Skip to main content

tv   Treasure Island Development Authority 11316  SFGTV  January 17, 2016 5:10pm-7:21pm PST

5:10 pm
different police chiefs. some of those chiefs were strong on law and order but they were challenged when it came to community relations. other chiefs had very solid community relations credentials but when it came to fighting crime they couldn't find a felon in san quintin. greg sur is the rare example of a police chief that is not only an exemplary crime fighter but he is also a police chief with a career-long history of compassion and sensitivity toward community concerns. now, we all know that police cal expediency rears its ugly head everywhere in city politics. i know it derailed my career but i have no regrets about that. i knew san francisco was a political city,
5:11 pm
yet i chose to serve in the san francisco police department with that knowledge in mind. as we all know, police commissioners are political appointees. there will always be a certain amount of legitimate political give and take by all police commissions. at this time, however, i would like to fervently emphasize to the members of the commission the importance of taking a stand and doing the right thing by supporting chief sur despite any political pressure being exerted. in closing, i'd like to explain my motive for addressing you here tonight. my wife was born and raised in san francisco. between the two of us we have served the san francisco police department 75 years. we're home owners in san francisco, we raised our daughter in san francisco. we love the city of san francisco.
5:12 pm
we want what is best for our city. now, greg sur certainly is not perfect. he proved that by never promoting me to his command staff. you got to wonder about that. but despite his lack of acumen when it came to promotions, he's been an outstanding chief of police and he has earned our support. thank you very much for your attention. >> thank you, captain krause, and thank you for your years of service. next speaker. >> good evening, my name is mike petrellis and i'm here to speak about a number ever things. the first item is, again, mario woods is omited from your agenda. since mario woods was killed by a cop you have had several meetings and not once has his name appeared on your agendas. i don't know if it's going to take a complaint to
5:13 pm
the sunshine ordinance task force to wake up this commission to really get with giving us detailed agendas before your meetings. it is not acceptable that meeting after meeting it says chief's report and the first item is review of recent activities and then of course he presents just verbal information. we never get a written report from the chief. the chief and this commission need to put on the agenda the death of mario woods. you can no longer bury what happened in vague chief's reports. the next item i want to address is the media department. it took a public records request to get three pages of information that came today about -- you have dozens of paid personnel who are maintaining twitter accounts. you have 8 people in your
5:14 pm
public relations department. this information comes from (inaudible) and i cannot listen to anyone say we don't have enough personnel to give you more information, michael, because i see you have 8 paid people in the media department. the information that they gave to me today is going to go up on the web. i've created a new web site, government access project blog spot dot com. if you go there you're going to find a few months worth of the police chief's calendar. i'm urging everyone to cares about police accountability in san francisco to go to government access project dot blog spot dot com. read the police chief's calendar. he is refusing to put his calendar on the web. i find that
5:15 pm
unacceptable. we need real transparency of the police department and part of that transparency equals the police chief's calendar must be on the web, i'll put it up every month that you give it to me so people can find out how he is spending his time. transparency is going to lead to some better policing in san francisco. and that transparency can start at this commission when you put mario woods' death on your agenda. thank you. >> any further public comment? >> good evening, acting president mazzucco, commissioners, deputy chief sinez and the staff attorney, i didn't get your name, my
5:16 pm
hearing is not too well. ladies and gentlemen, i'm here to support the chief and the officers involved in the mario woods shooting. i'm a retired san francisco police officer, i live here in the city, and in my duties i served over 8 years at the bayview station. and during my time in the department i also served on the critical incident response team which, as you know, responds out to assist officers that have been involved in a traumatic incident. and officer-involved shooting is considered one of those traumatic incidents and be from my experience use of force is never pretty. it's ugly, no matter what, whether it's hands on, using a taser, using less lethal or having to use deadly force. it's not nice, ever, for an officer to have to punch somebody it's ugly. for an officer to have to grab somebody it's ugly but at times it has to be done.
5:17 pm
from my time on the critical incident response unit i can pretty much guess what those officers are going through. they are probably wishing they had never gone to work that day. they are probably wishing that mr. woods had submitted to their orders. they are probably wishing there's something, anything, that they could have done other than what they had to do. you know, they had him in an area and people said, well, they should just let him go. well, they were with the understanding that he had stabbed somebody and i can tell you today that if they let him get past them and hurt one of my family, one of my friends, because they got out of the way then i'd be up here calling cowards. instead i'm up here to call them heroes. that's what they are. they showed up for work that day, they put that uniform on not knowing what was going to happen and that is a day that they had to
5:18 pm
do what needed to be done, that no officer ever wants to do. i did over 32 years in the department and i was lucky, never lucky, that i never had to use my gun but i'm here to support the chief and those ofrsers. thank you. >> thank you, chief frost. any public comment? >> my name is brandon weiss, i am a post doctoral fellow in clinical psychology and my area of expertise is ptsd in addition to all the issues that i'm sure everyone wants to talk about, i think that one very major problem that i at least don't see nationly let alone in san francisco is doing something about mental health
5:19 pm
reform and stigma for law enforcement officers, critical incident stress debriefing is not bad but the efficacy data is not very strong over time. in that moment it might help but what they really need is to be able to destigmatize coming out as having issues witnessing traumatic events every day over time and the symptoms that can come across because of that. i think, i don't know about in this incident, but i know a lot of times when you have experienced chronic traumatic stress one response you have, it's not only to be very hypervigilant but also to sometimes act impulsively. so even if it's a split second gut reaction i think a lot of things could be avoided if this was actually properly
5:20 pm
identified and addressed. it's not going to happen until the culture surrounding mental illness changes really nationally but especially within the police department. because as i'm sure you are all aware, people don't come forward because not only do they not want to look weak, they are also afraid of losing their jobs if they are deemed to be unable to actually serve and many folks can have ptsd and other mental health disorders and still do their job very, very at adequately and can get very good treatment. i think that would be something worth looking at and investing in especially for the future of the police force. i wanted to mention that. >> any further public comment? ufr already commented once, i'm sorry. no, i'm sorry, i apologize. any further public comment? as the next person is making their way, what the last speaker spoke about is actually an issue the police department
5:21 pm
has been addressing in many fronts. on the one front, as we said, we have over 400 crisis intervention trained officers but you may want to meet up with lieutenant frost i can't afterwards, this commission has put in place for the officers (inaudible) when ptsd kicks in as you probably know better than all of us it's down the road and we weren't recognizing that and now we're recognizing that. police officers are very good about helping; they are not very good about asking for help. you bring up some good points but we have a strong and robust program in place. several years ago we realized some of these officers involved in incidents ended up down the road needing discipline. yes, sir.
5:22 pm
>> i'm a clinical psychology student, study trauma, brandon is my best friend. and i was on the bart train in oakland this past saturday when a man was shot and killed by -- and all of the footage on the media was mine and like brandon said, a lot needs to change with mental health stigma and how we put, we sort of misconstrue what mental health is, what mental illness is. one of the problems is that, you know, a
5:23 pm
lot of what people do in those critical moments that i saw when i was slammed down on to the ground of the train and thought that it was a terrorist attack and i was certain that i was going to die, one of the things that you see are the snap judgments by everyone. so it's really not just the police officers, it's all of us. apblds a lot of us don't want to be afraid, don't want to be sad or scared. and we want to prevent other people from being sad and scared and what not so a lot of times we push off a lot of the things we're feeling in these moments. one of the other things i think we do is we don't want to fail, we don't want to do the wrong thing, we don't want to dehumanize someone, we don't want to see the color of someone's skin and be like -- and assume that they might be
5:24 pm
more likely to hurt us or that they may not more likely to be a criminal. and on that day i think that it's important to point out that there was one black man who killed another man, but the person on my train who i was very scared of in the moment was a very large black man who screamed at all of us to get down. and i didn't know if he was the person who was going to attack me or if he was the person who was trying to save me or help me and he was definitely the person who was trying to save and help me, as well as two people in the back of the train who were also black who likely had been through some gun experiences before because when they were laughing, which they weren't laughing in a xheedic comedic way, they were comforting some people on the train. some
5:25 pm
people when they started laughing at them started yelling at them, don't you know this is a traumatic experience? they responded by saying, yes, of course we know this is a traumatic experience. we experience gun violence all the time. people in our family have been killed by guns by the police, you know? so another person who was, i guess, you could say acted heroically, i with also say that that's accurate but also more true was the fact that a lot of people in those moments had the training to act really against their stereotypes. there were nurses who were able to resist the emotional experiences that they had and move through the chaos and to the scene of horror to the able to be there for someone who most certainly was going to die. you know, i
5:26 pm
recorded all of that because i knew that we often get this information incorrectly. i also listened to the police officers who were a couple of them were really amazing and comforting and i think that's important to point out, especially some of these women who were just absolutely horrified and, at the same time, in some ways trying to protect those women from having to say too much. they asked a question, i don't know if i want to ask that question, they would continue and accidentally cut things off and almost frame the questioning in a very leading way. >> i apologize, your three minutes is up. >> may i read one thing? >> i'm sorry. >> may i request that? >> no, i really apologize. if you stick around, when we talk about current activities, why don't you come back. we have another, we have the chief's
5:27 pm
report, you can come back after that. i apologize, we have to follow the rules. i really do. just stick around. thank you. next speaker? hearing none, public comment is now closed. >> three minutes and --. >> good evening. >> good evening, i'm putting another information request in, get this one signed as received. i guess the problem is, you know, you talk about the police being traumatized, i'm traumatized by the police. you know, just, you know, continuous violence from them, you know. you know, they attack relatively with immunity. i hear stories where they are pulling assault rifles on people sitting in their vehicles and they are just sitting in their vehicles. you
5:28 pm
know, i got a video, i put it on you tube, the police are just parading through the bart station and they start taking selfies. i mean, they are in the milds -- middle of the bart station with their shotguns. it's just worse, police threatening to kill me, police threatening to plant evidence on me, i mean i brought it here, this body thought it was okay. so, i mean, it's what bad to be a police officer because of the post traumatic stress disorder but it's bad to be a citizen because of the violence they commit on us. i could talk about mario woods and different things like that but it's just one of the numerous people that have been killed by the police.
