And also another count of violation of a section which prohibits any city or officer or employee from making a contract in which she has a financial interest. And then there was another one having to do with inappropriate conduct. This committee had gone ahead and prosecuted her for those ethical violations under its powers to do so. And had entered into a stipulation with her giving her, and which she accepted certain putsv, which were the extent of what we could punish her for, for these particular violations. So, in that sense, then, our job was over in regard to ms. Ellis. The thought was at the time when we were doing this, and we had none of you all here, nobody was here. The thought when we were doing this, that in regard to these particular violations influencing a government decision, which the official has a financial benefit, thats a fairly egregious ethical breach and the thought was, and we had some discussion, i had mentioned it, this person by admitting these things has
Her, and which she accepted certain putsv, which were the extent of what we could punish her for, for these particular violations. So, in that sense, then, our job was over in regard to ms. Ellis. The thought was at the time when we were doing this, and we had none of you all here, nobody was here. The thought when we were doing this, that in regard to these particular violations influencing a government decision, which the official has a financial benefit, thats a fairly egregious ethical breach and the thought was, and we had some discussion, i had mentioned it, this person by admitting these things has really admitted that she engaged in corrupt conduct and has disgraced herself and it would be unlikely that she would continue in San Francisco employment, that she would likely be fired. So, the next step, then, was that it was in the the ball was in the court of the San Francisco Public Utilities commission. And i had heard that they had not terminated her. So, i was the one who int
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, see. Thank you especially secretary hagel for joining us. Lets start off with one bit of this. There is some ebola order today, tell us what the significance is. What i signed this morning was a memorandum to the chairman of joint chiefs of staff in response to the memorandum of recommendation i received from the chairman and the chiefs yesterday to go forward with a policy of essentially 21 day incubation for our men and women who would be returning from west africa. That policy was put in place by the chief of staff of the army a couple of days ago for general williams, and 10 of his associates who are now back at their base in italy. And what i said in response this morning was, give me within 15 days the operational specifics of how that would work. And then i believe we should review the policy within 45 days. The fact is the military will have more americans in liberia than any other department. Thats number one. Number two, our people, our younge
Herrera in similar amounts. In section ten is says that due to the records involved. And it has been side tracked from the regular duties end quote, under the sunshine ordinance and the San Francisco public records act. And responding to public records requests, they are among the regular duties of every City Employees. This mistakingly represents this as something that they are being taken away from their duties. It is part of their duty and any City Employee who is asked for a record is a requirement and part of their job duties to provide a job response. And putting this in a report saying that they are taken away from the regular duties it is simply a ploy and the record request to something and it is a legitimate legal request from a citizen of San Francisco. And the control and the supervision or a record and not getting it. And it is my own experience after chasing him for two solid years and going through the City Attorneys Office and a petition that the supervisor of records t
From the regular duties end quote, under the sunshine ordinance and the San Francisco public records act. And responding to public records requests, they are among the regular duties of every City Employees. This mistakingly represents this as something that they are being taken away from their duties. It is part of their duty and any City Employee who is asked for a record is a requirement and part of their job duties to provide a job response. And putting this in a report saying that they are taken away from the regular duties it is simply a ploy and the record request to something and it is a legitimate legal request from a citizen of San Francisco. And the control and the supervision or a record and not getting it. And it is my own experience after chasing him for two solid years and going through the City Attorneys Office and a petition that the supervisor of records to continue to records and those were the very records used to find him in violation of the regulations. And i did