program. this program -- pertaining to alcohol abuse that may be offered to 34e78 berz members in conjunction with discipline. department of justice collaborative reform initiative suggested policy review development, one, use of force, 28 policy recommendations. two, bias, ten policy recommendations. three, community policing, three policy recommendations. four, accountablity, 33 policy recommendations. the executive sponsors are responsible for the appropriate level of assignment and development of recommendation processes. that's the end of my report. >> thank you very much, captain. for the members of the you belie believe -- public, this was done by our former commission, teresa sparks, and it was just to keep an update on the many department general orders that we have for the san francisco police department. every department general order is approved by this commission.

some don't need to be updated. some do. for example, we're talking about police radios, dive teams to domestic violence to issues of officer involved shootings, so a lot of these department general orders input from the community and some of our stakeholders, and more particularly as we'll hear next from the dpa, and it's collaborative effort. but what people need to know is each general order is reviewed to update technology, update changes in the law, and each department is held to these general orders. they have to train to these department general orders, and then, these sadly are sometimes the basis for discipline for officers if they don't follow the general orders. they're kind of -- i wish it was only ten. it's not only ten commandments,

but they must be responsible for. that's what we do. it's a lot of work. like the captain mere, captahe moore, who spent time revising them and bringing them up to date. next we'll hear from the dpa who's an active participant in these department of general orders review. >> thank you. good evening, vice president mazzucco, commissioners, chief scott, and members of the public. i'm just going to highlight a few of the projects that we've worked on in the next few months. in response to the do 1k3wrd's recommendations, we provided written amendations and made presentations to the sponsor working groups which involves a number of community stakeholders on bias and this was to expand the definition of bias consistent with the state law. we also suggested enhancing the department's current procedures

on detentions so that officers not om would they provide their card when they stop an individual but it would have the officer's contact information as well as how to file a complaint or commendation. we've vachbsadvanced that recommendation. i know that's under review by the police department. another thing we've done during the last six months is we've made lots of recommendations regarding tazers and the tazer review board and have attended many meetings as many of you can attest to. lastly, the last sparks report that we provided, we did substantial editing. there had been comments that it's just too lengthy and not readable, so with an eye towards really highlighting recent work and some of the dpa's outstanding policy recommendations, we tried to make it more concise, welcome any feed that you have. we hope there's a number of

outstanding reportings like recording, persons and personal effects. we hope that we're able to address those recommendations in the up coming months. that concludes my report. >> so as the public can see, our officers have to be judges who on the street have to follow the law and make quick decisions in tense situations, and follow the law. so thank you for trying to simplify it. a lot of effort goes into this, and people speak highly of your hard work in this area. dr. marshall? >> quick question. we just passed a general order regulating general orders. so i'm just wondering, you know, the -- i know you're moving as quickly as can, but it did have some time frames in that new general order. how are they interfacing? i'm just curious. did they take it, start to fly

right away -- so, i mean, do you have any comment on that at all? i'm just curious about that. wrong question? >> no, wrong person. the general order 3.01 is in the meaning confer process. that was the last action that the commission took, so we're waiting to hear back. >> you're waiting until it's really official. >> yeah skbl okay. that helps. thank you. >> thank you. >> any further questions? any public comment regarding our department general orders? hearing none, public comment is now closed. please call the next line item. [ inaudible ] >> ace, you can pretty much go. if you sing, it's got to be earth, wind, and fire, or sinatra. >> excuse me. i'm re-cooperating from surgery

in the rain. if i've heard from chief scott, what you had been doing -- see, i haven't been here for the last six months, you've changed your agenda. captain moore, i've never met her before, but obviously these are some of the things that we've been stressing for for years. excuse me for not being -- getting information, and i'm one that loves information, but what i just heard was something that soothes me a little bit: main thing that i want to stress -- and it's going to be a bomb shell, and i haven't released it yet -- oh, that i am -- that rhymes. >> even though you're still doing it, there are still pockets of bhies, racism. the general order's good, it's

