supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: just to start, thank you for that. and, you know, i've done a lot of domestic violence prevention work and i think that can be very triggering to lot of people. and i understand where you are coming from. i am wondering, i mean this nation is a wash -- awash in guns. i don't know how that individual got the gun, especially after the circumstances you just -- just described. it sounds like he was in and out of custody that night. i don't know how he ended up with a gun in his possession. but i am going to have the same question that i have to you as you are a public defender and i and the prosecutor and i asked the same question to others. in your experience that you have had with police officers and in the story that you just told, whether or not that is in disciplining officers, you can be impartial, and also i would

like to ask whether you've had implicit bias training yourself. >> excuse me and coming up -- off of a cold right now. regarding impartiality, i think i can be fair, and just, regars ofwho is in front of me. like you said, i'm a defence attorney, primarily i work with cases like i just mentioned. i not just going to go into a courtroom and spite where my clients due process right every day and turn around and deny them to somebody, because they are a police officer. everyone should have equal justice under the law, under the procedures and under the rules of the police commission. your second question regarding implicit bias, i would say that i, i'm not sure i went through training but a self trained and

i have moderate -- moderated a program between law enforcement and it was our public defenders on the panel as well. in preparation for that i took in implicit bias test as well as read all of the leading articles and materials surrounding implicit bias. >> supervisor stefani: to be effective, the police department use the community's confidence about building trust in the community and the police. i wonder what policies you would pursue to build that confidence for us. [please standby for captioner switch]

-- the more general answers are, we need to engage in all of the communities. and we need to do that -- the words we generally use are community policing. but it has to be done in a way that builds relationships. it's not just a matter of, you know, jumpin out of your car to grab a coffee once in a while. it's a matter of engaging with the community, with the community groups, with everybody. and that doesn't just include the leaders.

that doesn't just include, you know, the heads of departments and the heads of various commissions. that includes getting out and meeting the kids on the street that, you know, are hearing bad things about cops so they understand that, hey, behind the uniform, there's a real person. and for the most part, w will find is, this is a person that's dedicated their life to service for the community to make our city and county a better place. >> supervisor stefani: thank you. this is your second application that you've put in before this body. >> yes. >> supervisor stefani: it leads me to believe that you want it bad. >> or i'm getting better at it. >> supervisor stefani: we'll find out. i have to admit -- i've seen you on a number of occasions in the police commission, for what i assume, to be sitting there to learn, to gather information. and this is prior to your

application over 1 1/2 years ago. >> correct. >> supervisor stefani: you were not appointed. you were still showing up to the police commission hearing doing the work. and now you are asking to be considered to be put back in again. >> i am. >> supervisor stefani: i want to talk about something that i missed the first time on your application. i understand you to be a member of the legislative committee of california attorneys for criminal justice. do you have a leadership role in that? >> i'm sorry? >> supervisor stefani: do you have a leadership role? >> excuse me. so i'm on the board of governors, which is basically the leadership for the largest statewide organization of criminal justice attorneys. so i'm on the leader shep of the board of governors and on the legislative leadership along with groups to draft and support

and oppose laws around the areas of criminal justice reform and policing. >> supervisor stefani: so on a state level, what direction do you see the state of california going when it comes to criminal justice and reform? >> i see a lot of good things, i do. we live in a sea of negativity and we see a lot of bad things that happen, but there's a positive in that it's brought broader awareness to people outside, like the people in this room are really interested and invested in reform. and so my mom might see something about police misconduct or overpolicing in certain communities and it's spreading in a way that i think is positive.

