That were put in place by the organizers of the event including fencing even though the event is free, those security measures were successful. We were happy to report no significant incidents at the harley strictly blue grass. Just one other note for commissioner taylor you had asked for Additional Information on a sexual assault. So we plan to add that to the Commission Next week. Well follow up on that next week. We have two additional reports. Next is the safe streets report. Commander dan poreia. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening president , Vice President , commissioners, director, chief members of the audience. Im dan poreia. And i am the commander of the m. T. A. My presentation is about our efforts for the Second Quarter of 2019 in regards to Traffic Safety. So i wanted to talk a little bit first about our efforts and our enforcement. Our strategy is to prioritize deployment in the highinjury network corridors that have been identified by data from traffic collisions throughout the city to increase enforcement and to educate members of the public especially the driving public about our strategies. Part of our enforcement include s lidar radar operations where were looking for people who are violating the basic speed limit law, also distracted driving operations pedestrian and bicycle, safety enforcement and those are things like a couple of weeks ago we had our Traffic Company motorcycle officers who were out working with officers from tenderloin station at turk and levenworth. We were having an undercover officer when the light was green enter into the crosswalk. We had motorcycle officers standing by. When an individual failed to yield to the pedestrians as required those individuals were stopped. There were a number of citations issued during that operation, as well as warnings to some of the drivers. The last bullet on my slide, very important. As part of our overall strategy to collaborate with city agencies, like the department of Public Health San Francisco m. T. A. , and also with advocates and stakeholders like i see jody mcgaris who is one of my new friends over the last five weeks from walk s. F. , a strong advocate for Pedestrian Safety in the city. Brian wiedelmeyer is someone ive worked with and gotten to know over the last five weeks. I think im in my fifth week here at m. T. A. My next slide is a comparison of our secondquarter results for 2019 compared to what we did in 2018. For members of the audience who might not be familiar with focus on the five we have identified five violations that are the most common primary collision factor in traffic collisions in the city. When you see focus on the five notation the Police Department has a commitment of reaching the goal of 50 in all of our enforcement. For members of the public that may not be familiar the focus on the five violations are for red lights, stop signs pedestrian right of way speed and failing to yield while turning. So youll see in all of our categories here for red light, the stop sign pedestrian right of way and failing to yield while turning we saw increases in a positive direction for the Second Quarter of 2019. Our speeding enforcement our enforcement of basic speed laws for the Second Quarter was down slightly, compared to this period for last year. I learned from another meeting that i went to last week not to throw numbers at members of the committee or the commission. I apologize for doing this but i spoke with jody maderas earlier today and she asked me a question that i hadnt considered. So i got that information and i wanted to discuss that and provide it to all of you this evening. So youll see in this next slide we have our focus on the five violations for the ten district stations and the Traffic Company, the solo motorcycles. One thing thats important to point out is that in the First Quarter of this year we issued over 10,000 citations in total. Of those citations 4,494 were for focus on the five violations which equated to 41 . In the Second Quarter of this year weve issued 11,000 citations, 5,773 were for focus on the five violations. Our percentage was 52 departmentwide. Of the stations that you see on this slide, id like to point out that bayview station northern station richmond, and ingleside all exceeded our 50 goal. Ingleside very significantly by 69 . Our Traffic Company was over 60 as well. So this slide is other traffic violations versus focus on the five. Again in the Second Quarter overall our citations were up from the previous quarter. As i mention, our department average is for that quarter is 52 . So these two quarters combined the first and the second leave us with a department average for the first two quarters of 47 . So not 50 but i think a positive thing to point out is it is trending upward in terms of enforcement and meeting that goal. Now, the next slide that i have here for all of you contains information about the traffic fatalities that weve had, unfortunately, in the Second Quarter of 2019. The first graph or pie chart to your left breaks out the information on the method of travel that a person was engaged in whether it was a person walking, a person driving, motorcyclist a passenger, or a pedestrian. We had a total of nine victims during this period. Youll see that for the age of our victims, the largest percentage of in the age group is our seniors, at 33 . Part of my assignment here, ive been educated at meetings and Commission Meetings about the vulnerability of people