all good, but this is my last time for public comment, because i haven't even filed yet. i'm not one that complains our history. it's been done to me here in city hall, you all, and i haven't revealed it yet, but because of the status that's going on, i'm not going to lump all police officers into this. there's one, amongst others, but there's one here at city hall, you all. read my memo when i release it, chief scott, because -- hold up -- all of all the good that you've done, which you've done a lot, you've got my stamp of approval, but you still amongst you here at city hall, where i've been many years, in room 200, believe me, commissioner marshall, when i drop this bomb, it's going to have to clear it up. my name is ace, and i'm on the

case. >> any further public comment on these line items? hearing none, public comment is now closed. please call the next line item. >> item five, discussion and possible action to approve draft revised public order, immigration laws for purposes of meeting and engaging with the police officers association, discussion and possible action. >> thank you very much, commission secretary kilshaw. i'm going to turn this over to our commissioners that worked on this, and that would be commissioner hing and commissioner dejesus. i want to commend them and thank them for their hard work. people in the public may not know that we're fortunate -- commissioner dejesus is a former public defender. she's a nay iftive san francis and commissioner hing is a professor -- local professor on

constitutional law, so i'm going to turn the mic over to commissioner hing. >> thank you, mr. vice president. i do want to thank commissioner dejesus for cochairing the working group and also thank the various participants in the 5.15 working group. the city attorney's office, the dpa, the various police afint groups, some of the community -- affinity groups, some of the community, asian americans for justice, the bar association, religious communities. thank you very much. i'm sure i'm leaving out a few critical people. i apologize. when -- i would like everyone in the audience to refer to the document that's dated february 8th, 2018 in the upper right

hand corner. that's the most recent iteration that shows the strike out. if you don't have that, there's extra copies, so make sure you're looking at the february 8th, 2018 one. commissioners -- well, commissioners, that was just handed out to us an hour ago. >> for the record, it was -- yeah. go ahead. >> commissioner, for the record, it was posted on-line over ten days ago and was posted with the agenda documents. >> that's correct. >> right. before i go into -- i want to do a quick overview of some of the highlights for the commission to pay attention to because we did adopt a version of this at the request of the city attorney's office back in july, so not that long ago. but i want to go over what we did and why we did that in a minute. but first, i want to turn the microphone over to the chief,

who has some general comments about the general order and the city's and the police department's commitment to the sanctuary ordinance. >> thank you, commissioner hing. i want to take this opportunity just to reinforce. i've spoken to the commission as a whole on this issue before, and the public. i want to just reemphasize that san francisco police department's commitment to ensure the public that they can report crimes and cooperate with the department without fear of anyone inquiring into his or her immigration status. as stated in the charter, we're committed to san francisco as a sanctuary city and protect the rights of everyone within ourix diction. it's our intent to foster respect between law enforcement and our communities, which is reflected in our policies, including general order 5.15, enforcement of general immigration law tz. although we've been updating this key policy in collaboration with our community and members of the

police commission, the department proactively reminded our members by issuing department bulletins that reinforce administrative section 12 h and 12 i in early 2017. in on that note, in early february 2018, we redistributed, through roll call training, all of our policies to all members requiring acknowledgement that they are aware of the strict ad heerns to th-- adherence to th order. furthermore, members shall not require individuals to produce any document as to prove their immigration status, and shall not assist with any sgs's immigration enforcement

efforts, and shall not arrest or detain an individual for an administrative warrant or civil warrant based on a person's immigration status. any violation of policies relate will be investigated and disciplined where appropriate. our community policing efforts are effective only if we have trust and respect of the communities that we are charged to protect. having local jurisdictions becomen tangled in immigration status undermines the relations that we've worked to build with our residents. this general order encompasses these principles, and i recommend the police commission adopt this general order. thank you. >> thank you, chief commissioner hing? >> thank you, chief.

