>> thank you. welcome everyone to the july 13, 2022 police commission meeting. if we can stand and do the pledge of allegiance, please. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic, for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you so much. welcome everyone. can you please take

roll ? >> yes, ma'am. [roll call] >> you have a quorum. also here tonight we have chief william scott from the san francisco police department and we have (inaudible) department of police accountability. >> thank you. welcome. can you please call the first matter? >> line item 1, general public comment. at this time the public is welcome to address the commission up to 2 minutes not on the agenda or within the subject matter jurisdiction. neither police nor personnel nor commissioners are required

to respond but my pride a brief response. (inaudible) 415-655-0001 and enter access code 24956689618. you may submit public comment e-mail the scaert of police commission or written comments sent to public safety building at (inaudible) if you like to make public comment at this time, please press star 3. good evening caller, you have two minutes. >> commissioner oberstone, (inaudible) the more i see aaron peskin is termed out [difficulty hearing speaker] race is the only reason for the

stops so ask you to present the following as you develop the policy. (inaudible) thought process on crime that relates to the population of each demo graphic and location and cannot ever be over represented without racism. three, (inaudible) made by police for the reported numbers of suspects. if poverty is the driver of crime as described (inaudible) any demo graphic has higher density of poverty versus population in a given area would this not account for disparities on police contact? five, how many violations by race did sfpd ignore and not pull over? six, have you visited with the rank and file to have a open and honest dialogue about what they are feeling or their

thoughts? seven, how did you choose the groups to correspond with about this policy and this is a request for all your communications on this policy with the groups you identified in your ambush of chief scott with you drew up the policy. looking forward to your answers. >> thank you caller. >> good evening caller you have two minutes . >> my name is [difficulty hearing speaker] there is urgency to address the unjustice (inaudible) use of force, arrest and racial profiling in traffic stops by

sfpd. (inaudible) talking to the police commission to sfpd and board of supervisors. where is the urgency? if the tables were turned and (inaudible) white folks there would be a urgency. (inaudible) low level traffic stops by sfpd for months. san francisco has some of the worst anti-black (inaudible) back in 2016, the level of racial disparity has gotten worse particularly in traffic stops. many other cities and towns have been made to lower racial disparities by ending (inaudible) anti-black racism is (inaudible) black people are so prevalent across the nation. (inaudible) into a life altering situation.

[difficulty hearing speaker] thank you. >> thank you caller. good evening caller, you have two minutes. >> can you hear me? >> yes. >> yes. hi, this is mrs. brown calling concerning my son. to this day his case isn't solved. my son was shot with a semi-automatic gun. august 14 will-next month will be his anniversary and still

this has been-the years i have stopped counting the years, it has been so long my son's case hasn't been solved let alone mothers and fathers who lost sons and daughters. i'm still looking for justice for my child and how do we solve the unsolved cases? these are cold cases, cases that have not been solved for years and my mother is a mother, i'm still suffering. i have been calling in for years, for years about the solving of my son's case. again, his anniversary is coming up on the 14 th and i want to bring awareness to the media coverage on the 14th for my son and for other mothers and fathers that are suffering in silence like myself. please if we can do something

about the (inaudible) no one wants to come forth, but how do we keep them safe so they can come forth? what can we do for them so they can come forth? they have all the names of the perpetrators who murdered my son. 850 vine, 4th floor with all the names. what do we do about the unsolved homsides and how do we bring people forth and how do we make them tell? do we keep saying a snitch (inaudible) keeps letting our silence kill another child? >> thank you mrs. brown. members of the public with any information regarding the murder of aubrey (inaudible) 415-575-4444. vice president, that is the end of public comment. >> thank you sergeant. thank you callers for calling in and i would encourage you to listening to our commission update as we have a lot of updates with respect

to the dgo9 .1. >> president elias can i say a word before we continue? >> sure. >> i know that the rules of procedure dont typically permit us to respand to individual commenters but to the first commenter who posed me a list of questions. i would be happy to sit down with you and answer all those questions and discuss anything else you think would be interested or relevant to the dgo. many questions you posed have been answered in the department data but my e-mail is max.carter-overstone@sf gov.org. >> they send the questions or documentation to the commission office as we do have a (inaudible) handle all the inquiries, questions that we

are fielding and our comments regarding this matter, so please feel free to submit those as well. can we move to the next matter, please? >> line item 2, chief report. discussion. with the crime trends and public safety concerns provide overview of offenses insdants or events occurring in san francisco having an impact on public safety. commission discussion on unplanned events and activities the chief describes is limited to determining whether the calendar for future meeting. >> good evening president elias, commission and executive director and public. i'll start my chief's report with the trends for the week and go with major incidents major arrests and major events update. starting with violent crime, we are flat. (inaudible) 26 year to date opposed to 26 this time last

year. trends of other violent crime down 2 percent. (inaudible) robberies are up 2 percent. 1211 compared to 1189. [difficulty hearing speaker due to audio quality] human traffic is down 42 percent. 11 compared to 19 this time year to date. 6 percent total increase in violent crime. property crime, we are up 6 percent as well. burglies is 25 percent decrease. (inaudible) 3900 last year compared to (inaudible) motor vehiclethets threfts up 3 percent. 3083 last year compared to (inaudible) down 18 percent,

152 compared to 185 last year and (inaudible) are up 15 percent. (inaudible) compared to 14.597. that is the biggest driver of crime in the city. in terms of our car break-ins auto burglaries are up (inaudible) compared to 9720. down 14 percent from 2020and down 14 percent from (inaudible) violent crimes breakdown of violent crimes for the year, out of 13014 violent crimes. (inaudible) 398 have been use of (inaudible)

shootings we are done (inaudible) non fatal shootings account for 90 of the shootings and homicide account for 18 so the total of 108. all three categories are down year to date by double digit percentages. homicides are flat year to date compared to where it was this year. we had one homicide for this reporting period for the week and i'll talk about that in a second and the overall homicide rate to date is 64 percent. district stations bay view is even this year to last year. mission is down by 7 shootings, 19 compared to 12. (inaudible) 10 shootings over this time last

year. 5 compared to 15. (inaudible) had one last year, none this year. northern is up by 3. (inaudible) park richmond are even. (inaudible) richmond had zero. (inaudible) 13 compared to 5. taravel up by 3 and mission (inaudible) i wont go through every division as far as homicide, but mission has significant increase, 2 homicides year to date and bay view down by 3, 8 compared to 5. the other significant station, tenderloin is down by 3, 6 compared to 3 year to date. seizure of guns is 539

total guns seized for the year. of those, the (inaudible) 116 year to date so a 5th of it guns are (inaudible) i wont report on hate crimes this year to give a feel where we are mid-year. 22 total hate crimes and last year we had 113 so looks we are on a downward trend on hate crimes. of those, 4 are anti-asian and 2 anti-latin ex(inaudible) 1 anti-jnder that acounds for hate crime. we did have a homicide last week. this happened on the 9 of july at 7:40 p.m. officers arrived on

scene regarding shooting. they located the victim who was suffering from gun shot wound. officer attempted aid (inaudible) victim succumbed to his injuries. (inaudible) i'll keep the commission updated on progress on the investigation. we also have 4 shootings for the week. this week. one is at (inaudible) tenderloin (inaudible) ingle and underwood related to fireworks and next is (inaudible) and market and tenderloin and there is a shooting on july 4 at the 200 block of rich. no arrest in any of those cases have been made. all investigations are continuing. significant over the past weekday there was a significant crowd incident

known as the hill bomber incident cht this is a yearly incident at dolores park. we had issues there with people getting hurt, traffic impacted in a negative way and community impact as well. vandalism and other things, other types of crimes or events. this occurred at 6 p.m. this past weekday. the event generated numerous calls for service and resident complaining about the events. many (inaudible) responded in great numbers due to the nature of the crowd. hundreds of participants, many (inaudible) emt were called to render medical aid to people injured. we ended up declaring a unlawful assembly and were able to break it up but it took

several hours. we also had vandalism on july 4, significant vandalism at 24 and harrison. a community center, brand new building was vandalized. pretty sad, significant damage and we are investigating that. we do have video camera footage to follow up on and we have some wanted be on the look out bulletins out to see if we can identify and arrest the people that we have-have on camera. that investigation continues. significant arrests related to a (inaudible) above $35 thousand. our investigators worked with outside police department. one person was arrested and there was some property recovered but

the investigation remains ongoing. also we are (inaudible) 7 eleven robberies and taravel occurred. (inaudible) what appeared to be the same people. (inaudible) the sfpd and san bruno pd located evidence linked to at least one robies. two people were arrested as a result in the san mateo county jail. we had (inaudible) as a part of the incident i just mentioned. our officers were called to break up the driving as well as a the skate boarding and traffic issues caused by the incident. that is a yearly event so we definitely are working to see what we can do to make this event either as safe as possible or in some cases where laws are

being broken, make sure we dont have reoccurrence in future years so (inaudible) heading up to see what we can do to prevent those type of events in the future. that is my report for the week. >> thank you chief. one thing i noticed on your report and wndering if you can give a update because it seems to be a significant event is, your advocacy in front of the board of supervisors advocating for the department to surveill people in real time without limitation. can you give us a update on that, please? >> that is at rules committee and i'll briefly (inaudible) lay out what the-it is part of the 19-b suvalence camera ordinance passed by the board of supervisors in

2019. what we are asking for is approval of a surveillance camera policy from the board of supervisors as required by ordinance that will allow the department to monitor in real time criminal activity both felony and misdemeanor as well as monitor in real time large scale events with public safety concerns. those are the two highlights i think caused most discussion and it is at rules committee. there is another hearing monday, and there are department heads presented nob will be in front of rules committee monday to discuss this further. no vote is taken yet on it and we'll see what happens monday, but those are really the two things that are significant i think have gotten most public attention. live monitoring of criminal activity and the current ordinance does give the ability to

live monitor in circumstances where there is likelihood of serious injury and or death. we want to go beiand that because that does want address many issues in the city. there is huge infrastructure in the city with private cameras and will allow permission with the owners of the cameras to observe and monitor crimes as they happen or if we have significant information or intelligence, credible intelligence to observe crime s we believe will occur to prevent them occurring and/or apprehend those. >> what is your-is there updates on that with respect to how the policy will be framed? as the commission and the policy making body

of the department we haven't been privy to the discussions or seen any of the policy. >> as required by the ordinance passed in 2019, any of our technologies that qualify under the ordinance we have to have policies for. some of the technologies we already have policies for, some we dont, but the way the ordinance is written, the policy-it goes through several steps. it has to be passed by the board of supervisors. there was discussion how the commission wanted to be a part of this (inaudible) and we were told to proceed with the process, which is developing the policy, goes through (inaudible) there is another committee it goes through that coit manages and

that goes to the board of supervisors as a ordinance tlft is a city ordinance. many technologies have a policy. (inaudible) body worn cameras are part of that. the license plate readers which is managed by (inaudible) is part of that and many others. i think we have 47 technologies that have to go through this process and the process has not been as nimble as we had hoped, but working through the board process to make sure each of our policies goes to the board for approval. if there is a policy that the commission wants to weigh in on, again, we did talk this through with president cohen at the time to see how the commission wants to deal with this and we were told to continue working with the board and develop the ordinances but if that changes with the commission of course we'll work with the commission on this where you all

need to be or want to be involved. >> okay, great. i think we should agendize for further discussion. i will turn it over to my fellow commissioners. not seeing-we'll start with commissioner byrne. >> no, i reiterate vice president elias-i think the matter should be agendized. >> thank you. commissioner benedicto. >> thank you president elias. chief, i had a question. i know that yesterday the district attorney gave a press conference in the tenderloin.

i'll curious if there is conversation on change of enforcement if that effects deployment and what conversations happened with the district attorney and the commission needs to be updated on that? >> thank you, commissioner. we are scheduling the meeting with the new district attorney. she is only in office for a couple days so we are trying to get a meeting on calendar. as far as law enforcement strategy, it remains what it was. we hope to have good working relationship with the district attorney office and come with strategies that are for the betterment of the city with this issue. (inaudible) hasn't changed. we are still enforcing drug sales and we also are enforcing on open air drug usage and so that hasn't changed. >> thank you chief. >> thank you.