5:29 pm
the video doesn't match, i mean i keep hearing the video doesn't match what the police said, it doesn't match what the police reports -- about my last information request, i put in a request for documents. i didn't get a response, you know, so i'm just wondering what the intent is. i put in a response for documents, i get nothing back, you know, so just as long as you know, as long as you know, i know ray hearts, i know crossman, i know those people and that is part of the people that i run with. so, you know, you don't have to respond right now, you don't have to respond in 24 hours
5:30 pm
like the ordinance says or you don't have to produce documents in 72 hours but somewhere along the way eventually give to the board of supervisors that you refuse to basically follow the ordinance of the city and county of san francisco. >> thank you. any further comment? hearing none, public comment is now closed. call the next line item. >> hi, i'm laz stanford tree. here i want to show you a picture -- beneath the stadium, i'm always last to comment. i came here last time, i was here december the 2nd, i didn't know that had happened to mr. mario woods but this was a picture of a little boy with his daddy close with some flowers, my quonset picture. i thought these got taken on sunday but they were in my briefcase. what i would say, i went to
5:31 pm
the funeral, i seen a 17-year-old guy there, he looked 17 to me, and the idea that he had read people like langston hughes, james baldwin, i felt part of me darryl was a very well-read child and i stayed there until 5.52 that evening taking pictures. i hope this will bring us a chance to have, i wore my blue shirt, blue piece, diana ross liked the police, sing the blues. i hope by this time tonight that also i have 4 lottery tickets. if i within the lottery i'm going to make sure that we have a new kind of
5:32 pm
peace, justice come together with the police officer association, officers police citizens, police officers and the community because, you know, the president spoke last night, he didn't say anything about violence in america but i was honored to hear that president london breed said that she would have someone look into it because i know i lost my brother in chicago january the 3rd, 1986 and that's been some years ago. it's just hard to think that you can be shot because of who you are or shot because someone has not been -- i also think in london, england, the police don't carry guns there. i was wondering what could we learn from england where they don't carry guns unless you have to have that. you know, i had told people growing up you often see execution and hangings from the old days for
5:33 pm
different things but you never actually seen a public execution. i was hoping there was a clip, a movie strip, but it was for real but i pray that we all -- my other thing is the tenants at my building, the bachelor hotel, we want to know can we get police cameras on the 5th floor, the hamilton hotel used to have police cameras because we getting a lot of speed in our building and we want to know can we be like the hamilton hotel. >> any further comment? public comment is now closed. >> item 4, reports and announcements, review of recent be activities, presentation of the annual report regarding the department's work with the joint terrorism task force, jttf; presentation. 4th quarter 2015fdrb findings and recommendations and ois
5:34 pm
investigative summary. >> welcome. >> good evening, commissioners, members of the community, my name is (inaudible) hector (inaudible) standing in for chief sur. as you mentioned earlier in your opening, chief sur is in washington, dc with president loftus and director hicks, they are attending the police executive research forum, also known as perf, researching the police force training forum. some of the things discussed are going to be part of this curriculum and i will touch on those briefly. they include officer safety, sank sit of life, critical decision-making model, tactical communication skills, time and distance strategies, handling persons
5:35 pm
with mental illness and crisis and as you mentioned, commissioner, the program is well underway and is now part of our training curriculum for the basic academy class. every academy class graduated from now on will leave the academy with those basic skills. also the deescalation skills so i look forward to the chief's report on this when he returns. that concludes what i have for this commission. i now call up lieutenant darryl faupb with the joint terrorism task force. >> good evening, lieutenant fung >> good evening, lieutenant mazzucco, fellow commissioners, my name is darryl fung, i will be presenting the terrorism
5:36 pm
task force. this annual report was comprised with a view of addressing community concerns such as advancing justice, asian law caucus and the council on american-islamic relations. the department continues to welcome any input or feedback to alloy the public's concerns. san francisco staffing of the jttf consists of one full-time employee. this employee departed in may of 2015 for another assignment and was replaced by another member who currently serves as the sole jttf member in a full-time capacity. this employee works approximately 2,080 hours per year. the officers use personal equipment issued by the san francisco pd but other
5:37 pm
expenses remain the responsibility of the fbi. the fbi remains familiar with our department policies and procedures. specifically the sfpd's guidelines for guidelines, the bureau on jtf operations, fo bfrplt order 2011-07 and the ordinance and they are aware of the sfpd must comply with provisions contained therein. (inaudible) the fbi also understands restrictions placed on members of the sfpd and have been
5:38 pm
cooperated in efforts assigned to sfpd the sfpd remains a close professional working relationship with our colleagues within the fbi. there are noish shies related to the sfpd's process of ensuring the ordinance was implemented. direct supervision is maintained. no member of the sfpd assigned to the jttf was used in undercover work or used as an infiltrator in 2015, nor were there any requests that they perform such work. they do not manage informants nor conduct case work involving undercover informants. there were no violations or possible violations of the ordinance in 2015. the department is briefed by jtf
5:39 pm
members on their cases consistently and these cases are vee viewed on a quarterly basis to ensure compliance with department policies and procedures. state and local laws as required by the ordinance. command structure. the jttf officer works under the command of the (inaudible) reports to the commander of investigations who reports to the deputy chief of operations who reports subsequently to the chief of police. while assigned to the jttf the officer reports to the special agent and this agent reports to a special agent in charge who reports to the special agent in charge. the sfpd assigned to the jttf is trained and is familiar with the ordinance and reviews are conducted on a quarterly basis.
