dishonest in responding to the complaint. honest and/or open communication from the sfpd including members of the command staff is something i have learned not to expect. i would think the police chief and the police commission would find this unacceptable. i will probably be proven wrong. every agenda you put out says know your rights under the sunshine ordinance and yet when an individual knows their rights and insists upon those rights they not only don't have them respected but they have to drag you to the sunshine ordinance task force at which time someone who did not engage in the behavior shows up, to try to explain it away. the people who actually do things don't show up because they know they were in the wrong and they don't want to be on the public record having to admit that they were wrong. so they simply just don't show up. your police department,

legal division, knows the california public records acts. i'm not going to be in a position saying they don't. they also understand the sunshine ordinance. they just have no belief that it applies to them. in this particular case that i am taking the ordinance, they he violated the law at least six different ways before they finally said, oh, well this paper is exempt from disclosure. the good thing about it is what they told me, which turned out to be dishonest, they also told a deputy city attorney when i petitioned the supervisor records for release of the information. i think it's disgraceful that police officers, in a legal division, will not follow the law. the simple fact that you want to hunker down and ignore the fact you have an obligation under state and local law is unacceptable. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> so i was talking with the chief off line because i wanted to make it as transparent as possible to the public since there is public concern about what's been done between the last time we had a taser report and now, so i defer to the chief on this. >> so the 90 day -- the resolution passed prior to me becoming chief was that there be a 90 day working group, if you will, between the occ, the commission, and the police department, to gather all the other less lethal options in addition to taser, and to try and arrive at a policy by which less lethal option could be adopted, or considered. so the data that we're speaking of is a compilation done by commander ali of all the other less lethal options that other police departments use in addition to the taser which is open source information, and then a

draft policy that's a compilation of other police department's taser policies with the addition of there was a doctor that spoke here from ucsf that suggest that certain cautions be included. that is also incorporated into the draft policy. the third piece of information is a schedule of dates that i would be available for public meetings that are not the -- the only public meetings that can happen. those are just the ones that i -- and i may be able to make additional meetings but those are the ones. so that's the depth and breadth of the information that's here. right now, i only unfortunately have hard copies of it but i'm happy to make it available to the public through the police commission, if you would just give us a little bit of time. i can, without the list of other options, again, those are available on line, they're all commercial vendors.

so the information that we would make available to the public would be the dates, the draft policy, with the appendices, and a list of the items, abtdz then anybody's welcome to research those on line. >> vice president marshall: thanline. -- >> president mazzucco: thank you for clarifying that. public comment. >> yes. less lethal weapon is very clear to us, who have been tasered before, as i was, is deescalation. >> president mazzucco: nis general public comment on items that were not covered. i apologize. so we can't talk -- >> okay. i just want to commend briefly on the fact that -- a lot of -- command about the chp officer who tragically died this week. and i find it disgraceful. you might be surprised to hear me say that. but the loss life is always tragic and we

mourn along with you. >> president mazzucco: thank you. for public comment, items not included. >> again, i didn't get to say what i wanted to say, but everyone knows who i am. i'm back again. august 14 of this year was my son's anniversary of his death. i've been fighting for the last five and a half years. and this is something i'm going to be doing for the rest of my life. i don't know what else to do. i still have no justice. i still have no closure. all i want is a little bit. something needs to be done. it's not just about my son anymore. a lot of young men are dying every day. i just had another one die on -- down the street from my house shot three, four five times in the chest. imagine us seeing that and hearing that every

day on the news that we've got to get inand watch the news every day and be scared for our children to walk out the house and go to school. i'm afraid every day. i will fight for my son in life, and i'm fighting for him in death. at this point, i'm not caring about my own life. i'm not going to commit suicide, no. but i would -- if that day, i would have ran in front of those bullets to save my son because my son should have been burying me, not me burying him. it's sad that we've got to continue to do this and i've got to continue for coming down here. i'm not blaming anyone who killed my son. the mayor said he know who killed my son. da and the police know who killed my son. it's in the papers. this is not out of my own mouth. this is being said by the mayor, the former mayor. so if you know who killed my son, why is that a slap in the face to me. i feel like it's a slap

in the face to me but you tell me you know but you're not working with me. i walk around with these pictures every day. where amount i going to put them, in my living room on top of the fireplace. we have no venue for my son or any other young person that's been murdered out here, whether it be a young person, adult, child, it doesn't matter. how long are we going to have to do this. this is a medical condition. i have post -- distress every day, when i've go the to turn around and watch my back or watch my children's back. anything's going on and i am tired of it. i'm tired of crying. i have my days that i cry and just weep out. now i've go the to use that and go to 850 brient, two to three times a week and sit on the stairs, under the hot sun, rain around cold weather to bring justice to our children that are dying. i'm mainly talking about

my child. i'm talking about me. how long am i going to suffer. how long -- and i'm not blaming anybody but how long do we have to suffer as parents that our children are being murdered. don't say take care of your own because when you do that, when we take care of our own and you kill there's a rippling effect and people continue to die every day. >> president mazzucco: thank you. next speaker. >> my name's -- bowler. so we live in a gun culture. i don't go to movies. but i know -- and i don't have a television. but i know that gun violence, it goes on all the time in front of our faces. it's embedded in our