>> thank you. commissioner yanez. >> the only thing i would like to share is there obviously concern on the community end with the appointment of a new district attorney. we definitely-there are a lot of sentiments of the sense that we may be going backwards as far as the approaches that we take to address some of the criminal activity that has to do with drug sales and so the real key being for me what our department, with the police department, what the role will be in continuing to pursue resolving violent crime opposed to empathizing energy in a direction that you

know, has raised many questions around the community. i dont necessarily believe that you know, a regressive approach to addressing violent crime through aggressive policing of users will necessarily reap the benefits that we expect and so i hope that the staff, the folks on the front lines doing the work continue to emphasize the needs of the community and respanding to the needs of the community, not necessarily respanding to the pressure that may be created by media or by the direction that the department and district attorney office is going to take. that is all i will comment around that issue and i hope that meeting does

produce i think clarity about what those comments and the media have lead people to believe, and that the police department remain solid and strong in the direction that we are taking as far as addressing violent crime and really improving outcomes in those areas. those would be my two cents in that area. >> thank you. commissioner carter-oberstone. >> nothing for me. >> thank you. commissioner yee. >> yes. thank you very much madam chair. i just want i guess like commissioner yanez has spoken about drug users versus drug dealers and need clarity on enforcement of and hopefully we can get help for those people that are in need

as users. also, looking forward to see what the rules committee and board of supervisors have on this-i guess 19-b. waiting for that in giving us direction. wait for their response. thank you very much madam chair and great to see you chief. >> thank you commissioner. i can kind of [difficulty understanding speaker due to audio] >> is it is a long discussion? it is probably worth agendizing. >> 30 seconds. i want to say i and i other members captains lieutenants and field folks have attended a number of community meetings, not just in the tenderloin but across the

city. one of the biggest complaints is open air drug usage and this department is asked to address that issue and that not address it so we are in agreement people need help but also there is (inaudible) communities we are talking about to not allow people just to use drugs on the street corners and sidewalks and so we are enforcing on that and ultimately what we like to see is people that need help to get help, but we have a responsibility to the community. (inaudible) we do have the responsibility but i wanted to say that we have attended a number of community events and meetings and discussion with people who live and work in the communities and they do want to see this issue addressed. >> right. thank you. i think this discussion cries for you to do something have gone on

quite some time even pre-covid so think this is matter to agendize to thoroughly discuss the issue. sergeant, can we go to public comment? >> at this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding the chief's report. if you like to make public comment press star 3 right now. vice president, elias, no public comment. >> thank you. next item. >> line item 3. dpa director's report. discussion, report on recent dpa activities and announcement. commission discussion is limited to regarding any of the issues raised for future commission meeting. >> good evening. >> good evening

director henderson, welcome. >> thank you. on my computer, still not set up so it is funny camera today. sorry. will be better next week. so, as (inaudible) where we are, dpa this week. we have opened 346 cases so far this year and we have closed 367 cases this year. that leaves with 240 cases that are pending right now and we have sustained 38 cases so far this year. we (inaudible) 11 cases this year and we have 20 cases who investigations have gone back to the 8-9 period that

we track. of those 20 cases, this time last year we were at 29 cases and of the 20cases, 15 cases are (inaudible) meaning civil or criminal cases pending that have stopped the time from tolling and of those cases, there are 12 cases that are pending with the commission and one of those cases is pending with the chief's for a chief decision. in terms of what has gone on in the past week, we have 45 percent of the cases that have come in have been with allegations for a officer failing to take required action specifically for to write or take a police report and 18 percent of the cases have come in and allegations related to an officer behaving or speaking inappropriately with the public. for the full list you can look at the

website with a breakdown of all the allegations that have come in in the week with the cases of dpa but many cases involve burglary, vandalism, tresspass and behavioral health crisis. what we are seeing at it different precincts, the top allegations came from northern station this week, related to-three allegations all concentrateed in northern related to officer allegations of officer failing to respond to reports of burglaries, vandalism and drug use and also those allegations included failures or demands to write police reports. all the other stations had zero or just one. the districts that had one allegation from last week were

bayview, taravel, tenderloin and the full summary of all the details is on the website in case folks want to see the specifics week to week, you can fiend the details there. in terms of outreach, our summer program is in full swing. the summer law justice program last week the cohort met with sheriff's office and assistant legal counsel. the past few weeks they also met with dante king to discus bias and chief probation officer (inaudible), chief juvenile probation officer catherine (inaudible), katie miller and also met with judge bruce chan talking about work and plans for restorative justice and reform and accountability. they also met with the bar association,

executive director yolanda jackson and chief of staff of oakland office of city council. as reminder you will have a presentation from the inturns end of summer but i wanted to give a update of the folks they are meeting with and the work they are doing while they are here and in the office. july 12dpa presented at northern station community meeting and in terms of operation, just a little feedback, i sent this to the commissioners but our questions and answers frequently asked questions are now live and part of when people come to our office and have contact with our office, the frequently asked questions are given to the complainant or folks coming into our office. again, i try to continue to improve the operation and follow-up from the feedback whenever we have complaints or when we get calls or confusions about the work we

are doing. some of the most common and frequent questions that we get frequently with whatever we do, we print information there deciding what a investigation is. we find frequently folks are confused and misunderstand whether or not our investigation is related to or connected to criminal investigations and or civil investigations related to lawsuits, so we fully explain all that. the same thing with the length of time for a investigation. people don't understand frequently what that looks like, so we it broken down with graphs and images so people can understand it easily. i'm always constantly concerned about (inaudible) establishing what defines this is also in the frequently asked questions and where people can fiend the results. often times

people want to know if i haven't requested and others have requested it can i get their answers as well so we point them to everything transparnt and explain the things that cant be in the document. there is a lot of (inaudible) used in our legal document that go back and forth i think a lot of people don't understand so those are defined in there as well and my whole point in doing all this is to make sure that the public knows what it is getting and understand the process so when they watch police commission when they are making a complaint or when they are trying to work with mediation they really understand the big picture of how dpa plays a role in terms of both reform and accountability and so it is live now in case folks want to look at it on the website but happy to answer questions about that. we have nothing in closed session today.

on the call today with me is chris (inaudible) to answer any questions in case something comes up during the meeting that he can be helpful with. as always if anyone in the public would like to reach out they can do sfgov.org/dpa or contact (inaudible) two items on the agenda today that i have comments for later on. item number 6 on the discussion related pending department general orders and on agenda item 11, possible action with department general order 3.o1. i will also say just in conclusion for the frequenly asked questions, one thing we are doing is revamping the response that my agency has with complainants when they come in. the questions will be given at the initiation of contact with my agency but looking into drafting

similar type of memos at every stage of interaction so when people come in and they receive a report or they receive a letter from us that letter will accompany a lay explanation and answer those frequenly asked questions. all this comes out of in part the audit work we are doing with the department because we want to audit ourselves as well to make sure that we are answering questions and being as efficient as we can to anticipate some of the known challenges that people have about our work, which can sometimes be esoteric and involve things that many people are unfamiliar with and we want to make sure that we are reducing those barriers of understanding as we can to make sure the public knows it has access to the very best quality services that they are entitled to. that concludes my report and i will answer any questions anyone has. >> thank you director

henderson. two things, i look forward to the inturn program presentation based on previous years mrs. thompson has done a phenomenal job with that program and the feedback that we've been able to receive from the inturns who participated in the program has been phenomenal, so great job and kudos to mrs. thompson for really i think making that experience for the inturns very positive and you can really see the growth that happens because they had them appear at the beginning of the program and the end and you can really see the develop of public speaking and other useful skills that your office and mrs. thompson has been able to instill in them so i look forward to that and that is really a fun presentation for us. >> really excited about it and they do really grow. part of what we started doing-the program gets better every year. what of what we did this year was each of the speakers, the students get assigned to the speakers ahead of time

so they can research them and they make the presentation with the speaker every week when they come in to talk about their background and then they lead the questioning back and forth just to get them-not just familiar with the folks they are introduced to but familiar speaking publicly to the audience and their peers just to try to give them a broader chance to be communicating so we dont wait tothened the end of the summer. every year it gets better. this is the best class, but it just keeps getting better. thank you for your kinds words. they pay attention and watch police commission all summer. >> (inaudible) >> sure they are on the edge of their seats watching this. >> the faq i think they are great. we got the e-mail with content and i'm really

happy and glad they are posted on your website. it shocks me sometimes how people are not familiar with the disciplinary process including department members when it comes to dpa and internal affairs and how to find complaints and procedure in terms of discipline that happens to officers, so i really want to commend you on the faq because they look great and i'm really happy they are up and available to the public and i do want to also commend you on your effort to be transparnt with the reporting, the disciplinary cases, your audit and the annual report where you report out everything dpa has done. one question that has come in is apparently the public is asking where are the faq on the dpa website because apparently they can't find them and i dont know-we can talk about this off-line but perhaps the commission can have a hyper-link to the faq's on our commission

website. >> that would be super helpful. just by way of background, many of the questions come from the questions that we answer at the front desk all the time and are questions that come to the investigators all the time while they conduct their investigations and i want to make sure that we are being transparnt but also everyone is receiving the most accurate information with hyper-links to other information that may answer questions as well. i am not super tech savvy but there are other d prks a folks on the call with me that may be answer exactly where the faq are contained on the website but i can say and will say they are included when folks contact our office. separately from wherever it is through the website. >> while your staff works on answering the questions i will turn it over to my

