a broad spectrum of different backgrounds, different races, different ethnic religions. to say that sfpd would profile just one group when they are a very small minority in the city and county of san francisco is probably not a big item on their list. i have been a taxi driver in the city and county of san francisco for 13 years. i have seen crimes take place with no policemen around. i have seen crimes of every background that you can imagine, everything except for a shootout, with no policeman around. i can say this emphatically. most of the crimes i have seen in the city and county of san francisco have been of ethnic

backgrounds that were not part of this city just 25 years ago. if the police department has to specifically look at some of these backgrounds, i think they have the power to. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. january 2 of 2011, my brother charles harrison was murdered in the tenderloin in san francisco. today, i would like to speak on something that was stated in the chronicle, i believe by a spokesperson from the san francisco police department. i was told two weeks ago when i come before the public that i should have my information as accurate as possible so that when i say something, you know, it reflects accuracy. so i believe, since i am being asked to be held to that standard, that the police

department should also be held to that standard. when you have somebody who says something more makes a statement to the public in "the chronicle ," they should make sure they have all their facts together so they are not painting an ugly picture out there about, you know, somebody's family. something else i wanted to talk about is that i have been watching the news lately and there has been a murder between a latino person and an asian person. they are using this person's tattoo. they have been advertising this on the news. they're using it to identify the person who was responsible. the police are interested in -- i am asking, can also the video that was gotten when my brother was murdered in the tenderloin, because a lot of it was caught on tape. i'm not sure how much was caught on tape.

i have been told that the tape and the film as grainy. would like to know if we can use what we can of that video. they're saying they have a hard time to identify the suspects. can part of that video be used to, you know, help identify the suspect in my brother's murder? i would like to say for myself and my family, we are law abiding citizens of san francisco and of the state of california, you know, and the pledge of allegiance you all pledge, justice for all, we want justice according to the laws of san francisco. we don't want just as any other way. we will not a lot of our way to do anything and take justice in our own hands, but we are looking for the police department to do their job in investigating thoroughly my brother's murder and making sure that the person who is

responsible for the murder is brought to justice so that it doesn't have to be taken, you know, outside of the proper way of doing things. i appreciate also all of the work that detectives have been doing on my brother's case. i don't want to make it like i am going off on the sfpd. i appreciate everything they have been doing. president mazzucco: think you, mr. harris. >> i filed a complaint against the san francisco police department. i alleged that over an extended period of time, the police department harassed me in an effort to get me to leave the city because i knew the identity of one of the confidential informants in the jackson street gang case. do you hear me? the occ ruled information only.

they said the matters i brought up raised issues that were beyond the jurisdiction of the occ. the definition of "information only" is the actions described were not permitted by sworn member of the department or the story told is so unbelievable that it cannot be accepted by a competent authority. they also said, regarding the statement in the letter of finding, that it was beyond the jurisdiction of the occ. one of the investigators told me that the fbi [inaudible] the policemen that i named in the complaint was retired and therefore they did not have jurisdiction over that police officer anymore. tonight makes my fourth attempt

to get clarification on all of those findings. i went and met with the occ investigators at the end of their investigation and try to get them to clarify what they are telling me, and they would not. i sent a letter to the occ director and she refused to explain the findings for me. i came before the police commission on the 27th of april and requested clarification. between that time and now, i met with one of the investigators. she basically told me to go screw myself. so i am here one last time, hopefully, to get clarification on what the occ's findings were. what i would like would be to get a letter from the occ describing what they mean by " information only." it is a story that i told -- is

the story i told unbelievable? if so, why? were the actions that i described not committed by a member of the department? i would also like clarification on what the minimum -- [inaudible] i am hoping i can get that letter sometime soon. [tone] president mazzucco: all right. thank you, sir. good evening, clyde. >> a note to the people making public comment. please speak directly into the microphone so sfgtv can pick you up. >> i would like to address the police chief on derogatory, disingenuous, and mean comments,

