issues subpoenas for documents. he actually is the hearing officer. he take care of the evidence, he holds the evidence. so i thought a parallel would be a little more well suit to that so they can work with the subpoenas, and also so the issues that come before us as a commission, sometimes we need legal research, and i thought it might give a parallel legal research on public policy or case law. we would have someone who would have that additional skifment i appreciate yailt a court clerk manage the docket, but i think a parallel can do that as well as well as do lel research for us. president marshall: and can lieutenant reilly be the die

breaker? -- the tie breaker? >> i would have to defer to my successor commissioner on this. commissioner hammer: you can't punt. >> it is true, in is a lot of scheduling and there is a lot of documents that have to go out, and notices to appear, and subpoenas have to be noticed under the authority of the commission rather than just my signature, which is what we used to do, but the city attorney adjusted that for us. that makes perfect sense and it actually is a much tighter process. but i think recording evidence, holding the evidence, and all that type of thing and maintaining each case file is something that probably a clerk, a court clerk would be much more experienced -- experience-wise would be better and able to handle a larger variety of

tasks. they necessarily would have some legal skills and abilities, but they seem to be enhanced, you know, with their -- the other side of that being a court clerk function. that's the way i would go. we do end up having to produce administrative words, we have to turn them over to superior court. we get requests for public documents, which, you know, it's not really in their relevant many, but it is something they could certainly help us do, and the commission does manage a tremendous amount of data. mr. harl -- hart will verify, we manage an awful lot of data and we store an awful lot of data and records, so we have to bring things out of storage. something like that would be tremendous help. president marshall: so which one of you --

>> the court clerk. commissioner lee: that just means we won't have someone that can't do legal research for us. commissioner hammer: do we need a motion? commissioner lee: my request is for a court clerk and after we signal who can participate in those interviews. commissioner dejesus: you should change it so that they understand they are reporting to a secretary of the commission which is all to the language. commissioner hammer: i would second the motion. >> commissioner i'll take this under advicement. we didn't make it an action item. president marshall: i'll bring it back as an action item. >> we can move ahead. >> we want to actually have h.r. put this up so we can put out politics.

>> we'll moslem -- we'll memorialize this on a future agenda. >> before we move off staffing, when are gewe getting lieutenant reilly's back-up so we can start the process of training someone and giving lieutenant reilly some back-up. i understand there is an answer to my question. >> we looked at several people. we had zugs with lieutenant reilly. i believe pluent -- i believe unite reilly is interested, and it is my understanding this process is completed. by the way, since we're on a trial basis, the commission can determine if they want this person or not. so we told this person it will be a 90-day or 60-day trial

basis. it is important it is a good fit, so you as a commission have to like the person, and frankly he has to like you, so we have also given him a way out. [laughing] >> i told lieutenant reilly i would buy him a pedestal one day because i think he is a savenlt but this swridge, quite frankly, is someone who is very skillful. we want to make sure we have someone very good. i'm not sure lieutenant reilly is fully replaceable, but i think welcome very close to it. commissioner hammer: thank you, chief. you told us there would be a -- an assistant to lieutenant reilly. i don't know if anyone knows this, he resigned a year and a half ago, and hope fle we can keep lieutenant reilly around much, much longer. he is a saint.

president marshall: public comment on item number four. the commission report. >> commissioners, i am director of san francisco open government. i provided my gizz business cards so you may have a copy as well as the director of o.c.c. and of course chief gascon. i would like to comment on the director's report saying there are 576 cases in and 544 out doesn't necessarily deal with the issue of aging. many of you are familiar with accounting terms, and unfortunately some of the cases put into the resolve column are cases that have languished in o.c.c. for nine nine months or a year. if you look athe more extensive report, you can see those are processed in the manner they are

handled with and the way the san francisco police, head of the san francisco police department, view sins citizens complaints and whether or not they believe they have juries dicks for certain cases or whether they should be allowed to investigate without impediment. four to five cases were found to be in some sort of violation. that is less than 8%. i would like to take that on its face and say that is a good reflection on the officers in the city and county of san francisco. however, i don't think simply saying that that number was resolved is anything. i was involved in one case like that myself back in 2007. i got to make a statement, and that was the last involvement i had in the process. i received a letter several months later simply telling me that my commitment was not sustained and i could appeal it but only if i could present information that was new to the inquiry. i side, well i don't know what

was presented in the inquiry. how can i present anything n.o.w. new? i was told, that's not our problem. it's confidential. so basically what i found is it was a meaningless exercise. the mediations are wonderful until you find out that if you agree to mediation, you surrender all furtherable to pursue the case. and sitting in the room where the report i mentioned earlier, the 2000 report, the o.c.c. board of services, indicated in many cases those mediations turned in to being fiascos. officers are nl scheduled to show up. they were at one time doing things, they had to be on duty, so if the officer was on the midnight to 8:00 shift that's when the investigator had to do the complaint. officers were not scheduled to show up. in some cases even showed up -- and i know they show up with their arms because they are required to, but they in some

cases threatened the investigators. so looking at these statistics,and looking at the documents provided by o.c.c., oh, it is not always clear exactly what is going on. [bell] president marshall: anymore public comment on item number 4? >> good evening, commissioners and chief. i want to comment on the dog unit. i am thrilled it is going to continue. i am thrilled you have taken the actions that you have. i wanted to mention one aspect i know of. sometimes there are vicious people as well. in this case, a few years ago, at upper douglas, three dogs died in quick succession.

