forward. >> thank you director reiskin and appreciate that. >> all right. directors item 13 vote to invoke the attorney/client privilege. >> a motion. >> yes. a motion. >> second. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> the i's have it. we'll go into closed session. >> session. >> all right. mr. chairman item 14 closed session the mta meet to talk about this and the boards approved the case and no action on the other two cases item 15 for a motion disclose or not disclose the information discussed in closed session. >> motion to notice disclose. >> second and. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> the i's have it. we're adjourned in memory of

carla johnson. >> thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman >> can we please rise for the pledge of allegiance. "i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

>> commissioner loftus, who i like to take roll. please do, sergeant. speaker: commissioner president loftus. >> here. speaker: vice president turman >> here. speaker: marshal. speaker: present. speaker: commissioner de jesus. >> here. speaker: commissioner mz. speaker: present. speaker: commissioner hwang is in route. speaker: commissioner melara >> present. >> commissioner loftus, you have a quorum with us tonight. deputy chief hector sinus for acting chief tony chaplin and the director of the occ joyce hicks. >> thank you, good evening, everyone. welcome to the july 6th police commission meeting. thank you for being here. we've got a full house, and a long agenda with a lot of important items. we're going to go ahead and -- i've had a request from supervisor avalos who has to take a plane tonight to move our agenda around, so colleagues, i'll note we're

going to move item number 2 first. and take that before item number 1 to accommodate the supervisor's schedule. before we do that, just i'm going to ask the sergeant to remind us all of the rules of order of the police commission. we want to hear from everyone and there are some specific rules that governor how we do public comment and all that. so sergeant please read those. speaker: thank you, everyone. speaker: rules of order, members fts public to end titled to comment on items prior to action taken on that item. in addition, the agenda shall provide an opportunity to address the commission on items of interests to the public which are under the jurisdiction of the commission and have not been the subject of public comment on other items on the agenda. the president may set a reasonable time limit for each speaker depending on the item and length of the agenda and the number of persons to speak on the item. tonight's public comment time will be limited to two minutes. speakers must speak from the podium and speak

clearly into the microphone. speakers are to refrain from screaming and yelling and using profanity. police, possess necessarily or occ or commissioners are required to respond to requests unless requested to do so by the president. commissioners and police personnel shall re-- to statements made by members of the public. police department or occ staff addressing the commission. applause are pro hib ilting. members of the audience may be -- to see or participate in the meeting or that endanger any meeting participants. cameras and taping devices may be brought into the commissioner hearing room, however, persons are

prohibited from using flash, camera lights or other devices that may disrupt the meeting. the president shall possess the power and duty to order removing -- remove from the meeting any person who commits the following acts after being warned that such conduct could lead to their removal. disorderly conduct that disrupting the course of the meeting such as making noise and speaking out of turn or refusing to comply with commission rules governor the meeting. a breach is a peace, or violent disturbance tending to disrupt the do and orderly course of the meeting. disobedience of the commission president which shall include an order to be seated. other unlawful interference with the meeting. speaker: to have a productive meeting, i'll need everyone's corporation and you can make sure we get a chance to hear from everyone. thank you. i'll also notes we have an overflow room for folks who are not able to be in this space. it will be at the north light court. so and that will be

televised so folks can follow there. thank you. we're going to -- sergeant, call the first line item. speaker: presentation of supervisor avalos, police reform, budget drafted dated 2016 discussion. speaker: good evening, welcome supervisor avalos. >> thank you, president loftus, commissioners, deputy sinus, deputy hicks. thank you for having me. i want to thank you for your service on serving on this body. san francisco is undergoing termoil and i want to bring our city together and to do that, we really have to work to establish trust, transparency, and accountability on all sides whether we're looking at from the community perspective of how members of the community kneel and are harmed by the police department or on the

side of the commission and the police department looking at how we can build trust. how we can put measures in place that will enable us to build trust and have a stronger effort to minimize force, and minimize -- and stop officer involved shooting with impunity. that's a task we have as a city to unite together. i have been working off and on with different organizations, community groups and justice coalition groups for looking at how we can put in measures to assure accountability, to reforms that are being discussed so they're not just adopted, but are implemented. and one of the things that i've come up with and i talked about last time or board meeting two weeks ago was this idea of putting on reserve, a portion of the police department's budget to be released as the

police department have reforms that's agreed upon. i came out with an alarming number. $200 million that was -- my first statement about it when i was asked point blank by the media, what were the size of your reserve and i said $200 million. that's a sizeable amount. the police department budget is $577 million. they'll be $377 million, but i realized $200 million is too large of an amount. we need a sizeable amount to assure the department is going to come before the board of supervisors to show -- to discuss progress the department is making on reforms that are being adopted and implemented. not just adopted, but implements by the department to the department can show the transformation is happening and the conduct and the be havenor of officers on

the street. so i have a draft proposal. you have copies shed there. there's copies on the table if people want to get copies of that, and these are ideas that have been in the works. some have been adopted and others are being discussed. i have reached out to acting chief chaplin, and deputy chief sinus about getting input about what this list of refoerls would look like. we haven't squared up on when we're going to meet face-to-face to discuss. we've had e-mails where we've exchanged dates and the department is going to share dates. it will be next week we'll settle on that. to me it makes sense that the police department identifies what they want to be measured but we have to make sure there's a media input by the board and the commission and the community side of what we expect the measurements to be in order for the department to

show they're obtaining specific thresholds in meeting reform. that's what this measure is. i'll go through the different sections. essentially, we would put a portion of the police department's budget on reserve. i'm saying up to $100 million. i think a sizeable amount, whatever it is will make sure the police comes to the board and how they're making progress. one was to have a joint police commission meeting, board meeting to go over the reform efforts so the police commission can talk about what's been adopted and the police department can talk about how they're implementing the measures. so first is on the use of force. there was a policy that was preliminary adopted two weeks ago. i still think that's being worked on. but i think whatever is adopted that we put specific matrix on

for the department to show progress in that. some of the ideas we have is, you know, a certain percentage of officers are being trained by january 1st of 2017. we're looking at training all full duty officers of a new policy by july 1st 2017. so we're getting to cover the whole department by a particular year. i think, it's going to be clear that the department might have different measurements, but we want to be able to come together and what the specific measurements are going to be. we also want to make sure we're getting quarterly reports on the use of force. how often the instances happened, what has resulted in death and injury. how many officers themselves have suffered any injury in the line of duty as well which would be important to note because policing can be very dangerous work, and that's something hangs over officers head all the time. we want to make sure

the effort around crisis intervention can continue. i've heard talk about training, but we have had a long time year discussion about the model and the model itself have not been adopted and been brought to our precincts. we don't have the teams in our precincts to be able to implement the training that officers should be getting to make sure we are doing whatever we can when we have to confront people who are in a crisis we have a real structured approach and a leadership approach to making that happen. so we have certain measurements on that as you can see on the form. number of officers who are certified for cit, the number of shifts happening per station. these are some of the matrix we would be looking at in terms of implementing a crisis and -- it's not adopted as a dgo as far as i have been told. we're looking at the

early system intervention -- early intervention reform. this is a dgo that has been adopted in terms of implementations, it's not clear that's the actual case that the department has implemented the actual early intervention system reform, so we want to look at the matrix on that and have the department present to the board of supervisors about fulfilling those matrix. speaker: what's dgo. speaker: department general order which are the rules that the department makes about how we'll conduct its work. >> let's do our best to let the speakers go. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. speaker: if you're out of order, i'll let you know. thank you so much, continue, please. speaker: thank you. we're looking at ways to strengthen racial profiling and make sure officers are collecting data and there's actual efforts put in place to make sure that

racial profiling is minimized and consequences are made when racial profiling happens. and that's really about collecting information, and going through a process around the process. also looking at lastly on this list, is establishing more objecting processes for back ground investigations for promotion. we get a lot of laterals that come from other departments to come work for the san francisco police department. and it has been the case in the past where some people coming from other departments have records that really should be more clearly poured over and questioned about whether officers are going to be the best officer to represent the people of san francisco and to where the badge of the san francisco police department if they come with serious issues from other jurisdictions and also officers who are currently on the department who have shown

dramatic use of force that has -- that's been questionable whether it should be happening. these are the measures we have in place. i'm open to further discussion with the police department about how to move forward on this. this -- in order to enact a board like this at the full board of supervisors, i would need six votes. i'm not clear if i have six votes. i believe i may, there's the whole public process we'll go to whether to implement such reforms. the first part of that process has to be some communication between police commission, the police department, my office, and to get input from the community as well. time is short for that. but i still believe it's possible to put on a reform. put on a reserve. condition reform and still square up what those actual conditions will be. i believe this should have been done last

year. this was an idea i was trying to get my colleagues on budget committee to adopt last year. and i felt if we had more scrutiny from the board of supervisors about the department and what was happening around the department and use of force and officer involved shooting, we could have prevented the shootings that occurred. we have seen great harm in san francisco that has happened since then. we've seen our city torn apart. we've seen communities that have trust with the department have that trust completely eroded. we have to come together and we have to make sure we're working across all of our city departments including the board of supervisors and the mayor's office and the police commission to make sure we have transparency, accountability and implication of reform to have -- >> thank you supervisor avalos for your comments. [applause] >> so this is an item, colleagues it's on for discussion so it's not an item

to take action on, but make sure we're informed. you have a copy. it appears your proposal has been revised since june 15th. >> yeah. speaker: some of the matrix have changed. speaker: the change from the matrix and the use of force, we changed the matrix based on what was adopted. i'm looking at an ordinance that's addressing use of force as well that actually could be stronger than what the police commissioner adopts, but this -- the matrix for -- on this form are based on what was adopted preliminaryly by the commission. i don't think this reserve works so much to make you and the department adopt policies more than actually show progress in the implementations adopted. >> you reduce it had to $200 million to 100%. what

percentage of the police budget is that, of $100 million s. . >> if the police budget is 575 -- speaker: i say up to $100 million. a sizeable amount, that would require the attention that would grab the attention of the department and the police commission could be less than that, but that's a sizeable amount is $100 million. the amount of the size of the reserve isn't as important as the resistance of the reserve. >> i see. do you know -- i feel from our time here and this might be for the deputy chief, which part of the budget is percent pell? -- is personnel? >> i think roughly 95%. speaker: thank you for being here and sharing this with us. i'm sure my colleagues have questions. commissioner melara. >> i think, last time, that was one of the questions i had, how it would impact the department.

