caseload is above what it should be pursuant to a controller's officeaudit of the occ back in 2007 . that is a reality .our community is growing and obviously personnel will be a struggle. that said we will do everything and continue to do everything to ensure our investigations are coming completed in a timely manner. we do have a letter of agreement in place to continue to investigate referrals from the sheriff until the office of inspectorgeneral is up and running . that office was legislated into existence and eventually will take over that work but in the meantime there will be a gapin those investigations happening . an upcoming audits, we are endeavoring as we've mentioned previously to the commission of policing audit.

we are leveraging existing departmental entity resources to perform this audit including partnering with the controller's office and using staffing currently at dta. next slide please. so bill 1421 is another area that will be impacted by the budget. specifically there are as i mentioned previously, there are four positions. >> four positions currently at the va that are sunsetting or will sunset at the end of the fiscal year and if we don't get those positions extended we will be in a little bit of a problem in terms of fully complying with its 1421 in a timely manner . so this table that is on the slide shows the kind of projections of how long it will take us to complete the

disclosure just based on the request that we currently have. if we are able to get them extended beyond this current fiscal year. and so you will see that at the top line , shows that our current staffing level of two attorneys to assistance would take how many years to complete just at the levels we currently have so if we get rid of these positions were looking at a timeline and as i believe the commission is aware there is pending legislation for which agencies could be fined for delays in curriculum. next slide please. this is an anticipated this line. as i mentioned, there is ending legislation which would levy fines if compliance is not done in a timely manner area and obviously dta really wants to comply with 1421.

we believe in the transparency and we're doing everything we can. that's why it's imperative we keep those 14. next slide please. so a couple of audit projects dpa has pending. so we're talking about a bias ssp audit to review and i spoke about this briefly at the same commission meeting. it's an audit of sf d with regards to how internal affairs is investigating complaints of bias and another budget that is working in his investigating trends of implicit bias through analysis which will be a continuous review of investigative trends of implicit bias which would create a snapshot of a specific officers work overtime. next slide please. switching gears from an

examination of equity within dpa, one of the things that apartments were called upon to look into and to include in their budget proposal was equity within the organization and making short services were continuing with equity in mind. this breaks down the various divisions within dpa. next slideplease . and then this looks at equity within the dpa pieces. we've been askedto provide this data in a couple different forms and one thing i think is interesting to note is this information is voluntary . it's voluntary for ourofficers to give us and a lot of categories of this , we have some data as to the race and f in the city of our complainants but there's also a large gap

because that information is asked for voluntarily andmany people declined . next slide please. the bottom line is that our budget cut proposal does not adverselyaffect our equity priorities . we will continue to use these programs and resources to promote equity in our department and we are not going to amend how we're doing our work in a way that will have impact on equity as we move forward . next slide please. and i think i've got it there under time andobviously i'm happy to take any questions . >> yes you did. that was a very thoughtful presentation, i appreciate . i was wondering if you could email me. i'd appreciate that. are there any questions for miss hawkins. i can't tell.

mister hollands. >>. >> i keep trying to jump in but i'mnot going to do it . >> thank you for that. just a very thoughtful and thorough presentation. i'm really enjoying you guys on equity. we really talked to the department and tried to have a discussion in terms of their budget soi appreciate you bringing that up . i have one question and it goes back to the slide you talked about the department's proposed budget. if we could just go back to that. what you brought up is that merit instructions were 7.5 percent. an additional 10.5 percent reduction for contingencywhich is if my manifest is correct . what i noted when i just and i just looked at the overall

budget that we are proposing of the 9 million 212 50. and 10 percent of that is 921,000, $105. but what we're seeing is actually $694,809 seem like a deficit of 226,003 96. i was wondering where that number was and where does that go and if i can calculate that correctly. >> you're asking alawyer to do math .but i am tapping into 19 and they let me know that the number is not exact. the mayor's officeprovides the numbers and the exact amount calculated by the consoler's office .so that's the best answer i can have. i will try did you roll down a

littlebit and maybe fill you in . >> i'll make sure. we can talk aboutit as well. it's just something i've noticed and wanted to ask . iq threeand . >> commissioner brooker, does that conclude your comments? >> that concludes my comments. >> i'll turn it over to councilmember elias now. >>. >>. >> i always wantto hear what kind of insightful questions he'sgoing to have . >> . [inaudible] miss hawkins, one question i have and this was in my questions for a long time is

it left a big hole in all our work and now you're telling us we are having to consider the budget cuts. the other side of it is that the epa has gotten it self heavy on us in the years but what i'm wondering how you quantify that with not being able tohave a policy source . but going with standing management. >> the expansion happened before the budget cut and we are fighting the work the city had done by miss marion and the legal team. >> but you are the policy experts, you don't need to divide among the management. >> then we just jump in and say i agree.

we'd love to bring in more people and more policy experts to do more of the policy because we are committed. we you are not going to see a diminished pipeline in terms of our policy recommendations . we are committed to that but from a funding resource as an agency, it's not our internal decision about not being able toreplace , rehire and expand our position as they leave. if there was a way we could have made and told us they won't give us the money to replace the solutions which i did try to tell her but that's neither here nor there. we made all of the margins. i think your point, you're not going to see a diminished approach in terms of our commitment to policy and we are trying to find creative ways to expand and do more of the policy work and i think a lot of that will be reflected in some of the stuff that you see when we talk about bias, when

she brought the biased stuff in our approach to bias. and rolling that things on it. a lot of that stuff has to include thepartnership with audit . that's what the policy step is going to be. i cannot disagree with you, i'm just saying you're not going to see us walking away from our commitment to policy as we no longer have camera with us. in the capacity that you're familiar with working on. >> what our work in the commission is very distinguished on our relationships with epa. i know for every commissioner it's been dependent on the policy expertise of epa and having the people that are working on it. i appreciate that management is working on policy and janel is working on policy. but it's slowing to all of our

work out. so i don't know why we're still in this system. >> we're in the position because we are down a significant amount in part. but these are ... [inaudible] even moving bodies around as fiscal impacts and those fiscal impacts have to be improved and those fiscal impact aren't being approved because those are, whatever fiscal impacts we have are suspended or taken away because of the diminished budget that we had to present. those were the numbers that you just saw. that doesn't mean we're not

going to be fighting to get them back and i'm happy to add your voice to those. that's the situation that were in because of the budget that we have right now you are not as big as a lotof other agencies. we are one of the smaller agencies and in the city and we don't have , there's not a lot of plot and we don't get a lot of opportunities to expand or and now currently we don't even have the opportunity to maintain even the budget that we had previously. though that's part of the problem. >>. >> thank you. >> all right. i have a couple of questions. >> can i ask my question you while you're pulling your other question. >>my question is , a little more direct and i think somewhat answered.

you even admit that your department is a small department so my question is if it's such asmall department why do you need to change ? in the presentation you're showing us we are seeing increasing caseloads for your investigators that are almost double recommended from the 2007 audit and also taking on the sheriffs cases which is a huge task especially with your limited attorney. not to mention the upcoming audit that you're endeavoring on additionally the 1421 finds that may be imposed on your department. to me it would seem you're less experienced attorneys, your grooming them so they invest themselves in your department and youinvest in them seems more fruitful than a department , a small department that has as commissioner, zaki says management heavy.

