mazzucco, commissioners, interim director, chief scott. commissioners, in your packet, you have a general draft order, 3.01, i have sergeant gary buck ner who will be covering the high point of that general order. that's a collaboration effort that's been put together over the last several months. it was originally a department of justice recommendation in the cri or collaborative initiative report. so i will turn this over to sergeant buckner to cover the highlights. >> president turman: sergeant buckner before you begin, i would like to address the commission on general order 3.01. it was my pleasure to see through this order with some of the stakeholders, including the dpa and the department in its final drafting where we went through line by line and

decided on some specific language, worked out some details. and also within the packet is what i have -- what we've included which is what should be attached to the dpa which is a five year rolling schedule of view of each dgo. this one is organized by year -- dgo in year, and then by year. this will be reviewed as attachment a. b has the very same order, but then it will also list the dgo. we'll start with the year one, which will be 2018, and it'll be march 4th for the first 20 years. but this is the proposed schedule we'll be voting on tonight. any different or proposed order the department wishes to bring forth, we will have to considerate another time, but this is the order that's going forward tonight. >> good evening. >> good evening.

my name is sergeant gary buckner with professional standards, and i'm very pleased to be here this evening to present to you a very brief synopsis of the draft that you have before you on 3.01, which was a collaborative effort with both internal and external stakeholders and both sworn and nonsworn personnel, as well. the draft before you, you should have. it's also available for the public's interest on the website. and aside from that, the chief asked me approximately i'd say about nine months ago to give 3.01 a very critical look. at that time that it was looked at, it was in 2010, so he wanted me to look at 3.01 to see what we can do to essentially improve the manner in which we do business not

only internally but how we do business with the police commission and how we could further also incorporate many of the doj-cri recommendations under accountablity. so we know that 3.01 needed this overall, not only from the doj's recommendations, but just because, well, the big elephant in the room is i guess if you look at our dgo, 70% of them were written in the 90's. so why is that? and i think the answer is we don't have an efficient or as some like to say, a nimble process of getting thinbusines change of getting things done, and we've relied on department bulletins to get things done in the past. so in looking at the new version, our goal was -- and

again, i just want to say that it was a collaborative effort with both the dpa. i'd like to recognize samir marian who's here in the room. she was involved in the process, as well as ronnie edwan. >> and john alden. >> john alden, several civilian employees in the office, as well as sworn personnel throughout the department. >> president turman: thank you very much for your excellent work, especially on the base document. we really appreciate your hard work. thank you sir. so you know the process was -- really, when i looked at it, there was really three themes, i guess you will: how do we make it more efficient, how do we make the -- the policy more transparent, if you can, and -- and accountable? and you know, there's really four things that i'd like to

hit on as it relates to the draft that you have now. you know, when we're looking at the plot, the draft that you have now, it's important that we go out and look at best practices as far as what agencies were doing. not for content, but for process. how were other agencies doing it efficiently? how were they keeping their general orders up to date. so we looked at that, and that was important. the take away was we can do some things better. so you know we looked at best practices, incorporated those practices into the draft that you see before you. later on, you know, we thought about, you know, what if we wanted to seek accreditation from calia? what would they expect from us as it relates to our policies and how we do business, so we looked at those things and incorporated some of those things into the policy.

you know, it was really important that we come up with a mechanism for efficiency, and we did that in this draft. faster? >> president turman: no, we need to get to the dgo terms. >> okay. so we created a process by which, you know, the general orders could be changed by the general order change process. and it was really critical that we reduce the number of bulletins that were being put out through this general order. that was a big one. our members had spoke about that. we have some 600 bulletins that are going out in a two-year period. we need to substantially reduce that number, and we did so with this draft. the other big thing is there are 17 different justice department recommendations under accountablity, that if this draft is pushed forward, we'll moved to closed status. so we incorporated 17 specific recommendations into this draft. so i think it really -- in

closing, i didn't want to get into any detail about all of that stuff. if you have questions, we're happy to answer any specific questions that you might have, but thank you for your attention and consideration. >> president turman: again, sergeant buckner, i want to thank you and tspp, as well as the dpa and everyone in the department for the fine work they did on this dgo. i will tell you that it took longer than i expected, but it's -- it's a good finished product. so just so everyone on the commission is clear, dgo 3.01 is the dgo on dgo. it talks about how dgo's will be amended, added to, what happens to bureau orders when a dgo is passed, what the power and effect of a dgo -- a bill or order can have on a dgo.