5:40 pm
the jttf member reviews these policis on a quarterly basis with their sfpd supervisor. they also have weekly contact with their immediate supervisor who was in charge with the division. in 2015 the primary role of sfpd officers assigned to the joint terrorism task force is to maintain (inaudible) information sharing by law enforcement partners consists but not exclusively include information which has a potential impact to public safety. sfpd officers assigned to the jttf work on a team who is mission is to identify potential terrorist plots and identify crimes and suspicious
5:41 pm
activities which may have terrorist related motive or nexus. the sfpd member assigned to the jttp also provides security for many special events including giants games, the sf marathon, fleet week, halloween, new year's eve and the 75th anniversary of the united nations treaty signing. in addition, the sfpd member has been an integral part of security planning related to upcoming superbowl 50 and superbowl city. number of cases. the sfpd member assigned to the jttf were assigned to a total of 35 cases from tips or other law enforcement agencies. those cases did not always result in
5:42 pm
full investigation. while tips are provided to the fbi being credible to have a nexus to domestic or foreign terrorism are forwarded to the jttf for follow-up. the sfpd is not able to release the names of members assigned to the jtf due to safety and privacy of its members. the jttf reports suspicious activity reports to the regional activity data center. based on preidentified risk indicators with a potential nexus to terrorist or criminal activity. the jttf is a recipient of this sort of information as are other law enforcement agencies. sfpd
5:43 pm
officers have investigated cases involving bomb threats, possible weapons of mass destruction, critical infrastructure and other criminal activity with a potential terrorism nexus. these leads are provided by sfpd as well as other law enforcement agencies. the private sector as well as the member s of the public. private sector partners involve business, mass transit, et cetera. sfpd-jttf officers are intimately familiar and comply with department order 5117 to ensure suspicious activity is not reported as a result of racial or religious profiling. types of tips: sfpd-jttf officers have handled tips that come from private citizens as
5:44 pm
well as public activities. they involve bomb threats, threats to life, suspicious photography, suspicious activities as identified by reporting parties. the sfpd officers do not engage in interviews regarding solely constitutionally protected activities. sfpd officers do investigate activities that have a possible terrorism activity. (inaudible) as a follow-up to calendar year 2014 annual report, on march 26,
5:45 pm
2015, after the 2015jttf annual report was presented, the san francisco police department was notified of a complaint filed with the office of citizens xlaipblts by the council on american islamic relations during the course of an investigation conducted in 2014. in addition, the complaint questioned the accuracy of last year's jttf annual report. the sfpd stands by the accuracy of the 2014 annual report presented to the police commission on february 4 of 2015 which was based on facts known to the department at the time in which it was reported. the complaint filed with the occ in march of 2015 is still open and on-going at this time. the department is cooperating with the occ in their investigation in compliance with the department policy and procedures. the member named in that xlaipblt -- complaint
5:46 pm
is no longer a member of the jttf we were unable to disclose specifics of the case due a nondisclosure agreement with the fbi which could result in civil and criminal activities. the member currently assigned to the jttf has no complaints related to his duties tt jttf that concludes my presentation. >> thank you very much, lieutenant fong just for the folks in the audience and those watching, we went through a process with significant community input during a period of time when there was discussion regarding the san francisco police department participating with the fbi in the joint terrorism task force. many of our partners including the aclu, many of the grueches in the community came forward with their concerns, they told us in this jurisdiction many
5:47 pm
things they were concerned about and there was a protocol put in place. i see some folks in the audience tonight that we will probably hear from regarding there's been one complaint but we established at the end of the day to summarize everything lieutenant fong told you, there was significant disclosure and transparency we do as far as we can go when you are dealing with sensitive nature of alleged terrorism for alleged criminal matters but we made it clear to the entire borld -- and the fbi that we have department orders that would trump anything the fbi would ask our officers to do. we would not allow our officers to do surveillance at a place of worship. it's absolutely forbidden, if there's a conflict they are not allowed to do it and the fbi understands that. those are some of the protocols we put in
5:48 pm
place. this was something we reached in consensus with the community, a delicate balance of safety for the community and a matter of trust. we'll hear about that in public comment. commissioner dejesus has a question for you. >> this is the one thing that disturbs me quite a bit. what i don't like about it, it gives all this information but it really doesn't. everybody is reporting to everybody but we don't get any meat or any real information in these reports and i have brought this up before. from my understanding there is a commissioner assigned to meet with the jttf or to meet with the department regarding the jttf or am i getting that confused with the first amendment? >> i can tell you what happens, once a month the commission through the
5:49 pm
commission secretary and the commission staff provides, they rotate it through commissioners to sign off as to whether or not they advise if there's been any sort of activity in relation to 8.01, if i'm not mistaken. >> 8.10. >> it's been a long day. there's reporting wheerpb or not and i know the two or three times i've signed it there's been no activity. >> that's my problem, there's really no rotating. the rest of the commissioners don't get anything but this report which doesn't tell us anything. it really puts a lot of trust into what you guys are really doing because if something blows up the rest of us are going to take the heat and i don't know what's behind it. but i have a question for you. when you talk about last year's report, the follow-up to the report last year regarding
5:50 pm
the complaints, and maybe i'm just reading it with lawyer's eyes, you said stand by the report which is based on the facts known to the department at the time. but it begs the question whether after it was presented whether other facts came to light and is there something we should know? it begs a question that maybe something did come to light after the report was presented and is it something this commission should know what those facts are or have run by any of the commissioners who are reviewing it, is there a discrepancy in the report? i understand it was accurate at the time but if something happens to change that, has it been brought to the attention of the commission. >> for clarification, commissioner, as i noted in the report, we do stand by the accuracy of the report. there have been no further information that has led us to believe that it is inaccurate and we are cooperating with the occ in the course of their investigation into the
5:51 pm
allegations. >> okay, that was my question, thank you. >> commissioner hwang. >> you expressed a lot of my concerns. this report is very conclusionary. one question i have, i will say i have signed off on some of these reports. >> i haven't. >> i don't have any information, most of the time it's presented to me, there are no, there have been no incidents that raise concerns so we want you to sign this and that's what i've signed. i guess a specific question with regard to this one complaint from 2014, can you say, i don't know if it can be disclosed or if it's part of the investigation, was that incident disclosed to the commission in terms of this sign off? was it listed as an incident we would have signed off on? >> no, commissioner, it wouldn't meet the criteria. >> can you tell me why? i
5:52 pm
don't understand why it did not raise any first amendment concerns and what would come up on our review? >> if there was a request in terms ever written authorization to conduct a criminal investigation that's affiliated with first amendment activities then it would be, the protocol would fall under that particular general order and the commission would subsequently be notified of such written request. so in that respect the commission would be notified as part of their monthly sign off and we would brief you on the nature of the request. >> would it just be that one commissioner? we don't get those reports. >> i guess to follow-up, the way i understand this incident, and i don't know anything from the occ, i just remember this incident being raised to us through public comment perhaps many months ago, but the way the complaint was raised to us
5:53 pm
was there was a voluntary interview that was, where sfpd officer participated in response to some type of public records request, right? so that seems like it would be some kind of response to a first amendment activity and that seems like something that would want to be reported to the commission for review and consideration. >> again, you know, without being able to review details based upon a nondisclosure agreement to the specifics of the case, again, it did not meet the criteria in which a request would have been made. i understand the allegations that have been brought forward to the occ and certainly that investigation is on-going at this point and i certainly can't speak to that. i defer to occ in regards to the allegations and the specifics or the details in that case. but, again, it was not
5:54 pm
disclosed as a written request because it was not something that met the criteria for disclosure, if you will. >> if i may ask, again, we dwot -- got to be very careful we're talking about disciplinary matters that may come before the commission. an investigation. let me ask one quick question. what you are saying is that the allegations that have been made are for conduct that would not fall within 8.10, is that correct? >> that's correct. based on the information that we, that's been brought forward, the allegations that are made with occ, the information that we have did not meet the criteria under that particular general order. >> i think we have to be very careful, commissioners, we're getting to -- the city attorney on this. >> that's the problem we have with this general order. one
5:55 pm
commission gets information, nobody else does and if it doesn't meet criteria i'm not sure what it is or what it isn't, it doesn't get reported at all. this is a dgo we have to look at in terms of the reporting in a manner that we actually get some information. >> another process question. i know you probably received some comments back from the community group that also indicated sort of following up on director hicks' comments last week that there were some difficulties or obstacles in interviewing this particular officer. can you discuss is there a timing issue involved here? is there a statute of limitations issue, is there a reason why this officer can't be interviewed? i'm just wondering where are we in this process and perhaps pending the outcome of the occ's findings we would need to take a look at this report again, right, and see where we are with this
5:56 pm
additional information. >> commissioner, (inaudible) that issue and the department has not been notified by occ that the officer, there's no indication that the officer has not cooperated with the occ or has refused to be interviewed, so as to the obstacles that we understand, it's not because the officer has refused, to my knowledge, to be interviewed. maybe miss franco can talk to those issues a little bit more. >> an occ complaint, maybe it's --. >> i think it should be additional researched. i would feel more comfortable at this point if we just stopped the discussion and i think occ should check with their city attorney, jenna clarke, to check in on that. commissioner mazzucco if you'd like to but
5:57 pm
i'm starting to get a little uncomfortable with the discussion, getting into too many details. >> ask another question if i may. i remember there were some community concerns around these sar, suspicious activity reports. i know you mentioned sfpd has received a lot of suspicious activity reports. do we also generate suspicious activity reports and forward them to the regional intelligence center? >> we do, commissioner. there are, they come from various sources. they come from, as i mentioned in the report, from citizens in the community, business partners, you know, other law enforcement agencies but we also do provide suspicious activity reports through the department as well. >> and we have a protocol for screening them before we would send them to the northern california regional --. >> that is correct. >> and do we, is that a public
5:58 pm
