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 5:30 p.m.               

PRESENT:             Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch

ABSENT:               Commissioner Turman

                Commissioner Mazzucco announced that Item 3a under the Chief’s Report, the FDRB Report will be put over and Item 9b is also taken off calendar.               

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO SUPPORT THE YOUTH COMMISSION’S RESOLUTION URGING THE MAYOR AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO REDUCE THE IMPRISONMENT OF TRANSITIONAL AGED YOUTH, IMPLEMENT ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION FOR TRANSITIONAL AGED YOUTH, REJECT ANY FUNDING FOR MAJOR RENOVATION, REOPENING, OR CONSTRUCTION OF JAIL FACILITIES, AND INSTEAD INVEST IN PROGRAMMING SUPPORTING AT-RISK TRANSITIONAL AGED YOUTH AND POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT     

                Vigil, Youth Commission, and Kiley Hussman, Director of Youth Commission, presented the Youth Commission Resolution.

                Motion by Commissioner DeJesus, second by Commission Melara.  Approved 5-0.

PUBLIC COMMENT

                Unidentified discussed concerns.

                Unidentified stated that what the Youth Commission is offering is very exciting and hopes that it will be adopted.

                Mr. Bonner suggested that the Youth Commission consider an alternative for petty crimes which can be addressed with a citation rather than incarceration.

RESOLUTION NO. 18-16

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE YOUTH JUSTICE REFORM URGING THE MAYOR AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO REDUCE THE IMPRISONMENT OF TRANSITIONAL AGE YOUTH, IMPLEMENT ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION FOR TRANSITIONAL AGED YOUTH, REJECT ANY FUNDING FOR MAJOR RENOVATION, REOPENING, OR CONSTRUCTION OF JAIL FACILITES, AND INSTEAD INVEST IN PROGRAMMING SUPPORTING AT-RISK TRANSITIONAL AGED YOUTH AND POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT  

                RESOLVED, that the Police Commission is in support of the Youth Justice Reform urging the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors to reduce the imprisonment of transitional age youth, implement alternatives to incarceration for transitional aged youth, reject any funding for major renovation, reopening, or construction of jail facilities, and instead invest in programming supporting at-risk transitional aged youth and positive youth development.

                AYES:     Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch

         ABSENT:      Commissioner Turman

CONSENT CALENDAR

• Request of the Chief of Police to accept donation of K9 vehicle heat alarm/temperature sensor system, valued at $8,374.28, from the Police & Working K9 Foundation for the Use of the Tactical K9 Unit

                  Motion by Commissioner Melara, second by Commissioner DeJesus.  Approved 5-0.

  PUBLIC COMMENT

                  None
   

  RESOLUTION 18-17

  APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO ACCEPT DONATION OF K9 VEHICLE HEAT ALARM/TEMPERATURE SENSOR SYSTEM, VALUED AT $8,374.28, FROM THE POLICE & WORKING K9 FOUNDATION, FOR THE USE OF THE TACTICAL K9 UNIT

                  RESOLVED, that the Police Commission herby approves the request of the Chief of Police to accept donation of K9 vehicle heat alarm/temperature sensor system, valued at $8,374.28, from the Police & Working K9 Foundation, for the use of the Tactical K9 Unit.

                  AYES:     Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch

           ABSENT:      Commissioner Turman

  REPORTS TO THE COMMISSION

  a.            Chief’s Request

  -              Report on recent Police Department activities, including major events, weekly crime trends, including staffing (current staffing levels, and overtime) and announcements

  -              Update on Supervisor Yee’s SFPD Staffing Resolution

                  Chief Scott reported on crime trends year-to-date.  The Chief also reported on upcoming events.

