Serving as a criminal prosecutor in the City for the last five years, I’ve seen it all in court. I’ve prosecuted crimes involving everything from attempted murder, robbery and animal cruelty, to crimes that impact our quality of life.

I’ve seen firsthand the toll crime takes on the victims, on our neighbors, on our merchants and all our community when we are unable to deliver the basic concept that all of us deserve- to be safe in our homes and on our streets.  And, while violent crime is the top priority, it’s more than that.

There’s another a level of crime that has become a serious problem in District 8 and around the City. I’m talking about the endemic graffiti, vandalism, car break-ins, petty drug pushers, public drunkenness, and other quality of life crimes that have residents going indoors and looking for answers. As your Supervisor, restoring safety and making San Francisco a safer and cleaner place to live will be one of my top priorities.

Here is a summary of my top priorities around public safety:

PREVENTION IS KEY

After years of serving as a prosecutor, I’ve learned that more arrests don’t always add up to more safety. There are deeper problems at work that drive up the crime rate in the first place. And I am committed to being just as tough on the root causes of crime as I am on crime itself.

If you want to find the root causes that contribute to crime, take a hard look at the people who are locked in our county jail. Most suffer from two overwhelming problems: substance abuse and lack of education. According to the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department, more than half of the city’s jail inmates are functionally illiterate, and more than half have a serious substance abuse problem. Jailing them costs the city as much as $40,000 per year per person.

That’s why I support aggressive crime prevention efforts that aim to keep people on the right side of the law in the first place. It’s common sense.

Substance Abuse Treatment Programs and Community Justice Center. I’ll support progressive investments in meaningful drug treatment programs where people can get clean and out of the underground street economy that hurts themselves, their families and our community. I’ve seen firsthand that drug treatment works, where combined with appropriately strict consequences for continuing criminal behavior.

The Community Justice Center (CJC), in particular, has experienced early success in mandating meaningful treatment programs for repeat offenders with substance abuse issues. The choice for them is clear: either get clean or go to state prison. As Supervisor, I will advocate for a similar program like CJC for our District that focuses on the hardest core of repeat offenders—people who have revolved in and out of prison and jail for years. It’s not compassionate to ignore them, and it makes us all less safe to pretend that offering help alone is going to change anything. A CJC program, linking a meaningful chance to change with strict, immediate consequences for failure, could have a significant impact on the everyday crimes that have a daily impact on quality of life in District 8.

Truancy Prevention/Drop-Outs. Another on-ramp to criminal activity is dropping out of school. Among the thousands of school-age chronic truants in San Francisco, approximately 2,500 of them are elementary school kids—that is, between 5 and 10 years old. These children are falling behind and will be claimed by the streets, a result that we cannot and should not allow for everyone’s sake. I’ll strongly support expanded efforts to prevent these children from dropping-out and becoming a statistic, including expanded anti-truancy programs, academic “reentry” centers, and expanded youth-oriented police resources, both in-school and off-campus, to channel truants back into school and reentry programs.

Workforce Development and Reentry Programs. Moreover, for older people who are stuck in the vicious cycle of poverty and crime, renowned anti-gang expert Father Boyle says, nothing stops a bullet like a job. I’ll support workforce development initiatives and programs designed to get former offenders back to work. In San Francisco, these programs, such as Walden House, Delancey Street, and the District Attorney’s Back On Track program, have saved the city millions in jail costs and have prevented hundreds of offenders from returning to a life of crime.

VIOLENT CRIMES

I’ve personally prosecuted hundreds of violent criminals in San Francisco. I’ve sent people to state prison for committing robberies and burglaries. When one person commits a violent crime on another, or breaks into their home, or targets another based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or any other ‘ism’ that the most significant consequences should follow.

Supporting Enforcement of the Law. As Supervisor, I will support the Police Department and the District Attorney’s office to ensure they can effectively investigate and prosecute serious and violent criminals.

Services for Crime Victims. Victims of these terrible crimes deserve our utmost support. Violent crimes shatter lives, and in their aftermath, victims often need help putting their lives back together. I will fight for specialized services, through governmental and non-governmental agencies, for victims of serious crimes, including our seniors, victims of hate/bias crimes, victims of domestic violence, and children who are victims of or witnesses to violence.

Victims Rights and Restorative Justice. Our Sheriff’s Department has nationally recognized programs like the Resolve to Stop the Violence Project that I will continue to support to hold violent offenders accountable and use the time behind bars to change the course of their lives.

SMART POLICING

We’re seeing more and more promising innovations in “smart policing” throughout District 8 and our city. I support this innovation, particularly using technology and innovation to deter crime and solve community problems.

Community Policing. Meaningful enforcement starts, but doesn’t end, with more police officers walking the beat. I strongly support expanded community policing efforts in District 8. Done right, it means more dedicated officers building relationships and solving problems on beats where their aim is to become neighbors. The payoff is trust and an increase in reporting of crimes. When residents know their beat officer, they report more crimes and are more likely to testify in court to ensure a successful prosecution.

Live-Time Crime Cameras and Beat Officers. An important innovation, live-time crime cameras have enormous potential to deter crime and help officers respond quickly to unfolding crimes. Using information from live-time crime cameras, trained officers can connect quickly with beat officers in the field if a crime is unfolding. They can help identify suspects, describe where they’re heading, and seamlessly direct emergency services to any victims or witnesses on the scene. Undertaken appropriately and with due regard to a proper balance with our civil liberties, I support a pilot program using this important tool to fight crime in District 8.

The Digital Police Station/Ingleside Model. I applaud Ingleside Police Station’s use of technology in deploying police throughout District 8. Ingleside has a full-time crime analyst who interprets data on suspects, victims and locations of crimes daily. They maintain a constantly evolving “live” map of crime within the area and use it to identify “hot spots” and to ensure police are present and active in any areas that are “heating up.” I’d like to see this promising practice evolve and, to the extent effective, expanded to other police stations within District 8 and the City.