all of them had gone to upper dog park. mine was the first. i went to the dog unit. i didn't know it was just the vicious dog unit. but i went to sergeant herndon and officer denny. they investigated it. they met with all the doge dog owners of the dogs that had died. they followed up with vets to find out what might be the likely causes of the dogs dying. they did investigations, and they helped to allay our fears that we had a poisoner in our dog park. so it isn't just thursday afternoons. it was very important. they did everything that they could to fine out what the problems were. it is not just the vicious dogs, but the work they have done with dogs in other contexts, and i hope that can continue with the

dog unit, because it truly is a community treasure and we respect it very greatly. thank you very much. is president marshall: next speaker please. >> good evening, commissioners. i want to thank you all for the dog court. it is a reflection of yet another progressive way of san francisco dealing with social issues. i want to thank the department for clearing up the miscommunication so quickly and so well. commissioner hammer mentioned sergeant herndon for accommodation -- for com men dation -- for commendation.

we can codify some of the resources he used for his position. i'm happy to hear sergeant hicks is also ined in ed conditional -- educational efforts. thank you very much. it is a pleasure to be at a public hearing with nothing negative to say. president marshall: steck around. -- stick around. [laughing] >> i would like to ask, first of all, one of the things i respected about sergeant herndon and officer denny is i didn't always agree with them, but i trusted them. they would be perhaps stricter than i would be, but i would trust what they were dealing with and i would trust what they decided.

i liked officer denny's awareness of the sub text in some situations. i work in the sheriff's department sometimes. and i also used to live in a neighborhood that was very old that had a lot of old families and a lot of crack. it turned out that the crack houses were also the old family houses. by started to see the crack was a social problem in our community. and one of the dogs in the area was a dangerous dog. and the family was eventually brought to vicious dog court. they didn't know how to deal with the things that needed to be done because the family was falling apart. but the dog being taken away from them ripped the family apart more. i would like to see some kind of social work aspect in some of these cases, because it goes far

beyond the dog. and i would like to tee the court named something beyond vicious dog court. something where people are not only educated, but they need some further resources on this item. president marshall: lieutenant, next item, please. >> item 5 is the election of commission officers. president marshall: we are back to this. i would ask -- we have a new commissioner coming on board in the next couple, two or three weeks, i hope. anyway, he's been nominated mple i would like ask we put this over until the new commissioner is on board. that's my suggestion. i don't know if i have a second, but that's my thought. commissioner dejesus: i'll second. commissioner hammer: i'll third.

>> the problem we have, they are on recess, and i don't know how long they are on recess. president marshall: i think the 5th. >> the 7th. commissioner dejesus: it could be 30 or 60 days, right sfl -- right? >> it should appear on the rules committee agenda. it has to go to rules first and then -- i don't see any indication it is on rules. >> middle of september? is that acceptable to everyone? i think we should make a decision. i don't know how long you want to put this over. president marshall: if it's not done by the 15th, we can bring it back. commissioner hammer: i would support your motion, with the suggestion that you pick a date.

president marshall: i would say the third week in september. that's the hearing meeting. i don't want to break a rule. commissioner hammer: i would support that commissioner marshall. >> as washington, d.c. preparing for that vote that will happen in a month or so, i want to put out there when what i am looking for quh i vote for a president of the commission, it is my wish list and i'll keep it very brief . someone who communicates well with the other commissioners to make sure that everyone is on board and gets information in real time as much as possible. second one is someone who does provide true stinch oversight.

so that person sometimes might disagree with the chief or agree, but that person does think with each issue what they want to do and what's best for the community and doesn't rubber stamp what the department does. the third i'm looking for is someone who makes the department and the commission as accessible as possible to the public and encourages public engagement public support. i spoke with someone recently, and he mentioned that a while ago when he would come to commission meetings it was usually full of members of the public and recently he doesn't see that many nebs of the public. -- that many members of the public. seduce >> commissioner dejesus: i do think that that is important.

that that information flows freely. i think we've been caught flat footed quite a bit this past year, and i don't know what the underlying reason is. i would echo that. president marshall: a motion. move to second it? commissioner hammer: on that note, the city attorney pointed out under the charter, the board must act within 60 days for the nomination, otherwise the pench is confirmed. and or the the mayor's nominee is confirmed. >> it is not to say he won't come on, it is just i don't want to keep delaying it. president marshall: third week. third week. >> we have a couple potential -- president marshall: when that hearing? >> 22nd.

