was insightful. and very helpful. at least i recommend it to the commissioners that have not done it yet, by all means, do the training. by the way, we are both very grateful to the department for providing us with this opportunity. and we want to thank them. commissioner chan: i agree. i appreciated the chance to go through that training. there were high-ranking members of the department of their helping us understand the fourth options trading. the computer simulation was quite helpful. i could see that there was one involving a woman hallucinating holding a knife, one that looks like a veteran trying to commit

suicide by cops. those are perfect scenarios we can use. i can see exactly where the escalation if it's there, because among the various options available at the time, the extended range, there is a whole of verbal and the escalation component in the eye could see him in there and expanding upon the tools available to officers in dealing with those types of situations and other ones that are very related. no one was injured and i did not injure anyone else, which was good news. commissioner marshall: i remember when i did it. i of think it has changed, but i will do it again.

anything else under item 2d? yes, we move to 2d. >> scheduling of items for future commission meetings. commissioner marshall: any announcements? >> the posting of the meeting. commissioner marshall: we will take items b, c, and d.

>> i have a very brief comment. i will not get to the report. i will bring up something i have brought up in the past that doesn't seem to be appropriate at any given time. it seems to be underutilized and not used. i have a background as a journalist and a reporter. it turns out reporters by the hundreds. they are not used in the investigative division that is understaffed, and there are people that aren't paying $150,000 a year to do clerical work. i have objected to that nonstop,

even last year when the police commission is very well organized. i don't think we need a lieutenant commander making $175,000 a year. those are the types of jobs that go for $15 an hour. begin the facts out of cases and turning them over to investigators. to save a lot of time. the reporters are city reporters and down the road, we are looking for real jobs. having jobs for the sfpd and the occ. nobody has ever utilized them. on the complaint i have against officer would where he assaulted me for a minute and a half in front of 12 witnesses, i was

interviewed by telephone. and that was in. and then it got lost in a reshuffle. no one person came up to me an interview me at all. i did my interviews later by talking to people in the same room. 12 other hall of justice employees, no person can now to talk to them. those are just things i would like to bring up that can not only save money for the police department, but also can bring journalists and reporters out here doing a job for you. to help out. because reporters are trained in writing police reports. i have taken a few courses myself, i know what a police report is. so do a lot of reporters and

journalists. commissioner marshall: further public comment? lieutenant, you can call item no. 3. >> occ director hicks. commissioner marshall: you have the priority list. you have the tiers about how to adjust . if we so choose, the priorities on this list. commissioners can all join in. >> thank you, mr. president.

we will see if there are any that he became. -- need to be changed. and get feedback from the public, and get things on the list or not ont he list -- on the list that they live like to see the commission give its attention. and then, beyond this, as an individual commissioner, i would like to throw out that the commission, once we set our priorities, we take a systematic look at certain areas within the

department and occ to first educate ourselves as well as to get an update on how those divisions with the department's -- department and occ, how they are working, and there are crisis items that come up from time to time, and i would like our commission to spend some time thinking about how we as a condition went to handle that. earlier this year, there was the surveillance camera rolls -- cameras that came down, and in some of these events, they are being investigated by various departments and various

agencies, but i do not think that that should necessarily preclude the commission from doing its own investigation or looking into those kinds of events. the other matter was the number of cases, like 36 cases megapixels -- 38 cases that da gascon has taken out due to lack of evidence. things of that nature that come up, i think that as a commission, we should decide what we are going to do about those things, in terms of our priorities, as well, so -- vice president marshall: we have 3 tiers. can we take away those things?

forgive me if we have already done days. . of language access, the things that are there you see. so i believe we a pretty much taken care of the discipline cases under the procedural rules. with that come off of the case? >> mr. president, i think that has been addressed for the time being, but the second part of that is yet to come, but i think there probably is not anything that the commission can do at this point in time. but i would not take that moment off of the list. vice president marshall: you would not take it off of the list? you would move it down in the tiers, but you would not take it

off of a list of >> -- take it off of the list? so the suggestion would be to move into a different tier? let me just make these suggestions. >> you can keep on the blue note -- keep it on the blue boat -- blow -- blue tier. vice president marshall: -- >> this commission has not done much on language access. i just looked at the equal access service compliance report that adrien gave us last week, and the department, while good in some places, is not good in other places, language access, so i think we need to have a hearing about

implementing this general order. vice president marshall: do you want to leave it? >> yes. vice president marshall: mental health issues? leave it on the top tier? this other one, we know where we are with that. >> do we want to move that to blue? vice president marshawn: -- marshall: getting with commissioner mazzucco. >> i would say to leave that until we can get with commissioner mazzucco. you have been at the commission longer than i have. vice president marshall.

-- vice president marshall: that is fine. we all noted for these groups. nightclub violence? personally, i would not move that one, myself, but not everything can be on the top, so we have to make some decisions. commissioner: why do we not get something from the chief on that? >> nightclub violence, not that it is not possible, but it has not been a problem of late. i think the clubs are policing themselves better. i think a lot of the conditions being put upon the clubs have been affected. i met with the entertainment commission, and then at the entertainment commission summoned about using some officers in a district sort of

fashion for the outside of the clubs, and then some of the automatics, like violence inside the club, that gets you a closure the next night. that seems to have been affected. again, with the numbers of people that we draw from every corridor of the bay area, we do not always of every time we have a big evening here in the city, and most weekends are a big evenings, but i think that the measures we have put in place have been better at improving the situation dramatically, so i am happy to report back on things that are in place, things that are different, things that have been done, but i think the fact that it has been done lately, and by lely my three months and a couple of months before that. vice president marshall: a lot of these, i do not have a

problem moving into a different tier. >> we were not really able to execute that, so that is something we did what to do. >> community policing, we are doing that right now. >> you will have a community policing general order. we are in the middle of our meetings. one at the central district. anyway, they are weekly. we already have been in the bayview in the mission, and now we have one in the central. i believe we have one in the western addition, and then we have another one in the terrev el. we are on schedule to have that

to you for consideration. >> we remain on the top tier then. i think i know what this means. the ongoing concern about a possible reduction of sworn officers we talk about it, but i do not know how to address it. what would you want to do with it? >> i know we have a succession plan it will all depend on the budget. >> i guess the issue for me would be doing this so we can address them, so i am looking at these that we would calendar first and foremost, i guess.

i guess this is an ongoing review of things. >> that is always going to bubble up to the top as we go into budget season. what i would do, and hopefully with the support of the commission, we will work with the board and the mayor's office as much as possible to try to get a minimum of three classes. vice president marshall: it seems that is always there, but i do not know how we would address it in some sort of formal way. what are your thoughts? commissioner: when the budget occurs, obviously, but as we go on, in between budgeting times, you mention that we have a succession plan put together? >> provided we get a minimum of

three classes per year. i think we can hold the line, as it were, but we went to see an officer that was retiring, and he is 11 months senior to me in the police department, but we have six academy classes between us, which means in 1981, we hired six academy classes, and that when on problem for a period of four or five years. all of those officers are going to leave. some of them have obviously left over time, but it is hard to replace six academy classes for a five-year period when they all get to the end, unless you're hiring three to five classes to make up for those officers leaving. vice president marshall note -- marshall: i guess we can leave it there. i do not know how to a

particular address that one. unless somebody else? moving to the second tier, i do not see -- brady 2. >> what this is referencing is that there was a bureau order that was last year to respond to the brady concerns. a lot of police departments do not have a brady policy, and we need to review the order, see how it is doing, and consider turning it into a department order, because the brady order is temporary, and we should probably have a more permanent brady policy. we are going to work on that. i do not think there was much work done. commissioner: and if i remember, the department wanted to see how the new was working, and then

tweak it in the direction of a dgo. >> i do know that there has been at least one appealed and overturned create it is possible that we need to sort of recovery what is appropriate in the way of brady letters, and, again, the judge is so knowledgeable on these things, having been a prior supreme court justice that he is probably the best to tell us on how the things we are doing, and i think we're pretty much all up to speed on brady letters, but now, some of the letters are being appealed and overturned. maybe the pendulum has swung a little bit too far, and we just need to reach calibrate, so we