COMPSTAT. Likewise, CompStat, while in its initial stages, has proven to be a valuable tool in fighting crime city-wide and, perhaps even more importantly, in holding law enforcement accountable. CompStat is all about tracking results—where crimes occur, what the response is, and whether the police response has curbed the problem. I applaud the CompStat model and support its continued use and improvement particularly with respect to District 8’s communities.

GRAFFITI

Every year, graffiti removal costs San Francisco $22 million. And it costs small businesses and families many millions more to paint-over graffiti or replace vandalized windows on their own properties. Most of the damage is done by “taggers” who come to San Francisco specifically to “bomb” streets in District 8.

Enhanced Prosecution of Graffiti Vandals. I support the District Attorney’s appointment of a specialized prosecutor who coordinates all graffiti prosecutions in the City as well as the office’s heightened sentencing and charging policies for graffiti cases to ensure more consequences for convicted taggers. Taggers need to know that the City won’t consider it “art” when they deface someone else’s property.

More Police Resources. I will support enhanced police resources dedicated to graffiti enforcement. The Police Department has a single graffiti expert who coordinates and tracks repeat graffiti vandals. More experts are needed. These experts can link together various cases throughout the City, using their knowledge of various “tags” to identify the vandal, then combining those cases together to bring before a jury. Building these cases takes time and attention, but will have a bigger impact on graffiti by taking the worst offenders off the street and sending the message that San Francisco is closed for business to “taggers.”

QUALITY OF LIFE AND SIT/LIE

Progressive Values and Quality of Life Crimes. I disagree with those who minimize the impact that quality of life crimes have on our community. In my view, it is neither compassionate nor progressive to ignore quality of life crimes or those who commit them. A truly progressive approach is one that honestly confronts the fact that there are people literally dying on our streets and in the doorways along 24th, Church or Castro Streets. It’s not a protest or a lifestyle; it’s often simply a cry for help. To make a difference, we need more meaningful, smarter enforcement of our laws coupled with an intervention that’s going to actually get people off the streets, not just for a few hours, but for good.

Community Policing. Meaningful enforcement starts, but doesn’t end, with more police officers walking the beat. I strongly support community policing—officers building relationships and solving problems on beats where they aim to become neighbors. Working together, an expanded team of beat officers can respond quickly and efficiently to complaints, sorting out chronic troublemakers from people who are looking for help.

Fully Fund The Home Team. An innovative, multi-disciplinary team of paramedics and police that responded directly to the streets to take troubled people immediately into treatment. They surround the most troubled folks with a continuity of care that addresses their core needs. Working closely with beat officers, who can identify people who are desperately in need of substance abuse or mental health, the Home Team can help ensure people are off the streets for more than a few hours and receive a meaningful intervention, not just a delay between stays on the street. We should have a Home Team unit dedicated to District 8.

Merchant Cameras. I will propose a city grant program for small business owners to equip their properties with crime cameras. In my experience, we have brought successful felony graffiti prosecutions based on crime camera footage maintained by merchants. Taggers aren’t subtle; they want credit for their “work.” I support giving them such credit before a jury – using video footage to ensure a conviction.

Sit/Lie. I have researched the issues surrounding “sit/lie” and studied its effect from other jurisdictions like Berkeley, Portland, and Seattle. I supported Care Not Cash as a welcome change to the existing system, and I have personally prosecuted aggressive panhandling cases and saw how this law did not have the intended effect. For me, the rub is in the details, and I’m not yet convinced “sit/lie” will have the desired effect – meaningful progress to our homeless population. I have advocated for, and will continue to advocate for, a Community Justice Center for the Haight, the Castro, and other hot spots. I am watching this issue with interest to see which model emerges from the City’s debate.

ORGANIZED NEIGHBORHOODS, SAFER NEIGHBORHOODS

Criminal cases that result in a conviction generally have a few things in common: the witnesses report the crime quickly, work closely with police, care deeply about their neighborhood, and build and keep relationships with their local police and others in their neighborhoods. Those are the hallmarks of an organized, active, alert neighborhood when it comes to crime, and that’s the type of neighborhood-level organization I want to foster and replicate in every neighborhood in District 8 and city-wide. For example:

Communities On Patrol and Patrol Specials. In Glen Park and other interested neighborhoods, we should establish a Community On Patrol, as has been successful in the Castro for a number of years. I’ll also work with and support merchants and neighbors who hire Patrol Special Police Officers to provide neighborhood policing to “beats” or clusters of city blocks, policing that supplements and supports the SFPD. Patrol Special Police are initially screened by the SFPD, then annually trained by the SFPD according to Police Chief standards. Their program is overseen by the San Francisco Police Commission which authorizes officers to be uniformed, armed, and on police radio frequencies. Officers get to know nearly everyone on their beat, attend community meetings, and work closely with SFPD foot patrol officers in neighborhoods they serve, as well as help the police department and other city agencies to find resolutions to everyday neighborhood safety concerns. They do so with professionalism and care toward all. I support their work, and I’ve seen firsthand that Patrol Special Police Officers help keep our community safe.

Community Courts. Community Courts are neighborhood-based “courts” where local residents can decide cases involving quality of life crimes that happen in their neighborhood and hold offenders directly accountable. These local, problem-solving courts should be expanded and strengthened. Community Courts hear lower-level misdemeanor offenses like vandalism, property damage, and public drunkenness. The panelists are trained local residents who use restorative justice principles to help the offender see what damage the offense caused, help the offender address any underlying issues that are driving their conduct, and make restitution to the victim.