thinking and looking when it comes to water supply.

>> routine by the san francisco public utilities commission. we act upon by a single vote of the commissioner with no separate discussion unless a member of the commission or public requests in which event the matter will be removed from the calender and considered as a separate item. >> any requests from the commission or public to remove an item. >> approval. >> second. >> any public comments. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> item 13 approve amendments 5 to agreement number c f-2 254 and ex u for total duration of n years with no change to the

agreement amount. >> move a trough. >> second. >> any public comment. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> opposed. >> approved. >> next item. >> technical services applied technology in science and associates consulting engineers award agreements number pro a-c to negotiate ex execute three professional agreements. each for an amount not to exceed 14 million with a duration of 10 years. >> i move it. >> second. >> public commented. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> next item, please. >> item 15 approve amendment 1 to agreement number (100)000-9233 and authorize the agreement by 168,532 for a total contract not to exceed $268,032 and extending the term

by three years. >> move approval. >> second. >> public comment. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> item 16 approval the plans and in the amount of 38,449,000 to the lowest qualified responsible bidder miner a mechanical. >> so moved. >> second. >> public comment. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> approved. >> approve the plan specifications in award contract number w674r in 9 amount of 16,246,547 to the lowest responsive bidder jmb construction. >> so moved. >> second. >> public comment. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> approved. >> new business. is there any public comments for any new business? >> this meeting is adjourned.

>> i would like to call role. >> please do. [roll call] >> thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen cackle

welcome to the wednesday, september 5th, 2018 san francisco police commission meeting. you can see we are high and tight to tonight. we have four members that we will try and get through our business as efficiently as possible. without further ado, please call line item number 1. >> line item number 1 is adoption of minutes. minutes of august 15th, 2018. >> in your pockets are the minutes from our meeting of august 15th. any corrections, changes or thoughts? hearing non, do i have a motion? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> any public comment about minutes? all in favor agree pleas call the next line item. >> line to, reports to the commission discussion. chief's reports. report on recent police department activities including recent events,, time trends and announcements. the firearm discharge review review board findings and recommendations and ois summary

report. presentation of the second quarter 2018 audit of electronic communication devices for bias. update evolving initiative. update involving the homeless initiative. >> good evening. welcome. >> good evening commission. i will start off the chief's report with our crime statistics for the week starting with the violent crime. homicides, we are 28% down from this time last year. forty-six year to date. 2017 as opposed to 33 in 2018. we are at 6.29% down in our rate a difference of about 18 crimes. the robberies we are down 2.84% which is about a 63 crimes a difference. we were at 2185 this time last year. we are at 2123 year to date.

fifty-two crimes. assaults, we are 1.9% up year to date. 1,789 this time last year and 1,824 year to date. human trafficking we have seen a significant increase. twenty-one reports of human trafficking this time last year. and we have 65 year to date which is a 209% increase. total violent crimes were down just under one% over this time last year which is a difference of about 13 fewer crimes. property crimes, we are overall a 7.54% lower than we were this time last year. 42,00031 year to date. -- 42,031 year to date. as you all no kak we have been tracking vigourously the auto burglaries in the city. we are 15.9% down in auto burglaries. we had 20,664 at this time last

year. we are a 17,375 year to date. we did have one significant crime to report last week. we had a homicide on september 5 th. the 300 block of van ness avenue the officers responded -- that was last night which was actually going to be -- that one is not a homicide. at this time, we think it is a suspicious death and to we are waiting on the medical examiner to return the findings on that one. significant events, upcoming, i mentioned in the last police commission meeting about the death of a man who wasn't -- who was an intervention worker. his services coming up. will be on september 8th, 2018 on september 9th, 2018. again, it is a tragic incident.

he was shot in the middle of the day several weeks ago. he passed away on august 22nd. he spanned basic nip again portion of his life trying to help the city and address our street violence in the city. he was well loved by the community as well as his family. we are still asking for anyone who might have any information leading to the suspect's identity to reported to the san francisco police department. we are assisting a coordination of the vigil on and the memorial service to make sure that they are safely and everyone in attendance is safe. at this point, no arrests have been made on this particular case. there was an incident last week at balboa high school that i would like to report. it was a shot that was fired inside the school. our officers responded and

worked in conjunction with the school district personnel. we did make an arrest on that particular case. fortunately, no one was injured. it did cause a lockdown of the high school as well as the middle school. the response and coordination was good on that case and it was -- there was an arrest made on a juvenile. in that case, the high school -- there was a high school student. the investigation is still ongoing. luckily no one got hurt. in terms of our staffing, we had a lateral graduation class that the commission attended last week. we welcomed six lateral officers to the san francisco police department and to these officers have prior experience. a variety of police departments in the bay area. we are very happy to have them here. it is a first class in a number of years.

