Bicyclist riding on crowded sidewalks i brought this at the sfmta to red restic. Im concerned that south side of Market Street from van nes to valencia. Is becoming more dangerous because bicyclist are riding on the sidewalks i will ask reskin riding on the sidewalk dont ride on the sidewalk as both a pedestrian and bicyclist i talk to them when i see them on the sidewalks please dont do that. I think the Police Department has an Important Role to play in making sidewalks safer through enforcement the prohibition of bicyc bicyclist on the sidewalk you can feed two birds with one seed. You can have the cops walking a beat along Market Street meating all the neighbors on market and talking to all ot bicyclists riding on the sidewalks we have bike lanes. We have to use them all the time. The second area that i think has to be of concern is grove street from market in front of the library. This is side of the street where there is burger king from grove to larkin you have pedestrians coming to city hall to get to the bart station and you have bicyclists riding on the sidewalk as if there is no room in the street i hope the police will do a better job. To keep bicyclists off sidewalks. Thank you. Good evening and welcome. Good evening commissioners im an advocate. [inaudible] i represent 10,000 peoples for the Bicycle Coalition. Im an outer sunset resident i have to bicycle in and pass through a jfk drive where heather was killed on june 26th. And another woman was hit and killed by biking enforcement. We need all the tools in the tool box to keep our streets safe. Automated street enforcement is one of these tools that has proven to work. There is plenty of information included in your packet from katie today all the bike education for Michael Patrelis that theyre not on sidewalks it doesnt stop were doing all the officers safety classes and this conversation were having with every single sfpd station it doesnt stop great work from happening it gives us more tools to keep our streets safe. On behalf of the San FranciscoBicycle Coalition im asking you next week to get this to a place you can all agree and pass this resolution because San Francisco needs this. Thank you mrs. Lee. Any further comment . Yes, sir . Come on up. My name is john jones my may my remarks please the commission. I have been an avid bicyc bicyclist i have seen bad bicyclist bad behavior on bart. I think there needs to be serious out reach to the Bicycle Community who consider it a matter of honor to flood the traffic laws. I regard myself to be an advocate for bicyclists they seed someone willing to obey the law and respect the transportation mode. I think bicycli bicyclists as a rule have the honor to do that. I think serious out reach need toss be done to the community. With valid means of transportation and not disparaged. The common behavior of bicyclist notwithstanding. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Welcome back. The enforcement installing in San Francisco to be in every neighborhood. Not just certain neighbors. Number two , this is a supportive comment the sanctiti sanctity life that the police chief talks about sometimes and the general nature of his report of innocent lives being saved at all costs i want to applaud that. Thank you. Thank you. Any more Public Comment on this matter . Hearing none Public Comment is closed. Next week they will reinclude the packet with all the information included. I ask my fell fellow ners to review that. Were going to schedule it more nekdz week. I ask that everybody be prepared for that next week. With that, im going to take a ten minute break. We have been going for over three hours, so it looks like if my math is right we will come back at five minutes to what is it . Eight . Fi commissioner loftus were back on the recard and in open session you have a quorum. Call the next item. Item 3. Update from the department of Human Resources on status of use of force policy negotiations in meetandconfer process discussion . Okay. So we have director Mickey Callahan here. You are oriented to where we are with, by way of remind on july june 26th the Commission Adopted a use of force conferring to the meet and use process with the various laws attached to this process by director callahan. And occ who had been a negotiator to participate in that process and the commission asked for updates on there is mrs. Mary updates on this process. We have scheduled today as we have done in the past an update in open session and in closed session i will let director callahan talk about the way were going tonight. Good evening and welcome. Good evening commissioners thank you for the opportunity to speak with you director hicks chief chaplain as well. I wanted to restate a lot of the things i said before to put it in context the department of Human Resources is charged with the resposbility of meet and confer contracts and the use of force policy have been the union has identified, they believe, impacts that fall within the scope of bar againing when there are items that fall within the scope of bargaining we have a legal obligations to meet and confer that, which means engage in a good faith process of exchange idea, consider alternatives and resolve or not resolve disagreements. The city has reserved its position as to whether the issues in the policy fall within the scope of barg n bargaini bargaining, but, were engaging in the process of seeing if we can identify and resolve any issues with the agreement its preferable to engaging in litigation or prema sure adoption of the process with concluding meet and confer. With the risk of proceeding without the meet and confer process the court or arbitrator may confer we have failed in our obligation and we do not want the policy to be over ruled etc. So i want to confirm with you, my understanding that this is a very high priority item that the commission i have been directed by the commission with my staff to move with all possible speed to complete our legal obligations so