had requested that part of the budget contemplation includes whatever technology resources will be necessary to implement for best practices for the sharing of information as well. so those are ongoing conversations, but we have started already trying to anticipate that issue to make sure that we're all on the same page about when the data's collected, how it's going to be
shared and what's going to be shared. >> president cohen: okay. is that all? okay. thank you. you left us wanting more. >> director: yes. that was it. >> president cohen: okay. no problem. i had a couple questions. i wanted to know how will the e.i.s. related to the proposed related to the proposed bias dash boards. >> yeah. >> president cohen: i see cindy nodding her head. will potentially bias behavior be used in e.i.s. or will a system be established to manage those? >> i'll take that one. so the good part about it is is as we integrate data, the
system that we're looking at has some flexibility and a lot of it depends on the types of data that integrated and how that data's used. for instance, if we're just putting in a stop, that's a different story looking at a different complaint which is usually in the e.i.s. system. i think they're two kind of different things, but we have some flexibility because the system, once we integrate the data, we can con figure things to work for our department. i think that's a work in progress. we just started at stage one of our dash board, but that's a work in progress, but those conversations with our new director of technology, director rich mckenzie, she's having those conversations right now in our team, so yet to be determined, but definitely something we are
looking closely at to look at the capabilities of what the system will be. >> president cohen: so you do recognize that there may be some correlation yeah, definitely could be. like i said, if you just stop, a little bit different situation, but we're going to work through that because i going to work through that topic. >> so i just want to learn a little bit more about so in slide nine, there's been a significant decrease from portal one in two thousand twenty to quarter one 2021 in the data that was measured in relation to the early intervention system. there was a minus 24.4 increase in indicator point.
that's a 30 these are really impressive statistics. a type of masters kre in type of policy and the one they train you on is that correlation is not the same as causation and so my question is whether or not there's a direct relationship between the early intervention system and these decreases. >> i think it can be. >> president cohen: okay. >> i want to be totally honest with you, some of these decreases can be attributed to the pandemic. but i think some of these decreases to some of the form of counseling and form of counseling outside of the e.i.s. system. i think we've also increased
attendance to the criminal mind set classes, the c.m.c.r. classes. plus, i think we've come up towards the end of the d.o.j. reforms and some of the changes in the d.g.o.s can also be attributed to that. i don't want to take away anything from the work that the department has done in reducing these numbers, but i do recognize that we are in a pandemic and that could have been a contributing factor. >> president cohen: don't misinterpret my question. i'm not criticizing your data. i just wanted to learn more about the thinking of those who have reviewed the data so that we can learn more about the effectiveness of the early intervention program. all right. >> i have access to, i'm in charge of internal affairs and i'm also in charge of e.i.s. i can tell you in many cases i
have recognized that the e.i.s.s have been effective. >> president cohen: that's good to hear. >> like i said because officer confidentiality i can't release that specific information and i can give you my word i have seen a reduction in specific officers who have received e.i.s.s in correlation to internal affairs and d.p.a. complaints. >> president cohen: i appreciate that honest answer and i think everything contributes to the better outcomes. chief, you were raising your hand, did you want to jump in? >> definitely some opportunities to really take. better more comprehensive process, so it's a good time for us. i know this has been a long
time in the making, but what we review, the database, data driven. so the conversations are happening and definitely we would love to get a presentation once we get closer to on the ground products. >> thank you, i would appreciate that because one thing i just want to note there was only one intervention last year, so i know you can't share all of the personal information, but that's what the report is showing. >> the one for the quarter. >> president cohen: say again. >> one for the quarter. >> president cohen: thank you for the correction. yes. all right. that's all i have. let's keep moving forward:
let's take public comment on item four. >> clerk: for members of the public who would like to make public comment online item four, please press star three to be released into the queue. good evening, caller, you have two minutes? >> good evening, police commissioners. as a technical professional living in your city as your undertaking any program using open source software specifically for these programs. you can obviously see necessary sarl both allows the software development professionals that live and work in your city by
contributing to the code that it uses as well as contributes that code that the city might own and other resources it needs and finally it allows it to be updated without managing those sort of negotiations with providers. while the initial outset cost might be a little more, in the long run, you're going to get a piece of software you own and maintain and that's something better for our city in my opinion. >> thank you. >> president cohen: thank you. okay. any other public commenting? >> clerk: no, ma'am. >> president cohen: thank you. let's move and call item five. >> clerk: line item five. presentation of the department of police accountability annual report. discussion. >> president cohen: thank you. mr. henderson, you're up again.
>> so i think it's kind of important and especially with the 37 evidence-based recommendation that's have been made and resting use of force and the national award that was received for that work. again, that was evolved out of the legislation that was drafted and introduced by president of the board of supervisors, and now president from the police commission malia cohen. i would say in conclusion, people pay attention to some of the other analysis that we've done and i think that it's not
enough for us to just present statistics and numbers. part of what managing public expectation is for us to analyze the data beyond just the policies. recommendation that's we have and crunch the numbers to present the unasked questions that are more obvious based on the work that we do. and then addressing some of those things, is how we try and format to make the report both readable, ledge able and useable for broad are audiences at a local state and national level. they may be interested for people to follow and track are some of the frequent findings in terms of the allegations and we've summarized them and those are all in the report. with that i will present our annual report and i will stick around, of course, and have --
i'm available for any questions that folks have. >> president cohen: thank you. >> the audience is yours. >> good evening, president cohen, vice president elias, commissioners, chief scott and members of the public. >> we can go ahead and start with this next slide. great, so one of the things i want to mention over all, before we dive in is this report has evolved over the time since director henderson has been the head of the agency, it's involved in part in response to issues that the commission has raised and wanted to see and issues the community has raised and wanted to see. so the first two slides that i'm going to go through speak a little bit to what director henderson said in really drilling down, because before we would give you the statistics on 40 cases were found to be
neglected duty but what that meant was not clear. right x so we broken those down into sub categories which i'm sharing with you now and which are in the report so that we can understand more of what that means. this isn't only important in the context of d.p.a.'s annual report, it also is something that is happening in our work with the department, for example, in the quarterly dis a pro where we examine trends and so we can respond to them in a more efficient and nimble manner so turning now to this slide, we're looking at neglective constitute and basically, there were a total of 70 allegations of neglected duty that resulted in proper conduct findings and those are broken down here and i'm not going to go through every one but i will say, for example, the number one is still body-worn camera. now we've seen that number reduced over the years but it's our biggest trend in the
neglected duty category. a couple of other neglected duty cases with find that's were improper conduct, were an incomplete or inaccurate incident report that continues to be a trend that we just saw in our most recent meeting of the disciplinary reboard and failure to properly supervisor is it this shows how we're drilling down on what we're seeing and seeing the discussions coming up and in the context of policy recommendations that d.p.a. makes in other formats as well. next slide, please. these two charts also look at separate over arching categories of allegations. on the top, we have conduct it's on the left, no. on the top, we have inappropriate behavior and language allegations making up 72 of all conduct on becoming allegations so ta top part of
the graph is the category of conduct unbecoming an officer and the majority within that category or the officer behave or spoke inappropriately. the other categories are the officer harassed a disabled individual which is a much smaller, again, we're talking 13 versus 3 and the officer displayed harassing and intimidating behavior. the bottom part of the graph outlines unwarranted action allegations and this is where improper and improper make up it's a mouthful so we're looking at sub categories to see what our biggest trends are and so that we can can accurately and efficiently address those
concerns with the department. next slide, please. this shows the cases that were opened in total by d.p.a. in each quarter of the year. quarter one, we had 26% of our over all cases and quarter 2, 30%, quarter 3, 23% and fourth quarter 21% and the number themselves are broke undown on the bottom and director henderson mentioned earlier in his remarks, the trajectory of cases opened by d.p.a. has been on the upward and commissioner elias mentioned, you know, with regards to stats we need to look at effect of the pandemic is it has continued since 2017 despite the pandemic. this graph shows our case closures so we increase the number of case that's we were closing in 2016 to 2020 with
director henderson and our agency to really close cases, thoroughly but also in timely manner because it's important for officers and the public to get kind of results from these cases in a timely fashion. one request was made and i believe commissioner, it was elias it was by you that we showed demographics of where the complaints are coming from in relation to specific station zoos we drilled down on that and this graph represents the complaints and allegations totaled by either directing stations or specialized units. one thing i do think is important to note though, just because there are more complaints out of the certain station, does not mean there are more sustained findings out of that station. so, this information shows both of those numbers. it shows what the number of complaints are whether or not
improper conduct was found in those complaints. these are our complainant demographics. the one thing about these that are obviously they're helpful, they're important, however, with regard to ethnicity, 35% of individuals declined this state so we're trying to get as much information as we can from the data that we can with age it can breakdown and 41% of individuals declined and gender as well solve we're trying to get the demographics with regard to race or ethnicity, you know, aside
from declining state, 196 complainants identified as white and 124 identified as black or african american, with regard to age, the biggest age group was the 31 to 48 age range followed by the 41 to 50 age range. we're going to zoom with our over all case findings so this represents all of the case that's we opened and just with the allegations these are what people alleged happened the biggest category is conduct in unwarranted action as well as neglected those were the three largest buckets that we drilled down on a little bit but again, this is just how the complaints come in and sergeant young blood, if you can get to the next slide for me, please.
