recommendation to the mayor. >> it was. >> i would be happy to help with the cantonese community speaking meetings. i really want to push us to move into public comment and suspend our discussion because i notice everyone here and i want to make sure we can hear from everyone. we can come back to this discussion. president mazzucco; commissioner slaughter? commissioner slaughter: i think applications in two weeks makes sense. i think that if we give ourselves, i guess, if key for me on the april 1 day, personally i would like to see if we can get a name to the mayor a couple weeks earlier than 1 and again, i think if we as a commission devote ourselves to time, we're only talking three or four community meetings, i think we can certainly get that done in the february time frame that we could hopefully shoot for it and have the first couple of weeks of march to do interviews

and we could shoot for a mid march date to get it to the mayor. president mazzucco; commissioner dejesus? commissioner dejesus: i just wanted -- these dates are fine except for when are we going to get the application? there is an application here that we need to get printed and mail and get out. i guess we need to have a deadline when that is out and i think it should be two weeks from the date that that is published. i don't think it is fair to say two weeks and we haven't put the criteria out and it has not been published or given to anybody. it is pretty detailed. you need to factor that in. i agree with commissioner hammer. i think april 1 sounds reasonable. there is a lot of coordination with our calendar and the community. that's just my two cents. president mazzucco; dr. marshall.

commissioners can understand you're wanting to get the public in but i want us to take the -- they got to know what we're thinking here. if we have to take a little more time to firm it up the best we can tonight, i would like to do that. i would like, you know, we have got some dates now. they kind of know what we are thinking. they haven't voted on anything but some beginning and end dates, a little bit of -- about the process. i just want to underscore. i just want to -- no matter what, the poovel candidates is going to be limited -- pool of candidates is going to be limited. if there is somebody wonderful out there, you know, who knows that -- i could be gone no matter if i'm the greatest cop who ever lived, who may be here or someplace else, so if we don't get a ,000 applications, remember, it

has nothing to do with the commission. it has to do with the realities of things. we're moving through with the process that we can best carve out despite that. >> i agree with dr. marshall having gone through this process before. >> i think we go to april 1, commissioner hammer and we're basically inviting people to apply for an eight-month job. we give the mayor time to do his vetting and interviews. the last time the mayor interviewed the three candidates and it probably took him about a week or two before he came up with an answer and you throw that into of into it and we're looking at a 7 1/2 month job. commissioner davis made a great point. we have to put out the job posting. what we need to do, unofficially tonight, we should tell people that, you know, we're opening up, there is obviously a job opening near san francisco to be police chief. get your resumes and cover

letter ready. it is pretty standard for any job and then we can find job posting but the reality is there are already people interested in the job, showing their interest. in fact, we have already received one application. there is no mystery here. here is my suggestion given the parameters again, i know, we really do need to go out into the community. i suggest that today is wednesday, january 19. i would like to see us have -- i propose -- please break out your calendars that we have applications to the commission two weeks today by wednesday, february 2. and in the -- i would like to pick three commissioners who are willing to put together a revised posting that we did last time. commissioner dejesus, commissioner chan. >> the ones who didn't do it last time. >> you want it, you can have it.

>> ok. >> we might as well do that. let's make it pefrl clear the job is open and we're accepting applications. i would ideally like to see us give mayor some time so that he can spend some time vetting the candidates. april 1, i just don't like that day for a lot of reasons. so what i would like to do, i think we can do this. i think reasonably. we're going to have to dedicate time like we did last time. it became a full time job for the commissioners in. i spent more time with the commission than my family last time doing interviews. we get it written on february 2. i suggest between that time, i would like to see us gets this to the mayor by tuesday, march 15. it is two less weeks than what commissioner hammer is looking for. commissioner hammer: you're ambitious. >> i amleto beneficiaries but

given the -- aam ambitious. but given program terse. >> if we can get this written one out by the 21st, two weeks from the 21st is february 4. that is my only concern. if you don't get the written one out on the 21st you're given a week and two days, three days to get the application in. it is less than two weeks. that's all i'm saying. if we get the -- if we can commit to get the written one out by the 21st, two weeks from that is the fourth. >> what we could do is meet this week. let's meet on tuesday and go over and do the formal written announcement next wednesday night. we can announce it wednesday night. let's do that, wednesday. points of inquiry, mr. president? is there a period of time we have to leave the application

