[gavel]. Morning avenue one. Welcome to our wills Committee Meeting of july 28 26 and im katie tang chairman of the committee get to my right is vice chairman eric cannot. From sfgov tv we would like to thank Charles Kremenak and jusco larson. Supervisor cohen is unfortunately stuck in committee today. She may or may not be able to join us will get a motion to excuse her from this meeting. With that mr. Clerk any announcements yes. The silence all cell phones Electronic Devices and complete speaker cards. Items acted upon today will be on the september 6, 2016 supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated thank you these call item 1 item 1, [reading code] actually with go into that motion real quickly to excuse supervisor cohen moved and seconded. Will do that without objection supervisor cohen is excused [gavel] so, we have here one seed one applicant mr. Clinton ellicott if you would like to come forward . Good morning. Thank you mdm. Chairwoman for the time spent with me relative to my application and thank you supervisor mar for your gracious telephone call yyesterday. I hope you have eight 3 min. Rule because i dont want to abuse my time. I want to make three points. The chairwoman and one or two other people have asked me my reason or reasons for applying. My answer is, good citizenship. Which i believe in. Because i was brought up by parents who believed in good citizenship and participation in Civic Affairs in public responsibilities. Second reason is my lengthy experience, mostly legislatively subject matter related to the responsibility of the Ethics Commission. As i reflected and thought about it, i began in 1972, the first year i was a San Francisco supervisor. The then charter, which had been adopted by voters in 1932 and amended contained only a predatory conflict of interest provision. I introduced a proposal to make it a conflict of Interest Coalition with penalties for violation. That was presented to San Francisco voters in 1973 and enacted. I also, in 1974, introduced with coauthor john j baba gelato [sp . ] the first San Francisco election spending and donation ordinance, which limited spending to about 46,000 for a board of supervisors campaign at a time supervisors were elected at large by the whole city and i think was about 123,000 for mayor. That emulated the first speed is of its kind in california in the city of san diego. Unfortunately, for a controlling Campaign Contributions excesses, the United States supreme court, two years later, in a case entitled buckley the vallejo, held it was a violation of the First Amendment to limit expenditures in a Political Campaign for public office. Donations could be limited and, gosh, 17 maybe now 15 years later, in 1988, a republican assemblyman, a Democratic State senator, my then seat mate in the state senate and i initiated a ballot measure by the Initiative Process to impose donation limits and other provisions on all california governmental entity Political Campaigns. That was proposition 73 and the november 1980 election and it was approved by california voters. Again, unfortunately, some 78 judicial attacks, most of which failed, but one of which in effect an old proposition 73 and the United StatesDistrict Court for the Eastern District of california. Affirmed by the United States court of appeals for the ninth circuit. In 1990, i introduced and pursued to enactment what is now, you will pardon, the egotistical recitation called, the quintin know conflict of interest act relating to the board of equalizer nation, the board of equalization, as you know, as quasijudicial responsibilities and that act was passed in 1990, but with a compromise on my part, which gives the lie to anyone who might say he never compromises. So, that there is a 250 limit or a member of the board must recuse himself or herself if he or she has received more than 250 from a party appealing a tax assessment subject to the board of equalize asian equalization. The footnote is there is pending legislation in both the assembly and senate to reduce that to 100 and also include in it the socalled behest of donations to nonprofits that a commissioner of the board of equalization might be involved in. Thereafter, at the instigation of Bruce Bruggeman [sp . ], the famous publisher of the San Francisco the guardian and the california Newspaper Publishers association, i introduced a bill to represent the first revision of the Ralph M Brown opened meeting at which is been enacted in 1953. That measure was opposed by every local agency in california could board of supervisors, league of california cities, the California School district association. The california special district association. Then Assembly MemberJohn L Burton became a coauthor and we were successful in enacting it with the acquiescence of then gov. Pete wilson who had been mayor of the city of san diego earlier in his career. After that, i introduced about a year or so later a major revision of the California Public records act to strengthen the ability