i was wondering if -- do you have -- have you had the opportunity to talk to the mayor and the board of supervisors budget office to find out what impact it will have on the department? >> i'm actually talking to but the impact of what happened in the department. i've talked to the mayor staff. i haven't talked to the mayor directly. the mayor and i don't really talk a lot. but -- and our budget office is every member of the board is overseeing the budget. speaker: okay. i'm assuming -- >> let me say this. on budget committee, we did approve three police academy classes and approved the classes that the department will reach it's 1,091 authorized strength adopted in 1994. the last time it happened was in 2009-2010. they have the money to meet the

staffing requirement of the department. way proved the funding for training, for the body cameras, and question is whether i want to prove -- prove support for tasers or not. that's something that will be before me on the 19th. but so far i think that's what's been adopted. 99.9% of the police department budget was adopted and there was $3 million at the board. that gives out the balance. speaker: the 95 -- the 95% is for staffing. even if you guys approve those academies, those would impact those academies as well. >> only if we don't release the funds and if the department doesn't move forward on reform, that's before the board of supervisors whether we should release funds. if the department is carrying out reforms and implementing reforms, i think the board has a strong case to release the funds to make sure that the

officers are getting paid and the academies are getting paid. the board has a political decision whether to release the funds or not. >> just one more thing. most of these are policy issues, so it is on our hands as the police commission to do so and to implement -- if implementation goes to the department so the department has little to do with the policy piece, so it would be upon us. speaker: i'm not sure what you mean by the department -- >> what it means, you're asking the commission to pass these policies in order for the department to prove they can do what the date to do what they're doing, so my question, i guess is that you're actually telling the commission to pass these policies, but you're going to punish the department by withholding money from the department.

>> i don't see anything about punishing anyone. i want to actually come to a way that we can unite on how the department is going to carry out performs that's adopted. it's not just adopting reforms. we heard a lot from the former chief that we're making progress on reforms, and then we had another person of color killed on the streets of san francisco. and so i want to make sure that doesn't happen again. how do we make sure we're actually adopting new policy and that policy is implemented in the department. and so i don't know what policies you're going to adopt. but the ones that you are going to adopt, i want to make sure we have specific matrix we can work out. i want to make sure that when we do have a conversation with the police -- with the police chief about what makes sense in terms of having specific matrix to show that the department is carrying out its reforms, that we actually have a clear document that's not going to be about what you're going to adopt, but what has been adopted and we'll

make sure there's transparency and accountability about how those reforms are being carried out to officers conduct on the streets. >> okay. i just want to make sure -- we're clear as to this takes policy for the department and who runs the department. so there's a disagreement there as to whether you're telling us to put these policies in place. this is a great proposal, i think, and i'm very -- i'm very in favor of the things you proposed, but the question is, is the division of who is implementing the policy for this department and who is running the department and i feel like this has to do a lot with policy. >> certainly it does, but it has to do with how policies are being implemented and held -- the department is being held accountability to policies developed. i have a branch all

about policy, so we have -- you were apart of the executive branch and the policy making body, but we have overlapping roles. speaker: yeah, i think that's the point. by charter we set charter, but it's important to -- if it effects their district. i think adding clarity on who is responsible if something doesn't happen is an important part of this so you know who to say why didn't this happen. i think an area probably we can fine tune here. vice president turman. >> thank you supervisor avalos. this took a lot of detail in work. thank you for coming. the $100 million, would you parch that between the five pieces regarding the -- and sort of doing a check list as to how each section is being implemented to start releasing funds or would it be a hold on everything until everything is

in place? speaker: i would say that the best way for this function would be probably starting after the first quarter of the or even the first six months of -- probably the first quarter is like releasing funds in chunks by quarter. so the quarterly report of the board of supervisors to talk about progress on the reforms that are being met and that will fund -- things will be met. it's going to be -- this is not, like, accounting in a ledger. it's about making sure that there's a discussion, there's transparency, and there's real effort to show progress with clear matrix and so it's going to be -- you know, vague about whether that's being met or not. the board has to decide how much to release. that's apart of public legislative process. but it's one that is not particularly hamstringing of departments. we do reserves all the time and together, a

reserve release, besides doing the work of leading the conditions the reserve, to get a reserve release, all you need is a letter. it's perform. it's about three sentences long asking for the release of the reserve be scheduled and the department has a hearing before the board of supervisors and then after that hearing, the board decides whether those funds should be released or not. i guarantee you, it's not going to be an easy decision for the board not to release funds, but the effort of creating this process of accountability and transparency is a meaningful one to build trust and to show there's many eyes looking at the department, working towards progress on implementing transformation reform. >> sorry, go ahead. just a quick followup. tell me what would happen? let's play it out. it's going to be vague, which i think i've got concerns about. just -- >> we will have 11 members of

the board of supervisors who are all going to want a piece of saying what's going to happen. so that is off of what happens from the board. like things happen here. i said the other day this wood that comes from mongolia is observing politics and it's something that is apart of the legislative effort that we go through all the time when we're actually making difficult decisions to make the city a better place for everyone. that's my issue is that it's not going to be -- i think we tie things to specific matrix that create specific conditions about how things will be released. we would have our hands tied and we wouldn't be able to get anywhere, but having something that is going to be broad enough to have a good discussion, that the department can show earnestly that they're working towards real reform and implementing program and showing specific data that they're doing it,

that's meaningful, and so having a specific measurement per month, to me is going to make it much more difficult to actually have a way to make sure the department can do the work it needs to do. >> okay. i got that. i think for me, the question is i like the requested of accountability and matrix because i think there's something we did this or we didn't do this. in terms of creating trust and building trust with the community, my concern is if we say there's matrix to set up and the department doesn't meet it, but in earnest, they did their best, it could be vague and it can be subject about i don't know about the wood and the mellow drama, but i'll take your word that's apart of it. the question is, the board says we're not satisfied with the earnest of the work. tell me because i don't know enough about the legislative process. if you said we're not going to release the budget. if it's 95% of personnel, what will happen if the board did not

release the funds. >> if we're talking about january we don't release $15 million, nothing. the department will have enough to do its work. we're not going to get to a critical stage until later in the fiscal year, so things will get critical if the department isn't earnestly working towards reform, things will get critical towards the latter half of this current fiscal year we just entered into. speaker: i though i'm sure we want to hear from acting chief chaplin. he had to go to a critical incident. >> i can't stay longer. speaker: thank you. i want to get to everybody, but the deputy chief, i think probably wants to weigh in too from the department perspective. commissioner hwang and de jesus, thank you for indulging us. speaker: thank you avalos for an interesting proposal. you've identified priorities which is department shares.

these are priorities we have identified as things we need to work on. it's interesting to put matrix on it. i think this has been the criticism is we don't follow through with looking at the matrix. that's all good. my two concerns are one is that the matrix -- what we're trying to do is achieve a philosophical -- the matrix may rush things. if you train 50% of the officers by january 1, there's one thing to read the policy to them. it's another to have them adopt the floss that's in their hearts. i don't know if this would cause a more superficial training as to opposed to a philosophical shift. that's my concerns with the matrix, right. >> they'll be a chance for public comment after this item. speaker: i would think about whether or not you want to force the department to hand that way if what we're trying to do is a shift in the philosophy. speaker: that's where the

implementen -- someone who doesn't work within the department can't say what the matrixes are. the officers needs to have training and best matrix to provide for the board to consider probably from the department. speaker: and my other one, and i'm kind of thinking out loud, instead of $100 million, whatever figure it is, that's a rough number you're working on, what makes sense to me, before we have our training and everything set is maybe to tie it to the release of funds to the academy classes. we don't want to train them using the old philosophy and have to retrain them. that's a better way to tie it whether a $100 million that's going to hit the budget and take officers off the street. >> it's my impression that the academy classes are just within the overall salaries and

benefits budget of the police department. so the police department can decide and the police commission can decide exactly where that reserve will hit. >> my final five, i'm concerned with this idea of too many players within the department, right. the mayor had came out with proposal around creating a new task force around auto burglaries, we can't have that much input from these different political agents and i think that causes a lot of problems with the department itself. and so -- >> i believe that that's a good point. and that's why i've asked for the chief to give me a sense of what makes more sense. i'm not trying to create more work for the department. i'm trying to make sure the department does its work. >> thank you. >> commissioner de jesus. speaker: i want -- i just want to point out this commission and we do recognize and we should recognize that there --

this department is in crisis still and remains in crisis with communities in san francisco regarding the use of force. this is the beginning of our process of reform. the second thing is although this commission sets the policy, we have been criticized for not holding people accountability and making sure it's enforced so just because we pass the use of force, i think it's incumbent on top of this commission to have our own report to make sure the reforms are being implemented and the officers are trained. my understanding when you came last time, people are seeing this as a punitive measure. this is a power of the purse and this is something that the department has done to get goal and matrix -- negotiated with them as necessary to get the job done. that was what you told us last time. >> it's common. the most common i've seen was on the

public utilities system and water improvement program. we have allocated billions of dollars for the -- the wifa program and we put on reserve, hundreds of millions of dollars. that's why the number is not a big -- it's not as big of a number. we put, 300, 400 million on reserve pending the public utilities commission showing us progress and planning before they get to spend those dollars on construction. so we want to make sure the planning is effective and right and we see those conditions are met, then funds are being released. so if we're punitive, we would have cut all the police academy classes and we would have done all these other things that would have dinged the department and been impossible for the department to function. that's not what we're looking at doing. speaker: some of the communities that people have brought some concerns and you've addressed some of that, but i want to point out the concerns that it was the slow growth of the department, that it was punitive for the department and that -- and that

it would take services a way from communities, in particularly, the larger communities that they're down in terms of officers. maybe you can address that to the people at home who are concerned about how it might impact the department. >> we have, in the past two years approved five academy classes. in the coming fiscal year, we'll formally approve 3 police academy classes. those were in line with the plans to get to the 1971 number to make sure every district precinct can have the resources that the charter says they can have. with those resources we can get to a stronger community policing effort and by district, everyone would want to see actual -- from our community organizations that are proposing a police accountability are also talking about beat officers, but those aren't being implemented