open? >> i don't know that there is a legal time you have to have it open. it sounds like one idea you're considering is to present to the commission a proposed job announcement for approval next week. usually i believe the department of human resources does that for the city so they would work with the police department's h.r. division to make hurry that the announcement was make sure that the announcement was properly posted. >> what is the time requirement for the city in terms of how long a posting needs to take place? is there a minimum time? >> i'm not aware that there is a minimum time. i would have to go back and look at the civil service rules and h.r. procedures. i can follow it up with whoever is going to be the point person on the commission. i don't believe there is a mandates period of time, however. this is commission's process so

you get to decide here. >> yes. so we're -- what we'll do with is -- we have our expert in the back of the room. we'll help lieutenant fall biwith this. and lieutenant riley. he's hiding back there. for the record, lieutenant riley has been assigned to us to help with this process. the question is what date do we want to give for applications to be in and then the interviews will follow thereafter. lieutenant riley, i don't mind you asking what is the posting requirement we need to set up for a commission hearing that will be in closed session obviously to interview the applicants? >> unaccustomed as i am to addressing the commission -- [laughter] commissioner. if you are -- if we're going hold a meeting of the

commissioners and an official commissioner meeting here at city hall, of course we need 72 hours notice and any location away from city hall, we need 15 days notice. that would include the hall of justice. >> thank you. vice president marshall: go ahead. you want to finish? >> stay there, lieutenant riley. don't go anywhere, please. >> if i can say this, maybe the thing i remember that impacted me more than anything about the previous search, was as much as everyone tried to find out who they were, where they were, this commission was unflappable. i got to say that. even i was surprised. the press was wrong. everybody was wrong. and a lot of that, our meetings were held in places, we're in bunkers and places like that.

all of those things have to be taking into consideration. i actually think it is going to be more difficult this time. that's the way i feel. so i -- i think it is going to be a much -- you know, us being quiet about everything we do, it is going to be really important here. so let's just keep all of that in mind in this and i just hope that we can do as well as we did last time. all the things they thought we were doing turned out to be not. i think that is really the most important thing that we're doing here. >> can i just address that? the timeline issue? i believe obviously, before the commission goes into closed session, it needs to have an open session meeting and i believe one of the ways that the commission addressed the issue of protecting the confidentiality over the applicants and also meeting its public meeting requirements.

the meeting here at city hall, do the open session here at city hall and then go into closed session and move to an alternate location. there was a little bit of road tripping involved in the interview process but that would mean that you would be able to do the 72-hour notice because the meeting would be convened here but then you would travel once you went into closed session to an alternate location and then we come back into open session again at this location. it is a little bit of traveling and some inconvenience but it dust protect the confidentiality of the process. -- does protect the confidentiality of the process. >> commissioner hammer? commissioner hammer: i put april 1 to get the conversation going. if my fellow commissioners are equally ambitious, i'm happy to join the aspiration of march 15.

if we have to move it back two weeks, then we do. i question the timing to revise this previous job listing, which is pretty darn good, except probably the dates and numbers are wrong. the time 14 case from the date you folks publish it. that is my suggestion. that will be -- the date once you do put it out. as soon as they come in, we start the interviews, i think we should talk about a bit tonight but i really want to get to folks who have been waiting here so long. we should set up the meetings in san francisco to hear from the people. >> the proposal was 14 days after the committee issues the

application. >> we will have to work with -- regarding that. can we get that done early next week? >> it depends on how quickly a final draft announcement can be finalized. >> i would move that the subcommittee be given the power to amend this document and the deadline be closed. >> we need to get public comment. >> i go back to the reality of this situation, people will apply or not apply regardless of what we put in their. i am all for letting the committee get it done. >> make sure it gets directed to

the police commission office. it will be put in safe keeping point we had last time in terms of the confidentiality of the applicants. we have the aspiration of getting the final posting next week. more on that next wednesday night. >> if you establish a committee, you will have to me to on this. >> you should not establish a committee to work on it. you should appoint one person to be in charge of the process and

that can work with less than a quorum. >> i think that that makes sense. >> we are ready to go. i will contact the commissioner. >> the goal is for the commissioner to get this to the department of human-resources. there is not a change in the dates and salary. public comment on this issue. >> land the director of san francisco open government. i think you know what mine opinion will be, how much is open and how much is put into this personnel. i would like to add on to the comment in the haste makes waste

