Police Commission - June 1, 2016 - Minutes

Meeting Date: 
June 1, 2016 - 5:30pm
Location: 
City Hall, Room 400
#1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
United States

The Police Commission of the City and County of San Francisco met in Room 400, City Hall, #1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, at 5:35 p.m.               

PRESENT:             Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, DeJesus, Mazzucco, Hwang, Melara

                Sgt. Kilshaw read the Commission’s Rules of Order.               

CONSENT CALENDAR

-              Request of the Chief of Police to accept donation of seven (7) Automated electro defibrillators “AEDs” to be placed in new patrol vehicles and assigned to the ten (10) District Stations.  Valued at $9,998.68

PUBLIC COMMENT

                Francisco Decosta spoke in regards to changes happening in San Francisco and spoke of a document released by the Mayor.  He stated that rules matter.

                Meesha Irizarry spoke of donation of defibrillators and stated that police should be able to resuscitate individuals and asked if the donation is given due to tasers coming up.

                Jeremy Miller agrees with Meesha Irizarry and stated that the donation is intended for tasers and that should not be accepted.

                Peter Alexander stated that there is a contradictory reality going on and spoke of electromagnetic weapons where it can stop a heart.

                Unidentified stated that these AEDs are an accessory to tasers.

                Tom Gilberti spoke of AEDs and stated that if it’s accepted to resuscitate someone that was tasered, he does not agree with the acceptance.

                Unidentified stated that as a formal flight attendant AEDs are used for someone that is in ventricular defibrillators and stated that all AEDs should be already in public.

                Unidentified spoke that if AEDs are accepted this equipment will do no good in a racist mentality.

                Thomas Parker, EMT, stated that tasers give out a 50,000 volt shock and AEDs give out a 3,000 volt shock.

                Motion by Commissioner Mazzucco, second by Commissioner Marshall.  Approved 5-2

AYES:     Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, Mazzucco, Melara

NAYS:    Commissioners DeJesus, Hwang

RESOLUTION NO. 16-36

APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO ACCEPT DONATION OF SEVEN (7) AUTOMATIC ELECTRO DEFIBRILLATORS, FROM MRS. LINDA ANTONINI, TO BE PLACED IN NEW VEHICLES AND ASSIGNED TO THE TEN (10) DISTRICT STATIONS, VALUED AT $9,998.68    

                RESOLVED, that the Police Commission hereby approves the request of the Chief of Police to accept donation of seven (7) automatic electro defibrillators from Mrs. Linda Antonini, to be placed in new vehicles and assigned to the ten (10) district stations.  Valued at $9,998.68.

AYES:     Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, Mazzucco, Melara

NAYS:    Commissioners DeJesus, Hwang

PUBLIC COMMENT

                Herbert Weiner spoke of the Police Community Relations Unit and asked that it be revived and spoke of suggestions to get the unit going.

                Peter Alexander discussed concerns and spoke of the 1 percenters and spoke of how the system is corrupted.

                John Crew thanked Chief Chaplin for taking the job.  He spoke of town hall meetings temporarily stopped and spoke of how the Department needs more transparency more than ever. 

                Magic spoke of being in the Central meeting and discussed concerns regarding use of a girl as a pawn in a political game.  She spoke of an award given to a young man.

                Tom Silhorst congratulated Chief Chaplin spoke of reforms that can be done.  He spoke of a new chief and what characteristics is needed to be chief.

                Unidentified spoke of the introduction of tasers and why tasers was introduced again because of Mario Woods. 

                Leonard Beckum would like to support the department and spoke of training for officers.

                Meesha Irizarry asked why tasers need to be discussed now that Chief Suhr is no longer in the department.               

                Unidentified spoke of disruptions in meetings and spoke of police killings of people who posed no threat to a cop.  He asked for accountability and spoke of independent investigative body to investigate police killings.

                Tom Gilberti stated that we need the police to be mental health guardians and spoke of how the city has the responsibility to get police living back in the city. 

                Jakkee Bryson spoke of having a stroke on May 15, 2015 and open heart surgery on May 17, 2015.  She spoke of how she’s been recuperating and spoke of the difficult job police officers have and the difficult job the police commission has in evaluating actions of the police.  She spoke of police training and how officers need to be trained to police themselves.

                Jeremy Miller spoke of not accepting a new chief of police and spoke of the legitimacy of the police commission.  He went on to talk about tasers and asked the new chief to reopen all officer-involved shooting cases.