because of their prior experience, we hope that they can hit the ground running. thank you commissioners for being there. just a little bit of facts on our graduates, two of them have bachelors degrees. we have one officer who speaks cantonese and mandarin. they are a ten week fto program. thank you for being there. that is the highlights for the week. a late week in terms of crime and significant incidents. next we have a sergeant here for the use of force and firearm discharging findings and recommendations. >> while he is coming up, this commissioner has a question. >> i got a lot of calls about balboa high school and they understand the juvenile who was arrested was not arrested in the high school.

but there were juveniles who were marched out in front of the crowd in custody, so to speak. i thought we treated dubin jos juvenile somewhat differently. people are concerned about exposing these young juveniles as perpetrators and some of them were not. going from the star football team to a suspected felon. i don't know if we followed the juvenile procedure but i don't know why we would -- i am just wondering what your take on that is. >> first and foremost, when you have a firearm discharge in a school, the first consideration is the safety of everybody involved. teachers, students and everybody including officers that are responding. there is a lot of anxiety right now on that topic. it is a very sensitive matter. what officers respond, they have to be concerned about several factors including panic. because of the number of shootings we have seen in schools in the recent history in

this country, and in other countries as well, we really do take the tactics of those types of incidents very seriously. of course, we want to be as respectful if possible when dealing with that situation. however, when officers go into a situation where a shot has been fired, they don't know who is armed and who is not armed. they have to use tactics that allow them to make sure that people, when they are moved from one site to another, they are safe. those tactics were employed. the officers, as far as everything that i have heard about the situation and have been briefed on, use the appropriate tactic to make sure everyone was safe. there was some evidence that was discovered during the investigation that led us to not only the fire alarm, which is still on campus, but also to that individual was that turned himself in and was arrested. >> i -- my understanding is after the lack -- after the

lockdown. that is when the juveniles came out. correct me if i am wrong. that is when i have been told. at that point, that lockdown was quite a while and he had the gun and you had juveniles and some. i am asking what your take is on that in terms of that with their privacy. >> privacy is always an issue. but the fact of the matter is, there were shots fired and until you have a situation resolved in the classroom searched, the officers have no idea if it is one gun, two guns. >> i understand that but this was after all the lockdown was lifted. after all that. i'm more concerned about that point when there was a crisis or that part of it was done. >> if i may interject, i watched some of the news coverage on this. it was obvious the officers were making an effort to protect the miner was brought in custody and they were concealing him. the problem was there were news helicopters that were filming it from above.

whatever the officers did wasn't going to prevent the act of it -- identification of the suspect was wearing the 40 niner gear. i did see that on the news. it is not with the officers, it is a news coverage of. >> i was aware of the news footage as well. to your question, commissioner, whether we were appropriate in the tactics that were used, my assessment is we were appropriate in the tactics. these are very dangerous situations. there is tactical measures that have to be taken to make sure that everybody is safe. >> i understand that part. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, i am currently assigned to the train division. but i'm here to report on the officer involved shootings investigations and the current status in the previous piece. just a review of material that

has privacy been distributed, and i believed tom has it on the table here. there are a couple of things that relate to us that are given out every time we give this report. one is some documentation. internal documentation including a letter that is written to the commission. and some summaries of the involved incidents. those are on the table following a summary of the business conducted, with some detail and specificity. in addition, there are copies of internal memos written through the chain of command of internal affairs that covers the snapshot of the status of the officer involved shooting investigations where things are, at the moment, at the time that the different memos are dated. the memos that you have would be dated july 30th. that was a snapshot at the time and preparation and whatnot.

