going to see a broken arm or torn ligaments. what we recommended back in december, similar to other law enforcement agencies is that the language include not only an injury, but if there is a complaint of pain that... and we have devised language, complaint of pain beyond the initial control hold, that that situation would be subject to the same type of investigation and reporting. now, we have met with the chief about it. and months ago, we proposed a language. i know that there are a lot of changes and there is short staffing within the department. my hope however, is regardless of where things might have fallen through the cracks is that we are able to come up with something quickly that resolves that. because ultimately individuals who have been complain of pain, but can't point to the particular injury, they deserve the same level of investigation

and reporting, and similarly, officers deserve that same level of attention if those situations happen. so we are asking for more transparency and those kinds of situations get the same agree of scrutiny that just an injury would be provided. the way that this could happen, you know, we have talked to the chief. there are ways to do it through the department bulletin, i just hope that we could resolve it quickly, but it is not many months later to resolve this one way or the other. >> thank you for your support. and also, beverly up ton is here, she is one of the individuals that we have been working with through the monthly meetings and we welcome here to make comments as well. >> the format, i am wondering if you can finish this agenda item two and during the public comment part have you speak. >> i am happy to have and i am working with the db related

policy >> good evening. we have been so honored to have such a broad range to meet with them about the moving the lep policy forward. it has been just as informative for us as it has been, i think, for everybody at the table. we do see it as homicide prevention. as everybody here knows, ten years ago, we used to lose about ten to 12 victims a year to domestic violence, homicides. 90 percent of them were english lep survivor and ultimately victims. and so we do think that in our community it has made a difference that the domestic

violence community has learned in some ways to speak about 70 languages. so we are excited about sharing anything that we have learned and being at the table and it has been honored and inspiring to see the commitment and the progress moving forward. >> on the psa issue, i think in that hour, if we could just help them learn how to tell people that they can't take a domestic violence report would be so helpful. i think that there is a way to say it in a good way that domestic violence is so complex we want an officer here to take it. right? and so just as samera mentioned. i think that there is a problem when you have a psa that is not allowed to take the report and rightfully so. we are pleased with that policy, very much so. but you have a lep victim who is there, who does not know that the psa is not an officer.

who does not understand why they are report is not being taken. so if that could be part of that training, it would be tremendous because it would really alleviate some of that tension that is... it is unintended consequence of a very good policy. so that is one piece. i also want to thank officer henry haw, for his leadership and his availability to the community. he came out and met at one of our monthly community meetings with about 25 advocates from 17 agency and gave everybody the phone number of how to get a hold of him and so we welcome our knew liason officer chag and also be out reaching to him and come and meet the folks in the community as well. it just really builds the confidence of the advocates when they know that if a woman or a client comes to them and says that i can't get my report

taken, that they can make a call and alleviate that problem very early on. so, we are very excited about that. and then, i will just touch quickly because it is not on the agenda but i will say within a few months we hope to talk about a project with the commission that we have been working on. i am so proud to be on chief's team, on an officer-involved domestic violence policy. we have been working with wane judson who is the father of a homicide victim in tacoma who was killed by her law enforcement husband. and so we have had not only san francisco and just a great team with lieutenant mcfaden and it has just been wonderful. and so we have outside consultants, i mean, informal consultants on this. we are very close to our very first draft and so we are not there yet but we will be here soon. i think in the fall to share that with you and we will make sure that as soon as we have a

draft that we will make it available. so we are very happy about the progress. certainly we all have more to do. but we are honored to be a part of it. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner loftus? >> mis up ton we have worked a number of years back when i was a dv prosecutor. i really feel like it is important to under score the significance of what you said around the lower homicide rate of the domestic violence victims in the city and acknowledge your role and the role of advocates in the community to serve as sentinaland watch dogs to make sure that the justice system works, that when we don't, or ways that we can improve you volunteer to serve on committee and help us work through some of these thorny policy issues. and also i think for the department, i really responded to the progress that we have

made on the language access pgo. and the recognition, a lot of times in the meetings we talk about the fact that the department is a leader in certain areas. it is almost like when you are dealing with discipline and problems and what the problems are and you don't tend to talk about what is going well and tonight it is good because the partnership between the community groups and the advocates and the police department in this city, i think, is something that you guys have really worked on and it benefits, identifies gaps and ultimately keeps people more safe and does not play a blame game. so i am really grateful for your service and acknowledge the department for bringing in the community to try to solve some of the things that we are facing. >> thank you. >> it is an honor. >> and i with have to say that i think that san francisco is a leader and what we find which is not true everywhere. generally our policy lags behind our practice. so in many cities you see where the practice looks good. it is on paper. but it is not being implemented.

