i would like to take roll call. [ roll call ]

>> thank you president turman. we have a quorum. and we have prosecutesident dpa. >> thank you. members of the san francisco public, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for attending the wednesday april 11, 2018, regular meeting of the san francisco police commission. because of some lengthy discussion i believe we're going to have as well as other items off the agenda i'm going to afound announce some squabblichanges. we'll take general public comments right away. item two discussion possible ite items. issuance of bullen tin 18-30e 5 that will be rescheduled.

18-305 will be rescheduled. >> you have that? >> yes, sir. >> you may call the first item. >> general public comment. the public is welcome to address the commission on items that do not appear on the agenda but are within the subject matter. speaker will address the remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individuals or dpa personn personnel. under police commission rules of owner neither police nor personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions but may provide a brief response. police and personnel should refrain from entering in deba s debates. >> because of time constraints and the linength of certain ite. we will limit items to two

minutes. public comment. >> okay. public comments. okay seeing none, closed. >> next item secretary? >> line one. 1a chief's report. report on recent police department activities including major events, weekly crime strands, including staffing over time and announcement. first quarter 2018fdr findings and recommendations and ois summari summaries. >> thank you, secretary. >> good evening chief scott. how are you this evening? >> president turman, i am well thank commission, director henders henderson.

>> good evening. we have a big agenda. i will start with the crime stran strands. starting off with our violent crime we are 38% down on homicide this year. which is really good news to report. we have had 10 homicides year-to-date compared to 16 this time law last year. none fatal shootings down. homicide with firearms down 58%. 12 this time last year compared to 5 this time this year. our total gun violence victims are down 34%. 56 last year, 37 this year. in terms of our property crime, we are also doing well. at this point of the year. sorry. burglar riese down 9 -- burglaries down 9%. motor vehicle theft down 32%

which is almost 500 crimes less than this time last year. >> wow. >> down 13%. which is almost 1500 crimes less than this time last year. autoburglaries down 18% year to date and that number represents dw -- i'll do the math, about 1500 crimes less. really good news to report. we will do everything in our power to keep this momentum don't going. i would like to thank many member of the community that work with us to -- with the recommendations and awareness to help us at least get to this point at this time this year. we are in terms of over time. i asked the commission last week if i could hold it to this week because they caught something

last week they had a question about. i have the over time report for this week. as you recall, last month the board of supervisors approved our over time budget adjustment and direct came and reported on that for the general fund and that was due to the northbay fires that caused a high dull degree of over time and the airport had issues that caused the high doegree of over time. the airport needed to increase over time to address the increase in service requests by san francisco international airport and to back fill some position vacant sis at the bing of the fiscal year. many have been filled. we are doing better staff wise at the airport. the general fund related to participating in the north bay fires that caused the response this past october.

we're working with sonoma county for a cost of about 1 .1 million dollars and we do expect it to take time. wh hopefully we'll get our monies as quickly as possible back into the city coffers. we expect that beyond the close of this fiscal year. 3 million for the airport and 19 .2 million for the general vapid -- fund we are 73% into the fizz cal year and -- fiscal year. under expenditures and we're on target as far as our expenditures in the general find. we are managing our over time ni nicely. we have a few months left in the fiscal year. our command staff and captains have done a good job managing over time. i know that was an issue last year. we have fly week at the end of june.

we're monitoring other areas to make sure we stay within budget by the end of this fiscal year. as far as our staffing, our full duty staffing, sworn staffing, is 18-794 .67% below our mand e mandated level. we are 1% higher than we were this time last month. class 259 graduates in june. that will add 38 uniformed officers on the our streets. these gnarlnumbers will help our all staff. we do anticipate requirements in -- retirements in joiune. >> items of interest for this yick woke -- this week >> this saturday april 14th the

seizure chav chavez parade and festival to 4 24th and folsom from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and april 14th and 15th a cherry blossom festival in japan town. we expect about 35,000 to participant in that. there are also three peace park events that will happen at rec and park facilities from april 12th to april 14th. the programming for peace park is with rec and park address having our young folks in the city have programming at the park to keep them engaged and give them something to do. we have officers deployed at the parks. they're real mission aside from public safety, is to engage with

