not just talking about intimate partner violence or domestic violence which is a cause that's very important to me. we're talking about rape and sexual assault. that's a very broad umbrella and people who perhaps don't feel safe and coming to law enforcement and don't feel when they come to law enforcement that they're treated in a compassionate way and they are able to, you know, become empowered in ways they should be and so it was concerning to me and i wanted to know if this was on the department's radar and what we were doing about it to make sure our vulnerable victims feel safe in this city just as safe as if there were not lgbtq, minority or a hotel maid or january ter. that's the information that i was hoping to elicit from this

discussion. >> just to answer your question regarding some of the data so the verifiable data that's pulled from a central analysis unit is here. the other data is very fie able but it's from a case file so they're pulling this in a spread sheet and actually verifying it manually just to make sure that we have everything. that's why it's separated because this is pulled from a centralized analysis unit. and that's why that's part of the report. we're just complying with the g.o. to keep the report they work with the hotel managers and

we don't just look at crimes that occur to tourists but crimes that occurred to members of their workforce and to keep the hotel safe. so some of the conversations they have is things such as crime prevention for their workers, responding to crimes for their security personnel that are actually going out there including the actual -- we know a hotel is a 24 hour operation so we're looking at not just crimes occurring within the rooms but to and from so those are things. i do know that we actively do participate in those regular meetings with the hotel managers and their security companies. >> it was heartening to see on balance the numbers are going down although they're going up in certain district stations. central we have a little bit of an uptick but those are -- i wonder if you have any sense of the reason for the over all

drop. >> as far as pinpoint what factors can contribute is no, we don't. it may be because some of these, some of the survivors don't report these incidents. and there's a lot of them. because, i've been into a lot of several sexual assault panels were in fact we just did it about a couple months ago the red zone at city college with the district attorney office and we spoke about sexual assaults and what we do to investigate, basically like an education and for the community and in fact i just said o sat on a panel yestt black rock just for information purposes. what can they do and do they come for help? a lot of people don't want to go to the police for help. even my sergeants when they come into the office they're

continually educating them and giving out referrals like the marcy victim violence crime card and the d.n.a. bills of rights so they are very well educated and the people that come in. we do what we can with the outreach where i sit in different panels with the department status for women and domestic violence consortium and so we try our best to get out there and educate everybody. >> that's kind of the information i was hoping to get. you pick a vulnerable population right. so for example, transgender population, right, so there are a lot of people not just people who look like me but including people who look like me that won't always be comfortable going to the police. it's important we're actually doing affirmative outreach because the worse thing in the

world would be for they don't have ta feeling of comfort so i want to hear what the department is doing proactively so you started talking about participating in panels and those kinds of outreach efforts are so critical and that is what i wanted to hear about tonight. >> also, commission, earlier today i met with the director cheryl davis of the human rights commission and they just named a director for the sharp office and that sharp office is all about what everything that you are speaking of. kelly lou densemore and she just started and that office is designed to -- from a holistic point of view and improve services to sexual assault victims including police,

district attorney, public-health, the whole gamut. we're going to be a part of these discussions and the next step is really sitting down with all the partners that have a stake in this and crafting out protocol that's will improve all of the processes, including identifying some of the concerns that you have. we're very happy to be a part of that. they just named the director so i think that works and we'll move forward at a quick pace from this point forward? >> thank you. >> thank you. >> all right. next item, please. >> line item 3b. directors' report. report on recent d.p. activities and announces. the report will be limited to a brief description of activities and announcements. commission discussion will be determining whether the calender any of the issues raised for future commission meetings. presentation of d.p.a.'s annual report and presentation of the d.p.a. system. >> good evening, director.

>> good evening. i'll be brief because i know we have the annual report staff. i want to go over the stats that i present every week and we are at 598 cases that are open now that's up from this time last year where we are at 524. in terms of cases closed this far 525 versus 464. the cases that are pending we have 385 versus 247 this time last year. we're cases at this point are at 71 so far this year versus 36 which is where we were last year. in terms of the cases that are passed, that are older than nine months and the agency we have 27. this time last year we were at 24 and in terms of cases that are mediated, we are at 31 cases that have been mediated this year versus 13 this time last

