Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20240713

Henderson from the department of police accountability. Thank you and good evening, everybody. This is the december 4, 2019 meeting of the San Francisco Police Commission. I am expecting to have a lengthy meeting tonight so Public Comment will be limited to two minutes. And we want to congratulate phil lowhouse and his family for their new baby born yesterday. He is working for the commission. He couldnt be here . He couldnt be here. [laughter] first item, please. Line item 1, adoption of minutes. Action for the meetings of november 6 and 13, 2019. We have a motion to adopt the minutes. So moved. Second. Any discussion . All in favor . Aye any opposed . Okay. It passes. Next item. Line item 2, reports to the commission, discussion. Chiefs report will be limited to a brief description of the significant incidents. Commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the incidents the chief describes for a future Commission Meeting. This will include a brief overview of any unplanned events or activities occurring in San Francisco having an impact on public safety. Commission discussion on unplanned events and activities the chief describes will be limited to determining whether to calendar for a future meeting. Okay. Good evening, chief. Good evening, president hirsch, Vice President taylor, commission and executive director henderson. Ill start off this weeks chief report with the crime trends. Starting off with homicides. We are at 34 homicides for the year, which is about 19 percent below where we were this time last year. With that, we have an opportunity provided at the end of the year ends well with homicides, to be as low as weve been in probably 40 years. So in the last five years, year to date numbers, the lowest weve been at this point in the year is 42. So at 34 we are tracking well, which really speaks well of the city and the work that the men and women of the San Francisco Police Department are doing. There were no homicides in the month of november. And we had three in october. So really good news to report to the commission on homicides. Overall, our part one crime is down five percent. That breakdown is five percent reduction in property crime and six percent reduction in violent crime. We have really across the the board we have fewer incidents in all categories. Burglaries down 16 percent. Auto burglaries down. In terms of violent crime, homicides down 19 percent, gun violence is down nine percent. This year weve had 98 shooting incidents with 118 victims of gun violence. Of the 118, 20 sustained fatal injuries so 20 of our 34 homicides are gunrelated which is still far too many so we will continue to work that number of people that have been shot and killed in our city down. In terms of major events, my report is out of order. Excuse me one second. Major events, we have 32 planned events in the city this week. The biggest event coming up this week, the Golden State Warriors have two home games this week. The new york nicks. And concerts around the city including the sf symphony on thursday, which is going to be a full crowd there. On thursday and saturday, actually. Other large events include the continuation of the circus next to the headquarters building. And this saturday marks the 25th anniversary of santa time. So we will have santa clauses across the city this saturday. Our department will be very heavy for that. We support that. We dont anticipate any major problems. We havent had any major problems in the last couple of years. This saturday, San Francisco Police Department officers and myself will participate in the brave the bay. It will be at aquatic park. This is an annual event, cosponsored by the department that benefits the make a wish foundation. So it culminated culminateds wig in the ice cold water of the San Francisco bay. On purpose . On purpose. We raise a lot of money. Also during that event we have a tip a cop event that happens at one of the local restaurants where we are serving customers and the tips go to the make a wish foundation. So its a very worthy event. The director of the dpa should join the jump in the bay. I will take pictures. All in favor . You could wear your turtle neck it seems cold to me but i support it on the side. On another note, i want to also mention traffic, vision zero is still a priority for us. There have been 26 traffic fatalities year to date. And that exceeds how we ended the year last year. Our Vision Zero Task force has been very active. Our citations enforcement has increased over the last year. But we have a lot of work to do. Our high injury corridors, thats where we have been deploying the Vision Zero Task force. We want the public to slow down, Pay Attention to your surroundings, Pay Attention to traffic laws. And that goes a long way. The Biggest Issue that we have had this year has been pedestrian fatalities. We have had 16 people who have lost their lives in our city walking on our roadways, and thats far too many. One was a cyclist, two were passengers of motor vehicles, one in a motorcycle and six were drivers. So, again, way too many. And well be out there continuing to enforce the law to try to bring these numbers down. And that concludes this portion of our report. Is there any questions from the commission . Thank you, chief. Its going to be a particularly cold and wet day on saturday, just so you know. I have a question about the homicides and the reduction. Do you have any feel for what may be driving that number . Well, i will say, i think part of whats driving the number is weve had now second really good year, three good years of clearing homicides. Last year our homicide clearance rate was 100 percent. Year