>> i pledge allegiance to the flag, one nation, under god, indivisible, -- secretary lt. falvey: taking roll call. commission president thomas president mazzucco

is en route. commissioner dejesus. commissioner chan is en rout5e -- route. commissioner slaughter: here. secretary lt. falvey: you have a quorum. >> this is the regular meeting for the police commission, wednesday, march 16, 2001. commission president thomas mazzucco is on his way, and until he arrives, i will be leading this. some items will not be called this evening. which leads us to, lieutenant,

please call item no. 1. secretary lt. falvey: item number one is general public comment, where members of the public can address the commission. speakers shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or occ personnel. neither police nor occ personnel nor commissioners are required to respond but may provide a brief response. commissioners and occ personnel are advised to not enter into any debates. comments are limited to three minutes. >> please come forward. the microphone. >> ok. hello, ladies and gentlemen.

my name is christine harris. i have repeatedly asked sfpd to have a stalker stay away from me. i wanted him to stop contacting me. i videotaped him in the hallway. he said, "they are going to attack you and your family and really hurt you." still, no one has done anything. he has left three threatening message on my voice mail after that, which i have recorded. and last week, i served the city and 70 of san francisco, several others -- i serve the city and county of several -- of san francisco -- i served the city and county of san francisco. there was a message left on my

recorder saying they were going to kill my family. i want to know how they know if i have family. this is the message. >> received yesterday at 7:22 p.m. >> christine, it is raj. they are controlling you. [inaudible] i am on your side. i am on your side. [beep] >> message saved. >> it appears to me that the gentleman needs to be held accountable. thank you.

>> good evening, commissioners. mr. crump, c-r-u-m-p. the only issue that i want to raise -- last week, i mentioned at the public safety meeting -- actually, in light of the room rage at the hotel -- so i was not going to speak any more about that issue. the second thing is that i noticed, when i go to the sfpd web site, in the archive section, 2007 and 2009 is inaccessible to public view, and i am kind of curious as to why

that is the case, and i wanted to address that to your attention. so another thing, too, in reference to ms. harris' testimony, i, too, listened to that very testimony, and it would be nice if you guys were attentive without speaking in the background. i wanted to get your attention. yes, i have been eight witness at some of these -- i have been a witness. i do not know what was up with this guy, whether he was disease, mentally insane, but he really should be 51-50, with harassment and stalking standards, she has suffered enough.

the past few years, i have seen some of the stuff happen. unfortunately, i do not have any confidence in the sfpd, so i just basically wanted to give testimony to that. >> thank you. next speaker. >> commissioners, san francisco open government. i just received this today. it is a determination from the sunshine ordinance. findings of fact and conclusions of law. judging on the testimony that was presented, the task force finds that the testimony constituted criticism protected by one section and that the commission in which to that criticism in violation of the same. -- the commission enriched that

criticism in violation of the same. i have been monitoring your meetings on sfgtv. it came to item six, the discussion of public comment regarding going into closed session, and dr. marshall kicked repeatedly saying, "you can talk about what is in the item -- and dr. marshall kept repeatedly saying, "you can talk about what is in the item, you can talk about what is in the item." one man stood up and said that he wanted to talk about something, and he was told he could not talk about that. six lawyers of the seven members of the commission. why you have to be taken to the sunshine ordinance to get the right to speak, and then i have to get up here to tell you that you really do not have the right to tell members of the public from talking about an item at all. you have a double track.

you say if it is on the agenda, you cannot talk about it on the general public comment, and then you say you have rules that mean you cannot talk about this part of this or that part of it. you do not have a leg to stand on. you are discounting on the fact that people do not want to spend an thousand dollars or $20,000 suing you for the right to speak -- people do not want to spend $10,000. in a public forum, you actually tell people there are things you will not let them talk about. now, it is always nice to note that the things you will not let them talk about are things you do not want said and things you do not want heard. you never stop them from logging you for something. you never stop them from complimenting you -- you never stop them from lauding you.

during the conversations of the mental health training and the tasers, i noticed there was a lack of courtesy and even blaine's condescension from one board member to others who wanted to make comet -- and even blatant condescension from one board member to others who wanted to make a comment. if you cannot respect each other -- [bell] >> next. >> i understand that you do have jurisdiction over police regulatory procedures, cage management, and this is regarding a lot that was enacted last year -- a law that was enacted last year, and i think

it was designed for illegal aliens, because they need their car to go to work, too, so i want to know what is an unlicensed driver. i am no angel. i have had my car impounded before, and i wanted to take use of the amnesty, but i your recently -- i recently found out my license was suspended. i am a u.s.-born citizen. do i not have the same rights? i need my car to go to work, to come and find a job period -- i need my car to go to work, too, and find a job. i need my car. i will pay the fees. is it consistent, the interpretation of a lot? -- of the log -- itlaw -- the

law? i have reported this to three officers. the officer who impounded my car was officer number 202. he did not really recognized the name, but he said, yes, the assistant d.a., and he did not know how to get my issues to be investigator. so i found out about the occ, and maybe between the two of you, i can get my harassment and other issues addressed. number three, during these issues, i noticed someone following me when i came out of a gas station. this was 3:30 in the morning of april last year. he pretended that he was going home, and he actually ran up into a precinct. 3:30 in the morning. there was nobody there. i walked in, and i had an