because the staffing levels rpt there. the last time we had them in district 11 along the [inaudible] with the 2009-10, we were at the 1971 number, people actually liked that approach because you had officers that people knew and were able to make relationships and that to me could be the strength and how to build that trust. it's not universally felt, but felt by the people who have been involved in our community police efforts and cpap and creating community safety in the neighborhood. speaker: thank you. >> thank you, commissioner mz. speaker: thank you, supervisor. a lot of topics on your proposal, we discussed back in april. and it's good to see you're very interested in what the commission has done. for example, a lot of the use of force policy, the crisis intervention team, early intervention, we've been working on that and the next stage is that's been in place and put in place and it's being

perfected at this point. those are things the commission has been doing. one thing i found going through the reconfirmation process, we're not good at telling the board of supervisors what we're doing and you're accountability to those in your district and we appreciate that more. we're doing a lot of this work. speaker: [inaudible]. speaker: you'll hear in a few minutes that it's work ina serious situation, so my only concern is, what happens if these matrixes aren't met? sometimes it's hard to get the officers into training because of major events and it's an election year, and the candidates will be here so that drains our resources. what happens if we can't meet these matrixes and what happens if the board of supervisors hold back the $100 million. i ask this question because this is the first time i had my mailbox full of people. you've got people's attention with this. a lot of people concerned about what happens. people are complaining about the crime rates in san francisco. they don't see enough police

officers. there's people complaining will the auto burglaries and these are san francisco ans that are complaining about not enough officers. do we send the officers home if we don't have the $100 million, do we cut back. >> how do you make sure you're moving forward on progress? if the board will have to decide. i might not be on the board at the time. i don't expect this reserve is going to be before me. it will -- it might come in january after 6 months until the next fiscal year. it doesn't make sense to start the trickle of releasing funds. i don't think the fund should be released at one moment. they should come in phases. we shouldn't expect the department to commit to a whole amount of reform at once because if that's the case, they should do it now and we know that's not as easy to implement at once. that's up to the department to

decide if they're going to act in a way that the board would really wonder whether it should release the funds. if that's the case, we're in a serious situation in san francisco and we're in that serious situation. do we want to prolong. >> that's my concern. say the end of the fiscal year is march and we're telling parch station, they're going to have two marked stations covering the -- the people don't want to hear that. >> i think it's better to think about how to make sure that doesn't happen rather than if it happens. >> the commission is moving as fast as we can especially in the leadership of president loftus. speaker: the police department will not have funds. and then the public won't have the protection. >> that's my concern, and this is the most reaction i've gotten from the community, e-mails about your proposal. that's good. the reality is we're moving quickly. we have a reform in place and we're going to make it better. i'm

going to turn it over to the deputy chief to explain what just happened with the reforms if he wants to do that. speaker: be mindful of the supervisor's time. it is useful to hear from the department. i'm not -- speaker: i might be able to stay longer. speaker: i appreciate. speaker: i wasn't -- this wasn't the most convenient time for me, but i did want to come and -- i was hoping there could have been a conversation with the chief but he was out of town and we didn't get communication going. even though i made an effort the last commission meeting to reach out to say let's schedule something and we haven't scheduled anything. speaker: got it. i think -- it's very important that you're here. >> at the very most, i can stay ten minutes and i have a flight and i have to [inaudible]. speaker: we appreciate it. doctor marshal. speaker: supervisor, i certainly don't want to hold you. these are my thoughts. a lot of great ideas in here, and

like some of the commissioners have said and commissioner ms. , mazzucco, we're working on these things. we had the reform policy. i guess my biggest concern is that we took probably three, four, maybe six months to pass that use of force policy. it was very extensive. we involved everybody, everybody. i can't think of someone who wasn't involved from a group. inconvenienced a lot of folks and got consensus from everybody and we passed that policy. i like that process because we took time and went around the country and did a bunch of things. and a lot of these things on here, i think we have to take time to do that. i like that. and the one thing i don't and probably because of what came out of that is -- and i like this

policy, is i wouldn't want to hamstring the department and holdup their budget -- can i finish. i won't want to holdup, especially if it's 95% of the salary. i wouldn't want to do that. speaker: the supervisor doesn't want to do that either. speaker: that's my opinion. speaker: based on what we crafted and the way we've done things and we're working on these things and so that's just my opinion. >> thank you, dr. marshal. >> deputy chief sinus, do you want to respond and where the department is with this proposal and it sounds like the need to get back to the supervisor to work out the details. speaker: good evening, commissioner, deputy sinus on behalf of chief chaplin. i have communicated with supervisor avalos and i have spoken with chief chaplin and we're attempting to set a

meeting to meet with supervisor avalos to talk about his proposal. as the commission is aware, we have been working on these issues that supervisor avalos has raised and we have providing -- the commission hasn't been holding the department accountability. some of the things that the commission has worked on such as the use of force policy, you recognize it takes a long time. it's a drawn out process and you want community input which i think is important. you want to get input from across the city. and that takes time to be able to hear from everybody. if you get these matrixes in place, that requires us to report quarterly when it takes time to get this, to get the input, you're talking -- supervise avalos is talking about 18 pefrs -- 18 percent of the budget and 5% is non included in the budget which is rent. you're running into

salaries and as the supervisor said, they don't meet the salaries and we don't meet the matrix, processes are held up for whatever reason, i hate to use this word, but we're talking about potential furloughs and if the money isn't released, where do we go from there? that's supervisor or to commissioner mazzucco point, is it a valid concern. i don't know. maybe the supervisor has an exit plan in that proposal or something. i don't know. i don't know where we go in the funs aren't released. speaker: i don't know if this has happened, has the board put an amount of money from the police budget on reserve. >> not to my memory. nothing never this large either. speaker: i think we did. the budget put on reserves -- they're used for the cameras and training. speaker: that was last year for body cameras to come back. speaker: i think we did it

again this fiscal year. we do reserves all the time. the police department does not receive a reserve, this is a sizeable amount. 80% of the police department budget, this says up to $100 million. so $100 million is a sizeable amount. $50 million is a sizeable amount. that would have the police department's attention. we want to have the police department's attention. we want to know the police department is being scrutinized about its effort to actually implement reform. that is essential. i have been part of watching a chief, not the current chief, the last chief talk about we're making progress, and i don't see that progress being made. so i want to make sure that we actually have things that are in place, that are showing that there's actually key matrixes that are being implemented and we want to work with the department to make sure that's happening and

work with the police commission to make sure that's happening. we're not interested in penalizing the department and we're not interested in making the department fail. we want to make sure the department is moving forward and we want to make sure we have a measure of accountability to make sure that happens so we're in it together. speaker: thank you supervisor. when i first looked at this, the feetd back i gave to you, these are areas we agree are a huge priority. for me the question comes down to what are the matrixes and are they obtainable. i don't think you want to do this either is set the department up so there's measurements that they're unable to achieve or when they don't achieve them. speaker: that's why i've reached out to the department and we're trying to play -- i want to have a conversation and make sure that happens, and we've actually sent now an e-mail setting back all the dates that we set we could meet at that the department gave us and now we're waiting for a response. we can move forward

on that. we can actually square up on what the matrixes are and then we can go in it to go. >> a couple of areas -- speaker: i'm sorry, i have to go. speaker: thank you for taking the time to be here. speaker: i apologize. i'm seriously need to run. >> thank you. safe travel. speaker: bye, bye. >> we can continue our discussion. [applause] >> other questions for commissioner melara. speaker: i wanted to add a couple of things because i'm thinking -- and so i look at this matrix and some of these, i think will require money to implement. when if someone in the board of supervisors meets with the department including with the mayor's office, we need to make it clear that $100 million is only going to strap

the department if we don't meet the matrixes as outlined. but if any of these will require additional funds. so i think that we need to put that on the table because it would require especially in the cit area. i'm not against for us to work on any of these policies, but i do think that we need to really be very careful on the matrixes because we're trying to change a culture not necessarily strap the department. speaker: dr. marshal. speaker: that can take longer. speaker: that's what i thought your question -- your first question was the best. was there a study on the impact of this on the department? when you said that, that was the first thought i had and your point of maybe it will cost more to do these things on here makes sense because it hasn't been done. so i like your first point. i like that point also.

speaker: >> commissioner de jesus. speaker: so i'm looking at this and what i think the supervisor is saying in terms of getting your money, we have to show we're moving forward. they're willing to work with you. i have to say the early intervention system unfortunately because of the use of force, i haven't been able to put it on. that needs to be reformed. that's not ready to go. that's something we need to work on. i would imagine for the crisis intervention, the use of force, that was included in the budget when we were putting the budget forward because we knew we were going to need training for the use of force and we've agreed that we were going to train more crisis intervention officers and team them up. i assume that money was apart of the progress going next year. it has been on our agenda for nine months. i think putting the carrot in front of you to

get the rest of the money is one way to get it done and there's different ways to hold people accountability and that's something they put forward and it's something we need to work with on them. >> deputy chief. i want to respond to commissioner de jesus. the amount that supervisor avalos goes beyond that amount into salary. so we don't need those matrix. that money won't be available for that training, for those reforms. speaker: i understand that. >> so my suggestion, colleagues, i appreciate the supervisor came here and presented the idea, saw our feedback. it sounds like the department is going to have a meter. whether this gets passed or not, it seems i would welcome a volunteer from this commission to work with deputy chief sinus and chief chaplin to look at what matrix would be reasonable because if this passes and we have to make the case, the department should get the reserved released. we want

to say that if we did have concerns about the matrix on the front end, that is the time that raise them because when you have concerns at the time where they're not met, it's not as credible to say we agreed to this at this time but we couldn't do this. i think the commission would have a role in that. so the thing that i'm concerned about is the time is very short. and i also think that it's not the same to say i want to set up matrix so we can evaluate you, but say it's going to be purposely vague and subject to a political process, and that to me feels like it's not sending a message one way or the other. i don't think that's the intent, but if we take it as the intent is to insure we're moving forward, i would invite someone from this commission to spend -- who has time over the next week to work with the department and address concerns on the front end if this does pass. so that we can

reflect on the back end. >> i'm willing to do that. i have some time in the next two weeks. but another -- something else that came up -- that came to mind when you were saying that is we need someone at the board of supervisors level who is not timing out to agree that how those measures are going to be seen and measured because the reality is next year, they'll be a new body and they will understand it very differently and my feeling is that -- at this point, supervisor avalos is doing this and he's on his way out, and to me that's a little irresponsible because if there was someone else -- >> hold on. speaker: okay, guys. i think about this -- everybody gets to express their viewpoints and if they're different, be respectful.