and i hope that that will continue. >> supervisor stefani: i will ask you a straight-up question -- how do you differ from the people that are already sitting on the commission? >> well, there's only three of them now, right? >> supervisor stefani: that's right. so it must be easy for you. >> let's think. mister -- i think what i would do is bring -- i don't want to be younger, but i'm in the trenches all day every day right now. i'm out in the communities, out in the streets. out in the community. hopefully your phones have rang and emails are full. i have support from broad members of the community because i'm a member of it and i get out there and i talk to people. and think i build up respect within the communities so that when i'm -- hopefully -- a

commissioner, i will be able to continuesentreg those communities or engaging with those communities to ensure that their interests are heard and the issues are addressed. >> supervisor cohen: which constituency do you believe you represent? when you are in a room and coming to the table or sitting here, who are you representing? >> i represent san francisco. >> supervisor cohen: all right. >> honestly, i -- i'm -- i think last time my support was broad from leaders and i brought a lot of people out last time. i think rudy and his team were standing in the -- in the room for the hearing. but also lawyers, leaders, community leaders, bar leaders. everybody had a seat at the table with me and i engaged them. so i don't, you know -- there's

nobody that is going to be excluded from that. i have close relationships with the black community in san francisco from some of my work. i have close relationships with the asian-american, the chinese community, from my work with the asian-american bar association. and other organizations. so i think i -- i feel like i have a broad -- >> supervisor cohen: do you have any members of the sfpd that are bold enough to stand with you? >> that's a good question. i haven't asked, but i will say i've set down with people from across the board from leadership, commanders, captains, the union. >> supervisor cohen: is in this capacity of the work you are doing on the state level? what is the reason that you sat down? >> for this. to talk about the interests of

the law enforcement community. i've talked to everybody. i think most of you know that. excuse me. law enforcement is what we're having oversight for, so i think they're important members of the dialogue. so that's how i've sat down with a number of them. >> supervisor cohen: i appreciate that. so i will interpret that none of them have endorsed your application. >> well, officers for justice and yolanda. >> supervisor cohen: okay. there it is. do you have anyolicy ideas? i'm sure you have a bunch of them. share with us three. >> three? >> supervisor cohen: or would you like to share five? >> supervisor safai: the more you talk, the more you are going to have to give. >> i will keep my answers short. one of them, we already talked about and i think that's

identified in the d.o.j. report. i wish i was like some of the people that can rattle off the numbers, but i can't. it's data collection analysis. i really believe that's the underpinning of rebuilding the trust with the communities, by ing either there is anecdotal evidence, but our research shows that it's not as bad as the community thinks. and hopefully that can help restore some of the trust. or, hey, we're having way too many stop-and-frisks in the bayview, in western edition. why is that going on? and then we'll have to have a talk with the officers that are involved there and figure out how to fix that. >> supervisor cohen: i hope we have zero, as it is a policy not practiced on the streets of san francisco. >> it's complicated. >> supervisor cohen: it is. >> it shouldn't be and it's not

done in the same ways, but it still exists. yeah. i think we've done a lot. >> supervisor cohen: okay. th >> supervisor safai: i was going to say, that's one. da da data collection and analysis. >> and i think underlies rebuilding the trust with the communities. there are certain communities that feel that because of cultural issues, as well as language issues, they don't have access to justice. they don't have access to the police in the same way that some feel, hey, i can pick up the phone and call the police and everything will be okay. we have seen too many times that sometimes that ends badly or sometimes people are mistreated. sometimes people don't speak the language and don't go through the trouble to get somebody that can speak the language.

so i think that we do need to address cultural competence. and along with that goes the assignment of officers. we need to have the right officers in the right jurisdictions. and that's something based on my conversation with law enforcement is maybe a little more complicated than i thought. >> supervisor safai: wait, i'm sorry. in terms of assignment of officers, you say it's more difficult. to follow up on that, just so we understand. >> supervisor cohen: why is that so? >> so my understanding is that with certain officers, there's a seniority system and with other officers there is not. and sohe ones with the seniority system have control over the assignments that they go and there are some assignments that i'm told that are more desirable or undesirable, like the airport.