policy that we --. >> there are department bulletins in terms of as part of our see something, say something policy as well as there's criteria and what identifies, there's previous indicators which actually define suspicious activity and what should be reported and vetted for further follow-up. >> thank you. just one last issue, if i might. i think you have received a, i think our protocol is that we send a draft to the community groups and they send you responsive comments. i remember last year you addressed you addressedtheir comments one by one. >> we did receive some drafts of responses to the report. the department welcomes any
5:59 pm
further input into whatever information we can provide to address their concerns. >> well, thank you, lieutenant fong, we have a group here we will hear during public comment with their concerns. >> please call the next line item with reference to the chief's report. >> the next item i have, xhirs, is a presentation. fourth quarter fdrb findings and recommendations. i call up sergeant john greudo >> sergeant greudo, if you can introduce your new partner. >> i would like to introduce sergeant dennis tumor who is moving over from the admin side. i had to pry a few arms, but i finally got sergeant tumor to come over and he's going to work ois with our teams. it's been out at some ois teams with me in the past. you may recognize him, he was a
6:00 pm
pio officer at one point. >> thank you, sergeant tumor and thank you for volunteering for a very significant assignment. >> thank you, sir. >> rather look at that. commissioners, miss franco, deputy chief sinez, i am with the internal affairs division officer involved investigation team. i'm going to present the
6:01 pm
fourth quarter report which includes the most recent firearm discharge review board as well as sort of an overview update on where we are with officer involved shooting investigations. the board previously convened on september 22, 2015, which would be third quarter, 2015. at this most recent fdrb convention, which was wednesday, december 23, 2015, two completed investigations were ready for review and those cases presented were officer involved discharge 0015, nos 15-005. this slide includes the members that composed this panel, deputy chief ali was the chair as the dc of the administrative bureau. it was also composed of deputy chiefs redman, tom schmidt, commissioner mazzucco was the member from the police
6:02 pm
commission present, commissioner hicks was present, captain yet was the acting captain from the risk management office and sergeant tang was there from the range. so the cases that were reviewed were officer involved discharge 0015. this occurd september 5, 2015 on the 3000 block of engel street and as a brief overview of the case, at about 10.05 hours, 10.05 in the morning, bayview station officers responded to a report, phone call to 911 of a vicious dog malling a child. they saw a pit bull that was in the middle of a fatal attack, a smaller dog, a crowd was attempting to intervene, to scare it, pull it away, without
6:03 pm
effect. an officer in fear for the people present as well as to try and save the smaller dog, fired a department-issued shotgun one time at the vicious dog which was struck and immediately collapsed and the dog expired at the scene. this was found to be an in policy use of firearm. the other case that was reviewed was officer involved shooting 00-5. this occurred (inaudible) this was the case that was reviewed from san mateo county. location, us101 san bruno avenue, the intersection of those avenues, it's a complex, there's several streets on and off ramps all in the area, but a brief overview of the ipbs doepbt, an officer assigned to
6:04 pm
the airport bureau responded with other officers to search for a hit and run driver who fled from a motorcycle officer who was investigating. the suspect in this case attempted to car jack several vehicles in the area in an attempt to flee the scene. as the officers closed in the suspect turned toward one officer and advanced on him. the officer fired twice in response to an imminent assault and the suspect was struck once in the torso and taken into custody. the use of firearm was determined to be within policy. with regards to the other recommendations, you do have the report that the chief gave you submitted to the commission and there were two additional recommendations with regards to the officer. we had to be sure
6:05 pm
that officer had been upgraded with the new holster. he had some difficulties with transitioning because he had an older model holster and in addition it was recommended that he receive training with regards to force option transitioning. the recommendations of the firearm discharge review board were forwarded to the chief, who accepted them, and you have his letter to that effect. the next fbrb is tentatively scheduled to convene wednesday, march 23, 2016. that would be the first quarter 2016fbrb with regard to open investigations where we are in terms of the snapshot at this point, the last time that you received a quarter update was october 5, 2015. so some major developments since that time,
6:06 pm
we had the one ois case i just talked about, 15-005 was presented at the last ftrb, a summary letter is forthcoming, it's actually on the chief's dechk right now, so we wait for him to come back, sign it and you will have it. two discharging letters were received from the office of the district attorney of san francisco, 13-008 and 14-001. the department received those on december 15th and then 4 investigations since october 5th have been opened. osi15-007, 15-008, 15-009 and 15-0010 and they are active criminal investigations by sf homicide and san francisco district attorney's office. there are also, as you know, open administrative investigations at this time.
6:07 pm
so looking at all the open ois investigations at this time there are 18 cases. two of the cases, as i mentioned, have been reviewed by the sf district attorney with charging decision letters issued with regard to the officers and those are expected to be presented to the firearm discharge review board at the next ftrb there thereare 11 currently under review. the clock is paused on those. there are also 5 active criminal investigations. one is with san mateo police department and four are with
6:08 pm
the sfpd homicide detail and the district attorney. so just looking at sort of in a year by year in this case 2013 to 14 in bold the developments would be those two cases, 13-08 and 14-01 we have received the charging decision letters so the final reports are being prepared by homicide and by internal affairs for presentation at the next ftrb the cases open at this time are 13-003 and the dates of the incident are presented alongside it, 14-002, 005, 006, 007 and 008. in addition cases from 2015, cases 1 through 4
6:09 pm
are awaiting a charging decision from the district attorney's office. case number 5 you just heard, so that will disappear from this list, and case 6 is an active criminal investigation with san mateo pd so the remaining case for 2015, these are all new since the last report, dates are listed alongside, and in all cases a criminal and administrative investigation was opened on the date of the incident and for your benefit the return to duty presentation h give you also brief overview of the case as known at the time was presented on november 4th for two of the cases, december 2nd and january 6. so that's the quick snapshot and if there are any questions. >> thank you, greudo, any
6:10 pm
questions for sergeant greudo >> regarding 15-005, she wanted to look at the differenceness processing charging time between the san mateo da and our local da, i wonder if you have any thoughts on the process. >> i have talked to a number of other agencies and the time frame that our standard investigations are going for, they are talking to -- i have to formalize everything, i'm still collecting information. but talking to a number of san jose, sacramento agencies, agencies in alameda county, there are different processes obviously for each county and in most cases while the pieces
6:11 pm
might be managed a little differently they are generally managed the same. but the time frame is generally consistent. san mateo county, however, really emphasizes these cases at their district attorney's office and with their, they have a joint task force, they have a multi agency county task force with a criminal side and their da commits a lot of resources to, they basically put this stuff at the top of their list. so they have a relative to other bay area and california agencies they seem to have a very quick turn around. our time frame appears to be kind of on the longer end but not by an order of magnitude or anything, it's sort of in the similar time frame. i would say 18 months
6:12 pm
kind of seems more of the average where we're sitting at about 24 or thereabouts. and i'm really still collecting the data, just sort of a law report on that. >> thank you. >> commissioner dejesus. >> that's my question. i am looking at 13-003 and that's 3 years we are waiting for formal charging from the district attorney and i'm looking at 14-002 and 14-003 in a matter of weeks, a month and a week we're looking at over two years. >> yes, ma'am. >> and i thought we talked to the district attorney in terms of why does this take so long? and the reason i bring this up is exactly what you said here, we're tolling, we're tolling any kind of administrative action and sometimes we lose stuff. i thought we talked to the district attorney with respect to speeding these cases up. >> with respect to tolling,
6:13 pm
what the tolling does is paus the statute of limitations, the time frame by which we have to get that done. that doesn't mean we're pausing the investigation, we're moving the investigation forward and doing as much as we can do without some other elements or pieces we will need to conclude the investigation. what is typically happening, and i think you've seen this in action over the years, is we get the declination letter, they have made a decision with regard to the officers, the criminal investigation can be completed and closed which is a major dependancy for the criminal investigation but we're using that date, the date on the da's decline letter, to end tolling. so the two reports we received on december 15th, which was 14-001 and
6:14 pm
13-008, 13-008 was dated 12-10 and 14-001 was dated 12-8 so we have a year from then to complete the investigation administratively. what's happening is we are targeting the next ftrb when we get that, presuming we have sufficient time to do that. worst case would be the next one thereafter, which would be 6 months at the far end. so we're getting those done within the time frame. >> i understand you guys are getting them done. it's the district attorney, i thought we still want to talk to them about moving --. >> i know there's been some discussions which, you know, at numerous levels and obviously it's not an area that i control. >> no, i know. >> but i will say that compared to the reports, the letters that we got, you know, 8 years ago, which might have had two lines saying the
6:15 pm
officer will not be charged at this time, period, now we get a letter of several pages with a lot of analysis and legal decisions, court decisions, that kind of explain the analysis and the reason for the decision that's made. so it's obviously a very valuable tool for us. >> perhaps you need the commission to speak to the district attorney. >> just for the record it was about a year ago or a year and a half ago i spoke with district attorney gascon about the commissioners concerned. he jurpbed -- jumped on it real quick and you saw that where we suddenly saw a lot of the cases closed out. the numbers now are not as bad as they were in the past in terms of the time frame so i'm not sure what the issues are with regard to these particular cases but the da did make a
6:16 pm
concerted effort to get back to us and things started to move quicker. he was responsive. >> any further comments for the agent? thank you very much, sergeant. please call the next line item, 4b >> 4b, occ director's report. >> good evening, miss franco >> good evening. as has been stated a few times tonight, director joyce hicks is in washington, dc, she will be back tonight attending the perf conference and i am actually here filling her spot at the last moment and she will be giving her report the next time we have a meeting. some matters have been
6:17 pm
discussed tonight as well relating to some pending occ investigations and they are pending and therefore i will make no comment about that. thank you. >> thank you, miss frankel >> item c, commission reports, discussion. commissioner president's report, commissioners' report. >> i will say on behalf of commissioner loftus i received a text message from her and she was back from the perf seminar she was at with both the chief and the president of the occ and she says they've learned some great things. she's excited to come back and share what they learned on the use of force issue. commissioners, do you have anything you need to report? >> item 4d, commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for next commission meeting action. the
6:18 pm
next meeting for the commission p be at the community in the tenderloin district. >> i'm going to be out of the country january 20 through 27. >> all right, now it's time for public comment with reference to line items 4a, b, c and d, you are going to come forth and discuss the issue of the joint terrorism task force. welcome. this is with reference to the chief's report, the occ director's office and the commission report. >> i'm not understanding.