                Francisco Decosta spoke of changing your ways and how the people are hostile and commissioners should find out why they are hostile.

                Unidentified spoke of history of police as slave catchers.  He went on to talk about different ethnic associations in the department.  He spoke of training in the academy and spoke of the last officer-involved shooting. (Document submitted)

                Unidentified spoke of what bothers and spoke of police accountability and that it should be the first action instead of the last action.  He spoke of no accountability for officers for killing someone and how officers get to seat behind a desk.

                Unidentified asked why Chief Suhr removed from office and was it to gain trust with the community.  He spoke of tasers on the agenda and how it is a lethal weapon of torture and escalation.  He urged the Commission to not approve tasers for the department.

                Ms. Paulette Brown spoke of the murder of her son Aubrey Abrakasa and that his case is still not solved.  She showed photos of unsolved cases.  She stated that August 14th of this year will be ten years since the murder of her son.

                Public Defender Adachi urged the Commission to speak boldly and direct the policy and make it clear and not compromise.  He stated that he does not support use of tasers.  He also spoke of body cameras.

                Unidentified spoke of the POA agreement regarding body cameras and asked for more public comment in regards to when officers should view footage.

                Barbara Attard spoke of looking forward to the chief’s work on culture change.  She spoke of the public defender’s justice summit and spoke of the UC medical doctor presentation about police violence as a public safety issue.

                Unidentified spoke of watching the new chief and spoke of supplying mental tools for the officers.

                Unidentified spoke of how tasers may cause more damage where officers pull out their firearm instead of their tasers. (Document submitted)

                Olga Petrov spoke of the issue of neighborhood cameras and the issue of body worn cameras.

                Unidentified spoke of how there were four opportunities to say no to tasers and spoke of nationally known experts on legal, medical, social issue of tasers.

                Mary, educator, spoke of the effect of violence happening in the city and that should be taken into consideration.

                Paulina spoke in opposition of tasers for the police department.  She spoke of taking the taser training while in the Fresno Police Academy. 

                Kaherine Tyson spoke of her son being murdered in December 2000 and how she went back and forth with the district attorney and the police department.   She spoke of her 21 year old grandson and how he still does not have closure for the death of his father.

                Unidentified spoke of how commissions are political stepping stones and how the current administration has a 30 percent approval rate and stated that they have mounted a recall.

                Unidentified stated how he is thankful for having a black Chief.

                Rosario Cervantes spoke against tasers especially for the police.

                Tammy Bryan opposes tasers and stated that there is not enough de-escalation going on.

                Unidentified for Frisco Five and spoke of how they are going to make something happen.

                Lindo for hunger strikers opposed tasers as they are lethal weapons and disproportionate use of tasers on black and brown people and spoke of focusing on de-escalation instead.

                Unidentified spoke of the chief cancelling the town hall meeting after an officer-involved shooting.  He spoke of how you cannot trained being racist out of somebody.

                Unidentified spoke of distrust for the police department and spoke of the OCC.

                Unidentified opposed tasers.                

REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

a.            Commission Reports

-              Commission President’s Report

                -              Introduction of Acting Chief of Police Toney Chaplin

-              Report on creation of Personnel Subcommittee to manage search for permanent Chief

-              Report on White House Meeting on 21st Century Policing with US DOJ and the COPS office

-              Commissioners’ Reports

                Commissioner Loftus thanked Chief Greg Suhr for his leadership and spoke of how to continue the critical work started while he was chief.  Commissioner Loftus read a short bio about Chief Toney Chaplin. 

                Chief Chaplin addressed the Commission and the public and how he will do the people’s work.

                Commissioner Loftus spoke of creating a personnel which include VP Turman, Commissioner Melara, and herself.

                Commissioner DeJesus spoke of past search for police and how it was done with all the Commissioners and not a subcommittee.

                Commissioner Loftus reported about the White House meeting on 21st Century Policing with US DOJ and the COPS office.

                Commissioner DeJesus spoke of going to the screening of the movie in regards to tasers.  She spoke of how the commission needs to make an informed decision and how the Tasers Company is selling doubt.  Commissioner DeJesus also attended the Public Defender’s Justice Summit and suggested that all the Commissioners should see the movie and would like to invite Dr. Zhang to speak to the Commissioners.

                Commissioner Hwang spoke of safety issues in housing developments especially the case of a 70-year old woman who was assaulted by a young man.

                Commissioner Marshall spoke of speaking at the Academy in regards to his work with youth and the conflict of language and spoke of destructive language to the recruits.

