To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

Meeting Information


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 


  held at City Hall   Room  406   1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place  San Francisco, CA   94102

The Minutes of this meeting set forth all actions taken by the Commission on the matters stated, but not necessarily the chronological sequence in which the matters were taken up


(ACTION)  Roll Call
The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:20 pm. Comms Queen, Chuck, Bonilla, were present at th gavel. Comm Stiglich was in the building but out of the room. Comms Hale and Richard arrived at 6:35pm and 7:10pm, respectively.



(ACTION) Review and approval of April 28, and May 26, June 23, 2004 meeting minutes
This item was tabled until all commissioners were present, but ultimately tabled until the next full Commission meeting.
  (public comments)
there were none.


(DISCUSSION) Chief Probation Officer’s Report

a.    Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative update

       The Chief said that G. Bieringer is on vacation, but had given a written report to the Comm Secretary earlier.  She asked that this be accepted as the report.  Comm Hale said he was concerned that it was coming down to the time where final recommendations would be made, and how would those changes in process be actuated (in govt. agency partners), and how the Dept will lead this.

He asked about the high number of overrides in the risk assessment.  He wanted the Dept to come up with a timeline for how the recommendations would be taken up.

b.    Budget update

M Lui reviewed his written report, citing some of the reductions to the budget, mainly in equipment requests.  There were also some position reductions. (his report is available from the JPC office)

They are also working on closing out the budget for 03-04, but haven’t been able to balance it at this time. “We do at this time expect to balance the budget, and this is the result of many of the budget balancing activities and measures that have been taken by this administration throughout the past fiscal year.”

Comm Hale asked why this Dept couldn’t do like other counties to, in using their POs as staff in their juvenile halls.  He wanted the Dept to investigate this. The Chief asked for the City Attorney to look into this.  She said that San Francisco had some very specific limitations.  She said POs had worked before in juvenile hall but there was a lawsuit and all those back wages had to be paid, because when you work a certain number of hours you then must be paid overtime. You can’t just write them off. And also it has a great deal to do with how the MOUs are written. And therefore that may be the difference between San Mateo and the other areas.   She said that was an extremely technical question that they have explored. She said she did know there was history of the lawsuit and having been “hit” with a “lot of” backpay.

Comm Stiglich said that overtime is a question of having good scheduling and adequate staffing so these two aspects certainly might be better managed.

M Lui mentioned that the difference between the counselor and PO pay is about $10k, but the subsidy for POs would not apply for their work in juvenile hall.

He reported a slight improvement in overtime, about 20% compared to an earlier pay period. The workers comp overage was expected to be over half a million, but it actually came in at about 400K.

The Chief reported that TANF ($134 million) is restored in the state’s general fund.

c.    Report on sole source contracts for FY 02-03; FY 03-04

M Lui: “really don’t have any report other than that we prepared a response per the requirements of the City, that there were no sole source contracts in FY 02-03, and FY 03-04. and we did forward off that copy of that memo to the commission.”

Comm Ricci: “so you were saying that there is no sole sourcing for ….”

Lui: “right, we had no sole source contracts.”

Comm Ricci: “I would like to just get some clarification on an item that I’ve seen in the past about some of these contracts.  YGCIC, is that a private or non profit? “

Lui: “I’m going to need to request the assistance of some other staff, possibly of…”

Chief: “Liz Jackson-Simpson can talk about YGCIC.”

L Jackson-Simpson:”the Youth Guidance Center Improvement Committee is a 501c3 corporation that was established when the juvenile probation dept was under the juvenile courts. It’s been in existence for over 21-22 yrs. And they are one of the providers that is on site and operates our Focus programs, Juvy Java, and our early study program.”

Comm Ricci: “ok, so that is a.. are you saying it’s a non profit?”

L Jackson-Simpson:”it’s a 501c3 non profit corporation.”

Comm Ricci: “who heads that….”