it's a comprehensive document with a great deal of thought, forward thinking, and it's forward thinking, and it has a type of reform and change. both the doj requested, as well as our own forward-thinking chief, and his department. so with that, i will take the questions. so petra dejesus. >> commissioner dejesus: so i just have a couple of questions. one of the things i remember, when a bulletin has a recommendations, it has to come before this commission within a certain number of days, and i don't think that was being followed. so my concern is if we're going to have a five-year review, i mean, how are we going to assure that it's brought -- any bulletin modifying or substantially modifying a general order is brought within 15 days, because that's one of the criticisms that i remember? >> yeah, that's a good question. under our bulletin, we're required to bring any bulletin

that substantially changes the order is brought to the commission within two weeks. we will bring any policy that substantially changes our current policy to the commission first for action. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. >> and then we'll take it out and endorse it into the go. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. >> president turman: and i might add, if a bulletin does come forward which we agree to and pass, then it should immediately call for a revision to the dgo itself. >> right, exactly. president turman, the process we created with the general order change will make it much more efficient, so we'll just be bringing forward every week, you're going to see general order changes that are essentially going to be changing the general order, and it'll evolve as the time goes. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. can i have one more question. for indexing on f on page 7,

one of the things we heard also from the police officers or when -- i don't know how you're going to store it, but if you're going to electronically store it, one of the things when they're writing their reports, it would be great when they refer to their dgo, it would be great if it had a tab there, this also relates to -- and have a dgo or list so they can make sure that the report or list that they're doing has all the related items to it. i don't know but that might be one extra step here, but that's something you might consider. you're going to change the way you number them. it would be nice to know that everything, items 3.01 through 3.9 are all related. >> thank you for the great feedback. we're improving the mechanism by which officers can do

searches, so if they're in the field and they're on a domestic violence call, for example, they could go into their cell phone and do a search and immediately know what the policies are with regard to that investigation, so those are being worked on. we're continually improving that process and looking at a couple of different solutions right now. >> commissioner dejesus: thank you. >> president turman: commissioner hirsch? >> commissioner hirsch: yes. i just wanted to confirm that the dates that we're looking at here for review are the dates that the commission will actually review after whatever work beforehand has been done and not the date that the department or committee will start reviewing it. >> president turman: what days are you referring to? >> commissioner hirsch: well, the first day, 2020. >> president turman: i'm glad to answer that for you. that is the day the dgo itself must be review, because some of those, the dgo has not been reviewed in several years, so we want to make sure the dgo's are reviewed. we put them on a five-year

schedule, so we want to make sure they're reviewed on a regular basis going forward. >> commissioner hirsch: so that means the commission reviews it. >> president turman: they review it, and then, it comes to us, and all of that should happen within the calendar year. >> commissioner hirsch: okay. >> commissioner davis, if you look at page 6, under d, to your question about the bulletins, also, is an extra layer of checks and balances there or accountablity that any bulletin that -- [ inaudible ] -- the general order, we will comply with the department of police accountablity as well, so they get to review it and weigh in on it, soand advise the police commission there, as well, so i think that's an extra layer of accountablity. >> commissioner dejesus: yeah. that was my concern, that it

just gets in front of the class quickly. >> i just wanted to applaud you, president turman, and the group of doing this, what do you call the dgo's? this will certainly prevent -- those of us that remember the use of force policy hadn't been reviewed since 1995. that prevents all of this and keeps us fresh and up to date. i don't want to minimize this. we just got out of a huge hole in the -- in the -- or addresses a huge hole in the doj recommendation, so thank you. took a lot of work -- and the fact that it took longer than it should, so that's good. it's good. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. all right. >> president turman: there does not appear to be other questions. thank you so much, sergeant buckner, deputy chief thomas. thank you. public comment on item 3?

