Skip to main content

tv   LIVE Police Commission  SFGTV  May 11, 2016 5:30pm-9:01pm PDT

5:30 pm
>> the city of san francisco
5:31 pm
sfgtv meeting of the police commission occurring wednesday, may 11, 2016 will begin shortly. >>
5:32 pm
5:33 pm
5:34 pm
5:35 pm
>>[gavel] >> president loftus: please stand for the pledge of allegiance. >>[pleage of allegiance] >> president loftus: i like to go home >>[call of the roll] loftus, here. turman, here. jan
5:36 pm
marshall, present. 10 judge uses his excuse jttf is en route melara, here. a quorum is present. also with us is chief of police gregory transfer and >> president loftus: good evening everyone and welcome to be made 11 police commission meeting. we are going to start this meeting by this body is governed by rules of order. the san francisco police commissioner rules of order so everybody knows exactly what they are i'm going to read them. i'm going to read the part around rules of conduct based on some of the stuff that happened last week. i want to make sure everyone understands what the wolves are so that if somebody does disrupt the meeting we will act on them. so everybody is on the same page. i'm going to read these. public comment, members of the public
5:37 pm
are entitled to comment on any matter on the calendar. prior to action being taken by the commission on that item. in addition to the agenda shall provide an opportunity for numbers of the public to address the commission on items of interest to the public which are under the jurisdiction of the commission and adopting the subject to public comment on other items on the agenda. the president may set a reasonable time limit for each speaker depending on the complexity of the item. the length of the agenda, and the number of persons present to speak on the item. at this time, i will allow public comment to be 3 min. per person. will be going to go by justin the commission. speakers must speak from the podium when addressing the commission and shall speak clearly into the microphone. speakers are to her fame from using profanity and/or yelling or screaming. commissioners find it difficult to give serious consideration to any comments addressed in such a fashion. members of the public should address the questions and remarks to the commission of another police personnel was
5:38 pm
easy personnel were commissioners are required to spot two questions, except when the request is to do so by the president. individual commissioners and police personnel should refrain from entering into debate or discussion with speakers during public comment. will quickly prepared audience conduct. persons in the audience cannot express vocal support or opposition statement made by members of the public lease department or occ staff addressing the commission. a positive applause is printed members of the public may not display signs that impede the ability or commission to see or participate in the meeting were in danger any meeting participants. cameras and tape recording devices may be brought into the commission hearing room. however, persons are prevented from using flash demo lights or other devices that may disrupt the meeting. will 3.4. permission to remove disruptive persons and the president shall possess the power and duty to order or removed from the meeting room
5:39 pm
and personal permits the following acts after being warned that such conduct could lead to the removal: so this is what we're trying to avoid so that we can all be here and we can hear from everyone. disorderly conduct that this disrupts the order. a breach of the peace oysters conduct or violent disturbance planning to interrupt the course of the meeting. disobedience of any lawful order of the commission president which i'll include in order to be seated. any other unlawful interference with the do an orderly course of this meeting. in addition to affecting the removal of any person or persons for the meeting, who in the beginning of the president has violated the order and the core committee meeting resume request lease personnel to place such person under arrest for violation of section 403 of the california penal code or any other applicable law and make us such person or persons to be prosecuted. therefore the complainant to be signed by the
5:40 pm
president or the omission second again i'm reading these will these rules that govern the police commission since 2005. just so we're all clear that members of the commission wanted a chance to hear from everyone. these are the rules that govern anybody does disrupt that i'm going to ask you to stop so we can continue with the people's business and if someone doesn't we will go into recess and then try again. opening seven conduct. so, with that, sgt. please call the first line of >> clerk: writer that commissioner loftus du jour make a note of light 3832 >> president loftus: yes. there is one change to the agenda based on the request of community partners and that apartment the annual report update during the joint terrorism task force by joint request, that is been taken off the agenda and to be put on parties need some extra time before that matter comes before the commission is my understanding so that we move to a future meeting. >> clerk: item 1, consent calendar. receipt and file
5:41 pm
action requested chief of police to accept donation of a key temperature system from ms. louise be totally, president of the police and working canine foundation to be installed in eight 2016 ford explorer assigned to a canine unit supervisor's vehicle. bible of the clothing and installation estimated at $3530. >> president loftus: so this item is in the consent come. any questions from the chief on this matter? do i have a motion? any public comment on the consent calendar? hearing none, public comment is closed. can have a motion? >> moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye. the motion passes. please call the next line of >> clerk: item to public comment. the public is now welcome to address the commission regarding items that do not appear on tonight's agenda but that within subject
5:42 pm
matter jurisdiction of the commission. speakers shall just the remarks of the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or occ personnel. on the police commissioner rules of order, during public comment from either police or occ personnel were commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public but may provide a brief response. individual commissioners and police and occ personnel should reclaim our from entering into any debate or discussion with speakers during public comment. please limit your comments to 3 min. >> president loftus: thank you. general public comment. good evening. >> testifier: good evening. one quick point. the general meltdown increased summons, san francisco, new york, massive corruption. charles and succulent. she's a unarmed youth in the back. florida, police corruption. what is going on ? someone is wearing a body coming. but we need those fast. but hayes appeared on it one more time at this. i would like
5:43 pm
this gentleman like set of you we subject every department in the country every major moment in this country has them except you. one is san francisco. one is san francisco. they're all around us. oakland, san mateo, when is the last time you heard of someone being killed by a teaser? no, recently. speed >> president loftus: we all have to follow the rules of order. clyde you have your 3 min. >> testifier: there's not been a man killed by a teaser. we are talking about the bay area. we are talking up the bay area. yes, this can be sporadic cases like that but as i said before, teaser me before you should that boy. yes, african-americans will get teased more than white people. but a brother can take a shock if he can take a bullet. have a good evening. >> president loftus: thank you.
5:44 pm
next speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening. i'm clyde mentioned the best cameras. i know couple weeks ago when i was here it was going to be a close session annually were going to get an update on how the socialization of the new policy with the labor or negotiation of the new policy. i don't know all the details, but can we get an update as to how that went? vocal, i think, was to get the gentleman was in charge of that project moving quickly, please. the sooner the better. it's already been over three years since the idea of the batch cameras came to this commission to three years is a long time even in the government. that's number one. number two, i know you probably have heard because [inaudible] about the commission finding that hasn't been fully released but the summary findings were released saying that there's no accountability
5:45 pm
in the san francisco police department. now, we know there's been a lack of transparency because of the lack of the badger cameras and other problems, the accountability issue really is going to be held much five by the cat scan batch cameras if you don't do your job, which is when people do wrong, they are punished. not rewarded. it's not swept under the carpet it when people do wrong, even if near the chiefs, no matter who they are, they need to be punished by you and they need not to get away with it. the police officers association is at the root of the problem as we all know. we know chuck lambert, former top former lieut. from the motor to lieut. a few years ago, chuck lambert, he was one of the officers in the association that before he met up with me. he was a treasure and of course was forced out of the police department under cloud of scandal. now, getting to the
5:46 pm
text, you would be such a problem if the text was the only person involved each time we find them or if all they were doing was texting. but every time we have a texting scandal, is usually about 15-20 other people in the department that are caught up in it as well. there is usually other crimes that led to the texting scandal being exposed by these officers that were involved. that is what is so troubling to the public. if we have a bad apple where they are it's not big of a deal. when evil branches of the tree that are rotten to the court, that is what is troubling to the public. finally, i note that chief suhr has the support of people ranging from david campos to the major if you can get up that wide of support in body politics in san francisco that says you have a lot of support
5:47 pm
within the body politic. but, in contrast, is a board in the public is not nearly as high. that is a sign of rocks within the body politic that's a sign of corruption. thank you. have a good evening >> president loftus: next speaker. >> testifier: good evening commission, and i like to begin my comments tonight by applauding supervisor jane kim for taking a stand on with it. supervisors have endorsed the call to look for a new chief of police. that is merely echoing with the people have been demanding for months and deserve. tonight, i want to focus my attention slightly always from that issue though because of the urgent nature of the use of force deliberate policy deliberations. they're going on and specifically, referencing the department of justice recommendations that
5:48 pm
were just released. i want to say that we are grateful that rationally, the department of justice has rejected suggestions by the poa to soften the language and has requested the use of shall, as opposed to should. there's no accountability in a policy that just suggests things that perforce shows absolutely no history of a hearing to. however, i want to take particular exception with the department of justices position that they have taken the draft policy concerning conducted energy devices, a.k.a. tasters. the exception i was to take with it is twofold. first off, despite the fact that the apartment of justice is not explicitly called for the use of tasters to be included in a policy, we take their
5:49 pm
suggestion that the policy be combined as one policy, is not just something that would be rationally sound for the department, but as a passive endorsement of the inclusion of tasters in the policy and reject that completely. secondly, i like to point out that in their commentary on section where i go, special considerations, specifically comment number 21, they say what if any evidence supports the notion homeless individuals may be more susceptible to adverse reaction if you sounded however, the word homeless does not appear anywhere in the draft policy which is evidence of the department of justices implicit assertion that they believe it's okay to use lasers
5:50 pm
on homeless people, which is an assertion we the people reject innocent entirety this is exactly the kind of bigotry, exactly the kind of derivative need your residence by the scandal by sgt.-earlier in the week that we are opposed to and exactly why teasers present such a dangerous option for the san francisco police department with its current culture and it's imperative that two disc loot conducted energy devices from these use of force to liberations. >> president loftus: on the briefly respond. just because i want to clarify two things. one is the us department of justice was unequivocal that they are not recommending that san francisco adoptees is. they are not recommending it nor are they not recommended that the local decision. i want to clarify that. the second thing is, there was a stakeholder comment by the coalition on homelessness that we as a commission might want to consider adding homeless population as a group that
5:51 pm
might be more vulnerable good so, they were spawning to that comments. i know it's been somewhat tricky to see the comments back and forth because we've got some feedback but i didn't want you to be left with the take away with that doj came up with that. it's a local suggestion and they were posing a question. so the other thing i want to say is that we will be having this is an item on the agenda went on down the road and the opportunity for public comment. this is general public comment on anything not on the agenda. so that's it. thank you very much. >> testifier: good evening, commissioners. [inaudible] i'm also a resident and work in the bayview. i want to express some of the bayview concerns. there are grave concerns what's been happening with the last text messages where again, is expressing that he joined the department to kill-i can't say the word. people in my building,
5:52 pm
are expressing fear. the last bunch who are very active in the community explains -expressed terror. this is not the first time some of you will remember, commissioner hwang they bayview least [inaudible] being [inaudible].and now we have sgt. sawyer who is one of the killers of alex-. and this individual works in the bayview. this is terrifying. we
5:53 pm
do not feel safe. something has to be done. come back, you know. as a group, as a police commission, come back to it has to stop. please do not send hired killers to bayview. it has to stop. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker. >> testifier: good evening. hello. my name is ivan gomez, san francisco native. i grew up in the bernal heights neighborhood as well as the fillmore. i'm here to plead that you restore justice to san francisco. i want to applaud jane kim for speaking out on behalf of requesting hiking and demand and, really saying that in this state of the perfect storm, i would say, we are at a place where, yes, this city needs police reform. it also needs a good foundation for that reform to happen. with
5:54 pm
chief dancer having a number of emotions that he had, it is surprising to me that he has somehow made it to chief. it is appalling to me that with the amount of information that we have now heard over the last couple of weeks, including this blue ribbon panel, these findings around bias amongst the police department that we still are at a place where we are not sure whether keith suhr will be fired. i say that whether you are speaking in the best interest of the people of san francisco, or you're speaking in the best interest of the police commission and your reputation, we know have a huge distraction and an elephant in the room we refuse to address. that is that we have someone who we do not trust, whether it is now or ever to implement these reforms that and we is promising with this new budget, this $17.5 million
5:55 pm
that he is seeking to bring into the city. over the next two years. we do not believe that this is the right direction you need to go in to implement those reforms and i really really hope that you guys consider your power and position as the police commission to move forward on the request of the people as well as supervisor kim and supervisor campos. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. next he could. >> testifier: alan schlosser, counsel with the aclu of northern california. i want to speak to you for a few minutes about an important piece of legislation that mark leno introduced, sp-1286. i wrote a letter to each of you this morning. i have to apologize because in the letter i singled out commissioner [inaudible]
5:56 pm
supporting this measure but i understand that commissioner hwang and dejesus has also supported that remains for the want to address might appeal to get residency and accountability have become the by words of what is going on in san francisco, and everyone is it seems is recognizing from washington to san francisco that those two concepts are absolutely critical. i am part of the group that president loftus called that's developing policies in a transparent way with sharp we have sharp disagreements but it's transparent and you all are going to be accountable when you vote on these policy. however, when you think about transparency and accountability, those of us who work in this area and certainly director hicks and certainly, you all know, that a major major
5:57 pm
parent problem is not your fault. the problem is state law. california has the most restrictive-among the most restrictive laws in the nation that keep records of disciplinary proceedings secret so that people don't know what the findings are. people don't know what the discipline results are, and if you are looking for ways of trying to build up trust and confidence, this system is directly contrary to it. we can develop, amongst all of us, good policies , but if we don't have a system where people can see for themselves whether those policies are being followed, where the community values are being followed, we have to open up the system. mark leno, as have the guts, i think to introduce this bill for statewide vote that we do exactly that. sp-1286. i think
5:58 pm
it's absolutely critical for the seven of you, the commissioners of san francisco who are sitting here developing these policies to support this bill. you are part of a law-enforcement community in an old chief suhr will support this bill as well because i think your voice will be heard and it's critically imported. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening. i have been speaking for number of weeks and months about transparency also and i want to comment the department last week taking a step in when they filed charges last week with this commission involving unfortunately another incident of racist language and sexist line which, to the step of making a public. sanitizing the opposite angle making a public. as i said before, the good things happen from transparency over the long wanted that things happen from too much secrecy. even in the short term, it feels uncomfortable the value of transparency has
5:59 pm
already happened in just a few days from this information becoming public. because we have seen the culture respond in all its warble ugliness, and now the public knows what we are dealing with. the public is in a better position to help you and hope this department overcome a. what i'm talking about is that these proposed new gary delaney's work reported in the examiner. now, some of this they don't allow to gary delaney's stories and some of it might be amusing kind of like donald trump some of them are deadly serious. this one is serious. now he commented on this in the basement posting and it's now in the newspaper especially broadcast every police officer in san francisco saying he didn't think his conduct warranted any discipline at all. that's fine. that's his opinion. that's how free speech works. so he said something that the community stands up and opposes it. i hope you will speak up on that but more importantly, he said this.
