Transcripts For SFGTV Ethics Commission 121916 20170103

Respected a skill a skill that was so wonderful that we have this masterpiece to show the world today. Chat. Thats like it tells the tomb oh, my god and not even wearing is a scarf. Welcome again to the special meeting of the San Francisco Ethics Commission for confess 19 it is my understanding that items one and 2 and 3 up to the point where we were recorded they just were not shown on television and mr. White is it necessary for us to go through them again. The audio the Deputy Director recorded the first 3 items not necessary okay turning to oh, no, i have to call any comment on the minutes and i will hearing none, call the question again. All in favor, say i. I. Any opposition hearing none, the minutes as amended by commissioner kopp and myself are approved turning to item number 4 is a discussion and possible action to approve Ethics Commission regular meeting of for calendar 2017 this is a new procedure of that the executive director has suggested to give rather than giving the notices once a month giving the Public Awareness of agreed dates assuming at dates on the calendar suggest in the attachment so one can plan over the 12month period. Any discussion. No as you point out commissioner keane not a requirement but keeping on the policy agenda as well as trying to enhance engagement the public ass are dates that conform with the requirement in the by laws and accepting over the time needs to change it had will be changed into a special meeting hopefully gives did public consideration. I noticed in looking at it youve take into account the Christmas Period in 2017 so it wont be a special meeting well be meeting on a regular meeting of and so in any case any commissioner have any comments or concerns . Ill call for Public Comment. Commissioners ray hart for San Francisco open government. Id like to commend the executive director for this action it is my firm belief the reason we do what i do every Single Commission has an obligation not just to put up with public attendance and participation but encourage Public Participation i think putting out the schedule well in enhance gives the people time to work into the public schedule they can attend. Any other Public Comment hearing none. Move we adopt the schedule. All in favor, say i. I. Opposed . Hearing none, the schedule for the Commission Regular scheduled merging for calendar year 2015 is approved turn to item number 5 discussion and possible action on sunshine ordinance for enforcement of Ethics Commission complaint ray hart vs. Eric mar attachments part of agenda and art to you want to make our presentation. Sure if i might an error on terms of the attachment the attachment number it on that item this be an attachment on item 6. Right. So i apologize for that error and is publics information. But is it different the item number 6 is a whats nancy versus the Sunshine Ordinance Task force that is what attachment number 2 is. Exactly, exactly attachment 2 relates to item 6 the nancy sunshine ordinance. Art i thought i had 5 minutes. Thats correct 3. Ray hart for San Francisco open government. The first two pages of the referral or the packet for item number 5 in the referral letter from the task force to this body and i would like you to Pay Attention particularly to the second page and the bottom two paragraphs it is says the Task Force Takes this matter 10i6r8 and buildings that eric mar intentionally refused to appear at merging before the task force to discuss the issue and not providing a written response for over 15 months based on the testimony in the hearing the task force interpretation of the ordinance and others applicable laws the failure to respond in a timely complete manner violates section and of the sunshine ordinance and the lack of policy infers intentional and willful noncompliant with the ordinance. There we go. What you see here is a rough thing of the order of determination includes they got a lot more information basically in march 19, eight hundred i put in an i dr not a extension are response i filed the shovrns complaint and the Sunshine Ordinance Task force had a hearing on may excuse me maybe third and supervisor mar didnt send anybody to the meeting he went before the board of supervisors on 3 occasions spent two hours a waiting for general Public Comment and put up a listing of supervisors not responded to this request i sent it to 10 of the supervisors of 5 not responded the first time i went two of them responded the next day and i withdraw those complaints the only 3 remaining were supervisor eric mar are supervisor farrell and leaping the president of the board of supervisors on may of 2016 a year and two months later an e ot hearing none showed up from supervisor mars office and sent a memo to supervisor mar and finally one year and 4 months later that sent a request about the 5 or 6 page from the packet back of your packet and on supervisors letterhead and id like to call your attention to a came up of things it took a year and 4 months to send this and under the brown act new look at the bottom two lines that i highlighted the Public Records does not permit an agency to delay or stop the written records when a denial must be in writing this response youre seeing the first and only response i got to any original i dr from supervisor eric mar now the last thing on the letter now on still 3 minutes or is the last paragraph, however, since the date of the complaint everywhere implemented appropriate measures to make sure the Public Records request didnt get loss because of a limited staff and legislative duties to extend it this kind of a bizarre statement to make as of the date of the complaint that was in march of 2015 we changed our procedures and then you still dont respond until a year and some months later and during the entire hearing process i went to all the hearings had to go to multiple extra hearings and even though people they sent couldnt answer the questions of task force and when the finally the first systematically said why after a year plus have no response to the fact you didnt respond to this i dr they still got no response so basically just i didnt respond and didnt respond to the complaint and didnt attend the hearings and finally when it was office use e ufos it went to the Ethics Commission is that the time. Theres a sentence. Basically this was the facts are that he willfully incurred the law i made every effort to communitybased great the board of supervisors so he knew that was out there and still waited a year and four months to respond. Thank you. Mr. Chair. Do we have anyone here from supervisor eric mars office. Yes. Yes, its your turn. Commissioners my name is angela legislative aide speaking on behalf the supervisor eric mar this hearing today on behalf of the supervisor i have the utmost appreciation for the shorn task force and the Ethics Commission and appreciate the opportunity to have this item heard an june 3rd any legislative aide mr. Long presented before the task force any office failed to respond to the eir dr and explaining the envelop Administration Oversight to respond to this in a timely manner and my office was unable to attend the followup scheduled and in which this item was agenda in 2016 at the Education Training committee since that time i and my staff from the task force suggestion took immediate chronic action to make sure my office is responsive and knowledgeable representative from any office for the sunshine ordnance meeting and since a representative has attended the following Sunshine Ordinance Task force meetings an july 26th i had attended the e dr meeting as a representative to provide an overview of the requests made to uphold us in responding and flagging and following through to all i drs and the official response was provided to mr. Hart through the september 7, 2016, hearing because supervisor eric mar was not available his legislative aide was speaking to the stuff were taking response to this complaint i greatly respect the work of the shorngz task force and recognize the procedures to make sure we respond to the requests of the public and tried to comply as the shovrng sunshine ordnance and all the consequence of