this is how the findings breakdown. so, all of the cases represented here were sustained so that is the universe we're looking at and we'll look at the most category sustained is that neglective duty category followed by conduct unbecoming an officer, use of force and use of force. so, wore going to switch from investigation to mediation. this graph represents the cases that are mediated by quarter. over all, in 2020, our mediation increased by 31% compared to 2019. the numbers were a little bit low in the first two quarters that was in large part due to the pandemic. however, the pandemic has the benefit of us transitioning to a robust remote program which has
been working very well and so we have been able to continue to get the cases mediated in that way. next slide, please. so, this slide represents the d.g.o. revisions process. i want to step back and talk about our policy work generally. i work on some policy but really the holl see work and jermaine jones and it doesn't just exist in the d.g.o. revision process although, in n community hears about the revision process coming from d.o.j. or from sparks or other areas kind of the most. so i the process itself is one that has a number of steps and they're all laid out here and the commission is involved, we are in discussions with the department and i want to focus
on process developments that have been positive this year. we have streamlined processes where the recommendations that d.p.a. makes are documented in a grid and we've had this conversation in larger context about recommendations that get made and how do we track them and we've been doing much better job recently of kind of many tracking those recommendations and making sure that there's a dialogue between d.p.a. and the department which the commissioners and then open commission meetings about the issue. in speaking kind of substantively of the work that d.p.a. has been able to do in addition to these d.g.o. revisions we work a lot on d.g.o. 6.09, regarding domestic violence and we've worked on the s.t.o. programs on e.i.s. and we've worked on language access, we've made recommendations relate today officer-involved
shootings and across the board,, we're taking best practice research as well as our cases and making these recommendations and using this process as one of multiple processes that we have to bring our recommendations to discussion and sometimes fruition with the department and with the commission. >> not to interrupt you, look how beautiful these slides are. good job, keep going, sarah. >> i will to say, as much as i would love to take credit for the slides, nicole arm strong is the one who knows her way around powerpoint. thank you, nicole. next slide, please. switching gears to 1421, this is kind of an over all lock at what we were able to do in 2020 and i think it's been said ad nauseam but the biggest advancement for d.p.a. in that regard was launching our public portal so all of this information is available and accessible to
everyone on our website. in terms of productively we enclosed 17,000 pages plus of and eight why officer-involved shooting investigations. this is for 2020 so those numbers are as of december and they are not reflective of where we are in july and that information has been provided in our regular sb14-21 updates to the commission. there's a six-month report due
to the commission on the status of the recommendations that we made and that will be coming soon. as will another presentation from our audit division so i think the audit is one of the charter mandated areas of work that d.p.a. has been doing and we made recommendation that's we are tracking and that we'll be acted upon. next slide. we also worked this year and in 2020 on racial equity plans. this is the team that comprised that work. one of the things we were able to do, despite the pandemic, was to keep our internship program going. director henderson and thompson have done stellar work to recruit, train and shepherd these interns through a robust program that includes speak and
he is others who come to speak our intern and they do a lot of work with d.p.a. because we take seriously, not just to get the help of the interns, which we need and love but also to give them an enriching experience so it's a program that d.p.a. i think is very proud of and you will be hearing from the interns later this summer. that is it. i think i made it within 10 minutes. even though i was trying to read some tiny print on a couple of those slides and obvious low myself and director henderson are happy to answer specific questions about the slides or the over all report. >> president cohen: i do have one question about a slide. i don't recall which slide it
was on. i think it's on slide four. so, it looks like the d.p.a. stats have gone up but i was wondering if this is because complaints have gone up or because d.p.a. has found misconduct when it's investigating cases. >> our sustained rate has stayet higher than it's been in past years and it's consistent or a little bit higher than the national average so our sustained rate is roughly 8% and the national average is like generally around 6% and one or two jurisdictions is around 8% or 9%. >> president cohen: thank you. commissioner hamasaki. >> one of the questions with the policy slide, is there any
movement towards finding a full-time dedicated policy to build the shoes of tamra, we've all been missing the last year or so. >> let me jump in there for that one. that is kind of a bigger budget issue. we had really tied constraints this year and that is one of our biggest priorities is more of a focus and expansion of the focus not just because of the significance here which we think is really important in san francisco and a lot of our policy, because it's evidence-based and fact-driven, based on complaint from the
agency, it's the maud that will other counties use in their divisions as well and it's a state and national level as well and so, it's a long way to answer the question is that it's influx and still being negotiated but we've never stopped asking for broader funds to try and address expanding that division and to have a full time policy person. >> ok. >> didn't you, what is one of your -- i don't know. what do we call you guys? director below ms. wu, didn't she leave? >> she did. so we did. >> that's like, i mean, you can get two policy persons for that rate. you would think but i'm glad that you waved that because this
was a confusion that was raised before which was miss communicated and through the general public about the number of leadership position and chief positions because they're actually, we're not a broad number of chiefs it was just leadership and management people and when we discuss it last time there was a district attorney office has and we had more than them when in actuality they have 12 almost 13 different leadership positions and we had just the two and as a reminder, we have -- it's a big command staff over there. >> yeah, well that's not what we have at d.p.a. >> we do not sadly. i am working on it but i'm trying to expand and as i said, i am in open negotiations with city hall about what our options
are to try and maintain the department in spite of the cuts and the restrictions that have gone on recently. >> i know you doing good work and janelle has been joining in on the policy work and we've seen good things come through it's just, you know, we got pretty soft over here on the commission and relying on your wisdom and expertise so. >> i'm not backing away from it and i'm doubling down on not just the policy but on the other areas of leadership from the department as well and that's part of the reason why to make sure that there's no ball being dropped and one the things that we did recently right before samra left was published her recommendations so she could do it by subject matter and the public will be able to search from them and not go line by
line to see things that are rel rant to them but, again, this brings us back to a topic that we've discussed in the past and the recommendations come and go like water under a ridge and we're not following up where those policies are going, my brilliant, great, outstanding, wonderful policy recommendations are for entertainment purposes and we have to develop a better system to cap some of those recommendations and that were because part of the frustrations both from samra and recent relationship has been what happens to that work. how do we have accountability for the recommendation that's get made again and that is made and they days appear and we have to have, we have toel build out at least some sort of flow to be responsive to that and in the meantime, i'm still and to build
it will out. >> i found a discussion on that and i appreciate that because, we really do depend on you folks so, it's important and the importance aspect what d.p.a. does and has done and at least in the history i've been involved in the commission so, looking forward to it. >> i am. and i will continue fighting for it and as i have an update can i share about what we're given the opportunity and the privilege to do and i will share it as soon as i'm able, i just, there's nothing i can say rit now other than i'm working on it and we're all scrambling but i'm reiterating that it's important to myself and to the agency as well and we're not backing away and dropping the ball or comport compartmentalizing it. >> thank you for that presentation. i just want to stay kudos to you
and your office. the last three years some of us have been here we've seen reports get tighter and the annual reports and they are doing a great job in there so i want to acknowledge that and i think coming oust pandemic, i've been doing this whole like 360° self evaluation like zen space and i want to know how do the two of you feel that the annual report then speaks to how d.p.a. moves forward. what's your over all take? you get these presentations and we get the numbers and what do you think this means for d.p.a. as we continue to move forward? how do we use what is in the annual report to come in a new fiscal year for d.p.a. and how can we be more efficient and it's a very loaded question. it's probably things that keep you up at night and just one or tiger woods things that they can bring up and i think just making sure that we are cognizant about those as we continue to move
through the year, we implement some of the things we saw or inefficiencies we saw that we can course correct as we main forward. >> i would say and i'll let and on her interpretation of it but i would say from my perspective, from when i first tackled rebam ups, relaunching, rewriting the annual report from when it was 200 something pages of just staff, i couldn't tell what it meant even though i can experts that could tell me line by line and i recognized the public couldn't do this and there's no value if people can't understand what we're doing. that was a blow against reform and a blow against accountability and if we couldn't show our work how can we take interest for doing it w
i would say, doing that in a bubble for myself was a great first step with the agency and my team helped put a large part of that together and being informed by both praise and criticism from the commission has shaped a lot of what the report looks like now and that was those questions or demands and that input was not always easy, finding those statistics was not something that was done without a lot of work and hearing both from the commission and quite frankly from the public as well that will also does not edit what they wanted to do and see of our work and i believe, has made made this annual report as the past few years but this one is a
reflection and a reputation of our most clear, our easiest to read and our most visible with the clarity of the charge and the analysis where we show the work from what the numbers mean. it's probably the most helpful document or the most helpful report and that we've done and i'm looking forward to what we've done last year and part of what we do to answer the questions and i just got this idea and answering the questions from commissioner hamasaki, is that we talk about some of the challenge and in spite of our limitations from budgets, of what we're able to do and just to give context to that, we at d.p.a. have 1% of the police department's budget and so what we do with that 1%,.
