Good afternoon and welcome to the special megan of the noifgs this replaces the normal meeting which would have taken place on june 22nd, 2015, commissioner Vice President andrews commissioner hayon commissioner hur commissioner keane let the record reflect all commissioners are present and accounted for item two matters appearing and not appearing on the agenda . Good afternoon chair commissioner renne and members allison park mr. Shaw two conflict of interests ethics complaints against the retirement system member weekend paskin jordan were filed in april of 2014 some people think i authorized both containments not that smart didnt know anything about the retirement system until recently paskin jordan 340i789d on youtube by a video project ill give you the video number she aggregated funds with her firm to reach the 10 million threshold for investing in b gi as the i got complaints alleged about our aggregated fund this commission needs to ascertainment who else she agree gated funds with and whether she or her investment clients can go gaited funds with the citys Retirement System Fund paskin jordan claims as a registered investment advisorer shes not held to the same threshold as others investors, however several on the registered advisorers have seen her claim and said it is you think true you should seek legal advise about her claim i believe that deputy city attorneys are misleading her paskinjordan land in San Francisco examiner shortly after fittings go right ahead restraining orders seize story put an edge or e end to the sleighs article reporting on her investment the sf e r F Investments you need to investigate this and move those name complaints forward the allegations are true she show you not be sitting at a fiduciary overseeing retirement funds. Any other Public Comment . Hi good evening my name is rebecca im the executive director the Municipal Executive Association i want to speak about the form 7 hundred junked i assume well speak flolts jaunld i want to thank the notification for agree talking it on it falls swairl into the allowing law of unat the end consequences and wanted to clearly say that m e a is the highest standards to the service to the public this is about process not sews and about changing the rules for 32 hundred people and making sure when we do that we do it thoughtful fully with sensitivity to their privacy and we do it in simple a way the rules radio clearly understood by a large group of people many of whom have not had the benefits of ethics training and frankly may or may not be proifl listed as potential filers i look forward to our discussion and really appreciate the patience to have the discussion in a way that moves your goal forward effectively thank you. Thank you any other public discussion there all right. Well turn to item number 3 which is a discussion regarding draft regulations for Electronic Filing and website posting of statements of economic Interest Form 7 hundred and i will ask the gentleman to sort of give us background and fill us in on what the issues with and what is the being proposed. Thank you commissioner renne jessie Deputy Director this is mentioned a discussion item for the staffs proposed changes to the form 7 hundred filing obligations for a number of City Employees probably numbering around 3 thousand to 32 hundred those are people to as designated employees preliminary hearings that have to file a form 7 hundred for Real Property interests income, investments and those currently are being filed with their departments those employees Vice President s so theyre filled with their department and kept 23 in a file there so earlier this year the commission that had put in the work plan to expand our Electronic Filing retirements that currently applied to members and boards and departments heads people fill electronically their statements are posted online with certain information redictated to expand to all filers within the city so staff went about crafting regulations to that effect. There are 5 regulations the first essentially requires filing of the statements electronically second requires provides for a waiver for folks that want to file on paper for compelling circumstances and the next posting online of the information as well as a potential waiver request to take down compelling circumstances and redaction of certain information and a penalty provision so if folks dont file electronically when theyre supposed to be filed electronically this commission could enforce that so staff drachtd a this and kuktdz outreach of the registers before you in the memo k34ukd outreach that xftd of interested persons meeting we got feedback we summarized in the one of the attachments but we also had a meet and discuss with we asked for a meet and discuss with Union Representatives who represent a number of those completed who would foil and had a meet and discuss and at that meeting there were concerns raised about sort of the privacy interests of the City Employees they folks are here and theyll say it better than me but the concern there are a number of folks not to be filing in the first place and a difference between those folks having their forms 7 hundred in file somewhere and posting that online so people can search it it so after that meeting there were further concerns raised and requests for a for tomorrowal request a meet and confer we move this from an action to a discussion item staffs hope that feedback can be received from the public the commission can talk about it and the commission can give instead of direction in terms of whether they generally like the proposal or things they dont like so we can, in fact, meet with the Union Representatives who were interested knowing generally where the tension is coming from rather than having staffs idea so thats why we put to an here and you know i want specific questions the one thing were interested in the commissions position on the posting online of these statements redaction of the