of strength. it is also an example of the local-private partnership, which is when and where the presidio had multiple goals they had to contend with. how do they achieve the highest level of sustainability, open up access to the parks to the surrounding neighborhoods, create an economically viable project for themselves that could help revive the 42 acres that this district is within, etcetera, obviously, historic issues involved. so there is an historic and revitalization component to it. the fivem project is an emerging project. hearst corp. came to us. this is where chronicle is located. it is where they used to do their printing. obviously, they have now taken a smaller footprint that things have evolved. their challenge, how do we make this the next media technology campus and involve where the

markets are going? we took a different approach to 5m, and did user research process and used some and ecological study around innovation. what makes san francisco unique in how it provides for an innovative environment, both culturally and also in terms of the amount of start-ups that come out of san francisco, why that is happening -- large companies in the ,too, and understanding the dynamics behind that. that helped us to place tenants into the next generation in how you think about the innovation campus. we use the existing states in a founder of the economy to populate the vacant buildings with those tenants. it was incredibly successful from a market perspective, from a community building perspective, showed our ability to partner with much smaller organizations that grow program and communities in different ways, including standards is good digital film school, intersection for the arts, and others, which it all has a

feeling of all entrepreneurialship, making it to the center. it surprised us the amount of demand coming from it. we were approached by many larger companies saying, how can i look it there? we could not fulfil the demand so we started to crack down on how we think we could in the bay area. how we look at pier 70. clearly, pier 70 does not want to be a google office park located in the city. that is not the highest value of it. we know the highest value for companies is their ability to be interdisciplinary, intersect with one another, for a gaming company to be next to a biotech company to share that knowledge. that is what is great about this city. when we look at what pier 70 is and what has happened already, the history of muni, in this

area, it is clear this is a phenomenal center point of that, which is what we want to advance and worker with the port as your partner. so going forward, is really the representation of the steps forward of how we think of a place as a place in the evolution, in context. we clearly have incredibly deep history that we can draw upon for all the issues that we are confronted with at this site. this is all about how we can create a partnership that will maximize the value, financially, culturally, and socially, and creates a place that is magnetic to the people that live around it, about creating creativity, an understanding with the new industry is. and as a magnet also, as a follow on for the larger tenants who need to learn how to innovate, to learn to be around this environment, and to need to

be around this in mind to succeed. thank you for your time. >> mission bay development group is next. >> president, commissioners, executive director, thank you for the opportunity to present our qualifications for working on pier 70. i am the managing principal with mission bay development group, the master developer for mission bay, the 303-acre redevelopment north of pier 70. we are a certified lbe and we are the lead of the development team. we are working in partnership with our prep -- capital

partner, cherokee. they are a private equity investment firm that manages multiple realistic private equity funds and focuses on brownfield redevelopment and specializes in redevelopment. we have built a core team of advisers that is kicked off with perkins and will. you have come across them before in much of your dealings, including with the building we are in today, and specific to our experience, and their principles helped create a master plan and design guidelines for mission bay. hargreaves and associates. landscape architecture and open space is a key ingredient to what the public experiences of what is going to be billed at pier 70. we have experience with them, we are building a water park just north of pier 70. finally, a famous san francisco

bay construction firm focused on historic rehabilitation and buildings along the port's ownership, along with buildings in the mission bay area. so you hear a consistent theme, mission bay. what is important here is we are not just a san francisco firm. we are a local, local firm. we have a commitment to the central waterfront. each of our members is invested in this part of the city. four of us are all of the waterfront, three of us are headquartered. this is a longstanding commitment that existed far before sales force came along and make a big splash. it is a belief that we have had for a long time, and we voted with our feed and investment dollars. we have been waiting for the opportunity to see the next that take place, which is pier 70, and we are excited about it, and we want to be your partner. this is the opportunity we

believe would come for a long time. that is what you want to work on pier 70. i can sit here and try to summarize a detailed rfq where our design team came up with an amazing plan, but the reality is, that groundwork was already late for us by the park commission. the community as well. they work together for a long time to envision what the site should be about. instead of spending my time telling you our refinements to that, i want to talk about what is different about our part -- approach. we are a master developer. we coordinate these large-scale data to projects, entitlement, planning, infrastructure development, and then both build out and selection of other developers to help execute and make the project happen. what that has is a multiple of it -- multitude of advantages. when you have a master developer engaged, you get a diversification. it is not just us building

buildings. it is other developers building as well. each of them brings their resources in terms of private investment, multiple private investors. it brings their contacts in terms of tenants and users. so you bring all that to bear, and that is why you see what is happening at mission bay happen, because we are not being selfish about it. we do not have to be the only builder there. probably better yet, a variety of specialists, each in a special building type, building out these projects. that is what will be the most ever source of revenue for the port. but the reality is, those buildings are not actually what the community experiences. what the community experiences is the experience of the place itself. as a master developer, by handing off some of the vertical development task, we spend more time focusing on what that experience is about, what are the connections on the sidewalks, streets, bike paths come out to the amazing open