year. last police commission when we met, i reported that we had 39 sustained cases again. we're resolving issues in our new c.m.s. system that is calculating all of these reports. a lot of these things have to be done by hand. i wanted to correct the record from last week when i said that we were at 35. that's incorrect. we were at 71. we're fixing all of these glitches as we get our reports and hopefully they'll be smoother as we continue both in the weekly reports and in the quarterly reports that we present as well to the commission. of the cases that are passed the 270-day nine-month tolling that we do, 10 of those cases are told and the i had the cases

reviewed and they are in the drafting stage for sustained report coming up and i'll monitor them and begin we haven't had a case outside of the 3304 dead lines yet. i hope not to have one ever. i will keep continuing reporting on these numbers. in the mediation team we had a conference in october and it was hauled here iheld here in the c. i want mediators that are trained so we provide mow professional services in terms of our mediation component in d.p.a. in terms of the outreach, there's a number of events and lift them and not go into much details unless you have questions about them and in aging your way and partnership

and the role we play in the city on october 17th and we have a community meeting with informational both that we staffed for park and rec that did a form on health and wellness for the community and on october 24th. we went to another community meeting with the -- we are the city family summit with the recchiational center and we had a presentation at the we are the city family summit at the richmond recreational center. we also attended community meetings at both the tenderloin station and the mission station since our last meeting. i point out that i just wanted to mention i think i sent it to

the commissions but our policy director at d.p.a. was awarded a recognition by the department on the status of women last month so very proud of the work she continues to do for d.p.a. on behalf of the rest of the city and the agencies and many are community based organizations that she works with and many of the task groups we partner with with the commission and the department and non-profit agencies here in the city. there are no closed cases in the closed session from d.p.a. susan gray is here as well along with susan and case issues come up and during tonight's police commission where we can be of service to folks that are here in the community.

that is my report. >> how about the annual report. are we going to have a presentation on that? >> ok. >> ok. >> page 1. >> here we go. so this is the report. it's been online since when it was initially scheduled -- is that september or october? it's been about a month. it's been several weeks now. it's been online and it's also on our website. joining us as i go through the annual report. i think everyone -- there are copies on the table if anyone cares to review it. i'm just going to go briefly through the things that i think that stand out but i want to point out the distinction that we've made from these annual reports brought the 2016 annual

report just by way of comparison. it's an important context for the work that we're doing now and re-evaluating to make this information more clear for broader audiences and reflects a lot of the input coming from the police commission. many of those things that are contained in the new report are things that i was specifically asked for both by the commissions and the public talking about our data. the previous reports were well over 100 pages. i've been to those meetings where these reports were just read line by line. i'm not going to do that. i presume if people want to dive down deeper into the details, hopefully the report in its current status makes it a little easier to do that. in the meantime i'll pass along the old report that i'm sure will make for scintillating reading in case anyone wants to review it. that said, let me begin and we'll be available to answer any of the questions that you may

have. page one is just the executive summary overviewing what the approach is with d.p.a. i think the things that are important here are the significant increase in cases and the significant reduction and the time that it takes d.p.a. to investigate cases. i think it's significant. what stands out to me from this page is the 293% improvement on completing sustained cases and within the nine month period and to try and resolve as many of our cases in timely manner. there's a brief overview of the improved report that i think we've taken steps to address the henderson report, the monthly and statistical report both the quarterly and the annual

reports. on page 2, just talks about some of the staffing. i wanted to articulate the staffing because it was an issue that took a quite a long time for us to get under control and get folks into the office to make sure we were fully staffed to address the needs of the office. there's a brief overview of the office and page 3 and page 4 and the 2019 monthly stats -- it's articulated here as well as and these numbers are important because they talked about how it's an 11% increase and this is over the 30% increase that we experienced last year so the past two years have grown exponentially in terms of the work that's been done at the

d.p.a. in the past they were included and tacked onto the annual report. ivan alliesed the data and summarized them so the keen report is now there highlighting and graphic so you can see how the length of the investigation takes place. before these were little circle charts. i thought they were a little difficult to read and this is a much earlier and clearer way to track the lengths of time the investigators are taking but again the keen report, which is about 40 pages is now online on the website as well in case people want to track those records. on page 6, we've included a definition of summary. a lot of the esoteric terms and many of the reports both quarterly and annually contained a lot of verbiage that folks might not have a clear understanding of what they mean and how they can textually

relate to the work that's being done so we've included the definition summary and i will continue to include this so that people know what they're reading as we talk about the investigations, their summary and the findings that the organization has made. i hope it makes it more clear for a lay audience. what we're talking about. and how it's connected to the work. our sustained cases. i'm actually really proud of our sustained rate for d.p.a. it's at 9%. i think it's one of the highest in the nation if not the highest. it's really difficult trying to get this information from the other agencies. a lot of how we collect those numbers is based on how other agencies collect sustained rates both in oakland and in portland. just to give you more context,

