mr. hammer? >> that's fine. i'll be brief. the chief is going to give his report coming up and i have questions to follow up on some members the community have asked about. it's not news in san francisco that our streets have many folks suffering mental illness. we all run into it every day. many of those folks are so disturbed they get involved in violent confrontations. the question is how do we keep our police officers safe and the people from being killed? i think we can do better. we owe to to all those in the city of san francisco and those suffering mental illness that they don't end up hurt or dead

because it's been happening too much. 's the thing i'll be mentioning to the chief and someone mentioned is why mental health training partnership was canceled. i don't know the answer to that. perhaps there's a good answer. whatever happened we need to quickly move back, in my opinion, to restoring the best training in the country. i know the department has been working on that. mr. opinion, mazzucco and i man to quickly act on that. some of our officers are in memphis, coming back tomorrow studying a model they have there for crisis model teams. not every confrontation allows a team to come in but there are some who could, a barricaded suspect, i know one of the options they are looking at is bringing in new techniques in san francisco so we have the best possibility to save lives. there will be more questions when the chief speaks but we hear folks loud and clear, it's

all of our problem and when someone suffers mental illness, we owe it to them to do everything we can to keep them safe as well. >> i've worked in mental the past two years. i was helped by the one client. and i just love that. [inaudible]

>> at a safe distance and there could be signals to intervene once nonviolent escalation by psych tech failed. how much community input will you get before or after the 20th. because we are studying a task force with the public defender's office, with the homeless coalition and the mental health association and doing our own groundwork right now in terms of sensitive intervention when it comes to 5150's. so what will be the venues of communication pre or post process before or after the 20th between the commission and the public? >> again, we've gotten a little far straight. what we will do is have a meeting and then a public

hearing regarding this issue. we'll hear from mental health professionals and hear from the officers, what they have to deal with on the streets. it will be a full blown public hearing. the first step is for the 20th for our meeting to discuss this issue. again, it's very important issue that affects the officers and the public. there's a lot of answers we need. >> that was exactly what i was going to say. community input is important and there are a lot of mental health experts in the community and folks who have relatives, family members and friends who have challenges they deal with and we have to take in the input. it's just an initial meeting. [inaudible] >> one moment. and we will also be meeting with the o.c.c. next week and we will go through o.c.c.'s recommendations that they gave last year, i believe, regarding mental health and there are a lot of to-do's and we have very well informed recommendations and will report back to the commission and certainly we

need to schedule a time to devote our attention to this because we're going to jump right into our retreat. i remember during our retreat, we voted as to our priorities, mental health was number one. >> we with talk a little bit offline. but they're going to meet as a committee but then there will be a public meeting. i heard some dates thrown around. we are going to talk about a date and how we're going to have that public hearing and people are going to be able to speak with the department. so that's important to me. >> thank you. we move now to line item number four, please. >> item number four is reports to the commission. item 4-a is the chief's report, a review of recent activities. >> good evening, chief, how are you? >> i'm good, sir, how are you? >> good. >> good evening, president mazzucco, director hicks and the director of the police commission. i'm going to give you a report ending january 8, 2011.

this is only for eight days of 2011. violent crime, we're down 8%, 137 violent crimes versus 149. property crimes were down 42% and property crimes 410 versus 703 of last year and total crime, we're down 36% which is 547 part 1 crimes versus the 852 last year. again, these are only for the first eight days of 2011 and the percentages, like i said, are 3642 and that seems to be extremely low but we're using small numbers here. the raw numbers that are more of a concern to me. we've had four homicides this year compared to two last year. property crimes down 18% to burglary and 18% to auto theft, 49% of burglary heft and personal auto theft down 41%. that's my report as far as statistics. >> thank you, chief. any questions for the chief regarding statistics or any questions regarding the police

report. commissioner hammer? >> thank you. i'm not here to put you on the spot but it's an important question, our role is oversight. we had hearings march of last year ago regarding mental health training. i remember distinctly chief de bach giving a speech on c.i.t. what stood out was our officers reported it was very valuable to them and they themselves, say it's boring and not useful but i recall it's something like 70% or 80% approval and satisfaction by the officers who took it. and then i read a week or two ago, i think it's been canceled and perhaps it's not correct but i want to know if you can explain, if you don't know, we can do it next week but what is the status and why was it canceled? 's >> it was never canceled. there was federal funding that ran out. the class was a 40-hour class put on at the presido and

because of the funding we moved the class to the police academy and we're going to continue the class in february. we've had about 800 officers that have gone through the training but the class was never canceled and as what was quoted in the paper, we just ran out of the federal funding. then assistant chief schmidt in the audience who is now the operational chief can comment more on when the class will start. there were more logistic issues, if you would like. >> i think i would. in people's minds when you have three or four shootings like this, it's an incredibly important issue for officers. good evening, chief. and the other related question i have, again, i could have my numbers wrong but my memory is when chief debach gave this lengthy report, maybe i'm wrong, something like half our officers at that point had don't the training and there was a speeded up schedule to get more of them through but now i hear only 800 or so have gotten it. so it sounds maybe it wasn't speeded up.

