head, and he lost part of his brain. the city of oakland paid millions of dollars for that, but it didn't give my client haze brain back. and i -- his brain back. and i think the commission should seriously inquire into what guidelines the sfpd has for using these dangerous munitions before injury occurred. in these discussions we held up san francisco as an role model for an experienced police department that has been able to handle volatile crowd situations without using dangerous weapons. it seems to me that the officers went in amped up, loaded for bear in an unnecessarily aggressive and provocative manner late a night, and a number of people were hurt, including being dragged by the arms and by

being hit and having re-trinity used on them. sfpd is experienced in dealing with passive resistance, and there's other things that can be done to get people to disburse without dragging -- [inaudible] >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you, miss letterman. thank you. need to abolish i.c

there's an incredible movement. it's been introduced in the house of representatives in the new york house, there's bills to stop this. i am talking to two supervisors in san francisco who are ready to put boabolish i.c.e.

we cannot have i.c.e. in this state. this is a sanctuary city, this is a sanctuary state. we are just not protesters like they said in standing rock. as the news flies back, we are over in helsinki -- when i think about children being treated like this, i can't even speak. this is the most appalling, i never thought we would come to this. but the police can't be part of this and say they're following orders. i talked to the -- why this happened last week is shocking to me. i talked to you in the hallway, and you told me i wasn't playing fair. i'm not playing. this is not a game. this is the most despicable

thing this country has ever done, to have our children dragged to jail. it's just appalling, and these people that are out there, they kept a good camp. they informed a lot of people. so many people came out with donations, saying thank you for what you're doing. that's the response we got. we never had anybody come and tell us to leave. an old man, 80 years old and said, you can use my showers. this has to stop. we are doing what we need to do in every way we can. you mentioned the first amendment rights. that's still -- >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you, magic. next speaker. good evening. >> good evening. i'm the person which treated the meeting which caused the district attorney's office and the police department to be summoned by supervisor ronen. it started by women -- women

are being commended by their performance. then it was my turn to speak. i pointed out how i'm speaking out for women who were on the receiving end of being assaulted and got 437 rape kits that are not being tested. i watched one of the females cry out for help and said is there anybody out there that can help us because every time we complain we keep getting hit with the statute of limitations. as a result i went to the law library and found there's this law called continual injuries. continual injuries means the statute of limitations is tolled because you can still demonstrate your injury. as a result of me making that demonstration, supervisor ronen setup a hearing. i also pointed out that there's another way of getting around the statute of limitations pertaining to fraud. if you show that you tried to correct the problem within a

year from the incident, the statute of limitations is tolled there, too. so as a result, a hearing took place, and at that hearing, i pointed out the same set of facts, and i also pointed out that there should not be no statute of limitations on assault in the first place. when the police were talking about their number one priority was car break-ins, and i said they got their values mixed up, assault should be a higher priority. you've got all these victims of assaults, and you've got all those assault kits, which i suspect would be about 1,000 or 500 just sitting there, and those are the easiest type of cases to settle. now as a result of that demonstration, i also pointed out that there's this white skinned colored male that just got arrested, and he's killed on or about 15 people and assaulted on or about 50 women. that's another example why there should not be no statute of limitations on assault. this person has been at large

for 42 years. i didn't know his name at the time because they just caught the last part of the news, but i heard the crime that he got arrested for. turns out his name is mr. deangelo. so after that demonstration by miself-over seen by supervisor ronen on or about a week later, the legislators in sacramento that were watching that came down with new legislation that there's no more statute of limitations on assault, and i want to commend ronen for that for giving me the opportunity to express the way that i need to express myself about this topic. now, you had a police officer that claims that $2 million was granted to the police for that information -- >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you very much, sir. thank you very much. >> i've got a question.