members of the commission and ladies and gentlemen, immigrant commutes are under siege and under attack by the trump administration, and because immigrant communities are a vital part of san francisco, that means we are all under attack, and under siege. i don't think i'm going to -- i don't think i'm overstating this when i say that those of us in the immigrant rights community are at war. we are at war with the trump administration and we will be at war for at least three years. and -- and the importance of a sanctuary ordinance is a vital tool in that -- in that battle. when we adopted the changes that were made in july, there was testimony that evening by community members that had some critique and some comments on what we adopted that evening, and president turman committed

to establishing a working group in order to respond to those suggestions, and that's what happened. so we formed a working group and was -- with commissioner dejesus and i. we met many times with the various members of the -- of the working group that i mentioned, and there were -- there were clarifications that needed to be made to the language. we had to make sure, also, that the dgo was consistent with the administrative law, and code that has changed in the last couple of years, and we wanted to make sure there was consistency with other language in the -- in other dgo's that exist. so the chief actually has highlighted several important parts of the dgo, but i do want

to mention a couple of other things that you can see in the strike-out language or the parts that are underlined in the 2-8-2018 draft. for example on page two, near the bottom, there's a reference to the fact that members shall not enforce administrative immigration detainers, that's -- that's something that's received a lot of publicity over the last couple of years. more than the last couple of years. there's litigation over that issue, and we wanted to make is clear what the various types of detainer forms that can be used by ice, that the -- that there not be any confusion. i would drop a footnote here to point out that in fact the -- the san francisco police department generally is not the entity that would -- that a detainer would be issued to or delivered to. it generally would be the

sheriff's department, but in the rare occasion when that might happen, let's make it clear, that the -- that when it comes to detainers, we're consistent with the earlier part of the dgo. also, there was a lot of confusion on page three, under part 3-a, over ice requests for emergency assistance or response by the sfpd. and it was very clear from the discussion and the department was very good in helping us clarify that language that yeah, when there's an emergency and there's a threat to life and danger, even possibly of an ice agent, well, the police will respond to that, just as they would respond to anyone who's in need. and so -- but in no event, as it points out in the next paragraph, part b, is -- will the members assist in federal

immigration enforcement as part of that. and going onto the bottom of page three, and carrying onto the top of page four, it -- there are times when there may be calls for cooperation between federal, state, and local law enforcement. again, it's made very clear here and in conversations with the department at the working group meetings that there's -- there's definite oversight that the department is not entering into an agreement to enforce immigration laws. there may be agreements to enforce other laws, but there should never be even part of that agreement that deals with enforcing immigration laws. and if it turns out that a member is called to assist in

what presumably is not an immigration enforcement effort, but it turns out that there is an immigration enforcement effort that was unbeknownst to that member, that there immediatneeds to be an immediate response to us that that's what happened. that's in the middle of page four. and finally, in the -- there's a call on page five to -- some additional oversight that every year -- and there's actually a typo graphical error at the top of page five that we should adjust, by no later than january of each year. do you see that? yeah. and i think commissioner dejesus found another typo. >> yeah. on page three, 3-b, on the second line, the little thing

that's crossed out, it needs to stay in. [ inaudible ] emergency response to ice or cbp shall immediately notify their supervisor. the strikeout went a little too far. >> t-o, and middle of page three, next sentence. >> okay. i think they did hear me. can you hear me? >> based on that, i would make a motion that the commission adopt the revisions to dgo 5.15. >> with the corrections made. >> with the corrections. >> i second that. >> and before we -- i seek public comment, i want to say, and this is very legally sound document. it's very fair. it's extremely fair, and it points out that, you know, we would respond -- if somebody wants to criticize this document, all's i ask is that they read it and read the

entire document, and also read san francisco sanctuary city policy and ask yourself what it is. you ask ten different people what's san francisco sanctuary city policy, you get ten different answers. they want to just take a position. read this. read this very sound document that basically lays out what our officers should and cannot do, and i just want to thank you. you did a great job, both of you. >> if i can just say something before we vote. the department was very helpful, the peg groups had helpful, but the community's so informed and pointed us in the right direction and really assisted us with great language and the forms and gave us examples and helped us understand the nuances in the language, so i just want to kmampg the community members. >> any public comment regarding department general order 5.15?