6:19 pm
>> never mind, miss brown, just go ahead. >> my name is miss brown, i wanted to use the overhead again. i just wanted to make a comment, i don't even know if you can see it. well, anyway, i want to make a comment on mario woods, the mother, and i was really embarrassed about what the officer said earlier that if that was his family, i don't think he took into consideration that that mother was grieving too. i don't think chief sur should be fired, i think he should be held accountable and i think those officers definitely should be fired. that was a firing squad on that young man and if that mother, and i stood with her and i felt her pain yesterday at the board of supervisors and i stood with her and i think people should acknowledge that mother and for
6:20 pm
the officer to get up here and say, i can understand if that was his family and that people need to be protected. but he should have also acknowledged that mother too. and my other thing, i want to use the other overhead again, please, my son, arby arbocasa who was did heed in 2006 by a semiautomatic gun, his case is still not solved to this day. as a mother i am looking for justice for my son. i bring this up because mayor gachb newsom know who killed my son, the da know who killed her son, they can name addresses, identify people. this is what
6:21 pm
i'm left with, my deceased son, my son, my 17-year-old beautiful son. they have the names of all the perpetrators that murdered my son. i'm looking for the names and i have them with me but i don't have them. but one of them is paris moffett, thomas hannibal, and i believe paris moffett is probably going to be out of jail if he's not yet. i'm looking for justice for my son. i want closure, i haven't any. my son went to vernal heights recreation center, he worked there for the city and county recreation center. i had to
6:22 pm
walk across the stage and receive his diploma. i'm not just fighting for myself, i'm fighting for other children and families and mothers who are self-medicating at home and can't get out. i come here every wednesday and i'm just looking for jut justice for my child. no mother should have to go through this. thank you. >> thank you, miss brown. ladies and gentlemen, there is a police tip line if you have any information regarding the murder of aubrey abracause is a. >> 575-4744. >> miss brown comes every wednesday in honor and memory of her son. i wish the community would step up to the plate and participate in the successful prosecution of the young men who took her son's life. we sit here every week and we hear from her, yet we hear nothing from the
6:23 pm
community, even with the $250,000 reward. it's embarrassing. next speaker. >> good evening, i'm maria barkses, thank you commissioners and sfpd for the opportunity to speak with you briefly concerning the fourth report on the safe san francisco civil rights ordinance. as you may remember many dozens of arab, muslim and southeastern community members and 70 civil rights and community rights organizations worked for years for the passage of this ordinance. overall we are extremely concerned that the ordinance has been violated and continues to be violated despite reports and assurances to the contrary. last year we anticipated that sfpd would discuss the comments we sent them in advance of the meeting and they did not. i
6:24 pm
have copies. we got the report on tuesday and -- i'm sorry, on monday -- and we sent this on tuesday just so he could have a sense of what our extremes were and as you can see, our concerns were extremely extensive. we're very disappointed in this report. the law in san francisco is clear. sfpd officers working with the fbi are supposed to follow the reasonable suspicion standard. the inspector who is the subject of a complaint that our organization has filed has still not even been interviewed and as you well know from the recent situation with the text messaging there is a one year statute of limitations. that statute of limitations is in march. we are on the record here, everyone knows that
6:25 pm
statute of limitations is right around the corner and that officer has not been interviewed. the fbi mou is inconsistent with san francisco law and it's preventing the occ from doing its job. the thing is, we had this fight and san francisco law won. that's why we have this ordinance. i guess my question tonight is who runs san francisco? first it was the mou that wasn't permitting all of us to talk about and figure out what in the world is going on in san francisco, today we hear about a nondisclosure agreement. what is it, who runs this town, is it sfpd or is it fbi. riding roughshod over our laws shouldn't be an option, a filed complaint that files all of
6:26 pm
those complaints out of the water is not acceptable. resolve the fbi attempted strangle hold over sfpd, it's the law. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good evening, commission, thank you for having us here tonight, my name is bries ham mock, i work with the islamic (inaudible) earlier on there was a comment that only one incident has been reported out of the sfpd jttf partnership. as far as we were recorded, there was nothing wrong there were no incidents that even approached violating the ordinance yet that turned out to be false. the agency is a
6:27 pm
federal agency that is extremely secretive. as commissioner mazzucco commented there's only so far we can go. mr. gelani when he was approached by the sfpd officer he was only asked about his religious affiliation, traveling and the sort. i am someone who works with the fbi quite recently. just a few weeks ago i met with a jttf officer in san mateo just a few weeks ago for nothing more than being a muslim, this person was visited by the fbi, we are in a starbucks, he is being urged to pledge allegiance to the united states, that he is not violent,
6:28 pm
et cetera, et cetera. the threat of this is really high mainly because sfpd does not hold any secrets they launch an investigation based solely on (inaudible) profiling. it's important our agency not interact on agencies that are blatantly doing so. with that said, i would request the sfpd remove themselves out of bed with this agency so it can fully comply with the constitution and other orders in place. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, councilor. >> good evening, i am the community advocate at the asian law caucus. i'd like to share some more information about suspicious activity reporting which is briefly mentioned in the annual report and reiterate
6:29 pm
our concerns from last year. sfpd submits information about so-called suspicious activity to the local fusion center called ncrc, a collaboration of bay area law enforcement, the fbi and other agencies. suspicious activity reporting, sars for short, is currently the basis of a lawsuit. it risks labeling people as potential terrorists in government data bases shared with law enforcement around the country. the risk stems from the federal government's request to local police departments to report, quote, suspicious activity that could be related to terrorism. but what does suspicious mean? sars uses a loose standard that is even lower than the traditional law enforcement standard of reasonable suspicion. in practice that
6:30 pm
means sars is at high risk of promoting racial profiling and collecting information about innocent and constitutionally protebted activity like photography. in response to public record acts requests, we have received thousands of samples of sars that confirm our fears. one report from california was about, quote, two middle eastern looking males taking photographs of folsom dam. one read suspicious middle eastern males buying large pallets of water. the reports i've quoted were not filed by sfpd, they are from the sacramento area, but that's because the public has no idea what kinds of reports sfpd has filed with ncra
6:31 pm
notably the local fusion center ncrc was the only fusion center to refuse to disclose its sors reports. ncrc has (inaudible) why the secrecy? why are other fusion centers able to share their sars reports but not ncrc why are other police departments able to share their sars reports but not sfpd, especially since sfpd is on report in this jttf report that they use information then as a community we believe sfpd can and should do more to explain its sars activity to the public by disclosing redacted versions of the report it has filed in past years. we fought for transparency and accountability and that is what we want. thank you. >> thank you very much.