who are in certain groups people of color the elderly people that are unhoused are and people that are outside vehicles are a lot more vulnerable than people that are inside vehicles. Our traffic fatalities for quarter two compared to 2018 we had five total for the Second Quarter in 2018. Unfortunately, this year weve had nine. So that concludes my report. I did want to touch on a few things very briefly. In terms of an update, i believe that the commission is aware that we have a Vision Zero Enforcement Team in the solos. The size of that team was increased. We have nine officers now who are working every day of the week. They are concentrated on focus on the five violations. We want to change behavior by issuing citations and conducting operations solely for that purpose. Since june 17th through september 30th theyve conducted over a thousand traffic stops and issued about as many citations in addition to 30 warnings. Approximately 90 of the traffic stops that they made resulting in a citation they cited individuals for focus on the five violations. So i think thats an important piece to point out. Finally, i just want to make the point that our Traffic Company officers are definitely the experts when it comes to Traffic Safety and enforcement within the Police Department. They are involved in collaboration with all of the district stations and with all of the captains to conduct operations. I think the tenderloin is probably the best example because weve had some serious injury collisions and deaths in that district. Having the Additional Support of motorcycle officers not just for one day but Going Forward as part of our overall strategy is going to be helpful in continuing our upward trend of enforcement. That concludes the information i have. Thank you. Theres nothing wrong with throwing out statistics to the commission, as long as were able to relate those to policies and actions the department is taking. Its helpful there. Im assuming that the increase in citations are designed to reach vision zero to get to the point where we had no traffic fatalities and injuries as well but i assume thats the goal. Yes commissioner that is. Thank you. Vice president taylor. Thats actually my question because traffic fatalities seem to be increasing. I wonder if theres a correlation between the citations and the fatalities. If were increasing citations and the fatalities are also increasing, it seems to be a concerning trend. I wonder if you have any sense of whether or not the citations are actually working over time to decrease fatalities or if Something Else needs to be tried in addition. I can tell you, unfortunately my understanding of where we are today is we have more traffic collision fatalities this year than we had all of last year. Id also like to point out, and i understand your question as a very solid point, that in addition to the impact officers have when theyre doing enforcement, i think in particular with motorcycle officers i think that people that drive people out on the roadways, when they see officers that are engaged in enforcement especially along these corridors where speed is an issue and people are failing to field to pedestrians in certain areas or making turns and they dont give a pedestrian a right of way, there is a deterrent factor thats probably hard to quantify. When people go by and see that its my belief that they recognize that something is going on. I think that makes them ponder and think about how theyre driving. I think that presence helps to change peoples driving behavior. I understand the citations are very important. The enforcement is an important piece. Im just wondering if there is a way to quantify it because if theres additional manpower and resources being put into increasing citations, i understand that. It would be nice if we saw that on the back end. Im wondering if there are other things we can try. If were increasing citations and increasing the staff to hand out citations and our fatalities are also increasing, im wondering if theres a you see the problem im having . Yes, i do. And i think the way that i would answer that is i think, like most of the command staff and other captains i think to my days of being a captain and this issue is a community concern. The best way to address Community Concerns is to get involved with stakeholders and advocates and also to put out information. Our solo officers are going to community meetings. They went to one in the tenderloin where they gave a presentation about safety for individuals there. They went to Sunset Elementary School about two weeks ago. They were interacting with the kids that were working the dropoff. That school is fortunate to have a dropoff thats in a parking lot. Still, being able to engage. Im a parent and looking at the watch hoping that i make it. My wife always says were you on time . I say yes always even when i cut it a little too close. The education piece is an important part of it. Were fortunate to have a strong team in terms of public information. Our director David Stevenson and i have talked extensively over the last couple of weeks. Put out an email to all my Traffic Company officers to talk about our twitter account. We have 2700 followers. I would like to get more information out. I would like to tell people this is our vision zero team. These are operations weve done. Getting any information out to the public. Thats information thats right in your hand and readily available. We got few responses back from our