administrator and sheriff and board of supervisors to provide third party review of analytical question. kyle patterson has over seen a lot of that work and can cover that and a couple other updates oen our work >> good afternoon. before i get into discussion of the more recent analysis done about couny james 6 i want to talk about jail population trends. you look at the slide up now, we know that bestween 2009 and 14 a sharp decline in the jail population and i hear folks say, if the population is declining why done we wait and see what happens and may not need a jail but the data don't suggest that. in the last couple years we have seen a flat jail population and the in the last 8 months it increased.

these are daily jail counts. on the left side we see 2014 the jail count remains flat and in november 2014 proposition 47 passed and this is a proposition that downgraded a number of felonys to misdemeanors and saw a drop of 100 to 125 inmates. afterthality initial drop we have seen it tick back up. in 2015 the population is increasing. reala what it tells us is the population will plateau or increase absent or major policy changes. we have done 3 jail population forcasts thoerfb past 3 years or so and here is a table from the most recent one. the forcasts suggests we need a replacement jail as long as countsy jail 6 cannot be used at capacity. it begs the question can we use countsy jail 6? there are 8 jail populations by

6 different organizations all of them suggest we need a replacement jail. in fact, our population forcast is the lowest of all 8 and say we still need a jail. we know there are significant issues with countsy jail 6. one is low security. countsy jail 6 is 372 bed inson bruno dormitory style which means it is basically a big gym floor with beds, there is no cells. the sheriffs department feels it is only safely house minimum scurpt inmates. there is inefficient program and mental helths treatment. there is one single program rheumcome paired to county jail 5 where there are many rooms. the dph said they don't feel they can

provide adequate mental health services. it is a costly fusimty to reopen, it is closed since 2010 and requires a number of repairs and maintenance and requires increased transportation cost. 85 percent the jail population is pre-trial that means they have to go back and forth from court. estimates have 1.77 million a year to transport folks back and forth. there are [inaudible] over the course of 40 years we are talk about 10s of millions of dollars. in excess och 50 million. if we build a replacement jail there are functions in the hall of justice included in the jail. that includes crl records and waurnts bureau which is next to the courts. it also includes holding cells for the courts.

if we didn't build a replacement jail next to the court we would need to replace those facilities that are costly to construct. we know there is a lot of issues with county jail 6 but we wanted a independent expert to look at it and asked around the city who is expert that everybody could know and trust and we asked departments who may have come out against the jail rebuild and the name that came up is doctor james austin quhoo is a expert in the field doing national work in this regard and the finding from his report is that the existing facilthies are not efficient to meet the problemt and security needs. this ubjecktdive expert that appointants of the jail agree on as being a expert said we need a replacement jail. i'll pass it

to director [inaudible] >> good afternoon members the boards. i think supervisor tank your question about jail number 6--so our department has been looking at many [inaudible] to fit this new facility and we look closely at jail number 6. [inaudible] is just so you know number 6 is in san bruno behind jail number 5 and just trying to fit it in will not accommodate the number of beds that have been recommended in that facility. if we were to improve the jail number 6 we would also have to do some more imprivements to jail number 1 and 2 and even build another annex

facilities. the cost for that is over 300 million dollars to achieve a jail for that size and so the best scenario that is before us is the scenario that's presented to you is the 384 bed ajaistant to the hall of justice and have heard a lot about the hall of justice, it is just not a building that be should continue using. i myself have spent many years maintaining the hall of justice. sth electrical system and hvac systems, the plumbing are horrible. calls every day. millions of dollars spent. that building has lived its life and through our capital planning process we have started to move everybody out. >> there has been discussion about a san bruno alternative here and

it seems aside from lugestics it is more expensive. >> transporty trustees back and forth is expensive and that included in the over 300 million to achieve that 384 bed size in county jail 6 so that is on top of- >> on top of the more expensive bill cost in any case. >> yes. i think the other important think to note is with scenario one we cleared the environmental impact report and that is how we were able to apply for the grant. that was a condition to make us eligible for it, so we believe scenario 1 is the most-best option we have for the city. >> okay. thanks.

>> good eveningism kate howers the mayors budget director. just a couple slides to conclude and know any of the members of the group that is presenting has hap ato answer further questions you may have. i spoke briefly about the ongoing financial benefit to the city should we accept the grant award from the state. the next slide in the presentation tries to visually represent that. as i mentioned to supervisor mar, should the city accept the 80,000,000 in grant funds that would free up 8 million dollars we are expecting to spend in debt service payments on a annual basis. those funds then would be available to do 2 things and that is what in front of you today, a recommendation from-through

the capital planning committee touous those funds to expedite the remaining city departments out of the seismically unsafe haul orphjustice and expand mental health respite for people leaving jail or diverted from jail. the next slide shows the original timeline to exist the remaining departments out of the hall of justice. you can see that the moving county jails 3 and 4 into a new rdf is the first thing on that list. you can see subsequently who remains in the hall of justice, the adult probation, district attorney and remaining units the police department, primarily police investigation. without the grant the city is unable to relocate

those departments until 2019 or 2021. moving forward with the proposal in front of you allows all those departments to move out of the jail by 2021 which is 3 years ahead of when they would otherwise exist. i guess a couple final thoughts, we build capital facilities with the expectation they will lest 30 to 50 years and that is what we have essentially seen with the hall of justice. it is tothe end of the useful life. in order for us to not need a smaller seismically safe jail, the population that iscurrentslin jail would have to drop by more than 300 people and it would have to

stay there for 40 years. we have never seen that in the last 40 years in san francisco that the population would be low and wouldn't need a replacement to the hall of justice. the grant that san francisco has been awarded got the top score from the state. one of the reason they said that they gave us such high marks was because of san franciscos really unprecedented success in preventing people from going to jail, diverting people from jail and having alternatives to incarceration and that this would allow us to continue to be a model for the rest of the state. the project in front of you is the culmination of more than 10 years of work and the best thinking of the departments you heard from today, department of public works,

sheriffs department, controllers office, mayors office led by the city administrators office through the capital plan. [inaudible] we believe this is the last opportunity that the city will have to receive state support for this kind of a replacement facility. that means if we do not accept the grant, we believe that we will still need a replacement to the seismically unsafe hall of justice and have to do that without 80 million dollars of money from the state. so a third of the project would not be paid for and we will have to go back the drawing board. we don't have another plan, you heard cj 6 is not a workable alternative based on the review we have done. the plan in front

of you provides a safer more seismically sound option, reduces the number of beds to 384 which is 57 percent reduction than the hall of justice. it provides improvedachy sess to treatment and programs and suvss inside of jail. it also allows to open up a brand new psychiatric restpet facility, a program which we have nothing comparable to in san francisco right now. finally, this really as i said a moment ago, this is our best thinking and we present it to you because we believe this sp the right thing for san francisco to do and it would be a mistake to not move forward at this time given all the work that has been done. there are people who disagree and there are strong opinions

on this issue, i hope we made the case that thought about it seriously and ask you to take it seriously too. >> thank you mrs. howard. supervisor tang >> thank you mr. howard. i have one question. i know you touched upon what would happen if yee don't have a new facilities which i think a lot the folks are advocating strongly for. i saw on slide 3 is a little touching oen what would happen on a practical side i would like to find more detail. for example, the out of cunty placement and risk of cort order or other action of replacement jail. i want to know if this doesn't happen what are the results? >> thank you supervisor tang. i can't entirely forsee the future among inpresenters who would be