to date, we are at 83 percent this year. That includes prioryear cases. But i think we are of the belief that when you focus on the right people. And a lot of the individuals that have been arrested and charged with these murders have had histories of Violent Crimes so theres not a single incident. I think that does make a difference. Because a lot of our shooters are prolific. Our gun, crime gun Investigation Center i think played a part. We put that up two and a half years ago. The whole mission of that Investigation Center is to focus on serial shooters and serial crimes, collaboration with other agencies in the bay area, as well as the bay pf who partners with us on that. And the casings are very much identifiable. And weve been able to tie guns to several crimes. Not only in San Francisco but in other cities. And thats made a difference because weve had good cases there as well. The concept behind that is the most prolific people that use guns are usually serial offenders. So we can focus on that, we think we can make a difference on the gunrelated violence. So thats thats played a part. With the gun buybacks, the more guns you take off the streets, the lesser being used. So thats been an effort in partnership with Community Efforts with some groups. All those things have played a part. Weve made some good arrests, Community Engagement plays a part. We had a gun crime summit that our director of crime strategies put together. And a lot of people came to that and were at the table to try to work on Community Solutions to gun violence, particularly in the bay. And those are all anecdotal, but we do think those are effective strategies that have helped us. Helps to have good partnerships and good prosecutions as well. So we just keep plugging away at those things we believe are working. Its the right trend. Thank you, Vice President taylor. As for the homicide, i would note thats one area where our partnership with agencies like the f. B. I. In particular have been fruitful. I was formerly a supervisor of the organized crime unit in the u. S. Attorneys office and some of the most prolific killers in the bay area have been taken off the street because of the partnership between sfpd and fbi in helping to solve those murders. Thats one area where sfpd has been very helpful in being able to wrap up a number of murders and a number of killers and gotten them off the streets of San Francisco where they cant hurt other people. I had a question about the vision zero, whats the percentage increase . Last year, year to date, i think we ended up with 22 or 23. Lets see if i have it in here. Year to date total was 19. I believe we ended up with 22 or 23 last year. So we are above that by three already. And we still have three weeks to go, three and a half weeks to go. Commissioner mazzucco. I was talking to chief earlier today. And people complain about crime in San Francisco. We talk about 34 homicides. When i was a young assistant district attorney, we were over a hundred homicides. And i think people need to appreciate the hard work of the men and women of San Francisco Police Department with our federal partners, i too ran on the trigger walk task force, the u. S. Attorneys office and also the community. Theres more cooperation from the community with these cases. And the chief is right, when you bring people involved in these homicides in, they are charged and put in custody, they are generally the next target. So i think thats lowered the rate. Its great work with the community, great work on behalf of the Police Department with our federal partners. And that number is amazing. I told the chief today i was shocked. People all they want to say is things arent good because our windows are being broken and other issues which are big issues but in the bigger picture, 34 homicides is incredible for a major city. I think baltimore is up to 300, a city the same size as ours. So a lot of negative things are being said but this is positive. So thank you for your hard work. And for working with the community. Thanks to all the officers that are doing the job. Thank you. Next line item. Line item 2b, dpa directors report. Report on recent activities and announcements. Dpas report will be limited to a brief description of dpa activities and announcements. Commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for a future Commission Meeting. Good evening. Good evening im going to go through some of the updates i typically provide. Im going to do the staff at the end because we have a presentation so we can talk about our presentation to go over some of the details that the commission asked me to talk about at this meeting. So our, in terms of the quarterly report, online we were talking about them at the next Commission Meeting but if people want to look at them ahead of time, the reason im talking about them is ive redone them to look similar to the annual report, so instead of just the data, there is interpreted analysis and charts so they are a lot more readable. Youll get the full presentation next week, but they are up there and up to date on the website in case people want to look at them. Our mediations are going particularly well. We just did this is just a case note, one of our mediations from last week was two and a half hours, pretty regulated and scripted. They are about an hour so we get the input from both sides, and they are structured. This one was particularly interesting, because both sides were frustrated from the community, the person that came into make the complaint and the officer that was involved, which took a lot longer to do. But we are talking about it because one, it took longer and it ended with the officer offering the complaint a ride and