motorcycle officers, because theyre out there and they see whats going on. Theyre also i should explain they work very closely with the department of Public Health and sfmta. Were part of a response team. If theres a traffic fatality they work and speak with people who are responsible for engineering the city streets. If theres an issue all of our officers are ready to raise a hand and Say Something im not a traffic engineer, but this isnt working at this location. So were involved in that were involved in trying to get that message out and have that conversation with as people as we can to change the behavior. Do you know how were doing in relation to other comparable cities . I wonder if there are lessons we can learn from other people who might have lower numbers. I dont have anything at the moment. I know that vision zero is a strategy thats been deployed across the United States and even outside the United States. So there are there probably is information and something we look at. Part of my approach in this new position is to get as much information as i can not only out to the public but out to the solos and all the station captains to give information to Police Officers so that they understand what the real impact because at the end of the day the this is a serious issue to public safety. You shouldnt have to worry about going out to the Grocery Store or traveling around on foot or your bicycle to get to work and worry about whether or not youre going to make it home that night because you were struck or you were in a collision. Thank you commander. It appears that the streets are more crowded with both pedestrians and vehicles. What inroads have we made . Most of these are Rideshare Companies, lyft and uber. If you look at the license plates theyre from sacramento or roseville so theres no familiarity with the city. There is the drive to generate revenue by completing the rides faster. We had this conversation earlier. The question for you is what inroads have we made with the Rideshare Companies about educating and training their drivers, in a similar format as we do with taxi drivers. Thats a big part of what we see. The ride shares are used to deliver food and my neighbors get their coffee delivered from an uber driver. What inroads have we made with the Rideshare Companies . I know we are actively engaged in issues citations, including individuals that are working for Transportation Network companies. I think we all know who they are. We keep track of that. Were working with the city attorneys office. I know theyre working on some policy and some litigation related to that and the impact that it has on the city overall. I can tell you that i went to a meeting with a bunch of individuals from the city family as well as other individuals involved in t. N. C. S at scoot which is the company that has the red electric rental scooters. There was a lot of discussion that i think at least at that level that theyre even aware of the impact and trying to offer a product while still trying to keep their riders their customers educated and responsible. So that conversation is ongoing. I can tell you that i appeared before the county Transportation Authority committee. President of the board of supervisors and the members of that committee were interested in addressing that topic as well. To try to be brief, because i havent been successful at that in answering, i think that our social media campaign, the Public Education is one way to do that. But i think enforcement helps too to do that as well. But it is theres a lot of complexity to it. Id like to ask whether the department keeps statistics right now on the citations that are issued to rideshare drivers. Do you keep that data . We do commissioner. Could we get a report on that so we can see what percentage of the total citations those rideshare drivers now constitute . Yes, sir. Great. Thank you. Thanks very much. Thank you. Next we have presentation of our Early Intervention system Second Quarter 2019 report. Good evening. Good evening, president , Vice President , commissioners, chief and director. Im sergeant lubernel and this is our report. The package we provided to you on page 2 this is a reminder of our Performance Indicators for an e. I. S. Alert. There is ten indicators which include use of force, d. P. A. Complaints civil suits officerinvolved shootings and discharges, onduty collisions, any e. O. Complaints internal affairs, any tort claims and any vehicle pursuits. On the readiness you will see the e. I. S. Activation. So any officerinvolved shooting or discharge will automatically put the officer on the e. I. S. System. Three or more incidents in a threemonth period will do the same. Three or more in a sixmonth period will put an officer on the system. Any indicators in a sixmonth period any complaints in a 12month period and any indicators in the past year will put an officer on the e. I. S. Alert. On page 3 we have the e. I. S. Flow charge. This is page 3. This is our Early Intervention system flow chart. When an officer reaches the threshold, an alert will automatically be generated and it will be sent to me. I will go ahead and review that alert. I have two options. I can either review it review the alert, review all necessary information and close out that alert in the office or i can go ahead and send that alert out to the district station and have that officers firstline supervisor review it with that officer. If either myself or the firstline supervisor