Transcripts For SFGTV LIVE Ethics Commission 20160329

Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the regular meeting march 28, 2016 of the San Francisco Ethics Commission. Commissioner andrews, here. Commissioner hayon, here. Commissioner keane, here. We have a visitor. Commissioner hur. Let me say we welcome you back and particularly in the view the fact well cover the wistal blow rr regulations we passed at the last meeting and i see you didnt bring your plaque that you stethly took away in february. It wasnt given to me but it is reviding in my office. Welcome. I will ask for Public Comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda and believe madam assesser is here to make a few words thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. Executive director pelm. We were in the crowd wondering about commissioner hurs name tag. Glad to hear you have one. Today i want to come here because today is commissioner hurs last day with the Ethics Commission and would prefer to find a way to extend his term but i want to express my gratitude and present you with a certificate of honor on the Ethics Commission. The mission of the Ethics Commission is promote the highest level of ethics in government and know how fundamental it is so the people of the city have the trust and faith in government we all kneis so importantism there is a very fast 6 years, not sure if you feel the same way. I believe you have been able to serve in this role with great distinction. [inaudible] insureing not only fair processes and also transparence and effective processes. He is a complete role model for dialogue and thoughtful leadership. Ben stayed true to the principles and integrity and his leadership shined rchlt imerallyy happy to be able to say thank you to commissioner hur in particular as the appointee even though i wasnt the one who appointed you. I hope will be able to serve and have an appointment to the commission who is able to serve as ablely as you have. Thank you for your service and if i could present this to commissioner hur. It is a certificate of honor on behalf the sitee and county of San Francisco and our office. We extend our higher accommodation and gratitude for your service on the San Francisco Ethics Commission. We want to say and note the capacity you have served with distinction, unwaurfbing commitment to insure fair processing and thoughtful leadership guiding on enforcement relulation and policy. We are in your debt and offer our deepest appreciation. Thank you commissioner hur. Thank you very much. Thank you you very much for those remarks and look forward to commissioner hurswe look forward to the new appointment commissioner, that you will be appointing. Im sure that he or she will be equally outstanding. He or she will have a tough road to follow. Thank you again. Any other Public Comment . Patrick [inaudible] shah. I want repeat thanking commissioner hur for his [inaudible] the Ethics Commission vote to mr. [inaudible] behavior had not risen to the definition of official misconduct. As i noted previously a once anonymous analysis at the [inaudible] im submitting for inclusion in the minutes turned out to have been authored by San Francisco private practice [inaudible] it was distributed to the full board of sups. [inaudible] didnt meet the definition of official misconduct. Thankfully along with commissioner hur, supervisors campos and kim reached the same correct conclusion. It is a pity other commissioners including mrs. Hayon didnt understand the significance of [inaudible] legal analysis in the face of the mayors bold attempt to strip City Employees of protection against faults official misconduct allegations. Since larry bush is unable to attend i want to repeat [inaudible] distribution to the commission. First, i agree with bushes recommendation that this commission return to issuing its own annual report. Second, i also agree with bushes suggestion calling for annual wistal blower Protection Training for all. Let me repeat, all City Employees, not just city supervisor and man injuryial employees and not just a handful of City Employees required to complete form 700. Required to take annual sunshine ordinance training and biannual ethics training. I recall as a City Employee i as a secretary was required to take annual Sexual Harassment prevention training which included having to sign under oath i completed the training. Adding antiretaliation wistal blower training for all City Employees is a logical next step. Mrs. Bush calls for [inaudible] managerial employees retaliated against City Employees, i believe that recommendation should be expand today include mandatory unpaid suspension for 30 days as a deturant for retaliation. That may be the quick est route to curtailing retaliation against employees. Thank you. Members of the Ethics Commission, [inaudible] in november 2014 following advice posted on the Ethics Commission website i contacted ethics investigator garered chatfield. After he was unable to dissuade me from filing he suggested a meeting the following the week. At that meeting [inaudible] tried for a hour to dissuade me from filing a complaint, any complaints. They did promise to look into it and get back to me. In january i contacted the new executive director leon pel umwho insured me i must have misunderstood the Ethics Commission investigator and said she will look into and get back to me. We are 4 and half months later and no response from anyone in those conversations including and especially the ecextev director. I believe have grounds to question whether any investigation is partial, starting where your next meeting ill file complaints directly with theectics commission in full view of the public, try to hide those complaints. When you go to the people who are supposed investigate complaints and before they look at anything they tell you there is no basing for sth complaint and dont understand why you want to file a complaint. It agregious and unacceptable and immoral and it is certainly unethical. To have the executive director commit to me trice to look into the matter and fail to do anything at all shows me she is just another continuation of john st. Croix. The john st. Croix who could decide yourhering while you were outf the state or no sunshine ordinance referral would be held because she didnt like the way they did things. You spent years go around and around by it sunshine ordinance and havent enforced but one time and that was against jewel gomez and recommended the mayor she be removed and the mayor ignoreed you just like everybody else. A year later we embarrassed sending a later to the mayor and saying what is your response to the recommendation and didnt bother responding. You are not worth his attention. In fact, im willing to bet mayor lee holds you all in contempt. He 12349 go isnt going it do anything you recommend. As far as mr. Hur, im glad youre gone because i cant think of one thing in your term you have done that made the city more ethical for its citizens. Any other Public Comment . David [inaudible] speaking as a individual as i commented add the jnl meeting i want appreciate commissioner hur and join in the comments of carmen chew and thank for all his time. Unfortunately we have term limits but think thank you for the work on the commission. Any others . Seeing none i return to item 3 on the agenda, which is the annual election of officers and discussion and possible action. To elect a chair and vice chair for the coming year. Commissioner keane. Mr. Chair, iwe nominate you to surfb a second year as chair the committee. Is there a second . Any discussion . Yeah, excuse me for jumping in. Deputy attorney [inaudible] a chair cant serve more than one year. Two consecutive years you have been violating it many years then. Thats not correct, it is two consecutive years my apology any discussion . Any Public Comment . David fillpeal speaking as a individual, i have no objection to president renne continues for another year i just want to ask publicly since there a new appointee to replace commissioner hur whether you want to continue for a month so the new commissioner can have a opportunity to participate but otherwise i dont think there is a problem tonight. Any other comments . My only comment is i think it would be great to have the continuity of you as chair. I think there is a transitional period with our new executive director and the other issues we are dealing with, so ii think you have done a great job and would like you to continue if you are willing to do it. Thank you. Patrick mu net shah. With all due respect chair renne and due respect to commissioner hur who i will also not be sorry to see leave, if you have been violating your own bylaws as commissioner hur claims, it is time for fresh blood and so i would urge commissioner andrews to nominate commissioner keane who is displayed it during his term on this commission some the soundest legal reasoning and ethical reasoning i have heard on this commission in the 20 years i have lived in San Francisco. Time for some fresh blood, commissioner. Thank you. Commissioners [inaudible] San Francisco open government. This is relate today the election so dont try to tell me you are not talking about the item. During the jan 25, 2016 meeting regarding the [inaudible] mark farrell chair fenny displayed how far he will go to hide from the publics the machination from the commission. First your own members had no idea why it was own the ajnda. Placing something on thugenda with attachments but not saying what the hell it is on there for leaves the public at a disadvantage. Now the public has no idea why it was on the agenda or what commissioner renne was authorized to do. Commissioner hayon doesnt seem to understand much of what goes on here during Ethics Commission meet ings and contributes little or nothing meaningful to discussions. That leaves two suitable candidates, andrews and peter keane. With these members i believe there is at least a possibility that the will the citizens of San Francisco for ethical government will stand any chance. Give ethical government a chance. I have watched you for years now and you are the most sorry bunch of people with exception to mb sellven and keane. Mr. Keane tried to stand up for something you were doing is hide from the public your backroom deal and whatever meckination you will pull regarding supervisor farrell. Supervisor hayon and hur, sure visor hur especially went along with it because it is their position on the Ethics Commission to withhold as much as they can from the public. Again, i ask those members what have you done on the Ethics Commission you can name that made any difference in the ethical atmosphere in the town . We have a mayor raising money illegally and a state senator going to prison. The citizens of San Francisco are tired of all the Different Things like going on like [inaudible] gate and whatever and they disappear into the nether world and never hear of them again and think that is what will happen and the matter related to supervisor farrell. You will make a back room deal with him, he will do the deal and somehow it will disappear into the nether world. At least supervisor keane and with some support from supervisor sullivan made a attempt to take the piece of grbage ouf the agenda. You can attach knck you want to the agenda including the San Francisco telephone book, it doesnt mean the item meaningful and when your own members have to come in and start out arguing for 25 minutes about whether you should have it on thugenda i think it is pretty clear the public was disserved. Now, as far as commissioner keane remaining or commissioner renne remaining as the president , i dont giver a damn if there is one or two terms he doesnt deserve it. What have you done commissioner to do anything to make the City Government more answerable to the people . To make elections fair . You nibal around the edges and go after people who cant defend it themselves and think you do it personally based on your personal animosity and the orders you have from the people who appoint you. [inaudible] renne should have never been before the body and should be removed on a recall not on a jury rigged policy and you and you and you were at the center of that. Thank you. Any other Public Comment . Any discussion . I would like to echo commissioner hayon about the leadership of you. You and commissioner an drews and the selection from the executive director and all the work you did on prop c meeting with the public and serving as our representative, it was a lot of extra work and appreciate it. Thank you. I call the question. All in favor . Aye. Opposed . One obtain and 4 approve. The second item on actually you cant obstain. I have a conflict of interest but ill vote if that makes you happier. Im happier item 3 is the election of the vice chair. Do i hear a nomination . Commissioner keane . Yes, i also like to renominate commissioner andrews as vice chair to the commission. I hear a second . Second. Any discussion . Any Public Comment . Patrick mu net shah. On the way into this chamber i spoke with commissioner andrews and he said between his work on the Ethics Commission as a commissioner his work on the non profit he is too busy for, so if that is the case, and if he were being honest about matters, i think he should thank commissioner keane for the generous nomination and indicate that he isnt interested in the position because he is too busy and futhermore, i think commissioner andrews should nominate commissioner keane, who has displayed the most ethical behavior on the body. [inaudible] San Francisco open government. While i do support the appointment or election of commissioner andrews as the vice chair, i really do believe it would have been better had he been the chair. I will do something now that i did at a Library Commission meeting which got me into trouble and made the newspaper. I talked about ainksant room where they appoint someone for life because the Library Commission appointed the same two people year after year and i said well, maybe it will be like the Roman Republic where we have a chance of an asassination to make a change. He is threatening and doing this the president the Library Commission, jewel gomez and these are her words not mine. I know 12people who would bury him. That is the attitude toward Public Comment. If you dont like what somebody has to say you threaten them and you fight them. I have 7 orders of determination gaest the library and commission for withholding Public Records part of which was to keep [inaudible] and found to file false perjureed statements and the group of the San Francisco Public Library who spends 6 million or more dollars a year money raised in the name of the city of San Francisco and not one