L. Jackson-Simpson: “the President of the YGCIC is judge Gyemant.”

Comm Ricci: “who’s the executive director?”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “there is no executive director as it stands now.” Comm Ricci:”are you telling that the judge is overseeing that…”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “There are some programs operated out of the 501c3, those programs that we indicated, and the Y-TEC programs are also under that fiscal agent.”   Comm Ricci: “my question is, do we have an employee that is paid by the Dept that runs the non profit.”   L. Jackson-Simpson:  “the non profit is run in partnership with the Dept. It’s housed …and staff,.. within the facilities.  They have staff that are paid for out of it, that work for the 501c3, there are teachers from the unified school district that are leveraged against those funding sources, as far as the contracts that are let by the dept….”

Comm Ricci:” Ms Jackson-Simpson, the question I’d like you to answer for the Commission is are we paying for employees from the Dept to run the non profit.”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “the non profit is not run by our employees. It’s run by the Board. Our employees work in collaboration with the 501c3, but all the invoices, the reporting, come from the Board of Directors.”  Comm Ricci:  “my question to the City Attorney is, wouldn’t a non profit, that would be a separate entity, right, separate from the Dept?”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “yes, a separate entity.”  M. Baumgartner:”yes, a 501c3 is obviously by definition a separate entity.”  Comm Ricci: “and how do they get their funding?” L. Jackson-Simpson: “they apply to solicitations by the Dept, and win out in procurement.”  Comm Ricci: “and that went out in an RFP?”  L. Jackson-Simpson:  “yes it did.”  Comm Ricci: “so it is not a sole source.”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “no it’s not.”   Comm Ricci: “and the YGCIC GED Plus, what are the number kids and utilization?”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “at any one time I believe they have a capacity of about 20 kids that can fit in those classrooms. They have 3 classrooms again on our campus, I think they have the capacity of 15-20 young people.”  Comm Ricci: “but currently are there 20 kids?”  L. Jackson-Simpson estimated about 14-15 in the GED program. She said it was one of the most successful GED programs in the county community school system. 

Comm Stiglich to M Lui: “when we say there are no sole source contracts for ’02-’03 or ’03-’04, that is we didn’t enter into any during that period.”  Lui: “that’s correct.”  Comm Stiglich:”so there are existing sole source contracts, previous. There are other existing sole source contracts, correct?”  Lui: “I… I am not able to answer that question. I’m sorry, I don’t know if there are others, not that I’m aware of.”

Comm Hale: “what I would say is,. And I think first, we certainly should get a report back.. but generally our contracts are annual. And so, even if it was a sole source, I can’t recall a multi year contract at all.  They usually come back, so..:   Lui:  “to my knowledge, there are none existing.”  Chief Tucker: “one of the things that I have sought to do to improve the way and change the contracting process is that all contracts, we’ve worked with the City Attorney’s office to make sure that all contracts go out on RFP.  We have almost made it a policy that there will be no sole source in the Dept. It gives the community, it gives an opportunity to everyone, rather than sole sourcing. Plus, it’s been our policy, it’s been the policy under me, and working with the City Attorney’s office, that we will RFP everything. And there is a clear, definite process by which we do that. And do the scoring and the recommendations. So because we know how seriously our Mayor is about the approach to contracts, that we have revamped and early on worked with the Mayor’s office, I mean the City Attorney’s office, to look at how we’re going to do business, and to reform if you will any contracts that go out will be RFP.”  Comm Hale: “there are always reasons, but it’s situational.  For example, we RFP’d a million dollars for an agency to operate, I believe it was Hidden Valley. We wanted to take a real hard look to see if there was someone out there in the universe that would see the value in Hidden Valley. We received no responses. And as I understand it, when you have that situation you can actually go out and try to pursue a vendor, and I remembered Marine… something.. came to mind, Cornell comes to mind...these are agencies that are running private residential facilities. And that was a situation where sole sourcing was appropriate. If we believe there is a certain need that is not responded to an RFP, then that gives rise to another option.  But I believe around the issue of sole sourcing, the process has to be transparent. People have to know that that is what the Dept is doing. Because where we run into trouble is where we are doing our work and we are trying to provide services but then people hear well, that was sole sourced. And they don’t know the reasons, there’s not been an open discussion, but I believe we should have at our option all of the tools, the problem is making sure that everyone out here knows when we are pursuing it.  I  believe it’s exceptional. I would probably safely say that the hundreds of contracts we’ve entered into, the overwhelming majority, I would even say in the 90% have been RFP’d, probably even in the 95+%. But I also believe we ought to take a look, and perhaps we ought to see from the time of ’96…perhaps to look at what the sole source contracts were during that period of time and how they came about, because I know there’s a lot of questions about it. So it makes sense to just take a look at it and see how those happened.  