information and also the potential compelling reasons why folks will not have to have their forms 7 hundred filed online let me ask you a question. What is the basis for the present policy of having some of the forms 7 hundred filed with the noifgs and some filed in the various departments. Howed did it breakdown come about. Well honestly im not sure the fact thats normally when you have Vice President filers low level fielders in most jurisdictions again file with their Department People know where to go and those rules were before Electronic Filing so people know where to go if somebody like me. Im curious about some determination was made somewhere that elected officials and commissioners and things like that should file with the noifgs that rather than the board of supervisors filing with any other Commission Filing their own at the question what was the basis for the breakdown of saying youve got to go to the Ethics Commission at san bruno levels but other City Employees it is already file with the various department. Commissioners this process was in Playing Place before i got here i dont know what the Decision Makers were thinking. No statutory language it commissioners have to file with the noifgs or the board of supervisors for or the city attorneys has to file with. Theres two tersely of filling off tier one with the noifgs and tier 2 people or decisionmakers and its a city ordinance. So your taushg u talking about with those regulations to bring tier two to have the same requirements ace tier one in essence thats correct theyll still the departmental filing officer will be responsible for surrounding them up and informing them of their obligations but the system will allow to basically be stakeholder so people can store it in one place. As i understand even for tier two the public documents the forms 7 hundred that are filed by tier 2 employees are public documents that some member of the public can say please provide me with a hardcopy or i can review of form 7 hundred. Thats correct also even with respect to your form 7 hundred to the ones filed now although online certain information basically address information is reredictated if someone comes to our office well give them that form in the unredacted form. The other questions or comments commissioner Vice President andrews. Sir along the same lines i want to hear a little bit more about what is generally redacted well lead that to a fuller discussion and the most commonly redacted and seems like theres also a determination on for those who are tier one or two some have constraint and some dont i want to find out in terms of the balance and why it wouldnt have been easy for everyone to have the ethics train your for in terms of the redaction we redact what is proposed that is the phone number information email address information address information, other than on Real Property interests where you have to know where it is to appreciate it and then also the names of the source of rental income so the idea being you know if someone rents from a public official that person didnt necessarily know has no expectation hair name will be on form 7 hundred from the information you request it well give you you it is not something you can Search Online those are the default redactions the f p pc does this they have forms 7 hundred and redact the phone number and other information they dont go as far as the sources of income rental income but address information, phone number and email around the ethics training. So the ethics train is required by the state and the state mandate the training for Department Heads and all elected officials. Correct. So in the proposed does it contemplate it will be a recommendation for those who are moving if tier one to two have ethics training. I can respond to the training question as the director mentioned for certain city officials theyre required to flow go ethics training to a lot of people not on the top chart note a lot of them are required to have go ethics training. As a practical matter the Ethics Commission get i think dated with questions a thats what were here for i know i personally and im sure the colleagues at the Ethics Commission were happy to meet with anyone to talk about ethics issues i get asked that frequently im sure you guys do but especially the regulation is something we can work on the other thing to follow up is that staff even though this is not in the regulation certainly the reason we had proposed this for consideration now is to ramp up sort of our outreach efforts so we were talking with the filing officers getting out there telling people about the Online Filing because the filing really is triggered april 1st next year we want to start in august to start with this outreach effort i mean it will still be polk but mower our condensed if we do it later on. My comment it falls terms of staff to make sure were going to hold folks be transparent and the folks the training is needed so theyll not find themselves running afoul of any requirements. I take it if were talking about 3 thousand employees expansion of the ethics training the tremendous burden on the staff would be well, i think the thing to be clear about all of those employees are file and they are obligated to file the change were proposing observing will theyll do it electronically and part of the process as andrew said wed be happy and pat talked about the outreach efforts and happy to talk to people we rely on the filing officers so an extent theyre the one side that do the talking but a lot of times directly to the filers but certainly we have thought of the calendar in terms of felt outreach to be most effective. My last followup to my followup i may have miss heard during Public Comment it felt like the attention would be an argument as placing devils advocate for those who are not aware of in terms of 6 their responsibilities in their defense feel they didnt receive the proper training are proper training is not available to them