driving them home after the mediation, which i dont think has ever happened before. We are leaning in heavily into mediation to make sure that it continues to grow and expand professionally to address the need of the folks that are coming in making complaints. So im excited about that. In terms of outreach, i think ive talked about it briefly about doing the review in all the stations. Some of the concerns were some of the stations, although now all the stations keep the information in our brochures about d. P. A. And how to file complaints. Some of the stations have run out of some of the languages in particular. So we are trying to figure out a way that we can get better information to keep that information out there. Plus we are looking to see which of the languages are running out faster so we can stay on top of making sure that everyone has access to the information about how to get in contact with the agency and on how to make complaints. We also participated in a job fair on the weekend of the 20th at santa clara just preparing to have law students and interns with us, both in the spring and in the summer. And the audience today, i have case issues come up related to any of our work. Sarah hawkins, senior investigator is here, attorney rosenstein and our chief investigator and one of our new employees is here as well. In terms of our numbers for the agency this week, we are at 686 cases have been opened this year. At this time last year, we were at 591 cases. In terms of cases closed, we have closed 600 cases so far, which obviously is more than the entire number of cases that came into the agency in all of last year. This time last year we were at 539 cases we closed. We have 403 cases pending. This time last year we were at 230 cases pending. In terms of cases that have been sustained through d. P. A. , we are currently at 75 cases have been sustained this year. This time last year, d. P. A. Sustained 36 cases. Cases that are past the 270day mark, we are at 23. And this time last year, we were at 24. For cases mediated, we are at 34 cases that have been mediated this year last time we were at 23. Of the cases past the ninemonth mark, those 23 cases, 11 of the cases are told. And so for the remaining cases, i have my chief of investigation here to present to talk a little bit about what those cases are and why we think there have been some delays and how we are addressing those concerns. Thats it. Okay. Thank you. I have a question about the sustained cases. Of the 75, did any of those end up as mediated cases . No those are cases where you decide theres a charge . They were purposefully and specifically excluded. If something is in mediation, it is not sustained as a charge. The cases that are sustained are their own independent investigations that have been sustained. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions . Seeing none, next item im sorry. The report. Right. Good evening. Good evening, president hirsch, Vice President taylor, commission, members of the public. Director henderson asked me to provide Additional Information regarding cases that are past the ninemonth mark. I will talk about some of the reasons for the delays and what we are doing to address these delays. For the people watching who may not be aware, under california law, when a misconduct investigation begins, theres a oneyear statute of limitations for imposing discipline. Our goal in the city charter is to complete our investigation within nine months to allow everyone involved to review the case and take appropriate action before the oneyear deadline. This is what we often refer to as the 304 date. Of the 23 cases the director mentioned, 11 of those cases are told due to criminal investigations pending. Some of those cases are told because the officers are unavailable because they are either on disability or some sort of military leave. When the case is told, the deadline for imposing discipline is extended or told. Of the remaining 12 cases, eight are in final stages of interviews, and the remaining four cases, the investigates need to write up the case for closure. A few factors have contributed to the delay. As we mentioned in the past police Commission Meetings, d. P. A. Switched to a new case system in july of 2019. District had a lot of training and adjustment from our staff which caused a significant delay of some of our cases. D. P. A. Has increased in the last two years. Last year our complaints were up 20 percent or 129 cases compared to 2017, this year they are up again. If you were to compare the numbers we were getting now compared to 2017, our complaint are up 52 percent. To address these delays, we are focusing a lot on training our staff on our new Case Management system and also developing written standard operating procedures. We want to make sure the information entered in the system is reliable and accurate so that well be able to produce reports at a later time. This is an ongoing effort, and we are starting to notice a significant improvement. D. P. A. Staff are being more comfortable with the system and moving cases towards closure. We recently filled three of our four investigate vacancies, and we have more candidate going through a background process. Filling these vacancies will help us better manage our caseload. It should be noted that we didnt miss any 304 deadlines in the last couple years. This completes my report. I have a question. I may have missed the number. There were 33 that are beyond nine months . Is that right . 