belter to speak on this than i am but a couple thoughts. you know, if we don't move forward with a replacement facility we will continue to keep people in a seismically unsafe building. we continue to keep city staff kw even more importantly people who cannot physically leave that building in the building until we come up with a plan everybody can agree on. in the mean time the building becomes unusable, then i think the options are equally challenging. one option is to identify and rent beds from other counties. i imagine that the sheriffs department would do everything they can to manage within a countsy or with the site in

san bruno but know that isn't sufficient given the classification of the folks in the hall of justice today. of course when you move people out of countsy you have transportation cost and people being far away from the public defender and representation and family and other kinds of support. i don't know if deputy chief freeman would like to say a couple words >> sfr visor tang i would share a story, a as young deputy sheriff in 1992 i remember very well working at the old saf county jail 3 on the grounds of san bruno and that jail is demolished. it was the oldest jail west of the mississippi. what i remember well is every thursday we have to gee and pull inmate tooz be put on a bus and they were going to santa rita kwrail. they were going to alameda county because we were under

federal consent to get the count down because we had inmates sleeping on the floors and in closets and gyms and had tragicintsdant tied to ovcrowding. judge [inaudible] didn't take kindly. serious ramifications were headed the way and that was 1992. i know what it wril cost to house beds in santsa rity. when the inmates are out there we have togo to dublin every day bring them to court and transport back at the thofend day and not to disparage alameda but the inmates will not receive the programs they will receive here. it is expensive to house inmates out of county, incredibly

expensive and not to the benefit of the inmates and the inmates families, not to the benefit of the neighborhood where those inmates come from. it isn't safe from a security standpoint because you transport inmates to and from court. san francisco county was under the federal [inaudible] back in the 80's under the michael henacy administrationism we do not want to return to those days. we dont want to relinshuish authority of the jail to federal [inaudible] >> thank you sheriff. okay, are there any other staff presentations? i know we are through the slide deck. colleaguesgy questions, comments at this point in time? supervisor tang, >> i think i will start off the

very difficult conversation. i know there are a lot of people who in the chamber and spoke very much against the rebuild of the facility at 850 bryant and know it is-there is a larger movement behind the arguments and i can understand that. my message to them would be that and i think i said this at the last budget committee hearing when we debate the grant from the state is we have a large of very mutual interests. we share that we believe that there should be more services for pre-trial diversion and more money put and services for treating mental health substance abuse. services outside the jail instead of inside mpt all these things we agree on. however, i

think overall some of those arguments really ignore the practical realties of what would happen if the new facility were not rebuilt. i think that in some of the departments that were here today answered my questions, i think those concerns outweigh what the current situation is. there are a lot of people who can't speak for themselves, the people in county jail 3 and 4 at 850 bryant now. some of the folks are here that are recently released and appreciative to hear their perspective but many cannot speak for them sevl squz don't want to presume i know what is in their best interest or what the families need but i doknow the current conditionerize not sufficient and doesn't provide a good path to succeed once they are reentering into the communities. so, with that said, i think that for me the decision

isn't driven by the fact that we have the 80 million dollar grant from the state, that helps, but my decision really is taking into crrkz consideration who is there now and what they need and think san francisco can continue to set a positive example for the rest the state and country in terms of what we can do to transform the space that we house inmates and provide them with the services they need to bow able to successfully exist the jail system. i think there are lots of improvements. i known [inaudible] nob solitaire confinement regarding juveniles. there are efforts by members the board regarding banning the box to smake sure people are records have better chance for job opportunities. the practical realty of not building a new

facility i think is very negative especially for the popeal that are there and their families. so, with that said, today for me i would like to move all of the items that are before us to the full board. i can do so without a positive recommendation. i know given there is a lot of concern and there should be more debate at the full board so those are my thoughts. >> thank you. mr. rose can we go to your reports and apologize >> on page 26 of the report we show the jail replacement project budget is 240 million dollars shown in table 2. on page 27 of the report the office of public finanls estimates a 5.02

percent interest rate that result in 9 8.8 million interest [inaudible] principle amounts of 208.3 million shown in table 3 on page 27 the report the interest payments that result in 307.1 million over the life of the [inaudible] and that is shown in table 4 on page 27 of our report. we do have a number of recommendations which are shown on page 30. we recommend you amend file 151175 to specify the certificate of proceeds are used to refund 12, 690, 00 [inaudible] to funds jail replacement program cost. we recommend you

amend file 151184 to choir the drerkter of real estate report on the purchase agreement for the 4 properties to be acquired within the 5 days of the purchase agreements and make that agreement because under the resolution the director of real estate is authorized to purchase the properties without board of supervisor approval. we recommend you [inaudible] authorize request [inaudible] we recommend also request the director of real estate to include consideration of the benefits to the sellers of not paying 248, 850 in transfer taxes. we consider approval the proposed recommendations and the ordinance to the policy matter to the board of supervisors.

>> thank you very much. supervisor mar i'll return but if we have questions we will return. >> thank you. i did want to say that i came into the meeting hoping that we could continue this item till after the jao meeting happening tomorrow. alternatives to incarceration are a big part of of funding of programs from the bail reform to many of the wrap around services on substance abuse and mental health service help to continue to to reduce the prison pop ygz in the city. i did understand the controllers report that the population is not going down as we assumed, but there are many different ways that community based alternatives to incarceration can help continue that trend downward. i appreciated the comment from former

inmates and children with incarcerated parent and many that gave testimony. i wish we did rnt have to exclude people from the chambers and could center had everyone here to be able to observe and not from a room outside of the these chambers, but i know the disruption earlier is one of the reasons why we had to re-sort to that. i also wanted to say that [inaudible] the sheriffs office and all the speakers and the care that you put into addressing issue for example cj 6 and how it isn't appropriate and costly to turn it entothe kind of facility some of the appointants are saying. the motion is to move this forward without objection i was prepared to vote against moving forward but i think i will allow this to go to full board for further discussion. i think the jao meeting tomorrow is important. i did

want to last say that i think the youth voices were important and could still have come to the meeting because this stetched beyond it but my hope is as the youth commission and others urge us to schedule meetings so that young people [inaudible] and these issues could participate. the last point i would like to make is i think this is a critical vote for us as board. it isn't just a 80 million dollar grant from the state but it puts our sate eon record moving towards rebuilding of a prison and supporting of a process that is continuing with mass incarceration of african americans and poor people as the numbers from the [inaudible] and other studies have shown and want to be on the right side of history so i'll vote no against the process that moves

forward in building a new prison when i think addressing the root causes are about addressing the mental helths substance abuse housing and other needs in our communities not spending money on a new prison so i will vote no as it comes forward but as the motion is move this forward i'll support that motion >> i will be brief in my comments and thank everyone for sticking round and have a lot of department heads so think for your time and all the work that has gun into this. i want to associate myself with the comments of supervisor tang and the questions that were asked were the things i wanted to dive into today. talking about san bruno and cj 6 and why that kmt a viable alternative is important to look into. i think this is a numbers game in one aspect and something we need to think about

and what is plan b? what is the implications? i think that is something we need to think about and so i appreciate all those comment. i will say in a quick question to the director of the controller, i think the original discussion was around for warding the item to next week. i know there are deadline discussions here. would we be able to maintain our status with the potential 80 million dollars if we forward to december the 15? >> our office helps with the technical aspect of the grant application process so we reviewed this question. no, the board needs to take action on these items before recess in december. there is no challenge with the december 15 date. >> colleagues i-first if we will be

able to [inaudible] i ask that we accept or consider the budget analyst recommendations. from my perspective as relate tooz next week versing the 15 we have a change in the seats and know there are questions around timing of planes and so forth and i think we should gichb a opportunity to make sure that the go forward board of supervisors is the one deciding this so think december 15 is a appropriate time to forward the item. if there is no other discussion i would love to entertain a motion to accept the budget analyst recommendation squz forward the items as amended to the full board december 15. motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor mar. take that without objection. okay, it is 6 o'clock on the note. mr. clerk do we have other business? >> no other business.