>> good evening. >> good evening. my name is maria esparza. i'm the coordinator for the san francisco rapid response network, which is a 24 hour hotline to provide assistance to anyone being targeted by ice enforcement in the city of san francisco. i want to thank the commissioners, the working group, as well as the police department in the most recent months, we've had an ongoing collaboration with the police department regarding verifying information when the community misconstrues police activity for ice activity, and the police department has been very instrumental in helping to verify that information? and with regards to the dgo, there are two specific points that i want to raise up regarding further editing to the dgo?

under .3-b, where it says except as required by federal and state law, that last clause, i think, first of all, i don't think it's consistent with other points regarding it -- to me, it feels like a loophole. there is no federal or state law that requires for local law enforcement to enforce or to collaborate with regard to enforcement to federal immigration laws? and i think that this point really undermines a lot of the trusts that we're trying to build with collaboration of the police department of having that clause that except for into these circumstances, because there is no except for. that should be made for, that there is never an opportunity or a chance or an instance of scenario where that

collaboration would happen. >> thank you very much. >> and i'm out of time. >> before we go to another -- can i ask a question, i'd like to ask the two commissioners who work odd this if you could respond to that last point. >> yeah. that language is actually taken from the city administrative code, and that language actually also exists in the immigrati immigration and nationality act that's being litigated right now. the issue of -- under the federal immigration and nationality act, local jurisdictions cannot prevent voluntarily cooperation with federal ice, and -- and

therefore we -- i actually think it's wiser to keep this in here to make sure it's consistent with the litigation position that the city and county is taking in its litigation against the trump administration. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners. i my name is saira, and i'm an attorney on the working group, and i want to thank commissioners dejesus and hing on bringing this policy along. like my colleague mentioned, the acceptance of federal and state law within 3-b, section three talks about providing emergency response to ice or cbp, and emergency members appears twice under this code, and it doesn't really make sense to put it under part of this code?

the context is a little bit different, so to put it under this particular piece when we're talking about ice and cbp, aurlocal law enforcement not working with ice and cbp, it does seem out of place here, quite frankly? so i don't think it should be in here. the second part that i want to talk about is we did address during the working group is joint drill operations, and i understand that sfpd's position is they have to work with ice. what really concerns us is that members of the communities, oftentimes these operations turn into not just criminal operations but joint criminal immigration operations? so i would urge the commission to rethink these situations, and for sfpd to also rethink their involvement in these. we saw in oakland that there was somebody who was -- who was supposedly picked up on a

criminal operation? originally ice said it was trafficking, but that individual was never charged with trafficking and in fact was just charged with immigration violations, and opd as a result did face some heat on that, and the city council decided to pass a resolution saying that their officers should not be working with ice on criminal operations, either, so we urge you all to rethink that, and once again want to thank the leadership of commissioners hing and dejesus. thank you. >> next speaker. >> welcome. >> can i ask, are you -- is your position that you're totally opposed to this language anywhere in the ordinance? the language of as required by federal or state law or are you suggesting that we move it someplace? >> while you're looking at

that, i just want to express a concern that if we do change this language -- i know this has been complete vetted, we probably will not be able to vote on it tonight because we'd have to run it by our city attorney. just what we're approving tonight is to be sent to the p.o.a. for further negotiations, so this is not final, so thank you for your suggestions, but if we do follow -- and i defer to what's already been done by professor hing and commissioner dejesus, but you have to understand we have to be consistent with what the litigation that's pending now, and i don't want us to be the ones that are going to do something inconsistent with what the city attorney doing in the other litigation. sometimes we're worth smithid here, so i want you to rethink your request. i know you're lawyers, but i want you to reconsider. the last thing you want is