6:32 pm
>> good evening, my name is lana casane, i am the head of the arab reporting 17 center here in san francisco. this is why we fought so hard against this relationship with the joint terrorism task force a few years ago, as was mentioned, and the compromise was this report that we expect to get each year and we expect a lot more. the fact that it was mentioned that it made people uncomfortable the way this discussion was going, well it makes us uncomfortable, this entire relationship, impacted by the interrogations and the practices of the jttf very uncomfortable by the surveillance, very uncomfortable by the impacts on the families and we expect people in positions of power to see and address and reflect the
6:33 pm
positions of people, people impacted by these types of programs. we also expect things like jttf are the antithesis to transparency and tonight is very indicative of that. this report does not at all reflect the experience and stories that we add community advocates and organizers hear about. this does not reflect the stories we hear about who come to our office with the business card of a jttf staff person, intimidated by them, enter gated by them, whose families and communities have been devastated with them. there should be no involvement with jttf with the city and county of san francisco. we have no faith in the san francisco police department, particularly
6:34 pm
chief sur. as there are demands that we fire him, we have officers coming to talk about how they revere him. federal law enforcement is not accountable, is not transparent and actually completely undermines human rights and civil rights in this country. so what we are asking for is that these types of relationships end. what we are asking for is that you invest more in the communities that you should be serving, that we receive in programs that actually build up community alternatives to policing, what we are asking for is that we build trust with public officials and not create different types of programs like this that distance our communities from being able to come here and speak to you directly. we want to build a city where people feel like they are building in integrity and dignity, not being surveiled and interrogated on a
6:35 pm
regular basis and not expanding the power of law enforcement when we know at this very time what we need is more accountability, not more power. >> good evening, commissioners, my name is dee kaly and i do want to remind the commission that this was absolutely a compromise and that the call really from the community was to end this relationship. so where we are now is that we have a report that we are telling you looks to us as if it is being presented in bad faith with incomplete information, it was the result of a compromise and we can't be asked to compromise more and really get no substantive information. i want to thank commissioner dejesus and wapk wapk for asking questions. i think there are mere questions remaining. i want to point out that one of the issues here and it was
6:36 pm
addressed in a letter you were sent is activity reporting is still being done on the basis of photography and i want to point out that the suspicious photography, this is in the report on page 3, suspicious photography may include sensitive and secure access points including iconic landmarks. i want you to ask yourself whether it makes any sense for us to have any suspicious activity reports being filed on people who are taking pictures of iconic landmarks? that's ridiculous. frankly that's a really good example of exactly what the problems with these kinds of activities are. the suspicious activity reports, i am one of the people who made a document request and i didn't get a single suspicious activity report, not even one that was redacted. in contrast in los angeles the inspector general there actually did a full audit of suspicious activity reports and looked at numbers and what
6:37 pm
those numbers showed, this is information that's a couple years old, they showed 74 percent of the suspicious activity reports in la were filed on non-white people. i think we would see similar things here, that it would show the same sort of thing. i want to read you a couple things that pertain to why this is such a problem. fusion centers have been the subject of a lot of criticism. an october 2012 report talked about how they produce intelligence of uneven quality, often shoddy, sometimes taken from already-published publish sources. is this what we want our officers to be doing? i don't think so. i also want to point out that fusion centers have been getting attention from the privacy and civil liberties
6:38 pm
overzulgt board oversight board. these performance measures include a number of suspicious activity reports, not quality, numbers. so we are putting a san francisco police officer in cooperation with an agency that is motivated by numbers and that's not what we should be doing. i urge you to end this relationship and follow-up on this report and do some investigation on these reports. thank you. >> hi, thank you, commissioners, officer, thank you, lieutenant, for the report back. my name is miriam sesunis, my family operates a corner grocery store and i am here with a simple request to honor the social contract meant to uphold the democratic process in this city.
6:39 pm
in 2012 you made a partnership with the members of the arab and middle eastern and south asian communities and 79 partner organizations. we put confidence in the due process of the system with the expectation of transparency and the solace that our concerns have been heard and taken seriously, the demands of which echo the number of requests for autopsies that have gone unheard in this city. the climate of this country alone as it relates and as it views arab communities is enough for you as a body on public safety is to do due diligence on this piece of important civil rights organization. that's what i have to say and thank you for your time.
6:40 pm
>> thank you very much. mr. crew. >> john crew again speaking as an individual. so i think with all due respect it's time to cut through the double speak. what do we know here? what we know is last year this report was given and the statement was made that the sfpd did not participate in any voluntary interviews with the jttc a xlaipblt was filed in march about that incident, yet the sfpd is still claiming that the report they gave you last year was true. are they calling care a liar? did this incident not happen? the fbi spoke about it in the newspaper. look at the san francisco examiner, they confirmed this happened. the complainant that was interviewed was interviewed by the occ in july. last week the occ director told you that
6:41 pm
they had requested an opinion of the city attorney about their, quote, ability to interview the officer. there's no legal doubt about that. the voters created the occ33 years ago, it's in the charter for 33 years, the sfpd must fully cooperate. as far as i know you haven't suspended that general office or gave them permission not to follow it. the chief put out a bureau order within weeks or days of his taking office that said exactly what you said tonight, commissioners, local law trumps. a local ordinance was drafted, thank you for saying it again, local law trumps. there's a complaint that hasn't been investigated, there's a deadline coming up, yet we are given this double speak. what's clearly needed, this is what i'm talking about earlier. policy reforms mean nothing if
6:42 pm
you don't apply the standards, if you don't use the authority you have been given. let me briefly say i am speaking as an individual but i have a lot of history on this issue. i was appointed by your predecessors to a committee after the human rights commission said we need a policy on intelligence gathering on this issue, there's been too many issues. chief will casy was happy to collaborate, sat down with me, i would recommend -- it's a long document -- it's based on best policies from several different departments and if you will indulge me briefly, several different departments around the country, that's why it's complex because it's based on best practices and it doesn't say what the lieutenant just said it said. this action clearly required prior authorization so that there would be a paper trail and it would be an audit and it
6:43 pm
would be reported. there is a provision in that general order that says these policies apply not just whether or not you label it a criminal investigation, that's the best practice. if you allow them to just label it something else they can keep it off the books and evade the policy, it won't work. i'll leave you with one more thought. ask yourself why does a report that's supposed to be about compliance with local standards and policies not quote those local standards and policies and, in fact, use the language of the fbi guidelines? this talks about a nexus to criminal activity. that's the fbi standards, that's not the sfpd's. it talks about we do not investigate activities that are solely based on first amendment activity. that's not the sfpd standard, that's the reason the general order exists, that's the fbi's loophole. same thing with the discrimination policy, the bias-based policing. sfpd,
6:44 pm
unlike the fbi, does not have an exception for national security. that's the whole concept here. we're 4 years after the fact and we're not getting clarity and it's not because, with all due respect to the fbi saying you can't say this, it's apparent to me that the sfpd apparently thinks it's okay to apply the fbi standards. they told you there have been 35 cases they have been involved --. >> thank you, sir, thank you very much. thank you for your time. >> sorry, mr. crew, thank you for your participation. >> pardon the rant but at this late date it's more than a little frustrating not just for me but for these community members. >> thank you, sir. >> any public comment? >> we just got through listening to half an hour of this guy and half an hour of this guy and half an hour of this guy, but in truth we get no time. three minutes is nothing. as far as being a hero or
6:45 pm
something, i'd like to be one. you know, it's one of these things you always pray to be. you know, without the fire department i wouldn't be a hero because they asked me to put out a fire and i did and saved a lot of lives. a bunch of police around and everything, they said we have to keep this silent. for sure we have to keep this silent because when it comes right down to it, the worst thing i ever seen was that murder. it isn't going to go on any more tv's, they're not going to talk about woods any more because it's back in the woods. no one talks about it, you know. it's sad, you know, when we come to being a hero, my mother, she had to face something. you know, she had to get to be one of these people that suffer, you know, beyond it, you know, she went to a priest said, we went to visit my son three times at the jail and he won't come down.
6:46 pm
and the jailor and everything, you know, and my mom said, priest said, wait a second. don't say anything. he went from monteray all the way to salinas and when he got there, he said, he's coming down or i'm going up. i'm a priest. thank god for them and you and law and order. but there was no law and order. my mom wanted to know what was wrong with me and i was sitting here like this and i wouldn't talk and i was scared. so when she finally got my father to have me pull down my collar she fell over backwards, knocked her cold. you know, as far as a hero, i'm proud to be who i am here today. my father's in heaven and he's an naacp president, he was in 1960. so every time they called and gave us a bunch of shit there was a
6:47 pm
lot of it back then. i just let them know, i'm white, i'm sorry. unknown comic, they won't tell my joke anywhere because i am a big joke. i'm funny, how he treats me. i'm on a border one time, this is for the mexicans, i was on the border, i might get a little extra time, maybe, i was on the border, hopefully. i was on the border one time and i was barefoot and in a restaurant. and a lady comes up to me, says spare change and i start to get the change out and all the people in the restaurant jump up, run around me and i start handing out the money. when i get to the last penny i go to hand it to her and i hope for five minutes, please. >> no, sir, sorry. >> please? >> no. >> no. >> just for you, then.