hearing none, public comment is now closed. commissioners, before you is dgo 3.01, the new draft of 2018 -- 17, i guess it should be. it says 12-18-17, but shouldn't it be -- essentially, shouldn't it be -- read number 2? it'll be revised so -- on this date, as well as -- as well as the proposed five-year rolling review, which is going to be exhibit a, and there'll be an exhibit b which just does it by calendar year. with that said, commissioners, i'll entertain an appropriate motion. >> clerk: excuse me, commissioner and president. this is on for item discussion only.

>> president turman: oh, it is. why is it on for discussion item only? >> clerk: this draft required a ten day posting requirement, and my understanding is that it did not comply with the ten-day posting requirement. so any time under the charter, there needs to be notice to be given to the public of any change in rules the commission is going to adopt requires a ten-day posting requirement. >> president turman: why... >> definitely hear you. >> president turman: i'm -- i sat down in early december with the department, the dpa, and went through this extensively. i also had a five-year rolling plan review system. someone want to give me an explanation why this was not

timely posted? i will take this up with staff later. please schedule this for a commission vote next. >> commission meeting. >> yes, next commission meeting. next item. >> clerk: item 4, discussion regarding department general order 2.04, citizen complaints against officer, discussion. >> president turman: okay. all right. so this is just a discussion item, which i knew about because i wanted to have a discussion. have a seat, commander. so the department general order 2.04 is a citizens complaint against officers, and it has typically been a dgo. now citizens complaint against officers is not just a document

that governs what the department will do and define certain terms, including what a complaint is. and it's not just a command to the department. it's also a -- a rules to live by by the department of police accountablity. >> to review it, such as -- >> president turman: considering what we have had previously, it is suggested, and i believe this is correct, that the proper form to have this in is a -- is a dgo expressing that. the -- to both the department and the dpa will -- will have this complaint procedure governed through an mou. we need an mou because dgo's do not govern the actual performance of the department

of police accountablity. we need a mechanism to where we as a commission or who oversees both of these departments can look to see if both are up to -- both organizations have met their -- their responsibility and their duty, and then if not to address these issues either-or whichever offending party, should that situation arise. so it is best to have, i believe, an mou between the department and the dpa that tells both what their responsibility is and then if they fail in that responsibility, to -- it should be reported to the commission for us to deal with. and the dgo will simply say complaints will be governed by an mou. discussion on that particular

item? command i'll stop. commander walsh. >> good evening, president turman, commissioners, director henderson, chief scott. i was just asked to come in and just give day brief -- i'm going to try to beat director henderson in time. this dga brief 2.04 was discussed in terms of the accountablity section of the doj report and asked that section of the accountablity wasn't the dgo, but looking at trends in the complaints, making sure our staff at the station level knew how these trends are moving forward, so it was all-encompassing. i think 2.04 would still exist. i think their requirements for the police officers and command to take those citizen

complains, because 24 hours a day, dpa is not open, so there would be guidance in that section. we have provided a 2.04 to the commission. i know that dpa also has had 2.04. we've had discussions with commissioner hirsch, and so we're working through that. we had a proposed appendix or mou which has been a topic of discussion that we've sent over. so we've kind of been trying to meld all of these things together. the complication is this does affect every police officer member of the department, so we know that the employee groups will be extensively interested in what that final outcome is. but i think that in cooperation with dpa and some of the guidance of the commission, i think this can be wrapped up pretty quickly and done after a couple more meetings and then

pushing it out to the peg groups so they have a say in what the members will be involved with. >> president turman: okay. director henderson? >> thank you for that excellent input and for this draft. we -- we as commissioners already now already have a draft of this that we have gone through, dpa meaning very thoroughly since july, and so i'm eager, ready, and happy to sit down to move forward to address these differences to try and come to the same page about our interests collectively in moving this forward. >> president turman: thank you, director. i have to tell you that it has been since july, so we do need to move forward on this, so i am proposing a meeting with the dpa and the department on friday of this week, and which