>> thank you everybody, we are adjourned.

>> power it's all around us in the sun and the winds and caves waves power that lights our

homes while protecting our natural resources clean power will provide power to san franciscans how about works right now our power is from pg&e from non-renewable systems that comes over pg&e maintained lines with clean power your energy about think generated by caesarean more renewable sources come to our home e.r. businesses to the pg&e lines

from the chief i've brought this up before a written report from the chief at every meeting especially, when one of his officer is is secondary for a hit and run case two people sent to the hospital it not okay that the police department which has plenty of members very well paid members that know how to write are not submitting written report from the chief what kind of out rankle is this it is not

okay. >> as a member of the public i want answers why was this officer not apprehend for 10 to 12 hours was we trying to sober up why is it we don't have his mug shot there are so many questions about that case and other matters involving the police departments since you're last meeting yes, sir i'm going to leave this meeting without anything on paper from the chief what has the chiefs report got to say well, nothing because we don't have it did the police department need more money anymore personnel behind me i see plenty of personnel he can't dictate a report it is not okay that there is a lack of a report it is bad community policing it

is so more distrust you guys hiding something on chris coerce. >> thank you. any further comment on items 3 a there d. >> welcome back. >> with the libertarian party i'd like to echo police officers are getting favorable - on social media that are subject to public i'll encourage the commission to look at that i wanted to in reference item 3 b ask director joyce hicks of the office of citizens complaints to update on the current backlog of the embarrassments against police officers waiting to be heard and cases left to be resolved and what what the average time that

someone that files a complaint against an officer wail until the complaint is heard thank you. >> thank you. >> any further comment hearing public comment is closed. >> oh, i'm sorry we have one more welcome, sir. >> thank you. i wanted to ask for future consideration of the director joyce hicks at at a later date whether the filing of a complaint if it is not justified remains on an officer's record that's all i want to ask for future consideration. >> maybe someone from the occ that will answer 2 director hicks anyone from the occ. >> yes. commissioner president loftus senior investigator. >> sir let's get that question

answered and another question bring that up as well from the occ further public comment on items 3 a there 3-d. >> i want to thank the officer for the turkeys that he gave the circle for thanksgiving all the families enjoyed it and thank you. i said if i saw him i'd do it pubically thank you chief suhr and lieutenant danger field. >> thank you. any further public comment. >> good evening juicy. >> i'm he had man juicy i want to say on this topic i'd like to make sure that everything that with the combhaem i think what is happening in chicago the real estate of those i see that as holding back when we get those

body cameras people are watching all over the nation to see how that young man was skipping and 13 months later get to see those reports i want you to know how important people are looking at san francisco and the commission and body cameras and you had something going on at the police station last night the american flags coming through when i was going to usc on owens you all looked beautiful from the - yesterday, i hope the body cameras are better and make sure it looks better i want to see 2020 i hope we have more time left thank you. >> thank you other public

comment hearing public comment is closed. >> accenting. >> discussion and action to approve the body camera for the department to use with the san francisco police officers association and the human resources. >> this is the big item folks we have before us the product of many months of work i have in the past walk through to the steps to this point many of us are part of conversation 10 public hearings there are a number of folks who weighed in and a at the working group i want to start off by thanking the bar association of the public defender's office and the office of citizens complaints, the piano are the alu and asian peace officer association and the latino peace officers and the women's peace officer association and the human rights

and miguel a community member that assisted as well as a number of folks that shared articles with us i want to start off by saying a testimony to san francisco and how much we care about the issues folks from different background background are sharing their opinions with us tonight an opportunity to have a discussion amongst ourselves i'll remind everyone that we start off with a draft policy with issues that were still outstanding we went to two public community meetings one in the western edition and the in tenderloin items in question were tracked and contact you think a month ago now in november and went through the 6 page policy line by line it took about 5 hours we've glutton this

word byword who you have before you 4 opens on the website for anyone they're available in paper form so we're going to go through them i want to start off by oriented ourselves to the things that have changed we'll spend most is of times on one issue but note to the community how the policy is different on some other issues as well so first, we talked about the package of ab 69 in sacramento and been defined by the governor it is about shortage of body camera footage and so we went back and the sergeant and the city attorney looked at the recommendations that will be appropriate for us to be put in here and consistent a few of them one making it clear that the recorded data from body worn

cameras are the property of the department at the bottom of page one an explicit indication periodic and random audits of body worn cameras with the combines with the policy we discussed with this commission you'll see that there is a section on notification and consent prior to our last discussion no indication in the policy that an officer had my obligations to at least even innovative the citizen they're being recorded and now says had feasible they should inform members they're recorded that's a change in addition what was added on page 3 in terms of the long and comprehensive list when an officer's is required to turn on a vehicle in vehicle pursuits

and on to page 4 per the commissioners discussion about documentation in cased had a member deactives a camera what you need to do the member should document it as outlined in decultivation and again, at the request of this commission based on the discussion if a higher member asked the lower member to deactuate it was in the piece a superior officer has the authority to turn off their body worn cameras on page 5, however, it was important for the commission that peer officer has to follow the rules and document why the stoppage and recordings on

page 5 pursuant to ab 69 language adams to the following from the member is one the subject of an investigation and an officer involved shooting or into custody dedicate or two a member is the subject of a criminal investigation or 3 at the discretion of the geoff shall take custody of the camera and take probability for up loading the data this is an open question it is taken from the member at this time by the folks indicated again per ab 69 members are prohibited from tampering with the body worn cameras and access and body worn cameras for personal use and uploading records onto the internet website without written approval from the officer of the mo

again under distribution added at the request of this commission we have explicit language to the point around the standards goal to release body worn cameras to the greatest will extent unless it lays obvious the analysis and endanger the witness or other person a jeopardy an investigation or violate federal and state laws as to privacy the departmental request pursuant to ab 69 the department shall have a log of distribution and j on retention as you can see the department shall keep all the body worn cameras recordings in exchange any other policies the department should retain the body worn cameras

recordings for two years in incident involved in use of force or otherwise that leads to the arrest of an individual to formal or informal against the members of the department and continues with the notwithstanding a body worn camera recording maybe saved for an incast part of time that is relevant to a criminal of any of us active matter not delete any body worn camera recordings without authorization and lays out the process and needs to be approved subject to the limitations their certain folks authorized to delete the recordings in the established recordings and the department had retain the logs so everyone can read this themselves those are the changes to all 4 versions the policy

those were changes seattle of the 5 hour discussion so those are the things i want to highlight in terms of the discussion we'll have prior to a vote we can start with we have version one, version 2, version 2a and version 3 differences between the versions have to do with how we handle the officer viewing component we'll start the discussion with any fellows commissioners on questions, thoughts do you want to start with a particular policy i'm open to that colleagues. >> i'll say the only differences in the versions is that i'm sorry, i want to say the difference in the version that particular item is that thing. >> correct. >> just to clarify. >> sorry you need to speak into the mike.