the public, the youth and we think that will pay dividends down the roads in communicati communicationests and give -- efforts and giving kids. it's getting off to a good start. that will include barbecue, free fo food, swimming, health fair and the other parks young blood, coleman and patrero rec center. and that is it for the chief's report. >> okay. i do want to comment on, and congratulate you and the members of the department especially the 31% reduction in auto burglar s burglaries. it's been an issue that has playied san francisco and spotlighted us across the country as an issue we need to face and your efforts increasing foot patrols and other tactics

are paying off. i hope that continues. thank you to yourself and to your command staff and to the officers on the street. what you're doing is making a difference and most appreciated. >> thank, sir. >> questions, comments for the chief? >> all right. let's move on to the dpa directo director's report. >> 1bdpa direct director report -- >> i'm sorry. >> chief, did you want to do the firearms discharge review? >> yes. we have that presentation. >> i'm sorry. before we move to the director's report. one moment. >> no problem. >> before you begin sergeant

crudo, i want to make people entering this room aware ric, because they weren't here previously and they didn't see the monitor because they were on the way here. public comment has already taken pla place. likely whatever you're going to say may be appropriate under the chief's report after this report. general public comment has already taken place. you hear that, frank? did wiyou hear that, ms. brown? good. all right. go ahead sergeant crudo. welco welcome. >> good evening. president turman, chief scott i'm sergeant -- i coordinate the ois investigation team on the admin side. i will give you the 4th quarter 2017 combined with the 1st quarter 2018fdrb report and an

update on the ois investigations. the last time i appeared before you to give an update was november 8, 2018. this is an update from that last appearan appearance. the fdr brick convened twice december 11, 2017, and march 2, 2018. you are have the materials that were dribistributed from the ch with the letter also on the table. they give you a break down of the different issues we're ta talking about today, including a snapshot of where the different investigations are. the fdrb that i just mentioned, first quarter, fourth quarter covered review the following four investigations. 14005, 14007 and 16002. i'll briefly review those three incidents. ewald 14 -- oiled at at the

intersection of california and batteri batteries. a roll over car collision at battery and california. a good samaritan went to assist the driver, the driver fired at them. officers attempted to persuade the armed suspect to vendor but he he emerged from his car po t pointed a firearm at the officers and six officers fired fatally striking him. this was an inpolicy oil officer-involv officer-involved. . >> four plained clothes officers suspe suspected a hand to hand narcotics transaction. two officers approached the subject. the subjects. one of the officers pursued a fleeing suspect. the suspect produced a refresh

my memory firearm firearm from his hardship. this was deemed in policy and the chief concurred. >> officer-involved shooting may 19, 20160900 hours. bay view district. two uniformed officers condu conducting a vehicle theft. discovered a stolen vehicle. the driver tilted to flee, cr h crashed the driver almost str e striking one of the officers. the second officer fired one time and fatally struck the suspect when the suspect drove towards that officer. this was deemed in policy. it should be noted since this time dg5.02 and 5.02 has been rescinded. 5 .01 w01 was revised to prohib shooting at occupants shooting

from the vehicle with the vehicle as a weapon. there was no incustody death cases reviewed. we'll get to a quick snapshot of open ois investigations. there are 17 open sfpd ois investigation. this includes five cases opened since the last time i spoke with you. of these cases five were opened. listed up on the board. seven cases -- 17 other cases have active criminal investigation. five have active medical examin examiner. charging decisions were received from the district attorney's office for two of the open cases as well as a criminal investigation completed by the richmond police department

that's one the open corners -- coroners investigation. here's a snapshot and, again, you have a little more detail in the memo document that was provided by the chief. cases dating back to 2015, at this time there are 1504 the reports are submitted. 1507 being prepared for fdrb. 1508. a charging decision received and the final admin report is being prepa prepared. that is also being moved toward fdrb. final homicide reports prepared for 15-009 and the admin report as well. >> 15-010 the reports being prepared for the fdrp. 16-001 and 16-003 open occasi s

occasions. they are being -- open cases. >> 17001, active investigations, 17-003 this is being prepared for the fdrb. 17-004 prepared. >> 005 active. criminal investigation as is 006, 007. 008, again, richmond pd outside jurisdiction and coroner's inquest is forthcoming. 18 18-001, 002, 003 are active criminal investigation at this time. we talk about active criminal ghags does not mean -- investigations that does not mean [ indiscernible ]. that is the snapshot. >> thank you, sergeant crudo. >> questions on the fdrb fourth

quarter report and first quarter 2018 report? questio questions? >> thank you for your time. appreciate your report. >> with that, that concluded the chief report. >> thank you, sir. >> line 1b. dpa director's report report on recent dpa activities and announcemen announcements. >> good evening. a couple of updates for you. we are at 133 cases that have been opened this year. 112 cases have been closed this year. our current pending case load is now at 262. just by comparison in context last year we were at 421 open and pending cases.