                  Director McGuire, CFO, presented Supervisor Yee’s SFPD Staffing Resolution in regards to a staffing task force.                                  

  b.            DPA Director’s Report

  -              Report on recent DPA activities, and announcements

  -              Presentation of Statistical Reports:  Summary of Cases Received, Mediation of Complaints, Adjudication of Sustained Complaints for February, 2018, and Companion Reports

                  Director Henderson presented the February 2018 Statistical Report and updated the Commission on investigators’ caseload and ongoing technology training for the staff.

  c.             Commission Reports

  -              Commission President’s Report

  -              Commissioners’ Reports

                  Commissioner Mazzucco reported on meeting with the Department regarding DGO 3.09 which deals with the Medal of Valor.  He also reported on attending the Easter Egg Hunt at Ella Hill Hutch and thanked Captain Engler for putting together the event.  Commissioner Mazzucco also reported on recent officer-involved shooting where an officer was shot.                   

  d.            Commission announcements and scheduling of items identified for consideration a future Commission meetings

                  Commissioners DeJesus and Melara asked that DGO 5.02 be put back on the agenda for a vote as it was placed on the agenda but was not accepted as such.  Also an item on closed session to discuss with the City Attorney about the meet-and-confer process.

                  Sergeant Ware announced that the next meeting will be on Wednesday, April 11^th, at City Hall, Room 400, starting at 5:30 p.m.

  PUBLIC COMMENT

                  None

  DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO SALE OF PATROL SPECIAL BEAT #47 FROM ANTOINETTE CANDIDO, AND BEAT #83 FROM DELORES LOVETT-MENGE, TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER ALAN BYARD, OR TAKE OTHER ACTION, IF NECESSARY 

                  Officer Brown, Patrol Special Liaison, presented the sale of beats.

  Sale of Beat #47

                  Motion by Commissioner DeJesus, second by Commissioner Melara.  Approved 4-0.

  Sale of Beat #83

                  Motion by Commissioner DeJesus, second by Commissioner Melara.  Approved 4-0.

  RESOLUTION 18-18

  APPROVAL OF THE SALE OF PATROL SPECIAL BEAT #47 FROM ANTOINETTE CANDIDO, AND BEAT #83 FROM DELORES LOVETT-MENGE, TO PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER ALAN BYARD  

                  RESOLVED, that the Police Commission herby approves the sale of Patrol Special Beat #47 from Antoinette Candido, and Patrol Special Beat #83, from Delores Lovett-Menge, to Patrol Special Officer Alan Byard.

                  AYES:     Commissioners Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch

         RECUSED:     Commissioner Mazzucco

           ABSENT:      Commissioner Turman

  DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE STIPULATED DISPOSITION OF DISCIPLINARY CHARGES FILED AGAINST PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER CALVIN WILEY, CASE NO. ALW IAD 2013-0305, OR TAKE OTHER ACTION, IF NECESSARY

                  Ms. Ashley Worsham, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of the San Francisco Police Department.

                  Patrol Special Officer Wiley was present and was represented by Mr. Charles Bonner, Attorney at Law.

                  Officer Carla Brown appeared on behalf of the San Francisco Police Department.

                  Motion by Commissioner Marshall, second by Commissioner DeJesus.  Approved 5-0

  RESOLUTION NO. 18-19

  APPROVAL TO ACCEPT STIPULATED DISPOSITION IN THE MATTER OF PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER CALVIN WILEY, #2684, (FILE NO. ALW IAD 2013-0305)  

              The hearing of Patrol Special Calvin Wiley, Star No. 2684, was called it having been set for this date.  Patrol Special Wiley was charged, in a properly verified complaint by former Chief of Police Gregory P. Suhr, on March 11, 2014, in violating the Rules and Procedures, as follows:

  SPECIFICATION NO. 1

  Accepting new subscriber/client outside confines of his beat (a violation of Rule 3.08(A) of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants);

  SPECIFICATION NO. 2

  Failure to provide in writing an accurate and current list of clients (a violation of Rule 4.15 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants).

              Ms. Ashley Worsham, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of the San Francisco Police Department.