publicly, privately, against our city public defender. you may or may not agree with him publicly or professionally or his point of views. to walk on the street and the mean that man because of his race, because of his financial status, i know that. i ran into the head of the poa and he disgraced me publicly. it is true. it is wrong. i don't have to agree with your opinion. you do not have to be mean the person because of his ethnicity. we must debate issues, not slanderous attacks. a lot of these police officers should be ashamed of themselves for doing that. thank you. president mazzucco: any further general comment? hearing none, he -- colorado item two. >> the response to concerns raised by the human rights commission's september 23, 2010

hearing report, "from -- , "community concerns of surveillance, racial and religious profiling of arabs, middle eastern, muslim, and south asian communities and potential reactivation of sfpd intelligence gathering." >> when several members of the police commission attended the original meeting, september 23, 2010, there were concerns addressed by the public regarding their perceptions about what the police department is doing in their participation with the joint terrorism task force and other concerns. these are things that affect their life. these concerns were taken to heart by the police commission. when we received the report, there are allegations in the support, but there are not

factual findings. there are concerned. these concerns have escalated to the point where the police commission feels we need to address these concerns. in doing so, background. how did we get here this evening? there has been work between the issuance of this report and to night's hearing. under the direction of the director of the human rights commission, theresa sparks, we probably had a good 8 to 10 meetings involving different participants. those participants are the aclu, john crew, the law caucus, and members of the san francisco police commission, myself, commissioner slaughter, and commissioner dejesus. members of the police department command staff, we have met to discuss what changes we think we need to happen in order to alleviate the concerns of the community and to change the perceptions. we have met with the police departments. we have met today with the u.s.

attorney's office. we have met with the special agent in charge of the federal bureau of investigation. we have taken every step we can to address these concerns before coming here this evening. before i speak any further, let me say this commission takes your concerns and perceptions to heart. the san francisco police department has a policy against profiling, against racial discrimination. you can see from that command staff that did before you tonight, we are a diverse department to represent san francisco. we take this very seriously. we put a lot of work into tonight's hearing. i hope everybody is responsible in their comments. i ask that you be direct. in our meeting today with the attorney's office and the fbi, give us evidence. we will look into it. they are concerned. i am listed as the first speaker. before we move into this meeting, to set the tone, i will move to the last speaker, chief

greg suhr. he will make announcements that will take -- that will set a good tone for this evening. chief? >> thank you, commissioner mazzucco. first of all, i would like to affirm everything the commissioner said as just so. i appreciate the outreach by the human rights commission to the community. i want to acknowledge the validity of the perceptions raised by the community. that said, we have very strict policies in san francisco police department in place so there is appropriate oversight for all investigations involving activities. 8.10 came about in 1994, has been revised once, and i believe mr. crew collaborated significantly on the original version of this order.

oversight include audits from the occ, a monthly meeting with a designated police commissioner, and approval required by the chief for first amendment investigations. specifically, with regard to the jttf, the police department has been a member since the attacks of september 11. there have always beensfpd -- been sfpd supervisors overseeing the clearance. jttf was assigned to his homeland security unit. i gave the order today. jttf will be moved back under special investigation. they will have the security clearance necessary to oversee the activities. the members are required to comply with all department policies, even if they can inflict -- if they conflict with

fbi policies. simply said, the san francisco policies, procedures, laws, and statute trump any federal policy or procedure. our officers are bound by those. to emphasize that, i worked with the captain and the other members of the command staff with the cooperation of the aclu, hrc, and the fbi to draft a bureau order that all members are subject to, which essentially turns back the clock and emphasizes that officers are responsible for our policies and procedures first. there was also a question raised that was not in the order as to whether the officers would identify themselves as members of the police department or across-designated task force agents with federal credentials. our officers are bound to identify themselves as san