                Commissioner Mazzucco spoke of attending the St. Thomas More panel about race and spoke of how it was very productive.              

b.            Chief’s Report

(This item is to allow the Chief of Police to report on recent Police Department activities and make announcements.) 

-              Update from the Professional Standards Bureau in regards to Collaborative Review status and Bureau Organization               

                Chief Chaplin gave a brief update on crimes including shootings that happened in the past two weeks.  The Chief also spoke of homicides that occurred, burglaries where guns were taken out of vehicles.  The Chief also gave a brief update in regards to the recent officer-involved shooting.

                Deputy Chief Garret Tom introduced himself as the new commanding officer of the Professional Standards Policing Bureau.  Captain Jack Hart then gave a brief update in regards to the collaborative review status.

c.             OCC Director’s Report

(This item is to allow the Director to report on recent OCC activities and make announcements.)

                Director Hicks spoke of how the OCC is filling in vacancies and will be hiring three senior investigators.  Director Hicks also announced the hiring of John Alden who was formerly an attorney for the Police Department. 

d.            Commission Announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration at future Commission meetings

                -              Special Police Commission Meetings on Use of Force

                                June 8, 2016 – Smith Hall Cafeteria, City College SF, 50 Phelan Avenue,

                                June 15, 2016 – Grattan Elementary School, 165 Grattan Street               

                Commissioner Loftus explained that the special meeting will be just one item and that it’s a chance for the Commission to hear from the public.

                Commissioner Loftus also asked for an update in regards to the Grand Jury Report in regards to the crime lab and also an update report in regards to recruitment.

                Commissioner DeJesus would like a report in regards to CIT and that it should be an action item to establish a subcommittee to work on the CIT DGO.  Commissioner DeJesus also would like an action item on the agenda for the following week to sever tasers from the Use of Force policy.

PUBLIC COMMENT

                Francisco Decosta spoke of COPS and that they have not done any good and spoke of how they invited COPS for the Mario Woods meeting and they told COPS don’t waste our time.

                Edward Lindo spoke of how the community should have input as to who the new chief is and what is need is someone who can stand up against the POA.  He went on to speak about the Latino Community Meeting.

                Tom Silhorst spoke of having someone from outside the department as new chief.  He spoke of having a people’s cop instead of a cop’s cop.

                Herbert Weiner spoke of how rank has no privileges only responsibilities.  He asked for mental health professionals to have feedback in regards to use of force.

                Magic thanked Commissioner DeJesus for her courage for saying that something went wrong with Luis Gongora.  She went on to talk about Jessica Williams.

                Unidentified spoke of the meeting tomorrow that the community does not know about.  He went on to talk about training.

                Karen Fleshman spoke of National Gun Violence Day and the 6 month anniversary of the Mario Woods shooting and spoke of the texting incident.

                Unidentified spoke of how the recruitment program needs a lot of attention and how the POA is controlling it.  He stated that somebody needs to look at the criteria of hiring.

                Tom Gilberti wants the chief to succeed.  He spoke of a lot of work to do and de-escalation.

                David Reagan spoke of the process and would like to comment more rapidly.  He went on to talk about the sub-committee in regards to search of a new chief.

                Gia thanked the police officers for their bravery to go out and try to protect the city.

                Unidentified spoke of taser and hold a community in the Bayview and Mission about tasers.

                Adrian spoke of use of force meetings and asked that it be held in the Mission and the Bayview.

                Unidentified spoke of wanting to see results.

                Rosario Cervantes spoke of seeing the documentary and was visibly shaken of having tasers in the hands of cops.

                Unidentified spoke of the use of force policy being a failure and how de-escalation is not being enforced.

                Unidentified spoke of how appalled she is and that this is all a joke.

                Unidentified spoke of how her son was missing and how she called different departments to find her son.

                Unidentified spoke of the nature of community in San Francisco and the “us against them” philosophy and this has to stop.   She stated that everyone needs to be served and that tasers are weapons.

                Barbara Attard spoke to have meetings in larger venues.  She spoke of CIT in Berkeley and the model should be considered here.

                Unidentified stated that its good to have community input and that the new chief should have the ability to change the culture from the top to bottom.

                Unidentified spoke of having sub committees.

                Jakkee Bryson spoke of coming prepared to meetings and practice before you get here.

(The Commission recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m.)