>> the section about viewing those railroad the only differences but the section about storage and use of recordings mirrors language in the viewing when you take away the camera had the commanding officer will take away the camera it mirrors the language in the viewing. >> okay. >> thank you. >> would that will helpful everyone has read them go you want to summarize or talk about one in particular i've been talking for a while i'll invite everyone else. >> him happy to start. >> all right. commissioner dejesus. >> i've been on record - >> i can't get close. >> move the mountain. >> there i've already discussed this over

and over but i looked at version one you know, i have to say the workshop in the department disagreed on section f so section f has land on our laptop what officers should be able to view the video footage i think we really were clear they're able to review it except for certain carve out sections those carve outs are an officer involved shooting or an into custody death a member that is subject to a criminal investigation at the discretion of the police chief but tparagraph they will cooperate with the legal representative to review those are not carve outs only for the

representative to get there there is an issue the way we handle officer involved shooting right now the best practice right now to isolate the officer to take a statement immediately he's not allowed to interview with witnesses and gather any cameras are viewing things bound up and down the streets he's isolated from the partners and he precedes with the investigation that's the current practice for all cities and there's a reason for that will the case law grand verse connor expect the officer knew the force was used he saw and preserved at this time not a hidden sight and not what is available for i am had to review before he makes his judgment or statement by the telling me he

can watch the video and do what we he does needs to do is the best practices we currently have and a caustic change a compromise the department and the communities are struggling with the issue i think this is a reasonable compromise for 3 certain criteria's that the officer will not be able to view the cameras and have to write his report bans state law a prospective of what he he was using and what we saw in order to testify the use of force and the compromise is after he writes the statement or provides the statement then review the camera and do a supplemental report change is hard but it is something we need to grasp but

need to understand it and practice this is our opportunities to write a policy that is actually works for everybody it is fair to the public and fair to the department it is transparent it helps restore trust and this is over opportunities to do that i think we should do it right rather than taxing it the way the department wrote it the way they want to write it is a disputed area we should do it right and cut the baby in half and view the certain criteria they can't look at the video they should make the statement that's what the case law says that's the best practice a disservice to change that practice and you know so i would certainly disagree with version one i agree with version two i

suggested version 2 i look at the version 3 but version 3 a concerning to me the officer can review it with the permission from the chief investigating officer and the chief of police in order to be transparent and fair we should set it up for a process that everyone understand and uses and we'll have to get used to the supplemental report that's not too much too hard to do we do supplemental reports all the time so that's in my opinion and so - >> (clapping.) thank you, commissioner i'm going to ask the chief one thing that came up i think that commissioner dejesus brings up an important point how do we do officer involved shootings now

what i understand and told the officer is the last person to be interviewed theirs an investigation that happens witnesses are talked to if there's video it is looked at but part of the investigation the officer is the last person to get talked to is there a video how is it handled now to commissioner dejesus point are we incorporating the item the same thing. >> i'll clarify the witnesses no officer who is a witness at the scene be advised. >> yeah. isolated you can explain what happens i've had conversations people think that officer involved shooting the office what look at their video and of you know my understanding of what happens bans the presentations is that they're separated and a whole process i want to make sure we're understanding the process. >> that's correct commissions

an ois a supervisor attends the scene with a general questions what direction or additional suspect that may not be outstanding that pose a treat to the citizens those are the basic questions again, the supervisor isolates those officers that are the discharging officers and each individually transported to the station and kept apart from each other they're not interviewed none has assess other than the representatives the discharging officer is the last over that is interviewed hours or maybe a twenty-four hour period multiple witnesses that need to be interviewed we'll cooperate they're the last ones and the investigators want a complete picture before

discharging an officer the officer are they able to read or watch the video from a store camera before they give a statement. >> there's been times where wee they have again for the reaps discussed under the past the inclusion and the tunnel vision it helps trigonometry something that brings more in accordance than noticeably the mind works in you know various was how to records life experiences e so they have been instances it triggers some recognize to provide for information when witnesses an officer didn't releases they were struck by a car oh, that happened. >> is that the exception of or the rule. >> what. >> is that the exception

watching the videos. >> it's a case by case basis early on when the investigation is within a couple of days and a interview goes on we get a basic understanding what is going on with concerns i think that is where we say you know let's figure out what we have before considering the next step. >> i'll say that is the wrong road. >> i think from what i hear from this i've understood 0 through the reading and pregnancy we've had is that there is an investigation that is done and decisions are made by investigators how to handle the interview and so i think that makes me want to jump to version 3 again, i'm happy to keep the conversation going i think version 3 it does include a safeguard a provision and

certainly a level of accountability when the decision to allow an officer to view the video the member shall not view the video with the discretion of the police and lists other folks he disagree that that lands you back where we start for a few reasons one that makes it clear that the decision to allow on officer in one of the situations is something that will be at the discretion of the chief and we know that the chief reports to the mr. johnson and return an officer to duty with this body we do to evaluate the performances i feel like there is sufficient accountability

that addresses the concerns that somehow officers reviewing the video in you'll instances is not fair or transparency the concern he have i'd like to hear from everyone i'll prefer to limit that discretion to the chief of police and not to the criminal investigator we don't have direct oversight we have an oversight relationship with the chief of police and so i feel like to the extent someone will have the discretion to make that decision i'll be more comfortable with the limits to the chief of police i'm open commissioner melara. >> i'm going to say little i have a cold and coughing badly connotation but you able or

building that officers shall look at video in all circumstances i'll support investigation 3 i've read it carefully i agree it is shall be in the hands of the chief of police he answers to the police commission no one else does so that's a second to that. >> commissioner turman. >> i would agree i don't know that version one is that officers should be allowed to view in all circumstances it is not what our public times or expects. >> ultimately i believe that there needs to be some type of limitations on the ability to view i'm willing to support version 3 strike out the lead

investigator whether criminal or investigative and add in specifically why the chief is can make that decision based on his discretion but that is by us with the same circumstances in which we review the chiefs decisions when we returns officers to duty officer involved shootings thank you commissioner turman wong i wanted to repeat something that commissioner president loftus said we have a policy in front of us we agree an 99 percent that's important that 99 percent of the incidents we agree on what should be done and have difficult issues i don't want the public to be

mislead we're focusing on a single paragraph having said that, commissioner marshall said what drives our innovation to adopt the body cameras overall that's again think a national level a lack of confidence or trust in our police we need to do a better job to build a police relationships it's important to adopt a policy with the perception of fairness the public say it is unfair for the police officers to be treated different i've tried to apply language in version 3 with a level of febltd i drafted from my certain as a former da in san

francisco having conducted ois investigations as part of district attorney's office and someone that filed a civil case in a wrongful death somebody killed by a police seen this from all angles and at the investigations where the investigations the captain in homicide we had a situation come up in one of the cases exactly had commissioner dejesus said there was evidence that was developed in the course of the investigation they wanted to show parts of investigation to the officer to get his responses to what happened and as the da's representative that evidence should not be shown and had a discussion late at night and we came to the conclusion it was better at this time to show the

pieces of evidence in order to get the best responded that order of discretion not a black and white rule where officers should be viewing or refused to view i'm okay with the chief of police but a minute by minute unfolding investigation i don't know from the chief wants to be involved in the day to day calls some happen at 4 o'clock in the morning sat at the scenes for hours on end and some things my change and now it is important to show the witness officer, i'm going to call them the witness officer to get a better response that's what i'm trying to craft some kind of discretion that the overall policy the officers sunshine involved in shootings