Comm Richard asked the Chief when they began the policy regarding sole sourcing, during Chief William’s term, or when she came onboard.  The Chief said when she came onboard they did a review because there was a focus on contracts. She instructed that contracts should be RFP’d. Everyone that came up should be RFP’d to avoid and sole sources. They seriously looked at the ones that could have been considered sole source, and “working with the City Attorney’s office, and I do have my memos when we went to.. . so I would have to go back to my memos..ah… our City Attorney was working with us around issues about contracting. And through that communiqué, I made the decision that all contracts, whenever possible should be RFP’d.  It decreases the probability of question and concern. It makes the process transparent. And that was the object. To make the process transparent.”

Comm Stiglich: “I was not suggesting by asking that there is any particular problem, I’m just think that, for whatever reason, wholly appropriate if someone is the only person who can do it, my understanding is that there are some contracts that are sole sourced. Now be that old or new, be there reason because they are the only people who can ‘build a flagpole or whatever’,  I just want to know what they are.” “any contract which was sole sourced, even if the City Attorney thought it was great, there’s no problem, I just want to know what they are. If you’re telling me there’s none, then I’m satisfied with the information, if you’re telling me there are I just want to know what they are, that’s all.”

Chief:  “we can certainly go back and, we checked because everybody continues to challenge us… we will go back and check, but to my knowledge currently we have no sole source. I can’t speak for those totally in the past.”  Comm Stiglich: “well, if there’s none going, then you’re telling me there’s none.”

Chief:  “we will, definitely.. I mean, this was sent around to us 3 times. and at each juncture we came up with the same thing, but I’m willing to go back and check every last one of them. We are in the process, …we have reviewed an existing one that is time for renewal..and we’re working with,…see, as the contracts come up for renewal,…”

Comm Stiglich: “ if I can just stop you.. see, that’s what I’m talking about. as they come up for renewal, then we are not sole sourcing, but that means that there’s a contract out there that was sole sourced. I want to know, which ones are out there that were sole sourced. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that but you’re saying that as they come up for review, we’re RFP’ing, we doing all those things, but as they come up for review, necessarily means that it exists.”

Chief: “what we will do is go back, and see that this Commission gets the information. Now, how far do you want.. you see, I think one of the problems, Commissioners, is that contracting and the rules for contracting have changed and it continues to change, and it’s an ongoing process, and an ongoing struggle for the Dept. and we struggle to keep on top of that. We once had a purchasing specialist, she was a supervisor of purchasing and she had the administrative ones. And there were different rules when she was doing them. And we did have sole sources back then. And in my mind’s eye, as I kept hearing the rhetoric and the question, it was my decision that everything should go out RFP, _(inaudible)_it is absolutely impossible.  So, we will certainly go back, and if you’ll define for me specifically what…  our response is that ’02-’03 and ’03-’04, we did not have sole sources, but what I’m going to go back and do, maybe we’re talking about how it was processed or something like that, let me, in fact Commissioners, if I could have some time with you and maybe a discussion I would certainly better understand exactly where you’re going, because I do understand, and if I have the President’s okay, I would like to work with her and get to exactly what the Commission is looking for.”