[inaudible] >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you, sir. what you want to do is maybe direct that question to sergeant yen -- lieutenant yamaguchi will take your question. next speaker. >> so i'm a man called clifford. this is going to be sort of tangential to the i.c.e. event and the policies and priorities. it seems the police are more concerned with harassing mentally disturbed individuals and harassing and attacking women than they are with dealing with child assaulters. on may 17, the sfpd were protecting and abating known child assaulters and former israeli prime minister ah

ahad barak. so the sfpd is going around being all big and bid, when they're protecting the enemies of not only san francisco by the american people. so the sfpd is engaged in treason, which is war against the people. i see we have a lot of legal scholars. do any of you know what the punishment is for war against the people? it's capital punishment. does anyone know what capital punishment is? that's execution. so all the police and everyone up here by association is subject to capital punishment under the law. if you call yourself law enforcement, you should understand that. i assume you've read the constitution, which is the law of the land. and another thing, as far as chief scott saying he doesn't know what got the porta potties. i was talking to the man who claimed he got them who was former military, allegedly, so when you asked, did the city

get the porta potties, and oh, it was military personnel, the city might have had a hand in it. chief scott, you've been kind of duplicitous, kind of dishonest, so i'm here saying the police need to be abolished. i want the war to stop. when someone is engaged in war against you, your option is to kill them before they kill you or get them to surrender. the sfpd is engaged in war against the people, and that's treason, and the punishment for that is capital punishment, and you all know what to do, turnover your weapons, surrender, and abolish this criminal organization. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you. next speaker. >> hi. good evening. i was here last week, and you

directed me to the attention of lieutenant yamaguchi. as i said previously, he did not help me, and he still has not helped me, and it's been months. [inaudible] >> -- no contact was made. it was a 3.5 hour stakeout, attempted force entry, threats of a search warrant while we were asleep. furthermore, this now has launched a miscellaneous investigation by the f.c.u. what does that mean? what is a miscellaneous investigation? sergeant, you, from the s.v.u. didn't seem to know. the f.b.i. seemed perplexed on what a miscellaneous investigation is. i still don't know. i still don't have any answers.

and when i asked lieutenant yamaguchi, he said, the police can investigate anything they want. how is that possible? furthermore, captain engler of the northern station said i'm a reportee on my own incident report. why would i call the police on myself? it makes no sense. he didn't seem concerned about his officers behavior. he didn't think it was strange that i would call the police to do a check on my daughter and myself. i just don't understand why my civil rights are continuing to be violated again and again and again and again because i happen to know an off duty sfpd officer. i'm a resident of the marina,

and i'm a tax paying citizen, and i demand answers to what's going on. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you very much. next speaker. >> hello there. i was there during the i.c.e. occupation. i just wanted to say that the police chief, when you were talking about the raid that happened on that encampment, you made it seem like oh, you know, since two days, police giving warnings every two hours, etcetera. that was -- that was maybe a couple officers in a car, giving warnings. and then, at 12:30 in the morning, when the camp was actually raided, there were, you know, hundreds -- probably at least 100 cops that rolled up without any warning, right? didn't let people leave at that point. at no point were there a force of officers there that were capable of dealing with raiding

that camp which was what you all's intent was, all right, against the sanctuary city policy. the intention was clearly to try to catch people who were in that camp who were, you know, may have had serious consequences if they were caught because, you know, homeland security, maybe i.c.e. was after them. i just wanted to say that about your comments -- >> commissioner mazzucco: sir, you have to direct your statements to the entire commission. >> i wants to say that about the police chief's comments, warnings were given, oh, we gave everybody as much of a chance as they were. no. they had two officers there, once in a while, two cars there. they were saying the same thing, and then they hit the camp hard with eight or nine -- i couldn't tell how many.

and people came back afterward to try to film -- it was undercover the darkness. i came out afterwards trying to film. i was fortunate to get out of camp afterwards, and i came back trying to see what was happening. a block down the street before i could even get there, multiple officers said no, you can't come any closer, this street is closed, prevented anyone from coming closer, at least a street down with vans blocking so no one could come in, no one could tell, and no one could see or document or film what was going on. i wanted to say that. i'll read what i can of my statement. >> i was there when police threatened the campers with protests and violence time and again -- that's not my final. >> commissioner mazzucco: sir, you have 28 seconds. >> -- by day and by night on behalf of the deplorable

enterist organization, i.c.e. i was there for all of it in the city, my home city, which i did live 18 years, and i spend most of my time, in a city which claims to be a sanctuary city, in a state that claims to be a sanctuary state -- [inaudible] muz muz thank you, sir. any further public speakers? hearing none, public comment is closed. if if you want to speak, please lineup. all right. go ahead. >> good evening. last week, i shared with you what happened to an elderly friend of my who was outside the i.c.e. protest on july 9. a few days later i learned how forceful the police officer was when he knocked my friend down with his baton not once but twice. a report was filed by some

witnesses who were present, and i will also file one as advised by you. i don't know -- know if the body cam of the police officer who did this was on. you know, from what i understand, the body cameras were on when the encampment was raided, and think that was inside. i don't think this was outside. we've heard statistics of how many officers have received deescalation training and the concern on the use of force issues. what is of grave concern to me is the disconnect of practice of officers on the streets. i don't know how certain behaviors and practices will be changed, but they do need to be changed to undo years of abuse and mistrust in our communities, especially communities of colors. i leave you with two questions. one, where does the police commission and the san francisco police department stand on the issue of i.c.e.?

