Exhibition reports to the brief description to the whether to calendar the future meeting. Commission president s report and commissioners reports. Anything to report . 3d, commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration of a future Commission Meetings. And warrants and you talked about several agencies which you talked to the press about and several agencies with the investigation and you had a plan Going Forward in terms of this and what needs to be done Going Forward. And Going Forward to avoid this type of situation and didnt come up and is maybe something to put on the agenda to speak about it because i think something i would like to knowened an i have been asks and i dont know the answer to that. And so thats, i think, we should agendize that and who is hand ing this now and what is the plan Going Forward. I talked to commissioner hirsch who is thinking about creating a working group to drop a property coal and d. G. O. Revision to address subpoenas and search warrants involving the press and if we decide to move forward and that he puts that working group together. And in terms of policy give the Department Guidance how to move forward with that. And out of that, there is certainly i discovered that the further rules, we have certain roles. With rules of orred arenaed can send it out and whoever is the first to get to a letterhead can send it out and that is disturbing. I would like to add and the Police Commission rules and the use of the letterhead to address that and set policy in place. My understanding as a commissioner and i cant speak on behalf of the full commission and make a statement on behalf of the full commission, but if i can Say Something contrary to what other commissioners want is disturbing to me. I would like to bring forward the discussion with the and not 72 hours. And the 15 days notice and put this on as soon as and the whole commission and not as one or two individuals. And i thought the letterhead reflected that. And if it doesnt, it should. I think we should put that on the calendar and address that. This has come up time and time again. We can put it on the calendar and get advice from the city attorneys office, but it is clear because its happened under every Commission Administration that the president of the Police Commission is allowed to speak for the commission and allowed to use letterhead. This is not the first and wont be the last time it happened, but we are happy to put that on the agenda for another meeting. You cannot speak of behalf of the full commission. You send out a second one to say it was from the two of you and you cannot make a statement on behalf of the full commission if the full commission has not supported it. Thats in the rules. I am pretty sure i am familiar with the rules, but it was clear that the statement was on behalf of myself and president hirsch. Lets move on. Next line item. The request to put those on the agenda were made . Yes. I would like to add the next Police Commission will be june 12, 2019 here at city hall at 5 30 p. M. And please note that the Police Commission will hold a special meeting at a location at the Park District at Gratton Elementary School on wednesday, june 19, 2019 at 6 00 p. M. And to hear comments from the public and the park station captain concerning Public Protection issues in the Park District. The public is now invited to comment on items 3a through 3d. Public comment will be two minutes. I am with the united Public Workers for action. We are outraged about the raid, illegal raid on Brian Carmody and no report and no investigation and i guess you will plan to bury it. Not that important. This is not just a San Francisco problem and the attack on journalists in australia and where abc, Australian Broadcasting company, was raided by the police to get a journalist with information illegally. This is a real issue of repression of journalism and free speech. So what we have here is a potential criminal conspiracy to violate the california shield act that you knew he was a journalist and conspired to say he had conducted a criminal act in order to invade his office and home. I think thats very very serious rand we have to compare that to the treatment of africanamerican poor people who were arrested, put in jail. Has anyone been arrested or put off because of administrative leave because of the actions they took . And no response. I think whats needed is an independent investigation. And can be relied and the commission folk. And the attorney general and you cant solve problem with the conflicts of interest and and serious and in San Francisco and the attack on journalists. Brad edwards, and i was disappointed that it seems to be a put bury and no discussion and it wasnt brought up. Chief scott, since the previous meeting has noted he has seen the light and noticed this was an error and the carmody raid and likely an illegal warrant, and it doesnt come up in the report at all. One speaker previously at the previous meeting noted he believed chief scott was saying that he believed that the i made the point he appeared to say that the journalist was had exhibited legal behavior and distribution. President hirsch responded that is not what he heard at all. That he heard the only description of the legality from chief scott was that it is transfer from the original source to the journalist, and not the journalist activity and since then we find that to