town and took him to reno. it was like a kidnapping. obviously emotions are high. so considering all that and having a fair hearing and keeping our communities safe from vicious animals. i think we learned a lot from sitting down with all the animal community, the animal care and control, and the police department, and we already had these communications, but we reached another level we're we're going to make it a et better unit than it already is. >> i do agree. i have been to the dog court. the emotions run high on both sides. i think both officers are good in terms of keeping it balanced, and keeping it -- you know, keeping the emotion down. >> i learned that the department of public health used to do the hearings, but it was so threatening, they were making death threats against the individuals, that's how the officers originally got involved

in the unit for a safe situation for all parties involved. commissioner dejesus: i am glad they are bringing patrol officers in, because depending on what sfation station you are in, the response will be different. so if we have a uniform training, hopefully we will have the uniformed response. thank -- welcome aboard. >> they will do great things. commissioner dejesus: thank you. president marshall: commissioner mazzucco. vice president mazzucco: i have one question. every time i see director katz on tv, i am on my way down to see the dogs in the shelter, and i get stopped by my wife. how is this process stopped?

all kidding aside. how does the process work? we have a heavy agenda tonight, but i think it is important. how does it work? i see a dangerous dog in the park? >> my job is to collect all the police reports from all the district stations, collect them from the hospitals, doctors that treat dog bye bites. they are mandated to take a report. it goes to animal control, and i take all of those. if you are walking in the park and you have an incident, and it is in progress, i urge you to dial 911. there is a handful of animal care and control officers in the city, and their response time. what we are doing with this new general order is giving the officers more direction on what they can and cannot do. when to impount pound, when to admonish, when to site. when does this dog need to be taken away? is it going to present an ongoing danger to the community? so the basic could have in any

event is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. hopefully the officers will make a report. i'll collect it. then i call the victim, ask, well what happened? then i talk to the dog owner sfl he can't believe how different -- owner. he can't believe how different one incident happens on either side. i con fact any winds, or they have dog rap sheets. animal care and control keeps an extensive list of all the animals they have come in contact w i look for a previous history. i gather a packet, and i look for the vicious and dangerous dog system. if it is a neighbor-neighbor problem and i can knock on the door and i can get two reasonable people to agree to disagree, but to act civilly and behavior modification of the dog, maybe it is a barking dog issue, or maybe it is one neighbor parking in one neighbor's driveway and they

want to use the dog as an excuse to get back at them. all these things happen. eventually threes things may end up at vicious and dangerous dog court. the reason i don't hear cases is because i'm doing the investigation, and officer hicks will be the hearing officer. there is a little separation there. it would be like getting a speeding ticket from a traffic cop and going to court to protest it and the court that wrote you the ticket wants to know what the problem is. it seems an obvious thing, but we try to keep a separation with that. so we go through the vicious and dangerous dog process. the victim will say, this is what happened. the dog owner will say, this is what happened. we listen to all the winds and victims. we look at the prior history, and that's when officer licks really feels that -- officer hicks really feels she's on the hotseat. last week she went through her first two hearings. there is no more uncomfortable

place to be. i'm sure every hearing officer remembers their first case. but she held herself very well. i think we are in good hands here. >> great. thank you very much. i appreciate hearing plore about the entire process. thank you everybody. i appreciate it. >> thank you, ms. katz. i think this is often taking a bad situation and having a good outcome.

thank you. that concludes my report. >> good evening, president marshall and members of the commission. as of today we opened 576 cases and we have closed 34 more cases than we closed. during the same period last year we opened 650 cases and closed 651. this is an 11% decrease in cases opened during the same period last year. as of today, we have 4123 pending cases. -- we have 413 pending cases. today the o.c.c. has sustained 35 cases. in 2009, we sustained 30 cases. this is a 50% increase in

sustained cases. moving quickly to mediation, as of today, the occ has facilitated 31 complaints this year compared to 53 by the end of last year. mediations are looking up. in july the o.c.c. mediated eight cases. so far in august, we have mediated 6 cases. that concludes my report. president marshall: anything for the director? ok. a couple weeks ago, we did a press conference on the new ambassador's program. let me give a little context to the folks about this. the recent violence in the --

there were two incidents in the bay view that brought all this about. the first was the killing of a chinese elder earlier this year in the bay view, and the second was the -- a woman was quickly thrown off the t line and it caused con center nation in the chinese -- consternation in the chinese community and the black community also. i was thrust into the middle of it for a number of reasons. folks asked me to be involved in it. vincent pan was in there with me, and we put forth some ideas to certainly not make things worse but hopefully make things better. one of the ideas was an ambassador program.

if people are going homes, going to senior citizens home, could we get a group of multiracial, multilingual, and i like the term "ambassadors" to be sort of he is courts. -- escourts. it was a great idea, but we don't have any money. it is a great idea, but we don't have fruition. i think a lot of the time. through the hard work of a number of folks, we were able to procure some money from the city. it was two weeks ago now that program went into action. a very nice press conference in the bay view. i think 12 ambassadors and on the t line and on the -- i guess it was the san bruno line.