so i guess my question again is why a small department would be too cheap especially with the impending impact of services and the other situations that are going to be demanding more labor intensivework from your department . >> i would disagree and say that we are not top-heavy in that respect. the investigators thatwe've had and we have greatly expanded as you are aware . when i came into the agency i increased the investigators staff by hiring more than 17 of, i don't know what the actual number is, probably closer to 20 but all of those staff, everything in terms of management and the management responsibility was too broad by the mayor's office own assessment of how my management was spread out, where all my

managers had more than a dozen direct reports to be coordinating. that's before we started drilling down to figure out specific protocols for our offers are involved shooting, specific protocols for execution of the 1421 and this is before we started examining all the work associated with the sheriffs department which is an entirely different approach in terms of the oversight we've been asked to do. if you couple that with the combination of the hiring freeze thatwe are in with the city , we are unable to continue to grow to manage the growing caseloads that have been happening. it is all hands on deck . so it's not ... the management positions that we have both in terms of directors, seniors and chiefs in the office isall hands on deck .everybody does everything and everyone is being spread out to maximize their efficiency, including

with the policy as well. though i don't agree that we have to much managementin the office . i would love to have more management. i would love to have more investigators. i would love to have more of everything just to keep up with our actual numbers that we present regularly. i'd love for us to have and conversation aboutthe correlation of numbers to comparewhat this agency is doing as compared to other agencies because that would give you a better indication of how spread out and how efficient we are , just on the audit section alone , the same audit department that does the things we are doing in los angeles . that's 60 people, 60. i'm just saying. we are doing, everyone is working anddoing a lot.

there's no lofty positions of management at dpawhere people are not handling things . >> in all fairness director henderson , as you said your small department, the va is office they have much larger budgets than yours and they have one chief of staff, they don't have multiple chiefs and i'm sure you would agree when you talk about resources and needing more investigators and attorneys to do 1421, with a certain amount of money that you pay you can several of those individuals with that money. so i guess again my question is why a smaller department would need to be cheap i'd say those agencies have a singular focus and a singular execution of skills that's different from an agency like mine that also had in addition to the investigations that we have we have auditing . inaddition to the auditing we

have a 1421 and in addition to the 1421 we have the sheriffs department . these are all compound things that go on separate from our day-to-day operations and need more management than one, two or 34 people can provide independently. that's just thereality . to me, from my perspective in terms of how i'm managing the agency and how we are handling things . there is not a lot of fat in the organization and the mayors oftenwith the current economic situation, the budget shrinking , we are at bare-bones and at capacitywhile our caseloads are increasing . again, i would encourage you to look at our caseloads from this agency comparison across the board to any other agency in terms of the manpower and our personnel including internally.

compare ourcaseloads to the caseloads handled by the police department and their 1421, compare our caseloads to the internal affairs caseloads . our work at any other comparison and i will take that comparison automatically because i think that will give you a more objective comparison validating the budgetary approaches that we've taken and they're not choices we are making they are choices that have been forced upon us because of attrition and because of the economic challengesthat every department is in right now . >> director henderson did you say . [inaudible] >> not at all, i said it wasn't mydecision for us to have the hiring freeze . it wasn't my decision to have the budgeting freeze placed on us, that's what i was referring to. >> let's speak about the timeline, one thing i want to be clear about is that. [inaudible] it's not that we

didn't want to replace her. but when that happens we're in a space now where we can't. it's not the way the city hiring freeze works at the system is. you don't have to i think the kind of flexibility and options to replace that position that i think you and commissioner elias are thinking to. >> my point was in 2017 when paul came in and you came in and tamara was there and the epa was fine and functioning for the three years and then in 2020,there's an additional chief for the department . rather, we didn't know covid was (us even if the caseloads are standing, the number and work forinvestigators low-level

attorneys or nonmanagement attorneys , then i guess my thought, it would bethat's where you invest the money in and build that . not obtaining another chief to run a department that's being run by 2017. >> i hear what you're saying but part ofthe problem is some of the things that are expanding our management level work . serious incident review discipline board, may stuff, all the executive level work requires both time and proper staffing for us again, the backdrop of all of these things that have been expanded over the past few years is also taking place while the caseloads are also going to so it's not like there have been expansion across the board and you know, that expansion was taking place was while i still had the cheese that i had with

the policy team that i had was still here at the time. no one exists that this was where we were going to be with the and we had to shrink the budget. tried to do that in a way without dropping the work that we've been committed to. my point and the presentation that you guys got for the budget and i don't need to get over from seven who presented allthis stuff but to point out that , that it's reflective of the commitment that we are trying not to back away from trying to stay committed to with the resources that we have. specifically with things like the management level stuff we can talk about index is not going to change and it needs to be on the table for us to be interesting but also the operational work1421 stuff the bias stuff we've been talking about . i believe we still have real

concerns about the stuff and the sheriffs stuff for now. i feel like our hands are restricted in the stuff that i don't want to have diminished. i don't want to have diminished capacity to make the presentations for the mission that the agency has been committed to from the beginning . >> tamara did all that for you. >> and more. i still talk to. i just talked to her last week and she still has things that she wants us to be doing that we are trying to do. i'm in communication with everybody and i don't think the door is totally closed for tamara and her work with all of us. she wanted some time. >> director henderson, it's not

you, it's her committee space. >> but i wanted to make sure there was nothing we could do or offer her because i know how valuable she was not just to dpa and my agency but to the commission as well. >> you ever consider elevating camera g?she's a hard worker at dpa. >> not only did i considerit i made efforts to . >> that would be amazing. >> it would be. i could control my own budget and that way what has been wonderfulbut towards the end he didn't even want me to do that . that wasn't the issue. that wasn't the issue asked. >> thank you for reminding me outside questions .>> i'm about tojump in here, it's not

a . okay. miss hawkins, iwant to go back to you a little bit . >> i am muting. >> so slide 4 shows salaries and benefits but as a salary savings of $264,769. also it says the merit budget instructions indicate a reduce in generalfunds supported by 7.5 percent to identify an additional 2.5 percent reduction in contingency there's some deep cuts to a department that has been already leanbudget . my question , ... >> i thinkshe had to rebootyour

computer so sees find law back on . >> okay . paul, are you hoped? [laughter] >> we have a lotof numbers on the .[inaudible] sorry we have to wait a moment . >> she's back. miss hawkins, are you ready? >> thank you. >> i want to back up for a second. i have 2 questions. the first, while we understand the need for budgetconstraints