president marshall: ok. 15th is fine. without objection. is there public comment? >> ray hart. san francisco open government director. i would like to put in my two cents as far as what i would like to see in the election of officers for this commission. i would like to see folks more interested in opening up not only the discussions that occur sometimes before this competition and timse sometimes in other venues, but opening up the police department los angeles police department and the police commission as far as the millions of dollars we spent every year doing reports and studies and things that get shuffled off and then lofert. i really do look at an old

expression, whether god shuts a door, he opens a window. i had an incident involving the san francisco police department in 2007. many of the experiences i was involved in left me with serious doubts, not about any of the san francisco police officers. the vast majority i have encountered have been honorable men and women who have a tough job and do their ultimate best to try to do that. however, i found the hierarchy of the police department and this police compligs, unfortunately, put the records that you keep and reports that you do beyond the reach of the average citizen. one of the things the sunshine ordinance task force clearly states is that it should be organized in such a to allow a person to research the requests and ask for specific documents.

in other words, i should be able to go in there and look. there have been a number of things i have tried to find and been unable to. the 2003 report from o.c.c. to the board of supervisors regarding the patterns of withholding information from occ investigators is something that interests me immensely but i was never able to find ute whether this commission actual -- out whether this commission took any action. so you can't find anything because there is no index of your documentation. there are cases i've also wanted to look in regarding the relationship between the san francisco police department and after can american members of san francisco's community. the reason is, i had the pleasure in 2008 of serving as field election deputy in the stench precincts in the -- in the seven precincts in the president obama election.

i noticed some things that occurred in that process that showed me that the african-american community has as a whole a negative opinion of the san francisco police department. one in particular, i was standing in a polling place, and a police officer walked in, and all the people in that room who were african-american simply tn turned and did not commence to vote until the officers were gone. president marshall: item 6. >> routine administrative business. back to item 6. routine administrate business. scheduling of items at future commission meetings. under commissioner announcements, i have the

assignment of disciplinary in case jwac-10. evidence to be determined by the commigger. similarly the assignment of disciplinary case jwac-10-187 for the taking of evidence on a date to be determined by the commissioner. commissioner, i did provide issues of the current document, so i have no specification recommendations but i'll leave that to your direction. president marshall: 6-a? it normally gets assigned. >> i'm wondering if we can reverse items a and b, if the

president will allow that, because under b i would like to address something pertaining to the assignment of cases. president marshall: ok. to make things easy, i will accept these two cases. let's make things easy and do it that way. >> commissioner, before we leave 6-a, i should announce the demigs will be holding a special election other than city hall, and that's next week on august 25th, next wednesday evening, the commissioner will hold its community meeting at the tende rloin, and we will hearp comments from neighborhood residents and businesspeople in

the area and also tender loin -- tenderloin station captain, joseph garritty. president marshall: a community meeting. it's been a while. >> 6-b, the scheduling of items identified for future commission meetings. president marshall: anybody? commissioner kingsley: there are two items. i think we're all -- it seems like we're in agreement in terms of discussing at another meeting the priority of addressing the issue that chief gas gone raised in connection with the parties and the private parties and the hole in the regular regulations

as to how to address outside of those clubs, how to keep the public safe. that's a priority we're going to want to discuss. another priority would be for us to discuss the backlog of disciplinary cases most efficiently. so i would propose or make a motion that we discuss these two priorities. at another meeting as soon as possible. commissioner hammer: i would second that. >> i would want clarity. we have been discussing a backlog. we put rules and procedures in place that shortened the hearings and stuff and we've also helped with these digests that will be delivered and we're getting them monthly. so i would like to know what you mean when you say -- >> i understand, commissioner. ix cues me -- excuse me, but i

haven't been part of the discussions. one of the thoughts i had in f in terms of want -- in terms of wanting to revisit it, we zil still do have quite a backlog of cases. it is routine, but this is a per view of the commission that we're responsible for in a very unique way. and that we might want to discuss it, and particularly with our new commissioner as well to see where we're going to go in terms of setting a priority. one thought, maybe we do more cases together as a whole. in addition to the individual cases. use some of our wednesday meetings to address cases. i understand the commission did that in the past. >> the third wednesday of the month will be a commission hearing. >> and i'm wondering if, you

know, i would like to hearing other folks address whether or not they would like to increase that number to maybe two or three or whatever. if we could engage in that dialogue. if we make a motion tonight whether we are going to discuss it. president marshall: we would put that down for further consideration and -- my thought about that is, really, i don't think anybody is leaving that son. woy suggest we do that. i don't want to do it again when the new person comes.

>> we also should set our priorities as a commission. i understand that annually the commission looks at its purpose and reformulates that, looks at its prortse at some point, -- priorities, at some point, objectives and goals. all of this should be discussed and voted on and priorities set. in the meanwhile, commissioners, we don't know exactly when that will be. we can go ahead and this is the