i was on a bus once when some undercover police began acting out, doing -- forcing somebody off the bus. i don't think that's a good idea either, because the person witnessing it does not know that these are undercover police. what they see is an act of violence being committed for unknown reasons. and that is not an acceptable part of social living, to my mind either. so thank you for listening. >> president mazzucco: thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, again. german miller with the -- foundation. it occurred to me that last night, i asked a

question to a captain of the bayview precinct, captain sullivan. asked him a question and i didn't get an answer to it. i was just sitting here thinking, i was wondering how ready these answers would be from precincts across the city. and the question that i asked him was i said, well, hey, how many cit officers are working here in this precinct. and, you know, we got -- you know, he addressed a couple other questions, and i will grant that it was a public setting so he may have just glossed over it. but i recognize that when we have come here and heard reports about the progress, or lack thereof, of cit in san francisco, there hasn't been much specification. there's been well we've had these classes and x amount of officers, you

know, ali's name comes up as a model but that's what we get. we don't get solid information as to if we live in this neighborhood who can we look for that has allegedly gone through this training, who can we look for when something is happening, who can we look for on the street and how would you address the situation, who can the community look to when we're trying to assess the physical reality of cit and the impact to our neighborhoods. is this information broken down by which precinct these officers are working out of, and is that information public, and can that be presented to the public because i think that's very vital information for the public to have. thank you. >> president mazzucco: thank you. any further public comment on items not on the agenda? >> you're about to go into closed session, and for me, i'm wonder when

do those records become available, and when will i be able to get a copy of those? i just feel like -- the other thing that i'm concerned about is these officers, they got this little black stripe, and it seems like they're covering their badge numbers. i'm just concerned about that. i went to a protest, and it seemed like they got sunglasses on, these hats, and then they got their badge numbers covered up. it just feels like they're just hiding out. i mean they're packed, and they got a big group of people, and they're hiding out from the public. >> president mazzucco: thank you. any further public comment? it's now closed. in response to your questions the officers are wearing the black stripe over their badge in mourning for the california highway proffer who we honor in

our meeting. it's customary for all law enforcement agencies to do that. they're not trying to hide their badge number. what becomes public record we're about to go into closed session regarding california supreme court ruling, the officers personnel matters are confidential. however we do in fact provide statistics on a pretty frequent basis about what the results of our case is, and what the dispositions are. again that's why we do it because the officers have, like any employee of any company there is privacy rights. if we can call line item no. 4. >> line item 4, public comment on all matters pertaining to item 6 below, closed session, including public comment on vote whether to hold item 6 in closed session. >> that's what i just discussed, these are private matters protected and privileged to public comment. do i have a motion? i move that we move

into -- >> commissioners, ray hartz, director of san francisco open government. as i spoke previously regarding this very issue at the very first commission, session which i attended in which you adjourned in the middle of a agenda item, went into closed session for four hours and as a result denied a number of members of the public opportunity to comment on the item because you came back after the four hours, finished up the agenda and said is there any other public comment and i was the only person sitting in the room. i'll be honest with you, given that i also talked earlier about the problems i've had with your legal division, chief, regarding not following the sunshine ordinance, the california public records act, i think for me, i will speak solely. i have a hard time believing, when you claim an exemption, whether you're being honest with the public about the basis for the

exemption. to be very honest with you, once you're lied to by certain people, once people tell you something that you know is not true, and that you know they know is not true, you begin to question everything they tell you. and when they then expect you to simply take them at their word, when you know in some cases their word is no good, that's not unreasonable in my mind. i stood up at this commission a few years ago. and i wanted to talk about that adjournment, and the subsequent denial of public comment, and i was told point blank, you can't talk about that, you can only talk about agenda item a, b and c. and i said in response and that is a violation of my constitutional rights. and then i was forced to drag you, this commission, to the sunshine ordinance task

force, which said i was right. and yet there has not been a word, an acknowledgement or apology or anything else. very frankly, what i said about the police department's legal division not feeling any compulsion to follow the california public record act or bract holds true for this commission. i have witnessed myself. as a citizen who sees know your rights under sunshine on your agenda and then is under the extra burden of having to take you to court -- to a hearing before the sunshine ordinance task force, which the person who did it won't even bother to attend, is i think really egregious. we will follow the rules if it suits our purpose and if it doesn't we'll simply ignore them. then when people question our honesty, we will act like oh,, he's just a crum pi old man that has nothing to do