event has been demonstrated and accident need for improvement not a willful intent to violate the ordinance or to discharge the duties i ask the commission to discharge this. May i have the chairman. What reason when the request was made back in 2015 and then there were meetings of the Sunshine Task force nobody showed up what is the administration failure. Their perhaps overlooked when they came to the in box the staff was responsive for different portions what an email came through admittedly there was not the appropriate mechanism and checkpoint to flag those i drs to be responded to identify made action now to catch those emails. Commissioner kopp. How along will have you worked in this office. I started in 08. And how many others to others. Yes. And what happens when a request for Public Records arrives at the office. Who is responsible for it. Im sorry can you repeat the last portion of the question. Who is responsible for responding to a request for Public Records. Depending on the the subject matter and give me examples of subject matter. Like housing we have had aid who typically hundreds overseeing matters take on the initial response of whether or not we have any records Partnership Requests if their pertinent to small Property Owners aids so first of all. Let me stop you because that answers the question i have in my mind who opens the letter the envelope or receives the email with the request. If theyre coming through electronic emails supervisor eric mars in box it could be the supervisor himself and or the aids but the aids are responsible for monitoring the emails. One aid or all 3. We set them up by time of day but currently im responsible. You split them by time of day and at the time, yes. So someone would be responsible for two hours for example, Something Else for another two. Hypothetically half the day from 12 to 12 and the other half of the day and, huh were those procedures reduced to writing. In the job discrimination. In the in the job descriptions but the responsibilities of legislative aids were. The responsibility are of the aids are discussed when we have Staff Members for example, when i joined the office to discuss who will be taking on what work role. That was deny orally not put on a memorandum that was on a Bulletin Board or a central placed. We charged it outthink the notepad to see what was responsible for. You targeted a sorry charged. Charged it out quam. In a staff meeting literally charged it out i for example, remember the time of day and we what happened to the chart. This was in a staff meeting we had just jotted it down. So each of you took note. In our Staff Meetings we take notes when we discuss things but particular for the time when prior to any joining the staff im not sure what about the written procedures. Im talking about over may 2016 was there a memorandum posted in the office as to who would perform responsibilities on Public Records request. No, not specifically dominated memo. Do you know if one of the 3 legislative aide to board president london breed. Will be employed over 2017. I cant speak i think everyone is going figuring out their next steps. Meaning none of the 3 legislative aide to board president london breed. Are presently destined for continued engagement after january 8th is that right . And supervisor eric mar is wrapping up had his term. Im asking you do any of the 3 legislative aide to board president london breed. Expect to be retained by the next supervisor. We do for transition period. How long is that. It is undetermined at that moment. Okay. Thanks. Any other questions commissioners have of this witness go ahead. Commissioner keane. After the Sunshine Ordinance Task force made the finding that supervisor eric mar had indeed violated the sunshine ordinance by not responding is that when your office first became aware of it im trying to get the sequences is that what youre saying our office became aware and started to react and my form colleague victor young appeared about the task force that was the 9 of 2030 and appropriated a response he became aware of the idea when we received i think a memo from the task force ordering us weve failed to respond to the i dr and did your staff explain to the task force the things youve said it was the aids didnt pickup on it and werent aware of it and that was why there was no response. He did he kind of explained the missteps that happened for that email not filed appropriately for the response. And this may not be a proper for you to opine on but it is it your impression in regards to the task force coming out with the findings that supervisor eric mars office did willingly didntly fail to respond to the task force the didnt belief in. There was not willful. I understand but obviously weve got supervisor eric mars Office Putting forth this explanation and accuse that look it fell under the cracks we didnt willfully do it and the task force votes visually or maybe unanimously that it was indeed a willful fair what that indicate to you that the task force didnt believe him . I think the task force decision i respect their processing of this of the cased before them but i think from our perspective from our office as soon as we recognized that we needed to respond to thought i dr and backtrack and figure out out the i dr as you say fall undertook the cracks and made sure that we focused on moving forward to make sure we respond adequately and in a timely fashion to all i drs we were focused on developing that protocol and system in response and western also finally able to that iron to mr. Harts throats july task force. At the Task Force Meeting they found that was a willful violation you said at the meeting you were unable to respond to the charges and allegations is that what youre saying. We had that opportunity but i think part of perhaps the willful violations was attributed to staffs statements my colleagues due to a scheduling issue was National Able to make the initial meeting but as soon as supervisor eric mar was aware of that having aids if not 2013 multiplied aids to speak to the commission. Forgive me what im trying to get at what it was that the task force had before them at the time they made this finding that supervisor eric mar had will fully Feasibility Study to respond to the sunshine ordinance that it is pretty serious finding in regards to supervisors blowing off the sunshine ordinance i think you what agree but i mean asking you to respond but that serious in the supervisor were to do that right. From the supervisor were i agree there are it is a serious issue by no means does supervisor eric mar mean to blow off the commission we do make the Public Records request in the highest regard and in the time since through our Staff Meetings we checks are that im asking you in terms of what you put down as of now are as of sometime after this you as i said youve instituted all sorts of things to make sure it wont happen again forgot about that im trying to find out the history and how it was that supervisor mar and his staff responded to them to the Sunshine Ordinance Task force why it was there was no response and having difficulty you may not know having difficulty getting that history in my mind to make a determination do you know whether or not at hearing before the sunshine ordnance task force if you dont know thats fine do you know whether or not the Sunshine Ordinance Task force was told on behalf of supervisor mar all the things you originally told us it was something that fell through the cracks none picked up on it can were they told that at the hearing if you dont know thats okay. I dont know for a fact, however, listening to the task force i believe that was pretty discussed by a colleague but dont know for certain. Well, if it is recorded it is on there. So is the recording in that. The sunshine ordnance task force hearing i believe see. Okay rather than making a decision now i want to hear what was put forward to the sunshine ordnance if anything as to the reasons why this was not responded to. Before we go forward if they didnt put anything or if they were putting forth something unbelievable i that would be helpful to me 34 making a decision here we dont know we know is that they