Waylen can speak to that. For clarity for the public and as the commissioner said, this commission has made it a priority that there be disclosure to the Public Defenders Office and any and all information regarding a pending case where someone is in custody with pending charges so that gets a First Priority when you make your request. And we made that we put that in our protocol and procedure. Its important for the public to know that this is new. We are hiring people going through backgrounds in the Police Department and the d. P. A. To review this and its va loom inus and they requested each and every San FranciscoPolice Officer, thats 2300 officers. Now we said if you have a case where its pending, then we would expedite that request. Its important for the public to know, and ive heard people go back and fourth on this, in the criminaljustice system, for those of us have that been there, these requests are made before the court where the case is pending and its made pursuant to either a pitch us motion, i hear you dont get everything you need and for the general public, its for a request for the Police Officers personnel file. There has to be a showing of relevance whether its dishonesty or use of force. The court does an incamera review and if something is in that officers file, the same file that would be turned over in 1421 the court makes that determination. Thats not accurate. Thats not close to accurate. I dont know what changed. Secondly, the prosecution has a brady obligation. If theres anything in the Police Officer personnel files that affect affects their abilio tell the truth they have to disclose it. Theres another method for getting this disclosed and the 1421. I want to make it clear, again for clarity, that if you have a case pending, and you make a 1421 request, you will get the First Priority and we made that clear. First and foremost, thank you for your due diligence. You guys have been coming toe meetings. Weve been having this conversation and i look forward to the robust conversation. I want today ask my colleagues and its fair to the public if we see the rest of the presentations as well too. I think some things might be answered in the presentations. There can be further questions and we can bring folks up if thats ok. Nothing like a guy without a law degree who is smarter than the rest of the folks here. Vice president taylor. Now i feel stupid. [laughter] i had questions specific to you and ill have questions specific to d. P. A. But my over all comment is that you come here every week but i think you guys should be talking to each other. That would be so helpful in getting you the documents where theres an immediate need. We do. Ive tried to be clear about that. When we ask for a specific officer that we need right away, we have been able to work with d. P. A. And ive tried to be real clear, yeah. I hear you but something occurred to me too when i was looking through this material. On january 2nd, it would have been great if the Public Defenders Office, instead of sending this request for every officer, if the news stations and various other groups, instead of just sending these huge requests out, they called up the Police Department and the commission and the d. P. A. And said, we ned to get on this right away. When can we meet. We need to talk about how this will work. Im not asking for a response. This is just the thought i had. It would have been helpful if we started working that way initially. Were not up to speed. Were not moving as fast as the statute contemplates. We know that. The statute is unrealistic. It has no concept in the statute as to how the mechanics of this would actually work for large Police Departments and large cities. Thats the problem. Thank you. Any other public this is your presentation. Were ready for the next presentation. This is department of Police Accountability. And you will have 12 minutes. Thank you. The presenting agencies get 12 because thats what i originally asked them to do. I want to present what it is theyre doing. Five minutes is what the judiciary house got to so that was sufficient for impeachment. Look where they ended up. Good evening. Good evening, everyone. Commissioners, chief scott, executive director, my name is diana rosen steen and im here to present on behalf of the department of Police Accountability about what we have encountered with respect to sb 1421. The discussions that we have seen occurring before you, whether in public comment, what weve seen in the media, has led me to believe that theres a fundamental misunderstanding about what we as attorneys do in the department of Police Accountability. I thought i would give you a brief overview first. We were not simply sitting around and twiddling our thumbs waiting for sb1421 to be enacted. We all had jobs before then. So we are going to answer the questions that you asked us. Were also going to give you a brief overview of what we do. Before and now, there are five of us and there are direct offers andirectorsand chiefof. Four of us lead teams of four investigators with a senior investigator. Each team carries a load of about 80 to 100 cases that have to be completed within six months, if not six months than nine months, and if we dont complete them within a year then were screwed. We do that on a continuing basis. As attorneys we help with the investigation, we help with the interviews, we analyze issues that come up and we write the sustained reports that the chief sees and we write the charges that you see, and we write the summaries of cases where there are no sustained findings. We also represent the d. P. A. And administrative hearings before this agency as well as before the chief. That happens about, on average, i would say twice a month for each attorney and as i said theres four of us. We also respond to officerinvolved shootings and we are intimately involved in the investigations in those cases specifically. We are at the interviews. We are at the crime scenes. We provide guidance and we write the reports. We also respond to other record requests other than sb 1421. So far this year, weve responded to 58 such