Transcripts For SFGTV Small Business Commission 41017 20170425

Good afternoon and welcome to the Planning Commission this is the regular meeting for thursday, april 13, thursday, april 13, any kind. Proceedings. And when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. My name is ace and im on the case. Reflect ill start off with an introduction im here specifically to talk on issues about part about the honorable cop the double dipping in the city here but my name is ace and im on the case. Some of those people out there they want to be all mass but no mystery just check the black history i been working on case and ball with a lot of conspires and some people dont like me cop im here for my 3 kids and Community Ladies and gentlemen, im for out migration at least believe me that was passed through our Lieutenant Governor newsom the next governor anonymously and made it institutionalized about the black population going on down hes saying would what is going down in this town the black population going down and when the benefits come we might not be no where around you know what 50 percent hiring is a bunch of stuff we cant afford to pay that high dog on rent in city hall it gets silly what you see in city hall is r it gets so silly you all call it city hall i call it silly hall. Once im going to tell you cop ill be here at city hall dont you want to know what goes on down here in city hall dont you want to know anyway, im here today basically to make statements and this is my first time here i thought ill come down accuse my appearance im here to express but the city of San Francisco i city and county we as africanamerican negroes are are in a state you find answering despite the city by the bay newsom put a mechanism together to out migration im here to talk about that my name is ace and im on the case. Thank you hello, im larry bush for friends of the library i have two issues not on the agenda one is the issue of whistle blowers between city agencies and not had a return to the Ethics Commission id like to hand you from the expect essay in the west side observer highlighted what it changed from the past to where that is now were urging that you all have another hearing to look at the changes the changes are significant we have a damp eagle effect different from the Commission Approved a year ago but needs to be revetted and go to an interested persons meeting the other issue i think we want to bring up the question of the Planning Commissioner accepted a Fulltime Position at spur as an advocate a position on a matter that is coming up this thursday on inclusionary housing she has taken the view not consistent on this issue theyve not directly lobbied the Planning Commission that is a crappy conflict of interest and disappointed to see in the corresponds with the meyers that was advise that came from an attorney who is also an attorney here and Ethics Commission and heres a copy of correspondence back and forth from the Mayors Office theyre interested in seeing that she doesnt have to recuse herself on issues important to the administration that would be this coming thursday meeting the fact shes now the advocate on spur on behalf of San Francisco policy and they building that she should resign from the commission we think that the commission should send a notice to all commissioners about what constitutes the appearance of a cultivating in discussions at a meeting she said that shes not paid by spur but a foundation but when be couldnt remember the pay at this time she couldnt resigns until the mayor allowed her to resign thats not the basis how people serve so were going to bring this to the attention of the commission to whoever is watching. Chairman i will wait until Public Comment has ended but want to make a motion on that subject. Very well. Commissioners thank you for having us. Green house us this time and thank you, larry bush on everything he said a do the best we can conflict of interest on that commission but im interfering a district 11 resident im the treasury for the bureaucrats and a volunteer field organizer for the Money Campaign going on 5 years weve working closely with organizations that often o move on and many outvoted in and the Campaign Finance reform oblique last years prop c x one and the state initiate to overturn Citizens United im here to support the commissioner keane ethic you can see proposal this corruption is at a heart of politics in the america and whatever the interpretation citizens u 234i9d allows the groups to used money to influence candidates in policy decision cool and in particular San Francisco is a leader in Campaign Finance reform thank you for that a concurrent influence of money in politics is equivalent we live in the richest and yet have the inequality gap in america were in a fullblown housing crisis and can guarantee you some of the policy decisions and contracts weve grand that led to the crisis were by Campaign Contributions and promises in mind rather than the merit and what is most beneficial to the people in public common good so im here to urge you to pass commissioner keanes proposal in its entirety thank you. Thank you good evening, commissioners mark solomon i wanted to go ahead and comment on larry bushes comments we have a major policy decision that will affect the east side for decades to come in our form of government a place for san franciscans are basically completely excluded a commission from the government nicole the developer form of government were looking a major decision where san franciscans are not at the table with the Affordable Housing people that are dumping this question into the Planning Commission not thought about it cutting us up for a shift from Affordable Housing they cant execute a Charlie Brown but to make sure that san franciscans r front and center in the commission 0 progress and spur that as basically been knocked it out of the park for policy and work within the membership to get Campaign Contributions for officials the work im going on the prop j not the developers the main go contributors but their consultants their architects, theyre associated people that sit around from projecting that is what spur is it is associated sector of the economy that makes their money off the project that on the Planning Commission is where the agency that will be regulated by the Planning Commission has been captured and no negligental independence not serving one master ms. Johnson is serving spur and the architect and supposed to be serving as a representative we cant have that for the Commission Council to recommend to that thats okay means is Ethics Commission didnt have independent counsel if in their council serves the City Attorney that serves the mayor and the Planning Commission for independent council for the Ethics Commission so not only does our counsel serve one master but independent advise so the commissioners can serve one master that is theyd the move the needle of its been with the pay to play cultivate we need you to step up and this will change the accountable policy moving forward so neighborhoods in the mission will see a change in the neighborhoods worse than in the past attempts to mitigate theyre not mitigating the problem it a complete mess thank you. clapping. thank you any Public Comment on matters not appearing on the agenda if not commissioner kopp. Mr. Chair fellow commissioners, i agree with many bushs comments and the