, i'm particularly concerned that positions to implement at the 1421 and the sunset and june 2021. did i read that correctlywest and mark . >> that's correct. >> considering how important it is to comply with the directives of 1421 to make police records for officers use of force incidents in sexual assault and honesty accessible under thecalifornia public records act , to discuss how some of these personnel positions would impact our ability to sunset 1421? >> absolutely, the way it's currently staffed is we have one time old-time attorney dedicated to 1421 and a second attorney wasa volunteer and joined up . once someone else left and 2

paralegals and they work as a team to get these records reenacted, reviewed and out the door. previously before we had that team at work was divided among our lawyers and our policy team. and that was, we were doing the best that we could but it was not efficient and was not letting us be effective so this current team of 4 has been working diligently and expeditiously getting out records to the best oftheir ability and essentially if we move those positions , we're specifically speaking about two other positions and 2 paralegal positions, were going to be back to the old model ofhaving to spread the work out among our legal team . obviously we will do everything we can but it will set us back

in a quantifiable way, i can't remember which slide it wason but there's a table that shows impact losing those positions will have . i want to be clear that over time that need will not be as great. we're talking about the backlog and i've spoken to this commission and i think it was before you were with us about the fact that we have quite a backlog of records and our requests asked for quite a backlog of records in the process of getting the physical filesdigitized and redacted . we are in what i would say are a groove now and i really applaud sarah who is the kind of leader of that team for getting us to aplace where we are going through these and prioritizing this work . but it would be pretty devastating in our ability to comply with the directors of that statute and also the spirit of accountability . if those positions sunset in

fall. >> you are on mute, president. >> you were asking me numbers. >> i had a question for you hawkins onbudget constraints . does dpa have a sufficient one to properly discharge responsibilities ? >> i believe that we do in the sensethat we will make it work . and we have a committed staff who is willing to pitch in and do everything necessary. the 1421 piece and audit piece are the things that i think are the most taxing and kind of difficult.

given the current funding levels but i think we are committed to ensuring that we meet that requirement. >> can i answer that, it's not that we won't be able to keep doing work but the standard by which we are compared to him the outside agency and individuals trying to get the work i think that has the possibility of diminishing and that's the frustration so when you hear the public defenders office saying where's our own all the 1421 and why can't we domore records , it's that exact thing that i think is in conflict which will be exacerbated by the anticipated legislation that ending which expands the scope of 1421 in a way that means all of the work that's been done by 1421 has to be started over because it will expand the categories so that means things that had

previously not been, but you couldn't turn over our are now newly discoverable and you have to start all over again and in addition there will be penalties associated with how the work is done or doesn't get done. i think that speaks more to what you are asking for. we will continue doing the work as we can but the cost is in goodwill and the cost is in delays and the cost is in the slowdown of production for individuals to do the work and to even maintain the pace that we're doing. essentially if the work expands bythe legislature . >> i appreciate that, thank you. i have another question and i see that we've exhausted the questions from my colleagues. so sergeant youngblood, let's go to the next item. thank yousarah and paul .

>> next is public comment regarding presentation of police accountability budget. members of the public would like to make public comment regarding line item for please press star 3. >> good evening caller, you have 2 minutes. >> this is zachcohen, public defenders office. thank you commissioners, chief scott, director henderson . dpa 1441 compliance estimate at a path from 21 annual report twomonths ago , it would give everything currently existing through a nine year of 20+2030 is bill far away. only one of you work on the commission fiveyears ago in

2012and neither director henderson in their current roles at the time .a lot can happen in nine years . it this doesn't account for 15 which will pass this year and the contingency just a valid will be flying every year not able to supply. directorhenderson has made a good point about the need to go back over the work that has already beendone , sb 16 passes but there's lots that had begun focusing on shooting incidents for now because those are going to be any kind of variation that passes if and whenit does pass . the dpa also shift resources away from not mandated in order to set up the 1421 compliance . based on my reading of the projected timeline chart one story concerning the 1400 hours ofwork citing to more jobs . [inaudible] which is getting a

lot closer to whatthe law requires which is disclosure of these records . 19. >> good evening caller, you have 2minutes . >> i called earlier, i apologize for repeating myself but i want to reiterate my concern about the idea of epa's audit of the sfpd. what we need isactually an immediate accountability, . >> president cohen, that is the end of the calls. >> i appreciatethat, let's keep moving forward. next item please . >> line item 5, the hr regarding bias at the hiring stage.

>> good evening president cohen, vice presidentelias and members of the police commission . my name is carol eisenand i'm human resources director , i appreciate you calling this hearing tonight. commissioner colin,i listened with interest on your earlier comments about bias . and i think this is most importantly where the role of dhr comes in and the work that we have been doing with the police department in hiring and recruitment hiring options. [inaudible] is at the early stages are police department have the emotional maturity to serve in the san francisco police. and to me starts at the very beginning at the underpinning for moving the department into the 21st century policing. we have worked closely with the chief of police and with his

staff to seek out, promote and retain highly qualified police officers . i'm not telling you anything you don't know what the job of policing can change quite dramatically over time and as recently within the past year or two . so we've been working closely with the department to make sure that we are providing the best and most modern efficient tools that we can for all of ourtesting and our promotion . dpa as you know has the authority to perform the testing and job analysis and we've been doing the best that we can and working closely with yourdepartment to make sure that we are in step with the needs of the department . we've also been involved and you heard a lot about implicit bias training of youroffices . we are working hard to keep that work relevant, refreshed,

flexible and tomeet the needs as you go forward . so i'm going to, we have a team with usto . anna is a services director, dave johnson is our long-term public safety exams manager lori is our chief of policy who will all be your presenters tonight without further comments want to turn it over to louise davidson to start us off if we could put our presentation,thinking . >> good eveningpresident cohen and commissioners . i'm here to talk to

>> important to note is the theory behind the complexion suggesting the unit built in inherentsafeguards against perspectives, mindful of the ethnic and gender ratios . we pride ourselves on having an eclectic groupwhich can aid and identify a balanced workforce . can we go to slide seven please?

slide seven? perfect. moving on to the personal history statement .as noted close revelation 1953 speaks to the mandate of referral background coupledwith completion of a personal history statement . as noted interesting in those agents with moral character and who process a background that supports their suitability for hire. important to note here is the hs gave a 27 page document giving canada's first profile himself serving as a important piece ofdocumentation . every juncture of the review of information provided must correlate with that initial profile that they initially gave of themselves and the consistencies exist, the currency interviews pleaded and

the ferocity of information. i think it's important this point to take a brief moment and identify the sequence of each process. it goes initially from the phq was his personal history questionnaire which is the first opportunity he has to give a profile who they are. the next phase and the background process is a critical history statement, this is a 27 page document where really their personal professional history, personal references, professional references where they, 80.into they are.moving into the holy site, this is where we get into their truth telling style which is polygraph examination and it starts on the veracity of their ability to give the truth and the psychologicalexamination is where we into cognitive abilities and speak more about . next slide please.

so in completing the background investigation process each candidate is measured if you will against very stringent documentations. and ones that most resonate with us and i think with most law enforcement entities, not just students in particular is number one integrity, interpersonal skills, number three is number four is patient . we feel these character traits are most critical in today's american policing mindful of the importance to enhance police community relationship so not to exclude five or six but before that i frustrated, judgment and medications we deal on cornerstones in terms of the crowbar just looking for without officers. these documents and to an individual who may by a forward thinking compassionate police officerwhich is what this organization is seeking . next slide.