oakland a changing their systems and unavailable to share what their sustained rates are right now. on page eight and nine. if i'm going too fast let me down but i want to try and give you an overview and i'll try and answer questions. the new protocols from the sustained rate. i lay person knows and understand what does 9% mean and how do we come up with those numbers? how are we measuring it. a lot of the complaint outcomes here on page nine, we did an manual count to do these things sadly because our systems aren'l worked out yet. i wanted to get the report out as quickly as i could. and this 18th month study refers to many of the cases that are listed in the appendix. you can see the appendix and i tried to make it clear on this page and you can see them both at the bottom as a reference and the end of the report.

on page 10, we talked about the reporting sustained case outcomes and the analysis of the sustained courts in terms of the decisions this is something the commission asked me to do to include as a reference both from the work that's being done at d.p.a. and what happens when that work is completed and information is presented both to the department and to the commission. i still think there's some real growth there for us to make improvements because there's still somewhat of a disconnection from us getting follow-up, d.p.a. getting follow-up information about what happened after cases and they have to be looked at and correlated. in the future what would be really great is if we're able to share that information or have

direct access to the department's own records when decisions are made about cases that have been presented to them. that's going to be one of the topics as we workout the technology connections between d.p.a. and the departments so we don't have this gap of communicating by snail-mail and e-mails to try and correlate what happens to a lot of our cases. you can see where -- i'm just explaining why we have an 18% unknown. the 18% unknown is we haven't gotten information yet about some of the stuff that has been presented. on page 11, it's just more discussion about the imposition of discipline. again, this is something the commission wanted me to include in our reports s reports so peon track that information. on page 12 and 13 we talk a

little bit about our policy stuff. i sam arized the key policy points of the things that are important. we make a lot of policy recommendations throughout the year and rather than list them all ad nauseam, we try and highlight those that related most relevant to the work of the things that we've been discussing over the past year and i want to make a note, this is a new thing and we're putting them online either from the commission or from the community people can go onto the website to track and see what those recommendations have been in the past and what they are currently. that's on page 14 and 15 and there's a link to those policy recommendations. there's a summary on page 17 of the audit and i think you guys are going to be getting a presentation about where we are with the audit again over the next few months and on page 20,

we'll talk about the overview of the pacific bridge partner and the work tonight so they are here following this presentation. on page 20 and 21, page 22, talks about the training. i just want to articulate the training stuff. it's really important. when i came to d.p.a. the training budget was $4,000. that's -- there is an opportunity for improvements there. we have a lot of improvements. we have a training budget and trainings are actually happening and scheduled all throughout the year. we partner with a lot of other city agencies and departments to

allow the employees to go and participate in trainings to see what the department is doing in terms of training. the district attorney office and public defenders' office so we can share resources and information about on going issues related to work being done at the d.p.a. and i'll also point out that since we've been there now for the first time, the entire staff has been trained. one of the things that stands out when we talk about some of these trainings is we recently had an officer-involved shooting training that was a collaborative training involving the district attorney's office, the police department, and d.p.a. all going over establishing some of those protocols for what happens when there's an officer-involved shooting. outreach and stakeholder engagement on page 23 and 24 there's a list of some of the

activities that we participated in throughout the year and there's staff on page 25 and the list of all of the folks at d.p.a. and then on page 26 is when we start the appendix. i just want to point out that there is a distinction here between the allegations by findings and the discipline by officer. i'm just making that clear. >> are you going to present on that? >> i'm here to answer questions if you have any about the report. >> will. >> ok. >> go ahead. keep going. >> well, that was mostly t the rest of the stuff is just the appendix. >> is there any other presentations by d.p.a. staff? >> we're here to answer

questions. >> um, i don't think i have that many questions. so, first of all, this is a fabulous looking document, director henderson. >> thank you. >> thank my staff. they did a lot of stuff. [laughter] >> i'm thanking you on their behalf. >> right. >> i picked the color. >> what about the font? just love it. >> i didn't even do that. >> that's all ceremony. >> so seriously, i'm joking but it makes it a lot more raid able and digest able and we get a lot of reading to do on this commission so it's really nice that it's a lot more accessible in this way. so thank you for your work on that. we put a lot of work in these reports. i've been here to hear the old

reports read to us and it's difficult to get the information. >> thank you. >> so, it sounds like the d.p.a. in the last year there was investigated a total of 1,524 allegations. it looks like you through a pretty sur owe process and weeded the unfounded ones or what is the other language you used. there are so many pages. >> not sustained or unfounded. or proper conduct. the question i have is on discipline and it seems like a lot of thes are below 10 days.