>> i want the inis put so i can serve the public this commission and the department with quality work. >> i'd like to just say a couple of things. we have a five-year strategic plan and we check in with it periodically to make sure what we're reporting on track funds what those values were that sometimes we have to be reactive, right and that is to make sure that work is balancing the proactive with the reactive but i would say kind of three things that the report and as helped us frame from last year to this year and what we have is a hunch versus the data to back it up and looking at the data, is it really a problem. what can we do with that and an example that d.p.a. would say
was fourth amendment cases and we had this sense we were seeing these trends and were we really and it became incumbent upon us to drill down on the case and then to have an approach and then we've kind of address touchdown and bright some of the cases to the commission and we needed the data to back that up so i think that is how the data is helping us and that is the level of data mining that we need to be doing and it keeps us honest, right. we thought body-worn cameras is a problem and it is. those data points are important and driveway how we prioritize our work and what we can come up in terms of solution to drive us forward. the audit is another big area where i think this reporting is really helpful. i come from a criminal law background and auditing was not part of my career plan and i
really overwhelmingly see the value of it and that is another area where we take a dope dive and away ply standards and we come up with recommendations, right, and i think all of us feel the burden of having issues we're trying to solve and having big data piles trying to come up with intelligent ways to address things, right. and tracking them to see if those solutions work or don't work and i think it's better to try something and maybe it doesn't work and we know we tried it and we have the results clearly defined and we have to report to each other on them and be transparent to the community and then we try again. right. so i think that it's easy to look at these annual reports as something, let's mack a nice graph and let's toot our own horn for the accomplishments we've had and hear the picture at city hall and look, we get to do that too. we are proud of the work we do and it is a tool that should a,
hold d.p.a. accountability to what we're saying and doing and b., be used as a play that can increase our capacity to serve the community and accomplish our mission. >> i'm going to jump into wrap this up. did you get your question fully answered? >> i did. commissioner yee. >> i want to commend department of police accountability and executive director paula henderson and sarah hawken and the team. due to the limited funding, since the budget has been passed and hopefully maybe there's more funding available somewhere
along the road that can help you and i guess meaning our goal as well as your goal and thank you for all your hard work and wish you the best in the next fiscal year. >> i don't have any further questions so we'll keep moving thank you. thank you, d.p.a., appreciate the presentation. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> for members of the public that would like to make public comment regarding line item 5, d.p.a. annual report, please press star 3 now. there's no public comment. >> president cohen: say that again. >> clerk: there's no public comment. >> president cohen: excellent. all right. let's keep moving. next item, please. >> clerk: line item 6, trial at the commission deliberation in
iad2019-0172 regarding officer joel babs. pursuant to rule 9 of the police commission rules trial of disciplinary cases they will consider evidence filed in case number iad-2019-0127 and resume deliberations to impose penalties for charges sustained to be take other action. officer babs has waved his right to confidential closed session hearing on this item. possible action. >> great, thank you. >> thank you, commissioners, this is the case we have continued and at this point i am going to ask to make a motion to continue our deliberations in closed session. >> all right. i'll second that motion. >> before we take action on it,
let's take public comment. >> clerk: remember the public would like to make public comment regarding line item 6 regarding officer joel babs, press star 3 now. good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> commissioners, i watched the meeting on june 16th and lis end to the public comment earlier tonight about officer joel babs and i grow there's evidence that officer babs is a victim of retaliation and bias by members of the san francisco police department. i heard nothing from the members of the wealth and disparities group addressing discipline case or claiming the woman victim in this discipline case is part of a discrimination and retaliation
and the experiences should be acknowledged and that the conduct of the named officer should be dealt with but that's not your task tonight and the commissioner only job tonight is to evaluate tonight's discipline case and to determine whether officer babs engage in the conduct he is allegedly to have committed against the women victim, women woman. officer babs being a victim in one case does not mean that he can sexually harass and assault a female co-worker with impurity and speaking of the victims, i want to commend her for coming forward and reporting the sexual assault and in spite of officer babs gaslighting and making allegations against her, she made a report against a co-worker and who is also a police officer. i'm sure that was no easy task and she likely doubted herself and question whether she was doing the right thing. she opened herself up and
possible criticism, retaliation and embarrassment but followed through despite the possibilities. her reporting of the incident and reports from her co-workers and officer bobs talks about conspiracy theories and being threat end by the chief of police. even if these claims are true, how has officer babs proven the victim he harassed is involved in those things or that she has is not telling the truth about the sexual abuse. think about your mothers, sisters, nieces aunts and the women friends when judging this case and put them in the place of this victim. what message if you excuse officer babs' behavior and more importantly, what are you telling the victim in this case if you use his behavior and you are you are not given the
experience weight and credibility because there are more important policies at play and you are telling her and other women that allegations of sexual assault will not be taken seriously so they should not bother coming forward and it should be morally and ethically and professionally wrong. thank you. >> thank you, caller. >> clerk: good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: this case is about police accountability. i work with sexual assault survivors and anyone who is ever worked with the sexual assault survivors knows that one of the reasons that women don't come forward is that society does not believe them and that they're often called liars and this is not about whistle plowers. the department should absolutely protect whistleblowers, we know that, you know that, everybody knows that and we saw it happen when they came forward but what this case is about is whether or
not you believe sexual assault survivors, joel babs has been caught lying multiple times and it's a matter of record and you know this he tried to run him over with a car, run him off the road with a car. you know that that's not creditable and i know you know that that's not creditable because he is still the chief of police. right. you know he is lying about that. so why on earth would you take a known liars' word over a victim of sexual assault? if you make the choice, to dismiss this, you will be sending a message to every woman who assaulted by a police officer, that they will not be believed and they will be considered liars if they come forward and they'll be calling this woman a lier and i beg you,
beg you to use commonsense and not to listen to special interest groups calling in who don't represent the majority of san franciscans, you know that and they clearly don't care about justice for sexual assault survivors. for christ sake, please use commonsense. please, use some commonsense. and get this man out of the department for the protection of the women and the department and the public, it is your job and it's your imperative, please. >> thank you caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> the issue about bringing up how there's been retaliation officers officer babbs is regular vant. if there's a pattern of retaliation against him then you have motive for people to say
lies about him. so i think that creates a great deal of personable doubt that this has been a conspiracy against him so i don't think he is lying about it or he is fantasizing because there's been a substantiated campaign of rieltation against him so you can definitely see how these accusations of sexual harassment can be part of that campaign of harassment so i don't think you can ignore this history of retaliation so you want you to consider that and consider that as possible reasonable doubt, right. and he is not the only person and the only black ploy see of this city who has had a campaign against him. even felicia had a campaign against her for standing up and being a whistleblower. it's a pattern in the city. it's a pattern in the department and i hope you recognize that. and i am a member of wealth and
disparities in the black community and thank you. >> thank you, caller. that is the end of public event. i think you and i'll pick up the actions and to go into public comment, private sessions and let me call role. >> on the motion, to resume in closed session, commissioner hama scary, how do you vote? >> yes, yes. >> commissioner brookter. >> yes. >> commissioner yee. >> commissioner burn. >> yes. >> commissioner burn, yes. >> vice president elias. >> yes. >> and president cohen. >> president cohen: yes. >> you have six yeses.
>> president cohen: thank you. loin item 7, public comment on all matters pertaining to 9 below closed session including public comment on item 8, whether to hold item 9 in closed session. please press star 3 now if you would like to make public comment. we have no public comment. line item 8, san francisco administrative code section 67.10 action. motion to hold item 9 in closed session. >> i'll second. >> commissioner hamasaki how do you vote? >> yes. >> commissioner brookter. >> yes. >> commissioner yee. >> yes. >> commissioner burn. >> yes. >> vice president elias.
. >> my name is dave, and i play defense. >> my name is mustafa, and i am a midfielder, but right now, i am trying to play as a goalkeeper, because they need a goalkeeper. >> soccer u.s.a. is a nonprofessional organization. we use sports, soccer in particular to engage communities that can benefit from quality programs in order to lift people up, helping to regain a sense of control in one's life. >> the san francisco recreation and park department and street soccer u.s.a. have been partners now for nearly a
decade. street soccer shares our mission in using sport as a vehicle for youth development and for reaching people of all ages. rec and park has a team. >> i'm been playing soccer all my life. soccer is my life. >> i played in the streets when i was a kid. and i loved soccer back home. i joined street soccer here. it was the best club to join. it helps me out. >> the tenderloin soccer club started in the summer of 2016. we put one of our mini soccer pitches in one of our facilities there. the kids who kpriez the club team came out to utilize that space, and it was beautiful because they used it as an opportunity to express themselves in a place where they were free to do so, and it was a safe space, in a neighborhood that really isn't the most hospitalable to
youth -- hospitable to youth playing in the streets. >> one day, i saw the coach and my friends because they went there to join the team before me. so i went up to the coach and asked, and they said oh, i've got a soccer team, and i joined, and they said yeah, it was he for everybody, and i joined, and it was the best experience ever. >> a lot of our programs, the kids are in the process of achieving citizenship. it's a pretty lengthy process. >> here, i am the only one with my dad. we were in the housing program, and we are trying to find housing. my sister, she's in my country, so i realize that i have a lot of opportunities here for
getting good education to help her, you know? yeah. that's the -- one of the most important things that challenge me. >> my dad was over here, making some money because there was not a lot of jobs back home. i came here, finish elementary in san francisco. after that, i used to go back to my country, go to yemen, my country, and then back here. last time i went back was a couple years ago. >> i came here six months, i know nobody. now i have the team has a family, the coaches. amazing. >> i'm hoping for lifelong friendships, and i'm super inspired by what they've been able to achieve and want to continue to grow alongside them. >> i love my family, i love my team. they're just like a family. it's really nice.
>> street soccer just received a five year grant from the department of children, youth and family, and this is an important inreflection point for street soccer u.s.a. because their work in our most important communities is now known beyond just san francisco recreation and park department, and together, we're going to continue to work with our city's most vulnerable kids and teach them to love the beautiful game. >> i want to tell everybody back home, i hope you all make it over here and join teams like this like street soccer u.s.a., and live your life. get a better life. >> right away, just be patient, and then, everything will be okay.
