Decision. Absolutely. I believe the absolute decision is going to the Ethics Commission. And we havent heard from them. We have not. Im not sure i feel comfortable going further into asking questions. I dont feel weve had the proper time to understand where things are with her poim. Appointment. Im not necessarily opposed to appointing her if shes cleared by if Ethics Commission, but i dont think the way the notifications happened and we dont have a meeting until our first meeting is january 8 of next year, which is a swearing in ceremony. We actually have our First Official meeting the tuesday after that. We could have a special meeting on january 7, which i think would be the 30 day rule 30 day s from the notice that the maize your had given us, but im not sure we want to schedule a special meeting before we have our special swearing in ceremony or we have the mayor rescind it and come back with another one, but those are my recommendations on how to move forward. I dont know if we have enough information to feel that we fell perfect ly well about making this appointment moving forward. Supervisor campos. Thank you madam president. Let me say that i have been treating calls with this individual with ms. Jordan and i know that she has been willing to have a conversation with me and i know that she could not be here today and so i dont want to prejudge anything or jump to any conclusions, especially if the individual is unable to be be here. Just a couple questions for the City Attorney in terms of how much time the board has to act on this item. My understanding is that there was an actual physical swearing in of this individual by the mayor and whether or not that swearing in is legally appropriate. Deputy City Attorney job gibner. The appointment is subject to charter section 3. 100, which means the mayor can make an appointment and the appointment is effective as soon as the mayor makes the appointment and sends the notice to the board of supervisors. Then the board of supervisors has 30 days of receiving the notice to vote to reject the nominee or the appointee business eight votes. Here the mayor, i dont recall the dates, indicated his intent to reappointment ms. Jordan to the retirement board and swore her in, but he swore her in before sending the notice of appointment to the board, so that swearing in was premature. She didnt start her term that day. The mayor then, i understand instructed his staff to take the appropriate steps to complete the appointment and the mayor and staff sent the notice of appointment to the clerks office, which the clerk received on december 8, so that is the day that the 30 day clause for the board of supervisors started to tick. I understand that the commissioner was later sworn in again because her first swearing in was too early and the Mayors Office is nodding that yes, she was sworn in again after the mayor gave the notice to the board. Where things stand for right now with you is you can reject it before january 7. If you dont act by january 7, the appointment stand. As a matter of law, given that he has once notification happens the board has 30 days depending on the appointment to act, when does the term begin . I mean, is that typical that the mayor would swear someone in even before the 30a that the board has to act expires . The charter is written in a way that makes it appropriate. Basically the appointment become effective when the mayor appoints and provides notice to the board. The person can be sworn in then and the clock starts ticking and if the board rejects it the appointee loses the seat. It understand it doesnt its counterintuitive, but thats the way the charter raze. Reads. In this case the special meeting on january 7, but that would be your last day. Now, there have a number of allegations made in terms of non compliance with ethical requirements and we heard free the retirement board, sort of their at least the executive directors view as to the question of incompatible activities. Does the City Attorneys office have an opinion as to whether or not this individual has complied with all the ethical requirements under state law . I can only speak to what i know based on the public filings and conversation with ms. Jordan. As supervisor avalos mentioned, the executive director of the retirement board received a complaint that ms. Jordan had accepted an investment while a member of the retirement board where the company had granted her the ability to invest even though her amount was below the threshold. The statement of incompatible activities is a local law adopted by the Ethics Commission for each individual City Department and commission and the retirement boards statement of incompatible activities has a statement which is that no officer or ploy yeez may directly or indirectly cyst or accept a Business Opportunity, personal loan, favor or anything of value from any public or private entity. This company gmo is doing because with so did ms. Jordan accept a Business Opportunity. There is as use can hear, the language of the statement of incompatible activity is open to interpretation. Mr. Huish has interpreted it in a way that he believes most appropriate. There is currently a complaint thats been forwarded of the Ethics Commission and they e would forward that as an enforcement p matter. The question is, did she accept the Business Opportunity, the advantage before she was a retirement board member and then just later exercised that opportunity, or did she hold on to it from before and then decide to accept it once she was on the board in 2011 . I dont think theres a black and white answer to that that i can give you today. Its a question of interpretation of the statement of incompatible activities based on the facts and as supervisor avalos said, i think ultimately the Ethics Commission in this case will resolve it. There