              Patrol Special Officer Calvin Wiley appeared in person and was represented by Mr. Charles Bonner, Attorney at Law.

  The stipulated agreement states as follows:

  “This settlement agreement (“Agreement”) is made between PSO Calvin Wiley, (“Wiley”), Star No. 2684, and the San Francisco Police Department (the “Department”) arising out of the disciplinary matter designated San Francisco Police Commission (the “Commission”) File No. ALW IAD Case #2013-0305.  Wiley and the Department are also referred to herein as “the Parties.”

  WHEREAS Wiley is a Patrol Special Officer and not an employee of the Police Department,

  WHEREAS Wiley is subject to the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, adopted by the San Francisco Police Commission December 10, 2008,

  WHEREAS the San Francisco Police Commission had delegated to the Chief of Police and the Police Department the authority to implement and administer these Rules and Procedures (See §1.01 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants.)

  WHEREAS on or about March 11, 2014, former Chief of Police Greg Suhr filed disciplinary charges (the “Charges”) with the Commission accusing Wiley of a violation of Rules 3.08(A) and 4.15 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants, which Charges are designated as ALW IAD Case #2013-0305, and which are incorporated herein by this reference and attached as Exhibit A; and

  WHEREAS the parties wish to resolve the Charges now pending before the Commission,

  NOW THEREFORE THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

  A.         Wiley Shall Admit Specifications One and Two.

              Wiley agrees to:

  1.         Admit the truth of Specifications One and Two as set forth in the Charges attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement, and accept the consequences of his actions.

  2.         Waive his right to further administrative remedies with respect to Specifications One and Two as set forth in Exhibit A, including but not limited to a trial before the Police Commission, which right is set forth in §3.12 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Officers and their Assistants;

  B.         Wiley Shall Stipulate to the Chief’s Recommended Discipline:  Revocation of His Appointment Held in Abeyance for Three (3) Years; Strict Adherence to the Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants; Abide by All Orders, Whether Verbal or Written or Sent Via Email Ordered by Officer Brown or Any SFPD Officer; and Pay a Fine of Not Less Than $250 on Specification One and $250 on Specification Two.

              Wiley agrees that the Commission shall impose the Chief’s recommended discipline (the “Discipline”) for the misconduct described in Specification Number One of the Charges attached as Exhibit A as follows:

              1.         Revocation/Termination of Appointment Held in Abeyance for Three Years:                       

  Wiley agrees that based on the facts and circumstances underlying Specifications One and Two, Revocation/Termination of his appointment as a Patrol Special Officer shall be held in abeyance for Three years from the date this Agreement is approved by the Commission.

  2.         Abide by the Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and the Rules and Regulations of the Department:

              Wiley shall abide by all Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and the Rules and Regulation of the Department.  Strict adherence to any verbal or written directive given by Officer Carla Brown or any other San Francisco Police Officer.

  3.         Fines as to Specifications One and Two

              Wiley shall pay a fine of $500.00 to Glide Memorial Church within eight (8) months from the date this Stipulated Agreement is completed.

  C.         Consequences of Future Misconduct

  1.         Wiley shall abide by all Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and the DGOs in the future without fail.  Further violations of a similar nature or violations of the Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and Rules and Regulations of the Department may result in a filing of new Commission Charges.  Such New Charges, (the “New Charges”) shall be referred to the Commission for a hearing.

              Wiley is entitled to a trial before the Commission on such New Charges in accordance with §3.12 of the Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants.  Should the Commission thereafter sustain the New Charges, the Commission may:

              (a)        Revoke/Terminate Wiley’s appointment as an Assistant Patrol Special;

                          Or

  (b)        Impose the level of discipline that the Commission deems appropriate for the New Charges.

  D.         Waiver of Rights by Wiley   

  Wiley hereby waives any and all rights he may have to any further judicial and/or administrative review on either this Agreement or the discipline set forth herein.  No other rights are waived by way of this Agreement, unless explicitly waived, as in the case in Section A(2), above.