we will be talking about the second quarter, 2018. there were five cases that were wrapped up and two that were presented to the final review board. we will talk about each of those briefly. again, in the documentation, a little more information about those. by 1504 occurred st. patrick's day, approximately 7:00 pm. around the area of van ness and pine street. and in that one, plainclothes officers were conducting an investigation regarding a reported stolen vehicle. when officers walked up to the parked vehicle, the suspect accelerated from them and attempted to force their way through pedestrian and vehicle

traffic. the suspect drove onto oncoming traffic and onto sidewalks and round numerous stopped and occupied vehicles. during this, two of the officers fired at the driver, mortally wounding her. the recommendation with regards to the use of firearm in this case was in policy. there was also a finding that the officers were not properly equipped at the time of the incident. the chief has recommendations. some additional notes from that, adds that were points of discussion during the meeting, the firearm policy was revised after this incident, effective 12, 21, 16. to prevent -- dust prohibits the use of a firearm -- a prohibits the use of a firearm of an occupied vehicle. training has been modified accordingly. that use of force has been delivered to our members. the officer involved shooting

1507 occurred october 15th, 2015 at noon. eighth street near market street in this one, two uniformed officers were flagged down. this is regarding someone throwing bottles at cars. the two sergeants contacted the subject who physically, suddenly physically attacked the sergeant -- sergeants nearest to him, causing the sergeant some injuries and a violent take down the suspect pinned to the sergeant and drew his firearm from his holster and pointed the weapon at his face. while the injured sergeant struggled for control of his firearm, the second sergeant fired at the suspect two times, fatally injuring the suspect. recommendation to the chief was that the use of firearm was in policy and chiefs got confirmed. in additional notes, one of the things that was determined in the course of the investigation

was there was a vulnerability identified in older generation holsters previously issued to patrol. all officers not equipped with the proper holster where then order to exchange their older holster for the more secure model now deployed. this was at their mandatory firearms qualifications. the officer involved shooting 15,008 occurred october 24th. 8:00 am. and the shooting was at the egress point on the main gate of treasure island. in this incident, a marked vehicle had been stolen in the marina district and officers searched for the vehicle citywide. the vehicle was reported ramming vehicles throughout the city and causing accidents on the citywide rampage. the suspect was located while entering treasure island and the pursuit was initiated.

two officers began to prepare a roadblock at the main gate, during that time, the suspect doubled back towards the officers. the suspect accelerated in the direction of the officers before swerving towards an occupied bus stop and driving on the sidewalk in the direction of civilians who were gathered over by the seawall in that area. that you officers that had been trying to establish the roadblock fired two rounds of the driver. they struck the vehicle but did not hit the driver. the driver continued his flight, crashing his vehicle further while he tried to get back on the bay bridge. after a short foot pursuit, he was taken into custody. the use of firearm recommendation was in effect, excuse me, in policy based on the policy that was in effect at the time. one of the officers was determined not to have been properly equipped. chief scott concurred with the recommendations, and again,

their prohibition of firearms, using a firearm at the occupant of a vehicle in the vehicle is the weapon, that policy has been enacted since this incident. officer involved shooting 15,010 occurred december 2nd 2015 around 4:34 pm. around the 2900 block of chief street near fitzgerald. and this one, officers were searching for a suspect to stab someone and they had located the suspects near third. this was near a busy bus stop. numerous officers responded and set up a perimeter and attempted to contain the suspect within the perimeter. he refused to drop his weapon and a succession of lethal force options were deployed without success. the arm suspect attempted to leave the perimeter, heading towards one of the officers who retreated as the armed suspect near the officer, five of the

officers fired at the suspect, fatally wounding him. the recommendation was that the use of firearms in this instance was in policy based on the policy in effect at the time of the incident and chief scott concurred. additional discussion at the fdr be, the use of firearm policy was revised, again, december 21 st, 2016. training including a range, ao, advance officer cpt, continuing professional training. it has been modified and the use of force delivered to patrol that incorporates the i.t. concepts and with a greater emphasis on de-escalation. there were other things immediately done after this incident including a short-term bayview station where it was no longer a training station. that was sorted out. but the department has sent a response and develop training with respect to field tactics

and see that it incorporates the i.t. concepts. and then officer involved shooting 17,008 that occurred december 18th, 2018. approximately 1:25 pm. it was on the location of hilltop mall road in richmond. in that one, an officer who was the subject of an internal criminal investigation, during, the officer had been the subject of a criminal investigation and during the execution of a search warrant related to this investigation, a traffic stop was acted out. in conjunction with internal affairs. during a traffic spot -- traffic , he shot himself fatally with a personal owned firearm. any time, even a self-inflicted gunshot wound is examined as an

officer involved shooting. in this case, the recommendation was that you did this use firearm was not in policy. one of the things that came out of it was the fdr b. did direct review of a warrant service matrix which had been using -- used in this instance, just to make sure it is properly assessing the situation when the subject of a warrant is a police officer. there is a review of that. the death review board, there were no investigations presented in the quarter. just in terms of the status of open officer involved shooting investigations, as of august 14 th, 2018, one this presentation was prepared, there were 14 open sfpd investigations since i last appeared in front of you, which was april 11th,