23 cases 23, all right. Thats what i got wrong. Any questions from commissioners . Thank you. Thank you. Anything else from d. P. A. . No, when i starletted july 1, 2017, there have been no 304 deadline misses. And i will continue to work to try and make sure that doesnt happen. But as you noted, those numbers started creeping up towards the end of summer for many of the reasons that we just talked about. So i just wanted to make sure we were clear about what was going on. I think weve got it under control, but i dont anticipate us ever blowing any of those deadlines. But i appreciate the attention and the opportunity to just talk about what those numbers mean and whats behind them. I feel like a lot of people ask me about what 3304s are and how they work. So this was helpful, i think, for the agency, for people to have a better understanding of what these deadlines mean and what the ninemonth report is when i talk about it every week. I can answer questions if anyone has questions. Thank you. Next item. Line item 2c, commission reports. Commission reports will be limited to a brief description of activities and announcements. Commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the issues raised for a future Commission Meeting. I dont have a report. Are there any reports by commissioners . Seeing none right now, we are ready for the next item. Line item 2d, commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at a future Commission Meeting, action. Any items . Seeing none, next item . The next police Commission Meeting is wednesday, december 11, 2019, 5 30 p. M. At city hall room 400. The public is invited to comment online items 2a through 2d. Any Public Comments . Next week is our last meeting for the year and we wont convene until the second wednesday in january. Any Public Comment . Okay. Public comment is closed. Line item 3, discussion and possible action to approve protocols for release of sb 1421 documents for purpose of engaging in the meet and confer process with the Police Officers association, discussion and possible action. A working group spent quite a bit of time preparing this set of protocols. And commissioner mazzucco and elias took the lead on behalf of the commission. So i will turn this over to them. Thank you, commissioner hirsch. We received, first we want to again thank the individuals who participated in the working group. It was very informative and it was good to see everyone in the room at the table and having open and fluid conversation with each other. We received a lot of requests and recommendations with respect to the language for the 1421. Commissioner mazzucco and is intention in terms of preparing this document was to have this document be sort of emulate the statute and the wording specifically in the statute, because we want to get this passed as quickly as possible as we know this is going to go to meet and confer. So the law is the law, and thats what has to be followed. We understand that it is a work in progress, and there are several nuances that are going to be developing as this process takes place. And we believe that ultimately, the court will be getting involved in sort of interpreting a lot of the questions that were raised by the various individuals that appeared at the working group. So we took that all into consideration and tried to create a protocol that would address as best we could, all the different sort of recommendations and suggestions, including the City Attorneys recommendations. And thats what we have before the commission today. I want to thank commissioner elias. This was a collaborative effort. We had the public defenders office, the San Francisco Police Department, San Francisco Police Commission office, we had many members of the Police Officers employee groups, various groups participated. The City Attorneys Office provided us excellent advice throughout and was present. And again, both commissioner elias and i were very consistent in that we follow the statute. If theres issues with 1421 as commissioner elias said, that will be litigated in court. And we wanted to stick to the plain meaning of the statute. Theres some things that are ambiguous but there are professionals involved. Well get this to the meet and confer requirement. There will probably be litigation. At that point the courts are make the determination. This do you mean came together quickly with the help of others this document came together with the help of others and theres nothing contentious about it at this point. I have a question for you. I think its work talking about in public a little bit. And that is, its on the third page, c1 page three. There is a paragraph that reads, there is no sustained if the officer resigns or retires any time before the chief or commission makes a final determination. If the commission continues its investigation despite an officers retirement, the charges will be sustained. If the commission has made a final determination sustaining a finding and the officer has been afforded the opportunity to appeal. And the question i had is whether we would ever have the ability to continue an investigation after an officer retires or resigns . I thought we had lost jurisdiction at that point. This issue did come up at the working group. And buck was present, and he actually answered the question that you just brought up. And his answer was that if the two categories that require sustained findings, the commissions had the power to order either the charging agency, so the San Francisco Police Department or d. P. A. To continue its investigation up until the sustained finding. Because thats when it could be wouldbe final and then subject to the 1421 disclosure. And that was an example that came up, because we oftentimes see a lot of the times the commission where charges are brought up against an officer, and the officer resigns prior to the final adjudication, and we see that a lot. So that question came up, and