>> ever wonder about programs the city it working think to make san francisco the best place to work and will we bring shine to the programs and the people making them happen join us inside that edition of what's next sf sprech of market street between 6th is having a cinderella movement with the office of economic workforce development is it's fairy godmother telegraph hill engaged in the program and providing the reason to pass through the corridor and better reason to stay office of economic workforce development work to support the economic vital of all of san
francisco we have 3 distinctions workforce and neighborhood investment i work in the tenderloin that has been the focus resulting in tax chgsz and 9 arts group totally around 2 hundred thousand square feet of office space as fits great as it's moved forward it is some of the place businesses engaged for the people that have living there for a long time and people that are coming into to work in the the item you have before you companies and the affordable housing in general people want a safe and clean community they see did changed coming is excited for every. >> oewd proits provides permits progress resulting in the growth
of mid businesses hocking beggar has doubled in size. >> when we were just getting started we were a new business people never saturday a small business owner and been in the bike industry a long needed help in finding at space and sxug the that is a oewd and others agencies were a huge helped walked us through the process we couldn't have done it without you this is sloped to be your grand boulevard if so typically a way to get one way to the other it is supposed to be a beautiful boulevard and fellowship it is started to look like that. >> we have one goal that was the night to the neighborhood while the bigger project of developments as underway and also to bring bring a sense of community back to the
neighborhood. >> we wanted to use the says that a a gathering space for people to have experience whether watching movies or a yoga or coming to lecture. >> that sb caliber shift on the street is awarding walking down the street and seeing people sitting outside address this building has been vacate and seeing this change is inspiringing. >> we've created a space where people walk in and have fun and it is great that as changed the neighborhood. >> oewd is oak on aortas a driver for san francisco. >> we've got to 23ri7b9 market and sun setting piano and it was on the street we've seen companies we say used to have to
accompanying come out and recruit now they're coming to us. >> today, we learned about the office of economic workforce development and it's effort to foster community and make the buyer market street corridor something that be proud of thanks to much for watching and tune in next time for >> i try to start every day not looking at my phone by doing something that is grounding. that is usually meditation. i have a gym set up in my garage, and that is usually breathing and movement and putting my mind towards something else. surfing is my absolute favorite
thing to do. it is the most cleansing thing that i'm able to do. i live near the beach, so whenever i can get out, i do. unfortunately, surfing isn't a daily practice for me, but i've been able to get out weekly, and it's something that i've been incredibly grateful for. [♪♪♪] >> i started working for the city in 2005. at the time, my kids were pretty young but i think had started school. i was offered a temporarily position as an analyst to work on some of the programs that were funded through homeland security. i ultimately spent almost five years at the health department coordinating emergency programs. it was something that i really
enjoyed and turned out i was pretty good at. thinking about glass ceiling, some of that is really related to being a mother and self-supposed in some ways that i did not feel that i could allow myself to pursue responsibility; that i accepted treading water in my career when my kids were young. and as they got older, i felt more comfortable, i suppose, moving forward. in my career, i have been asked to step forward. i wish that i had earlier stepped forward myself, and i feel really strongly, like i am 100% the right person for this job. i cannot imagine a harder time to be in this role. i'm humbled and privileged but also very confident. so here at moscone center, this is the covid command center, or
the c.c.c. here is what we calledun -- call unified command. this is where we have physically been since march, and then, in july, we developed this unified structure. so it's the department of emergency management, the department of public health, and our human services hughesing partners, so primarily the department of homelessness and supportive housing and human services agency. so it's sort of a three-headed command in which we are coordinating and operating everything related to covid response. and now, of course, in this final phase, it's mass vaccination. the first year was before the pandemic was extremely busy. the fires, obviously, that both we were able to provide mutual support but also the impact of
air quality. we had, in 2018, the worst air quality ten or 11 days here in the city. i'm sure you all remember it, and then, finally, the day the sun didn't come out in san francisco, which was in october. the orange skies, it felt apocalyptic, super scary for people. you know, all of those things, people depend on government to say what's happening. are we safe? what do i do? and that's a lot of what department of emergency management's role is. public service is truly that. it is such an incredible and effective way that we can make change for the most vulnerable. i spend a lot of my day in problem solving mode, so there's a lot of conversations with people making connections, identifying gaps in resources
or whatever it might be, and trying to adjust that. the pace of the pandemic has been nonstop for 11 months. it is unrelenting, long days, more than what we're used to, most of us. honestly, i'm not sure how we're getting through it. this is beyond what any of us ever expected to experience in our lifetime. what we discover is how strong we are, and really, the depth of our resilience, and i say that for every single city employee that has been working around the clock for the last 11 months, and i also speak about myself. every day, i have to sort of have that moment of, like, okay, i'm really tired, i'm weary, but we've got to keep going. it is, i would say, the biggest challenge that i have had
personally and professionally to be the best mom that i can be but also the best public certify chant in whatever role i'm in. i just wish that i, as my younger self, could have had someone tell me you can give it and to give a little more nudge. so indirectly, people have helped me because they have seen something in me that i did not see in myself. there's clear data that women have lost their jobs and their income because they had to take care of their safety nets. all of those things that we depend on, schools and daycare and sharing, you know, being together with other kids isn't available. i've often thought oh, if my kids were younger, i couldn't do this job, but that's
unacceptable. a person that's younger than me that has three children, we want them in leadership positions, so it shouldn't be limiting. women need to assume that they're more capable than they think they are. men will go for a job whether they're qualified or not. we tend to want to be 110% qualified before we tend to step forward. i think we need to be a little more brave, a little more exploratory in stepping up for positions. the other thing is, when given an opportunity, really think twice before you put in front of you the reasons why you should not take that leadership position. we all need to step up so that we can show the person behind us that it's doable and so that we have the power to make the changes for other women that is going to make the possibility for their paths easier than
ours. other women see me in it, and i hope that they see me, and they understand, like, if i can do it, they can do it because the higher you get, the more leadership you have, and power. the more power and leadership we have that we can put out hearing for thursday, july 8, 2021. require everyone's attention and most of all your patience. if you're not speaking, please mute your microphone. to enable public participation,
sfgovtv is broadcasting and streaming live. we will receive public comment for each item on the agenda. it's available by calling 1-415-655-0001. and entering access code, 146 938 9479. when we reach the item you're interested in commenting on, please press star and then 3 to be added to the queue. when you hear that you're line has been unmuted, that is your indication to begin speaking. each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes. when you have 30 seconds remaining, you'll hear a chime. when the allotted time is reached, i will take the next person to speak. speak clearly and slowly and please mute the volume on your television or computer. if i could take roll, commissioner chair moore? >> vice president moore: here.
>> commissioner diamond: here. >> commissioner fung: here. >> commissioner imperial: here. >> commissioner tanner: here. thank you, commissioners. we do expect president koppel and commissioner chan to be absent today. on the agenda is items for continuance. item 1, 2019, 13412, 146 jordan avenue. the variance portion is requested to continue to the next variance hearing on july 28, 2021. item 12, case number 20 19d-17481. 530 sansome street, the appeal of the preliminary negative declaration is proposed for continuance to july 29, 2021. so that it may be heard with the other entitlement items. item 3, case number, 2020-788, 722 wisconsin street,
conditional use authorization is being proposed for continuance to august 26, 2021. and further, commissioners, we received 11th hour request on the regular calendar for item 12, case number 2019, at of 628 shotwell street, for it to be continued to september 23, 2021. and items 13a and b for case numbers 2019-611cua and 5114 through 5116 third street, conditional use authorization and variances also to september 23, 2021. i have no other items proposed for continuance, so we should take public comment. members of the public, this is you're opportunity to address the commission on all items proposed to be continued by pressing star then 3 to be added to the queue. when you hear that your line is unmuted, that is your indication
to begin speaking. through the chair, you'll have two minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is ryan patterson, attorney for the project sponsor at 628 shotwell street. we are continuing to work with the neighborhood non-profit groups including a walk through of the property. to that end, we're requesting continuance to the next available hearing date so we can keep working toward resolution. i've been in touch with their attorney this morning and informed that the neighborhood group support the continuance. thank you very much and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> jonas: go ahead, caller. >> i apologize, i was on mute. this is jeffrey eid, i'm the project architect for 146
jordan. i wanted to call in if there are questions regarding the project, i would be happy to address them. we have submitted revisions to the planning department which the neighbor who filed the d.r. is in agreement with. but, again, happy to answer any questions. >> jonas: thank you. i'll remind callers that we're only taking comment on the matter of continuance. >> hi, my name is christine. and my husband and i, we owned a house at 722 wisconsin street. and we are requesting -- i'm sorry, i'm a little bit nervous. i am requesting to have our item continued to the july 22nd planning commission meeting. right now, we are slated to be heard at the august 26 meeting. and the reason that it's been pushed back, there was a
miscommunication between our architect and our city planner. and there was a mistake made with the noticing. and keeping cleared up -- echoing -- and at the time the planner is chair haney who has been wonderful to work with. she's informed us that the project is ready to be -- and that city staff was ready to speak on behalf of us. another item -- [indiscernible] -- move forward with our project and we'll be on a plan -- >> jonas: i'm sorry. i'm going to interrupt. i guess i have an echo as well. >> you do, jonas. i was going to suggest that the caller maybe turn off one of your devices. if you have two devices going, phone and computer, it will cause an echo. because mine has subsided.
>> i am so sorry. is that better for everyone? >> much better. and i'll resume your time. >> i'm so sorry. i heard the echo. i wasn't sure if it was on my end. i'll start from the beginning. my husband and i are owners of 722 wisconsin street. and we are requesting to be -- have our item heard at the july 22nd planning commission meeting. we're currently slated for the august 26th planning commission meeting and the reason that it was pushed back was that there was a miscommunication between our a be text and the -- architect and planner and the noticing poster wasn't able to go up. at this time the miscommunication has been cleared up and our planner, ms. clare feeney, who has been wonderful to work with throughout the process. clare informed us that the process is ready to go in front of planning commission and city staff is ready to speak on our behalf.
and also, we're super eager to move forward with our home project. we will also be on a preplanned family vacation on august 26. we'll be visiting my in-laws in southern california. and -- [bell ringing] -- if we could go on the 22nd, we could be in the same room as the architect and avoid being in the same room as our two children, our 3 and 6-year-old. >> jonas: thank you, that's your time. >> okay. no problem. >> hi, my name is teresa calderon. i live in 1451 pine street. i'm requesting a postponement for the cancel use approval -- conditional use approval -- >> jonas: i'm going to ask that you call back. our request to speak again under general comment.
1525 pine is not on this agenda. it is scheduled for july 22. we'll take the next caller. >> sorry, i'm going to need to dial in because i have the same request. should i just hold on. >> yes. press star 3 again when we get to general public comment. >> hi. i need disability access request for the meeting, and no one has responded. i'm wondering if anyone received my access request. i sent four e-mails to commissioners, m.d.o. and the secretary. >> jonas: indeed, i thought we got back to you. that the item you were interested in speaking to is being continued or proposed to be continued and general public comment is already toward the beginning of the agenda. >> that's very helpful. thank you. >> jonas: all right.
