Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Replay Public Safety Neighborhood Services Committee 12315 20151204

Is when was that number presented to you by the sheriff . This was when the comptroller forecast was released. The 2015 forecast that estimated bed need between 120 and 393. We previously installed 512 beds. What we did with that, we took out two pods. Hes pod had 64 beds in each pod. Taking out 128 was almost half of the floor. We were able to reduce that to 384 to still fit within it. The comptroller gave a range of 120 . Did you do an estimate for what the cost would be if it was 120 . Well, we did the cost for 256 beds. Which was midrange. I think from the Sheriffs Department, even the he can speak to what the needs are. I understand that. If the comptroller had a range of 120 to 393 why wouldnt you a set of alternatives that looked at the entire range . The alternatives that we presented was the one that met the Sheriffs Department requirement. As my understanding at that time was 120 beds would not meet the requirement. In your analysis, youre aware that the Sheriffs Department is actually leasing some beds to the federal government . Im not aware. Thank you im more than happy to address that issue. If you had an opportunity to watch the hearing yesterday, this came up and it was discussed more than happy to discuss it again. The Sheriffs Department in our collaborative effort with the adult probation department, known as reentry pod, a program that returning inmates to the corrections and rehabilitation, returning persons that were committed to the state prison out of San Francisco county, bringing them back to the county jail, approximately 90 to 120 days post release so they can start their reentry process here in the San Francisco county jail. Unfortunately, that hasnt worked out as well as we had hoped in terms of returning inma inmates. It worked owl really well with inmates here in the county jail. I think theres three or four total of those inmates. Another issue you may be referring to is that the United States Marshal Service. We have Marshal Service in Northern California district. The federal courthouse is located in the city and county of San Francisco. There are times when the u. S. Marshal Service Requests from the Sheriffs Department what is known as a safe keep housing. What that does, it lets the u. S. Marshals safe keep one of their custodies in the San Francisco county jail for a short period of time while theyre bringing that prisoner to the federal courthouse here in San Francisco. I think off the top of my head, i dont have that exact number with me, the highest ive seen is usually between 40 and 45. Its its more in the mid20 range. Thank you very much deputy chief. Question for you, does your estimate take into account you may as many as 40 or 45 beds that are being used by the u. S. Attorneys office . We didnt break the beds down into the use. We just had a wholistic approach in terms of number of beds. What i like to do to illuminate the question that youre asking a little bit in terms of the costing that was done by the department of public works. Keeping in mind that were attempting to project here to the year 2020. In the Comptrollers Office, a projected inmate forecast on the high end of 1631 beds needed, with a 384 bed rdf facility, San Francisco jail would have a total of 1544 beds. Which falls well short of the high end 1631. What i would point out with 1544 beds, this past monday the county jail population would have been approximately 83 capacity. On slide number four, it itemized the scenario that was studied. This is my issue with what youre presenting before us today. Its not what we had asked for. These are all different configurations on how to rebuild a jail. We ask you to explore what it meant to rebuild facilities for alternative programs and policies that would actually reduce our jail population. Whether were looking at Substance Abuse Treatment Centers, Mental Health component, supportive housing. That is actually what we ask. This is still helpful because were interested in cj2 and cj6. We know that there are beds needed. I dont think theres argument about that. This is the critical juncture you can reimagine the system and not rebuild what we have. This is our opportunity to do that. I think were very limited when all were getting is how to reconfigure the jail. We didnt just want a reconfiguration of the jail and maybe some cost savings, etcetera. We want to address the criminal justice system. Lets talk about what we learn. What the District Attorneys just told you, what the Public Defenders Office told us. Lets use all of that data and build a better system. We know that the system is not good enough. We are rebuilding the same system because it is the easiest thing to do. Were getting offered a state grant that will help subsidized building. It may be that is the right thing to do moving forward. Before we do that, i think this board really needs to hear that the city has explored all of those a. Alternatives. Thats not in the presentation before us. We were very clear in our hearing request that we want an examination of facilities that would house the alternative and programs that reduce the jail population size and not keep it as well. I didnt want justification as to why the jail population will continue to stay the same or increase and we done everything that we can. I dont accept that as the answer. I think theres much more that we can do continue to push and challenge ourselves to address something that is finally Getting National coverage. How do we reform our incars reagan system incarincarceran system. We know that theres a percentage of jail population that is there. Theres no other reason for them to be in prison if not for that reason. Theres a percentage that is Substance Abuse addiction issues. We know that many people are there because they are poor. If those are the reasons why people are in jail or in prison, lets come up with a better system that addresses that versus just locking people away. That is what we wanted in the hearing. The presentation that you have before us, that was appropriate for yesterday. At budge and committee and finance. I have to express disappointment the hearing request that we made is not the ones being dressed. I dont know that San Francisco public works really decide policies that were not asking you to decide that. We gave a series of questions in july that said we want to you explore the facilities to house all the policies that have been proposed. The community and Public Defenders Office, they made a bunch of suggestions. The d. A. Here talked today about the miami and we gave you the policy. Now were asking you to come up with a proposal for the facilities that will house it. I get it. Im not asking you to be a policymaker. We actually did make proposals. We want the facilities that house this proposal. It is here if i can go through through the scenario, you will find how eaddress the issues that were brought up to us in terms of providing better mental and health treatment. Actually have a proposal for what are the cost to build a facility that has a Mental Health clinic . Thats what we wanted. Supervisor campos. I think the point what i would say to department of public works is, i understand your own frustration because i do think that if you step back, i dont know if its dpws role to do what i think this committee and the Board Members wanted. I think thats a responsibility of the Capital Planning committee. For whatever reason instead of addressing the request that this committee has made, the Capital Planning committee decided to kind of step back and say its not our job and have you do what they should be doing. I