i don't know exactly when they do it, but i know it is during peak commuting hours. we made the point, they are not police. it is the community helping the community. it is really -- it really was a great idea. we were able to put it together. it turns out i knew some of the ambassadors. i gave them my card and said if they had any problems, call me. i don't know what you've heard, and maybe at some point, i would like to get them in here at the right time, but it is a pilot program, and they are doing a study. a lot of nem -- them were former census workers. so it was easy for them to make the transig. they had been doing work in the community. it is a program that is going to

help the community. >> so far all the reports are very positive p p it was community members that brought the idea together. it was community members that identified funding sources. it is community members continuing to look for funding sources that will sustain this over a long period of time. a great deal of credit goes to the mayor's office and mr. ed lee as well as the board of supervisors, president chuy, to work -- president chiu, to work together on this. frankly, i believe that this is a model program that i would like to see continue to evolve with the city.

the police department is in a support role. this is not a police department problem, but we are supportive of it. we provided training for this ambassador, so that they knew how to contact the police and how to be of help. employment opportunities for people that would otherwise be unemployed right now. so it is a win-win. there are several corporate citizens that want to continue to help this, i believe. a developer has already moved forward to put funding toward this effort. again, i can't say enough about it. hopefully the commission can help also, be on the bully pull pit to get the funding. it is not necessarily coming from the general fund. we know there is money there, but i think this is the public

safety bread and butter issues that i think the community could get their arms around it and maybe identify that and contain that in this current situation and take it to other communities. i'm glad you raised this. all the early quagse indications are -- all the early indications are good. the feedback has also been very good so far. president marshall: we'll keep our eye on it. commissioner hammer. commissioner hammer: thank you. i want to apprise my fellow commissioners of an unusual development. i'm presiding over -- over a disciplinary session where the officer was in a closed session and now it is open and the media is broadcasting parts of t i don't want the commission to be surprised of it. officer hurley is the officer, and she has publicly raised her

right to a closed hearing. so that is proceeding. >> the other issue, so you're aware of it, so no one is surprised by it. there are complicated issues in that it is a public hearing. some officers will be calling -- called as officers who don't want their names broadcast. i have issued several protective orders today. one of the defense lawyers uttered the name of an officer who may be the subject of disciplinary hearings. so his attorney will be addressing the proceeding tomorrow. again, an unusual case. president marshall: ok. the next issue.

commissioner hammer: i just have a couple issues when you are done. commissioner reilly, can you help us out in terms of which of these matters might have hearing officers. i know there is one, but i think there is more. >> commissioner, you should have an overall case dock et. >> i see that. >> if you look at the last page, second page, the last group of cases, you can see -- commissioner hammer: five officers grouped and a sergeant below that? >> correct. >> right now i have three cases assigned a hearing officer. one ever those is concluded. two are set to begin. actually, four cases assigned to hearing officers.

one is yet to be set. it was the chosen hearing officer is out of town. we're trying to communicate with him. >> if i -- commissioner hammer: if i could follow up. the first was concluded with the hearing officer, and this one is set for october 1? >> that's correct. >> the next one, when was that assigned? i notice there is not a hearing date yet, if you know. >> i don't have that date in front of me here. >> if it is the next meeting, lieutenant, and fellow commissioners, i think one of the things we need to track is sometimes these cases get lost once they get assigned a hearing officer. i'm going to propose commissioner mazzucco had an idea, commissioner chan had an idea, commissioner kingsley had an idea how to modify our rules a little bit to keep some attention on these hearings. is that the only one not assigned a date?

>> that, and we have a hearing officer -- we haven't fixed the date on another case, because the selected hearing officer has been out of town, and we have been trying to communicate with him. but we do have those three with dates and two without dates. >> i would ask, perhaps, maybe the first meeting in september, if the lieutenant could highlight the two hearing officer days so we can keep a group eye on those so they can move along. commissioner hammer: that's all i had, commissioner marshall. president marshall: anything else? all right. the next issue is commission office staffing. commissioner kingsley: i will

explain. commissioner dejesus and i talked with the offices and they gave us an additional arm for commissioner reilly who has worked hard on our docket of cases. basically, weigh want you to review these options and vote on which one you prefer. so for the legal assistance option, and of course, you can vote for neither of them, but this is the proposal here. for the legal assistant, the salary is about the same as the court clerk, so the salary doesn't make much of a difference. the experience this person would have is they have parallel studies, the associates degree, with six months work in a legal setting. their skill they generally have, or tracking system for adjusting claims, cornedse and communicates with attorneys, they analyze depositions, and briefs, affidavits, they conduct legal research, they help with legal research and staff and legislation. that's the qualification for legal assistant.

question? president marshall: you can keep reading, but i just want the recommendation. >> oh, ok! commissioner hammer: me, too. >> the court clerk, it will they have high school diploma, four years clerical experience, and one year doing legal or court work. they are experienced with court appearances, court calendars, getting a court reporter, and they understand legal time limits, preparing documents for judge's signatures and a variety of legal paperwork and hearing dates. so for me, and commissioner dejesus can share her thoughts on this, i prefer a court clerk because it seems like that's what we need, someone who can

set the calendar and guide our cases and all the work lieutenant reilly works so hard on. it is managing the docket and putting out these tables that we have, making sure our hearings are staffed, and that would allow lieutenant reilly or the future lieutenant to focus on the office work and all the commission meeting work. i would prefer a court clerk. commissioner dejesus: and as you said, we would prefer a court clerk. what we do need is we need someone who will work under the secretary of the commissioner. it will be basically his agreement. he issues subpoenas, he issues subpoenas for people to come, 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