i will join so that we can begin some initial work on that. so i'll -- our last -- i will ask both director henderson and his staff, as well as the chief, commander walsh, and his staff to see if we can meet at our -- at my usual early morning meeting time with the chief to see if we can at least start to bang out and talk about some of these issues. because i would like to have this dgo pushed out to the groups and i'd like it to be voted on by the second week of february . so let's move it. it's been too long already. commander, are you waiting for more comments? >> is there going to be bagels and coffee, because the last one we went. >> president turman: if there are coffee and bagels -- hold

on for public comment. questions for the chief or director henderson? public comment. >> my name is collide brown. i'm serving as the chairman of the bar association of san francisco oversight committee on the dpa and its operations. i am -- i rise to express some concern about the vagueness of the last sentence in 1 a, officers shall cooperate fully with the dpa and provide their full assistance in the impartial processing of the citizen complain complaints.

>> president turman: i'm sorry. what are you referring to? >> right there. >> i'm concerned because information that we've had indicate that police legal -- i know there's a document production protocol that's in draft and being worked on, but the problem is that documents are not coming from police legal when requested in a timely fashion by dpa. that's my understanding, and this document -- general order doesn't explicitly refer to the need to incorporate into it a reference to a document production protocol and the need to comply with that. i think that that is a critical issue when it comes to the dpa's ability to follow through

on citizen complaints, and i -- i just would raise the issue. >> president turman: thank you. mr. leidman is of course correct. the document that he refers to is document 2.04, which are -- is our current 7-20-94 draft. he raises a good point, one which miss marian of the dpa has already raised, so it will be thoroughly reviewed and looked into. and i thank you for raising that point. anymore public comment on this item? >> yes. i'm also concerned about the expediency of the complaint. i -- at the last police commission meeting, i complained about the fact that the body worn video cameras were not turned on and when o'neal was killed, the only one that was on was by the rookie

who killed him, and it was because it had 30 second delay backwards. why isn't there an investigation? i'm talking over here, an investigation by the dpa about why that officer who was with the rookie didn't have his body camera on? why the other people involved in the chase, because there were other officers involved in the chase, did not have their camera on? where is the films of those? what disciplinary action has been taken against those officers for not putting the camera on when they knew it was required by law. as soon as a chase occurs, it's supposed to go on. here is a rookie cop not being given direction and then kills -- kills a person. that person's dead. then, those videos are shown in a church, in a church, during the season, the christmas season. sort of like the two theevs

next to jesus. and let's show it twice to really traumatic people. this is not how community relations get built. i don't know why when you're doing your commission reports, none of you asked what's going on with this murder case? i don't hear anything going on. it seems with the d.a., it's just an unspoken agreement in this city, if a police officer kills someone, nothing happens, and that's been happening over and over and over again. by the way, tomorrow night, there will be a community gathering about the end of policing. some of you might like to come. >> president turman: all right. any other public comment on the item 4? hearing none, public comment is now closed. commissioner hirsch?

>> commissioner hirsch: i'd just like to say i'd like to be present for the friday meeting if i can make it. what time do you start? >> president turman: usually around 8:00. >> commissioner hirsch: okay. thanks. >> mr. chairman? >> president turman: this is not an action item. >> i'm sorry. i don't know why i didn't catch it, the retreat that i have for my entire office and my new staff is friday, and i'll be gone all day. >> president turman: all right. i guess you'll have to catch us on the next round. >> okay. >> president turman: all right. secretary kilshaw. >> clerk: public comment. the public is welcome to address the commission on items that do not appear on tonight's agenda about they will be before the commission.

speaker shall address their remarks as a whole and not to an individual commission or dpa or police personnel. neither police or dba personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public but may provide a brief response. individual commissioners and police and dpa personnel should refrain, however, from entering into any debates or discussion with speakers during public comment. please limit your comments to three minutes. >> president turman: thank you. good evening. would you like to use the overhead? >> yes, in a hurry. i'm just here to talk about my son who was murdered on august 14, 2006, still waiting for some closure on his case.