6:48 pm
>> no. your time is up. any further public comment? >> can i speak to you? >> commissioner dejesus. >> this is on my own. >> i'm sorry, sir. >> sir, you are out of order. thank you. >> we're done, we're closed. >> closed? >> get my minute, close up. >> go ahead, commissioner dejesus. >> sorry, juicy >> the public comment brought up some concerns i didn't have when we were talking about it, but i guess the question is, maybe we should ask what the processes of the department in deciding for these suspicious activity reports if they are released, how many are requested, how many are given, even if they are released
6:49 pm
heavily redacted, why aren't they released in some format. i'm looking at the letter quickly, maybe the sample we are looking at is using fbi language, it would be better to have a report that follows the language provided in the dgo and whether or not the criteria is being met with our own language rather than this other report. i don't know if we had a sample that we were using but i think we should retaylor that and look at each of our criteria, use the language of our criteria in terms of answering the report. we should follow-up on this and i'm happy to talk to commissioner loftus about putting it back on for the issue of these suspicious activity reports and how many are being made and how many are released and maybe redoing this report in a format that meets the criteria of the general order. >> commissioner wong.
6:50 pm
>> i just wanted to indicate to the community groups i will make a commitment to follow up with director hicks when she is back just to make sure there are no statute of limitations issue and this investigation can be completed within the time period and see if we can remove any obstacles, if there are any, to finishing up the investigation. >> thank you, commissioner hwang. commissioner melara. >> i heard of some anecdotal information regarding potentially other violations. and i think that the best way of dealing with those matters is for the occ to be involved if you do have other complaints from other people you should go, you should file those xlaipblts -- complaints with the occ because we deal with evidence and we deal with things that we know. if we
6:51 pm
don't know about it, if it is something that is happening in the community and it's not being investigated there is nothing we can do about it. so i would encourage you and those that you represent to come forward and do file complaints with the occ >> thank you. ladies and gentlemen, we're going to move all the way down to adjournment because all the items that come forward after this deal with going into closed session, we're not doing that. i'm going to turn the mic over to commissioner hwang. >> i would move to adjourn tonight's meeting in honor of franco fleming, i received
6:52 pm
several emails he was beloved by his colleagues, by the folks he worked with at city hall and by many folks in the da's office who cribd described him as somebody full of life. he was assigned to the mta bureau, he was formerly a member of mayor newsom's protection detail and in his private life officer fleming was named a member of esquire's best dressed list and there were photos of him on the web. i would adjourn today's meeting, january 16, 2016, in memory of officer franco fleming. >> may he rest in peace. >> motion for adjournment. >> second. >> thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, we adjourned.
6:53 pm
(meeting adjourned). >> welcome to the small business commission meeting. it is monday, january 11 and the start time is 5:30 pm.. unlike remember to remind all attorneys to turn off all cell phones and pagers. we don't have ages but cell phones. and
6:54 pm
i also want to thank the staff that is that of tv for recording tonight. before we get started, the small business commission would like to remind our viewing audience that the office of small business is your central place to start your business and seek assistance. we have referrals to-we have referrals in terms of business resources. your licensing and permitting. it's the place for you to start, and the most important thing to know is we have the expertise relationships with the city family and the office of small business is the assistant center is a free service or every new and existing business. so, our website is sf that's sf san
6:55 pm
francisco office of small business without mr. pres. i'd like to call the meeting to order. >>[gavel] >> all right. >> so, i will take local. [calling names] >> commissioner adams, here. commissioner dwight, here. tour-sarkissian, here. riley, here. commissioner ortiz is absent. excused absence. so mr. pres. you have a quorum. >> all right. so we are here for the first episode of the 2016 small business commission. before we start by the rare piece of memorabilia and of the planning commission's gavel. you think i could get some money for it? anyway, welcome to the meeting tonight. as
6:56 pm
regina said, the office of small business is the only place to start your new business in san francisco. she will be talking about any new business owners to stop first at the office of small business so they can find out what they need to do and where they need to go to make sure they cross all the t's and dot all their eyes. without further ado, let's open for public comment. so, we have public comment for anything that is not on tonight's agenda. things that are on tonight's agenda illegal, and for each of those separately did anyone from the general public have anything that would like to comment on any thing not on tonight's agenda. yes? come on up. welcome. >> my name is eileen-my resident of the parkside district. i'm here to urge the commission to contact the plane department and the mayors office of housing to schedule an informational presentation on proposed federal housing
6:57 pm
density bonus programs. these programs would increase height and bulk in many of the city's zoning districts. the programs are for demolition only. the districts which would see much of the impact are in the commercial district. the mayors office of housing stated this would result in the displacement of some neighborhood businesses. the mayors office of housing has also stated it has developed a relocation assistance program for these small businesses. i would urge the commission to hear firsthand with the impacts to small businesses would be. i've committed a list of youtube links to community presentations by the planning commission, the planning department and mayors office of housing. your secretary has that. these would have the final hearing on january 28. each program should then be heard at the board of supervisors. thank you. >> thank you very much for
6:58 pm
that. anyone else from the public have anything they would like to talk about before we get into the planned session? seeing none, bubble, disclose. oh, come on up. public comment is not close. >> public comment is close. onto item number three. >> so pres. dwight, our presenter is currently still in land use. so what i'd like to propose is that we hear item number five, which is the presentation and discussion update on the trans-bay transit center program and then as soon as our presenter is here will return back to item number three. >> sounds good >> so we are on item number five which is presentation and discussion update on the trans-bay transit center program
6:59 pm
the spe program. we had a presentation by andy phillips of the contracts compliance manager of the tj pa and paul prendergast was the spe program manager. when your packet is a powerpoint presentation for you to follow along. >> welcome, eddie. >> thank you. good evening commissioners. i like to say that in 2009 at the? board staff developed and adopted small business enterprise program. it is a policy to ensure that sp have an equal opportunity to receive and participate in tj pa contracts. under the tj pa program did tj pa places forcible spe goals on contracts as appropriate. spe goals are mandatory and binding
7:00 pm
and meeting those goals were demonstrating a good-faith effort to do so is a condition of contract award. the tj pa accepts certifications from the following programs to participate at the spe program. this navigation from the sid of covenant department of gen. services procurement division from the office of small business and disabled veterans cities and counties of san francisco women on business are survived by the contract monitoring division by the office of city administrator and any state unified certification program including the california unified certification program, which is the federal program for disadvantaged business program. i will turn it over. >> hello commissioners. all tonight asked here. thank you very much. the translate transit center is over $1 billion in value and therefore
7:01 pm
are the challenges for small businesses in participating a program in that size is that many times they get squeezed out in a competitive process. so what i want to go to hear today is tell you how to translate is actually addressed some of those issues and how we become a role model for other projects both in san francisco and california and across the nation. >> bolcom i turn on the microphone 40. >> thank you very much. first and foremost with any of the project of this size it takes executive leadership and i want to get my hat to maria kaplan executive director of the tj pa. she's actually led a robust program of lay down through the construction management and all the different large contractors who are working on this project about how bored small business participation is. this is the only project in the united states that pres. obama cabinet members actually visited the project because you want to know what was working here and
7:02 pm
how can they take these practices to other projects across the country. again, small business on the project this size generally gets squeezed out but as any mention, we have three different pools we can pull from to survive small businesses. local, statewide, and national. we also include minority and women owned businesses. the very heavy emphasis for our project you were also very strongly encourage the participation of disabled veteran business it did in fact, the most wonderful examples of this; and bill builders which is okayed in hunters point here in san francisco. there contract on translate now exceeds $25 million in value. based physically started translate having 13 employees now have 87 employees. those are local employees from the san francisco night county bay area. so and bill builders is an example of how this project
7:03 pm
is truly walking the walk and talking the talk building meaningful jobs that sustainable sustainability. because this project is large many times small businesses get divided into networking events and offenses but literally, we are doing with a lot of people from one project your time with those decision-makers are really limited. a lot of times small businesses don't know exactly what the key points to hit our. we are seeking off of this wonderful unique online tool called the expression of interest. so i is a small contractor i could sit back in my office and fill out the specific form online that gives all my key contact information but also gives me a chance to talk about the projects i've worked on, different contracts of work done that were unique in nature only employees insurance bonding, when i'm finished filling out this online form i get to press submit. this data goes directly
7:04 pm
to the large contractors were making the decisions on teambuilding and so forth. they're actually using technology to help build relationships with small businesses. another thing we've done which is been helping a lot of fun businesses will come with a brochure and we took this to the next level. when she called the company line card and actually are program takes control of our aspects of the-it doesn't cost small business to produce this. we have to come up with that template is with all the information they populate it with. our team works with them to use their logo and color scheme to make this branded towards their company and we take care of all the graphic design. so the small business is not get frustrated with having to do all the different things to grade these two which helped some talk that the key relevant information. we were both 72 chambers of commerce throughout san francisco in the nine county bay area. this is of course because of the fact a
7:05 pm