he answered that, and that was his answer. Thats correct. Much to my surprise, one of our again, it was an Attorney Client concerns, but one of the most esteemed City Attorneys, buck, told us that. Its the first time ive heard that in my years in the commission. And theres some practical insures with us Going Forward and doing this. When these officers do resign, they are walking away from this. But how much further do we need to go, is the question this commission has to address. We can go forward, and we can, and it would be i dont think it would appear once theyve resigned. So those are the logistical issues weve thought about afterwards. But its an issue. The first time we learned of that issue. I think commissioner elias and i were surprised when we received that legal advice. So its an issue we have to deal with. And many of these cases where the officer resigns because theyve had criminal charges sustained against them, so to speak, or theyve been found guilty or pled guilty, and thats something that would be disclosed. But its a decision this commission has to make down the road about whether or not we ask the d. P. A. , the Police Department to continue their investigations and to come forward with the hearing. Most likely the officer will not be present, and there would be a finding by the commission. So again, its something we need to discuss in the future. And he said it isnt about dispolice, us continuing to go forward wasnt about discipline but taking the case to final adjudication so it would comply with the 1421 requirement. Exactly. There has to be an opportunity for the officer to at least defend him or herself. They absolutely can. They can participate. They can just choose not to. All right. Is there Legal Authority to this . Or is this just an opinion buck gave at the time and we dont know if theres authority . At the time he did answer the question, and he did say he looked at the charter. Because when he was giving us this advice, we were in the working group and he collected all the submissions by all the various agencies. Because i think one of the agencies raised this issue or came up during the working group, i think he went back and may have spoken to the City Attorney working group that they have on the 1421. That im not sure of. But then when he came back and told us again, it was at the Second Working Group we had, because the First Working Group we had was the one you were present at and he was sitting next to me and said it. And the second time was when commissioner mazzucco and i set at city hall with the very select sort of agencies and the City Attorney. And he again reiterated that. This is actually our third meeting at city hall with our attorney. And it was the agencies that are represented by the City Attorneys Office were present. And thats when he gave us that opinion. All right. I want to stay on this issue. So do either commissioners taylor or hamasaki have a comment on this point . I do. I think miss taylor that was one of my questions. I mean, i think we are all surprised by it. Its an interesting vote [off mic] yes. We are all pretty surprised by this. Its an interesting road to pursue, right . If we pursue an officer who is resigned, i want to make sure we are on firm ground if theres litigation over that. It would be nice to have more than buck, who is obviously wonderful, and i respect him, but more than that for our ability to move forward. So i dont know. Im not sure what the question is, but that is the opinion of the City Attorneys Office, its not just buck and this is based on legal analysis of case law . Right. So the commission has subpoena power. The commission could issue a subpoena. We would have to go to court to enforce it. But all those are questions that would be anticipated heavily litigated down the road. And well cross that bridge when we get there. Commissioner hamasaki . Yeah. So this is something thats come up for me since i think early in my term on the commission. Its always seemed troubling that by resigning, an individual deprives us of our ability to investigate disciplinary or criminal conduct thats being thats occurred, either under the cover of law or another capacity, because they resign, and then the city, were not doing our job by conducting and overseeing the investigation and releasing findings and Holding Individuals Accountable and being transparent to our city about the problems that may have existed. So ive always been in favor of this. Im glad to know that we have the Legal Authority on this, because the idea that we are going to sweep things or that we have forever swept things under the rug, not intentionally, because i think there wasnt the knowledge that we could do this, i welcome this news. And i look forward to us instituting this process. And i also think its good for the members who want to clear their name, instead of resigning and quitting, going somewhere else, they have the opportunity to have the full rights and due process that is afforded to any member of the departments through the investigative and disciplinary hearing process. So overall, i think this is an excellent addition. Commissioner dejesus. So i got two questions. Why havent we done this before . Because this is incredibly frustrating. And weve been told we have no jurisdiction, and now we are told we have jurisdiction. So i dont know how that switch flipped. But let me finish the second question. I am concerned about due process. I mean, if somebody leaves the country, our subpoena doesnt work. If we cant give anybody notice, and we are having a hearing without notice, theres a due process and potential litigation and potential privacy issues. So im baffled by this process. If i can address two