a policy can be adopted the outcome is either a policy is adopted that everyone agreed to, both the poa and commission or we have concluded our legal obligation, determined no agreement is possible we reached impasse or we may argue that the issues are not within the scope of bargaining that remain and the chigs would move forward with implementation. It is our goal given the pace of meetings we have set to conclude this process at the end of september although, were precluded from having a deadline because that would indicate that we were not necessarily bargaining in good faith. Im here tonight with employee directors with sam and michael from staff. And you know lawana preston is on vacation this week which i accidentally approved. You got the management right. They get vacation and think they get to use it. And susan has been attending the ameetings since late july during closed session she will be able to answer specific questions i wanted to let you know we started meet and confer on july 19th. And met five times to date. We have three more meetings scheduled we hope to see you again next week for another update because we will be meeting before and after your next Police Commission meeting so we are trying to move quickly to resolution or you know, if unfortunately we dont reach an agreement we will have at least completed the process. The issues just brief la that the union has identified concerned there are about nine issues some of them. Have been debated publicly at Great Lengths i wont go into them and a few in closed session i would charac r characterize as drafting issues etc. We hope there are some things the commission will be able to consider favorably. Either way we will take the direction from the commission and take it back to the bargaining table. I want to commend sam ramarian who has been very much involved in the process and give us guidance to what the commission would not find acceptable and chief staff lynne in his staff have been helpful to us as well staffing the process. I want a follow up question. Some of the advocates are very invested in this. And transparency is a huge part of what we have been a huge part of what were endeavoring to do. The question if you can speak to your experience the law especially in San Francisco. Does not allow for everything. In closed session. If you could explain why you believe its beneficial to have those conversations not in the public view when so many of these have been in the public view. Certainly it will be to the public view for the commission in all. Labor negotiations involve strategy and if then scenarios and discussion of legal issues and potential outcomes and positions that the employer may take. Having a public discussion of our strategy with respect to the poa would mean were transparent to the poa that is not considered good labor negotiation strategy. For other labor negotiation strategy we debrief the Department Heads involved and previously we brief the board of supervisors and those have been in closed session that is so we can get direction without exposing internal deliberation to the people were negotiating its similar to the Police Commission negotiating a lease. Because of this, its one of the few reasons that closed sessions are allowed to for governing bodies and agencies commissions such as yours. Im sure my colleagues have questions for you it is a little bit we intentionally set the agenda to have open as well as closed session with this. As we brought so many people along this process were explicit about the approach were taking why were dpog into closed session and what the process would be. I have been very anxious for this policy to be finalized as i know my colleagues and Community Members are. Not only actually i shoild say more so after going to line up and speaking with officers i think confusion around the state of this poll sigh its confusing for your average person at home to say i saw the commission approve this and a discussion of meet and confer and where is it at . That is for the public to be confused and i have a concern that our officers are not clear. And that is not good for them and the public and i know you appreciate that. I have to say while july 19th. To september is not a long time in labor negotiations this commission feels there is urgency to completing this process i appreciate your counsel and role to make sure we dont make steps that would put our position in further jeopardy to get locked up in litigation not that we reached a disagreement which is a possibility we could end up in a significant fight because this commission feels strongly about a number of issue were talking about, that is a strong possibility. Im concerned we have the unforced error where we choose to go too fast or skip a step and end up in litigation im happy to hear you say that you have been meeting regularly and that accept this is the month. There is going to be an agreement or there is not. I know you have to be somewhat good with time line but we have been taubing about this policy for a long time the issues are clear, delineated we need to get this finalized. Colleagues . Any questions or thoughts . Thank you. I have to say i read your response to us, we realize were at a cross roads with transparent here many public mes have given us positive feedback and followed this closely we know the poas position they made it loud and clear. Its clear these are either particularly Public Safety issues were trying to avoid. The kor rod corrodic hold in there which, which can easily slip into a choke hold which is banned in many states which can cause death. It comes down to a Public Safety issue and management issue we have here and shooting at a moving car the best practice is not to do it. Were moving in that direction to follow the best practice available and the danger of sho shooting citizens people on the street, children, babe ees dogs dangers are really high. Again, that is a Public Safety issue and Public Management issue i see