feels that there is some type of atRisk Behavior, we can go ahead and initiate an intervention. If we dont feel there is any type of atRisk Behavior we will go ahead and close out that alert. On the righthand side these are some of our Additional Information that we look at for the officers. So what might be causing the alert. Any type of compliments or rewards. The Officers Training history. If the officer is using additional discretionary time off than most other officers theres a lot of stick time that the officer is going out and using, these are other indicators that were going to take into consideration before initiating an intervention. [ indiscernible ] officer and vehicle stops . So what we do when an officer generates a report, if theres any kind of e. I. S. Alerts that come from vehicles, any type of complaints to do with racial profiling or no probable cause to stop officer reviewing those cases for whatever cases come in. Ill start catering my investigation of the officer and look at whats going on with that particular officer on the differing circumstances. Page 4 is the highlights page. So what we find here for the e. I. S. Alerts between the First Quarter of 2019 and the Second Quarter of 2019 we had 1. 15 increase on alerts. We had two initial alerts from the previous quarter. Theres a little typo on the second line. The Second Quarter of 2018 and 2019 we see a 12. 5 decrease in alerts. In alerts by station we see an actual 3. 32 decrease. And the e. I. S. Alerts for the previous five quarters. So last reporting period it would have been all of 2018 in the First Quarter. This one will be the Second Quarter. Onto this period we saw a 4 decrease in e. I. S. Alerts. For e. I. S. Indicators between the first and Second Quarter of this year, we saw a 10 decrease. We saw 760 for the First Quarter, 683 for this quarter. Compared to last year we are actually down 23 from on the same reporting period. On the use of force we did see an increase. Ve a 28 increase compared to last quarter. 274 this year, 211 last quarter. We take that number and compare that for the first and Second Quarters of 2016 when we began taking statistics for the first and Second Quarter this year there is a 40 decrease overall for the entire department. When you take the use of force for without putting a firearm First Quarter is 303 Second Quarter 270 for an almost 11 decrease. When we take the combined first and Second Quarters for 2016 at 604 and 2019 we have a 5 decrease, 604 to 573. So this is our Second Quarter, e. I. S. Alerts by type. These are the activations. We had seven officers with three d. P. A. Complaints in a sixmonth period. 33 officers with five indicators within six months. Two officers with four d. P. A. Complaints in 12 months. And 63 officers with six or more indicators in 12 months, for a total of 575 alerts for this reporting period. There is a pie graph that just visually demonstrates that. In this reporting period we had 118 members that had at least one alert. And as far as interventions, we currently have five interventions five officers that are on e. I. S. Intervention. Not part of this report but we initiated a 61 today. We currently have six of the five. The reasons for the intervention, two for appear in court and three for tactile communication. That number will be 33, so thats where we stand as of today. Tactical communication . Im sorry . Tactical communication you said. No for failure to appear in court. We issued one more e. I. S. Intervention. Its not part of the report. We just initiated that today. [ please stand by ] station. The station with the most alerts is mission with 42. Our lowest is with five. Mission station is, again number one. As they have been for the previous quarters. We have been researching a lot more of the type of calls that the station is engaged in and the type of runs they are going to and theres a slide ill present to you. Theres a chart on the right hand side that demonstrates that. Of the 175 alerts, seven of them were not from any station, they were actually part of the unit. Just a reminder that the iist actually follows the officers so if he was at a station at the time of the alert transfers to one of the other units. The alert will follow that officer so that unit will be showing as having an alert. So when we see something, that officer may have been at a district station at that time when he obtained the alert. So we have seven total for outside of the station. And we have included all the indicators from 2016 to this quarter so we can see in 2016 we had a total of 46,011. The first and Second Quarter is 1106 compared to this year we have 760 indicators for the First Quarter and 683 for the Second Quarter. And when we are looking at the percentages and the numbers, we can see that we are on a downhill spiral, on a downhill grade as far as indicators and larrys for the department alerts for the Department Since we started keeping track. And these are the indicators per member. So what we can see from 2016, 2295 members, 682 had at least one indicator compared to this year we had 2287 as far as officers and 464 members with one indicator. The chart on the bottom, you can see from 2016 to 2019, its been going down as far as the number of indicators for our department. As far as the ten indicators i spoke of earlier these are the indicators broken down by numbers. So mission station total of 96 indicators for this reporting period. We have 76 useses of force nine dpa complaints, one