voted unanimously that there was a willful violation based on the presentations i dont know what they had before them if anything from supervisor mars office and if they had the facts before the full account before them from supervisor mars office that you told us that you believe the way it happened then it would appear they didnt believe supervisor mar i think ill be interested to find out. Any supervisor. I dont know their where you or mr. Hart can tell me if any history of this matter is correct but the original request was in march of 2015. Correct. And there was a task force hearing in june of 2015 where mr. Lynn showed up. Correct. But the Task Force Made a preliminary finding of violation but then in may of 2016 they took up this matter again and mr. Harts made a presentation at that merging accordingly to the order of determination the task force sent a letter to supervisor mar outlining a number of bullet points and asking him to provide certain documents were those documents every provided. Yes. Sent to the commission and when. They were provided through i believe the july 26th hearing of the education outreach and Training Committee and the requests for a log of you drs and as well as the Office Procedures that are taken in response to i drs. Those are provided. Correct. And the letter of september of july 26th it says on review the foils we didnt find any relevant documents thats not referring to the documents in june 2016. May of 2016 and to clarify not having the documents was in response to mr. Harts original response request. Okay. He have nothing further. Commissioner kopp. You know i support commissioner keanes motion of people this one more month for because so much time and effort and taxpayer money has been spent on this it makes me gag. But commissioner keane as usual is logical and may i suggest if youre around as a legislative aide why not just have one person have every request presented to that person and let that person record it. On a simple chart whatever you call it the date received by which the documents if existing must be provided. Commissioner kopp thank you for the suggestion and the time since we have changed that process so im now the one handing the receipt of all. Philosophizing me that eminence some comfort how many requests to you receive a week or month whatever time you want to use. Perhaps three or four a month it doesnt make sense. All right. So not overwhelming. Thats a motion ill second the motion. Telling me exactly. I move. Im so sorry commissioners before you do that mr. Hart is getting rebuttal. One other motion that mr. Harts response to that and the motion. Id like age further clarification sorry following up on well, one thing id like somebody can answer or knowledgeable executive director or our attorney is didnt this task force make some finding before july of 2015. That that the law had been violated. Yes. I believe the Task Force Made a determination that the law had been violated and decided that was a willful violations after mr. Mars. Why it makes a determination that makes a decision why will it consider it further if on the second question whether that was willful or negligent. Theyll consider it further because mr. Mar failed to appear before the education and Train Committee he didnt appear and hearing they sent to the Education Committee to learn how to implement the pleasured for the i drs he didnt show up for that either they changed it. Your spinning the whole. Respond . Is this any rebuttal or response. I dont know about you if i run an office and get a request and it gets falls through the cracks if i get a notification the first thing ill respond to it and get it out of the way they didnt do that and then a notice of a complaint being filed and again didnt respond to the oriental i dr and didnt show up for the hearing didnt respond to the complaint and got the hearing notice and didnt respond to the i dr and didnt show up for the hearing and then another hearing since the hearing didnt respond to the i dr and this went phenomenon for a year and 4 months bottom line if someone notifies i went before the board of supervisors and put up the charters of and put you up the names of supervisors doesnt respond and Public Record i sent in 2, 3, 4 i dr in march 2015 and status state law it must be in writing and looking at the task forces ever looked at is them coming up and sawing weve put a procedure in place to deal with it were here supervisor mar leafs office ill westbound gone by the time the in connection Ethics Commission is held and the bottom line the staff will be gone and absolutely nothing downey done with this the observed he got so many notice no way to be dumber than a box of rocks to not realize there was an i dr floating that had none not received an answer and his aids show up i have pity theyre caught between a rock and a hard place and the supervisor didnt respond to the i dr or anybody and when he participated some people basically said were sorry that fell through the cracks and repeatedly asked have you responded to mr. Harts original i dr. Question. Mr. Hart, how long was it before you got the answer that theyre no records. Those letters from supervisor mar thats the answer i got. What day. The july 26th emails. What a year later and a year and 4 or 5 months i believe it was to basically hey, if i make an i dr to the executive director and it falls through the cracks were all human people make mistakes but if i say to her the next Ethics Commission and says shell look into that and send a letter and mr. Blossom didnt at what point he just is ignoring is not participating in the process thats the biggest thing i did this in a way no way that supervisor mar or the other two supervisors can stand there and say i didnt know anything about that. What relieve do you ask the commission to give you youve pointed out that supervisor mar will be out of office in january. 67, 34 willful failure to discharge in any duties the brown act of the Public Records act those r violations of brown act shall be deemed an official misconduct and goes on to see this body will do it i want you to find supervisor mar guilty of willful misconduct. And then what. Is there a penalty attached to that mr. Blossom. No. Your honor to post on its website a finding that the individual has violated the brown act and issue a warning letter to the responder the latter is the more predicament by read the definition of willful. Im interested it in what the evidence was that was before the sunshine ordnance task force upon which they made the findings i know what their evidence was in regards to the allegations and mr. Harts evidence that there was a willful violation. Im totally vague what if anything was responded to by supervisor mars office at the hearing in which they found a willful violation and im curious and not just curious i mean, were essentially sitting another an appellant body to uphold the sunshine ordnance willful violation if supervisor mar didnt do anything or his aids said hey, ill know what to do but so for nothing maybe mr. Hart can tell me. Let me fashion it as narrowly as i can so we dont go all over the place. At the hearing in which they did sunshine ordnance task force find a willful violation what was put forward in defense if anything by supervisor mars people. Nothing this is what youve heard it fell under the cracks were you sitting up procedure and have you respond to mr. Hart the answer inform and any reason why no response to this longdrawnout process their answer was no okay. Do you, your motion is what. Well, ive ill take mr. Harts representation as being truthful and accurate that was the state of the sunshine ordnance Task Force Made their determination on willful violations and my motion would be that we sustain the findings of the sunshine ordnance task force there was a willful violation. Is there a second. Ill second. Any discussion. Before we vote i want to find out oh, go ahead commissioner kopp. I dont get it ive not seen the task force in action all ive done is read material but on june 3rd, 2015, there was a decision and order of determination that mr. Mar violates section 67. 