we should go dark on wednesday because we have interviews on tuesday, and we have interviews on saturday following that. and this commission has been working ral hard. -- really hard. we need some time off to focus on what is our biggest issue and selecting the next police chief. so for all those reasons, i've heard from all our commissioners, i suggest, i will talk to supervisor campos myself that we continue this for three or four weeks, postpone it because we're going to do this. it's very important. we have a week to noich the community groups that -- notify the community groups to cancel this and we can get them together at a dw date. we -- at a good date. we should accommodate them when we have a new chief in police. >> can you clarify the motion? >> there is no motion. i'll ask that we go dark. there is no motion pending on the agenda. and again, it's just -- i will talk to commissioner dejesus. >> i think we should -- i think we should get a sense -- i mean, it's been agendaized

already as a meeting that's been public announced that we're having a joint meeting so to change that the commission should vote on that. and i would support if i could finish for the moment, i'm sorry. i would like -- be nice if we agreed and maybe we won't. but my motion would be to authorize you to talk with supervisor campos. but if he didn't agree to move it that we proceed with the meeting. because i think having agreed on our behalf, it would be a bad signal on behalf of the commission to cancel it unilaterally. but i would move to allow you to reach out to him and see if he wishes to change it. but if not we should honor the commitment you made on our behalf in good faith. >> i'll second that. president mazzucco: we need to take a vote on whether we should move to postpone. the event until a date within the next three or four weeks. and go dark on wednesday. we really don't need a motion to go dark on wednesday. but so i would ask that there be a motion for that. >> i thought you made that motion and it was seconded. >> made a motion earlier. >> a motion to amend. >> i don't think the chair can make the motion.

president mazzucco: i can't make the motion. i do have a motion? >> i didn't know that. president mazzucco: i can't? >> you can make a motion. president mazzucco: my motion is -- commissioner hammer, my motion that we move to postpone this and we work closely with supervisor campos and reschedule this to a date three or four weeks down the road when we have time to look at the paperwork that's been provided, the drafts, very important issue and hopefully we'll have our new chief in police. be part of that. that's the big part of the puzzle in terms of community policing. so i move that we continue and actually -- i don't know if we need to move this but go dark on wednesday and focus our attention on the police chief selection process. do i have a second? >> i second. >> motion to amend. it takes precedence under the rules. >> whichever way you want. >> you have to vote on the amendment first. it takes precedence under roberts' rules. >> i don't think roberts' rules are binding. >> they're stated in our commission rules.

>> ok. >> the motion to amend is that -- to authorize commissioner -- to discuss the scheduling of the meeting with supervisor campos and not to cancel it unless supervisor campos agrees. >> second that. >> that's not an amendment. that's a different motion. >> that's a competing motion. >> first one up or down. >> i'm sorry to be belaboring this. and i know you want your motion on. and a vote. but i really need clarification on how jointly did we proceed from day one jointly on this, and set up -- and that's ok. i understand. your background on it. future if we jointly set the date and if we committed ourselves from day one, in my mind that's something important to take into consideration. if on the other hand supervisors campos said i'm having a party, you are invited, and we said ok, we'll

be there. and now something has come up. and we're saying you know, we are absolutely over our heads with so much work to do. we're going to have to take a rain check. which of the two? >> quite frankly, my conversations with commissioner campos, i met with him and we talked about this. and we've tried to arrange dates that were convenient. and i did agree to the date. there's no doubt about that. but in light of what's happened in the future, i think that we've got a week to postpone this. we're not canceling. we're postponing is the wise thing to do. and i'll talk to commissioner campos about this. so i did agree to this date and quite frankly i -- i've been told that one said i had the authority to do so and another that i doesn't have the authority to do so. so this is something we're going to address. it's a matter of when. and i think that the reasonable thing is to postpone it until

we have our new chief in police. we'll start with commissioner hammer's amendment. commissioner dejesus. sorry. >> ok. so point of reference, we have governed by the roberts' rules of order. and the chair can't make a motion but let me just look at roberts' rules of order and a motion made first by commissioner hammer and seconded by chan before commissioner mazzucco made his motion. so if we take them in order, commissioner hammer's would go first. and i have a recollection of sitting here and discussing -- discussing that supervisor campos invited to a joint meeting and that you said you would contact him and you guys would talk about a date and i remember the march 9 date was in the air. and it's got to be in the minutes. because it was talked about here. we didn't do it over the phone. we all said you could talk about it. and the idea that we want to not have a meeting to go dark and normally scheduled day to

have our meeting, and that's why you put it on a wednesday, and i think we really should honor that and we should be there. i expected to be at a meeting next wednesday whether it be here or whether it be with the joint meeting with the board of supervisors. and i do think we should go. and we can make decisions there. as we choose. but there's -- the presentation, this community group, we have a week to read the ordinance, like two or three pages. it's not something that's going to break us. we read more than that when we get our stuff on friday. so that's my -- and we should honor this and go. president mazzucco: dr. marshall. vice president marshall: just so you know, commissioner kingsley, they canceled meetings on us before. just want you to know that. there was an entertainment commission meeting also and something set up with the board of supervisors and so this has happened before. just so you know. president mazzucco: ok.

