A question for clarification on this issue, i had a clarification. So there was detailed letters from the d. P. A. With the line item at, like, line edited revision. There was also letters from the bay area legal and the d. V. Consortium. And somehow, they werent identified i dont know whats the right word, kbut there were people concerned about this resolution. They were filed under 30day correspondence with the commission. People were looking for them, and they didnt know there was input from all of these different groups. Some criticism, and some requests for modifications, and the input. Just for the agendas sake, i wonder why this wasnt identified under the resolution . Why was it just, like, 30day correspondence . Im concerned about the way it was listed in the agenda. Im not sure giving people notice that there was a lot more information regarding this resolution. Vice president taylor commissioner elias or hamasaki . [inaudible] Vice President taylor im sorry. Commissioner hamasaki . Commissioner hamasaki yeah, that was an issue that confused me, as well. Ive never seen d. P. A. S materials not included in that materials, which is i dont know why that happened. I reached out to the commission, and they told me the City Attorney. And the City Attorney told me it was a policy decision that was made by the acting president. Vice president taylor, can you give me some guidance as to why these materials werent included in the documentation . [inaudible] commissioner dejesus we cant understand you. Youre breaking up. Vice president taylor can you hear me . Commissioner dejesus yeah. Vice president taylor one thing, the materials were posted publicly. D. P. A. Was involved in this, the resolution. Theres nothing under the charter that says that d. P. A. Has to advise the commission on a charter resolution. This was not a d. P. A. Resolution, so a letter from d. P. A. Or anyone else would not be a supporting document for a resolution, and there are plenty of times where d. P. A. Or other parts will send letters to the commission, and those letters dont become supporting documents for the commission. So i believe, my understanding is, the City Attorney advised the Commission Staff as to where the appropriate place was, and to my knowledge, for something, a bulletin or resolution that d. P. A. Was presenting, they wouldnt have a letter posted as supporting material for that resolution, especially when we consulted d. P. A. So im not sure exactly what the issue is and also, we post our materials with enough advance notice to the public. Commissioner dejesus well, the thing is to give notice to people. So if youre going to put it in the agenda, we should give it some proper notice, you know, like edit suggested for resolution item 3, instead of just correspondence within 30 days. You know, what does that mean . Unless you opened it, you didnt know what it meant. If youre going 20 list it to the public, say what it is. Its discussion and changes to resolution. We just cant say agenda, we just cant say chiefs report. We have to give a little more detail, and thats all. Notice. Were just giving notice here. The letter is from friday. Thats the date that i saw. Commissioner hamasaki thats when it was sent to the commissioners. The issue to me one, the issue to me is, one, i see d. P. A. As a partner in this process. I would never i dont think that we should do anything that undermines their role in the process, and i havent seen it come up before, but maybe it has. Petra might probably know that better. [inaudible] commissioner hamasaki yeah, thank you, commissioner taylor. And so but the other [inaudible] commissioner hamasaki this all comes down to our work developing policy for sfpd. So the City Attorney actually did not weighin. She said i can read her email to me because i asked her. These are all policy calls that should claw back on the Commission President or commissioners that are placing the items on the agenda. So i think and i believe i forwarded this to you, commissioner taylor. [inaudible] Vice President taylor at what address. Do you want that just out there like that . Vice president taylor no. Heres my progress. We went to d. P. A. We did not post all the line item revisions from sfpd nor d. P. A. D. P. A. Reports to the commission. Cal d. O. J. And hilliard hines has made it clear that delay is what were trying to address here. Were not required to do that under the charter, but we did that because we wanted to do that. So the idea that this needed to be posted as a supporting document as a Commission Resolution just makes no sense to me, and its not something that weve done before that we as a commission can point to. Im a little flummoxed here because were trying to address the delay in the d. G. O. Process. 3. 01, its a wonderful document, but there are issues with it, and were just trying to fix a little piece so the issue moves quicker. 3. 3. 01 let me finish. Were trying to do it quickly, so we dont want another few weeks process, we want to be able to move it along. Thats all were trying to do. To me, this is all just a little bit more of why is this a delay . Why do we need to incorporate d. G. A. S comments when weve already considered so many of them. We want to get through them as quickly as possible. Commissioner dejesus well, information is power. People who are calling in, they already told you, they only got two missions. And the revisions that are made, i think make it clearer and make it more abkwat, accur not just fast. This is not personal, were just talking about, ive never seen it done like this. People didnt know people may not know, some did not know that that was related to the resolution, and people want to come prepared to speak. So its nothing personal. Weve got to talk about how we put things out to the public so they have notice. Its really a notice issue. Its nothing personal. As suggested, it might be a criticism. I dont know, but its a suggestion that we try to be clearer. City attorneys always telling us to be clearer when we post things. I mean, i ju i [inaudible] Vice President taylor we dont do that as a commission, and weve never done that as a commission. Why is this a thing tonight . To me, its a little bit more delay. And i know that its not personal, but guys, weve got to get moving with