>> vice president cohen, i'd like to take roll. [roll call] >> also here tonight, we have chief scott from the san francisco police department and

executive director henderson from the department of police accountability. >> thank you, welcome to the march 9th, 2022 meeting we're back in-person and it's good to be here. call the first item, please. >> line item 1. general public comment. at this time, the flick is now welcome to address the commission for two minutes on items that do not appear on tonight's agenda but within the jurisdiction of the police commission. under police commission rules of order during public comment, neither police or dpa personnel are required to respond to questions by the public but may provide a brief response. comments are opportunities to speak during public comment and period are available in-person as well as by calling (415)655-0001 and entering 2497 323 7673. please press star 3 if you wish to make a comment. you may submit in the following

ways. e-mail the. or sent by u.s. postal service. we have a number of calls commissioner elias, that i will open up. >> good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: hello, my name is david erinson and i'm a resident of district 1 and the team of wealth and disparities in the black community funded by felicia jones and it's recommended to the commission the elimination of routine traffic stops by the sfpd and

dating back to the 2016doj cops report traffic stops charging black and brown communities do little to promote public safety has been identified as a serious problem and racially biased policing and not only were black san franciscans stopped at a higher rate than while people, they were less likely to be ticket and found with contraband and during the june 9th, 2021 police commission meeting the d.p.a. worked with community groups to present recommendations to the police commission. with regards to traffic stops including wealth and disparities in the black community and wealth and disparities in the black community is repeatedly called out the fact that according to sfpd a black san francisco is six times as likely this is far higher than the state wide disparity and -- philadelphia and berkeley have moved to eliminate routine

traffic stops to prove justice in policing and we have not seen a sense of surgery tee from this commission to eradicate the unjust process. we demand the police commission prioritizes pretext actual task stops as one of their core commitments of the people of san francisco and i would just like to thank president cohen and commissioner hamasaki for their time on the police commission. we did not agree, i appreciate your service and thank you. >> thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good evening, my name is (inaudible) with wealth and disparities in the black community and i don't want to repeat what david just said but i want to -- commissioner carter raised a dgo and the commission will discuss whether that or

it's a beth forward as well as being as effective as possible and so, i would like to see whether this commissioner will be agenizing the different options for going forward on this issue and in addition to the possibility of the dgo. thank you. >> thank you, caller. >> good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> this is season and from the black community and and even though most of them have returned to in-person. i do ask, sergeant youngblood in the future you mute your mic because it is break ups of people making public comment. that's all i have to say.

thank you. >> thank you, caller. >> we have one person who would like to speak. go ahead and speak. speak into the mic. >> there we are. hello commissioners. i just couldn't let this go by without you having one person speak public comment in-person. i didn't have comments today but i'll take this opportunity to introduce myself. i'm curtis bradford and i work in tenderloin and a member of the community police advisory board. i'm going to be running and back before and meeting and i wouldn't let this go without one person comment now that you are back. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> tonight the elections were

supposed to be on in speaking with the rest of the commissioners we've agreed until we have a full commission elections should not be held until every seat has been filled. with that can you please call the next item. is your mic working? i couldn't hear. >> it might be the microphone. >> it's on. your mic is not on. >> maybe take the other one? >> this is your mic. >> this is my mic. >> you wanted two? >> i wanted to hog the mics? >> well, all right, ok, next item. >> item 2. discussion and possible action to adopt findings for the police commission to continue to meet tell conferencing technology per

assembly bill 361, discussion and possible action. >> president lopez: we have these. >> this is just a vote for the virtual so i just need a motion. >> so moved. >> item number 2. >> this is for 361? for the commission to meet virtually. when commissioners meet virtually, we have to still pass this. [off mic] >> we have a motion by hamasaki. >> i'll second the motion. >> thank you. >> on the motion -- [roll call vote]

>> you have six yess. line item 3. chief's report. discussion, weekly crime trends. provide an overview of offenses occurring in san francisco. major significant incidents provide a summary of planned activities comments. this will include and any unplanned having an impact on public safety up and planned events and will be limited to. >> oh, you are right. >> excuse me, chief. for members of the public that would to make public comment regarding line item 2, please star 3 or step up to the podium.

good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: david erinson resident of district 1 here. i support the continuation of a virtual option for the police commission meetings. just wanted to voice my opinion. thank you. that is the end of ally as. >> i'm being told we have to redo the vote. >> president elias: it's public comment before action. >> all right. still a motion by commissioner hamasaki and a second by commissioner. how do you vote? [roll call vote]

>> you have six yess. >> hold the line, please. >> line item 3, chief's report discussion. >> thank you, sergeant youngblood and good evening vice president elias and commission executive director henderson. i want to abbreviate this a little bit and i'm going to go through the shooting trends and hopefully we'll a brief eight this a bit and for the public, all of our crime statistics are on the website so if you go through san francisco police you can pull our crime statistics from our website as well.

we are 9% lower than we were last year and

a concrete retaining wall at the soccer field. the driver and front seat passengers were arrival upon arrival of emergency personnel. the fire department extracted the driver both were transported to the hospital but the driver unfortunately succumbed to hisinjuries. that one is still under investigation but it was a single cartridge and . as far as strategy, auto burglary has been the focus. officers both uniformed and plainclothes officers are working the hotspots where these incidents are current. there's also enforcement on the border of the tenderloin district around stunned and mission and ate then mission. the northern district is working on mitigation

enforcement of anuptick in burglaries and auto break-ins . patrols are deployed in the outermost square to the finer areas where these incidents have been occurring most frequently and the commercial corridors which continue to be impacted. community members have shared concerns about theft and vandalism and quality of life issues throughout the northern district and those are being addressed by captain jackson in northern mission. mission is focused on the uptick in gunviolence in the mission district . it's impacted the district over the last few weeks and officers are working with our reduction team andare officers along with community partners to mitigate these shootings . the disability patrol will be along the 24th street corridor until further notice and that commissioners concludes my reportfor the week. thank you . >> any questions?

>> thank you chief, thank you vice president. i have one question about the violence interrupt or program that you mentioned. the last time you reported on that there was engagement . i think you mentioned there were about 10 young people or adults engaged in the process. what does engagement look like and what makes folks eligible for this because i am concerned about the uptick in violence. there was a incident in mission high school that although it didn't lead to injury, it's still concerning. and i'd like to know whether those young people or we don't know their young people or young adults are eligible for these types of services. >> thank youcommissioner. there's some very good news to report on that . there was an assignment of new personnel to that unit and they

have gotten off to a good start with the engagement. we have really stepped up our engagement in the past month and the lieutenant who was assigned, lieutenant cortez has done a fantastic job. the criteria, with our data an research and knowledge of what's going on in the community , people who have been involved in gun violence either as a suspect, a perpetrator or the victim, that's the first thing we look at and sometimes we hear on the streetsthat people may be active but they haven't been shotor they haven't shot anybody . they also qualify if we can validate that information . the process is in working with the cert lieutenant and tiffany sutton who is a part of this is to engage individuals with our scid workers with a life coach and invite them and their support people, family members

hopefullyto a community safety meeting . those community safety meetings have increased since lieutenant cortez deployment to that unit and we hope that continues. that communitysafety meeting , the hope is if the person wants to engage with services and support from as the type it those problem things will be offered. this is part of a grant as i said before that we obtained a couple of years ago now. we're coming towards the end of that grant and applying for more significant grants to continue this work and carry that work forward. the grant, the $6 million grant would provide more funding to bring in more like coaches. to bring in more support for the individuals most at risk and part of the metrics is to track how manyengagements we have, how many safety meetings

we have . all that ispart of the grant and what needs to be tracked . so we will continue to report to the police commissionand report on whether or not we received the grant that we applied for so it's coming along . there are still somechallenges . the life coaches , where in the process of trying to hire more life coaches because the first two other jobs and now we're looking for another life coach but in the meantime we do have services with counselors and through sbit and our operation genesis program which has been around for a while and we are still engaging with the people that are most at risk . >> thank you. this is a different commissioner, the work is based in the disparities that we are working to address. this work is with california partnerships.