fellow commissioners briefly. >> i'll work on it right now while we are talking. >> commissioner yee you have anything for director henderson? no. commissioner yanez? commissioner byrnes. no. commissioner benedicto. >> yes, just a quick question which i think director henderson answered. in addition to being on the website, the faq document which i agree is excellent is given as a document when people file complaints? >> correct. when you get documents back saying thank you for making a complaint or thank you for talking to us, this document will be provided as well every single time. and by the way, the third arm, these are also many of the questions when members of the public come to the commission as well as

from the board and mayor's office and so just seemed like a good idea, rather then continually train our staff to say the same things, to have this forward leading document to answer the questions that we know people ask over and over. the e-mail you got will be forwarded to those agencies as well, the board of supervisors, mayor's office and folks that refer cases to us on regular basis. it is supposed to live on the website and i'll find it before the meeting is over. >> if i'm not mistaken, there are tables district stations where people have access to literature and make a complaint, is that the case? >> that is correct. it has been a issue because in the past that was not done. there was some sort of mandate order the department was going to be maintaining and doing those things. when i came on, that want done, so we revamped all of the brochures and

pased them out. it is pretty arduous for my staff constantly going department to department to check to make sure it is there andcurrent and they haven't run out of supplies so one thing i like to do in the next few months is coordinate a system where we bhake the documents and pamphlets available in the departments and the captains do that independently, without it having to be an issue for my staff driving around precinct to precinct. seems like a waste of time. >> that makes sense. (inaudible) added to the materials at the district stations. >> i agree. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner benedicto. commissioner carter-oberstone. no. >> just one comment. just wanted to really commend director anderson and all his

staff putting the faq together. i read it, i think it is hard to distill complicated legal concepts and harder to do that in plain english without technical jargon and maintaining nuance and accuracy so i know that is a hard task, but this accomplishes that and just wanted to recognize the quality of the work product and the hard work that obviously went into it and it is vital for public transparns so thank you. >> thank you and thank you for commenting specifically on the clarity. we actually had it reviewed by a third party to make sure it was readableable and understandable so at the bottom you'll see that it has a grading for the understandability for a lay person to read it because it seems no one should

have to have a law degree to understand what we are doing. no one should have to have college education to understand what we are doing on their behalf and think we were successful having that as part of the faq before they were launched. thank you. >> great. do we have a answer or i can move- >> i'm texting. >> okay. >> nobody seems to know yet. >> if we can't get it tonight please check the commission website and we'll have the hyper-link or the answer on the commission website and can direct people to dpa. can we go to public comment? >> if you like to make public comment regarding line item 3, d pa's director report, press star 3 now. you have two minutes. caller, you

have two minutes. there is no further public comment. >> great. next item, please. >> line item 4. commission reports. discussion. (commission reports will be limited to a brief description of activities and announcements. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for a future commission meeting.) - commission president's report - commissioners' reports - commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future commission meetings (action) >> thank you. i'm going to turn it over to my fellow commissioner yee. we'll start with you. >> i have nothing to add to my report. >> great. thank you commissioner yee. commissioner yanez. >> thank you president elias. my report will be brief. i did have a good

opportunity to meet with sergeant youngblood to discuss and get further understanding and insight about early intervention system. it was very very (inaudible) i know that it is a work in progress and there will be a presentation on that tonight, so i am looking forward to that and i do have some questions to follow-up on in that area. one thing i would like to inquiry about is, couple weeks back i had mentioned that during the chief's report, there was a glaring concern with the fact that there was a increase in youth arrest and had asked whether there was any pattern or any reason that the chief and the department believes this increase has been taking place and the reason i bring that up again is with

this announcement of the direction the district attorney's office is taking and the concern around young people charged as adults, it just really you know, does raise the alarm i guess for me having worked with young people as long as i have so i wnder what safeguards the department will have in place to not persecute our young people considering we had a good 5, 10 years of decrease in crime and decrease in young people behavior considering we have the community assessment referral so i want to make sure the department is using alternative resources and procedures in place by dgo order around how to work with young people, so i just wanted to understand a little better whether there is any

new information that the chief may have about what-why this rise in youth arrest has been taking place. >> thank you commissioner yanez. commissioner benedicto. >> thank you president elias. i is a quick update and update on (inaudible) i first wanted to report that i had the privilege spending 6 hours with a ride along with officers from mission station. (inaudible) helping to coordinate that. (inaudible) setting in the back of the car 6 hours. it was a enlightening experience to see up close the work rank and file officers do and challenges they face and to get-have conversations with officers over and get sort of

the-put a face to the commission so really privileged to do that. i also want to provide a update to as a commission and to members of the public on community outreach for 9.01 on (inaudible) and i think we have as previewed last week, thanks to the tremendous help of (inaudible) community outreach starting august 2 and run through august and september. it will consist of 3 components targeted community outreach at specific events, second component being town halls organize human right commission to get community feedback and the third being working groups that are working to

revise and draft the policy. a couple things (inaudible) on the commission website as it approaches but the first set of events there will be department and commission outreach at the national night out and night out for safety and liberty events august 2, 2022 so that consist of members of the commission or department of hrc there to answer questions and receive feedback. (inaudible) that is august 2 at the national night out and night out for safety and liberty. on august 26, members of the commission will be joining the hrc which has a monthly zoom round table composed of community stakeholders so we'll drop in on that event to answer questions and feedback. also august we will be meeting with members of the latino task force (inaudible) that is another specific outreach meeting we will be

attending. on september 6, that is outreach event with the community youth center and coalition for safety and justice a group of 4 asian pacific islander (inaudible) they have a standing meeting on september 6. it is zoom so we will participate in that to get targeted outreach as well. moving on to our general purpose town hall on september 6 at 5:30 at the main library there will be a town hall. september 20, location to be determined in bay view there will be a town hall and also in september at location to be determined there will be a town hall in the mission district. that is for those other components. working groups we expect to convene our first working group meeting august 2 to convene

stakeholders and commence that process in cun junction with community events. very excited. also remind members of the public are welcome to send written comments to the mailer address or sfpdcommission at sfgov.org. in addition to targeted out reach also doing outreach with officers at department (inaudible) soliciting officer feedback as well. >> thank you. will that information be posted on the commission website the events you just announced with the dates and details? >> yes, all the public outreach events will be posted on the commission website. in particular the three town halls as those details are finalized but also the targeted outreach events open to the public as

well. >> great. thank you. commissioner carter-oberstone. >> not so much a update, just a question. i think it was back in february at one of the commission meetings, chief scott graciously agreed and discussing qadr, he agreed he would send both the commission and dpa the raw stop and search data on a quarterly basis at the same time the department already has to send the data to the california department of justice, and i just wanted to ask chief scott if he would send the data that has been sent to cal doj in the last two quarters since the last discussion so the

commission can start reviewing it ahead of whenever our next discussion about the data will be. can you hear me okay? >> yes. >> yes, commission, we can. >> just so-chief we talked about this, but i anticipate having the 96a report update at the next meeting on july 20? >> yes. >> so, if we can get that hopefully by this friday. >> you'll have it by thursday (inaudible) >> i heard that line before. [laughter] >> you will have it by thursday. [difficulty hearing speaker] >> okay. a couple of updates. i wanted to also reeterate and encourage the public

to submit their questions, comments, edits to the commission website regarding dgo9.01. we have received e-mails with officers and been in contact with officers regarding traffic enforcement ride alongs so we as commissioners can better understand the challenges and difficulties officers encounter during traffic stops so we can have that in mind while we craft this policy and so again, i encourage people to continue to reach out to us through that portal. the other thing i wanted to agendize when the sparks report comes before the commission which will be i believe in september, the status of the expired juvenile (inaudible) how and why it expired, so if we can also have that included in the sparks report. the other thing is i have been working on

scheduling a meeting with the chief and his command staff to regarding the list of dgo and or working groups. it is my understanding the department will be resuming working groups so the priority list for dgo and order in which they will be agendized and or handled discussion is going to be had soon, as soon as we schedule it. those are the things i had to update the public and fellow commissioners on. the other thing i'm seeing in the chat is that the frequently asked questions are under--sorry--detailed website and found under resources tab. >> that is correct. >> okay. >> it is there in case you want to post it on your website and like i said, it will be given

to every individual that-at their initial contact of the agency. there is more of those. this is just the first. we are waiting to roll them out but every stage of the interaction with the investigation we want to be able to provide responsive questions like this. >> okay. i understand that dpa you have a new website and so it is on the new website at the bottom left corner of resources in the link. on the new website, right? >> correct, that is correct. >> okay. great. alright. that's all i have. can you go to public comment? >> at this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line item 4, commission reports. if you like to make public comment, please press star 3 now. there is no public comment. >> thank you. next item, please. >> line item 5 presentation of

early intervention system 4th quarter 2021 and first quarter 2022 report. discussion. >> great. thank you sergeant youngblood. good evening commissioner president elias chief commissioner scott and (inaudible) the risk management office and tonight i thank you for opportunity to discuss the early intervention system. specifically it is about the 4th quarter 2021 and first quarter of 2022 and we have a presentation if you dont mind sergeant youngblood. >> i'm putting it up right now.

can you see it? >> yeah, thank you. if we can move to slide 2. so, i do want to give credit where credit is due and there is a full time team that works on our early intervention system full time for the department. the early intervention or eis team works under the risk management office. the teamcast consist of reilly, also receives the legal-oversees the legal division including (inaudible) eis. and the legal division itself. eis (inaudible) senior analyst wendy leon and

senior analyst stephanie (inaudible) we are used to a lengthy presentation with lots of breakdown of data, but that information is provided in the quarterly reports so based on the commission recommendation we will have a much more (inaudible) let's answer thefirst question, what is early intervention system and why we have eis. i will highlight a couple things. this is mechanism for insuring police accountability prior to adverse events and key word is prior. highlighted in the slide and i'll just read that. the early intervention system is not (inaudible) about problem officers but a way to help officers before they experience an adverse

event. next slide. let's talk about the threshholds. officer involved in a officer involved shooting. 3 orfore use of (inaudible) in a 6 month period. 4 or more dpa complaints in a 12 month period and any 6 endicators in a 12 month period. so, what is eis? any time a member (inaudible) when a member reaches the thresholds we just spoke of, they are (inaudible)

number of alerts in a certain time period. the aim application generate alerts each month validated by our analyst the team i identified earlier and forwarded to sergeant (inaudible) so that they can have a discussion with the supervisors and officers about the alert itself. next slide. so, what are they? they are use of force incidents or any use of force. dpa complaints officer involved shootings, officer involved discharged. (inaudible) complaints, internal affairs complaints,

civil suits, on-duty collisions and vehicle pursuits. additionally we look at associated factors. i'll list a few. citizen complaints. (inaudible) and things like pedestrian stops (inaudible) next slide. the are questions asked at the last presentation or the last quarterly presentation about the timing of the quarterly reports and then really what is the lag for the presentation. i wanted to touch on that. in order to complete a eis quarterly report, what has to happen is we have to finalize all use of force incident documentation that can take up to 2

weeks. past the close of the reporting month. supporting data and documentation has to be obtained in all areas we spoke of in the previous slide for this report so use of force complaints, use of force incidents, dpa complaints, internal affairs complaints. we have it look at hr (inaudible) potentially with staff services, for instance, we talked about (inaudible) evoc or emergency vehicle operations. we talked about traffic collisions, (inaudible) labor intensive process, data needs to be obtained and compiled from several sources before they can be analyzed. i wanted to touch on that. next slide, please. two pie charts and here's a breakdown of what we are seeing. in the