internal affairs three on duty collisions. Every district station is broken down with that being the fewest of the use of force with 11. Park has four dpa complaints, five internal Affairs Investigations one eo complaint a total of 599 indicators for the district stations. This is a breakdown of all the units. And again the indicators will follow the officers, not necessarily by that unit. We have a total of 84. And we can see all the different breakdowns of all the different units. Having seven uses of force but the airport having nine. So nine was the highest number of uses of force outside of the stations for this reporting report reporting period. On the last presentation, it was requested to have some type of personnel numbers corresponding calls for Service Numbers for the alerts and indicators and thats this page here. So we see the station with 42 alerts, 96 indicator they responded to 23,072 calls for service in this reporting period. They are not the highest number of calls for service. And we also dont have the highest number of officers. But they do have the highest number of alerts and indicators. So what we started to look at in the report was we went through the 69 reports and started looking at the number of stops number of detentions, number of Violent Crimes. And what we are finding out in mission stay station is the leader in most of those categories. It has the highest number of Violent Crimes out of all district stations. They also have the highest number of arrests at 911 for this reporting period. For the total stops in the whole district they have 3838 which is the second highest out of all district stations. When we look at the report mission station has the highest number of Violent Crimes. They are just as high as far as homicide and shootings firearm seizures, they are not too far up there but they do have some significant amount of firearm seizures. They do lead in arrests for this reporting period. And they do lead in the uses of force for this period. So next step we took regarding trying to find out why numbers are so high, especially for mission station is we started breaking down the number of alerts per incident. And what we are finding that mission station seems to have a higher number of officers engaged in a single event. So one event being a high risk stop, we had 24 officers in one event. And that turned out to be 24 uses of force because there were three suspects in the car and eight officers out there on the scene. Other stations do have that as well but we are going through the date and we are going to review the reports more closely, trying to determine whether or not this particular station, if theres an issue or if theres Something Else going on. The last panel meeting, we had the Training Division with us. So with the Training Division, what we did is we took the date for all district stations and broke that information down to see how many officers at each individual station took the critical mindset critical reach course. And i have from sergeant that we are going to go ahead and start expanding that program and start inviting other stations especially those with use of force into that course. We are going to address if thats a training issue whether it calls for service or anything in between. So we are going to start looking into those options as well. On the next page it says the critical mindset coordinated response training. I heard its a great program. It is. A lot of positive responses from it. Yes, we have. Its a great class. Its a really good twoday course. Every officer has to take it as far as their continuing professional training, which is one day out of the four days. But they do offer a twoday class. So the sergeant and captain are going to work on expanding that course to bring more station personnel into that class. We are rolling that into our training and just for the rest of the commission, better coordination at the scene better command and control which we hope will equate to less use of force. Weve had some where a lot of guns have been pointed so the better the coordination, we want to see a better outcome in terms of less use of force with pointing of the firearms. I dont know if any commissioners would be interested but it might be helpful if anybody is interested to be able to sit in one or two days of that course. Absolutely. I will definitely discuss that with the sergeant and see if we can facilitate that. Thanks. Go ahead. We have a use of force. And this is a combined for the first and Second Quarter of 2016. We have 73 the 3 incidents with 1346 members, 935 subjects. For 1878 on the applications for use of force. Compare that to what we have for the first and Second Quarter of 2019, we have 518 incidents, 844 members, 600 subjects and 1058 applications. So on the right hand side, you can see the graph. Every single year, we are going down. We are going down on a number of alerts, number of indicators and hopefully we can continue on with this information. And here are the applications of force for the Second Quarter of 2019. Between the first and second, we did have that 29 percent increase. So 211 we had a total of 485 uses of force with firearm. You can see the remainder of the categories, we were pretty consistent with previous reporting period or we actually went down. So the question gets asked what those are, thats deployment of the flash from the tactical unit. It didnt fit into any category to its under other. Our favorite, university of