6:00 pm
talking about the incident, two other officers were the statement immediately raced to their supervisor" snitched him off. as our officers are now taught to do. boom. but when the former head of the poa to as influences talked about snitching and complaining about that it's incredibly important that this commission, that this department speak up to him and say that officers will be protected or not intimidated i compliment brought you handle it when they try to intimidate sgt. williams. she's a tough way. i don't know who these two officers were good they did the right thing they deserve your support but more portly, unfortunately, goes beyond that. the marshall who is an attorney at sheppard mullin's four presents a part where the host respected attorneys in the state was root porting his part of the detail report the other day and he reported on the problem that there is, as he put it, they found that the sfpd is insufficiently
6:01 pm
independent from the poa. to kind of illustrate that point, i gary delaney says private security website, made these horrible things, there's testimony is been doing this i've known gary delaney for 30. i would hire her barbary coast for any security. greg suhr chief of police. now i understand loyalty to a friend but you have a will in your policy, in your general orders that says, members shall not recommend to any non-city employee [reading code]. that includes political benefit. if it if i could finish with a seconds [inaudible] >> president loftus: i will provide a brief response. it goes like this. gary delaney us is no longer a san francisco police officer. gary delaney us is no longer a san francisco
6:02 pm
police officer. i've no say over what he says what he does. i do think you pointed out an interesting thing that he noted, which is officers are now trained to based on the not on my watch pledge, that they took that if you see racism or bigotry or homophobia or sexism, you are encouraged to notify your supervisor and investigation will be done, and if that is sit down to be true it will come before this commission and so i will sure any officers and back up what we said on not on my watch, that any officer who does that will be supported by this commission. i will say, i did get members of the community reaching out saying it took incredible bravery for them to do what they did that is in fact a culture change that we are talking about, which does take time and part of changing the culture is illustrating that change and part of it is when some people have a bad reaction. also suggested that changes happening. yes, sir. next speaker >> testifier: daniel mohammed for the record. while you are
6:03 pm
taking time and people getting executed by the sfpd, and people are losing trust and more and more trust of not only this commission, but the city itself, as well as all the other government officials including some are weak supervisors, who refused to take a strong position and say that reforms start with firing the chief immediately. now, this commission which most people i talk to think is not going to do a damn thing by the way. believes that you cannot have a city that you see like a damn titanic ship going down, and you have the power to fire the chief. the mayor has the power to fire the chief. now, most of you who were handpicked by the mayor, if we look at over a time period, your positions you have taken is only supported the chief. for us to really understand, you all of a sudden want to tell us about gary delaney as a poa,
6:04 pm
which would be considered the kkk, at this point, is ridiculous. it's too late. it actually proves that this commission here-we don't depend on this commission and that's why we're calling on the department for justice investigation. this chief work at bayview station. the sergeant that was on the scene or work at that station mario what was executed by on his watch? give me a break. so we can act like we are trying to be sincere now because there's a lot of pressure and i've been volunteering for 20 years trying to get this department on track. so i don't need no lectures from you, commissioners. i don't need no lectures from weak supervisors. i don't need no lectures from the sheriffs department. i don't need no lectures from most san franciscans gives you haven't done the legwork that it takes to change the
6:05 pm
department. i use it in a golden seat. the little power that you have left, otherwise you will go down in history as being nothing but a handpicked lapdog commission that signed off while people were dying in the streets. i'm not here to say what you want to hear. people-the marriott with is already dead. the calling on atty. gen. to investigate this department for the pattern and practices over 40-50 years and we go back to 1850. so let's speak straight words and be real about what we are talking about you. you don't want protests? you don't want rise? you want reforms should you want changes. you want to be a loving david conversation dialogue discussion. you don't even have on your agenda to deal with this chief. you never posted it on your agenda. so you start with your form and
6:06 pm
eight paramilitary structure by firing chief suhr. >>[applause] >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker. thank you, next speaker. >> testifier: we don't have much time here so we are speaking as fast as we can. we should at least have 5 min. this hardly anyone in. was always impossible to fight our way into. that everything blocked. i mean find any kind of protest was real hard. i went everywhere. finally ended up at a protest at 1111 for the [inaudible]. i still on my mother's birthday that is 11-third. the last time i was there they did not allow me to speak in the civic center because i was a little bit mad but i'm plastered i really am happy of all these things that are happening because the ghost buster busts are fighting the 13th when wild out there. maybe there is a time to noah's ark and i spoke of the station coming down because this is a
6:07 pm
polluted world. i'm sorry. i was yelling horrible things, and we all are murderers but we need reform. my birthday is 911. i speak of how i was asked to get an id card by the social security department and i said, you don't know who i am but you will on my birthday. the social security lady asking, why are you doing this to me. i said i'm not doing this to you and him doing this for a good it was happening to me or you would be happening on the west coast but it's not going to happen on the west coast. it's can happen on the east coast. 9/11, and 1111, i put the do together and i said, this could be a fukushima number earthquake i mean the day before this can be a seven and then attend the glass i predicted an earthquake i felt
6:08 pm
real bad because he was twice under the same nuclear power plant in i did not say anything. these things are stick in the eye of god the things they're doing here today. i praise you all. because god does good egos loves each and every one of you very very much. i think god for this form. because i get to speak of this. when it comes to fighting the 13th when i put five in front of you, that's the number five and that takes two to make five. in other words, three. we all have mothers and we are blessed with. i got 5 min. >> president loftus: thank you. you have a few more-thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i want to talk
6:09 pm
about teasers. get this, a washington post report cites california as having the highest number of police shootings per capita. in the country. the highest number of these are deaths. teasers are legal and dangerous and shouldn't be used in san francisco. records show that police overuse and misuse teasers. they don't follow training guidelines. instead of using tactics such as calming, subduing, or arresting people, they resort to the use of teasers although most of the teaser incidents that we are seeing didn't even meet the criteria to justify their use. those people are shocked with teasers get wide? because her verbally noncompliant with a police officer. because the
6:10 pm
police officer issued an order and they didn't follow it. not because they're being i can because of being aggressive or posing a risk of bodily injury. no. they don't get teaser for that. just because they're not complying. i really want you to get this. most use of pacers are on suspects who pose no danger or risk of injury to anyone. now, we have seen the lack of awareness among police about the risks of prolonged and multiple shock which has resulted in death. there is also the danger to vulnerable populations, such as mentally ill. people in shock or trauma, older people. and those with heart conditions. in one city, one in four teaser incidents involve shocks are roughly to the chest area. despite explicit guidelines by the manufacturer to avoid firing teasers in the chest area
6:11 pm
citing the risk of cardiac arrest. people of color are overwhelmingly represented in teaser incidents, as you can guess good one study showed 60% of teaser incidents involve black or brown people. now you say that in san francisco things will be different and in other places that teasers will only be used in certain circumstance could well, how can you give us a guarantee that the used only in those circumstances could you can't. because they won't. they will be used because the police officer has one in his holster and can use it. the misuse of teasers is going to be very expensive to the city coffers which we see in district courts shall out of millions of dollars , up to $6.2 million, to families of suspects who died after being teasers and were seeing it all over the state. i will say, orange county, st. angeles, san jose, riverside county. what makes you think there won't be police of use of this weapon? death and
6:12 pm
subsequent lawsuits? >>[applause] >> president loftus: i like to remind everybody that this is general public, the sioux have an opportunity to speak about teasers in the use of force discussion which is i think item number five. item number four. >> testifier: teasers, later than. what i want to say is in a new fact i like to remember for people to remember this. we say that the police as an occupation force and black and brown communities designed to terrorize people and drive them away, and one might think this is rhetoric or not true, but i like to remind people of an incident on martin luther king day in 2002, when police invaded a mlk celebration in
6:13 pm
bayview. these are police under great suhr commands and they separated out a number of teenage girls and patted him down in a way that can only be described as groping. the outraged parents said, why are you doing this and how long has this is this going to go on? the officer in command said, as long as you are here. as long as you are here. so, i just want to reassure people that the date of the working class is going to come. we are going to rise up and you guys are going to go down >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. no
6:14 pm
outbursts. remember the rules could i do want to take a recent. everybody will get there 2 min. you are welcome to excuse yourself. i spring the rules at the beginning. >>[gavel] >> president loftus: your outlook. if i were you again will will have to take a recess. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i know not allowed to dress anyone directed by the intention of talking today, could my manager training is in a corporate environment so maybe it's different than many other places but when i saw a commission or go, boom we have a basic hr policy that's not acceptable. this is not acceptable. that should've already been in place the employees are expected to say something to make your supervisor dropped the n word. just how people are being trained on. that's actually enraging to me that that is something people are touting as
6:15 pm
a congressman that now we are telling people to say something when their coworkers are using racial slurs. that is terrifying to me. i don't know what the smile is about? but if it's funny, i don't know what to say. >> president loftus: next speaker, please. >> testifier: could even get i didn't expect to come up here and talk, but i just want to let you know how difficult you made it for us to even get into this meeting today. we had to-i literally had to walk around the building. i went to the front. there was mass confusion on even how to get in. when i got into it separate entrances for people who had a backpack or it was crazy. i was told that the sun that i had, which was 11 x 7, was not the right size. then i was told that i written on it mayor ed lee doesn't care about us. on the sign and why make it so
6:16 pm
difficult? let us come any. there's probably people that want to be in this meeting right now that can't be it. also, i want to say that i believe that words have meaning. i know that over the past three weeks people have enchanting fire chief suhr. hundreds of thousands of people. google it. it is becoming big. just put in fire chief transit. the revolution will be tempo televised. it's on facebook is with the young. it's getting bigger. my 14-year-old son knows about it. fire chief suhr. >>[applause] >> president loftus: thank you. six next speaker, please. >> testifier:i want to play the video.