you have a sustained finding where the discipline to be imposed is less than 10 days. >> that's a great question. there is confusion about the process. what happens is the d.p.a. writes the sustained report and that report is then taken to the chief's office and it's reviewed by a team on the chief's side and they send a letter to d.p.a. and myself have a conversation about whether there is agreement or disagreement. if it's disagreement about whether or not there should be discipline at all, if it's the amount of days. whether it's discipline should be imposed at all it's the end of it. it depends.

we might recommend the finding be sustained for body-worn camera and the chief might say it wasn't proper use and i don't see it as discipline but a retraining issue and so that means it's not in the discipline track so retraining does not seek discipline. the chief might also say that i disagree with you and i think what the officer did in this case was proper conduct and if that is the case, d.p.a. cannot proceed any further because it's under 10 days of discipline we're recommending. >> is that by city charter. >> correct. >> ok. >> so, if we are in agreement about the fact there should be discipline, then the chief sends a letter of notice of intent to

discipline to the officer. someone from the d.p.a. goes to a moderating and they present their case and the officer is represented and presents their case and then there's a conclusion from that particular hearing. and from that. >> do you feel that by having the ultimate decision-making power within the department, how does that impact your work on the 10 days and under cases? >> i think there are categories of violations where we are asking for certain higher sentences uses of excessive

force and those are the types of cases where we think it's supported by the conduct and the disciplinary matrix that we're currently operating under that will be shifting as new disciplinary matrix looked at by this commission. but that's kind of what we gage it by. the structure that we have in place now and the severity of the conduct and any disciplinary history of the officer. >> but the chief's office, there's an 81% agreement with the actual -- there's a sustained violation and then there was also a difference statistic regarding the imposition of discipline, right. so 81% of the time they agree with you. d.p.a. and you got this right and director henderson what

alluded to this. we're working out the system. we often don't get notified of what ultimately happens? so we get the notice to meet and confer but we don't always know kind of what happens at the back end of a case. we're trying to streamline that process that one director henderson was talking about 50 or 60 letters we got recently, that's because we went through manually and made all these requests and received the final results of the case. >> ok. >> that needs to be fixed right away. we are working a lasting

solution request. everybody is great about providing information when we request it but the automated part of it has been missing. so i think we are up-to-date now and should be up-to-date going forward. but if there's not a technological solution at this point. >> i think it's really important that what we're trying to get to is an audio mated where i don't have to ask. it should be automatic when the decision gets made that we get the notification and if we don't answer or if someone doesn't send it or because even if the document that's we get we have to read through it to figure out does this correlate to one our cases and we have to follow-up. >> >> i'll come back. >> it's just a clarification. i don't understand. if we are meeting and conferring

in-person and he is agreeing or disagreeing, how do you not know the outcome by filling it in your file? >> the meet and confer is a phone call between mow ser and myself. it is at which point i'm being notified they disagree with us on either the issue of whether the findings should be sustained or the amount of discipline. then, other processes occur. we dis agreed that is the end of it and i don't necessarily get the letter that closes that loop. >> hang on the no, know, we're not going to have a free for all. anything else? >> so if there's no disagreement with the discipline is there any recourse appeal or anything from the d.p.a. side or any options you have to challenge the lack

of imposition of discipline? >> no, because the city charter authority is that under 10 days we're essentially bringing the case to the chief for the chief to make the imposition of discipline decisions. it ends there. >> understood, thank you. >> commissioner. >> i have several questions. first let me say that the report is great. great job to d.p.a. for providing this information. i think the appendix a showing the information on the disciplinary outcome because it gives the public more -- yes, it is. it gives the public more transparency because the public is confused as to what you do and they feel like given occ's history that they don't -- that people would make complaints and nothing would happen and d.p.a. has worked hard and can can and