  E.         Police Commission Approval 

  The parties agree that should the Police Commission reject this Agreement in whole or in part, Wiley may rescind the Agreement at his option, and may assert his right to a decision by the Police Commission on the Charges attached hereto as Exhibit A.

  F.         Entire Agreement     

  The parties agree that this Agreement is a full and complete resolution of all the claims of misconduct that the Chief could bring against Wiley with respect to the incident described in the Specifications.  This Agreement has no terms other than those recited in this document.  The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement cannot be modified save for a written instrument executed by the Commission.

  G.         Right to Representation

  Wiley acknowledges that he has the right to consult with an attorney and/or union representative concerning the waivers and promises contained in this Agreement.  Wiley acknowledges that he has had an opportunity to discuss this Agreement and his rights and obligations with an attorney, should he desire to retain one, prior to executing this Agreement.  Wiley acknowledges that he has voluntarily and freely entered into this negotiated Agreement and that he understands and agrees to each and every term set forth herein, including but not limited to the waivers set forth in section A(2) and section D of this Agreement.”

            The Commission took the matter under submission and the following resolution was adopted:

RESOLUTION NO. 18-19

DECISION – HEARING OF PATROL SPECIAL OFFICER CALVIN WILEY, #2684

(FILE NO. ALW IAD 2013-0305)                                                                    

            WHEREAS, on March 11, 2014, Chief Gregory P. Suhr, former Chief of Police of the San Francisco Police Department, made and served charges against Patrol Special Officer Calvin Wiley, #2684, as follows:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS:

(1)        At all times herein mentioned Calvin Wiley, Star Number 2684, (hereinafter referred to as the “accused”) was and is a Patrol Special Officer.  The accused owns beats 59, 64, 39, 45, 135, 137, and 147.

(2)        A Patrol Special Officer is defined as “A private patrol person, appointed by the Commission, who contracts to perform security duties of a private nature for private persons or businesses within the geographical boundaries set forth by the Police Commission.  A Patrol Special Officers is the owner of a beat.”

(3)        Patrol Specials and Assistant Patrol Specials are not members of the uniform ranks of the Police Department and they are not employees of the City and County of San Francisco.  A Patrol Special Officer is responsible for knowing and obeying the rules and procedures of the Patrol Special Officers and Assistant Patrol Special Officers.  (See the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, Adopted by the San Francisco Police Commission, December 10, 2008).

(4)        Encompassed in those rules is the directive that Patrol Specials and their Assistants shall obey all written orders of the Department that are not clearly inapplicable to their respective assignments.  (See Rule 3.12(A) of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants.)

SPECIFICATION NO. 1

Accepting new subscriber/client outside confines of his beat (a violation of Rule 3.08(A) of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants);

(5)        The allegations incorporated in paragraphs (1) through (4) are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.

(6)        On April 1, 2013, former Patrol Special Liaison Officer, Sgt. Simon Kim, #417, requested that the accused turn in his annual information.  Sgt. Kim never received a response.

(7)        Officer Carla Brown, #1247, the current Patrol Special Officer Liaison, made the same request on May 15, 2013 and June 12, 2013.  She never received a response.

(8)        On June 26, 2013, Officer Brown received the accused’s client list.  However, the list did not include any contact information for his clients.  Furthermore, the accused listed Beat #55 under the section titles, “Beats Owned.”  However, the accused does not own beat #55.  The records show that the accused’s daughter, former PSO Lisa Wiley actually owns beat #55.

(9)        On December 6, 2013, Officer Brown alleged in memorandum that the accused had failed to provide his annual information in a timely manner and that he was soliciting clients outside his beats.  Specifically, the accused was soliciting clients within beat #55 of which he does not own.

(10)      On January 23, 2013, the accused admitted to Officer Brown that he failed to provide a current and accurate client list from 2010 to 2012.  The accused stated that he was unaware that he needed to provide contact information for his clients.  This is despite admitting that he was familiar with the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Specials and their Assistants.