of people to obtain Public Records. Today, the word is called transparency. The third reason that i filed my application is based on hearsay, reading, and some conversations that the Ethics Commission new executive director is competent and capable and brings a sense of reactivation as compared to her predecessor about whom i heard complaints. That the staff is composed of strongly motivated individuals and that it is a worthy exercise of citizenship to be a part of the fivemember Ethics Commission in these present circumstances. Thank you. Thank you very much good for the deep background of what you have done in your role especially as a legislative at the state level in terms of better Government Transparency and so forth. I know that a lot of the times you will probably be spending, if youre pointed to the Ethics Commission, your time may be interpreting law that perhaps youve written yourself or that you have laid a huge role in it so that will certainly be very interesting. Now, given your deep background in again cracking open government and transparency laws and policies, i am just wondering you in your role as a commissioner, you will have to be very neutral just like you are as a judge which im sure youre very familiar with. In terms of setting aside maybe positions you held as a legislature to be in a neutral. I am just wondering if you can kind of elaborate on whether you find that to be something youre going to be able to achieve . Im sorry. My hearing aids are beingyou want me to, don . So youre very deeply involved in the crafting of open government and shows that the legislation as a legislature. And in your role as an Ethics Commissioner here you will be tasked with interpreting some of those Laws Committee you had involvement in as a legislator. So, i was just asking you to comment on your ability to be a neutral commissioner . I know that in your role as a judge you certainly have been able to demonstrate that the regulations in the charter sense, and the duties and responsibilities and limitations on members of the Ethics Commission are in the San Francisco charter, and i note the bar against participation publicly in any city Elective Office campaign. I note, also, the bar on participation in any city ballot measure. I believe in law enforcement. I believe that the law applies to everyone. That, obviously, includes me as a perspective Ethics Commissioner. I will certainly follow and obey that law and those prohibitions in all matters. Thank you. Supervisor mar thank you for the history and legal lecture, too, about how a lot of our laws in the state and San Francisco have come about. It will be great to have you on the attics commission sen. Cobb. I want to say that even thinking back about buckley versus alejo and four years of speech and money in politics i want to ask you about a question from 30 years ago, and you addressed opposition 73 it wasnt just you but others that crafted the state ballot measure, but one part of proposition 73 really opposed to Public Financing of elections and i think it was according to common cause, which raised a concern with my office, i just want to ask you about your position on Public Financing . Because i know San Franciscos small donor Public Matching Funds Program is really a heart of reducing the influence of money in politics. I know that you insert supervisor tangs question but i want to ask you more directly, do you still believe in the proposition 73 positions against Public Financing and also how would you address that as the Ethics Commission is charged with carrying out and in forcing our Public Financing policies . There are a couple of ways, maybe more, to phrase a response to your understandable question. The elemental response is that Public Financing is the law of San Francisco. The Ethics Commission has important responsibility in the execution and administration of that wall. As i just said, and i will repeat it, i believe in law enforcement. I walked accordingly. Now, let me ruminate for one more item that is relevant. Proposition 73 included several provisions. One of them barred Public Financing. All three of us im a democrat republican, independent, included that because we believe in it. Another one also banned one Political Office holder taking donations and then transferring them to another or [inaudible] unfortunately, that provision was held unconstitutional. The Public Financing clause was held invalid in Los Angeles Superior Court and a lawsuit initiated by the city of los angeles on the ground that state law could not regulate a charter city. Los angeles was and is a charter city. The easiest way to describe the reason for my feeling is that, personally, i would abhor the use of money i paid government in taxes, fees, to be used by a lets take an extreme exampleas david duke of candidates. San franciscos ordinance weakens that kind of a transaction because San Franciscos ordinance requires, in effect, to use the abbreviated description, a candidate to be serious in order to