supporting comments of other members of the public who taken the time to give us the benefit of their effort and attention. And it is bother some with with respect to the issue not the procedural issue respecting commissioner johnson of the Planning Commission but the substantive issue about which i made no statement whatsoever and would be in appropriate for this commission to make that statement but i note the record shows that commissioner johnson was announced last month as the executive director of spur San Francisco chapter and the public records demonstrates some of the donations matters of which resulted in positions of opposition or support the various ballot measures in 2016 and probably before that i strongly believe commissioner johnson should recuse herself from the item which is on the Planning Commissions agenda for thursday which is april 27, 2017, and therefore i will make a motion that the Ethics Commission transmit a letter to combhoks requesting she recuse herself if any item dealing with the subject matter which i will characterize as low Income Housing and other sponsors can probably refine it in a technically appropriate way. Is there a second to the motion. Second. All right. If i can interject not a matter it is agendize for tonight meeting beyond the scope the brown act i want to not that for procedural but nothing about the brown act for the individual commissioners like commissioner kopp and yourselves may want to separately send a letter to commissioner johnson. Noted for the record in regards to the substance of what youre raising mr. Chin that is educated this is a matter coming for vote rather soon and it is something that is clearly within the purview of the Ethics Commission something that the Ethics Commission shouldnt speak to because of the importance of the ethical issue involved so i think that im going to rule that common places motion it in order and that we should go forward with the discussion and debate on it. We have a motion and second any further discussion by the members of the commission . Ill just want to associate mitchel with commissioner kopps remarks and motion and also ill associate mitchel is it so germane to say things that were raised by the members of the public it seems no further comments in the commission well take Public Comment good evening david pilpal a couple of thoughts while i certainly agree with commissioner kopps underlying concerns i do give worth to the City Attorneys caution this is not prove or disprove on the agenda and think nairns the timeline perhaps a way to graft the findings that you this came to the commission attention subsequent to the posting and defer this matter to the following meeting will whatever the appropriate brown act and sunshine findings youre in a good place to take this action absent that a problem setting this conversation from the full commission could do this is as individuals and the other caution ill suggest there could be a complaint or investigation if commissioner johnson does recuse herself im not sure the commission is in a good place to send this advance warning even if it is coming from a good place inasmuch as you have to do not future to consider the merits of an investigation enforcement action should that come out those are many real concerns you may want to been in the next couple of minutes who to proceed im currently with the underlying concern it is well founded tough place. Any future Public Comment. Yes. Ace on the case im supportive of commissioner kopps investigation double dipping is gingko in the city after you finish them go to ocii look at their executive director executive director of what is it public finances and go to the Housing Authority over and over the president the commission the depend upon of oewd that tells me mayor ed lee didnt have enough qualified people im speaking specifically dealing with the Africanamerican Community in a state of emergency and the mayor has people double dipping and in the fillmore particularly i got to mention it read the papers im looking other people ive known for 15 years and fbi with the mayor ed lee knows me knows me now the mayor thank god he didnt want to see me once the paper said over 5 hundred agents investigation from 2011 to what is going on now all that money spent when we finish this we need to go down the list ill be coming here and telling you what i see at city hall and trying to tell you that is against the law what i horde is so absurd in the history in front of me ive been here for 25 years yeah 24 years and through the administrations i worked on the Frank Jordans with the first black marijuana ace in our face and evolved to what i am 63 years old and done died of surgery for 24 years and now double dipping and double dual you need to context that my name is ace and im on the case. And here to evaluate ill bring you a list ed lee shame on you man ive not be able to see him skews the way im looking not dressed to impress but here to have clarity in the way they do government im 63 years old and been around when commissioner kopp was on the board of supervisors and doing what people are doing now checking government i was a young pickup and now 63 ive done you know my friends leave that alone im here on the act of god move on with a new era i dont have time for new eras speaking on behalf of friends of ethics we support this to commissioner johnson i think david pilpal suggestion of preamble this was an issue that arose since the last Ethics Commission and the fact that the vote is coming up on theirs was only noticed i think over the weekend but it is shouldnt be a prisoner of the calendar should be speaking out on behalf of the citys interest and would be an opportunity down the road when you take a review of conflict of interest policy in the city to deal more fully on the appearance of a conflict because if you go to the City Attorneys gallows government guide about a financial conflict with money coming into to you this is a indirect payment according to commissioner johnson is problematic to make that claim off the top no problem with saying a conflict of interest pretend to be an advocate and no conflict as long as no lobbying the fact theyve gone on that pubically and made a recommendation and the Mayors Office is saying they want her to boost because it is impactful to the administration because there is a swing vote on this that the outcome has been baked into the process outside of public view what youre doing bringing this to Greater Public view thank you. Yes. Commissioners mark the worse that can happen with a resolution irregularly mr. Johnson someone can go do court and make and sting and get not corruption i doubt that will happen youll have to come out and take the risks and stand for the right thing. Thank you chair. Id like to make a suggestion i do believe the commission needs to be able to express its and encourage the commission encouraged about taking formal action if not agendize and not an open mall one and alternative approach with the Commission Opinions expressed with samaritan to communicate whatever you wanted the commission implicit comments and have a letter sent to the commissioner to raise whatever question or points busy think that is one way to achieve without compromising this to the open government when we do that are important to the court so offer that as an alternative approach to achieving the plan. Mr. Chair. