grow, and we are not going to be able to direct them to go anywhere. we are only going to be able to police areas in which we have some reason to say this is not wear an assemblage can be, and not everyone here understands first amendment rights. i am an advocate of the first amendment. i know the chief of police is an advocate, and we are going to facilitate this demonstration, and we are going to do it in a model way, but there is a line of public safety that we have to carefully maneuver, and i am committed to finding that liolie

to make sure they have their rights and protecting the other rights of san franciscans. go>> i have a couple of questions, too. i wanted to ask about a notice on sunday, if there is a written notice given, because i did hear from public comment. goowhen was it given? , did they have to adjust according to the notice? i want to ask about property being damaged. i know you spoke about using a scalpel approach, and i want to know if that was applied on sunday night and what is the impulse is going forward. >> there was one speaker who at

2:00 was told they were provided with written notice. i had asked that the leaflets, i am just going to go by that particular speaker. at least one person was noticed, and i would assume more, and that went on through the day. as far as the damaged property goes, i think anyone who has seen in the video clips, it was a rather hectic situation, and if something was damaged, there is a claims processo that occupy sfers can avail themselves of if someone's personal property was damaged. that was the first i have heard

of something being damaged. >> when there is notice given not to protesters or a plan for what happened on sunday, would you please let us know, because i know that we are going to get an earful, and for us to find out afterwards, we cannot be too careful. >> i am happy to do that as long as everyone understands such a notice would be in complete confidence because the safety of the officers and the weapons possessed by some of the fringe element that if we were to take action and someone were to tell the demonstrators we were coming, it would put the officers at tremendous risk. >> i completely understand. now we are very used to confidentiality. any written notice given to protesters, if you can give us a

copy of that and let us know if it is going to go public. >> you have the only copy of any document. this is not something that is super complicated. i read issued the same document i provided as a result of our meeting and have been continually every day, so i do not 1/3 to be any confusion. i do not want now is there to be any changes. we measured twice and cut once. if i can add anything, that would be to be very conscious. we have had a pretty good dogfight at the occupied oakland situation. >> humane and notice given at the meeting with supervisors and with myself but it was three years to -- do you mean the notice given at the meeting with supervisors and myself? >> it was given to the press,

and it was reissued i believe on monday. >> can you let us know when that is reissued? >> they do not change. they have a pile of them. they keep photocopying and passing it out. >> i just want to get notice for these kinds of actions, when they happen, and i think that is what we are asking for. >> we as a police commissioner procedure, it is operational,

and confidentiality is important. i trust every member of this board, but i think it would be appropriate that we only receive notices after it has occurred. officers' safety is of major concern. there is a fringe element. i as a commissioner do not think we should give notice until after the operation in case there is inquiry. i do respect your position. >> i respectfully disagree with you. i want to clarify what the request is. my understanding is protesters

are given notice before an action occurs. officers are given an option to correct their behavior. i just ask that we are given notice also. it is a public notice. i am fine with that for now o. we should be given notice. i think it is not helpful for us to find out about it by reading the papers, because it makes us not in the loop and not able to respond. >> i think there is confusion over the notice. commissioner chan is saying when notice goes out that you are not

in compliance with health and safety standards and the issues that are written and distributed. she is saying we should receive notice at that time. am i clear on that? >> that is correct. >> she as well as i would like to know that they are not in compliance. >> getting back to that point, a lot of times, having dealt with that protest, the police department gives notice if there is compliance. a lot of times they give notice when they do not do too much. >> it does not mean that at all.

we understand that your good -- we understand that. he has not done anything he did not say he would do. >> just some of the things said in a public comment. these are all things the fire department has already told us we are at great liability as a city if we let this happen. i have responsibility when put on notice by the fire department to ask for compliance, and given nine, we have to gain compliance. i know there are folks who do not think that is so, but they're withdrawing decision -- the assertion.