his case number is -- well it was on here. well, we're just still waiting for some people to come forth to say what happened in his case, and the case number used to be on here, but i can't see it, and i want to say it. in that time, i do want some closure as a mother. i'm down here with my grandson now, and it's not easy, but i needed to come and speak about my child. okay. and i'm going to stop right here, okay? 'cause he's not going to let me go the rest of the way. >> president turman: he's fine. go ahead. he's actually welcome. >> yes, and i'll take the overhead off. but i'm still looking for some closure for my son, and i think this year is a little hard for

me, and i don't know what else to do. i'm -- it's going to be coming up on this year. august 14 is going to be 12 years that i've been out here on the battlefield trying to get justice for my son. i'm still asking that we have the fliers that i care wry aro, that we have a venue to put them at the bus stops, at the schools, a place to put them so that i won't have to stand on my car and put them on top of a post for someone to tear them down. and then, you know, i can -- well, even if i get a little closure, i can spend a little bit more time with my grandchildren instead of coming here, doing this every wednesday. not that i don't want to be here. you know, i've built a relationship with everyone in here. and -- but i do want some closure, and i do want to spend more time with my grandchildren

instead of being here talking about my son. i mean, i'm going to still talk about him either way. i mean, this is his nephew, marcus. little marcus. this is my last grandchild right now, and i have four grand boys and one granddaughter. i have five grandchildren who is not here to see their uncle, and it's not sad -- i mean, it's sad. and they hear me talk about it all the time, and they always ask me, mommy where is -- or nana, where's aubrey at. they always see the pictures all the time. i want to be able to tell them something. i don't know what to tell them. i want to be able to say well, there was some justice in this case, but i'm not even able to say that right now. so i still need help. i still need closure. if anybody knows anything about

this case out there on sfgov television, please help. thank you. >> president turman: thank you. any further public comment? thank you, mr. salinas. >> thank you, president, chairman, commissioners. jim salinas. i'm here to thank the chief through the chair for the respect and the attentiveness he's given the latino community the last few months. i truly appreciate the fact that this chief is in great demand, and as i said earlier is working favorishly to try to reinstill the trust and the confidence and to build the community relations that were once much much better. i just wanted to come down here. i know that he's very busy, and i know that he's taking time.

i also want to thank while i'm here deputy chief sainz, when he's not able to come down and answer questions and continue to build on this relationship, that they're there. and again, despite the fact that all of them have a great many duties. lastly, i just want to say in december, commissioners, i read an article in the mission local regarding some issues with the sfpd, and i have to say that i hope maybe you all will take some of this to heart in that we're one of the few jurisdictions that can't locate our radio cars. we're a major metropolitan area, right, and -- and that's one of the things that i think that should be in place. i think it's a safety factor for the officers, but it also

makes for a more efficient system for us to say hey, there's a radio car half a block where this is occurring. so i hope all of you will look into that. and again, i want to thank the chief and the command staff and all of you for working so hard. obviously, all of you get paid a great deal of money to do this, so i want to continue to thank you for that. happy new year, and thank you for all the great work all of you are providing for our citizenry. thank you. >> president turman: thank you. further public comment? >> good evening, commissioners. first, to the chief, commissioners, and director henderson, i want to tell you how fantastic it's been working with you for the last four years. i'm no longer the president of rfj, but i want to say how much we appreciate your commitment

to police reform, your commitment to social justice. it has been reflective these last years, and i want to say the last quarter of 2017 has been the most exciting times for officers of color and also i think for our communities because we really truly feel that you have embraced wholeheartedly the whole idea of police reform and what the doj has been speaking about. and now it is my pleasure to turnover the leadership of the officers for justice to monday g -- montgomery singleton and trent williams. i will be as supportive of everyone as i possibly can, and i am sure you will continue to

