facilitator. i am looking into seeing if we have any money to do that. i actually put in a couple e-mails to good facilitators i knew to see if they are available. if you now know of a good facilitator, we don't have much time, so please see if you know somebody. or we could nominate one or two commissioners to facilitate the entire thing. and if you have any other creative options, go for it. she's a good person. president marshall: i guess the question is, how do we feel about that? the down side of having one of us or all of us rotate, designate, or facilitate when you are in a duel role, and when you are in a duel role, that is only one -- that is the only one that talks. ideally i think an outside

facilitator would be good. the issues there are comp, i haven't approached -- i haven't broached that subject with anyone yet. i asked if he knows someone who is a good facilitator, and he said the amount of money i would need to be involved in to come up with the issues, the landscape of the commission and the department, is probably too much. so i guess we should probably find one a little bit familiar with the commission. then, of course, cost. so i take it, the option, the most desired option would be an outside facilitator, or am i presuming too much here? commissioner dejesus: that would be my preference would be to have an outside facilitator, and that that outside facilitator,

if he or she isn't familiar with police enforcement, peace enforcement, the police department and so on, that they pay particular attention to individual interviews of each commissioner and understand the agenda and what we all want, you know, from the retreat. that they be complitted -- committed to that time. because i think it will be a tall order to find somebody that comes with the background that might be ideal on this. president marshall: and that could be a taught order. commissioner chan: we have 2 1/2 weeks. i already got one "no" from

someone who i thought was very good. so if we cannot get the facilitate -- facilitator, we could have a rotating facilitator, and that worked really well. commissioner dejesus: maybe we can talk to the department with a facilitator. commissioner kingsley wlon: what kind of practices do we need? the other question is, if we find someone, if there are retired judges on the list of outside hearing officers, one thought is there might be one of our outside hearing officers that might be competent as a facilitator and familiar with our work, and if we hired them to do the retreat, could we take it out of the budget? are there some options there?

ä are there some options there? commissioner hammer: we're not working during lunch. we get lunch off. president marshall: a half-hour lunch. all right. i'm sorry. commissioner kingsley: because the question is around what process to hire a consultant. is there anything tying our hands or processes we need to know about? commissioner chan: you might want to find someone who would do it pro bont want to find someone who would do it pro bono as a gift to the city. [laughing] commissioner chan: those are great ideas, actually, and i think we just need to talk to

the department. commissioner kingsley: ok, that's fine. commissioner chan: in terms of taking notes, we are hoping lieutenant reilly will be present that day to help us with note-taking. >> it would have to be conducted as a regular commission meeting, so we need to be recorded. commissioner chan: and someone has to be there. commissioner kingsley: we had anticipated that that would be with all meetings, but i think what we have in mind here is specifically when you are brainstorming, somebody that can tumly -- actually write it up on poster board. commissioner chan: i think a facilitator can do that. commissioner kingsley: it can, but if it is us, then it is this

duel thing of thinking through your own thoughts and writing it all down. that's why we're opening it up, so we can prepare for that early on. but shouldn't we resolve the lunch, mr. president? mr. ppt, should -- mr. president, should we resolve the lunch with regard to the time of day and what we're going to do if we are going to work through it? commissioner chan: i had a suggestion for lunch, i don't have a suggestion when to start, but in terms of lunch, we could see where we are at 12:30, we can see if we want to work through lunch or not. president marshall: we can sit there and eat. but we can take a break. we can make a decision then. let's make it now. commissioner kingsley: do we have volunteers for the nunteers for the note-taking. >> you are not going to need to

have time on your agenda. the time is probably more for your internal purposes and planning this out, and you could take a break at any time during your commission meeting, so you could have some fluidity around that. commissioner chan: is starting at 10:00 ok with everybody? is that ok? and ending at 4:15? ok. any other changes? i think the only other thought i didn't include on here is that we tabled a number of matters for the retreat, and so that's not necessarily designated on here. when we talk about priorities, we might want to talk about smeeze, et cetera -- subcommittees.

president marshall: lieutenant, can you tell them where we will be meeting? >> the conference center at embark dare owe 4. -- embarcadero 4. we will have that information all published. >> lieutenant, would you be the person that would inform mr. slaughter about this? commissioner chan: thank you for getting this location. it is a much nicer one than our previous one. commissioner kingsley: are you going -- the question is whether or not we have a need for a closed session. we did have that as our last question here. >> i would scug suggest that, just in case we want to go into more detail, we could have it in

there or noticed. >> if you are covering process, i don't know that there would be a ground for a closed session. you would have to know which one you wanted to talk about and agendize it with specific notice. >> i would think you would have to update the priority. that's what i was talking about. what i was thinking about, last week we talked about who where we -- about where we are with the calendar. we have a new commissioner who i want to reassign some cases at that time, so i would suggest we have a closed session. if we don't have it, we just don't go there. president marshall: you want to have it at the retreat? we can do that at a regular meeting. commissioner dejesus: why? president marshall: i thought the intent was not to do stuff we can do at a regular meeting. commissioner chan: i'm wondering for number 6, communication with