body or individual in this City Government can tell anybody where that money went. That was the hearing we had that i was out of state and decided to do it cleverly and announce it before i left and hold it before i got back. You are too much of a coweredset of cowereds to bring it back and hold a honest hearing. We need new leadership and we need to get rid the two people i think are the worst. We have already gotten rid of one, mr. Hur. Commissioner hayon did nothing but stand up and say i was on the Library Commission and if the friends did it it must be okay which is totally prejudicial to my position. And commissioner keane, i really cant see what you do that serves any purpose at all. Sorry commissioner keane. Commissioner keane has shown some balls if you exkoos the expression. He questioned a item on the agenda last time and the rest of you with the exception of commissioner andrews went along and did what you always do which is go in the back and hide from the public. Thank you. Any other comments . Sorry, taking a moment. David [inaudible] speaking as a individual and want to support the nomination of commissioner andrews for vice chair since it appears you having the nomination tonight. Any commissioners have any comments before we vote . Alright, ill call the question. All in favor . Aye. Opposed . Commissioner andrews will remain vice chair for another year and well turn to item 4 which is discussion and possible action on a proposed stipulation, decision and order regarding ethics complaint number 19131115 luinate sweet im garret [inaudible] one the investigators on staff. Can i interrupt youis mrs. Sweet here tonight . No, i dont believe she is. She was notified . She isnt required tobe here and she isnt here. So this matter for your consideration for approval the stipulation. This matter was initiated as a audit for mrs. Sweet Campaigns Committee 2010 where she ran for district 3 supervisor and she was publicly funded. Sorry, district 10. Mrs. Sweet Committee Received public funds so she was subject to a matte mandatory audit which covered the period from january 1 january 31, 2010. Mrs. Sweet was notified of the audit which she was as advised to require documents. She required documentation however there were dauments not provided. Throughout the course the audit the staff try today obtain the [inaudible] because she stopped responding to them audit staff went forward without the documentation they requested. The final report was issued july 17 making [inaudible] material findings form the basis of the stipulation. This matter has a probable cause hearing january 26, 2015 where the 10 counts were presented and the commission made the funding there was probable cause to believe the violations occurred and staff issued the acquisition on february 5. After the acquisition was issued mrs. Sweet contacted enforcement staff to deal with the matter where she provided additional documentation to staff when evidenced the other outstanding expenses however didnt do all of them. Staff proposed as a penalty in thet mayor that generally on line with recent stipulation of the recent violation but higher because she was uncooperative with audit and only engaged with the commission once acquisition was issued. So, i would request respeektfully you approve the stipulation as presented and happy to answer any questions about it for you. Am i correct in understanding that she was publicly funded . Correct, she was a publicly funded candidate the audit was mandatory because she afs candidate receiving Public Finance . That is correct in any of the other cases you say the recommended punishment in this case is in line with the other ones. Were they also dealing with public funds . Yes, so in i thinkone second. The example of complaint 2410, 1021 that candidate was publicly funded and had the same violation where she didnt turn in records and the commission for that violation was a 2500 fine to the extent you have records was it a indication they were improperly spent . The indication was the expenditures were okay. They were what they should be. The issue is that originally there was a large chunk that was missing and once the enforcement matter or once mrs. Sweet engaged with enforcement she did find additional records that this deal is outstanding reported expenses. There is some still unsupported, however, from what audits saw originally and what the enforcement staff saw after engaging with us, the records do support the right type of spending. How much is left unaccounted for . About 20,000. The make up as reported is 13,000 as salary payments and the remainder is various expenses, literature z office expenses, things like that. Do i hear a motion . Move to approval of the recommendation that we approve it. I hear a second . Second. Public comment . David [inaudible] speaking as a individual. Several comments on this item. Um, the report here and i would suggest in the future doesnt include the cam pine id number or the treasurers name, that would be helpful. Actually i take that back, page 3 includes the [inaudible] number but the treshier isnt named in here and think the id number should be part the caption on the matter. The audit report referenced wants included so there was discussion of the fact this is a publicly financed candidate but the amount of financing providing wasnt included and think that should be a consideration for the penalty amount. As you just discussed, the report indicates there is 20,000 plus in expendsures and 5 thousand in contributions that is still unaccounted for. It seems to me this is a good or bad example of Record Keeping and Record Keeping is kind of a corner stone requirement of Campaign Finance whether it publicly financed candidate or not. As i said, in the future i would include that information including the audit report that forms the basis of the recommendation squz in summary, i think the 9250 is low and encourage you to consider rejecting this amount and seek a higher amount and finally, the staff report has proposed stipulation but it is not signed and dated by the eare sponded so it isnt clear if the responded agreed to this amount. Normally when there is stip the stip includes a signature by the responded so it isnt clear if the responded agreed to this amount as a proposed settlement. Before youyou want to respond to that . Just briefly. Mr. [inaudible] stated that the amount of public funds she received waernt in the stipulation and that isnt correct. It is the third paragraph. She was the 57, 439 in public funds. The stipulation attached is proposed so mrs. Sweet agreed to it and there is a signed copy should the commission approve it, however i wasnt about to presume this would be approved so if this was rejected we would redraft a new one if that is what we were druckted directed to do. Thank you. Commissioners rea heart, [inaudible] San Francisco open government. Im a private citizen and dont pretend to take credit for serving on a Committee Like you do but i also dont have responsibility to do the job you are supposed to do and i think the very start of this with commissioner keane, commissioner renne admitting he doesnt know if there were public funds. He will vote and approve a recommendation where he doesnt know what the recommendation says. Sounds like he didnt bother to read it. I have asked whether this agreement is a joke. According to your own numbers lunet sweet cant account for 45 percent the contributions and public funds received by hercome pain. That is based on what i received from your staff in the mail and now we find we found another 25,000 which seems ludicrous you send out information to the public that is incorrect and put it on your agenda which is increblth and vote on it. If the Ethics Commission was asleep at the switch and failed to [inaudible] or she tafailed to follow the law and you didabout do squat about it. This would be something akin to my robbing a bank for 62,000 and when caught asked to return 9, 250 and keeping the rest. She still has a outstanding 20,000 balance and you ask her to pay 9250 which means she made a net profit. I believe the public has a right to know the rational for the exectesk directors recommendations. Public money was accepted and expended for the purpose of the politicalcome pain. 45 percent or 25 percent, whatever figure you choose to use because you are flexible in the number, how that money want spent will never be known to the public. Why should the public believe this finding is beingthis fine is being paid for with the very money that disappeared . I keep 20 thousand dollars of public money, put it in the bank and stick it under my mat rass and when you find the half i go under the mattress and pay you back your money and then laugh about what fools you are. This agreement is in fact a joke and if you approve it today you are a joke. This person by your own admission, your own investigators facts still has unaccounted for twice what you make the fine. That was like whenueese hurara took 5 thousand a year from friends the Public Library and fined 200 dollars for lying on a statement of economic interest under penalty of perjury. Thank you. Chair renne, i thought about keeping my yaper shut on this item but have to concur with ray hart. You asked the taxpayer tooz foot Public Financing and then as ray mention td you let lunet stick the money under the mattress and pull out half to pay a fine. Im turning to one of you with a ethical backbone. Introduce a motion to table this and send mr. Chatfield back to the investigative drawing board and finish that audit. Why should we do Public Financing . And finding the fining the candidate office for less than what they snatched out of the taxpayer coffers . I agree with mr. Hart that if you pass this thing without tabling it for further investigation, you will be making a mockery out of your own body. Good evening commissioners. Charley [inaudible] with foe, friends of ethics. We did pledge to the public back in 2000 with prop o that we would have concurrent and proactive auditing of Public Financing so we dont find ourselves in a position still deal wg a matter that should have been expedited. I understand why there is delay but hope in the future we will be tighter on the timeline. I did want to say i understand why some the questions are raised the way they are because we are educating the public who is watching on television and all they see is the header on the screen that described what the action is, but no details, so the fact is yes, Public Financing is involved and i think it would be important for you to explain to the public if in fact there is missing funds that would raise questions as to whether or not there is a liability and whether the da or the City Attorney as they have the right to do with the stipulation plan to proceed with any action or at least are considering doing so to recover any missing funds if it turns out there is a net balance due shortage in the Public Financing account. That should be explained i think as best as you can orally make that report now on television. I think there is simple explanation that could be explained and clarify confusion on the part of the public. I do think the fine is a little on the low side. I do think that normally fines should be used as a shield and not a sword. In Public Financing there is a margin i think or a appreciation that should be given. If there is something that is not making the reports in a concurrent and timely way, so in any event, i would just say at this point given the ability to collect might be a factor. The fact is the party will have to make a effort to make these good on these fines and hopefully that will happen and this will be wrapped up and we can look at any other shortages in the actual Public Financing accounts in this case, but i do recommend that you raise that and clarify it on television tonight. Any other Public Comment . Before we vote on it, let me say yashare when i read this the concern that some of the public expressed. When you deal with pup public money and a candidate cant account for how they spent the money, it would seem that at a minimum the penalty should have to be to pay whatever is missing. Now, that may not be doable for a number of reasons. It justi start from that assumption that if you take public money you got to account for it, that is what our ordinances say and let me ask this questionin our procedures when someone takes public money they have to file monthly reports . What do they have to file with the commission saying how they dispersed the money . They file the Campaign Statement reports on the schedule that the state mandates. When they apply for public funds there is a more scuteinous process about whether it contributions can be matched and those are vetted at that point but the expenditures come through just as every other campaign files the 460. I dont if it is legal but is it possible to set up a system where those candidates taking Public Financing have to report on a more frequent basis expenditures so we dont up at the end of the campaign they dont have the information that we need . Because some of the candidates may be inexperienced and may not have experienced treasurers and they dont find out that they havent complied until long after the fact. Is there some way that we dont get to the end and find out they failed to comply . That is a good policy issue you raise and not one i think i can necessarily answer, but i dont [inaudible] City Attorney but you can impose additional filing requirements. I dont see why we couldnt. I do want to address quickly that that is true there is the money unaccounted for we base this off the prior stipulation that the Commission Approved rel tivly recently which had money unaccounted for that they never turned documents over and that was a 2500 fine so if you have the [inaudible] well go back and talk to the responded about that. We pushed it up higher because of her unresponsiveness. I share chair renne concern and throughout the whole case i have been concerned about the amount that is unaccounted for and for the reason you raise, this is setting a president for the next time and concerned if we dont have a system where we are at least demanding what is unaccounted for that we create a precedent for future individuals will point to previous decisions and claim that approximately half of what is unaccounted for is the appropriate penalty. Im concerned about that as well. Did mrs. Sweet talk anything about any Financial Hardship she is having . I want to figure out the rational we apply to this up front. I think 2500 in the first 60 days and another level payments of 600i cant remember. There was discussion about that and her ability to pay and that is why the payment plan was considered into the agreement. I think that is probably the extent i could say at the moment. It was a part of the consideration though . As far as the payment plan goes. What is thei have to reread it, but if she fails to make payments as agreed to, what isis there a provision she is libel for the full amount . If you can go back to square one so to speak to collect if she fails to make a payment or misses a dollar we can reopen the matter and have the hearing and litigate at a hearing. Including the amount of the fine . The entire matter will be reopened. Based upon your discussions and investigation the ability to pay iswas a consideration . The ability to pay was a consideration in how she was going to pay. We didnt it didnt factor into total dollar amount that you thought the fine should be . I mean, we looked at the past stipulations that fts primarily what we looked at and they were around this dollar figure including the fact that they didnt have a return in the documents to show what they had spent on. Again, if you believe the 3500 is the one dedicated to the failure to disclose records or keep the records. You have the ability to send me back and renegotiate this with her if you feel that is too low. So, there are no records what so ever . She has no provided them. So we dont know whether there are records or not . She is unable to account for the remaining 20 some thousand dollars. What is the maximum that could have been imposed under all these counts . 