two, where does the police commission and the san francisco police department stand on san francisco being a sanctuary city? there's one comment that -- another comment. i understood that there were two people that were hospitalized, you know, from this incident, and no mention was mentioned about that. i understand they were both released from the hospital now. thank you. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you. public comment's now closed. commissioner dejesus? >> commissioner dejesus: i guess -- i know there were five uses of force. the five uses of force, those are the -- i call them bean bags, but they are -- >> e.r. w. >> yeah, those are the e.r. w.'s, and i guess we would look back at the use of force and see why you had to use them. the people that were hopsized,

about they hospitalized because of the use of weapons? >> one was hospitalized -- it was a bodily force use of force, and he was treated and released. hang on one second here, commissioner. >> extended range impact weapon. >> so one of the persons that was taken was due to physical control hold, and the second person that was treated and released was the person that was struck by the e.r. w., the

extended range impact weapon round, and they were both released. >> commissioner dejesus: and the other question i had was somebody mentioned that people were -- and i don't know if this was accurate, that some people were caught for i.c.e. i'm not saying that's true or not, but i'm wondering, was the department looking for anybody in particular for i.c.e., or did the department respond to complaints from i.c.e. to clear the streets? >> no. there was no involvement whatsoever from i.c.e. or homeland security on this operation, and nobody was held or detained or any of that for i.c.e. immigration was not an issue for any of our action. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you, chief. please call line item 2. >> clerk: line item 2, discussion and possible action to temporarily modified d.g.o.

10.01, uniform and equipment, action. >> commissioner mazzucco: good evening, deputy chief connolly. >> mike connolly from professional standards who oversees written directives. i'm here to introduce sergeant ray padmore who will be discussing department rule 18-135. the pink patch project is for breast cancer awareness as it does temporarily modify department general order 10.1, and as such, that's why i'm introducing them. sergeant padmore? >> thank you, chief. >> commissioner mazzucco: good evening, sergeant. >> good evening, vice president mazzucco, esteemed members of the police commission, chief scott, director henderson, and members of the public. my name is ray padmore, and my intention through my presentation this evening is

really two ford, to share -- twofold. to share the pink patch project, and to share the intention of the san francisco police department to participate in this amazing, amazing project. it started in 2016 with several different public safety agencies around the nation. members of the participating agencies, such as we hope to ourselves, will wear the patches on their uniform for the entire month of october each year during breast cancer awareness month. some of the benefits i highlighted, and there are many, each agency participating will be partnering with a cancer research organization. it just so happens that ours will be the bay area cancer connection, local 501(c)3.

so through. p.o.a., pink patches will be sold to officers that desire. it's not compulsory. it's not mandatory by any stretch of anyone's imagination. if they desire to be part of this great cause in which all of the proceeds will go to this nonprofit i just mentioned. the pink patches are intended to stimulate conversation with the community and to encourage public awareness about the importance of early detection and the ongoing fight against this dreadful disease. just some stats. approximately one in eight women will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in her lifetime. it's the second most common cause of death, and almost 2.5 million breast cancer survivors are alive in the

united states today. currently there are 170-plus public service agencies like ours, we hope, from all over this great nation which include law enforcement, fire, emergency medical services, and federal agencies, all participating in this amazing, amazing cause. just to name a few, so down south, los angeles county public safety agencies, all of san jose he's public safety agencies -- san jose's public safety agencies, most of u.c. san francisco is the 14th largest police department in the nation, and as such, we have an obligation to dem stras leadership -- demonstrate leadership in supporting this worthy cause. the month of october is nationally recognized as breast cancer awareness month. the department's participation in solidarity with this cause