category. what it says to me is that if you put out of these time frames looking at a job that you have for only six or seven months, many of the top-qualified candidates would not apply. someone who is out there and is not qualified is in a position of trust and they will not want to take the chance of moving here. what this does is that it limits it primarily to officers in the san francisco police department. if they accept had positioned and the new mayor says that they are not satisfied, there is so low service protection without any real lack. at some point, that limits the

candidate said he will get outside of the community. you just read a list of things that you looked at the last time the not for the public. we have no idea what you are reading. what i heard read sounded very vague and very nonspecific and most members of the public would have no idea when you save those things. i would like questions relating to issues that have been in the press and in the public eye for a while and how you will ask those questions. problems with a lack of disclosure to the defense council relating to officers that will testify in the previous testimony and so forth. there has been a number of issues that have come up and you see them in the paper. the best example i can think of is -- which went away for years.

i don't think that anyone knows what happened. two of the officers said a lot of court. i don't know what the city ended up on the hook for that. to me, this whole process should be out in the open. the only things that really qualify as a personnel is a review of the resmae and application. you should have a clear objective before you go in. >> good evening, i am the new co-chair of the -- palace has been part of the community for nearly 40 years.

one of the first things that you mentioned is community input and community perspective. i would like to personally say that i would appreciate the commissioners perspective as well as others on having some more public comment related. i recognize that you did a great amount of work a year and a half ago. a lot changes over that time. within the police department as well as without. a great many things have changed. we have a whole new world out there and new concerns and issues and new commissioners that we would love to have here. i hear a lot about the political -- in line but i am concerned about the community reality for this process and

making sure that our community is heard. >> thank you very much. >> commissioners, good evening. i have been a resident of this county for 42 years. i have seen this before. i don't see what the rush is to get a new police chief. the last one was so incompetent that you made a big mistake. -- threw out any job as police chief anywhere and he came back to just get a paycheck. the longer it takes you to pick a police chief, the better off you'll be. i would not rely on some think

tank, that is a big waste of time and money. my suggestion is to stick with your rank-and-file police officers and even then have them vote on the new police chief. i think you should think about what you are doing, not just for yourselves but for the public at large in the city because so far what i have seen is that the past spectrum of commissioners have been doing an inadequate job. that is not just my opinion. you have seen that it is pretty much stated.

you see a lot of political theater going on rather than decision making. i would ask you to spend your time picking someone and let the rank and file click on this. i spoke here a year ago and i was very impressed at the compilation of the document request and that it is given to me in a timely manner. the other -- has not done so. on an investigation and a complete against the officers, they botched the whole investigation from day one by losing the documents and resubmitting the request. the third time they came up with an issue or no reason to

complain or whatever. then i'd do my own investigation and find that the officer has more problems than jumping jack flash. i would like the office of citizen complaints to comply with my request. >> good evening, commissioner spent soms. i have a degree in theology and i fought with the german military. that is beside the point right now. i would like to implore this body to choose a police chief

and they do so very cautiously. there is also the unique systems we're like the united nations right here in san francisco. someone who has experience running a big city police department. there are many others out there. i am somewhat concerned that their might be a rush to get someone in their. but i think that that might not be as prudent. we don't want to have problems

down the road. i think the best way to proceed, i would like to think the commissioner for their time and effort and thank you very much. >> thank you. >> i am speaking on the council. we have been part of the community for seven years or so. i had a series of questions that we would like to pose to the candidates. this will also come in writing.

what safeguards will be used to protect community members? how will the next chief increased transparency. i 8 hope that we are providing for some of these questions. how will the next chief work with the board of supervisors to help san francisco opt out of the committee's?

how can the next chief say that the rights will be maintained? asking the applicants opinion regarding the counter-terrorism bureau proposal. do you use the u.s. census bureau data, and other demographic information to map muslim community is in it an effort to attend a fine hotbeds of extremism. this was a proposal out of los angeles and there are questions about whether or not this promotes the ability of people which may enjoy their freedom of speech and beginning deep racial

profiling which is not a good road to go down. how will the training which officers be accomplished? one of the things that i heard earlier was the cost of the training. this is millions. i work in the mental health side chair richard ward in san francisco. >> i work in the national security and civil-rights program.

we sent you questions in a letter. the issue that we have been trying to convey which is to ask the commission to take away the rights from the middle eastern and south asian community. the way this can about it is following the march 2010 comments that were made when they portrayed as the entire middle east and community as a terrorist threat. the civil rights abuses that happened are not as well-known. , neither are