qualify for my tax payments. Were yours or others of our 850,000 fellow san franciscans. That is rational. A candidate, as you know, has to raise so much money on his or her own in order to qualify. That certainly reduces the possibility of it being used by somebody who you abhor. And resent using your money. I appreciate your candor and your supported across the board by so many different people from communities that appreciate your history of resisting conflict of interest and creating Greater Transparency and being a watchdog did i want to say that friends of ethics its great that mr. Buckman is here from our former guardian but i know Many Community members feel that Public Financing and the electoral reforms we have achieved in San Francisco were very proud of come up with the different efforts by big business groups to weaken our Public Financing and electoral reforms could im wondering if if future efforts, where big business forces in particular i tried to weaken the Public Financing system. Would you reconcile those issues at the local level . Well, with respect to specifically to Public Financing, as far as i know, i know of no suggestion that it be altered. That certainly i know of no suggestion or no person who has communicated with me a desire to repeal it. Or, to change it. In some way. If such a proposal is made to the Ethics Commission i will treat it like the quads i judicial position that an Ethics Commissioner has. That is, evaluate the arguments. Evaluate probably evidence about use in other jurisdictions, both american and foreign countries. And make a decision accordingly. Im not going to let my feelings in the commencement of the proposition 73 drafting in 1988 control or affect my evaluation, theoretically, in 2016 or 2017 or 18 of Public Financing in San Francisco. Thank you for your willingness to serve and i think you would be a breath of fresh air on the Ethics Commission to support their leadership role. I think everyone for writing to us with very thoughtful comments from John Dollinger to larry bush and friends of ethics to many others. Norman yee writing in your support. Thank you sen. Cobb may i impose mdm. Chairwoman, just to express the Public Record my thanks. To all of those individuals to former mayor art agnews, mr. Broadman, the San Francisco chamber of commerce, the california First Amendment coalition of which ive been a board member about 3. 5four years. For my friend, as i thought about it over 40 years, fellow attorney and vice chairman of the attics commission, peter kane. Mr. John gallon jug, nobody forgetting people. I dont know of other organizations. I know the friends of ethics mr. Larry bush, i want to thank them publicly. Thank you mdm. Chair one thank you very much. For your presentation and for answering our questions. So, i know there are quite a few people who probably want to comment on this and so i just have one card jim lazarus would appear here to speak on item 1 please, on all. Good morning chairperson tang supervisor mar. My name is peter king. Im the vice chairman of the San FranciscoEthics Commission and im happy and honored to be here to speak on behalf of judge called for this position. If you see fit will be joining us as our fifth member good supervisor brett and is to help position that was appointed by the board of supervisors because of a busy schedule he resigned a wild go so thats why supervisor cop the vacancy is there. Supervisor cop mentioned, known him had been his friend and also his admirer in San Francisco government for over 40 years. Ive watched him as a San Francisco supervisor as a state senator and as a judge. He has the ultimate in integrity and knowledge and intelligence relating to ethics and law. He is someone that will bring more than a breath of fresh air to the Ethics Commission. He will exalt it tremendously in my opinion. Hes quite corrected i been on the Ethics Commission now for about 22. 5 years. When i came on the prior executive director before the deployment of land palo, the commission itself was really something that left a lot to be desired. Leeann palo has brought an enormous amount of energy and drive and focus to the commission and to the staff. So, for the first time really in the commissions history as i know it, its doing its job and its doing it well. Thats why its been able to attract someone like went and caught. So im very excited and looking forward to being a colleague of judging, on the commission i think the city is going to be enhanced by it and all of us will be very appreciative of your support of his candidacy. Thank you very much thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Thank you mdm. Chairwoman supervisor cannot. My name is peter scheer and executive director of the First AmendmentCoalition Nine here to speak on behalf of the First Amendment coalition. As supervisor cop mentioned a moment ago, he is currently a member of the board of directors of the First Amendment coalition and has been for about 34 years. Its in that capacity that