issues. One, i think its very important to remember that this be, this only play mris to sustained findings. Only applies to sustained findings in co2002 categories, Sexual Assault and dishonesty. We owe it to the public to continue the investigation on those two categories. Because the public has the right to know whether theres someone accused of sexual misconduct, they have a right to know about that or dishonesty. The other thing i want to [off mic] okay. One at a time. Go ahead. Only because this came up at the working group too. So with respect to the charges portion, that was another issue that was raised at the working group. And the sort of consensus was the officer would know about the charges, i mean, presumably, he would have the charging document, and then he resigns. So he or she would be fully aware of the charges. And given the opportunity to either litigate the allegations, up until the final adjudication or not, but at that point he would have notice these charges are happening, because usually the way we do cases, they resign right after the charges are filed or okay. Vice president taylor. The City Attorney weve had cases before, as we know, from before the commission, where we all felt frustrateed because obviously nt in every case, but there are cases where weve all felt like we really my understanding was that we couldnt keep going. So i understand the frustration, and thats part of the question i was asking. I want to make sure we are on firm ground if we are Going Forward, if we have a legal basis for this. What changed . What changed . We could maybe get a memorandum. Whats your question . The question was is what changed so that now we can continue up to sustain charges with or without the officers presence, when before weve been told we have no jurisdiction . I guess thats just a big question mark in my mind. To my knowledge, the questions that have been asked of the City Attorneys Office has not been specifically about can the commission continue once an officer has resigned and the charges have been withdrawn. You werent here. You werent present, but it was to a different deputy City Attorney. And again, to those specific situations that you have, i ask that you direct those questions specifically to the department that was here in closed session, i imagine. But to my knowledge, there are walls for a specific reason. So im not involved in that. Moving forward, this is the advice from the City Attorneys Office, that once a week u. K. Proceed. I think actually every that you can proceed. I think actually every, i cant speak to those facts as to why you couldnt move forward. Is there a consensus, we would like to get a written statement from the City Attorney advising us as to the law . That would be helpful. I think i understand the opinion but it is different than we receive aid year ago i had a second followup. Just so we can make a request. If you dont mind, can you put it in writing so i can pass it along within the office . Put the question in writing . The exact question. Okay. Can you draft the request. Like a onesentence request. Ill send it to you. Thats why we were shocked and kept asking buck, are you sure. We asked him several times. And it was the answer that was repeated. And hes wellrespected, so we didnt, you know, after the third or fourth time, we sort o great. You had another question. My second question. That was my first question. My second question was about Sexual Assault, but child Sexual Assault victims, there are privacy concerns and issues there, and thats not laid out specifically in this document, but im sure thats part of what you consider. So if you can just talk about that and being able to redactorr protect in regards to Sexual Assault. There are redactions. Theres another area like privacy protections that are normally in existence which that would be, then it would be protected or redacted. So this was just for 1421 issues. So we have to focus it on 1421. It mentions federal and state law. It doesnt lay that out, so i wanted to make sure that was clear on the record that nothing changes with respect to the privacy of children and victims of Sexual Assault. And just for the record, the people that are being hired to do this work, to review those files, i know on behalf of the Police Department, for example, the people that we have in the Commission Office are experienced, have an understanding of the law, and their judgment will be they are familiar with what needs to be redacted, whats privileged and whats not. Nothing is going to be perfect, but we have people that understand what is privileged. They have experience as paralegals, whereas attorneys or investigators. Thats going to fall within their discretion. If it doesnt work, well hear about it. Commissioner hamasaki. Yeah. Just a procedural what do we in the interim, what happens . We are going to vote on this tonight, right now. Right. Public comment i meant so are they using this for guidance . Are they releasing records now although its not going to be an official document . Because it has to go through meet and confer for some reason . Weve been using something close to this but not exactly this, only because the statute is there, and these agencies have to get their information out. But once we do pass a written protocol, well have to go back and make sure we were in compliance retroactively. And Going Forward we will, but in the meantime we go to meet and confer. And that will take whats the meet and confer basis busy for basis for thi . I dont know to what sent but thats what the department of Human Resources will advise us as to what issues we are obligated to meet and confer over okay. Are they going to be here in closed session next meeting