5 thousand 5 thousand per violation so 50 thousand dollars could be imposed. Or 3 times the amount spent. Do we know what her financial situation is . I know that is asked, but is there any realty to our being able to collect any of this whether it be the 9250 or whether it be the 40,000 plus that is unaccounted for . She is unemployed and believe this amount is doable on the payment plan we set up. That is extent i know about her financial situation. Not sure what to say about that she hasnt offered a reason why she hasnt provided the documentation of the money that is missing . She has provided a reason without getting too far into details there is a issue with her treshier i believe the treshier didnt keep the record properly or maintained them in the way they were supposed to, however, as the candidate she is the responsible party. The treshier is also responsible but look that candidate in these matters. So, there was a legal issue with her treshier that created difficulty for her. So you are satisfied there is no ilintent on her part in regards to the records not provided to us . I tell you when the audit was issued and had the 45 percent the expenses still outstanding and finally contacted us and provided documentation for another 40,000 of spending that was accounted for. I wont speculate with the remaining 20 but Everything Else she provided supported what she supported and they were legitimate Campaign Expenses was there any indication you saw in your investigation she may have been pocketing money to herself . Other than campaign . There were a couple attachments tote aelg maybe 100. That was the extent that didnt have a receipt or equateed back to a legitimate expense of the 20 thousand remaining 13 thousand is reported salary to various Campaign Volunteers so that is a area of question. When you report salary without showing me a time sheet or something to support that. And you didnt check the individual who she said she paid the money to see if they got the money . That wasnt done at this point. Because this had already been determined probable cause based on what we have and cant add new things on it after a acquisition is issued. She contacted us and wanted resolve this. We believed we would bring forward the settlement to you. Of course you are at liberty to keep it open and direct me to do what you feel is appropriate at this point. Call the question. All in favor . Aye. Opposed . No. 3 to 2 opposed. Turning to item 5, discussion and possible action to select audit of Campaign Committees and lobbyists. Proceed. Thanks. Good evening. This is the item in your materials that provides you with the opportunity to randomly select campaigns that will be part the upcoming audit. These are for candidates and committees active in 2015 and subject to random audits. It is a opportunity to select lobbyist that will be subject to random audit subject to city law that requires random audits of lobbyist. We have a process, we have eric willet from audit staff and by quick background about the Selection Process. As you may recall, all publicly financed candidates have a mandatory audit so they will be audited at whatever level of campaignic tavety because they received Public Financing. The process tonight is randomly select other Campaign Audits for candidates controlled committees for committees that did not receive Public Finances, ballot measure committees and [inaudible] more than one election. So, we have again committees active in 2015, lobbyist audits effective july 2014, requires the commission to conduct one or more audits lobbyist. The first group the commission had selected back in march 2015 and we selected 4 lobbyist audits last year. Based on the guidelines you established back in 2008 the commission established in 20 o8, we propose to audit more committees and lobbyist for higher levels. We have a audit pool segregated inoo variety of levels. Spending my Campaign Committees above 20 o8, we propose to audit more committees and lobbyist for higher levels. We have a audit pool segregated inoo variety of levels. Spending my Campaign Committees above a ton thousand thresh hold represented nearly all Campaign Money reported. 99. 7 percent. Spending by Campaigns Committees with activity of 10,000 or less represented. 3 percent of all spending. Spending by lobbyist is above the 10,000 threshold with 10 thousand or 10 contacts that is the bulk of expenditures reported in 2015 and below the 10,000 10,000 threshhold represented. 4 percent of spending. The focus is trying to capture audits putting in the randle audit pool of those engaged in the greatest level of spending activity in citycome painsism we propose we select randomly 20 percent of the committees from a total of 53 committees that were active last year. This is 11 total committees that we propose to audit. 6 is from above 100,000. 3 would be in the midtier between 50 and 100,000 and fwo 2 is 10 thousand to 50 thousand. As we lobbyist audits we propose to select 4 lobbyist which equakes to 10 percent of those active in the last year for a total of 40 lobbyist. This follows a similar pattern of a category based on money and contact supportive but the focus is try to capture proportionality with largest expenditures selected with a higher percentage chance of beingrendomly selected and in terms of the Campaign Activity i would note our proposal is well. Once the committees are selected we would propose that are going to audit first those candidates based on their level of responding. In the past we have done audits of committees for candidates who were not successful in the elections and think it makes more sense probably a better use of resources to do audits where the Public Interest is greatest in terms of money raised and spent so we propose to audit first those candidates based on the level of expenditures reported. There is a lot of data but want to give a opening sense of what our thinking is how it reflects policy discussions you had in the past and happy to answer questions. Eric is here to answer questions as well and if there are questions we can take those or proceed to a random selection with erics help. Commissioner hur i appreciate the effort to prioritize because i know we have limited resource squz want to use them effectively as possible. One concern i havea couple concerns. One, when it comes to those that are spending 10 thousand or less it is perfectly understanding with. 3 percent of the totem spending why you wouldnt audit any. I worry about the message that sends. We are saying if you spend 10 thousand of less you have zero risk if you misspent the funds and not sure that is the message we want to send. Even if it is a rel tivly token percentage at least it sends a message there is some risk that fraudulent reporting would be caught and fined by the commission. My other concern, when it comes to the audit i think a lot of that depends on how quickly you can get through them. One thing im concerned is lets make sure we do them faster and if people dont comply we should hold it against them and not wait for them to give materials. If you tell me it is lot faster than the past then what you suggested makes sense. If it is about the same speed than we run the risk where candidates who lose dont have a vested interest complying and may be long gone by the time row get to them. Part of what you want to do is dependent on how quickly you get through it. I completely agree with the concern with the timeliness to get thou audits. It serves aenchds interest to make sure the audit is thorough, accurate and timely and have rooms we can make improvements. Based on my conversation with the auditors there are no guarantees but we are work to provide the autd audits completed within 18 months of the start date which is ahead of the timeframe of the past. One thing that will make the audits folk is say auditors have one hat and have to adjust our resources accordingly. I think one question that i would like to explore with the staff as we finish up the current round of audit squz how to stream line the process kwr bring to you recommendations for what level and changes we want to make in the Audit Program overall. It may be worth taking a look at the policy discussion uzfrom 2008 to see if the commission is will toog codify it in a regulation and how to approach the audits Going Forward. Based on the timeline that you are recommending or hoping for, when do you think the last of these 11 audit would be completed if they started today . Byone moment. Probably by september of 2017. All 11 would be done . Thats pretty good. We provide time for the committees foogive their records so assuming we have a selected list tomorrow who we know will be audited the staff send out letters and provide the record and scheduling them out and asking for the documentation. There is the back and forth sometimes with the committees if they are not able to give the record timely how that extends but that is one of the tools and processes we need to refine on ourened to help insure committees if you are scheduled for a audit at this point we need to try and keep everybody to that schedule. That may come with further thinking how we set up parameters of a audit that are very transparent and predictable or it hast been dusted off. If and are a committee that doesnt provide records what do we do . Do we put you to the back of the line and keep moving so we can keep going through the audits . I think there is a variety of methods but it is september of next year assuming all goes well. That is for all of them. You are not saying each audit will take 18 months you say you will be through all 11 of them . Yes, thank you for the clarification. Comment by the commissioners . Any Public Comment . Charley [inaudible] i really had just a question. I know you do a facial audit when the forms are filed and i assume that is to make sure that the filing is correct and complete or complete. You are not really looking at correctness. There may be some systems for auditing that maybe fall short of a full audit. For instance, the sweet committee had in fact more than a few 40 and 60 dollar atm withdrawals which raised my eyes eye brows as to what was going on with that committee. There may be some things for smaller committees too that you can do that fall short of a full audit, but would give you enough of a indication as to whether everything looks like the treshier knows what they are doing and are doing a comp tent job. Because i suspect early in the process you might see things that raise eye brows and that is what im thinking. There may be a mechanism in audits that fall far short of a full blown facial audit that takes 18 months to complete the process for the batch of people selected in the lottery. So, you might ask schista who did a good job on the audit of the sweet committee from what i could see, from whatever data she put together. The process does need to be sped up and it does particularly for Public Financing need to be robust, concurrent and proactive and those are the essential words when fendmentally public dollars are being used. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners ray [inaudible] given the subject is audit squz heard in the previous items the audits are [inaudible] to begin with, the simple question of she said she paid 13 dollar did you ask the person if they got the 13 thousand and said no . What type of audit is that . Any professional stand rds the person would get their credentials removed and probably lose their job if not go to jail. I will make a prediction, i think when we get done with the Selection Process for audits a small percent objectf the 26 million, well be under audit. The large Campaign Committees will receive all most no scrutiny. I dont ed lee will be audited. Neither will most or perhaps any groups that set up to confuse and deceive the public regarding the current housing crisis. There were millions and millions of dollars spent that achieved no purpose dut deceive the voting public but what these items were for. This Ethics Commission is confusing activity with accomplishment. The only reason we now know the persons connected to ed lees reelection engaged in ellegal activities is due to federal investigation. I will request Public Records relate today the last audit to ermidet if they serve a legitimate purpose or scams designed to fool the publics and let wrong doers of the hook. You look at your meetings and nobody bothers to come i think because nobody believes this committee does anything to improve things in the city. I come here because i like to watch mr. Hur laugh with his smirk about the fact you challenge stuff and he cannot and will not disagree with and that is another reason why im glad he will be gone. But the bottom line is these audits are a joke. Edpz slee for mayor 2015 if that comes out of the hat give me the piece of paper and ill eat it. We know from a federal investigation that at least 3 of the staff sulistted contributions illegally. Falsifying records to make it seem like it wasnt. And yet here we have the pitally audit squz act like that is seriously going to deter anybody from wrong doing. That is because the people you need to deter are the people who appoint you and you dont want to mess with them. Thank you. David [inaudible] speaking at a individual. Several