(11)      The accused also admitted that he had originally owned beat #55 and that he had transferred the beat to his daughter.  He further admitted that he had not transferred beat #55 back to his own name.

(12)      During his interview, the accused admitted that he had accepted money from the clients located in beat #55.  He stated that although he had transferred the beat to his daughter, he felt that when she left the program, he took the beat back and started running it again.  He stated that the beat was never transferred back to him through the Police Commission.

(13)      The accused, by knowingly working and soliciting clients outside the confines of his beats (beat #55), engaged in conduct which reflects discredit upon the Department in violation of Rule 3.08(A) of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, states:

            3.08.  SUBCRIBERS.

            (A)  Patrol Specials shall neither solicit nor accept new subscribers in areas outside the confines of their beats.

SPECIFICATION NO. 2

Failure to provide in writing an accurate and current list of clients (a violation of Rule 4.15 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants).

(14)      The allegations incorporated in paragraphs (1) through (13) are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.

(15)      During his interview with Officer Brown, the accused admitted that he failed to provide a client list that contained accurate contact information for the years 2010 thru 2012.  Although he later submitted some information, this was an untimely submission.  The accused had not explanation for his failure to provide the Commission with a client lists from 2010 to 2012.

(16)      The accused, by failing to provide the Patrol Special Liaison Officer with client lists and fees charged from 2010 to 2012, violated Rule 4.15 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants.  Any reasonable Patrol Special Officer must know that such conduct is cause for discipline and/or revocation of his appointment.  Rule 4.15 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, states:

            4.15.  RECORDS OF CLIENTS.   Within 30 days after adoption of these Rules and annually thereafter no later than January 31^st of each year, Patrol Specials shall submit to the Police Commission:  (1) a complete list of the clients on their beat, and (2) a complete list of fees charged to each client in the prior quarter.  Notification in writing shall be made to the Police Commission of any additions or deletions of subscribers within their beats.  Notification shall include the subscriber’s name, address and telephone number.  This information is confidential and will be used for official purposed only.

PENALTIES:

(17)      If the Specifications are sustained after trial by the Police Commission, the Department may recommend that the Commission revoke the Accused’s appointment.

            WHEREAS, on April 4, 2018, a settlement agreement was submitted to the Police Commission for decision; therefore be it

            RESOLVED, that based on the stipulated agreement between the parties, consistent with the Commission’s duty to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and County of San Francisco and the public in general, and in order to promote efficiency and discipline in the San Francisco Police Department, the Police Commission orders the following stipulated agreement:

This settlement agreement (“Agreement”) is made between PSO Calvin Wiley, (“Wiley”), Star No. 2684, and the San Francisco Police Department (the “Department”) arising out of the disciplinary matter designated San Francisco Police Commission (the “Commission”) File No. ALW IAD Case #2013-0305.  Wiley and the Department are also referred to herein as “the Parties.”

WHEREAS Wiley is a Patrol Special Officer and not an employee of the Police Department,

WHEREAS Wiley is subject to the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants, adopted by the San Francisco Police Commission December 10, 2008,

WHEREAS the San Francisco Police Commission had delegated to the Chief of Police and the Police Department the authority to implement and administer these Rules and Procedures (See §1.01 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants.)

WHEREAS on or about March 11, 2014, former Chief of Police Greg Suhr filed disciplinary charges (the “Charges”) with the Commission accusing Wiley of a violation of Rules 3.08(A) and 4.15 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and their Assistants, which Charges are designated as ALW IAD Case #2013-0305, and which are incorporated herein by this reference and attached as Exhibit A; and

WHEREAS the parties wish to resolve the Charges now pending before the Commission,

NOW THEREFORE THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

A.         Wiley Shall Admit Specifications One and Two.

            Wiley agrees to:

1.         Admit the truth of Specifications One and Two as set forth in the Charges attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement, and accept the consequences of his actions.