>> i'm sorry, i was calling for 1525 pine without raising my hand again, i'll wait for general public comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is community organizer are usff. imcalling to -- i'm calling to support the continuance of shotwell, looking forward for the developer meeting with community members to find the right source of funding as well as the right, you know, host for that set. thank you very much. >> jonas: members of the public, last call for public comment on items proposed to be continued. seeing no additional requests to speak, public comment is closed.
and those matters proposed to be continued are before you, commissioners. >> i wonder if you could address -- i don't know if the request for the different date had come in. >> jonas: for 722 wisconsin? yes. commissioners, as always, you can continue any item to any date. i will simply note that although this week and maybe even next week may not be very impacted, your hearings starting july 22nd through september 23rd are -- or actually september 9 at this point are very full, with very large complicated items, informational presentations. so the soonest accommodation based on your advance calendar for 722 wisconsin was august 26,
which is why it's being proposed to that date. you have a joint hearing on july 29. and as i mentioned, you have a very full hearing on july 22. >> vice president moore: it is exactly for the reason that we want to balance things that we -- i feel comfortable taking guidance from secretary ionin. we've all made comments how hard it is to be overloaded and sit there for 8-10 hours hearing meaty projects that do require our full attention. so i really need to look to his guidance on this. >> jonas: right. having said that, it did sound like the caller -- the project sponsor is not available on august 26. i don't know if you want to continue that then to a different date in september, but
-- >> is it possible to do that hearing on july 15th? or is that -- we can't accommodate that? >> jonas: i believe there is a posting issue. maybe staff -- linda, are you available -- >> i'm -- >> i'm sorry, clare. >> when we start off the poster issue, the hearing that the project is eligible for is -- [indiscernible] is the 22nd. if the posters did not go up early enough for the 15th. >> jonas: clare, do you feel this will be a lengthy hearing? >> i don't think so. there is -- i've heard a little bit of community comment, but otherwise, i have not heard a lot about the project. >> jonas: okay. i mean, again, commissioners, i will let you make that decision. i'll only note that the review of large residence developments
is on july 22nd. 469 stephenson. and as of right now, 1525 pine, with i think you'll hear requests for continuing that item out. further under general public comment. you've got the life science and medical special use district as well as conditional use requirements regarding residential care facilities. make special note of the historic preservation commission who had considerable discussion related to the proposed code amendment. so i mean, again, you know -- i'm here either way, so... >> is the project sponsor amenable to keeping it on august 26, rather than moving it to a later date in september? can we find that out. >> jonas: i think she's raising her hand. is this the project sponsor for
wisconsin? >> yes. this is christine, the project sponsor. yeah, we are amenable to staying with august 26. we definitely don't want to push it out any further. it will just mean we'll be with our 3 and 6-year-old during the -- we'll be in the same house then. which is -- and we'll be on vacation, but the 22nd is our preferred date. >> vice president moore: i appreciate that. we had children in other hearings and it was quite delightful. i would suggest that is the best suggestion. >> i would move to all continuance, including items 12 and 13. >> vice president moore: second. >> jonas: if there is no further deliberation, there is a motion seconded to continue all items as proposed.
on that motion -- >> commissioner tanner: aye. >> commissioner diamond: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> i will continue item 1, the variance case, 146 jordan avenue to the next variance hearing which is july 28 and item 13b for third street, that variance will continue along with the c.u. to september 23rd. >> jonas: thank you zoning administrator teague. now we can move on to the consent calendar. all matters are considered to be are you teen by -- routine by the planning commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless member of the public, commission or staff so request.
in which vent will be removed from the calendar and considered at a separate hearing. 201 california street, the cancel use authorization, 559 clay street, conditional use authorization and item 6, case number 20191341, 146 jordan avenue, discretionary review. commissioners, we should take public comment for -- in case anyone would like to remove any of these items off of consent. >> linda chapman. just briefly, my star 3 was for the previous item, the continuances. and so i will just state that i have not been able to get contact with the project --
pardon me -- with the staff person in charge of 1525 pine despite numerous attempts by phone -- >> jonas: ms. chapman, i'm going to mute you there. we're not taking public comment on 1525, nor were we under the continuance calendar. but you are welcome to press star 3 again when we get to general public comment. commissioners, i have no other request to speak on the consent calendar, so public comment on the consent items is now closed and they are now before you. yes, commissioners, i live within 300 feet. the house i own is located within 300 feet of 164 jordan avenue. so i would like permission -- your permission to be recused from voting on that item and request we split the consent calendar into two votes.
one for the other two items and one for 146 jordan, so i cannot vote on that one. >> jonas: very good, indeed. commissioners, because this is procedurally -- commissioner diamond is restricted from participating in jordan due to the proximity of her residence, i don't think a vote to recuse is necessary, but you will need to fill out the paperwork with the commission. maybe we can take 146 jordan, and come back so commissioner diamond -- >> vice president moore: does someone else have to make a motion on jordan? or does it stand -- >> jonas: someone other than commissioner diamond needs to make a motion for jordan. but i'm saying no vote is necessary to recuse commissioner diamond. >> vice president moore: okay.
>> commissioner fung: grant the permit on 146 jordan. -- move to. >> jonas: thank you. then to take discretionary review and approve 146 jordan as modified, commissioner tanner? >> commissioner tanner: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> vice president moore: aye. >> jonas: so moved, that motion passes unanimously, 4-0. commissioner diamond, please come back and we'll consider 4 and 5. >> jonas: i don't see commissioner diamond coming on. >> jonas: she's with us. >> commissioner diamond: i'm here. >> vice president moore: the motion is now -- restate the motion. >> i'm proposing to state the motion for move to approve items 4 and 5. >> second.
>> thank you, commissioners on that motion then to approve items 4 and 5 under your consent calendar. >> commissioner tanner: aye. >> commissioner diamond: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> vice president moore: aye. thank you, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 5-0. and places us under commission matters, item 7, consideration of draft minutes for june 17 and june 24, 2021. we should take public comment. members of the public, if you wish to speak to the minutes now is your opportunity to do so. seeing -- there is one. you have two minutes. go ahead, caller. >> hi, thank you for taking my call. i'm in a lot of pain, i got my
vaccine shot yesterday and i sent some disability accommodation -- >> jonas: yes, but we're just taking public comment on the minutes at this point. general public comment is coming up, though. >> oh, i'm sorry. my mistake. >> jonas: that's all right. okay, commissioners, public comment for the minutes is now closed and they're before you. >> move to adopt the minutes. >> second. >> thank you, on that motion then to adopt the minutes for june 17 and 24, commissioner tanner? >> commissioner tanner: aye. >> commissioner diamond: aye. >> commissioner fung: aye. >> commissioner imperial: aye. >> vice president moore: aye. so moved, that motion passes unanimously, 5-0. placing us on item 8, commission comments and questions. >> i'd like to take the
opportunity to thank the sfmta project manager in terms of providing me the tour last week. in terms of the potrero bus yard. i recognize all other commissioners to attend the tour for the potrero bus yard. i learned a lot in terms the needs for modernization. we need to think or consider about the workers of sfmta. so, as this project is coming along, there are a lot of things that i think we need to think through and also how we care about the -- our bus facilities. i want to thank the sfmta for providing the tour and for other commissioners to also take the
tour with sfmta. that's all. thank you. >> vice president moore: thank you. >> commissioner tanner: and i definitely will thank you for letting -- commissioner imperial. i will tour the facility. i will make time for that. i want to thank staff, who helped offer tour for the high school students last week of the planning facility and provide an overview to them what planning is as a career, but also what it means to be civically engaged in planning. it was a wonderful couple of hours we spent with the students. i think they were pretty excited. to get high schools excited about planning, that means it's a pretty interesting topic. wanted to thank the staff for
that. >> jonas: thank you, commissioners. if there is no further comments from members of the commission, we can move on to ams department matters, item 9. >> just one item. i wanted to make you aware and the public that notice of preparation for the housing element update e.i.r. was issued on june 16. this is the first phase of our environmental review and includes broad scoping of the eir. comments are still being accepted until july 16. just to give you a reminder, it's anticipated to be heard in spring 2022 with final eir adoption in housing hopefully in january 2023 to meet the state's mandated deadlines. so, more information can be found at s.f. housing element
and that's all i have. >> jonas: thank you, director. >> item 10, review of past events -- there are no reports from the board of supervisors, so the board of appeals and the historic preservation commission. >> planning department. i can give a brief presentation on what happened last night at the board of appeals. they considered one item that may be of interest. it is building permit for 31st avenue. it's for a vertical addition to add one story to a two story dwelling. it's set back from the front building well about 24 feet. the planning commission heard this as d.r. in january 2020 and took d.r. to reduce massing at the rear of the building and look at the height of the front parapet. staff reviewed the front parapet
height and found it to be appropriate in minimizing the appearance of the building from the front. the d.r. requester in that case appealed the building permit application and sought to have the setback increased by an additional 18 feet. which would have this one-story vertical addition setback more than 30 feet from the front building wall of the property. the board of appeals unanimously denied the appeal. one other item of note, since april of this year, the board of appeals has been down one commissioner. commissioner resigned from the commission. two weeks ago the mayor did nominate mr. lopez. he's moving through the process and hopefully the board will be fully complete within the coming weeks. and that's all, thank you. >> jonas: thank you.
historic preservation commission did meet yesterday and considered several items that might be of interest to the planning commission. they adopted a recommendation for approval to establish the sunset chinese cultural district ordinance. this is an administrative code amendment. they heard an informational presentation from your staff on centering planning on racial and social equity. and also had significant conversations on the proposed code amendment for the review of large residence developments. that will be coming to you on july 22nd i believe. they ultimately adopted a recommendation for approval with staff's proposed modifications. however, they had significant concern and added a whereas to acknowledge that. over some of the proposed items
in legislation, specifically, the 2500 square foot benchmark or threshold and the 10% expansion standards so to speak. and then they felt that some of these numbers were a bit arbitrary, including the 10-year threshold for expansion of large residences. again, commissioners, this item will be coming to you for your consideration on july 22nd. finally, they did approve a permit to alter 233 geary street for some minor ground floor exterior modifications to the historic i. magnin building. if there are no questions or further comments, commissioners, we can move on to general public comment. at this time, members of the
public may address the items of interest that are within the subject matter of the commission, expect for agenda items. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. when the number of speakers exceed the 15 minutes, they may be moved to the end of the agenda. this is your chance to address items not on today's agenda. through the chair, you'll have two minutes. >> linda chapman. i'm sorry. i was confused. i've been unable to get information that i was inquiring about from the planner in charge of 1525 pine. michael lee responded kindly and took me back to the phone who doesn't take messages.