in san francisco, we find our practice generally is way ahead of our policy. so we want to institutionalize what is already happening that is headed in the right direction. san francisco has been headed in the right direction, over this last decade. you can tell by the homicide, the domestic violence homicide rates going way down, calls for service, both 911 and to the community going way up. we see that as a positive. people have a lot of confidence in calling. so we just need to keep that trajectory going. so we are very excited to come to the table and we are very proud of the work that has been done in collaboration between the community and the department. so thank you. >> it is a great opportunity. >> thank you. >> in fact about five months ago on the united states department of justice website, and i immediately... they realize that had there is an issue of access and they are starting to explore and so we are way ahead of the curv and

thank you chief and for all of your involvement. so thank you. >> thank you so much. >> okay. please call line item two b. >> line item 2 b. occ's director report. discussion, review of recent activities. >> good evening. director hiks. >> good evening, members of the commission, i have no none to report. i have nothing this evening. >> are there any questions for director hiks this evening. >> thank you very much. please call line item 2 c. >> commissioner reports to discussion, commission president's report. >> just briefly i want to thank the chief i actually called them yesterday because of my concern. there is a lot going on in the city but there seems to be a lot of traffic and really out of control, especially out here tonight. and i hope that when the city planners put these things together that there are so many events that you realize to get around the city and so i called the chief and shared my thoughts with him and he was very kind and so i appreciate

that. but that is all that i have to report this evening. >> commissioners anything further? >> i wanted to give an update on where we are. last week we had a little bit of a confusion about the taser issue. since then, it looks like we have a couple of potential dates for community meetings and i wanted to put it out there and please chime in if i am saying anything incorrectly. october 22nd at 6:00. and this is a suggested location, of course if there is community input, it could be somewhere else. but right now they have reserved the hampton recreation center. and there is another community meeting set for october 23rd at the scottish rice center. and then a third one on october 30th at 6:00 at downtown high school. at 693 ramont street. i don't think that these are set in stone. but i wanted to be very

transparent and put these dates out there so the community members can start planning and give input on the discussion that we have had. >> my understanding is that those are the dates for now. and am i leaving anything out, chief? >> no. that there was a september 24th date that commissioner asked that we vacate due to either short notice and the fact that the commissioner could be present. so provided the other two commissioners are in agreement, i would not object. >> thank you. >> and before, these meetings i think that we are going to have ourselves going to meet, with the chief just to go over some of our ideas and discussion so that we have a good format for these meetings that really takes in the community input. that is also something that will happen before the first meeting on the october 22nd. >> that is it. i don't know if i am leaving anything out. feel free to chime in. >> however the commission

wishes to proceed. >> okay, great. >> commissioners, i know that the other two commissioners working with you, so commissioner loftus are you okay with the cancellation on that date or would you like to go forward. >> more preparation time and then... >> we have the others schedule and certainly there can be other meetings as well. >> great. thank you, very much. >> commissioners anything further to report before i move to line item 2 d? >> please call 2 d. >> commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future commission meetings. >> is there anything that you would like for identify for future consideration? >> just circling back on the presentation that we just received about the response of pursuit of driving. and 5.01. use of force, we should calendar a date for it looks like the 5.05 will be ready in six weagings or so that can be

actually be an action item and the use of force. action item. and if not ready. i want to pick some dates and get feedback from the secretary about what would make the most sense for our schedule. >> it looks like six weeks from now, the end of october, the beginning of november. >> >> the 7th of november, the 14th, the 21st, if you are talking november, then we can look into our days. >> the 7th or 14th. so to be clear, for djo5.05. it looks like that is almost done, so we could choose the 7 or 14th. for the djo, for use of force

5.01. since we are discussing it already, october 24th maybe we will leave it there for the use of force 5.01. but for dgo 5.05. we can calendar that a potential action item. >> what is your next available date? >> the 17th? >> would the 14th be okay? >> no the 7th is the second. >> is that the second? >> it is the second? >> yes. the second one. the 7th. the 7th. >> november 7th. >> perfect, thank you, chief. >> thank you. >> okay. >> thank you, commissioner, anything further from the commissioners? >> okay, hearing none, we are now at public comment on-line items 2, a, b, c, and d. >> commissioners, ray hearts director san francisco open government. i guess that you probably sense a certain level of anger and frustration from me when i come

before you. because i watch your meetings on sfgtv if i am not here, and it isn't just the fact that you seem to disregard the rights of the citizens under the sunshine ordinance and the brown act. but you seem to be flagrant about making promises and commitments you don't keep. last week there were documents that were shown on the overhead which were not leg able for the members of the public. documents which under the law should have been made available in the information packet which was sent out. and then they should have been available to the public so they could be participating in this. and it gives the lie to the idea that you want the public participation and then you deny the documents and the information that people need to actually make meaningful public comment. and then, you make a commitment to putting these documents later up on to the police department website, and low and behold you go to the website, and they are not there. so what is it? are you going to let the public par participate? are you going to give them the