2.         Waive his right to further administrative remedies with respect to Specifications One and Two as set forth in Exhibit A, including but not limited to a trial before the Police Commission, which right is set forth in §3.12 of the Interim Rules and Procedures for Patrol Officers and their Assistants;

B.         Wiley Shall Stipulate to the Chief’s Recommended Discipline:  Revocation of His Appointment Held in Abeyance for Three (3) Years; Strict Adherence to the Rules and Procedures for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants; Abide by All Orders, Whether Verbal or Written or Sent Via Email Ordered by Officer Brown or Any SFPD Officer; and Pay a Fine of Not Less Than $250 on Specification One and $250 on Specification Two.

            Wiley agrees that the Commission shall impose the Chief’s recommended discipline (the “Discipline”) for the misconduct described in Specification Number One of the Charges attached as Exhibit A as follows:

            1.         Revocation/Termination of Appointment Held in Abeyance for Three Years:                       

Wiley agrees that based on the facts and circumstances underlying Specifications One and Two, Revocation/Termination of his appointment as a Patrol Special Officer shall be held in abeyance for Three years from the date this Agreement is approved by the Commission.

2.         Abide by the Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and the Rules and Regulations of the Department:

            Wiley shall abide by all Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and the Rules and Regulation of the Department.  Strict adherence to any verbal or written directive given by Officer Carla Brown or any other San Francisco Police Officer.

3.         Fines as to Specifications One and Two

            Wiley shall pay a fine of $500.00 to Glide Memorial Church within eight (8) months from the date this Stipulated Agreement is completed.

C.         Consequences of Future Misconduct

1.         Wiley shall abide by all Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and the DGOs in the future without fail.  Further violations of a similar nature or violations of the Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants and Rules and Regulations of the Department may result in a filing of new Commission Charges.  Such New Charges, (the “New Charges”) shall be referred to the Commission for a hearing.

            Wiley is entitled to a trial before the Commission on such New Charges in accordance with §3.12 of the Interim Rules and Regulations for Patrol Special Officers and Their Assistants.  Should the Commission thereafter sustain the New Charges, the Commission may:

            (a)        Revoke/Terminate Wiley’s appointment as an Assistant Patrol Special;

                        Or

(b)        Impose the level of discipline that the Commission deems appropriate for the New Charges.

D.         Waiver of Rights by Wiley   

Wiley hereby waives any and all rights he may have to any further judicial and/or administrative review on either this Agreement or the discipline set forth herein.  No other rights are waived by way of this Agreement, unless explicitly waived, as in the case in Section A(2), above.

E.         Police Commission Approval 

The parties agree that should the Police Commission reject this Agreement in whole or in part, Wiley may rescind the Agreement at his option, and may assert his right to a decision by the Police Commission on the Charges attached hereto as Exhibit A.

F.         Entire Agreement   

The parties agree that this Agreement is a full and complete resolution of all the claims of misconduct that the Chief could bring against Wiley with respect to the incident described in the Specifications.  This Agreement has no terms other than those recited in this document.  The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement cannot be modified save for a written instrument executed by the Commission.

G.         Right to Representation

Wiley acknowledges that he has the right to consult with an attorney and/or union representative concerning the waivers and promises contained in this Agreement.  Wiley acknowledges that he has had an opportunity to discuss this Agreement and his rights and obligations with an attorney, should he desire to retain one, prior to executing this Agreement.  Wiley acknowledges that he has voluntarily and freely entered into this negotiated Agreement and that he understands and agrees to each and every term set forth herein, including but not limited to the waivers set forth in section A(2) and section D of this Agreement.

            If this decision is subject to review under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5, then the time and within which judicial review must be sought is governed by California Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6.