and others -- do you want, if you are an officer and you just had a child and you have long nights and long days, do you want to be in the tenderloin dealing with all the challenges there, or do you want something more relaxing, where it's not going to, you know, affect your ability to be a parent as well as an officer? so that's what i meant by it's a bit more complications. >> supervisor safai: that's a good explanation. supervisor cohen? >> supervisor cohen: i wanted to take a pause, because that's an important point that you touched on. you had an idea about officers with the right skill sets being assigned to a certain beat, but through your due diligence and understanding and reaching out, you better educated yourself on how it actually worked. there's always a gap between theory and practicpractice. yes, we have cantonese-speaking

officers, we need it put them in cantonese neighborhoods, so it makes sense. but it's not that simple. the point that you are making about the seniority weighs heavier. n the hearing about omment paying officers a little bit more, which is moving forward as a result of advocacy from members not only on this body, but also just across the entire community. i'm waiting to hear the third and final policy. >> so the -- one of the important -- there is a whole category of things that fall under use of force and deescalation. trying to avoid people getting hurt. and that should be everyone's job one when it comes to policing, making sure civilians don't get hurt and making sure that officers don't get hurt. and one of the things that was

rolled out -- and i forget exactly when, a few years back, but the crisis intervention training. >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> and thi that that -- i mean, i drive through the tenderloin every morning to drive my son to school, to preschool. and there's not a morning when i don't go by and see crisis. i see people in crisis, people struggling with mental illness, people struggling with substance abuse, and ultimately, and i think unfortunately, the burden is often placed on police officers to deal with this. and it's not easy or glamorous to deal with somebody in the middle of a manac episode or episode where they're hearing voices or behaving erratically. how to do those interactions so people don't get hurt, so the situation is de-escalated.

and so hopefully everyone goes home safely. >> supervisor safai: i just want to recognize supervisor katy tang is in the audience with our lincoln high schoolgirls varsity basketball champions. so thanks for joining us today. [applause] sorry. supervisor cohen. do you want me to jump in? >> supervisor cohen: no. >> meet and confer? are we there yet? [laughter] >> supervisor cohen: welcome to the lincoln high school varsity team. we get an opportunity to see strong, female leadership in action. right now, we're having a hearing. this is mr. john hamasaki. we're interviewing him and

drilling him. back to the line of questioning. i want to talk about the policy of shooting in cars. i think it's incredibly important and it's a teachable moment here. as you know, because you were there, the discussions that occurred around this policy, has been long and storied. >> right. >> supervisor cohen: but yet and still, we had a recent shooting where officers opened up and fired on a moving vehicle. if you were a member of the police commission, how would you handle this? you've been to enough commission meetings to know the rule and the limitations and what you can and cannot do. >> right. but at the same time, i'm going to end up on the commission, which i'm hopeful for, i probably shouldn't prejudge a specific case. >> supervisor cohen: yes. that's actually a very appropriate answer and i appreciate that. >> i'm sure there's a way we can

discuss the underlying issues. >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> that all went on during the last time i applied and that was, you know, ended up with television ads attacking the commission president. >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> which was really destructive. it was -- and i think that we actually talked about that at the last hearing. but there's a policy in place that says, you cannot shoot at a moving vehicle, but there is the, i think, preamble to the overall policy that says that this policy does not cover every situation and situations may arise where -- and i forget the exact language. so i -- you know, is there a situation under the policy where somebody could shoot at a moving vehicle? yes. there's the exception.

but, you know, i think that that would be a very rare situation. if somebody is in a narrow alley, the wth of a car and the officer in the vehicle is bearing down on them, you know, i think i would have a hard time judging somebody in that position. but, you know, it's a difficult -- it's difficult to make up scenarios and imagine what i would do. >> supervisor cohen: what i was looking for is, i just wanted to -- i wanted to get an understanding as to your thought process. how are you thinking about this? so you've given me what i'm looking to hear and getting a better understanding of how you go about solving problems, go about constructing and deconstructing scenarios. i am making an assumption here -- correct me if i'm wrong -- but that you know how to read and understand a police report.

you speak a certain -- there's a jargon, a language, that is incredibly important. talk to me about your understanding about the brotherhood and the sisterhood that exists within the police department. i mean, there's benefits to that as well as there is probably a few things that are not so beneficial. >> you know, i think anybody involved in a high-stress career -- and policing is a high-stress career -- benefits from developing close bonds with their co-workers, with the people who have their back when their lives are on the line. i think there's a benefit to that. and there's nothing wrong with building those relationships and having a strong and united police force. that stops when misconduct starts. once the misconduct starts within a department, you know, you referred to earlier the thin