go ahead. i have out of ordered them. you're out of order. you're out of order. if you want to participate, you have to follow the rules we started with. thank you. speaker: we will see who, of the board level will approve or disapprove this, or we can work with because i want to have the memory in place from when this -- if it passes, when it passes, by whom, because i want to ensure that we all understand the same thing. because these -- i believe the supervisor wants qualitative change in the department and putting quantitative measures in place does not meet the former. so i'm just -- >> it's not within our control. but we can certainly reflect on our perspective on challenges and try to add clarity. thank you for that volunteer, i would ask you to work with deputy sinus to make

sure whatever meetings get set up. commissioner marshal. speaker: just to echo what you said. these matrixes, it's coming from the board. it's not coming from us. these matrixes aren't being decided by the commission and the department. they're being proposed to your point about speaking if it passes, and speaking up about the matrixes right now is very well taken. because you know, then it would be incumbent upon the department and upon us that we didn't say anything about them if it passes. point well taken. speaker: it's not as if this one person can reflect everything of the 7 commissioners. we have our independent voice. if we can have someone representing us. >> i was going to volunteer, but i can't do it this week. i can do it next week. i'm going to be in stockton most of this week. i have been listening to

the chief and i've been watching the pod cast. he believes he can meet this police reform. i haven't heard him say he can't meet it because it's important they be retrained immediately since it's a new policy and something they're going to be held accountable for. and then the early intervention system is something i'm interested in. i don't think it's set up to meet matrixes. it's something that has to be discussed. that may need more time, but it's something that has to be reformed as well and the cit is something you have been talking about and i'm sure the chief already has an idea of what he needs or how many months he needs to meet this. before we start saying we're going to lose this money, i think we should talk about what we can meet and meet with the supervisor. if it's next week, i can participate. speaker: commissioner mazzucco.

speaker: i applaud commissioner avalos over his concerns but he didn't answer the question. what happens if the money is held back. what communities are going to be effected. i've never had so many impact from san franciscans who live and work here. >> do not interrupt me. those who live and work in this city are complaining about where these three -- >> you're out of order, sir. you'll have your minute when we get to public common. speaker: i had to be the reasonable man in the room, if we don't have the money, where are we going to pull the officers for. i can see the carrot and the stick, but i'm talking about reality. we have a city that's understaff and the crime rate is out of control and there's a lack of confidence in the justice system. we can't say we're going to pull officers off the street because 95% of the budget are officers. that's not fair to those areas that

are impacted and it's irresponsible. speaker: i understand, i've been getting a lot of e-mails. we need to do one step at a time. one foot if front of the other. we talked about meeting with the chief and hopefully some of us, meeting with the supervisor and talk about what matrixes are achievable, what can be done and in terms of putting -- encouraging fear that we're not going have any police is not the way we should go. we need to be positive on this and we need to see what we can meet and how we can meet it and what happens if we don't meet it. we'll tell people we're not going to have police, i think it's irresponsible and we need to move forward. >> we're going to get to public comment, but we've been joined by chief chaplin. chief chaplin, anything you want to share with the commission? speaker: just real fast, i'm sorry late. i came from a scene where a gentleman in mental state to his own head.

and i had to probably a quarter of the police officers speaking to stto shut down the street. the question was why did this take to long so resolve and i said no he's not dead because of all the reforms we've implemented. now, thank you. that's for the folks out there because they had information and this is similar to the things that happened in louisiana. they had information he had a gun. they quickly created a pocket. they pushed the public back and they created a situation where this gentleman could walk away with his life. that worked. the reality is, it is about time and the reality is you can only do that with enough bodies out on the streets working to make sure that you shut down muni. this is market street and there were a tremendous people finishing their work streets and i can't go to the supervisor and beg for money when this comes up. life is

huge. i would agree with supervisor avalos, if we weren't embracing these reforms and we're pushing forward and he said that his number was grossly inflated. that he wants to scale it way, way back. i don't know what that means for him. but the department is pushing forward with the reforms and changes and one of the things we do not need to do is not hamstring by extra level of bureaucracy to ask for money directly related to the reforms. it doesn't make sense. we're not holding money because homeless problems aren't being solved. people are working towards this. and we're working towards this. i'll say this, the training that we're pushing out and reforms are pushing out, today is a good example of how that -- those things are working. it took a lot of manpower and folks for four hours to resolve this issue. the things we're doing, they're working and we

need to stop what we've been doing. speaker: congratulations, chief. speaker: thank you, chief. that is certainly good news that that resolved with everybody going home safely. and so thank you for the update and thank you for your perspective. the supervisor ask about a meeting being scheduled about the matrix. commissioner melara is available this week. there's a time the board is going to make decisions within the next week. we would like to have commissioner melara attend whatever meeting you do and have a real opportunity to raise some flags or concerns we have about some of these matrixes because the last thing we want to do is set the department up with an expectation you can do some things and we want to raise concerns before anything could get passed. speaker: absolutely. i scheduled that meeting with avalos because he had no idea that the public and that other folks have put so much work into the use of force policy. he thought it was stagnant and

thought there was no work being done on it. he admittedly didn't know a lot of the work that had been going into these new policy and some of the things he had on the list were already done. some are almost completed and some already done. he didn't know that. his credit, he admitted as much. that's when i reached out to him during the budget process and says we have to sit down and talk and he agreed to do that. i welcome you being there because a lot of things you're asking for are already done or in the process. >> part is communication back and forth. there's a joint police -- the board has so many responsibilities across the board, maybe part of the disconnect is we're not sharing information about the reforms and updates so that's something you guys can talk about and let us know. speaker: colleagues, anything before we have been comment on this matter? >> commissioner de jesus, if it goes into next week, she would

like to participate. please let commissioner de jesus know if this goes. public comelement. >> this is public comment on this particular item. good evening, mr. rogers. welcome. >> i sit and listen to everything that went on about this particular situation. one of the things that bothers me as a homeowner and a citizen of this city and have lived here all my life, one of the things that truly bothers me is right now i see way too many police officers in my district. and i see them out of control. so for me, for you to ask me if it's okay for those police officers funds to be held back, i say absolutely. possibly. hold it all back. and the

reason i say that because i want to stop anything you may be doing that may make change in this city, that's not why i'm here. the reason i'm here is in the past, it has been so many times that others like you have said we're making change and we see nothing. so in order for that to happen, some where along the lines, some where in this process there must be checks and balances and the way that we get checks and and balances is when we pull on the purse streets. pause it's on the purse streets that people are reacting and it's when you sit and you say to yourself, wait a moment. i've got only $50 million left and i need 100. are you going to say okay, let's make sure everything is in place so i can get that 50. that's what's important. is making sure

everything is in place at the time in which the money is given. we don't care if you get the money. i'm 70-year-old. i want police officer on the street because they're going to protect me. if it comes down to the difference of having police officers on the street, verses safety -- >> thank you, sir. thank you, mr. roger. next speaker. come on up. good evening, and welcome, sir. >> i'll gill. maybe if we have to withhold funds, we can do it from a top down situation where the chief -- the assistant chief, the captains, the mayor, and the other part of that would be, what's the percentage of administrative personnel if the department that are not on the street, maybe we would withhold funds from them too. if we can get the people in the

department that are not on the street to feel the burn, maybe we can make it go better. now, we touched about the idea that if there's neighbors that don't have enough police and the auto burglaries, we can hire 400 new police men and put one on each block. we still won't be able to cover all the blocks. there's a possibility that there's a lot security home security cameras on street that's private. if the communities can hook them up together. if they can get a feed into the police department, if they can be made public, those neighbors can be able to track where these hoodlums in their cars or on their bikes or whatever are going after a crime are held. i believe that's going to be the biggest key and that's not

going to cost a lot of man money. that's going to cost people water -- >> reform is 40% of the police activity is mental. and involvement. and the city -- this is just the beginning. city has no place to put these people. that needs to be taken care of. that's apart of this equation. that the supervisors and the mayor need. we need to safeguard these people too. thank you. >> thank you, mr. gilbert. next speaker. speaker: good afternoon, commissioner. david. san franciscan for accountability. one the commissions made a statement that the commission makes policy and nobody else does and the supervisor

shouldn't be making it. the poa has a gigantic feet in the policy arena. that needs to change very rapidly. so it's not true that only the commission makes policy. i'm hearing a lot of basically the sky is falling argument with regard to the avalos reserve proposal. $100million on a quarterly basis is $25 million per quarter and so it would take a while for that $25 million even, if it was withheld to catch up to the point where it made any significant difference. i think it's frankly not a good idea to use incidents that happen on the street or that happened today as a wedge to be pushing the idea that there should be absolutely no sticks with regard to a transformation reform of the sspd. the san francisco police department had

no sticks. there's been carrots and the department is the largest in the bay area on a per capital basis as i'm sure you're aware. san jose has a higher crime rate and have a smaller police department. we have the highest paid police chief in the nation. so all these things should go into -- into the hopper when kwhur -- when you're talking about going into some sticks. we need a reserve to create a financial -- and for you to move more quickly towards transformational reform. thank you. [applause] >> i'll try to be quick. let me pay my respects to captain hart who is trying to get to the souls of the police department through his training

exercise. as worth xhepding matrix is not about attitude and earnestness and i heard that term being used. did it happen? how often did it happen? how much did it happen? and is quantity of change. i'm sure most of you are familiar with federal contract compliance programs. and how the federal government funds great institutions like the california state of san francisco. they threatened the be may -- behavior of institution. they threaten if you don't comply you promise on an annual basis, review, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually and incorporate into your next year's agenda for changing be e -- behavior.

i don't care how much racist you have on the police department. i care about their behavior. do they kill anybody. thank you for preparing -- you come from oklahoma. you know what racism is about. i would suggest you look at matrixes as data that informs progress, that you're making. and try to move in that direction. i think that's -- i'll hold the rest until another meeting. if you don't measure, you don't manage. look at the speedometer. >> next speaker, good evening, mr. miller. speaker: good evening, commission. i guess i'll begin these comments by saying that the [inaudible] foundation we

endorse supervisor avalos's proposal. we think it has been soft evened too much. it should go back to the $200 million. secondly in response to the acting chief, congratulations. it's in fact you and your department conducted operations in a sane and compassionate way today and saved the life. that's beautiful. that's what you should be doing. that does not atone or account for years of carnage and that's what we're talking about. and then address specifically -- i do not know what the level is of newer commissioners, but joe marshal, de jesus and director hicks, know full well in the last four years, the department budget has been augmented to the tune of $100 million. it was working perfectly fine in 2012 with $100 million and all that has happened since is 23 dead bodies. this idea that -- i feel like there is an attempt

to lie to the public here. this idea that we don't know if the department can afford $100 million. four years ago, it could. so it can now. there is no critical infrastructure that would be hit by putting a hold on $100 million. i agree with supervisor avalos as well as several of the speakers that have commented on this. a stick is necessary. a financial incentive is one of the most known true effective measures or effective sticks as you will if you want to follow the metaphor and you know what, the -- formally i'll comment on joe marshals ludicrous assertion of the grand consensus that resulted in the resolution two weeks ago, the muni force policy. that was a queue before the police association and challenged by any means necessary. [applause] >> good evening, welcome.