getting into the polygraph and psychological assessments, the sequence is phq then bhs apology and then the site everyone has a clear picture o the chronology . the high points to slide number nine is this slide speaks to the legislation8846 which stipulates as of january 20 , will insert processes to detect bias related character traits explicit and implicit as it pertains to evaluation . making that distinction that all not only are we looking at implicit, underlying subconscious if you will those that aremore overt as wellwhich the explicit behavior . in terms of applications , you have the dhs on the front end and the applicants are allowed to establish a kind of descriptive protocol of

themselves and move into a deeper dive of the poly assessment which really into the style which is what i refer to as their ability to be truthful and forthcoming and looking at the assessment which was really a deep dive into the cognitive abilityas well as their problem solving aspects but is . assignment also is the legitimacy of our efforts as we also have a recommendation that speaks specifically to recruiting and hiring as relates to these instructors while also bolstering others in an effort to mitigate sentiments for approaches. as of now we have 72 percent 32 and rehiring recommendations completed with anticipation of completing youin the next few weeks . with that i think i'll circle back on the assessment of the

subject matter experts but i think at this point i will turn back to you to continue. >> next slide please. one thing that we introduced which you are probably all aware the queue has been delayed several times since covid and we are optimistic wheregoing to be moving forward in april . one thing we added to the announcement is a disqualifier where any allegation of any misconduct, risk-based, they disqualify a member from the selection process to beeligible so it's not a one-time thing . if you're on the list and you have a sustained allegation against the you can be disqualified. at any stage of the process. and of course the subject of the memorandum has that understanding. next slide.

development committee, i think this is where ... comes in right after this. okay, so test development committee, we had supervisors from the department have a test that reflects the department. i do not have police expertise, i admit that and i will never try to develop a testwithout the help of the experts of the san francisco police department .we look at new policies and procedures and problematic efforts, problematic areas. we are bound by guidelines to test the current policies and procedures that produce people that can apply their qualitative procedures. next slide.

>> this gets into the development in terms of the smaller role on our end in the police department and it says here on the slide the subject matter experts that we also call smes. we have an example with dave and his team over the past few years and i can tell you without question this is a process that's critical to the success of theexam . as dave mentioned before want to make sure that the transcendence have a deep rooted knowledge in terms of the knowledge of procedures and policies and best practices in this organization to see the construction of the exam and they actually fall into two categories. we do job analysis where a group of sme's come in and look at the prior executive summary and the verbiage and the terminologies to enter in with regards to what's happening now

at the organization and then you also have a test construction committee which i another group that allocates on the back and of job analysis , maybe 10 or 15 people that build out the components of what david is seeing and external consultants. but i think it's important to emphasize that thesme's are vetted very stringently . there's a complete review through internal affairs and even pushes out even further to speaking to any disciplinary history of treatment so this is what we call what used to be called the mc, someone is being vetted foranything , certainly serving as a sme with the organization are going to be vetted for these different types of information if you will. in terms of officers exposure and or director hendersons epa.

that's the best way that we utilize our clienttends , making sure that they are they making sure that they have requisite approach and skill set to build out these exams cause the quality exam would certainly take the quality of the old candidate. moving down to the second or thethird bullet , i think this was a given, dhr testing was developed. [inaudible] the sme's that same end and the chief of police has appropriated an industrywide process on the back of the promotional process where i believe it'sdesigned where we can get a candidate and further assess their suitability. with that , i would turn it back over to you .

>> next slide please and this will be quick. i wanted to talk about your error, we trained to recognize and mitigate biases at the table so separating in a subjective manner. >> next slide. >> good evening commissioners, president cohen, vice president elias . our training director could no be here so i'm here to pinch-hit . i'll share a little bit with you about what we're doing on the testing partand outside of our authority , then we will improve over the last several years.the hr was a managing inclusive bias training four times a month for the police department forentry-level police officers up to the chief . today we trained nearly 1800 swornofficers , response staff and 20 non-sworn staff and in

2016 when the training began. in 2019 we updated the training and that update, we looked at how to make the trainingmore relevant to current world context . we worked to include discussions on high profile incidents in policing and racism including discussions o redlining and structural racism .we also included discussion on gender inclusion and gender identity which was not addressed. at this point were looking at adding more to education among our officers, this would include the addition of continuing education activities and looking at ways to enhance our training through building in a self assessment tool as well as including a post training reflection tool developed by the organization called project implicit. we're looking at adding both these tools this year and with

that that brings us to theend of our presentation and we're happy to take any questions . >> colleagues, thank you for your presentation. any questions? >> no questions for him? i know, clearly. >> get all the good questions up onpaul . >> commissioners, i do want to emphasize very excited about the changes we face. we've had to put it off a couple of times but we collaborated closely with the chief on this. i harken back to the comments

we heard earlier this evening in the report at thebeginning of your meeting about the importance of that sergeant level . setting the tone and saying the leadership and i think it's a great opportunity in this new list that were going to establish and the new methodologies that we want to rollout in thatselection process so we are really looking forward to it . >> let's go with commissioner, sake.>> i think this was from the doj reportoriginally . one of the concerns was the background and investigations process . am i right that that was the doj report? does anybody recall? >> that are some recommendations. >> there was concern about the use of retired officers and the police union and hiring and

basically who makes it through the backlash. did you give us a little bit of a clarification as to where that is now and whether that's been addressed? >> i believe back in 2016 as it stands we have four full-time sworn and23 part-time process members in the background . i believe it's on slide six and seven that outlines the gender and ethnic makeup of the unitas well . >> i guess what the concern is is these 23 members, who are they? are they retirees? >> they are all retirees, formermembers of this organization . they're working in our investigations. >> sorry, that's me.

>> why do we use retirees to do this? >> there's a physical component obviously but i think based on operational need the organization is always focused on operations. we have that outward facing strong and robust not to diminish background investigations but the current configuration is four full-time sworn and the bulk of them are like i said part-time members. >> i guess as to the concern, the mayor and i talked a few weeks ago about the issue of culturing and policing has always probably been a challenge and i know this department is trying to move

beyond some of the cultures that i think we don't want to be a part of anymore. so the concern i think that was raised in the report has been raised was that people that are the old-timers that are retirees, i think all day through their own biases from havingbeen part of the whole department without the new culture , are they imposing those rules? it's not intentional, i don't think it'sintentional but that's just who they are and how they came up . how do you control for that and how doyou avoid that from corrupting the process ? >> let me back up. right now ratherthan in years past , that process and in fact it's currently still the same way, it's a higher authority above mypay grade .

