the chief report is a report on crime statistics, recent activities, presentation of the first quarter findings and recommendations and presentation of the investigation of that summary. >> good evening. in deference to the time, i will give an abbreviated crime report. the good news is crime is down over the last four weeks. . property crime is down 11% accompanied by drops in burglary. violent crime continues to remain down with a 13% fewer here today. this equates to 176 fewer violent crimes. considering the crimes here today, we are slightly ahead of where we were last year with a net increase of 331 total crimes, approximately three

crimes per day. on homicides, we're 20 versus 17 last year. the number of arrests is flat, virtually the same. the number of shootings continue to be behind where we were in 2010. 67 against 69 shootings. >> it is abating a bit. >> where superstitious, but it has slowed. president mazzucco: item 3b. >> presentation of the first quarter findings and recommendations. >> the evening, commissioners. i am with the inspector.

i am here to do a quick presentation on the report as well as the status of the investigations. the first quarter convene the december 21. i think i have the date wrong. that should be march 15, 2011. as you can see, it is consistent with what is of their on the screen. the board looked at the discharge. only one occurred on january 16, 2011. it was while the officer was cleaning a firearm and it was discharged. nobody was injured. the report was submitted for review. an officer shooting occurred on

april 12. this incident involved a plainclothes officers stopping to detail driver on a series of different vehicle infractions. the vehicle fled and the officers that was to assist, during this incident, the suspect vehicle fled against one way traffic. the officer discharged a firearm. the rounded did strike the suspect and he was taken into custody. the finding in this matter was not a faulty finding and it was forwarded to the chief of police. >another shooting occurred on te 700 block of arkansas street. this had to do with an officer involved in the pursuit of a vehicle. during the pursuit, the officer

observed firing around. at the conclusion of the pursued, the officer discharged one of the suspects, and the suspect fled the scene. this was found to be and policy. i will be happy to take any questions you might have regarding the board. otherwise, we can move to the next report. this is actually up to date. but that was when the report was generated. we reported -- that we recorded a couple of chief summary letters.

a couple of other investigations were completed, and those will be brought forth. there was a dispute in terms of whether they should of been presented at the last one. it will work on that issue and bring it forward. the oldest open case we have is august of 2010. we are in good shape his darkly from where we have been in the past. we anticipate a few cases being presented in june of this year. and all told, we have 14 total cases that would include any open cases. any cases that require a summary letter, six are completed investigations. but only have eight open investigations. i will be happy to answer any

questions you have regarding the status of the shooting investigation. >> item 3b is occ directo'r's report. >> good evening members of the commission. just a brief report this evening, the day, we have mediated 25 cases compared the seven that we mediated year-to- date same time last year. that is because our coordinator last year at the beginning was an unexpected leave of absence. the mediations are rolling along, as a matter of fact. what i will report next week in my first scorer statistical report is that our rate of mediating cases is 8% compared

to our rate of stating cases which is 7%. a very high number of mediations, we are very happy about that. next week, we will determine the march statistical report as was the first quarter statistical report. that concludes my report for this evening. commissioner kingsley: with immediate cases, just in general column -- general, how many get resolved? you have any ballpark sense of that? >> that is a good question, i can provide debt information next week rather than give you a

guess. very few of where the complaint and walks away from the table feeling that nothing was resolved. i would say a large majority of them, they feel and it has been resolved in full or in part. i can provide you with that statistical information. what happens when a complaint and agrees to mediation, that is the final step in the process even if they are dissatisfied with the outcome of the mediation. the investigation is closed. i would say over 50% of the complaints that are asked if they would like to mediate do agree. with officers, and has been in the ninetieth percentile.

for them to agree. your welcome. finally, if budget cuts are taken, our mediation program will be eliminated simply because i don't have the staff to manage the mediation program without our very able mediation coordinator. it would be tragic. >> item 3c, an update of process. >> i have nothing. anybody else? >> helium at with steve johnson. this is regarding the hearing process.

did you want to say anything about that? >> i did not hear all of this. >> i will briefly summarize for the commission what the work in connection with the discipline case reform, kind of where it is today with the request at the end. that request is going to be to ask that next week, we address a charter amendment in connection with discipline reform. and that we also have a discussion around our own ideas in and thoughts in terms of improving the discipline process. i certainly have my thoughts on this as well. that is where i am leading with this.

