>> 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

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,

hennessey 1346 is brought in for questioning, saying at first he didn't know the girl's age and sayshe had no intention to have sex, then he changes his story? >> when you left san francisco, how old did you think she was, based on the information you had? snow 13. >> so why did you come down here to meet this girl? >> to have sex. >> he also admits to some of what he said on line. >> i do remember that i said oh, like, bring condoms, i guess. and i am not -- going to lie. i have them in my trunk. but they were not for that. so that means i'm going to jail. >> yeah, you are going to jail today. >> and what about the man what sat in the truck across the house, now it is his turn to be questioned. 36-year-old chaka khan brought beer and condoms, just like the decoy asked. >> she said my mom is gone, i'm 13, we can get naked and do this. she made it sound like it was the greatest thing, at first it was like oh yeah, this is cool, this is cool. >> what else did you two talk about doing? >> she asked me to bring beer? >> what else. >> and said get in the hot tub, when i got there, i said

hennessey's declaration beginning with i am aware

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. >

. >> 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

Ñ she suggested calling mike hennessey?not. >> in the middle of that phone t a response, i cannot and neither can he. you have to reject the actions. we both do. i cannot involve new people. did she tell you about getting that text? . >> the you know what it meant -- did you know what it meant? >> that is speculation. >> i am asking. >> i did not. >> ok, so that comes in at 5:51. no, that is wrong. i apologize. that comes in at 6:01 in the middle of a phone call you are having with lopez the glass until 6:00 for -- that lasts until 6:04, so you hang up and then call sheriff mirkarimi. you know what that is about? >> i do not recall. eheriff, and says, do not write any other thing. answer the call. she has advised now. you know what that is about? >> i do not know what that is about. >> what advice did you have? >> the only advice i had is that they both needed to get attorney's separately. >> did you tell her to stop writing texts? >> i did not. >> did you tell her to tell the things? >> i did not know. >> how did she know

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

molly hennessey-fiske of the los angeles times is following the decision and the reaction to it. she joins us from houston. molly, tell us a bit more about the boy scouts explanation for why they are reaffirming this policiment policy -- policy, what are they saying. >> it's interesting the announcement made yesterday. reaffirmed the policy, it reiterated what had already been said and it came at a time as you mentioned when they're having these protests and high profile appearances by jennifer turrell and others who have been outed as gay scout leaders or gay scouts. so the reaffirmation were seen by observers who i talked to yesterday as just sort of reaffirming of the character of the scouts as a more conservative organization. some of the observers who i talked to who were, has been involved in scouting, had followed scouting for decades said this just indicated how intertwined the boy scouts of america, had come with some religious organizations that sponsor a lot of troops. that this was sort of both a moral decision but also a business decision as well. >> brown: to be cle

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

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 next speaker is vicki hennessey. thank you for being here. >> thank you for inviting me. good morning, supervisors. it is very exciting to be here. i was just reflecting -- 1977, i was a deputy assigned to the women's furlough program which was inside the old city prison on the sixth floor of the hall of justice. we have come a great distance over the years and i have to commend the former share for all the work that he did. i also want to echo the collaboration in this effort. currently, since i have been in his recent position, has been great. i also want to a knowledge of leadership of chief still and all the work that has been done. we are talking about impacts to the sheriff's department for ab 109. we are very fortunate because the population has seen a steady decline in the in the population. it has been hovering around 1500 to 1550 for the last few months. prior to that, 1700, 1900 the year before that. it has been going down. that has allowed us to use the resources that we have always been using for community programs and to use them now for this population that