you can just use in vi -- vicki hennessey. >> we would want to submit a declaration from michael hennessey probably addressing different points. one would be the fact that many, many deputy sheriffs have suffered criminal convictions during his tenure and that was not -- does not seem to be official misconduct. that is one point i do not think the mayor intends to introduce. the retired sheriff may be able to offer other pieces of fact information that would help the commission in reaching its decision. we have not obtained one but we think we can obtain one from him. >> you indicate in your witness list that you expect him to testify about communications which i could see coming in. would you rather have michael hennessey and the acting sheriff if their testimony would be overlapping and michael hennessey will speak to statements made by mr. mirkarimi? >> i think given the burden of preparing a declaration, i feel is more appropriate to place them on someone who was working so we would use the key heresy -- hennessey. >> if we could keep the silence. it is a long night. the views on vicki

>> about michael hennessey. we are trying to work up a scheduling issue. chairperson hur: while we are on it, that is on my list. what is his status? >> as i discussed on a conference call, the sheriff and the seat is more than willing to submit to cross-examination remotely. however, he will not appear in person, primarily because he has a family member who is severely disabled, for which he is responsible, and he is currently living 3.5 hours away. we have offered repeatedly to make him available for remote testimony. chairperson hur: is he available june 19? what is your view on this? >> i do not know the availability of care givers for this issue. to me, experts are a little different than regular witnesses. the party hires them and retains them. one of the jobs of an expert is to show up. for me, i do not think it is right or fair for him not to show up. i think it is very difficult to cross-examine an expert, where you are going to be using a lot of exhibits, while they are on television. from our standpoint, we would really like to see him here. cha

hennessey is talking about how he would be viewed. i don't see how that is relevant here either. i would sustain the objection to the second full paragraph of page two. niss dissenting views from the commission? that objection will be sustained. the third objection to the third full paragraph. here he's an expert. i think he's qualified to testify about this. it is a little general. i certainly understand the objection, but this one i would overrule. we have testimony from the hennessey and we will have chief lansdowne as well. i would permit this. i would overrule the objection.

hennessey. i think the last few people are people who i could see potentially coming in by declaration if they must testify. here is how i would like to proceed with this. i welcome the views of my fellow commissioners on first, whether there are folks i have mentioned who we think there is no need to hear testimony from. secondly, if there are people who why it -- who i committed to and i would like -- who i omitted. when the parties address this, i would like to hear from any witness you think we need testimony and who is not on the list that we discussed, i want to know what charge that testimony would relate to. let me open it up to my fellow commissioners. anybody on the list who you think is -- we do not need to hear testimony from or it is an open question that we should reserve until later. commissioner renne: when you went through this list and said the witnesses who you thought would possibly -- we possibly should receive testimony, were you referring to live testimony or by declaratio

merton and -- sheriff hennessey. we would like to get that testimony before the commission. we do not want to lose the opportunity to get chief still's testimony. to talk about how a three-year term of probation will affect the share of's ability to perform his duties and how it might create a conflict for him. chairperson hur: i appreciate your concern. with respect to witnesses appearing by a declaration and we should address that but i want to focus on live witnesses right now. you were saying that the people you think we need to see live r. michael hennessey, the mayor, ms. lopez, mr. merton, and ms. williams. during have that correct? >> i do not think the -- we need to hear from a share tennessee. >> i thought you did. >> i was filling out the list. he probably would not be on the list. we do have our subject matter experts. chairperson hur: what is ms. williams going to offer to us that is relevant to any of the charges? >> we expect ms. madison's credibility to be attacked. ileana lopez told a consistent story. the fact that ms. williams is telling both of these witn

i was inheriting a department that had been well-led by my predecessor, sheriff mike hennessey, who had been the longest-serving elected in the history and county of san francisco, 32 years. there had not been an open election for a share of, so there was a great period of transition. part of that transition was my making staff changes and promotions of both deputy sheriffs and civilian staff. making constant rounds to all of our properties, both within san francisco and in san mateo county. being able to change policies so that i would have a more inclusive administration of lower ranks that had been previously included in budgetary decisions and policy-making decisions. preparing the sheriff's department for what was now becoming the first full year of state prisoners realignment, as propelled by assembly bill 109, and had begun a number of projects that would really elevate our ability of having in custody and post-custody rehabilitation programs, building on the success of the mike hennessey administration in ways that had never been experienced before in san francisco. for example,