we are continuing to close out our cases as my staff comes on board and is able to resolve a lot of cases. we have 11 sustained case this year. and we are at five cases this year mediated. we are -- cases that we've had on our docket that are over 270 days old down to 32 cases. and by comparison last year, we were at 107 case. i will continue to give these kinds of updates for a comparis comparison. coming on board we had new personnel growth. this is always a prior to me to increase the staff for our back loads and increase our jurisdiction with prop g. starting this week is diana rosen seen t rosen stein here in the audie e audience. many of you know her. she's been with the city a long time. he was with -- she was with the

city attorney's office before joining our team and before that she was at the public defender's office. we're excited she is here. we also brought in sharon elsli who is not here this evening. she's going to work in our mediation team. she starteded to. the next steps are to bring in another lawyer. i didn't mention it before. inez frankal who was with the office for a long time retired. >> oh. >> yes. we are bringing in another lawyer to replace her this month and a new investigator. i will bring them and introduce them as well. i would like to say also present in the courtroom are also several investigators our legal team john alden. sara, and saar viae. and susan. sara and susan.

my chief of staff. i hadn't announced it before and people were not aware. john aldon will be leaving us. he's on the more exciting adventures with the district attorney's office and my investigators will be here in case issues come up that they can address throughout this meeting from the public. that's all i've got. we're going to miss john. it's a loss to our department. he's done some great work over the years. i'm proud of the work he's done particularly while i've been there in the past few months specifically in dealing with the dg dgos. he's done a lot of work with the doj while they were here as well. he's not going far. i think we will probably still continue to see him and invite him to these meetings every week. >> well, thank you.

to the new folks. welco welcome. thank you for coming in. we need your help and we appreciate having you. to inez and to john aldon. i want to thank you both for your service to the police commission. mr. aldon especially has done service on both sides of the department and the dpa. we are most appreciative of the work you've done. you've been very helpful. and we could not have done the work we've done without shouch tremendous service and sacrifice by all of you. thank you. any questions for director henders henderson? director henderson, also in your presentation, you didn't note that there were -- that the [ indiscernible ] which is certainly a good sign and i'm assuming you're satisfied these

are thorough investigation. also what i'm hearing is we seem to have less filings between last year and that year. is that correct? >> that is correct. a combination of two things. one, we've introduced a triage model. so cases are handle and are not ta taking a full year to do the investigation. also we are getting less cases coming in the door. i think that that is going to change once we get a new computer system up and web site up so that it's easier for people to access information and get us the information either on their phones or through the internet. you can do it but it's a tricky process to do it now with the current web site. >> i understand. thank you. any other questions for director henders henderson? thank you. >> line 1c. commission reports, commission

president's report. >> the commission president has no report at this time. >> commissioners? any reports? >> commissioners have no reports today. next line. >> 1d. commission announcements and scheduling items identified for consideration at future commission meetings action. >> i know the commissioner herb is not here -- some possible changes and i think there neem need to be f l fuller explanation and questions beyond just the changes to the mou. so i am asking secretary to look at the calendar to see when that is scheduled. it's not likely to be scheduled before may 9 but secretary will

give an update on that. any other items? >> last week we asked that the item on the 5.0 -- or 5 .02 be put back on the agenda for the rewarding that was re7commended by the city attorneys. >> yes. that is has been can she thinked as well. >> okay. >> i would like to add for 1d. for members of the public the next police commission meeting will be next week april 18, 2018, at city hall room 400 at 5:30 p.m. >> all right. >> commissioners any announcements and scheduling of ite items? >> all right. with that, we will take public