in essence was kind of doing the round about somehow address that cut that off quickly i know there is more discussion to be had. Thank you thank you. Commissioner hur. If by the decide to have Affordable Health care automatic redaction for this is there a mechanism by which someone that wants the information and provides a compelling basis for getting that information. Certainly the redaction will occur on anything that is posted online but if somebody were to come to our office and say i want the unredacted version that version will be given to them. Okay. So then if for example the employee who information is redacted online but information is requested in person has a belief that that purpose was for harassment or suffered harassment as a result what happens. So theres another procedure we put in there so the extent some place didnt want their form 7 hundred posted or Water Department it taken down their theyll submit a request to the director and have compelling reason. I understand if it is offended on o posted oly thought that was in the instance where things are not redacted and required would require compelling reasons to redact. Certainly you can choice one or the other but for instance someone has to list the name of the employer of his or her spouse and somebody is worried that a person that is upset with them say going to go to his or her spouses work and you know its not a huge company but a Law Enforcement officer law firm easy to assess the information or someone owns property and theyre worried their property has been defaced in the past and theyre worried i know like a store the name is readily identifiable names are not redacted for the normal process but if somebody said hey look im worried those calls to my business we will then if it is compelling the request could be granted that then granting will have to be recorded to the commission as that person though can go to the get the paper copy from the unredacted. Yeah. Thats true thats true i think the concept is that somebody sitting at home i mean its a dressing degree in terms of people searching that information youre correct that hazarder could request that information and the difference well not post it online so they could do it where they work. But if they came to you well putting aside the noifths where theyre being filed but preservation being filed with the Department Head tier two people and someone comes to the difficult head and wants to see the file by john doe hes got to produce it. Thats correct and can we redact any part of it. No and so if the does the fossil fuel employee get advised someone asked to see is it. No form required they maybe told. Not on the Ethics Commission i have if someone came to get a copy. Thats correct. Ill tackle Public Comment on this subject. Patrick shaw i see ms. Wriths comments are once again amazing me she claims two issues a lack of training for the tier work two employees and sensitivity to their privacy because theyve filed at the department the members of the public can place recordings requests to on them theyre typically provided as electronic pdr attachment and the complaints about privacy is muted her concern about lack of ethics training is nuns nuance to only file form 7 hundred electronically didnt go far enough tier 2 designated should be required to buy no be ethics train in the ended requiring both may well reduce both sunshine complaints and the number of retaliatory wrongful termentsz they need to be trained they can do the training in the comfort of their offends on line like the Department Heads do training is set up on and on online and the Department Heads take the training and civil right those in the confront of their own offends. Im aware that some city departments have tipping not required the contractors where identified in the governing ordinance to smith form 2 hundred despite the ordinance in essence to the commissions roll that the contractor were identified by position in that ordinances are required to file requiring on the tier two filers to do this online but not the contractors also didnt go far enough you need to send this back and have the staff give it up. Thank you any other Public Comment . Thank you, commissioners my name is jean im an Airport Commission employee a form 7 hundred filer for 33 years and the departments filing officer for this same amount of time in the last two years ive provided workshops for all the new filers and any older filer whos status changes maybe marriage or job constitutes youve provided that id like to speak i want to say that while im an airport apply im not speaking on behalf of the airport im speaking as a filer and my experience my big concern as mentioned the inintended consequences specifically tenants of an employee tenants when a tenant signs a lease that tenant has indeed theyll be signing away their right to privacy and tenants like anyone else in the world some tenants are many people have a reason for living maybe slightly under the rad oar and those reasons could be their 12k3wi7b8 i indulging private people and maybe escaped an abusive partner or no expectation on the part of the tenants their policy will be invaded in that way and not for me to question anyones desire for privacy more their right to it ill say simply ill say that theres a way to address this issue and that is to simply have filers file their cover sheet that clearly identifies what schedule my the if i recall as provided and anyone going on your website can identify that and call me or my person identified as the filing officer and provide that information but the point is that any, any tenant is not you cant google that name and find out where they live this information goes up on the website that will heap you can google my name find out im an employee 83 of the city and county of San Francisco of the airport thats the difference but not it is no longer public and one person is seeing
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.