they were the ones that presented in front of the police commission and they work for a lot of cities including stocktonand if we are granted and get this grant we plan to continue the work . [inaudible] they don't hire th counselor. they are our consultants so the counselors are hired by the city . through the grant. the grant will fundsome of them. the department will notdirectly hire the counselors . that's going to be on the intervention side of the work . >> i know i'm going to sound too muffled. chief, any update on the investigation involving the deathof the juvenile teenage young lady that died of an

overdose in the mission ? >> thanks for askingthat. as of now it's still classified as a suspicious death . what's being investigated is whether there were any criminal activity led to the young ladies death and whether any crimesoccurred just prior to her death . there is evidence including video evidence that was recovered . it has not revealed or confirmed the criminal activity occurred at this point but there's still a lot of investigation to be done on this one. there are witnesses that were there at least at some point in this incidentthat we're trying to locate . there's a lot ofrumor and talk on the street about what happened some of it has been found to be not valid but we have a lot of work to do on that one . but the cause of death has not beendetermined and we're waiting on that report as well

as trying to okay the witnesses . soif anybody has any information for that case or anyother case i mentioned , please call sfpd . >> iq. >> thank you. at this time thepublic is welcometo make public comments on the line item 3, the chief report . please press star 3 . vice presidents, itappears there is no public comment . line item 4, epa directors report. report on recent activities and announcecommission discussion will be limited to determining whether any of the issues

raised for future commission meetings . [inaudible] >> shall i start? >> yes. >> good evening.at this time we have 107 cases have been opened so far this year. we closed118 cases . we have currently 270cases that are currently pending .we've sustained seven cases so far this year, this time last year wesustained nine cases. we've mediated one case so far, this time last year we sustained two cases . we have 34 cases whose

investigations have gone beyond or taking longer thannine months so far.this time last year we had 36 cases that have gone beyond nine months . of those 34 cases 27 of those cases are told cold. 12cases are pending with the commission and six cases pending with the chief . in terms of the trends just from week to week and again, i'll outline the topthree. 22 percent of them have been from , for an officer eating or speakingin a manner unbecoming an officer . 11 percent of the allegations were from officer alleging and offers are preparing an incomplete, inaccurate or not preparing an incident report and seven percent were for an officer allegedly failing to take requiredaction . the full list is on the websit . those are thetop three allegations from the week . the number of cases with a breakdown from the precincts

and again, i'll just outline the top two were the top one this week is from the tenderloin, four cases from the tenderloin for failing to take a police report and one allegation for issuing a citation in retaliation for police action . second-highest number in the mission, mission station for failing to write an incident report and one allegation for detaining a person without cause. again, the full list for the full allegations for each precinct is on the website. i'll move on now to our audits. i don't have an update for audits this week. we are continuing to scale our investigation depending on it. in terms of outreach last week i announced the distribution of

the pocket card for the know your rights review. we will hold it up so full can see. this is an actual card. i just wanted to show it this week. but we've made two changes to our website since lastweek to accelerate the distribution of this as well as other outreach materials to the community . so the know your rights youth pocket card is what we're calling this. it is now available for download on the dpa website though people can go to the websitedirectly and download the document i just showed you to carry around on their own . and members of the public and community partnerscan also now request dpa brochures in the pocket cards directly from that website . again, that website is sfgov.org/dpa and the links i

mentioned are at the top of the website. question and information can be requested at the same website. also just in conclusion of that i sent copies, a small stack t each of the commissioners so they haven't aswell. you should receive them this week if you have not already . the senior investigator today , here in the hearing room with us is senior investigator stev walt who is available in case there are issues to be addressed . and just so we're clear there are no items in closed session tonight from the dpa. i'll conclude with that and i know we havea number of other issues that are on the agenda . and my agency will be presenting and investigating windows, thank you director henderson. is that better? what i've asked the chief to do and i'm going to ask epa to

provide any number that you'll be reading to us prior to our meetings . we think that the chiefs report and dpa's report, any specifics can be provided to post those on our portal for the public and that wayit leaves more time for you and the chief to tell uswhat current events are and some of the highlights that have happened . >> i'm happy to do that but just so we're clear termsof not my numbers ,it means you will be cut off by friday so you won't have up to that friday to report that . >> because it's a report i believe we can get it tuesday after . just to make sure we're clear. sodocuments available at the time of the posting are required to be posted and available to thepublic . anything not generated you could have that available as soon as it's distributed to the majority of the body . >> you indicated there was 11

percent,seven percent of the action, was that based on the numbers provided in one page sheet ? >> that's why isaid if people want the full details and want to see the complete list , there on thewebsite so you can see them . >> we appreciate that. also just to let people know we're going to get awayfrom reading . if you're going to read from the material, we have material. we can read it as well. we don't need you to read it to us. we can present and moveforward . >> just to clarify these numbers arepresumed to be the numbers you're talking about that you want me to submit . >> the ones you talk about, tender one for . >> is there some sort of correlation from the department for these or is there an internal affairsreport on the cases or something for other presets or is ?

>> the epa but that may be a goodsuggestion . >> i think we're headed in that direction with the changes the commission wanted in our discipline report but that's a quarterly report sowe can work on how maybe to coordinate those reports . >> al matchwhenever the department wants to do . more easily, actually. >> we can figure it out and achieve can put in his trend and see what dpa is doing. any other commissioner, commissioner yanez. >> i want to chime in on this. i would love to see a little bit more information from your department so that there is a way to compare and contrast these trends and it will help us i believe really hone in on solutions when we're lookingat two different data sets .

it helps us make uniformed decisions . i'm going to encourage not monthly but quarterly we will be talking about this in the future. >> i think quarterly is too much. i think the direction dpa is going in terms of weekly numbers asreal-time data other than reading us is the direction we need to go and i think the chief has been moving in that direction to with his data . i don't think that many cases from ia so it will have left. >> i don't have the numbers to guess as to what that could be or might look like. >> any other commissioners? can we get public comments? one other thing, director henderson can you provide the project for thecommission office so we can post it on our 30 daycorrespondence . i know your department worked

hard up on that front pocket . >> i'm most excited it was evidence-based feedback on what the community thatthey wanted to make the accommodation . you'll also get individual copies as well but i'mhappy to make that available . >> sergeant youngblood. >> at this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item 4. come to the podium or pressáthree . >> vice president, we have no public comment. >> next item please. >> commission report discussions, commission reports will be limited to a discussion ofactivities and commission discussion will be limited to determining whether any of the issues raised for a future commission meeting . commission presidents report ,

commissioner's report and commission announcements are identified for consideration at a future meeting. >> do we have any reports commissioner yanez . >> it seems like i'm just taking over this meeting. i really appreciate creating a document from your department around the matrixstaffing methodology . i have been learning out on that because it has been one of the most informative pieces of information thati've received . it really gives me a better sense i want to do this too. it gives me a good sense of how decision-making is taking place and i want to agenda eyes of full discussion on that report because i think moving forward would have been really beneficial to have had that report along with the budget kind of powerpoint. which just would make it a more

robust conversation. so i think we could move to agenda eyes thatitem , there are a lot of things in that but i think we can to move forward in a more efficient fashion given the staffing shortages that we have. >> commissioner byrne, commissioner yee. commissioner carter-oberstone. >> i'll give a brief report. in part because one of the commenters in general public comment asked about the status of attracting low-level staff enforcement. so the caller is correct. last meeting i agenda eyes and april 6 meeting discussionand possible action . i'll have dto address traffic stops and other forms of racially biased traffic stops.

the plan for that meeting is to have a draft dpo for the public to begin to comment on. i've been inclose contact with the department about this. chief and i met . on february 14 when we were going to discuss this and i've also been in contact thereafter with staff and my understanding and application is that the department will be providing me with some draft language that would like we would like tosee in the dpo and i very much look forward to that . i'm hopeful and expecting the department will really meaningfully engaged in this process because i think the final outcome and final dpa will be just a better policy document with departments inputs and work.