UPDATE FROM DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES ON STATUS OF BODY WORN CAMERA POLICY NEGOTIATIONS IN MEET-AND-CONFER PROCESS 

                Commissioner Loftus introduced this item and explained that this is not a new item and spoke of meetings with stakeholders in regards to this policy and that the commission voted on this draft policy.

                Mr. Martin Gran, Department of Human Resources Chief Negotiator, spoke of the compromised agreement between the City and the Police Officers Association. He explained that the agreement forces officers in OIS, in-custody death, or criminal matter to provide an initial statement before viewing any BWC footage.  The initial statement by the officer shall summarize the actions that the officer was engaged in, the actions that required the use of force, and the officer’s response.  After providing an initial statement, the officer shall have an opportunity to review any audio or video recordings depicting the incident with his/her representative or attorney prior to being subject to an interview.

                Motion by Commissioner DeJesus to take policy back to the stakeholders.  Second by Commissioner Hwang.

PUBLIC COMMENT

                Alan Schlossberg, ACLU, spoke of the ACLU’s position is that they did not support a brief report or a summary.  He stated that what they meant is the officer will give a full report.

                Tom Gilberti expressed concern regarding a brief statement and that it should be a full statement before looking at video footage.

                Tom Silhorst stated that it’s been three years and that they are tired of waiting.  He said he does not agree with Commissioners DeJesus and Hwang.

                Yolanda Jackson, Bar Association, stated that position is no viewing of footage on officer-involved shootings.  She stated that we have to get this right and to rush to a decision is not what the commission should be doing.

                Unidentified stated that it should be sent back and terms should be defined.

                Unidentified stated that there should be a full statement before viewing the footage and have a full description of the whole situation.

                Bryan Kneuker, VP Asian POA, spoke of welcoming the cameras.  He spoke of not rushing the policy and discussed concerns about 60 days being too short to keep footage instead of two years.

                Sharita spoke of body cameras and her trust for Commissioner DeJesus.

                Magic spoke of a killing in Sonoma County.

                Unidentified spoke of the need for action cams to end up with clear footage.

                John Crew stated that it’s taking so long because the city of San Francisco does not say no to the POA. 

                Director Hicks, OCC, expressed concerns regarding the quote of President Halloran about the OCC.  She stated that the policy is different from what the OCC has agreed to.  She stated that the definition does not provide sufficient clarity about the initial statement.

                Yulanda Williams, OFJ, expressed concerns that the change was made without their approval.  She spoke of doing the right thing and put cameras on the officers.

                Francisco Decosta discussed concerns regarding betraying the stakeholders and the community.

                Unidentified discussed concerns regarding how long the policy takes to be approved.

Motion by Commissioner DeJesus to postpone and take policy back to the stakeholders to review language.  Second by Commissioner Hwang.  Motion Fails 2-5

AYES:     Commissioners DeJesus, Hwang

NAYS:    Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, Mazzucco, Melara

                Motion to by Commissioner Melara adopt policy, second by Commissioner Mazzucco.  Approved 5-2     

AYES:     Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, Mazzucco, Melara

NAYS:    Commissioners DeJesus, Hwang 

RESOLUTION 16-40

ADOPTION OF NEW DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER “BODY WORN CAMERAS”

                RESOLVED, that the Police Commission hereby approves to adopt new Department General Order “Body Worn Cameras,” effective June 1, 2016, which states:

BODY WORN CAMERAS

I.  PURPOSE

The use of Body Worn Cameras (BWC) is an effective tool a law enforcement agency can use to demonstrate its commitment to transparency, ensure the accountability of its members, increase the public’s trust in officers, and protect its members from unjustified complaints of misconduct.  As such, the San Francisco Police Department is committed to establishing a BWC program that reinforces its responsibility for protecting public and officer safety.  The purpose of this Department General Order is to establish the policies and procedures governing the Department’s BWC program and to ensure members’ effective and rigorous use of BWC and adherence to the program. 

The BWC is a small audio-video recorder with the singular purpose of recording audio/visual files, specifically designed to be mounted on a person.  The BWC is designed to record audio and video activity to preserve evidence for use in criminal and administrative investigations (including disciplinary cases), civil litigation, officer performance evaluations, and to review police procedures and tactics, as appropriate. 

II.  POLICY

  1. Use of Equipment.The Department-issued BWC is authorized for use in the course and scope of official police duties as set forth in this Order.Only members authorized by the Chief of Police and trained in the use of BWCs are allowed to wear Department-issued BWCs.The BWC and all recorded data from the BWC are the property of the Department.The use of non-Department issued BWCs while on-duty is prohibited.