records. Those come from the City Attorneys Office in cases where there are pending lawsuits. Those come from the u. S. Attorneys office, the d. A. s office and individuals that just want records other than sb 1421 related records. Our dance card is pretty full. We also have two attorneys, sam ra marion who you all know and janelle kaywood that go to meetings 10,000 times a day. You asked us to explain how we deal with sb 1421 requests. What i did was prepare a chart for you about how these requests move through our office. So first, we identified them, because not all requests are easily identified as sb 1421 requests. We get requests from the public who say give me everything that you have about officers who are killing someone. So we then, the public records act puts the onus on us to identify it. Is it an sb1421 request, we scan it, log it and assign it to an attorney. Then the attorney has the unenviable task of figuring out where the records are that respond to the request. And the problem with the im going to call it the occ because were now dpa is that at that time that it was occ, records were not kept in a uniform fashion. What we have learned, is that records, sometimes, are attached to an officers name. Sometimes theyre not. Sometimes theyre attached to the name of a specific case. Sometimes theyre not. So what we have done is we have developed a system in our office, three different systems that we check with respect to each officer to determine what records are responsive so that we can be thorough. One is the mold card which a employs to officers employed currently and that is based on our old data base. We will run the card and we will determine all cases that pertain to that officer. Then we have to pull all of those cases. We only have cases from 2016 on on site. The rest of the cases are in storage. So we pull cases because from the card we cant tell if theyre responsive to sb 1421 demands because the records were not kept in that fashion back then. So we cant look at a mold card and say oh, look, unnecessary force causing Great Bodily Injury, its not there. Officerinvolved shootings are not there. Thats not how we kept records. So, when we pulled the card, we pull those files for the attorney. We also have created a master spread sheet of cases based on incidents. So that way, we also know each and every case that involves unnecessary force. That involves l. I. S. , that involves dishonesty. Because again, records werent kept in this fashion so we cant just assume that every case that has unnecessary force also has g. B. I. We also just check that list. We pull those cases as well. When all the cases are pulled, and sitting in the attorneys office, we start the task of reviewing each and every case. We review each and every case to determine whether each case falls under the categories. When weve done a preliminary determination, we have one person currently assigned full time to handle this clerical aspects. Mary poll being, who is not here, but god bless her, had the task of then scanning all of the materials doing the first level of redaction and asking for the digital or audio things to be prescribed, transcribed and then we start with the reductions. Then we go to the attorney and they do a second level of redactions and then we notify the party and we release the records. So this is not an easy task for d. P. A. To do. The types of request that we received have been many. Right now we need to add one more to this specific list. Because theres been a new request for everything under the sun for all categories. We have been working with the Public Defenders Office. We have their, what we call the omnibus request and we have 30 individual requests from them and we also have records from the aclu who im sure if they were here would not be very happy about the prioritization issue. We also have requests from private citizens who are savvy enough to ask for these records. Prioritization has been a challenge. When we first got the first requests, and we were going to go newest to oldest and by officer still employed, but that system was scratched based on our conversations with the Public Defenders Office and the needs that they have so we have been trying to prioritize request to the extent possible and the problem with those is that each individual request doesnt necessarily list different officers so what weve come we realized we didnt know the two different requests request the same officer. Were working on it but the protocol helps. Weve also got taken care of some small individual requests. I want to show you the statistics of what weve been doing. Although the number of requests is low and the number of the files that weve disclosed may look low. I want you to understand what that entails. The number of files that we disclosed contain more than 15,000 pages. 15,000 pages that people had to read, redact and produce. And there are currently 36 identified cases that are in various stages of production. In order to get that that point, weve reviewed 1,998 cases. Because again, not every case is disclose able. Thats the whole point. So, that means we are reviewing eight files on each working day on top of the full time jobs we had before this law was passed. Each file we review is not five pages, its hundreds of pages long. And i think chief scott should be proud of this statistic. What weve also done is weve app signed one specific person to find officers that have never had any complaints with the d. P. A. And weve identified 244 currently employed officers that have have owe complaints with the d. P. A. We found that was an efficient system to get information out the door quickly. We have multiple people working from multiple angles to provide as much information to the public as possible. I think the future of sb 1421 is extremely bright. We now have protocols by which to identify the cases that will need to be disclosed in the future and we know the request we need to make of the evidence. So part of the problem is were reviewing case after case that looks potentially like its disclosable but the evidence isnt there. Someone says, oh, i