Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    October 12, 2010 4:00pm-4:30pm PST

5:00 pm
5:01 pm
supervisor chiu: good morning. welcome to the october 4, 2010
5:02 pm
meeting of the public safety committee. we will soon be joined by ross mirkarimi and sean elsbernd. madam clerk, do we have any announcements today? >> if you wish to submit speaker currents, please submit them to your left. if you wish to submit copies of materials to members of the committee, please submit an extra copy for the file. supervisor chiu: thank you. please call item no. 1. >> hearing on san francisco's public safety conditions, including a discussion of citywide crime levels and crime levels by police district station and/or neighborhood. the hearing shall include a presentation from the mayor's office of criminal justice
5:03 pm
and/or the san francisco police department, which shall provide all information relevant to the discussion. supervisor chiu: this is our regular item regarding statistics and crime. capt., good to see you. >> good afternoon. during this presentation, i want to present the crime stats. we are preparing an extraction period from august to september. homicides were down from six to 3. rapes were down from 11 to 10. robbery's were even, 236. aggravated assaults were up from 263 to 271.
5:04 pm
property crimes were down from four heart of 34 to 231. auto thefts, 350 to 317. arsons were down 18%. personal theft was down 21% from 1213 to 959. also, we have compared our crime stats for a week. the week been from some timber 12 to september 18 compared to our september 19 until september 25. in that week, homicides were down 100%. down from two to zero. rates were down 25%, from four to three. aggravated assaults were up
5:05 pm
43%, % 58to 83. on the property side, blurb reason for down. auto pact was down 47%, from 97 to 48. arsons were down 80%, from 5 to 1. personal theft was also down from 244 to 183. we also have crime stats for part 2 crimes. assaults and batteries, not domestic violence related, up 4%, 283 to 293. embezzlements were down 29%, 229 to 205.
5:06 pm
weapons and firearms violations was down 8%, 26 to 24. sex crime were up 27%, from 30 to 38. this is excluding rape and prostitution. narcotics related drug laws were up 5% from 361 to 380. possession of burglary tools, down from 248 to 228. incidences of graffiti and vandalism, down 9%. mental health detention were up 12%. in instances where people either exist -- resisted or delayed the
5:07 pm
police officer, up 7%, from 30 to 32. those are our crime stats for the last four weeks. >> colleagues, any questions? supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: good morning. thank you very much for helping to integrate some of the part to information. -- two information. i just want to extend our compliments to sfpd, the community's working with them, for doing what they are due to lower the crimes in the part 1 categories, especially. the fruits of our labor are evident. beyond the khartoum that is -- be on the part two that is identified, what does sfpd identified the other crimes as? there is a significant dearth of
5:08 pm
many other so-called miscellaneous crimes. how is that classified for the lay person to understand? is it just based on each crime onto itself, is there a part 3? >> i believe the way the stats are capped, each individual crime is kept. however, in part two, we took out the most significant ones, the one that had the highest numbers, incidences that are unusual. though cannot be captured because the numbers are so small. our crime analysis unit felt that these were the main part two crimes that we should be reporting on. supervisor mirkarimi: just to reconcile that notion, if there was any crime whatsoever, if it
5:09 pm
is even perceived as a crime, i would say, by numbers, quality of life violations would far exceed all other categories. quality of life violations are reported to be in the thousands, but when we are trying to seek status on this question from sfpd, it is slightly a moving target. so i would love to understand station by station, it in totality, what are those numbers? [applause] >> i believe in the past, i have brought those numbers, but i do not have them now. i can get them for you. quality of life crimes are a conglomerate of a number of different violations. most of them have been reported to the sfpd.
5:10 pm
those are the ones that we track, the ones that we are taking action on. supervisor mirkarimi: because the numbers seem to be substantial, at least that is what is anecdotally reported by the press. there is a columnist here and they're suggesting this. it really is a significant number. therefore, the interpretation is we have a loss for it -- officers that are spending a lot of time writing citations for those violations. i just think it is important to line up those statistics that were missing in the discussion. >> i will make sure in my next report i bring those extractions to you. >> and you can walk us through how that is administered. that would be great. supervisor chiu: just to add to that, i know in the conversation
5:11 pm
that we had previously, a lot of us had requested information on quality of life. we never got a response, so i would add to super bears and mirkarimi, that we are happy to ask -- supervisor mirkarimi, that we are happy to ask for this information. in "the chronicle" there was some mention of these quality of life crimes, and your department had not given us information around what the numbers look like. one question i have is you have a category of mental health detection. can you talk about what gets bundled into those numbers? >> to be honest with you, it says mental-health detention. i believe, those are the 51 detentions since the general hospital.