i sent her a long e-mail. the director is here, the commission is here, the secretary is here and i presume that you might have more success than i have had. also, i understand scott sanchez is -- i appreciate very much his help. but i have not been able to receive -- since he went away on vacation and he's back -- the information i wanted on the major rezoning errors. we're not talking about a few plots. 22 plots. i'm looking at the maps that will -- many, many requests. and that show 80-foot areas and 130-foot area wide where i expect to see 65 foot area. just like i see on the 1979 map that scott sanchez finally ok'd it. and probably incorporates our first rezoning, of course. the m.c.d. rezoning that was initiated by the planning department and also the van ness
rezoning height, which were for 130 foot height out of california street, one lot along van ness. nowhere else. it does not incorporate -- [bell ringing] -- rezoning that were subsequently submitted by us and by north of market planning coalition. i should not see 130-foot height. i don't understand that. one of the supervisors eventually submitted a plan which i assume are reflected this the map to cover areas that were not incorporated in our 65 foot height limit for market planning coalition. maybe there were -- [bell ringing] -- mapping errors at the time, i don't know, but we need to follow up. >> jonas: thanks, ms. chapman. that is your time. i have heard from staff directly
as you were making your comments that claude ina will reach out to you. samantha is no longer with the department which is why you were calling a number that may not have voice mail on it. go ahead, caller. >> can you hear me? hello? >> jonas: yes, we can. >> my name is teresa calderon. i'm asking to postpone the conditional use approval for 1525 pine street for at least three weeks to august 13. the reason is that the project sponsor performed a life study, but minimized effects of the building on the life of the second, third and fourth floors. they were using averages rather than showing a 90% light
reduction for the second floor for example. that shows a negative 15% light reduction for all the units that are in the lightwell. and also, they were focusing on the light that is outside in the courtyard rather than the light is that in the units. and in addition, the project sponsors rather than addressing our concerns proposed to replace natural light with artificial light, which should not be acceptable. thank you. >> jonas: hi, my name is samantha. i'm also a resident at 1545 pine street and like teresa, i'm requesting continuance of the hearing scheduled for july 22nd regarding 1525 pine street. i requested that meeting be moved at least three weeks, probably better four weeks from
that july 22nd date. apparently the developer has conducted a light study which i specifically requested from them that they provide me with a copy, but they never did. i'm still currently reviewing it. several residents, including myself, have significant concerns about the light study and are in the process of trying to engage our own light consultant to evaluate that study and also potentially have our own study so we can have our concerns addressed. that understandably will take a little bit of time. and so we're hoping so we can get the best information to this commission, you would be amenable to a continuance so we can get that consultant engaged, get the best information, so when you do eventually consider 1525 pine street, you'll have the most accurate information about the impact of the light on our buildings, 1545 pine street. thank you for your consideration.
>> hi, my name is zack. i e-mailed this commission, commissioners and m.o.d. and secretary and the e-mail on the website and agenda to try to get a disability accommodation for this meeting. i'm now only able to speak after 36 minutes of waiting through other issues. i'm in a lot of pain and i wish someone would have applied and told me your accommodation is denied, because i wouldn't have waited 36 minutes in pain. i'm really hurting right now and i really wish this office would respond to disability requests. i -- i just wanted to speak against gentrification in the mission, which is the neighborhood i have the privilege of living in. it's one of my favorite places in the world.
it's a vibrant community. many people from south america and asia and many amazing restaurants and stores and places that you can't find anywhere else in the world. it's one of the reasons i moved to san francisco more than 10 years ago. the city department planning commission, please don't approve more mansions and huge luxury condos and buildings that are displacing rapidly the asian and latinx communities as well as disabled and seniors from this vibrant neighborhood. the destruction of the urban canopy along 24th street is sure to pave the way for more gentrification and removal of longstanding businesses and community -- [bell ringing] -- to the community for decades and has struggled very, very hard. of course, to survive during the
pandemic like so many of us have. please reject the building of the mansion on 628 shotwell. and other locations that only seek to eradicate diverse community in the mission. thank you. >> thanks for taking my comment. a resident of 1545 pine street. next door adjacent to 1525 pine, the proposed project with the density program and increased height. one of the residents has received the light shadow study that was done by the project sponsors recently. and as mentioned, by neighbors earlier, the study does have a lot of short comings, including the fact that there will be direct sunlight blockage to homes like mine that only have
light through the east-facing lightwell. we would like to do our own evaluation of the light, as well as study the impacts of loss of direct sunlight to our homes. which we were planning on having access to given that the density bonus program would not be applied and wondering about these homes, the only proposal there was to build a 65-foot building. so as my neighbors previously mentioned, i would like to kindly request a continuance to august 26 or a later date so we have time to conduct our own evaluation of the light study that was handed to us as well as understanding what other impacts we might be having from loss of light and direct access to sunlight to our homes. thank you. >> jonas: thank you.
last call for general public comment. seeing no additional requests to speak, commissioners, general public comment is closed. and we can move on to your regular calendar. reminder to members of the public, items 2 -- 12, 13a and b were continued to november 23rd, leaving item 11, residential open space controls presentation. deputy zoning administrator sanchez, are you ready? >> yes. planning department. what is before you is an informational presentation on the residential open space controls of the planning code. this in response to request from the commission for the information. the goal is to provide the planning commission with historical background of the open space requirements found in section 135. and a general overview of the primary elements.
for background, the residential open space requirements of the planning code have evolved over time, resulting in the provisions found currently in section 135. to understand the development of the requirements which are separate from the planning code sedback lot coverage and exposure requirements, it's important to understand the relationship. none of these requirements are original to the first city-wide ordinance that focused on regulations and did not contain setback, usable open space requirements when established in 1921. in the first zoning ordinance, we had six, and there was about three pages long. compare that to today's planning code where we have 116 map zoning districts and 98 special use districts, it's a vastly more complex code in today's world. in 1930, the planning code provided for its first setback
requirement in residential districts. these are building setback lines. these were not required, but only if requested by the property owners. these became the forerunner of what are now known as legislative setback lines and regulated under section 131. in 1946, there was significant amendments made to the planning code to establish minimum lot size and area requirements for newly subdivided lots. prior to this, lots could be any size. at least there were no requirements under the planning code. this lot coverage and rear yard requirements on newly subdivided lots. interestingly, the requirements did not then apply to existing lots that met the minimum plot line requirements and area requirements. but they were required for existing lots that did not meet those requirements. so if it was an existing substandard lot, you would have
a required rear yard or lot requirement, if you have an existing code compliant lot, there were no minimum standards. in 1960, there were two major overhauls. the general requirements for side yards and year rear yards were added and they applied to all lots, irrespective of when the lots were subdivided. that was a change in 1960, applying that retroactively to all existing lots. the building setback lines were retained in the same form but as a separate provision. in 1964, usable open space requirements for group housing as well as exposure requirements to the planning code were certain higher residential districts primarily affecting pacific heights, arena, twin peaks and the richmond. open space and exposure requirements were administered
through the housing and building codes. these amendments provided the basic structure for usable open space that remain to this day. including in the structure were for common open space versus private open space, limits on features allowed within the open space, minimum dimensions in area of the open space as well as exposure requirements for the open space. in 1978, the planning code underwent the second major overhaul with the residential rezoning ordinance. this revised all residential zoning in the city and all dwelling units and r.c. and zoning districts under the current 135 designation. this created the modern planning code. and remains in effect today. the standards imposed are still in effect and later expanded as nearer districts were created such as the neighborhood commercial district of article 7 and the mixed use district of
article 8. after these changes were made, the planning code was amended to add usable open space requirements for non-residentials uses in certain districts as well as open space requirements, however, this is not the subject of the memo or this presentation. now going on to the residential open space requirements themselves. this is a pretty simplified discussion. as i mentioned there are more than 100 zoning districts each with its own requirements, subtly different. just to give you an overview of the open space requirements, these are contained in section 135, although some special use districts may have additional provisions that apply to these. generally, these requirements are designed to ensure that open space provided for residential uses has adequate dimensions, accessibility, exposure to light and air and other traits to be termed -- to be found usable. first focusing on the amount required and this is outlined
generally in the tables of 135, and it does vary by zoning district, generally the requirements are greater in the lower density districts. there is more open space required for the lower density in the city, where more space may be available to provide that open space. and they're lower in the higher density districts where space may be limited. zoning districts are dense district. the 36 square feet per unit and the c-3 zoning district are generally [indiscernible] . for group housing, usable open space is regulated by bedroom, instead of by unit. and each group housing bedroom is required to provide one-third the amount for dwelling unit in the same district. and this roughly corresponds to the different density provisions. so where you can generally have for group housing about -- not
quite the closest three times, the density is allowed for group housing as compared to dwelling units. the code for the reason there distinction exists, why it's only one-third per group housing, again, it could be part of the difference in the baseline, too. because for dwelling units, the open space requirement is to satisfy the entire development. where with group housing, it's to satisfy the needs for one bedroom. that explains some of the distinction here as well. planning code section 135 goes ton to specify if you have a unique situation where you have group housing with more than two beds in a room, it's for every two beds is found to be the equivalent of one group housing bedroom. so if you're to have one group housing room with four beds, we would view that as two bedrooms
and they would provide the open space for two group housing bedrooms. separately, senior housing is also subject to the one-third standard and also s.r.u. units and dwelling units that measure less than 350 square feet, plus the bathroom. they are at one-third of the requirement of the standard dwelling unit. homeless shelter units are not required to provide open space. on to open space typeology. this various by zoning district and -- varies by district and project. private usable open space is an area or areas private to and designated for use by one dwelling unit or one bedroom. common open space is area designed for two or more dwelling units or two or more bedrooms in group housing. when providing comment, it must be provided by the ratio 1.33
times grater than the -- greater than the amount of private usable open space. in the eastern neighborhood, mixed use districts and the downtown trans-- d.t.r. districts and transbay and also for certain landmark buildings, some or all of these open space may be satisfied offsite with publicly accessible open space or in the case of d.t.r., and each neighborhood district by publicly accessible private open space. now moving on to the last section here. again, focusing on the physical characteristics. which probably the most important aspect of the usable open space requirement. to ensure that open space is usable, the code contains certain requirements as to the location. generally, the access to usable open space is to be as close as practical to the dwelling unit or bedroom and group housing for which it's required.