will demonstrate our cause to be part of something greater than ourselves, and donate funds donated to research for this cause. in closing, on behalf of the men and women of the san francisco police department, i ask for your favorable, favorable consideration and approval of our request. permit me to call upon officer shawn navarro what the uniform would potentially look like. >> simply stated, this is what this incredible uniform would look like, and we're looking forward to donning this come october. >> commissioner mazzucco: i understand the officers don't wear the patch. we do this amendment to the

dress code, so to speak, the officers can wear pink t-shirts underneath their shirt as opposed to the usually -- >> the black or blue t-shirt, yes, sir. >> commissioner mazzucco: and then e the police officer's association role in this -- i actually see sergeant mccray here -- would you like to say something about this, sergeant mccray? hello, sergeant mccray, how are you? >> vice president, commissioners, chief scott, director henderson, community members, thank you for hearing our presentation. rachel, along with lieutenant hurwitz, sergeant crimiano, when we discussed this about donating the funds to a local organization, i don't think there hasn't been anyone that

hasn't been touched by someone they know having cancer. unfortunately, we've lost active duty members. i believe the last one was lieutenant yvonne pratt to breast cancer, so it touches everyone. our friends, our families, just the community as a whole. so by doing this, raising these funds, donating to a local organization who i believe for the past nine years have had a four-star rating for the work that they do do in the community, what they provide, emotional support, support for caregivers, which is a -- really, a daunting task of having to take care of someone or being there for someone who does, unfortunately, suffer from cancer. so it was our hope that by doing this, raising awareness, joining, as you know, professional leagues, n.f.l.

players, they donned the pimnk. we just wanted to do our part in supporting this community. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you. commission commissioner elias? >> commissioner elias: thank you. i wanted to thank you for bringing this farther and putting this on our agenda. my mom is a two time cancer survivor. i'm wondering if there's an ability to have people donate on behalf of officers so that, you know, i know that people can get the patches themselves, but if people were able to donate, and then, you were able to provide officers who hadn't, you know, purchased the patch, if that would be possible. >> of course. we'll take it all. >> commissioner mazzucco: commissioner dejesus says she wanted to buy several. >> yeah. you can buy them. pink is your color.

but there's a mechanism by people to do that. >> also, buy extra back donated to the department? >> yeah. >> yeah. i just wanted to add through this local agency, if they wanted to go to the website specifically, they can do that, as well. so this is just one mechanism through the police department, but we will put them in contact with this agency, which is -- it's as local as it gets. the bay area cancer connection, and their goal, as sergeant mccray mentioned, personal support to breast and ovarian cancer patients and their families, so it's pretty broad in terms of the services they provide. >> all right. thank you. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> thank you. thank you so much. thank you for doing that. >> commissioner mazzucco: so what we're going to do here is we have to make an amendment to the uniform department general order for purposes of this october, so i'll ask, do i have a first and a second, and we'll go to public comment. >> so moved.

>> commissioner mazzucco: do i have a second? >> so moved. >> commissioner mazzucco: any public comment regarding this? has to be regarding this. >> okay. i agree. i stipulate to that because i, too, have family members that are on the receiving end of breast cancer, and because you are law enforcement, i think it's ideal for you to take not only this up in the organization, but also how a lot of this assault cancer is affecting females that worked at the shipyard, and also in your jurisdiction of treasure island. there's three different types of materials causing cancer in females and birth defects coming from that shipyard. >> commissioner mazzucco: all right. thank you very much. any further public comment regarding this? all in favor?

[voting] >> commissioner mazzucco: it's unanimous. thank you very much, again, to sergeant and everybody who did this. thank you. [applause] >> commissioner mazzucco: please call the next line item. >> clerk: item three, presentation of sfpd general policy proposal sparks report, first and second quarter 2018. discussion. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you very much. we have deputy chief connolly and samra marrian from the d.p.a. to give the report. >> okay. vice president mazzucco, chief scott, director henderson, and

commissioners, covering the first and second quarter 2018, the sparks report, which is a reporting out on our policy and development. i'll switch over microphones. in essence, i'm going to be very brief in my comments. the numbers speak for themselves. there have been 123 bulletins issued in the last six months. 64 a priority bulletins, 54 b, and eight c. at the bottom, it is reporting, you see department general orders. the next -- the following six slides are those general orders in your packet. i am not going to go through them all, but i will tell you that there's 21 general orders in progress. of the 21 general orders, six are directly related to the department of justice, 272