. >> had michael hennessey already vacated the office you were going to move into? i mean the physical office. >> no. chairperson hur: counsel, if this is a good breaking point, we are at about 9:00. >> it is as good as any. chairperson hur: sheriff, i caution you that you are still under oath. we ask that you not discuss your testimony overnight, because you are still on the stand. >> i understand. thank you very much. chairperson hur: the witness is excused until tomorrow. counsel, if we could do a couple housekeeping things? typically, we would expect the exhibits that you planned to use with the witness in advance. i mean, you could pass them every time, but it probably disrupts your examination more than necessary. >> we brought them last week, but we did not think they were needed. we will bring them tomorrow morning. can you bring them tomorrow? >> we should be able to do that, yes. >> how much more time do you think you have? we have to figure out the schedule for the remaining witness tomorrow. >> how long do you think we have been going so far? >> almost a

think that he has more expertise about what it takes to be the sheriff of san francisco then michael hennessey >> objection, relevance. improper testimony by counsel. this is beyond the scope of both the mayor's declaration as well as the disclosure of what they were going to ask mr. lee about in their disclosure of witnesses. >> i am not sure exactly the basis of the objection. >> that was beyond the scope. >> beyond the scope, i am inclined to overrule beyond the scope. the sheriff could call the mayor into taking -- to not require the mayor to appear twice. i think we should allow it. i think the mayor brought it up in one of his answers. i will overrule the objection. >> could i ask if we did have the question read back? >> would you like to ask it again? >> do you think that he has more expertise about what it takes to be the sheriff of san francisco than the ex-sheriff mike tennessee? -- tennessee. >> i think they have equal weight. >> why is that? >> because they both have extensive background in law enforcement. >> he has never held elective office, correct? >> objection, foundation. >

what is stated in chief lansdowne's declaration is our position finance sheriff hennessey wants to answer that as their expert, he can answer that and be subject to cross on that as well. so we're not trying to hide the ball here. we're just trying to provide an effective charging document that gives sufficient notice. >> ok. we actually ended up jumping, i think, if commissioner liu pointed out to 3-b2. originally has to do with paragraph 45 not 46. given we just discussed 46, i think we should address this objection. because my -- my view with respect to 46 are different than 45. so what is issue in 45 are lines 13 through 15. is that right?s0 i'm sorry -- >> 3 through 15. >> i think given the concern that's have been expressed by my fellow commissioners, perhaps we should permit the statements starting on line 9 with but and ending with in 14 -- >> just for the commission's information, we stipulated to an objection beginning on line 15. >> right. stipulated 15 to 28 is out. >> yes, beginning with ross has repeatedly. >> right. i would strike the remainder except for the portion that i

have some date certain by which we will now -- know whether or not sure if tennessee -- sheriff hennessey will be here on the 18th. chairperson hur: it sounds like he is not appearing. >> is that the commitment? >> if he changes his mind, i will let everyone here on short order. -- hear on short order. chairperson hur: if we did not hear from you on july 10, we should exclude him. >> thank you. chairperson hur: after the 19th, i presume you will want some time to get us, by citation, the evidence that supports whatever facts are actively in dispute. i will provide the parties with an opportunity to brief whatever legal issues they think need to be briefed. you do not have to submit them, but i think we should give you a chance to do it, if you feel like. how much time with you need to accomplish those two tasks specs -- tasks? facts, supporting evidence, and the brief on the legal issues. >> i am sorry. one thing that goes into this is in terms of the rebuttal witnesses. are you going to ask us to proceed by declaration again? are we bringing people in for live testimony? one is faster th