for private usable open space, it's intended to be directly and immediately accessible from a dwelling unit or bedroom and shall be on the same floor or no more than one story above or below. common usable open space is to be easily accessible from the dwelling unit or bedroom. when it's coming open space, there is more flexibility on the location as compared to the private usable open space. planning code section 136 are allowed within the required usable open space. these can include window screens no more than six feet in height, outdoor recreational features, playing and garden furniture. for dimensions, for private usable open space, the horizontal space is six feet
with 36 square feet if deck, balcony, roof. and the 10 feet and minimum area of 100 square feet if on open ground, terrace. for common usable space, the minimum requirements are greater. the dimensions are 15 feet in every direction with minimum area of 300 square feet. additionally there are certain exposure requirements similar to what we have per dwelling unit although less stringent. this is to ensure that the open space has light and air. generally they must be within a required rear yard or front setback or facing the street, so that they have light and air. there is additional requirements outlined in the code for them. slope is important part. anything that is greater than 5% slope is not credited as either private or common usable space. and in certain circumstances you
can provide required usable open space if you meet certain requirements in certain districts. that concludes my presentation. and happy to be available for any questions that the commission may have. thank you. >> jonas: thank you. if that concludes your presentation, we should open up for public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter, pressing star and then 3. okay seeing no requests to speak on this item. public comment is closed. commissioners, this informational item is now before you. >> vice president moore: i'm calling on commissioner moore, speaking for myself. mr. sanchez, has covid taught us anything by which these standards may be called into question? particularly when we're talking about higher density forms of
occupancy, the standards seem to go down. could you explain that variable as it is an antiquated way to think about open space that may have worked so far, but -- [indiscernible] -- also under the new informational and social equity, do those standards stand up or will they be challenged? >> i think that's a question for the planning commission. that's a policy discussion and policy consideration. certainly, these requirements predate covid and going back to the 1960s is generally when this framework was established. not that there weren't pandemics or consideration of pandemics, but a lot has changed since the 1960s and that would be up to the planning commission to consider whether these open space requirements as known in the code for decades are adequate or should be modified or improved. and such action could happen
ledge london bridgely to make -- >> >> vice president moore: we are tasked at looking at increased density and sometimes it would be at the expense of reasonable accommodation for open space. the commission in certain projects, although there are physical restrictions has asked for the additional [indiscernible] -- that subtrabts from the amount of living space which is already small, however, those are considerations that the i hope the commission will take forward, maybe even form a subcommittee to work through what realistically is possible. there will be a talk back and forth in either direction, but i strongly would support, with your guidance and your involvement, for the commission to charge a reasonable path to reconsider some of these significantly inequitable open space allocationings. thank you. i'm calling on commissioner
diamond. >> commissioner diamond: thank you, commissioner moore. first, i want to thank staff for the really helpful background memo. that provides context and history for where we are today. and i also want to acknowledge and agree with commissioner moore's comments that having now understood how we got to where we are, it's incumbent on us to question whether or not the current standards are appropriate for the reality that we are currently facing as has been underscored in recent months by a number of projects where the commission has really struggled with the amount of open space that has been proposed by the developer and where the commission has, you know, wanted the project sponsor to provide different kinds of open space in different places.
so there were two standards in the memo that stand out in particular to me as warranting further investigation. of course, other commissioners may have others, but i at least wanted to highlight two that i think would be important for staff to look at. perhaps as commissioner moore said, a small group of staff and commissioners take a look at together and consider whether or not something should come back to the commission that proposes refinements. whether it's done through guidelines, legislatively, opinions, at this point that seems up in the air. but the two substantive areas that stand out for me, the first is the minimum standards for private balconies. 6 by 6, 36 square feet. i think if we have learned as commissioner moore said, anything during covid, it's that access to open space is really important from a health and
safety perspective. and i am worried that a 6 by 6 standard creates disincentives for developers to want to add private balconies because it's, you know, they added smaller balconies, they don't even get credit fort open space standard. i query whether or not a smaller balcony would still be important and helpful, would further our goals of access to open space without having to be quite so large? as we have said on a number of occasions when these projects came up, if it's enough for two chairs, even that is helpful and i don't think we need 36 feet to accomplish that. but i do believe that rather than just saying that, it warrants additional investigation. and then the second area that really stands out for me is different standards of open space for group housing versus
residential use. and while i understand the logic of different standards, it strikes me that logic may be more amicable in -- applicable in the kind of group housing we used to think about. smaller projects, developed for users, potentially supportive housing of some kind, or they were -- it was mission-based housing provided by non-profits, but now that we're seeing projects with hundreds of units of group housing being proposed that look like the functional equivalent of studios, although with kitchenettes, not kitchens, querying whether or not the open base we're applying makes sense? i believe that the staff may be looking at this issue, but i think that poring over that and
coming back to the commission with recommendations as to whether or not, you know, a different standard of open space currently exists in the code should apply to different kinds of group housing dependent on size, person or location, might be appropriate. so those are my comments for staff to consider. and i'm very eager to hear what other commissioners believe on the subject as well, too. thank you. >> commissioner tanner: thank you. i want to agree with chair moore and commissioner diamond and thank staff for bringing this forward. i know it's complex and the memo stated other things, but i think you helped to boil it down to the more important aspects. i think that taking a second look at this, whatever the format is, whether it's a committee or some other way to take a look at these and i thank you, commissioner diamond, for pointing out two areas. certainly adjusting the balcony so folks get credit for them and
provide them. i think, commissioner moore, your point, okay, it's 2021, we've learned a lot since the 60s, all the time this has developed, what do we think is appropriate now? i certainly appreciate our higher density areas maybe not having the same amount of open space as a single-family home, but maybe there is something more revised from what we currently require and similarly from the group housing standards perhaps it can be adjusted. one of the troubling things and i don't know if there is an answer for this. i don't know if the city attorney wants opine or other planning staff. even if we give folks credit for the balcony, that plays a role in the larger project that we see coming forward, in that they're able to ask for a concession and/or waiver from the standards and that can undermine the work that we may
do to refine open space. certainly not every project. i just reflecting on it and reading through the code and the memo, just even seeing how we as the city tried to provide incentives for people to create publicly accessible open space. and to kind of provide some of the community open space that is lacking in our denser districts. that, too, can be way for a concession. and then we're losing that great policy initiative. not only for the residents that build the open space, but possibly residents of the neighborhood. so it's one of things on one hand i appreciate the legislation on this density bonus at a statewide level to provide housing in california, but i think it has downside for the denser neighborhoods in san francisco. and just trying to see if there is a way to balance that or something besides a state legislative solution that we could do at the local level to try to address that.
so i know, director hillis, do you have any comments on that or the city attorney has -- it may be a done deal as it is now. but thank you. >> vice president moore: does the city attorney want to weigh in? >> i wanted to respond. one, thank you for all the comments and for elevating this discussion. it's been hopeful internally to re-look at our rules. just to some of the points. one, on the 6 by 6 being the minimum size that counts, you know, i've been talking to staff and as obviously it's been on the books for a while. you know, i don't think we quite know why it was determined that 6 by 6 would be the minimum size that would count to your -- fulfilling your requirements. so we'll go take a look at that. because i think we've seen here you all encourage project sponsors to include balconies or
open space that may not meet those criteria. is there a disincentive from providing that because there isn't the ability to get credit towards the open space requirement? so we'll look at that and either come back and recommend a subcommittee or come back and talk to the full commission about that. on the group housing issue, as we talked about before, we're looking at broadly our policies and regulations around group housing, so we will -- i believe this was part of that analysis as well. we will make sure it is and continue to work on that aspect of the open space requirement as it relates to group housing. then, commissioner tanner, to your part, we committed before and will continue to do so, looking at is there a minimum level of open space we can
include either in the building code or as an objective standard for health and safety that could kind of dovetail with the housing -- the density bonus, so there some minimum level that can't be waived? so that's what i'm taking as our to-do list coming out of this. >> commissioner tanner: can i follow up on that last point, chair? >> vice president moore: yes. >> commissioner tanner: for the health and safety project related to open space, is that something that is currently under way and if so, if you have any insight? what do you think might be the timing on developing those types of standards? >> it's -- i mean, we talked about there before, so, yes, i think we've got to look -- i'm not quite sure of timing. we have to look at exactly what analysis we need to do. kate can help me to make sure it meets the state standards that
it is health and safety-related and also looking at our existing building code. kate, do you want to -- >> sure thing. thanks, director hillis. yeah, right now, we're kind of taking the three pronged approach lookthing at how open space and state density are related. we're looking at the public health and safety findings. we know it's high bar, but we're looking at different research issued and contacting academics trying to figure out if there is connection with public health and safety and the provision of onsite open space. i think that's really the challenge. we're also looking at it from an equity lens as far as trying to figure out how many parks might be surrounding a certain development and seeing if there is some way to look at it from that aspect. finally, we're contacting all the different jurisdictions within california that currently have state density bonus, provisions and how are they
handling it in terms of open space? are they able to establish that floor and how are they doing that? my team is working on that now and i would say, probably late fall, i think we would have completion that we can bring back to you. >> commissioner tanner: thank you so much. i know you have a lot on your plate, so we really appreciate the leg work. >> vice president moore: i would like to open the door, instead of being punitive, to dated roles, this may be the time to look at examples in other cities, not just in this kurnths but across the -- country, but across the world. we're living in an environment where people do not have backyards each of us, but as we're looking for new forms of vertical landscape, the idea of green rooms for upper floors that has been open space element that serves one particular floor, that is kind of not just
small balconies, but it's basically like a corner unit. and it becomes the garden. cities like singapore, harris -- you look at any city, paris, are experimenting with these things because the pressing question for livable units where people do have access to open space is not just -- in san francisco. i would like us to look at -- i would like for us to look at those examples and we should start involving all professional, communities and architects and landscape architects of which we have quite a few to help us with their own experience of what they do. it is not just really about square footage. it's not just about the three feet of where you can put a chair. it's a much larger issue. but really -- more than we currently do. >> thank you. and thank you to all the
commissioners for their comments. i also echo their concerns. in concerns of actually -- as we are looking into this open space requirement, depending on what kind of building it is or which district it is, i like -- i think we also need to look into -- looks like we're prioritizing based on the health and safety standards and the equity lens which is a good start. and i commend the planning staff in thinking that way. in terms i do have also question in terms of the -- of privately owned open space. and especially when it comes to the dense neighborhoods like the eastern neighborhood. as of now, looks like the requirement can be also provided offsite. and i'm assuming that providing offsite means being -- i'm
wondering as to when it comes to the space requirement, how are they being distributed in terms of the open space? are they distributed in a way that it is serving that particular district or particular area? or it's all over city-wide, where we are not assessing, again, based on equity issues on this? i wonder if that is what mr. sanchez can answer. if we're looking into the offsite? >> thank you. planning department. so in terms of the publicly accessible private open space, that may be used to provide the usable open space requirements in neighborhoods and zoning districts, there is actually a physical requirement. it wouldn't just be paying a fee. there would be offsite usable open space.