move in the right directions and be successful. and thank you chief for your commitment to the members of the san francisco police department. >> thank you, lieutenant will coms for your service to the officers for justice and for the wonderful job that you've done as your long tenure as their president. further public comment? >> i was listening to public radio, and there was a show about tear gas and within it, they discussed tazers, and i don't know if you're all aware of this. i never heard it told at any meeting that i came to, and i would just went to almost all of them, that the information from body worn cameras and the tazers, the data goes directly to axon, tazers international. so why is a public service group, the police, sending data to a private corporation on the people of this city? if we -- we already have the

body worn, and i'm still wait fighting against the tazers. i want to know about that. i want to know why this wasn't discussed. if you all have an issue about it, i hope you do. you know, probably the next thing is they'll want to collate the data and sell it back to us. this is appalling. the brown act, my reading says you can discuss the actions of any employee of the city by name, so at these meetings, when we say we can't discuss them, that's not right according to the brown act. as i now under the brown act, have filed a complaint that is going to be heard by the sunshine task force. i differentiate what president turman says about tazers, and the action that you took at that meeting. for example, during the

presentation, commander walsh twice apologized for going over time. no one stopped him. no one was concerned about it. he was, and i think that was respectful of him to say that. but that the woman that was speaking for us, kristina maria was cutoff immediately and the sound killed at exactly two minutes with no opportunity or respect for her to say, could you wind it up, could you -- other people want to speak. you know you're a respected member of the community. no, she was just cutoff. and so again, there was not -- no one informed us of where that meeting was moved to, and people were locked out of city hall, and that is not legal, so we're going to fight this tazer thing, and we're going to keep being the best city in this country to not have violence and people being killed or tazered with electric shock that we at first also was never discussing was fatal. and now of course we have to

own that that's the truth and over 1,000 people have died from tazers. and by the way, you know, the mental health issues within the police department and with officers in the correctional institutes is three times as high. the suicide rate, three times as high as the general public. are we caring about them? where's the concern about their mental health because they're not doing well living with these things. thank you. >> president turman: any further public comment. seeing none, public comment is now closed. secretary kilshaw. >> clerk: item 6, public comment on matters pertaining to item 8 below, closed session, including discussion on whether to hold item 8 in closed session. >> president turman: members of the public, we are about to go into closed session to discuss both matters with legal counsel on existing litigation as well as other disciplinary

matters. so any public comment on the fact that we're about to go into closed session and we're going to vote on that? sorry. mr. alden stood up on that, and i thought we had public comment on that. all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> clerk: item 7, vote on whether to hold item 8 in closed session, and whether to vote on items 8 a and b, and san francisco commissioners 51.7 section. >> president turman: okay. commissioners, i'll entertain the appropriate motion. >> i think we should go into closed session. >> second. >> president turman: all in favor? all opposed? before we say good night to the

public, is there anything you want to tell them about the next two weeks? >> we aren't meeting -- oh. >> we're dark the next two weeks. sorry. thank you, commissioner. we are dark january 24th, january 31st, and we will be reconvening on february 6th, at 8:30. >> president turman: thank you. we are now going into closed

session.

>> thank you all for being here this morning. i want to touch upon the encouraging news we heard last night, a federal judge just issued a stop against discrimination actions of the trump administration to deport daca recipients in the country. (applause) and we all know it's not the

first time the judicial system had to step in to protect our residents from the cruel and misguided policies of this administration which targets our immigration communities. while we were happy to hear this welcoming news, we know that in this city we must work together to protect our immigrant families. we must stand united in the face of intolerance and today with the opening of this new incredible family resource center we're showing that san francisco supports all residents. i want to thank sam reese here today for hosting us and acknowledge the latino parity coalition for providing families in need. and i'm delighted to be here to acknowledge the role they play in diverse families and the

newest member is the el centro bayview, which will open -- (applause) which will open its doors this friday. and it is just such a beautiful facility. i'm so excited with how welcoming it will be to the community. since 2009 the centers have operated across the city providing cultural services to families and youth. and with the opening of el centro bayview, san francisco can proudly say 26 centers are serving residents and neighborhoods throughout san francisco. they will be specifically charged with providing services to immigrant communities who for one reason or another are unaware or hesitate to reach out for support or services. it is so important that these