comment on items 1a through 1d. public comment. two minutes. >> hello, everyone. good afternoon. i'm here to talk about my son and i like to use the overhead. >> my son was murdered august 4 14, 2006. as i said last week his birthday was april 6th. we were out in sacramento for survi survivor's speak. so it's survivors speak through healing and action. i want to thank you, chief scott, for coming out and ta talking about my son. you really make my day because i almost didn't go. i want to thank you for talking about him bringing up my son. it was like a birthday present

to me to him from you. as a second father, but thank you. for that. i'm still looking for closure for my son's case. it will be 11 years august 14th. and i'm still going. i think i'm going to keep on going until the day i die. he was my only son, as i said before. i want to keep keep his memory -- i want to keep his memo memory and his faice in everyone's face and my children's thoughts, my thoughts august is coming up really soon. august 14th. i just experienced someone tearing down my son's picture on the pole where h -- where he

died. again. maybe they don't know. that's why we need a venue now i come up on cars and put pictures up on the pole which people can tear down [ bell rings ]. >> thank you for listening to me. i appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you, ms. brown. >> can i have someone in the department, can we just call the dpa and make this request that they not remove the sign>> thought we had -- snshgs dpw. sorry. can we make that? >> thank you. >> commissioners on behalf of the chief's office we made that request in the past and i will make it again. >> thank you so much. >> secretary can you prepare a letter for the dpw for my signature to that effect as

well, please? thanks. >> next speaker. next member of the public? next one of yous. all right. thank you so much. public comment on items 1a through d is now closed. secretary, next line item. >> line 3 discussion and possible action to approve revised department general order 2 .04 complain04 complaints agas and draft memorandum and understanding between department police accountability. and meet and confer bross the police officers association. discussion and possible action. >> all right. dgo2 .04 complain04 complaints officers and the draft mou.

my good right hand, our good right hand adwon is out ill and not able to help us guide through. i've had several meetings with the department and the dpa on the issues. i will ask -- well director henderson there but i will ask [ indiscernible ] i will also ask commander walsh to come forward as well so we can begin the discussion on the items here. 2.04 has been significantly revi revised. through mostly a back and forth direct conversation between the dpa and the department. we also received letters from the public about and other stake olders expressing their interest

and belief around the level of investigation and the dpa's authority to investigate in different areas when there's a complaint against an officer made to the dpa. with that, we have some items that i specifically said we would refer to the commission. those are the items we'll begin with. okay? and after that we will take up additional items that you now want to raise. i understand from ms. adwan that after the meeting the department asked for the reinsertion of a term and that is one of the i m items we'll take up in the second part. so you're before the commission, i'm going to ask ms. mrian along

with commander walsh to begin with the issues that we left outstanding that we specifically present to the department. i would like to hear the issue, the dpa, the department's position. >> thank you. good evening from the department of police accountability. if we could turn our atintentio to the government's -- the one out standing in 2.04. right now the provision that is in 2.04 that is recommended for adoption is the our agency, the dpa would investigate complaints deferred by nonlaw enforcement agencies for example, the office of the public defender, civil engagement, immigrant affairs and department works. i'm referring to page two under procedures two and this is

section six. it's our agencies position -- agen agent's position it makes since our -- first it's the practice. the department frequently affords government agency complaints to our agency. we alone also get government agency complaints directly to us f for investigation. so it is the current practice. it's also historically there were police commission rules that provided our agency the opportunity to investigate government agency complaints as welling. it it also makes good sense in that this is a time where the department of justice community based organizations are asking for increased accountability, increased really, powers of the civilen over sight agency. asking for more accountability to have government agencies

complaints got the police department under mines our agency and what we do and is the opposite direction of providing more civilian over sight of these kinds of complaints and ultimately when you look at o h government agency complaints, most times they originate from a member of the public. these are situations, for example, when someone is being represented by the public defender's office those are circumstances where the come splint originated from a number of the -- a member of the public they have talked to an attorney and it moog might be the public defender files the complaint. when you look at whether or not a government agency complaine s a public complaint, most times it originates from a member of the public. the power that our agency has includes the ability to

investigate government agency complain complaints. >> one second. >> i'm having a little bit of trouble. my marked up copies which were here a moment ago seem to have evapora evaporated. >> thank you. >> continue, i'm sorry. >> the last point i want to make is by the charter, the chief of police can investigate any complai complaint. so that if a government agency complaint comes in and the chief also wants to investigate it, he