chicago they provided a final report. In the last update, we asked the university of chicago to fix errors and gapes not accounting of internal affairs, officer involved shootings and officer involved discharge cases that were opened and closed at the time of the study. They fixed the errors in the dates but refused to fix. We dont have the back page in our materials. You should be able to fix the screen so we can see the whole page on the monitor. If you zoom it. There we go. Okay. So they fixed the dates. We didnt get the other information fixed. So almost half of our cases were still open. So the information thats not really correct at this time. That includes what i have. Thank you. Could you go back to page 3, which is the flowchart . Yes, sir. This may have been answered at another meeting. But in the center of that page is that box that is the subjective box to me. And it says review by supervisors. And you said that we tried to feel if theres a risk of behavior, at Risk Behavior if theres a pattern taking place. Is that just subjective . Is there some protocol you follow . How do folks make that determination . So the sergeant will be the first line for that officer who receives the alert. The sergeant is more than likely the sergeant which means they do their performance evaluations every six months and that pit sergeant will be with the officer most of that reporting period. So they have a better understanding of how that officer is. Normally their schedules coincide with one another so they work pretty much every day. Now when i review the alert prescribe to getting it out to the chief sergeant, i have the flexibility of looking at it, not knowing that officer. Most of the officers i dont know unfortunately these days. What i get to do is read those officers reports i get to review the body cam i get to see what was the reason for the alert. And then i can see if i see a pattern outside of that immediate street sergeant. How do you decide if you see a pattern . Im trying to really bore into that to understand how you do it. Its on a case by case basis for me. So what i will do is look to the reason of the alert. One officer had five uses of force within a threemonth period. I went out and started investigating as to why that officer has five uses of force. Come to find out, that officer helped every officer that was in a fight and he had to report it. So did i see a pattern of at Risk Behavior . No, i saw a pretty wellgauged officer that was trying to protect wellengaged officer. So in that case i ended up not sending out that alert because i did all the work to review it. Im trying to take on as much work i can to leave the street sergeants to do what they need to do. So i will make that determination and close it out if i feel thats okay. Can you give me an example of where you did feel there was a pattern of at Risk Behavior . There was an initiation we just initiated today. There was a pattern over 18 months of not attending mandatory assignments. And so i reached out to the sergeant directly. I sent it out to that street sergeant, which he concluded he agreed with me that there was Something Else going on. So thats why we initiated the intervention today. Okay. Thank you. Vice president taylor. As you can imagine im going to focus on the 30 percent increase on page 4. Yes maam. I want to as much as you can unpack. Its great the other numbers for the most part went down. But 30 percent is a huge increase from one quarter to the next. And i want to understand, to the extent that you know, if you can unpack why we have such an increase in the pointing of firearms in such a short period of time. I mean what go ahead. No, so thats one of the reasons that we are running the reports are applications with incidents. So what we found out is that we have let me see if i can locate my notes. So for mission station what we looked at is we saw six incidents that showed up on our radar and out of those 6 we had 46 officers with the use of force and out of those 6 incidents we found out it was a high risk felony stop on multiple cases and with having multiple officers and possibly multiple suspects the officers have to report that use of force in each individual person that had their gun pointed at each individual person in the vehicle. So what im starting to find out is that someone these incidents where its high risk felony stop where theres numerous officers and something as far as pointing firearm it may not be the number of incidents that go up, it just may be the number of officers for that incident. And when officers report it correctly that number, in this particular situation with mission station, it was 24 uses of force for that one incident. So just so i understand, was the number you mentioned 46 officers before . Yes, that was for mission station total. Did all of those officers point their firearms. It was six different incidents but yes. So every time the officers go out and because i mean, i take your point you might have a large number of officers in the same incident. But if thats 23 officers in one incident all pointing their firearms at i dont know how many people, one person potentially thats. Three incidents . Yes. This is where the training comes into place for critical mindset. So when we get into that type of training we have a sergeant that comes to the scene. And that sergeant will normally take that person out. If you have eight officers not all eight people have to have their handguns out. So the sergeant