>> great. thank you. >> i do have one more. >> one more request. i found out through some meeting that i had that there is supposed to be a staffer assigned to the commission. and i really would love for us to pursue and prioritize that because as commissioner hamasaki had mentioned before there's a lot of work to be done and it would be ideal to have that person in a qualified top-notch big brain to help us work through some of these challenges. so i would love to prioritize that once again to makethat decision . >> just so you're aware commissioner position is currently budgeted but it's my understanding that because our

budget is tied to the police department and they have maxed out, i think they're overtime quote or some quota that has been a hiring freeze until the controller releases them from it, we are unable to fulfill that position. identifications with hr director houston regarding this position because you are right it's important and crucial to the commission and we do rely on that position . >> we will continue to try to work on that issue. it's the commission's position as well as the professional staff are also on balance so we're working with the budget office. we will see how we can kind of make it work and speeded up because otherwise will be making for waiting for the next fiscal year which can take about a year. we will continue to work on it.

>> sergeant youngblood. >> this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item 5. please do the podium work pressáthree. and vice presidentelias it looks like there's no public comment . >> like six, discussion regarding orders regarding plaintiff's motion for sanctions inyears versus the county of san francisco number 20 cv zero 1357 . that's an easy s discussion. >> is presenting on this. >> i will open it up and also the city attorney has some

discussion onthis as well . >>, we just got from them? >> thank you. so i think the commission has a memo, a memorandum from the city attorney's office, city attorney raymond rowland and deputy city attorney alicia . alicia cabrera and i will read the whole thing but i'll just get to the chase of the situation. the sanctions that were given to the city and county of san francisco on the case stemmed from the department not providing information both to the city attorney andultimately to the court . there were some issues in short of whether this information

would be privileged due to confidential nature of compromising an ongoing criminalinvestigation . the bottom line is those of you that have seen the judges section, that was not the case. it is not privileged information and as a result, the department was sanctioned. part of last week's discussions stemmed from not only the section itself also when i kne , what time i do and how much i knew that's explained in this memo as i said last week. the timing on it as far as my notification was about two and half hours before the full commissionmeeting . i didn'thave a lot of information . i did have more information now and i'm happy to answer questions but i would like to allow the city attorney to also speak.

we've been working with the city attorney to make sure that this issue and what caused this issue are taking care of. so we don't have this issue again and the result is the department notice policy that we didn't have before. it really spells out how this process works and it's a part of the package you all had that i do believe we turned to alicia cabrera before we take comments. >> good evening commissioners. you should have a hard copy and an electronicversion . the issue by the city attorney's office, and you a brief recap of exactly what happened. we take full responsibility for not providing the information to chief scott when we had. we had received the order on wednesday morning. while we were figuring out the

city attorney's office. we did not provide chief scott with the information and we apologize for that we will get better to make sure we can indicate better. chief scott had not seen the memo or the order. really what we want to do is move forward and how do we do better? and that what we've done is created a unitorder . that you have attached to the memo and in the unit where it spells out exactly how they're supposed to provide documents to the attorney process in conjunction with the city agents. there will be steps that we ca take in order to try our best . we need to have documents and that's really what unit order does is provide clarity for the attorney's office and for sfpd

which documents areprovided to the city attorney's office . i'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> i do want to give my commissioners an opportunity to discuss the matter. we did just received this so we're trying to read it and discussit at the same time so if commissioners have any questions now is the time to ask but i will also agenda is this at alater date if youhave any other public questions . >> thank you vice president , acting president elias . and so i know other commissioners have been much more, a little bit more determined on this is really hard when we get things and i've been out of the office since the middle of the day so ihaven't had a chance to read

this . but the question at the last meeting for the meeting before that were not just about how the chief was or some of the questions about how the chief was advised regarding the sanctions but i think the more important question and i assume this is what the unit order is attempting to address is how to happen tobegin with . and what assurance do we have that this hasn't happened and we see a lot of this conduct, police abuse cases come through inclosed session not every week but every few weeks or so . so is there an audit is going to take place, the previous cases to ensure that discovery obligations were fulfilled?

and let me ask that first question to be a question for ms. cabrera. >> we fully comply.>> can you . >> we fully comply with discovery requests.there is that other declarations where we filed the reports. when we said that we have a document that is responsive but we will not provide. in each of certain circumstances so ... >> let me back up. it's clear from the court order that what happenedwasn't at the city attorney's level . it was that the departments at least legal didn't provide the city attorney so my concern is you have order that's going to address that moving forward? what type of oversight is ther going to be ?

i think as those of us who are lawyers know, if you're not getting discovery , and the civil case, if this had come out we would never knowabout certain things that happened and so forth . i guess i think we want to be assured that there's going to be some sort of cause i don't know how much oversight we had over police, i don't know if that's within our jurisdiction but whether or not the city attorney can have some sort of oversight there or how do we make sure this doesn't happen again basically? >> for all our open cases absolutely are trial can ensure that we have all been.

>> but you'resaying we ensure, i understand from the city attorney but what about the department and how do we address that . >> yes, the way this will work effective now is one of the problems with this is when is discussion about a document that was believed to be privileged , it did not elevated to command staff levels. there was acommander in charge of risk management . i'll just say thatthe departments were part of this and this unit order does a number ofthings . number one if there is , number one we've got to turn over documents but if we believe there are legal privilege situations where the document should not be turned over, that would be in writing to the city attorney's officeand the city attorney's office and will get to weigh in on whether that's a valid concern . they will still have the documents because the way this works as a state attorney's

office is the entity that would go into court if it is a privilege we make that privilege known to the jocks. the issue here is there was believed to be a privilege and didn't get elevated in the documents wereturnover. we all met these . but wewere going to fix that is make sure that the documentsget turned over . there's a concern that concern is documented in writing to the city attorney's office .is elevated automatically to the commanding officer of risk management . and so my understanding and i can't speak for the city attorney's but it gets elevated if there's any kindof dispute. we will turn over the documents . >> the second part of that is the question i asked when this first came up which is i understand it's now going to be somebody in the command staff in charge but command staff, i don't know if there's lawyers there. is there somebody from the you

know, basically a lawyer that's going to be working command staff to help make sure this happens so that i don't know that we can necessarily these are complex legal analysis but is there going to be a lawyer that'sgoing to be responsible for the departments side ? >> of course the city attorney is our has been handling the case. so in terms of where the memo was written, it's written to the city attorney's officebut we do have in-house attorneys and we just recently got approval . to have a managing, we had a managing attorney before. we've had a number of attorneys in the departments. the way we were structured and we were more members which needed to befixed, that has been corrected . somebody that you all know well ms. ashley wasserman is now going to be the managing attorney but that's a new change.

where there's attorney oversight, licensed attorney oversight of our attorneys in the department. so there's that internal components with the attorney involvement but also ultimately it's the city attorney that is in charge of representing our interest in these civil cases. so ultimately theywill be the ones to decide whether or not there's a front . >> cannot comment on that because again, that is an excellent choice. she's great. right on the heels of international women's day an international women's month, celebrating another black woman in a management position but maybe one of the solutions for this would be to transition or make transparent both those records when there may from additional findings like the hand when their settlement like

this through the city attorney process. in a transparent both dba and commission.that way it's not like it would beknown . it's not like it won't be, what have the possibility to stay active. we can address that methodology of those transactions well. and both of those lanes. either when their assignments and when there by a court which raises the issue so it's not internal and we're all just playing catch-up including department that would be my suggested remedy that we should have a conversation. >>may i add , hopefully is it in the unit were we also have an a mechanism where we will identify which documents will have to idea of what is within the files and then we will have

additional steps. we just wouldn't consult and have a discussion around that and make sure any documents that are being withheld are withheld within the universe. andvery small, the universe documentsshould be withheld . we believe that gives some clarity . >> i think having to the city attorney obviously overseeing this litigation and the department both feeling everything that falls within thescope of discovery , as long as you all are getting it we think that addresses. it puts you in a position where i think again the court was clear that it was not a dereliction of the city attorney's office so the other question that i have is and i don't know what the applications are and i know it would be different for criminal