comments. I appreciate that staff spent a lot of time working through this audit proposal and statifying the committees and attempting to include progressively increasing selection percentages so that the Public Interest is better served by greater scrutiny for those committees and lobbyists with additional funds and activity. Never the less, couple of point here. The list that are attached at attachment 1 and 2 in some cases appear to be curtailed or have their capital lower case changed and so i would appreciate in future lists if they could include the complete name as reported. That would help. Also, the suggestion that your director made that the order of audits proceed from those with the greatest activity to least, i disagree and say the best practice of auditing those candidatecome pains with unsuccessful candidates first is best because those unsuccessful candidates often leave town or move on with their lives and want to terminate their campaign deal with any audit or Record Keeping issues and just close that activity and so chances are they want to finish that work first and those candidates who are elected if the mayor, the District Attorney, the City Attorney, the sheriff are selected they are already in office and unlikely to disappear and the records are likely still around so i would just suggest prioritizing those losing candidates if any of them are selected along with ballot measures that have terminated orneed to terminate opposed to those in office or ongoing general purpose committees. And just fine finally, there is no indication in the report from the last round of audits, the executive director report talks about that but the previous round that is complete i think there should be a paragraph that indicates how many audit said were done, the average length of time and whether they were material findings. To me understanding how many material findings come out of the audit process gets to the issue of invesment of resources for audits so if we are yielding material findings that result in investigations and what not, then this is good work. If we are judging people compliance there may be other ways to approach it. Thank you very much. To mr. [inaudible] point. Would it be possible to start all the audits at the same time . I know traditionally you started some and finished and then moved to others, but especially if you have a situation where part the problem is waiting for the candidates to get back to you, why not start them all at the same time and if it takes longer to finish them all, a little longer to finish them off because of that maybe that is a worty price to pay so when there are stalls in one audit you have plenty of others to work on and finish. My experience tells me it is very difficult for auditors to juggle 3 different audits at the same time due to the level of depth and make sure wecopy track of the documents. My sense though is i think the idea of taking the large est committees and also starting some of the smallest are probably more manageable. I think we have 4 auditors, having 3 audits for each at the outset is practical but looking how to include the smallest committees and taking a bite at both ends of the process would be a way to approach it that is more manageable to in practice so we can take a look at that and see if we can get that process started . And defer to the expertise on auditors. Lawyers get deep into many different ones. Refer to your judgment. You want to go on with the selection . Let me turn it over to eric and think well look for volunteers from the members of the public. I would like to volunteer mr. Hart. We wouldnt want the papers to be consumed. I wouldnt want to be part of your nasty [inaudible] i just thought you might want to put your money where your mouth is in regards to being part of the volunteer aspect of it and picking them out and seeing what we come out with. Just a suggestion. How do i know it isnt rigged . You can be the one reading them off. I dont whether they are all in there. Commissioners, if i might i would like to note [inaudible] greg started with our office today as a intern from uc davis and contim plating going to law school. We are glad to have him here as a extra hands on deck. He is appreciating being here. Welcome. To begin the random audit selection well begin with Campaign Committees with a activ level greater than 100 thousand in expenditures. If i can have a member of the public volunteer to read off the list of Campaign Activities in Campaign Level one, i appreciate it. Yes, please. Well follow along with the Campaign Activity level. Ed lee for mayor, 2015. Mrs. Hart you will have dinner tonight. He is just reading off the hensy for sheriff, 2015. Sf for everyone, [inaudible] sponsored by major funding by air bnb. I need someone to watch their hands. Watch for slide of hands. San franciscans for Affordable Housing, jobs and parks. San francisco giants, mission bay residents labor small business. Sf housing, now, yes on a. San franciscans for real housing solutions, no on i. Share better sf, yes on f. Landlords Affordable Housing people. San francisco tenants and families for Affordable Housing. Truth in energy, yes on h. Committee to save the mission, yes on prop i sponsored by coalition of neighborhood organizations. San francisco alliance for jobs and Sustainable Growth pack. Asian pacific Democratic Club, Political Action committee. Committee for a progressive and affordable San Francisco, opposing peskin for supervisor. Friends of jewelry christensen for supervisor sponsored by sfpd association. Unit here now local 2 pack. Protect our benefits. San francisco Labor Council and neighborhood pack. Committee on jobs government reform fund. Building owners and Managers Association of San Francisco, pack ind independent expenditures. Ect. Need another member of the public, please. Maam if you can come up. 19 Campaign Committees within activity level one greater than 100,000 well choose 6. Henacy for sheriff, 2015. Committee for a progressive and affordable San Francisco opposing peskin for supervisor, 2015. Committee to save the mission, prop i sponsored by coalition of Mission Neighborhood organization. Building owners and Managers Association of San Francisco Political Action committee, independent expenditure, boma sf pack ie. Unit here local 2 pack. San francisco alliance for jobs and Sustainable Growth pack. [background speaking] for activity level 2. Reelect sheriff ross vmic reney, 2015. Reelect District Attorney george escone, 2015. Alex randolph for Community College board, 2015. Dennis [inaudible] for City Attorney, 2015. San franciscoan for open government, 2015, yes on e sponsored by the chinese American Voters education committee. Yes on j, san franciscans for preserving legacy businesses. Save the San Francisco flower market. San franciscans for clean power, yes on h, no on g, supported by london breed. San francisco labor and neighbor member education political issues committee. San francisco Apartment Association Political Action committee. Sf forward sponsored by San Francisco chamber of commerce. San Francisco Police Officers Association independent expenditure committee. Alice b toqueious lesbian gay and Democratic Club pack. Sf moderates. Retain our independent sheriff mark reney, 2015. That is 6 in a row. She is reading off the list. Okay. Request another member to choose from activity level 2. That should be interesting. Im sure mr. Weaning is happy san franciscans. Clean power yes on h no an g support by london bree by londd sf moderate youre killing me the following are campaign comets within 10 and 50,000. Tom for College Board 2015 stuart for mayor of 2015 seis in her for treasurers 2015. Francisco herrera for sf mayor for 2015 committee to elect we happened for the College Board 2015 wise for mayor 2015 surplus lands for public use in support of prop k dont silent San Francisco Letters Committee for a brighter San Francisco future golden gate Restaurant National union of Health Care Workers commitment phenomenon quality patient care and Union Democracy transport united workers local 250 a Chinese Progressive Association San Francisco Labor Council labor and neighborhood depict and Political Action committee fdr Democratic Club of San Francisco homes for all committees supported by the hours association of Northern California San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs Association pack building owners and Managers Association of San Francisco pack ballot issues aching ballot issues and last the San Francisco womans political committee. May have a member of the public to draw from the hat here. Thank you. A Campaign Committees with active between 10 and 50 will be drawing two committees. Committee name golden gate restaurant association. Tom for College Board 2015 moving on to our random selection of lobbyists our first active level will be lobbyist with lobbying activities greater than with an hundred thousand dollars or one hundred contacts. Good year Peter Hayward and associates. P platinum sires oversees h Ms Associates Ground Floor Public Affairs bmw and partners i know reuben, junius rose lp coalition for better housing public Advocacy Partners San Francisco Apartment Association Barbary Coast consulting, burg davis public affairs, Pacific Gas Electric company, and the last one karen flood. May i have another member of the public to choose here in lobbyist activity . Thank you, maam. Karen flood how many are we choosing . Pacific gas electric company. Following group of lobbyists have active levels between 50 thousand to one hundred or 50 to one hundred contacts and will be choosing one lobbyist from that active level two. Love and associates, llc, Daniel Consulting incorporated, phil lester, google incorporated, michael yack i didnt kissing could systems Trust Company of the west, building owners and Managers Association for San Francisco commissioner the Public Information a level two we list as sf aa we realize that should be the apartment so we moved the dollar amount in the first year puts them into the can go one and didnt appear on the list and the pool for selection. May i have another member from the public to draw from the lobbyist between one and 50 thousand to 50 to one hundred contacts one from this pool. Just the within for the record charley phil lessor fits activity level two i thought we were on one. Okay should we put them in there oh, we go 3 thats right. Our final pool with lobbyists greater than 10 to 50 thousand and drawing one lobbyist from this pool. Lobbyist john newman and Singer Associates incorporated s g c strategic communications, james ross, braun and mary tell, k i s consulting, tissue Man Properties lp San Francisco association of realto realtors, credit securities usa limited Liability Corporation committee on jobs, Hotel Council of San Francisco target corporation, bay bio. One word t z k broadway llp, Walgreens Company by the way, ma San Francisco. C s p securities lp, yeah. One final member from the audience are the member of the public to draw from this pool required for one lobbyist if this pool yes. Please thank you. S g c strategic communications. Thank you. And that concludes the Campaign Selections of campaign lobbyist for this evening. May not be necessary ill ask if there is any Public Comment on this process that took place . David pilpal speaking as an individual i would ask the summary of actions the next day or two includes the list so thank you. Thank you ray hart for San Francisco open government and ill agree with mr. Pilpal the by a lyric the levels of came back should be given out i predicted are mr. Brown this no mayor ed lee and no huge 9 million, 4. 02 millions all the housing bond initiate on the initiative not one is getting an auditing yet all the oitdz of 50 and 20 and 10 ill figure out exactly what percentage of the 26 million will get an audit because i dont think that the auditing you know mayor ed lee mayor ed lee has 3 eggs that have been convicted and sentenced for illegal mayor campaigns and all those people are not going to be audited because you cant audit the mayor well, im sorry you could but you wouldnt your two Budget Committee hypothetical to them on appointments or whatever happens to be the citizens of San Francisco really ought to watch the sfgovtv and especially those meetings and isle like to see more come here and call you out for your dishonest and your lip service to doing something that will actually make are elections more fair every single election the city for the last 12 years ive served is a field election deputy or a poll inspector i believe my abrogations to encourage people to vote and im really disturbed when i see the groups some of the ones on this list deceive the public blatantly spend millions of dollars to do so and yet you have no interest whatsoever the mechanics of their institutions ill go after a person with 20,000 that doesnt have the resources and consider yourself oh, so virtuous our City Politics are for sale the mayors position of City Attorney looking want mayor none boktsd to run against him he ran by default and didnt get a mrurlt yet those campaigns list the way is a bunch of crap i dont appreciate the commissioner writing a nasty note to the person next to him while im talking. Thank you good evening. Im a neighbor in San Francisco my question is i partially agree with the gentleman over here one of the you know the larger committees that were in active one were not selected now my question to the commission when they file their forms and theyve recorded their expenditures when the Ethics Commission revealed that isnt there do they catch anything not recorded or spent correctly isnt there a way to catch that during the process of reporting the forms . Every time the forms are due some of them are recorded every 3 months and some of them depending on the type of committee they are filed more frequently they file only a monthly i believe or every other month depending on the date my question is that so if a a committee that recorded so much has spent more millions of dollars how can they be held audible it there. I dont know if im wording it right mates i thats my question from the committee hadnt been selected like what we did moments ago and they catch something the reporting how is that handled one and two is it Public Record . Thank you. Thank you do you want to respond to that. Yes. Thank you thank you for the question for purposes of selecting the committees for the audit the committees not selected will not be support to a random audit now the commission has authority under the chapter of the regulations to initiate an inquiry of initiated complaint if we build that someone has not filed or suggested in a wrongdoing we deal with that excuse me. Within the enforcement arena that puts it into the arena of other complaints are confidential the charter mandate. Shes asked the question at the when we file their quarterly are whatever the dates they file a committee files the report from the staff were to see that for example, a contribution of 10 but the limit is 5 thousand dollars theyll pickup and have an action is there some review. Theres a process the regulations i cant remember the site exactly but a process that the commission has used to do a facial review and when statements come in i think the question outstanding to what step up to the plate weve been doing that it clearly is an important place to review things at the first instance well detect the problems proactively. Seeing the Public Comment has not closed no, no ill let you talk but go ahead ill. I wouldnt want to speak out of school. Ill remember what you are to say and mr. Pelham mentioned you have the authority when a Questionable Campaign you dont have to rely on a random drawing or chance to decide who audits e. R. Go top cadet recorded the expenditures one . 