  2. Training.Prior to the issuance of BWCs, officers will be trained on the operation and care of the BWCs.This training will include mandatory, permissible and prohibited uses, significant legal developments, and use of BWCs in medical facilities.

  3. Program Administrator.The Risk Management Office (RMO) is the BWC’s program administrator.The duties of the RMO include, but are not limited to:

  4. Tracking and maintaining BWC inventory

  5. Issuing and replacing BWCs to authorized members

  6. Granting security access to the computer server

  7. Monitoring retention timeframes as required by policy and law

  8. Complying with Public Record Act (PRA) requests and all court record requests

  9. Conducting periodic and random audits of BWC equipment and the computer server

  10. Conducting periodic and random audits of BWC recordings for members’ compliance with the policy

    III.  PROCEDURES

    A.  Set Up and Maintenance.

    Members shall be responsible for the proper care and use of their assigned BWC and associated equipment.

    1.   Members shall test the equipment at the beginning of their shift and prior to deploying the BWC equipment to ensure it is working properly and is fully charged.

    2.   If the member discovers a defect or that the equipment is malfunctioning, the member shall cease its use and shall promptly report the problem to his/her Platoon Commander or Officer in Charge.   

    3.   If the member discovers that the BWC is lost or stolen, the member shall submit a memorandum though the chain of command memorializing the circumstances, in accordance with Department General Order 2.01, Rule 24, Loss or Damage to Department Property.

    4.   If the member’s BWC is damaged, defective, lost or stolen, the member’s supervisor shall facilitate a replacement BWC as soon as practical.

    5.   Members shall attach the BWC in such a way to provide an unobstructed view of officer/citizen contacts.  The BWCs shall be considered mounted correctly if it is mounted in one of the Department-approved mounting positions. 

    B.  Notification and Consent.

    When feasible, members should inform individuals that they are being recorded.

    However, state law allows members to record communications that he or she could lawfully hear or record.  Penal Code § 633 see also People v. Lucero 190 Cal. App. 3d 1065, 1069.  Members are not required to obtain consent from members of the public prior to recording when the member is lawfully in the area where the recording takes place.

    Members are not required to activate or deactivate a BWC upon the request of a citizen. In addition, members are not required to play back BWC recordings to allow members of the public to review the video footage.

    C.  Authorized Use.

    All on-scene members equipped with a BWC shall activate their BWC equipment to record in the following circumstances:

  1. Detentions and arrests
  2. Consensual encounters where the member suspects that the citizen may have knowledge of criminal activity as a suspect, witness, or victim, except as noted in Section III, D.
  3. 5150 evaluations
  4. Traffic and pedestrian stops
  5. Vehicle pursuits
  6. Foot pursuits
  7. Uses of force                                    
  8. When serving a search or arrest warrant
  9. Conducting any of the following searches on one’s person and/or property:
    1. Incident to an arrest
    2. Cursory
    3. Probable cause
    4. Probation/parole
    5. Consent
    6. Vehicles
  10.  Transportation of arrestees and detainees
  11.  During any citizen encounter that becomes hostile
  12.  In any situation when the recording would be valuable for evidentiary purposes
  13.  Only in situations that serve a law enforcement purpose  

D.  Prohibited Recordings.

Members shall not activate the BWC when encountering:

1.            Sexual assault and child abuse victims during a preliminary investigation

2.            Situations that could compromise the identity of confidential informants and undercover operatives

3.            Strip searches

However, a member may record in these circumstances if the member can articulate an exigent circumstance that required deviation from the normal rule in these situations. 

Members shall not activate the BWC in a manner that is specifically prohibited by DGO 2.01, General Rules of Conduct, Rule 56 – Surreptitious Recordings – and DGO 8.10, Guidelines for First Amendment Activities. 

E.  Terminations of Recordings. 

Once the BWC has been activated, members shall continue using the BWC until their involvement in the event has concluded to ensure the integrity of the recording, unless the contact moves into an area restricted by this policy.  Members shall deactivate the BWC in the following circumstances: 

  1. When discussing sensitive tactical or law enforcement information away from the citizen
  2. After receiving an order from a higher ranking member
  3. When recording at a hospital would compromise patient confidentiality
  4. When gathering information from witnesses or community members, and the officer has a reasonable and articulable concern that a BWC would inhibit information gathering efforts

In cases when a member deactivates a BWC, the member shall document the reason(s) for deactivation as outlined in Section III, G, Documentation. 