be false. And not even going to bring that . Up that is exactly with a false impression to be with the president and recognized the mistakes and this is a positive step. So i support that. If you never come out and admit that we screwed up and are not going to fix it, and the p. O. A. Does. I am going to run out of time here. There are so many more things to be covered. It is unprofessional to bristle as the title leadership when you are in leadership. Just getting used to it. Ms. Brown. Im tire and i need to get home to my grandbaby. I am here to talk about my son and i am pretty here is chief scott has talked about the homicides has beening here in San Francisco. And as i come here, i like to use the overhead. I am here concerning my son who was murdered august 14, 2006. To this day his case isnt solved. I am still looking for justice for my son. I come here every wednesday to talk about this, and i guess i will be doing this for the rest of my life. I just dont do it for mire children. I do it for all the other homicide victims here on this picture and their mothers and their fathers that cant stand and are standing along, so i speak for them, too. I want to tell you that my son had a father who is still grieving for his son. And here am i standing over my sons casket and this is what the murders left me with to grieve for the rest of my life. They say there is no limit, no statute of limitation for homicide. You guys have the names of all the perpetrators that murdered my son. And i am just asking for justice so that i dont have to come here anymore and show these pictures because it hurts. Sometimes i feel like i am just really stupid coming here every time, but i need to for my own therapy, and this is my therapy coming here instead of sitting at a therapists office. Thank you. Thank you, ms. Brown. I think were all sad and disappointed that you are here every week. And i would urge the public and the tip line if you have any information about the murder of aubrey, call 4155754444. Someone knows, someone was there. When this boy was murdered. If you have information, please bring it forth. That is the only way these can get solved. Good evening. I want to reiterate what the twho gentlemen have said, why do we hear nothing about this report . Who is doing the investigation . Why doesnt the why didnt you mention Paul Henderson that you are doing an investigation . You dont have to say what it is, but it is like it disappeared. This is where this is matter is supposed to be discussed. Were all kind of in shock. This has Gone National and international. Our city is looking terrible and nobody is even talking about it. And now the p. O. A. Which i find to be the most despicable group that i have ever experienced noo my entire time as an activist because they do personal attacks over and over ben again. I do appreciate, chief, that you apologized and the ability to apologize is commendable, but that you are not talking about it at all tonight is disturbing. I think that people if i were you, i would go the high road to not talking to people like p. O. A. And called Hillary Ronin imbalanced and up to jeff for the neighbor he lived in so a Police Officer call someone a crazy white marxist. And i dont think that works for me. I think it is important that you make sure there is no attacks on personalities and people and their lives during this process. That there is a memorandum and we dont support this behavior and we want to hear about it in all situations. I would preeshlt it if you would stop calling us the audience. We are not here to observe in a passive role. We are the people. We are the public. I am the president of officers for justice and we are here to support our chief. Thank you for your time. Thank you for coming. Thank you very much. Thank you for your service, too. And just for those in the audience, were not commenting on an open investigation because its an open investigation. And we want the results just as much as you do. So if there is curiosity about that, that is why. And i will talk about sb14 again during general Public Comment, but one thing that the current item drew my attention from the m. O. U. Between the d. A. And the interviews of sfpd officers which the commissioners discussed. Prior to interview, all sfpd officers directly involved in or witness to a covered incident shall be physically sequestered from one another and directed not to communicate to maintain the integrity of their statements. Well, the last time i was here i spoke about how the d. A. And rather, the d. P. A. And the m. O. U. And the collaboration that was required in the proposed language. I would urge you to follow this language that could maintain the integrity of the agencys representations to the public. Thank you. Anyone else for Public Comment . Public comment is now closed. Next line item. Item four, discussion and possible action to approve issuance of Department Bull din 19092, Investigative Services detail internal affairs. Criminal unit name change and responsibilities modifies dgo3. 10, 6. 20, 8, 11 and 8. 