2018, to discuss the status of the cases, we heard significant milestones are places where cases are. we have two new investigations that were opened. it opened may 11th, 2018. nine cases still have active criminal investigations with the sfpd or the d.a.'s office. this is as of august 14th. three of those cases, of those that are criminal, at three of them also have an open medical -- an open investigation with the medical examiner. we did receive, during that time , one of the outstanding medical examiner reports and we received one from the contra

costa eat corner -- contra costa corner. we did receive a charging decisions in three cases since i last presented to you. that was four for 15,010 and 16 -- 16,001. it was dated july 24th, 2018. that is a snapshot of where we are. i wanted to update this lightly today, just because we expect to present at the next meeting. 16,003 is being readied for presentation. 17,001 has ongoing criminal proceedings related to the case. 17,003 and 17,004 are being prepared for fdr be.

at 17,000 has an active criminal investigation and final homicide and the final admin ports are being prepared for 17,006 and they have active investigations for the remaining cases listed. that is where we are. >> thank you, sergeant. that is a thorough report. for members of the public, we are using terms like fdr b. which is firearm discharge review board. if you could tell the public, who is on the review board a little bit about the process and report out on these different incidents and we hear that they are in policy and some things have changed as a result of these incidents. who is present and how does a policy and of changing? >> yes, sir. the firearm discharge review

board is an executive review of the completed investigations. internal affairs does a summary report that includes our own administrative investigation as well as the criminal findings and presents that to the executive review board, which would include the deputy chief of administration, airport, field operations and special operations. they review and consider the findings. in addition, a police commissioner's presence and d.p.a. is represented. police academy training division is presented. the risk-management captain, the officer in charge of internal affairs division, the sfpd range master, and to the internal affairs investigators who prepared the summary report.

the findings of the investigation are presented. there is a powerpoint. in each case is delved into. all of the confidential reports, photographs, all the confidential pieces are distributed to members to consider and read and dig down into the investigation before the presentation. then the presentation is given and the board kind of discusses the recommendations with respect to all in policy are not in policy findings. internal affairs, as well as anything else, that they may deem necessary and appropriate. >> for the record, the police commissioner that is present, and him both of these, there was two members of the d.p.a. present, we are not voting members. we do participate in a conversation, the questioning, and making recommendations. the voting is done within those with the experience and expertise within the police department, correct? >> yes, sir.

it is an internal review before the case is finalized and presented to the chief to really make his final say. at the end of the day, the way that we are set up is the chief has the final determination on the findings. >> having been there, it is a very robust conversation. it is extremely thorough. and some hard questions will get asked. >> yes. i wanted to no kak for out of the five cases you presented were from 2015. the fifth case was from 2017 which is a self-inflicted gunshot wound. why are they taking three years to come before the board? what is the delay? >> we had a backlog. i would say, within three quarters, probably 2426 cases. something like that. in fact a couple of my coworkers are right here behind me right now. they are with me and going to

training. there are three investigators. the chief gave us a directive. part of what we had been doing before was waiting for some kind of finding in the criminal case. we wanted to have a determination with regards to that because that does factor into the considerations on the admin side. there is a dependency on that. but we went ahead on the d.a. side, they accelerated their process and they're getting things turned out a lot quicker. we have streamlined certain things on our side. once we have an idea of where the criminal investigation is landing, we are working on getting these things finished up with regards to -- we have other cases. there are other cases from 17 that have been closed. a self-inflicted investigation, for example, i want to say is

easy but it is a lot less complex. in that case, the turnaround times by the criminal investigators and the coroner's office were significantly faster we were able to -- in terms of our workload, it is a measure of where to put the resource. we get something off our plates and we are anxious to do that. like i said, there are five more cases that will be presented. we really whittled down to where we should be. >> because out of the eight cases that occurred in 2017, the two that were actually completed were officer involved, where the officer accidentally discharged -- >> less significantly, there's less complexity and less dependency on that. at the end of the day, administratively, it is very clear cut.