think thats the problem here. I think in the end, you are presenting what you are asked to present by the committee that should be the one making that presentation that we had asked for. The problem with the presentation is that, to give you analogy, if we and the board of supervisors said, we want alternatives to driving a car, then you muny came back and said, we have looked at driving a small car, driving a red car, driving an suv, driving a bus, which is helpful and its useful but not what was being asked. The request was alternatives to incarceration. What we ged instead, get instead we wanted to build a jail this size and this size. Thats not really exactly what was being asked. I dont think thats your responsibility. I think thats the Capital Planning responsibility. Its unfortunate that they havent done laughs havent done what was requested to them. To the members of the public it is telling how poor the planning is here. We are talking about a 240 Million Investment by taxpayers and yet, before signing on the dotted line, which this board is being asked to do so in a couple of weeks, its clear that we havent really considered any alternatives to incarceration really. If they have them, they would have presented them. Im not saying, you, Capital Planning committee. If they have considered them, we would have seen them. Thats the sadness about this whole thing. We are asking San Francisco taxpayers to commit to a lot of money without fully exploring all the options. Thats really not how you want government to operate and thats not true planning. Thank you. Supervisor if i my Say Something on what i was asked for us to do. The reuse of county jail number two. That was also studied. I think the chief can speak to that. I think supervisor kim also brought that possibility of using county jail number two. We studied. I see all of that. It goes back to what supervisor cam pose campos said. I want to appreciate that you examined how we can work with those existing facilities for beds. Its just that our hearing specifically asked for actual kind of more concrete proposals around facilities for the alternative program. Its not what i see in the presentation. Its important for us to get three or four concrete proposals. We want to make sure we really examine and study what the other options are. I am questioning the existing system. We have to put in 300 million of our own money to build something for the system. If were going to do that, i want to really reexamine the system that we have so much evidence that harms people and doesnt address and get to the outcome that we wants can a safer city and rehabilitating individuals. Thats what todays hearing is about. Supervisor yee. Im actually enjoying this discussion. Whats happen is that is raising more questions than answers at this point. I think whats missing thatches presented earlier in terms of what if. We can probably reduce the number of inmates. The idea the concept has been presented. Whats missing to me is i think the analysis that youre presenting also in terms of the reduced number of beds can be useful if we had information about the alternatives or the things that we if we were to do certain things, how many inmates how many people would be what would be the inmate numbers . How much are we reduce the numbers . Thats whats missing. We dont have numbers. For instance, if you were to say, were going to build Mental Health. It will be reduced by 208. The numbers youre coming up with are alternative built. May be the conclusion is that we still need to deal with a few more beds. I think what we have is adequa adequate. Were running out of time. Im hoping that the individuals that have presented what are are some things that we can do to reenvision what we can do for people that are incarcerated. Thank you supervisor yee and thank you public works. We do have karen from adult probation, chief probation officer here. Then following that, Carl Patterson from the Comptroller Office and the department of Public Health. Good afternoon, karen fletcher. I wanted tell you about our population. Since 2009, the number of probation has decreased almost 50 . That has a lot to do with the legislative reforms happened throughout the state. In addition to that, magnify i iied of the policy changes. Employing rewards and Investment Initiatives where we partnered with the d. A. And the courts to develop a system of shorter term probation. Thats affecting the numbers as well. In addition to the pretrial assessment, our d. A. Spoke about earlier. In addition, we have also incorporated a number of programs that helped with reentry. The a pod that have been discussed in cj2, the Community Assessment and Services Center and the cast program. We used programs like jericho project. What we identified in our population, criminal thinking, Substance Abuse and Mental Health as a key issue that affect the success of individuals coming out of custody and being supervised on probation. What really need to focus on regardless of a new facility or modified facility, the reentry component is the most important factor. We need space for programming. We need systems set up to address the Mental Health and Substance Abuse housing and employment issues that inmates face. What we really need is to enhance what were doing in custody so theres a seemless transition from whatever that facility might look like, the reentry component is critical. To have programming space, to have the availability of clinicians as well as probation staff to assist with the Sheriffs Department and serving this population. The services are the key component and if San Francisco really continues to focus on reentry, the key is to make it happen in custody before they are released and we lose them while theyre being push and navigated through the Community Without direct access to services. Thank you. Thank you very much ms. Fletcher. I had one question which was what will be the back for your department on having to travel to san bruno . There would be a limited back. We prepare about 100 presence reports every month for the superior court. Those are individual who are pending sentencing on felonies. Those referrals are made to officers. We conduct an assessment and write a complete social study report on them. It would require us to then travel more often to san bruno for those interviews. We have one set up for video conferences a we utilize now. Thats limited with just the one set up. It would impact us in addition, we do use the reentry pod. Thats at county jail 2. If we were to help clients being released and we needed to talk to them about services that werent in the a pod that would require us to travel to san bruno. It would be limited back but it would be some. This is something that adult probation feels comfortable if that was the direction that it board took we already go out to san bruin bruno. Our final one presentations are the comptroller and wanted top end with department of Public Health. Good afternoon supervisors, my name is kyle patterson. My office has been involved in the analysis including weve done three forecast. Weve also recently released a report earlier this week about the county jail 6. The question that we were asked to answer since the summer that weve carried out is imp. County jail six. We seen large drops in the jame population between 2009 and 2014. Youre all aware of that. Common question i usually get, why dont we. That trend to continue. In actuality, weve seen in the past couple of years, the jail population has remained relatively flat. On the chart on slide one, we can see on the left side, the jail population in 2014 has remained very flat. In november of 2014, population 47 passed which downgraded a number of felonies