6:17 pm
>>[video] >> it's one thing to anticipate that'll because of old age or sickness. it is quite another to experience the sudden violence and possible loved one.since 2004, san francisco
6:18 pm
has experience an unprecedented number of [inaudible]. 60% of
6:19 pm
the homicide victims are people of color. their loved ones living in neighborhoods of scarcity must deal with her personal tragedy, while at the same time facing the crime and violence of the unsafe neighborhoods that surround them every day.
6:20 pm
>>[applause] >> testifier: as i come here every wednesday and ask for justice for my baby to my still looking for that. i'm still looking for your help. they said they were going to re-higher the investigator that are gone and you're going to bring them back to help investigate these unsolved cases. i am still waiting for that. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. >>[applause] >> president loftus: if anyone here or at home has any information into the murder of operate-there's an anonymous tip line mode 415575, 4444. thanks ms. brown. next speaker. >> testifier: my name is angel navarro. [calling names]. i
6:21 pm
would like to get names first before you start going off. i want to start with this , church boy just what you know so i don't know if you are familiar with that. it goes proverbs 21, chapter 21, verse seven. the violence of the wicked shall sweep them away because they refused to do justice. i'm going to say that one more time. i'm looking your eyes. proverbs 21, chapter 21 verse seven. the violence of the wicked shall sweep them away because they refused to do refused to do justice. i was born in san francisco. i've been here. i been running around. i was watching those kids that got kicked out plain soccer over there by the tech company. the likely book but a
6:22 pm
paper we can't play. what happened to us, man? what happened to us? we were all kids get we are playing in the street, playing ball. plain cops and robbers to become victims of that. i'm just tired of it. i'm here to shout at you or anything. we have the kid say here and say remember the i think it was batman because i think you would be asking some questions. i don't know. i don't get choked up right now. i'm just saying, i'm tired of it. my people are taught. it's not fun to be out there yelling and it's cold out there that we are yelling and more and get no, man. it's protect and serve. we need to start having a conversation rescheduled more to the school much as once a month and it is a little pain. you've got to start talking to us start talking and be how can we change this. at this point, numbers don't lie. using steph curry, right? number so much. he's history and what was it
6:23 pm
the numbers don't lie. the numbers don't lie in the people have been killed in the city. the numbers don't lie. you guys got a big warriors like in front of the city hall. what's up? i'm just saying. i do want to go all crazy like that but that's all i got to thinking i'm tired of it. i didn't even plan to come up your the ones i heard her talk about spaceships we've got to speak up. i'm just saying. with that being said, people, think about it. just work moment. the last thing here. the city was people were looking for gold, right? look freckled inside of you right now and that's precious right there. look freckled and pull it out because that's where it's at. forget all these people trying to bias with her paper. san francisco, what's up. >>[applause] >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i don't need a
6:24 pm
timeclock. it's right get my name is john jones. i lived in san francisco for 50 years. i work for the san francisco department of social services from 1973-1978. during that period, service secretary and was reelected as secretary of the san francisco chapter of sei oh local 535. i served in numerous positions within the welfare department as we called it all lower-level. i worked chiefly in intake come up with in my role as an activist coming if you will, i could take partial blame for during that period of time as having helped shut down [inaudible]. i interacted with many people and people talk to me. even in a department as left wing as the welfare department is notoriously, people developed ices to the welfare clients, which would be deemed objectionable if held by a police officer. what i'm telling you is, that you cannot
6:25 pm
do the job of a police officer and not developed these biases. it's in the nature of workers compensation injury. i remember talking to the wife of a muni driver, who told me that when that person when her husband came home, she cannot talk to him for an hour. you had to leave him alone. that kind of stress develops in many of the jobs that the city has, and i think it's in particular police officers in terms of what they have to do. my concern is not to denigrate at all the concerns that were expressed here today, but to tell you that administering justice to police officers we need to understand the injury, if you will, inflicted by the job that they have and you have to do that job for 20 years before your pension is asking almost
6:26 pm
be impossible. i left the welfare for five years and i can tell you after five years, i was ready to leave. i was no longer of any use to that department. my concern is that these disciplinary hearings whether open or not whether transparent or not, will be very difficult to adjudicate because once you have an officer saying something if you will politically incorrect, it's going to be almost impossible to let that officer keep his or her job. i would encourage in administering discipline to keep that in mind. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. any further public comment three give general public,? welcome. >> testifier: my name is william cisneros. i been living in san francisco for nine months and i live. from a tech company i work for google. since moving here i've been astounded by the way that
6:27 pm
police treat the citizens did i follow closely the [inaudible]. i follow closely the shooting of-i've seen the videos. on friday my wife is a reporter and i saw the video how she was beaten by the police and she was hit in the ribs and arrays are now bruised. it i think it's disgraceful that the police can treat people like. i like to just state that. thank you very much. >> president loftus: >>[applause] >> president loftus: who is a senior investigator from the opposite citizen and citizen complaint is here? director hicks. have you reported the allegation of misconduct on behalf with the san francisco police department because if so the senior investigator can take your complaint. >> testifier: is been all over the nose. there's loads of videos and second of all, but underwent and reported that she was treated disgracefully. like the way the police treat when a rape victim goes in to set to show her back by two males.
6:28 pm
males who spoke derogatory to her and basically made it sound as if her [inaudible] were not that that. that culture of impunity, that we are speaking to victims, making them prove as if based they've done something. i think the disgraceful and i think it shows the overall culture of impunity. during the trial we saw police snickering when-was making her case. this is a general culture of just disrespecting people in ireland the police are part of the community they don't go around with guns. actually part of the community and a very well respected. but for some reason i don't know why, the police here don't recite the people why they treat people the way they do. >>[applause] >> president loftus: director hicks. >> testifier: yes, it is my understanding that those were sheriff deputies and not san
6:29 pm
francisco police officer. our office has not investigated that complaint, but the senior investigator present is--. he's in the audio signal raises. >> president loftus: many can connect you with the right person at the sheriffs department. thank you. next speaker, please. any further public comment? good evening. welcome. >> testifier: i guess i'm can have to say i've lost the majority of respect from the police department. over 15 years that i've lived here, they have not-hide mr. marshall. are you a i live? over the years, the police department has continuously endorsed violence towards me. they have not supported my property rights. it feels like every time there's a crime they find a black person, they find
6:30 pm
black person and think them as a victim no matter what happens that's my 15 years in the city and county of san francisco. i don't think they investigate what happens. just like the alex me until trial they didn't test and see the police officers the neighbors on the gun. they just state pathology. but i'm just your cds will form you are saying, it's not good enough. 8% of all the [inaudible] you'll confirm only a percent. i mean, it's not good enough. most of those people come into the occ are victims because they would've not known of that system or even took the time to come there unless they felt they were a victim. but, i guess, the only thing where we are at right now is we are going to-it's inevitable. more
6:31 pm
protests. more riots until this body and the mayor heels. i'm deftly using the word heals, obey, allow, submit. it needs to happen. you can be very crass and aloof but it's very flaming that the police department and the city and county of san francisco assurance department does not value human life. it's in the statistics how they flamingly murder us. if you look at the drive-bys, what happened with the lewis case is very similar to a drive-by. in 30 seconds the police department did not have either they did not have time to make any type of decisions as to what this person had. they jump out of the car and start shooting. i mean, did he even have-he had
6:32 pm
his gun in his car when he was pulling up. 30 seconds. he had a shotgun in his hand while he was pulling up. how do i respect people who are continuously violent towards us ? then when the blue-ribbon commission they put their report out you make it sound the police commission is lying after they put this work in. so you can have a bunch of lawyers and judges and uganda paying them off as liars. how do we respect-[inaudible]. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. thank you. next speaker, please. >>[applause] >> testifier: good evening. i've been absent 11 thinking about you. i had a stroke on
6:33 pm
may 12 of 2015. then i had open heart surgery on may 19 of 2015, and so i have slowed [inaudible] anniversary. i've been thinking about you and i been watching, when i could, television and reading the newspaper about events going on in san francisco. what i am jackie bryson. i'm guilty of what i've criticize other people of not doing. identifying themselves and that spelled jackie bryson. i find it rather interesting that, here i am, looking at training i received at san francisco university during my graduate program in behavioral psychology and applying it to
6:34 pm
what's going on in san francisco. not only in this room but within the city, the government, the police department. when you find people of a same organization, who are reacting in an inappropriate way, the same way, that means there is something lacking in the training. so, toward that end, i asked her what i usually do, i want to wait until all the facts are in. i want to find out what reforms are being suggested, which reforms are being accepted by this commission,, 42 the please and implemented by the police with a timeline for evaluation as to whether or not it's working. that is basely what i have to say on this. i'm not one for yelling and screaming. i do quiet confidence the mills
6:35 pm
college way. no yelling. no screening. just when i earn my way into both those schools. no special programs. >> president loftus: thank you. any further general public on?comment? welcome. >> testifier: good evening. my name is karen-huffington post blogger, attorney and professional entire racism speaker. i'm also a mother, taxpayer, homeowner and proud member of the justice for mario words and cofounder of san francisco's for police accountability. >>[applause] >> testifier: i come to you today to urge you to hold accountable for the crisis in san francisco. we are run by a rogue police department over
6:36 pm
whom you have oversight. i ask you today to take the first important step in laying weight raining in the san francisco please run by removing chief greg suhr. greg suhr continuous chief threatens not only the genesee of sfpd, but of the entire government of the city of san francisco. all san franciscans need a police force we can trust. according to president obama's task force on 21st century policing, trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve as a central in a democracy. it is key to the stability of our communities by the integrity of our criminal justice system and the safe and effective delivery of police services. i send you all a d joined the reasons why greg suhr should no longer serve as chief of police. last monday, teams of pro bono lawyers from the most prestigious law firms in san
6:37 pm
francisco detailed there are innumerable findings of racism, and misconduct that none of you were present to hear them. none of you are present to think them. they were doing your job. your job is to hold bsf pdi accountable. >>[applause] >> testifier: earlier, hunger strikers went without food for 17 days and thousands of san franciscans marched through the streets of our city to hold chief suhr accountable. that, again, is your job. the children that my daughter's school want to know why sfpd shoot people so many times. perhaps, you can come and explain it to them. if you can't explain it to them, then you need to remove this man and the form that police department. >>[applause] >> president loftus: next
6:38 pm
speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening. i'm adamant jordan. i'm part of anti-police black lives matter these days. one race in san francisco. galileo high school. i have some information problem within the east bay address the needs be repeated good if not known to this panel. in 2003 jeopardy chief suhr [inaudible] do your member the allegedly an indictment of chief suhr. after that, 25, then the chief was reassigned. i was his first the motion. he was assigned to guard the water supply. do your member the g8 protests? people were hurt. it was mass incarcerations from iga protested number two demotion
6:39 pm
he would fail to [inaudible] that's the type of chief we have at this moment. then, suhr was elected chief by newly elected mayor. that points to cronyism. willie brown points to cronyism and be able to use ed lee as a up old chief trance or a man devoted twice and becoming chief. i know a doctor made to misdiagnosis people died under his watch. [calling names] if the doctor had to mishandling to a not get a promotion but he became chief even though he was sued for retaliation from the sfpd from the lawyer who is recommended firing [inaudible]. after
6:40 pm
becoming chief. so that is a direct retaliation and abuse of power, in firing this person. he was sued in monetary damages were given to this person. so the drug test-excuse me very [inaudible] the whistleblower he knew these cases were jeopardized. nobody can. i can see the panel knows about this. people are closing their eyes. they don't hear the information of somebody completely i mean he's not enough. he knows exactly what he's in good that's why doesn't want to quit because is the highest-paid police chief in the american nation amy's was make sure he gets his retirement. that's why he won't step down even though he's practical being forced to step down. i'm almost done. will quickly get the exposure of the racism the first exposure [inaudible] [calling names] exposure raises tax, the
6:41 pm
clip backlogs of rape kits. peoplesoft division. mario woods is killed. this list is long. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >>[applause] >> president loftus: any further general public comment? good evening, sir and welcome. >> testifier: if this commission and chief served things that the justice for mario woods is going to go away is not to go happened it would come down on this city like a sledgehammer. the voice of the people. yesterday, going to the board of supervisors meeting all day, i can swear i was like