should not view only with the course of the discretion of whichever investigator a leading the investigation i want to wrap up the policy overall essential with the number of changes at the last meeting is something i think is a great policy. >> thank you, commissioner i almost called you president commissioner mazzucco. >> i want to thank the commission and commissioner president loftus a long process that involved the community meetings and narrows down to one issue we're talking about whether or not the officers should review the video before giving a statement myself like commission wong and former district attorney i've responded to numerous officer involved shooting and presents at an

otherwise, i know what takes place at an officer involved shooting and the deputy chief told us the officers generally relax the preconception narrows on 60 minutes anderson cooper did angle investigation they talked about how the officers vision narrows a stressful situation not something we examine behind the decks so the officers should have the opportunity and like this carve out the safety value thank you discretion of chief if he thinks the situation warrants not look at the video go with the chiefs discretion and i'll assume the deputy chief of the an officer involved shooting the chief has accountability to the commission and commissioner president loftus rereview every single

officer involved shooting and before a return to duty before to determine whether or not things we can do better or something that trifrdz so the chief does answer to us that's a good carve out if something is wrong with us who do officer involved shooting whether this is an issue with the officer involved shooting within the first hour or two if interest there is issues i think the chief in hois training and experience knows that they get a feeling they're accountability to the commission this carve out is a good carve out it is fair and the officers have to have that opportunity they need to review that because we've heard about writing a supplemental report with all the defense attorneys in the room it is

called cross examination nonetheless you've been there like some of the men and women you can't stand in their shoes i then this is the discretion of chief or his represent and the other to the commission and fairness to the officers. >> thank you commissioner turman. >> well i respect what commissioner mazzucco and commission wong said it is important but this is a main voyage we need to look at the policy and at this time it needs to be the chief and then it needs to be reviewable by this commission to see exactly how this policy works from 3 to 6 months be back here and saying how it is working and what he need to do and change i don't

want to give anybody the impression what we set here and sendoff to the meat process should be final we should continue to look at the process we should continue to see how it is going to work but needs to start off being reviewed by such circumstances with critical instances and the chief needs to make the call and that for whatever reason he makes the call we need to review that if it becomes necessary. >> thank you commissioner turman i agree and predict commissioner wongs comments about this experience we're a product of our experience you've brought up an important point about the investigations happening in arraignment and discretion can be useful to actually, you, choose to show portion of the video because you

have concerns whether or not the officer was until oil or committing a crime but an accountability i feel that certainly this chief and any chief that san francisco will select given the importance of the newness of body cameras especially in critical incidents as officer involved shootings and into custody death any chief in san francisco wants to make that call and ultimately be accountability to the commission it is the right thing to do for that people to say i was not there on the issue has to do with with the trust and other in san francisco that exists so i'm fine with the chief of police or hois did he give new and commissioner marshall.

>> we better get on at the last meeting after we heard everyone speak and that came back to us we were going to try to do the enforceable carve out a general rule on body cameras that satisfied everyone i knew that wasn't possible and i've not been inundated with so much stuff in my life i was more concerned with listening to all the rings of paperwork and things i've gotten i was concerned with what the members of the commission thought. >> i noticed commissioners spit what people do they put in a lot of work and did a lot with that so to come to o a consensus and

to hear and i got to say commission wong you came up with something solid to put this out and commend you on that around this particular issue viewing of the video i was wondering i wanted to hear we can reach consensus i think that is great a great idea i think that it is the way we should go given all that we heard it is not set in stone for the general order and change it wherever this is new everything is new so i too support version 3 and i believe the way it is written now commissioner president loftus is that the leading

investigator will come out. >> that's my, my request. >> i'll make a motion. >> we have to get public comment first. >> point of progress just to reiterate something we've talked about this is a - not the final everything dot all the i's and cross the t's i see people nodes what happens we're voting tonight to give the direction to our folks with the department of human resources and hope we'll make final adoption this was such an important issue of concern we wanted to make sure we heard from everyone and able to deliberate and hoping the final process will happen in short order tonight vote is the high-level pieces and get the final piece and make a final

adoption i want to make sure i said that for the hundredth time other comments before we go into public comment colleagues i just want to say one last thing i've gotten the sense from everyone is irritated what the things together in you're feeling that way i see you're faces you're in good company we are balancing a number of interests and responding to one aspect of this policy we want to hear from everyone your perspectives but i can't say enough i think the fact we've had people from such different points sitting at the table and respectfully disagreeing is a testament to the city thank you for coming and look forward to hearing from you with that, i'll

call for public comment. >> two minutes. >> policy about social media not with the overall public affairs i said previously tonight no mug shot realize of coerce so in both instances talking about mug shots are

public record and soon going to be taped that the police officers will be recording with this equipment so we are talking public records and both instances i think that there has to be great leeway regarding the tapes from the kwoemz that is going to make that easy for members of the public and presto get a public records request to get the tapes and get the tapes soon we've all seen in recent weeks out of chicago a dash cam documenting the killing of an unarmed teenager was held for 13 months i'm glad we're soon 2016 you guys are behind the curve in

developing putting body cameras on officers we need you to finally develop the policy that is applied regarding the release of mug shots thank you. >> thank you. good evening and welcome. >> good evening, commissioners ladies and gentlemen, on both sides of the aisle i was a mayoral commitment i didn't make it but my idea did you received a copy of what i submitted regarding the cameras in regards to the san francisco police officers viewing the video before presenting the reports is denied it is the 21st century is for the an automobile part a person has rights but he didn't have extra rights video cameras with there to not

to entrap everyone but to identify truth from fix and co-hemorrhages and force when it comes to the comments of the gentlemanless unless you've been there no teacher will let you view an examine before the test to make this tool one of the efficient, active tools this is my story i'm sticking to it my lips my words to gods ears thank you very much. >> hi number one thank you for making the improvements since no draft policy was issued by the

defense lawyers to basically protect their own interest so thank you for screening but more improvements number one the random audits that is awesome how frequent is a requirement a certain number and how many no requirement they be done i'd like to know what the specifically is going to be number two not footage is jeopardizes the investigation this is not a valid excuse that might be a better language but the idea of jeopardizing is made up a loophole ready to be abused and number 3 what are the consequences i don't have the policy in front of me the negative failures to do what

you're supported to do number for the dash cam off ramp should be used or other people used for training purposes and the occ for they're part of their investigation process other uses by getting people caught and lying about that is an important use as well and finally i've been pushing for 32 months for the dash cantonese the idea you've been working faster is not true this year 2015 you've done a better job and i really, really appreciate it thank you very much. >> next speaker >> clyde good evening and welcome. >> nice to be back this is home and lie love first of all, the officers should be able to review those

films at any time i don't care we're not out there to play got you and lie we don't fled to do that we got you okay he lunged at me he shot him 16 times only an excuse to justify homicide in carolina so if in is what we're play we'll get you in a lie don't need it, it is look at the hotel a pack of lies a pack of lies okay now i can tell you through personal experience that happened to me a couple years ago i'll not talk about it specifically i end up in a hallway with an individual showed a gun he let me know i

shadow there i was panicking i didn't i'll admit the blood pressure dwoupz i wasn't scared i've been in the service by the grace of god how to stop this threat i said by way of you're on camera he ran out the door the next day if you asked me clyde what was he wearing a gun what was the color of his shoes a gun. >> i was so fixated on that gun i could care less about what he had on let's of the officer review the video. >> welcome good evening commissioner president loftus and commission chief of police and director joyce hicks i'm the president of the san francisco police officer association thank you

commissioner president loftus for her leadership and the commissioners i've spent on this it is a long process especially starting with the working group and the numbers and the hours of the paperwork the position of po a members should be afforded the opportunity to review the body worn camera video in order to provide the most complete and thorough and accurate statement or report the current practice with the sfpd is officers shall seek out video from a muni bus era fixed building or a citizen on an eye phone that video is evidence and that needs to be properly recorded on an initial report that an officer will provide a statement doing it later on in a supplemental report is contrary to the current policy i believe that the department and the

commission expects our members to present the information on the report at the time of the report viewing the body worn cameras is supported and george gascon and chief suhr one of the studies by the united states duff's we have dozens of officers right now that will be testifying they believe in the policy that is on the front line officers they need to embrace this to be successful that's why we're submitted to the po a letters to the commission thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening and welcome.