recommendations. four are currently with the california state department of justice for their review and input in conjunction with the memorandum of understanding with them, and additionally, there's one department bulletin that is with the department of justice, and that has to do with the -- the limited english program or the l.e.p. program. again, they're in your packet. you also have a listing of the all department bulletins, primarily the a and b bulletins. on the final page of the -- the -- let me move forward here. these are the objectives from the -- the federal use of -- or excuse me, the federal department of justice report. those are the objective areas. there are a total of 74 recommendations out of the 272

that point back or speak to some areas of policy development. as you can see, by the 21 general orders and the numerous bulletins that we have been working diligently on this. it is a capacity, too. there's always competing interest, but we have prioritized most of these orders -- in fact, all of them, but you will be discussing that at a different time outside of this presentation. so other than that, it's open for questions. i do know d.p.a. has the second half of the presentation in conjunction with the sparks report. >> commissioner mazzucco: we can move through the second half and then we'll have questions. >> good evening, commissioners, chief scott, deputy director henderson and members of the community. it's my pleasure to be able to talk tonight about four main policy projects we've been working on for quite sometime, but we took the time to not only give you a cover

highlights of those four policy projects but also to give you an indepth recommendations. and a few of them also have action items for this commission, so those four areas are use of force review, interactions with deaf and hard of hearing individuals, some language access recommendations, as well as reports provided to victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking and el der abuse. so to start with our number one priority, it involves a robust review of use of force incidents. and when the d.o.j. reviewed the firearm discharge review board, which is the way in which historically officer involved shootings have been reviewed, they made some really important recommendations to really enhance that process so that it would be an opportunity to look at tactics, training, policy. and building on that, our agency, we looked at what lapd has historically done in terms of looking at their officer

involved shooting cases. and in february , we had an opportunity to go to seattle. and we purposely picked seattle because in part they're really at the forefront of some reforms. there's many similarities to our own city and to our own use of force policy, and san francisco police department has also worked with seattle specifically around crisis intervention team work, so we thought this would be a great opportunity to see the kind of reforms that they had done. we invited the police department to accompany us on this trip, and it was really an informative trip. i wanted to spend a little time talking about it because it really forms the nature of our policy recommendations. when we went there, we had an opportunity to not only meet with their use of force unit, and that's a unit that's reviewing all of their use of force cases, we had an opportunity to look at their use of force investigative unit, as well. and that's another -- another aspect where they're able to look at and really delve into

use of force, and we were able to spend several hours listening to their use of force process. it was a really robust discussion where there were different kinds of sergeants who were providing detailed responses and critiques on their use of force cases. so based on looking at what lapd has done, discussions with the chief specifically around being able to replace a firearm discharge review board with something broader like a serious incident review board as well as looking at some of the accountability features that seattle has in terms of the kinds of reports, we've made a number of recommendations, and the first is to create a serious incident review board to replace the firearm discharge review board so there could be a broader array of reviews, so those kind of cases that involve more serious injuries, certain kinds of cases, perhaps with the eriw injuries to the head, there would be the opportunity to

have a much more robust review process. we have also made recommendations to categorize the types of force so that there's a stream lined way of reviewing certain types of cases. other types of cases would have less serious review. to have this force investigative team, from our perspective, we could see what currently is an involve involved shooting team to be expanded so that there's a way in which there'd be greater response for more serious incidents, and then, to have this review unit so all uses of force would be reviewed through a particular kind of unit. and ultimately, during the review process, similar to what is best practice now, to be able to look at deescalation, officer decision making tactics. of course we're looking at the use of force in policy or not, but also concerning quality of supervision, the quality of the investigation and equipment issues. and in ward, we recommend

there's a template for looking at those types of issues, that there's a report that's provided at the end of that process and there's a report that's provided to the public. so again, there's more accountability, there's more transparency. and ultimately, one of our recommendations is to move this process along because we've been in process. we're talking to the department about it. we've gathered best practice research, but our recommendation is that this commission move forward with having a small stakeholder group that can really formulate what does the use of force or the serious incident review board like like? what are the components? what does that department general order look like so there's a working group that can pull together that -- that d.g.o., present it to this commission. but i would also recommend, and our recommendation is that there be site visits. when we embarked on c.i.t. back in 2010, it was a huge move forward, and part of the process was to have a working group. we did site visits, we look the at lapd, we looked at memphis,