where you do have an ongoing obligation with citysettlements . is there any need to audit say the last five year commissioner cases or do you not have any such obligation and you can just assume or i don't know what the right, i just spent falling here but the right-hand is to ensure everybody who has received adjustment for what it was most of the time when we settle cases that held in discovery so we already have releases for that. there's really not the category of cases and we arecompliant with our discovery cases moving forward . >> basically, somebody lit

litigation ifsomething is disclosed that isn't turnover? >> the likelihood is slim. if they do we will address it and take a look at it and i'm happy to report that . >> i'll think about it. >> i want to make sure i understand. you understood what you just said. you said the commander didn't notice it happened. and then so i guess my question is who made the call that this wasn't turned over because i assume it wasn't leaked by a person. >> the officer in charge is was run by lieutenant. >> can use only what unit that is again? >> that is the legal unit. >> it wasn't elevated to the commander. there was discussion about it being anongoing criminal investigation . it could compromise the ongoing criminal investigation. that position was taken in the court and it did not agree and so this is where we are but it

was not an elevator to the commander. that is correct. >> i'm sorry to interrupt but did not understand the procedure, a request is made for discovery the officer in charge andcontacted criminal affairs and said hey, we need these documents . did internal affairs say no, i'm not turning over these documents or do they turn over the documents to the legal department and then the person at the legal made the decision not to turn them over to the city attorney .>> in this case the legal division that made the determination that the documents should not be done >> the internal affairs provided the documents . >> the decision was made and i don't know that they provided the documents because the decision was made externally thatthese documents should not be turnover . >> so the legal department made that decision andit's unclear

whether they notified internal affairs . >> that i'm not , normally there is a discussion but because none of the things that werebeing presented in this particular case , there was an open ongoing ,there were multiple investigations . but it was acriminal investigation that was an issue . it never got to thecity attorney's office . it never got to the city attorney's office. it was a declaration with the thought process of why these needed to be, the documents that were requested were released to be a privilege and that was not found to be valid by the courts. so it never got elevated which by the unitorder now requires it to get elevated and also on the other side , it didn't get elevated. that's the bottom line. so i believe had elevated we

would be in a different attitude but it didn't. >> the person that's illegal is making not a legal background. >> that person ultimately was in charge of this unit at the time, not attorney but lieutenant. the lieutenant is in charge. legal doesa lot more than just salt public records requests and all that . redaction of body camera, reductionof records that are found to be not disposable . legal does a lot of those types of things so that's a lieutenantthat runs the unit . we saw the need for managing attorney to weigh in on these positions and make sure that legal oversight separate from the city attorney's office when decisions are made internally. >> think it would be helpful because i've read the order quickly but i think it would be

helpful to understand the procedures like when these requests do come in and how they notified internal affairs and how internal affairs works with legal onthese issues . because the unit order, it doesn't address the procedure with respect to how these divisions in your department arecoordinating or working together . >> the requests comes legal. one of the things we do so we can make sure that whatever request comes through for records, they come through their base stamp, there process. so we don't want random units in the department to be fulfilling those requests. there are attorneys that work with legal. they do more than that but there are attorneys that work with legal . everything goes through. >> how that interact with internal affairs and meeting those requests andthe documents provided to legal ?>> legal

would be the coordinator of going to whatever unit. if it's training records,they keep training records . if it's personnel records .it goes to human resources, ia a records ist records is really what's at issue here. our investigative services division, they would go to that and coordinateso that is their job . they would go to the unit to hand in the records. >> but you said it was now the new process is that the city attorney's office will make a request and then the department legal unit will work with the city attorney's office. is that going to be miss cabrera or the litigation that. >> the litigation piece. >> i would add in the unit order it's an issue that i will get involved as well as the

case trial in my office as well. so we can put a number of steps in place to ensure this doesn't occur again and my understanding isthis is a rare case . >> given the nature of the case and the complexity and importance, i'm wondering that if maybe not only is elevated to the commander but the chief directly because in thesecases or situations like this , you don't want it to happen again because it's probably pretty embarrassing but 2, you want to make sure you're aware what's happening when there's a privilege or somereason why the department did not turn over records .>> so the commander of risk management or who the commander would be in this case is chief of staff. chief mosher. so what we werediscussing , it

would probably never get to that level again because at the end of the day everything will be documented in terms of the concerns and that goes to city attorney. we're going to turn over documents regardless. if there's redaction of those documents at issue, if the city attorney's office says you have a valid concern that's what legal does as well. but the documents will be turned over. i hope that makes sense to you. the documents would be turned over ifthere is a legal battle to be fought on privileged information . if there's no such situations and city attorney's office will be working with the department or they would redact. >> i just want to add within the unit order there is also the commanding and also that

person is required to contact the city attorney and offer the assistant chief of staff so that's written in there. in terms of the redaction, it's very small and limited. what we would do is have a discussion whether or not we should have the documents and a separate question as to whether we wouldlitigate it as to whether to turn those documents over . >> i wanted to clarify again because the order said and again i read it briefly but my understanding is if the department claims privilege it will put it in writing and notify you but the chief is saying on the documents over to visit a situation where he's turning the documents over and the department won't have the ability to raise privilege or say they're not turning in silver and allow the city attorney to make that decision or is it going to be the department can makethat decision but they have to document and city attorney deals . >> they can make the decision

whether or not we could present the position and whether we think it's accurate or correct the we will have to ask access to the documents and with the index if there's questions about whether or not the documents fall within the privilege, whatever the concern may be then that's whatthe conference is for for us to sit down, talk about the documents and make a decision from there . >> even if they doclaim privilege you will have access . >> we need to be able to believe we can get behind that privilege . >> i don't know if thatwas clear in the unit order but i'll read that again i'm happy to rework it to . >> commissioner byrne. >> miss cabrera, is the city paying $2500 sanction or is it a payment? the sanctions by judge corley and the federal court for $250 . is the city paying that? >> know, we are paying it.

>> my second question. how did the plaintiffsattorneys discover the oversight ? >> it was any related litigationmatter . we had already reached a settlement and as you're aware the city's process for approval of settlement takes some time to go through the board of supervisors ultimately for it to be, so this is very unusual for there to be a sanctions post settlement. >> i've never seen it before. >> correct. >> but how do they discover it? >> there was a related case in which theinformation was discovered during deposition . >> a criminal case? so there's a second civil case involving mister spiers. >> not him, it's his ex-girlfriend. >> and his ex-girlfriend is in

litigation againstthe city of san francisco . >> correct. >> vice president elias, ifi could go back to the question . at the bottom of the last paragraph of the unit order, which hopefully answers your question about how this process works where it says oic will gather,all information responsive to the request . the legal division shall provide if the city attorney complete and full access to the information request including furnishing pockets of all documents ormaterials contained in the files . any portion of the information requested may be prohibited for privilege such that resulting information would be unlawful. the oic shall document them to the commanding officer. and the city attorney including the incident and description of

any documents and their reasons for believing so. if the oic feels that there is a court or whatever informatio , the index goes to the managing city attorney's office and that is where the consultation happens. ultimately if the city attorney saysthis is not legally valid , the information would be turned over and documented and the city attorneycan make whatever arguments they feel they need to make .>> i'm happy if there is individual language you'd like to see we can take that to the officeor the city attorney's office .>> just one follow-up. the documents that led to the sanctions in the spiers case,

those same documents wereturned over in the related case ? >> correct, but not the original. >> i understand. i guess i'm tryingto get to the gist of it . it was figured out that eventuallythose documents should have been turned over . >> correct. >> so what was the mechanism that cure that problem because there was no mechanism because obviouslysomebody figured out the mistake and turn it over . >> i can get some more detail on that but my understanding is we needed the documents to comply. >> but at least there wasn't a pattern and practice because if there was a pattern and practice there would have been a consistency that wouldn't have shownup in the othercases . >> this is very unusual, i'll say that again . we're going to make sure there's clarity in providing the order. just to correct, the amount that we have for settlement is

2300. >> i'm sorry, i said 25. >> just making sure we are clear. >> i think the article indicated deposition it was the department that testified that there would be documents to existing and that's how they discovered these documents existed because they never expected those documents in the original caseand were told those documents didn't exist . >> i don't think that's accurate. i believe the documents should not be turned over . that was invalidated i believe. >> just to clarify we knew the existence of the documents did not have an physically but we knew of their existence so we submitted a declaration and we argued it was an open investigation and those reason

cannot ever have been argued . >> this goes back to commissioner hamasaki's question which is how do we know this hasn't happened in other cases. if we feel we don't have to turn it over and there's no legal person reviewing the legal validity of that assertion, how is that ... >> for anything that's already beenlitigated and settled we have releases for all future claims . there is no issue with anything we've already settled. in terms of particular documents that wecurrently have for open cases , we ensure that we meet our discovery request and make sure we have all these documents and turn them over as we're supposed to. >> i have a questionon this .