and misdemeanors. This is a name that came up from a number of departments including folks who has been opposed to the jail replacement project. Existing facilities are not sufficient to meet security needs. What hes saying, he doesnt think that county jail six is a viable option. Its a little more detailed than that when you look at the report. What theyre saying, some folks may be able to housed at county jail six. Those would have to be folks received a lot of programs. It would result in a need for increased staffing for security reasons. It would mean theres increased cost for transportation to and from court. Also it would mean that 70 of inmates will be housed out of county. Including the fact that families of those folks would have to travel Long Distance to visit them. What we tried to do in response to the report, what would it cost to turn county jail six into a facility as he would suggest it to be used. The line items what those cost would be. The folks wanted program space. We would need to provide them extensive programming. Theres no programming space there. Eask the question, how much it cost to build a facility that can be used to provide program space. I will say, this is a high level estimate. We only had about a week to do this. We wanted to provide you with this information. That was estimated to cost about 37 million. If we dont know the replacement next coth court, there are a couple of facilities that would have to be constructed there. Also, the central records bureau, which is staffed by the Sheriffs Department, that has to be directly adjacent. That would no longer be there. The fencing outside of the jail is not very secure. A number of repairs and may not unanimou maintenance that need to happen. We estimate the cost 11. 8 million. He said, you cant staff county jail six as it has been staffed in the past if you have higher level offenders housed there. We looked at what the cost of increase to staffing. Over a 40 year period, we estimated that cost to be about 96. 5 million. One of the cost thats been mentioned before, the fact that you would need to transport folks to and from the court. I understand that theres already some transportation thats going on between county jail five and the court. Its important to keep in mind, the folks that are housed, most likely going to and from courts. We estimate to the transportation class involved about 1. 7 million per year with one time cost of about 2 million. Over the course of 40 years, that comes out to 54 million. That says the cost of reopening county jail six and its current configuration is 219 million. That compares to the jail replacement project proposal currently in front of you which is 160 million after the 80 million state grant. This suggest its more costly to reopen county jail six and its current form than to build a new facility. I think its important to note, theres a number of costs excluded from this estimate. County jail six is already a 26yearold facility. You will have to replace it anyway in another 25 years. We dont include in this estimate cost escalation. We know that Construction Costs go up about 5 per year. Also staffing go up about 3 or more per year. Finally, theres other travel like public defenders travel that need to take place. I know folks stoke to that spoke to that before. That is the cost of city and travel. Thats all i have for you today. Im happy to answer any questions that you have. Thank you, i did have one question. When you look at these numbers on the cj6 maintenance repair, does that include the cost of what told. Would it would take to make cj6 able to house medium or maximum security inmates . I know what he said, cj6 currently cant house medium or maximum security. How much it would take to renovate if they could . He says, you can never house maximum security in that facility. You cannot renovate it so this could . Based on what he said, how much it would cost to turn this into facility that could be used by medium security. Theres been a separate cost estimate done which is what he was going to speak about. What if we turned county jail 6 into a style facility thats more medium maximum security. That would cost 305 million. That exceeds the cost of replacing creating a rehabilitation and detention facility. Okay. Both of those alternatives show they will be more expensive than building a new facility. Supervisor campos. Thank you. Do you have the back up materials for the numbers that you given us . I do. Can you get them to us now . I dont have copes of them currently with me. Ill be honest with you, i have a lot of respect for the Comptroller Office. When you do this kind of presentation, you lose a lot of credibility. You give us a one sheet with no back up documentation, claiming that if we dont agree to the 80 million, then were going to be stuck spending 219 million. Now, has the doctor verified these numbers the 219 million. That was not part of the scope of his work. He thought they were reasonable estimates. Look, you either have actual concrete verification through an expert. If you rely on an expert to tell us that its going to cost 219 million, then you better have that expert verify the numbers that the point here is to shock us with these numbers, have them verified. Hes not a cost estimation expert for construction. Okay, to me, the whole point of the Comptrollers Office is to help us make informed decisions. I think you lose a 3ot of credibility with this board certainly with me and when you try to scare us into a number of 219 million and you dont have any back up documentation for that number. You say you do, you say you dont have it with you. I think if were going to go down this path, lets have experts review your work and then you come here and say that youre trying to put a real life numbers, the analysis that has been done by this expert that you yourself is saying, has verified your numbers. Youve saying is not a cost expert. What is the significance of what youre saying. I can come to you and try to scare you and provide a parade of horribles. Unless you back it up, i think that you lose credibility. Im surprised by how sloppy this presentation is. The Comptrollers Office has been asked, they have a very unique role. Its one office that is appointed by both the mayor and board of supervisors. This is really this leaves a lot to be desired. Its not credible. Its very unfortunate. I think that you have put the good reputation of your office on the line for something that was simply unnecessary. It is not how i would think your office would do its work. I think it leaves a lot to be desired. Its really sad because have the politicians debate the policy and the politics of this. You should not get involved in the politics. The Comptroller Office should in the get involved in the politics of trying to help one side make a case. If youre going to come here with 219 million asen estimate, then have the detail outline of where that comes from, justification and have experts backing it up. Dont come here and allow the office to be used by one side. The fact that it could be my side doing it. I think comptrollers is better than that. Its sad to see this today. Thank you for your comments. Ill be happy to provide any back up documentation later today. Thank you. Our final presentation is Gerald Robinson from department of Public Health. Good afternoon supervisors. Thank you for holding this hearing. Today im going to talk about what the department of Public Health currently has as averments alternatives to incarceration and new initiatives. Colonelly currently the department of Public Health has a sober center. Theres i believe 26 beds and were looking at expanding that by 30 beds. The architectural designs