and it was an opportunity to get from subject matter experts an opportunity to see what's different, what could be applied to san francisco, so that's part of our recommendation. so that's our number one recommendation, and i don't know if it makes sense to talk about each one and take questions and then move through the -- >> commissioner mazzucco: one thing is yeah, we're going through the sparks report, and i know that commissioner turman would have had a heart attack. >> that's why i did a cover letter. >> commissioner mazzucco: so we're covering the high points. we're not getting into detail and making cases for or against these different things. so what we need to do is just stick to this is what we recommend. this is what we look to look at when we revise that department general order. so i hate to limit you, but we have to keep on the time limit. >> commissioner dejesus: i have some questions about this. we have sat on the firearms

discharge review board. when i hear you talking about the serious incident review board, we're talking about the serious ones, not when somebody is taking off their weapon, and it discharges. having sat on there, sometimes there is robust discussions, sometimes there's not. so you talk about a template, that they would have to go through a check list each time. i think that's a great idea. so when you get done, part of it is what's the next steps to really get this thing moving forward. >> and that's where -- i mean, part of our recommendation to the commission is that there be a working group so that we're able to move forward. we've had ongoing discussions with the police department and we're really wanting to move it to the next level. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. great. is that what we have to calendar? >> commissioner mazzucco: yeah. >> thank you. so that's our top recommendation. so the second is working with deaf and hard of hearing individuals. so in february , i initiated a

working group with deaf and hard of hearing individuals with the hope to put together a department general order. we've been working on that for quite sometime with the police department. at this stage, we are almost completed with the department general order. the department's had a chance to look at it. and part of why we're bringing it to the commission at this moment of time is in september, will be national deaf and hard of hearing awareness month. we'd like to calendar it for september so that we could actually roll it out, individuals from the working group could attend. it just seems it would be a great time and to have that deadline in place. again, our request is we're able to calendar it for september and move forward on training and -- and get the department general order to you for september. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. >> so then, the third topic has to do with language access. we have provided really detailed recommendations that we're working on. in the past there has been a

commissioner who has attended our working groups. that commissioner is no longer. our request is if there is interest, a commissioner would begin attending our language access meetings. the next one is next month. i don't have the date right offhand, but it's the third week in august. it would be great to have that continuity with the working group. and then, the next recommendation has to do with sexual assault, and elder abuse. and we've worked for over a yoer to have the department comply with family code section 6228 because by law, those enumerated victims have a right to have their victim incident report within five days. for good cause, the latest is within ten days. we've worked with the department to get a procedure in place, but there's still a lot of glitches. and again, we're bringing these recommendations to the commission so that there really can be full implementation, and

our request is that there be quarterly reporting to the commission on compliance with 6228 because it's been such an ongoing issue that's been raised in numerous cases. we've tried to resolve it, but it's been an ongoing problem. so tho can concludeds my report in terms of our four main policy areas. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you. and your report is very thorough, always extremely thorough. >> i just wanted to say, samra, those of you that have been on the commission for a while, and we've been talking for at least the last year, refocusing a lot of these sparks reports, and in the past, you've gotten a lot of the documents that have been presented to you. in my opinion, they've gone kind of like water under the bridge, and so with any position, we're trying to get a new position with the sparks report so they're a more focused and meaningful presentation with the topic

issues. we're taking the top priorities and focus on issues when they become ripe or that we feel that they're ripe for the commission to take action which is why you're getting these four with the recommendation on each of the topics which is to create the serious incident review board, to attend the hard of hearing board -- i probably should have explained it before we made the presentation, but i just wanted to answer the unasked questions of how and why we're approaching the sparks report in this manner to make it more efficient and effective for the commission. thank you, samra for doing all the work and helping us get her. >> commissioner mazzucco: commission

commissioner elias. >> commissioner elias: thank you. i guess my question would be how we would get the police department with respect to the firearm review board. >> commissioner mazzucco: commissioner dejesus? >> commissioner dejesus: i was -- first of all, i want to applaud you for telling us next steps. the serious review board is something that's near and dear. i think i've been asking for a variety of different reviews. so i would ask to put it on calendar, whether this commission will agree to put together a working group with the department and all the different groups that we're going to include to talk about serious incident review board and moving that forward in terms of following the recommendation. i also think we should calendar whether we should have quarterly reports for the domestic violence to give the