5 million the gentleman informed you it there are 3 people being investigated by the da on now local charges involving the ed lee mayor caption for 2015 dont you think this is the primary campaign to audit dow dont you think George Gascon needs help the Ethics Commission will have an ethical backbone to audit mayor ed lee from 2015 the public seeing news reports in the examiner about moseley and keith expect this commission to do its part in auditing those campaigns and those consultants and the comilking of 10,000 campaign nominations that apparently are twice unpaid mayor ed lee made aware of the 10 thousand donation being split the people who read the newspapers and can red between the lines know this is something going on here that needs to be investigated and you need to mount on investigation of ed lee campaign. Thank you. Commissioner keane. Can i ask the gentleman mr. Pelham would it take Something Special to audit mayor ed lees campaign outside of the regular things that are auditing the other matters or i know it was in there he didnt get picked but if at the golden picked would that be an enormous thing to do or could it be done the regular course of things. Sandy it wouldnt have an, an enormous pursuant to the audit process. Im not saying i was there and hoping he would get picked so i could see mr. Hart swallowing but if it had would that have entailed anything more substantial than the audits of the other matters. Not other than the dollars amount be a bigger audit again, if i understand your question right from the commission were to initiate an audit in addition to those who were randomly selected whats the purpose of the random collection that maybe a large question what kind of policy the commission may want to reinvite for the committees and that methodology. In addition to the random selection that we have a few moment ago i thought i heard were in the limit we also want to do anything one and went forward that we have the authority to do that would that be correct . Again, the current selection is based on the current populated discussed in 2008, from the commissioner were to discuss and want to adopt a different additional prologis ccig Oakland Global policy my recommendation that is the way to approach the question whether the committees in addition to the process would be audited. Okay. I understand that in terms of well be doing something out of the ordinary and you would not feel comfortable in terms of the protocol i understand that i also understand how the colleagues and others would we be preincluded. There is not that preincludes the commission for what kind of audits you may or may not want. And ged and initially with the random ones nothing that preincludes i move we audit mayor ed lee. Ill ask the City Attorney if it is on the agenda or whether it has to be agendized for the next meeting. Well, ill leave to the City Attorney the legal i will raise from the policies prospective i think that is very, very important for the commission to have with a broader discussion about the factors again, if the commission is call for an investigation that is one thing but i just think that is important for the commission to have a clearheaded policies to determine who is audit so everyone knows our for the purpose of treating everyone fairly and i agree with you entirely ill not want to do that is it just throughout this year we have had both the press and weve had discussions amongst ourselves in this body interest the members of the public and weve audited about the matters has to do with with alleged corruption at the top levels of San Francisco government the federal investigation, and the indictment of the individuals that were involved, the fact that the da George Gascon is involved in a vigorous investigation related to the maertsz has to do with with those taped transcripts mayor ed Lees Associates with various individuals that were shown to be illegal, in fact, 3 people that are now essentially theyre going to prison and the talk was continually about the mayor and influence pedestrianing i think we have not nor have i asked for more i think would we have enough issue to initiate a formal investigation of mayor ed lee regarding these things many of them anecdotal but certainly in regards to us having the power to conduct an audit and i hate to agree with mr. Hart he gets my obligate on most of the things he says the questions that are raised i think are substantial and since say is not something that will be a lot of effort or hassle for us to do i think there is sufficient justification for us to toss ed lees name inlets do him as as audit i think we have things that call for some questions that might be answered so in that sense whats the harm i see nun i see also a certain degree of credibility coming to the commission for stepping forward and doing that and it is beyond the protocol but ill say in terms of my own observation of the City Government it is anecdotal for me, i see a lot of corruption that is soft corruption from the top down and i think many other members of the public the editorial boards of newspapers do it is more us of sticking our toe the water and put him in the audit so mr. Chair, i respectfully move we audit mayor ed lee. So i think there is two pending questions me to take them one at that time for the general powers to audit the subsection the government could code provides the Ethics Commission shall audit the committees in addition his or her description to take a the ram selected members eir receptionist from the committee gets the local fund thats what we prescribed. But mayor ed lees committee didnt receive the public funds i know that some of the public funds did he receive. Its not a mandatory audit subject to the audit by the Selection Process like the one you saw the second issue in terms of the agenda notice or description i think that is beyond the scope to talk about commissioner keanes motion. Do i hear a second to the motion. Ill second it. Any Public Comment . Charley for the record i remember seeing something when ed lee considering electing Public Financing im glad that we do audit Public Finance cadets he only spent a Million Dollars and a half not a robust election i dont know what we will see if we did audit him what will be better so look at some of the independent expenditure committees with the city contracts and 3 would be taken generally because that is always an issue the city but i support frankly the position of executive director ill think that given the questions that have been raised by the public tonight on some of the processes that it may be that the new executive director might have some perspectives on the process that states 2008 before they are tenure and that there maybe a different process for instance, for the f p pc or los angeles that she maybe aware that i know she is active in other organization over the years this year might be a better way to approach than the past and the past traditions have fallen short of where we may want to be as we move forward i can assure you youve not been expresses with the audit process and not sure that is shaken out very much as a as a result maybe the time to look at audit the audit process and see if this is meeting our exceptions and the extension of our public and the technical dynamics that are occurring the city contracts. Commissioners ray hart for San Francisco open government the reason i didnt want to participate the process my lucky would have drawn mayor ed lee and wouldnt have obtained eating it glad to eat it to get him audited bottom line the person responsible like mark farrell who came in and wanted to deny the one and 93 thousand an amount equal to 60 percent of what he spent on his campaign that is the same thing with mayor ed lee it was a bunch of my flung easy was the United States navy and the bottom line if you want to end our career as an officer go to a hearing board and saying our ship was sunk or damaged youre responsible youll out the door in 5 seconds if youre in charge youre responsible the mayor is in charge and ought to be audited as far as commissioner keane this no the popularity contest not here to get our friendship i know those things mean absolutely nothing unless youre a member of City Government i call you the backroom like the chair was called for the fine or supervisor farrell and we dont know who was said or the problem is and you go the back and hide it the bottom line the mayor needs to be audited this Campaign Needs to be audited one reason he has 2 to 3 opposition thats the reason he didnt take Public Comment that was an easy out the bottom line is this is really a test before the public as to whether or not you have what it takes to hold sfopg audible im predicting that there fail on a 3 to 2 vote and there will be no audit of the mayor that simply shows that you are the pocket of people that appoint you and you can sit there and shack your heads no or what you usually do no comments and especially lawyers that silence is consent so go ahead vote this down dont audit the mayor and let the insistence of the San Francisco feinstein see what i see and many others we come to those meetings and listen to your stuff trying to justify doing nothing and ill say it again, if you can show me anything this committee has done the last 10 years to make this city better id like to see that. Before we vote that commissioner renne im in support of commissioner hayons motion on the floor. Id like to think that mr. Pelham having heard the District Attorney indicate she has the horticulture to make that decision without you that that will get you off the backside and take the leadership role and prove mr. Harts wrong there will be a 3 to 2 vote all right. But a 3 to 2 vote to audit the mayor campaigns for 2015 san franciscans expect you to do the ethical thing and conduct the audits because if he didnt have anything to hide he shouldnt be afraid for audited even in la you have pelham; right . If youve done nothing wrong dont be afraid of an audit it is only when the and the keiths get caught on federal that the mayors start worrying about what will happen on an audit you can doing the right thing with a 3 to 2 vote and audit did Mayors Campaign or ms. Pelham so consider ord the audit independently based on the City Attorney information san franciscans want to welcome you with open arms ms. Pelham thats because weve had too much corruption at city hall for too many years. Thank you. Dipped again speak as an individual sometimes things happen that are not scripted that makes it interesting i think i would agree with the comment from the deputy City Attorney Northern California that process only selects audits randomly other than the law that was quoted i dont im not sure i see a problem making a sort of start selection based on at criteria and from the commission chooses to audit the Mayors Campaign based on what weve read the paper im not sure there is a problem i dont know what an audit will reveal we believe that the higher value campaigns hire the also and account its an im not sure well find material problems through an audit but not sure i could be wrong and maybe the audit is the best course to answer any outstanding questions relative to the Mayors Campaign 2015 an intriguing question and good luck on this one thanks. Any other Public Comment . Before we vote i want to ask ms. Pelham if this motion passes if it pose any problems to your point of view at the staff level to add this to the other audits that will be done thank you for the question commissioner renne my concern not whether this pose a problem for the staff in terms of doing an audit or looking at the level of the audit that will result if it were to add the mayor Ed Lee Ed Lee for mayor of 2015 for mayor to the mix i want to be clear about my general concern about establishing a process that is not predictable for the public or for candidates we we select for example, important to be able to follow through on that Selection Process there is certainly, if the commission choices and feels a need to audit that is the direction to me i understand that i think that is very important as an organization, however, it is about transparency and about process and about other Holding Others accountability to the process my concern will be simply from the commission feels there is a level of committee and there are issues raised i think that is something that will be very important to create a new policy Going Forward so we share the candidates if they spend more than 50,000 but the last thing to have the public haves the miss prospective it is based on individual rather than policy concerns i know that is not the intent of anybody on the panel but make that point and encourages us to do things in a formalized process i think that ultimately benefits the work of the commission and the integrity of the commission i appreciate the opportunity. As i understand the thrust e. R. The basis of this request made is that there is at least some Public Perception that there may have been problems with the Mayors Campaign and clearly if any campaign not a question of over one Million Dollars any question were to rise the newspaper than mr. Exes campaign was accepting illegal payments or whatever else it would be a justification for the commission to say lets even though not randomly selected i understand the random was so that there isnt the sort of fastenerism picking on someone that is not popular but the randomness to show were not selecting and making in any determination that the committee should be audited in our random selection the question if there is a perception public that a Campaign Committee may have violated the law isnt that sufficient