6:42 pm
watching the fluffy bunny show. starring mayor ed lee. then, after he gets them talking, he just gets along with a little bunny rabbit and took off. never got to hear any public comment. just unbelievable. this stuff in san francisco has got to stop. the killing has got to stop. change needs to be made. i'm tired of it. i'm tired of looking at him. i'm tired of watching it. i'm tired that when i see racial profiling going on in san francisco them i see it. especially in the bayview. i'm in that area all the time. that needs to stop. some changes need to be made. we are going to help you make it. chief suhr is going whether he likes it or not. >>[applause] >> president loftus: thank you. any further general public comment? hearing none,, please call that sodom >> clerk: item 3 reports of
6:43 pm
the commission. discussion 38 chief report. this item is loved chief of police to report on recent police department activism make announcements. >> president loftus: good evening, she. >> chief suhr: briefly tonight we started another academy class on monday good we still hope to be on pace to it the charter mandated 1971 by the end of party 17 which would be a year early. i know that everybody in the city, the mayor, the board, this commission wants of those officers in place. commissioner loftus with iron long with other numbers of the public in the african-american relations board with the mayor's public safety budget announcement, $17.5 million over the next two years to go for the lion share to go for violence prevention but a good portion of that to go towards the police department full reforms both in training and equipment and other portion for oversight of an outlet
6:44 pm
director hicks speak to that in her presentation. then, today, we began procedural justice training with the oakland police department. again, the department will get implicit bias and procedural justice training by years end. also, the mandatory fingerpainting of all automobiles are good automobiles is going through. we had about 400 officers that are trained to take field finger printings and just since the inception of this program, in the last 10 days, two weeks, it's yielded about 25 sets of prints. about 20% of those have yielded and if his quality prints were we may be able to identify a suspect and take action. finally, this weekend will be the beta breakers. we encourage everyone to come. have a good time. but obey the rules that will be lots of san
6:45 pm
francisco police officers, m.d. and private security on the course. as well as medical personnel to assist anybody to get in any kind of the situation. that concludes my report. >> president loftus: chief, could you address what was brought up around the specific language around the discipline case that there is a phrase that is been alleged in the news. can you address that, please? >> chief suhr: as was mentioned by an earlier speaker, we did announce the charges that were filed last wednesday here at this commission when an officer made statements. they were not tax. they were verbal statements. in the presence of two other supervisors that had racial and sexual undertones that were off easily not appropriate for a police officer to make and we are sent here for discipline of two and including termination. it was reported by one media outlet that a certain sentence was said that was obviously
6:46 pm
would be reprehensible and racist to anybody hearing it. that allegation was not alleged by either of the supervisors present and throughout the investigation they were asked because it was brought forward from a secondary source is something they had heard but somebody had said. that is not something that was spoken to were discovered in that investigation. that investigation is now here with the commission for discipline. >> president loftus: chief, do you want to comment on the former president of the poa safe facebook postings? >> chief suhr: again, as you said earlier, retired members, many of them have facebook postings and their outside my jurisdiction. >> president loftus: questions commissioner jttf >> commissioner hwang: what
6:47 pm
protections are being offered to the officers who have come forward at least raised allegations of misconduct. other protocols in place to protect officers who come and inform of ms. police misconduct? >> chief suhr: absolutely. i know were going to mandatory harassment and discrimination training we are all officers are being retrained on as one speaker already said that they should already know. again, i plot the supervisors for coming forward and they're both good supervisors from and they did the right thing. >> president loftus: chief, do you have-obviously, the blue ribbon panel give their limited fine setting on monday night. i know that their politically findings, think is a greater report that 20 issued. i have said i testified at the blue
6:48 pm
ribbon panel before and i think all was met with a number of the lawyers and i would agree that the number of smart lawyers worked on it and what we said to them was if you guys come up with good ideas, things were not look at were all years. from my perspective, having spent i think about 400 hours just at these commission hearings which is how much of the time and commitment this is only taken into account so that actual report is really important, get a chance to look at it and do you have a response to certainly, folks are concerned. i think members of the board have expressed that was aching teacher for them the pulmonary findings of that panel. so do you ever sponsor that, chief? >> chief suhr: report itself is not how could i was not present for the preliminary spoken with get i will say that the were some representation that stop and frisk his practice in the san francisco police department and that was asked a couple years ago. we do not practice stop and frisk. i know they later said that there were anecdotal stories with a heard that people's opinion was that. stops in the san
6:49 pm
francisco police department are based on reasonable suspicion. as prescribed in terry versus ohio and all searches are done for officer safety are, again, with reasonable suspicion and cause to do so. absent that, i, like you, we'll go over the report once it's released thoroughly. will take to heart any recommendations we thank the panel for their work and we will get the difference to the collaborative reform review for their consideration and incorporation into their overall reports and recommendations and findings as appropriate. >> president loftus: commissioners, is my intention to invite the blue ribbon panel to ashley present their findings in official report here at the commission. since we are the policy and disciplinary body. speak up and >> president loftus: for the questions for the chief? commissioner hwang >> commissioner hwang: i wonder if there's a way to
6:50 pm
issue a stronger statement to suggest because i was concerned is not gary's just not up retired member but he's quoted in a press release i believe that's attacking the blue ribbon panel. so i don't know if there's a way that draws the distinction summary who so closely affiliate with a unit which is charged with protecting the members, is then going out and issuing a press release and saying, well we condemn these snitches these officers are reported misconduct. it seems like there should be way for the commission with the department to come out with a stronger statement saying that these officers absolutely will be protected whether by the commission whereby the leadership of the department. i am concerned with this idea the poa seems to speak with the department on things. >> commissioner zepp: >> chief suhr: the members of this department have taken a pledge to bring forth intolerance conduct well? oscar marty holleran at the poa supports that pledge but he took it himself. the members of
6:51 pm
the poa supported that pledge. the officers are encouraged to come forward and said it's retired numbers are just that. statements of retired members. >> president loftus: so this commission can draft a statement. i think we give that statement verbally but if you like to draft the statement, i agree it's important that needs to be made more expressive by this commission the department believes they made it expressive. so i'm happy to agendas but that on the agenda in a future meeting. any further questions for the chief? sgt. please call the >> clerk: items 3b was easy directors report this is to allow the director to report on these and those easy activities and make announcements. >> president loftus: good evening dir. hicks >> staff: good evening commissioners and chief answer and numbers of the public. yesterday, i here attended the mayor's press conference where he announced his budget plan to include $17.59 in this
6:52 pm
2016-17, 17-18 budget for a police reform. including $1.89 for occ staffing and support. the occ staff and i think mayor lee for his attention to our critical staffing needs. so the occ can probably fairly and partially investigate complaints. a police misconduct in officer involved shooting. the occ staff and i am especially, address our appreciation to the attention president's loftus is given to the occ budget needs and this commission support of the occ. last month the occ meeting in an outreach or nader don salazar, etc. racial and ethnic disparities community meeting sponsored by the reentry counsel and community-based organization. we've attended a series of these meetings and she will be attending future meetings. these meetings are facilitated meetings with stakeholders to discuss racial
6:53 pm
disparities in the criminal justice system. on the recruitment and, the occ is currently recording for temporary 1051 information system business analyst to assist the occ 1052 information system business analyst. the position is posted on the cities phr, department of human resources, website at www.dot sf dhr dot work in the jobs section. the temporary position can be filled for up to six months to provide them much-needed support to the occ only information technology employees. other common of human resources develops the test for a permanent position. their common of human resources has advised me that they hope
6:54 pm
to begin testing for that permanent position by the end of this month. then, finally, the testing process for the 8126 senior investigator position has concluded. the list for this position should be completed within the next 30 days enabling the occ to higher vacancies. that concludes my report. >> president loftus: thank you dir. vp turman >> commissioner turman: how many vegans do you have opened currently? >> staff: yes, in which area? be anyone 26? there are currently three of the four 8126 positions vacant. two of them are filled by acting 8124's journey level investigators. in the mayor's budget proposal, which is still to go before the board of supervisors, for consideration, and additional senior investigator is included in
6:55 pm
that package, as well as for journey level investigators. because of the attrition formula and staff adjustment formula, of those, a total of five positions should the board of supervisors approved that fit one, one still must remain open. >> commissioner turman: [inaudible] saul the transcription problem in the office? see that that is correct vp turman. the mayor is proposing to and $50,000 for transcription or additional training for the investigator as well as monies for experts
6:56 pm
>> commissioner turman: we also had some issues around that as well? [inaudible] >> >> staff: i've been sure there was eva did additional vehicle in the mayor's budget office is working with the occ on obtaining new computers. >> president loftus: anything further for director hicks? please call the next item >> clerk: three decommissioned announcements commissioner reports commissioners has her board and commission reports. >> president loftus: i'm going to start off by taking us back to the revelation that there were eight text messengers beckon before this commission withheld racist and homophobic
6:57 pm
views. now, i have to say part of our job on the commission is to be hearing officers and so we have seven open mind near the facts and make a decision. so that's part of why we don't get to say sometimes everything that we think because our job is to review the facts. what i will say, because it's directly related to the reaction that i had about the facebook page, is that when the revelation came that officers could hold those viewpoints and having been in the department for so long without having that been revealed under many chiefs, because there were officers of different rank who been in this department for a long time. so the question was how good those officers have been doing their job every day in this number got caught under other chiefs, so be not on my watch pledge, was actually people are saying nothing happening, nothings
6:58 pm
going on. i do think since all he took the time to be here, and you honestly care about this issue, i want to take us back to that moment and attach it to the not on my watch campaign was an effort to say this is not tolerated and if you see this, taken action on it. you will be supported. so, while i can totally understand the reaction that should not be a victory to say that somebody said we do that. that's what we are taught out. to me, that is a sign that the message is getting out there. to the extent to which everyone thought they could not report that, that message is being broken down and that is the type of culture change, which everybody is recognizing this department is in the midst of. so, with that, all you've taken so much time to be here and referred from you good one of the things that happened to this process is just which read a few of the reforms that have happened because i think it's important that we continue talk about the work of the doing and i know all of you are leaders in respective communities good
6:59 pm
so, for the first time in 20 years you'll hear us discuss the use of force policy. that has not been changed. the actual and 20. the goal is to emphasize as many of you have said, the sanctity of life de-escalation, personality, and time and distance to ensure lethal force is a very last option use. i will also take us back to december 9 on a 15 in this very room writing for hundreds of people who demanded nothing less of this commission that we take a look at how officers are trained and the very core is sanctity of life put at the beginning of the center and and and officers are trained and equipped to make sure they're preserving life. along those lines, the were some lessons, all officers in the field are not required to carry helmets 36 inch batons and gloves in their vehicles to provide other options for situations were officers need great time and distance. thereupon issued a bulletin requiring the pointing of a firearm to be a reportable use of force. i understand that
7:00 pm
cleveland is now adopting that same policy. that before an officer couple of gun and was not actually required to be reported. that has been changed. the less we go options available to officers have been doubled, as well is a suggestion that had been brought up at this commission to adopt net guns good so sometimes the connection isn't always made what people offer, but that is very clear reform that is being tested by the department. eradicating bias that i said this one had the mayor's press conference. this department was established in 1849. that's one 6070 years ago. as i said then, that was 14 years before the issuance of the emancipation proclamation that was 71 years before women were given the right to vote. so this institution has been around for some time. the stain of racism and sexism and homophobia is not new to many of us in america. it certainly not due to any institution that's been around for some
7:01 pm