or something . If we are sending this to meet and confer, why are we and on what basis . We need to meet with before they go to meet and confer, they get back to us, usually in writing, and tell us what it is we have to meet and confer over. Just so this isnt one of our multiyearlong engagements thats why we treed to keep it very it seems very unoffensive. To anybody even tribe to be there was trying to be. There was a request as to how each Department Releases records. We tried to do that but we realized the system in which they find records and release records is a completely different than what d. P. A. Uses and what the commission uses. So it was not practical for us to create one unified document where it would require San Francisco Police Department the commission and d. P. A. To follow one set of logistical procedures in terms of how these documents are released. We tried very hard, but it wasnt feasible. They have different systems, different protocols. And so thats why we only we have this. And i would like to add, the statute is in effect. And whats happening now with reference to disclosures is they are following the statute. So again, we are just dressing up the statute a little bit with more explanation. Theres going to be challenges and issues. Then the case law will develop thereafter. You look at the statute, next time we look at it, there will be more guidance. But we are starting. And what weve asked everybody to do is follow the law and turn over the documents as required. And i think the public needs to know if there is an issue, if theres a concern, then that concern or issue is run by the City Attorneys Office for advice as to whether or not we should go forward with this disclosure or redaction. So theres a process in place that follows the law. This is just sort of a little bit of a codification of what we are trying to do. The public needs to know, we are following the statute, and those involved are asking and seeking the advice of the City Attorneys Office to ensure that we are in compliance with the statute. Commissioner dejesus so i wasnt privy to the City Attorneys comments with the working group, but i just have two questions again. Why are the initial records that are mandated by statute part of work conditions for the employees . Why isnt it the employers obligation to comply with the law . Why is this an exception to the meet and confer process . I need some understanding why this is an exception. And the second one is if we do put this through today and get a memo or clarification that we need to make changes, shall we do that while its in the meet and confer process or do we have to start all over . If we have to change something, well change it. If we have to do it in the middle of the meet and confer, well do it. We are not going to get bogged down in the process. Whether it should even go there i think what i would like to do is invite the City Attorney and d. H. R. To come and present to us in closed session after theyve made a determination as to what, if anything, has to go through meet and confer. Thats what i was requesting before. Normally they thats in my question to the attorney. Im making that request thats an issue we were asked to deal with, is whether or not we were putting the protocol in place. Again, we stuck to the statute. Lovely protocol we stayed with the statute. If they have a problem, theres an appeal process which is governed by the sunshine ordinance and the Public Records act. So theres the governmental codes that gives people sortofrights to bring litigation to appeal any decisions where the records are turned over. So there is a process that would allow an individual access to the records if they felt that they werent being disclosed properly. Commissioner mazzucco, did you have anything else . All right. So nothing else. We are going to vote on this. But first ill take i would like to call for Public Comment before a motion on whether we approve or not, this protocol. Good evening. I dont see a copy of the Police Departments protocol that they are acting under now. This is it its the same then, as what we are seeing . Okay. Very good. Yeah. So im just concerned about this. Im glad we are going to get a direct report. It says on page three, public accountability, i think thats supposed to be police accountability. The public is doing okay. [laughs] so yeah im glad we are moving forward with this. But i would like more clarity before the meet and confer why this is a personnel issue that has to be thank you. Has to be handled in that way and what you are expecting from the Police Officers association so it doesnt get mangled by them. We wanted to make sure you were reading it. Well, the law is the law, so theres no way to negotiate around the statute. But thats the good news for most folks. Any other Public Comment . Hi, there. Im from the aclu of northern california. Hello, good evening. We appreciated the opportunity to submit comments and appreciate the thought thats taken into the final, the third version of the protocol. Two quick points. One is the definition of records in b1. I think its page 1. The statute in 832. 7b2 provides records that shall be released pursuant to the subdivision include a number of specific types of records. But the list is not exclusive. And ultimately any record that relates to the report or investigation or findings must be released. So we would suggest just revising that language ever so slightly to suggest the list to reflect the fact that the list is nonexclusive. So putting in there that a record relating to the report investigation or findings of any of the discloseable categories described in second 1a is subject to release. And then noting that 832. 