anything to be in opposite to the pending litigation now that the city attorney's office has so i think you need to respect that, and i'll turn it over to commissioner hing. >> my preference is to go forward, and we can consider other recommendations at a future date. that's my recommendation. i do also have a response to the second part of your comment. my recollection in the working group was that although hypothetically there could be joint operations with the san francisco p.d. -- and i'll let the chief respond to this -- and ice on solely criminal matters or dhs on solely criminal matters, that entering into these agreements is not automatic; that there's quite a lot of deliberation that goes on, and that i don't let me put words in your mouth, chief, but

the department would lean against those kinds of agreements. i'm asking you, right. >> those -- that process is vetted up to the deputy chief level and criminal operations bureau, so those operations have to be approved by a deputy chief, and they are vetted, and we do look for collateral issues. we're very cognizant of that. there are operations that we have not participated in because of that, so it is a very thorough process, and it goes up to a very high level for approval on any such operations. >> thank you. >> okay. thanks. >> commissioner hing, you had a question about the language, about except for state or federal law. so i just want to point out that under 2(d) 1, under there it talks about not releasing certain pieces of information? and there it has except as

required by federal or state law, and that would cover federal 1872, it's already included within here? it's included again here when it comes to collaboration between local law enforcement and ice. it's not only redecide dundant, but that refers to specific types of collaboration? >> i understand that. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, chief scott and commissioners. thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak today. i was also part of the working group. my name is jay han leaner. i appreciate you taking the time to update this. i just want to echo the same things that saira and maricela was saying.

i know there's a lot of checks that you do before entering into a joint task force operation with dhs or any ice agency on what they call a criminal arrest, but in ice's only press release as recent as the l.a. arrest that happened this week when almost 200 were arrested, they call hrm and ice. maricela has responded to ihsi. they're basically the same organization here in san francisco, where three people were collaterally arrested. they weren't the target of a criminal investigation, they were just arrested on immigration violations. they've had their own press releases saying that they're using hsi as that arm. and also to underscore what saira said, i appreciate that you want to keep this language

in with the litigation. i think that's a broader goal that we all have the same, but yeah, the same language is already in the section b as sara said, and it only applies to not sharing immigration status? it doesn't apply to these enforcement operations, so i would also take it out of the emergency operation part. thank you. >> thank you very much. any further public comment on this issue? hearing none, public comment is now closed. i'd like to thank the junk lawyers and community participants for working on this. it's good to see lawyers actually doing something for the benefit of their community and not for money, so thank you. it's greatly appreciated. director henderson, you had a comment that you were going to share? >> i was just going to point out what we were talking about, in that section, section 3, section b, those comments that you were commenting on have been included in this general order under section 2, section c, where we talk specifically about any investigation, attention or arrest procedures

where any such instance, either express or implied, if the purpose it for enforcement of federal immigration laws, is restricted. so i just wanted to make sure that we talked about that inclusion, and to thank john eldon from my office who worked on this. >> so now, we have before us, we have a motion and we have a second with reference to the two small word changes. i think at this point, we need to take a vote. >> on the motion to accept department general order 5.15 with the two corrections as stated by commissioner hing, for the purposes of engaging in the meet and confer process with the police officer's

association -- [ roll call. ] >> the motion passes, 6-0. >> thank you, everybody. >> thank you. >> great job. please call the next line item. >> item 6, general public comment. the public is now welcome to address the commission regarding items that do not appear on tonight's agenda, but that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. speaker shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or dpa personnel. under police commission rules of order during public comment, neither police or dpa 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 two minutes. any further public comment? ace is not here, so hearing

none, public comment is now closed. >> i'm back again. i'd like to use the overhead. i'm just bringing up about my son again. when i was asking about a venue for our children, this is the kind of venue i'm asking for: the police association put these on the bus a while back ago so we can have some recognition about or children and who's out there murdering our children, the perpetrators can see thipgs like this and signs on the buses, maybe they'll think again, and maybe some of our children's cases will be solved. i've been asking for that for some years now, and we put all of the signs in the windows when other people are being