subject to change the culture you have to identify what the problem is and take action. so, part of the way we do that is to discipline as we talked about. the other way is to data good i think the blue ribbon panel brought this up in this matter we been talking about for years at this commission and most recently, the printer in the white house data initiative to share data and make it available to the public. the department now publishes demographic topics up data with race and ethnicity with annotated list of officer involved shooting investigations going back to 2000. not on my watch campaign was launched in all officers are mandated to complete the city of san francisco preventing workplace arrest and training. the department has adopted the best practice of using scenario-based learning at the academy for training. all recruits are going to san francisco communities community immersion and engagement as part of their core training. all academy recruits within cultural competency training including one at third baptist church rev. amos brown. increase crisis intervention
7:02 pm
training, 520-again you have your opinions though it's happening i just want you to know what it is. i've 29 officer trying out for cit and the department is establishing advanced cit officers to be dispatch of the scenes were somebody is in crisis. all officers to see procedural justice trained and implicit bias trained by the end of 2016 and we will talk tonight about the initial findings we did get from doj but it's important to note that part of justice will be on the ground here in san francisco writing gets at least two years to do collaborative review and reform that unified goals. a lot of them are similar to what's come out of both these commission and the blue ribbon. it's on identifying bias policing, checking on the oversight mechanisms, changing training, emphasizing use of force, make each of those policies are not just write on paper the training is right and the
7:03 pm
practice changes. we created the first ever bureau of professional standards and principal policing, which is run by gevity chief county chaplain. so, those are the efforts underway. you all get to hear the broader shift in the rest of use of force also talk by the liver don't use the time my presidents reports to show you the respect you shown us to come and tell us a you feel and how you see things. one of the things that we need to do is talk about what is happening to people can evaluate whether it's good or bad i'm a but there is and has been a significant amount of movement on these reforms in large part to the people come to talk to this commission and talk to us in various community meetings. that is my report predicted colleagues, do you have any reports to give? >> commissioner turman: that always seems to be confusion about those officers and the text message me once again, once we have control over what happened to them along with the
7:04 pm
department and the process, i keep hearing nothing has been done but i would just say along with your report via clarity on where we are without reyna. the loftus there two batches of text messages case. the first eight cases that is not within the jurisdiction of the commission at this stage. it's with the appellate court. as a legal issue they are deciding depending on the outcome of that decisionwill come back to this commission breast to decide whether the officer did or said whether alleged to have said and what the punishment is good in san francisco that she does not have the authority to terminate an officer. that authority rests with this commission. the second group of text messages there are three out of the four text messengers are no longer with the department and the last officer is facing termination with this commission. anything else dr. marshall? >> commissioner marshall: thank you for saying it all that has happened in the last few months and all this is are things that are-have happened and continued while were taken
7:05 pm
on the task of reforming the use of force policy. i just want to say, thank you to all those folks that are engaging with us. i'm even this a herculean effort and we are trying to involve as many people as want to do so. so i want to thank all those people that come to the table. everybody. i mean a lot of partners involved in getting us to this point. we're going to keep our eyes on the prize and do as much reform within the possible purview of this commission. i just want to mention one of the groups is the community police that a african-american police advisory at western and get the mate speak to this today and continue getting an update on
7:06 pm
all of the reform efforts and accountability efforts we are doing. i just want to thank them for coming and sharing and listening and telling us what they feel needs to be done. and, i want to say further, taking initiative on their own around recruiting and setting up -doing some wonderful things to try and get more officers, particularly african-american officers in the department and informing the public of how that happens. taken on those tax of-i appreciate that group coming out and being part of the solution. so, i just want to you or their president loftus did i just want to see the back-and-forth and that's what makes this happen because there is a this is what we like to see and we take all the suggestions to heart and maybe you want to speak to that during public comment and commissioner turman you may want to say something about that also. >> commissioner turman: what was impressive about the community form that put together about significant road blocks, tv, police they will be
7:07 pm
holding a form this saturday at without be at southern station is that correct? i believe it starts at 1:00 pm. there'll be speakers to address different issues in the application process, as was the actual how to apply aspects of-for the san francisco police department. so, it's important step. the community is taking a lead in the police department is partnering with them so i'm looking for to seeing what outcomes will come from that. >> president loftus: any further reports are many commissioner? >> commissioner marshall: just one other piece. i just want to again, this whole inclusive and collaborative efforts under your direction, and in reforming these policies, i just want to again highlight all the young people involved in this prospect of that to say that as someone who works with young people to see them coming in and being part of this been
7:08 pm
very very impressive to me. again, i'll say all the time when people what we can and develop future leadership. you young people of an amazing. antitrust 6, 0, 23-year-old. who, despite their feelings within me feel maybe that's what i'm impressed about and decided we got to jump in and make this happen they tell me if we don't change things things are going to be the same. them to be involved in this process and wanting to make the changes that brought this about in the first place, i'm very very impressed with them. >> president loftus: thank you dr. marshall. i realize the last thing that i neglected to bring up is the commission did get a policy analyst allocated in the budget, which one of the things i did testify to it the blue ribbon panel is one of the challenges to the commission is we do a small but incredibly dedicated staff. we certainly
7:09 pm
with a number of reforms and efforts that this commission wants to-we love races appetite for policy reforms and so grateful we have that support. it does nothing further on this, sgt. please call i'm >> clerk: items 3-d commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future commission meetings. action. >> president loftus: colleagues, anything that we are not discussed we need to put on commissioner-commissioner melara >> commissioner melara: we got some information on the use of social media policy.i was wondering when we were going to be with to discuss that richard >> president loftus: i know we don't have a normal city attorney. does anyone have an update on what that policy is? >> clerk: >> commissioner zepp: we've already been in one meet and confer. we are very very close, i believe that i think we have one more scheduled and then it'll be becoming before the commission. >> president loftus:
7:10 pm
>> commissioner melara: ciardi drafted a policy in your meeting >> chief suhr: when it comes to you it'll be for approval or changing and then a vote. >> commissioner melara: yes because i some questions about. speeds >> chief suhr: also knew the working copy to get those comments or questions in so we can fix them before it gets- >> commissioner melara: okay. >> president loftus: vice president turman >> commissioner turman: i think during public comment about the body cameras. can you update the public on where we are in a process to the extent? >> chief suhr: again, there is >> president loftus: am sorry to follow the rules are used the chairs authority to go back to the chiefs report secret answer a question. go ahead, chief. >> chief suhr: again we are talking going back and forth about the language. i believe there is a some copper mines
7:11 pm
language federal compact before this commission for your consideration but again i think we are close with one major contention, whether some compromise language. if we can get past that one larger stick and put them i think the rest can still make our start date of early july. >> president loftus: so let's schedule for june 1 that the commission would like the policy must the body one policy for final adoption, june 1. june 1. i know june 1 is busy but it's priority. we will put that on. great. anything further? any public comment on-i'm sorry >> clerk: just the members of the public the next commission meeting will be out in the community on the 18th, 2016 at 6 pm in the central district. it's going to be at the court
7:12 pm
in jail out elementary school, 940 play st. again that will start at 6:00 pm. capt. david lazzaro will make a presentation on issues impacting the central district will have children from the school there to help them. with a presentation. >> president loftus: great. i will comment on item 3-3-d? >> testifier: thank you for quickly dozens of my concern. i appreciate that. a few things you mentioned i want to fly. first demo the spec to stop and frisk. i appreciate they are counter the report to get into but it's important to understand defining as i understand it isn't you have an official policy. it is a problem with the practice there's a difference between a policy training and practice in with the fines were vastly happens on the street is that though the presence or absence of accountability to encourage officers to follow privacy policy. it's easy to find. you can look at the [inaudible] and
7:13 pm
see what happens in this. i've noted this no lack of discipline. i testified. you can do a conference of stuff get you guys that was easy but graber were pretty big raspy it was easy to come back and it is the case. you had fourth amendment sustain findings and look at what that pattern of discipline is or isn't it the question is, the practice which is not just policy and train but whether not this accountability. perspective and not on my watch program, i do the graduate department for starting the. but it was in collaboration with officers for justice, really does work on this issue. that's a wonderful collaboration. a few comments about it was interesting important to understand these are supervisors reported that. good supervisor. that's great we need to be realistic supervisor reporting misconduct is different than peer to peer reporting misconduct were worse, underlying unsupervised. some of us are old enough to remember-well maybe not that many but was famous whistleblowing cop in this country frank superdome manager said the goal here to talk about culture change is you quite a great environment with relatively few backups have more to fear from the good cops
7:14 pm
than the other way around. that's the goal. that takes work. it takes commitment. two suggestions on not on my watch. number one amigo age for officers were to file complaint could i know x bout the chain of command some of the chain of command is a problem could i strongly encourage you to use the law in san francisco and have on the page the whistleblower protection from the whistleblower program outside the bounds but it's not appropriate for the supervisor. we've seen some of the problem officers being supervisors. secondly, you brought scenario-based training. that's very important in this. in particular officers understand that things they know that the department thinks are important are the things they practice. the things that are most stressful they practice scenario-based trinket does this department go to scenario-based training to teach them what do you do if you're in the presence of a your supervisor uses a racial slur? what do you do abuse see a supervisor used excessive force? you should practice
7:15 pm
that. if you practice that, it's not the full commitments. new orleans police department has a very good, i hear, i can review to some resources and they been through a lot in that apartment, they have eight what is supposed to be a pretty good program but scenario-based training on breaking the code of silence. lastly, don't want to lose track of the early intervention system. that is a proactive system. you should see of officers- >> president loftus: >>[applause] >> president loftus: next speaker. >> testifier: i want to address specifically chief suhr . we fail to remember that in 1997, under his watch when he was captain of the mission district, daniel garcia was beaten to death at the corner of south van ness. so, it goes way beyond that. i was present
7:16 pm
during the beating of the kids on-not only an officer commanding officer told to [inaudible] who will continue doing this as long as you people [inaudible] there's also an officer who fondled a 14-year-old girl called her a little b:. it's not those isolated instances. it permeates and it continues. we are in bayview that officer-has a redesigned. i don't see he can be undercover anywhere. [inaudible] lecs not beating on people in bayview anymore. some of you may have seen the tape of the carpenter being brutally assaulted, but i demand that
7:17 pm
the officer who joked about joining bayview because he wanted to kill negroes be fired. not just displaced to another department could this is grounds for firing. this is not ground for train. we need to uplift the standards of psychological requirements of th of the police. he should not be a cop. those are things to consider in terms of general water and reform as well. what are the standards that we want at the police academy level? after a 15 week academy and citizen training, i know, the organizational culture and it's not pretty. that can be done.. [inaudible] it would good for you to read [inaudible] this is the website of my [inaudible] who's the president founder of-
7:18 pm
his name is-davis who wrote extensively about community policing training. something you should look at. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. any further public comment on 3a-3-d? good evening and welcome. >> testifier: my name is darrell rogers. a resident here. as i listened tonight from all the reports, there's one thing that's i did not hear and that's accountability. until officers understand that they have to become accountable and tool that actually happens, i don't care what kind of training they received. nothing's going to change until they realize that their are consequences for the act, and i'm not hearing what those consequences are going to be.
7:19 pm
that's come as a citizen, that's what i want to know. i want to know what are the consequences. but just who is training who and what's being trained because that doesn't tell me anything. as long as they are sitting here and they feel like they have no accountability, they don't have to account to anybody, that i keep doing what they've been doing. no matter what you train them to do. you know it and i knew it. you do to. so, what is the accountability part of this? how much of this are we actually going to make these officers accountable for? i need to know that. that's what i like to hear. >> president loftus: mr. rogers, thank you. next speaker. >> testifier: i would agree. i think accountability is the missing piece here. for me a symbol of her real cultural shift for me would cede leadership held accountable.