Comm Ricci: “ I would highly recommend that because I will make an announcement later on.”

Comm Hale: “maybe this might get to it, perhaps, all agencies that have received a sole source because if Commissioner Stiglich, if I was reading you right, I think you now understand that it may have started off as a sole source and then RFP’d. If the question is who received a sole source contract initially, regardless of whether or not they went through an additional RFP process down the road, you want to know which agencies received sole source.”

Comm Stiglich: “I can see that it’s more complex than I had anticipated. It’s just any existing contracts, right now, and again, you’ve been doing these reviews, so it shouldn’t be tough.  If you’ve reviewed any contracts that look sole sourced, that you all reviewed it and this one looks extraordinary, so it’s fine, I want to know which one it is.” “ I don’t care if it has already been RFP’d because then it’s not a sole source contract.”

Chief: “That’s the confusion. I think if we look historically, as the contracts…as we started contracting, as the rules began to change, and as we began to gain expertise in what we should be doing, by going and getting training and developing a process, I know the community programs division, I remember it must have been 4 or 5 yrs ago, we were really struggling with contracts and we developed a whole process, we went to get training from the contracts, and we really struggled with were we doing it right. We were not doing it right in some cases, and we have gotten to the point now that I think we’re much better with it. That is why some of the contracts initially maybe were let as sole source, or maybe they were even put out…maybe they weren’t even sole sourced..but I’m saying to you, I believe historically we didn’t do some things right because we didn’t know what we were doing. But we have, on an ongoing basis continued to increase our expertise, and corrected, and get ourselves in a position, especially working with the City Attorney, to understand the requirements, and Margaret, and, if I may, Ms. Morley, have been fantastic as giving us the kind of counsel we need to be in the right place on each contract. In fact, that’s the reason why anything we let first goes to the City Attorney. Because I want to make sure they’re saying we’re in the right place.”

Comm Ricci: “so Chief, what you’re saying then, and I’d like this for the record, is that every contract for ’02-’03 has been signed off by our City Attorney.”

Chief: “no no no no. Not ’02-’03. I’m talking about this year. As we go up for RFP, and once the process is gone through, once we did an inventory of what was to happen, who was up for renewal, we worked with, early this year, and I can’t remember the dates exactly, we were with the City Attorney’s office and looked at what our contracts should look like, what the process should be, and what the issues are. And what were the changes in the processing that we needed to adapt ourselves to, so that we would….. if you will remember, in October, we had,  I had just come onboard, we had, a really problem with contracts. That’s when we atarted working with Margaret around what needed to be done.  We cut, ah,  we… because of budget reductions, we had, we made reductions on the contracts.  Well those contracts had to be modified. That was something we didn’t know how to do. Not at the level of the way we did it. And there’s technical stuff, so we went, and what our City Attorney was able to say was ‘ no you need to do it this way, you need to do it that way’…wording, and those kinds of things.  So we’ve been working very closely with the City Attorney, and it is a learning curve, and I would be the first to admit in this Dept, our history,  we did some violations, I’m going to say that. My focus has been to work with the counsel of the City Attorney so that we will not be at any juncture at a point that we have what may be considered illegal, incorrect, or any concern about. So, that’s what I have been working with, and Comm. Stiglich, I will be very glad to share any information, because it’s another learning process for me.

Comm Hale:” one of the things I recall when there was a discussion back in a day about sole sourcing was that there’s a number of sign-offs by city depts., even the ethics commission I believe has to take a look at… which  commission is that, that takes a look at the sole source?….as well as the city attorney, so for me, particularly because they said sole sourcing is something we don’t like in the city, that there were these checks and balances. So I was always comfortable in terms of any sole sourcing that was ultimately approved. Now were these technical  violations, these improper whatever, I think we ought to know, because we have not been reported, as I recall, it has not been reported to this commission what those types of missteps were. Or the contracts that it applied to. And I think we ought to know. The community needs to know, because no one, I don’t think has anything to hide. And if there are mistakes, and I appreciate the Chief’s comments, and we should know, and clear it up and not let it happen again.”