are a couple different ways the Ethics Commission resolves issues like this. One is a person can ask for advice, a public request for advice from the Ethics Commission. They then draft a public resfons saying heres what your statement of incompatible activities means. Thats a public process. When mr. Huish forwarded the complaint to the Ethics Commission he instigated a confidential process of ethic enforcement action. I dont know how long that process may take, but at this point its confidential so i dont know where it stand and i understand the board it is possible that the Ethics Commission could decide either way depending on their interpretation of that. Thats right. Theres an matter of ethics. They could dismiss it, preach a settlement where she could pay monetary penalties, or hold a public hearing leading to a determination. What is the amount of the penalties here . Under the charter and local ethics law, the Ethics Commission has the ability to impose fines for up to 5000 for each violation. It takes into account all sorts of factors in determining the penalty they apply. Besides the specific ethical requirements that apply to this agency, are there any other sections of the government code or common law that would apply to a determination of whether or not there was compliance with ethical requirements . Arising out of this gmo transaction, its possible. Im not entirely sure that ms. Jordan could have a conflict if in agreement with gmo comes before the retirement board in her the future. I understand the last time the retirement board approved an agreement with gmo was Something Like 20 years ago. I dont know how many times ms. Jordan has recused herself as a board member. I know that supervisor avalos asked for that information a few days ago. This chronicle article referenced other allegations. I dont really have any information to verify that or speak to it. And i know that for elected officials and others, the section 1090 of the government codes requires limitations. Section 1090 would apply to a commissioner. The political reform act would require her to recuse herself if shes making a decision in her role as a board member that would impact her own financial holdings. An as always, my office works with every board member who want to figure out when to recuse themselves. I know there are times when recusal may be necessary for any of us, but many times when a recusal could invalidate the decision of the agency, is there that risk here . The law that you referenced, Government Code Section 1090 is the law that sometimes requires commissioners to step down. It would only require a commissioner step down if he or she has a financial interest in a company that is contracting with her department that her board has to approve and her financial interest in that company doesnt sit within a recognized exception. I havent looked at that particular question for ms. Jordan. I dont think this is the type of transaction that would require stepping down if a gmo contract came to the board in the future, it would require her to recuse herself. [inaudible]. I hate to predict the future based on the limited information that i have, but from what i know, the primary allegation is that ms. Jordan violated the statement of incompatible activities an we obviously will work closely with her to make sure she recuses herself in any future vote to ensure those votes are not subject to any legal challenge based on a con septd. September. Thank you very much. What id simply say is i dont know what is whether or not theres any violation here. You know, i think that you want to be very careful about jumping to any conclusions. What i can say is based on the fact that she was certainly willing to speak to me, i know that she wants the facts to be known and i think you have to give the individual the benefit of the doubt, but i do believe though that there are enough questions that i dont feel comfortable saying one way or the other here and i would think that the best thing to do with Something Like this is to give the individual an opportunity to come before the board and answer any questions that we may have and to engage in this kind of discussion so thats what i hope happens. I think that we have an obligation to this individual to make sure we give her that opportunity, but i think we also have an opportunity to the employees an retired employees of the system to make sure that their interests are protected and so i think that to do that, more information is needed and i certainly dont feel comfortable moving forward without getting that additional information. Thank you supervisor cohen. Thank you very much. Excuse my back. I have a couple questions. Just so were on the same page. My names molia and i m im appointed by this body and colleagues to sit on this body in the retirement board. I have a couple questions to bring us up to speed on the page on what exactly San Francisco retirement board duty is. Karen, could you tell us briefly what is the mission of this organization . Its to invest the assets prudently and in the best interest of the beneficiaries. How many people are on this body. Seven commissioners. How do they get to sit there . There are three elected by the retired and active members, three that are appointed by the mayor and there is one who is appointed by the board of supervisors. Okay. So some are elected, some are appointed. Yes. Oftentimes the word fiduciary is thrown around. Could you describe for us what that is . Fiduciary has the interest to put the interest of their trustees ahead of their personal interest at all times. Okay. Can you give us the background exactly of what the complaint is against her . The current complaint relates to ms. Jordans investment in gmo quality fund, a publicly traded mutual fund. The allegation is that because gmo is also an investment manager