separately, if they're not providing the open space, there is a fee that is paid. it's my understanding and other staff that deal more directly with the neighborhoods and can speak to this, but i think that the fee does have to be spent within the district. but we can always get more information to confirm that with you. because if the goal is to provide open space accessibility requirements in the district, i believe that generally those fees that go in generally stay within the district. >> commissioner imperial: okay. thank you, mr. sanchez for that comment. and, yeah, the reason that i brought that up because procedure on more developments coming in, the neighborhood district, and we have more eastern neighborhood does not have adequate open space compared to the west side of the city as well. so if there is going to be a subcommittee for this project, i would like to be part of it. and especially looking into the
state density project. i know we have affordable housing -- the local affordable housing bonus project. i wonder if there can be anything similar like that in terms of a local one where we can incentivize the project sponsor to take on our local open space requirement, but it's kind of like the same as affordable housing. i think this will be open for discussion with the community as well. i agree with commissioner moore to involve local architects and landscape members as to how the open space should be in the neighborhood. so thank you very much. and looking forward to hear more of this and hopefully, we can form a subcommittee. thank you. >> just to speak to commissioner
imperial's last comment. the home s.f. program that we do have is the local preferred density bonus option when it is available, does grant automatically only a 5% reduction of open space. so it's not a full reduction. it's not a waiver of open space. so in those cases where a project does choose to do home s.f. as opposed to state density bonus, they're only getting a 5% on the open space, compared to a waiver, something they would otherwise be able to obtain through a state density bonus. we have at least some option of incentive for using a different program that will help ensure closer to code required open space. i just wanted to make that clear from the last comment. >> thank you, i appreciate that.
>> if there is indeed an expression of interest for this commission to have a subcommittee dealing with open space and becoming a conversation partner with the department, i think i would like to see if president koppel supports us in that and also, if we get direction on how to -- what procedures it takes to have subcommittees? there are procedural issues and if you could help us with that, that would be great. >> jonas: certainly. why don't we add that to a list of conversations between yourself and the commission president. >> vice president moore: thank you. >> jonas: if there is nothing further, commissioners, that will conclude today's agenda. >> vice president moore: thank you. >> jonas: right. enjoy the rest of the afternoon, everyone.
valencia has been a constantly evolving roadway. the first bike lanes were striped in 1999, and today is the major north and south bike route from the mission neighborhood extending from market to mission street. >> it is difficult to navigate lindsay on a daily basis, and more specifically, during the morning and evening commute hours. >> from 2012 to 2016, there were 260 collisions on valencia and 46 of those were between vehicles and bikes. the mayor shows great leadership and she knew of the long history of collisions and the real
necessity for safety improvements on the streets, so she actually directed m.t.a. to put a pilot of protected bike lanes from market to 15th on valencia street within four months time. [♪♪♪] >> valencia is one of the most used north south bike routes in san francisco. it has over 2100 cyclists on an average weekday. we promote bicycles for everyday transportation of the coalition. valencia is our mission -- fits our mission perfectly. our members fall 20 years ago to get the first bike lane stripes. whether you are going there for restaurants, nightlife, you know , people are commuting up and down every single day. >> i have been biking down the valencia street corridor for about a decade. during that time, i have seen
the emergence of ridesharing companies. >> we have people on bikes, we have people on bike share, scooters, we have people delivering food and we have uber taking folks to concerts at night. one of the main goals of the project was to improve the overall safety of the corridor, will also looking for opportunities to upgrade the bikeway. >> the most common collision that happens on valencia is actually due to double parking in the bike lane, specifically during, which is where a driver opens the door unexpectedly. >> we kept all the passengers -- the passenger levels out, which is the white crib that we see, we double the amount of commercial curbs that you see out here. >> most people aren't actually perking on valencia, they just need to get dropped off or pick something up. >> half of the commercial loading zones are actually after 6:00 p.m., so could be used for five-minute loading later into
the evening to provide more opportunities or passenger and commercial loading. >> the five minute loading zone may help in this situation, but they are not along the corridor where we need them to be. >> one of the most unique aspects of the valencia pilot is on the block between 14th street. >> we worked with a pretty big mix of people on valencia. >> on this lot, there are a few schools. all these different groups had concerns about the safety of students crossing the protected bikeway whether they are being dropped off or picked up in the morning or afternoon. to address those concerns, we installed concrete loading islands with railings -- railings that channel -- channeled a designated crossing plane. >> we had a lot of conversations around how do you load and unload kids in the mornings and the afternoons? >> i do like the visibility of some of the design, the safety aspects of the boarding pilot for the school.
>> we have painted continental crosswalks, as well as a yield piece which indicates a cyclist to give the right-of-way so they can cross the roadway. this is probably one of the most unique features. >> during the planning phase, the m.t.a. came out with three alternatives for the long term project. one is parking protected, which we see with the pilot, they also imagined a valencia street where we have two bike lanes next to one another against one side of the street. a two-way bikeway. the third option is a center running two-way bikeway, c. would have the two bike lanes running down the center with protection on either side. >> earlier, there weren't any enter lane designs in san francisco, but i think it will be a great opportunity for san francisco to take the lead on that do so the innovative and different, something that
doesn't exist already. >> with all three concepts for valencia's long-term improvement , there's a number of trade-offs ranging from parking, or what needs to be done at the intersection for signal infrastructure. when he think about extending this pilot or this still -- this design, there's a lot of different design challenges, as well as challenges when it comes to doing outreach and making sure that you are reaching out to everyone in the community. >> the pilot is great. it is a no-brainer. it is also a teaser for us. once a pilot ends, we have thrown back into the chaos of valencia street. >> what we're trying to do is incremental improvement along the corridor door. the pilot project is one of our first major improvements. we will do an initial valuation in the spring just to get a glimpse of what is happening out here on the roadway, and to make any adjustments to the pilot as needed. this fall, we will do a more robust evaluation. by spring of 2020, we will have recommendations about long-term improvements. >> i appreciate the pilot and how quickly it went in and was
built, especially with the community workshops associated with it, i really appreciated that opportunity to give input. >> we want to see valencia become a really welcoming and comfortable neighborhood street for everyone, all ages and abilities. there's a lot of benefits to protected bike lanes on valencia , it is not just for cyclists. we will see way more people biking, more people walking, we are just going to create a really friendly neighborhood street. [♪♪♪] >> we're here to raise
awareness and money and fork for a good accuse. we have this incredible gift probably the widest range of restaurant and count ii destines in any district in the city right here in the mission intricate why don't we capture that to support the mission youths going to college that's for the food for thought. we didn't have a signature font for our orientation that's a 40-year-old organization. mission graduates have helped me to develop special as an individual they've helped me figure out and provide the tools for me that i need i feel
successful in life >> their core above emission and goal is in line with our values. the ferraris yes, we made 48 thousand >> they were on top of that it's a no-brainer for us. >> we're in and fifth year and be able to expand out and tonight is your ungrammatical truck food for thought. food truck for thought is an opportunity to eat from a variety of different vendor that are supporting the mission graduates by coming and representing at the parks >> we're giving a prude of our to give people the opportunity
to get an education. people come back and can you tell me and enjoy our food. all the vendor are xooment a portion of their precedes the money is going back in >> what's the best thing to do in terms of moving the needle for the folks we thought higher education is the tool to move young people. >> i'm also a college student i go to berkley and 90 percent of our folks are staying in college that's 40 percent hire than the afternoon. >> i'm politically to clemdz and ucla. >> just knowing we're giving back to the community. >> especially the spanish
speaking population it hits home. >> people get hungry why not eat and give >> we are right now in outer richmond in the last business area of this city. this area of merchants is in the most western part of san francisco, continue blocks down the street they're going to fall into the pacific ocean. two blocks over you're going to have golden gate park. there is japanese, chinese, hamburgers, italian, you don't have to cook. you can just walk up and down
the street and you can get your cheese. i love it. but the a very multicultural place with people from everywhere. it's just a wonderful environment. i love the richmond district. >> and my wife and i own a café we have specialty coffee drinks, your typical lattes and mochas and cappuccinos, and for lunches, sandwiches and soup and salad. made fresh to order. we have something for everybody >> my shop is in a very cool part of the city but that's one of the reasons why we provide such warm and generous treats, both physically and emotionally (♪♪) >> it's an old-fashioned general store. they have coffee. other than that what we sell is
fishing equipment. go out and have a good time. >> one of my customers that has been coming here for years has always said this is my favorite store. when i get married i'm coming in your store. and then he in his wedding outfit and she in a beautiful dress came in here in between getting married at lands end and to the reception, unbelievable. (♪♪) >> the new public health order that we're announcing will require san franciscans to remain at home with exceptions only for essential outings.
>> when the pandemic first hit we kind of saw the writing on the walls that potentially the city is going to shut all businesses down. >> it was scary because it was such an unknown of how things were going to pan out. i honestly thought that this might be the end of our business. we're just a small business and we still need daily customers. >> i think that everybody was on edge. nobody was untouched. it was very silent. >> as a business owner, you know, things don't just stop, right? you've still got your rent, and all of the overhead, it's still there. >> there's this underlying constant sense of dread and anxiety. it doesn't prevent you from going to work and doing your job, it doesn't stop you from doing your normal routine.
what it does is just make you feel extra exhausted. >> so we began to reopen one year later, and we will emerge stronger, we will emerge better as a city, because we are still here and we stand in solidarity with one another. >> this place has definitely been an anchor for us, it's home for us, and, again, we are part of this community and the community is part of us. >> one of the things that we strived for is making everyone in the community feel welcome and we have a sign that says "you're welcome." no matter who you are, no matter what your political views are, you're welcome here. and it's sort of the classic san francisco thing is that you work with folks. >> it is your duty to help