documents that by law you are supposed to be sending them and providing them? or are you not? >> it really seems strange that i have to come here. i would rather be doing something else to be honest with you. i watch time and time ago, while you sit here many of you lawsers and disregard the fact that you violate the rights of the citizens of this city to participate in these meetings and it does not seem to bother you at all. not a whit. and it was like two months ago the chief promised me a copy of a report that i have been trying to get since february, nothing. last week made the same promise, nothing. >> so, when people tell you stuff, it turns out that they are not telling you the truth, it always brings that expression to me, fool me once, shame on me, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. when you fool, 15, 20, 30 times

and more importantly you watch other members of the public receive the same discourteous and dishonest treatment simply because they don't know their rights under sunshine and don't know how to get the rights under sunshine enforced, i think that it is unconceniable. >> when it comes down to consecutively rights and constitutional rights that a citizen has to drag people before many hearings of the sunshine ordinance task force and the ethics commission just to get a body that swears to support and defend the constitution to do so. i think that it is disgraceful. and i am glad that commissioner chan finds it funny. and i also find it interesting. >> i am not going to let you rit kaoul any commissioners. >> you are supposed to talk to the commission as a whole. >> and you are supposed to do a lot of things. that is the way that it works...

>> thank you, mr. heart. >> thank you, commissioners mazzucco... (inaudible). >> next, public speaker, please? >> public comment is now closed and line item number two, athrough d. >> please call the next item. >> number four, whether to hold item five in closed session and to assert client privilege with regard to 55. code section 67.10. >> this is public comment on whether or not we are going to have a closed session, police discipline matters that are protected by the supreme court as well as pending litigation, public comment, mr. heart? >> san francisco, open government, i said this last

time and i will say it again, thank you for turning on the microphone after i started speaking. i don't trust you father than i can see you. in fact i don't trust anything that you do in open meetings, because you really don't follow the law and you ignore the law and somebody brings it to your attention and you simply ignore that too. and yet you ask us to trust you that you will go into a closed session and you will only discuss the things that are listed there. i don't believe you. and i think that there are a lot of people in this city, especially members of the african american community and other communities that really don't have a lot of trust for you as a police commission because they see you as nothing but a body that runs interference for the police department. i'm curious why the police department needs to have the police commission run interference. my understanding was you are supposed to be representing the interest of the public. what you do is you protect the police against the public.

and very honestly, i don't think that you when you go into a closed session, i have not been given one single reason to believe that what you say you are discussing back there is limited to what you put on the chart. and in case, somebody wants to think maybe i am paranoid, i'm not, i have watched you to do it to other people. i have watched you make the same kind disengine you yus and comments about wanting to participate in these things and we will give you this information and it doesn't come. and we will show it on the website. and it doesn't get there. and then when someone comes and actually challenges you, you either look down at your papers and work on something else or you just ignore it. or, more than likely, if it really, really bothers you, you take whatever time you want to

dismiss whatever members of the public say when they have two or three minutes to do it. i'm coming to every single meeting from now on. and as long as i am going to be here, i'm going to be commenting on every item that i see that is appropriate. and very honestly, i see no reason to be polite with you for the simple fact that you are not polite to the public. in fact you are not even honest with the public. >> i think that anybody... you know, i think that... you look at a meeting like this and the public isn't even here. i think that is because they working under the impression that mamma didn't raise no fool. why should i come here and listen to somebody tell me how much they care about what i speak when everything they do makes that a lie? if you want to sit there and act all offended and all insulted like what i am saying is not true, i would ask anybody to just go back and review some of your hearings on sfgtv and see the same things that i do.

>> any further public comment. >> yes, sir, please come forward. >> commissioner, board, chief, my name is mike and i am with the occupy movement. and i don't have much to add in addition to what mr. heart brought up is that these concerns are pretty prevalent in our neck of the woods. and it has been a very good year for everybody, i hope that you guys learned as much as we did. i would like to ask a question, is the city interested at all in working diplomatickly with this movement? is the department simply going to continue to take its orders from the mayor? whether they be just, unjust, legal, or illegal or whatever. i just want to know what the temperature check with you guys is regarding working with us and building a relationship with dedicated personnel. much as the language program and many other things that you guys are working on. are you going to need to take this a little more seriously.

so, rough idea? would you guys are interested in working with the occupy movement instead of working us over? >> you have three minutes for comment. the commissions cannot engage. >> not allowed to answer questions? >> no. >> thank you, sir. >> any further public comment? >> hearing none, public comment is now closed. please call the next item. >> line item four vote on whether to hold item 5 in closed session, including whether to assert the attorney-client privilege with regard to item five, san francisco administrative code section 67.10 action. >> do i have a motion? >> i move to we move into closed session. >> i have a second? >> second. >> all if favor? >> aye. >> thank you very much, we are now going to move into closed session for all of the reasons that we previously stated.