>> yeah, hi. i just wanted to let you know that i don't travel here an hour and a half on bart and by bus to disrupt your meeting by asking what an acronym means. i'm trying to educate myself and i've asked before if it's possible that you could ask speakers to say what they're talking about instead of using ftp or omg and things like that and to be threatened with being thrown out while everyone else was screaming, nobody else was told that they were going to be removed so for asking what an acronym means, yeah. anyway, so as far as this -- i'm wondering where the interests of this money that's going to possibly be withheld from the police department is going to go to, and i say that interest

should go to the stellarly foundation because the police rpt going to do their reforms so because they never do. and you know, that means the chief is going to have more work. her phone is going to ring. as far as what happened, you mentioned on the streets, i was on the street and i heard something totally different from at least nine people who were on the streets because i don't hang on the streets anymore, but i know the streets. used to be my area, the tenderloin and they saw something different from what you're saying. so again, there's a conflict. i hope that maybe all these nine people were so high and but they don't look high to me. i know what high looks like and these people said something totally different. he was shot with bean bags off his bicycle. he didn't have a shirt on and he had no gun and he was

petrified. >> thank you. and i will -- you have raised before when people use acronyms. if you can be mindful. i appreciate that reminder. i do have to, the rules are i let everybody know and i have to do that equally to everyone. okay. any further public comment on this matter. hearing none, public comment is closed. sergeant police call the next lined item. speaker: item reports to the commission discussion. one 1, chief reports. this item is to allow the chief of police to report on recent police activity and make announce manies. summary of pride week and crime trends update redistricting and presentation regarding recruitment. >> acting chief chaplin, good evening. speaker: can you give me a

quick moment here. >> okay. i'll start with the summary of pride week. we had 1.2 attendee. what happened in florida it was an additional 20 minutes. the attendance was 500,000. there were 234 contend ants and marching was 2 hundred -- with an additional 100,000 estimated spectators. the staff for the event, public intoxication, 22 arrests. sobers sent referral were 45. medical calls, 20. that was a

rock med reports. the crime reports of thefts and assaults were 15. assaults and warrants were 8. gun possession and hate crimes assaults and vandalism were 4. and 1 gun recovered in the castro. now for the crime that concludes the pride update. the case update, there was a shooting on 7416 at 1300 block of eddie street. no arrests were made. one victim shot there. there was one homicide during the reporting period. i'm sorry, two homicides during the reporting period. the first one occurred on 7-1 of 16 on 300 block of tenderloin and that's being investigated and this was a 23-year-old shooting victim transport and pronounced dead at the hospital. the second at 24th in admission and again, being investigated by our homicide division. and that occurred also on the 7-1

of 16 at 2345 [inaudible] at 11:45 p.m.. the officers arrived on location and found two shooting victims. one was a 27-year-old male who sustained a gunshot wound to the head. that victim was transported to -- pronounced decease at the hospital. the second victim is an 18-year-old who suffered gunshot wound to the leg with a fracture to his femur. speaker: hold was the victim. the second victim. >> 27. >> area to date, i know you asked this last time, so i'll update you. we're up to 28 homicides this time last year, we were at 25. 2014, we were at 15. we're trending higher for homicides for the year so

far. so we're praying for a slow down at some point. we're trending higher as most of the agencies in the bay area. and that is it for the updates. speaker: okay. any questions for the chief on crime trends? were there arrests -- no arrests in both homicides that happened over the -- in the last week? >> no, but in the second week, our task force is assisting homicide with that investigation. speaker: okay. any questions for the chief on crime trends, colleagues? i will say on pride week, i know there was some concerns about a more visible police presence as being something that might distract -- one piece of feedback i got from folks was the officers, i think, who were present, the feedback i got was there were -- what's the word, the word they said was there were being cool and not being

-- creating a presence that would impact the spirit, but playing that guardian role we talked about, chief. i want to pass that along, the feedback i got was there was a concern about that and if the officers who were there and experienced numbers -- was they felt like the officers created a space where those could celebrate pride. i wanted to pass that along. anything, colleagues on this two items. commissioner de jesus. >> i went to pride and i left because the line was too long. i want to say that. there was something else i was going to -- so when i was in the community, some of them mentioned we no longer publicize the staff -- what do you call those, statistical

information. we no longer hold public sized -- >> is that true? >> no, we do not. speaker: i was approached saying we no longer do comstat and make it available. speaker: all the comstat information is available on our website. it's held at the public safety building. sometimes because of -- because of environmental issues, outside of our control, we may move it to different dates, but it's updated on our website and it's published for the public to view on our website. we have it and we continue to have it and we're going to continue to have it. it's open to the public. sometimes the press attends, but comstat is still ongoing. >> is it done daily or weekly? >> no, it's done monthly. >> all right. maybe we should get more notice out when you do -- do have you people present it or people can listen to it or it's on the website?

speaker: people come in because the captain present what's going on the in district. there's a huge presentation going on about crimes in that district and the captain sits there and the deputy chief of field operation is in charge of the patrol bureau and the restrictive commanders in charge of the golden gate. the presentations roll around. if you have your particular district, you can go to our website to find out when your district is reported. it's open to the public and it's on the first floor before you go to the metal detectors so you can sit and listen to the presentation. >> okay. go ahead. i know you have a couple of other items you want to present. speaker: i do and i don't have my notes. >> updating regarding presentation and recruitment. presentation regarding recruitment and i have lieutenant troy dangerfield to present on that.

>> good evening, and welcome lieutenant. speaker: good evening, president loftus. chief, and commissioners. >> our slogan is ordinary people doing the extraordinary. our goal is women of all races and african american males, black males and hispanic males. we have attended events since 2016. since october we have recruited 6,000 people -- 6 ,216 have moved into taking the tests. have done the profiles for dhr, that means that's starting the process for applying for the job. so has good. the total number is

16,000 since they started the national testing so that shows we did 6,000 so just this reporting period. that's all the way through may 31 that they've calculated those numbers from dhr. tracking is the hardest thing for us because once people start the process, we have to move away. we can only attract the people that come back to us and tell us where they are in the process and we're tracking 836 people in the process or are in the police academy currently. speaker: let me stop you. why do you have to back away from the process if it's a recruitment process, why would it require somebody knowing to call you? >> because they've signed up with dhr who is the -- they're in the process. once they're in the process of the police department, we move away. we don't follow them in the academy, but they can continue to tell us, hey, i just finished the background process. i just took the pap,

they can tell us stuff like that. we're not to is -- so we're not so solicit them. the feedback we got is people would get dropped out of the process or community safety -- apart of their conversation was i got dropped out. i didn't know what to do. so i think that's an important component is letting applicants know if they do get dropped out they can followup with you to get information. >> when people drop out, we bring them back and work on what they did. is it time or distance -- we try to work with them based on what the back ground, if it was a back ground issue or if they failed the test. we tell them their timelines to get back into the process. >> there's a note -- there's a

n notification. >> they have to contact us if they want information. it's like hands off once they get into testing. we do coaching and training up until, oral boards pap, the physical agility test. i understand that so people aren't be coached through the police academy. speaker: the challenge for communities particularly, like if you don't have a police officer in your family, the issue is apart of recruitment is identifying people we want and make sure they're supported. that's a good flag to look into how we can support applicants through the process, legally, certainly. but in recognition to some degree if you do have somebody in your family or you're more familiar with the process, you have an

average and if you don't, which is a lot of what we're trying to do is have other people see themselves in the department so that's a good thing for us to followup on. >> we give different programs for them to take the oral, how to take it, things like that. we're doing that, but we're not singling out a specific person. we tell them what it is and they come. we don't ask them where you are in the process. if they said i'm going to take a test next week. if you come in to one of our sessions we help you. but we can't be going down the list and saying, joe, come here and we just let them kind of self define. we make it available to everyone. speaker: maybe that's something for us to continue to look at and support you and make sure the key folks we're -- continue, thank you. speaker: we're trying to do innovative things in our signage. we've worked down san francisco county and buses and signs and street signs. you have some of the artwork we

have done. costa county because we were told by dhr where the people were we were trying to reach, richmond, velejo. the buses don't always take the signage down, so we get them for a longer period of time for the amount of money we're spending on that. also -- >> those are the bus companies watching tonight. >> then we're using the latino television, uni-vision and using our own crons website. they can track how many people, what they call clicked. for one advertisement, we had 144,000 people review it. of

the 144,000, 55% clicked on and asked for more information about the police department. we consider those a win for us because you have to get the people to go there. we've used pandora. that's a radio app. >> get out. speaker: you'll hear us with a little 30-second commercial. >> rapping. speaker: no, we're not rapping. a 30-second commission about us hiring and where to apply. speaker: that's great. >> we're doing the military. that's a target for us. we sent people to texas for a week because there's a large segment. military that's exiting out of it and they need jobs. and we're trying our best to make sure that we can get some of these quality, americans to work for us as well from all over the country. speaker: guys, everybody, let's respect every speaker. everybody will have a chance in public comment. thank you, sir. >> one of our newest campaigns that started is a good thing.