12. Discussion and possible action. Good evening. Good evening, Vice President taylor, members of the commission, executive director henderson, chief scott, member of the public. I am assistant chief robert moezer and here to present to you db19092 that covers the internal affairs criminal section to the Investigative Services detail. As partover that name change and part of the responsibilities and the m. O. U. Discuss and it involves or touches several d. G. O. S and Department Bulletins. And you can see with the Department Bulletin and responsible for the following types of investigations and custody deaths and use of force in Great Bodily Injury and member involved criminal conduct and any investigation that is deemed appropriate by the chief of police. And the Investigative Services division as part of the new m. O. U. With the d. A. Will be replacing functions that were traditionally done by homicide. And will be assisting in ancillary investigations with iib outlined in that mou. That is why its noted for with use of force and as a result of taking the place the homicide and affected the following g. O. S and the firearms discharge review word and previously relied and from the homicide detail regarding officerinvolved shootings and thats the change due to the new m. O. U. Member involved Domestic Violence is simply a name change from the i. A. D. Crim to i. S. D. There is no other change beyond that. Investigations of officerinvolved shootings and discharges and in custody deaths touch on the return to duty panels which traditionally had presentations made by homicide because homicide was there investigating. And i. S. D. Would take that place. And attaining Public Safety statement had to do with providing the Public Safety statement to homicide. Obviously homicide is not going to be at the officerinvolved shooting investigations Going Forward. Release of information to the news media regarding homicides and the title says homicides but also covers in custody deaths and officerinvolved shootings. Part of that Department Bulletin refers to the fact that any information among other check points would have to be cleared by the officer in charge of the investigation. And that mirrors the general orders as well as the Field Operation and officerinvolved shootings and replace homicide with isd. Thank you. Any questions . Essentially this is just a name change that we have had already before and no questions about it. Correct. No substantive change. Just the name. Commissioner de jesus. Well, i dont know if its just a name because i looked up d. B. 19092 and it is not on the website. The only thing that comes up is the one from 17. So have you changed it already . Or is there a new Department Bulletin that is out . It is out. It is posted on the sfpd internet internal website. Im sorry . Its posted on sfpd internet internal website. An i was looking at the website for the public and d. G. O. S and Department Bulletins and no such thing there. When you give us a report and says this will effect the following d. G. O. S and Department Bulletin, i would like them attached to see how they have been changed. I actually go line by line and compare, and i dont see that. So i really am interested in obtaining a Public Safety statement and what changes are made. And i dont know. And that is something that we should know because your Department Bulletin cant stay that way. Isnt it part of a d. G. O. Or should be changing to a im sorry eventually. Eventually it turns into d. G. O. , right . If it amends. There are d. G. O. S here and i would like to see them. I think its really important for us. And asking to rule on something thats been effective and i dont know fits just a name change. If you are telling me db19 and the Department Bulletin is reissued with a name change for Investigative Services detail and Everything Else stays the same. Correct. For each of these, can you answer the questions and 3. 10, 6. 20, 8, 11, 8. 12, and 19. 028, db18. 040, and dm16 section k. And section p, fob40403. The only thing that is changed on the entire list of what i just mentioned is the name, is that right . It is the name and that homicide is no longer involved in those investigations. That is the primary piece of it is that homicide was tasked with conducting those officerinvolved shootings and in custody deaths and they no longer are. There is no other substantive change, right . Right. You mentioned written reports and does that mean it just didnt come from homicide anymore . Correct. So if homicide would lead a report during the excuse me, would provide documents and the firearms discharge review to rely on those. We are not going to be getting the reports via homicide. Where will we get them from . That is the followup. Where do you get the reports from the administrative review . We would still have all the other reports that ewith would normally get and then any other report that we would eventually receive from iab in their final investigations. Are you changing homicide to the iib . No. Homicide is not involved in this. Just taking out homicide from the d. G. O. S. Homicide would be removed, correct. And for officerinvolved shootings and in incustody deaths. Commission sner just a quick question. Effective may of 2019ia has been changed to isd, correct . Correct. The d. G. O. S and the d. B. S, d. M. Y. , all still read i. A. , correct . Well, some do. Like probably the number one on this list is 6. 