have been created it will be submitted to Capital Planning very shortly. The hope is this could be up and running in 17 or 18. We also have urgent care. This is a place that was built for Police Officers to bring individuals that theyve had contact with. There are 12 beds, its a 247 operation. Its rarely full. Its usually between five and eight people that are housed there. We also have the Behavorial Health access center, which is our main access point to our Behavorial Health services. Including Substance Abuse and Mental Health. Thats a five day a week im sorry, we have a presentation. Its open from 8 00 to pack and polic 5 00, Police Officers do drop individuals off there in hopes of getting them into appropriate care. Earlier today someone addressed the collaborative courts. There are many that we have had. One for probably 15 years and one for 11 years and one for six years and two very recently. The Community Justice center is located down the street at 555 hope street. This is for individuals that have committed crimes in a defined area and around the ball park. Police officers can also bring people there instead of bringing them to jail if the individual agrees to treatment. Currently, theres 210 active clients there. Drug court has existed for about 16 years. Currently theres 144 active complaint clients there. It is lower than it has been in the past. We very much agree that we would like the public defender and the d. A. To expand the eligibility requirements. We also have the Behavorial Health core which is Award Winning court. Its been in existence for 11 years. Thats for individuals with a serious Mental Illness. It has about 140 participants in it. Most of these are fell non felons. Wonted and misdemeanor Behavorial Health court. The two newest court is Veterans Court and department of Public Health actively participates in all of these collaborative courts. In addition to that, we have misdemeanor competence to stand trial. We are the few counties that remove individuals from jail and provide care for them in the community. Right now theres 11 of those individuals. In addition to all of this, if an officer brings a person to jail, that at the time of intake make meets the criteria, the health staff refuses that individual and ask if the department the Police Department takes them over to psych emergency for an assessment to see if they need to be admitted into the hospital. One of the new initiatives our director garcia is working very closely with wa the chief of police. Its called able. Assistance before lawyer. This is model after the seattle lead program. As most programs that San Francisco implements, we have to put our own touch on it to make it work for our department our city and director garcia and the police chief are actively working on creating this program. Its going to be for lower level drug offenders that have Substance Abuse disorders and working at gems them gosh getting them in treatment. Will hire a social worker for it. It is planned to operate out you have our sobering center. Thats on Mission Street. Working at connecting these individuals with Treatment Programs. Womb of the kae components one of the key dont components we want to make shoe all the officers help them understand how to work better with people that have a mental status. Someone with a drug possession that has Mental Illness or a Substance Abuse disorder, theyre given a citation and a date to appear in court. If the person appears in court, then the criminal justice plan is very individualized depending on what the judge, public defender and d. A. Agree on. Mostly they go into treatment. If the individual does not appear in court, then a warrant will be issued for their arrest and again, going back to the court where the treatment decisions, the criminal justice plan would also be individualized. Well see able plan. These individuals would be given the choice whether to go to regular criminal Justice Court or to engage in the able program. If the individual chooses to engage in the able program, then they would be transported to the Mission Street site and work with in engaging them and connecting them in appropriate Treatment Program. If you turn to the slade thats got slade slide that got the flower like design, folks in the able program will have access to the full array of services from the department of Public Health with the goal of engaging them in the level of care and the kind of care that the individual needs. Then on the last slide it shows how much money the department currently has for Mental Health, 290 million. Substance abuse disorder, 75 million and housing at 40 million. One of the Biggest Challenges is housing. The cost of housing in the city is beyond high. What these individuals need is places that can have support of housing where treatment staff and the facility to help them to make sure they stay connected in treatment. If they get into some kind of trouble or issue that there is a staff on site, that can help them. Another new proposal is a 47 bed psychiatric respite. This will be housed in the current Behavorial Health center. We propose moving those patients over towards 7a at San Francisco general hospital. Then creating a psychiatric respite. It will be for people coming out the jail and again, providing treatment and working on connecting them in an going Community Treatment and also working to getting these individuals housed. We estimate that the people that go to this program will be there from 9 to 12 months. But looking at a very individualized Treatment Program. Were hoping to have this project up and running by 17 or 18. The citys cost for the improvement is 1. 5 million. Moneys that the state 80 million grant will allow them to reallocate some of the capital fund money to provide this. I know you had a question about do people get better in jail . I was going to ask that question. I think we already there are instances of individuals who can improve in jail. My question are, what are the impact of mentally ill images of being incarcerated. Ive read quite a bit of literature how it can be very traumatizing for those that are suffering in a severe Mental Health to be in jail. Even if theyre getting treatment in that type of setting. From your expertise from Public Health, what what about dph found . Its individualized. People with Mental Health issues are placed in a solitary confinement setting, dont do very well. Individuals that are housed i believe most of you went to county jail 5 and probably saw the area there and very open space. Has individual treatment. Has group room. Most of those individuals thrive, they get better. In 20 years working with the population that i believe allows that is that while theyre incarcerated, theyre institutionally clean and sober. It allows an opportunity for medications to work, it allows for an opportunity for treatment to work. The current jail Behavorial Health staff provides a variety of evidencebased treatment including they do a manualized treatment. Ive seen many people improve and stay better. I also recognized that nobody is saying i will clarify that, i am not saying that jails need to become psychiatric hospitals. I absolutely dont. Do i believe that when an individual is incarcerated as Health Issues and mental Substance Abuse issue, they need to receive the appropriate level of care. They need to receive in a place that is more treatment friendly than the older jail. Is jail the best way to do that . Are you saying that jail is actually maybe perhaps the most appropriate space for some folks to get the treatment that they need because it ensures that youre institutionally clean and sober while youre inside the jail. Is there an alternative facility that dph can