families step out of the shadows and receive the resources they need. we understand why they are weary to do so, they feel attacked, we hear the threats from our federal government every single day sadly. and just this monday president trump ended the temporary protective status for our el salvador residents who came because of a devastating earthquake in their country. and similar to haiti and nicaragua and pushing families out for trying to make a better life for themselves or trying to tear them down or build walls will not make our country safer or stronger. the people who are a part of this country, the immigrants and the folks who are part of the communities is what makes our

city and our country stronger. (applause) and we are here to remind residents in san francisco, in this city you will always be defended, you will always be supported and we in san francisco are a sanctuary city today, tomorrow and always. (applause) el centro bayview will be a place of community, a place where families can grow and thrive and children can reach their dreams. when we open the resource center we're telling the administration we will not back down from our values here in san francisco. we will stand strong, we will stand proud, we will continue to do all we can to put the

resources into resource centers like this that are going to continue to support our families. this is so important. this is a major step in the right direction and i'm so grateful to our many community partners who make this work possible, the ones in the trenches doing the work working with our communities and families and at this time i want to bring up sam reese for some comment. (applause) >> and i was going to talk a little bit about family resource centers but somebody beat me to it. (laughter) excellent, you're hired. so good morning everyone. before i say anything more, out of respect for someone who helped us lead the process for this site to become a reality, honorable mayor lee.

without his support we wouldn't be here this morning. with that being said, i would appreciate it if i could use one of my five minutes specifically in honor of mayor lee. a minute of silence, please. (moment of silence) thank you everyone. much appreciated. so, we are here at the site called southeast families united. this is an early care and family facility, one of 11 sites mission operates in various neighborhoods in san francisco.

this site is introducing a family resource center with one goal in mind, that is to provide our children attending these classrooms with the necessary support for our families to thrive. it is the parent who is the first teacher and the first teacher must always be ready to engage with their child, to support their child, to nurture the child so he/she can develop into an individual who is a contributor to our community and our society. the reality is that it's not just what the child learns in the classroom, it's also what happens at the home. unfortunately, many, most of our families whose child is attending our classrooms here are experiencing significant barriers, significant challenges at home. and mostly because they have been through the eviction

process. in san francisco in the mission district in the last 10 years we've lost 8,000 families. that's a lot of folks. and yes, they have moved, they have relocated to counties outside of san francisco, but the neighborhood of choice, there have been two neighborhoods of choice for families relocating, one is bayview hunters point and the other is the exselsior. it's no longer about families renting a room to live in, it's renting a hallway to live in. that places significant issues on our families and the family resource center with a competent team will support these families as they move on to hopefully a better situation. so, i also want to say that i'm glad that our courts have

stepped in to address the issue that was just identified by our mayor. but i also have another stark reality that i think we need to accept. our core value at mission neighborhood centers with early head start program is to prepare the child to enter school and succeed throughout so they can graduate and continue on to college and graduate. now, the reality that we're facing whether we want to accept it or not is in our prison system. let's all understand one fact, fact of life that you cannot contradict, not 50, not 60, not 70, not 80% but more than 80% of our prisoners, of our men and women happen to be high school drop-outs. over 80%. now, yes, it's true at this site

we'll only look after 52 children, but all the data that we have, every single report we have read, those children, children from low income families who have access to early education programs will most likely graduate and continue on to college and graduate from college. that's our goal and with support from mayor breed, we'll make that a reality. in closing, i would like to acknowledge that this effort, our coalition and frc at this point is being introduced because of two other organizations with mission neighborhood centers at the lead, good samaritan community resource center. (applause) is one of our partners. our second is mission economic association. (applause) so with that, i would like to

thank the mayor's office of community housing -- mayor's office of housing and community development. they keep changing the name. my apologies. (laughter) thank you very much. so i would like to introduce our next speaker, a client of mission neighborhood centers, a parent, anna (spanish) (applause) we'll have translation services for those who can't speak spanish. thank you. (voice of translator): hello good morning. i'm very grateful to be here to be here with everyone here at mission neighborhood centers.