the only thing in the 2016 report and not provided in this report and that information is really helpful and important. >> it's a well taken point. >> kudos on that. my other question is you just said that you are up-to-date on the notifications and if that's the case why are there still unknowns on the appendix? >> because we had to print the report at some point so we're up-to-date today. like calender day right now but we weren't in time for printing up the report? >> so, i love the charts and sort of your percentages and math but when i manually count it i get a different number. when i see the appendix a it looks like there's are 79 cases and there are various officers

for some cases have various officers and some some don't. i want to try to understand or wrap my head around the fact when i looked at themen79 cases9 of the 79 case it appears the chief agreed with misconduct occurring but 5 59 out of the 79 cases the discipline imposed by the chief was lower or less than what you had recommended. so it seems like a high number and i'm trying to figure out why and how that sort of happened. and i think that -- i also -- so that's one of my questions. before you answer that i want to make sure that i understand the process. when these decisions in terms of the discipline that is imposed in your chart, is that from the chief himself or is that from

the meetings where you talk about where your meeting with his upper management. >> the ultimate decision about imposing discipline is from the chief himself. >> ok. >> so can you explain why 59 out of the 79 it seems the discipline that was imposed is less than what you recommended? >> i think that's a question for the chief frankly. in terms of what happens on that side, i do have conversations o i understand certain things but i don't know the ultimate decision on his side. >> can i just jump in and add that separate from the conversations, that my chief-of-staff has with moeser, the chief and i have those conversations as well. when you are asking if we're having conversations how do we not know. even when we have the conversations there's no, there's not a district follow-up so we get a confirmation that that is what happened what away

talked about is what happened until we get those. >> chief, you want to respond. >> one second. chief, i want to respond to that because i have a follow-up question on those numbers. before you respond if i can just ask one other question, with respect to the d.p.a. report because i think the other questions may actually be more properly suited for the chief that i have. on page 17, you indicate the audit unit and i wonder when we're going to get this audit. it says 2019 but when will we get it and i know why is it taking so long but there has to be -- >> i have a couple of responses and updates on that. so we anticipate publishing an interim report relatively soon. we just got notification that it was gone through the upper chain. the agenda for commission is full for the rest of the year so it would probably be early in january that we'll be able to

issue that report. >> can i give more information. that as we recall and we've talked about this, it's the controllers' office that is doing that process and so we could not control the interim report they've had changes and management and we have been -- we started meeting with them weekly going over this when are we getting the report and when are we getting the report it was just cleared for us to release last week when you met with them. >> i thought it was earlier this week but it was recent. >> yes. >> i'm just giving you context. >> when you get the report done in january are we going to see delays like this again? >> i hope not and what i've asked to be included in that report are specific things to change so the process doesn't take as long as last time and again, the process for this report is being done by the controllers' office and hasn't been moved into d.p.a. yet and so we've been working with them

as a third party get this out into us as quickly as possible. >> if i can give one example it's being able to access juvenile records so having to go through an 827 process to get -- >> you can't do it peace meal? >> no. >> so we didn't -- we weren't involved in that because it was the controller's office who was attempting to get the juvenile records and to access purposes when people authorized occ to do that and it was revoked making it very difficult for us to get access to those records. >> do you want to address the question. thank you, commissioner. in this report goes back to juna

couple of things i just want to enter out that are really important and step positive, i think the working relationship between the two agencies is as good as it's been since i've been here. this process of our that this report started and now i think it's gotten better so if you look at all the of the disciplinary decisions most of them that where we disagree or lower level discipline and it's undisciplinary many of them involved camera and issues and that issue i think has not only are we pretty much on the same page of that with the commissions disciplinary guide coming out and as soon as we get

to that process and we'll rectify a lot of those issues i make the decision on the case presented to me. what i want to point out is our processes are really good now and there's a lot more discussion in terms of when we disagree than there have been before and there's a process that we didn't have in place and in june when director henderson took over and before ms. hawkins came aboard we didn't have a formalized process. we talked about it and now we write a letter on everyone we disagree on and we explain why and we have a meet and confer and we get to a common ground and sometimes we don't. i think what you can expect in the futur future is less of a disagreement and when we do disagree, there's an understanding as to why. sometimes we agree to disagree but most of the time i think we

come to a common place and many of these were in the past that would not have happened. >> thank you for that answer and i appreciate that. i really want to understand sort of your thought process for the fourth amendment violations. i know you and i have had personal conversations and i have expressed to you the the rights of individuals and i want to try and wrap my head around sort of how you process fourth amendment violations because in reviewing these 79 cases out of the 79, half of these cases involve fourth amendment search and sees you're issues and 22 of the case there's were instances where you agreed with the fact that misconduct had occurred and the discipline that you imposed was less than what d.p.a. recommended. and some of the examples that i