Comm Richard asked for an explanation of how sole sourcing worked.

Comm Hale: “a sole source really is when there is a particular service that we looking for that can only be handled by a select group. Let me give you Pride as an example. The rationale behind Pride was that there was a organization back east that received recognition from Harvard government school about how effective this particular model was. And the Chief, then, Jesse Williams presented that information to this….. introduced it into this process, these check offs, why perhaps the city attorney may ask those questions, why is this being sole sourced, what is it about this service you’re saying can’t be provided by any other agency out there, and then it goes down that list. Now in terms of actual steps, because I know there are a number of steps, a check off before a sole source contract is approved by the city, but the genesis, what starts it off is that there is a allegation (that’s a legal term), but there is a proposition that this particular service can’t be provided by anyone else. For example I used with Hidden Valley. Now as I recall, and there’s a difference, we can take a look at that, as I recall there were no responses because a million dollars wasn’t enough. Even Cornell, once they went in there because they were actually very aggressive, they sent their staff out here, they went out there, they drew up all kinds of plans, bedspace, how much they would have to charge, how much they wanted the Dept to put in, in order to make it feasible. And they finally said, ‘we can’t do it.’ And so that’s why we don’t have anything going on at Hidden Valley because no one could take on that project. But that’s what starts it off, and then there’s a number of steps, and I remember that Ms. Jackson, …was it the city attorney that did the actual training on the sole sourcing process, to make sure our dept……”

Comm Richard: “So, are the sole source contracts presented as sole source contracts to the city attorney, or are they just presented as just a contract needing to be signed off?”

Comm Hale: “oh no..its sole sourced, when they come to the city attorney I’m sure they’re sophisticated enough to know, well ‘you’re not coming here with an RFP process’, that’s not part of what they do….”

Comm Richard: “that’s what I’m saying…is the contract going to the city attorney with sole sourcing on top of it, or is it just going to the city attorney as a contract just needing to be signed off. That’s what I’m asking.”

Margaret Baumgartner: “When it comes to our office there is no difference between a contract that has been sole sourced or not sole sourced.”

Comm Richard:”so you don’t know?”

Baumgartner: “well, I often inquire, but the surface of the contract does not indicate whether it has been sole sourced or not.”

Comm Hale: “well… that raises a question for me, then. Is there a specific review process or do all contracts, because now I’m getting…….this would be new for me, if all the contracts go through the same review process then I’m a little bit more concerned that there needs to be some distinction, but I always thought that a sole source contract had a certain check off that’s different than all the other contracts that go through RFP process.”

Baumgartner: “the human rights commission has to approve a sole source contract. They have to prove that the contract is a sole source contract.”

The Chief: “our expert is Liz Jackson-Simpson, and if you would entertain, perhaps she could answer some of your process questions.”

Comm Stiglich: “…I didn’t mean to pop open this whole can.  My question was a pretty simple question, before we get through this, is there a problem, or a problem with one contractor, you’re talking about specifics, are they any that exist right now? If there are, then we can take a look at them because we know that now as new contracts come up, we’re throwing them through the process, or we should be, so that’s all. I don’t want people to feel defensive or attacked by this. It’s just information that we should have. If there are any, it shouldn’t be hard…, but I still don’t know if there are any.”

L. Jackson-Simpson: “there are none in the community programs division.” “and there is a process, I think when I started 3 yrs ago, I walked the commission through the contracting process, both when there’s a procurement and when there’s a sole source, ‘cuz this is an age old concern. There are many checks and balances as the city attorney indicated for sole source contracting. We cannot make a move on a sole source contract if indeed there is..  and last year there was an added step in that it had to go through the Mayor’s budget office before we could even put through a personal service contract to the civil service commission, with a contract we had secured, we had to demonstrate all the steps. For sole source contracts we have to get approval of the Commission, then it goes before the human rights commission, then it has to go to the civil service commission, city attorney, purchaser’s office,… all of those steps and checks and balances have to be done before we can let a sole source contract out. And the current Mayor is very particular and stringent about sole source contracting happening. So we have been very diligent to ensure that contracts that we currently let are going through a procurement process.”

