were or who allegedly acted badly? are there other cops who are harassing the residents of sros? or otherwise, not acting in good faith as police officers? and i asked that question because i can't recall what or whoever got held accountable for what we called the fajita gate. you know? a lot of us see law enforcement as one entity. the sheriff the cops, and the da. we don't distinguish one institution, one agency from another per se. and we see you, altogether and when we see things like it took years to get those cops indicted. we are like, wow, i guess that you better not take a picture of a supervisor in the bathroom, that will move fast, but if you are going to harass the residents of sros and you are a cop and they are going to capture that on camera, it is

going to take years for some accountability. >> now, there is also this issue of the fire department guy who was drunk and created an accident, almost a year ago. still no indictment. what this has to do with the rogue cops is a rogue fire officer. we don't see the criminal justice system gearing up to take those folks into the criminal justice system and hold them accountable. and i think that one thing that the police department really needs to look at, is putting george gascon before the cameras, putting him in the hot seat, to answer questions of why did all of this happen on your watch, and on the day that the indictments are coming down he is holding a state of the district attorney's office.

and excuse me. there is an attempt there, i believe to obscure his role in what went down. >> thanks for the public comment >> any further comments on these issues. >> hearing none, the public comment is closed and call the line item. >> four, hearing on a disciplinary charges filed against assistant patrol special officer john barry file number alw iad 2013-0154 of discussion or possible action or sustain specifications. >> ashley on behalf of the san francisco police department, good evening. >> ladies and gentlemen, this is a hearing with reference to the charges that were brought against a patrol special officers john barry and the matter was set for hearing tonight and these matters are public and i will note for the record and i will ask, is

patrol special officer john barry present? >> i will note for the record by dr. marshall that he is not present. and do you have anything to share with me regarding this, the attempts to serve or conversations with patrol officer barry or should we have officer brown come forward >> i think that he has information but i will provide. when we actually suspended patrol special officer barry we sent him notice by certified mail and express mail, it came to the department certificated mail and the u.s. postal service, attempted twice to serve the letter on patrol specialist and he did not accept service of that letter, however, he was aware of the

hearing, that was schedule, for february the 19th in the morning and he was aware of the hearing because he called officer brown and told her that he would be unable to attend the hearing, due to car problems and realizing that i notified him that i would need to set it for the police commission and it was set for this date at 5:30, i believe that recent from the office sent a letter to officer barry for the certified mail and we have not heard from him sense, and officer brown may have some additional. >> and before officer brown comes forward, let me tell the public that he has been accused of not having proof of commercial liability insurance, and auto liability insurance, which is required for patrol

special officers to endemnify the city as pursuant to the procedures. >> and to provide it with the names and address and telephone numbers of the assistant patrol specialist that worked for him or provide a list of the clients that he is charging the fees to for this protection. and specification, number three, he failed to report in person, to the commander at the district station and he is assigned to and that is essentially failure respond and he also on the specification number four and he failed to attend mandatory range qualifications in other words, the officers are held like our officers go to the range to insure that for safety reasons they qualify that they are safe with the firearm and he has failed to show up. and to qualify with the firearm and to be carrying one. and he failed to attend for the

training which is specification number five, could you have officer brown come forward and if we could have her sworn by the court reporter if possible. >> >> thank you, good evening, officer brown, could you state your name for the record. >> officer, carla brown, star number 547. >> who are you employed? >> san francisco police department. >> bha is your assignment in the currently in the san francisco police department. >> i am the patrol special liaison, and the program administrator for that. >> and now with reference to the charges that have been against and brought against officer barry have you made effort to contact him regarding the hearing that was schedule on february 19th. >> and yes, he contacted me, after the hearing or shortly before a few hours before saying that he would not be able to make it, and that he was suspended and that he would