4th quarter 2021 these were the type of alerts we had. two officer involveped shootings or two members involved. one member involved in a officer involved discharge. (inaudible) 12 members had 5 or more endicators within 6 monthsism 7 members 3 or more dpa complaints within 6 months and the majority had 3 or more use of force within those three months so 48 members. comparatively or let me tell you about the most recent quarter, the first quarter of 2022. 6 members involved in a officer involved shooting, one member involved in a officer involved discharge. 21 officers had 6 or more

endicators. 20officers 5 indicators within 6 months and 6dpa complaints in 6 months and 35 members had use of force within 3 months. next slide. let's talk about members receiving alerts. the numbers between quarters are actually consistent. 3.3 percent of the active sworn members generated alert in q4 of 2021. 3.2 percent which is all most identical, (inaudible) generated alert in quarter 1, 2022. the 4th quarter 2021 a hundred alerts. 70 members in the first quarter of 2022 there was 89 alerts. 65 members. so, actually a question you might ask is why a hundred alerts if it is the same percentage in q4 of

21? we have less officers from that quarter. i actually have the number. the 4th quarter 2021, we had 2104 sworn members and q1, 2022 down 2027 sworn members. next slide. >> we will talk about disposition of the alerts. alerts are generated every month. sent out to the station (inaudible) they are specifically february, april, june, october and december. only the most recent alert is sent to the officer note so the eis units records for data tracking and the reason ree talk about that is you'll see

in the charts there is a merge categories and those are alerts between months so they are merged. eis alerts in q4 of 2021-of the 125 were administratively closed by eis, 13 merged, 62 sent to district stations or whatever unit for review. for any officer to the supervisor to the officer. q1 this year, 11 were merged, 5 were administratively closed and the vast majority, 68 were sent to the unit for review by the supervisors and the officers. next slide, please.

intervention. in quarter 4 wnt 21 there was one new intervention open. (inaudible) one intervention in progress, one new intervention open so two remain open from q1, 2022. outside of the interventions, these are the outcomes. formal counseling, 61 in q4, 2021. 71 in q1, 2022. 4 formal counseling interventions or in q4, 2021 and one formal counseling in q1, 2022. and then 2 members put on performance improvement plans in q4, 2021. three in

q1, 2022. next slide, please. i give everyone a update regarding our work with benchmark analytics and the first sign early intervention system so moved to a new system methodically. the project kicked off october 2021 as i think most of you know. thecurrent phase we are in is data validation and import and that is quite a heavy lift so i do want to give credit to our it director (inaudible) who has been working directly with benchmark and it is no easy task merging and converging data bases so we have a more effective system. the next phase is data modeling scheduled for september of this year. it is pretty aggressive schedule. we should

have a-hoping to have a sand box version to view and play with at that point and concurrently we are working on policy and dgo, moving a little slower then i like but none the less making progress and moving forward best we can. we hope for production release january 2023 and that is contingent on everything going wellism on to the next slide sergeant youngblood. that concludes my presentation. i am available for questions. thank you. >> thank you so much and thank you for being sus sinkt with

your presentation. i will turn it over to commissioner carter-oberstone >> thank you. i -couple questions. on one slide there was a list of associated factors. can you just clarify, do those feed into the threshold alerts or are those you looked after the fact? i want clear how those were monitored. >> those are looked at after the thresholds have been net so not part of the thresholds but we know those are important and those are things we expect the supervisors to monitor and those are the things we will look at when there is an alert and see what role it plays in the reason for the

alert. an example is overtime alert. (inaudible) discuss with a officer. if they have issues at work, maybe overtime work is something that we need to monitor as a example. >> got you. but just to be clear, you look at overtime work unless a threshold was triggered by one of the track indicators? >> correct. >> perfect. i know there is different thresholds for different types of indicators but is there a waiting system at all to the indicators? for example, i one was if you get (inaudible) in 12 months is every indicator weighted the same or different weights? >> i will use officer involved shootings as a example. you are automatically

triggered for eis if involved in a shooting. the others are weighted because there are different amounts and different timeframes. maybe sergeant youngblood, historically i dont know how these were determined, but they do seem very logical to me just based on my experience. i dont know if i actually answered your question. i also know working with benchmarks the weights and the thresholds the triggers and associated factors are going to be reworked, revisited. >> i think maybe part of it was my question could have been clearer. (inaudible) and use of force are all implicitly weighted because the system has separate thresholds and my question is for the other indicators is there any weighting among them or are they all equal value?

on the preezentation it seemed they were equal value but i wanted to confirm that. >> those are equal value. sergeant youngblood you worked in eis, i dont know if you can maybe-- >> (inaudible) the programming will go off the thresholds so if they have 3 use of force in 3 months that trigger an alert, but if there is a on-duty collision that is wrapped up in there they will look at the on-duty collision the same way they look at use of force so the same equally but the triggering of what passes the threshold will spur that eis to go off. >> thank you sergeant, that is helpful. >> my other question was, do we track the degree to which alerts are either over

or under if inclusive? to give a example, on over-inclusive it said 4 officers got alert triggered for having 3 or more use of force in 3 months. that may be concerning for some but just like luck of the draw some officers are placed in situations where use of force is entirely proper so that would be an alert that didn't alert anything that requires intervention. under inclusivity side an example of that would be, there is adverse incident but no triggering event in the month leading up to it and we realized if we had been tracking a different factor we could have intervened with this officer before this adverse event but our system just doesn't capture the warning signals that lead to the adverse event if

that makes sense. >> it totally makes sense. the first part of the comment i agree with what you said. let's use (inaudible) as example. if use of force triggered an alert the eis would compile every report where that officers was involved in use of force. in addition to all the other information and they actually send that to the station captain if it happened at a district station, so that is available to the sergeant and i remember doing this. i would read through every report, look at the force and reason it was used for each officer, each incident and in many cases as you said, i can tell a example, one officer happened to eare respand to very dangerous calls as a backup and may have participated in the arrest or might have had to

displace the fire arm because of nature of the call (inaudible) figure out if there is a pattern that we need intervention or the officer happened to go to 25 really hot calls and involved in these type insdants so that is the duty of eis, it creates a situation where supervisors are actually looking specifically at officers because of the alerts and able to have communication with the officer about what happened and checking it. now i forgot what part 2 was. >> the second part was the opposite. just to clarify on the first question, i guess i asking do we track how often that happens? there were x number of alerts, why percentage did not

warrant intervention, the percentage warranted intervention and the second part of the question, (inaudible) there is adverse incident but not eis alert, are we tracking and asking ourselves the question perhaps if we had been tracking a different factors different indicators we might have been able to intervene before the adverse incident took place? >> first, i say i think we have a pretty good list of triggers or alerts. pretty thorough. but there might be something we are missing, absolutely. i think there is a opportunity right now because we are working with benchmark to try to identify those. there could be adverse event that does not trigger eis. we would rely on the sergeants and supervisors at that time to

monitor the officers reaction to that event and even if there isn't a eis alert they can still intervene. they can still work with the officer to improve or make sure they are okay, essentially. whatever they may need based on that event. going back to your other question about use of force and if they are tracked, historically we will always have the record of the officer having alert to trigger review. they are continuing monitoring. >> thank you. the last question is probably my most basic question. i think you might have said it and missed it but on slide 11, there is one subheading that says if engagement outside eis. not sure what that meant. does that mean there is

intervention even though there is no eis alert? >> there might be semantics with the word intervention. in my mind when we identify an intervention for the purpose of the presentation it is when the supervisor contacts our office, really feels there is a pattern of behavior that needs formal and documented intervention and we would work with the captain or who ever is in charge at that opponent point to formalize a plan for them. really, with each alert there is intervention of some type. it just might not rise to the level where we want a formal intervention where training may be mandated, we want certain behaviors corrected in this method, et cetera. >> got you. just so i

understand, in q4 there were 61 instances of informal counseling, does that mean that those instances of informal counseling occurred in cases where none of the thresholds were met set out on slide 4? i am trying to understand what outside eis means. >> it is confusing. of the-so, if a eis threshold alert is sent to the station, when the supervisor meets with the officer (inaudible) 61 times that resulted in informal counseling so that is outside the eis office. the eis office created the alert,sent it to the station, it did not require the supervisor did not come back to the eis office and say, hey, i want a formalize a plan

for this officer. (inaudible) there are so few, it isn't because nothing was done, it is because those are the outliers. >> outside eis means done outside the eis office personnel not outside the eis notification? >> this is a very eis centric presentation. >> that was my confusion. thank you for the presentation. it was very helpful. >> thank you. commissioner yanez. >> thank you president elias. thank you for the clarification there about what engagement outside of eis means, because i also had a hard time trying to wrap my head around that. my question,

considering the number of alerts that you know, the number of officers that are accumulating you know, 3-6 alerts within the short periods of time, right? what is the standard or what is the expectation for someone to go into a performance plan? what i see the large number of alerts and we know that if it is 80 or a hundred officers who reached the threshold, whether the allegations are substantiated or not because there is investigate dpa may be actively involved with, what process is undertaken in order to outside of a formal counseling actually document the pattern, because when i

hear that there are 6 indicator points, that in and of itself demonstrates a pattern for a individual officer and when i hear there are 60, 80 officers generated 3 plus alerts within a short period of time, as a manager i assume we go into a formal plan to make sure that if this is a intervention system to address behaviors that become problematic, that we dont ever allow them to get to the point where they are incidents that require an investigation or something outside the eis system. what guidance is given to those sergeants or supervisors when they receive the alert from eis in order for them to go into a written plan?