francisco police officers. that is also in the bureau order i will give to presidents sparks -- president sparked. the department reviewed the resolution. the city stepped out of the jttf because of the concern of not being able to be informed of potential terrorist activities by the fbi and federal authorities. they recently rejoined and adopted an mou that we took content from in drafting this bureau order that i think meets a lot of the concerns that caused become -- the convening of this session. the department offered this bulletin. in it, members must identify themselves as members of -- as police officers, not federal agents. they work on terrorist cases that have a criminal maxus. the chief reviews all investigations on a quarterly basis and he is to meet with any

change in fbi command to explain these protocols within 30 days of that change in fbi command. we will continue to work with the fbi and hrc to engage in dialog regarding our members' roles and responsibilities and are receptive to this particular unit bureau order. we are happy to amend it further. as far as to night came, i wanted there to be something that was a standing protocol in place moving forward that i could represent to this body. president mazzucco: thank you, chief. the tone is that most of the concerns we heard regarding whether or not the memorandum of understanding from 2003 was different from the most recent one, about what trumps, whether our officers' orders supersede what the fbi said, we have now made that clear. our officers follow our

department general orders. we follow our san francisco values. the chief gets a lot of credit, as does captain mahoney, who worked diligently to make sure that most of these questions have been answered before tonight's hearing. i want to thank them for their hard work and think the chief for making quick, good decisions. the other thing that came up, there is concern about what took place at the airport. i think we should make clear the police department has absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever over the tsa. that is not something that comes within our jurisdiction. i want to make that clear. i want to thank everybody for their hard work. this was all accomplished thanks to the hard work of the aclu, the law caucus, and the human rights commission. with that in mind, we can move forward with the hearing. >> thank you, my name is michael sweet, and i am chair of the human rights commission.

i think the police commission for sharing their regular meeting time with us and for everyone to join us, i want to take a second to recognize that we have been joined by a number of additional members of the human rights commission. they have joined us a sense roll was called. the record will reflect their presence. i want to echo mazzucco's statements regarding the tenor of this meeting and acknowledge for everyone what i feel has been a great collaborative effort between our commission, are commission staff, and a number of different entities, including the police department, as well as other organizations in town. i want to recognize the hard work of the aclu in bringing issues to our attention.

i want to say a few things to lay the context for why we are here, at least from the human rights commission. many of you who are here today were also present on september 23, 2010, when the human rights commission held a special hearing concerning the community. i believe that over 150 folks attended that hearing, many of whom spoke. what they said was heard. rolling from that hearing up through where we are today, a number of events have transpired, which i will identify in sequence. our commission convened unanimously and adopted a report of the hearing, and there were a number of recommendations in that report. what i will identify is number

12, which requested that the human rights commission, the board of supervisors, and the police commission ensure that all officers, including those deputized, follow and comply with local and state privacy laws, including the sfpd's general order, which provides guidelines for officers to ensure the protection of first amendment rights in their investigation. soon afterwards, on march 1, supervisor mirkarimi introduced a resolution at the board of supervisors and encouraged relevant agencies to consider recommendations detailed in the report. the following month, the board of supervisors voted to endorse the report. about this time, the memorandums of understanding came to light and raised some additional concerns and questions, as identified by the chief and

police commission chair mazzucco. questions were asked and the dialogue commenced. i look at tonight by no means as the end of a discussion. i think the dialogue has to continue. i think it will always continue, particularly in san francisco. the way a city like this can succeed and folks can work together to celebrity -- collaborative lee is a testament to the people who work here who want to have a dialogue. i expect it to continue for many months. i do think this is a watershed event. the coming together of these commissions and the opportunity to ask some questions and get some answers, and i think that what we have seen and heard from the chief and what we have heard about the bureau order of may 16, 2011, and the other steps that are being taken, i think will go a long way toward helping to alleviate some of the concerns. there will always be concerns of