7:20 pm
so not just firing the low-level officers were doing something like where is the leadership. i think the second question i have, which i think the commissioner hwang what pressures are taking for people, and report things. i have that question would have been especially communicated about the witness elements. whistleblower policies and what protections they have. has that been communicated along with hate, we want you to report this? have they been told and were going to take your view so that nothing happens to you? that's my question. >> president loftus: think. public comment on three-3b next speaker, please. >> testifier: i'm speaking of a problem but they have and that's accountability. the accountability we have here is none. i was talking to a lady out front here and she was
7:21 pm
talking how her son was beaten up by these police. i saw on tv a policeman san francisco police policeman waved a chain around with a croissant and asked her about this. i was kind of confused by the way they were presenting her son and everything. it was sad to see her son run into the ground and never to be the same again. no accountability. but today her son, at least there was a charge came down, but what do we have? san francisco policeman and why is it that there's no cameras anywhere and people have to come forward with cameras showing a policeman waiting a chain around? what to get rid of the nra because the police are
7:22 pm
going to be held accountable so we can be thankful. we can be thankful because they're not going to want the guns around because the dirty held accountable. they can go to jail. i mean, mario woods was murdered. seven people killed him and we held no one accountable. it's witnessed frame by frame and is not going to be seen on any network tv. then i keep this silent. he lied ed lee lied under oath. to keep that sounded a citizen of your bomb. you know, going off and where? >> supervisor avalos: can be ushered out of it. it's obviously knew there was no bomb. you couldn't lie under oath and get away with it. we already didn't like. and he
7:23 pm
made a bomb scare. i mean, our mayor should be held accountable. along with everybody else. i mean, if you shop me in the back, just before you went off and shot [inaudible]. i mean, the supervisors. i hope that you ended this because i was going to wonder, why you can get away with this. you had to call them crazy good. [inaudible] no one knows really what went on there. they want to talk about jimmy jones and everybody else. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: so, we just heard it while ago from mark
7:24 pm
schlossberg policy practices director for american civil liberties union, and in october of 2002 he wrote a long paper, a department in denial. the san francisco police department's failure to address racial profiling. supposedly, now this is good be turning over a new leaf and coming clean and yet, right in front of us today greg suhr has said there's no racial profiling involved in stop and frisk. stop and frisk is just not happening. i'm wondering if he's going to go further and say that there's no racial profiling involved in traffic stops? >> president loftus: thank you. any further general public comment on 3a-3-d? welcome
7:25 pm
back. >> testifier: briefly, on the issue of accountability i'm listening to the stats he recited mdm. pres. browsers involves. three are no longer with the department and one is interest being terminated. i have some concerns about the entire disciplinary process that is, whether or not this process were ever it is, within the police department were before this commission, you're exercising appropriate discernment who merits the term termination and who does not. this generates a feeling within
7:26 pm
me a subjective feeling. it sounds an awful like the french revolution when people run around denouncing each other. or the salem witch trials were people made accusation of witchcraft. i'm not saying it's like that, but it feels like that. the next time i come, i tend this meeting, i hope mdm. pres., the statistics would be more realistic. i mean, four out of four, that's not encouraging in terms of identifying this panel's ability to discern. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> tes i have done this but not enough. it's been a while but i've done this. so, bear with me. first of all i want to say good evening. my name is [inaudible] and i'm a first-generation college students who be graduating within 60 days in this month. >> president loftus: congratulations. >> testifier: thank you. i'm a native san franciscan coming from, of well i made san
7:27 pm
francisco native been involved with many things are on the community. most in the mission district where i was born and raised. i really don't-i been wanting to say this but i really don't feel safe around sfpd. it's not that i don't have anything against sfpd, but just recently, two years ago, what hits me hard every month is the 21st and i say that because i was able to-because -was my brother. every time i go to bernal heights and leave flowers to him, it's like if somebody knocked the wind out of me. i really don't have anything against you, chief
7:28 pm
suhr, but from what i've heard and would have researched and seen, i think you have, for me i don't want to say, but you're going to have to either resign or [inaudible] but like i said, i don't have anything against you because this is my first time seeing you in public. i mean, it's really hard for me. every time it hits the really hard. so, yes. >>[applause] >> president loftus: thank you. is there any further public comment on items 38-3-d hearing none, public comment is closed.
7:29 pm
please call next item >> clerk: item 4, us department of justice office of community oriented pleasing services, cops, memorandum and suggestions on use of force draft policies. discussion. the leftists colleagues, you have in your packets >> president loftus: colleagues you have in your packet ends available online at here in the chambers with us, as i mentioned, back on december 9 of 2015, this commission endeavored to revamp the core policies. at the same time, the police executive research forum's work with a number of other cities looking at but immensely changing the way they interact with individuals who have edged weapons were other weapons were knives. taking lessons from england and scotland and other places where they have had success with keeping everyone safe, keeping the opposite safe keeping the suspects from being use people for some protecting
7:30 pm
the public. so, in a process, the chief, myself, it represented from supervisor cohen's office we traveled back to washington to participate in san francisco be one of these places that looking at how we do this differently. out of the conversation of the number of principles that came in some of those were validated here by the department of justice. the key principle is putting the sanctity of life that the core over the policy is and what the training is. another concept which we talked about a lot now is creating time and distance, which is-other studies that show if you can increase the amount of minutes between when an officer rides on the scene and a supervisor or hostage negotiator or swatting or specialist, there's a reduction in of 280% reduction in officer involved shootings. the idea
7:31 pm
is, were doing everything we can to prevent the type of trauma and harm that happens across the board when officers believe their only option is to use lethal force. so, colleagues whom you have in your packet at the same time as we are a open up use of force, the mayor and the chief also asked the united states department of justice to come in and endeavor with us to a collaborative reform. since were already down the road on this process, we brought in kids who live predominantly in the western addition and eight you could some kids that live in the tenderloin could i should say young people. they're not young kids are in high school and some in college. they led us to a community conversations about what the use of force mean. we did hear from folks is always feel safe and were some suggestion that how that could change. those comments were taken and given in the first draft policy was put before us at this commission. we have a
7:32 pm
number of people who worked on these issues for some time. folks from the aclu, from the occ, represented by the police officers association, officers for justice, represents of the asian poa. when your talk about changing use of force, there's lot people who want to make sure their voices are heard. so, as you've heard, we could gather stakeholder group included many of the groups that i mentioned and also included the coalition on homelessness, bar association, could include represented from itself working group who built up a crisis center intervention training over the years. their three meetings. i think totaled 18 hours just pure service. for any those folks they have been working incredibly hard to make sure that this commission is all the information many to make the right decision. and, again, it was a great model for ,-i've heard representatives
7:33 pm
from the public defender's office accident some common ground with the members of the police officers association. certain areas because start listening to each other and hearing each other and so we ask the oj to do is take a look at the policy that's been draft. take a look at all the sick over the back and give us your perspective. the one large comment that we got was, they commended this commission in this department at the level of stakeholder engagement, that we do. we have a lot of people not only in san francisco who care passionate about this issue but also the depth of experience in it. so, that was the overarching guidance. i will just say to you all, colleagues, what we did was we asked for feedback in writing and that's a bearable for everybody here in these four pages. they also provided redline comments. want to explain to everybody that process as were all going through it, i pointed commissioner tran dejesus and
7:34 pm
tim is a gold on a subcommittee to make sure we can incorporate the suggestions. the way collaborative for form works is we got some large scale things to look at some summaries. there's a lot of redline comments some that contradict each other in some ways because they take subject matter experts from across the country who look at our policy and will say, for example, even though the doj economic recommendations on teasers one way or another, if you look at the comments, some of the common say this might be too restrictive. if you do adopt tasters might want to change this. some of the comments agree with certain stakeholder feedback and some disagree. so, we need to take all those comments that is a commission and present another option to the public. for those of you
7:35 pm
who are last were here last week with water stakeholder feedback really thoroughly in this commission knows we have two versions in many ways the version tell down on pretty clear lines. a number of those pieces are reflected in the doj's recommendations. so, commissioner dejesus identical versions of the policy worked on last we can incorporate the changes suggested by cops and bring it back to this commission on june 1. so you all will have the ability to take a look and then as we promised, those policies will go to to full community meetings before they're brought back for a vote. that is the process i propose. i want to get feedback from all of you in just a note to that some of the general feedback was that the policy should be very clear to an officer could they should know exactly what's expected that there are some practices
7:36 pm
that this process is designed to get outside perspective and their outside perspective was, why have three policies were four policies when you could have one. their perspective was, at the center of the conversation should be ensuring the officer knows what's expected of them. so, those are number of the pieces that one cover to make more clear. in addition, they provided some recommendations that we consider task force action items picking out of the president report on 21st century policing. to that i think are very important for this commission to consider. one is to mandate external and independent criminal investigations in case of police use of force resulting in death. officer involved shootings resulting in injury or death were in custody death and another to the ocean incident review board there would inform form committee
7:37 pm
members to review cases involving officer involved shootings and other serious incidents that have the potential to damage community trust to ensure community voice. so, these are number of the recommendations that they've asked us to look at and consider. along with the changes of the support policy. again, ari stated they do not give a recommendation one way or another on teasers, but it provides feedback for us in the event the commission does decide to adopt tasters. now is the time to discuss the feedback and i'm happy to answer any questions. commissioner melara >> commissioner melara:: i was hoping one of the items we would take on would be highly considered would be the merging of these three policies. i think it's one of the best recommendations that they have because the more simplified i mean, not simplified in terms of language, but in terms of making it simpler for people to define a policy and follow paul's bit uneasy zero when you have one policy instead of three. so, that would be something that would highly
7:38 pm
recommend. >> president loftus: the other thing i would say to that point, this is again i want to thank you because they're going to do for port editor for support expedited the 20 august but given where we are the love of humanity engagement, they did sort of shift their approach and were willing to, without having reviewed everything, they were willing to give us feedback on these policies did so they made that clear, too, that some of the things that the current existing policies will come up for them later on down the road. but this is the limited. thank you for addressing that. dr. marshall >> commissioner marshall: first, i want to say we really made a lot of substantial progress last week were here at the 12:30 am to do it, but the progress going to everything that we've received up to the point and then the progress,
7:39 pm
coalescing amongst the commissioners, around a lot of key language and things. it was really good for us. this particular document is just the latest example of what were trying to get everybody involved in the process, and certainly, i am just [inaudible] from the young people to cops office and the doj that makes them really really good comments here. i said before, i like the choices of commissioners. commissioner jan dejesus and mazzucco could integrate document. there will to anyone. also give us your feedback on. we have some of
7:40 pm
that feedback tonight and i'm really glad that we did do this we held out for this and held out for hearing your thoughts about almost everything that we've been proposing to purchase get the process moving. this is a very important document for us to get. >> president loftus: other commissioners? questions, comments? commissioner hwang >> commissioner hwang: i think what i hear from of we have a number of good policy. i think everyone would agree cit's a great thing that has happened within the department. i think the problem is sort of the tracking of data,, same thing with the early intervention system is that were not doing enough on the backend to follow-up. i think that's where we followed the question i have
7:41 pm
in my mind as i read this posting i think the folks i talked to agree, this is generally speaking, a good policy on use of force. what happens if the officer doesn't follow? these are the aspirational guidelines. disabled we have cit, i do know in my mind what happened in the left when the officers with cit training to why didn't come into effect? so what are the consequences of not following policy and how do we track whether not this policy is actually working? doing know what happened in the last couple of shootings so that we can correct it and incorporate it in this new policy is that of drafting something in a vacuum good what are the areas we could've improved in the last couple of shootings have a better policy in the future? >> president loftus: so you raise a number of very important points and things i think folks here today avast as well. colleagues, all jumping any of your the first, i would say, as you know,-from the ohs easy, one of her suggestions
7:42 pm
which a number of commissioners as to include in the was to specifically layout which types of use of force would be tracked, how it would be tracked, how would be shared and made publicly available that anybody who does watch this on wednesdays, other than my mother, knows that i've been my head up against the wall repeatedly but the lack of good data. so, good data that you make good participant data is not the enemy it's the answer. so, that's one of the suggestions to put in here. around tracking use of force. the other thing i would say is, the cops office, part of the reason they're here on it on one of things i said to them, we are here on wednesday night. we are not with san francisco's wheezy officers doing good job. if they do a bad job we take action like anyone else would but were not