am going through the 79 cases, are for example, number two which involved a d.u.i. where the officer field-sobriety test was given and it was indicated that there are no alcohol was found on sort of one of the breath test and a more evasive test of a blood draw was taken of the individual and the individual was prosecuted and sort of -- you go that misconduct had occurred and that discipline should be imposed and the discipline was held as rather than imposed on sort of that officer. another example is example number 15 which is a search issue where you again, the person is arrested and his car is -- the individual's car is searched. the incident, the report documenting the incident was

inaccurate and su one officer failed to supervisor and the decision was no discipline would be in that case and then there's also example 14 on the case snow squalls another one where the fourth amendment issue would arise and sort of a stop and or search of a residents. search of a residents and also to some of the examples that i saw were stopped where the stop data wasn't entered in the system and that is troubling but this data isn't entered and it's important because it allows to

track the demographics of why people are being stopped and you agree that this misconduct occurred with no sort of discipline is imposed and and number 26 involved five officers where it was an improper traffic stop and it stuck out to me and you know, it stuck out to me because of sort of the jewel nile issue and it's example number 34 and we had talked about in our bias working group about minors being given cars when they're detained or stopped by police officers and that wasn't something that the department was interested and how they would figure out how time notment that but examples like number 34 where children, you know, a juvenile is detained

and his parent aren't notified and the violation of the policy and given our talks about those situations and sort of and so have their parents notified of any interactions they have with officers it's really concerning to me and i think that sort of individually, maybe when we see these cases and individually they don't really sort of rise to a certain level but i think that when they're compiled into a report like this and there's patterns that we're seeing or numbers that are sort of coming up, i'm wondering what sort of your thought process is and two what you can do sort of to approach this on a sort of whole

so that you can start looking at patterns that maybe not -- they're not obvious when you lock at them individually and in isolation, right. because 22 of them, i mean, they have to do a search or seizure issubut it'sa little bit confusm just trying to get clarity on it. >> i'll start with the larger issue. fact patterns. i don't think it's fair to the process to real see look at a couple sentences from a summary and make an assessment about a case because when those cases are presented to me they're presented in their totality and all those things have to be considered. a lot of is these cases you do

look at facts of the case. it's unfair to look at a sentence and say, you know, make an assessment of whether i disagree or not agree based on two sentences. the other issue with that is the one thing than i do is i see all the cases. so the consistency of discipline i think is really important. progressive discipline and i know we talked about this in the commission before. let's say the stop information. for many, many years that first offense has been an admonishment. if there's aggravating factors that make that rise up to a level more than admonishment it has to be considered. i try as best as i can to be consistent and not be all over the map when i'm dispensing discipline.

and i think that is really important. but to say -- to look at a couple sentences and make an assessment about a case, i don't at this it's fair to the process. some of these cases i can remember really well because i actually read the case and others i was briefed on and even when i'm briefed those cases are given in totality with mitigateing and aggravating factors. some of these cases we don't grow on. some of these cases are interpretations of case law that we might not agree on but as far as the policy violation itself, i mean that's first and foremost of what we look at what is the policy violation. i say all this and say we -- i look at the case as a whole and the patterns that may or may not be present i think you will see more consistency now that we have a disciplinary guide

because we look at the same factors. they're using separate disciplinary guides. in terms of my understanding and directing anderson or ms. hawkins, the admonishment, the guide with admonishment on it i don't think you are using. when paul came along he considered admonishment but before d.p.a. cases were started in reremant and the department if it's a low level of discipline, and the spirit of progressive discipline may start at a admonishment which is not disciplinary but for cases where the violation was found but it was found that violation could be handled within the admonishment and retraining so that piece has been reconcile with the penalty guide.

some of these there's a lot more to it than what is on this paper. i don't mean to cut you off. i was just going to say under the new 2.04 that you passed, there's a disciplinary review board that is going to be started to exactly address this holistic issue of looking at trends. so, there's a meeting set up next week for us to convene about what that is going to specifically look like but it will do exactly what we're talking about which is bring everybody to the table to look at the findings and to come to a better understanding of what happened over the past quarter, what are the trends, what is happening, where is the disconnect between d.p.a. and the department in terms of how the discipline is being handled and for lack of a better terminology kind of what a case should be worth or should settle for or should be disciplined at. >> the two suggests i woul suggn the report is one maybe putting dates?