what are you saying and understand the strategy i wonder first of all, if theyre bargaining in good faith i hear i dont know if its true they make Public Statement statements no one has to use this use of force theyre arbitrated dont worry dont bother i understand theyre making statements like this it leads me to believe theyre not negotiating in good faith and go to arbitration and drag the process out one of the consequences for them. With these types of statements let me just finish how do you go about getting consequences on them for bargaining in bad faith, if that is the case. So, to respond, i think that they do have an obligation to bargain in good faith. For examp example, one reason were driving for a lot of meetings we never miss a meeting, r we never con sell a meeting because were going in record were bargaining in good faith. If not they make a charge and go to Civil Commission services because of the unique structure of the police. I have before filed charges against labor unions for pair gar banning unit however here i hear very much the urgency that you and the commission and members of the public are bringing to the table to get this done. Whether theyre bargaining in good faith or not were going to bar gaun bargain in good faith. If we fail it will impose a policy to be contested. My goal is to do our part to bargain in good faith if its transgent it could mean we conclude it is a suggestion on certain items under any circumstanceses ul would agree, etc. As for the pun public announcements i did call what are the statements im hearing about . I was given an assurance theyre bargaining in good faith and the comments are taki taking en out of context they know we bargain in good faith and we expect them to if they stop bargaining or have no meetings available that puts us in a different position in of Going Forward with an agreement we have waved our opportunity to go for a bargain. I think we have answers here we could potentially be seen not in good faith. So i get that were putting the chief and this whole dependent and the whole city liability at risk while we have this policy in place that is 20 years old. Shooting out of a moving car using corroded restraints. That is sitting out there while were in arbitrating and im concerned about that. And i think our community of stakeholders are concerned about the lock longer this drags out the higher potential we cold have a type of incident and [inaudible]. Thank you. We will report back to you. Having ride your arguments pi first conclusion is when i heard you say is what i wanted to hear you you say today by the end of the month, you will give us a report and whatever that report is, whatever that is i havent had a time i heard september 30th that is great. Were all concerned its a policy we approved and would like to get done i have faith you have to have a lot of faith in [inaudible] i know that you said this before i know what you would like to see happen im fine with waiting until the 30th and i look forward to seeing where we are, where ever we are. Thank you. Commissioner hwang. Can you say anything about the poas position and you identified there were nine issues they identified for discussion. I didnt know there were that many. There are one of them is a typo to be corrected we identified that as an issue they used the wrong word we think its the wrong word we will ask you is this the wrong word and will you let us change it . That is the simplest. That is one of the nine the two probably most difficult ones has to do with the corroded restraint and shooting discharging of firearm of a moving vehicle. There are other issues reassessing between shots repeated use of force, some language about i would say its primarily in the area of theyre not really sure what it means and they want to understand what it means. Thats what theyre saying to us were saying maybe there is simpler language that the commission would be willing to look at that makes it more clear. I think while there be many issues people feel strongly not in agreement i think what everybody agrees you want to be understandable to the Police Officers that comes naturally and automatically and they can be trained on it so if theyre comfortable with it they know what is expected. And very cog any centauri of cognizant that drives us to a solution. I hope that answers your question. Im hearing two policies with the corroded restraint. Theres a penal code. 3035. Right. Whether that can be there. We would like to discuss that with you, what it is that supervisors are supposed to say to individuals who are in the middle of an incident where the officers are talking to the officer, what should be said. Those sorts of things. So there are the big issues you have heard about and if we can see how far we can get with the minor issues that will lead the way to the resolution of the larger ones or we will identify there is no resolution possible at which point we report that to you. And you ma make a decision have we completed bargaining and come to a point of impasse where were not going to reach an agreement. Last question if this goes into your strategy, feel free to let me know there. Is there a possibility where you would come back to the commission in september and say theres a partial commission. Saying yes, we agree on 80 this is locked in and the other 20 we didnt agree upon and put it before the commission. Is that a possibility or all or nothing . I think that is possible. Much of the policy is already not contested so having concluded negotiations if there are, lets say, 2 or 3 issues outstanding we dont feel we can resolve the Commission Decision might be to some extent Strategic Decisions to some extent what you need to do for the good of the public would be, do you mend the policy and move forward and keep talking about the other issues again that would be one option. Another option would be to say if we report to you we reached impasse and there is no agreement we completed bargaining and go