run that would address those individuals in the same way or even a better way . Is the Current System is the best system that we can come up with . I dont know a Current System will be the best. We always need to expand and have a dynamic system of care, looking at how we can help and improve individualized. There are people that for whatever reason, the court, the criminal justice systems that they need to be incarcerated. For those individuals, i wanted them to get the best treatment. What i also would like is anyone that can be diverted in jail, to be diverted and work out of Community Treatment. On the other end, when people are being released from jail, i want them to be able to receive a Treatment Center that is open, welcoming and evidencebased. How do we pay for a Mental Health services when an individual is in custody versus out of custody . General fund dollars in custody. Out of custody is state money, federal money, grants and some general fund dollars. Can we do more than we currently do to treat people outside of custody . So we can not use general fund dollars and use state federal dollars instead . Do you think that we have room to do more of that versus of what we currently do . I do, stabilization housing is probably the best thing that we can do. I go to state meetings monthly with my peers. We probably have the best Behavorial Health system in the state. Do we need more . Absolutely. We have more individuals that have psychosis than any other county in the state. We need to keep working and improving and appropriately expanding. Again, i dont think every individual needs residential treatment. I do think they need to be housed. If theyre housed, then outpatient treatment works well. Would you have questions for chair yee and president breed. I will hand the floor over. Thank you. Thanks for your presentation. Thank you for the work that you do for our citizens. You named several programs and some of them are focused when they come out of incarceration. Some of them while theyre incarceration. How many individuals would not be incarcerated but enter these programs . My focus is, can we reduce the number where we dont need an additional or two building a jail . That would be pure speculation on my part. I do know theres a number of individuals that could benefit from these Treatment Programs. Collaborative court refuse them. They would take their chances in the criminal Justice Court and hope for a shorter sentence versus spending time in a Treatment Program which can be a year to two years. Again, everything has to be so individualized. If we cookie cutter the treatment for these individuals, its not going to be successful. Last year, this board passed outpatient treatment. Weve began doing that on november 2nd. So far weve had about 22 referrals mostly from mothers. Then the next largest referral is from the jail. Those individuals are eligible for aot. Its a very narrow criteria that the regulation called for. Thats another tool in what we can do to working and engaging people and finding successful ways to have them say, i want treatment. Thats what we need to keep doing better. I appreciate that. If i were to say, this sounds great, i will support it. I have no data at all to say im really speculating. I feel like whether its your level or a deeper look at what these programs can actually accomplish, whether its from the experience of existing programs that you have or from programs like seattle. It would be really helpful. At this point, everybody is speculating. We do have for behavorial court and drug court data thats been gathered, evaluations that have been done. I believe your office was sent a copy of that supervisor kim. It shows pretty remarkably how well Behavorial Health court works for people that have serious charges and serious Mental Illness. Thats not just in our county, its throughout the state that the study was done. We can either get that information to you or the supervisor can share the information that we gave to her. Who would be the best organization or individual to ask they look at this information to see. If we were fully funded, would they have impact in reduction of people in San Francisco that would be incarcerated. I appreciate that. Do you have evidence that would peek to reduce jail population and how much if every individual that was eligible and wanted . [indiscernible]. You mind coming to the mic. Members of the public cant hear you. I never seen data that specifically addresses that. We dont refuse people for capacity issues. The primary reason is someone get denied if theyre mentally ill because the d. A. s office is uncomfortable with the case legally being in that court. Certainly, theres significant evidence showing reduction of recidivism for those that participate. The numbers are even better for those that graduate but you still see improvements for those that participate and dont graduate. I believe the first two years we did have a cap on it. We were trying to learn what we had been doing. There hasnt been a cap for eight or five years. Any individual thats eligible, meaning the public defender, the d. A. , the psychiatric staff and the individual agreed to participate in the court. Its a voluntary court that takes them out of the routine criminal Justice Court and really works with their Mental Illness. Thank you. Thank you. For your presentation. I just had a couple of questions. I know that you mentioned that while individuals are incarcerated, they are stutionally clean and sober. I respectfully disagree with that. I know for a fact that people are still getting access to drugs while theyre on a50 bryant and while theyre in other facilities that we are responsible for. Thats true of of a small percentage. People with serious Mental Illness, less than any of the other population have the ability to get those drugs. Again, i worked there for 20 years and within three months, people became unrecognizable from when they first game in how good they look. You work with them directly inside of the jail . Yes. Specifically the last statistics that we got about individuals who are mentally ill and those who addicting to drugs i think the people who have those disorders is 80 . Can you explain like the individuals that you are able to work with in most cases, youre saying closer to 80 of that particular population as well are individuals potential have both substance and Mental Health issues. Thats correct. You do this same kind of care you would do in community. You do motivational interviewing. You do Substance Abuse education. You do medication for the individual. You do socialization. When i was there, we were not doing thinking for a change. Its something thats really just become evidencebased practice. We do that in the facility. We also do that with all of our Community Programs that treat individuals a have been involved in criminal justice system. Theres illness management and recovery can teaches people how to manage their own Mental Illness. I personally did that group door three years and saw great improvement. We do that in the community too. We see people getting expert and rerning how to manage and plan for times theyre not going to be so well. Its prevention as well as current treatment. Anyone forced medication or is it only if they agree to take it . In a jail, you cannot doors medications. I believe title 15 allows you to one title forced medication while youre in the jail for an emergency situation. In the 20 years that i was involved in jail Behavorial Health service, there was one time that we forced medication on an individual and it was somebody that was incredibly psychotic. We couldnt get them transported until they were showered. We couldnt get them showered until