blue line. whether or not police are willing to cross that line. i don't know of any recent situations -- and i think the people from d.p.a. may know better and probably know things confidential that i don't know, or definitely know things i don't know. but the only recent incident i can think of, i think it was the henry hotel, where one of the officers testified against one of the other officers. and i will say from some of the people i know around that case, some of the people around that case, it was seen as the ultimate betrayal. we need to figure out how to change that system. i don't know that i have the solution right now. i think that's something that i would need to spend more time

talking to officers and talking about what would allow somebody. as an earlier applicant said, when you speak up, you get shunned. and that can affect your assignments, promotions, your relationships with your co-workers. so we need to figure out how to overcome that, but i have to be honest, i don't have the answer to that today. >> supervisor cohen: right, thank you. i don't have any other questions at this time. i have to admit, i'm dying to know about meet and confer. [laughter] >> supervisor safai: we'll get to that. can you reiterate the specific question again.

>> supervisor yee: i want to know your view in general and if motors can determine the policies. >> no, it's not a good idea for voters -- that's not how we make policy. there may be a rare exception in the civil rights area, where we have to overcome the will of policy makers. that's the police commission and ultimately your jurisdiction. it's an attempted coup of the authority of the police commission. i'm strongly against prop h. i would not apply to this position and support somebody taking my authority away. i hope that answers your question. >> supervisor yee: and your general view --

>> supervisor cohen: can't hear you. >> supervisor safai: can you read that into the mike? >> supervisor yee: just a general view of the use of tasers. >> i will say it's complicated. last time that i appeared, i said i was against tasers. it may have been the report that mr. rowe worked on, but i read a recommendation and took a position at that time. now that i'm hopefully pending appointment, i don't know that i should prejudge something that's alive and active before the commission. there are over 80 documents on the police commission, commission did a lot of work to come to the decision that it did. and i can't judge that because i haven't been through the work. i've started, but there's a lot.

>> supervisor safai: thank you. i want to go back to a couple of your answers because i think you gave surface-level answers on a couple and dive in more so people understand and i understand. you said you work with community groups, you are on the streets on a daily basis, you have aot l of contact with groups and referenced rudy, and i think i know who you are talking about. what are the groups you worked with on a daily basis and people that you would get guidance from and getting information from the guidance from the commission and those that you have worked with on the rules something. and one of the other questions, you've been active, even when you did not make the cut last time. you stayed active with this commission. so talk about that a little bit. and the work that you have done to attend meetings and stay

current with the direction of this commission. >> so people i -- excuse me. people i rely on, people whose voices i trust, probably originate in my work as a lawyer. i'm active and involved in the bar association of san francisco. i'm president-elect of the barristers, which has over 3,000 members. the bar association and the criminal justice task force is part of the working group that worked on the use of force d.g.o. as well as the taser d.g.o. i've consulted with them since i began this process, you know, 1 1/2 years ago. there are broader asian-american

groups that i engage with with the asian-american bar association of which i'm the treasurer, the largest asian-american bar association in the country. i'll be president within two years. and through that, i have pretty -- i would say, extensive relations throughout the chinese, japanese, and asian communities throughout san francisco and the bay area. we're constantly working with other organizations, working with other -- we do a lot of working together with other affinity groups, charles houston bar association, which is african-american bar association, bailiff, lgbtq community. >> supervisor safai: any nonprofits in san francisco? community-based nonprofits? >> i mean, yes. i think some of them that you might have heard from, they

changed their name, but there's a legal services organization in the bayview. >> supervisor cohen: bayview legal. >> which i think wrote a letter of support. obviously, asian law caucus, people from those organizations. >> supervisor safai: okay. >> i'm sorry, and the second part of the question? >> supervisor safai: the second question is how active have you been with the commission and have you stayed and attended meetings? supervisor cohen said that she noticed that, but i want to hear it from your mouth. >> i've attended commission meetings. i attended i think one or two. i want to say it's meeting of the whole or something where the police commission came and had a meeting with the board of supervisors. >> supervisor safai: yes, committee of the whole, yeah. >> i watched numerous meetings on-line, just because of the nature of my work, it's he's

year do that. [please stand by] . >> as a lawyer, i've been in private practice working for myself, essentially.