F.  Viewing BWC Recordings.

  1. A member may review a BWC recording on his/her assigned device or on an authorized computer for any legitimate investigatory purpose, including but not limited to, preparing an incident report, preparing statements, conducting a follow-up investigation, or providing testimony.

    Following any (1) officer-involved shooting; (2) in-custody death; or (3) criminal matter, any subject officer shall be required to provide an initial statement before he or she reviews any audio or video recording.

                    The initial statement by the subject officer shall briefly summarize the actions that the officer was engaged in, the actions that required the use of force, and the officer’s response.  The statement shall be distinct from the “public safety statement.”

    After providing an initial statement, the subject shall have an opportunity to review any audio or video recordings depicting the incident with his or her representative or attorney prior to being subject to an interview.

                    Nothing in this section is intended to limit the Office of Citizens Complaints’ (OCC) role in these investigations.

  2. Members shall not access or view a BWC unless doing so involves a legitimate law enforcement purpose.

    G.  Documentation.

    Members submitting an incident report or completing a written statement shall indicate whether the BWC was activated and whether it captured footage related to the incident. 

    If a member deactivates a BWC recording prior to the conclusion of an event, the member shall document the reason(s) for terminating the recording in CAD, an incident report, a written statement or a memorandum. 

    If a higher ranking member orders a subordinate member to deactivate the BWC, the higher ranking officer shall document the reason(s) for the order in CAD, an incident report, a written statement or a memorandum.

    If a member reactivates the BWC after turning the equipment off, the member shall document the reason(s) for restarting the recording in CAD, an incident report, a written statement or a memorandum.

    If a member determines that officer or public safety would be compromised if a BWC were activated during an incident requiring its use, the member shall document in CAD, an incident report, a written statement or a memorandum the reason(s) for not using the BWC.

    H.  Storage and Use of Recordings.

  1. A member who has recorded an event shall upload the footage prior to the end of his/her watch unless instructed to do so sooner by an assigned investigator or a superior officer.  If the member is 1) the subject of the investigation in an officer-involved shooting or in-custody death; 2) the subject of a criminal investigation; or 3) at the discretion of the Chief of Police or his/her designee, the senior ranking on-scene supervisor shall take immediate physical custody of the camera and take responsibility for uploading the data.  
  2. When uploading recordings to the computer server, members shall identify each BWC recording with the incident report number, CAD number or citation number and the appropriate incident category title to ensure the recording is accurately retained and to comply with local, state and federal laws.
  3. Members are prohibited from tampering with BWC recordings, accessing BWC recordings for personal use, and from uploading BWC recordings onto public or social media internet websites without written approval from the commanding officer of the RMO.

I.             Duplication and Distribution.

  1. The San Francisco Police Department’s goal is to release BWC recordings to the greatest extent possible unless disclosure would:

  2. endanger the safety of a witness or another person involved in the investigation,

  3. jeopardize the successful completion of an investigation, or

  4. violate local, state and/or federal laws, including but not limited to, the right of privacy.

  5. Departmental Requests:

    1. The officer-in-charge or commanding officer of the investigative unit assigned the incident recorded by the BWC, or the commanding officer of the RMO shall have the authority to permit the duplication and distribution of the BWC files.

    2. Any member requesting to duplicate or distribute a BWC recording shall obtain prior written approval from the officer-in-charge or the commanding officer of the unit assigned the investigation, or the commanding officer of the RMO.

    3. Duplication and distribution of BWC recordings are limited to those who have a “need to know” and a “right to know” and are for law enforcement purposes only.The Department shall maintain a log of access, duplication and distribution.

    4. When releasing BWC recordings, members shall comply with federal, state and local statutes and Department policy.

  6. Non-Departmental Requests:

    1. The Department shall accept and process PRA requests in accordance with the provisions of federal, state and local statutes and Department policy.

    2. Members shall provide discovery requests related to the rebooking process or other court proceedings by transferring the BWC recording to the requesting agency by using the computer server where the BWC recording is stored.

    3. When requested by the OCC, members of the Legal Division shall provide the BWC recordings consistent with the Police Commission’s document protocol policy on OCC routine requests.               

      J.             Retention.

                      1.            Consistent with state law, the Department shall retain all BWC recordings for a minimum of sixty (60) days, after which recordings may be erased, destroyed or recycled.                