25 a for failure to respond to an immediate disclosure request in a timely manner shouldnt that have been the end of that part. I know what they referred him to develop methods for the future but make a finding as to what occurred what occurred was a failure. So what do they keep going on through this it goes to a committee didnt meet for 7 or 8 months. But didnt go to the committee as instructed. Why does he have to be there if hes not there they can dismiss it. Youre talking mr. Mar or one of his legislative aids. He mined the subsequence of mr. Hart when they found he failed to respond what they ordered is you should go to the Training Session to found out how youre to prove or disprove respond; is that correct . Yes. And no, he that was part of it but the other part was reply to mr. Hartsz i dr and the second findings where the first one they said well not find willful but he violated the ordinance and tell you to center lane it out but a year later another hearing here we are and still not come applied with the order and didnt participate in the process you know and you still have not given us an explanation that was not respond to a year and months later unanimously that was willful no way we cant call that willful. For a point of the information the definition in the sunshine ordnance weve adapted will full means an action to respond or failure to act was a violation of sunshine ordnance so repeated that the order was issued to the supervisor mar with constitute informing him youre not responding to the i dr was a violation he had knowledge that was a violation and failed to act. Before i call for a vote any Public Comment. Hearing none, i will call all in favor of the motion for willful violation and i. I. Opposed. No. Let me explain. Let me ask. The record the motion didnt carry 2 to 2. Let me explain any no vote mr. Chairman i mean is so much of a do going through the procedures the central question to me whether they had not given and that hadnt been proclaimed presidio parkway it is one thing to say weve gotten no responses of documents i dont know. I didnt hear testimony from mr. Harts or anything else that was unbelievable or not has to do with with a grant to the library boy oh, boy a lot of paper and time people have spent on something that should have been handled the first instance from the Supervisors Office having one person to look at three or four requests a month not a very arduous task to perform and get a letter an email out to whoever requests this terrible. All right. Commissioner all of these referrals in the sunshine ordnance Task Force Ordinance committee i find very frustrating because awhile i believe that a citizen who makes a request of an elected official some be responded to. Either yes or no or we dont have the information you want and that can be handicapped in a bureaucratic matter getting our systems proclamations in order so as mr. Cop stated but also the in this particular case that is around the gour and the library and thousand of requests of this nature to elected officials to Department Heads about this belief that is something amiss about the San Francisco friends of the library and since there the criminal activity something of that nature the City Attorney needs to look into that it gong and on and all individuals that who used this measure you know requesting i drs as a form if i may say side of harassment of elected officials and the Department Heads there has to be a happy medium yes officials need to respond to the public but if your bombarding nicole it is possible that they be willful in ignoring those requests im going saying this is right but as commissioner kopp said all this paperwork this goes on four months and years it is connected with the shovrng task force i find this frustrating i dont rile and if we find the supervisor guilty of will fully doing that is that is official scuzzy dont see that i mean a limit to how much they can do but a sense of frustration on people seeing that going on all the time im one of the people. Fine and i dont disagree with that but on and on and on and on. Youre trying to cover yourself but your autograph sat on a panel with her. Get out of here. All right. Ill call item number 6 discussion and possible action on Ethics Commission complaint number 151623 and 1623 dash 4 doyle versus nancy and the sunshine ordnance task force. Is is she here. Who is supposed to be here. The complainant. Do we have a recommendation from the staff on this. Yes. And none from the sunshine ordnance task force is here. Yeah. So the report represents from the staff a essentially the general staff mr. Joe was a patient at a San Francisco general after his period of treatment he requested a number of records of Public Information officer of the Public Health department and that Public Information officer didnt respond in a timely manner staffs report recommendation to the underlying request he officer violated the sunshine ordnance request and a letter of warning to her askinger had to comply in the future perhaps not admonish interesting but the layer the gentleman filed against the Public Health department with the sunshine ordnance task force but later withdraw that the task force didnt handle that within a set timeframe so ultimately that sort of blocked the complaint that did gentleman had against the task force so all those complaints from the task force and filed them with you guess and after reviewing the documents and materials and a thorough review of the sunshine ordnance task force policies and annual reports our staff xuktd that the gentleman was correct the task force misses its deadlines as opposed to to the sunshine ordnance and felt our hands were you tied with a clearcut violation you make a findings the sunshine ordinance was violate and issue a letter of warning with the 3 options with the letter or post it on the website or a letter of warning the letter of warning was appropriate advising the task force to continue the process and resolve the complaint in a timely manner the task force did respond under either gentlemen respond by accident task force responded the letter speaks for itself and someone is here from the task force to speak on it. This matter was originally on the november calendar and at the request of the task force it was continued they were unable to because of holidays they were unable to respond so who is here from the task force and happy to hear your response. If i could remember the commissioners to speak directly into the microphone. Pardon me. Speak directly to the microphone. Sorry. Good afternoon. Mr. Chair and commissioners my name is a bruce from it in coming chair of the sunshine ordnance task force starting in june of 2016 and i will lowest you know many other new members of the task force have joined at this time so half if not more not been partied to this issue at the time that come mentioned and started so one thing i can say and period of time where the task force was unable to meet for 6 months and it developed a large backlog and that was by and large because the board of supervisors was unable to appoint the person with disability and under the ordinance requirement that a person with a disability is appointed all the time so the backlog took a number of years to get settled out i imagine some hiccups that they missed the 45 day rule by a couple of days or so nicole two days. And but exceeded 45 days we agree the y reason why to clarify we asked for a continuance because your meeting would have happened before the task force had known about it i only found out about it because i get our regular agenda and he saw if there and in the middle of interoffice communications before all of us i appreciate the continuance and i should have said that they beginning. I want to further say with that i instituted to adjust the way they we do things first of all, the 45 day rule is simply supposed to find under the sections only is public thats all the the matter is about it is not to adjudicate but, but to make a review where it is public if it is in the it goes watt not in the jurisdiction we could find that public but under hipaa not our jurisdiction so thats what we are determining so we we have done pushed all 67, 25 and 25 that is rerequests more information and i