unsafely victimized and they can run into restaurants and run in and go get help, but our children have nowhere to run. we don't have signs for our children to go run that are being shot by bullets, by a community violence. they have nowhere to run. they have no place to run into, and if they do, they're going to get put out and killed. so that's why i'm asking for signs like this. you know, if we don't have nowhere to run to, maybe signs like this will detour the perpetrators that are killing our children out there. i keep these names, and we brought this up earlier: thomas hannibal, andrew vadue, jason that ma

thomas, acme hunter, and marcus carter. these are all the perpetrators that murdered my son. thomas hannibal and paris motter are the main suspects in my son's case. i'm not making this up. this can be looked up. >> thank you, miss brown. any further public comment? hearing none, public comment is now closed. please call the next line item. >> item seven, adjournment, action item. >> do i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? thank you, everybody, have a good evening.

good morning, everybody. first of all i would like to thank our california state attorney general and the staff for working so closely with the city and county of san francisco. i want to begin by thanking our late mayor ed lee for initiating the police reforms and responding to create a

historical partnership with the attorney general offers. i would like to acknowledge a number of people, chief of police bill scott. london breed, senior cohen and the mayor's office and all those who made it possible. i would like to thank them for engaging with us. in 2016, our city grappled with crisis seen in a lot of american cities, the dissolution of trust among the community and law enforcement. responding to cries from our community for improvement, mayor lee reached out to attorney general lynch and the department of justice and san francisco entered into an agreement to evaluate the police department and get independent analysis of

how we could serve our city. the department of justice presented recommendations and our city embraced all recommendations and to work closely with the justice department. to date we have started more than half of those reforms and huge credit to the police chief bill scott and the men and women of our police department that have embraced the reforms. we have some of the best officers in our country. and we are seeing promising improvements with use of force incidents down 18% just last year. unfortunately, attorney general jeff sessions announced that the department of justice would no longer provide assistance or guidance to departments seeking to improve the trust between the police and the public. but under mayor lee, we were determined to push forward as a city. that is why mayor lee turned to our state partners to push forward the reform process.

with the help of an independent partner. today, we're here to announce that the california department of justice will evaluate and report onion going reforms -- ongoing reforms. this partnership demonstrates our commitment to the reform process and includes measures needed to ensure it will be unbiased and transparent process. today, marks the beginning of a chapter in the reform process. one that stays true to our goal of transparency, accountability and most importantly of trust-building here in san francisco. mayor lee started us on this path and i will continue the journey he began. again, i want to thank our police chief scott and the police commission for their leadership and the men and women of our police department. i want to close by thanking our attorney general for his

commitment to our city and to the reform process. his leadership here and at the state level are unparalleled and we're incredibly happy to have him here. i would like to introduce our attorney general of california. [applause] >> first, mayor, thank you very much for bringing us together to chief scott, thank you for so early on reaching out as well to see if this could be a possible course of action and i have to tip my hat and give a shoutout to mayor ed lee. because from the very beginning of my tenure as attorney general, mayor lee reached out to me and said the city of san francisco wants to be your partner, we want to continue to make improvements and any way we

can work together, i want to do that. so when we found the u.s. cops program and you the u.s. department of justice abandoned its work with the city of san francisco, right away mayor lee and i were in conversation. and i just got to say to ed lee, we miss you, but we're here doing your work. this is a product of what ed lee wanted to see happen and i think it's important for us as leaders here from the city and county of san francisco, the leader of the police department here and certainly the city mayor to say on behalf of all us, we all owe ed lee a great deal of gratitude for always putting the people of san francisco first. [applause] he said something very important when he began this, to help families in san francisco, our

men and women in uniform, believe there could be confidence and trust to do the best job. he said, fair and just policing that treats everyone the same and places the sanctity of life above all else was important. i think today, that's our mission. those of you who reached out and have been reaching out to help all of us come together so that families throughout the state, certain here in san francisco, can feel confident about the work that is being done to provide them with the public safety should look at today's announcement as a sign that in san francisco they're serious about getting the job done. we need that kind of focus. and we need this memorandum of understanding between the city and county of san francisco, the police department in san francisco, and the state of california through the