>> the indicated earlier, he finally received the medical examiner's report. is a year later that you received this report? >> 17,005, yeah, let me look that one up. >> it took a year for the medical examiner? >> typically it is a year are sometimes longer. we have outstanding cases. sometimes, you know, -- right now -- >> if i would like to interject, to give you a historical perspective, used to take two or three years to get these cases to the firearm discharge review board. the police department was waiting for a case closure from the district attorney's office. there is concern that it was taking three to be long and there is to reach out to the district attorney, explained to

the d.a. that a lot of times, the police departments reach their conclusion, but everybody is waiting to hear what the final say is from the d.a.'s office. the police department no longer say because candidly, their conclusion should be independent from the d.a.'s office. so there's been -- and escalation of speeding up the process. it all started with an officer involved shooting at the airport the san mateo d.a.'s office closed it down in six weeks. so i think that was an example to give impetus for people to do a thorough investigation, but not to let things sit on a desk. said there is a huge backlog four years ago. that backlog has been cleared up and there are more resources being put towards this. there has been a change. >> i believe that one of the dgo is recommended that we not wait for the district attorney anymore. i see one of them from 2016 where it indicated that charging

decision was announced on may 24 th, 2018 and we are finally moving forward on the fdr b. review. [laughter] >> so we are doing this balancing act. it was the chief's directive. all things being equal that we understandably -- we concentrate on the oldest cases and get those done. and then, you know, as it would be, we would get a letter from the district attorney and have all the pieces that we would once we can close the cases. the focus has been a moving target based on what we can get done most effectively. so so there some shifting on that. but i think we have been able to do that well. 17,005, for example, took about

a year to get that. we got it a couple weeks ago. so now, we have enough to wrap it up and get it presented to the fdr b. >> what is a typical turnaround time for the ia reports that are done? >> a week? a matter of weeks. part of it is there is a really in-depth review process before it comes out of our shop. it gets thoroughly reviewed and that takes as much time as anything. typically, we get the pieces that we need to close it out. we close it out and prepare the report. the base report might be 70, 80, 85 pages of information and analysis. that goes through a process of

review, and sometimes reviewers say that we need to flesh this out or this isn't clear. what ever. so there's this whole internal -- within the internal defenders just affairs division, there there's a thorough review process of those reports. and then is a matter of getting materials ready and everything prepared and scanned. in time, to distribute so that the reviewers at the fdr b. haven't enough 7:04 pm to read everything. so we have to get it done in x number of weeks ahead of them and have that. it is always a process. is a process of pushing things out but it is constant. >> if i may add to your question , there are a number of things that we have a streamlined. we have a little bit more work to do. we met with director henderson and this goes on with

coordinating the investigation with the sfpd investigation. so they are able hopefully, to present their findings to the fdr b. as well where it is appropriate. and between the medical examiner sfpd and the d.a.'s office, there is four, sometimes five investigations going on at the same time. ideally, there's a lot of coordination that needs to happen so all the information gets to the people that it needs to get to to make the decision to the chief's office. but i think we are in a much better place. i did give a directive to start with the older ones because we were backlogged. we are at a point now where we will not wait on the district attorney process decision, on a policy decision. that will play out as it will. we do talk to the d.a. and get a feel for where a case is going. but it is a policy decision,

whether it is in policy or out of policy. we are in a much better place and it should get better as we work with d.p.a. to coordinate these investigations. all the information presented will be at the same time. >> it is my understanding that the district attorney's office has two investigations going. one from the d.a.'s office at south and one for their independent investigation bureau is that correct? >> it will conduct -- we conduct a criminal investigation and they also conducted their investigation to make a determination on whether the shooting -- the use of force is legal. it is one investigation from the district attorney's office. it is all it determines -- determining the legality of the shooting. but still, there is some coordination that has to happen. the bottom line is, we don't feel like the recommendation that the d.o.j.

that is where we are right now. basically making that transition >> thank you. sergeant, let me follow-up on questions that have been asked. just to be clear right now, there is no -- you don't take into account the d.a.'s investigation and whether it has been closed or not in conducting your own investigation, correct? >> our direction has been to move away from that. >> is it accurate to say that there is no issues of access to evidence and coordinating with the d.a.'s office? >> no issues of access to evidence. do we have access to evidence, yeah. we do. >> meaning no one is holding you up from doing the job on your