[laughter] >> go ahead commissioner carter-oberstone. >> i'm sorry about that. >> big-screen. >> it did sound like god. >> the voice of god. >> that's a first. before i ask this question i think it's important that all the commissioners understand this to understand what you're talking about because what happened here is incredibly serious and it's hard to understand why if you're not a lawyerso i just want to give a one minute summary of what happened . when one person sues another person early on in litigation you get to call discovery and that means each side gets to ask the other side fordocuments and other evidence in their possession .

and it's really broad. you get toask basically anything, it just has to be relevant to the litigation . there are only a few very narrow exceptions like attorney-clientprivilege or documentation privilege . but the key thing to note here is that there is never a time where you get to ask for a category of documents you just get to withhold them and not tell theother side you have them . the latest doing is you say the stuff that you asked for, yes i have i don't think i need to give it to you because that's attorney-client privilege and there's asking the court to rule and if the court agrees if you you don't have to turn it over and you do have to turn it over. just to put a fine point on this even those that implicate

issues of national security like when the cia, even the cia has to acknowledge that they have response documents and they still have to submit for why national security would be turned over. the reason what happened here is so critical is because department did just that. it just keptthis information to itself and never told anyone about .and our entire system of justice depends on complying with their discoveryobligations . because otherwise you have people winning cases don't deserve to win and people losing cases who deserve to win them and often the stuff you need to prove your case is in the other guys possession. if you're suingyour employer for one of discrimination , those emails to managers of the

company talking about how we need to fire the plaintiff because based on gender or religion or race, those are going to be in the company's possession the company should say there is really badfor us, we're not going to turn it over , you see very quickly how our entire system ofjustice completely unravels . in most cases the judge can impose the harshest sanction of federal judge can impose and call these in bad faith. she called them reckless and she said they were taking more improper purposes. so i just want to lay the groundwork there so everyone understands why this is serious and why were talking about it. so chief, you've mentioned that the lieutenant runs the applicable division. i want to be clear, where there any attorneys in the department who reviewed thediscovery requests and signed off on withholding this information .

>> the way this happened commissioners, number to my knowledge the attorney inside of legal did not. declaration was written was written and reviewed by the city attorney'soffice . the declaration claiming the privilege this information if released would compromise the investigation so there's two things that i wantto clear up . just to be clear, part of the problem of that situation part department takes full responsibility for it was a very broad hey, this is a confidential investigation. if we release it will compromise acriminal investigation . there was not an exposure to what was in investigation it's why we've nowincorporated an index . that we own . the lieutenant said wehad this

investigation . there wasn't full knowledge of everything that was in the investigation and that declaration was taken to the city attorney and presented to the courts. so one of the fixes here is whatever we happen investigation regardless of whether it's an internal affairs investigation or any other type ofinvestigation , or there's civil litigation one thing that will happen is an index of everything in that investigation for the attorneys both internal and city attorneys have full visibility of what in the investigation. >> i appreciate that and i appreciate the department is going to make changes to make sure it doesn't happen again but i'm actually more concerned withright now understanding whether this has happened in the past .

there were two reasons for why this information was unlocked for withheld and the first is an internal department policy where the department just evened over certain information listed in the course of a confidential investigation that asserted certain detail. so that was reason number one and that covered most of the stuff so most ofthe evidence that wasn't turned over . if that policy, how long have that policy been in place because if that policies been in place i'd imagine there were dozens of cases that could have been implicated by and the only reason we know about this is because of this totally random and unlikely occurrence where we're seeing attorneys representing two different plaintiffs in an unrelated cas

. things that should have been handed over in case a are coming up in case the. that's the whole point. there's no way we would know. how long has this policy been in place or just a blanket policy where thedepartment turns over this investigation . >> there is no written policy on the issue and what was stated in the declarationwas not policy . it's that this had been past practiceone of the things again , i want to be very clear. on this. >> i don't want to cut you off but i'm not going off the declaration. just like any other member of the public read the judges order that says there's a policy. >> there is no policy, commissioner. what i'm telling you is there is no policy and what the lieutenant wrote in the

declaration thatmade it to the board was that this was a practice . there is no policy.>> how long is this unwritten practice in existence that is my question? >> i don't know because this actual set of circumstances usually doesn't occur. what made this difference, number one. cases usuallydon't settle this quickly . and in most situations by the time it gets through the settlement, the cases are done. >> but teeth, this doesn't depend on whether a case 669-900-9128. >> i totally understand that. >> if the answer is you're not sure that's fine. do you know as her sitting here right now how long this informal or unwritten practice has been in place? >> i don't know.

>> that's fine. next question is there was another set of the discovery that was handed over and as i'm in the order was perhaps unspoken. it involves the text messaging. text messages for lieutenant carter where the lieutenant o'connor was asked for the text messages. he responded right away, the next day and gave the department text messages that he was asking for so he did his job and the department just settled for that and as far asi read the order has nothing to do with policy . so and it didn't seem to be any real reason given by the text

message handed over since they were part of this investigation. so my concern again is if the department's just not handing over text messages at in its possession for no reason, this has to be coming up off a lotof the time . >> i'm sorry, go ahead. >> for this particular moment with the text messages it's our understanding the case has settled once the text messages were . so it could just be that the timing of it was unfortunate. so we didn't provide them because usually once we have settled and the case is settled we don't go any further with discovery . >> two things on that, text messages were provided on tria . and the order says the settlement was reached in

principle andaugust for five specific dates so here we would note the text messages were provided for settlement . so by the way the fact that a settlement in principle happened to be in the works is for not complying with discovery. but even if it were it doesn't seem to comply here. again it seems like we'renot turning over stuffed in our possession . and if that was passed again, is there any reason for us to think this is happening all the time? >> we haven't had thisissue commissioner . to your question, commissioner, psyches question, it hasn't come upin these cases . >> is almost never going to come up because no one'sgoing to know . no one else has information to get it over so no one will be

the wiser if the department keeps it to themselves. that's no reason to believe this is happening all the time. so again, i just want to be clear on this. the department received lieutenant o'connor's text messages on july 16. the settlement is reached in august. between july, even with this explanation that we don't comply with discovery after a settlement principle is reached which by the way separately is extremely troubling. even accepting that explanation it wouldn't apply here because the text messages were received at a minimum two weeks before any settlement so i'll just, this would be the lasttime i asked . we are just not handing over officer text messages . with no justification, wife of the public think this isn't happening all the time as a matter of course. >> you asked me a question and

idon't have the answer to . we work with our city attorneys andthat's we work with . i can't tell you whether or not there was a situation where something was not turned over about what i can tell you is if it is raised toan issue , and we work with the city attorney'soffice on those issues , you're asking me a question that's impossible for me to answer. what i can tell you is that what happened in this case this unit order will address.>> i appreciate that she and your answer is saying you don't know if it's ever happened.>> the question is whether this has never happenedbefore whether a text message was not turned over onrequest . as far as my knowledge , numbe . >> we would never know because as we said we would just never know but the same person who

handled these text messages i imagine is involvedin dozens and dozens of other cases and there's no reason to think they would act any differently in those cases . looking back on it i think most likely thing here is that this is happening all the time. >> let me answer it this way the cause you've made a declarative statement. the department was willfully denying that it happened, that it had the information. if the city attorney's office said you have a text message to be turned over and department says we need this privilege or it's going to compromisean investigation ,those things we should be able to track . if your question is whether he had a text message and denied that we had which is what you