this work. Commissioner dejesus but you did postit. Im just asking for more clarification with more descriptive information. Thats it. Its not a really big thing. Its just that people didnt know i didnt know that it was buried in this thing called correspondence, thats all. Vice president taylor can you let director henderson respond . Commissioner hamasaki unmute. Thank you, thank you. I just want to try and take this up a bit to focus on the bigger picture. I think its fantastic that were moving in this direction to address the delays and trying to move in the direction of trying to get the actual work done to address some of the problems and concerns to get things out really quickly, and the focus here is were all moving on the right direction. I want to focus on the work because i think its really important here, but i want to clarify some of the issues that i think have been brought up because it was said that we were delayed and did not turn the work in on time. Vice president taylor no one said that oh, yes. I just wanted to clarify. Vice president taylor no. There was no issue. We conferred with d. P. A. , and there was no issue. Like i said, i just wanted to clarify because i thought that was said. The other thing that was said was that hill arrested heinz had talked about the policy and delays related to the process, but those were policy delays in the process, not that d. P. A. Was creating the problem. Weve always been very fast in trying to turn these things around, which i think speaks more to the heart of the issue, which i think we should focus on, rather than try to point the finger of blame, rather than figure out what the big process is. 3. 3. 01 is why we put so much work into the other concerns because we did have a lot of suggestions, and we were asked to respond, which we did in a timely manner, so that rather than fix a small piece of this, we take a bigger piece of this and address the short comings that d. P. A. Atcomings that d. P. A. At least at leahade pass. I think thats the real issue here, that we should be focusing on, rather than all the rest of the stuff. If we have some of the solutions, we should be having the conversation about what those solutions are and adopting the solutions. Its fantastic that were moving it in the right direction, and i think we can go beyond just the small stairs, and we dont have to be having this intermingled argument about it if we can focus on the solution. Thats what im saying. Vice president taylor yeah, i wish we could. I wish, before commissioner elias and i took this on, we knew that. We are trying to solve the heart of this problem. 3. 01 was just passed last year, i think right before i joined this commission. Rather than revising the whole d. G. O. , we want to get to what the heart of the delay is. Every time were before this commission, at least one commission complains about a d. G. O. That sits in commission for six months, nine months, a year. That is the meat of the problem. We are not trying to rewrite 3. 01, that resolution, we are trying to fix this part that everyone has complained about, and then, we can work on more holistically the document. But lets actually do something as a commission. Lets fix this, what we all acknowledge has been the major crux of the problem. Commissioner brookter . Commissioner brookter yeah. I think, kind of to director henderson, i think our discussion is kind of exacerbating the challenge we have. I want to make sure im hearing correctly, because i think im hearing two different things. I heard from commissioner dejesus that its an agendizing challenge, which has nothing to me to do with the resolution that we have before us. Vice president taylor right. Commissioner brookter and i havent heard anyone say theres anything about the resolution. We need to separate them out. If theres challenges with the resolution, i think we need to have that discussion and move forward. We talked about the last meeting, too, because there were conversations around agendizing and how we do so. I think theyre two separate issues. I saw the letter yesterday. I apologize. That was my bad, and then, it was friday. Commissioner hamasaki yeah, great. Thank you, and thank you for reframing things, commissioner brookter. I wanted to add, when i worked on the c. R. I. , i havent done it as much lately, but i never heard criticism of d. P. A. S role in the process. That may have changed in the last six months, but i havent heard that. Ive reviewed all of the documents. I think that, based on my review, and my review of the underlying materials, i would make a motion to adopt the resolution with the d. P. A. Changes that are in the record. Commissioner elias second. Commissioner brookter second. Vice president taylor i want to hear the motion to adopt the resolution thats on the table. Commissioner hamasaki theres a motion on the table, so you have to call a vote now. [inaudible] yes. Clerk okay. So on the proposed motion, commissioner dejesus, how do you vote . Commissioner dejesus so i just want to be clear, its to accept the d. P. A. S suggestions . Commissioner hamasaki yes. This is to include the d. P. A. [roll call] clerk im sorry, commissioners. Prior to taking the vote, we do need to take Public Comment. Vice president taylor there are two votes that are on the table. How do we do that . Commissioner dejesus can we clarify . This is so confusing to me. Hold on. I guess my question is my understanding is d. P. A. When i read d. P. A. S edits, their edits like, commissioner taylor and i focused on the concurrent process, but theres a process that happens before concurrence thats very lengthy and thats really what causes a lot of the delay, as well. My understanding is that d. P. A. S suggestions address that part, which isnt included in the resolution that you and i worked on, damali. If this is on the table in front of us, is it a fix that we can just fix now so that we dont have to revisit 3. 01. Vice president taylor what i dont want to do, commissioner elias, when we worked on, we were focused on that resolution. Sfpd has not weighed on that. We have not spoken on that. Im not going to be pressured into making a decision tonight when none of us have looked at the resolution and found out what d. P. A. Says is the best way to go. We can revisit 3. 