with retirement system, that that was an improper investment on her part. There are two sections of the statement of incompatible activities that were referred to in the complaint. The first prohibits, both employees and members of the board, from investing it says specifically no officer or employee maize invest money with limited partnerships that are doing business was [inaudible]. Because the gmo investment was publicly traded at that section was inapplicable. The one that seems to be of concern here is the second one that says no Business Opportunity, a personal loan, a favor or anything of that value from any public or private entity or firm doing business with spurs. The allegation is that although ms. Jordan received this opportunity before she was appointed to the board in august 2010, the fact that she exercised the opportunity after the fact was a violation. What year did she exercise this . 2011. 2011. So shes been on the retirement board since 2010 and the allegations these charges are brought up against her in 2014. Correct. Okay. And correct me if im wrong, but there was the we fill out a form 700 indicating how much where our assets are and where our investment ms are, correct . Yes. And when we file these forms, what happens to them . The process has changed recently, but in the past they would be filed directly with the board secretary and she would forward them to the Ethics Commission and with respect to the Retirement Commission, the board secretary would file them in house and review them. So she filed on the 700 form that she had this investment . Yes, its been disclosed. Did she or did she not have to disclose that . She did not because her investment was a publicly traded mutual fund. The law says it will be ill league ague illegal to make an investment in something thats a private entity. So thats good to know. What exactly if we were to approve her appointment, is there any recourse that this body has should we find out at a later date that the Ethics Commission has found her to be in violation . You may not be the best person to answer this question, ill defer to the City Attorney. Say the Ethics Committee finds her to be in violation, then what . Deputy City Attorney again, the Ethics Commission typically in that type of situation would impose a monetary penalty. The board secretary would not have any further authority to discipline or remove her. The mayor as the appointing authority has the power to remove the members that he appoints. Does this body have any power to remove anybody . Cow do. You do, as you may recall, a number of different appointed and elected officials can be charged with official misconduct and removed for official misconduct. The way that process works is the mayor or appointing authority can suspends the individual, file charges, and the board ultimately decides to remove the commission. The retirement board is not subject to that portion of the charter. The retirement Board Members serve at the subject of the mayor and can be removed by the mayor. Okay. So im going to go back to you. Can you tell me how long has ms. Jordan served . She was appointed in august 2010. Any complaints against her . No. Other that what surfaced today. Okay. All right, thank you. So colleagues, i this question opportunity for questions have been very helpful. Im supporting the appointment of p wendy jordan. Shes been a fair person, easy to talk to and able to listen. Whether she takes a meeting or doesnt take a meeting, thats up to her personal interest. The difference between being a trustee and a member of the board of supervisors is we are elected to serve people and our constituents and we have the responsibility to be accountable to folks. Whats interesting is when youre a fizz fiduciary is youre supposed to be a political. Our number one role [inaudible] when we retire. So im vested to make sure that this fund grows and im sure many of you are interested in making sure this fund grows. I am not interested in scheduling another meeting to sit at a whole. I think if the Ethics Commission finds her to be in any kind of violation i think we can take up the matter then. I want to reminds people that the Ethics Commission could take almost a year to review this process so we could be in limbo for a long time. Thank you supervisor cohen. Supervisor avalos. Thank you. Well, like the ginsu knife theres more to talk about. For instance, gmo had a 10 million threshold for their funds, but having a 10 million threshold, is it really a public fund if you have to have 10 million to invest. You cant by investment for gmo through e trade so i cant really shed a lot of light on that, supervisor. My understanding is that the april 2014 complaint was directed to the executive director of the Ethics Commission. I know that mr. Huish received a copy as well as others. To our knowledge that is pending before the Ethics Commission. I can say the Retirement Commission has not been contact td regardsing that. Thats something thats still in doubt. Also the 10 million threshold for investment and she didnt have to meet that it looks like theres a favor that has been given. Whether its publicly traded or not and she has stock, thats an issue. I dont feel comfortable moving forward and that would be my recommendation that i would ask the mayor to either rescind the appointment and come back in the new year and then therell be more time to decide. Perhaps there could be some effort for the Ethics Commission to clear her more quickly than they are now. Currently right now i dont feel we have enough information to feel that this is the right approach to take. Now, i also before i get off the mic, i did talk with ms. Jordan last week. I know shes very knowledgeable, i recognize shes given quite a lot of time and her service for the retirement board. I dont want to discount that in an