>> every alert is specific to the officers. every alert a large package is generated with the information about the triggers, so i'll go back to-we will use the same example. use of force, this officer had so many uses of force, every report is printed out for the sergeant to look at and to review, and they know that they are supposed to look for a pattern. included with your example, the officers with 3 or more triggering events, those are the outliers and i had discussion with the office about what happens with the cases and where we go with this cases and in those cases what i was told is the officers were involve in a lot of

incidents and pointing in the firearm triggered those alert. i want to answer you by saying, each case is different. we do rely on the supervisor to have-to thoroughly review the package given to them whether dpa complaints or (inaudible) to look at the pattern and sit down with the officer to have that discussion and really to have the discussion why you have so many dpa complaints within the last 6 months. what do we need to do to mitigate it, or is this just-you just happen in your career to have this three month period where you accumulated so many complaints and let's deal with it now but it is outliers (inaudible) it isn't normal

pattern of business, right? his or her. and then the only other thing i will add is since eis, the spirit is to identify officers before there is-before the discipline process we want to prevent a officer getting into a situation where there is discipline. we keep a (inaudible) the triggers for ied or allegations of misconduct, so eis (inaudible) we don't want to confuse the two what so ever and why we are very careful about separating the two. eis is a system so we as supervisors can better identify officers that might be having problems and then it is in the name of the system, intervention so very much used at that process. not to be

confused with hey, you are charged with misconduct and we are going to investigate and it is to-if we do it right it is to prevent a officer getting to the point when there is allegation of misconduct. it isn't you are rude, it is this is misconduct. it is now-there will be discipline. eis is very much used to try to prevent and i think-i didn't mean for that to be a example but that would be a example. >> what do you believe may be interfering with supervisors ability to curtail the behavior after the 3 point thresholds because when i hear officers are getting 6 alerts within a 12 month period and sometimes a 6 month period, it

seems to me the verbal warning is not actually having the impact that it is intended to have. so, my question would be, is the moral issue interfering with folks going into formal written plans to prevent that 4, 5 and 6 indicator and obviously every day is different and when you are looking for a pattern maybe different behaviors are not interpreted as a pattern, but i would believe that indicator points themselves are a pattern, even if the behavior is a different behavior every day, so what is interfering after the third alert with folks going into a formal written plan to address the behavior and not only address it, but put it in

writing so that folks know that there is outside of eis a direct supervisor who can implement the consequence that may lead to disciplinary action in order to prevent the escalation of those acomulation of incident to get into 4, 5, and 6. do you have why there is resistance to go into writing when they read the third indicator point level? >> let me say this, generally supervisors are not surprised when an eis alert comes. if they do their job they know the officers and know they are involved in multiple insdants and know they received complaints. generally the supervisors are not surprised when they get this. my hope and everyone hope is

they are already intervening and talking to the officer and pulled them aside and said what happened here. they have been engaging with the officers. generally they are not surprised. in cases where a sergeant genuinely dident know this officer was involved-had so many complaints, eis is a trigger at that point for whatever reason they didn't know and now whether the sergeant or captain knew or didn't know, now they are forced to address it. they are forced to review it and respond to eis. forced to have a conversation and look for the pattern and tell us what they will do about it. what plan have they come up with. i would answer your question about are they putting it in writing, it depends on the situation of what they recommend for the officer. if it is sick pay abuse, absolutely they should write a performance plan. it is so many weeks you have been sick without a doctor

excuse and we expect you to come to work in the next 3 months we will monitor your attendance and if you are sick you need to stay home, but if not you need to get to work or explain what is going on. there are times where formal performance improvement plan is laid out. other things might be training and that is documented in a different way. it is a memo submitsed to the training division, so it is not a warning system in that hey, you are going to certain trainings and if you dont meet--it isn't used that way, it says we identify a training we want you to go to the academy to talk to the field tactics experts and work on your tactics so that is also documented because when we snd them to training there is record of the training. there might be a memo generated about the reason they are sent there

and generally after the training the trainers will potentially write a memo about we administered the training, this how they reacted under these circumstances this is what they were counseled on. it is maybe not-i think what you are asking is how formal is the system. it depends. it depends. it could be performance improvement plan or could be as we identified earlier informal counseling, it is sitting with the officer having the conversation and dialogue what is going on. it could be referral to behavioral (inaudible)

>> comes to light and the supervisors reviewing them that that curtail the behavior. the tool is only as good as what is being used, and so i want to see is there a correlation between the early intervention system and evaluation process currently taking place with individual officers in the department. >> i will answer that by telling you my experience at the station. i will tell you officers are hyper-aware when they are on eis. even

though it is non disciplinary, it triggers a lot of work for the supervisors and it is known. you triggered this alert, let's have the conversation. i seldom see officers on eis consecutively. it is talked about in the station level. meaning officers know that they have-they hit so many triggers. they realize. it is something that is talked about. it is something that sergeants talk to the officers about. you know, you will trigger the alert even though it is not disciplinary they are hyper-aware. that is why i said earlier, when a alert is triggered it is seldom a surprise. they know about the system, it is in play a long time. it is really

part of the culture and it is something that not top of mind but they know. >> thank you. commissioner benedicto. >> thank you president elias. i'm curious, on slide 12 you mentioned the work with (inaudible) next phase of production release. can you provide a summary of what improvements-there are efficiency improvements but in terms of other improvements the department hopes to see on the eis system once the new collaboration is rolled out? >> yeah. so, i think we have a good system. from my conversation with

benchmark they will bring more science into the threshold system. they've apparently done studies and have proprietary information but what they've kind of shared with me is that based on the surveillance that they have true indicators-preindicator s-they can identify with more certainty potential members that have potential-that could have potential issues moving forward. what i am told is that now we have a system that is a threshold system, but they have also a threshold system backed by analytics and more based on science. they are saying there are

triggers and i need to have further conversations with them about what those are, but from their research they are confident that they'll identify more officers and have less false positives. in theory in our system, there could be false positives so based on the thresholds we are never in danger of going down the path of potential discipline. they are counting that as improvement over what we have currently. and then, we are going in there with a lot of faith. want to be based on system we already have, but backed by their research and science for

improvement. i'm optimistic. >> thank you, that's all. >> thank you. commissioner yee. >> thank you very much. commander, i guess with the eis-2 to alert the department for officers that are approaching i guess the need for counseling, i'm just curious whether-because do you use it to alert the training for the-to maybe i guess for the department to focus on? like, maybe there is a hundred officers that are missing this point and there's trigger points that the

officers are doing this and it is not correct and they can go back and look at or you reviewed the mountain of triggers that happen and go back to maybe to the team and see whether there's a need for additional training, or to probably change policies? that will be my question. most of the questions have been answered already. >> definitely i would say training is a big part of eis in that it will identify deficiencies in officers or training deficiency. i'll go back to the same example. multiple use of force trigger eis alert, the

sergeant can see a pattern of the officer not just using this-this isn't a real example, but the conversation might be that (inaudible) why are you going hands on? that can identify whether the officer feels that there physical control holds are or verbal persituation isn't good enough. they revert to force physical force too quickly. that is something that can be referred to the academy for that particular officer so they can get additional training and address that issue specifically for them. or it could be something as simple as identifying a approve course that has to do with what might be identified as a issue for that officers

and sending them to that course. i do think eis is tied into training and that it is one of the solutions to the issue that eis brings forward. >> i guess maybe changes in policies--the members have to keep track of them. these trigger points, and they do pop up, is that maybe the need to i guess to reinforce it on a annual-i know you do on a annual basis, or maybe on a quarterly basis if they are still missing a point. they continue to be on that-i guess on the thresholds where they trigger alerts. at what point

do you say, you need to sit down and then i guess issue a report and i guess call them in as they call it? like, is it repeat i guess for the members to come up on the -i guess on the -on the alerts. i guess once they are done they are out or do they come back in and for the ones that are repeatedly coming back in, are they document and move forward or supervising? >> i'll go back to what i had-reinforce what i said. even one eis alert-it is not a

warning per se because it is to intervene and improve, but i do think the officers do see it as a warning like i'm on this alert . they are very conscious of that and move forward with that in mind. as far as-i think the next 2 quarters of eis the reports will be very interesting because of 501 and we will have discussions whether we need to recalibrate thresholds based on new policy. to your second point about policy and eis, they are connected and we will see that in the next couple quarters, because the numbers will change drastically and it is discussion we will have to have about where we want it go and the direction we want

to go as far as what the thresholds will be and things are involved. >> my question is, if refer to training and they have to go back, could it be the amount of time spent on the training making sure they are thoroughly trained on the new policies? i guess (inaudible) to get them out versus to get it correct, i think that is something we probably like to look at. i'll end my questions here. thank you very much commander. >> thank you. commissioner byrne. >> thank you. as you indicated there is a form al counseling, what exactly is formal

counseling with these officers ? >> for us, informal counseling isn't documented, it is (inaudible) it is documented. so the supervisor will generate a memorandum regarding the reason for the counseling, and- >> what is it? what is formal counseling? >> well, it is when a supervisor identifies a issue with the officer, it is documented, the conversation will be documented and whatever improvement plan is talked about for that particular officer is documented also. sorry, go ahead. >> what is the improvement plan consist of? >> ool i'll use a example, excessive use of sick time it will be addressed and

documented in a memo. the exprecitations would be laid out for the officer and because it is documented it will be placed in their performance improvement binder or tip binder with follow-up and the officer is expecting to follow the plan. there is a timeframe set out, so the abuse of sick time example, the officer might be monitored for 3 months minimum. the supervisor will sit with the officer in the three months to review what happens since that formal counseling session. >> are they ever referred for psychological counseling? >> i think that is always a component of performance improvement is i think we have a beat of robust behavior science unit and referrals are regular made to that unit. after the referral is

made, the convarsations are confidential so we may or may not get feedback from that, but i say the vast majority of times where that is appropriate that or that is something that needs to be explore td d it is a avenue the supervisor will take. >> i know i'm off topic but will finish. are officers recommended-i'm referring to a recent incident. are officers recommended to go to psychological counseling? >> well, we have gone as far as-- >> sorry-- >> well known. >> (inaudible) i know the chief had the hand before you started speaking, so-- >> thank you. just wanted to jump in to answer the question.