7:43 pm
at the station. we all have full-time jobs. so are outside of our purview as policymakers is the actual implementation and so part of the collaborative reform is that apartment partnering with chief chaplain who i know is here and that apartment to monitor that and let us know how it's going because that's another key aspect of collaborative reform. the last thing that i would say he is for mike it with her very clearly a resistance that there is this notion that there's a legal standards and if the community standard. the direction of this policy very clearly is in line with the chiefs will you set this out initially in january,-that the community standard something that we decide. it does not have to be, with the legal standard is that what we have seen is, if we set a clear
7:44 pm
community standard and train officers to it, if they do not follow that policy any violation of any policy subject to discipline. the doj also made the point that where there's a equivocation and windows options, it's difficult to make want to create clearer lines of what's expected, right? the main thing is you don't set people up to fail. the policy should not be designed to set people up to. should be designed to make clear the policy what does success look like? what to expect our officers to do, and train to that provide them that agreement and when that doesn't happen, then our job as police commissioners, is to handle but this one. certainly, the officers citizen complaint has a 25% increase in their investigative resources. that's how i would answer that question i think data is measured and tracking is a huge piece. as you know, commissioner, endeavoring to create another discipline record on the front and so people in compliance with state
7:45 pm
law can evaluate disappointed i do think that it is that doesn' openly this ascends there's no accountability, and yet, this commission has terminated more officers under this chief than any prior chief. in any prior commission. so, for us, there's clarity on accountability and one of the ways we need to continue to do that is find ways to get that information out. >> commissioner hwang: appreciate everything you are saying. some of the wordsmithing on this as we debate sort of like safe when feasible when thoughtful to medication good i agree with 90% of what the use of force policy. i think the good policy that is an aspirational policy. i don't see how it translates to the average officer on the street. i don't know if this is a useful tool for them on the street. i remember the chief insane proposing this kind of maybe were just talking this an official also because i get somebody has a knife and you can shoot them. that's an easy
7:46 pm
policy that we could have been a nothing that the perfect positive that something the officer on the street can use and understand. i think if they have a knife, don't use your gun. you have to back off. >>[applause] >> commissioner hwang: this is the good i like this philosophy but it's not easy to translate for the average officer to use to try to figure out four-page legal legalese document how it actually impact their day today and how they perform their job. i think that's the part am worried it sets them up could integrate aspirational document. i'm just not sure that's clear enough. >> president loftus: can i say something? video g agree with. the limits for the policy needs to be simplified and clarified the rank-and-file officer can understand general guidance and principles good deposit copy understood by an officer reading or referencing them in the policy is not until the intended purpose. the latest easy strong and clear rather than minimizing the guidance of
7:47 pm
all parts. the point of that is, that's a major thread week. the holding unlike anything, when you're making-we got to the sauces making together. i think this is a good moment for us to reflect on what we have a lot of good ideas for fighting in these policies, we have to -it's a smaller group of commission it will work to those details is this greater? are we using a simple image as began? it's going to take that step take some time. in that way, the doj does definitely agree with you and given that guidance. commissioner marshall >> commissioner marshall: that's one of the things is to say other than recommending it should be one policy instead of three, more than one, simple, direct language that the lehman police officer, everybody can understand we've heard say that made him cops want to know what they can do what they should do good i think that's what we are
7:48 pm
trying to get. you know, that's the charge we get all these drafts but that thread running through everything i mean, look last week we agreed on minimal. that was a big gifted a call that wandered through everything and get to the point where i think it achieves what we all want. i just want to say, but the discipline prosecute the process we have is a process of by the voters. you can't fire. it's got to anything beyond 10 days has got to go here and we get we got some cases designed tonight. supper we don't get people we get them all the time. we fired, 9-10 people in the last-i won't say names-that's not counting the number delivers on because they were going to come here. so, you know, as we go forward with this new policy, new everything, if you have any
7:49 pm
ideas how to do that we spoke about on the table we can try and incorporate them into the way were going to do things as we move forward. to want to say something >> commissioner: 12 straight probation people have been killed including police officers with edged weapons and other weapons and the like. so i think the emphasis of the policy on shallow and practical create time distance the position is possible, to go all through i think that's-i don't think it's reasonable to have any sort of the coalition on having summary not allowed to prevent protect themselves or others because that's what we swore we would do. >> commissioner hwang: i know
7:50 pm
that a conversation with the poa and we don't know sometimes how to use this language like sanctity of life. how do you violate that and what's the punishment if you violate the sanctity of life? integrate aspirational statement but i think we need more nuts and bolts to the direction, to the officers. in terms of punishment on the same or not punish enough, and it has to be spelled out in clear that everybody understands could opposed? at sanctity of life is like a preamble. unless san diego but is also get laid down after that. one of my rules for the kids [inaudible] that is where we start with the kids. so that's the starting statement but laying out everything >> president loftus: i think you're working your way to the subcommittee commissioner hwang. that is the thing that we need to do. another thing doj
7:51 pm
flack we have to declare what a sergeant with the expected of sergeants. supervisors responded to the scene. i think this is why we've been so i can working so hard to continue having these meetings continuing this work. these changes are the real changes that we have not had an opportunity but we also on the safest. we have a really tough time it's a tough environment to bring people together and have them see what's possible for everybody in this process. that the officers, is better for the officers. it's better for the community so commissioner hwang item of your suggestions along those lines, but i think the challenge in order to make this change real we actually need everybody and we are talking about the safety of an officer that is something that the sense i get is that we have work to do to make sure that there's not a sense we are writing a policy here that doesn't account for their
7:52 pm
experience, and that was the point of the stakeholder meeting. to make sure everybody is heard. i think he oh geez feedback has been very clear that the object of the policy is inferred to be well understood and acted upon. so, that work remains and the goal is for the subcommittee to get back to this group on june 1 and this commission will review that and determine whether or not we feel like it's officially made that promise. if so, we can take it to the people. commissioner melara >> commissioner melara:: bawsca assay for any policy, where it works is worried you you put it in operation. so, the trick here, the real test, is going to be in how we implement training. because that was my first question i first saw the policy, was, how do you teach sanctity of life? it sounds to me to out there.
7:53 pm
so, it's very important that the training becomes the central piece of this policy. because without the training even when you're reading some people some officers may say i really don't understand what i'm supposed to do in x situation. that's what i'm hoping that our training will become so good that we can really say our policy is working. >> commissioner marshall: invited to the recruitment to the training >> president loftus: vice chairman turman >> commissioner turman: the training is important but the written policy has to be clear because it's also the reference point. training should be frequent but a written policy
7:54 pm
is something you're going to read over and over and over. what's more frequently than you're going to get training. so the doj not only suggested we got the language but at the find some of these special terms of art we are using, and until it becomes part of the memory bank of every officer that's what this means, that's what this means we've got to make sure it's got to be written so they can [inaudible]. >> president loftus: i also think we had this conversation before about i know you have raised with sanctity of life mean. but it's interesting because part of it is that the teach people in different ways because for me, you could not be more clear. when you say the
7:55 pm
purpose of this policy is to preserve sanctity of life, to me that it's like i know my job is. my job is to deserve life at every possible way and if i cannot i cannot but that's my job. as a value proposition, i think actually, i think it's up on a board somewhere in the academy because of the cabin recently the blue perch training and it says that it's a point of like i'll be saying the same thing over and over again. i would think about the exhibition and not only that, but we provide the tools and trade together because of this point is the sheer value is about seven people up. it's about ensuring were delivering on a promise, which is-that's what's been asked of us ensures legal force or viewed is the very last option and if it is use, we give up something like a serious incident review board 20 members will be on the board and would potentially say either no, that's not right to it. that does not meet the standard of this policy works you know what, that was the very last option. it's terrible what happened, but we find ourselves in now is a perpetual sense of grief and it never ends in terms of whether not something was in policy were
7:56 pm
not impulsive. so, were endeavoring to-i mean >> commissioner marshall: that's a great statement because we got to narrow that. your absolute write about the pause. the policy has to be very clear, very specific but will get all that it will get it all done and again, and if you want to throw in here, please do. commissioner hwang, we need you and your thoughts. the loftus i would like to thank the commission's staff for putting together very large reminder of the cycle the comments and i would like to specifically call out and thank the aclu, bar association of san francisco, blue-ribbon panel, the crisis intervention team working group, coalition on homelessness, officer officers for justice, finalize, san francisco public center of his all is organization took to
7:57 pm
time to pore through these document supervisor comments that we have all those comments and i would have doj's comments on their comments nov is a commission will put that together with a trusty hand of sergeant killed shaw and the goal is to get that back to all of us as commissioners by june 1. there is significant, the work ahead of us. nothing further on this matter, colleagues? anything i missed sgt. joseph? so let's get public comments on item number four. >> testifier: in regard to knowing officers with the expectation in terms of [inaudible] we also need to make sure that they there will
7:58 pm
be consequences of different type of being. that comes from the top from the slap on the wrist to counseling to suspensions with or without pay. as to filing and eventually criminal prosecution. again, i can understand why private session to discuss individual cases because it is sfpd to protect and defend the police officers from harassment, but to a certain degree, you will remember rachel hastings who was one of the killers of kenneth [inaudible] two years later, after it received a gold medal of valor by president, commissioner pres. mazzucco for his intervention [inaudible] he was found to have sexually
7:59 pm
abused a child for two years. there were nine counts [inaudible] against him each starting with that kid when he was 12. to this day, we know [inaudible] [inaudible] redondo these past. we still no fees in the department and the bayview officer. we need to know. give children to protect. again, i understand that good apples and apples but setting the standard when we are sure that there is not a culture that supports bad apples. as a survivor of sexual abuse in childhood particular, i'm particularly sensitive to me i know our kids in our neighborhood are safe. i remember officer-in central park station used to mentor our kids and he was: shoot balls
8:00 pm
with them in the park and everybody trusted this man. he was the officer who made us safe. where are the officer we need these days we need to see them back. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: dale rogers, again. getting back to this question of accountability, what i've seen is in the police shootings that happened was recently, the officer has been put on paid administrative leave, which amounts to a two-week were three-week vacation before going back to work. as a member of the community that doesn't ring
8:01 pm
right. i mean, you give this guy a vacation and then you throw him right back into the middle of our community and that's not even a slap on the wrist. so, what i would like to see in a policymaking part of this is, if it is that kind of a question, where it's a question of, should i shot and killed someone or not, that situation but being paid for shooting the guy is kind of [inaudible] in the eyes of the community. that's what it appears. he's being paid and given a vacation. so, policy, that policy for me that part of
8:02 pm
the policy should be corrected. no, i don't know how you're going to do that but that something that definitely needs to be addressed. there are other people that are on suspension and they're not receiving pay while on suspension. so, i don't know how it should work, but something has to be done there as well. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening. mdm. pres. commissioners and chief suhr and director hated my name is mike nevin among the executive board of the san francisco police officers association. i just want to first uprising if the poa came to the cycle of may 2 cooperation met with the aclu,
8:03 pm
occ, bar association, homeless coalition cit group. you can ask any of them in the probably tell you all may have been passionate in our positions, respectively of the process. when received the department proposed changes general orders were immediately reach out to jim cameron the foremost expert in california see these proposals made some. hans pursley traynor 45,000 w percent personal account. he says like taught thousands of times on the use of force for the defense and plaintiff is greatly been retained by san francisco. don was involved in the first 20 domains and been involved in every subsequent revision. post the records recertified overseer of police training in the california benes in the designer here to post training standards academy can be decertified. all active learning remains are written by subject matter experts the team of attorneys that meant by post check on the accuracy according
8:04 pm
to current case law the state and federal level. don is not here this evening please respond to a 15 page response we submitted for review. in essence, john agrees with the doj that the language the policy need to be supervised and clarified the rank-and-file officer can understand the general guidance and principles. the policy cannot be understood by an officer reading irreverence and their policy is not fulfilled the intended purpose. incarnation with john the poa offered its own use of force proposal rather than trying to reinvent the wheel being part of much of the language in a proposal directly from post. solutions to many the doj suggestions can be found in our proposal. this includes combine the policies into one and describing levels of force. we supposed chart within categories of a cracked the definitions of the levels of force, the reasonable force options. all of our responses and proposals can be found on her home page of our website,