always maintains that power. but if the commission were to adopt a rule precluding us from investigated investigating the complai come flaunt means they would only be investigated by the chief. that is counter to the recommendations of the department of justice. counter to our role as an agency for 35 years to investigate complaints by the public. >> let me ask, when you referred to line item six on page two. is this in the proposed or the current? >> it is in the proposed. >> the proposed draft. >> in 1949 a 24-year-old -- in 1994, the lank language there exclued our . even though it exclude it in 1994, the practice was we did investigate government agency

complain complaints. but this would be -- >> the 1994 language is a revision from the 1983 language? >> yes. >> when the commission expressly allowed it, correct? >> exactly. >> okay. >> exactly. >> okay. all right. >> okay. i got it. >> okay. >> commander, i'm sorry. any other questions? >> commander. >> thank you president turman. and chief scott. qui qui quickly. the department's point of view, first off, the sfpd needs to be able to respond to city, state and federal partners. we do a lot of work whether with dpw, dph and that can be reso e resolvresolv resolved quickly through the department. a comet com plaint to dpa can go to some kind of outcome, potentially discipline. the commanding officer and chief the head of dpw and supervisor,

we can council -- counsel, r retrain and remove that officer from that type of environment. for us to handle it we can handle in multiple ways and we have gotten complaints. for a department from the fire department to the chief taking care of going vernment agencies how it's to work. i don't discount members of the public making complaints. i think dpa could also involve city agencies with how the complaint process works out. they all have westbounds -- websit websites. when it comes from a person officially doing work with the san francisco police department on duty and that person sees behaver that needs to be corr t corrected it needs to be brought to the department's attention to handle that. if you give this power to the dpa what the chief is asking res

and the department would like, under the charter the chief without a complaint can investigate anything through the department. we ask that we are neildly notified and receive the documentation so if we need to -- our preference is to keep us as the first line to handle interdependental issues with members of our department to keep the city, state and federal agencies within our partnership. >> anything different or -- anything we haven't heard that director henderson or the chief want to add to this? >> noted from -- not from me, sir. >> nothing differently. >> okay. thank you. so the issue is one that we sort

of have to, i think, decide now. the day and age we're in, i don't know that we ever want to put out the message that we want to limit the investigation and discussion of these issues. i'm not saying we interdepend t interdependental goals and . the department should be put on notice and they can conduct their own, i also think the day and age we live in, speaking of transpare transparency. speaking about having a dpa it under mines their authority not to be also looking at these things. there may be some clash that we hope that they can work out. but i think that it service both the public good and all of us to continue to have these discussio discussions. in 1983 the commission granted

[ indiscernible ] i'm not sure what happened in 1994 that it would go away. but it doesn't make sense for us to not allow the dpa some authority at this point. i will make note that since there's only four of us, we got to agree one way or another to pass. so -- >> it's got to be unanimous. >> commissioner mazzucco. >> here's my concern. if a complaint go to thes police department first they have authorities and powers to deal with taveras that the dpa doesn't have. if there's a complaint that the chief thinks that officer needs to be removed from the street and put in another location or be suspended without pay or put on administrative leave. if it goes to the dpa they don't have the authority. we -- we may have an officer that is on the treat that -- street that shouldn'ted be. i i think there should be

simultaneously reporting and immediately returning that informati information to the madpolice department so they do what they need to do and what they have the authority to do instead of waiting for the dpa to come to their -- >> i never said that. i said they woushould have immediate notice as well. the department needs to do what they need to do. that doesn't mean we shouldn't have the dpa also investigating. they're not the ones going to deal with it anyway. whatever they find will come to the chief or us to deal with in any case. the department is doing other theics deal with it. i think it's compliment -- compleme complementary. >> immediate notification to the police department and we have many instances where there's simultaneously investigation. >>s okay. >> commissioner -- >> commander walsh, said a co come -- compromise. a middle point the department

was willing to be a part of i think with commissioner mazzu o mazzucco's language that it both be, whatever complaint there is, to be submitted at the same time. is that something that could happen? >> let's clarify. >> yes. >> the person complaining is going to go to one person. it can't be simultaneously, but it can be there after, immediate. >> has -- the nan dpa will receive a complaint they will need to send it to the chief. and the investigation cannot begin until that happens. >> okay. >> is that something we can work on? >> yeah i think that was the propos proposal. just on the city government section specifically, having the chief at a meeting with numerous department heads or other supervisors to have that. the other thing is, they can