formal referrals and psychological services, as the policy stands roget right now it isn't mandated, it is recommended and voluntary. that is how the policy stands right now. >> so there is no mandatory recommendation for psychological counseling? there are incidents obviously where i refer to a recent incident where it would have been nice or (inaudible) maybe psychological counseling would have helped. i know i'm off but talking about the early intervention thing and you dont want to see a officer hurting themselves or hurting others in that sense and just wondering if this early intervention system is there any

way of encouraging officers to seek psychological help so that these bad outcomes are avoided? >> encouragement does happen. it is voluntarily whether the officer or employee follows through. often times they do, but that is the discussion that is had about the ability to direct in certain cases. there are (inaudible) that require a fitness for duty, then we can mandate the psychological evaluation as a part of the fitness for duty. the way the policy is right now as we sit here today, that's the avenue to mandate services. >> thank you. >> thank you, sir. sorry to interrupt. >> that was where i was going. thank you commander. >> we actually have a

app called (inaudible) that all officers have on the department cell phones and they have immediate access. not immediate, but they can--it is voluntarily, but they have services at their fingertips. >> my point being, some of the indicators may refer to discipline but also reflect a psychological thing going on in their lives and they benefit from some sort of counseling. that was my point. thank you. >> thank you commissioner. >> thank you. okay, seeing no other comments, thank you commander, thank you chief. can you go to public comment, please? >> thank you, commissioners . >> at this time the public is welcome to make public comment regarding line 5, early intervention system. if you like to make public

comment please press star 3 now. vice president elias, there is no public comment. >> thank you, next item please. >> item 6, discussion regarding pengding department general order. discussion for request of dpa. >> great. who-is it mr. kaywood presenting? >> yes. >> thank you. >> janelle kaywood the director of policy at the department of police accountability. i'm here to report on the problem of languishing department general order or dgo and open and under revision at sfpd. cannot be overstated policy is critical, the framework for officers it guides their decisions and actions and helps them understand what is expected of them. sfpd has

long history failing to update it general orders in a timely manner. this isn't a problem created over night, ing the 2016 assessment the u.s. department of justice said and quote, we are concerned sfpd is not directing preoperative focus developing improved policies. general orders remain open without significant identified progress. this lead to finding 7 the u.s. department of justice fountd the process to update general orders is overly protracted and did not allow to respand in a timely manner to policing issues. orders were from the 1990 and did not reflect current policing practice. here we are 6 years later and the problem continues to this day. early 2020 asked dpa to expedite recommendations on 54

general orders the department would update in short order to address the department of justice recommendations. it was a lot of work and despite our small policy staff of 2 we rolled up our sleeves and provided a ton of thoughtful well researched recommendation to the department in both 2020 and 2021. sadly this turned out to be a hurry up and wait situation. many of the general orders are stillpeneding two years later, so we made a list and we identified and provided to the commission 26 general orders under revision that languished for unreasonable period oof time and many are basing essential policies that should have been prioritized. for example general order 1.03, something as basic as duties of patrol officer. submitted our recommendition may 19,

2020, 785 days ago. this dgo is still pending and hasn't been concluded. another example is general order 1.04, the duty of sergeants. it is difficult to conceive a more essential general order. dpa submitted recommendation may 20, 2020, 784 days ago. this dgo is still pending. of particular concern is general order 3.13, the sealed training program. this is a policy that guides sworn members who work with a new recruit. we submitted recommendations april 8, 2020, 826 days ago. dpa worked with it department subject matter expert who is excellent and developed together a good working draft of the policy. a year ago it wnt into a black hole and still pepding today. another example is 5.07 rights of on-lookers. this is critical policy to

keep updated. dpa submitted the rond of recommendation may 18, 2020, 786 days ago and the list goes on. the significant delays on updating so many general orders is unacceptable and call into question sfpd is in substantial compliance with the u.s. department of justice recommendation 70.1 and 70.2 direct sfpd to create a sufficient process for updating general orders. one barrier to getting the general orders completed is the written directive use advice officer drafting general orders not to speak to policy team of 2 me and high colleague germane jones. when acts as a intermediary between dpa and subject matter experts work grinds to halt and left in the dark. on the few occasions

where dpa worked with sworn officers writing the policy the general order development is much improved. while the enactment of 3.1, 3.01 on calendar will hopefully improve matters in it sets deadlines it isn't a panacea. there has to be greater will within thdepapartment to fiend a different way and we are asking for the commission to help. specifically dpa asking the commission monitor the status of the general order to insure the department prioritize policy for the benefit of both is sworn members and community once and for all. thank you. >> thank you mrs. kaywood. chief i like to give you a opportunity to respond. i know i had reached outto you and staff asking for a update on the list of dgo, dpa provided and received a update

which i didn't--dont think it answered all the questions why some of these things are languishing for 2 years. some issues is with the subject matter expert, and my understanding is that the subject matter experts are different depending on the dgo, meaning doesn't have to go through one subject matter experts and i'm wondering why it is being or taking so long for the subject matter expert to advice on the dgo and get it back and get it back on track and get it going, because presumably if the subject matter expert, they are the expert and have expertise that we would need and guidance for them to review the policy and make corrections edits and or recommendation. so, maybe you can answer-that is couple questions, but maybe you can

answer-give you a opportunity to respond and are maybe answer questions and i think my fellow commissioners are probably going to have questions as well. i don't know if director henderson also has-- >> comments. >> right. >> chief, you are muted. >> thank you, sorry about that. thank you president elias. i will start by saying definitely we are (inaudible) mrs. kaywood, we recognize that we need to improve in this area and we recognize that quite some time ago but i want to put context ing the past 2 years so there is understanding what some of the challenges were and continue to be with dgo development. june 2020, we really reshaped our entire cri

collaborative form initiative focus and we basically went to a all hands approach to meet the deadline of getting 90 percent we got to in terms of the implementation but what that entailed and how that impacted the dgo revision schedule, it was a lot of these things were given to us in 2020 around the same time. we reassigned 5 commanders, reassigned patrol officer, reassigned sergeants to strategic management to work on getting the recommendations done. with the priority became commission director dgo which fl were some the commission directed and the dgo that were tied to cri recommendations. that was our focus. from june of 2020 until march of 2022 is when that california

doj deadline. that was the focus. with that, i want to emphasize, there were dgo completed and dgo, dpa pointed that is not completed. doesn't mean work isn't done. how the dgo process works with the subject matter experts. the way the policies are written for many years is the policies are given to subject matter experts members in the department with expertise in that particular subject. these often times are people working with assignments, field assignments, investigative assignments, these are people who have full time job and assigned the drafting and subject matter expertise, the

policy while they do their full time job. that is extremely problematic. that is model the department we have been doing for years. we recognize some time ago, couple years ago we needed to change the model, because couple things (inaudible) subject matter experts depending on the assignment is very difficult for them to develop the time to work on dgo and when we were doing dgo at it pace we were doing for many years, we got by with that. this schedule is the most aggressive dgo revision schedule the department ever had and that process will no longer work. we recognize that and with that we had a series of meetings with people that write the policies including subject matter experts, command staff members, sworn and professional staff to really vet through how we can change the situation and what we came up with

was a revised structure that we are in process of putting into place right now and what that structure looks like is this-we cant rely on subject matter experts working field assignments to write policy. we need to rely on the expertise but the model we are about it go to we will have full time people devoted to writing and drafting policies. not subject matter experts. that is extremely problematic for us. the other thing is, in early november, november 3 and sent a directive to (inaudible) we were having issues with managing the working group, so thankfully with this budget when it passes in a couple weeks we just had first reading this week, we did getfunded for 4 positions, 2 to facilitate community side of the input and work groups, and

2 professional staff or civilians to write policy and that will help us out tremendously. not everything we asked for, but as soon as the budget is passed we plan to hire those positions. the written directive unit will go to the chief of staff of the department out of strategic management and the work groups go to public policy and governmental affairs to facilitate the work groups. we think that will be a tremendous value and get these policies done at a much quicker pace. not the panacea but this restructureing will address a lot of our wos. i have the status of all the policies on the dpa list. one other thing i will emphasize, the way we drafted our policiesfundmentally we would like to change and i

know commissioner elias you and i had a brief conversation about that some of this, but the bottom line is from the start now dpa is going to be involved in framing the policies. we hope the commission is also involved with framing the policies, so when that policy is handed to the executive sponsor responsibility for getting it done, there is direction to the policies. the way we have done it in the past some policy had direction from the commission, others didn't and we have a number of policies on this list when they got to the commission, they were not what the commission would like to see because the direction wasn't given on thefront end so we believe that is major change that help the process to prevent the back and forth that happens. the other thing is, looking at the policy holistically, some of the policies is language updates. simple. some of the policies needs to be totally

rewritening because have been (inaudible) a number of policies on the list are in that category. i can name them if you want me to. some of the policy-the one janelle mentioned, (inaudible) that is a total rewrite. (inaudible) it needs to be rewritten so it isn't just a change of few words here and there with the policy and we is a number policies like that that are no longer relevant with the department in 2022 that need to be totally rewritten. we also need to look at a policy to see if some need to be (inaudible) some things written in 1994 and before may not be relevant today. the last part of this is grouping these policies together, 9.01, three policies on this list that tie into 9.01, 9.01 is traffic enforcement policy the commission department and are dpa and public soon

will be working on (inaudible) all tie into the policy so it doesn't make sense to advance policies when the master policy of 9.01 is about to be changeed. wept to do the policies with thought so we dont put the cart before the horse. change the policy and have to change the policy. we are looking at this with a different lens then in the past. also, manuals. 3.01 requires a whole different process for department manuals. there are policies on this list, for instance the fto policy, there is a fto manual, doesn't make sense to revise the policy without touching the manual. both of those are being done. it takes a lot more work to revise the manual and we dont have a good picture what that looks like because we

have never dung done it before. some we have to see what the workload will be. i think it is the right direction the commission has given how we address the manuals and marry with policy at the same time. a good example is 5.01 was revised we didn't revise the (inaudible) we can do better then that, so this is a significantly heavier work load then we had in the past. we have crafted a plan to address these issues, it address some of what the problems have been but the biggest problem will i think (inaudible) smb has 2 sworn people in supervision and strategic management bureau doing the work of 4. we haven't had a captain since captain bailey retired in 2020 and haven't had lieutenant so have two people doing the work of 4, responsible for

the policy and (inaudible) that is a pretty heavy lift, so what i am saying is, with this restructure, we believe that many of these issues will be addressed. we believe the civilianization we hope to get approved in the final budget goes through and we have already gotten to this step of the budget will help us lift some of the sworn needs that the policy writing and we can no longer operate with 3 people in that unitt. we have 3 people. two sworn, one professional staff. it is that way a number of years rchlt that will not get it done. we have to restructure to meet the work load so that majority of what is going on. happy to answer questions about specific policies but i wanted to give the context. >> i have a lot of questions but i will turn it over to director henderson and like to give mrs. kaywood a

opportunity to respond. i dont know director if you want mrs. kaywood to go first, but i think that-- >> i can go first just to respond to some of the things that the chief has raised. thank you so much. i wanted just to give context. from the perspective of dpa. the point of irk withing with dpa is trying to professionalize that process. the policy staff has to be one of the cornerstones of the things that are important. part of the reason we raised the issue in the past and part of the reason we asked for this to be agendized is because it is so important and as part of the process that we have been going through in evaluating our own practices.