everyone has been to the dmv and know how long you have to wait. we have advertisements at the dmv that flashes on their television while waiting at the dmv and where to apply for the san francisco police department. we also -- in black college magazine. because we're going to start a whole campaign where we're going to go out to the black colleges in the south starting in august and september and they're going to spend some time out there. we have one civilian coach rush who is pre-viewing the main team. heeds going out and getting with the athletic directors because our goal is not just to go to the criminal justice department, but go to the departments where people are trying to -- they decide they want to be a nurse and at the last second they're going to graduate as a nurse, and they don't want do nursing. we try to grab those who want to change their career. he's going to go out there. we have people going to different places following him around as

he goes to that so we'll have a wrap around recruitment at the same place. and then there's another campaign that goes through 168 colleges. we'll put our posters up at 168 colleges around the country. then we have radio ads that's going on. one of the good things we had was a community recruitment work shop done by ray bob it. that was something new for us because we've never done it. he was hands off, you just come in and tell us what the rules are, what the goal is, and let us do it. out of people that came was about maybe 50 people. 16 of those people signed up already. >> wow. speaker: that was very successful because we go some places and we don't get 16 and we see hundreds. that was very successful. >> if i may just to comment on that, that was very special because that was community recruitment. community. that was not the department's

recruitment, but community recruitment for folks to be in the department which i thought was a very effective strategy. >> in the work shop, he brought in things that could be corrective for the candidates and that would be like, if they had drivers license issues, the dmv to correct it. they had someone that was there to help repair credit and that was very instrumental to what people think. there's a myth if you got bad credit, you're not going to get hired in the police department. that's a myth. you just have to be able to explain properly what these issues are and you're on the road to correction and whatever it may be. >> lieutenant, dangerfield, the last academy police department was the most diversity in. history. it seems these efforts have been going on for some time. it seems as though

you've doubled the efforts and increased them or is this the pace you've been on for some time. >> we've been on this pace, but it's now starting to show it by the classes. you can tell how diverse the classes are now. i mean, it just shows and we're trying to get more women, we're trying to get more people of color into the department and that's what we're specifically targeting with all our campaigns. and the thing we just got yesterday, city college is doing a new billboard, and they wanted someone to help sponsor an advertise: the cost of sponsoring the billboard is less than our recruitment efforts so we'll have a place on the city college new billboard that will say we're hiring and it will stay up for approximately ten years so we figured out the cost and it's very cheap. we will be on the city college new score board that they're building. >> wow. >> it will be there for ten years or longer at least. speaker: okay. >> that's where we are if you

have questions. speaker: my colleagues have a number of questions. commissioner mazzucco. thank you. one of the things i heard from several people, i have been encouraging to apply is that they don't get any notification as to where they're at in the process. they fall into this limbo area. do you send out letters saying your background check showed a driver's record or drug usage. do they get notified of what there deficiency is and they're told when they can apply. >> that part of the back ground and i'm not with back ground so i can't say as to what letters they're getting. there was some terminology in the automatic responses they were getting from dhr that was not clear to them, and we have written -- rewritten a third to make it clear and let people know when they get those e-mails they're coming from the police department. sometimes they look like someone spammed them a thing. we made it clear it's coming from the police

department. we cut on the the legalese and made it simple for them to understand. they get letters from backgrounds but i don't know what they're sending out. >> they do get the letters. if it's an issue, if it's a time issue, they're given a date to reapply. if it's a thing that would keep them out for three years, they'll get a date and when they're encouraged to reapply. they're given a date to reapply. they get the letters and get notice that they're being dropped and they tell them why. >> you said you were hiring women and african american -- he's reporting that the greatest deficiency in the department was asian-american women. i was wondering, how do you set the goals? >> we mean women of all races.

>> what is it based upon? speaker: the city's demographics and based on what's in the department. the chief always wants more. that was clear. >> its specific deficiency, was it filled through the last hiring class or is it no longer the goal? speaker: it's still the goal from my understanding. i don't think it's filled yet. it's ongoing. especially with the women, it's not filled. >> my same question, is there a thought to giving priority to local hire like san francisco residents. my concern is you hire a filipino applicant from costa, they're not going to know -- >> currently we do not. >> is that thinking it's better to hire somebody that matches ethnicity because when you hire outside the city, they're not going to know the neighborhoods the same way. >> we get data from dhr as to

where the candidates are. there's people in san francisco, but there's less because a lot of people can't afford to live here. they say in the close bay areas, they're talking richmond, down the peninsula, there's other people that they may work here currently, so but they had to move out of the city for economics. they send us down into these directions just to get the demographics we need. >> what's interesting about that, a lot of folks move out of the city but they might have grown up here. so the question is, if there is -- we all recognize every person i talk to from kids who are saying i hate the police, i don't trust the police to those in the marina that says i love the police, i trust the police. if you grew up in the city, you have some experience in your childhood here. it's like a parent. it's a character in your life that helps you be a better police officer. so i

wonder, chief, if you want to address that about -- you don't have to be a current resident, but if you grew up here, is there a way to factor that into determining how successful you would be at being an officer. >> i don't know if there's a way to determine how successful you'll be. we've opened up. the demographic of san francisco is shrinking and it's tough to recruit those. african american population is shrinking so you cannot -- you can't localize your recruiting in ironing and that's why we've expanded way out. reality is we sent a class and police academy that's half because we're not settling for anyone in the seats. we want to make sure that people are qualified and they can do the job. if i have to cut the class in half, i'm going to do that. that's why lieutenant dangerfield, going out, we're looking for folks that has the right

attitude and right mental. i love to give san francisco -- san franciscans, but i want people to serve the people and do their job right no matter where they come from. it's desirable, but not required. speaker: the recruit is trained to ask this question when they're recruiting. let's say they want to be a police officer, why do you want to be a police officer here and if they said they signed up to 10 other places and they're asking -- we ask what are you doing right now and what would make you a good fit for san francisco. they have to answer those questions. they can sign up anytime they want, but they answer the questions and we try to tell them san francisco is a unique place and it really helps to know the culture of san francisco. and in you want to be -- >> cultures. >> cultures of san francisco and if you want to be a police officer here, you have to learn that if you're not from here. give them the understanding

this is just -- not a running to be a police department. we're ordinary -- >> see how you got the tag line in there. go ahead. >> i don't know if we've changed the thinking around recruitment and run it by the bureau of professional standards. if we're looking for a different type of officer where -- not the football team or the military. i'm thinking if we adopted that so we're bringing in new people who might be more a tuned to the new training that we're trying to put in place. speaker: the philosophy we have, we're looking for people who can think and who can talk. we want people to make good decisions period. good decisions. so that's the philosophy. i don't want to say an exfootball player won't

make a good police officer -- we have to look -- we want people from varied backgrounds. speaker: sounds like you're targeting specifically. ex-military. speaker: i did not say criminal justice. speaker: we want people who want to change their career like those who were in nursing and don't want to be a nurse. we want to give them an opportunity. speaker: policing is a job you can be a teacher, be a football player and do all those things at once. we're looking at people with various back grounds. a great police department is those with great vast departments. speaker: it looks like captain hart wants to say something. >> the cops office in their collaborative review are looking at force, accountability, bias, community policing and recruitment and promotion. recruitment is going to be apart of the recommendations. so they've asked a bunch of questions from

the department and we're getting their first report in the middle of august. as dangerfield is continuing his work, we're getting input from the department of justice and the cop's office. speaker: thank you. >> commissioner melara >> we're not unique as a department in recruiting ex-military personnel and i'm the last to say -- not everyone has the same experience in military. some people have desk jobs and other types of jobs and others unfortunately and my compaction goes to them, do have experience extreme damage because of war. and i'm wondering if there's anybody -- anything within the department, in the recruitment process where you can ensure that people can sustain violence in a way that it is -- that they can see violence and not react in the same way that someone in

a battle would which could lead to other behavior, so is there anything within the department right now that tests the psychology of those who have been in the military under difficult circumstances in battle. >> i know i haven't worked in staff services and did the hiring. that comes in the psychological review which is apart of the background process before they're hired. and they take all those things into consideration. and they can test and meet with them one on one to determine whether or not they're fit to do this job. we're not in the area of being able to stop someone from signing up. but what we found with the military people is that it a lot of people when they go in the military, they have to go back. to the south and how do they get back? because they do have a job. they want to get out of the military, but they have

nothing. if they can get a job back to our area, they can get back. we're targeting those military people who want to come to california and be successful as an officer. speaker: commission er de jesus. >> thank you for to be this. i heard you want to concentrate on people of color and women. what are you doing for the latino community. do you have any focus for latinos like colleges. >> we have specific workshops and things we go to. i have a list of them. it's hundreds of them. i would happy to give them to you. we do go to all the different events, all the -- when they had -- what was the one we just had. we go to colleges like san jose state and different communities in the mission. we have community, when they have their open sunday streets, we'll be out there. so we try as much

to target them. we're using spanish television as well as an advertiser in radio. we're trying our best to get to all the communities. there's a lot of things going on all the time and we're doing the same thing all the time. there's a women's boot camp. it doesn't sound like recruitment, but strength is an issue. it's about women officer running this boom camp and showing them to become physically fit passing the test without going to the test first. onissue with women is they don't like to do things around men because they feel intimidated when they do the test. we try to make them feel confident. speaker: i have a question. you mentioned cops looking at our recruitment job which i'm glad to hear. one of the things that i have seen over the years is after we get people out of the academy which

is hard, but when we do the performance, we lose the people. we have a different -- using your head and common sense and time and distance and things like that and not taking control. i'm wondering if we -- if cops are someone we should evaluate how we do our performance review for 3 or 6 months. i can't remember what it is. we lose officers. how are you going to work that in and train the performance officers and give them the credit where we want to give credit instead -- speaker: we're -- the recruitment -- when they're in the academy. we can't do nothing. when they're out, we can work with them there. we can't intervene there. >> that's something i should talk to the chief about. >> i can answer the question. at that point we don't want to save them. they've

demonstrated they cannot do this job. it may be an issue with force, an issue with non engaging with the community, and it's easier to sever ties at that point than to wait until they have the job and then if we still have those same issues and they're showing up on director hicks desk and we have to refer them here for termination, we have paid money down the road. because every one of these is a check and a balance. and as they hit these points, this job is not for everybody and that's why these things are the way they are. some people may be great academically and make it through the academy and they can jump that wall and run, but they cannot engage the community. if we realize that in this process, quite frankly, they have opportunity, they have three different phase koretz of fto where they work with three different officers. if they can't get - >> i misunderstand my question. so we're changing the

philosophy, we're changing the use of force and taking immediate control of the situation and we're changing the time and distance and using critical thinking and common sense and things like that. maybe i should rephrase that. are we training the performance officers on the new philosophy so they can reevaluate their recruits with those tools than the old ways that we've been training our doing performance evaluations. that's a better way. >> absolutely. it goes back to what i said before. under the new matrixes that's where we're failing people. once they get to those points, if they can't perform to those folks have worked hard to grab, we've got to cut ties with them. we are losing people because now we're looking at it with a critical eye to make sure things that may have been overlooked in the past were not overlooking it just for the sake of putting warm bodies on the streets in

these cars. there's nothing different because you know, if you were talking about veteran officers, that would be an issue because we're bringing something new. if they're coming in and this is the only thing they know and they can't do it, then we're cutting ties. speaker: the training with the new philosophy -- speaker: arguably our officers are the ones who get anything before anybody. they're the people we put on the front lives to send to the program -- >> commissioner mazzucco. >> what percentage of the people that take the exam that make it to the academy. it's a selective process. it's helpful for the community to know how many people -- the percentage and i know it's a low number.