the meet and confer, i've learned a lot about it. i think i would defer to people with more -- luckily, there's bob hirsch who's on the commission now who has a strong labor background who probably knows these issues in depth that i don't. but really how they arise in the context of the police commission, and they -- there's an issue with the -- i'm blanking -- with the use of force, there's an issue that's still in litigation surrounding meet and confer and whether or not that issue is a working condition that's subject to meet and confer, or i think the language is managery jag discretion or something along those lines.

generally, we're meet and confer. we're a strong city. no one denies that meet and confer is a -- is a fundamental part of labor negotiation and bargaining. but i -- my knowledge of it exists only to the implementation of the d.g.o.'s. >> supervisor safai: okay. in terms of ensuring that the police department is representing from diverse communities, what are some of the ideas you have to advance that? >> it's interest. i was -- i was working my way through the d.o.j. recommendations again, and it -- what it sounded like is that the hiring and recruitment section of the police department, the d.o.j. felt they had made some good creative efforts, but those efforts hadn't come to fruition in the way that they would like

to see. >> supervisor safai: are you familiar with the ibt view process, how applicants go to the process from a to z? >> i am not. only from the d.o.j. report and reading their thoughts on it. >> supervisor safai: i'm sorry to interrupt you. because otherwise, i would have taken the question in a different question. >> oh, no. i think it would be beneficial to learn. they interview a lot of people, but people get washed out at various stages, and i think that affects minority applicants to a greater degree from certain communities. >> supervisor safai: any other questions from the committee right now? supervisor cohen? >> supervisor cohen: no. >> supervisor safai: okay. great. if we have any other questions, mr. hamasaki, we will call you back up -- oh, actually, i do have one last one. i do. and supervisor cohen referenced it. you've been through this process before, and how do you

think having gone through this process before informs your return and what that means to being on the commission? you've been through the process of application. you were very close to being appointed, and you chose to stay active. >> yeah. >> supervisor safai: so why, and how -- and how does that inform your -- your decision? >> just like high school, i got over a broken heart, you know? you know, everybody -- it was tough. but honestly, the work, and i think i see the sincerity in all of the applicants today. this is a chance to save lives, to have a real meaningful impact on the community, and if it takes getting a little beaten up and bruised to have that opportunity, i'm willing to do so. >> supervisor safai: okay. thank you. thank you. >> supervisor safai: please call the next applicant. >> clerk: the next applicant

is gloria berry. >> supervisor safai: miss berry, please come forward. >> okay. here we go. hello. thank you, supervisors, for listening to my request to be on the police commission. i'm basically going to start off by informing of you what led me to today. i'm a native. i was born in san francisco in the fillmore in 1969. my first view of police officers was cultivated by what went on outside my window of my apartment. i saw police officers beating

up black men, and it really resonated with me at a young age that the fear that is in the community. then moving along to thege of 15, i found myself a victim, and i was assaulted, and the police officer that responded was very compassionate, very concerned. took a thorough report, and he went as far as keeping in contact with me and my family because he was very devastated and touched by what had happened to me. so through communications with him, he recommended i join the san francisco police activities league, and i did. and through that experience, i was able to do ride alongs, and ride alongs are important to me because a lot of times when you

hear the blue lives matter folks who condemn action against police, they say do ride alongs with law enforcement or stuff like that. i had an experience. i responded to a rain or assault in the mission. i responded to incidents that was there in the mission valencia gardens project. i responded to an incident of a drunken man at the bar, and after the police responded to that, the police left him on the street. they said i didn't want to take him to the drunk tank because i don't want to get urine or vomit in my squad car. and that stuck with me also. and also, back to the domestic violence situation, i remember the officer, after responding,

saying he didn't want to bother taking a report because women always go back, so he said it was a waste of time. excuse me. let me put my glasses on. also during police activity league, i took tours of the jails, i also fingerprinted children because at the time it was considered helpful in finding them in they were kidnapped, but at the same time, i went on ski trip with officers and got to bond with some of them, but at the same time, i got to be with cadets who i saw had some of that cowboy mentality that a lot of us are concerned with today. lastly, i was trained with firearms at the range that used to be on the army base at the presidio, which got me into my