20 which is number of Domestic Violence which specifically speaks to i. A. Crim which is now isd. And the other ones like officerinvolved shootings and excuse me, officerinvolved shootings and in custody deaths dont specifically speak to ia crim, but speak to homicide. We have d. G. O. S and d. B. S that have the name of a section that doesnt exist, right . If we change the name of i. A. And its i. S. D. , we are simply changing the name. There is a name change and then the function changes of homicide being involved as the lead investigator on officerinvolved shootings and incustody deaths no longer exists. It is now a function of iid and Investigative Services division as outlined in that m. O. U. And where it says ancillary investigatic functions to assume those functions. Commissioner elias. Does it now refer the officer back to the m. O. U. With the d. A. s office . If you take out homicide whichevers the lead of the investigation which was the lead of the investigation and not replacing it with who the lead of the investigation is going to be, how does the where is the information going . Are you telling the officers to look back to the m. O. U. . So it would remove and are you speaking specifically to officerinvolved shootings and discharges and custody deaths . Right, the three categories. It would remove homicide from that and just replace it to isd, but the actual investigation piece of it and who is responsible for it would be the m. O. U. That is outlined also in will that change also be outlined in the d. G. O. S that you are changing the name to isd . It will not be in the general orders. Its the name change is simply in this Department Bulletin. I dont know if we have a separate bulletin that is coming out that speaks towards the functions of the iib, but once the m. O. U. And everything was approved and that function, then we could put out a separate bulletin that speaks to that. Do we have a motion . Wait. I have one more question. That was very confusing. One of the things the d. O. J. Said is we have bulletins on top of bulletins that change d. G. O. S and it is hard for officers to keep track. Now what i hear you say is this bulletin is going to change these d. G. O. S, d. B. S, and manuals, but the d. G. O. S will remain the same. They have to know to look here and to the m. O. U. For d. G. O. 3. 10, 6. 20, 8. 11 and 8. 12. Got you. U an i was going to add, so on top of this we have now the schedule of d. G. O. S that will be revised by the commission. So when those d. G. O. S come up, that will need to be changed. There is a number of general orders with units and names of units that are through the reorganization of the department over the years, and those units no longer exist. Those will all have to be updated. And what we are trying to do here is do what the d. O. J. Report says is when we do have a bull fin that impacts the d. G. O. , that it comes before the commission for approval. This is not the only ones that have to be updated. There are many d. G. O. S with names of units that no longer exist or changed through the numerous reorganizations that the d. G. O. S are written and have to be updated. I understand that. And the d. G. O. Is not in front of us. This is Department Bulletin in front of that is altering several d. G. O. S and they are not in front of us. With o. I. S. And something significant to change the lead investigator to the District Attorneys office, that is real significant. That is something that should go to the top of the list. And if its minor changes, that is something that cok be brought forward very quickly. I see this getting very confusing a z the rest of the stuff is already confusing. My impression is that this is the minor change, and i cant imagine that anyone in homicide is going to be confused that they should be conducts officerinvolved shooting investigations when they are specifically no longer allowed to do so. So with that, i would ask if anyone has a motion. Move to adopt. Second. Second. All in favor . Public comment. Public is invited to comment on line item four. No Public Comment. All in favor . All those opposed . All right. Can we do a roll call vote please. Sure. Commissioner de jesus. No. Commissioner mazzucco. Aye. Commissioner Vice President taylor. Aye. Motion passes. No, it doesnt. 32, it doesnt pass. Oh. Next line item. Line item 5. Discussion and possible action to approve issuance of Department Bulletin 19101, outside Agency Courtesy reports, modifying dgo5. 11, section a2 and discussion and possible action. Commissioners, chief, Vice President , executive director henderson, our public, good evening. I am the lieutenant dave falzon, the acting captain of the crime Information Services unit and we are responsible for dispensing the department dpoz sir of Police Report or incident reports to the pub luck with outside agencies and the necessity because of the technology. And tonights discussion and and going back to 2017 and where we used to have manually written reports and we would handwrite in outside agency report. That is what i did when people like myself and the assistant chief were on the street. We now have evolved into a computerized report writing system that requires an incident case number and as such, this outlines how we go about doing that. I wish i had something more exciting to tell you. My one shot in front of all of you. That was brilliant. This is what i got. So as its great. But i would actually request from this point on, and i think commissioner de jesus brings us is if you are going to give us Department Bulletins to look at and amend the d. G. O. , and if we can make ate policy and when i went to the internet to find the original d. G. O. , it takes some time. I can completely