Comm Stiglich: “and that’s for the community based agencies?”  L. Jackson-Simpson: “yes, I can speak for those.”

Comm Stiglich: “so, now I know that in your area there are no sole source contracts.  Am I to leave here and understand that in the Dept there are no existing sole source contracts?”

L.Jackson-Simpson:” in the Dept it was reported that there are none.”

Comm Stiglich: “…in the whole Dept?”

The Chief: “exising now?”  Comm Stiglich: “yes”      (silence)

The Chief: “I need to, and you know…   I assure you…and I would really like to.. we’re talking about.. we do have some other, you know, other than community based.. those I want to go back and review…I absolutely want to do that….”

Comm Stiglich: “where I thought I started was are there any existing sole source contracts in the Dept.”

M. Lui: “ I think I’m… the Chief had mentioned she’d be happy to go and look through that and review all our contracts one by one to see if indeed there are any.”

Comm Stiglich: “the answer is, we don’t know right now?”

M Lui: “yeah, we didn’t prepare to answer that question in the context that you are asking it.  In terms of reported sole source contracts for 02-03, 03-04, there are none.”

The Chief: “also what we would be willing to do in a learning process is, because it was a learning process for us, commissioner, is if you would like to go over them with us, and then we could address your questions and maybe give you a historical perspective. We’d be very glad to do that.”

Comm Stiglich: ”well, I’m always happy for information, but I know what sole source contracts are. And in other capacities, other lifetimes, I sued the city over sole sourcing, and I know sometime we need them, but the bottom line is, competition is good, it’s public money, and if you’re not putting it competitively out there, you’re not getting the best price, and then it’s stealing.  ……I thought I asked a simple question, and clearly it is much more complex than I ever imagined. Are there any existing sole source contracts. It’s clear that nobody can answer that for me tonight, although I know for community, there are not, thank you. But I would like to know. that’s all.”

The Chief: “and I agree with you. And that is the reason why I made the kind of mandate I made. So as I said, perhaps we can work together and then you will probably be educating us as well.”

Comm Hale: “I’m now having some real problems, because if in fact sole sourcing has to go through we additional check offs, then we should have a sense of whether or not there are some administrative … you know, on the administrative side, because, that’s what I’m checking. A lot of attention has been directed at community programs so I understand why you have a good grasp on what’s been sole sourced or not. I think you should have a sense of whether or not, you know, whether it’s, I believe Comm Stiglich was getting to it, if we’re sole sourcing to a company to provide the soap on the units, if it’s to provide whatever, we should have some sense, there’s one or two out there……we may not have all the details, but I would hope the staff should know or have some sense of sole sourcing contracts that have gone through these additional check offs. I know none have come before the Commission for approval. I can’t recall the last sole source that we’ve stamped so please somebody give me a little information on is it your sense that there are none, that you want to go back and check, and I’m talking about throughout the entire dept, or do you really just not know and somehow there’s a process that may be ongoing that, ie, not come to this Commission, for sole sourcing, and somehow they’re getting approved. … I don’t see how this can happen, but please tell me….you guys don’t have a sense of whether we have them or don’t?”