        AYES:       Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch

ABSENT:          Commissioner Turman

(These proceedings were taken in shorthand form by Ms. Dawn Sandner, CSR., Roomian & Associates)

PUBLIC COMMENT

                Unidentified spoke in regards to Tasers and recommended that money should be spent on de-escalation training and not on weapons.  She stated that the Taser ballot measure called The Safer Policing Initiative is lie and stated that carrying more weapons does not make anyone safer and asked the Commission for anything that they can do to keep this initiative off the ballots.

                Aliya, Supervisor Cohen’s Legislative Aide, spoke of behalf of Supervisor Cohen.

                Ms. Paulette Brown spoke in regards to her son’s homicide case and stated that his birthday is coming up on April 6^th and showed the names of perpetrators:  Thompson Hannibal, Paris Moffett, Andrew Videau, Jason Thomas, Anthony Hunter, Mauric Carter.  She also spoke of a venue to put up homicide posters. 

PUBLIC COMMENT ON ALL MATTERS PERTAINING TO CLOSED SESSION, INCLUDING PUBLIC COMMENT ON VOTE WHETHER TO HOLD CLOSED SESSION  

                None

VOTE ON WHETHER TO HOLD CLOSED SESSION

                Motion by Commissioner Melara, second by Commissioner Marshall.  Approved 5-0.

CLOSED SESSION: 

PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION:  Chief of Police

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

Review of findings and Chief’s decision to return or not return officers to duty following officer-involved shooting (OIS 18-002)

(Present:  Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Cabrera, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan, Sgt. Franco, Sgt. Ospital)

CONFERENCE WITH NEGOTIATOR – COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (Body Worn Cameras)

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:

City Negotiator:  LaWanna Preston, Employee Relations Manager

Organization representing Police Officers:  SFPOA

Anticipated Issues Under Negotiation:  Body Worn Cameras

(Taken off calendar)

CONFERENCE WITH NEGOTIATOR – LABOR NEGOTIATION

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(3): 

City Negotiator:  Carol Isen, Employee Relations Director

Employee Organization:  Police Officers Association

Anticipated Issues Under Negotiation:  Procedures for Implementing Administrative Appeals in Police Discipline Proceedings

(Present:  Commissioners Mazzucco, Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Porter, Deputy City Attorney Mongan, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan)

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Existing Litigation.  Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(d)(1):

Paulo Morgado v. CCSF et al., SF Superior Court, Case No. CGC-12-518287, filed February 16, 2012

(Present:  Commissioners Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Porter, Deputy City Attorney Mongan, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan) Commissioner Mazzucco is recused.

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Existing Litigation.  Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(d)(1):

Young Chi v. City & County of SF et. al., San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. CGC-14-540675, filed July 22, 2014

(Present:  Commissioners Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Porter, Deputy City Attorney Mongan, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan) Commissioner Mazzucco is recused.

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Existing Litigation.  Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(d)(1):

Derek Byrne v. City & County of SF, SF Police Commission and SFPD, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. CPF-17-515892, filed October 12, 2017

(Present:  Commissioners Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Yank, Deputy City Attorney Mongan, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan) Commissioner Mazzucco is recused.

PERSONNEL EXCEPTION:  Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:

Discussion and possible action regarding proposed rules for administrative appeal filed in Case No. ALW IAD 2016-1019

(Present:  Commissioners Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Porter, Deputy City Attorney Mongan, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan) Commissioner Mazzucco is excused.

PERSONNEL EXCEPTON:  Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and SF Administrative Code Section 67.10(b) and Penal Code Section 832.7:  Status and calendaring of pending disciplinary cases

(Present:  Commissioners Marshall, DeJesus, Melara, Hirsch, Chief Scott, Assistant Chief Sainez, Deputy City Attorney Mongan, Sgt. Kilshaw, Sgt. Ware, Rania Adwan)

OPEN

 

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

                Motion by Commissioner Hirsch, second by Commissioner Melara for non-disclosure.  Approved 4-0.               

ADJOURNMENT               

                Motion by Commissioner Melara, second by Commissioner Hirsch.  Approved 4-0.  

                Thereafter, the meeting was adjourned.