than come here and make it hard on the police department. believe it or not just because you say something negative doesn't mean you're trying to hurt somebody, it may be that you're trying to help. >> president mazzucco: any further public comment on whether or not these matters should be in closed session for personal matters. please come forward. >> german miller of the -- foundation. it's very interesting, public comment period right now because i don't know that i recall ever having a public comment period about closed session but i'm very grateful for it. >> have it every week. >> you have that every week? >> yes, sir. >> excuse me. i had not noticed that procedure of yours. this one in it particular, i want to say that on principle, i am definitely opposed to this matter being discussed in closed session. i'm very cognizant of the applicable laws of the applicable supreme

court decision as was referenced. i understand the legal basis. however, myself and many others that i'm in communication with, have never accepted the philosophical and ethical rationale of those laws. it seems to me that in evaluating -- performance evaluation of the chief of police is a prime example of the public's business. i think the public has a right to know how the review process of the command staff or the police department is proceeding, and what the critiques and rebuttals may be approximate likewise, and this is quite more serious, another issue that is to be addressed in closed session is the review of findings and decision to return officer to duty following an officer-involved shooting. as you all are well aware we've come before

this body many times with serious critiques and questions about officer involved shootings and one of the things we've brought up is that we find it to be an inherent hazard to the community when officers who have been involved in officer involved shootings are returned to the community to patrol armed while questions linger about their responsibility in these acts. to have such an activity returning officer to duty take place, with the review of such to take place in a closed session is against the public good, flat out. and i'd like to thank you for this opportunity to present that view and i assure you it is not mine alone and wie are constantly working to open this process up for the safety and protection of the public. >> any further public comment on this? hearing none, public comment is closed. do i have a motion? all line item 5. >> whether to hold item

6 in closed session. action. >> do i have a motion. >> exwr so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you, ladies and gentlemen. >> thank you. all the commissioner are present. we're on line item 7, whether to schoas discussion held in closed session. do i have a motion? >> move not to close. >> second? >> second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> line item 8, which is adjournment. >> line item 8, adjournment is zl as i stated at the beginning of the police commission agenda weed like to close and adjourn in memory of california highway patrol kenyon youngstrom, age 37, who will be buried tomorrow who died in the line of duty

last week serving the state of california. we send our sympathy to his family and his cohorts, and retired san francisco plaintiffs inspector art fobs who died last week after serving the police department for more than 40 years and my father's former partner. may he stop at the pancake in the sky before going to -- that was his daily routine. we'll miss you, and officer kenyon youngstrom, thank you for your service. we have a motion. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> we're adjourned. t's going ond

the person's of hispanic decent, normally an officer will say i'm talking to so and so, white male latin, date of birth, blah, blah, blah. and so 911 will put that in as wm, which is white male. and there is no box for latin. it's just wm. so just as director giffen is saying, in every single incident, an officer might say black male latin, asian

male latin but the latin will be the third designator and there's no pox for that for us. going backwards. going forwards we're tbg to report all 19 ethnicities. and if somebody asks somebody, what ethnicity are you, you look at the bulletin we will have that and will report that out to the commission, regardless of what the state or the federal government wants us to report. >> so that dropdown box, it didn't exist before this, but it -- right now it exists, was created? >> no. what we're going to have is two separate categories. let's say we can wave a magic wante wand and had hispanic. if we add hispanic to the state, then the state, when they report to the federal government, will move all the hispanic into white, actually incorrectly doubling your white count, if you do that. so we don't want to do that. so what we do want to do is report race, exactly

as the doj requires, and separately, ethnicity, which is what we can do with the 19 ethnicities. which one of them is also white, black. so because some of us, like myself, if you ask me my ethnicity, it's nothing except white so it has to be in that drop down box. the 19 include the race but they also include hispanic and several other ethnicities. >> so the ethnicities will be a lesser included under the five races. >> going forward. and so has a -- because there's talk about a dropdown box and having that option in the dropdown box. has that option been created? >> no. i think susan was speaking -- >> two different dropdown boxes, win for race, one for ethnicity. >> some of this is new. >> it is not new. it's been there in the sheriff's system. the sheriff has been --