as a reminder, we started down this road when the former chief indicated that he thought that we could do a better job in this department with our discipline hearing process and are disciplined process in general. he in particular was interested in getting more authority for the chief and police department in terms of authority for penalties. another matter which i have been advised by the city attorney is that since it relates to employment matters, it needs to be discussed in closed session. there is another matter that looks like to address in adequately would require an amendment to the charter in connection with the discipline as well. with meetings with the

department, what i hear them saying, you would like to see the hearing process be more efficient. identified, assessing, addressing problems, her of lying and effective, consistent, progressive system of discipline. you hear the department of seeing that giving more authority and responsibility in connection with the supply and is key to all of this. and all of this game is toward a potential charter amendments as well. >president mazzucco: in terms of scheduling, and we frame the discussion in some of your letter statements about how we can improve the discipline process? whatever comes out of that, it

might be all right at this point to say how that process would have been. individual commissioners can chime in about how they think it will best be done. i would ask that we frame it that way rather than in terms of a charter amendment. and whatever comes out of that comes out of that. would that be palatable to you? >> i would ordinarily say yes. the reason i am pushing towards a discussion early on a round of a charter amendment is that from the discussions that i have had the there are a number of issues that people had brought up, they are more likely than not going to entail a charter amendment to address them fully. because we're under a deadline, may 24 is the deadline for

submitting a proposal for a charter amendment for this ballot cycle. if we don't get there by may 24, it has to be before then. we would need a supervisor to introduce this to the board. that is why i am pushing to include in the general discussion because the city attorney's have come forward with a very straightforward charter amendment a proposal that would address all of these measures. i wanted to make sure that i covered this because of the sunshine act, i need to finish this. since i have already

distributed when i was going to say. i need to finish it, if i may, please. >> of the department or the chief would have full authority to decide of penalties through termination. if an officer wishes to appeal, the commission will hear the appeal. cases would be handled as they are presently with the same case is being forwarded to achieve departments. a director retaining power to refer a sustained case to the commission. i do feel the malaise. -- noise. president mazzucco: you see that that emanates from that, it is under a different constraints. you're talking about putting some and by the deadline. i was still suggest that it be framed the other way.

but that is my suggestion. >> you started the process, and you think is important. my concern is that in order to get a charter amendment, and to get the consensus required from all parties involved involving all of the issues that would have to be addressed, for example, you can't just raise one. the issues you have raised here are incredibly important. i think the most important issue from my personal standpoint is the way that we hear cases. i think yeah idea that we hear cases where individual commissioner take the evidence and the six other commissioners read the transcript and have to make judgments based upon

credibility judgments is a broken system. it is something that i personally would want to see addressed in a charter amendment. i guess my point is that i think may 24 is not going to happen. you have to get the mayor's office, the board of supervisors, community groups. you have got to get everybody on board. again, i have only been on the commission six months. i don't think we process works well. the items are a proponent of, but not the whole thing. i don't want to go to the voters unless we have these stakeholders behind it. you can't go to the ballot unless you have everybody done. i have never heard of a charter amendment in getting the valid

-- hitting the ballot in six weeks. i guess we have it for potential action. i would caution you that even folks that are going to be very supportive of you, including me of these recommendations are going to feel compelled to suggest the layout because i don't think we have gone and done the homework yet to get the community behind it that are going to need to be behind it to make it successful. commissioner dejesus: i cannot take any credit for this. i was in one meeting and there was nothing about a charter amendment. nothing was addressed. they talk about the system that we currently addressed. maybe having a little more authority to stopping things before they blow up.

kind of like the early warning sign system. i have never seen this charter amendment. i am disconcerted here that there is some kind of deadline. i never heard that there was some deadline. what i don't understand is that the chief wanted this because he was going to take control and have discipline. the whole reason it came here is because they couldn't even get them to respond to charges that they wanted to file. they let the statute of limitations run. they want everything and they will discipline officers and you will not have any of it. that is ludicrous. they have this commission more active in discipline and taking away from the department. they are not party to this. they have met with the multitude of groups.