>> so, attendant passed -- 78% of the people that passed all the tests can get to the academy. i should say get to backgrounds. that's all i know. speaker: okay. >> to backgrounds. speaker: there's a huge drop off there because of background process. speaker: 78%. >> so the other question i have is i know chief sir had this idea about time and distance for people with their back grounds that he found other spots for them through the department whether it was through a psa police service aid at the airport and we give these individuals time to work into the department for two or three years and they would go into the department and clear up what they need to clear up and they would be vetted because they spend two or three years in the department. our

law firm helps sponsor the highs girls basketball program and there's young women from that program who want to be officers who were trying to get into the cadette program. they're san franciscans and raised here. will they get a preference. >> i didn't mention that. i apologize. we try to get our pl cadettes to go into our paid cadet program and our home grown people from here and they go into the paid cadet program for the college students and psa, that may consider law enforcement and get a job to learn about law enforcement to see if they want to be an officer. i know five people from the paid cadet academy. that process is working. a lot of the ones that were pla cadet

signed up to be paid police cadets and we're working to get them in that process. one i was going to bring tonight's, but he had to go to his other job. he just turned 21 and signed up for the police department last week. >> thank you, dr. marshal. i want to say one more time because this was unique and and different. i want to thank bob for doing it. but let's move forward with that in the future where it's not the police recruiting for the department, but if we can get the community to recruit the department. that says a lot to have community members stand up in front -- i know what people bring to that. i know young people -- i talk to them all the time. bring all of that to a community member, members of the community to help answer

all their questions and take them through the pitfalls, all that stuff. stuff on social media stuff for them to hear that -- i wasn't there, but the reports i had was powerful. that's a great strategy we can move -- because you have community members recruiting. that said a lot to me that they wanted to do that. that's a very promising strategy. we should do it as often as we can. >> it cost us nothing but a room. >> that's correct. >> thank you lieutenant. anything further for lieutenant dangerfield? thank you, lieutenant. >> you're welcome. thank you. speaker: colleagues, i will ask for your indulge znswer and ask sergeant killshaw to come back to the chief to finish your report, but we have under the -- our csi group. the kids are here and they've been working

since 9:00 a.m. and they're supposed to be out -- i would like to accommodate the young folks coming up. i'll do a brief introduction. as you'll recall last year in partnership with mow magic and hope ssf, the commission partnered to rethink the summer opportunities that we were providing for young people within the police department and it's perfect, the timing because last summer a couple of focuses was how do we recruit with the tension being so tense with the public and the police department. how do you create plans for people to see themselves in law enforcement in particular young people. jordan was with us last summer. and we got the recommendations and incredible videos and a number of those recommendations were implemented by the commission and the work continued. so the department

and we have recruited some additional folks, many of whom who live in our lowest served communities that end up experiencing the most violence. we want to welcome them, introduce them receives selves and the work they're going to do. speaker: i'm jordan wilson. i worked last summer for the community safety initiative and i felt like we made pretty good progress. this summer i came back and asked to do the same work. i'm blessed to do this. this is harris, she's a leader. there's probably about 20 of our interns sitting here in the first two rows. so i want to thank them for staying. last summer, we worked -- my part worked on a documentary to bridge a gap between the community members and the police department. we actually

made a lot of progress within my interns. i think when we started, only one said they were interested in law enforcement. and by the end of the summer, i think 13 out of the 15 said they were interested with a career within law enforcement. they - i've touched upon and touched in with a lot of them throughout the school year and they said that the feedback from the community members that we spoke to when we see them on the streets, they say it was quite impressive. so i'm happy to report that. after this summer, we're taking a different approach towards it. michael is focusing more on the programs that the ssf provides to the youth. so that could be pal, operation genesis, the wilderness program and we're doing a video documentary because we feel that's the best way to portray these programs and these issues. hopefully through there we'll find a way for not only police officers,

but the community members and particularly the youth to get a feel for each other and hopefully understand on a more personal lefbl both sides of where they come from. that's the project we're working on and i'll let ash lynn talk about hers. >> my name is ash lynn harris and like was said earlier, there's tension between the community and law enforcement. so we're planning on focusing on the use bias towards law enforcement. so with that, we're going to be getting both perspectives on it, and just like jordan, we're going to be making a video on that, and with doing that, we're going to try to address those issues and figure out ways to diminish the bias towards you guys. that's it. >> great, and you two are co-leaders which means -- you're in college and working with younger people who are in different stages. if you can explain the demographics of who is working with you. >> we're both in college. i

went to washington high school. >> i'm here from los angeles, so i'm currently going into my fourt year of san jose state. speaker: it was an initiative to get people of color, men and women within these lower income areas of san francisco, so the main focus was double rocks, sunny dale, pa trail hill and -- what's the fourth? hunters view. that's particular but we branched out since it's a collaboration. a lot of our students come from the fill more district. hopefully that's where we find the biggest gaps between police officers and the community. the goal is to not have them

join the force, but maybe educate them and hopefully not recruit, but be open to a career in law enforcement. hopefully they can think about that later on so they can go back into their communities later on and patrol the areas they know and understand. speaker: they'll come back with their video presentation and the young people will present. and that's apart of the process of coming to city hall. you're here tonight. we've talked through this. one thing that's really important to this commission is there's a lot of folks making recommendations about changes. you can hear those from the board of supervisors, and we're working with the -- people who live and young people who live in areas that are policed with high numbers that we're hearing directly from you about what's working and what's not working. please continue to bring your opinions and thoughts to this process because it's going to

make us better. colleagues, any thoughts. dr. marshal. speaker: great program. you know, last summer -- i'm from la. it was a great program. and i want to tell the young people, take advantage of this. i was talking to a bunch of young people last night about opportunity. and opportunity and opportunities come, get involved. take advantage of the growth. the young people asked last year grew from him and attitude changed. they came in one way and came out thinking another way. let me say something else and i think particularly president loftus, it was this group, this group that i think was instrumental in moving things forward when we hear the impasse on a law jam, we were trying to reduce our use of force. we have been moving into a certain area and there was screaming and shouting which i didn't think was productive, but it was when

we returned to you, the young people to run those groups at the various sites that we we actually made some real, real, real, real progress. got some solid feedback and that moved the whole thing forward. that came from young people. so don't think you can't be apart of this and what you bring forward and it's good for everybody. so take advantage of it. it's great. it really is great. i want to applaud you for doing it get. i wanted to say thank you for doing it. thank you for coming back and i'm looking at all you. you take advantage of this because you never know. this could start your future and we welcome your ideas and thoughts and we'll use them. >> other questions for our co-leaders or interns? special thanks to cheryl davis and the staff at mow magic for the

partnership. we look forward to seeing you at future meetings and have -- having you back in august. thanks, everyone. [applause] >> sergeant, calling us the next line item. item 1 a, the are remaining item is updating regarding redistricting. thank you chief. speaker: the redistricting didn't cause problems. the police department -- both departments did plan for worst case is a -- scenarios. it finished earlier than expected. the imagine management and letters of appreciation for that transition. its dem experience any issues. the department of emergency

management. there were no issues post cut over. there were no complaints from them about issues, the transition was seamless. there were some complaints from the public at southern station known as company b. some confusion from community as it relates to the 6th and 9th street corridor. after the switch due to tenderloin station and taking over down to mission station. both captains use outreach to educate the community on those issues about the boundary lines lie and who to report to. and company c known as bay view station, community group had an issue with the line at 18th street and not 17th street. and the reason was to keep ucsf in one district and not split it. obviously there's no way to get around that. there's are the only issues raised with the redistricting. it has gone smoothly. speaker: thank you, xheef. --

thank you chief. i got the call for loads and so we're talking about redistricting and the factor was its data at determining -- where it's different on the map. it would be good for us to -- if the department could run that report on how the calls for services are balancing out. the anecdote calls i get from folks are like, some people feel attached to the station they used to call whether it's northern verses park. there's a sense there might be a delay or the change is hard. some of the questions i've gotten, i don't know if fellow commissioners are around, whether it's evenly balanced or northern station is getting a real hit and so it would be great for us to have a report with those numbers so we can report out to members of the public who have concerns. >> okay. >> commissioner hwang. speaker: i think i had the same concerns. i've had anecdote

reports that i think one of our concerns was where the mall was going to get place and i think it ended up in tender lone. >> it did. >> whether there's a slower call for service in the tenderloin. i would like to look at those numbers and see how we're balancing out. >> any further questions for the chief on this matter. >> i forgot to -- do you have the community policing program they can go to -- where people can go to and be trained through the process, what the officers go through in terms of the shootings and things like that. they're saying that program is not offered anymore. i forgot what it's called. speaker: are you talking about the -- speaker: the citizen's academy.