>> ok. i have to apologize because i didn't hear chief debach's report so i can't comment on specifics on that. pcit, police crisis intervention training is training we've had in the department for a number of years. i myself attended it. it was excellent training. the funding source disappeared but it was a priority for the chief that we continue training in that area and the training division worked very closely then, officer kelly and now inspector kelly dunn working with our mental health advocates to identify what were the extremely positive, as you say, by the perception of not just the officers that went through it but by our mental health advocate partners, what were the positive aspects and what's the necessary training, how can we get that training presented in-house? so a lot of work has gone into that. there is now a 24-hour course developed, which, you know, we're scheduled to begin

presenting in february. certainly we can discuss the specifics of that more in depth. i can provide for you what the curriculum is but i don't have that with me here today. >> that's fine. i'm not here to put you on the spot. people have asked about it and why we have public comment and why we're a commission. do you have any idea, chief, maybe we can do it next week but how many officers have gone through that 40-hour training? >> i'd be more comfortable giving those facts if i -- >> could we do that next week briefly through the report so people can hear -- i don't want a lengthy hearing but so people know what's happened and what's coming up. of course after the subcommittee meets there will be a bigger one. i remember something like half the department had got tennessee and i thought there was a plan to sort of double the pace of it because again, it sounds so darn important, i think chief sawyer told me one person every hour is 5150ed in

san francisco and that means involuntarily confined because their illnesses are so great they're of physical danger to themselves or someone else. one an hour in san francisco. that's an extraordinary number. so i think it would be very helpful to hear the facts so we won't be mystified or focus on the press release as to what to do. >> we can get that for you next week. >> commissioner chance? ? >> we touched on some of the questions. we heard for quite a while that half the department have had the training but they're trying to get the other half in. i want to know when. when are we going to have the other half in? what is the plan to get the other half in for training? i have to say the video was playing over and over and didn't see any mental health fact particulars being utilized and just heard shouting and the guns being pointed and being shot. and you know, i'm just wondering with that many officers, how many of those officers are trained in the mnl health area and it's a question

we keep asking and before you go to tasers, you better talk about the mental health training and the mental health units rather than trying to say we have to tase mentally ill people in the streets. it's an issue for me. >> commissioner chance? >> i wanted to ask and thank you for answering these questions. i heard through some folks who worked in this area the hours were cut down 48 hours to eight hours of training for officers, is that correct? at one point there was 40-hour training we keep discussing, it was cut down, it wasn't like there's no training, right, there's some amount of training, what amount has been given since it's been cut down? >> since the new proposed training, it's a 24-hour curriculum. >> between the time the training was cut, the 40-hour training was cut due to the funding and now, how many hours have the trained officers received? >> i think probably the best answer to that question would be for me to come with a full report next week. >> ok. thank you.

>> it would be most helpful to the public and yourselves. >> further questions for the chief regarding this report? >> thanks very much, chief. >> we'll have public comment after we go through the rest of the reports. i apologize. line item 4-b. >> item 4-b is the o.c.c. director's report and review of recent activities. >> good evening, director hicks. how are you? >> fine, thank you. members of the commission. members of the audience, the o.c.c. has no recent activings -- no recent activities to direct. >> please call line item 4-c. >> are the commission reports, the commission president's report and the commission reports. >> thank you, lieutenant. obviously i reported on what i needed to report on for the commission president's report. any other commissioner's have a report they'd like to make? hearing none, let's go on to status report regarding commission priority list. and obviously we addressed the priority list last week and our

priority list has, as usual, been reshuffled again by some dynamic change. so any matters the commissioners would like to fit into our busy schedule with disciplinary hearings and resolutions and selection of a police chief and all the other matters, the department of general order regarding shooting of vehicles, the reintroduction of the potential of the use of instrumenting the use of tasers, all these different things circulating out there, is there anything else that commissioners would like to add to our agenda? >> mr. president, we're on 4-c, status report, commission priority list. >> that's correct. >> but the committee that's basically been working on this consists of myself, commissioner slaughter, and commissioner marshal and what we put together for the

assistance of the commissioners this evening is a recap of our retreat back in october where in order to focus on the work and the priorities and objectives of the commission, we all discussed at some length the mission of the commission and i believe commissioners chan and dejesus are going to solidify and write the mission out. but what we have before us this evening are the objectives, not in a priority listing but as they came up of all of the commissioners at that time. and i think that when we should at our priorities and decide how to set them, we want to keep in mind our objectives, the criteria that we established at a that time for setting priorities with the understanding that it was understood at that time that when things come up, such as they have over the last couple