my name is leslie hennessey. thank you for the public comment. i am a voter in the south beach arena and am now the new president of the tenants' association. we are up to 260 members of the seven people in the harbor. we just heard about this, literally, 30 days to 45 days ago. of course, we have a lot of problems and i guess one of the biggest things that we do not have right now is the time to go through, record them, and have larry bring it up to me now. basically, the california department of boating, they have a certain number of millions done by san francisco redevelopment. those funds have never been finished or finalized. the documents do state that if redevelopment does stand, there has to be a notification. we do not even know if that has been done. we have major questions about unlawful transfer of the harbor to anyone. we also have problems with the timing, as you have heard. most specifically, rates. we just looked at the harbor ourselves and we saw a tremendous amount of low hanging fruit that is not being used by the harbor. peopl

. >> the second version we do is called white lightning, that is similar to jack daniels, hennessey,n fact, 150 proof. >> according to outlaw, white lightning has a very dark side. >> pruno can get you drunk and riled up and get you just that intoxication under the influence trip, whereas white lightning can cause you to drink a half a cup of white lightning and it will actually if the cos were to come to ask you a common question like something like can i see your i.d. card, because you have the white lightning this system, you will immediately get violent. a lot of times they do that and they have to take the dudes to the ground because they are on white lightning and takes six or seven cos to bring them down. >> at pelican bay, we saw the definite inmate's guide to distilling white lightning. a hand drawn illustration confiscated in a cell search. >> it explains to his friends in the tier how to manufacture pure alcohol. >> they're actually making it. everclear. 150 proof. that's not your regular pruno. a little more sophisticated. >> this is the final result. this here is about t

. >> why is this candidacy about liz perez, david hennessey, more for less with very incredible resultsort of yield. at the same time, we're talking about this not through the lens of rules and resources, which is how the political debate works, but through the lens of culture and the way we choose to interact with each other. and why is this a cultural conversation? why is what these people have in common a cultural issue, not a ruled resource correlation? >> you know, if you have a culture of innovation you're basically -- you know, you're creating people breeding a culture that's willing to challenge orthodoxy. that's unbelievably useful to a society, because when you challenge orthodoxy and innovate, you create new solutions to human problems which is essentially what civilization is all about. but i think we need to learn to be more self-reflective about our own orthodoxys because they block us from progress and that is just so endemic to both our culture and our political climate, obviously. >> what is the up side? here's the thing. you're saying okay you've got to challenge -- yo

as hennessey writes, this date was cherry picked to make president obama's record look good.nd i would just ask does president obama also disclaim anything to do with bailing out the auto companies, for example, that occurred in that period of time? no, last time i checked he was bragging about that. that's the height of cherry picking. things that make you look good, you take, the things that don't, you reject. you can't have it both ways. second, the president actually proposed spending far higher than what was enacted into law. for example, his latest budget request proposed spending of $3.72 trillion in fiscal year 2013 but the president's taking credit for spending in the c.b.o. baseline which is $3.58 trillion which is some what less than the $3.72 trillion that he proposed. so the president wanted to spend more but was restrained by the republicans in the house of representatives. in congress. mr. president, hennessey also explains how the president's spending claim collapses once you take three basic errors into account. he writes and he -- quote -- "if you instead do

our brilliant hair stylist here every weekend and ray hennessey, her lovely groom, he ray of course,ws channel, also. >> alisyn: they had a great wedding and it was touching and loving and fun. and you'll have to pardon my performance today. >> and your hair. because amanda does our hair and responsible for this. >> alisyn: it's different today. well, amanda get back here. >> dave: mine is flat amanda. congratulations. >> clayton: going to hurt the feelings of someone who did it for you today. >> alisyn: and we also love you, carol. love you. >> clayton: just want to make sure feelings weren't hurt. and here is something else, that feelings get hurt for the tsa, and there's something else to complain about for the tsa now the pressure the house is putting on tsa using common sense how to approach patdowns of individuals. you recall the photo of donald rumsfeld patted down by tsa. now, representative rogers and the house is asking, why should celebrities be screened? listen. >> there are certain people that are so well-known, that you've got to use common sense because if you start pa