the nature of what we're dealing with here, but i would hope that folks in the room would feel that progress is being made. most significantly, folks who came and spoke on a september 23, 2010, less than a year ago, will recognize that the system is working. voices were heard. there have been discussions of the highest levels in the city. less than a year later, in a city where it takes 10 years to build a 20-rebuilding, we are here to talk about those concerns and to address them. i want toothache -- thank everyone for coming here tonight. i want to thank the commission for being gracious enough for incorporating us in this meeting. i look forward to hearing what folks have to say. with that, i will turn it to the police commission share. president mazzucco: our next speaker will be theresa sparks,

director of the human rights commission. she is behind all of this. she is a former president of the police commission. when her mind is set on something, you had better get out of the way. >> thank you for your remarks. welcome, everybody, to this hearing. i want to thank members of the police commission for agreeing to hold this joint hearing with the human rights commission. it is really an important step in ensuring that public safety and the civil rights of all citizens of san francisco. members of both commissions have also participated in this process. i would want to personally thank the presidents for their participation as well. i want to thank members of the coalition for safe san francisco, a coalition of numerous african, arab, middle eastern, muslim, and south asian organizations for their

ongoing commitment and energy in making sure we continue to address these important issues and ensuring our public officials remain faithful to all citizens of san francisco. we must clarify many of these issues defined by the september 13 hearing and subsequent report, most notably the american civil liberties union and the asian law caucus. thank you. i would be remiss if i did not think the members of the public who participated and spoke at the september 138 jersey meeting and are also here tonight to listen to this status report. the subject of this hearing is one of the most significant issues in this country today. it addresses two of the fundamental principles established by the constitution, a common defense and civil

rights for all people in big u.s. eric holder, in comments at an annual dinner in san francisco, stated, "communities we serve must see and fully understand that we are defining civil rights that are bigger than public safety." he went on to say the relationships between the arab, muslim, and asian communities are critical to ensuring public safety and civil rights. this is a follow-up to the hearing held that thehrc -- held at the hrc earlier. there was a report from february 4, 2011. it is critical to understand that the hearing and the creation of this report was a joint effort, not only the hrc,

but the coalition for save san francisco. this is a community-based, community-generated process. during the hearing, a number of members testified to alleged civil rights violations by various agencies, including the fbi, sfpd, and others. we categorize testimony in 31 separate findings. it is important to note these findings are not findings of fact. their specific statements made by the community. hrc did no independent investigation to verify this testimony. from these findings, we created 16 specific recommendations, of which we will talk about this evening. hrc has been working to address the recommendations detailed in the report and have created a task force in conjunction with

the coalition comprised of community members and staffed by the commission. we have had meetings and conversations with representatives of the sfpd, the police commission, the san francisco airport, of the mayor's office, and others to discuss the best way to implement the recommendations. we will divide these into three general categories for recommendations, of which there 16. one category is for the board of supervisors to work with thehrc -- with the hrc to hold public forums in the community some members of the community can address agencies directly, can address sfpd, the fbi, the human rights commission, the police commission directly. in conversations with the fbi, with the attorney, with the

sfpd, we have a tentative agreement to move forward in some form with public meetings, a town hall-style meetings, where there is a dialogue between these agencies in the community. hrc will be facilitating these meetings hopefully in communities that are heavily populated by members of the community. the recommendation to the board of supervisors was to create a commission similar to the historic church commission to review potential abuses by government surveillance and first and fourth amendment right. we have not been able to do it yet, but we intend to do so. also to encourage the board to implement the recommendations of the inspector general and appoint a special prosecutor to look into terrorism cases to determine if the prosecution in these cases is valid and fair. we have also asked in these

recommendations for the board of supervisors to install a permanent ombudsmen to provide oversight for are arriving travelers and to discuss and mediate issues that might be arising between travelers and various public officials and federal agencies at the airport. we have met with the director of the san francisco airport. he has scheduled a meeting for us sometime in the near future. he has also met with the coalition and other individuals in the community to try to address these issues. keep in mind that most of the law enforcement activities at the airport are not in the hands of the san francisco police department. they are at the hands of tsa and immigration officials. we will be hopefully meeting with them as well in the near future. future. it is noted that in the annual it is noted that in the annual