they were sedated. We went to him to get his permission language with the medical director to do that. When theyre on an 5150 and hospitalized, then, yes, we can force to medicate them with all the due diligence. Lets talk about the Mental Health facility thats potentially become proposed. Im not certain how much involvement you had, i know youve listed it as an option to helping its more of the inpatient beds that would be available for those who would need are you talking about the psychiatric increase spi respite or new jail. Im talking about the respite. You know whether or not theres a capacity for a large number . Not on that facility. Other facilities near sf general area . There have to be a search. Keep in mind that med cal would only reimburse for facility with 16 beds or less. Okay. Under all circumstances . Thats correct. I think thats all the questions that i had for you ms. Robinson. I had two follow up questions. This the last presentation . I wanted to also ask questions of probably brian strong, Capital Planning. Good afternoon heather green. I wanted to ask a question about the option. I know that we still have not gotten into details around the options of what could have been available. Is it possible to have design or prepare a facilities that was more comprehensive around Mental Health equally in terms of the detention component that a beds that we needed along with a larger kind of Mental Health component within the same facility. Where dph could have operated languag along with the need for or the desire to have also a jail or detention facility as well as a Mental Health facility. Could those projects have been combined . The proposal before the board now represents that effort. Its my understanding. There was the rdf proposal which is designed for improved treatment of people in house with the input of the department of Public Health and the people who delivered the services there. It would still be for individuals who are specifically jailed . Correct. In response to this board concerns around this population, which we heard loud and clear and resonated strongly with all the folks involved if the design process, the Planning Group went to the department of Public Health directly and said, what can we do that will best address the needs of the population that you see today that will help to keep them out and serve them best when out of custody. The department of Public Health provided the design and operational specifications of the Respite Program that you have for the rdf. This was the city believes the best that we can do . This is. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I want to bring dph back up for one final question. Our District Attorney talked about actual alternatives that he would like San Francisco to examine. One of them being the Mental Health programs that exist in memphis and miami. Im wondering if dph has looked at these programs and what thoughts it has on replicating them here. I have never been to them. I heard the discrimination discrimination judges from those programs speak. We have all the services but they are more scattered. These are in one building on one campus when we talk about presenting alternatives with a facility proposal that would allow that to happen, i think what we were hoping from this hearing when we started this conversation is that today, we might actually have a proposal that examines miami and memphis and see how we can consolidate what you had mentioned. Scattering over services and putting it in one facility. Do you think thats something we can examine and dph can work with the board of supervisors to actually put that together . I certainly think its worth exploring. Thank you very much. Okay, that was a very long series of presentations. I do want to thank all the departments for coming and presenting. I know that the questions were not easy. I know that the board is frustrated because it appears were not getting the answers to the questions that we want to see. I still want to appreciate that everyone is here and put a lot of every and work into the presentations that occurred before us. I do want to allow chance for public comment. I know members of the public have been patient. Many of you have been waiting since 10 30 a. M. I will call the card. Pleases feel free to line up after the names i have before us. I have gay, reverend glenda hope, lindsey. Daequan louis. Even if i did not call your name, please do feel free to line up on the right side of the chamber. Reverend hope. Thank you. 18 years ago, i founded the safe house for women. Those who identified as women and who are homeless, addicted, traumatized and prostitute tightsed are welcomed to come there and engage in a comprehensive program. A program which cost about half as much as it cost to keep a woman in jail. I want to address the question specifically in regard to women. That supervisor bread asked about forced medication. We have been increasingly concerned for many years about the numbers of mentally ill women in particular who come to safe house. Most of them, come with a sack load of prescription drugs. If you are mentally ill, if you been abused, you were traumatized, you have a Substance Abuse problem, now youre in jail, you can no longer get what you were taking on the street to relieve your pain. Something is offered to you, you will take it. You dont have to be forced. Then thats spills over into safe house itself. We currently have 20 women on the waiting list for safe house. They are either in jail or they are still on the street. We would like to expand our work and we would like to improve our work with our graduates. We already have to raise a quarter of a Million Dollars just to fund safe house. I want to say in conclusion, once again, im thinking specifically of women and the impact on them of being in jail and separated from their children. When you think of Mental Illness, plaza do include brain trauma. Brain injury, some of it going back into childhood. Also, include the effects of posttraumatic stress disorder. We say that increasingly. There are alternatives, we would appreciate support to expanding the one that we have. Thank you reverend hope. Im coming from the young woman freedom center. Im the Program Manager there. I facilitate with workshops inside the juvenile hall. I was able to go into this weekend to the womens facility to hold a group there as well. I do courtroom advocacy. I just kept a couple of notes. I live in bayview, i have a 4yearold girl. Personally i would like to see us invest more into education. I would like to see San Francisco, we can talk about what great education facilities we have and not the jails. Other than that, i wrote a couple of notes. Housing, wrap around services for the population. Trauma Recovery Services to address the sexual abuse the prison pipeline. Im talking more about the womens focus for anybody who identifies as a woman. Also Community Liaison to help gaff nature navigate through the bureaucracies. Talking with the programs or whatever it is that they need to get through. I hope that made sense. Employment, meaningful employment. That has mobility to get dilemma through and programs for parents children and housing and Mental Health services. Thank you so much. I been here since 10 30. Lot of departments give their presentation did not speak on point. The first thing that we need to understand is that San Francisco has a wide disparity gap. Board of supervisors and this mayor must understand, in order for you to really understand the situation, San Francisco ranks below rwanda. For those who dont know where it is, ace a country in its a country in africa. We are talking about alternatives to incarceration. A lot of that is being