end of things? >> it has not been an issue. i have been doing these for seven years and it has not been an issue. >> what you are saying that because in the past you had relied on the policy waiting for the d.a. office to conclude investigations, that policy has been changed and you can expect it to be wrapped up. >> yes, sir. before our directive was to weight until there was a conclusion on the situation that had been adjudicated. however, we have never not to don the administrative concurrently. so what we typically have a something that is drafted up with pieces missing that we would ideally have an investigation. what our investigation is usually -- had in the past back been pretty well moved along, waiting for the last pieces. that is why once we had -- once

we had the signed documents on our side and approved reports from the others, as well, it was a matter of getting -- >> has their, i may have missed this, but has there been a goal set or a timeline set for concluding these reviews? >> no. no specific timeframe as far as i am aware. in the past, research with other agencies -- 18 months is not in a typical amount time for other agencies. but we've done cases -- i did a very simple case and it was a self-inflicted, but a very simple case that was wrapped up, signed up and delivered before it had a chance to do a return to duty presentation on the case

so because of dependency, they can go very quickly. a medical examiner dependency, you know, we definitely want to know cause of death and we want to know toxicology. we need to know these things. there are dependencies that are out there. analysis, information that we would get from csi. same with the criminal investigation. >> i guess what my questions were getting to, are there any impediments to you conducting your investigation now, we would obviously like to know about them. so if there's anything we can do to assist you in moving the investigations along, we obviously would want to do that as a commission. >> in fact, i feel like we've got pretty good support in getting these things done quickly. i know that i feel very fortunate or have felt very fortunate in my world because through the chain of command,

the folks i have worked with the past three years have been all very sensitive to getting these things wrapped up and done as thoroughly, as and quickly as possible. there is great -- great cooperation with the homicide detail that handles the criminal investigation in these things. and d.p.a., they get all the material we developed. >> one other question. my understanding is with the o.i.s., they -- there either is or will be a switch in the lead agency on the investigations. >> that is above my pay grade. i know there is a discussion about it. >> there is an m.o.u. on the table that the meeting can confer. >> let me follow-up. this might be a completely new be question, but with case

15,004 and 15,008, you mentioned there was issues of not being properly equipped. >> yes. >> can you explain what that means? >> so i have to be careful because we are not allowed to discuss the specifics with regards to an individual officer for the bottom line is this. in the course of an investigation, we may find that an officer didn't have their best or they didn't have general orders. the requirements sometimes a factor in to factor decisions. >> ok. >> we have determined what is a ballistic vest or a bullet resistant vest that the officer wasn't wearing. whatever it may be that comes

through the course of the investigation, maybe it does not have a direct impact of the outcome of the incident. may be, we turned over the rock and we will not ignore it. >> that is what i was trying to understand. if the lack of proper equipment -- if that is a factor in the actual investigation of the discharge, that would be detailed in the actual report, right? >> and definitely a point of discussion at the firearm discharge review board. >> that was not a significant factor? >> no, sir. >> regarding 15,001, is that a particular o.i.s. that was pretty well publicized?

>> i would like to understand a little bit more about the findings in that case and how the determination of this and policy, how did you come to that let me ask some preliminary questions. did this occur under the old use of force policy? >> yes. >> ok. the old use of force policy did not have requirements or guidelines regarding de-escalation, time and distance , using general tactics that are now pretty well accepted in these type of situations? >> i'm very wary of getting into the specifics to drill down on this. but the general order, the old general order did not have the

level that this order has. in this case, there was some review of the tactics. there was a review of the consideration and there was a review of the perceptions of the officers at the scene at the time their efforts to de-escalate or use alternative force options with someone who had committed a violent, deadly assault prior who was in a public arena, and in the area of other people who could have been exposed to violent assaults. >> so going back, can you tell me, or discuss what de-escalation techniques or tactics were used during this investigation? or were analysed during the investigation? >> i did not personally do this investigation.

i can tell you that the different force options were reviewed and the considerations of the officers back in using deadly force, were reviewed, and other force options and other -- including uniform presence, including voice commands, all the officers that fired their weapons had c.i.t. training. some form of its. >> and you are satisfied in the investigation that all de-escalation and c.i.t. tactics were used in this case? >> if i can interject, commissioner, the discharge of the firearm evaluates the tactics. they do evaluate the tactic as to how they impact or effect the

use of the forest that was used. de-escalation and those things are considered and in this particular case, it was verbalization deployed. all of that is evaluated. in terms of whether or not -- how much they use or did they use enough, and that is not a factor, at least in the decision of the firearm discharge review board. you evaluate the tactics and look at what the officers did, and then they have to apply that to whether or not the use of force is within the department's policy. there is no measurement of how much is enough in terms of de-escalation. it goes to a point of what is reasonable. unreasonableness is a standard. i'm not sure if that answers your question.