argument, and i run down the stairs, and i made a 911 call. i told 911 i get better service getting a ticket. "do you want to wait for an officer?" and the guy was still in the lobby. do the cameras in their work? if you call, they will say, a bold faced lie, that there is somebody there 24/7. do the cameras in the lobby work? number four, please -- [bell] take -- off of the police academy curriculum. >> thank you. >> hello, my name is mr. hunter. i spoke at the last police commission meeting, safety meeting, over here in the big room, and i have come back to just point a few things out to the police commission, and, for

one, when people come or go to the police commission, occ to file a complaint, that person must have been violated to take all of this time to go there, so he or she should be taken seriously. i will say that to the whole group. and the only avenue a person has come a citizen has come is to go to the occ. i do not know how long the occ has been around, but they have been around long enough. as you see with the corruption, i do not believe that occ is enough to put the fear in officers when they are committing this misconduct on the citizens of san francisco that, oh, they file a complaint with the occ.

i would just say that, and i mean no disrespect. i filed a complaint with them because that is my only option, to file with the occ, so i filed a complaint back in august, and it was finalized july 1, 2010. the allegation of unwarranted action against a police officer for searching you is sustained. this was in 2008, when i filed this, so it is nothing new. especially in the black communities, where police do not understand the logistics of how the black communities are, so when they go there, their mentality is -- an illegal search. low economic areas. across the street, there may be a $500,000 condo.

they go to low-income areas in parts of the city and conduct is bad business, as you know. i went to jail three times by the hands of the s&p -- sfpd, and at no time did i go into the courtroom to have the charges dismissed. they were already dismissed. they were sending me to jail, just because they had the authority to send me to jail, and when the officers are in the fifth district committing these acts -- reese. start with him, who is an undercover officer. i am sure the occ is familiar with that name. [bell] >> anyone else to speak on items

not on the agenda? >> are you going to speak on -- >> closed session. we definitely do want to hear from you at that time, sir. >> i want to say that part of the bay community is here, as well. [applause] >> any further public comment? i just want to thank everybody for coming tonight. i cannot specify what you are here, but if i could, if i could just briefly had a moment with counsel for one of the officers come in maybe we can do that, but it is up to you. -- for one of the officers, and maybe we can do that. mr. johnson?

we will move on to the next speaker, and we will address your issue after that. good evening, sir. >> hello, my name is -- and i am a san francisco taxi driver. i wanted to make public comment. there has been some robberies against cabdrivers, and i guess the issue is taxi driver safety, and they are putting more of these video cameras in zaidi -- the taxis that take continuous video, but i wonder if the people who really gain from this are mainly insurance companies and others who are saving a lot of money by having these cameras

installed. they can determine who is at fault. i know the claim is that they deter crime, but i do not know if it is really true, because there are still robberies happening against cabdrivers, so that is all i wanted to say, really. that there could be some kind of driver safety training or something like that, some kind of participation involvement, maybe educate drivers on how to better deal with this issue. vice president marshall: thank you. i just saw an article today on the safety of cabdrivers, and i know that we want to be involved in that. if you can leave your name with the assistant chief, you can become part of that process, if you would like. thank you. and i have just been advised from the police officers

association that we can acknowledge the individuals who are here tonight in support of a particular officer. if you could please stand-up? if you're here to support the officer? please stand up and be recognized. [applause] so i would like to thank you, and at some point, you folks will be available to come forward and testified, thank you. any further public comment? good evening. what is new at city hall, clyde? >> i spent a lot of time praying -- i spend a lot of time. i want to congratulate a lot of the great work you have done. i know you people are not compensated. i know it is all in mayor lee's hands. the pain that we, the pain of

these accusations of these undercover police officers, i am not going to call them -- the pain is running deep. as far as the police not caring, let me tell you. not for themselves. they are wondering. they are scratching their heads. i hope it is coming to a transparent, on this resolution. vice president marshall: think you, clyde's. any further public comment? -- thank you, clyde. if we can call item number two, please? secretary lt. falvey: item number two, a discussion and possible action to adopt revised department general order 5.02, use of firearms. vice president marshall: the use of firearms.

this has been a work in progress with collaboration between the police department, the police commission, and the occ, and it is my understanding, mr. o.d. -- mr. mahoney? >> that is correct. we have finally reached consensus. vice president marshall: i appreciate all of your hard work. it is in your packets. any comments? i think director hicks wants to say something. director hicks first. director hicks: yes, the occ has reached agreement with the police department. some language that we suggested be included in the dgo was

determined by the department to be tactical in nature, so we proposed that when there is training on the new dgo, should it be adopted, that the training include the following, the officers shall not intention to place themselves in harm's way by standing in front of a moving vehicle, standing directly behind a moving vehicle, or reaching inside a vehicle. secondly, provisions exist because moving to cover, repositioning, and/or waiting for back up to gain or maintain a superior tactical advantage maximizes officer and public safety in minimizes the necessity of using deadly force. -- and minimized the necessity of using deadly force. -- and minimizes the necessity. thank you. vice president marshall: thank

you, director hicks. commissioner hammer? commissioner hammer: i think we should put this in plain language for the people of san francisco who are watching. because we have a situation where officers were finding themselves in situations of firing on cars, an incredible risk that they happen to hit the driver in the car, and it would have unintended consequences. some kid walking across the street, -- the perception that it is sort of an either/or. that either the officer is going to be safe or someone else is going to be safe. this is to maximize everybody's safety, and it sounds like we are going to be able to do that. that was the goal all along, to amend the training so you do not get in situations where they feel compelled to shoot c