their backgrounds have all been considered. there have always been a group selected to be on the front. i think the hearing role between identifying these, typing into their investigative expertise and vetting process that goes on within that process, i think is really designed to the right mindset in the unit. i can tell you right now in 2016 when they came and did initial assessment currently i can say we have a very as you can see a very balanced and forward thinking conscientious group of retired employees. >> has this group and the whole

department undergone some sort of review or audit to make sure those concerns that were raised and i understand it wasback in 2016 they address . as that already happened with denmark. >> the background is always in flux because of the egress of the personnel i can tell you,, not surging, and in 2016 and the current complement right now is extremely common interms of ethnic and gender makeup and i know always people personally and professionally and they are very conscientious . i feel confident in saying what now current complement of background investigators is solid. >> let me ask you this and my final area on this is how they undergone by s3? have they gone through doctor king training, have these individuals gone through

similar similarantivirus, antiracism training ? >> full-time people have, i have to confirm how many of our part-time people havehappened but they all participate in the training . >> thanking. >> i can do the research and have the answer for you within a day to. >> thanking. >> i was going to ask you a question, certainly a very good point. we were in the process of developing civilian positions to assist with our background investigations. we were actually in the final stages of that and it got shut down because of budget impacts of covid. there's also issues that we had

to work through and in that processas well so your point is well taken and we definitely were addressing the issue . budget concerns ditched all that but it's something that is on our horizon as we work out thebudget as well as some of the union issues . >> are going to hearfrom commissioner elias and then hear from bob henderson . >> if director henderson has something to follow up i'll be happy togo after him . >> is not a follow-up, i just wanted ageneral inquiry . >> i have three questions. you mentioned the 250 sergeant announcement which is on one of your slides which indicates sustained allegations of a race misconduct maydisqualify a member from the selection

process eligibility list . a few things, one maybe educate us and the public on how allegations can affect an officer's ability to promote and number two, what about the open allegations? i know the new disqualifier for sustained allegations but what about the incidents where an officer has an open case has not yet been adjudicated and they are up for the exam? maybe you can educate us on thatprocess as well and is what about other categories ? what is officer has other allegations of misconduct that are necessarily related to bias . does that also disqualify an officer from being able to promote and is not, why? a lot of questions but i think theyare related . >> thank you commissioner elias and i'm probably not the best person to direct them to. i see i have office phone call

or dave johnson who is more involved with the details and i'm just going to comment on your first point about allegations and charges that have not beensustained . the problem with holding that against the officer is exactly that . there's still due process aspect any charges that have been filed a lady taking possible judgment for our examinersto be able to determine . just keep in mindshould probably address this . under our civil service rules that were put out there, applicants have very substantial individual to be able to protest the announcement, the scores, the results of all. take a lot of time to close us

down so we're pretty cautious about trying to make sure that our process will sustain any challenges from any of the individual applicants but perhaps the director can take it from here. >> commissioner, this is dave johnson. i just want to mention we initiated quite closely, negotiated isn't the right word but leveraged discussions with the police officers association with these requirements and we came to the agreement that having these allegations sustained until the police commissioner has taken action, it's not fact. there's a very dark mind here saying once you processand we can take action but we will not touch it until that point .

>> can i follow up with 2 questions. when you say sustained allegation is there is a training time because in the discipline matrix allows your discipline mitigation can be considered only for the past seven years. if there's some kind of requirement with respect to disqualification number one number two is absolutely agree about the dark line and not being able to course any due process and i wantto respect that but what about instances where in fact later on they are sustained ? how do you real? >> first the question only going forward.>>

>> vice president elias: we talked about females in leadership and sort of the lack of females in leadership, and one of the chief's responses was they have to go off a list. and my question is are we

looking at factors that may contribute to the lack of diversity on the list? because we have to go off the list, and i understand that, but are we looking at factors which may contribute to why the list is made up of the list? >> are you referring to the entry-level list? >> vice president elias: more so the leadership list, but i mean, any list within the department where you're advancing. >> well, i think on the front end, with respect to the notion that there is maybe a lack in representation by female applicants, i can tell that -- and actually, captain mccormick is on the line. he receives the background and recruitments processes. i can tell you that our efforts to recruit and elicit female

applicants is robust. we go to a lot of lengths to recruit female applicants. we go to a lot of schools. there are great efforts to encourage representation not only on the force but the administration. >> when i first started this job, the majority of applicants were not only male but asian,

over time, we have diversified the ranks among races and gender, and that's something that commander ford referred to earlier when we're also trying to get a representative to develop a test because those communities are very important. every community's idea is different of how they should get the job done. so to the extent we can involve those groups in the process, the more likely we are to give a test that more accurately represents all groups in the test. >> if i could just insert myself into the answer, to start with, d.o.j. representation 86.02 specifically speaks to

diversity, and that is being completed as we speak. and i spoke to our professional standards supervisor, and 98% of our 960 backgrounds are in compliance with training, leaving 2% out of compliance either because of some type of leave or disability. so commissioner hamasaki, in answer to your question, in upwards of 95% of those who do background investigations are up to speed on bias-related training. >> commissioner hamasaki: thank you. >> absolutely, sir. >> commissioner cohen: thank you. commissioner elias, did you have any other questions? >> vice president elias: no, thank you. i appreciate that.

>> commissioner cohen: and paul henderson, did you have a question? >> director henderson: yeah, and my question was for holly, as well. i feel like they have a better understanding of how the department works, but are there things that the police department or the police commission can be doing to help that plan or are these things that are just strictly for d.h.r. and the department directly? >> paul, are you referring to the bias training that we -- that we mentioned? >> director henderson: yes. >> i would welcome the commission's involvement in welcoming the concept and the way that it's changing. we're always open to advice or looking to keep it as current or contrary as relevant to the needs of the department as we

can. do you want to comment on this? >> i think carol said it. i mean, we are, as i mentioned, always looking to keep it -- keep it relevant, and i think the involvement from d.p.a. or from the commissioners even, if they want to participate in any of the trainings, would be really helpful. i mean, yeah, whatever we can do to really keep it a useful [inaudible] we're doing that. >> i was very intrigued with the earlier comments that we heard this evening about introducing history and having the officers understand, you know, much more deeply about the history of race and racism and its roots.

it's a very interesting idea, and i'd like to explore it further. >> i already texted the team. it's some concept that they're interested in and excited about, as well. >> vice president elias: that's good, because the bias complaints or allegations, i think d.p.a. is the only one that's ever done one, is that right, director henderson? >> director henderson: that's right, and then, we were stuck with the officer that left the department. that was a real challenge. i'm not aware of any other agency that has had a prosecution or a sustained case for bias. >> commissioner cohen: all right. thank you. let's continue moving forward with our agenda. >> thank you, commissioners.

>> commissioner cohen: we appreciate the presentation. stacey youngblood, sergeant youngblood, please, what's next on the agenda? >> clerk: public comment. the public is now welcome to make public comment regarding line 5, presentation by d.h.r. regarding bias at the hiring stage. members of the public who wish to make comment, press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hi. my name is cheryl thornton, and i am -- work for the city and county of san francisco, and i've gone to many commission meetings. some of these hiring practices and what they're doing, it sounds like more of the same. what i mean is i think in order to change the culture of the department and to get good leadership, it's who you recruit from the very

beginning. and i don't see enough diversity of officers. when i walk around san francisco, i see very few black officers. i don't know how many there are in the department right now currently, but i don't see very many. and the ones i do see, sometimes they're not even community friendly. some are, but some are not. so i would like to see officers, like, after they hired from the consent decree, like sylvia harper, captain yolanda williams, dawn stanford. these are actually people from san francisco, from the community. now i know that gentrification has gone on, and we have a lot less black people, but we need to get black people who identify at the entry level in order to change the culture of the department. thank you.