you know my understanding, and red d have to get them here the new release happened in october. so process-wise they haven't been using the ethnicity drop down but have agreed it start using it. >> we will use it according to this department bulletin. >> yes. >> that means going forward when we go back to the cal domg website for data for 2012 that we're going to have more hispanic numbers, not just the highway patrol numbers but also have sfpd numbers. >> it gets complicated. internally within san francisco, immediately we will be able to report arrests by ethnicity, immediately by using the dropdown. the reporting to doj gets more difficult because of this convoluted way it flows through our system. so what we need to do is have a new collection

mechanism that's going to go to the doj. that's why single entry booking is a prerequisite and -- the vendors make the change that we trying to make. so we don't have a time line for when we will be reporting hispanic numbers to the doj. but we do have a timeline for when we can report them internally in san francisco. >> is and what's the time line? >> effective immediately we're going to start entering these ethnicity. so give us three months, we could have a report for adult arrests in san francisco by ethnicity. >> okay. >> i have a quick question. i don't mean to complicate things but when we travel around san francisco, go to one of our high schools, we're a city that's a melting pot. how do you report somebody that's mixed race? >> unknown or other. >> well, it depends on how mixed, right? >> and how they report. >> yeah.

so they'll have the option of reporting. so however they identify -- that's always been the practice on all of our orders is respect how a person identifies. >> and in research on this, that was one of the conversations is how big the other category is getting. that reason. >> so the other commissioners know what data i'm referring to i'll send you a link through our secretary send you a link to the cal doj data so you see how that seems like for hispanic numbers there is work to do to get it to be consistent. which i'm glad that director giffen has been working on. i wanted to also ask about the new world system. i've been hearing about upgrading our databases for a while and working really hard on it. i'm wondering a time line of getting us all on the same new world system. >> we have been working on it. the sheriff's working on it. we're dependent upon the vendor making some changes because right now, when the police enter data, we're going

to be -- the police are going to be entering data into the arrest module it will feed into the booking module and we want the data to transfer so the officer name and badge. that doesn't happen correctly right now and so that has to be fixed before we can start using it. the police that's currently using new world and so is the sheriff but there's two different versions of the system. so we've got to get the software fixed and the vendors has not given us the time line so i don't have it here. >> it's not as simple as the data warehouse which is our web based platform because our own engineers and projected managers can fix that as soon as we want to fix it. this is the reason why it was a better idea to be on the data warehouse than at the mercy of the vendors which is specific just to the booking system. >> okay. i wanted to will -- we don't have a time line -- waiting on. >> for the doj

reporting. we do and we can begin reporting basically -- we'll need some time to get the data, but fairly quickly. we can still do this reporting. it's just -- but the doj's already getting what they need anyway so i'm not shir... >> we will be able to give you the last quarter of 2012 for sure. >> yeah. >> and then this -- the reporting by -- asian as other, if that's completely incorrect, where did it come from, was there a misunderstanding, like how are asians reported, to where, by whom or was it being categorize add chinese? >> i think what happened was the crime in california report, created by the department of justice, has black, white, hispanic and other. and so i did speak with them, and they took our asian report arrestees, and they put them in

other for the purpose of this report. but in 2010 for this report we reported 760 chinese, 9 filipino, one japanese. and this came from them. so i think there was a confusion about a report that the department of justice produces, and what we -- san francisco is reporting to the doj. >> okay. so that was a report i was mentioning to the commissioner. so if it's possible to leave a copy of that with our secretary that would be great that way you can distribute it and i don't have it. >> also something on the website for the public here tonight that might want to look at that. >> also wanted to ask about the data itself. you know, what is our arrest data for san francisco? so if we're looking at cal doj and f.b.i. seems there's a reason why it's not as fully detailed as we like and chief you mentioned we will have some data at the end of this quarter so should we ask --