we are constantly held accountable from not just the work we do but the public as well and when i say the public i dont just mean the folks that watch police commissioner, i mean the partners that care about reform and accountability that work regularly with us addressing not just our evidence based recommendations to try and address problems that we identify with the dist plin, but also the input we get from important organizations like the bar association, like the elected officials here in san francisco, the public defender office, it district attorney office, the aclu all giving input and challenging dpa about recommendations that have been made that have not been implemented. the process is just not working efficiently at a level that has to be addressed i think in a very public way. i know that dgo can be delayed for valid

reasonings but leaving this volume and all most every dgo languishing years at a time i believe calls demand for public scrutiny and something to be done differently. we have given examples. i dont want to make a long speech here, but-i think janelle alluded to dgo3.13, that is the field training program and just want to use it as a example to talk about why the process has to change beyond even some of the things that the chief has raised and by the way that was one of the recommendations submitted on april 8, 2020, that in case anyone is counting that is 826 days ago, because it goes beyond the changes that are needed in terms of staffing because for this one in particular and many others it was the staff itself that was a problem with sfpd and internal

processes of evaluating the work from dpa that got in the way of moving forward. this one dgo 3.13 was a perfect example because it was very clear eesken when we made the recommendations and guidelines to confer that we recognize that there was a major hole in dgo 3.13, specifically with how could disqualifying a member from participating in field training program when they had mandatory disqualifications that were not effective, was not drilled down upon and when we raised the issue that needed to be addressed and fixed, what we were told is we couldn't do anything until meet and confer took place and when meet and confer took place when we had the recommendation to address the hole they said the hole hasn't been created, we have to wait till it is

created and when it was we rerecommended the solution and nothing happened and here is what that means--basically the discipline isn't going to take place. just using as a example to show it goes beyond just having staff. particular concern to me is the department itself came to dpa and asked us to scramble and asked us to do the work. again, with two people that also carry a case load and have other responsibilities as well, but again, policy is a priority and it has to be reflective as priority and addressed and worked on as priority with the 56 policies that we did do and submit and again they fell into the same black hole. we get presentation of graphs and chart s outlining the process that doesn't speak to the institutionalized changes that need to take place

publicly and transparently to address how policy needs to take place and resolved in the process, so i understand that respectfully as you indicated chief we recognize that we need to change the model years ago, here is yearscurrent and still hasn't happen and i understand and know the budget always has a role to play in it, but i would say that beyond just the staff the practice themselves need to shift drastically in order for us to resolve these things more efficiently and i would say and didn't hear you speak to this specifically, but there are some internal processes that are in the way of having this operate more efficiently and so what i am asking for is for this to be regularly scheduled with the commission so we can hear and see what is actually being done

and this could take form in a place of a report from the chief, but i would ask that this be monitored specifically by someone or entirety of the commission and that we have a way to prioritize the request and the policies that have been submitted. again, part of my concern is even with very important request that have been made, very important policies submitted, there are pockets of disciplines not occurring because policies have not been changed and caept hold the officers accountable. more then 2/3 of law enforcement agencies don't have things like use of force policy updated. san francisco is on the forefront and can be on the forefront being a model for policy type discussion that actually make a difference, that actually speak to

race disparities institutionalized in law enforcement and models other departments can use and they will if we are able to get out of our own way and do this work so i do think it is really important. i understand and appreciate that now there is a revised structure and i'm happy to continue to work with the department but could no longer allow this process to be as inefficient and ineffective as it was for things that are so important and speak to the core of what we are trying to do through the commission and the work dpa is committed to doing. i didn't mean to make speech but wanted to respand and articulate the significance and why i think this is so important and think we need to move in a different way, not the least of which is because of what the doj recommended but because of what the community is demanding and what all are here for. >> thank you. we

welcome the scuteany. dont mind at all. the right thing to do. i want to reemphasize, going back to staffing because what i say until this changes is when you have 2 people doing the job of 4, and 2 people doing the job of 7 and we pull sworn out of the field to back-fill,ioahave to have people to do the work and we are in very dier (inaudible) you pull admin units to work special events and specialized back-fill patrol so that is a part of the equation i don't want to be unheard because it does impact the ability and very real as we all know and we are going to-the structure will help. we are adding civilian professional staff to this process. they are not

getting pulled out of the field to work (inaudible) or pride or whatever special event that is the event of the day, so i do think that will help at least to this part of the dilemma. i want to emphasize that because that is a real issue for us right now. >> i understand. i also would point out my department is agency is 1/10 your size which is why we committed our priorities and my personnel to do the foundational work to provide input as requested from your agency to give you the starting point or outlines to be edited. my concern is when that work is done it languishes and goes away. i am happy to outline a broader and easier priority in terms of staffing, but i don't want to run your agency and i don'ts want to control your personnel anymore then you want to control mine as well, but at some point it is reflection of

priorities and these are equally as important as your staffing with patrol and the decisions you make. i know always controlled by budget as are all the agencies, i just don't want this to be lost as part of the conversation and that at this pont i feel it drifted. if not lost it drifted which prompted the need to have this conversation and to reprioritize what needs to get done in terms of next steps. that's it. >> thank you director henderson. mrs. kaywood. >> thank you. ia gree with the chief the department relies too heavily on sworn members. with regard to the staffing issues these are recent in the last year or 2 based on the officers notp wanting to get covid vaccines. the general order problem has gone on decades so i think the issue is distraction. i understand it

takes a minute to rewrite policy, but it doesn't take 2 years, it just doesn't. dpa regularly writes 20page reports in a week and so i just dont accept that is the reason. i think it is a priority issue and hope we can find a different way forward in the future. i also want to point out my colleagues are available to help the department write policy. we have been told they don't want dph to write policy and (inaudible) they don't want the red lines. if they were to accept our help i think things would move along quicker. there is very little policy done (inaudible) i mean written directives. dpa worked with the chief office on the search warrant policy and (inaudible) outside of the written

directives process, but that work has grinded to a halt. i think we need to be honest about that and shine a lot on what is actually happening. thank you. >> commissioner carter-oberstone. >> thank you mrs. kaywood for the presentation. thank you chief and director henderson for the follow-up information. chief, happy to hear about the forthcoming changes with additional civilian staff dedicated to this. i think that will be a really good development so that is great. i wanted to better understand what is driving (inaudible) you talked about (inaudible) talked about smb being having 2 out of 4 employees. can you briefly discuss written

directives role in the process and how many employees are in written directives? >> thank you commissioner. written directives has 3 employees that work the unit. 2 sworn sergeant officer and professional staff. three work written directives. the supervision and management outside of the sergeant that works written directives, in regular time there is a sergeant a lieutenant and captain. the captain is vacant so the lieutenant is active captain, the lieutenant is vacant so the sergeant is acting tenant so they are doing their regular job and they are management of the oversight of written directives. what i was alluding to is those

same people the acting lieutenant and captain oversee the cri work so they are doing both. the way written directives is structured and the way it is structured for many years, the framing-once the policies are written by the subject matter experts which is not a person necessarily assigned to the written directive unit, that policy goes to written directives and they do the formatting but they are not drafting the policy. the new structure when we hire these folks, the drafting will be done in-house and that is what director henderson i believe was saying about professionalizing the drafting of the policy. consistency brings cantnuity and just a better way to do policy writing. we never are structured like that at this time. >> great. thank you, that is

very helpful and agree the professionalization will be a welcomeed change. can i ask you about 3.13, because mrs. kaywood and director henderson raised it? mrs. kaywood said this is a one where we are able to meet with the sme and exchange ideas and come to agreement but pending since april 2020. what is the hold up of that- >> (inaudible) part of what needs to happen with this particular policy, there is a manual at the department that needs to be revised as well. the policy in the manual has to be done concurrently. that just makes sense.

there is much to be done. the policy-- (inaudible) review the policy and give a recommendation as to whether or not changes need to be made. prior to the policy being approved by the chief of police and going to the commission or approve to be forwarded to the commission for approval. this policy (inaudible) a lot of work, so it was sent back and it came back again, still needed revision and sent back. also, it had to be married with the field training manual

and first go-round was not a part of the calculus with marrying the policy with the training manual. we have to do these at the same time because they interact and need to be consistent and field training manual has not been updated in many years so makes sense to do it at the same time, which requires more work. so, that has been worked on. there is movement on it, it still is not completed yet, but that is where we are with 3.13. >> i will say with that example, we had done the work and provided that to the department to try and fix and address those problems and the real issue at the core of this is that not having those amendments and modifications effectively eliminate the discipline as discretionary factor, so now it doesn't say who has the discretion to disqualify a member for field training programs and it is a glaring hole and glaring

omission that doesn't need to be fixed. i just use it as a example because i think it is appropriate examples we have some of the fixes we are willing and have done and offered work which is why i said internal practices have to be modified in addition to the staffing which i know and understand are real as well. it is a big sweeping reform i pleev believe that is necessary. >> thank you. chief i want to give a chance to respand mrs. kaywood said. mrs. kaywood said a department as a matter of course asked dpa not to participate in the drafting process just that is a department accept the recommendation but it doesn't dpa edit the red lines or drafting in the first instance, is that correct? >> i don't fully agree

with that. it was the department that actually recommended dpa be part of the framing of the policies. that is what 3.01 will give us when this is passed and the department recommended dpa be in the concurance meeting so they have a voice there and the department recommend said or concured with i think dpa recommendation after all that when the policy (inaudible) that it dpa has a tonight to present its point of view to the chief of police. in the policy there is much more cooperation throughout the policy development process with dpa. in terms of this year, from october to really up until just recently the working

groups as i said a minute ago were halted and the policy development did slow down because of many reasons. january and february was chaotic. covid caused significant disruptions in the department. reassignment, people resigned and people released, major disruption, so those things did impact our ability to move some of this work forward and we are still not out of that but we have a plan to come out of that but i disagree with that partially. there is a willingness to cooperate and work with dpa and things are slow this year but there are factors that aren't of the norm this year with just where we are with staffing and covid has exacerbated that with the mandates and the like, so it made our situation worse. >> i appreciate that. the department does cooperate with

dpa, some of which you enumerated but i was asking a specific way mrs. kaywood raised, which is does the department as a matter of course tell dpa it does not want help drafting policy in the first instance? the reason i want to give you a chance to respond is because it departments main explanation for the delay in the process is like we just dont have enough headcount to do the way we want to. you had another agency offering to help and jump in and an agency that has a lot of expertise and no-how, i want to know if what she is accurate. if dpa offered on any of the dgo to take a crack at drafting in the first instance, is the department welcoming or is the department saying they don't want the help? >> i dont agree with that, because there is a policy dpa drafted and that is

patrol and probation we are working on now. ideally we like to draft the policy and incorporate dpa into the process. that is the way we like to do it, but dpa has offered policies and parole and probation is one of them and got looped into 9.01 traffic enforcement and separated it again. i dont agree with that. no. >> okay. i just wanted to give you a chance to respand. chief, i appreciate you said you welcome scrutiny, i appreciate that. most heads of departments dont have to sit through a oversight meeting every week and get asked hard questions so i appreciate that. i say that because i'm really concerned about this agenda item. you said-i agree the head count issue is real, no denying that, but you

got two people at (inaudible) three people written directives and you got one floating sme for each of these ego. mean while nob has two people that run through 26, 27 and these are people that have other responsibilities outside of this so it is very hard to accept that head count alone can explain this. i heard you say certain things are paused because citing delay. how can delaying revision of a manual be delay for (inaudible) citing delay as justification for other delay i just dont think that is compelling, and i will say i'm worryed from a democracy standpoint.

