Will try to use the system to shut you out yeah shut you out is exactly that was what we were seeing happening on thursday as you saw this whole you know monday through wednesday of last week as well like you know that stock just skyrocketing because theyre buying and buying and buying would just call the short sellers to be like oh my gosh i was broken with you know basically what was interesting with that is that thats when you know trading like robin hood t. D. Ameritrade Charles Schwab and others started restricting users from being able to actually buy game stop stock and other stocks that also were being looked at as short sells that the you know other groups driving up the price of what you see and things like that its pretty incredible robin who claim this was due to recent volatility in the market over listen to this submission. Of the week and many posters on wall street pointed out that quote one hedge fund suffering amid the game stop surge was Melvin Capital Management whi
On here as guest speaker, but we have heard from mayor libby schaaf. You are joining the department on a interesting day, a day that we have changed leadership. I want to be ee perfectly hones with you that my decision yesterday was extremely personally difficult for me. I made it because i believe that it was in the best interests of oakland oakland. New Oakland Police officers have received the badges and just moments after hearing the news ahead of the police commission, and Regina Jackson said she made the motion to dismiss the police chief last night, and the mayor said she supported the decision while praising the progress made by oaklands First Female Police chief. The state of california, Department Reporter and they are in the midst of a sexual scandal involving five officers and the firing of the chief without cause leaving concerns with city counsel member gallo. We have safety issues in the neighborhood and on the 11th police chief within the last ten years, and so that the
Is going after what voters know. And as was said, the Supreme Court within the bounds of Citizens United said transparency and disclosure, fine. I have a few examples. This was a district 6 mailer, and the video at the bottom of an internet mailer ad, paid for by a committee, clean and sunset. Major funding by progress San Francisco. And the district 6 version said paid for by san franciscans for change, major funding by progress San Francisco. I think all of us in this room know who are behind that committee, but most regular people would have no reason to know. Two big things. Number one, it will require the dollar amount of the donors to be listed, so that voters get more than a name and an actual piece of data that they can use to say to ask if they wish, whos really behind this and whats their agenda. And more importantly, it pierces the shell of fake name committees like that by requiring that progress San Francisco in this example, the top two donors to that committee would also
Again, were trying to give voters information and ensuring they really know whos behind the Shell Committee and how much they gave. Only other thing ill say on that component and ill get to the last one is some may ask, well, arent the clever election lawyers going to find some other way to hide, and im sure they will. And to that i would say, were going to do that the same way you would eat an elephant, one bite at a time. And i think this will become the strongest in the country and a model for other cities. So at the end, i want to submit some materials, and supervisor mar has the same if you wish to share, is the paytoplay division, which prohibits not just the developer, which is already prohibited, but the top executives associated with that developer from giving to any city official running for the board of supervisors, mayor, or City Attorney or sitting in those offices for the entire time that the measure is pending or for 12 months its approved or after its done. We tried to
So what were really doing here is going after what voters know. And as was said, the Supreme Court within the bounds of Citizens United said transparency and disclosure, fine. I have a few examples. This was a district 6 mailer, and the video at the bottom of an internet mailer ad, paid for by a committee, clean and sunset. Major funding by progress San Francisco. And the district 6 version said paid for by san franciscans for change, major funding by progress San Francisco. I think all of us in this room know who are behind that committee, but most regular people would have no reason to know. Two big things. Number one, it will require the dollar amount of the donors to be listed, so that voters get more than a name and an actual piece of data that they can use to say to ask if they wish, whos really behind this and whats their agenda. And more importantly, it pierces the shell of fake name committees like that by requiring that progress San Francisco in this example, the top two dono