just said a minute ago, i don't think that's happening . it didn't happen inthis case . >> in this case did have that you have a text message turned over. >> what i thought i heard you say is we had a text message and denied that we hadis what i thought i heard you say . i apologize. >> you were asked for document , those text messages within thedocuments requested . so the leader is telling the other side of the don't exist because the other side is thinking they will get everything. >> i just want to be clear on something, what ms. cabrera said. we let it be known when asked about the text messages is senator o'connor turned it over. there were discussions with the

city attorney's office on whetherthere was a need to turn that over . i'm not trying to absolve us of our responsibility. that's what this communal order is and i'm not saying we willfully deniedwe had a text message . the other thing is we did let it be known that text message existed. we're talking abouttwo separate cases, the second case in which the text message was brought to life . a lot of it came from mister spiers or the first case. >> i'm well aware of this case, i appreciate that. given that we just can't say whether this, the department's failure on the summary has been happening recently, do you think that there is a need for an investigation into the civil

cases to ensure that the department is complying with discovery applications. >> i don't believe that is what's happening. but if there is a need for an investigation or that is the belief and we welcome it. >> i'm asking you if you think there's a need. >> i don't believe there's a need because i believewe work with our city attorneys on discovery issues . understand what the issues are. i don't think there's need. that's the answer to your question. >> thank you, thoseare all my questions . >> can an audit be done with it because i understand what you're saying.i think that it's two issues. you do work with city attorneys especially when you're litigating the matter i think the problem iswithin the department and city attorney

doesn't know and i'm reading the order now , that's as a matter of practice those records are internal affairs investigations . so even though the unit order is outlined in the budget, i guess how we address the practice of it? >> looking forward, here'swhat we all agree should happen . the department can't just broadly and categorically say we don't turn over our own criminal investigations. it has to be in those investigations the information has to be turned over . that claim is made then that has to be documented. moving forward that's the process.do your question commissioner about whether or not this type of thing happens to commissioner partners questionthis is normally not an issue .

>> i think what he raises is the factthat is not something we know until you know . we can say it's not an issue because this is the first time it happened or you're aware of it and that's what it makes it look like it's an isolated incident but the truth is we don'tknow because that could have been happening in every case, you just didn't find out . >> i don't agree with that because in this case it was disclosed to the city attorney therewas an investigation . so there was the knowledge that the investigationexisted . that got brought into court which is why it was invalidated by the judge. it's like that's not a legitimate reasonfor not turning over identification . the department did not deny that the investigation existed so i wouldn't agree with that assessment because even under that scenario the department

says we have this investigation and we don't take the turnover because it may compromise an investigation which is what happenswith a criminal investigation . we're not denying it had the investigation,that's why the lieutenant made that call providedthe declaration . that declarationdid not stand up . they were in denial the investigation existed . what should have happened we all agree was there should have been aninventory of what's in that investigation but it should have been an inventory . what is it that you're claiming theprivilege on and that information needs to be discussed upfront .and done on a broad sense that it was done here. that is a totally different scenario than an apartment saying we're not telling you and we're notgiving it to you . that's not whathappens . >> i think the investigation, when i read the order i'm sure

you can understand our concern as well as the public testing to the fact that this is a practice and a lieutenant responded the next day and decided not to forward text messages to the attorney because they prioritized it under litigation after the party reached a settlement happened weeks after the request was made for those tex messages and i'm citing page 42 . back to my question, is there an audit and can bedone ? i understand what the attorney is saying now. the people that have signed a release have because they signed the release but i'm sure you agree it would be very unfair for someone who entered into a settlement agreement thinking they knew their universal documents and evidence and made a decision based on that to now find out that no, i didn't know the unit

evidence. you would agree that's unfair. >> i do agree it's unfair to answer your question about the audit , the legal track reques , i can't speak for how the city attorney's office tracks what they produce but i know when we get requests, that can eitherbe audited . >> it's a big thing and most people don't understand the complexity of what an audit entails. but back to the point of understand what everyone is saying.maybe there's a review that we could do is submit a review of past rulings from the courts on these types of discovery issues to determine

if there are things that are uncovered from that because those records already exist independent of what an audit might show or might not show and it would be much faster to do it that way because we do an audit it's going to take six months before we get an answer tothese questions and those rulings, there's already a record of what the rulings are . and maybe it's part of the first step and it's why were saying separate from the board that solution is going to be internal and to your point and to the point i think the commissioners made earlier we just have to guess for hope it's working but we wouldn't know . if there have been transgressions in the past those would target how the solution gets implemented in a broadway . >> i think what the chief agrees on on it should be done. and then report back if there are any. >> commissioner elias and chief scott, there are issues with attorney-client privilege . before agreeing to any kind of audit i would like to have a

deeper conversation within the attorney's office because there are privileges that i don't think we'regoing to be able to wave . >> the city attorney's office might be the body that would be more appropriate to review since they already are privy to that material through attorney-client privilege. >> that's fine but i think we have the chiefsassurance that he believes we should look . >> what commissioner carter, i said i do not. i welcome an audit. if the city attorney's office for whoever wants to do one we welcome it. >> he said investigation, i said audit . >> what i'm saying here is there legal requested our track and not well documented so those can be audited is what i said. we will participate in any audit. >> we can finish this

discussion off-line, figure out what the privileges are and have epa in the department tell us about the resolution. the other thing, one final thing and will move on is at the unit were to the policy of practice that when these kind of court orders to come out at the commission is notified, and then receive some notification on this, i know that we reviewed settlements and things like that but if we can also have the orders and other information from the court that would be helpful aswell . >> i would like to have clarity on whatorders , is thatwhat we're talking about ? >>. >>. >> do we need to make a motion

to have the city attorney provide information or have th department provide information or is that something we can request ? >> for our purposes from the cityattorney's office we don't need to have a motion . i understand that we did provide the order through the secretary but i'm happy to say we don't need an order. >> i think we should so the record is clear in any civil sanction against the police department that the commission be provided with a copy of that and obviously my apologies. obviously the department would place accountability be provided with a copy of the judge's order involving sanctions so i motion. >> is for discussion only but

we can put it back on the agenda and have a resolution ready. >> let's do that. >> a comment. >> at this time the public is welcome to make public comments on line item 6. the podium for press star 3. good evening color, you have 2 minutes. >> this is chief hodges. i'm just calling to see if this audit would be moving forward. to see what is happening to the officers involved in evidence withholding and if there are other actions being taken to be sure that they are being held accountable and also indirectly constrained . this is a new policy document

that has shared. that's all. >> thank you for your call. >> good evening color, you have 2 minutes. >> caller: this is susan buckman. i want to appreciate commissioner max carter-oberstone. he's been a great asset to the commission in explaining these things to the layperson. i appreciate the timehe's taking to explain these things . and i asked him to keep up the good work. thank you. >> thank you call her. presidentelias , that is the end of publiccomment . >> president: next item.

>> line item 7, update from the regarding firstamendment client audit of san francisco police department record pursuant to general order .10 , discussion. >> who do we have? [inaudible] which one, mine? is this mike on west and mark okay. lieutenant o'connor. what's your first name? >> david. >> it's not thelieutenant o'connor we just talked about, right ? well, welcome.

glad to haveyou. go ahead . >> good evening vice president uis, commissioners, chief scott and director hendersonand members of the public . my name is lieutenant david o'connor, i'm lieutenant with the specialinvestigations division. i'll be presenting on item number seven is an da the regarding first amendment compliance , both records pursuant to department of general order 8.10.this audit occurred regarding the year 2020 and was completed towards the end of 2021. assistant chief mozer oversaw this audit and she's present today.