shall we start with commissioner hammer's motion? >> i'll concede you have the right to call the motions in order. so i won't argue that point. i did intend to move to amend your motion. and i'll allow the chair to rule on it whether that's a proper motion or nolt. -- or not. it's your prerogative. president mazzucco: i'll start with the motion at that we move to postpone this meeting with the joint board of supervisors, public safety committee meeting regarding community policing until three to four weeks whatever is convenient for commissioner -- form commissioner and supervisor david campos. with the hopes of having our next chief of police presently as anent gral part. community policing -- an integral part of the community policing proposal. >> you have to rule on the motion to amend first. that takes precedence over the motion itself. i think the proper -- under roberts' rules still have to vote on the motion first. president mazzucco: let's put your -- >> the motion to amend is to authorize you to reach out and

on behalf of the commission and talk to supervisor campos about rescheduling it as you discussed and the event he agrees to authorize you to reschedule it, in the event he does not, to honor the commitment of the commission. that's the motion to amend. >> we're getting pretty far down a rabbit hole. an amendment has to -- would seem to me relate to the underlying motion. and that amendment would make the motion -- is die metically opposed. it's not an amendment. it's a separate motion. we can vote on both of them. but it's not a proper amendment. it's a separate motion. >> i would ask the chair to rule whether it was a proper motion to amend. president mazzucco: let's vote on it as an amendment or a proper motion. let's have a vote on it and we'll move to the second motion which is mine. so we have a motion and amendment from commissioner hammer. >> second. let's take roll. >> this is on the amendment. commissioner hammer's amendment. commission president mazzucco,

no, vice president marshall, how do you vote, no, commissioner petra dejesus, how do you vote, yes, commissioner jim hammer, how do you vote, aye. commissioner angela chan, how do you vote, yes commissioner chan: because the community has been alerted about this already. >> commissioner carol kennels how do you vote? -- carol kingsley how do you vote? >> no. >> commissioner hammer. >> it shouldn't be a requirement by the terms of the motion. if i voted yes. but i do think that it's the courteous thing to do, commissioner mazzucco, to certainly when we're done with this reach out to supervisor campos and explain the reasons for what we're doing and emphasize our commitment to the meeting and to community policing. president mazzucco: i will do that. >> the amendment fails 3-4. president mazzucco: so the next motion the original motion. to postpone/continue the joint board of supervisors public saist meeting and police

commission meeting regarding the definition of community policing. do i have a second? >> second. take role. >> roll call vote on the motion. commission president thomas mazzucco. aye. commission president dr. joe marshall. aye. commissioner dejesus. commissioner dejesus: to vote no to go dark when we were scheduled to be here anyway, i think is really disrespectful. i vote no. >> going dark is not part of the motion. >> that's something we'll discuss later. >> no. >> that's what the intention is to go dark so i vote no. doesn't matter. we're not going to have a meeting but we're not going to have a meeting at all, i think is disrespectful. >> commissioner james hammer. commissioner hammer: under the law of contract and good manners, having made the offer to them and having it accepted and acted on it it would be unwise for us to unilaterally cancel it which is what this motion is. i would ask the president

reconsider it. but nonetheless i vote no. >> commissioner angela chan. commissioner chan: no. >> commissioner carol kingsley. commissioner kingsley: i vote yes. and in part because i don't feel prepared. i don't feel like i have -- or will have the opportunity in a week to be adequately prepared to assess what i'm voting on and the resolution and the action that may be taken at this meeting. and i also have a very high regard for supervisor campos and i very much feel that this is of utmost importance to the city. to our community. and as the police commissioner -- the interests with the board and would like to have that communicated to supervisor campos. >> commissioner james

slaughter. commissioner slaughter: i vote yes. and commissioner mazzucco if could you communicate to all of us after you have spoken to supervisor campos about finding out his intentions because if he intends to go forward with the meeting not as a joint meeting but a community meeting among the board all of us should know and those who want to attend obviously should. and could. and i suspect even some of us who vote to postpone it as a joint meeting may attend. but i think it's important that we know whether it's going forward or not. thank you. >> don't we have -- don't we have an issue if more than three of us decide to attend and then we essentially are officially as a body -- >> i don't know the answer to that. >> that's a good question. >> i would want to look at that question because i think there are some exceptions when you're attending a noticed public meeting on a subject of community interest. so there may be an exception. although it's wise to spot the potential brown act issue.