appreciate that. What i can tell you in this case it is outlined in the top of the bulletin. This is the section that is being amended in this one circumstance, but your point is well taken, commissioner. Thank you, and i appreciate that. Great seeing you. Thank you. Okay. Do i have a motion . So moved. Second. Public comment . Nice to see commissioner falzon here and that is the entertainment commission, is that right . Yes, sir. If it affects and i know this is similar to what we were just talking about, but if it affects other d. G. O. S and other documents, why wouldnt you update it . It seems so dismissive to say, well, no one would be so stupid to not know that they dont go do this. Show me the piece of paper and the document. If this is the policy, show me the document. Is this what you believe . Show it to me in writing. If you are not willing to say that, i am probably not going to believe you. I think you know i am informed by my experiences. Thank you. Any other Public Comment . Okay. Shall we vote . All in favor . Opposed . Motion passes. All right. Next line item. Line item six, general Public Comment. The public is now welcome to address the Commission Regarding items that do not appear on the agenda but that are subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. Under Police Commission rules of order during Public Comment, Neither Police nor d. P. A. Personnel nor commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public, but may provide a brief response, individual commissioners and police and d. P. A. Personnel shall refrain, however, from entering into any debates or discussion with the speakers during Public Comment. Good evening again magic altman. All of you received the referral letter hand delivered about the Sunshine Task force and the District Attorney and the board of supervisors put pressure on the Police Commission to abide by their unanimous decision to support so i certainly hope you get that letter soon because this is not okay. So basically the Sunshine Task force has never done this with a vote decleared unanimously and just because they dont have legal teeth, apparently certain commissioners dont think ethics is enough, to have moral integrity is enough. You voted that that vote stands and even president hirsch said at the time of the and the law was violated. Simple as that. I spent two years on this. And im not going to let this go. I spent this woke at a trial because my friends son was killed by police with tasers. This is a life or death poet that you cannot take lightly and i sent you information about tazeers and articles. I would appreciate just a little yes, ive got it and read it because i am doing the research so and i am so proud of the Sunshine Task force saying you could lose your job, be fined, be sanctioned, and you need to wake up. I dont think anyone on this dais got this letter. It is the Sunshine Task force referral letter. And they were told to get it to the commission. They hand delivered it to the ethics d. A. And board of supervisors. Was it delivered to the Commission Office . None of us received. I dont know. I didnt do it. I just know they were hand delivered to those three offices. And they were asked to get it to you as well. Please request to the Sunshine Task force to get this and each of you have a copy and you are on the hot seat now. This means the people want the will be attended. That is what brown and it says, we, the people. Your two minutes are up, but we have not received a letter, so i request that the letter be presented to the Commission Office. The Commission Office. Not sure where the holdup is. But Commission Secretary can make a phone call to ethics and see if get a copy next speaker. Brad edwards, district 11. Continuing with my further comments, i am not here so call for chief scotts ouster. Not at all, and to a degree i two appreciate. I have a viewpoint for and my and all is graded on a curve. I have disagreements on the policing approach with chief scott, but all the world is on a curve. We are not going to do better. I appreciate officers for justice and i dont appreciate an appeal that is endangering me and the fellow citizens every day when marty was gone and tony will be the softer face o. P. O. A. And comes out with this vitriol. It is not even in good faith. The p. Ovma. Flourishes in a power vacuum. And how many chiefs of police have we had in the last 15 years. So if they can form more chaos, they fill the void. The p. O. A. Is so antiSan Francisco and against our values. Check out the october p. O. A. Nouz letter where a crooked cop who is taken repeated underhanded views and framed someone and has been against journalists going way back. Check it out. These are bad people. Thank you. Next speaker. Hello. Zach dylan from the Public Defenders Office. Commissioners, i was hoer a few weeks ago to talk about 1421 and hoping it would be on the agenda again tonight and since its not, i am here now. I wanted to update you that we have since we last met received just so you know, we can start the time over, but it will be on calendar for july 10 and there will be an opportunity to have a full presentation. But go ahead. Thank you. And with the spoke and the office has received three records from sf pd and one record from d. P. A. And while this is some progress, this is five and a half months intot year. And for records seems a little light. I have asked