>> since it does cover that it will be helpful information and providing more information in the sort of case summary or even adding a box to sort of why the discipline was lower than you had recommended. >> those are great ideasment we'll have to talk to the city attorney's office in terms of what we can include but i grow witagreewith those suggestions. >> vice president taylor. >> thank you. first, commissioner stole one of my questions. i think having the complaints by demographic was helpful so putting that back in would be helpful for the commission. and then, second i want to apologize because i have to disagree with her on the number only because i had it's important that we're accurate

about this and what i found in going through this and the vast majority of the complaints here why citizens explaining about failure to investigation. the vast majority. i counted nine having anything to do with fourth amendment. even those you just referenced and 14 and 15 they have nothing to do with fourth amendment and there's nothing about unlawful search but it's having a incident report inaccurate and failure to exercise a subordinate. what was surprising to me is the scheer number again of police in writing an incident report so they didn't and police were trying to dissuade someone from moving forward in the investigation so they file a report. they didn't want to investigate it. that's a little horrifying to me. i counted 18 of those and that was over we wil overwhelming mae 79 that i saw.

followed most closely by issues related to body-worn cameras. failure to turn on your body-worn camera was a serious issue. i counted nine having anything to do with unlawful detention searches and sees you'res but it's concerning to me to have citizens complaining and calling the police which is a terrifying thing for a lot of people to do and then the officer just not wanting to file a report and i don't feel like it. or you know, so, i was surprised by that number. i didn't think that would be the number one issue and so i do know in terms of trends i don't know what -- if you have an answer why that was such a high percentage of the 79 complaints and that was a majority by my account. i realize this is a snapshot in

time from june 2017 to december of 2018. i don't know. i don't know if you see any trends about anything and it indicates some trend and that is a chief and i don't know if you have an answer. >> i can say it's on the most part random but one thing that i see over and over again with some of those type of neglective type of constitute is experience. we've had incidents that have been sustained where officers we felt should have known better. i mean, ignorance to the law is no excuse and we know that. experience does matter. particularly with new officers, you know, in a chaotic situation sometimes where they just make a mistake. and that is the case sometimes other times it's more egregious and we try to adjust and address

those accordingly. on the large scheme of things, what really helps is if we have body-worn cameras put to help us determine what happened and often times that is another factor with some of the cases where there's an allegation of neglect of duty and there's no camera because you didn't turn it on and captured that part of the incident so what you are seeing again, these go back two years and i think you are seeing less of that and i think we've made our point to officers that this is a serious matter and discipline will be handed out accordingly on this and we actually started seeing less of them. we've made some policy recommendations on the body-worn camera and we wrote a lot of issues we were seeing during this era and i think that both and also help because some of

thcommissioner's questions, some of these were policy failure because of the ab barghouti of thambiguity so youwill see lesse plays into the other. we can actually see evidence as to how that situation evolved and makes us able to determine the pro pro at level of discipline and whether it's a training issue. >> i would like to see follow-up. especially with the failure to investigate. all of it. i would like to see if there's han been improvement and folks are confident about that. i would like to see post december 2018 data. >> i think the other thing is with the quarterly discipline review board so it's not a year and a half we're waiting to have these stats an stats and we cans the trends as they're happening

so that will definitely help drill down on what the issues are and fixing them in a quicker amount of time. >> chief scott, did you have something else to add? >> oh, no, i'm sorry. >> ok. commissioner dejesus. >> i don't know. i counted 21. let me just say, i think you hit the nail on the head, you know, patterns. i think when we looked at this, this is all we have available to us and so it's good to point out that it's over a two-year period. this is all we have today. we're looking at it and there's some flaws that we're trying to get some better understanding. it does look like a pattern and that's what we're trying to talk about and rather than one individual instance and we don't have all the facts in front of us and i can't second judge you but i did look at 21 either traffic stops and searches. first amendment stuff and i mean, i have them circled over

here. and there's like five or six body-worn cameras and some of these are improper searches of the car or of a home and when you look at them and i guess what i was focusing on is i counted 49 where the department agreed that there was a violation but there was no discipline. and i guess just looking at that that's just concerning and we don't know why and it's concerning. especially when there is somebody here that violated a fourth amendment or data fell to that so those are important things and when there's no discipline, not even a reprima reprimand, it tells them that tt was ok and they would be disciplined. we're just looking at this and