actually, as you know, anybody can say i don't want to make a d dpa complaint. as long as it's available. >> do we need to change the language in any way? >> i think we would have to change the language in some w s ways. so do you have a suggestion for me? >> let me -- i got it. but -- let me do this my way first. >> perhaps if we include a throne said, upon receipt of the complaint dpa will forward the complaint to risk management or -- or the chief of police, what we can work out that language. >> the commissioners are spe speaking now. >> if i may also address the

point, commissioner mazzucco, is there are times we receive a complaint and tell the chief and have the discussion so that the department can take immediate action and that has been our practice as well? >> commissioner marshalal>> i don't want to limit what is expected now. but add to. this should add to not detract from. >> right. >> so especially when it comes to the department willing to deal with something an officer and do something. that should be able to stay and this should add to the process, not detract from it. if you can come up with something that will do that, i'm fine. >> the other aspect we provide what is called a morning report within 24 hours. and that is a copy of all of our complain complaints. the department is given that information. and that's a process that we currently do and it's also momental liesed in the mou.

>> appreciate that process. let's keep it going forward. we may need something in addition to that to specifically comply to 2.04 if we go that way, okay? maybe it's enough, i don't know. i haven't looked at the report. we can work that out with you in the department. >> director henderson, was there something -- in addition to -- >> i think it was reiterated. i wanted to make the point this was not going to limit how the department was informed how complaints were being made. >> all right. so that takes care of the issues within 2.04 that were outstan outstanding. were there specific ones you wanted to -- were there other issues that the dpa or the department wanted to raise? i'm not sitting here through a

laundry list after sitting with you for ten meetings. so give me what you got, but don't think i'm going to be here all night. >> other issues in 2.04 that dpa was raising. >> commander walsh. >> haven't been resoalved alre y already. >> commander walsh? >> yeah. in the mou, and i will get you the passenger. >> we're not to the mou yet. >> i'm sorry. >> 2.04. i know we struggled with a couple other issues and we would just rather, again, go with what we believe the charter says and what the city attorney said about transferring some cases to another law enforcement agency. so we just like to keep that out there for future -- for tonight. >> that's in 2.04? >> yeah. it's in both actually. >> what's your point, commander? are you asking to change the

language or keep it the way it is>> we believe it would be a violation in any form for dpa to forward 293 forms or write them down prior to the da's office prior. >> you know what, i've given that a lot of thought and that's [ indiscernible ] i appreciate your thought on that whether or not it's a violation or not. i don't think that's something we can decide for you. and i think we can construct the policy as it is. you both seem to have different views on this. you're both siding different authority. someone will have to fair this out with higher authority than what we have at this point. >> yes, sir. >> all right. the mou. you can start, commander walsh.

>> let me get you the page. i believe we basically greed on most -- agreed on most. the issue i believe this had been left off accidentally prior to the discussion. and we discussed with -- and ms. marian and i e-mailed and we never came to a resolution. if you go to page two of the mou. under dpa procedures it will be under a-6. and the sentence says in case of concurrent investigations so something like we were just similarly talking about. government agency if we both gated, shall not receive the ia investigative memorandum until the completed dpa report. for clarification, that is where ia comes with the conclusion.

we conclude officer x committed misconduct. it's not the gative report. they would get the record quing traipse transcripts. we want at the last -- before they turn in for their truant investigation they come up with their own conclusions at the end of that they hand it over and we will have to concur and mesh them together. that was our only equal pal at that point. they get everything under the charter, we agree. however, the chief gave up the 06-day chart tore cut to 45 days on behalf of the dpa to be able to get items to the commission prior to the 60 days. which again, is in the charter. that -- we're asking basically that we with hold a few pages. these are our conclusions tully we exchange -- until we exchange completed packet. >> nobody exchange their final report until everybody is done investiga

investigating. >> no. they can have everything up to we believe officer x. for a truant independent finding. >> okay. that's what i said. okay. >> thank you. as written now, the iad gative memorandum is more than just the conclusions of the investigation. number one, the language that the department's suggesting is not reflect knave the actual provision. more importantly under the ch t charter we have -- and in past practice we have always gotten the full file. there are many reasons for that. >> so commander walsh, you said that you want to turn over your conclusion and recommendations, is that correct? >> [ indiscernible ]>> change the language that you don't get