five days so we can camera out and do what needs to be done with that so we can be in compliance with the law. and the third thing is if no commissioner would sit on the language thing, i'm more than happy to do that. >> commissioner mazzucco: all right. thank you. anything further? any public comment regarding line item 3, the sparks report? just for reference, the -- hearing no public comment, the sparks report named after former commission president teresa sparks, 'cause we're trying to keep up with all the general department orders and changes. we've dealt with things on an emergency basis with the department of general orders because it's become an issue. what we're trying to do recently is we're trying to mirror the reforms that were requested by the u.s. department of justice. obviously if they think it's a priority then we've been prioritizing those. with reference to serious

incident review board, commissioner dejesus is right. we both have sat on that, and actually it's getting a little more robust, i have to tell you the last couple of times. there's been some discussion thanks to the participation of the d.p.a., well, how would this look under the new department order? i have to tell you there's been more questioned being asked by the members of the command staff. that is important that we do look at that because you know, things will change, and we start -- you know, the public wants to see -- in any serious incident, they want to review. and i think what happens for members of the public, things happen, and they say what can they train to do differently. we're always looking to

improve, and that's part of our role to make sure that happens. i appreciate your efforts, and again, thanks for sticking around. >> yeah, yeah, yeah. >> commissioner mazzucco: please call our next line item. >> clerk: item four has been put over. we're now on item five, general public comment. [agenda item read] >> commissioner mazzucco: good evening again, sir. by the way, your research on the statute of limitations was

excellent, and it was right. go ahead. we'll start your clock. >> i want to close by answering a question that was presented by your staff. sfg, please. this is the senate bill that you were curious about, the companion bill in the state assembly, ab 3118 is the one that was in question, authorized by assembly man david chiu, democrat of san francisco will compel a statewide audit by 2019 of police agencies, hospitals, crime labs, and any other facility that handles or stores sart, which is assault kits, so get the definition -- definite count of the backlog of untested assault kits in california.

a number that currently only exists in -- san jose police only has assault kits totals going back to 2012. moreover, a joyful heart foundation, a nationwide sad voe cassy -- advocacy group helped craft along with chiu an estimate that the state backlog numbers at more than 13,000 assault kits based on available records and public records requests. it is believed that the actual total is likely thousands more, and is chronicled at thebacklog.org. and i believe that and i'll stipulate to that because at

hearings when representatives for females spoke how at san francisco general hospital during one time frame, there were about 260 reports of assault to the hospital. during another time frame, there was another 300 victims that came into the general hospital. then in another time period, there was another maybe 2 or 300 victims that came into the general hospital. in fact during the hearings before the board of supervisors, it was testified to that there was one year, about 500 assault kits came to the general hospital. then, another year, about 450 assault kits were taken from victims of assault at general hospital, so the number is a lot higher, and i know what i've seen on an educational show. when they showed that storage room at the hall of justice, the assault kits and numbered were stacked up to the ceiling. so that's a major problem.

and also, i notice in the documentation from staff where they were talking about the -- [inaudible] >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you, sir. your three minutes are up. thank you very much for your presentation. any further public -- general public comment? yes, sir. >> hello. pleasure to be brief. my name is jonathan burger. i'm a resident of san francisco and i work at a technology company here in the city. the thing that brought me here today was a question/comment about car break-ins. given my first meeting here with the commission, i'm not sure if the public comments are always as negative or as critical as i saw today. but i wanted to -- >> commissioner mazzucco: oh, they are. >> they are? okay. i suppose i -- i wanted to add that that i think it's clear to most citizens, you can't block a public street for seven days, and i very much appreciate the

police's difficult job in that matter, so thanks. >> commissioner mazzucco: thank you. any further public -- general public comment? hearing none, general public comment is now closed. and actually, i should say, we do get a lot of positive comments. but people come, and this is their opportunity to say good or bad things. we do see some of the same crowds that bring up the bad i think thises all the time. but our job is to sit here, listen, and do the best job that we can. next item. >> clerk: item 6, adjournment. action item. >> commissioner mazzucco: do i have a motion? >> motion. >> second. >> that was quick. thank you very much. we're now adjourned.

[pledge of allegiance] >> clerk: this is a reminder to silence all electronic devices. our commission regular meeting,

wednesday, august 8