broke my leg. But theres no evidence in the file of a broken leg. What do we do with that . Now we know, if you are going to say you have a broken leg were going to ask you for records to support that. In sight our new progress is amazing because it allows us, at the end of each case, to flag it as an sb 1421 case. In the future, any time we need to run future reports, we can do that. In terms of additional staff, i will let my chiefofstaff explain to you the issue with the two attorneys and the two people that we planned to ask for as clerks. Your time is actually up. That was your 12 minutes. We have some questions for you. Sure. Good evening. So, obviously it sounds like you guys have done an incredible amount of work with i dont think anyone here doubts i speak from speaking for myself, i dont know. There are some doubts. It sounds like you have done an incredible amount of work on this. So, is it that i was trying to follow all those numbers. You said the only files that you have physically at d. P. A. Are 2016 and onward . Correct. And so, how far back do files exist for currently employed officers. We are very lucky in that no one followed the retention policies in our office so we have all of our files since the inception of our office, which is 82 or 83, right. 82. Ok. Potentially, there could be officers still employed that were employed in 82 . Yes, we have requests that ask for information even officers that are no longer employed and we will eventually have to satisfy. Right. And again, just like with the public defender before, im prioritizing what should we be focused on and whats most important to get out. Of the ones off site, how many do you know how many files exist that you still t still have to h through and code. We used the liberal identifying method with certain key words and we have identified a little bit over 5,000 cases that we will eventually have to pull. And review. You said some files arent necessarily, they have a big officer so and so attached to the front of it. Yes, the Data Collection system in our office has changed from year to year. At some point, we were using these things called involvement codes that have to they mirrored disciplinary labels and like i said whats we have found unfortunately, is that not every allegation is tethered to a tech officer each and every time. If it were, we would probably be much further along in this. How are you able to responded that there are no records for an officer if you havent searched those 5,000 files . Our records of complaints per officer go back to 1989. And so we can search a data base by the officers name and star number and determine whether they have any complaints with our office so that 244 officers, that i spoke about, are officers that are currently employed who have never suffered a complaint with the d. P. A. And you mentioned the staff that was previously or currently currently employed with d. P. A. Was there not new hires relating to 1421 . I will let ms. Hawkins speak on that. Thank you. Good evening. So, a few conceptions about the funding that we received. The money was allocated in this budget cycle, however, we could not use it until october. The positions for the lawyers didnt fund and become available in the system until october. We have hired one lawyer who will be transitioning to do 1421. We are not able to hire the two parallel positions until december 14th. Because of City Civil Service hiring protocols. What that means is that we also didnt get the funding for that until october. Then we can send out an r. T. F. Which is a request to fill the position and we have to go to a list. There is no current list. The list is being developed and will be finalized as of decembe. Then we start the interview process and we go through backgrounds. So, in a very unlikely optimistic viewpoint, im hoping that we can bring those people on mid to late january so thats where were at with the hiring and thats why even though we did get funding, we asked for a lot more than we got. We did get funded. We havent been able to access that from now to the end of the year. Thats encouraging to hear. To the question i asked the public defender before, is thern times, say if they have homicide do they get a priority. Everyone has any name and number. Sure, i will be happy to do so. In december of 2018, i went to the Public Defenders Office and did a twopart presentation about how we plan to tackle this issue. I provided everybody with my Contact Information and let them know i would be the point person. I have spoken on some occasions. The issue, as i said before, has been that we keep receiving the requests. We keep the priority has changed on us. At minimum five specific instances. It was give us all dishonesty, then it was no, no, we need individual officers. My focus is cases where people need it. People need it because they have a right to go to trial. That was the only thing i was asking about priority for. I dont know because no one has reached out to me. I have spoken to ms. Harris once or twice. Ive spoken to zack, i forgot his last name, i welcome any phone call from any public defender who wants me to prioritize any request that may be pending criminal issues before the court. Good to hear, thank you. Vice president taylor. Youve actually answered a lot of the questions that i had. Its surprising to me you are not in more contact with the Public Defenders Office just to beat that drum one more time. It seems a lot of this would be help circumvented if you were talking more before coming here, which is obviously you are entitled to do. It seems as if more dialogue would help streamline the process for cases where you really need the information. I do have one question, so you have requests from the aclu, the Public Defenders Office and you have your day jobs of helping us punish officers who are acting inprinappropriately. I dont punish. I only recommend. We do. And part of that is by bringing cases to us. Bringing matters before us. Thats what we do as a commission. Which i think is important. Maybe im bias in that view but i do. You have your day jobs in addition to these 1