drs to the head of pack they get scheduled first so that way we can plan for 45 days in advance additionally what weve done usually two hour subcommittee moefrgz and reconstituted it hears all complaints and any offer flows were using the second hour of any subcommittee to start a Complaint Committee to center more than one within a 45 day period if we start to see that under beginning to pile up those are the adjusts weve made with that, im available to answer any questions. And also, we are are victor young who is more detailed about that particular says. Do you have any objection to the commission issuing a letter documenting the determination that is the past agenda warning you that try to comply. It iteration has no problem with that. Has what. No problem if you find a violation we have no problem well own up to it we get a heavy caseload. Mr. Warner here the complainant is not do we have a rule or policy from the complainant is not interested enough to show up sits a sign to me didnt want to pursue is notwithstanding mr. Walls act was an the fact that the complainant is not interested. I dont think there is a requirement under the rules we give them notice but. multiple voices . No requirement they have to appear. Thats correct. The complainant can rely on the record that was made that was brought here anyway. I mean to me that is a psychtion to send a warning letter after this testimony. Do i hear a motion. I move we send a letter. In terms of accept the represents of the staff okay. Any public discussion. I want to clarify are you finding violation or are you sending a letter. Finding a violation and sending a letter. Very good want to hear it. Any Public Comment . Ray hart for San Francisco open government. As you may know i have been spending spent years going to the Task Force Meetings i have thirty orders of determination not one of which is enforced not one and the law itself says this commission is responsible astonish enforcing that. And i think that is rather ludicrous that every single order of determination but one forever ever has been found to be the sunshine ordnance task force got it wrong. And here you are sending a letter of condemnation to the task force when they have a case before you that is two days past the 45 day deadline you are responsible for enforcing this ordinance and have never enforced that ever, ever ever you tried one time sent a letter this the mayor unanimously recording the president of the Library Commission to be be resolved that was give you a little bit of background you dont like that the bottom line you do this to avoid trying to enforce it you have no power to enforce it and dont want that to be observe to the public either no power or no will ive got thirty thats me never been a letter of determination where youve done anything equip one time telling me were any reasonable person will say that is logical that you get it right every single damn time and the task force didnt get it right but once. You dont want to enforce this. Why . Because you cant the one you tried to enforce the mayor ignored you and ignored the letter a year later bottom line youll not find a violation if we find it like supervisor mar you sent it toe did board of supervisors the board of supervisors will do nothing theyll exposure it like the mayor ignored our one to the Lobby Commission the question who are you being honest with yourselves youre not youre not being honest with the public all those years the law clearing says this body is responsible i find that unbelievable there has none not been one single time that you didnt sustain that. What does that is a about your credibility. Did the Ethics Commission have the power to order of mayor or fire a department head. If it is a finding of official misconduct a willful go violation under the sunshine ordnance it gets referred to the mayor but it is up to the mayor what they want to do. We can recommend in our opinion ill call the question. All in favor, say i. Any opposed. Oh, on the ad admission. The motion carries 4 to zip and it might be some thought for future meeting maybe the enforcement mechanism should contain financial penalties as opposed to simply a letter that requires legislative action in order to do that. That sounds logical. That requires changing of the sunshine ordnance but that we can put that on the agenda for future dates. Turning to item no. 7 decision for enforcement report and updates and ms. Bloom. In the tradition of our new reports we give you every month i judge provide a program and operational highlights we went to the across town governmental lawyers conference in new orleans and just like that was a delightful time i appreciated the opportunity to go thank you. We in addition to that weve been reviewing the old complaint on file and giving proximate cause so we can present to the commission in january ive been working on several stipulated orders with violations and then also preparing for a hearing on the merit in january because none on staff is licenses under the California Bar that hearing on the will be prepared by the hopefully the oakland ethnicity youll have a guest lawyer come and in addition take several complaint theyve tap elder off since the election but last couple of weeks october and november got a lot of complaint the uptick is 36 overall weve lost our investigator were trying to triage those complaints and staff has been helpful in fulfilling those gaps and working with me in getting those tracks and do the best but for now our priority to get rid of the older matters were at least under 18 months when the new staff comes on board with that, im available to answer any questions on the charts or anything in the report. Any questions or comments. Commissioner kopp. On page 2 the chart. Uhhuh. Which i welcome. But four of 5 items theres no notion as to the status and at least 2 of them are going on 20 months old. Yes i believe that i had told you he last meeting ill get a document something that explains the process and forgot ill followup i know the sweet matter goes to the 90 day over air force the order was issued by the commission that will be latter in december pause the commission issued the order in december so in january that will be continued. And going to the first one were looking a year old judgment do we ever get or do we ask for a report on what has been done to enforce the judgment. We ask and on this one we had external acquires this adjusted the b dr has been excused on the judgment by foil it was the court and doing on asset search but obtained any money from mr. Jackson the courts turned up in assets in the city and county of San Francisco so nothing to attach the judgment to. Execute not attached. Can you write them and ask them if theyve conducted an order of examination. I can ask them. Please and attribute the request to me thank you mr. Chairman. All right. Any Public Comment on item no. 7. Hearing none, well move on to item 8 thank you very much ms. Below. Jacqueline started and is here this afternoon. Welcome. Shell be the face of the commission who are calling and joins our education and Compliance Team working with pat and also johnny and so were delighted that jackie is here and johnny is also good news hes assumed the roles of the compliance assistant after the recruitment december 7th and johnny has been in the office as a special is person and be providing questions to the public and following up were happy to have to announcement and as johnny moves along were lucky to have the two staff people for longer theyll be here france will be here with us into the spring as a fulltime staff assistant and jack will be able to stay with us another month providing transition as jackie joined Us Developments on that front and also, we continue to have at the top priority of my time and a number of others working with the department of Human Resources on attending the provisions under the 8 vacancies and we are effective do i have a work order initiating a of time senior personnel analyst to help to get the this is very intense and were happy to have the additional sets of ice working with us i look forward to have more to report in january as that process moves along and met with delores