Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Dna Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors accept amendments to DNA database ordinance after DA disclosure; amendments approved unanimously
Summary
Supervisor Ronan introduced an ordinance to restrict storage and use of victim DNA profiles in non-CODIS databases. Amendments narrowing scope and clarifying retention and purge requirements were accepted unanimously.
The Board considered legislation (Item 17) that would amend the Administrative Code to prohibit the San Francisco Police Department and other city departments from uploading or storing victim DNA profiles in non‑CODIS DNA databases for investigative use and to limit retention of evidentiary DNA profiles in non‑CODIS databases to no longer than 60 days.
Supervisor Ronan said the ordinance was prompted by a District Attorney disclosure that a victim's DNA profile from a sexual-assault evidence kit submitted six years earlier had been used in an unrelated investigation in a way that identified the victim as a suspect. Ronan introduced amendments, which she described as narrowing the ordinance’s scope to better define “victim reference DNA profiles” and “victim evidentiary profiles,” and to ensure use of non‑CODIS databases would be restricted to quality‑assurance and contamination‑check purposes only.
Ronan moved the amendments; the motion was seconded by Supervisor Peskin. The board approved the amendments unanimously in roll-call (10 ayes). The clerk announced the amendments were accepted without objection.
The ordinance text recorded in the meeting includes several operational requirements: by July 1, 2022, or within 15 days after the ordinance’s effective date, the Police Department would be required to purge from non‑CODIS DNA databases any evidentiary DNA profiles stored for longer than 60 days, and to limit use of non‑CODIS databases to quality‑assurance purposes only. The measure also would require the Controller to submit an audit report regarding non‑CODIS databases and would require public posting of the Police Department’s policies on city websites. The transcript does not record a final, adoption vote on the ordinance after the amendments.
Supervisor Ronan thanked staff and the Crime Lab staff for collaboration and named the District Attorney, Chesa Boudin, for bringing the issue to the board’s attention. Members of the board accepted the amendments and no recorded opposition to the amendments appeared in the transcript.
The transcript does not specify the date for the Controller’s audit report or additional enforcement details beyond the purge requirement and the 60‑day retention limit described on the record.