justification for the commission to say lets add that to our random selection as a policy matter but this is a thought. Commissioner commissioner andrews. Im sorry mr. Chair were creeping were actually getting into the discussion i feel we should have i do have to say i probably will not support that im one for process i believe in transparency and protocol i believe if we are amended or justifies over and over adjust our protocol or policy weve been blamed in the past first, i want to say yes. I think in terms of an audit we should definitely do more audits if that is messing campaign this is not our only chance next month seems to me we can do that but ive seen at least the last 23 or years ive been on the commission we jujd to a conclusions and dont have all the steps laid out and we get tripped up and try to put bandaids im thinking about a few situations i want to think this through so it is not mayor ed lee were take into account were targeting any candidates or many particular a campaign that has an allegation we need to talk about that a little bit more and continue this for next month and after that discussion or ms. Mroem bring some policy revisions or suggestion well think about where the commission would think about moving forward with a audit that we come up with some developed policy first and give it good thought at the end of the discussion say not only did mayor ed lee campaign meets the threshold any other commitment meets the threshold and coming for you as well as in that campaign you were spending your dollars it feels like one of and feels chief executive officer reject i didnt or that we need to be more thoughtful about that as we move forward this is not our one and only time to call for an audit we can do it a time and place of our choosing within our regular meeting i think we should exercise both the opportunity to have good discussion and make a good informed decision about that. Commissioner hur. I agree with commissioner andrews and the executive director when you talk about backbone especially this commission what is important it is equitable and fair, i think to have to throw for a commissioner to start throwing out names of people that should audited without the policy descriptions there are for that policy makes us vulnerable to a political process were supposed to be in support of so ill agree the motion should not carry. I agree with everything many was said by commissioner hur and commissioner andrews and our executive director i think that lets set a policy maybe needs to audit every single Campaign Committee over a certain amount not just the random ones but if we think we need to audit go anything over one Million Dollar and lets agree that well do that it appears to be fair the last thing to be having a witchhunt and total urban fairness ill not support the motion at this point but, yes lets come up with a policy if thats what we want to do and you know look at how much work that will be given all the other committees that are being audited as well but maybe a separate category where it is called for. Commissioner keane do you want to reconsider our motion. I dont want to reconsider my motion with all due respect to the colleagues it disagree when were not coming up with that one on sort of a toss of a coin were coming up with this one there are substantive things the appearance of substantive things out there and surfacing in the publics mind as viewed here and the press and in the prosecution of a number of people that appear to have on their claim have been plugged in with the mayor and the mayors people in terms of being able to deliver pay to play type of situations now, im not prejudging that but and there is an active as i said an active investigation going on by District Attorney George Gascon he said it several times so this is not just us saying someone myself saying out of the air ed lee is a big shot and has more than a Million Dollars he is spending maybe we dont like ed lee lets audit him were doing this with real substance behind it ear auditing all sorts of other characters minor characters for the random on the random basis we might have been auditing mayor ed lee if h he had mr. Harts finger the jar or Something Else happened were not and so i think in terms of the fact we can do that we have all those reasons in terms of public credibility to go ahead and do that we should do that. And i think it wouldnt be a big deal if we did certainly not a witchhunt and in regards to going after poor mayor ed lee in regards to the allegations out there were not picking him out the fact it is unusual and protocol is something that has not happened before there are times in history you say protocol is indicated that Something Different should be done watergate investigation im not comparing ed lee with nixon but a complete parallel type of process to the usual processes there appeared to be dirty things going on in government and im were doing something much less than that and theres no big deal about what we are could go that is a question of dignity we should go forward and do that. Ill call the question. All in favor, say i. I. Opposed . No, no the motion is defeated 2 to 3. All right. Turning to item number 6 discussion thought possible action on craft regulations terms used the city whistle blower protection ordinance i will im going to turn it over to tom and commissioner hur. Thank you chair this is the agenda item continued from last months meeting contains the recommendation on the memo and commissioner hur and acting decree jessie look at the end of last year and put together a memo outlining recommendations building on the comments and concerns of the civil grand jury report issued last in 2014 to 2015 regarding the San Francisco whistle blower ordinance in need of change this memo is presented with a recap of those grand jury recommendations provide a recap the analysis and the responded from the earlier memo in january and recaps proposed language for the issues that were that report identified and an attachment one and two as drafted language in attachment one these are draft regulations for your consideration assuming the whistle blower ordinance stayed as it currently is with the statutory language and attachment 2 takes that a bit further and looks about the changes to the ordinance itself along with regulations and that will come with that to clarify and address some of the issues that were raised the report im not sure in commissioner hur want to jump in and happy to walk you through and ill take the direction how you wanted to proceed. Sxhour. Thank you commissioner renne and director pelham the memo was well done i want to focus the commissions attendance on the attachment on the meat on the bones that is the actual language for the proposed amendments to the actual ordinance i also thought of president to thank the grng thank you for your recommendation and friends of ethics it was helpful in working out and the public was quite helpful i think it is worth paejs to the two attachments attachment one we as the commission can pass the ordinance amendment obviously will require help from the board i think of we jump past attachment one it will be a significant step in the right direction but the ordinance can use some work and i like the proposed language the ordinance its the one section that i think maybe we can use City Attorney help on this cancelation of restrictiony but we can put in tre well have the authority to you know it is workable that would i think that is maybe worth a particular focus. We also tried in here to get at contractors who were working for the city in a fairway and share theyll be covered and subject to the ordinance. Any discussion generally let me ask you commissioner hur any rson why we shouldnt adopt the task of one the regulations and also move forward with the attachment two in terms of that the way the board acts any down side with our enacting these regulations. Is that duplication of effort or confusion here. Director pelham should weigh in this we pass attachment one well do some good it is not redundant to the changes to the ordinance i think that the ordinance changes separately should be adopted as well dont believe we can do that tonight but vote to send it. Oh, i was kevin with the City Attorney from the commission passes that they would have the effect of yeah effective one 60 days after the commissions acts that does provide some improvement as commissioner hur said seller to know whether the Commission Direction to move the discussion about the statutory with with that would be helpful will be require the board of supervisors to weigh in on this regulations that will be in place either way whether it takes the wind out of the sales the changes are not statutory changes that is hard to predict but a case for wanting to improve the bill with not the perfect with the better of the good i suppose. So would the board if we were to pass it and send to the board the board can pass it and send to back send it back. Right . Yeah. So in terms of the legislative process for the owners inu unlike the changes within our purview there is no requirement that it be sent back certainly the sponsors of the ordinance wish to do that as a courtesy or seek other guidance from the ms. Pelham we can make ongoing dialogue but no legal requirement. So theyll make whatever whangz and if it passes it is law. Although i imagine a lot of opportunities for the mayor to get it to more formal sort of looking legislative proposal im sure theyll have further questions in the end and certainly hearings about the prompt changes at least one Committee Meeting and potentially more which the director can participate again informal was for the commission to participate. Isnt the process cant the process you know were talking about the ordinance changes is working collaboratively with the board in terms of at least of the one or two supporters on the board that will chair carry the water when it comes time for approval in terms of our drafting didnt have to be this is it and the board sit down and drafts it with staff meets with staff from some of the supervisors and heres the language as to what is feasible. Yeah. My recollection on that point in terms of the board of supervisors considered this the civil grand jurys report several supervisors on that Board Committee spent a lot of interest with the protection ordinance with the protection there is probable some represent certify activity from the board of supervisors. So tonight might be a Good Opportunity to you know for folks to vet this and it makes sense and hopefully send it along. Ill propose we deal with attachment one whether we want to go through each sections are deal with that as a whole and then have a motion either to approve regulations or not. Would be my professional go ahead and commissioner, i suggest we deal with it as a whole it is integral. You mean one. Yes. It is fairly sdwral and go ahead and have discussion and agree on that take it as a whole. Any comments . I guess the question ill ask you commissioner hur is that we did get a draft or an email i think from larry bush with some suggestions for example, taking issue with 4. 1 is 0 that the complaints must be 2, 3, 4 writing i know we discussed it the last time but you would not be open to making a change to i think that is a balance and i talked to mr. Bush about this direct a balance between having some something that is concrete and insuring that all complaints with adjudicated i think that one thing mr. Bush said i thought was a good i included all communications reported by a recipient should account we have something in writing it is concrete whether or not someone submits it and frankly mr. Bush not here to explain his part of conversation but you make a complaint to someone in the department you know it becomes quite it can be hard to determine what happened and i think that on the sort of burden benefit scale weighs in favor of not including things such as those. Are there any other comments . Do i hear a motion move we approve attachment one. All right. Motion to made and seconded call for Public Comment . I brought a handful one for many pelham and 5 copies for the board i would hope that you would adopt both amendment one or attachment one and attachment 2 almost four years claude i didnt ruled the wrongful termination a major flaw in the conduct code the code provides no retaliation protection for employees to experience First Amendment speech rights im san bruno an a strange of the ruling between seven hundred and 50 solicit and 450,000 to the City Attorney expenses trying to stop dr. Occur the city dished out 1. 