this morning and possibly to be here to be introduced but hearing more in january on that front separately in terms of policy and legislative developments attached to this report is the updated policy plan for this month i realize there was one oversight needed to have the Development Enforcement policy wards with regards to the investigative work with the District Attorneys Office that well have including in the january agenda if we can bring that forward that didnt show up i apologize for the oversight and separately the protective ordinance calling your attention this is something the commission weighed in this year following the introduction of the ordinance amended ordinance by board supervisor president london breed the staff from the drs and the Controllers Office and our office have been meeting to discuss that implementation issues around the ordinances following those xhfgdz we have a series of recommendations that looenl squarely meets the goals as the commission envisioned it and make sure that is strong when it comes to implement i wanted to highlight some of the key components changes through jessica for a moment we anticipate that will be in january that will come back to the full board but make sure youre familiar with the changes United States of america to jess can. We realized quickly after sending this to the board of supervisors there were collaboration that noted to happen between other departments one of which say is the Controllers Office and the department of Human Resources because the Controllers Office is the board that investigates unless the complaints are within the subject matter jurisdiction and department of Human Resources has a lot to say about retaliation they work with the unions in order to do the restatement if it is something that the commission desires to happen so working with those to agencies we identified we had a series the preview meetings and identified 4 areas that are sort of sticking points for everybody and the first is training and intact the concern really is the commissions original ordinance expansion would have expanded it in take of the complaints do all local, state and federal agencies to in take those complaint and the drs were rightly concerned the commissioner commission would not have power over this and no authority to recatch evidence to the agencies to have someone look at them so a practical matter they both desired the authority to in take what the lower complaints with the city have been at the city level and further wanted to see the complainants complaint to the supervisors the intact of the complaint could have happened across any City Government and the therapy a janitor are an outcry to a colleague shouldnt engender the same level of protection as a report to a supervisor we felt this was a good consolidation to make we expanded the number of places a complaint can be filed by 3 thousand or 8 thousand from a handful of departments to 8 thousand supervisory employees and the sfroefz is on board a number of supervisors can handle the complaints now the ordinance requires mandated training of ploys how to look at the placement and that Controllers Office is excited about that so they provided the language we used in order to make that a change to the lower ordinance so in terms of now we got 8 thousand to in take complaint so the question is what types of complaints should the whistle blowers protection action attached to and in evaluating the aspect of the ordinance we really had a breakthrough moment the check and balance complaints can be filed with the Controllers Office originally or through the supervisors without necessarily nodding that those the foiling the complaints with the whistle blowers was the only way to get protection so what happens to understand this under the current regime if you report it your complaint of a retelevision station to the supervisor the Ethics Commission cant do anything about that the complaint has to be recorded to the Controllers Office with the program that commission wanted to expand that if someone is retaliating to a complaint to a supervisor they should get protection by this commission we bieftd the protection of whistle blowers from the place they saw the complaint from the whistle blower wants the complaint investigated by the a professional fraud or improper government if. Retaliated against foil with the whistle blower or with the supervisor or develop head you file those complaints with the Ethics Commission we can protect you no matter where you are we striped the two processes for practical purposes in doing that we had to come up with new definitions for the government activity to improve the circumstances and fraud and waste and activity that employs to contractor for fraudulent ways and other aspects and we actually included the definition for fraud so the civil grand jury asked us to include the gross abuse and using the terms in the whistle blower terms itself i can read the terms are misuse of city fund and diversities and wasteful city practices we stuck with the terminology with the existing ordinance those are the ways we clofbd with the Controllers Office and the drs to improve 2, 3, 4 ordinance in a way that is effective Going Forward in terms of dmaeft authority and the various protection. Any questions either of the director or ms. Bloom. My question is who knows logically why this power was reposed in the controller of all officials i mean, theres no nexus. Who. Sam doing it. Yeah. Historically people probably know the reference but seriously it ought to be in the Ethics Commission. Yeah. Noindz the hotline was when the Ethics Commission was kr5e9d sometime in the late 19 the hotline was changed to the Controllers Office that maybe a bit of history dont have that information. We ought to ask our leaders to reexamine that. If i might commissioners two other things to highlight first is to without a lot of fanfare we are excited to announce we are posted today notice of web maintenance that will be concurring on wednesday the interpretation well anticipate that on the website this week so we are doing everything we can to notify those who might be working with the site and knowing this is he hopefully, a quiet week and that well be able to have people start seeing that site beginning thursday we are communicating with folks that maybe effected by 23 this as i said a soft launch looking forward to impeaching the public through the senior Federal Reserve a work in process on the continuous improvements as we go forward our goals to make that a navigate site and the ability to build better tools to help people understand the laws were excited about it you see any glitches hopefully, well be up on thursday and look forward to bringing a report of the january meeting were working closely with stephen macy and the rest of the staff my fingers are crossed appreciate everybodys patience as that played out this week and finally, the Budget Development youve seen in the press recently the mayor has issued the departments fiscal year budget earlier this month we met with the budget analyst and i believe our colleague in the back of the room we the mayor met with the Department Heads on december 8th to walk through the instructions regarding the budget for the couple of years you recall we submitted a twoyear budget last year outlining our priorities and focus but because were not in a fixed twoyear budget process well be submitting documents to the meyers in february the deadline is february 21st so my goal is to have to you in january a document that speaks to the commissions budget for the next couple of years the mayor talked about a post rebalancing plan cited concerns about a 5 year projection and said the department were not in lay off mode not in Cutting Services but that we will be as a city his goal to take steps to look at the indicators the departments are asked to not grow their budget and financed fulltime head count were being asked as departments to propose a 3 percent cut in the next year as well as a 6 persecute the following year and thats out of a big budget of 3. 