of weeks, that there will be room to address those urgent items. but i think this is worth noting, what we visited and worked out at that time and something else that our subcommittee would like to recommend also to the commission is that once the commission has agreed on the objectives and perhaps the order and the criteria for setting priorities, that that together with the mission statement be placed on the website for the police commission so that the public has access to that. so that's some background in terms of our moving into what is on the back side of this handout, which is the summary which was prioritized of matters that the commission at the retreat felt that we needed to address at the commission. i think that it was also our

intent at that time to get feedback from the community, as we have this evening, and have on other evenings to take into consideration in solidifying our priority items. >> great, thank you. commissioner chan and commissioner slaughter, would you like to add to that? >> so i just want to thank you for putting this together. i appreciate the hard work and follow-up to the retreat. i'd like to ask, so at a future meeting we will vote on this priority list, or rather -- what's the plan for dealing with this list? >> ok. a couple of things. one is i had actually thought we were going to discuss and vote tonight in terms of the objectives and the criterias so that we're all on the same page to how we're going to approach our -- the prioritization of our matters so that we're not,

you know, we're really staying on track in terms of our all over, in terms of our long-term and short-term planning but i see it's been listed as a discussion only. so perhaps we can discuss the objectives, the criteria, and then really get into the setting of priorities tonight, have that solidified and just vote on it at our next meeting. >> that answers my question. >> ok. >> i don't know there's much to discuss since we did spend a retreat talking about this. i don't have a problem with the list, the objectives and criteria. >> i agree. thank you. thank you very much. >> i do. like number five, the criteria for setting priorities. i'm looking at it now. it's been a while since i've seen it. is it a high priority matter for the chief of police, the director of citizens complaint, i think for the public as well,

any issues that come up are high priority for the public. >> absolutely. that was a short sightedness in terms of the typing it up. absolutely. we can't make a motion now but next week i'd like to take a motion to consider in the interim whether or not the commission would like to put these up on the website together with the mission statement as well as here, you know, from the public. can we do that tonight or do we have to wait until next week to get feedback on the public on the objectives, criteria and priority matters? >> unfortunately next week is a focus on disciplinary case and it will be a rather long evening so january 26 looks like the best date for an action item. >> thank you. >> we're still on four.

>> i think the next step is to hear public comment on these items. >> any public comments on items 4, a, b and c. >> when it comes to priorities i'd hike to respectfully urge this commission to pay particular attention to the -- [inaudible] >> this is the third event by chief to introduce a taser in contract in san francisco. this commission has bid it twice in 2004. the reason i bring it up, i'm not totally convinced it's not better or worse than to kill people with a regular bullet. however, we know that tasers have killed close to 500 people in this nation right now since 2001. mostly people with autism, old people, people who are border

line diabetic seizures, the elderly and of course people with mental health issues, etc. at the dawn of prop l being implemented in february, just think, keep in your consciousness how many people on the street will have hypothermia who will be borderline seizure, who will be frail and elderly or just simply beating to their own drum who would not be getting up from the sidewalk or sitting and lying fast enough or not at all. they will be shot to death. i monitor those incidents nationwide. when you look at your priorities, please pay particular focus to this third attempt at the taser contract. thank you. >> thank you.

>> good evening. chief, thank you for your report. a very simple comment, it was a little difficult to hear you through parts of it, so just for future reference. one particular part of the report that caught my ear on account of an article, a feature article i just read, i believe it was the "s.f. weekly" this morning, you mentioned automobile theft going down and the big feature article in "s.f. weekly" about a program gascon signed on to where the san francisco police officer got in bed with a reality show where vehicles are apparently dropped off with keys in and running in front of

-- in different places, often parked illegally, blocking streets, and there's cameras in the cars and if anyone gets in to try and move it, they get pulled over and arrested for a car theft charge. i find that to be a horrific program. and i also understand, according to the article, that the san francisco police department is keeping the cars that have been donated to it alongside the money that's been donated to it by this reality tv show and my question is, under your leadership, do you intend to continue this kind of entrapment -- actually, i will not hesitate to use the word because i find it to be entrapment and will you continue this program as chief of the san francisco police? >> chief? >> i'm well aware of the bay car tv program and i know for us in order to take possession of the vehicles there is a process the police commission will have to vote in reference

to us in reference to getting these particular bake car vehicles but the commission has a part in making that decision. let me tell you something, the reason why that bay car is out there and the reason why undercover officers are out there and the reason why we put purses on park benches, i want the word to get out to anybody who wants to victimize a citizen in the city of san francisco, that if you attempt to get in a car that does not belong to you, if you attempt to steal a purse that does not belong to you or you attempt to rob somebody that is on a bus in the city or county of san francisco, there's a potential that that property belongs to us or there's an undercover officer there. that is the reason why we do that. i want the word to get out that if you're a criminal in this city and you commit a crime, there's a potential you could go to jail and an undercover officer could arrest you. that's the mindset i want out there for people that are committing these crimes. >> we're not supposed to banter back and forth.