the commeef and -- with the chief and director hicks, does that fit under the personnel description for you? >> it is hard to know from this description. if you evaluating, they are communications with the commission. you might be able to put that in under the personnel evaluation. you may be able to limit the discussion and keep it within the scope of the closed session. you obviously have a separate item for both the o.c.c. director and the chief. commissioner kingsley: maybe we should talk about whether we need a closed session or not? commissioner chan: not the agenda has to be ready, just the notice of the meeting. >> the agenda is still subject. president marshall: thank you.

thank you lieutenant. anything further? job well done. president marshall: i know what i'm doing. i'm did kidding. i'm kidding. so then we will take public commentcommen. so then we will take public comment. commissioner hammer: today ms. blitz wrote back that things

look fine in terms of ideas. i would like tomorrow for lieutenant reilly to distribute them to all the commissioners. essentially they tighten up some of the timelines with some of the problems of cases being assigned. you will notice in there it has a mechanism built in, that if -- very briefly, right now, if someone says they want a hearing officer notice, it goes out and floats for a period of time. what i'm proposing is that the commitment by the officer to go to a hearing officer actually happens within 14 days rather than seven when you have a detailed selection of who the hearing officer is and the date. it is a built-in mechanism so that if it breaks down, the commission secretary can give it back to us at the next meeting, as happens in other cases, so we can be on top of it. i also want to state that i think it was commissioner chan's idea. so someone is bird-dogging the

case and following it. i would like to submit that tomorrow. if you have other yts i suggest we put it on next week's agenda just briefly. my idea is, commissioner marshall, that ms. blitz advises, that we just need to get the ball rolling. all it would be is it has other ideas, it is a document we meet and confer with. and this could take a long time. my suggestion is on briefly for not an actual discussion item next week, that we as a group can say we want to go forward on this. i would be happy to work with another commissioner or two if you wish, and hopefully in a month or so, we could adopt these sheets. that's my hope. president marshall: next week is the -- sorry. next week is our designated discipline.

we tried to keep that clean. i would say if we do that, mr. johnson, if you are listening, we will try to put that at the end. >> do you want to have a longer discussion, put it on 9-29. do you want to do that? we can have a longer discussion. commissioner hammer: i think that's a great idea. i will have lieutenant reilly send out the draft. i welcome any other ideas. perhaps the 29th as a group we could schedule a meet and confer and try to adopt these. how does that sound? president marshall: my only issue is the disciplinary. commissioner hammer: we should make them wait. i frankly think it will be a brief discussion, but if you folks want to do it on the 29th, that's fine as well. >> under commission comments, i would like to thank the members of the police department, especially liane corrales attended by commissioners on

sunday. it was well attended by the police department and frd fire department -- and fire department. i would like to thank the commissioners of the community that attended, that being supervisors dufty, chiu, chu, and city commissioner herrera were all present. i would like to thank them. i would like to thank those that put the mass together. it was non-denominational. we had a rabbi give an incredible prayer. it was in a catholic church, but as a police department we are a family, and the loss of many retired families we lost this year and active duty officers we lost this year, so i would like to thank everyone who put that together. it was a job well done. president marshall: i don't want to leave commissioner ha president marshall: i don't want to leave commissioner hammer hanging here. so that would be a discussion item? commissioner hammer: yes.

and any other ideas people have, we incorporate them, and then we meet and confer. president marshall: we would be adopting it? commissioner hammer: just enough to meet and confer. vice president mazzucco: i left out that former commission president theresa sparks was there in her role with the human rights commission, and she sat there front and center, so i would like to thank her, too. president marshall: anything further? then we'll take public comment. any public comment? none. thank you. item number 4, please. >> item four, mr. president, is a discussion and possible action to request for the board of supervisors' approval and acceptance of two automobiles --

donations to the department, and that is two automobiles from k.k.i. productions, a 2007 honda accord and a 2008 toyota corolla to the police department. the first vehicle is valued at $15,667.34, and the second is valued at 15,667. -- 15,571.44 and $15,667.86. commissioner dejesus: i accept the gifts. president marshall: without objection, so ordered. >> so because the total value here, the matter has to go to

the full board, so the commission will be recommending this to the full board. president marshall: ok. thank you. public comment on this item? you have a program, take your time. j >> commissioners, i would be glad to facilitate your retreat. we would clear up so many cases, the chief would have much more time on his hands to do whatever he wants to do. [laughing] >> i have been here complaining previously, that my items are supposed to be first. commissioner dejesus: third wednesday of the month you get priority. >> seriously we have the attorneys here, we have the officers here, but i think it would be important to put those items ahead. commissioner hammer: i'm relatively knew at this, but

that people are paying lawyers and stuff? president marshall: we can discuss that at our retreat. commissioner hammer: when you facilitate it, mr. johnson. you have to volunteer to facilitate it. president marshall: any other further public comment? then item 5, please. >> item 5 is presentation of the department's bi-monthly report regarding the audit of the secure communities program under commission resolution 73-10.