>> hi, i'm a police officer for 8 years i wrote a speaker but a subject came up i want to talk about the issue about the what's the difference between police officers and suspect they are treated save officers are there because we're hired by the san francisco to be there and most ois wouldn't occur in the officers were not there we go through the academy for 9 months everyday to train how to handcuff and do control holds and take downstairs all that stuff when stuff happens you have to rely on memory one the problems without viewing the camera you do sure enough by memory and forget and if we're going to be treated the same as other people we should be having

rights to miranda and other things any defense attorney that is good if we had a client and have video and the police officer want the client to make a statement they'll have to look at the video i don't see why we're any different yeah, that's pretty much it. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening lieutenant and welcome. >> good evening, commissioners i'm mistake the concert the po a i want to point out the po a is a working member we've never drawn a line in the sands or said body cameras shout come to san francisco this is might have e my belief it is a benefit we come to this discussion we not

saying body cameras shouldn't come to san francisco but only important that the members very a reasonable policy that something they'll come to embrace down the road in my prior job an internal investigator investigated officer involved shooting and worked with many of you with the boards that commissioner dejesus has been at many of those and obviously director joyce hicks and i know each other from those days those investigations it is of my opinion viewing the video footage for officers in officer involved shooting or into custody death is critical the way the process needs to be clear once an officer gives a statement they're brought to the station and isolated i fully understand that no one is

talking about officers watching video camera without the investigators first, the investigators themselves and in a controlled setting those investigators will show the video to officer i can't imagine do a thorough investigator not showing the officers what did they do and say and hear and more importantly what did they do or say thank you for your time. >> good evening and welcome. >> commissioners and ladies and gentlemen, of the audience good evening good evening. >> i came here for one reason about 2 and a half hours ago i was reading the article in the examiner and then the first thing i heard mumbo-jumbo how you'll go

against every guess in a the united states and give the pertinent information they've beat up the citizens of the city and county of san francisco what i came here for to find out if you have any integrity to vote the way it new york city voted or other communities in the united states not to give special privilege to police officers 99 percent of them are fine men 2 percent are criminals and what you're going to do is protect the criminals of police officer association is not responsible for them they're a union they're only union looking for union dues their left in one million dollars to san francisco and not willing to pay it the mob promotes the police officers work keep paying the dues we'll

give you a deck jimbo bob city job i'm not here to promote deck jobs but the city and county of san francisco they lost all their surveillance equipment their claiming confidentiality it is public information you should do tonight to make sure that any officer that turn on the recording turns on it so they can watch on another so it won't disappear when you come through the arrangement and find out we can't find the video thank you for your time in this matter. >> thank you (clapping.) >> good evening and welcome. >> good evening. >> john evans san francisco police department. >> over 25 years ago as little

baby police officer i was told i shall i must review all evidence prior to making a report i didn't have a choice not a choice i was entrusted to carry a gun and to be involved in officer involved shootings the idea that maybe there needs to be a time when i shouldn't review evidences before me to make a report properly and accurately makes me think contrary to be told not direct authority i wish you did but maybe you don't trust me, you trust me with a gun and trust me to go do the work i appreciate the trust and want to be true to the trust but oh, no, we don't want you to see this evidence it going against everything i've

done for over a quarter of a century you don't trust that me if you don't trust me i'll go if i was was a lesser officer without reviewing evidence i don't know i'll wait and hope i get to see the evidence i should it is ridiculous not to review evidence whether it is written or audio or video why should video recordings be different than the evidence i shall review before making my report i want you to think about thank you. >> good evening and welcome. >> good evening. >> commissioner president loftus and other commissioners deputy chief and joyce hicks aim

the president of the officer for justice i've been a police officer for 26 years in the patrol division i stand to commend you on our hard work i say at this time i believe you have the best consensus comes in version 3 i'm thinking about what i was looking at today in subdividing you can't tell me those officers can tell you everything has unfolding i can be tell you my officers can't because of post traumatic stress and because it is humanly impossible we have to be able to look at those videotapes when you have a critical magnitude you can't expect the chief of police to authorize who can and cannot do

video the videotapes you need to allow him to use and exercise his judgment to authorize who should be able to allow the officers to review videotapes in some incidents as officer involved shootings, etc. i urge you to allow us to view the tapes thank you. >> sergeant. >> good evening welcome. >> good evening my name is bryan currently a san francisco police officer assigned to the southern station i've been a police officer for 6 years i can tell you when i take on a suspect one-on-one i've had to fight them i can tell you how to use force and had to go back to the station it is hard to remember everybody what commands and how much time i gave them by having a body worn cameras that

will give transparent to the report to show what was said he when and how the person come applied or not i can truly in 2012 i was at 3 and market street the night the giants won the world series prior to that myself he and officer westbound taking multiple bottles if we were able to watch the video we could have caught is suspects and who committed the fire bombing earlier it is a valuable tool we need to be able to video is it and officers writing a supplemental report that if that policy go through less and less officers on the streets and at the station writing reports not

beneficial for the community i urge the police commission please let officers view the video thank you. >> thank you, officer good evening and welcome. >> good evening commissioner president loftus and commissioners sergeant i work they mission station at midnight you don't cook our holiday diner and review the repeat afterwards you don't go to our doctor having filling a prescription and review the medical charts later the didn't file charges and then review the case files juries don't reach a verdict and deliberate the testimony why would you want a police officer to write a document and

afterward only afterwards review the relevant evidences commissioners, i urge you do not approve any policy that prohibits officers from viewing body camera don't make us where blind folds we write our statements and write the reports thank you. good evening and welcome. >> hello commission commissioners my name is joe a 20-year veteran the san francisco police department a supervisor at the parks station i've heard a lot of people speak and i've been involved in officer involved shootings i've had pulled the trigger and taken a life in the san francisco ethics commission with a duty weapon issued by the city of san francisco and something that weighs on my life until this day for the commission to think of putting in a policy

where officers can't 50 view video my own video to me a ludicrous i view as a police officer daily video from other incidents crimes that occur i think that is important for officers to have you united states videos for the accuracy reports of incident that occurred on the evening i took a life the person murdered someone and attempting to carjack someone i don't remember everything that occurred die remember my life been in danger and acting appropriate that is a situations that goes beyond normal human beings contention i'm a deter storm veteran since i've been a police officer in

the city of san francisco i've not experienced more violence except a proud officer wearing a uniform please i urge you commission commissioner marshall i've learned to you on the radio i wear the uniform please let us view our videoed to get the most accurate information. >> thank you. >> next speaker good evening and welcome. >> geary even though a police officer i want to say the organizations that want this passed want the police officers to be treated by criminal suspect however, unlike criminal suspects they want police officers to be forced to make a statement and made in a way to increase the impression they want police officers to be forced to make the statement without viewing the evidence a

right given to criminal suspects despite the - the office of citizens complaints wants to sustain more complaints against police officers and justify their existence the defense advertising will have a harder time getting police officers off and the aclu i am asking you to vote against if and every time a police officer use the force is honestly justified not in the interest of the public or city the city's honest police officers to cause them to be mistakenly looked it is not in the interests of the public or the city to have the prospective of the criminal society that didn't accurately reflect the intention of the members.