7b2 sets forth a nonexclusive list of various types of records that are subject to disclosure. Although any other records relating to the report, investigation or findings is discloseable. And then the second point is just that we appreciate the conversation before that was just proceeding this, about the ability to continue to investigate sustained findings. And we appreciate the commissions willingness to do that in appropriate cases. Thank you. Im sorry. You wanted to add so in section b1, where its on page 1, just to add that, at the end, the penal code 832. 7 lists the type of records that are subject to disclosure, although any other record relating to the report, investigation or findings is discloseable to reflect the actual statutory language of 832. 7 b 2. Because the way the policy is written, i dont think intentionally, but suggests the list is exclusive. And its not. All right. Correct. Although right. Right. I mean, that seems like a relatively small fix. Yeah okay, thank you. Any other Public Comment . [off mic] im trying to pull up the powerpoint that we submitted ahead of time. You are going to do a presentation in a little bit. I am. But i didnt realize the time i prepared and submitted it that you were doing protocols. You have two minutes as a member of the public. If you know the exact page you can have them put it on the overhead. Do you have your report . Okay. Sure. We can use the overhead if you cant and after you put it on, theyll start your time. Because this is about the protocol. Start the clock. Thank you. So theres just a couple things that we were hoping that could be clarified as well in the protocols. So what we had seen, we received about two weeks, the departments 23rd request for a 14day delay. And we get them every two weeks. So the 14 days away is now 344 and counting days away. The protocols include that there is 14 days away. But the way its being interpreted is theres no limit. So that means theres no deadline. Thank you. Any other Public Comments on this matter . Ok, Public Comment is closed. How do you want to structure this . Do you want to include an amendment as part of the motion to approve this . Sure. Maybe we can take the two suggestions first from the aclu and then still try and understand the public defenders request. I have a question about the aclu because im trying to find im trying to find im on the web trying to find the language that you were talking about. It suggests to me its not an it just says include. A specific number of records and then theres subsequent language that says any record relate to go the report investigation or findings. Where does it say include . This is the one that starts with records that shall be released pursuant yes, include. Include all investigative reports. Where is the text that you were just citing that was more encompassing . Relating i think its further down in the statute. Relating to the report investigation or findings. Can i just interject for a second. Penal code is in our protocol. Which means the statute is to be considered. I think people get frustrated with lawyers and were sitting here wasting everybodys time and energy on language and looking at the statute. We cited the personal code section is what they need to follow. Thank you for your advice. I dont mean to disagree, i prefer to have i mean, yeah, thank you. You did disagree. Thank you. By disagreeing in a manner. I prefer to have more clarity rather than less. If its helpful, i mean whats if we just tagged on including but not limited to. I dont see any difference here. You are saying, we say this sass all records relating to and you say any record relating to. This is a very minute. What is the difference between all or any. This is a super, supe super. Put your name up. Can i show you something . Yes. What if we did it this way. After the first sentence, of section 1a we say, or penal code section cited and then, which list the type of records. So it includes the first sentence which is inclusive of that whole section and the penal code. Im fine with that. Were just going to do yeah. Were going to direct everybody. That addresses the issue. Thats fine. So instead of here is says these are the types, this is not a actually all types. I just want to clarify her point. I want to make sure we understand her point. We have to let each of us speak without interruption. I do get the chair and i want to understand. You are not on the list yet. You are saying instead of the period next to section 1a you put a comma and or the word personal code 832 which means you basically capture anything that the statute refers to. The statute has these specific ones listed which are a, b, c, and d. And so i think that if we say that whole section plus those specifically listed in the statute so if we put the or i think were ok. Commissioner. I pass. Im good now. Thank you for bringing this to our attention tonight. All right. So were adding so the motion would be with that change s. There any other amendment you want to make to the document before we vote on it . Another one was the public defender. I didnt understand what she was saying about the 14day. Yes. The delay. Why think we can address that. That is by statute, i believe, ms. Harris. I dont know how we can we cant change statute. I do understand what you are saying. The frustration of getting and ive also received these from other agencies, all you get is 14day notices but im not certain how we can is there different language in the California Public records acts. Yes, thats going to address it. The fact that theyre not releasing it ask asking for delays its not a 1421 issue its a sunshine ordinance and the Public Record act and government code complaint and they should