you have to go down there and see if everything is on top of itself. all of these tarps are highly flammable. it is a situation. it is great to sit there when it is peacetime and that will never happen, but i do not think anyone wants rats of the campsite. i do not think anyone wants anyone to get harmed, and i had to use my judgment as chief of police in trying to make it safe. that is why i wrote it down. i met lawyers and all, and it has been about safety. if we can keep it saves, but i think when there are comments about we are going to do this,

there is a certain want to be antagonistic, and i am resisting the tendency to be antagonize, and i have gone to great lengths to get support of parties done -- to get support of parties -- to get port-a- potties done. >> this may be one of those things were commissioners disagree, but for me personally, i do not want you stopping what you are going to do. u.s. got emergency is to deal with. -- you have got emergency to deal with. whatever you are going to do is fine with me, because we are going to disagree.

what ever you got to do, it is not important for me to get it. i am just saying that for me. i think we are going to disagree on this. >> let's move on to item 4b. r.f. i think we are talking apples and oranges. if you give them notice. i would like to move on. >> item 4b, the review of recent activities. >> good evening. i have no recent activities to

report this evening other than to say they have received complaints regarding occupy sf, and we are taking those complaints and investigating them. thank you. >> do you have any numbers in terms of how many complaints have been filed in connection with occupied san francisco? >> i can tell you generally the nature of the allegations, issues of force and property. >> next item. >> the commission report. >> i have nothing to report this evening.

commissioners salmos? 4b. >> items for future meetings. >> do we have an announcement for next meeting? >> we all have our next meeting on november 2 at city hall. >> commissioners, we have an agenda that is pretty packed coming up, >> november 16. president mazzucco: if we could get some notice to the chief of patrol specials. we would be willing to meet with him regarding these issues. commissioners, is there anything you want to add to our packed agenda? nothing.

is there any public items regarding items for -- items 4a, b, c, d. do you want to come back again? you can come back on this issue. >> i want to state very clearly that i am not a given voice or representative for occupy sf. we all play that role. i have been asked to take notes about what you guys say about us and bring it back to the general assembly. i have been taking notes and we are trying to file complaints about unnecessary force, unlawful seizure of property,

and unlawful damaging of property by at -- via police violence. you police officers have been great at communicating with us up until sunday. i only have one comment. you say you have gone to a lot of effort to have the written documents given to the demonstrators, to make sure we get it. i have a problem with the fact that i have never talked to you. i make myself known as the head of police communications for a reason. >> when i say i make sure that you get it, i do not mean that i bring it. have you seen it? >> and no, i have not. the only options communicated to me about anything you have given us was from sergeant frazier.

that is all the comments i have right now. we do request that you bring to our key communicators, who we have very clearly stated. thank you. i have spoken with jona . he is a good man. he does not talk much, but he is a good man. we were trying to make communicative points to him. it is a little bit annoying, frankly. i would like to compliment you on sergeant frazier and would encourage you to reward her in any way possible. she has made communications between demonstrators and police very easy and friendly. she can to rectify the situation the day after the sunday night involvement with the police.

she is our insider. she is a really good friend of ours now. she came to share your half of the story very openly. she was very transparent with us, which is why we have gone back to slowly trusting the cops again. i guess i should probably stop talking. president mazzucco: you have 30 seconds. >> we are grateful for the communication we do have and the ability to voice our concerns. what else? that is my comment on what was said thus far. i will be here throughout the rest of the meeting. president mazzucco: thank you very much. we do not ordinarily go back and forth with its biggest. you shared with me some serious medical issues. >> i have literally stage-4

leukemia. i have resorted to energetic healers. i have not been seeking any medical treatment. i feel safer than any where i have been before. the people there are great. president mazzucco: any further comment on this issue? >> discuss and to adopt findings of fact in the matter of patrol special officer robert burns, case numbers jwa c09-220, alw c10-094, and alw c10-233. president mazzucco: we have a