first involvement with weapons training. after being on the presidio, i saw military police, and that inspired me to actually want to join the military to become a military police because i thought they pretty much were community -- community involved-type policing, and i respected that. so my senior year, i joined the navy. i had more firearms training, received a ribbon for being a sharp shooter, learned about use of force and self-defense. i also drafted, reviewed, and edited standard operating procedures. i was a training officer for some time. later, during my tour in italy, our u.s.o. was bombed. five were killed, 18 wounded,

including a woman sailor. i know my time is almost up, but i wanted to include also, i was in law enforcement for eight years, so i've seen both sides of -- of the scale. i've been on both sides, and i would like to end with a quote. this quote is from a vice chief in detroit who has come in compliance with their reforms who says, "we don't look at this process as the errand of journey, but more or less as a beginning. we're happy to end governmental oversight, but for the reforms and other course of years are not new to us. it's embedded in our police." >> supervisor safai: thank you. so members of the committee? >> supervisor cohen: thank

you. i'm just going to assume that i can go. >> supervisor safai: please. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you. hi, miss berry. talk to me about your eight years in law enforcement. which -- where did you serve? >> no problem. i was a correctional officer for eight years. i worked at san quentin prison, where i was promoted to sergeant there. >> supervisor cohen: and maybe you can speak to what you see, 'cause i, too, have seen you at the police commission meetings at an active participant. speak to the neighborhood level needs: things that you've seen, things that you've experienced. i've seen you on marchs, rallies. i've heard you articulate concerns in public comment. talk to me a little bit about how you believe that serving on this policy body would help bridge the cap gaps from you a both have heard crying out for

reform. >> well, that's very significant to me because when we have these town halls, police commissions, protests, or whatnot, it's -- it's apparent that there's a problem. foat many people to sho up, to stand in those long lines. to say what they have to say, it's obvious there is ha problem. it connects with my experience with law enforcement, because i had the same problems. i've seen the side, what they're saying exists, but they have no way to prove it. i've actually proved it. i myself was instructed to antagonize and provoke black men. i was -- >> supervisor cohen: you were instructed by superior officers? >> superior officers and senior officers that dominate the culture in law enforcement, so

i was ostracized from a unit because of my refusal to do it. so i went through the reporting process, and the officers, i don't know their discipline because it's confidential, but i was allowed to come back to the unit, and i did notice in my presence that those behaviors seemed to be reduced. >> supervisor cohen: you've sat through going on almost six hours of interview. it's almost like this hearing is mirroring a police commission meeting. so the standard, really, question has to do around policy because in the end, this is a policy making entity, and i'm looking to assess new commissioners that will be

bringing policy idea, policy experience, to the table. do you have -- do you have any ideas that you want to share with us? >> well, something that's been on my mind for a long time, especially attending police commission meetings is something i was trained on and something that i'm pretty sure to this day i'd have to confirm does not exist, and that's a policy around report writing. if this world were mine, i would make a new policy on report writing because i know that when you're trained, you're trained to write your own report, to not confer with other officers, to not have a master report that you copy off of, but in my experience, i know that's not so. i know officers do communicate with each other, do try to get their stories straight. and if i had a policy, it would be something to the effect of

the handwritten report perhaps being conducted in a separate station after an incident so that officers could not group around and get instructed by the sergeants or whatnot of what to say. >> supervisor cohen: okay. i don't have -- i don't have anything else. thank you. >> supervisor safai: okay. i -- my question is, have you attended meetings over the last few years and been active with this commission? >> yes, i have attended meetings over the last two years. >> supervisor safai: thank you. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: sure. go ahead and answer the question, whether -- what's your viewpoint on tazers and whether or not policies around things like this should be done with people voting on it. >> yes. i personally know someone that has been tased twice, and her

story stays with me. and like i say, i think my life, everything that has happened has brought me to today. i'm actually against tazers because her reason for being tased were her -- she had a foul language, she was very disrespectful to the officer, so they tased her on two different occasions. this is a drug user who sometimes used things and so forth, and i think officers need to be trained more on this tool, that it's not for those types of reasons, it's immediately under lethal force. it's, can be lethal. and i was reading the general orders where -- excuse me, i was reading proposition h where the police officers want to use