space? how you integrate them back into the community? we get that what development is about, from the city's standpoint, community's standpoint, is what you experience on the ground floor level. our attention is freedom to make sure those community benefits exist, and the experience that you have at pier 70 is a special place. we also get we are in a partnership. that means the benefits, economic, resource-wise, need to be experienced at every stage of development. they cannot just be about what we make at each stage of the development. the question needs to be, what backbone is in place to help support the rest of pier 70 development? we want to be a part of that development, as a master planner, to help make sure that what gets done at the waterfront

site is complementary and additive to what has happened. we also want to make sure that there is real, tangible benefit to the port. the economic deal that gets cut here is one that generates the highest level of revenue. which means you can bring in developers at a later stage of development. you work with a master planner like us, and then cut individual deals with the developers. that is upside that can be delivered by teaming with a master developer. one of the biggest community balance that exists is the generation and creation of jobs. with development, pier 70 used to be an incredible source of employment for the city. it can again become that, first with construction jobs, and as an lbe, we understand construction jobs reach out to

the community. when we had mission bay, frankly, we had a horrible track record of getting engagement from local firms. we changed our entire contract in strategy to make sure that but there are opportunities for local firms, minority-owned firms, women-owned firms, and that strategy took us all the way up to 40%. and it is not just about the firm's, but who they are hiring. when san francisco residents do not have the opportunity to work, the full benefit is not experienced. at mission bay, we have gotten 85% participation in terms of women and minority-owned in plymouth, local hiring levels near 40%. the job generation does not stop just that construction. it also goes into the vertical development out here, and it is about getting the businesses that we have already been interfacing at mission bay, who are already circling, where can i relocate? bringing those relationships to

bear on this development. but it is unique. it cannot be. it is a totally different place. part of what we bring to the table is financial strength. financial strength not just in our capital partner, cherokee, who manages $2 billion, and has millions available for these types of projects today, but about the financial strength of our team. i worked for 13 years in the investment and lending sector. i understand what it takes to bring capital to a project, how investors think. with that knowledge, we can figure out what are the areas we need to remove to help make the products succeed. we also have the experience of having done $270 million worth of public financing to help facilitate infrastructure, parks, and open space, and it is that understanding of the public market that will be critical to making pier 70 work.

and finally, we have experience in soliciting state and federal funding. at the end of the day, to survive these economic cycles, you have to be able to tap into all sources. that is something we have done at mission bay. we get this is a long-term partnership. if you look at how long mission bay has been going on, we have been involved in the central waterfront effort from day one. you cannot lose interest. i recently heard sales force landed. this is an interesting project to jump on. this is something you have to be committed to. it is not always clear through the down cycle that things will work out. at the end of the day, that is what partners to. they commit for the project, they are there for the duration, they have experience with staff, over 10 years with the san francisco redevelopment agency, the city of alameda. these are the kinds of things

that you look for in a partner. we can bring those experiences from mission bay to bear here. pier 70 is not mission bay. they both strive to deliver jobs, for open space for the public, but pier 70 has an incredibly rich historic fabric that needs to be celebrated. where the comparison is relevant is this. they are right next to each other. we have been here. we get it. this is what we can bring to bear. seven waterfront sites worth of experience. thank you. >> commissioners, i wanted to generally recap where we are. this is so exciting to have multiple responses to the

solicitation. much more fun than the last one i did. the reason we are here is, we, the port, did what -- 16 commission hearings on the master plan, 60 community workshops. we did this master plan work where we essentially laid the table and in the hard choices of how many acres per ship repair, parks, what is for land, what our party historic buildings? we realize the right way to get a developer partner was to say, we want to do this, so why are you the right partner? why is your experience, your checkbook the one that can help us to this? that is what we have. the ranking and evaluation of the technical panel, with the financial capacity check is to test that, to see. we are not ready yet to talk

about what the pier 70 will be in terms of an eir product description. we would choose this partner, negotiate an agreement, and over time, working with the community, commission's direction, refine those parts of it and create certainty for the developer, for the public, and get us to something that can be achieved and built. just a little bit about the historic building request of its end. we know it will take us probably until the end of the year to -- whoever we choose -- to get engaged. starting to look at the process of if there is somebody out there that would like to be in one of those buildings, breathe life into that. we can get that going in vain they can work with this developer and with the whole framework. we really want to accelerate the interest and investment in historic buildings. any questions?

is there any public comment on this item? that is a first. i guess everybody did such a great job. >> i would just like to thank all of you for coming today. it is very affirming for all of us to have such an array of distinguished and experienced firms with your portfolio's express interest in this project. we look forward to working with some of you down the road. >> bilditto. >> we are fortunate to have all of you here wanting to work with the port. going forward, i am looking forward to our march 22 commission meeting to see where this all leads. so thank you very much. we appreciate you coming out. >> item 11. new business.

>> is there any public comment on new business? >> item 12. public comment. >> is there any public comment? >> we have a motion to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor? meeting adjourned at 4:00 0 p.m5 p.5 p.m.