lot of small businesses want to receive the information directly from their chambers. so this is a smattering of a different organizations we work with. we also work with the unions because a lot of the unions a small business members as well. we actually worked with unions and small business organizations across the board to get the word out about contract opportunities. a couple different things with done specifically. we believe in the protégé approach. we worked with a women's construction owners and executive organizations to grade a mentor footage a program to really help work with for a full year women owned business specifically helping officer vie as well as going out contract opportunities help with the backend accounting and that sort of thing. we've done work with the african-american chamber of commerce. san francisco. the asian american community has been active in the next one is interesting because this is the first time a public works project ever did and i weeps to the og bt business community. it took
7:06 pm
until 2014 for a public works process that said we want to work with the lgbt business community and we put that together. so thank you to this office which helped be a partner in that event. very forward thinking and all other things are happening across the country. it's important with a population of the size we actually track the commitments and promises made. we have a 17% participation goal for the construction of the trans-bay price. that means that $.17 on every single dollar goes to small business and matches for the construction part. i want to invite any backup to talk specifically about the dollars that are going to small business on this project thus far. >> thank you, paul. so, to date, the project has awarded over $329 million to small businesses and this life is used for both of our sp
7:07 pm
presentations and the v is a subset of the spe. that shows you what is going to small business. to date, more than $160 million has been paid out to small businesses. this shows you for the professional services side, paul spoke in detail about the conception portion of the project and he's been very helpful in getting participation construction portion. prior to construction happening and once construction is finished, we still professional services. currently, we have 54 times on the project and of those 54 primes, 13 of them are spe firms. when we go down to the
7:08 pm
subs, there are over 100 subs working with those primes and more than 60% of those are spe firms. then when we go over to the construction portion, we have just about 40 primes on the project right now. 13 of those primes are actually small business primes and one of the prime examples was and bill builders has paul mentioned. when we did down in the lower tier we have almost 300 subs working on the project and of those, over 158 of them are small business enterprises. with that, we like to thank you again for allowing us to give you this presentation. if you have any questions will provide you with any answers. >> commissioners, any questions. >> thank you. out of the $320 million small business, how many are san francisco business? >> i would have to go back and look it up. i did not bring
7:09 pm
that specific number. we are federalized project we keep it as an overall global number but it is something we do keep. i can go back and look at that more discreetly to give you an answer. >> thank you. i two more questions about the company line card and the expression of interest. these are very interesting tools, indeed. explain to us so that we understand it better, how is that channeled? house that exposed? is a online? kind of the process if you could? >> sure. the line card with a wonderful company, the officer vie and she also is
7:10 pm
traffic control business. it is based in bayview hunters point. she is a business and san francisco and one in richmond get we work with the lineup and her company to go out all the different key data points about her business which were important to people looking to make a decision. so we got all the information from her business. and we got for local colors, or brand or company brand get we put it together we worked with her and that was two years ago. she actually has a hard copy of that. we keep a hard copy on file as well. so when yolanda has updates to her company when she brings on new contracts and brings on new employees, new insurance, new capacity, she can call us and we can simply very easily update her line card. we center back a pdf version version electronically transferred. we actually go as far as recommending a certain kind of paper stock because we know when you're dealing with marketing it's all about that first impression. so will work with all these companies give recommendations to put their best foot forward. with yolanda within upping her line card for
7:11 pm
the past two years for both companies. ironworks also. enormously successful on translating another project it even though she got her line card to us but she gets these that line card for other work. plus that's good government in action get using resources for one project so she can actually grow her business that way. now, in regards to the expression of interest which the electronic mechanism that information, which is sometimes confidential, because sometimes people don't want their bonding capacity and so forth public. so that information is back to us electronically operated into a spreadsheet and shared only with those contractors who have been preapproved to bid on a project. this project that she died she spent a lot of time prequalifying the larger contractors made it very clear on a contract by contract basis, each of the context had a different participation level, which is based on
7:12 pm
elevators this not a whole lot of work for small business. interiors there's a lot of work for small businesses. so, basically when they submit their information to us it's kept confidential but it's only used by the prequalified business. it's worked out pretty cool >> so it's more than she should contact you? >> yes. we are for the most part through the bio process. was contracts have been left. we may need to were three contracts that we come up in the next six months. so when we were in height above contacting last year there was a place on the website that you could actually go and download the expression of interest form so that all that information could be sent to paul and be able to get it out to the prequalified bidders. willis and courage of our pre-bid conference is to involve letting the prequalified bidders know how
7:13 pm
committed we were to small businesses and letting him know all the resources that we were helping to provide to them to bring small businesses to purses based on the contracts as well. the tango >> don't forget the information about the local businesses just for matter of note, the overall for small business definition using the california state definition is 100 employees or less. at this point in certification is at 20 million for contracts. were working with a lot of businesses were really generally on the 25 or less. that's a sweet spot for working with contractors. >> commissioners, any of the questions? >> i just want to say great job. this is awesome. i love the fact reach out to the lgbt community and women owned businesses. this is actually like setting an example for the
7:14 pm
rest of the nation. i like the fact it's under 25 employees that are benefiting on this. this is awesome. so good job. we do the commission has been really coupled. regina has sent out a lot of information about the program over the years of the commission has been with us right here at the forefront so thank you biju thank you. commissioners any other questions or comments? we have any members from the public would want to comment on this item? seeing none, let's move on. can we do three or four were moveon to number six? >> so, supervisor wiener will be here in just a moment. perhaps let's take a moment to -i forgot to do this to welcome our new commissioner commissioner miriam zouzounis. and will under commissioner comments provide you with an opportunity to do an introduction about yourself.
7:15 pm
so, we shall move on to item number three. welcome supervisor wiener. item number three is a discussion on possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on file number 151179. this is the health code banning the sale of tobacco products to persons age 18-20. this is an ordinance amending the health code to prohibit tobacco retailers from selling tobacco products, including smokeless tobacco electronic cigarettes to persons 18, 19, and 20. today, we have supervisor wiener who is here to present and members of the department of public health and for any questions you might have for the department. >> welcome. >> welcome. >> thank you. think you for giving me the opportunity to present on this legislation
7:16 pm
today. it's important public health legislation. the legislation before you would increase the legal age to 21 emma in terms of selling tobacco . it would prohibit the sale of tobacco to anyone under 21. it does not prohibit possession. the were some people let concerns about the opportunity for the police to contact young people but it's limited to the sale by a retailer. i want to thank supervisors mar cohen farrell for the early cosponsorship of the lives ocean as well as the american heart association, american cancer association, and the san francisco tobacco free coalition for their early and strong support. consistent with san francisco policies, this legislation would treat tobacco and laconic cigarette secrets equivalently. mar had author
7:17 pm
that position which passed unanimously. tobacco, as i know you know leads is the leading cause of preventable deaths killing nearly 500,000 people each year. costing the united states as much as $170 billion annually in health care expenditures. according to a ucsf study the cost of smoking in san francisco alone amounts to nearly $400 million in direct and indirect health care cost. when it comes to youth and adolescence, it is estimated up to one third of high school students nationally consumed tobacco products and in san francisco among 11th graders 7.3% smoke cigarettes, cigars were smokeless tobacco. an additional 6% use electronic cigarettes. 95% of smokers start smoking before the age of 21, so if we reduce smoking below 21 we will have an impact
7:18 pm
well beyond the age of 21. people who start smoking as teens are more likely to become lifelong smokers than those who start smoking in their 20s. i school students who smoke are three times more likely to consume alcohol, eight times more likely to use marijuana and 20 times more likely to use drugs. high school students smoke were more likely to drop out and more likely to experience teen pregnancies. the nicotine and tobacco are merely changes the brain of children and adolescents who use it. according to a federal study by the institute of medicine, if we were to increase the smoking age from 18 -to 21 across the country within 25% drop in youth smoking. 12% drop in overall smoking. the 12% drop in premature death, excuse me premature birth and see a 16% drop in things which we know
7:19 pm
kills too many infants. nationally, 80 jurisdictions have artie increased the smoking , tobacco purchase age from 18, 221 including new york city and most recently the state of hawaii. oakley santa clara county acetate ordinance. the tobacco industry bully them into withdrawing the ordinance by driving an expensive lawsuit that small-town. berkeley is also considering a similar ordinance. a bill to raise the tobacco purchase age to 21 died in california legislature after intense lobbying i the tobacco industry. so, from eight --perspective this ordinance does not change the existing framework it is already illegal to sell to some of someone under 18 inches changes the age
7:20 pm
from 18 to my tutorial get our goal is to make sure compliance with the law is as simple as possible and consistent with the way things are already handled today. merchants are used to carding people for the sale of tobacco and that won't change. it'll just be a different age. so, with that, we do have folks from department of public health here to present i'm happy to answer any questions you may have of me as the author. >> commissioners? >> i'm just curious instead of the way it's written, 1819, 20 can we just say under 21? >> you are referring specifically in terms of the title. we can consider that. i'm not sure i don't recall if there was a reason that we did that or is that the city attorney did that were happy to go back and a


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on