culture. and i say that partly because of the prior speaker. i wanted to comment on something that i saw in the paper recently, which had to do with muni having -- i don't think it's the police. i think it's people that they hire to check to see if you've paid your fare. and i read that the intention is to have them carry guns. the idea of people carrying guns on muni with the risk that they might be used in crowded -- on a crowded bus, with people in the way of the bullets, is

unacceptable. i don't know if this is the appropriate place to say that, but i would -- if it the police are on the bus with guns, that would also not be an acceptable practice, in my mind. 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. wewe >> there has been an acknowledgement of the special

places around san francisco bay. well, there is something sort of innate in human beings, i think, that tend to recognize a good spot when you see it, a spot that takes your breath away. this is one of them. >> an icon of the new deal. >> we stood here a week ago and we heard all of these dignitaries talk about the symbol that coit tower is for san francisco. it's interesting for those of us in the pioneer park project is trying to make the point that not only the tower, not only this man-built edifice here is a symbol of the city but also the green space on which it sits and the hill to which is rests. to understand them, you have to understand the topography of san francisco. early days of the city, the city grows up in what is the financial district on the edge of chinatown. everything they rely on for existence is the golden gate.

it's of massive importance to the people what comes in and out of san francisco bay. they can't see it where they are. they get the idea to build a giant wooden structure. the years that it was up here, it gave the name telegraph hill. it survived although the structure is long gone. come to the 1870's and the city has growed up remarkably. it's fueled with money from the nevada silver mines and the gold rush. it's trying to be the paris of the west. now the beach is the suburbs, the we will their people lived on the bottom and the poorest people lived on the top because it was very hard getting to the top of telegraph hill. it was mostly lean-to sharks and bits of pieces of houses up here in the beginning. and a group of 20 businessmen decided that it would be better if the top of the hill remained for the public. so they put their money down and they bought four lots at the top of the hill and they

gave them to the city. lily hitchcock coit died without leaving a specific use for her bequest. she left a third of her estate for the beautify indication of the city. arthur brown, noted architect in the city, wanted for a while to build a tower. he had become very interested in persian towers. it was the 1930's. it was all about machinery and sort of this amazing architecture, very powerful architecture. he convinced the rec park commission that building a tower in her memory would be the thing to do with her money. >> it was going to be a wonderful observation place because it was one of the highest hills in the city anywhere and that that was the whole reason why it was built that high and had the elevator access immediately from the beginning as part of its features. >> my fear's studio was just

down the street steps. we were in a very small apartment and that was our backyard. when they were preparing the site for the coit tower, there was always a lot of harping and griping about how awful progress was and why they would choose this beautiful pristine area to do them in was a big question. as soon as the coit tower was getting finished and someone put in the idea that it should be used for art, then, all of a sudden, he was excited about the coit tower. it became almost like a daily destination for him to enjoy the atmosphere no matter what the politics, that wasn't the point. as long as they fit in and did

their work and did their own creative expression, that was all that was required. they turned in their drawings. the drawings were accepted. if they snuck something in, well, there weren't going to be any stoolies around. they made such careful little diagrams of every possible little thing about it as though that was just so important and that they were just the big frog. and, actually, no one ever felt that way about them and they weren't considered something like that. in later life when people would approach me and say, well, what did you know about it? we were with him almost every day and his children, we grew up together and we didn't think of him as a commie and also the same with the other.

he was just a family man doing normal things. no one thought anything of what he was doing. some of them were much more highly trained. it shows, in my estimation, in the murals. this was one of the masterpieces. families at home was a lot more close to the life that i can remember that we lived. murals on the upper floors like the children playing on the swings and i think the little deer in the forest where you could come and see them in the woods and the sports that were always available, i think it did express the best part of our lives. things that weren't costing money to do, you would go to a picnic on the beach or you would do something in the

woods. my favorite of all is in the staircase. it's almost a miracle masterpiece how he could manage to not only fit everyone, of course, a lot of them i recognized from my childhood -- it's how he juxtaposed and managed to kind of climb up that stairway on either side very much like you are walking down a street. it was incredible to do that and to me, that is what depicted the life of the times in san francisco. i even like the ones that show the industrial areas, the once with the workers showing them in the cannery and i can remember going in there and seeing these women with the caps, with the nets shuffling these cans through. my parents had a ranch in santa rosa and we went there all

summer. i could see these people leaning over and checking. it looked exactly like the beautiful things about the ranch. i think he was pretty much in the never look back philosophy about the coit. i don't think he ever went to visit again after we moved from telegraph hill, which was only five or six years later. i don't think he ever had to see it when the initials are scratched into everything and people had literally destroyed the lower half of everything. >> well, in my view, the tower had been pretty much neglected from the 1930's up until the 1980's. it wasn't until then that really enough people began to be alarmed about the condition of the murals, the tower was leaking. some of the murals suffered wear damage.