there is a determination made as to how much escalation there was made. it is evaluated but that is a very difficult measurement in terms of how to objectify what is enough and what isn't enough. >> let me ask a different question. part of the investigation and analysis of these incidents, the departments looks inward and determines whether or not -- not just whether or not something is in policy, but whether it lessons can be learned from that -- from this. to improve tactics and training. did any such improvements or lessons learned arise out of this investigation? >> yes. as i mentioned, new training was developed after this incident that involved the combination of tactics.

there is a 20 hour course of the academy that has a lot of practical exercise reviews. there were some short-term things that were attempted at the station involved. to try and mitigate things. but the bigger picture things involved training and the revision of policy. that included a greater emphasis or more specificity on some of the de-escalation things that you have described their. >> just a little background, being in the discharge review board, they can't wait to -- you will both have that opportunity -- there is not soundbites. it is very thorough in their statements from members of the public who don't want to be public that are reviewed. for the first time, the statements of the officers generally aren't public. their perspectives are given.

these conversations are very robust at his conversations about -- as you said earlier, what can we learn from this and you better? these are thorough conversations and very hard conversations just watching the command staff go through it. i know the d.p.a. participates. these are never good incidents and there is a strive to do better. >> so you have to forgive us, but this is the first time that this is come before the commission. the public needs to know that this commission does not sit on the firearm discharge review board. only one member sits on it. as that member is a guest, none of us vote on whether this is an policy or not. this is an entirely internal decision and we just get to view it as one individual. we get this report is a short report. as we have said, this is a wood case. i'm not asking about the policy. i understand you say it is an

policy, but what concerns me is this letter is faded -- dated june 2018. when you read this particular incident, -- i don't want you to get defensive. i think we should really talk about it. we have an opportunity to discuss this. i know you are not the chief of the times you aren't even here. what concerns me is that the captain discussed the department is in the process of updating training to address the scene. the members should evaluate the incidents and consider options such as assigning officers for crowd control and forming arrest scenes. i don't know what that means, one of the things we have been told over the years is this incident is used as what not to do for officers training across the nation, what not to do. it has also been looked at as a

failure in training. what i want to point out is that even though the d.g.o. is old, the chief had put a bulletin in that was in place at the time this took place about time and distance. so there was time and distance bulletin. not only are the dg a supposed -- d.g.o. supposed to be obeyed, but so are the bulletins. i understand it has been a while now but most of these were young my understanding is they did not wait for the sergeant. they did not close down the street. they didn't move the bus and they didn't move the passengers. it happened very quickly. i was disturbed i was wondering if you were disturbed when the prosecutor and the district district attorney's report said that the time that they analyse a video, it showed the suspect was not directly threatening the officers with a knife 126 shots were fired and 21 hit him. i guess i am looking at this. and it seems to be -- there seems to be a lot of rules that

are already in place. there seem to be some training errors here. i am concerned when it says we are in the still -- were still in the process three years later of updating these type of -- i don't want to call them simple, but analysing these incidents. so i guess i just want to no kak when you say it is in process, what you mean it is in process? what does forming the arrest team mean? >> are you talking about -- >> i'm talking about 2015. >> i understand. i'm not sure when you say the arrest team and you are referring -- >> i am reading your report. i'm reading your letter. >> i'm sorry. the second page of your letter. isn't that the one we are talking about? >> it is the chief's letter.

>> i'm sorry. the chief's letter. >> said the letter to the commission? >> the letter to the commission. second page, third paragraph. this is as of june. i was a little baffled -- baffled. >> if i could clarify. there is, based on, you know, this is subsequent to this particular case, but based on some of the cases that the commission has acquired recent officer involved shooting us, we have identified a need to address some command-and-control issues. we have asked our training captain and our staff to work on

a module of training to address the issues that we have seen, including those issues that you just raised. in progress, the training is almost at a point where we are excited to -- pointed out. that is not just a result of this particular incident, but incidents that have happened since then. we saw a need to -- >> this is not the only training this is developed -- so there's been new offerings in training already that have been put out there in different places. cpt, you know, which is when officers recertify. there is training related to use of force policies in time and space and de-escalation and tactical communications. that has all been put in place. but the chief has been working with the training division to put together this more comprehensive