>> thank you. >> good evening. >> next speaker. >> good evening. >> commissioners tax for having us i'm a san francisco police officer mission station this program. >>was presented to us a tool and i think that nationwide it is being seen as a tool to make us better police officers and better at our jobs to allow us to do our jobs in a safe and transparent way many policy is impacted where the members e members of the commission and organizations are trying to change this policy to have it be something we're not able to view our footage prior to making a statement it will create a diversifiesness that is not necessary in this situation i'm a san francisco police officer but a member of

the community and enough division at this time moving we should be allowed to use the program as a tool to be better police officers not to put ourselves in situations where we have to not only create accurate police reports and create accurate reports but defend all actions i'm sure that not many people in this room have been in situations like we see as police officers in the city of san francisco thank you for your time >> thank you. good evening and welcome. >> good evening my name is tammy a resident of the district 5 and also a tax paying citizen the police officers work for me in paying their salary i'm here to talk about i need my glasses

about accountability and the public trust he respect police officers for the sacrifice they're not never in the wrong i've witnessed two incidents in the of him a neighborhood where the police officers is respect for the black community that's reached the point i won't call the police i mean, i'll not risk the killing of allocate citizen by the police people are called to call the police department because someone is not andrew's i came to speak in port of cameras and not allow them to use them before writing reports it comes back to acknowledge as a tax paying citizen i want to add i saw the photos on facebook of the officer involved shooting

it looks an execution it sleeves mass murderers are not caught but police officers kill unarmed people we need the video not to be viewed so the officers that are doing this the right way this will not be a problem thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. good evening and welcome. >> good evening commissioners and director joyce hicks i'm henry a rank and file police radio police an officer in the police department i'm accountability to the public through the commission you have over set forth over me such me we wear the uniform you lent us i'm aware of the star of the uniform i wear belongs to the people of the city my experience in situation where a potential

or actual use of force the anxiety level goes up as a result each person gets tunnel vision i urge you to allow the police officers to view the camera video we are trained and told to look for additional witnesses so we can form an accurate conclusion a video is not designed to be biased i urge you to allow us to view the body worn camera videos an accurate statement can be made thank you. >> thank you if people can line up who will want to speak i am trying to decide if we're going to have a bathroom, break looks like we'll make it to the

end of the public comment. >> good evening, commissioners i'm with the library telethon party and the civil liberties coalition i want to talk about something that schobz said earlier the drafters of this policy that is which is the department that is the police department they wrote it the way they want to write it this workshop was drafted by the people that are being regulate by the document this is a huge conflict of interest and this you know discussion between the different versions the vertigos are not that different all the versions you're talking about will belief of leave it up to the police discretion to decide whether or not the officers get to review the video or not i think the officers can write a

supplemental report this is a dictionary e distraction other people involved in the incident have the same ability to review the video the officers deal with those situations on a fairly regular basis someone who is a victim of a crime or a suspected or something like that is victimized by the police they're not dealing with that that on a regular basis so they should have the same reason to view the video i want to address overhead please in the new york times the real issue what happens to the video after it is taken right now the policy will have it go go into the custody of the police department this is a problem goes to a independent control like the police officers should have charge of that video not the

police department she shouldn't be able to choose at their discretion what we release to the public they need to have public accountability and the nationwide on the cameras people want - >> thank you, sir. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening and welcome. >> thank you hi commissioners my name is tracey rewritten beggar with media alliance we're out there a democratic advocate i want to start off by talking about a document in may 2015 civil rights principles for the body cameras a signs is the napkin napkin, the national urban league and the lawyers

committee for civil rights and you know prominent civil rights organization item 57 on the list preserve the independent evidentiary report by pro bono the officers from viewing footage before file their reports footage of the an incident presents a partial and sometimes misleading story on how events unfold it causes the officer to conform the report rather than what the officer actually saw based on some of the testimony i'm having a hard time how the reports were written prior to the use of body cameras obviously a protocol to require the reports based on what the police officers

remember of the incidents this president pro tem has not all of a sudden become useless because of an additional tool what we're after is the prudent of truth what is happening we do that by examining discrepancies on a video and what's in the reports what the the meaning of those discrepancies is could be trauma or loss of memory or the position of camera it would be that the incident report is not true if we're not willing to admitted that possibility and use that for that purpose we'll turn into chicago that's not what i want thank you. >> thank you, ma'am are we having a problem with the timing. >> good evening and welcome. >> oh, i think that is getting

turned back on. >> hi aclu and nolan organizer we want to start by acknowledging this is a national conversation we've all watched and many of us stood as the public with the demand of transparent after police officer violence has taken another person of color (calling names) please body cameras should be a tool for accountability not abuse and clear guidelines are needed both about when off ramp had should be released and when officers b.a. can view the camera to rebuild the community trust allowing the officers to see the footage before make a statement gives the offers an unfair advantage the camera

footage is other one incident getting the information about what was in the mind of the officer during the shooting is one more piece of truth and therefore uphold the investigations district it is the officers memory is alternated by seeing the footage beforehand the integrity is gone body cameras will not will solve the precisely but with the right policy they can be an important step targets accountability i want to thank the commission for hearing the voices of the san franciscans civil rights outcomes and is aclu and care and color change and vance justice and the public defenders and who else has asked for the version of 3 thank you. >> okay.

>> next speaker. >> hi names a allen he like to echo what a couple of speaker ago said based on the importance of seeing the video is a 0 wonder any investigation could have gone on and reliable since this has been done important a long time one of the officers that was up here prior mentioned trusts something we not been about but identifiable that trust is part of issue and it is not trust necessarily between the police commission and the officers or the chief suhr it is about trust between the public and 0 police officer whether or not justified by the incident across the country chicago being a great t is trust it an issue not just a tool for enforcement but a tool for transparency

transparency to the public and i think that is important to keep in mind the changes suggested from what i understand from version 3 sound like a big improvement i'd like to see more openness i do want to thank the commission or whoever came up with version 3 to have made that change thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening commissioner president loftus, commissioners director hicks and deputy chief i'm bryan a police officer in the city and county of san francisco assigned to the midnight control at the bay station i take pride in our great city i hope to provide substance to allow the officers to see the video before memorializing any documents we acknowledge this tool is

valuable at the same time the technology of body cameras should not make policing more difficult policing is one of the americans most notable professions it can effect people for life and communities for generations given this ever police officers must be centered on what was important justice and fundamental importance are the foundation principles the notable understanding how high the stakes for the police officers will allowing the police officers to view the footage a paramount to all vault all relevant evidence which is the leg term and to provide the most complete and accurate depiction of an incident to get