5:12 pm
they are basically -- whenever an officer responds to an incident where a subject is deemed to be a danger to himself or others, are then taken to the hospital for observation, rather than arrest. >> so we supervisor chiu: dick -- supervisor chiu: so where do these quality of life violations fall into? >> this is the first time i have had part two in this format. i have responded in the past with part two crimes, in a different format, and i could add in quality of life. i can pass on that information. i do not know where the mental health issuance and quality of life -- i am not part of the -- supervisor chiu: you have
5:13 pm
hundreds of citations given on the sidewalk. where do we see that? >> it is not captured in this report. supervisor chiu: you just said all of these crime were buried under part 2. >> in this particular report, the obstruction of sidewalk, quality of life is not captured in this report. supervisor chiu: ok, that is what we have been interested in. if possible, provide us with a full part to to see what the trends look like. that would be very helpful. >> i will see if we can add those to our profile. supervisor chiu: other questions, colleagues? let me see if there is public comment. if you could step up to the podium. each speaker will have up to two minutes to speak. first speaker please. >> my name is christine harris.
5:14 pm
i respectfully request the city of san francisco to investigate my perpetrators. the president of 720 york street, san francisco, california, her husband peter davis was a lawyer for an international law firm. the property manager, her sgt husband. the crimes against me are the use of directed energy weapons, burning all my vital organs. i have had to fight to stay alive. organized stalking. psychotronic. the towing of my car to install a gps system. wiretapping of my phone lines. please investigate tim anderson as well. he created a group called terror, stalking groups.
5:15 pm
tim anderson may be the control of this technology. these are heinous crimes against humanity. supervisor chiu: thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning. my name is douglas yep. i would like to applaud the previous speaker. i think she was very brave to say what she said. we do not know what is true or not, but i think one questions need to be asked, people need to be brave enough to ask them, especially in front of the board of supervisors. secondly, i would like to say my normal appeal for asian victims of crime, especially when the suspects are city and county employees. according to my experience, for
5:16 pm
the past four years, i think many people have said a lot of high support for victims. when it comes to actually helping them, i am disappointed. i think most people feel the chinese are not going to oppose the treatment they get, but i would hope many other chinese follow my example and just keep on plugging away. eventually, maybe we can change them into cooperation. thirdly, i would like to say the fraud detail at the sfpd need more support. my neighbors and i are still trying to follow up on an important case involving our neighborhood, but with the work overload, we cannot get any answers, so i guess we have to sit patiently and see what ever happens to this case, since it
5:17 pm
involves influential citizens of district 7. my last comment is, in terms of crime in san francisco, we need to act more forcefully against people who tried to intimidate others. intimidation has been an under stressed crime issue. from my own experience, i feel like to many people attempt intimidation -- thank you. supervisor chiu: thank you, next speaker. >> my name is francisco dacosta. one of the main purposes of the meeting is for the constituents at home to get an idea of what is happening around the city and county of san francisco. i want to bring your attention to a document where one of the
5:18 pm
supervisors participated and spent $400,000 regarding community policing. so it is ok for us to spend $400,000 on this document, but from time to time, we need to get empirical data and reports, as to what is happening with that document. at one time, the captain of the area where this document was implemented was captain lazard. he is now a commander. that leads me to bring youto yor attention as to what is happening with our chain of command in the san francisco police department.