>> no. in january we can give you the last quarter of 2012. >> so maybe we'll wait 'til january or ask earlier to see the actual data itself because i would like to see what our arrest data is. >> we could give it to you at the end of -- end of october. >> that would be cool. >> end of december probably. >> no. maybe give october for october. >> sure, if we can. >> that would be good. maybe a comparison of before and after any changes have been made or after this department bulletin, so october data and a month before october, to have a comparison of has the reporting changed or has the reporting changed. so maybe end of october, beginning of november? >> uh-huh. >> thank you. >> commissioner loftus. >> commissioner loftus: i just wanted to suggest throughout your process if you identify any obstacles, tej 2345 logical obstacles, other solutions we haven't thought of, i think the

chief is committed to making sure we've got the best data to make the best decisions and the commission and the mare is on the same page. as you find out what the obstacles are my request is that you share those with us so we can be supportive in coming up with a solution. >> i don't think these meetings are long enough. >> we can have a sidebar. >> there are some challenges but we'll get it done. >> let us know mow we can help. >> dr. marshall. >> vice president marshall: i want to thank you for working hard and get this report out to clear up in he misconceptions and working with all these different agencies, and try to categorize them in a way that's equitable and fair for everyone. so i thank you. >> well i appreciate that. but i'll tell you the reason the department has e-mail and a web base server is because of director giffen. and reason that we can now do the race and ethnicity reportin repot we can do is because she puts this stuff through like maybe nobody else, in it any other

department in the city. >> that's very nice. thank you. >> just hold all the other city departments. >> anything further for -- anything further for director giffen? thank you very much. please call line item 3(b). >> line item 3(b), occ director report, recent review of activities, monthly comprehensive statistical reports and compendium reports for january 1, 2012 through august 2012 and january 2011 through august 2011. >> thank you for being here this evening. i know you have a lot going on and i appreciate your presence here tonight. >> thank you very much, president mazzucco, and members of the audience. in your packets this evening, you have the ooh cc's august

comprehensive statistical report. from august 1, 2012 to august 31, the occ opened 68 cases which are two fewer than were opened in august 2011 when we opened 70 cases. in august 2012occ investigators closed more cases than they opened by closing # 2 cases. as of august 31occ had 317 pending cases. as of today occ has 10 more, 327, compared though to 43 # pending cases as of september #2 last year. moving on to mediation, ocr mediated seven cases in august or 10% of the cases that closed. in august, eight officers were offered mediations and all accepted. i know the last time i reported to the commission, i indicated that three officers had declined, but they were all on the same case.

so the statistics, in terms of officers declining weren't nearly as high as we thought. moving on to sustained allegations, occ sustained allegations in four cases in august, or 6% of the cases that closed. in august, the chief adjudicated nine cases. those are more particularly detailed in your packet. and i'll briefly discuss them. two of them were for neglective duty for an officer failing to issue a certificate of release after hand cuffing and releasing the complainant. in those two cases officers were admonished. inive five of the cases an officer failed to collect traffic stop data. discipline was either an admonishment or in one case a written reprimand, and then finally in another case,

the chief found that it was a policy failure instead of a sustainable allegation because it had to do with permissive language in the department bulletin, about certain kinds of stops. traffic stops for suspicious persons, traffic stops for high risk vehicle stops and dui. in prior department bulletin that had been permissive, but the chief has issued a new department bulletin making it mandatory for the collection of that type of data as well. in another case of unwarranted action a sergeant detained and searched the complainant without justification. the sergeant was admonished. in another case involving a domestic violence call a sergeant failed to properly supervisor and made an

unauthorized order ordering the husband to leave. it failed to comply with general order by failing to document the incident when he determined that it would be verbal only, and that no -- that the conduct was verbal only, and that no crime was committed. the officer was, pursuant to department policy, required to give the complainant a domific file card and does not. the sergeant received a written reprimand and the officer was admonished. that concludes my report about adjudications. and then one last issue, and that is in the area of outreach. in august, our outreach and mediation attorney, donna salazar, as well as investigator jessica cole, staffed the table at b magic, back to school celebration. and was mentioned

earlier, i attended the memorial mass for firefighters and police officers. and that concludes my report. >> thank you. one quick question. we've had some discussion about collection of data. can you tell us about how occ collects their data regarding national origin or race regarding those complaints. >> i does not bring all of the categories with me in anticipation of that question. but we do identify -- we allow the complainant to self-identify, based on race and ethnicity. so it is more -- much more inclusive than the data that's required by the department of justice. so we do have a category for latino, chicano, for native american,