And it appears on the march 10, 2020 agenda unless otherwise stated. Mr. Clerk, call item number 1. Clerk a motion directing the clerk of the board to initiate a request for proposals process for special Investigation Services. Thank you. Supervisor haney, as a sponsor of this measure, the floor is yours. Thank you, chair marr, and good morning, everyone. I think that this is, you know, obviously a very challenging time for our city right now with multiple departments who have been implicated in a larger investigation. Clearly, you know, charges that have been levied by the u. S. Attorney against individuals in government and outside. And it is critical that we do everything that we can to investigate fully, prevent any future fraud or corruption, and to do everything that we can to restore the public trust. This is not a time for business as usual and i think that the public is looking to us as the board of supervisors to investigate fully to make some serious changes around accountab
Imperial here. And johnson, here. We expect richards to be absent. First on the agenda is items for continues. Case 202052pca for the standard environmental conditions of approval, administrative and planning code amendments. Proposed for continuance to march 18, 2020. 2018, 11430, 1776 green street are proposed for indefinite knz. Items 3a and 2018 deny 282, 780 cancer street, continued to march 5. And case number 2018149, discretionary review is withdrawn. I have no speaker cards. President koppel anyone who wishes to comment on the items proposed for continuance . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner johnson move to continue items 1 through 4 as proposed. Second. Thank you, commissioners. On the motion, diamond aye. Fung aye. Imperial aye. Moore aye. Johnson aye. Koppel aye. So moved. That motion passes unanimously. Item 2b and 3b. I will continue to the date specified, thanks. Very good. That places us under item 5, adoption of draft minutes can february, 13, 2020. P
Good morning Committee Members, im dr. Derek kerr, a whistleblower. An audit of the program is a good idea but it should not be a peer review audit. That would just buy into the biases and weaknesses that all Whistleblower Programs have. It would be important to get to an whistleblower advocacy organization, such as the Government Accountability project in washington d. C. One of the consultants could advise to the standards that a Whistleblower Program should have to meet the needs of the whistleblowers in the public. It needs to be an independent audit and not by the same folks. We heard a lot about the rising quantity of complaints, but i want to talk about the quality or value of those complaints. Since the inception, the Whistleblower Program has been plagued by minor complaints. The 20102011 civil grand jury found that 36 were true whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to tria
My kids have trouble accessing content in the textbook loaded online. Sometimes physics text. Its a good idea to be using online resources, but then it brings into question my concern around access to technology for students who are expected to do their instructional kind of work is loaded on google classroom or their textbooks are uploaded. My kids are sharing the concerns, but i dont know how other than a parent sharing with principal, how that would come back to you and then us. I want to raise a question because were moving online, a lot of the instruction is moving online and that its a funny space because its not a textbook per se, but it is the curriculum materials. Kids dont have access to if they dont have access to Laptop Computers or wifi. Its my understanding that we dont have a Technology Policy around access to curriculum. Do you know about that . Not know about that . Ive asked and it doesnt seem like we have an explicit policy around ensuring students have access to onl
Maritime. Points to maritimel evaluation criteria will get poe reality is they may impute it. T a requirement from the pointing. On page 12 of the staff repoe the scoring criteria with more e saw on the slides. And if you ld 1e under quality of design devet submittal, 1b talks about perfot objectives which includes marite calls out this balance that comr makras is pointing out. I agreet talk about how they are weightee is called out. So how many people are goinge panel. At least four. And its in tt plan or include just a momen. I saw that. But is four a go . Dont you usually need an odd n . Well, theres scoring so i me was a tie i guess having a fifte good. And we left it open. But , it has development expert, porty member and person representing r regional interest. We thought in additional need, we could add ar expertise if needed. When is that decision going . Who is going to be included on . We would in our schedule g to begin to put names out there, have the rfps out on the street