3 million which will if if place translate to a cut of 3 people from our currently authorized list all that said all indications as you may know it is a critical priority for us to right size the organization and sees hiring weve launched next year and been doing that and continue to do that my understanding and hope that because the the Mayors Office found it as a priority well continue to move forward so we can do the important work we have front of the i wanted to highlight thats the update from the Mayors Office ill be here and my colleague for particular questions. Do you want to give us some further information beyond what she told us and we appreciate your patience. Yeah. Thank you. Im joined by might colleague brad i dont have any comments to add to what leann told no ftes to be added that is not mean that any of the positions approved for 20172018 in the previous budget season should be cut all those positions are safe the 3 persecute is obviously something were kg all departments option for and my supervisor and director asked that note be from layoffs no request for hiring to slow down no, not a hiring freeze in place and the commission is understaffed. Hopefully those cuts can come from somewhere not ftes use and if no efficiency can be found were willing to meet with the Ethics Commission to talk about what can be done. I think i speak for the commission when i say we strong in urging the mayor to adopt the budget that the executive director submitted he was kind of enough to eckwees and we feel strongly for that commission to be fiscal the budget that was submitted in 2016 certain and hopefully implemented in 2017 will stay in place despite the citys concerns. Right and the budget season for 20172018 shouldnt have to change. Great. Commissioner keane. I wanted to emphasize what commissioner renne said with the budget we have now when originally we had the mayorss instructions for the twoyear budget there were there was a request from the mayor we owl what i think a two or three percent or 6 percent kind of cuts and one of the things we felt strongly about were in terms of history of the commission was that we have a new executive director excellent executive director whos vigorous in terms of what we need the history of that commission in terms of the previous executive director was not that and he was not someone that advocated on budget she went along with the cuts and even when the city was flush and other departments getting things he never asked the only thing he was concerned with if his position was okay. If that was fine he was fine the commission has been acting for a number of years in other words, with a lot of problems because of that because of theyre being no vigorous vocabulary in regards to other departments i was the explosive public defender and advocated on behalf of our budget as does ever budget director ive ever seen with the city with the exemption of the previous executive director of this commission so one of the things weve done in order to highlight our real strong feeling about that we instructed our personnel to not submitted any proposal in regards to a two or three percent and she didnt the mayor was pleased winner pleased when the mayor contact and give us the positions we asked for that should have been after years and years and years i would like you and the Mayors Office to continue to have this historical emphasis that we have that in terms of what this commission does initiation to the ethics of City Government is extremely important to the citizens of San Francisco and cant be looked at and play around with as it didnt exist the dog kafrnz department we believe were on a different level of that not just in terms of what we do but the fact this commission has been so ill served in regards to getting hitting its budget to the point it needs it okay. Ill send that message. Thank you. Art thank you very much. And lastly echo jessicas comment at the Program Sponsors and government in new orleans was a Steering Wheel opportunity to get the session to talk about topics to the work we do were digesting and looking forward to sharing that with the colleagues on the staff and as our interested an opportunity to be in touch with the peers from around california from the local agencies and i think that continues to Spark Collaborative work looking at each others best practices and also to connect with people that will be used and of interest as we go towards the policy submit in crafting the policies theyre a lot of good people a lot of of the action is happening at the state and local level particularly at the local level and looking forward to drawing lessons from those and from all of us wish you and the staff who engage with us a happy happy holidays. Commissioner renne a couple of points first on the whistle blower discussion i urge the commission ask for an interested persons meeting to see if any final action if ibtsd or the staff to supervisor breed i see that we were informed that there is an objection to having complaints going to all agencies i worked for 15 years for the housing an unwarranted development received complaints from people that facing retaliation for bringing up complaints on high funded programs and i think that is appropriate that at at minimum that that the city informs other agencies whether there is a relationship between those agencies and the city that a complaint come in that includes side hud and Inspector General they should be informed on something going on and it is destined that only supervisors would be getting the training but, in fact, its supervisors that are the ones that had had retaliation you can imagine what is like for an employee heres our right and by the way, you have to right to foil a complaint against me that didnt work and shown not to work and in the controllers own report on the whistle blower with the National Standard 10 percent is far lower than other jurisdictions in the number of complaint filed and resolved because other jurisdictions do training for all employees not just the supervisors and right now as you saw with the cases there is an ability to destroy records in the process of having an investigation infrastructure. Way a policy that should be saying the records have to be retained while the investigation is underway and a clarification this misconduct is sex harassment weve seen that in the workplace or bullying or other kinds of threats the policy should include agencies like the Housing Authority not been included in the past i would was involved in the creation of the program with the mayor that was a assigned under the Mayors Office ed lee talked about i talked about with the Ethics Commission and how the whistle blower can Work Together after a period of time the Ethics Commission was going to do nothing but suggested that be turned over to the Ethics Commission and no reason not to bring that back heres the charter i know my time is out but i have two other things id like to mention. Ged. Two minutes. On the budget glad no chances but San Francisco fines and penalties paid at the direction of its go into the Ethics Commission has leveled many thousand of dollars in fines not penalties just direct fines that compares to the one and 3 thousand theyre asking so things should be appropriate ate finally when our taking a look at enforcement issues i hope you take a look at the Police Officer Association Current campaign asking the public to contact the Police Commission over the use of force since theyre doing the television adds this appears an expenditure lobbying effort not recorded that way so as you review how things are working you might use that as an example whether or not all of the expenditure lobbying is being disclosed as it should be thank you. Commissioners ray hart for San Francisco open government. First, id like to address commissioner keanes on the budget that didnt occur many a volume the director was Los Angeles County but commissioner renne and other commissioners were on in and to the best of my knowledge they made no effort to get any increase in the budget mr. Sincroy was the executive director but again not working in a vacuum so the budget was bad it was the Ethics Commission fault you can try to pin it on mr. Sincroy believe me im not a did haveer but do try to waive off our responsibility secondly, on