will go in the scene take control and remind the officers you can step back. We will have relief if we need to for those incidents. But thats where letting the sergeant in there having the sergeant respond to the scene, we are hoping to see if this is going to be one of the indicators that will bring the number down for use of force. Thats what i was getting at. Not every situation a sergeant will arrive at the scene and what we are stressing is somebody has to take the lead whether or not you have that or not, somebody had to coordinate it. So thats the essence of the course is when theres coordination and control of the scene, we hope we will not have as many officers pointing guns because its coordinated better. Thank you. You know, you mentioned that a lot of this is likely stemming from mission station. And do you know what percentage roughly of this 30 percent increase is because of that particular station or . I do not. I dont have that information for this reporting period. Okay. Elias. Thank you for your report. I have a lot of questions actually. Because to me the cis system seems extremely subjective. And i look back at my notes and i know that the First Quarter the last time you presented was on june 5, 2019 and we asked for some data with respect to this presentation and i didnt see the data that i requested so im hoping you can point it out to me. If you can turn to page 3 for for me. Because i think commissioner hirsch had an excellent point with respect to the subjectivity of this sort of flowchart but the subjectivity starts at the very beginning which is the review by you because the review by you, the first sort of rectangular red box underneath threshold activation is you. So you review it to see if theres a valid alert and then it goes to the station supervisor and they review it to see whether or not theres a pattern and they determine if its valid and then it goes back to you if the supervisor finds that it is valid, then it goes back to you again to review. So i know ive asked last time for you to provide me the numbers for how we get down to the bottom where it says intervention. Because right now, we only have five interventions going on. But i want to know how many cases came to you from the blue box to the to your box. Yes. So out of the 175, 90 cases were sent to the sergeants, 85 of them i ended up closing out in the office. So let me get this straight. There were 175 then they come to you and after your first round of reviews then how many go on to the supervisors . 90. Okay. So you essentially give or take, and math is not my strong suit, but 80 youve already disregarded. 85. Then from 90, from the supervisor back to you again is how many . They all come back to me, all 90 come back to me. Well, okay, so all 90. And then from the 90 that came to you, only 5 warranted intervention . No 5 is what we had previously. We had no initial interventions from this reporting period. So all 90 that came back to you you discarded and put into the closed box. I didnt discard it but i reviewed it again and if i saw any at Risk Behavior then we should initiate the intervention. But i didnt see anything in this reporting period. Out of all 90, all of them you closed out right . Yes. So theres no cases that warrant intervention this quarter, is that what you are saying . Yes. Okay. And you are the only person that reviews sort of this stuff right . Thats correct. Okay. So my other question is why arent interventions automatic . Why are we sort of doing this trickling process all the way down to the intervention so all those steps that you had on the flowchart . So the reason being is if we sent out an intervention for every alert that came out, some of them are invalid in the sense of some of them have cases that have gone into that so what might happen is you might have a use of force you might have a dpa complaint and you might have a lawsuit, all three items being related to the same event. And so all three of those will be counted at one. Now the program cant make that distinction so thats why im going to review it. But as far as the cases for any type of use of force, the example i gave of the officer who had five uses of force it wasnt an officer initiating any of those uses of force, it was an officer backing up other officers. So am i correct in understanding you when you say that example you gave were three incidents one was the citizen complaint, one was the use of force and then i forget what the other one was because those were three separate incidents in terms of the factors, you would not consider that sort of interventionworthy right . Because theres no pattern because it doesnt fit one of the specific boxes . I would consider that one incident. Im looking for a pattern of performance. So if im seeing any type of pattern that is consistent within that reporting period im looking for everything altogether. Now if. Dont you think its problematic if an officer has three different indicators that even though they arent the same sort of incident or group of indicator meaning its not all citizen complaints, not all use of force but there are three different violations in one of these various categories you have determined to be a risk factor, why doesnt that warrant some concern versus a pattern where we have to say, we have to have five different or five citizen complaints, they have to have five officer sort of uses of force . Its not absolute as far as it has to have five of any particular category. What