01 and fix the preconcurrence process. We have not spent the time to figure out what d. P. A. Is suggesting the way that we want to make go. Again, miss marian is amazing, but 3. 01 is a document that she drafted that has some issues. I want to make sure that before we have a successful fail, that i want to make sure that what we all want to do is push reform along. Im not ready to go on that tonight, and i dont want to delay this process anymore. Commissioner hamasaki theres a motion on the table, and that motion is in the process of being voted on. I would suggest that commissioner taylor, if youre not comfortable with the motion, its within your rights to vote no. Vice president taylor wait. I think were asking for clarification, commissioner hamasaki, and were within our right to do that. Since commissioner elias had a question, were trying to figure out that. Commissioner hamasaki sorry. Commissioner elias when we did work on this, you and i, it did raise all of those questions, which is why the department gets so much time, and it was one of the concerns that i had raised. But i guess when i read when i read the revisions, i guess my thought is why cant we just do it now and fix it now so we dont have to bring it back up . Vice president taylor because whats happening now is sandbagging. I have not had a chance to look at the preconcurrence process, and i know you havent, basically. If were going to be fix that, i want to be able to look at that before we hold everyones feet to the fire. I havent had a chance to do that. I dont think its right to vote on a resolution that everyone hasnt had a chance to look at. I want to make sure that if we address a concurrence process, its in a way to stream line it and move it along. Lots needs to be examined, but im not in a position to vote on that yet. But i agree theres stuff that needs to be mixed. Commissioner elias miss marian, she pulls you research and gives you facts Vice President taylor i hear you, cindy, but 3. 01 gives no time for concurrence. Im just asking lets do this in a way that actually makes sense. I dont want to commit to something and were going to find out in two weeks that theres another problem. Im not going to look at it tonight in a halfhearted fashion just to say i did it when there might be issues. Commissioner elias can we put it over to next week . [inaudibl [inaudible] commissioner elias it doesnt make sense to do it piecemeal. Vice president taylor this whole process [inaudible] Vice President taylor this is why nothing gets done with this commission. I talked with you earlier about this, commissioner elias. All of a sudden, we have to vote on a brandnew resolution thats not no longer a Commission Resolution that potentially has issues. Commissioner dejesus dont make this personal. I did read it. I did read it. I read both of them, i compared both of them, and theres a process that the o. C. C. Puts in that makes sense to me. I re dont say that were trying to sandbagging you, because were trying to raise the motion. [inaudible] commissioner hamasaki we were all provided the material on friday. I do have an issue with it not being provided to the public, but, you know, we spent the time, d. P. A. Spent the time. Respectfully, very respectfully, commissioner taylor, you know, theres five of us on here. If the motion passes, it passes, if it doesnt, it doesnt, and we go back to the drawing board, but we have to vote as a commission. Im happy to engage in discussion. If theres issues with any of the lines, we all have it in front of us, and lets talk about that, but lets not just say were being sandbagged because the policy is different than the one that the department supports. Vice president taylor as someone who has looked at these issues 3. 01 is actually a fairly complicated document, and the process for these d. G. O. S is fairly complicated. I looked at what miss marian said, and im not ready to agree to that document, and that needs to be tightened up and fixed. Thats a, and b, we need to have a fuller discussion about it, and im not prepared to do that. Commissioner hamasaki, lets put this off to next week so we can take this to d. P. A. This is the first time that im hearing that this is up for a vote. Let me finish. Im not saying that thats personal, but that is a complete that has nothing to do with you, commissioner dejesus, but it is a complete surprise to me, and i would like for us to have the time, and im not going to do it under the gun, under pressure in a commission meeting, when there are items that commissioner dejesus we cant have serial meetings. I can only do my own homework. Im not delaying the process, im not sandbagging you. I did my review, and i agree with the revisions. Commissioner hamasaki i can raise things, and if they fail, they fail, but not a single one of us works to strangle the entire purpose of the commission. We have a process, and i think that its being, you know i think we if theres not room for discussion, theres a motion and a second on the table, and i would ask that the Commission Secretary continue to call the vote. Vice president taylor i think we should put it over to next week and give everyone time to get it done all at once. It doesn i think, cindy, what petra said, we can commissioner elias what im saying is why are we sitting here, taking a vote, when we can get it all fixed at one time. Because theres been a motion, unless john wants to rescind his motion. Commissioner hamasaki not at all. Lets just continue to vote. Thats what we do. If people dont want to continue to support the resolution, they dont have to. We all have equal powers in that regard. Commissioner elias i support the resolution, but i also think we should incorporate the changes. So im not sure what were voting on. Commissioner hamasaki the vote is to adopt the resolution with the changes that are incorporated in the d. P. A. Letter. Commissioner elias im not prepared to do that tonight. I think there are issues with those changes. Commissioner hamasaki are there any you can identify and discuss . No. This was not up for a vote, and im not going to be pressured to voting for something that i havent reviewed tonight. Commissioner hamasaki Sergeant Youngblood . Vice president taylor so how does it work . Theres a motion on the table so we ca