5:19 pm
i think so -- you should know, anything about the organization, if there is a flux. where there is no leadership, we cannot attain our goals. finally, what i see happening here is, this safety committee should file a report to the police commission. there are lots of changes happening. that is the only way we can address quality of life issues. thank you very much. supervisor chiu: thank you. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak? public item -- public comment on this item is closed. colleagues? supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: on parole
5:20 pm
and probation violations, i visited the city wide reentry council. the numbers that are being batted around on x offender violations seem to be significantly higher than what is reported here. is this because this is a relatively new or break down, being able to capture this number? -- newer breakdown, being able to capture this number? >> yes, this is the first time i have gotten the part to crimes in this format. i know our parole and probation enforcement is done by force teams. they would be the ones to report the number of violations they have, and they would also inform
5:21 pm
officials of where our parolees are staying, if there is an issue. i really do not know how the numbers reflect what they do. i know they are out there every day, and i am sure the numbers are pretty high. supervisor mirkarimi: just so we make the best use of this conversation, when it happens periodically with sfpd, do you suggest that we should have the aid office attached, probation attached? just to give us better context? knowing the numbers, knowing the capacity you are in, we are not going to get a lot of depth information. >> you are right. i oversee a homicide division, gang task special investigation , and our criminal
5:22 pm
investigations unit. all of them are centralized. i also work with our station investigation teams. but i am mainly focused on part 1 grimes, the crime picture, of violent crimes -- part 1 crimes, the crime picture, how we react to violent crimes across the city. when you ask me about part to crimes, sit-lie, these are things that i do not work on, on a daily basis. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. supervisor chiu: thank you for your presentation. with that, let's continue this item to the call of the chair. >> please call item -- please call item 2. >> ordinance amending the san francisco administrative code by adding chapter 27, sections 27.1 through 27.6, to create a program to recognize nail salons that use nail polishes free of the toxic chemicals toluene,
5:23 pm
dibutyl phthalate, and formaldehyde. supervisor chiu: thank you. colleagues, members of the public, this is legislation that i had introduced. i want to thank supervisor maxwell, alioto-pier, carmen chu for their leadership, as well as supervisor mirkarimi. this concerns the toxic trio. three hazardous chemicals that have been standard ingredients of nail polish over the years. formaldehyde, todd you mean, dibutyl phthalate. these chemicals have been associated with a variety of public health -- significant public health issues. we know that over the years, not only have consumers, but thousands of nail salon workers in the country have been exposed to these chemicals. in other jurisdictions around the world, there is much more regulation on these chemicals.
5:24 pm
unfortunately, that is not the case here in the u.s., although there are toxic-free nail salon products that are readily available at competitive prices. so i want to thank the advocate to have been working with both the environmental community, and workers, to work with the department of the environment to create a healthy nail salon recognition program that would allow us to the knowledge those massillon's using products that are free of that toxic trio. we have around 200 massillon's in san francisco with 800 technicians. the vast majority of these nail technicians are immigrants being exposed to these chemicals. that being said, i want to bring up a couple of people who can speak behind the thinking of this legislation. first, debbie rabb file from the
5:25 pm
department of the environment on how the city would implement this. >> thank you, supervisors. thank you for the opportunity to address you today on this important and exciting opportunity for the department of the environment to partner with others to protect the health of san francisco workers. what i would like to do quickly is put this initiative in context with the work that we do in the department of the environment, so you know why it makes sense for this to be in our department. we have a robust toxic reduction program, where we have addressed both the supply and demand of safer alternatives. we do this in a number of ways, by leading by example, such that we have city agencies, whether
5:26 pm
with pesticides, safer alternatives. we have all sorts of ways the city department lead by example to identify safe alternatives. we also do financial incentive programs. for example, our work with garment cleaners, where we offer grants to go to safer alternatives. again, you see the theme of working to increase the safer alternative and to increase awareness of the demand for them. we also sometimes than the offender, and we have done that with children's products. i want to emphasize this is not a ban, and mandate, this is a recognition program. we have a long history of recognizing businesses in san francisco, and the most relevant example is our grain business program. we develop criteria, we are and holders with business, and we
5:27 pm
look to reward them for going the extra mile and offering grain products and services to our residences. when we look at this help the nail salon recognition program, to what we are talking about is the recognition program. we are not talking about the heavy hand of government. we are talking about using the resources of the government wisely to partner with the small business commission, to partner with the wonderful activists from the nail salon organized group, as paul as others who are -- as well as others who are interested. our role will be fairly limited. our role will be to work with our partners to determine what criteria makes sense to recognize the businesses, to identify the safer alternatives, and to work with distributors so that the nail salons themselves have an easier time identify
5:28 pm
what they're calling 3-free products. unfortunately, we are finding it is not easy for a nail salon worker, where residents like myself, to find a 3-free product, even though they exist. so we are excited to work with these partners. we believe, in the end, it is the workers that benefit. this is a health issue to this population. we are proud to be a partner. supervisor chiu: i do have one question. are there other programs like this in other jurisdictions? >> this nail salon program would be a first, as far as i know. there is a lot of interest in massillon's. it is a population that every jurisdiction has an example off. because san francisco has such a robust toxic reduction program, it makes sense to pilot it here.
5:29 pm
supervisor chiu: thank you. supervisor elsbernd supervisor elsbernd:? a bigger picture about the department of the environment. -- supervisor elsbernd? supervisor elsbernd: a bigger picture about the department of the environment. the department of environment's roles and responsibilities throughout the city are getting bigger and bigger. the amount of money that they have is getting smaller. realistically, should now salons across the city in the next couple of years expect a new fee to subsidize this program? that is something that we should put out there, so that folks are aware that that is probably coming. >> i am glad that you asked that. what was most helpful about the wording of this ordinance is that it is a recognition program, it is voluar