>> thank you for checking on that. >> the motion is approved by a vote of 4-3. president mazzucco: for the record i will reach tout commissioner campos this -- reach tout commissioner campos this evening to schedule it to a mutually convenient date. >> do you want to ask for authorization from the commission to reschedule it in the future without having to come back to the commission? president mazzucco: yes. if possible. >> you certainly have my proxy. >> absolutely. but could we plan it in such a way that we have already calendarred internally some internal discussions on it so that we're prepared as a body as well as individually? president mazzucco: i'll talk to supervisor campos about his availability and available dates of the community groups. >> if i may, i certainly would not mind giving you that authorization. however, i would like us to discuss it here so that we can all be prepared. and in the past it hasn't been uncommon so you know, commissioners, for a supervisor to come here and talk to us in

person about what he wants. this is just so different for me. it's very difficult for me to go along with this. but i will give you the prerogative, president mazzucco, but i would certainly like to discuss it here at the commission so we don't go blindly. some commissioners get some things and others don't it makes me feel very uncomfortable going in as a group. president mazzucco: ok. thank you very much. any public comment regarding this? >> are we going to be dark next week? >> good evening. my name is barbara growth. -- groth. and about community policing. i'll step back to when i was evicted from my house. my ex-husband paid off my lawyer and was rather obvious. he and his lawyer were sitting there in court, armed fold led, legs crossed, both leaning way

back in their chairs. not a care in the world. and i'm evicted. well, i'm back. i was obliged to pay him better than three times what we paid for the house jointly. they always leave that part out with a divorce. they always act like the wife got it scot-free. nowhere near it. community policing -- president mazzucco: to anything we talked about -- >> we want our people to look out for our own people. you try to watch your own first. and when you can't quite watch your own, then you finally call the police. that to me is community policing. it's kind of old fashioned. i was working for the city and county when president kennedy was assassinated. i was working at the library at the time. i had to take time off. i didn't have time in. temporary or new employee, too bad for me. one, it was the police department, later on,

secretary. but i still have the police values with me. even though i wasn't a police officer. community policing means look out for your own as much as possible. and when it comes time to have your face pushed in, your toes stepped on, you step back and then finally call the police. and they come in to do what you request. and you don't want somebody to be taken in, would you please not call the police. i think that's what community policing really is. a lot of us are normally, we think that's what it's all about, it's the people that always want to file charges against the police that think community policing is something different than that. thank you. president mazzucco: thank you. any further public comment? if there is an issue about whether or not we go dark next week, that -- needs to be agendaized at this point in time, is that correct? under scheduling? no. ok. thank you. please call line item number six, please. >> item number six is public comment on all matters pertaining to item number eight

below, closed session, regarding disciplinary cases, including public comment on a vote whether to hold item eight in closed session. president mazzucco: commissioner kingsley wants to return to line five. commissioner kingsley: i appreciate the indulgence of the commission on this, but following our last discussion, this is more important than ever. i think that we as a commission have to really set a date that we're going to set our priorities. so that we aren't as a commission being reactive, you know, reacting to what comes to our attention and instead be

proactive in our approach toward our work. so among things, i know that there's a new priority that we're going to want to add in to that factor. and i myself would like to get the discipline case set into the priorities as well as the community advisory boards. and this whole communalt policing matter -- community policing matter. so i would implore we set a date that's going to be really adhered to in setting our priorities. and can we do that? president mazzucco: pick a date where we could just discuss the priorities as an agenda item and action item. because the public is well aware of priorities change because of incidents. chiefs, shootings. i will say for the record that the first priority of this commission was mental health and we attacked it. discipline was our second suspect -- our second and we do

need to refine the process and what's a good time for that in the near future? lieutenant falvey? >> march 16 would be discipline day, march 23 or march 30. president mazzucco: how about march 30? everything should be settled down, i hope, in this -- ok. march 30. >> that's nor discussing our priorities in general. president mazzucco: dr. marshall. vice president marshall: only because we did return to this item. it doesn't look like we foresee any community meetings in the near future. is that -- can i say that as a general statement or is it just this month that we're not going to have one that might be possible that we move back to community meetings in the next month? president mazzucco: i agree. we've had three community meetings in the last two weeks but once everything settles down with the new chief, we do need to move to our last meeting, because quite frankly that's the better part of the police commission is going out to the community meetings. that should be obviously