im saying is for all three of those incidents because they are all linked, i would consider that one incident, because when you take the dpa complaint, when you take a lawsuit and take the use of force and all that is combined into one thats going to be one event. If we are seeing repeats of that event in other circumstances, im going to go ahead and my interest is going to be piqued into that officer. With me going out and reviewing it and say i dont initiate an intervention at this moment doesnt mean im closing it out and not paying attention. Next quarter im going to go back and review. And thats what goes on. I review the previous reporting period and the previous alerts. So if i see a pattern where within one year i start seeing a pattern thats starting to develop, i can go ahead and initiate an intervention at that time. So the example you gave with the three different criteria you counted one incident, those three dont have to be related, right . Meaning i guess my concern is you are calling it one incident and theres three sort of violations but those three violations can be on different days and not related to the same sort of facts, right . The incidents that were brought into this one report or this one alert thats something i would take differently than one event causing three different indicators. But you still consider it one incident right . For this particular one, the one we are discussing, yes all three i would consider one. But if an officer has a dpa complaint for one incident, a lawsuit for another one a use of force for another one, i would weigh those separately. They wouldnt be considered one incident in that matter. What does intervention consist of . My concern is i would rather have an intervention and the officer being mentored when they have five plus indicators versus someone who doesnt go to court. So when i send out these alerts its not only for the officer to know that we are watching and that he or she has hit the threshold but its also for the sergeant of that officer to know that, okay, this officer here, whether or not you are aware of it or not he has crossed that threshold for an e. I. S. Alert so it notifies both parties and i have a pretty Good Relationship with most supervisors where i can give them a call and theyll know my concern. And if that sergeant wants to tell me we can go out and start intervention thats fine. But if im just reaching out and i just go inquire and give that sergeant a headsup saying hey look, im concerned about your person, not necessarily to the point of an intervention but im going to be watching him or her and i would like you to do the same. Ive done that numerous times. What does an intervention consist of . It depends on the violation. So in this particular case, if theres an issue with any type of, lets say not going to mandatory training, whatever it would take to help that officer get straightened out, we would do. If it comes to a point where the officer is disrespectful to victims or to suspects thats where the communication comes in. We would cater whatever training we have to them and go to the academy and see whatever it is we had to do to get this officer back to where we want him or her. Other issue is on page 12 where you have sort of the divisions and sort of each area broken up. Because i dont think this is an accurate reflection of whats happening at each station. Because if the incidents follow the officer you know, i was concerned that we have nine incidents nine use of force incidents at the airport. But thats not true entirely because it doesnt capture the actual airport or the instances where use of force happened at the airport. It could be one officer that was transferred from Mission Statement to the airport and theres all nine incidents right. I do understand what you are talking about. So thats when the individual alerts pop up in the computer system. Thats when i start taking a look as far as what that detail was for that officer for that day what assignment that officer was doing that day. I mean, if an officer was assigned to mission for five out of the six and then goes to the airport, you are correct that alert would follow that officer over to the airport. You would agree this flowchart is deceiving because it doesnt accurately reflect indicators by unit because its not by unit, its by officer. Its by numbers, thats correct. Also on page 13, is this another situation where it follows the officers . So meaning the 42 alerts by station is it following the officer or is it following the station. Im sorry. Page 13. Can you repeat your question, commissioner . Im also wondering whether or not this data that you have based on each station is based on the actual station or if its based on the officer like you do on page 12. When we run the report, wherever that officer is, thats where this alert hits. So if, say this officer gets into the station, gets three out of four indicators and that officer happens to transfer to the other station the alert would go onto bayview station. It follows the officer. It doesnt go out and say, we are not going to say it stays over at taravel. If they are assigned to bayview station thats where the alert would be generated from. I think what the commissioner is trying so ask is if you look at this document, is this reflecting that time period, those alerts and indicators are these reflecting what happened at those stations in that time period . Or
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.