our job on the commission is to issue regulations with the force of law, and when the regulated entities can grind to a halt citing business, that calls into question the system of democracy we have here as it relates to passing laws that regulate the department. i'm really concerned about this. i think this is something you should present during the chief report, maybe not every week but regular basis because this is something there should be movement week to week. the last thing i will say, this isn't a question, but a big part of the fault lies with this commission. we should be more vigilant about this. i appreciate dpa putting this on the agenda but we need to do our part in the commission staying on top of this and

demanded more accountability. thank you chief for answering our questions and i'll turn it over to my colleagues. >> commissioner benedicto. >> thank you president elias. i echo everything said about the concerns here. i do appreciate that there are plan s to improve it, but i also want to echo what mrs. kaywood said, this isn't new and something that that was created in as a result of the pandemic. mrs. kaywood (inaudible) 2016. that was interim chief and chief ago this was a problem. i will read a exert from (inaudible) which is that many dgo do not appear to be updated on regular schedules. 2/3 not updated stins the

1990. do you know the status now? i suspect it is lower but not fear not that much lower of how many issue dates are in the 1990? >> i dont have a exact count but know there is a lot of them. >> would you think more then half? >> i'm not sure. i wouldn't want to say. i can check. >> we can get to that number as well, commissioner. >> thank you. and echo what commissioner carter-oberstone said that it is also incumbent on the commission to provide greater scrutiny and hope we will do that. ideally including as part of the chief report will be very informative to the commission. >> if i can just--one comment to your comments and commissioner-i want to reemphasize, we have gotten dgo to the commission improved. through the commission, so

these 26 are outside of those that have already been done as a part of the dgo revision process, so maybe i dident say it or didn't hear it, but it isn't like no work is getting done with this unit. i just want to make sure i reemphasize that, we have gotten dgo through and approved and understand there needs to be improvement and think there will be improvement. certain there will be improvement. >> thank you, chief. >> thank you director henderson, mrs. kaywood, chief. i know that this issue of getting dgo before the commission and sort of trying to streamline the process was something that was raised or has been a issue several years and think commissioner taylor and also phil willhouse and sergeant killshaws

tried to revamp 301 to streamline the process or a portion of it and we finally did 301 to really streamline the process to make sure this is to try to cut down on red tape and bure ocacy that seems to happen with the process getting dgo to the commission to pass. happy to hear that written-you are going to remove portions of how this process works out of written directives and into a different unit so it can proceed at a more rapid pace and providing the staff to do this, so i think that would be very beneficial. one thing that maybe would be beneficial, you indicated it-some of these are simple and you can just pass them through and perhaps you can sit down with your staff and figure out which ones fall into that category so

we can start clearing those out first and get them out of the way and get those before the commission and then we can maybe start tackling the heavier more cumbersome ones that require more rewrites. i think that i'm hopeful 301 will help and staff you bring in will help the subject matter experts do what they are designed or what we want them to do, which is read the policy, not draft it, but read the policy, tell if it works or not because you are the expert, we rely on you, tell if it works and then say yes or no, make edits or revisions or work with dpa and the staff that is going to be provided by the department to get that information there so we can move this process along. because again, as a subject matter expert, to me i imagine there wouldn't be a

lot-it is easy for them to make revisions, add notes or give feedback on the policy. it isn't like they have to do research or start from scratch since they are experts we rely upon to make these changes. the other thing that i think-two things, one, i really am happy to hear you are committed to allow dpa to work with the department more closely rather then going through written directives because it seems that is where a large part of the bottleneck is and having them reach out directly to the subject matter experts and members in the department so they get the vital information from the department members because it seems to me that if dpa is writing policy or trying to give recommendation, one thing we would want them to do is contact members in the department who are experts or

have expertise and ask does this work or how does thes work or what can we do to make the policy better so i think you would want to educate dpa on the practice and expertise your members have so when they go in and write policies they are able to have that information and utilize that in doing so happy to hear you are committed to allow the practice to happen. the other thing is, i think that commissioner carter-oberstone is right, it is incumbent upon us to keep this moving and make sure it on track so think it is best practice to have you report on monthly basis to the status of the dgo and where we are moving forward on some of these and sort of giving progress reports. >> maybe a first step could be we start off with-there is inconsistency about we

have been informed the department does not want us to red line when we submit general orders and if that is inconsistent we can clarify now to move the needle and start prioritize how we address the inefficiency of creating work on the back-end. >> i can answer that director henderson. yes, that is what we wnt through that seemed to be more efficient was the recommendations grid and the whole purpose of that was to track everything through the grid and ultimately going to be the commission's decision of which way to go if there is disagreement. to me that was a lot more efficient as far as tracking the recommendations and training. (inaudible) and i think the red line

got into issues because of this-it is very cumbersome. that is what we wnt through about a year ago and think that is pretty efficient with the recommendation grid. ultimately the grid is gibbon to the commission or has been and the commission can follow the track ing and recommendations and make the decision when there are disagreements so that is what we adopted and that (inaudible) prior to janelle's time on dpa but that was input from some of your team. >> i think it may make sense chief to agendize this to have you present on the-how the new structure of the process is going to be and where it is housed because it is no longer under executive director muguy, it is going to a different unit is my understanding so i think it would be helpful for all of us and the public to see where it is housed and what staff you are putting there to dedicate to get these things

moving along and make it more efficient and better process. >> yes, definitely happy to do that. >> could i add one thing? >> uh-huh. >> i did receive a detailed e-mail from lieutenant (inaudible) he laid out a specific plan moving forward that looked good to me how to move a lot of dgo along. it was detailed just called for, i can share that with the commission if that's helpful. >> we can also present when we present the structure at the commission--i was a part of the conversation janelle so i have the plan and step further to commissioner elias, a comment but it also lays out a schedule for what we will complete by the end of the year in terms of dgo.

>> what i will do chief is agendize in september if you can give a list of the ones that are simple that could be done right away and get passed pretty quickly and maybe provide a update and handful of dgo simple to rewrite and get moving and we can move forward from there i think or at least have that as a starting point. >> thank you. >> great. thank you. sergeant can we go to public comment? >> member s like to make public comment regarding item 6, please press star 3 now. good evening caller, you have two minutes. >> hello. good evening. david (inaudible) and sorry i'm just joining in the meeting a little bit late. i think it is my understanding you are talking about policies and

procedures. i spoke with lieutenant sanders regarding asking if the san francisco police department has a policy and procedure regarding when an investigator is found guilty of presenting and manufacturing perjured testimony such as the case with my mother. as of last week he initially told me my case would be reopened and reassigned and then the following couple days he is telling me it is no longer assigned, but i brought to his attention that this is issue and he would not answer me if the san francisco police department had a policy or not regarding when this happens. thank you. >> thank you caller. that is the end of public

comment. >> thank you. next item please. >> line item, public comment on all matters pertaining to item 9, including public comment on 8 whether to hold item 9 in closed session. if you like to make public comment, please press star 3 now. there is no public comment. >> great. go to next item. >> line item 8. vote on whether to hold item 9 in closed session, san francisco administrate chb code section 67.10 action. >> motion and second, please. >> motion. >> second. >> thank you. sergeant. [roll call]

>> 6 yeses. that will take us into closed session. [closed session]

>> can you call the next item? >> line item 10. vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussion on item 9 held in closed session. >> motion and second, please. >> motion. >> i'll second. sarge ergeant. [roll call] >> you have 6 yeses. >> thank you. can we get public comment? >> members of the public that like to vote on line item 10, please press star 3 now. >> comment, not vote.

>> we have no comments or votes on item 10. >> awesome. next item. >> item laechblg, discussion and possible action to adopt revised department jen rg order 3.01 department written directives. >> this is come been before us several times and ask for adoption for 3.01. >> motion. >> second. >> >> do we need public comment? >> yes, we do actually. members of the public that like to make comment on line item press star 3 now. no public comment. [roll call]

>> you have 6 yeses. >> great. now we have the next item. >> line item 12 adjournment. >> great. thank you everyone. i hope you all have a great night. >> thank you, good night. [meeting adjourned]

>> we love our parks, but we love... >> and the community who is really the core of it all, came together and said what we need is a place for our teenager to play, not just play grounds for the kids and soccer fields but we need a skate park that will keep the kids home in the neighborhood so they can play where they live. >> the children in the neighborhood and it will be a major boone. and we have generations, the youth generations that will be able to use this park in different places. >> the best park in san francisco right here.

>> creating place where people can be active and lead, active, healthy life styles that are going to just stay with them for life. ♪♪

>> by the time the last show came, i was like whoa, whoa, whoa. i came in kicking and screaming and left out dancing. [♪♪♪] >> hello, friends. i'm the deputy superintendent of instruction at san francisco unified school district, but you can call me miss vickie. what you see over the next hour has been created and planned by our san francisco teachers for

our students. >> our premise came about for san francisco families that didn't have access to technology, and that's primarily children preschool to second grade. >> when we started doing this distance learning, everything was geared for third grade and up, and we work with the little once, and it's like how were they still processing the information? how were they supposed to keep learning? >> i thought about reaching the student who didn't have internet, who didn't have computers, and i wanted them to be able to see me on the t.v. and at least get some connection with my kids that way. >> thank you, friends. see you next time. >> hi, friend. >> today's tuesday, april 28,

2020. it's me, teacher sharon, and i'm back again. >> i got an e-mail saying that i had an opportunity to be on a show. i'm, like, what? >> i actually got an e-mail from the early education department, saying they were saying of doing a t.v. show, and i was selected to be one of the people on it, if i was interested. i was scared, nervous. i don't like public speaking and all the above. but it worked out. >> talk into a camera, waiting for a response, pretending that oh, yeah, i hear you, it's so very weird. i'm used to having a classroom with 17 students sitting in front of me, where they're all

moving around and having to have them, like, oh, sit down, oh, can you hear them? let's listen. >> hi guys. >> i kind of have stage flight when i'm on t.v. because i'm normally quiet? >> she's never quiet. >> no, i'm not quiet. >> my sister was, like, i saw you on t.v. my teacher was, i saw you on youtube. it was exciting, how the community started watching. >> it was a lot of fun. it also pushed me outside of my comfort zone, having to make my own visuals and lesson plans so quickly that ended up being a lot of fun. >> i want to end today with a

thank you. thank you for spending time with us. it was a great pleasure, and see you all in the fall. >> i'm so happy to see you today. today is the last day of the school year, yea! >> it really helped me in my teaching. i'm excited to go back teaching my kids, yeah. >> we received a lot of amazing feedback from kiddos, who have seen their own personal teacher on television. >> when we would watch as a family, my younger son, kai, especially during the filipino episodes, like, wow, like, i'm proud to be a filipino. >> being able to connect with someone they know on television has been really, really powerful for them. and as a mom, i can tell you that's so important.

the social confidence development of our early learners. [♪♪♪]