>> clerk: and president cohen, that is the end of public comment. >> commissioner cohen: is that my cue? >> clerk: yes, that is the end of public comment. >> commissioner cohen: okay. next item. >> clerk: next item is line item 6, presentation of the monthly collaborative reform initiatives, c.r.i., updates. discussion. >> okay. good evening, commissioners. president cohen, vice president elias, chief scott, and members of the public. i'm catherine mcguire, and i'm director of the strategic

bureau. i'll be updating you tonight on our progress on the c.r.i. program for the month of january. next slide, please. the -- as you can see, we had 20 recommendations go from review to substantial compliance in january, and we had 23 recommendations prescreened by d.o.j. and hillard hines. the details of these recommendations are in later slides. we currently have -- national to those 131 recommendations, we have 32 recommendations in review by hillard hines and an additional 35 in review by cal d.o.j., and the breakdown is represented in that slide. next slide, please. for the use of force objective, we have two recommendations that were in substantial compliance for use of force,

including a recommendation that included synthesizing information for the report and reporting on use of force. that will address not only a usdoj recommendation but a controller's office audit recommendation from last year. through that, we'll also collect new data required for the amendments to 5.01, and as you know, the -- that that amendment or those amendments help respond to some of c.p.e. recommendations. and next slide, please. in the bias objectives, the four recommendations moved into substantial compliance, including recommendations that suggested sfpd encouraged

personnel to report bias behavior, to prioritize and mandate the collection, analysis, and reporting of nonconsensual data, and to develop a strategy to collect and use data management practices. those recommendations are significant in that technology and data, as we all know from presentation does this evening, help guide us in identifying where bias might be, help us then also review policies to ensure that we find ways to reduce or eliminate the influence bias may have on our officers' activity. next slide, please. three recommendations moved to substantial compliance were the community policing objectives, including objectives suggesting that sfpd engage the community members -- engage community members in the implementation

of recommendations, ensure all personnel, including professional employees, receive community policing and engagement training, and providing procedural justice and implicit bias training to all personnel and make it part of the annual requirements. we also submitted information demonstrating the rollout of the community policing strategic plan through the use of video messaging in the department. next slide. for accountability, one recommendation moved to substantial compliance, and that 'em aration suggested that all personnel are trained and educated on the -- and that recommendation suggested that all personnel are trained and educated on the bias.

next slide. recruitment hiring and retention objective included saw ten recommendations moved to substantial compliance, including recommendations that sfpd increase their social media presence, assign more personnel resources to further recruitment to further represent under represented communities and evaluate relief for impacts to diversity and develop implements where impacted are bound. i am happy to take any questions at this time. that will conclude my presentation. >> commissioner cohen: colleagues, are there any questions? i can't see the chat.

none? okay. so thank you very much. i appreciate your presentation. we can take public comment on this at this time. >> clerk: at this time, the public is now welcome to make public comment regarding line item six, the collaborative reform initiative. please press star, three now if you would like to make public comment. and president cohen, it appears there is no public comment. >> commissioner cohen: okay. let's have the next item. >> clerk: line item 7, discussion and possible action to adopt a resolution urging the prompt development and implementation of a distribution plan for covid-19 vaccines to sfpd members, discussion and possible action. >> commissioner cohen: thank you. i appreciate that. i'm going to turn to commissioner hamasaki to introduce and discuss this item. >> commissioner hamasaki: oh, thank you, president cohen.

yeah, so this was an item that was prompted by the letter about two weeks ago that the department and the p.o.a. had sent asking for priority be given to sfpd officers. i think we on the commission know the work that the officers do, their work with the public, and the fact that they're forced to be out -- the nature of the job forces them to be out in the community, interacting with the people all day along, and for their safety, the public's safety, they should be prioritized in a higher tier based on the nature of their work and the necessity of their work. and i brought this to president cohen, and president cohen took it away from there.

>> commissioner cohen: that was nice set up. chief, i know that you've been working with the p.o.a. to get your officers the vaccines, so we stand with you and support your efforts. >> thank you very much. >> president cohen: if there's no further discussion, we can go ahead and take a vote on this. >> commissioner cohen? >> president cohen: yes, chief, please. >> can i just say thank you to the commission on this very, very much? i just want to point out to the public that covid-19 was the biggest killer of police officers last year. it's a huge issue, and thank

goodness we haven't lost anybody from covid-19, but this is a huge issue, so i just want to thank the commission for their support. we really, really appreciate that. >> vice president elias: and maybe chief, next week, you can give us an update now that we're moving into a different tier and how that affects officers in your weekly report. >> yes, thank you. >> president cohen: all right. thank you very much. so can i take a motion to adopt the resolution? >> vice president elias: i make a motion. >> commissioner hamasaki: second. >> president cohen: i'm sorry. we need to take public comment. we'll take a motion after public comment. >> clerk: at this time, the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item 7, resolution urging the prompt development and implementation of a distribution plan for covid-19 vaccine. members of the public who wish to make public comment, press

star, three now. caller, you have three minutes. >> yes, yolanda williams with the d.f.j. i have spoken with you about this. i think it's alarming that a community would allow police officers to be classified below any other essential worker. we should have received it at the same time that the fire department received it. and i personally went to several stations last week, and i had officers come up to me crying and begging for me to try to get them vaccinated. many officers are suffering and experiencing the loss of their family members. please do everything you can to ensure that we don't have to wait until the 24th to get our officers vaccinated. it needs to happen, and it needs to happen as of the next few days. and instead of our giving away

or throwing away vaccinations that they're not going to be using at these various sites, they should be calling our district stations, asking if we have any officer that's can get -- officers that can get there within 15 to 20 minutes to get the vaccines. so thank you, chief. i support you, and support the officers. >> president cohen: are there any other member of the public that would like to comment on this item? >> hi, yes. my name is cheryl thornton again, and i agree with captain williams. i was just hurt and appalled to find out that the sfpd -- i work for the department of public health, and we get lots of calls -- i work out in the tenderloin, and these officers call every day. and they don't even have the proper equipment.