M lui: “well, operationally, we have materials and supplies a great deal, and the largest budget is for food.  We do use the ‘city blanket’, we’re required to use the ‘city blanket’ to do our purchases, and in fact we do use them and have used them for many many years since before I came onboard.  So I know definitely that that expense is going through the city blanket. Our copy machines are all under the city blanket and the city blanket allows us to use several vendors, but we chose the best one we thought would provide us good service at the most reasonable price. And ….I’m trying to think of some of the others……..  the Dept is one of the so called Prop Q depts. where we have the authority to purchase up to $5K in years past, now it’s been upped to $10K.on a single order, and we don’t have to have a contract, it just needs to be a city vendor, so that can be done, but those are much smaller expenditures. The big one by far and large is food, also our office supplies there are two city vendors….. and that is a city blanket.”  …. “we do go through a post audit every single year by the Controller’s   office and they review to see that we comply with all these requirements. If we do not, on a regular basis, for example with the Prop Q requirements, they can take that away from us and make us go through purchaser for every little purchase. We’re not perfect. We have had significant reduction in number of staff, as you may know, so there are errors from time to time where we might not totally follow all of the procedures, but for the most part, we do use city vendors and city blanket.  That’s the first thing, if there’s a city blanket, you must use them. Another big area of purchase is computer supplies, materials and supplies.  We have to use city vendors…..  so we are covered in that sense. I don’t know of any sole sources in those areas. I’m very confident that in those areas we don’t have any.”

(public comments)                                            
There were none.


Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission

Fia Carla Valentino, Office of Samoan Affairs, expressed concern over not being recommended for renewal of funding.  She spoke about their involvement with the County Community Schools to serve many youth who were falling between the cracks. She spoke about the need to work with families too. She encouraged them to re visit her contract



(ACTION) Approval of the Department’s and Commission’s Statement of Incompatible activities.

Comm Stiglich moved to approve the two statements. Comm Queen 2nd.  The question was called and upon voice vote, carried 6-0.  Comm Bonilla was excused from the meeting so did not vote.

(public comments)

There were none.


(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Status report from LCR Director on Log Cabin Ranch safety issues, with possible action to direct correction of safety issues.

D. Sanders reviewed a step by step process that was followed during the two incidents reported earlier (the gas leak and fire).  He said that in each case, all proper actions were taken that complied with the policy and procedure manual in effect.

Comm Hale asked Sanders to review the public comments from the July 26 Commission and respond to them at the next meeting.  Sanders said that he has a meeting with the City Attorney on an issue, which could have been a basis for some of the those comments.

Comm Stiglich asked about the safety of Hidden Valley for staff using it as an overnight stay.  Comm Hale proposed not allowing LCR staff to stay there, until a full review of HVR for safety and supervision issues was done.

The Chief said that it is her understanding that the areas that are condemned are beyond access, but where the staff stay there are no problems.  She said that maybe they should do a re assessment of the area to reach a new conclusion regarding its safety. She said that the areas where there are problems are chained off. There’s no access to them. 

Comm Stiglich continued to express her concern for the safety and asked the Dept to reconfirm the safety of all so that there are no problems or injuries.

Comm Queen agreed and didn’t think it was really safe.  He agreed there needs to be a very serious re assessment of the whole operations.

(public comments)

There were none.


(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Review Department selection of fiscal year 04/05 contracts, with possible recommendation for approval.
Comm Ricci announced that under advisement from legal counsel, there would not be any action taken on the contracts tonight.  There are questions that the Commission hasn’t had the opportunity to get answers to, so this will be tabled until a later time, and if needed, a special meeting will be called to take action on the contracts.
(public comments)