done in some areas with no funding from the city. Talk about violence prevention and intervention, prior to me handing over my large office 3000 square feet, we had violence prevention done on bay shore and some other areas that had no facilities. Giving these people an opportunity to not only address violence prevention and intervention but also have a fitting program where they feed people tuesday through saturday. You have this department here and you can see at one time, the legislative branch and the executive branch and the city administrator was in attendance. Now we have the city administrator and the mayor on one side and some of the board of supervisors on the other side building prisons. Nobody has acknowledged michael hennessy. He should be here. He planted the seeds. Nobody acknowledged him not even once. It shows how dumb the city is. Secondly, we have a mayor who is building stock over here and congestion and this mayor singly responsible for not addressing quality of life issues. Thank you. Good afternoon supervisors. I want to give you all a flaming heart of love for your leadership this week. Really appreciate todays discussion. In addition to everybody else weve been talking about. It seems were at a philosophical impasse here in San Francisco. Whether or not well continue to invest hundred of millions of dollars of incarceration. Taking this opportunity to do something really transformative. All of our experts, all our official are saying, now is the time to do something transformative. Now its the time to do something creative. Brian strong, kyle patterson, these people are not criminal justice spirit experts experts. These people are city administratorring. Weve been asking them for years to us some analysis. You have people who are working in the communities who are spending our wheels trying get this research to all. Our city administrators who have the resource and the capacity to do that are not doing that. Its really important that we listen to experts, that we listen to experts and tell you what San Francisco needs. I think its important to say that we are getting a lot of National Attention for were kind of a locking contradiction. We have a 50 jail population and we have d. A. S and pd saying we can continue to decrease. As a city, our mayor is pushing 400 million plan. This National Attention is also playing out in our money bail reform that we need to be looking at in terms of creating more prisons here in San Francisco. We are under federal lawsuit now. Going to have a huge impact on this discussion. Lastly, i want to say i feel that dr. Austins perspective was being misrepresented and distorted. I appreciate the leadership the hard questions. Thank you. Thank you. My name is tash wynn at the Ella Baker Center for human rights. I grew up in San Francisco for years. Imal one of the five people who disrupted the meeting yesterday. After going getting booked and going to jail and getting arrested, i got to meet a lot of women who have been in and out, who are leaving, who are coming in and coming back. I want to respond to what the department of Public Health said in regards to the level of treatment inside versus of level treatment outside of the community. Its a fact that jails are isolating environments that exacerbate and can create Mental Health. They are the most isolating environments to put people in. I am still feeling the effects of that from yesterday. People dont get the same quality of level of treatment as they do inside. L. A. County is also working to model what is happening in miami and whats happening in memphis. Theyre working on a Mental Health diversion program. Based on what happened in miami, the city received 5000 Mental Health related calls in 2013, they only resulted in five arrests. The success resulted in the closing down of a jail, which saved 12 million annually. I think you cant lock someone up and say dont get sick anymore. You give them a life, a place to live and an environment, a job and thats how they get better. Thank you. I do want to repeat and thank you very much for having this hearing and giving six months warning that we need to come up with alternatives and continue the path that means we will decrease the population in our jail as we have for the last 20 years. I want your leadership to continue beyond today because i really think that you can ask an architect or an engineer to talk about the alternatives but can ask the department of Public Health and the department of Public Health has deliver. You can ask other social Service Departments and they can deliver. Thats their job. For example, today, i just want to build on what others have said. There are insights to build on what the sheriffs offices sheriffs report was about. You can expand pretrial to give them a social worker or a clinical nurse or something that they said they can help 100 more people to stay out of jail. You can find a permanent place for a pretrial. For example, 930 bryant, it stays into that area. Theyve who to move. Their budget has been decreased. On the outside, the most important thing that hasnt been raised today is the burns report. You need to dig into that report. That is the point that supervisor kim made that this is about the criminal justice system. Its not just about the jail and the sheriff. Hello everyone, my name is paulette brown. Im here concerning my family. I like to use the overhead if possible. We talk about public safety. My son was murdered august 14, 2006. Shot 30 times with a semiautomatic gun, you talk about public safety, where was the safety at for my son . Think about those mothers. Put my face on theirs. This is what i have left of my son. Mothers have to go around and be at their final rail. Get funeral. This is my son laying up on the gurney lifeless. A beautiful young 16yearold boy, lifeless. This is what im left with. We want these cases solved. Thank you. People who have a Mental Illness or Substance Abuse issue and theyre on probation or parol. They end up being picked up for dealing or related to the drug addiction. They end up back in jail. Then end up losing their housing and back out on the street. Good afternoon. I am a member of the San Francisco Mental Health board. I have done site visits t the jail. I would like to just share with you what some of the inmates have told me. One inmate on bryant street said, he comes into the jail two or three times a year. He has a Mental Illness. He also has a physical illness. He has aids. He said hes homeless. This is a place where he can come, be warm, and get fed. I interviewed some inmates. Also those that were on the Mental Health unit. Their story was slightly different. They did not have money for bail. If you dont have money for bail, you can stay in jail up to three years. It was heart wrenching to meet with some of these people. Today, there was a whole list of alternatives . I would like to see more homeless outreach. I would like to see more jail diversion programs. The respite drop in program. We dont have a continuum of Housing Alternatives here. We dont have housing theres too many rules in many of our housing programs. People get kicked out who really need to be there. Thank you so much for your time. Any other members that like to speak on this item. Seeing none, ask the claire to close publi chair to close public comment. Public comment is closed. Colleagues, i have some closing remarks. I imagine you do as well. Thats not what we were asking the Department Like public works and capital to do. We were asking the department to do was work with the experts. I think that it is even more important to work with the very folks that have said, do not rebuild the jail. So that we have those concrete averments befor