reference to the findings regarding robert burns. as you will remember, this is the matter when the patrol special had numerous charges pending. we found that each and every one of the charges were sustained. it was clear that the patrol special officer testified to us that he did not think we have to follow our rules. if we have to review our findings. with us is the deputy city attorney who handles disciplinary matters. do you have anything to say? >> we would like to thank her for the proposed findings and mr. burns have this -- mr. burns has submitted a paper that is more than an initial argument and then propose findings. i left for each of you some suggested edits to the proposed

findings that were, in essence, clarifications with some citations to the record citing him a particular specifications for a group of findings. those that were presented during the hearing by both parties. i added a preliminary paragraph in framing what the findings are. my attention was not -- my intention was not to change the substance of the findings, but to make it more clear and explanatory in case we need to bring them to court at some point. i understand that she is in agreement with them, unless she found something else tonight. >> and we are in agreement. >> i cannot for debate in that hearing nor can i read any transcripts. president mazzucco: i have they

moved to reduce -- to recuse and a second. commissioner turman: for the same reason, i would also be asked to recused for this matter. president mazzucco: we have a motion and a second. commissioner turman has been reduced. -- recused. i have read to the findings and they look all right to me. vice president marshall: do you mean the red line copy? president mazzucco: yes. without further ado, i guess we have to ask for public comment. any public comment regarding this? hearing none, can we have a

motion to adopt the findings? we have a motion and a second. all in favor? that is approved. item #6. >> item #6 is public, on all models pertaining to item 8 below, closed session -- disciplinary cases, including public comment on a vote whether to hold item 8 in closed session. president mazzucco: he is not a peace officer so he is not protected by the confidentiality in the police officers' bill of rights. any comment? hearing none, for the record, on the last issue, the patrol special officer was dismissed. anything further? next item. item #7 is a vote on whether to

hold item 8 in closed session. president mazzucco: president mazzucco: we are back in open session. we have a quorum of commissioners. dr. marshall, commissioner the jesus, commissioner kingsley. president mazzucco: i have a motion of nondisclosure. all in favor tax -- all in favor? >> aye. >> item number 10 is adjournment.

>> before we adjourn, i want to think the chief for handling a delicate situation tonight. if you handed it -- you handled it in a great manner. president mazzucco: i have a motion and a second. we are adjourned. please stand for the pled of allegiance? >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you.

we will take the girl called commissioners. president mazzucco, present. commissioner chan, present. commissioner slaughter, president. -- present. we have the chief of the police department. >> welcome to the october 12, 2011 police commission meeting. tonight's agenda has a few atoms of the front. we have a busy agenda on the closed session portion involving matters of discipline. we will move through this agenda rather quickly. would you please call item no. 1, general public comment. >> the public is welcome to

address the commission regarding items that do not appear on tonight's agenda. speakers shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or occ personnel. during public comment, neither police or personnel, nor commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public that may provide a brief response. individual commissioners and police and occ personnel should refrain from entering into any debates or discussion with public speakers. please limit your comments to three minutes. >> good evening. i am christine wagner, a resident taxpayer and law practitioner. i wish i was here to commend the san francisco police department. i am here to share with you abuses by officers in recent months and days that have

personally and affected -- adversely affected me. you need to know about it and things need to be done about it. as an officer of the court, i do not appreciate police witnessing -- witnessing police officers lying under oath, not once but twice in a court of law for 8 $220 traffic citation. this is egregious to me and it must be an embarrassment to the police department. i do not appreciate the taking of my busy time to appear on a citation that was issued to me without cause and under false pretense. to meet quotas of the san francisco police department, apparently. i do not appreciate the san francisco police department ignoring a court order for the production of documents.

no documents were provided, and the reasoning for now documents was provided. that is a contempt of court, quite problematic. i do not appreciate repairers by these public employees. on the street or in the courtroom or the courthouse as i experienced last week. i do not appreciate a police officer who is clearly on duty lying to me about it and refusing to identify herself by name or by badge number. i do not appreciate i am paying days bad apples for their salary and benefits. this is not a good use of police time and is an abuse. also i do not appreciate that report and made about stolen property that