something we should start scheduling. do you think march 30 is too soon for that? >> i wouldn't do it on march 30. i wouldn't do it in march. >> april. >> we just talked about this. and assuming that we would have a new chief very soon, the community meetings might be helpful there anyway. but i would -- i was just asking the question, not saying we need to do it, and i wasn't referring to the type of meeting. etc. our general go out to the station after the district meeting. so it's just a question i raise. we don't have to pick anything right now. but it doesn't look like we'll have anything in march and maybe april might be the next time that we go back to the regular community meeting that we've had in the past. so that's just a statement. president mazzucco: that's a great point. thank you. both commissioners kingsley and dr. marshall. commissioner hammer. commissioner hammer: on community meetings, i would suggest we go where the worst violence in san francisco is now. we just heard it was the mission so perhaps in april

we'll return to those. we should go wherever -- who is suffering the most crime in san francisco, that would be our first priority, i think. president mazzucco: i agree. that's a good idea. ok. any further -- any public comment regarding the reopening of this hearing? hearing none, please call emit number six. -- call item number six. >> item number six is public comment on all matters pertaining to item number eight below, closed session. disciplinary cases including public comment on vote whether to hold item eight in closed session. president mazzucco: any public comment regarding molding a closed session regarding -- holding a closed session regarding disciplinary matters? hearing none, line item seven. >> line item on whether to hold item eight in closed session. >> second. president mazzucco: all in favor? thank you.

>> we are back in open session. the assistant chief is present. >> calling item number nine. a vote to whether to disclose any of the items. moved in to closed session for item 10. hearing none, we move for closed session. >> we >> call item 13. we are back in the open session. the vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussion on item 12.

>> second. >> without objection? >> item 14, and establishing further procedures to submit for chief of police or take other action for selecting nominees of chief of police. >> nothing further. any public comment? >> adjournment. >> thank you very much, everybody.

supervisor campos: welcome to the very 102011 meeting of the board of supervisors government audit oversight committee. my name is david campos, the chair of the committee. i am joined by committee vice chair supervisor mark farrell and committee member board president david chiu. we want to thank sfgtv staff for covering the meeting. thank you for your work. madam clerk, do we have any announcements? >> please make sure to turn off or place all bonds on migrate. if you wish to present any documents, also provide a copy to the court for inclusion into the vial. items acted upon to they will be included in the february 15

board of supervisors meeting. supervisor campos: thank you. we have a very light agenda. before i begin with the item, i have a basic question to the clerk. i am wondering if it is possible in the future for the people watching these meetings, for the agenda item -- is it possible to have it in chinese characters as well? i know some folks in my district were asking about that. if they are watching the item, if there are any language issues, at least knowing the subject matter. >> i can check for you. supervisor campos: please call item one. >> item 1. resolution approving an agreement with the nonprofit owners' association for administration/management of the property-based business improvement district known as the "mission miracle mile business improvement district,."

supervisor campos: thank you. this is an item i have introduced. to speak on the item is lisa. for purposes of my colleagues, just some context, october 5, 2010, the board of supervisors renewed the property based improvement district and this allows the mayor's office of work force and economic development to execute an agreement for the management of the district. good morning. >> good morning, chair campos, committee members. thank you for having me and let me to fill up this agenda with this item. lisa pegam with the office of workforce development. we are happy to present to an agreement with the nonprofit home owners association, miracle mile, for the property based

business improvement district known as the mission miracle mile business improvement district, which was renewed by the board of supervisors in october of 2010. this management agreement is required so that the city can transfer the special assessment that was collected on behalf of the district to the non-profit management corp. who oversees the management of the services that are paid for by the special assessment and also conduct all the reporting to the city annually, regarding the expenditures of those assessments. not office of economic and workforce development overseas these agreements between the city and county of san francisco and a nonprofit management groups or the business improvement district. we are asking for your approval of this agreement. supervisor campos: any questions?

any specific highlights in the agreement, in terms of what it does? >> it is a bic agreement, it allows for -- thick agreement, it allows the nonprofit to operate for five and half years. it includes all of the city requirements for contracts with nonprofits for this purpose. supervisor campos: great. why don't we open it up to public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? you have three minutes. >> that was three minutes? supervisor campos: yes. >> it shows two on my counter.

thank you. douglas yepp. i have been living in santa scope for 35 years. i would like to speak on item one. -- san francisco 435 years. even when i have had business meetings on mission street, i am forced to do it in the daytime because i cannot afford to be an innocent victim in the ninth time. i think this is well in order. if people like me cannot afford to be on the street at night, i hate to think if you were a regular citizen going back and forth on mission street, how they must feel every night when they have to go through that. secondly, i am a little surprised that on today's agenda there was only one item pending under a 30-day rule.