this right the first time not an historical foot not i understand this is no easy task and the positive important issue thank you for your time and effort during this process. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening and welcome. >> good evening commission my background a medicine not law enforcement there is a public safety interest in knowing how police officers precede critical encounters before they review the camera recordings a police officer ability to assess a threat accurately and to respond appropriately those things are essential for public safety eventually there will be discrepancies between the

officers statement and the body camera read into the record we know that but if oversee skrerpgz are gross distorgsz or they are - currently much concern over how police officers report use of force incidents the new york police department inspectors general reports on body cameras in cases of suspected seclude the officers should review their rortsdz after filing a report not before and most of cops agreed do with that they can file an addendum how they did it in new york this process serves investigative integrity and public interest and the police departments trust

for public service i hope you do a followup audit with the recordings of demonstrations their transmitted through the infusion center by the police department or the ventilated to make sure that the first amendment rights are being audible. >> good evening and welcome. >> good evening. >> inspector i've been with the san francisco police department over 20 years with the gang task force it is interesting i completed a trial in which an armed robbery the defense brought in a witness to testify regarding memory i found interest rate under the

most optimum conditions is 70 percent when you start adding stress factors the peg percentage plummets to thirty percent no different than victims when they're under a stressful situation their focus they'll have tunnel vision i found interesting in this case commissioner dejesus quoted a little bit earlier case law an officer talked about what they saw or knew at the time they don't get to talk to witnesses even though a camera is a partial witnesses that's the officer point of view you're seeing with the officer. >> saw and knew the president at that time, you're giving them the opportunity to remember

during the testimony of the expert with the they're talking about the fact that triggers help memories the human mind is not a video camera but things that trigger the memory if an officer reviewing the camera or the video what they saw are heard will help to trigger those memories you owe it to the officer and community they serve thank you. >> thank you inspector. >> next speaker. >> good evening and welcome. >> good evening rebecca deputy pr and member the body camera work first of all, i read the recessions in the edits and the addendums and i want to say bravo those revisions made that a much tighter document and more

complete and thorough and specific document to basically guide police officers in understanding how to use body cameras retention and viewing and so forth is very good job listening to the commission on version 3 drafted by commission wong i take this is a reasonable effort of compromise and i'm impressed at the effort i would suggest that you add to item f one a subdivision d right now abc if you add a subdivision d and add a reportable use of force just take that one line if commissioner dejesus's draft and that will make that more

complete the deletion of board relieves or criminal investigation on scene is an excellent suggestion from commission and all and all good job we've come a long way towards to draft policy. >> you said add a d after abc. >> page 4 the reporting under one you have subdivision a officer involved shooting or into custody death and d as a criminal investigation or c at the discretion of the chief of police or hois sdeeg i'm suggesting you add d a reportable use of force. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you, ms. young. >> next speaker. >> and good evening public

defender's office jeff adachi. >> i wanted to listen to all the speakers that was educating a point i've supported body cameras from the beginning to improve the quality of the police investigations the reason for the carve outs when an officer moves from a neutrality observer to a witness that may have a stake in the controversy or a victim or maybe a defendant those points we want to make sure there is a record of hois independent recognize not inflicts by the body camera video an example if an office says oh, the reason he stopped mr. smikt he went through a red light and the video shows that mr. smith went through a green light but the officers issued

the ticket will the officer feel the pressure to change that similarly in a case an officer addressed small business someone is from resisting arrest and the video explicit support that again, the person is under the officer feels the pressure to change his account that will be dealt with we want the officers to record the dependent recognize and then look at the video ando see whether or not it support that state is important in instances there were informs uses i want to comment on adding another carry out for the recorded use of force a situation like the gentleman this is the gentleman that was bean by the alameda deputies in the additional by billy clubs those officers will be allowed

under the thirds proposal to view that video i do think this should be added thank you very much for your work. >> thank you public defender jeff adachi. >> next good evening. >> i'm richard a retired sort of. >> speak into the mike. >> we can't hear you. >> i said my name is richard i'm retired sort of i trust that body and trust the police officers and work with them today it is interesting to have this meeting he wasn't going to be here that we have the aftermath of you know chicago and also have intsh and that will have to work for everyone an active shooter and someone

gets the evidence you can't looked at the the officers use this critical tool there are concerns with the first amendment but the police officers in the 71 beagle by more than 99 percent are good working honest cops the whole idea is consumed by that in these days of what happened i don't know that much about san bender but that happens with you know everyone kind of being aware of what was the case thank you. >> next speaker >> good evening and welcome. >> hi names a dean a member the san francisco police department a member for 25 years of those 25 years i've been investigating crimes for just about 22 of them and

investigative tool we use is video and it is very important to have that video available to us in order to document correctly the incidents that took place i have faith in our chief i have faith in the command staff he's put together a command staff second to none the officers that work for those people work for the command staff have a lot of respect not lying about anything i think you get 16 officers they have 16 different versions video everywhere on cases i investigate daily we have video coming in constantly all day long videos everywhere and trusting in the chief and the police department you put them

there are no more a reason we need to trust and echo deputy chief if this the police department we appreciate the fact we'll be going to cameras and something we do need for both ways for the public so we can protect ourselves as well as the public thank you for your time and i'd like to echo marty and his instance on the body cameras thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker >> good evening again ms. brown welcome back. >> my st. francis stance on body cameras he building that it shouldn't be viewed the officers should tell his story about he views the camera we're taking the filings out of the family

members and the people being murdered they say black life matters all life matters think about those lives also that are being murdered okay they're not a lot of police officers that are crooked but there are some that are and i'm thinking on other mothers i've talked to their children were murdered by police officers i think that the police should tell their story before that he view that's my stance my son was not murdered by a police officers but other mothers i've spoken with their children were murdered by police officers so see me as them thank you. >> thank you ms. brown (clapping.) any further public comment on this matter welcome back juicy. >> i'm larry juicy edmond i want to read this is at

carpenter larry juicy edmond proclaimed cheerleader speaks in favor the medical marijuana this is july 23, '03 i'm showing us because i've spoken for medical marijuana and same gender married but now want to speak we need a new policing communities gods and america lives are changing i was reading a report someone took all the people's videos not one lady kept a camera that was what happened but we find out had the black america you don't know who is going to shoot you i hate

looking normally i'm a regular black guy i can could be in danger up think this report you need to make that report without - then making a report why not who two reports now make a report now review is and make another one later you'll see the most accuracy today, we need accuracy in our lives ♪ country they have all the men n one side and we wanted balance it is time to have a 21st century police and communities involved together thank you >> thank you is is there any additional public comment on this matter. >> hearing public comment is closed.

>> i'm going to take a recess like a personal bio break. >> we'll be back at 10 minuac♪

>> i'm going to take a recess >> we'll be back at 10 minu>>s

to 8 o'clock. >> the meeting will come to order can i please ask you to take you're seats commission back on the record. >> thank you back on the record. >> in our discussion of the body worn camera policy we have heard public comment colleagues now is the time to take a vote i'd like to say i found public comment to be critic in a number of ways one i appreciate the thoughtful corrections from some of the police officers on the oversight that have over them i want to clarify that point that the

compression role is to set policy and do adrenalin but if i call you on a wednesday and tell you to go somewhere you'll not have to listen to me the reason he make that distinction the structures we have around the authorities the police commission has matters it is directly with the chief of police regarding his performance of his duties so with routine officers you'll see me for adrenalin matters but how you do do our job everyday you deal with someone else i want to note a few points one i think you know colleagues i'm interested in our perspective we've heard from this group that there is a