>> i'm talking about the citizens academy. speaker: we don't because we have -- the parking lot is packed. every classroom is up. we've had to take training outside because there's no room to train them at this point. >> that's something the community members were saying they thought it was helpful for them and other community members to take that course. it's something to put back on the list at some point. >> okay. anything further, chief chaplin. speaker: that concludes my report. speaker: item 1 b, occ's report to make announcements, presentation of the occ statistical and companion report for the months of april and pay 2016. speaker: good evening, director hicks. >> good evening, president loftus. commissioners, chief chaplin, members of the public. i have a few brief

announcements. i'll make -- today, the san francisco grand jury released its report on its investigation of the transparency. the san francisco -- apart of this investigation, members of the civil grand jury reviewed occ record and interviewed occ staff. the grand jury investigation was confidential. but it is now public and the report released today is titled "into the open opportunities for more timely and transparent investigations of fatal fatal san francisco police officer, officer involved shooting." the government audit and oversight committee will hold a hearing on september 15th of this year in city hall to go over the findings of the grand

jury and the date is subject to change as september approaches. in the next item, today and last thursday, i attended the board of supervisors rules hearing on proposed charter amendments. two of which would impact the office of citizen complaints and the police commission. one is sponsored by supervisor cohn and the other by supervisor campos. the one sponsored by cohn passed out of the rule's committee today with a higher support by its members supervisor hwang, mar and helen. and in short, what it would do is it would change the name of the occ to the dpa which is the department of police accountability. it would provide the dpa with audit jurisdiction over the police department and it would remove the dpa's budget from

the police department's budget. supervisor campos measure is the public advocate measure, but it was amended and those amendments were provided at the rules committee meeting, so it will be taken up at a future rules committee meeting. and an amendment that were made to the supervisor campos measure, it would take out most reference to the office of labor standards and enforcement. however, it will give the public advocate appointment of the occ director

and standard -- that concludes my announcements. moving onto the two reports i provided to the commission which are the statistical reports from april and from may of this year. i will move to the april report. and in april, the occ meeting four cases for a total of 19 mediated cases january 1st through april 30th. moving to chief proposed discipline on occ sustained complaints in april, and those would be proposed disciplinary cases from former chief sir -- decisions from chief sir. the third one which is a negligent

of duty allegation. the officer received a written represent mand and retrained for failing to create a report for something he observed. a second one. this was nement of duty and unwarranted action where an officer in violation of department policies, training regarding the low jack stolen vehicle detection process and felony vehicle stops. unlawfully handcuffed the complaint. if the officer followed the procedure, the unlawful arrests wouldn't have occurred. the officer was retrained and reprimanded. the third case negligent -- the

fourth case, the officer used discourteous language and the officer was retrained. the 5th was involving the complaint ant who was a cantonese speaker and involved in an automobile accident. and the officer failed to obtain an interpreter and the officer was admonished and retrained. in the 6th case, it's a domestic violence case. the officer failed to properly investigate the complaint ants investigation that her husband violently attacked her when she told him she was filing divorce. the officer was suspended. moving to may, mediation of complaint. occ mediate five cases for a

total of 24 cases mediated from january 1, 2016 to may 31st of 2016. moving to the three cases of occ sustained complaints and police chief, action was complaint. former chief surveyed findings and proposed discipline in two cases and chief of chaplin, proposed discipline in one case. on the first case, another language access case. the officer failed to advise the complaintant of her right to a russian speaker interpreter. the officer was retrained. in a second case, a sergeant neglected duty and not properly preparing documentation. this was a

sergeant and the sergeant also failed to issue a certificate of release after handcuffing the complaint ant and failed to properly document -- in the final case, and this involved an officer failing to make required reports of a crime or incident requiring police attention. this is a fairly complicated set of stack, but the complaintent complained to the officer that her ex-boyfriend had been given access to her apartment during the civil stand by by other officers. and the other officers let the ex-boyfriend

into her apartment. she did have a restraining order against the ex-boyfriend. and the officer instead of investigating, the complaint ant allegation assessed referred the complaint ant to the district station and to the occ. ant to the district station and to the occ. >> the one who allowed the ex-boyfriend to his former apartment, these were policy failures because there was not a clear enough policy for those officers regarding, allowing

former occupants into their former residence to obtain their property. and policy attorney sam ramarian reviewed this case, and will make the appropriate policy recommendations. that concludes my reports. >> and just a civil stand by is where there's a restraining order and the police are requested to come and be present when the party being restrained from the other party gets their items back, goes back to their home, and so just for folks again, we're trying to make sure we're not using terms the public might not know. civil stand by, did i directly describe that, director hicks. speaker: i would say so. speaker: great. speaker: all right. we've got questions. commissioner de jesus. >> so you were talking about the charter amendment that you attended the hearing and it's really involving your office and i'm assuming you're working with people in terms of understanding it. i want to

ask this question because you mentioned and i've read this that there would be -- that this new -- it's called i pod, that's the acronym for it. independent police oversight department, will conduct reviews of how the police commission and the police department handles claims of officer misconduct. i'm curious, do you know how that works? let me just -- the officers discipline records are covered by the police officer's bill of rights and that's state law and i don't know if your office is going to have jurisdiction over that. do you know how that's going to work and how are you going to do that if you don't have access to those records? >> first of all, commissioner de jesus, you may be referring to a former -- of a proposed

major. the name has been changed to i pod to department of police accountability. and the departments are not generally invited to participate in a proposed measure prior to its public release. and so those measures were created by supervisor cohn as well as supervisor campos without prior referral to me. however, once they were made public, i certainly did provide input and so the audit function

is a function that is conducted by other -- from oversight department in california, and so the -- the city attorney's office did review the measure for former legality prior to its release. >> how does it work? the question is how do you anticipate it's going to work? i'm trying to understand the question. >> what are you auditing? are you auditing how many cases there were and how many complains there where he. -- speaker: one can audit for, example, whether traffic stops were recorded. one can look at that data. one can look at

discipline imposed and make a report on whether discipline was consistent. or whether it was in compliance with the discipline manual that the police department had. one can, again, look at stop data and make certain findings. it's an audit function where one can look at patterns. one can make -- from looking at those patterns, one can make policy recommendations. right now, the office of citizen complaints make policy recommendations, but it's based on a based limited of information, the complaints that occ receives. >> that's all one can do all that. i'm wondering how do you perceive this committee or your

new committee doing -- what exactly do you. is there a discussion about how you're going to go forward on this audit or is that up in the air? maybe that's what i should ask. speaker: we did have a conversation at our last meeting that one of the things we need to have as a commission is a presentation on how this would effect our work and how we fit in and to that extend to which we want to weigh in. apart is legislation is unfolding and we're hoping to see what resources we can pull together with the help of the city attorney's office to advise us on the impact it would have because i think to some degree, those are open questions and director hicks, you may not be aware of that. along the same lines of supervisor avalos, it's incumbent upon us to understand the implications and if we want to insert our voice in the process while it's going on, we need good information to do that. i don't think we have that yet. director hicks, did you want to say something in

response. >> if i could. so supervisor cohn's measure will go before the board of supervisors for a vote to determine whether it will be placed on the november ballot. it's a similar process to the process for proposition d which provided the office of citizen complaints, jurisdiction overall officers not just shootings where we received complaints. the proposition from supervisor cohen has gone through changes. there was a set aside for the orc that would base the occ's future budget on the budget

that's proposed for 2016-17, 17-18 that was removed. and there -- there were other prevision that's were removed as well, but off the top of my head, i'm not recalling them. similarly with supervisor campos' measure, originally that proposition would have placed the office of citizen complaint under the public advocate and would have removed the relationship between the offices of citizen complaints and the police commission. that at least has changed. so but i think and again without going into too much more details since it's not

agendized, once something is finalized, then it could be presented. >> great. thank you. we have questions from the commissioners. xigser melara. -- commissioner melara. speaker: this is a clarification from my brain is the difference again a written reprimand and retrain and admonish and retrained. does the admonished and retrain get written some where? >> yes, it's all noted in the -- so when we get a file on an officer, everything that has been done is documented in a file for past discipline. it's noted and available when they come before me. i do get -

speaker: written reprimand is something formal handed to the officer. speaker: that's correct. >> and also the -- commissioner melara, admonishment is not considered discipline. it's not apart of the disciplinary schedule and admonishment cannot be peeled sort of speak. admonishment doesn't go under the skelly rules before a chief's hearing, but a written reprimand can. speaker: can you explain an scelly hearing. speaker: when an employee -- their record is a property right and if there's something -- if there's something negative on their personal

record that's considered discipline, the individual is entitled to have a -- a meeting with a reviewer to determine whether that discipline will be either changed or removed so when the occ or internal affairs division for that matter, makes a sustained finding and the chief imposes discipline and an officer is -- does not -- wants to contest it, then the officer can request a chief's hearing and i was using scelly and i should say chief's hearing. that officer is able to express his

perspective along with or her perspective along with the representative and the attorney for the occ, one of the attorneys for the occ will advocate on behalf of the chief's decision, and it's a hearing, and the attorneys for internal affairs division would advocate on behalf of the chief when it's an internal disciplinary matter. something that's not arising from a citizen's complaint. speaker: thank you for that clarification. vice president turman. speaker: the april 3, 16 report, item number 6 under discipline, the officer was suspended for how many days? >> one day. >> one day. is that consistent with similar instances? >> commissioner turman, the

occ does not have access to all of the discipline that's imposed by the police department. i cannot speak to whether or not it is consistent. what we're receiving now and had not been receiving in the past is information from internal affairs division of whether or not an officer has passed discipline, and in that way, and looks in the discipline schedule, i can recommend an elevated level of discipline, and so whether this is consistent with past discipline imposed, i think a question

that the chief could answer through looking at internal affairs records. chief, can you offer any enlightenment there. speaker: i would have to research to see what other people in similar circumstances were given. and again, this is all progressive discipline. i would have to research this individual case for you. speaker: all right. >> okay. commissioner hwang. speaker: two quick questions. one is a followup. in this type of instance with the dd case, other than the discipline of the officer, does the department take a new report from the victim in the case? it's not too late to followup on the case. >> definitely not. in one of the cases that was spoke out earlier, a case was done months earlier. it's never too late to document an independence dainty.

-- incident. >> do we followup and see if the victim wants to followup with the prosecution in that case. >> that's generally what happens. i cannot speak to the specific case, but once the case is identified, generally someone other than the person that did the violation is sent back out to take the report and do the followup. >> thank you. we had two language complaints which is unusual from those two communities which don't generally generate a lot of instances. is it a pattern? is there a recommendation in terms of -- it's something we have worked on for a long time. speaker: right. >> is there a reason why we all of a sudden saw these two complays surface. speaker: yes, commissioner. these types of violations occur, it's prudent