tazers during resisting. resisting is not defined -- is not clearly defined. do you mean, resisting, not showing your i.d., do you mean resisting, not coming over here? do you mean resisting, telling someone to get on the ground, and they say no, i'm not? is that an automatic tazer issue where you're allowed to do that? so no, i'm against tazers, and i'm against proposition h. however, i know the commission already voted them in. >> supervisor yee: thank you. >> supervisor safai: supervisor stefani? >> commissioner stefani: thank you. i just wanted to follow up on the implicit bias question we've all been asking and whether or not you've had that type of training and how you feel about implementing it for our police department. >> yes -- excuse me. i've been a member of the racial justice team at glide

for a few years and also their bible study, and those two groups are very concerned about implicit bias. we receive training from karen fleischmann, and i engage with her, but as far as the city-provided train, i have not attended and would love to attend. >> commissioner stefani: and you also mentioned your experience in law enforcement. and i'm wondering, and i've heard this -- and this is anecdotal, whether or not the up tick in guns, the availability for guns and the easy access to guns in our society since really the n.r.a. changed in the late 70's, where now, there are so many guns on the street, it's so easy to get guns, whether or not there's a

mentality among officers that, you know, we talk about them being in fear of their lives, but whether or not you've seen that change over time whereas at one time they weren't as fearful that everybody had a gun, and whether or not that's something you've experienced. >> i think what you're asking me is what i feel about the level of fear compared to maybe 20 years ago to today? is that correct? >> commissioner stefani: yeah. i mean, the agenda among the n.r.a. and a lot of the gun manufacturers has changed over time, especially since the late '70's, really, and they've been writing a lot of our laws across the country as to -- to -- basically our gun laws across this country, and it's been kind of a policy of guns everywhere for anyone at any time if they can get away with

it. and it's increased the proliferation of guns and guns on our street. i'm asking you with your law enforcement experience whether or not at all that is a contributing factor to this elevating fear that somebody might have a weapon? >> i don't think it's a contributing factor. i think there is a recruitment issue with the type of police officers we're hiring, and their fear levels. i've been in very fearful situations with men bigger than me that i've taken down by myself that i've pepper sprayed, that i've handcuffed, and i've definitely did not want them shot dead. even though i feared for my life, my goal was to handcuff the person and to secure them in an area that was safe.

so i think it's in recruiting, that the fear -- we have people who are not from the community coming to our community and not familiar with cultures, and their fear comes from personal issues and what people call biases. >> okay. thank you. >> supervisor safai: any other questions right now? seeing none, we will call you up if we have anymore questions? >> may i say one more policy that i would like to see? >> supervisor safai: sure. >> i would like to see the rain backlog cleared. that's very important to me. >> supervisor safai: madam clerk, please call the next applicant. >> clerk: yes. the final applicant is cindy elias.

>> supervisor safai: missal elias, thank you for waiting through the long day. >> i should say good afternoon. despite my humble beginnings of growing up in guadalupe, california, in the lettuce fields, i'm here. not only am i here, but i'm in this wonderful city. i believe i'm a good candidate because i have the courage to speak truth to power, and that's what the police commission neds, and that's what san francisco residents want. to find the truth of what really happened, why it's happening, how it's happening. to figure out why the rules and the policies and procedures that the police commission have drafted and enacted aren't being followed or adhered to. to figure out what's going

wrong with this process, and to use the power of the police commission to fix it. i'm currently an enforcement attorney for the california labor commission. i fight to protect workers' rights. i hold employers accountable for violating workers' rights and for maintaining unsafe work environments for workers. i also participate in criminal prosecutions for wage theft and insurance fraud. being a labor attorney will serve me well on the pole commission because i have experience in the administration hearings, and these are hearings when it comes into play with disciplinary hearings of police officers. you need someone who has experience and the skill to understand how these hearings