know that we are appropriately sending brady letters to those people who should get them, versus sending them out wholesale, because i know it is a big deal to officers in how they go forward in the rest of their import after they have gotten a brady letter, and it is hard to un-ring that bell. >> it looks like we definitely need the judge's opinion and then a department general order. this is for each of the relevant parties, so this is something that the commission should be doing within our realm of work. commissioner: would this be something with the jurisdiction

of the department to meet with judge lowe? >> sometimes the commission is involved, and there will be a subcommittee or one or two people who will get involved in writing the dgo. it is up to us how involved we went to get, but it does, at the end of the day, and up in our laps. my personal opinion is the more involved we are in the process, the more informed we are, so the really important dgo's, we are more involved in the process. vice president marshall: should we leave it on this tier? >> i think so. vice president marshall: the next, i do not know what it was supposed to result in. where are we with this one?

commissioner: as i remember, commissioner hammer had partially brought this up. this was informing them of their rights and the procedures involved, and -- vice president marshall: i remember. we had a pretty heavy presentation on it. commissioner: because we do not have commissioner jim hammer here, to see if there is any backlog, we need to stay on top of it to make sure that it continues on into the future. it could possibly be on the third year, asking for an update quarterly, for example -- it can be on the third tier.

vice president marshall: then we can take off. i would not mind taking it off completely, because we have had a presentation on it, and we have the ability to have a report on it. these are my thoughts. >> this is where i was kind of coming from in terms of systematically deciding which departments or programs or systems within the department that we would get systematically, and within that kind of approach, it would take one year, two years, however long, but something like this, and follow-up would come up within systematic review hi. that is what i would agree to take off. a priority for the next 12 months, but have that instead

moved to something that we want to systematically lepidote, at some period of time. commission: after we take the action to follow through with their initial investigation and monitoring, then we can remove it. i really want us to finish our work and have a system to make sure this does not end up back in to higher priorities before we completely remove it. commissioner: you do not feel comfortable that we have gotten the information? commissioner but -- commissioner: know. i think we just need to follow through. vice president marshall: the second tier?

commissioner picking: -- commissioner: second or third. vice president marshall: i do not remember who brought that up. commissioner: they are dealing with this since this happened to improve responses, we will monitor and see if we can close the loop before we move it. vice president marshall: tier.

>> i did, since we haven't done a ton of work around this, i would remove it from the third until we do a little more work on it. >> you're saying it was third and second? >> in both second and third. just remove it from third. and the reason why -- the department has done a lot of work around this. we haven't necessarily done a lot of work to see where the department is on this. i would just delete it from the third line from the bottom, domestic violence third tier. >> ok. let's go to third tier, which is breach of confidentiality. i don't know what that was about. anybody remember? >> that was in response to a specific case where it looks like an officer disciplinary matter was leaked to the public.

the question coming from at least one of our commissioners was who is looking that and violating the copely decision. >> i think we dealt with that, right? >> i would just check in with that, commissioner. i think it was commissioner dejesus before we remove it. >> that's why you have all of the commissioners here. everyone has their one. i hope you're keeping up with this. and then we have the reviews of the chief of police and o.c.c. director. >> what time of year is that usually done? what has been the practice of the commission in the past, mr. president? president mazzucco: that's a good question. whenever we calendar it. that wasn't necessarily the end of the calendar year or end of the fiscal year. just whenever we calendar it and i don't remember it happening -- i think we have done that off

more than on. >> yes. >> and you tend to submit yours. >> i submit mine president mazzucco: >> yes. >> i do. >> director hicks, do you have a particular date or month that you -- that you have calendared that you typically do that? >> in the next few months you are due one from me. started in november of 2007, seems that within about a year, you reviewed my performance. so you have reviewed my performance twice as a commission. >> well, for consistency, why doesn't the commission decide what month each year, what week, whether it's the second weekend