      Notwithstanding any other provision of this policy, the Department shall retain BWC recordings for a minimum of two (2) years if:

      a.            The recording is of an incident involving a member’s use of force or officer-involved shooting; or

      b.            The recording is of an incident that leads to the detention or arrest of an individual; or

      c.             The recording is relevant to a formal or informal complaint against a member or the Department. 

                      2.            Notwithstanding any other provision of this policy, a BWC recording may be saved for a longer or indefinite period of time as part of a specific case if deemed relevant to a criminal, civil or administrative matter.  

                      3.            A member may not delete any BWC recording without prior authorization.  The member seeking to delete a recording shall submit a memorandum to his/her Commanding Officer requesting to delete footage from a BWC file and shall make an entry of the request in the appropriate case file, if applicable.  The Commanding Officer shall then forward the memorandum to the Commanding Officer of the RMO for evaluation and appropriate action.

  7. Subject to the above limitations, members of the RMO are authorized to delete BWC recordings in accordance with the Department’s established retention policies on BWC recordings or when directed by the Commanding Officer of the RMO.

  8. The Department shall retain permanently all records of logs of access as set forth in I.1.3 and deletion of data including memorandums as set forth in J.3 and J.4 from the BWC.

    K.  Accidental or Unintentional Recordings.

    If a BWC accidentally or inadvertently captures an unintended recording, the member may submit a memorandum through the chain of command specifying the date, time, location and a summary of the unintentionally recorded event.  This memorandum shall be forwarded to the Commanding Officer of the RMO for evaluation and appropriate action. 

    L.  Discovery of Potential Misconduct during Authorized Review.

    Members reviewing recordings should remain focused on the incident captured in the BWC and should review only those recordings relevant to the investigative scope.  If a member discovers potential misconduct during any review of the BWC, the member shall report the potential misconduct to a superior officer.  The superior officer shall adhere to the provisions of Department General Order 1.06, Duties of Superior Officers, Section I.A.4.  Nothing in this procedure prohibits addressing Department policy violations. 

    M. Targeting Prohibited. 

    Department supervisors may access BWC footage for purposes consistent with the policy.  Supervisors may not review an officer’s BWC footage to search for violations of Department policy without cause.

    References:

    DGO 1.06, Duties of Superior Officers

    DGO 2.01, Rules 23 and 24, Use of Department Property and Loss or Damage to Department Property

    DGO 2.01, Rule 56, Surreptitious Recordings

    DGO 8.10, Guidelines for First Amendment Activities

                    AYES:     Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, Mazzucco, Melara

                    NAYS:    Commissioners DeJesus, Hwang        

    REPORT FROM COMMISSION USE OF FORCE SUBCOMMITTEE ON UPDATED USE OF FORCE POLICY AND DRAFT CONDUCTIVE ENERGY DEVICES BUREAU ORDER

                    Commissioner Mazzucco gave a brief history on the use of force policy and the CED bureau order and that they are waiting for the subject matter experts, which is the COPS/DOJ group, for their input.  What has been done is that the DGOs have been consolidated and that there is a lot of work done.  This is not a finish product and only changes made were those from the subject matter experts.

                    Commissioner DeJesus stated that this still needs to be looked at by the stakeholders and explained what has been done and/or moved around within the policy.  Commissioner DeJesus explained the difference between version 1 (prior version) and version 2 (amended version).

    PUBLIC COMMENT

                    Jennifer Freidenback, Coalition on Homeless, submitted a letter to the Commission in regards to tasers.

                    Erin Kariyama, Bar Association, best position is not to put additional weapon in the hands of police officers.

                    Kevin, Morgan Lewis Blue Ribbon Panel, reviewed the two versions of the Use of Force and supports version two of the two versions presented.

                    Alan Schlossberg, ACLU, spoke of having a chance to comment on the two versions.  He went on to oppose tasers.

                    Yulanda Williams stated that 21st Century Policing requires out of the box thinking and recommended a Crisis Intervention Team.

                    Bryan Kneuker discussed concerns about version 1 where it discussed carotid restraints and urged the Commission to review the policy especially the use of the carotid restraint.

                    Tom Gilberti spoke of treating people with dignity.

                    Magic agrees with Jennifer Friedenback and spoke of health care training at UCSF.

                    Unidentified spoke of UCSF training and how tasers can be used for torture.

                    John Crew spoke of a film called “Killing them Safely.”

                    Samara Marion spoke for the OCC and that their position should be de-coupled from the Use of Force policy.

                    Unidentified spoke of Luis Gongora incident.