be able to return the id and that was it, meaning that he would surrender his star and id. >> have you had any conversations with him since he failed to appear for the february 9th hearing. >> no, that was a voice mail messages, i have not spoken to him in months, he only leaves me offices when i am not in the office. >> that is non-business hours. >> correct >> how many messages has he left you during the non-business hours snment >> six. >> what is the sum and substance with reference whether he will appear for the charges. >> these were throughout two separate investigations and he would call the night before and or leave me a message saying that he was not going to make the skeled interview for various different reasons. >> and so, in your opinion has he failed to comply with any of the requests or any of the requests mandated by the interim rules for the specialists? >> yes. >> is it impossible for you to supervise him at this point in

time. >> no. >> would he be a danger to the community, out there, without the proper training in advance officers training. >> yes. >> commissioners do you have any questions for officer brown? >> well, my first is that can he be charged with failure to appear for a police commission hearing? >> if he could i would add those to the charges, but, no i mean, me reading this, and unless someone can show me and of course, very different than what i read here and the failure to show tonight, i don't have any other questions. commissioners anying further. >> at this time we should put this matter up to a vote as to whether or not we should the proper terminology is terminate a patrol special officer barry and rescind any rights as a officer in the city and county of san franciscoer. >> could i ask one question. >> i am a little slow down. >> just the other part that gives me pause, is that there

is no one representing mr. barry he is not here and he does not have an attorney and so i am sure that president mazzucco has flagged this, but is there anything that we should consider that he or his representatives were aware of in terms of their perspective about service and maybe, any issues that i could create a bunch of issues but i don't need to. i just want to flag, any of the colleagues is that something that we should consider or not at all. >> we had testimony but from the officer of the court that they made effort to serve them and he left voice mails saying that he was going to miss the initial hearing and he has been told of this hearing and he is not here. and for me, commissioners so noted >> okay. >> and also, sorry. that they are president of their association has made multiple attempts to contact him and he wanted to help him

and represent him but he will not contact them back at all either. >> he is completely awall at this point. >> and all of the notices were sent to the same address and he had actually signed for two previous notices regarding interviews with officer brown at that address and what we sent the notice, regarding the february 19th hearing, and as i previously stated we sent it by certified mail and we also sent it by express mail and the certified mail was returned back to the department but he was aware of the hearing but then he called the department to let the department know that he would not be awaring at the hearing. so, it seems that he is very selective in what he will accept from the us postal service. >> and i'm assuming that president mazzucco that there is no requirement that he present in person for us to make a ruling. >> great, thank you. >> i have a quick question. what is his assignment or his beat or whatever he call it? >> parks. >> he works out of the park district and owns beat 53.

>> and i move to terminate patrol special officer barry and his authority and power in the city and county of san francisco. do i have a second. >> second. >> take the roll call? >> sure. >> president mazzucco? >> aye. >> vice president turman? >> aye. >> commissioner marshall? >> aye. >> commissioner chan? >> aye. >> commissioner loftus? >> aye. >> motion passes unanimously. >> thank you. >> takes the steps that you need to. >> i have a question, does that mean that the clients in the park district they will be notified how do we make it public that this person is no

longer a patrol special. >> we should talk officer brown and the patrol special who came to the meeting in park station, and so that the community will know who he is and maybe we should have both of them notify the clients if there are any clients in that beat and let them know that there is a possibility of well, let them know that he is no longer a patrol specialist and should not be soliciting business or fees from them. >> i will do that. >> thank you very much. >> please call line item number five. >> public comment on all matters pertaining to item 7 below, closed session including public comment on vote whether to hold item 7 in closed session. >> are there any comments regarding closed session regarding disciplinary matters? >> hear none, public comment is closed. call the next line item. >> vote on whether to hold item 7 in closed session. >> moved. >> so moved, second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> thank you v