to not have them prioritized, it's just unthinkable. just like myself, they've been serving on the frontlines through the entire pandemic. i think this should never happen again, and whatever resolution you write, they should be prioritized if there's another pandemic, another vaccine, what have you. they should be first in line because if they get sick, who is going to protect our city? >> president cohen: thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is arlene drummer, and i'm a member of the officers [inaudible]. today, i was riding down eddy street, and i saw so many people that were unmasked. and just to think that these officers aren't being vaccinated doesn't make any

sense. these are essential workers and they should be vaccinated, so please handle that. thank you. >> clerk: good evening, caller, you have -- >> president cohen: good evening, caller. >> good evening. this is starchild, chair of the libertarian party of san francisco. i just wanted to bring awareness that the moderna vaccine was finished and ready to go last march. it was sent to the u.s. government, and for most of last year, it was held up by the regulatory bureaucracy of the federal government, so all the time that people were dying from covid last year and this year, that vaccine had been ready to go, and without the government regulation and restriction of people's access to life saving medications, including vaccines, a lot of

unnecessary death and suffering could have been prevented. so i urge you to put in your resolution a call for these regulations to be reviewed so that life saving treatments are available to the public, and we don't have a repeat of this ef

efficiently as possible. i spoke the resolution, and i know that my colleagues will support it, as well. with that said, may i have a motion? >> vice president elias: motion. >> president cohen: i have a motion. >> commissioner brookter: second. >> president cohen: all right. thank you. i have a motion by commissioner elias, seconded by commissioner -- >> commissioner brookter: brookter. >> president cohen: brookter. can we take that without objection? motion passes without objection. next item. >> clerk: item 8, discussion and possible action to adopt revised department general order 1.08, community policing, meet-and-confer draft was approved by the commission on october 7, 2020, discussion and

possible action. >> vice president elias: president cohen? >> president cohen: yes. >> vice president elias: i'm going to make a motion to accept this, but before let's d

go to public comment. >> clerk: members of the public, at this time, this is your opportunity to make public comment on item 8. members of the public who are listening, press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. caller, you have two minutes. >> oh, excuse me. i was trying to unmute. this is starchild again, libertarian party of san francisco. i don't see the proposed order here. i'm calling in by phone, no summary of the changes that this would make have been given, so i would just like to note that for the record that i probably would have something to say about this community policing order, but it hasn't been facilitated for that to be meaningfully possible since i

don't know what it says. in a good thing, it's good to have -- in a general thing, it's good to have officers get out and walk around on foot beats, so if that's what's meant by community policing, i support that. but a lot of the real issue is not whether the officers are in their cars or not, but what priorities they're pursuing. are they going after actual violent crimes and crimes against property, like, assaults and car break-ins and this sort of thing or are they pursuing action against people who are not actually violating anyone else's rights, like people simply being on the streets or selling drugs or engaging in prostitution, things around which there's no community consensus that police should be involved in or

excessive free speech demonstrations or protests that don't need or require any police involvement and where police involvement can actually heighten tensions and actually increase the risk of violence. this is what i think the focus should be on, and unfortunately, community policing has become sort of a buzz word that doesn't have a lot of specifics on what that actually means, and again, i hear the -- >> clerk: and president cohen, there's no further comment. >> president cohen: okay. ladies and gentlemen, a motion has been made by commissioner elias. is there a second? quickly, a second? >> commissioner brookter: second. >> president cohen: thank you. seconded by commissioner brookter. we can take that without objection. unanimously passes. sergeant youngblood, this motion passes. excellent. let's keep moving forward. next item, please.

>> clerk: line item 9, discussion and possible action to adopt protocols for release of s.b. 1421 document. meet-and-confer draft was approved by the commission on december 4, 2019, discussion and possible action. >> vice president elias: the only thing i'd like to add, president cohen, is i'd like to thank commissioner mazzucco for this one, as well. he was the one that really started this working group and tagged me in to join him, so i'm very grateful and make a motion after public comment. >> president cohen: okay. that's great. thank you again. i'm sorry you guys have to hear the background noise. okay. is there someone presenting on this? is there a motion? is there a motion? >> vice president elias: motion after public comment. >> clerk: public comment. >> president cohen: oh, that's right.

>> clerk: all right. at this time, the public is now welcome to make public comment regarding line item 9, the adopt of the s.b. 1421 protocols. for those who would like to make public comment, please press star, three now. and president cohen, it appears there is no public comment. >> vice president elias: motion. >> president cohen: motion made by commissioner elias, seconded by commissioner brookter, and we can take that without objection. without objection, motion passes unanimously. next item. >> clerk: line item 10, discussion and possible action to adopt revised disciplinary penalty and referral guidelines for sworn members of the san francisco police department. meet-and-confer draft was approved by the commission on september 11, 2019. discussion and possible action. >> vice president elias: i'd like to make a motion after public comment, but i'd like to

thank commissioner hirsch for getting the ball rolling on the optics. >> president cohen: look at you, old timer. we'll take public comment. >> clerk: members of the public, this is your opportunity to make public comment on item 10, discussion and possible objection to adopt revised disciplinary penalty and referral guidelines for sworn members of the san francisco police department. >> yes.

their starchild, chairman of the san francisco libertarian party. once again, there's no material available on-line, and i have no way to know what the changes are, so i would ask for the commissioners to let the public know and give the opportunity for public comment after they've heard the description of what the changes are before taking action. thank you. >> president cohen: thank you, caller. sergeant youngblood, are there any other speakers? >> clerk: no, ma'am. >> president cohen: okay. colleagues, i don't know if there's anyone else that would like to speak on this? hearing none, is there a motion? >> vice president elias: i'd like to make a motion. >> president cohen: can i have a second?

commissioner brookter. okay. can we take this without objection? without objection, the motion passes. next item. >> clerk: item 11, discussion and possible action to adopt revised department general order 5.01, use of force policy and proper control of a person, discussion and possible action. >> president cohen: i love that we're moving through and doing what we should be doing, passing public resolution. commissioner elias, anyone that you want to thank? [inaudible]. >> president cohen: it looks like the chief has something to say. >> well, i'm going to echo commissioner elias' thanking of miss preston and thank the commission, as well. we moved through meet-and-confer in record time,

record speed, and i hope it instills some confidence in the public that the department and the commission is serious about getting these policies updated and revised, and the work that we're doing will move us forward at a much quicker pace, and a lot of that is credit to miss preston and credit to this commission, so i just want to thank both, both of you all. >> thank you. thank you all. >> vice president elias: and you too, chief. you brought her here. you had the foresight to bring her here and make this thing happen, so kudos to you. >> president cohen: i love that we're ending on a positive note. kumbahyah, everyone. kumbahyah. all right. let's take public comment. >> clerk: public is welcome to make public comment on item 11, adopt of department general order 5.01. for those wishing to make

public comment, please press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> hi. can you hear me? >> clerk: yes? >> yes, hi. so i've been watching this on the sfgovtv website, and there's a bit of a delay. you all kind of breezed through the last few agenda items, so my question is regarding agenda number 8, item number 8. i'm wondering why there was no statements made particularly around what protocols that were just approved? if anyone is able to elaborate on that, that would be very helpful. >> president cohen: sergeant youngblood, are there any other

speakers? >> clerk: one more -- or a couple more. >> president cohen: public commenter, unfortunately, we're not able to respond directly to your question but would encourage you to write an e-mail to the commission, and we'll work on getting an answer for you. all right. next speaker. >> clerk: good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> yes, again, this is starchild with the libertarian party of san francisco. libsf.org. i'd like to echo the previous commenter's comments. the commission is breezing through the last few items without any explanation, and the write an e-mail and we'll get an answer for you is not sufficient. someone here now should be able to describe what these proposals would do, at least summarize them because we don't have the documents in front of

them to know so that there's meaningful opportunity for public comment. i think the way this meeting is currently being conducted is a violation of the spirit if not the letter of open public meeting law that is supposed to allow for meaningful public comment, opportunity to comment on what's being done, and that there's no description offered of what's being voted on, and it's really difficult for that to happen. the minutes should reflect that. i want my public comment to be included in the minutes as verbatim in possible in print as well as on-line, and i ask the -- the members of the commission to specifically address what i'm saying and not just continue on as if nothing was said. thank you. >> president cohen: sergeant youngblood, are there any other public comments?