8 million that should incorporate for that amount of money incorporate concerning argue w p l o amendments of the grand jury didnt report the glaring problem passed prop c directing the board of sups to say a meaningful pio and the basic human rights has not been added it is time to do so today what does it say about this commission in San Franciscos City Government itself to continue to allow retaliation against City Employees that simply exercise their First Amendment amendment rights the employees want to serve the say they have a relinquish their Voting Rights which jurisdictions require the Government Employees to forego a First Amendment protection and enjoyed by all americans insistence in order to gain Government Employment i testified to the board of sups the Oversight Committee september 3rd, 2015, City Employees expect this body and the board of sups to amendment the w pio for the First Amendment protections for the City Employees it is its been a Long Time Coming it is long overdue i encourage you to have the human rights protections while youre taking this tuesday night but urge you to advocate with the board of sups and the mayor to incorporate that protection the f dot one a 7 c. You thank you. I think your time has run. Thank you. Any other comments good afternoon, commissioners and director pelham im dr occurring over 20 years the Ethics Commission has never sub granted a whistle blower exclaim one reason that the Ethics Commission is a dead end for whistle blowers is that whistle blowers threaten power structures to which this commission is connected i i dont see a procedural fix for what is a political impasse but since were addressing fixes tonight ill make some suggestions 4 the first so consider alternating the burden of proof by requiring proximate cause rather than a clause of this is what the whistle blowers protection whistle blowers dont have access to 41 percent of evidence the wrong doors are 100 percent percent of the evidence of wrongdoing your staff lacked the resources and the courage to get the evidence so users a probable cause standard is more appropriate given the circumstances and number 2 im worried about your defining a complaint as solely written it tends to did he leg missing misses other complaints that written complaint is reasonable for a whistle blower retaliation claim but not for the primary initial whistle blower containment most of whistle blower complaint with made verbally to a supervisor but what the boss is compliant the misconduct the whistle blower is doomed and has no prove of having filed a complaints it whatnot written it is usually verbal it is on this after retaliation that people write things down and send them in also nowadays workers will report complaints on their cell phones or misconduct so if somebody brings you a video of misconduct or a video of their complaint will be dismiss that because it is not written suppose the whistle blower brings you documents that show fraud are you going to about g ignore those without a written complaint that goes with them will you dismiss someone like deep throat that discovered nixon containments because it was observe the phone september e expect the documents or written im concerned about setting a time limit on investigations it not enough because it doesnt insure that the investigation will be adequate it is very easy to do a substandard investigation under the time limit. Thank you. Your steady your time. Im sorry. Thank you. David pilpal the motioned is on attachment one to Death Penalty the four proposed regulations. Thats correct. On that the first 3 start out with the sub a that suggests a b and possibly a c ill suggest not including that unless that are b and c the writing is what inconsistent and include the language shawl and some have will i will standard device that to shall throughout perhaps on the second right point and other similar adverse employment shall include effecting the last one of the regulation staff shall initiate, etc. The third 1b one im not quite sure it is titled b1 is refers to one one a im not sure that is the correct reference i think that sub b that the hearing or the adjudication of complaints. Im sorry under the third. Either b1 and then line 24 referring to b or if it is a maybe it is a too i think that suck b and so maybe 24 that needs to get fixed i think staff is on this i think in general going on to page 2 the nonetheless Quarterly Report to the commission make sense i assume those had been confidential reports not entirely clear and i think in keeping the complanlts up to date about the status of their primer review make sense one of the things that people make complaints and dont get an immediately acknowledgement so i think in summer those regulations help you will make those minor housekeeping changes and ill offer comments when we get to the next item thanks. Commissioners ray hart for San Francisco open government attend the Ethics Commission is similar to watching people rearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic whistle blower protection in this city is noncompliant any person involved the City Government possessing even a motor intelligence theyre on their own and rewriting the rules is meaningful when the commission lakes the resources to enforce their own finding each must be of this commission is appointed by the people over whole their provide the oversight with the whistle blower are the responsibility felt 5 individuals each one that reported you and if that happened in their department under our watch your j judging them with the whistle blower complainants the past the most sub certainty is placed in charge in investigating or handling that regardless of effort to rewrite the rules whistle blowers no idea to be aware that they are solely and completely on their own they will get absolutely jack crap from this commission or another at commission to protect them or to support them. This Ethics Commission the past as far as im aware has done nothing nothing to support those who have the encourage and sdrit to speak up when you woenlt protect the people with the courage and the integrity your own lack of encourage and lack of integrity people dont like my comments you should be polite but i tell them when they make thatomment that im being exterminate to file under the marcus keenzburg rules while the commissioners and starch is using mixed Marshall Arts rules youll not do a damn thing to protect the whistle blower pass the legislation like the sunshine ordinance you spent 5 damn years rewriting how youll handle 9 sunshine referrals have you ever had one that is meaningful stuff you put out there to make people to think youre doing something and fool them ill be honest is rises to the level of defrauding youre doing something meaningful i ask mr. Occurring subject to one of the things the one and something the Million Dollars that 33 had to pay the city will rather pay is ousted dont try to cut me off when you give everybody else 10 more seconds. I didnt. You started to. Hello commissioners elaine friends of ethnics commissioner hur tutor all the effort for the whistle blower regulations together and for acknowledging larry bush sent information ive been dealing with him i just wanted to speak specific to the idea about the written comment and as i understood our introductory comments youre saying it may not have to be in writing but there should be some kind of record if we could find of using the way record instead of written that then allows phone video you you know just a little bit snip even though of a video that is a record of someone saying it is written it could be a language barrier problem or the dr referred to Something Else by use the word written we have had a strong reaction to our using basically a Standard Technology now a number of other technologies that can provide the record that youre after thank you. Charley again with friends ever ethics i thought that at the bill back meeting the general Obligation Bond Committee Meeting that mr. Bush happens to be that a member that was recorded in their recent hearing last week on the whistle blower ordinance that the state does not require a written notice do you remember mr. Bush making that statement or you dont remember that being raised it is possible that was raised by the chairman or the yeah, the acting chairman 9 Civil Grand Jury Committee that made the presentation before go back by the way, im sorry you pissed missed that that was an excellent presentation we may not be totally in conform as an with the states concept they allow nonwritten reports so i would agree with my colleague on f o e we might want to fudge that definition and include some record that complaint was filed that was broader this is an written i thought that mr. Bushs that there are an unanimous training because i know the City Employees receive those as a matter of course in a great many areas and could well be this added to that program about basically make that contrary to the City Committee the need the best mechanism would be the need to put it in writing and if this is problematic it didnt preclude others means the best and highest standard to protect all concern would be to put it in writing as suggested and then indicate that it is writing presents a problem on language or some people really cant write or express themselves well in writing then that another measure could be utilized but that that is important that a record be maintained in that of that meeting and the fact that the complaint what in a documented form i dont know if im totally clear im giving a hive standard of prove. Commissioner hur. I like ms. Smith and the mr. Currency suggestion i wonder we should ill give you an examp example. Maybe if youre going on with our examples you ought to put some example electronically something that shows whether it be a cell phone or video or whatever. Might be concern with putting in an example of video or audible so, yes i think if a person were to record an event happening that could be sufficient evidence of the complaint that would comply with the regulations this is again tending to prove or disprove i hadnt thought about that but dont want to make a suggestion that people are recording it is illegal under California Law i mean im open to including example im not sure you need examples i think that will open it up and not to make it meaningful distinction. Ill kept that as friendly amendment to approve attachment a that sxhour has suggested to end the words and record or reco record. I think he had other language in there. We may need to delete written at the end of the first line have to be i mean a written communication do you have any thoughts on that. Director pelham. Or you that that is okay. Because it is just an example. I think that you were to strike the written at the end the line 10 im not sure well losses anything it is informal writing or record it has the balance of some recognize i agree if someone is standing on the street with video capturing and people taking good ideas out of a whatever theyll want to capture. Lets take out written at the end of the line sorry to interrupt you. You accept that amendment. I do yes ill call the question. All in favor, say i. I. Of adopting attachment one as amend amended i. Opposed . Let the record reflect. This is in response to mr. Pilpals comment we looked at 24 that should reference so lets talk about that minor anti or take a separate vote. City attorney advising if you could take a quick vote. Maybe vote to give me her discretion. Thank you anyone else you find. Die have a motion to that effect. So moved and. All in favor, say i. I. I guess ill call Public Comment . All right. I like an opportunity to comment on a motion on the floor particularly it gives ms. Pelham is Discretionary Authority to add to section 4 dot 114 a romania numeral 3 and insert roman numerical 3 to comply with the judges recommendation to add First Amendment rights protections why would you not do that. Why would ms. Pelham not use her discretion to amend editorial issues and attachment one why should my neighbor in and Apartment Building have freedom of speech rights and as a than current City Employee i didnt what was that all about . Simply because you become a City Employee you can be retaliated against and thats okay do my managers did any managers add laguna honda hospital and substantially department of Emergency Services no, it would be okay to retaliate against me using my First Amendment free speech right and youll be okay with that if one of you dont make that motion to add it i think you should pull out the red editorial pen and add that g before i windup in front of the board of sups begging them to put it in there so the next judge wilkins didnt have to noted a serious flaw in the city chapter and in your regulations that you write with our red pen can change thank you. Ill call the question oh, any Public Comment. Just one more thing commissioners im worried about the preferential fix of having timely investigations that would be an empty procedural represent rationed what is needed a quality review mechanism to insure that an investigation is an investigation whether it is done in thirty or 90 days didnt matter the quality of the work that matters to the chibz and the public also i strongly support amending the whistle blower ordinance the protection ordinance so that contractors are covered one of them recorded miss appropriations the central subway Accounting System a contractor there they were fudging the budget she went to the Whistle Blower Program and met with the City Attorney and was told oh, we cant protect you, your a contractor so the ordinance should be amended to so that fraud in contracts which take hundreds of Million Dollars of public dollars every year could be imposed and the whistle blowers will be protected in some way thank you. Commissioners ray hart for San Francisco open government and i will repeat on this section the same as the section before what damn difference does that make you pass you have no intention of enforcing and you dont this law has been on the books for how long and not one time has anyone been protected an effort made to protect them and city agencies rare on a regular basis retaliate take job actions and the only defense that most of City Employees is their own union that gets a bad name their oh, i cant firefighter an City Employee you can photographer a City Employee if you do paperwork that is justified and supply get rid of of an employee that does something which discloses the fact you were doing something illegal and they in an effort to hide it retaliated now, im not an City Employee but alicia the city larger than and the jet of the Library Commission used and abused their position to withhold records from oar period of two years i appellate the City Attorneys office to force them to disclose they denied two positions the first one after a year and the second one after the second year i took them to the Sunshine Ordinance Task force they found them in violation for supporting on public body that was with for acting as their council for a public body withholding Public Records you wont do a damon thick to enforce this you can sit and reangry the letters on a page but the citizens of San Francisco anyone who is ever been protected by this law he said no, he couldnt so it pa what youre here to sit around and just a second our yauz and make changes to things that are irrelevant have no intention of enforcing them the very people you have to go after the people that put you in our seat it is hard to convince a man when a mans job is not united way thats what you do you sit down and do everything that you look at 83 the desk and dont Pay Attention you make funny noise and funny faces and when the public comes and calls you out you sit down silently theyll not finally come to the conclusion you dont work for them despite the oath. Thank you ill call the question to give permission to the executive director to make the changes for the tip graph errors things of that nature. All in favor, say i. I. Opposed . That motion carries 5 to nothing turning no 80 now to attachment number 2 which if i understand correctly what youre seeking from us here is direction to whether or not we want you to proceed with drafting amendments to the ordinance for the board of supervisors approval; is that correct . Yes. This has the entirety of the ordinance and to clarify some of the issues with the civil grand jury and commissioner hur and others commissioners original january 20th memo there are some items in here well be looking for the policy commissioner policy direction to like us to continue on with conversations with the board of supervisors and is as you said weve had a collaborative process and possess on the officials of controller to xiem the contractor that the policy decision that Commission Time to explore furtherncluding the contractor that work for the city under terms of the contracted for to say city and county of San Francisco that that works in pagers and similar soundproducing Electronic Devices are prohibited at this meeting. Practice will be some requirements further input from a the departments that are experience working with the city contractors i think were looking for policy direction on all things probation officer purchase. You very specific issues that you would like directions on you mentioned the contractor. If we start at section 41 hundred for example, there is language that addresses the language of contractors start on line 17 it would state the language is mirrored through the employment places ill highlight this was will create a new reference to the protection of the whistle blower ordinance extends to contractors operating within the scope of a contract with the city and county of San Francisco from retaliation and but also expands the language on line 20 to file complaints what about beyond just those filed with our own agency that recognized an employees theyre more comfortable bringing complaints elsewhere and extend to the individuals that want to bring complaint outside of their own agencies if to a supervisory employee and decided to do something with that that is in section 41 hundred to expanding the base or the points of contact for actually receiving a complaint that actually provides protection for the whistle blower protection ordinance. Do you want me to continue. Section for example, on line starting at line 15 there is some language that would clarify what are the types of activities that improper government activity means and so it strikes reference to violations of the california penal code because that seems to be a very High Standard for what can be alleged in other words to get protection under the protection ordinance but not fits language about engross raised fraud and abuse of city resources that adds clarifying language for those types of irks are appropriate subject matters for the retaliation if their information is brought forward that should be appropriately covered. If i can forward to lets see sections 4. 