>> the first slide talks a little bit about general order 10 and the mandate that the office, department of police accountability conducts an audit into all materials related to general order 10 amendmentactivities . i will read the entire excerpt from the general order. just to say that it is something that occurs on a yearly basis . the department cooperates with that audit. this year it was connected by dba and auditor steve flaherty. i was the lead of coursein assisting with the audit . the report was released december 7 2021 and was presented to the police commission february 2 of 2022.

out just go over some of the findings that dba came up with and give you an update on where we are at regarding compliance withthose recommendations . dba finding recommendation number one was to work with the police commission to clarify and provide examples ofwhen the gop 10 applies to criminal investigations . the police department's response was concurrence on this . we agree with that recommendation. the department will work with thepolice commissioner and other appropriate stakeholders for the revision of 10 , clarity on the application of this ddo and relation to criminal investigations will be considered . the ddo has not been revised since2008 and it will be scheduled for an update sometime in 2022 . this recommendation will be

directly addressed with revision of department general order 810 which is scheduled for this year. dba recommendation number two was to ensure members receive e.g. 08 10 training before working, before beginning work at the specialinvestigations division . the police department response was concurrence . we agree with this. the sip commanding officer, that's me will make sure sworn officers assigned to the special investigations division receive the gtech training prior to commencing work so effectively this recommendatio has been limited . there was an audit it was discovered that 2 members were trained a short time after their assignment test iv and that's what this finding was

about. it's something that's been passed back to the square. any new member is immediately trained regarding department general order 10 and thatis the practice going forward . so dba recommendation number three was to assign responsibility for the destruction of records on the board by general order 10. the department concurs with this recommendation and the department has assigned responsibility for the destruction of records and media governed by the geo. this has been implemented and i have been designated with the responsibility to carry out this recommendation. or whoever happens to be sid in the future. >> are already committed.

>> dba recommendationnumber four . review the department general order 810and destroyed any records of media as required by the records destruction schedule . the department's response is conference. the sip commanding officer would review the file cabinet and destroy records andmedia as requiredby the records destruction . the timeline for completion is the first quarter of 2022 . this is in progress and we are in the process currently going through the items within that file cabinet . they are being itemized and locked at this point. dysfunction willoccur shortly thereafter . dba recommendationnumber five is create a writtenchain of

custody to document the destruction of dg oa 10 records in media . covid's response was conference . sip commanding officer myself will create a document for construction of records and media. expected completion is in line with recommendationnumber four that is by first quarter of 2022 . once again, this is underway and i will be responsible for providing a written document which enumerateswhat has occurred with those records . dba recommendation number six ensuresthe police commission receives the department general order 10 investigationmonthly . the covid response is conference . the department effect and myself will work with the police commission to create a process that is more efficient

and effective delivery of the monthly logs although not required by the general order to send along for review and months where there are no requests for a 10 investigations, covid will provide notice whether there is a request or not. this is already been implemented. we're committed to getting that long through the commission monthly and to make sure even if it is negative reporting will be presented monthly. dba recommendation number seve . to update the agency assist forms to include fields for department general order information requestevaluation requirements. the police department's response is conference . the department and myself will update the agency assist form so that it now captures the old dg oa tends information request

evaluation requirements. the expected implementation is by the first quarter of 2022 with considerations to add dd to the current ddo to the updated form. this is underway. this we have already begun to work on a draft of this and i expect completion by the date noted here, march 31 of this year. dba recommendation number eigh . require members to reference the source of information collected from amendment event planning. response for this was partial conference. when appropriate in determining this information will not jeopardize ongoing investigations , or diebold

federally protected information confidential informants that apartment will cite the source of the information collected. members will state that the information was collected through open domain means or otherwise . additionally, related to this, the department is also in the process i believe updating apartments general order 2.0 9.2, social mediapolicy . and developing policy for investigating social media accounts that will provide further clarity on accessing and referencing opendomain sources . the final slide is a timeline of the a-10 process. it was originally assigned in february 2020. it was designated the subject

matter expert. and determination was made that a working group would be necessary at that time. in november 2020, written directives provided additional working group support to the smp, smp notified the working group will need to resume following the dba audit filing . due to the fact that dba audit was underway, it was sort of determined it would be better to wait until those findings were made before really diving in two a new policy development for example. >> in december of 2021, the audit report was published.

and in january 2022, the recommendations were made and are being worked on as indicated. at this .6 of the eight recommendationshave been either completed or substantially completed . the other two being the first recommendation andi believe that eight . that includes the presentation that i've prepared but i'm happy to answer any questions . >> before presenting that. i have two questions and iwill turn it over to director henderson . actually one is a question and the other is the comment. the commissioner that's assigned to this will be

commissioner yanez so make sure you contact them and incorporate them in those conversationsas well as dba and do we have an estimated time on 2.09? or was it on that paper you gave us ? i didn't see. >> maybe it's not on there. it is not, this is a bulletin schedule. let me see if i can getthat information . >> i'm going to turn it over to director henderson. >> let me say first of all thank you so much for that presentation. i don't want it lost on anyone the significance of having these responses presented from the departmentin a public forum like this based on audits that we've done . and responses to those things are really important primarily because as part of concluding a valid audit the agency have to

do a follow-up on the action plans and that gets done every six months. so we will continue to follow up with the department every six months on the status of these recommendations. again, recommendations themselves can betracked online and we are currently set to initiate the 2021 audit . the police department's compliance with 8.10 by the end of march so that's worked well and includes verifying the responses that we heard from today in response to the 20/20 report recommendations i'd like to point out because if you look through the response you'll seethere's a lot of concurrence . i think the department says they stated all that to of those recommendations. our report willdrill down to address the action steps , not just in case anyone was assigned to it or say they will do it but it hasn't been done. what you can expect in march is

the specific review of the action steps taken from the department before the next response and the department headlining what has been done and that will be the measurement so it's not just boxes that have been checked thank you so much teeth . you for your presentation and we look forward tocontinuing . >> i think that commissioner yanez will be on this as well so hecan work with you and lieutenant o'connor . >> i'll come so he can see how that gets reviewed on a case-by-case basis now that you have that presentation from the department. that's perfect. thank you so much do we have a date yet? >> sorry. >> at this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item 7. ifyou'd like to make public comment

approached the podium or press start 3 . >> president elias, there is no public comment. >> you are offthe hook, lieutenant o'connor . have a goodevening . next item . >> lineitem 8 . presentation of the covid dba report on general order policy proposals. third and fourth quarter 2021. for police commission resolution 20 06 regarding the department and dba to submit a report regardingthe status of policy proposals and recommendations under consideration by the departmen or dba . >> welcome. i want to remind everyone that we do have a 10 minute limit . so when the buzzer goes off and the mic will go off as well. >> i'll keep my short so you allcan have most of the time.

good evening commissioners . >> president elias,members of the commission, director henderson and chief scott, members of the public, i'm executive director of strategic management bureau .the written records unit sits in the strategic management bureau and the professional standards principal policing unit and coordinates the work of dg oh development and revisions. so i'm going to jump to the overview slide and this just is a reminder of all the steps involved in the revision and or the development of a gpo. and within each one of those steps this is just an eight step process, no issue but each one of those steps i think you all know this is pretty

involved so even aworking group process . the initial review of the first sparks meeting after a draft is developed and the concurrence meetings, the final dba look and then of course your process as well so all of those steps are pretty intricate. next slide. so then this is just the kind of status update as of the end of quarter 3 and four of 2021. these represent sort of the bigger buckets and just a reminder, working groups were suspended during the quarter three, quarter 4 timeframe so sort of note work there to report tonight just because we need to reengineer public and private as you all know. so then covid as the dba spark number one, so sparks meetings

are justour opportunity to discuss recommendations the dba has on a policy . and then move it to concurrence. during q3 and q4 we had one meeting and discussed one dpo but dba was in receipt or have received or re-received meeting we had shared with them another draft of the version 10 dg owes. and then we moved to covid concurrence with 12 dg owes reviewed and one dg 04. further revision and then finally we had the sparks 2

meeting and other follow-ups so not just to meetings. often we go back and forth with dba and have littlediscussions and goback to get more research or what have you . and then it looks like we have fourmeetings there . so next slide please . in quarter 3 and 4 we should 65 bulletinsand notices . six bulletins and 60 dpi notices. no general orders in those two quarters. next slide, thank you. finally and i think you now will talk a little bit more about these and maybe these recommendations and many others that dba has made. it's essentially the dg owes we were working on in q3 and q4,

the recommendations whether it be in sparks 1 or two andthe number that we reached consensus on . and then that's it and i'm happy to answer any questions unless i should hand it over t general . >> why don't wehave miss kate would answer the questions . thankyou . there were twoadditional things you wanted to add because they were included in the documents . did you address those western mark sorry miss kaywood. >> the powerpoint presentation has a reference to addenda. you all received that tonight and is available for the public year and it's finalized. >> and those are the 2 documents.

