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

Skip to page body

Meeting Information



Programs_Committee

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 

MINUTES OF DECEMBER 15, 2004 PROGRAM COMMITTEE MEETING of the JUVENILE PROBATION COMMISSION
held at Youth Guidance Center Conference Room   375 Woodside Ave.  San Francisco, CA  94127

1.

(ACTION)  Roll Call

Comm Queen called the meeting to order at 5:40pm  Comm Stiglich was present at the gavel, Comm Chuck was excused.

2.

(ACTION) Review and approval of November 17, 2004 meeting minutes.
The minutes were approved as written.
(public comments)

There were none.

3.

Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Program Committee of the Juvenile Probation Commission
there were none.
 

4.

 

 

(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Participation of the community in the selection process for the new Chief Probation Officer, and recommendations to the full Commission.

Comm Stiglich objected to the item being on the agenda, saying she felt it was more appropriate for the full Commission.

Comm Queen commented that because the community has had long standing requests to be a part of the process of selecting a new Chief, and the Commission will be meeting on Friday for this very thing, he wanted to hear what the community had to say about this, and to take those comments to the full Commission for review on Friday.

Comm Stiglich continued her objection and asked to move to item #5, and that if Comm Queen wanted to have a separate discussion with the community regarding the Chief selection process, outside of the program comm. that would be okay.

Comm Queen chose to stay with the order of the agenda.

Comm Stiglich said that she felt that Comm Queen was using the Program Comm. mtg to exercise district based planning, rather than holding ‘district’ meetings. She didn’t think it was appropriate, saying it was like a ‘bait and switch’.  She felt it should be on the general agenda of the full Commission. That it was inappropriate for this agenda.  Comm Queen objected to her comment regarding bait and switch, and reminded her that the full Commission did vote to support district based planning, but that was not the issue here.

This was just an effort to hear out the community as to the selection of a new Chief.

A member of the public spoke regarding her interest in having some input into the process, as a concerned community worker and a relative of a juvenile in the system.

Comm Stiglich continued her objection to the item, maintaining it was not appropriate for this forum.

Comm Queen moved the discussion forward at this point to take public comments.

He reviewed the process to date.  Through the Mayor’s office a headhunter outfit has done advertising for the Chief’s position. Applicants have already been screened and selected individuals have been screened by a panel of the Mayor. Those selected by that panel are being forwarded to the Commission for interview this Friday.  Comm. Queen stated that the Commission has the discretion to do various things. It could accept those “pre selected” candidates, reject them, and/or add others to the consideration.  The Commission’s responsibility is to provide 3 names for the Mayor’s consideration. He said his commitment is to seeing that the community is involved in that and this is the opportunity to hear how the community wants to be involved.

(public comments)

Tracy Brown, Mission Neighborhood Ctrs, commented that were hasn’t been any Latino representation in the process to date. And no Latino to her knowledge has been contacted by the headhunter operation for input on the concerns of the Latino community regarding a new Chief.  She asked the Commission to make sure there is some Latino involvement in the selection process.  She said she heard the issue of confidentiality had been thrown out as a reason “outsiders” cannot have access, but she knows that there are resumes that have been reviewed by “outside” groups, and that people who applied are open to a community process.

She also expressed her concern that there are two vacancies on the Commission, one of which she said Mayor Newsom promised to fill with a Latino, but that hasn’t happened, and in fact, the City’s website misleads people into thinking there are no vacancies for this Commission.  They have submitted names and resumes to the Mayor for this but no action has been taken.

She said this would be a bad precedent if it went forward without any Latino input.

Jack Jacqua, Omega Boys Club, objected to the process because many people from the community, directly impacted by juvenile violence, and the dept, have not been listened to, and are not part of the process.

NTanya Lee, Coleman Advocates, felt that their concerns were included in the criteria for selection of the new Chief.  While the process was not broad, and not many stakeholders were involved, they were satisfied by the Mayor’s agreement to their criteria. (3 pts from their paper).  She feels the process has been positive.  She did not want the process to be delayed.

Yulanda Harris, single parent, resident of Bayview Hunters Pt, CBO worker, and aunt to a juvenile in Juvenile Hall, felt there needs to be a community involvement in the process. She feels the disconnect within the Dept’s different divisions, and felt that there needs to be cohesiveness in operations.  She offered to do whatever she could to help this process out.

Barbara Johnson, PO, also agreed there needed to be community input in the selection process. 

Jesus (last name not heard), Mission Neighborhood Ctrs, community advocate, raised the issue of cultural and language awareness and sensitivity.  He mentioned times when dealing with the dept there was a lack of attention to these issues, leading to much miscommunication or breakdown of process. He said it was critical that the new Chief have this awareness, and that having the Latino community involved in the selection could better help assure this.

He didn’t think the process should be rushed through.

Comm Queen asked the comments be recorded and forwarded to the full Commission.  He said he had given a list of names of people to the headhunter, that he felt was important to hear from, but none of them were contacted.  He had a meeting with Steve Kawa, and Murlene Randle, who were concerned about the agenda item regarding having community input into the selection process, because applicants were told their materials would be held in confidence, but if this could be resolved there might be a way to have community participation in the process. Comm Queen said that he was told at a later time by the community, that a number of resumes were given out to certain community groups to look at. 

He said that he is committed to having those most impacted by the system be a part of this process and seeing these concerns of the communities be taken to the full Commission for consideration in their process on Friday, and expressed caution about the Commission taking action when it is, itself, not a complete body.

5.

(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Review of the recommendations from the Ad Hoc Committee on Log Cabin Ranch School and how to proceed with them.

Comm Queen said as this is not a policy matter it didn’t need to be acted upon.  He would just forward the information to the blue ribbon committee on Log Cabin Ranch, for their review.

(public comments)

There were none.

6.

(DISCUSSION) Announcements, future agenda items.

None.

7.

Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Program Committee of the Juvenile Probation Commission
There were none.

8.

(ACTION) Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:10pm