they can bring it directly to the commission without having to be bound. i am kind of shocked. we bring in the parties that are part of this. he is gone. six months ago, he wants all this power. we have an interim chief, this is really premature. i feel like i was sucked into the charter amendment thing. here is something to enhance the rules. i think that this is premature. i am disconcerted here that we have some kind of deadline. i never heard that we have a

charter amendment. i did not participate in any meeting that said that. it is premature, and it is going the wrong way. we haven't even finished voting on our own rules to see if that is going to work verses' some kind of charter amendment. >> my concern is that we are having the discussion now which is one of the reasons why wanted to have a discussion. you wanted it again does or what ever. i suggest this not be around an amendment, but a discussion. i think in the end, we're still going to have to decide. >> i think this is the wrong way to go. we have begun to tweak our

rules. i have worked hours with the city attorney. we have cut our backlog by half. commissioners have worked harder. we are not a political body. that is what the mayor does. if we are going to go on, i will go on, too. i suggest we wait until seven of us are here. i move that we continue this item to next week's's meeting. >> i second of this. >> i don't think we should have a discussion to have discussions, we should have a discussion with seven of us here. with respect, the best of intentions, we are motivated by good intentions. we ought to all the at the table. >> i suggest we discuss it next week.

we can't have a motion because it is not open for action. >> we will talk about a charter next week. >> i was afraid that would put an item on for discussion. >> i don't think we should be having this debate or discussion now without all of us here. let me just respond to that. to my chagrin, items and the because one commissioner wanted. to sit around and say that we ought not do this at all and i think is completely disingenuous for many people here. if you want to have a discussion about discipline, it has got to be good for the goose, but for the gander. the idea that we won't even have a discussion about the supply and i respect proposition h.. i think the proposition as it stands now is fundamentally

flawed. it is not fair to the officers, the department, or the commission. i think we should have an open and honest discussion about it. it might subsequently lead to a charter amendment. not even suggest that we have a discussion about his is really -- come on, guys. >> there is a motion [unintelligible] >> what i understood the motion to beat is to take this item -- the commissioner is just trying to hedge and -- agendizing it. >> commissioner slaughter, that is not my intention. my intention is that we have an honest and open discussion.

rather than keep going, i suggest we continue this discussion next week. >> i would like to add, if i may. think you all for your input. i understand totally where you're coming from the. of the point in terms of getting all the appropriate stakeholders' on board. it is ambitious. maybe it doesn't happen. but it gets as focused so that by the next time around, we're there. it might take a lot of time. and the other hand, i feel much more optimistic about this. as to commissioner dejesus, the reason why it has not been framed in that fashion, up until now, it has been in exploratory meetings to get some ideas on

what they think could make the system better. it is not just that. even though it started there. that is one solution that seems to be pointing in that direction i know it took you by surprise. when i further talk with the city attorney about the deadlines, it became very apparent that if we did not take this head on and trouble with that, that we needed to do that. i would just like to add one more thing. that is that we adhere a couple of discussions. a critical part of this needs to

be discussed in closed session. i propose that we have part of the discussion in open session and the necessary part scheduled for an agenda item. >> attempts like this have happened before. that is why i know that we have never actually discussed this at the commission meeting. we have studied the department, we have never actually had a discussion or studied the disciplinary process. i would like to have a discussion openly here. i don't mind people talking to other people, but we have not had it here. that is what i am trying to do. however you want to legendize -- agendize it.

the point is, i just want to have the discussion. >> can we agendize it for both open and closed? >> i will talk to commissioner mazzucco. >> are we at agendizing for next week? commissioner marshall: we are at commission reports that will lead us to d. we will get there. it will be there in some form in a way that maximizes discussion. let's go to item d. >> scheduling of items for future commission meetings. commissioner marshall: we have one? another one?

>> we are going to meet with the human rights commission at some point. commissioner marshall: where were we? >> may 4. the human rights commission had their meeting and asked if we could do it may 11. commissioner marshall: what is here for may 11? nothing? >> i will not be here, and i wish to be part of the conversation. commissioner marshall: anybody else? commissioner hammer? commissioner