                    Barbara Attard opposed tasers and should be separated from discussion with use of force policy.

                    Kelly Cutler, Coalition on Homelessness, discussed how much older and sicker people on the streets are and adding tasers to the equation is not helpful at this time.

                    Unidentified spoke of what it was like when he was a young adult.

                    Unidentified spoke of medical issues concerning tasers.                              

    PUBLIC COMMENT ON ALL MATTERS PERTAINING TO CLOSED SESSION

                    Tom Gilberti stated that it would be nice to hear what’s going on in closed session and that closed sessions are where transparency starts and public has a right.     

    VOTE ON WHETHER TO HOLD CLOSED SESSION

                    Motion by Commissioner Melara, second by Commissioner Mazzucco.  Approved 7-0.                               

    CLOSED SESSION (11:40 p.m. – 1:00 a.m.)

    Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco

    Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

    PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION – Chief of Police

    Review of findings and Chief’s decision to return or not return officers to duty following officer-involved shooting (OIS 16-002)

    (PRESENT:  Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, DeJesus, Mazzucco, Melara, Hwang, A/Chief Chaplin, Deputy Chief Schmitt, Deputy City Attorney Cabrera, Sgt. Kilshaw, Risa Tom)  No discussion, put over

    Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco

    Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

    PERSONNEL EXCEPTION:  Discussion and possible action to accept or reject settlement agreement filed in Case No. IAD 2013-0117, or take other action

    (PRESENT:  Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, DeJesus, Mazzucco, Melara, Hwang, A/Chief Chaplin, Deputy Chief Schmitt, Deputy City Attorney Russi, Sgt. Kilshaw, Risa Tom, Attorney Worsham, Attorney Robinson, member involved, & family & friends of member)

    (These proceedings are taken in shorthand form by Ms. Anna Greenley, CSR., Roomian & Associates)

    Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco

    Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

    PERSONNEL EXCEPTION:  Assignment of disciplinary charges filed in Case No. ALW IAD 2015-00208 to an individual Commissioner for the taking of evidence on a date to be determined by the Commissioner

    (PRESENT:  Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, DeJesus, Mazzucco, Melara, Hwang, A/Chief Chaplin, Deputy Chief Schmitt, Deputy City Attorney Russi, Sgt. Kilshaw, Risa Tom, Attorney Alden for Attorney Worsham, Attorney Furst for Attorney Nobles, member involved)

    Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco

    Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

    PERSONNEL EXCEPTION:  Discussion and possible action decide penalty on a sustained specification filed in Case No. ALW IAD 2015-0115, or take other action

    (PRESENT:  Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, DeJesus, Mazzucco, Melara, Hwang, A/Chief Chaplin, Deputy Chief Schmitt, Deputy City Attorney Russi, Sgt. Kilshaw, Risa Tom, Attorney Worsham, Attorney Brass, member involved)

    (These proceedings are taken in shorthand form by Ms. Anna Greenley CSR, Roomian & Associates)

    Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco

    Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

    PERSONNEL EXCEPTION:  Discussion and possible action whether or not to return charges filed in Case No. ALW IAD 2011-0037 to the Chief’s level to be handled administratively, or take other action

    (PRESENT:  Commissioners Loftus, Turman, Marshall, DeJesus, Mazzucco, Melara, Hwang, A/Chief Chaplin, Deputy Chief Schmitt, Deputy City Attorney Russi, Sgt. Kilshaw, Risa Tom, Attorney Worsham, Attorneys Furst, Rapaport, Pavone, Berry-Wilkinson, Brass, members involved) Item is put over.

    (These proceedings are taken in shorthand form by Ms. Anna Greenley CSR, Roomian & Associates)

    Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco

    Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

    (PRESENT:  Commissioners Turman, Marshall, Melara, Hwang, Chief Chaplin, Deputy Chief Schmitt, Deputy City Attorney Russi, Sgt. Kilshaw, Risa Tom)

    OPEN SESSION (1:00 a.m.)

    VOTE TO ELECT WHETHER TO DISCLOSE ANY OR ALL DISCUSSION HELD IN CLOSED SESSION 

                    Motion by Commissioner Mazzucco, second by Commissioner Melara for non-disclosure.  Approved 6-0.

    ADJOURNMENT

                    Motion by Commissioner Melara, second by Commissioner Marshall.  Approved 6-0.     

                    Thereafter, the meeting was adjourned at 1:00 a.m.

     

                    __________________________________________

                    Sergeant Rachael Kilshaw

                    Secretary

                    San Francisco Police Commission