(DISCUSSION/ACTION)possible recommendation from Program Committee regarding the use of district based juvenile justice plans, as the foundation of the Commission’s juvenile justice planning strategy.
Comm Queen reviewed that this resolution was presented at the last commission meeting, and was asked by other commissioners (Bonilla and Hale) to give some examples of what exactly this meant. Comm Queen commented that he reviewed this and set it against the “mandate” of the City’s Admin Code, which does instruct Depts to involve the community in their strategic planning and budget preparation. This resolution just carries that principle further by more clearly identifying how the community can be involved –see the added language. This expanded resolution was presented at the Program Comm. where Comm Stiglich had some issue with the language. Finally the Committee agreed to move both forward for the full Commission to review and action, but that he was recommending the adoption of the resolution language as he submitted it. Comm Chuck 2nd for the purpose of discussion.
Comm Bonilla asked how this would be implemented.
Comm Queen reiterated that this follows in the steps of the City Admin Code, but suggests ways of doing what the Code says must be done.
Comm Stiglich questioned whether the code requires or encourages the involvement that Comm Queen says it does.  She reviewed that the original language included the words “will use and participate in”…seemed to suggest changing the way business was done. She offered the word “support” is sufficient to indicate that the Commission prescribes to the concept and principle of district based planning. She felt there already are means by which the community can be involved in the Dept’s planning.  Possibly having more Commission meetings in various communities could improve this involvement.  She noted that in the short time she’s been on the Commission there has not been a lack of seats at the table for interested parties to come and speak. Maybe there should be more outreach to get people to the table.  She felt that adding more process to the existing forums would be problematic (with the numbers of meetings already occurring on many levels). That is why she suggested the revised language.
Comm. Bonilla repeated that he was supportive of the principle.
Comm Chuck questioned the words “all stakeholders” and asked who these were. He thought it was too nebulous.
Comm Stiglich said that the difference between her suggested language and the original doesn’t really change anything.  They both indicate the Commission supports the principle and that it is a good thing, and the Dept will use it and support it.
Comm Hale said he did not support her version. He said the community doesn’t come because they don’t see their input being acted upon.  He said that they are not integrated into the process of how the Dept does business, plans. He gave JDAI as an example, where only now there’s an array of community members who didn’t exist before JDAI (this due to them seeing the changes in the Dept’s structure). This wouldn’t have happened if they didn’t make JDAI the driving policy for the Dept.
He said Comm Stiglich’s version was (as she stated) more “fluff.”
Comm Queen said that he was not getting hung up on the language (wording). He didn’t think the wording (either one) was fluff. He merely wanted to make it clear that the Commission and Dept will abide by the Admin Code’s language that the Dept “shall” do those things mentioned.  This resolution further examples what can be done to accomplish that.  It codifies it at a point in time.
Comm Stiglich commented that she didn’t want to set up expectations and obligations that might not be reachable.
Comm Bonilla suggested adopting Comm Stiglich’s version and setting up an Ad Hoc to go over the plan to see how it would work.
Comm Bonilla offered a friendly amendment to Comm Queen’s motion, to add setting up an Ad Hoc Committee on the implementation of the resolution.  The question was called and upon voice vote, was approved 5-1, with Comm. Stiglich voting nay. (Comm Richard not present for the vote).
(public comments)
Fia Carlo Valentina, Office of Samoan Affairs, was very supportive of this resolution. She invited the Commission to come out to her community. She offered to host the meeting.




                        Finance Committee

This will be tabled until next full Commission meeting.

                        Comm Ricci on establishing an Ad Hoc Committee to oversee Workers
                        Comp and Overtime issues In the Dept.

Comm Ricci asked Comm Stiglich to chair this committee, with Comms Queen and Hale as members.  It will report to the Finance Committee, which will also be chaired by Comm Stiglich.

                        Program Committee

                            Follow up on Ad Hoc Comm recommendations

Comm Queen reported that these would be worked up and be ready for presentation at the next commission meeting.  He also reported that the Committee approved asking the full Commission to initiate a complete fiscal and programmatic audit of the Dept’s operations.   

                       Comm. Stiglich on the status of deputy sheriff coverage at YGC

                       Comm Stiglich would report back on this at the next commission meeting.

(public comments)
There were none.


Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission

There were none.


(DISCUSSION) Announcements, requests for future agenda items

Comm Hale asked about a time to set the retreat.  A possible date was in mid August, or early Sept. with two areas to be discussed: programs and finances. He asked that committee chairs come up with issues they think should be considered.  It is a public meeting and needs to be posted 15 days in advance.

Comm Ricci asked the Dept to provide more detail on the Ark of Refuge and whether it was a sole source. 
(public comments)
There were none.


(ACTION)  Adjournment

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55pm.