alternatives before us. Its not so say that the body deserves to get it. Any time we have an opportunity to rethink the system, were going to rebuild something, we should absolutely question that system. Is that the best system that keeps our city safe that sals at also the best system for those who offend and commit crimes here in San Francisco. Its frustrating that everyone is not on board with building the best system that we possibly can. What im going to say, again, i think there are a couple considerations we should look at. What the best system moving forward . What is best way for us to operate local criminal justice system. We have proposals coming from advocates and the d. A. And pd who are not considered by the city. The second is a fiscal responsibility, stewards of public taxpayer dollars. If were going to spend 372 million and the state public dollars, those are taxpayer dollars too. Lets make sure were building the right facility. The third question that we would ask in july, who is in our jail . What percentage of those in our jail are there because theyre severely mentally ill, are there because they are homeless or poor, are there because they are addicted. Lets create a facility that addresses those issues, that lead them to commit crime. There was a great report that came out of stanford law school, which is when did prison become a acceptable Mental Health care facility . Lot of data on how l. A. County and l. A. County, the jail is now the largest provider of healthcare services. Not a clinic. Its the jail. We know that system isnt working. The data is showing its further harming individuals and its harming their families and community. I think that on tuesday, when the board would have to make a decision on moving forward with the proposal as is, if we do not move forward with that proposal, im hoping that we can start fresh. That i think we have a lot of great ideas that we can explore bringing here in San Francisco. The one that im most interested in, so theres a little bit of specificity in my request, that we look at miamis memphis and miami. He said if you take a look at any Street Corner in downtown San Francisco, we have a Mental Health treatment problem. I dont want us to go down the path what is singe and easy simple and easy for us. We should question it. We should try to do better. I want to give an opportunity for my colleges to make some closes remarks as well. Thank you supervisor kim for your comments and just for your detail questions about this particular issue, it brings it back into perspective. We have been talking about this for a long time. I know that we approved the capital plan for the board of supervisors, one of the things that i made clear is that this is in no way an approval of a jail. Theres still a process. As a result of that process, we have held several hearings. We have continued to not only work with advocates for and against but weve continued to work with different departments to understand what are the alternatives. What can we do better. How can we do it better. Is that the only option. What i asked for when i supported moving forward with the application for the grant was to give us a better alternative. To not give us a jail with services but give us a better alternative that makes sense for the population that we are trying to serve. The population that we are trying to hopefully rehabilitate. The population that needs a lot more than just to be housed in a facility. I made it clear that the jail was clearly too big, it was clearly too expensive. I was not supportive of the current plan. Since then, the only thing that has changed has been a transitional facility with 47 beds. Thats not good enough. Because hundreds of people who are in need of those transitional beds. It is frustrating. I know that many of the departments here and many of the people here have brought forth information based on research, based on what their responsibility is to this project. For some, all not fitting together well enough to move this particular plan forward. I just not making any sense to me. There are a lot of folks that have put forth a lot of effort and hearing something as simple from roma guy, if we added just a million more dollars to pretrial diversion, we can add a case manager and more support to deal with pretrial diversion which would help those individual who are in custody who dont have violent offenses. I no the d. A. Have their own program and the Sheriffs Department has its own program. I know adult probation is doing its own thing and Mental Health. Sometimes for certain things they all work together. This is not working. The system as a whole is broking. All were doing is following in the same footsteps what we believe we posed to do rather than changing it. This is not okay with me. It is kuwait kuwai quite frustrating. I know that next week at the board of supervisors we will continue this discussion. I will have a lot more to say during that time. This hearing has done nothing to really make me feel overwhelmingly compelled to support a project that doesnt do enough. It doesnt do enough to deal with the problem. With that, i appreciate you supervisor kim for helping to lead the way on this effort. I appreciate supervisor yee for calendaring this hearing. I a hard thing to discuss. We have a lot of work to do in this city. I look forward to a more details discussion. Im walking away disappointed this is not a winwin situation. Ultimately the ones who suffer the ones in custody. Whos lives we claim we want to make better, this does not do that. I want to thank both supervisor kim and supervisor breed for bringing this to the chamber in terms of having this discussion. I moved from original discussion of this new jail fills a people are jails that people are talking about. Its been the reduction of beds that they claim was needed what it is now. Theres even more ram to say there might be not total need of 384 or so additional beds. Coming into this hearing, i was really expecting a little bit more than what i heard. I feel like at this point, what was brought up, what was discussed by whether its from people from the departments or the public, this almost feels like the beginning of a discussion rather than the end of a discussion. We need to look at it. Im feeling at this point, try to make a decision whether up to build a new jail or not. That decision seems to be sort of the donkey before the cart. Rather than stepping back and saying, what are the things that we can really do to reduce as much as we can. And figure out what jail capacity we really need. What are the resources we need for those other alternative programs that can lead us to a lot more successful individuals going back into society. Im very challenged by this discussion. Im really hoping that people whether its the department, they can come up with answers in the next few days. Come tuesday, im feeling very uncomfortable. Again, thank you to the public and thank you to everybody else. Thank you colleagues for this hearing. Just also want to recognize roma guy who really assisted our and and president breeds office in crafting many of the a. S alternatives. I know that this conversation with continue. It likely will not end on tuesday. I think well look forward to that conversation at that point. I want to thank everyone for being here. You want to continue this item or file it. President bread to have a preference . Well continue it. I dont think im on the committee. I make a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. Again, president breed thank you for your leadership. Is there anything else on the agenda . No further business. If theres nothing furthered, the meeting is adjourned. [meeting adjourned] n