>> clerk: we have one more public comment, commissioner. >> president cohen: thank you. >> clerk: good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> i would agree with the previous two callers regarding the sort of breezing through these items. i'm looking at the agenda here provided on the website, and yeah, there's really no description of the revised department general order 5.01, so -- and, you know, there's no links or anything, so i have no idea what this revised general order is, and i don't know -- i guess there is a supporting documents page there, although, you know -- okay. so i guess i go to the

supporting documents page. there is a file called police commission 021021 dgo 5.01 use of force. so without going there, one would not know to go to the supporting documents link. and that is only if you have a computer with internet access, and you have some familiarity with the website, which, of course, not everybody does. if you're watching this on t.v., you might not have access to a computer to look up this p.d.f. file. so yeah, [inaudible] not everybody has the internet, and since libraries are all shutdown now, internet has been significantly reduced for a lot of populations. yeah, just having greater

transparency and maybe this page of p.d.f., supporting documents clause, i don't know if there's a way it could be mailed out to interested parties. >> commissioner hamasaki: president cohen, may i say something briefly? >> president cohen: sure, and i'm going to say something after you, please. >> commissioner hamasaki: well, i do think the public commenters did raise a fair point that perhaps we could have introduced them, usually, but i thought miss elias -- or commissioner elias did, the one that she had worked on, and that's usually how it works. the one that worked on it generally introduces it. but the other callers are needing information with the agenda and supporting documents are -- but the other callers that are needing information with the agenda and supporting documents are posted the friday

before the meeting. we can't do anything about the internet connections. unfortunately, that's not within our power or purview, but the documents are always up and if you have a problem with that, please contact the commission office. >> president cohen: well said, commissioner hamasaki. far more gracious than i would have put it. i would just say that everyone on this commission are expected to do their homework before they comment, and members of the public are expected to do the same. >> and if i could just say something, we passed these d.g.o.s some time ago, and they're just coming back from the meet and confer process, but they've been in the meet-and-confer process sometime ago. >> president cohen: that's right, commissioner dejesus. the public commenters probably

haven't spent much time on-line or have spent a lot of time researching the commission's work. these items were started in 2019, and it's sad that we're in 2021 and just getting it done, but we've done it and we've tried to keep it transparent. with that, i want to move forward, and thank you, miss preston, for helping us stay the course, and chief scott, as well. all right. with that, public comment is closed. i'll entertain a motion. >> vice president elias: so moved. >> president cohen: i have a motion and a second. can i take this without objection? without objection, the motion passes. sergeant youngblood, next item.

>> clerk: item 12, public comment on all matters pertaining to item 14 below, closed session, including public comment on item 13, vote whether to hold item 14 in closed session. >> president cohen: all right, public comment. let's hear what your thoughts are. >> clerk: good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> good evening. starchild, president of the san francisco libertarian party. i must object to the last comments. we're not involved in the closed session. when there's a delay of two years on something, it implies that there's a change to something that the public didn't have access to, well, it's reasonable to ask what changes were made? these agenda items, it has these orders. there's no link on the agenda to the supporting documents.

you have to go and look and dig into a separate document, and members of the public who are not serving on these commissions, we have other lives and other things going on. we're not appointed to commissions where we're expected to do a lot of time and homework on this stuff. the people who are being paid to do this stuff and who are appointed to positions, you know, to have this responsibility should be making it as easy as possible for the public to understand what's going on, and i don't feel like that's happening. i feel like members of the public are being disrespected here. thank you. . >> clerk: and that is the end of public comment, commissioner. >> vice president elias: i make a motion. >> president cohen: all right. thank you very much. motion made by commissioner elias, seconded by commissioner brookter. can we take that without objection? all right. without objection, let's move forward.

>> clerk: all right. line item 13 is vote on whether to hold item 14 in closed session. >> president cohen: can i hear a motion? >> vice president elias: motion. >> president cohen: motion made by commissioner elias, seconded by -- let me guess -- commissioner brookter. >> commissioner brookter: second. >> president cohen: motion passes unanimously, without objection. >> clerk: all right. >> president cohen: motion made by commissioner elias, seconded by commissioner brookter. thank you. we'll take that without objection. thank you, ladies and gentlemen. okay. this motion passes unanimously. commissioner -- i'm sorry, sergeant youngblood, do we need to take public comment? >> clerk: yes, ma'am. >> president cohen: let's take public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who would like to make

public comment, please press star, three now. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> yes. i believe that there should have been, you know, public comment permitted before the motion. somebody just said that the motion passed unanimously, which, you know, confuses me greatly. any ways, yeah, so i don't know. maybe i misheard, but i don't know if public comment should have been taken after the motion passed. i thought usually the procedure is motion is brought forth, public comment is taken, and then, there is a motion and a

vote. it seems like the procedures are irregular, and i don't understand why. i would like to raise concerns about that, and certainly, that would make anyone any more comfortable about what happens in closed sessions that are not disclosed to the public, and so yeah, i think that's everything i have to say, so thank you. >> clerk: and commissioner, there is no further public comment. >> president cohen: thank you, sergeant youngblood. colleagues, i'm going to make a motion to rescind our motion not to disclose. may i have a second on that? >> commissioner dejesus: well, i'm not sure what part you want to rescind. >> president cohen: well, i'm going to make a motion to rescind, and then, we will make

another motion to close. the caller is correct. motion should have been made after public comment. >> commissioner dejesus: okay. so second, then. >> president cohen: thank you for the second. so colleagues, if we could take this motion without objection, without objection. sergeant youngblood, you want to reopen public comment at this time? >> clerk: for members of the public that would like to make public comment on item 15, please press star, three now. it does not look like there's any public comment. >> president cohen: thank you. all right. so i'll make a motion not to disclose what was said in closed session. >> commissioner dejesus: second. >> president cohen: thank you. seconded by petra dejesus. if we can take that without objection? thank you. without objection, that motion passes. sergeant youngblood, next item,

please. >> clerk: item 16, adjournment, action item. >> commissioner dejesus: so moved. >> commissioner brookter: second. >> president cohen: we have a motion by commissioner dejesus and a second by commissioner brookter, and without objection, the motion passes. thank you, everyone. good night. >> good night. >> good morning, and welcome to the rules committee of the san francisco board of siewrvesz.

supervisions. i am the char, aaron peskin, chained by mandelman and connie chan. our clerk is mr. young. mr. young, could you please make any announcements. >> members will be participating in the meeting remotely. committee members will attend the meeting by video conference, the same as if they were physically present. public comment will be available on each item on this agenda, both on channel 26, and sfgovtv.org. i.d. 1464694909