are held. you need someone who's going to be fair and impartial and be a true fact finder in the process. you also need someone who's going to ask these difficult questions of what is happening and why this happened, and you also need someone who's going to lay the foundation for the decision that the commission come does up with later, because as we know some of the decisions that the commission makes are being challenged in the superior court as well as the appellate court. we have to have a strong record to give the judicial officers guidance on how we came to this decision and why. as a public -- prior to being an enforcement attorney with the labor commission, i was a public defender for 12 years. i was a seasoned trial attorney and litigated many cases and had many roles in the public defender's office. i have experience in the criminal justice system, i have experience with understanding police officers' duties and responsibilities. i've experienced dealing with the same communities that the police officers face on a daily

basis. i've experienced -- i have experience working with individuals who suffer from mental health illness, who suffer from addiction, who suffer from homelessness and poverty and are victims of trauma. have represented all walks of life and people from various backgrounds. i have read thousands of police reports, and i have a practical understanding of how and what good policing looks like and what bad policing looks like. i have experience and knowledge of how split-second decisions and choices can change one's life in an instant. one of the most valuable experiences i had while being a public defender was participating in the lead program, which is the law enforcement assisted diverse progrdiverse -- diversion program, and as a lead attorney, i had an opportunity to do something i had never done before, which was shadow officers on a daily

basis, and i was surprised to see all of the things and challenges they face on a daily basis, because not only do they come in contact with the people that i represented, they also have nother struggle, a struggle with the community who's upset with the homeless person on the stoop and why they're still there, a community who's upset at seeing homeless people abuse drugs on the sidewalk. and being in a role of that lead attorney i was able to see the actions of police officers for change. they weren't sold on this quick action of the lead program. they wanted to see real sort of solutions with the problems they were facing with not only sort of homeless, the people suffering from poverty and addiction and trauma, but also the community members who are complaining. being a part of the lead program allowed me to collaborate with other departments in the city: the

department of public health, the district attorney's office, the san francisco police department, the sheriff's department, the b.a.r.t. police officers, people from glide, people from felton, and we all tried to get this program up and running and implemented in approximate the city. it is modelled after a seattle program, and one of the things that irned is in order for this program to be successful, we need to have officer buy ins, and in order to have officer buy ins, they need to see success in the program, and they're more apt to buy in. i have dedicated my life to public service. i believe my skills and experience would be a vital asset to the police commission. there are a few things that i'd like to address with respect to the questions that were posed earlier by the supervisors.

with respect to proposition h, i am against proposition h. i am concerned because it does circumvent the police commissioner's authority to sort of implement policies behind how these tazers will be used, when they will be used, and it prohibits the ability for the commission to discipline officers when they don't adhere to those policies. i believe that that should lie with the police commission. the mayor has already sort of earmarked $3 million in order to help facilitate that process. i think what's more important, though, about tazers is not how we feel about them, but more importantly, how are they going to be used because the reality is, you're right, they are here. and we do have a policy, and now, we need to see how this policy is going to work. we need the data, we need to see when they're being used, how they're being used, and in what manner, because they are lethal weapons. with respect to the question

about data -- and i do completely agree with supervisor cohen's statement that the story can be told by the numbers, but here's the problem with that: if the numbers aren't there, and the data isn't collected properly, we don't get a full story. with respect to the d.o.j. recommendations of three, four, and five, some of the things that they talk about is the data that's missing in order to provide us sufficient background as to what these numbers mean, and i think that that's a very important process, that's something that we need to change and make sure that we are able to obtain. and i will let you -- i have a few more, but i'll let you ask me questions now. >> supervisor safai: okay. what areas did you -- just -- i'll just -- since you didn't get to it, what areas did you want to highlight specifically? just give me the headers, and we can ducome back to it.

>> first the use of force logs. the only two papers we have had the police report which is the officer's narrative that describes the situation and sort of a one sheet of paper, and it doesn't give us any information how it was used, why it was used, what other steps were taken before this force was used; it only gives you -- the only information that is tracked and that's required by the officer is their name, their sort of -- their back number, the date, time, and sort of what the use of force was. but we need more information. we need background information as to how we got there because it's not until we look at how we got there that we can understand how we fix it. because if we don't know how we got there, then how do we implement a policy that's going to fix it? >> supervisor safai: next, what other areas? >> i think that one of the key critical issues that may be coming up is vetting a new