department of justice, to make -- live those reforms that were proposed by the city more than 270 of them, and make sure they get implemented. that is how you gain the confidence of the people of your city and county. i think it's important to note that simply because the federal government decides to abandon ship, did not mean we were going to let the ball drop. there is fumbles that can cost you a whole lot and we saw a fascinating game yesterday at the super bowl, but i will tell you this, at the end of the day, the people in the city and county of san francisco are going to be the big winners, because we picked up the ball and we're going to run with it and do this for the people of california and san francisco. [applause] my team at the department of justice stands ready to be with you as a partner. i can't tell you how important it is to have independent eyes

overseeing these reforms. accountability, transparency, confidence and trust all come from giving people a sense there will be independent review of the work that is being done. i believe the people of the city and county of san francisco should be heartened that it was the leaders of the city and county of san francisco and their police department who asked for the independent eyes to come forward. so it's all about working together. and i got to tell you, public safety is as much a team sport as anything you've seen on tv in the last 24 hours. we have to do this together. nothing is more important than public safety. nothing is more important than public trust. we hope to build that public trust by working through this memorandum of understanding. and if i can send one last message to the people of this

great city and county in san francisco, this is the work that we must do. we hope that what is done here will become a model for what other communities can do. i will tell you that the work at the department of justice won't end with this. in the next few months, the men and women in uniform here in san francisco will start to employ the work that they must do now to make sure that identity profiling is not something that is a reality anywhere. we'll begin to see the ripa regulations take effect where all the contacts there are made of people on the streets, in our communities, will be documented. and we'll be working closely with the men and women in uniform to make sure that happens. we'll look forward to working with the city and county of san francisco and the law enforcement agencies to make sure as we go about documenting who is in a gang and who is not,

we get correct information into the cal gang system and not incorrect information that could harm the lives of people moving forward. so we're going to be doing a lot of work to get people that confidence. and that trust. that we in law enforcement are doing this to provide public safety. so i am pleased to say that today's announcement is just the beginning of a process that the city and county of san francisco began and i hope that what we can say, it won't end with the city and county of san francisco. that many communities will see what you do here can be replicated elsewhere and there begins the trust and confidence that people need, that our leaders are working in our best interests. with that, i'd like to now turn it over to your leader when it comes to law enforcement, chief bill scott. [applause] >> thank you, attorney general,

and mayor farrell. i would start my comments off with thanks as well and then touch on things that are important for you all to know. let me thank the members of the community that are here and those that couldn't be with us, because really this is about policing the community with the community. the people you see in this room, many of them, we sit down have in-depth discussions about public safety, keeping our city safe, when there are things, whether violent crime or car break-ins, these are the people we partner but, but at the same time, they're demanding a police department that is fair and just. it's that commitment that is a win that pushes aura needs to change, where we need to change and reform our department and the way that makes us better. let me start with my thanks to

the members of the community who are there with us, hold us accountable and again, they're here with us this morning, so thank you. [applause] >> also, the people standing with me at the podium. attorney general, who has been willing to work with us, mayor farrell who is continuing the work started by mayor lee and got continued by acting mayor london breed. and today, is the beginning of the rest of the journey in terms of making this department a better department. also to my left, i can't -- i would be remiss without mentioning supervisor cohen. who has always been a champion for reform. when i stepped in the door, i think one of the first things i did, before i started and got sworn in, i sat down with supervisor cohen around saw her passion for having a police

department that not only does its job and protects the community, but is a fair and just police department. she has always been a champion for police reform, so thank you for that as well. the people along the wall, the teams of the attorney general, the california department of justice and on my right, captains and in the back, our president of our police officers association. i can't say it any better than attorney general did, this is a team effort, this is a total team effort. without everybody in the room working together, all oars in the same direction, we cannot get this done. it's the ultimate team effort. it's not a sport because we're talking life and death, but it's the ultimate team adventure. so without the people in this room, none of this work can get done. my last thing goes to our police commission. president turman couldn't be here this morning, but his guidance is vital to our

success. they oversee the police department and they take that responsibility very seriously and we definitely appreciate all that they do to keep us going in the right direction. and also with former president, who was the commission when i got hired, but never had the opportunity to work with her. thank you for all that you've done to get us to this point as well. so we know that collaborative reform, the initiative that we started with, the cops office is positive results for the san francisco police department and the communities that we serve. the mayor mentioned it, the 18% reduction in use of force, we have reductions in complaints. i think those are all indicators we're going in the right direction. we're committed to focus on improving our department and the california department of justice assessment will provide independent assessment of the work we're doing.