8:05 pm
under link titled use of force. in addition to consulting with don, we also consult with blake close before joining private practice with the deputy city attorney in san francisco for 22 years. for nine of those who's the chief of civil rights litigation. is also assisted the sfpd and shaping policies on force and vehicle pursuits. fortunately blake is here tonight. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you. welcome and good evening >> testifier: if the san francisco wants to increase the use of de-escalation techniques and emphasize use of minimum force, which are very important and model goals, this policy as drafted i think is pointed out by the doj doesn't achieve that goal. in some ways it cuts against it. some of the language isn't very carefully use. when you're drafting something as important as the use of force guidelines, whatever word matters, every word matters a lot. i could give you a few examples of where this language, even
8:06 pm
though i know it may be changed, there can be some very dangerous language used that i think cuts against what you're trying to achieve here for example, if you look at the ds collation policy, it states the de-escalation applies to subject not endangering the safety of the public or officer fleeing or destroying evidence. if that is the time and only from the de-escalation applies, you are excluding most instances in which officers for using de-escalation techniques. i'd are not outlandish thought in there but only positive person is dated. barajas in situations where you have professional the escalators were called to the scene to de-escalate someone is threatening someone it is an example language that's used here is not carefully considered without consequences that you don't intend by this policy. mr. nevin suggestion
8:07 pm
that you can use some of definitions that are provided by post to avoid some these consequences i think is a very good one. for example, the definition of lethal force that's in this policy is not a definition that found anywhere else. it's not one that will work. part of the definition in this policy for lethal force says we go force is force is designed to be lethal. that suggests there's a subjective intent by the officer. no policy in the country has that type of definition. because what lethal force should be or deadly force, as defined by post, is substantially likely to cause death or serious bodily injury without regard to the intent of the individual. officers do not intend to kill. they are trained to stop the threat. if you have that type of language in their other well-meaning, you can have dangerous consequences. i would
8:08 pm
suggest in revising these policies with the doj guide and lines in mind it's important to have someone with real training and experience you can look at his policies and answer the question, if these policies are adopted, would be officers understand them and can an officer train them to these positive the de-escalation policies in particular officers cannot be trained as rhythmic they can understand. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: all be really brief. i've got to say, it's really kind of mind twisting to hear about the sanctity of life in the context of summary people being killed by cops. it's really very difficult. i think if it was really a feeling of wanting to have the sanctity of life be primary now that the police commission and
8:09 pm
the chief of police would be begging on their hands and knees for forgiveness. as regards to the use of force, we have tried-we've tried and succeeded four times to be dr. yusuf kaser's. it should be a but only clear the community does not want them. any kind of use of force documents to talk about the sanctity of life and also talk about use of lasers is a nonstarter as far as the community is concerned. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: alan slusser. i was out of town and haven't had a chance to review carefully
8:10 pm
the cops submissions. i also have not had chance to consult with some of the stakeholders that i've been working with. so i was pleased with the schedule that you set out. i am assuming based on past practices, if we had some comments on the cops submissions oh we could commit them to you between now and june 1, as the subcommittee is deliberated? would you be open to that >> president loftus: for everyone, yes >> testifier: i don't envy the task of the subcommittee of putting together these 4-5 different versions. probably no one more than sgt. will be happy when there's one version and no bubbles for everyone to take a shot at. i think the cops there some interesting things. i can tell that already but i do think and i've said this before, they don't answer
8:11 pm
the really hard questions, which is appropriate. you are going to have to enter those hard questions did some looking for to seeing what you come up with on june 1. thank you. >> president loftus: stay tuned. next speaker, please. >> testifier: karen fleischmann again. i served in both the bloomberg and giuliani administration so absurd or a closely how officer involves incidents are handled in new york city and you do not see, although obviously, new york police department has many incidents, you don't see a massive movement to remove the chief of police. because, when an incident occurs, the chief of police and the mayor hold a press conference and they give you the facts to the public. they do not render a judgment or try to exculpate the officers involved in the incident until an investigation occurs. i think one of the main
8:12 pm
reasons why sfpd has such as oral relationship with the community is the way that officer involved shootings are handled by you chief suhr. i reiterate the importance of very clear policy, that everyone, the community, the officers, can understand and that when something happens when someone does lose their life it's very very important and it's also in the 21st-century-the us department of justice president obama task force on 21st-century policing, that the standard practice is for the police chief to come forward and in a neutral way, just to clear what happened, but not try to spin that it was justified until some kind of
8:13 pm
investigation determines whether , indeed, it was. >> president loftus: thank you any further public comment on item number four? >> testifier: i would like to be able to have-say this exactly right-but i want to believe susie, that you are truly wanting to really make a change here in the city. i kind of don't want to be disappointed but i don't think the public wants to be disappointed. i do want to really believe that this is real and that's can be fixed for the final and last time. i don't want to do here three months from now that someone was gunned down and shot. as far as the kaser documentary, did you take time to watch it? does that
8:14 pm
seriously needs to come into your decision-making because we don't need kaser. we don't need to be twitching people with kaser's. teasers. that guns is probably one of the best options ever. also, when you're thinking about getting video cameras, another item that i should've added from last week is make sure it's an action camera. so that it can take really good clear video. right along with the high definition to make sure it gets loaded into the cop car without the cop having access to it. make sure it gets automatically uploaded to the cloud because we need to know what's going on. we need to be able to of axis and see this. we don't want to be lied to anymore. over and over and over again. by kenneth harding, all the cameras just
8:15 pm
suddenly didn't work. of course, nonsense. things need to be cleaned up in this city. i want to see some change. so, make us proud. again. >> president loftus: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: could even get my name is adrian and i am listening and reading ajax of your policy. one thing that is really concerning to me and i'm sure it concerns you, the language versus actual practice. i think there's a big divide their. i'm sure that a lot of you have heard like the flight to flight term. what happens when police officers six, seven, or how many of them are in a situation and they see somebody. there's something about a group mentality that
8:16 pm
all of a sudden people start firing and that, to me, is a big problem. so, how are officers trained to deal with stressful situations so that they are not firing? >> president loftus: thank you. thank you for that feedback. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening my name is maggie scott. founder of [inaudible] weathers illustrative into homicide and balance as well as folks who have lost loved ones to law enforcement on both sides. i want to say, thank you to all the people came forward in this city that you mentioned commissioner loftus. earlier. the aclu and all the other folks that came together to put this together, to start the process somewhere that we will
8:17 pm
get this problem fixed. there we would do it collectively and together good it's been hard. we've had to help mothers. their children. as we continue to do that that is very painful. i definitely understand the outcry as we as citizens of the city that we want justice for everyone. as i was say as a mother who lost a seven 19 years ago which a lot of people witnessed a lot of people didn't say a damn thing, to this day, but everybody wants to an outcry about everything else that is make the pain go away or less. if were going to have justice we have it 100% across the board so at the end of the day, your son or your daughter can go home safe and at the end of the day that police officer could go home to his family safely. that is the
8:18 pm
city i want to live in get out to live in a city where i can trust and have faith in the criminal justice system and at the same time that we both can work together with the community, without leaders, with our officers, with our clergy with everybody so that our children, children can be safe and have a future they can look forward to and trust in the system that they respect and look up to and at the same time that we as parents can feel safe in our communities and the we can work together collectively what we have done. no, this is all new. yes, this is only what it's going to take him but i want to commend the people that came forward in the city to sit at the table and say, yes, we can work this out. yes, we can do something positive. we can stop the killing and start the healing. thank you. >> president loftus: thank you.
8:19 pm
next speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening everyone my name is-[inaudible] at first when i think the police commission and the gray stakeholders brother hard work and dedication the countless hours you guys poured into the community with as well as outside speaking to citizens and giving of your time because that's very important to recognize that. i just want to say that i took many friends that are police officers as well as people within the judicial system on both the da side public defender side and i want to say that appreciate the conversation but clarity within these policies. but i am deep concern about the language that's in these policies regarding reasonableness as well as the language that continues to be throughout this policy that says-sorry-i'm
8:20 pm
going to point to it if i can find it quickly. feasible. i think these words need to be stricken i think we can create clear language that says it must instead of what should be a what's reasonable or feasible. i think that creates a lot of the issues that we see that happen in the officer involved shootings good police brutality issues and so forth. that this idea reasonableness as always given someone the benefit of the doubt. the matter what they do that the dems training. what i also want to say is that currently, even with training, to the policies, his mentors whether to for officer to do with they want because they feel they fear for their lives. then, i also want to speak as well to the comments about the current expert for post training officers that the police department has used with the statewide trainer, don. i just want to say payers testified in
8:21 pm
a contradictory manner and favorably cited with police officers and officer involved shootings every time he's appeared in court. i personally have witness that officers need not follow policies that they need only to pass the reasonableness test. that's why i'm concerned about seeing that language in there so many times because it kind of gives an officer the ability to say, if i did do something wrong, if i did not follow policy than i can always rely on the crotch of reasonableness and we kind of have to be more clear about that the community doesn't feel like summer can do anything and there's no punishment. the last thing i want to just say quickly is that i don't my [inaudible] fortes is good i think it more effective use for tax dollars would be to continue to use that on officer training, but also in which
8:22 pm
create events and opportunities to bridge the divide between officers and the community. i remember years ago, the bayview station did a struggle with children we have fairs and so forth and that helped to kind of creates some kind of conversation are officers know the community that think there'll be a better use- >> president loftus: thank you. there's an officer that's actually station that works with kids collaboratively at the boys and girls club on cisco road. perhaps to share more about the significant youth engagement but that's one of the things that has been going really well. any further public comment? come on up. welcome. >> testifier: my name is carla the josh. executive director of [inaudible] foster family service agency. we been servicing families here in san francisco throughout northern california for 26 years. i'm also a number of mothers in charge as well as a mediator
8:23 pm
for the officer of citizen complaint. i want to say this is a great opportunity for all aspects of law enforcement to come together. i'm going to use the example of the sanctity of life and what that really means, what that means is directly relates to the oath and officer takes to protect and serve. what is he protecting or serving where she? it is the sanctity of life. of a president that believes that is the previous speaker spoke, if we can get back to a direct relationship of trust between the department sfpd as well as the da's office, and public defender, and the mayor, that we can facilitate the situation in the community-all use district 10
8:24 pm
as an example-where kids can see the fire truck, and they get to play on top of the fire truck and ring the bell and all this kind of stuff should use to do the third street fair for six years and we had a fire truck that. we have police officers that walked up and down with the concerts were going on and they love to talk to the members and the family members and one of the things that was [inaudible] they said it couldn't be done because this could be some kind of violence under. you can get large numbers of minorities together. it's an opportunity to show that this community had prosperity. they had a wealth of culture, knowledge. we had the food. the head of music. we had the kids zoo. we have law-enforcement the good we have the fire department and we had actual recruitment of folks who wanted to come into the department and so, i'm really
8:25 pm
grateful for the chance, now, for all the things that we say in the community to begin to be put forward in the modifications that need to be done but together. we do this side-by-side and we can do that without accusation and show some form of mutual respect. i believe it's honesty in the to care for our children will come forward and it will not only come forward in the life we have here in san francisco and these multiple cultures, but it will also be seen in our law enforcement and persons who come for it to become to protect and serve. thank you for your time >> president loftus: bank. any further public comment item number four? hearing none, public comment is closed. please call the next item >> clerk: items five public
8:26 pm
comment on all matters pertaining to item 7 below close session including public item on vote whether to hold item on seven >> president loftus: any public comment on whether not we hold items seven and close session? hearing none, public comment is closed. please call the next item >> clerk: vote on whether to old item 7 in close session san francisco code section city 7.1. >> president loftus: to have a motion? >> moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye. opposed? the motion passes we are in close session, ladies and gentlemen. >>[gavel] >>[closed session]
8:27 pm
>>
8:28 pm
8:29 pm
8:30 pm
8:31 pm
8:32 pm
8:33 pm
8:34 pm
8:35 pm
8:36 pm
8:37 pm
8:38 pm
8:39 pm
8:40 pm
8:41 pm
8:42 pm
8:43 pm
8:44 pm
8:45 pm
8:46 pm
8:47 pm
8:48 pm
8:49 pm
8:50 pm
8:51 pm
8:52 pm
8:53 pm
8:54 pm
8:55 pm
8:56 pm
8:57 pm
8:58 pm
8:59 pm
9:00 pm

1,090 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on