>> good evening, members of the commission, o.c.c. director hicks, members of the audit. my name is gordon brusso. i'm the i.d. manager for the plud police department. as you know, this is the second report on on a secured commuents audit, and the first report covers only three weeks, for the month of june. this report is going to be covering two separate four-week periods for -- of data for july and august of 2010. the slides that i'm going to present here address the police commission resolution 7310, and i have labeled each slide

according to the resolution number that it matches, and there is some sub sections -- subsections of those. i have also identified the july 5's with an orange background, and the august slides as a green background. so you have an intwotive process for identifying the slides. these matches, so i'm clear, these are matches where we have been notified by homeland security that there was a match. it doesn't necessarily mean any action was done. so the match -- that's what the word "match" means. it is just the fact that this was a match that came back to the i.d. bureau.

and the total number for the month of july were 2,145, and the number of matches was 137. we love these along -- we lump these with all the other information that comes back from the f.b.i. and the state in a log sheet that our i.d. text, make sure that they have this tract information for be able to pull up information in the future. the next slide is august for 2,339 live scans, and each livescan represents a transaction from the sheriff or one of the other law enforcement jurisdictions, like the juvenile hall or juvenile detension facilities as well as the parks. so these come from different sources. not all the men's jail or the

jail. even as you look over the june, it is a selective percentage. it shows an aggregate amount. level 1, level 2, and level 3. keep in mind these are not san francisco penal codes or charges. we went through those matches and determined which charges would fit through those catagories based on a list that ncic provides as different sections.

ok. you're on the last slide there. this slide shows the level 3 reporting. one of the questions that came up in june was a charge -- charge 8525 one u.s. code. nobody knew what it was. i'm still not real certain, but it has to do with the rebookings when someone is already detained on another type of a charge and it needs to be added. this charge needs to be added. they relive scan it. so we identified it almost as a duplicate booking. commissioner dejesus: i am looking at numbers 1 and 2, but are there numbers attached?

>> you will see the numbers attached here in a moment that shows the quantities. this just shows the aggregate charges so you knew which kind of charges were being evaluated for each type. commissioner dejesus: ok, thank you. >> so oftentimes those are added in scent -- subsequent charges that made our numbers look larger. seduce and with the -- and with the -- commissioner dejesus: and with the rebookings. >> that's right. that response comes back to us. additional warrants are found and additional charges are added. oftentimes, what will happen is the person tells us who they are or tells the jail who they are,

we process them. once the fingerprints hit the state and the feds, the response comes back with an f.b.i. number and a c.i.i. number, and then the i.d. tags take the added step of running those for warrants based on the f.b.i. number rather than based on the name. in the month of july we had 75 new warrants. these were warrants that were not snone known. we also had 173 confirmed warrants. then more warrants confirmed for the month of august. an example of these were murder suspects or sex offenders or other charges that were added to this as the subsequent. and so that's -- i want to make sure you understood that those

charges are added. commissioner dejesus: which slide are you on? are you on level three, the aggregate charges? >> those numbers are just in my notes. sorry. i can display those, too. commissioner dejesus: that's fine. that's fine. >> i was more explaining where those warrants are coming from and where the additional charges for the rebookings happened. commissioner dejesus: no problem. >> next slide, this is for number 2, aggregate for 2, and 3, these are the numbers you are asking for. for the month of july, there are 76. 76, 63, and 10. i know the numbers of interest are of the level 3.

of the level 3s, if you total those two months, there were a total of 19 charges there. of those, there was some additional research done on there, because we wanted to know what those numbers were, and there were 15 of those 19 had felony convictions outside of san francisco. and 11-19 of those arrests also had arrests in other states. so those lefrl 3 convictions -- those level 3 con vicks -- convictions may have had other kinds of arrests. commissioner dejesus: were they misdemeanor misdemeanors? were they felonies as well? >> they were felonies as well.

let's go to the slides mple the agriculture gates were -- the aggregates were sorted. this is based on each livescan as it comes across. i'll let you read the numbers. i'll trip over myself if i keep reading these numbers. commissioner chan: i think it is self-explanatory. for muslims, arabs, and south asians, where do they fit within the racial catagories? >> that's a good question. it doesn't identify those, because with the livescan that we come across, that information isn't gathered. were so it doesn't necessarily show you what their religion is. >> would they booked under "other"? >> what are they normally booked