115 youll see the same language we get to the language it talks about the retaliation it prohibited it talks about the contractor operating outside the scope or contractor has in good faith filed a complaint elsewhere define it with supervisory employee with the at the individuals department or another city and county or federal agency so again, this language is trying to provide the actual protection on the bottom of this same page in the administrative complaints the notation that in order to provide some accountability that doesnt currently exist the Ethics Commission may refer matters to the dhr and require that any other board or officer report to the administration that is referred for a followup that will introduce some language that is spectacular to the Controllers Office elsewhere that says 90 a day within receiving a referral the commission or referral from the administration for investigation and possible disciplinary action the department shall report back to the administration if so a power tool what happens on the issues when their properly referred to another department thats the language were proposing to include and get our feedback on. There is clarification on the next page on line 7 to 9 under the burden of retaliation to clarify one of the points that commissioner hur and staff member addressed that clarifying where the burden of establishing what pivots that will clarify to establish the retaliation occurred a complaint in a civil action demonstrates or the commission in an administrative proceeding must determine by the preponderance of the evidence that the complainants engagement was a motivating factor and trying to clarify the standards for the procedure that are used under subsection c were proposing to include under subdivisions 5 underlines 25 through 29 accident requested that the commissioner hur mentioned earlier that the language for cancelation that following an administrative hearing for the existing authority and making a vbldz many or that a violation happened may doll for call for the interpretation or other adverse employment who exercise their Voting Rights under the protection ordinance that was directly referenced if the civil grand jury report. So i think that and combined with the Civil Penalties thinking about what makes sense maybe that massachusetts make more sense for not the retaliation but it is worth the Commission Consideration how best to implement some sort of penalties and remedies for violations. If i could directing your attention to section on the next page on lines 26 through thirty were included new language for the sanctioned for the disclosure of the whistle blower that was through no the addressed in the civil grand jury report i think on point as we went through this there is not a specific sanction for someone it disclosed a identify of a whistle blower of the perimeter of the law and those individuals that knowing are subject to a sanction as well. I think those are the essential components the hangs that for the actual statutory language the last two packages of the attachment two there are draft regulations that very much anywhere the draft regulations of attachment one that you acted on to this to the extent that make sense the changes will be made consistent and to the extent they clarify the reverberations that are added or exist the revised ordinance those regulations will apply. Is there a motion what direction wishes the staff to proceed in attachment 2. Thats a good question on the draft regulations on the back of the revised ordinance do we need any of these now weve adopted attachment one. I think the idea was this the language of the ordinance will change as shown in attachment two those regulations will still be useful because for example, as it is currently drafted it would not chaplain complaint as shown in promoted regulation 4. 10. Weve. If that were in place would it needs to be changed based on the language of ordinance actually no. Those will be consistent thank you for that clarification i misunderstand. All right. A so just to confirm mr. Chair im assuming now weve gone over them it would be appropriate for director pelham to meet with key staff at the board of supervisors to review those and get their comments on it and possibly bring that back to the commission. For more discussion . I think if this is the commission desire ebt or if those are policy areas of interest and action by the commission to say were on board with those in concept and want to talk with the Board Officers to see where the specific language thats one way of approaching that dont think the lovely of comfortable with the concept that are embedded the draft ordinance i dont know from the City Attorney has anything to audio. I mean thats the pobltd and the other possibility were recommended and so the board know that is soft what we want to do and several a back and forth with the board no, we cant do this and that but i might be more helpful to send them language for them to device and deal with. Im for one am consistent with the upgraded changes that were discussed and so whatever we can do to get this forward and get it before the board hopefully and adopt that. I think that makes sense mr. Chair and also for us to the number of things we are addressed by ms. Pelham to try to word smith well be here all night and whether or not we could i mean, ive tried to process as much as i can in terms of the fine presentation i think that commissioner hurs suggestion is good lets get it to the board. Moved. I move we approve attachment two. All right. Any further discussion before Public Comment ill take Public Comment. David pilpal speaking as an individual my first is there a meat and cover as it effects the City Employees the past and certainly i dont know next very much appreciate the first of all, all the work but also in particular including contractors im not sure though this language actually ultimately does the tricky read this to cover the contractor. Sorry starting on package one lines 17 and 18 the contractors operating outside the scope r beyond the scope thats the contractorism bus not an employee therefore so ill strongly encourage adding the employees something to it effect if youre intent to cover not only the contractor but the employee and i like that construct of operating beyond the scope of a contract but for some reason that entire expect isnt on page 2 lines 14 it says operating pursuant rather win the scope and not just the contractor but the employee there were other points in here sorry these pages are not numbered i guess 4 about the one one 5 a im not sure why youre proposing 90 days the particular with the controller is 60 days you wouldnt days is a good amount of time ill suggest that conforming that to 60 days on the next page penalties and remedies line 24 i like increase the amount from 5 to 10 through these but not sure indexing that to inflation is easy to do unless the controller is the shoring the new amount it gets complicated reducing it to 10 and the next time it can be increased again, if it make sense i mean is seems odd the amount in two years is 10 thousand plus i have real questions about the cancelation retaliatory job commissions does that commission have the authority to do that overruling Civil Service that is an interesting question to me i dont know if you got advice on that ill appreciate the rest of points in here i think there is a section sorry just one more if i could the notice of whistle blower protections in e and 4. 115 i believe requires the controller to post the notices not require theyre an employee handbook that seems like a good place and finally the Ethics Commission i think a handbook would be okay and equal time to run over mr. Pelham. E mr. Pilpal. I was line i when i was 23 i ran away to the army against my mothers advise they said i was gay you know dont ask no tell so at the end of the boat camp i sweated it knowing i didnt have Upper Body Strength on adrian that get me through those camps so i wont have to repeat 8 more weeks of hell my mother flew out to see me graduate any drill sergeant told her he may not make a good soldier the army but by god hesitate tenacious im back tenacious is helen this whole issue of free speech right. How much judges to point out to you that four dot one one 5 a hesitate your regulation needs a facelift rue paul would note it needs a facelift im going to repeat myself because im tenacious why should my next door neighbor have protections under the First Amendment right but when i become a City Employee i lose it is that what the bifurcating is all about once youre a City Employee you start losing protections under the bifurcating bill of rights under the constitution. You need to find our wholeness whether you have them or not you need to recommend to the board of sups that they add First Amendment free speech rights and tie retaliation protections for City Employees otherwise you will be over thank you for the opportunity e turning or our founding father in the bill of rights it is okay to stipulate the employees of First Amendment is that something you want to do to our grandchildren commissioner is that what we do the avenues why would you not give City Employees First Amendment protections because in their bad people earning a pension it is sufficient to take away their First Amendment rights give me a break. Good evening, commissioners and director pelham friends of ethics i have one comment first of all, thank you very much a lot of hard work has gone into this i thank you all but the one thing the section 4. 120 to 23 confidentiality that i dont see one of the biggest problems on i discovered when i chaired the committee for the Whistle Blower Program back in 2010 and 2011 other than the civil grand jury when the whistle blowers would try to find out the status of their complaint they were kept in the dark using confidentiality as the weapon to keep them ignorant of what is going on with their whistle blower complaint i dont see anything in here that might give them information whether it is thirty days, 60 days but dr occurrings complaint wu were used as a pingpong ball between the Controllers Office and this body i know that things are moving forward to improve i wonder i may have missed it if a whistle blower were to try to find out what the status of their complaint was theyre entitled to know that thank you. We address it in the rags. Commissioners ray hart for San Francisco open government i left hand to these conversations and could have scorn if you send something to the board of supervisors they choose not to respond end of story and very frankly given the efforts from the members of the public have tried to get them to do things that is likely what. Happen. Youre happy the executive director as sitting here oh, lets find a way out not have a conversation to respond to us lets sends this over if necessary keep it for 5 or 10 years or dont bother to respond thats what we wanted you dont really care about in whistle blower thing because if so none of you that will be in that position you dont care, he can stand here and say eave never helped a whistle blower you dont care i can stand here and say your historical and practice show that you have absolutely no interest in protecting maintain but the city and the City Employees and the elected officials and you can sit here and go through this charge raid thats all it is a charge rad you send documents into the netherlands and hope a member of the public again didnt found how ineffective you are willful ignorance is with your willfully ignorant of those processes you were willing to send is it to the board of supervisors and just sort let that hang out there i think youre all hoping to god our term of office is over before you it exams doss honestly i dont think anyone one of you want to deal with anything and certainly anything that protects a City Employee that blew the whistle you wanted to protect the city departments from being discovered it illegal actions we talked about ed lee hes been found by a federal investigation to have people under had his control and command engage in illegal activities on his behalf you dont think an audit of his campaign is even worth consideration you are the total slaves of the people who appointed you and the only thing youre interested in not putting their noticed out of joint and want to get our backside in at a hair on a commission. Thank you. Commissioner keane was trying to get me to declare a recess and stepped out im prepared to call the question do we have a motion one thing that mr. Pilpal raised that about conto