>> we have a motion not to disclose. >> motion. >> out. >> hi, i'm japanese with the san

francisco public utilities combination sometime people call me sewer girl our systems has served the area for 1 hundred and 50 years we're planning you understand public health and our environment don't think that so come in down and see how

good afternoon, everyone and welcome to our first full budget and finance committee meeting for 2014. on wednesday march 5th and i'm supervisor mark farrell and i'm joined by mar, and supervisor john avalos and london breed and supervisor wiener. i want to thank the members of sfgtv covering this meeting, jennifer and the clerk of the committee, ms. linda wong. madam clerk do we have announcement. >> silence electronic devices and complete speaker cards and items

will appear on the board of supervisor agenda unless otherwise stated. >> madam clerk, call items 1 and 2 together. >> item is a resolution approving a performance contract behavior health services and the department of health care services incorporating the mental health act in transition for homelessness and health services grants, program for the period of july 1, 2013 through scombrun 30, 2014 and authorizing the behavioral service so sign at greement ed agreements. resolution authorizing adoption of the fy2014-2014 annual update to mental health services act program and expenditure plans. >> okay. thank you. we have sims ons to speak on these items and thank you for being here. >> hold a second. can we make

sure we have our mic lit up. >> is that better. >> so the first item, the performance contract is a zero dollar contract that basically includes the conditions and requirements that the department needs to meet to get these different streams of funding, the federal funding, the past grant comes to serve services for homeless individuals, the mental health block grant is broader, and that comes through the state as well and the mental health services act funding that comes from the state controllers's officer month so they have their own mechanism of funding authority and go through the regular budget process. the state recently let the department know that we needed to get a resolution from the board, adopting the performance contract. it's not a contract that has been required for four or five

years. the state recently transferred from the department of mental health over to the department of health care services, all the over sight for mental health so in that transition, there was a feeling that the state that we needed to update this. so it's about data reports and do you want me to update -- the second item, the mental health service between 2005 and 2006 and we have plans and the annual update is the requirement to provide an implementation update so be update all the plans at one time and just as a side note, very soon i'll be back to present a resolution for adoption of an integrated plan for the next three years which is all those pieces together. but this is just for the annual update.

>> okay. thank you very much. colleagues any questions? okay. we have a report from our budget analyst, why don't we go to that now? >> good member dhar farrell, this is a zero dollar contract. it sets up the conditions by which the city accepts funding for the prop 63 and other federal grants for mental health services and it's fiscal year 13-14 and it's retro active and the board has approved $30 million in the 13-14 budget. they'll have to be another approval for the 14-15 approval and the estimate budget for 14-15 is $34 million. >> thanks. i presume given that the 14-15, we'll have the resolution before us, so it's not retro active. >> that's the goal now that we know the state is going to ask for it.

>> i can't wait to have these come to the board of supervisors. colleagues, any questions. president mar. >> i wanted to ask mrs. simmons, i know the budget items will come later for the department, but do you have projections for what the state's mental health funding will be coming up this year with the governor's budget, do you have any projections right now? >> overall budget, i don't. for these three fundings, the information is in there and it's my area and that's what i can speak to. >> okay. and i know with discussions about laura's law and even within the mental health commission, lots of debates and discussions going on that it seems like an important -- your budget items but the state's funding of mental health services are reestablishing a lot that was cut over the years and that's critical so i'll be looking

forward to the information that you and others provide later. >> we're launching a planning commission and i'm sure the board has looped in on that. but being around individual that's have been difficult to end gage into services so i think the laura's law sits into that discussion and it's a tool that we have to work with folks. >> okay. thank you. colleagues, any further questions or comments. okay. thank you. at this point we'll open up to public comment. seeing no public comment. public comment is closed. colleagues we have two items in front of us. can i have a motion to move to the full board. >> so moved. >> we can take that without objection. >> all right. madam clerk, do we have any other business in front of us? >> no, mr. chair. >> all right. we are

adjourned.

>> welcome to the san francisco historic preservation commission regular meeting. this commission does not tolerate any disruption or outbursts at any kind. please silence any mobile devices and when speaking for the commission do state your full name. commissioner haws, commission wolfram, johnck, pearlman. first on your agenda is general public comment. at this time members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission with the exception of agenda i at