d. P. A. To make i dos honesty cases a priority Going Forward and is currently released with most officerinvolved shooting cases and in the last couple of days, i have learned that there have been sustained allegations that would fall squarely underneath 1421 from d. P. A. This year already. Unfortunately, all the requests which are january 2 dont capture those. Now i am in a position where i have to make rolling requests maybe every week to add to the backlog and delay, i am sure. You will be hearing a little more about this. Thank you. Good evening. I am a law student and a member of the community in california and here to talk about sb1421 and there are 2,339 San FranciscoPolice Officers as of april this year. In january when the Public Defenders Office requested the records, the list was 2,315. How many of them have records that are responsive to our request . Which ones . And in other cities, statistics show that its likely about 10 of the active officers would have these records responsive to this request. A list of officers and into whether the officers have responsive records that categories of which they would fall in under sb1421 and as well as approximately how large that file is, similar to a brady list, and the level of inaction with the four records is reminiscent of the plessian brown. And i urge the offices to be on the right side of history and not a mar on our record. I hope we look forward to the future and the Public Information that we have a right so is being released to us. The last thing in 3a is the importance of transparency to public trust, and i am ask that value be supported here under 1421. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening. I am an intern at the San FranciscoPublic Defenders Office and also speaking about sb1421. With dozens of records and same with this commission. And if someone were looking at the content of the reports closely with an eye to what an outsider might consider dishonesty, and how about g. B. I. . Publicly defining the terms is essential to keeping with the spirit of transparency mandated by sb1421. How the departments define the terms of are critical importance with the first and most fundamental future for what they have the right toing access. The Public Defenders Office trusts whether it is determined dishonesty or not. If we have a report from the client saying i had a sustained report, and we ask d. P. A. And there is nothing, its challenging to that relationship of trust. It would be imperative to have public definitions. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. Director henderson, chief scott, my name is Marshall Hammonds and i am a law student and a resident of the tenderloin in the great city. I have spoken before as an intern under Paul Henderson at the d. P. A. And this summer i am interning at the Public Defenders Office. Upon starting the internship, i was concerned to discover about the numerous letters of extension that the d. P. A. And the San FranciscoPolice Department have given the Public Defenders Office to why they are not disclosing the 1421 information. In an effort to discover what information would be likely open to disclosure, i looked through every single openness report of 2019 and made a list of anything that would fit squarely within 1421 and the list of things that would likely fit within 1421. This information is public. The people have determined it to be public. Sacramento has determined it to be public and judges have determined it to be public. Release the information as it is the publics observation. Thank you. Give to the secretary so we can get them please. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Hannah Larson and i am a student at columbia law school, and although i go to school in new york, San Francisco is my lifetime community. The other day i was talking with my father about the prison excuse me, the county jail population in San Francisco. And while just 5 of the city of population is black, black people make up 53 of those sitting in county jail. And shocked, my father asked me how we fix that. How do we fix that . One easy starting point is to give the Public Access to Police Misconduct records. In other words, an easy starting point is for sfpd to comply with california law. What this Public Access to Police Misconduct records have to do with disproportionate incarceration of black people . It strongly suggests racially discriminatory policing is at least partially responsible. Without Public Access to Police Misconduct records, this community cannot identify Police Officers who may exhibit racial bias. The sfpd has a major stake in promptly releasing the conduct records and the failure to comply with penal code 832. 7 serious serious seriously undermines the credibility of the office. Fewer crimes are reported. The oakland Police Commission rejected a report because it was not investigated properly, and also because there might have been collusion between the Police Department and the investigators, and could have influenced their findings. This causes the Publics Trust to be shaken, and having separation between the agencies and the records being released from each of these agencies is beneficial because it holds the police accountable. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening. My name is lauren bradley. I am a law student at u. S. Avenue. A february 1st, the Defenders Office made a Public Record request to the polices commission for records on two specific Police Officers. Four days later, we received an email response from sfpds position, assigning a single tracking number 2 are separate requests to these separate entities. Upon required inquiries, we handle document requirements for sfpd in the Police Commission. Since that time, we have not received any further communications about our request to the sfpd or to the Police Commission, subsequently, on may 23rd on may 24th, we received an email for response to our february request , this time directly from the Police Commission, stating they had received our request that very day. More than three months after the request was made. In that email, the Police Commission said they would be handling their own responses and that they would get back to us by the 6th of june. The 6th of june would have been ten days from the 24th of may, however, it is more than 90 days from our initial request. The handling of his Public Information has cause an undue delay in receiving response of record, and it is unclear to us whether these requests and responses are being coordinated by separate entities. We do not know why this mission has changed the policy now, and we dont know whether the commission have different or similar records. Regardless, we request records from the commission specifically because we have seen they have different records. We look forward to receiving any and all documents to our request thank you. Lets keep this up for our july 10th Commission Meeting to talk about how the process works. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening. We appreciate july 10th being the next date, as of today, we are 156 days into the year, in july 10th, we will be 186 days into the year. We have people sitting in cages, waiting for these records to be released. This is an exclusive arm. It was raised last time about potentially filing motions. The California Supreme Court and the brandon decision stated, in daily trial practice, the pitch s pendulum has swung too far in favor of Police Privacy rights and the gift of disclosure, henceforth, and that was 20,002, 16 years later, the legislature decided legislature decided to act. Additionally, an accused has a right to discover and is entitled to a fair trial and an intelligent advance. With the Public Records request, this information should be readily acceptable, and although i am not necessarily saying that you all as individuals or entity are stonewalling, but we feel that way from all San Francisco agencies to have these records. I walked over here and i looked at the first definition to stonewall all on my phone, and it said you could delay or block a request, process, or person by refusing to answer questions or by giving the basic replies, especially in politics. The highest level of bureaucracy stonewall, that is what they used it in, and that is how we feel. These records do not belong to you. They belong to the public. Enough is enough. This is gamesmanship and you all ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Im not. Good evening, commissioners. Chief scott, i am with the Public Defenders Office of San Francisco. Since generally first, 2019, you have been compelled to comply with spee 20 phone s. B. 21. You have produced just full records. The Public Defenders Office reserved that the request should be narrowed and sfpd lacks a resource to comply fully with the law. Instead of streaming a way to respond to a simple request first, the ripon to the request silently. Specifically, these letters state that despite best efforts to respond promptly, the backlog has developed and will remain for some time. Sfpd has no clear policy on how to process claims other than in the order in which they were received. Consequently, it adds unnecessary delay to those requesting records. Members of the public and those awaiting a day in court. Suggest that they use mechanism to control the release of information. This adds unnecessary expense. The few resources that the office has should be for zealously defending clients to access what the law entitles them to receive. The current policy wastes public time because several staff must constantly submit request to capture new incidents. Staff monitoring request and public hearings leads to delay and disclosure. If s. F. P. Real comes this lowly, one can wonder how they would move if there was no pressure at all. Justice delayed is justice done lied. Is justice denied. Thank you. Thank you. Any further Public Comment . Hearing none, like next line item. Public comment on items pertaining to item nine below, closed session, including Public Comment on item eight. Vote whether to hold item nine in closed session. Any Public Comment . Hearing none, next line item. Line item eight, voting on to vote on whether do i have a motion . Second. Second. All in favor . Aye. Motion passes. You still have a quorum. Please call the next line item. Vote to elect to disclose any or all items held in closed session. Administrative code 37. 1 to a york action. Vote on whether to elect or disclose any or all discussion on item nine held in closed session. Motion . Second. All in favor . Aye. We have to take Public Comment. Public comment from the ghosts in the room. [laughter] hearing none, can i get a vote . All in favor . Aye. Next line item. Item 11 is adjournment. Action item. So moved. Second. All in favor . Eyes. Okay. , great