>> there should be three. it's really just a lot of detail and background and reference material for you all in the interest of transparency thatshows all the bulletins that are expiring, have expired . notices that we publish and notices . so what we've issued and what has expired or is aboutto expire . >> thank you, miss kaywood. >> good evening acting president elias and executive director henderson. before we start i'd like to confirm i have a separate10 minutes because i filed a report . so i am janelle kaywood, director of policy andpolice accountability. i've been in this role since september and i'm going to report on a third-quarter policy work . during the third and fourth quarter dba researched and

provided to sfpd policy recommendations on five existing dgo's and all our recommendations are pending except for the recommendations that pertain to dgo 3.1, most of which were fully implemente . the cornerstone of our policy work for the third and fourth quarter had to do with our extensive negotiations with the commission and with covid regarding dgo 3.01 which is covid's written directives policy. we advocated for greater community input, increased civilian oversight in the development process. i missed my opportunity to talk about this when the dgo was adopted because we havepressing matters to discuss so i'm going to take the opportunity to go through some of the key provisions which we are excited

about . to start the new dgo expedites the general order development timeline . as the police commission will have greater oversight responsibilities to ensure general orders are developed o revised in a timelymanner we are thrilled dba is authorized to talk to the subject matter experts at sfpd instead of going through intermediaries . we're thrilled about that piece of this project . our favorite section has to do with 30day notice and comment period . early in the dgo development process, sfpd will post their draft policy and 430 business days dpa and trend that sfpd will takerecommendations for everyone. while we love our robust attorneys we lovehearing from the public defenders and the bar association . they provide great input . we also want to hear from community-based organizations from members of the public in disenfranchisedcommunities and

are critical of the police department .we want to hear from the people who want more policing in their neighborhoods . please speak up and talk to us about what you need your police department to do and what you need from dpa and we want to hear from the rank-and-file. i have a patrol officer stopped me and tell me the policy was too complicated and he told me post has promulgated a new standard and we should implement it and we want more of that . another key part of dgo's report and one we're excited about this dpa presence at sfp concurrence. that's a staff meeting during systemic finaldecisions . a particular policy goes to the police commission and dpa's role is to advocate for our own recommendations. previously we've done our

recommendations in writing and it goes through many intermediaries before it gets to conference. now we get to advocate for our own recommendations to the decision-makers and we're thrilled about that opportunity and we thank the commission and chief scott for engaging with us on that point. during the meeting dba and covid will decide which humanity recommendations made during the public comment period should be included in the general order and will publish ajoint report post on the website to provide an overview of the recommendations that were included and not included . we're also thrilled about the working group process thatwill be overhauled.this is been a source of much consternation for the public . basically the commission or police department can convene a working group when they want to revisethe general order that's important to the public like

domestic violence was a perfect example of that . now dpa will be invited to participate in all covid working groups which we're thrilled about and will will be given the opportunity to provide input to chief scott o selecting working group participants and helping develop protocols subject to final approval by the police commission . we're also happy to announce covid will be required to updateall working group participants on the status of the general order in writing on a quarterly basis . during third and fourth quarter we've also done a lot of work around reducing disparities in traffic and pedestrian stops. i want to acknowledge my brilliant colleague jermaine johnson has been working on thissince last year. some of our work is with regard to general order 9.1 ,the departments traffic policy . we recommended it be revised to prioritize stops related to

public safety over equipment failures and quality car inferences. we analyzed covid's capacity to collect additional stop data. beyond that which is requiredby state law have met with advocates working to end the text stops and consulted with experts on intelligence led policing which has been shown to decrease the overall number of stops as well as racial disparities in stocks . we had robust assumptions on race disparitiesand how to best reduce them without compromising public safety. we talked about bob barker's book suspect citizen. the apartment i believe is fully engaging on this topic . we provided covid with an outline for draft policy curtailing stops and we're excited about commissioner carter-oberstone'sleadership . we are fully committed to engaging with him and the

department. our final recommendation regarding traffic stops and racial disparities , i will be making those in the next few weeks and dpa has been working on general order 516 on search warrants. we've been working with julie tron and others on criminal justice task force at the bar association with san francisco and working with chief scott in the das office. just drilling down and trying to understand the type of search warrants the da office will review prior to issuance the scope of district attorney review and we've had a lot of robust discussions around covid policy involving new technologies for geo-fence warrants. that would be ongoingand we have a meeting on march 17 . the work has been exciting and but that's all i have. thank you. >> i think we should take anotheropportunity to thank you for your hard work on 3.01 .

you were instrumental to getting impacted working with a new road change from the department to get this thing passed and i want to thank you again also miss rosenstein was on the call that we had for hours on end as well as the chief and chairman house who really did a lot of work on this to the best part of the ddl and the part i was most excited about was the 30 day notice for the public to give comments but also the members. they can do it anonymously because as you said times the rank-and-file input is lost in translation and it never makes its way to us because it doesn't matter how good our policy is if nobody's going to put it to work and implement it then it doesn't mean anything so unhappy about that and i really encourage members of covid to partake in that new process because it's going to

be anonymous so theydon't have to diebold with ar and hopefully it will be more honest and open to provide feedback on these policies . the other question thati had was do we have an eta on the working groups change for is going to be the new structures in place ? >> thank you because i guess the secretary cananswer that question . we hopefully can get these working groups in place. we're going into the 10th quarter of the year. we are looking to hire a few people, professional staff to take thisto a different level but despite that we've got to get that going because we are falling behind . also vice president to answer yourquestion on 2.9 it was a part of the 2021 schedule . we did posit to restructure our working group process and we plan to get back this coming quarter on the workgroup and we are going to hopefully have fun found the right person to carry

this forward and we will get that startedregardless . and thank you for the acknowledgment and thank you foryour work . >> i know that you were the ones bringing this home.>> director henderson. >> i want to thank the chief and thank my department and staff again for helping put all of this stuff together. i hope is not lost on our audience and the public as well this new policy process is around breaking and i believe will define best practices for our law enforcement agency. i'm not aware of any other agency that's refined their process to this level of efficiency and i don't want to miss on how groundbreaking this these steps are and how important the work is going to follow from this new process that is now in place so i just want to point out and thank our

staff for making the presentation as promised. starting this year i want more of my staff that aredoing work to be making presentations . and janel kaywood of course has to step up to make these presentations thank you for making these and just to manage expectations for the commissio , you'll be seeing more from my staffand more from the different divisions . i know you all hear me talk every week but i wanted to encourage you and the people that are doing the work more regularly so that they, so that people understand it and you can ask more broadly, more broad questions to thefolks that are putting it together . >> any other commissioners. sergeant youngblood. >>thank you, that was a brilliant presentation . >> thank you commissioner.

>> i want to commend the work that yourdepartment has been doing and thanked the chief for collaborating on these efforts . and i wonder whether you have some kind of order to make people aware where their sunglasses that they need to wear? is there a standard policy? >> in a shameful way i'll admit that these are janel's glasses. >> we are glasses twins. >> there hers, i lose mine all the time. this is awful. this is embarrassing. >> your readers. i wanted to support her by wearing their glasses. >> we have these glasses in solidarity. thank you everyone. can we get public comment? >> at this time the public is welcome to make comment online

item 8. if you like to make public comment approached the podium for press three . >> president elias, there is no public comment. line item 9, public comments on all my matters pertaining to line item below including public comment on item 10,like item 11 in closed session . if you'd like to make public comment press star three or the podium. >> there is no public comment. >> line item 10, vote on whether to hold item 11 in closed session including vote on whether a certainattorney privilege with regard to 11 b. administrative code section 67.10 action . >> having a motion. >>almost an vice president . >> second. on the motion, commissioner

yanez. >>. [roll call vote] >>