unfortunately, when we concluded -- or the u.s. department of justice concluded the work, they were in the process of writing the first assessment report that never got released and won't be. it's really important that the public see from an independent review, independent eye, that we're doing. i mean it's one thing for us to report what we're doing, it's another for someone totally independent to come in and assess what we're doing and report to the public. that's one of the benefits of this collaboration with the california department of justice. there are other benefits. technical assistance. part of the last agreement we had with the u.s. department of justice, there was technical assistance provided. there are many areas where we need to go outside of the city and outside of the department to call on experts, many of who have done the work before, many who have ideas that maybe we didn't think about and that technical assistance is a major part of a collaborative reform agreement. with the california department

of justice, with the partners we have in place, we believe that technical assistance will continue, we believe that it will help us with the improvements we know we need to make. and ultimately, our commitment is about becoming the best police department we can be. working with our community partners, we've already accomplished a lot. many people in the room are part of the groups put together to have the public input we need to get better. we can't do this -- you'll hear me say this over and over again -- we cannot do that without the public. our use of force dropped 18%, we hope that trend continues. we expect it to continue. we saw 9% increase in citizen complaints in 2017. there are several components of this initiative that will continue. one is addressing bias. and how we deal with some of the

disparities and disproportionate we see in the city of san francisco, not only here in san francisco, but across the country. although we can only focus on our city, we believe we can be a model for good policing across country. we're addressing bias. one of the things we've done is our automated electronic audit of all electronic devices owned by the department. that is in effort to root out bias, deal with it if in fact we see instances where bias is afoot. we've also integrated procedural justice training into the continual development curriculum, which officers must attend and procedural justice is an important recommendation because it goes not only externally, it's about fairness. it's internal. and with the people standing on the wall, the command staff, the police officers association, i

think what we're all looking for is fairness. fair innocence the way we police, in the way we run the department and the procedural training will help us get there. we've dedicated new units, that really their job is to listen to the community. we instituted a community engagement division. our captains of our districts do a great job in doing that very thing, listening to the community, but one of the recommendations was that the department needed a more robust structure. so this process is institutionize and we've seen good results. we're also focused on accountability and we're demonstrating that through the use of a body cameras. body cameras is a whole new dimension that opens up a world that we didn't have in terms of accountability and transparency. i'm very proud with the work that has been done on body

cameras, because for a department this size to implement that policy and equipment as quickly as it did, that's astounding. although there are things to improve, it helps our department be a better department. we're recruiting a diverse force. very important. diversity brings perspectives that we need. perspectives from different cultures and different religions, countries, educational background, different levels of experience, diversity brings perspective, perspective brings better policing. so very proud that we are moving forward in our efforts to be a diverse department. instituting and sustaining these changes won't be easy. we know that. and we accept that challenge. the people along the wall on both sides, along with the community we understand it will be a challenge. change is hard. most people don't like change.

change is a very difficult thing, but we're committed to doing the changes that we know we need to. and it won't be an easy task, but we're committed, focused and we'll get it done. out of the 16 law enforcement agencies that were once a part of the u.s. department of justice collaborative review process, we're proud to step forward today to continue this work and i think we're really the first department that has taken this on in this form. so again, san francisco leads the way. we're proud to do that. and we really think this is going to be value-added to get us where we need to go. the california department of justice will provide us with the technical experience and assistance to help us stay on the right track and achieve the goals that we committed to. this agreement gives our work validation, the attorney general mentioned it, gives us credibility. it gives us transparency. and more importantly, this is about maintaining and building t