the whistle blower i filed two complaint with the Whistle Blower Program one against the friends of the library and a second one against sue the secretary for allowing they are personal feelings to interfere with her public duties in herons to the despite what commissioner said i dont know where she got her thousand ever numbers she is trying to put in things she stated im wattage a vendetta im harrys them and started to put in comments how she didnt like the tune of my voices and words, etc. So basically started to slander me pubically in writing rivaling me in retaliation for the fact i filed complaint that are lawful complained or records requests legal and the friends of the library have been found in violation 7 minds where commissioner got the thousand of requests someone is lying to her or shows making that you will i up not thousand of requests 1 or 2 a month is not thousand and heard from supervisor eric mars representatives commissioner kopp asked he how many they get 3 a month. Thank you not what they claim thousands of complaints and we could not but respond to the complaint we get thousand of requests for documents and cant respond it is bull excuse me bottom line. I wont excuse. The constitution says i can use whatever terms are appropriate. I dont have to listen to it. Do i get extra time since he interrupted me. Your 3 minutes are up. Okay stand but for next year. Every meeting beginning and end. Any other Public Comment. To item 9 discussion and possible action regarding a complaints received or initiated by the Ethics Commission. Wait a minute mr. Chairman on the executive directors report. I think we should note the election of ms. Pelham to the governing board on the golf its been lose conference congratulations. And. Suspicious achievement im sure. We all join. All right. Agenda item 9 is discussion and possible action regarding complaints received or initiated by the Ethics Commission concerning golf code sections 1. 22 par by a candidate for purposes other than the campaign and possible closed session ill ask for Public Comment before we vote on who to go into closed session and commissioner renne im larry bush i sent to the members of the commission materials that is relevant to cases like this i dont know the specific case but, but hope you have an opportunity to take into consideration in this or any other future case thank you. Thank you. Mr. Hart you do want to make a comment that you wanted to make earlier when your time ran out. For the agenda items the violation inaudible . Thank you. All right. Do i hear a motion to who to go into closed session on item number 9. It is required by the charter to go into closed session. Then why do we need a motion. A procedural one has to occur in closed session but numerals a motion to always required to go into closed session. By order of chair and ill second the motion. All in favor, say i. I. Opposed . All right. We will now go into closed session and i would anticipate that we probably will come back into open session by 4 and take a 5 minute break before we go into closed session. Right. All right. Were back in open session. Do i need to make have a motion as to what shall be dlousz although weve dealt with that in closed session. You made that what to disclose and now up to you. Then what i in closed session the commission agreed to a stipulation decision and order in the manner of stuart for mayor 2015 complaint number 29 dash one 51 dash and the full stipulation and order will be on the commissions website probably by tomorrow. All right. Turning to item number ten discussion and possible action on items for future meetings any commissioners have any comment or discussion well mr. Chairman id like to calendared with skrnt for the next meeting the matter of existing complaints and the status of existing complaints which probably requires a closed session noting without reference to any specific complaint that there are oh, approximately thirty and some have occurred as would be expected since the election or just prior to the election but weve got about 10 that have been abated at the request of the District Attorney going back as far as almost two years ago. Justice delayed is justice denied and there are also i think 3 were abated at the request of the City Attorney and i want to know the status of those and i know want to know why the status is whatever it is in each of those matters it is to use the cliche word troubling and most of it is probably due to the last it is the duty of prior thats my request and for the record ive asked executive director to have an item on the agenda every month which will be a closed session item to discuss and get a report on all outstanding complaints and their status that will be occurring every month so the public understand this is done for the purpose that was expressed by commissioner kopp that one that cases dont fall by the way side because no action was taken having been referred to the da or the City Attorney and or other agency and then the statute of limitations runs well do this on a monthly basis to make sure were on top of the pending complaints. Any public discussion . On that and on any other item you wish to discuss. To make it clear ray hart for San Francisco open government. I fomentd the sunshine ordnance and brown act and the Public Records act i make my request in accordance so ill talk about this agenda item first i think that is a good idea a lot of the things in the past and here as is sunshine ordnance task force fell through the task earlier in any case commissioner kopp seemed concerned that case concerning supervisor mar dragged on and that became any fault supervisor mar didnt do his duty interest he was responsible for responding he failed to do so and i have to building that he didnt handle much of that himself directed his aid to ignore the hearing not to go to the hearing not attend i find that ridiculous his aid wouldnt opposed him and so forth the reason is dragged on for 14 months ill tell you those thirty orders not ones did anyone pick up a phone or send me an email were not aware of an i dr we lost it and will be happy to look at it every single they forced me do through that and none of that was my fault in the navy we called that blame the victim instead of holding that person responsible they committed the acts or violations against. As far as having a schedule of items there was Something Else Internal Revenue going to talk about oh, future actions as much as you like me ranting and right of way ive realized the honey didnt work you dont get a response or an action so if you cant get a response you go for a reaction that is blaming the victim someone comes back again and again and raise the issue you fail to address it dont be surprised their frustrated this is body is responsible for enforcing the sunshine ordinance you wont enforce it not for me but any citizen of San Francisco if they go to a public hearing and go to the trials and tribulations you exposure it and hope people will be nice and go oh, okay. Thank you just so the record is clear i didnt blame this gentleman anyone utters on the commission reflects blame them. Before asking for a vote on adjournment i want to wish everybody a Merry Christmas, happy new year all right. Take our Public Comment before i wish Merry Christmas and happy new year. Ray hart for San Francisco open government. Commissioner kopps he didnt like the comments and whatever i think you especially you attorneys the fact you dont like someones comment is not a reason to tell them or dispager them instead of having an honest conversation you make a sly remark oh, well everybody i say he, he takes personal im the one that had to sit through 60 meetings to get the letter of determination and come here for years and saying why wont you enforce that and been ignored i am denied a hearing and you ask why well, it is confidential. So you know it was kind of interesting when the executive director after the first meeting the executive director and bloom were showing signs and in november i looked at the agenda and decided nothing here we want to comment on so ill just let it go i only came in here tonight and was going to leave after any hearing it was