conclusion and recommendations. >> and that's better than what is here. >> and that's enough. and then you can put the two reports together at the end. you get everything else up to there. you make your own separate findings and conclusion and they come together. you don't have to have the final of what they're thinking before you make your own conclusion. you're going to get all their pape papers. you can decide what issues you believe exist yourself. that's how -- that sounds like a comp muse to me. >> can we talk about the timing of that? they only want to turn that over at the conclusion. >> they don't want to turn what over at the conclusion? >> the information. >> what do you mean? tell me what you're saying. they don't -- go ahead. >> until we turn over -- until they've received our completed dpa report they're not going provide -- >> no. no. you're going to exchange the

documentatido you think so when you have the documentati documentation. you're not going to give your conclusions of recommendations until everybody is done. that's how it should be written. >> president, may i give you an examp example? >> sure. >> there was a case where we had six weeks left and we were provided the case for other reasons. we had six weeks. we wanted to the entire file including conclusions because we had limitation. >> i understand that. that's why we're going to make sure and you're going the draft it into the documents as documents are created and become available, you're going to turn them over. the conclusions and recommendations will be excha e exchanged when -- when everybody has made their conclusions and recommendations. you don't need their conclusions and recommendations to conclude and recommendati yourself. you just need to see what has been done to reach -- what has

been done, and reach a conclusion. that's fair. now, is there really more issue than that? >> from my perspective there is. >> tell me. >> when we're boith investigating, we are better when we know what we've each covered. if the department's not making recommendations about a particular allegation or a particular policy -- >> no ma'am. you should be making your own ge independent recommendations about a case in an of itself. independent of what the department is doing and the department should be doing the same thing. >> in real time for clarificati clarification. if there are live whereiitnesse going on independent of what the conclusionin conclusions are will be getting that information? >> i already answered that question. >> everything up to the conclusion. >> why is that not fair.

i'm never -- i've never in my life, by the way, once other on onny of my points? i'm asking you. >> that will be a first is that what you're saying>> that won't be a first. you see that face? that's not going to be a first i will do my dammest. >> if there was a reason for this change, again, the department justice talks about the collaboration, the ability to work together. so -- >> i'm not stopping your collaborati collaboration. i'm encouraging you to share your information. >> absolutely, but when it's -- when it's at the ninth hour that we are talking about conclusi s conclusions, i think it's to the disadvantage of the entire process. i respect your decision. >> they don't know your conclusion. >>s we'll tell them ours. >> good. put that in.

i'm just saying. ] capti [ captioner transition ] based on workload. the issue is gpa is looking at a set of facts and coming up with conclusions they come up with

different conclusions that we didn't think about. we meld those together. you get one case to the commission or the chief unless there is a huge disagreement, at which time they bypass to come to the commission. >> my thought is that a parallel investigations are going, one set of conclusions to me shouldn't influence the other set of conclusions. that would be interesting to see if you come to the same conclusions. that makes sense to me. where you match, you match. where you don't, you don't. listening that is the common sense piece to me. >> can i make one point? >> sure. >> what i'm concerned with is the definition of the cooperation. where it is clear and numrated in the language that the

department is to cooperate and disclose all documents and records except where disclosure is prohibited by law. why are we going through the twists to create new enumerations not contemplated in the past. why create restrictions? why do we have less access, less conversion of information? >> i don't think it is less transparent. you are getting the documents to lead to that conclusion. >> we are getting the documents, not the conclusion. >> you are concluded then melding the two, if that is necessary. where they diverge and come together. that is not less. that is -- there is no lack of transparency there. >> if it is not an item that is not prohibited by law, which is what the language has been in

the past and the standard we used in the past, why would we create? >> the standard we used in the past under 1994 was that you don't ge get to investigate complaints about -- from nonlaw enforcement. do you want to go back to that? >> no. >> we are making new policy now. although i'm not particularly swayed by commander walsh's thinking. what i am going to do is not vote. i want to take an informal straw poll among the commissioners to see what they think how this should be resolved. commissioner mizzou co. >> i agree with not turning over the conclusion.