>> please stand for the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] i will be taking roll-call of the commissioners.

president mazzucco: present. vice president marshall present. commissioner dejesus: present. commissioner chan: present. commissioner hammer: present. commissioner kingsley: prese nt. commissioner slaughter: here. >> also on the dais, and joysticks, from the office of citizen complaints. president mazzucco: ladies and gentleman in the audience, we are going briefly into closed session. we are going to have a motion to move into closed session to handle a disciplinary matter, an issue with some subpoenas. it is confidential information regarding personal files. we will do that quickly so we can excuse the attorneys and parties involved and move into

our next item. without further ado, will you please call line item 5? >> line item 5 is public comment on all matters in item seven, including whether to hold it in closed session. president mazzucco: hearing none, please call like item 6 -- line item six. >> to hold the next discussion in clo

>> we are back in open session. line item 8 is a vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussion on item 7 hold in closed session. president mazzucco: a motion for nondisclosure? all in favor? thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, we are here for the wednesday, february 23, 2011 regular police commission meeting. tonight, obviously there is an important issue, line item four. we're going to move right into line item four. we are going to skip public, income -- skip public comment and line item three and go back to them afterward. without further ado, please call line item four.

>> discussion and possible action to authorize the chief of police to develop a proposal for modification of department general orders 5.01, "use of force," and 10. 02, "equipment -- and 10.02, "equipment," to include use of conducted energy devices, and to develop proposed practices, subject to final approval of the police commission. president mazzucco: this item was before this commission roughly a year ago. >> it is on that screen there. >> can you move your camera stuff a little bit? president mazzucco: as i stated, this was an item that was on a

year ago. it was a matter of whether or not the police department should start a program, a proposal to implement a program using what they call conducted energy devices. since that evening, there has been a lot of well-publicized events, where there has been a cry out to give police officers one additional tool in their arsenal. frankly, i think we can all agree tonight that in situations where we have officer-involved shootings, we would like to limit those, and give officers tools they need to reduce injuries to the officers and the public. since that last meeting, myself and commissioner hammer have had meetings with the former chief to find a middle ground, an area where we can all agree there is something that is necessary to protect the public. what could that will be? some people call it a weapon. some people call it a tool.

commissioner hammer and i have been very thoughtful about this. there have been statements made that if in fact we had another device for would not have been a shooting. the have been incidents you will hear about tonight that did not get to the level of a shooting, where officers were seriously injured and other individuals involved were seriously injured. what we are going to do tonight is very analytical. i am asking for professionalism. i am asking for people to come forward from the field to give us examples of what they think is appropriate. we're going to do a risk analysis tonight. this has to be without emotion. in has to be very analytical. we have to do what is best for the community and best for the officers. commissioner hammer and i have looked at the proposal tonight. going through it, we are at the end point to suggest an amendment to this. this is not about tasers.

we are going to ask the police department also look at any other non-lethal weapon that our department can use, not just tasers, but other weapons. there has been some talk about an sl6. we're going to amend the language to add, in asking for the department to evaluate and investigate other methods, to return back to this commission in 30 days with a recommendation, whether it is conducted energy devices or an sl6, or another weapon, or a combination thereof. we are going to ask that two commissioners be assigned to this task. i have asked commissioner slaughter to be one of them. i am about to ask commissioner

chan, given her great work on mental-health issues. i think we all agree we need one more weapon to help protect the officers and the public. we are going to go forward with the presentation tonight. you are going to hear about conductive energy devices. you may hear a little bit about the sl6. we're went to be open-minded about this. we have incredible speakers. i want everybody to be open- minded and look at this. as i stated, people have to understand the use of force is never pretty. it is always of a. it starts with verbal commands that you will see tonight and hear about. sometimes, when officers give verbal commands, we get allegations of being discourteous. they explain why they do that. physical force never looks right. then it is escalating to baton or pepper spray. that is not pretty.

then it escalates suddenly to the use of a firearm. that is devastating for all involved, and it is far from being pretty. as a former assistant d.a. and a former u.s. attorney responding to officer-involved shootings, you see things you wish you would have never seen. our goal is to avoid that. commissioner hammer and i have an amendment. i will let commissioner hammer read through it. the chief has accepted this amendment and is comfortable with it. i want to make one thing clear. we have separated the mental health issue from the tasers. this commission has unanimously accepted the memphis model. this is not about the mental health community being tased. it is for dangerous people,

people under the influence of narcotics. i want everybody to be professional. i want you to be analytical. let us do the risk analysis. i will turn over briefly to commissioner hammer. commissioner hammer: thank you. i will be brief. i am sure folks have a lot to say. we want to hear from them. i want to thank president mazzucco. i reached out to him after the last polarizing debate to try to find the best way forward. i said that as something -- as someone who has worked as a reserve police officer. i believe there is a gap between what our officers have between baton and firearm. last time this debate came up, it was solely focused on tasers. the question should be how we change our tactics, how we avoid use of force whenever possible. and in those rare instances when force has to be used, what is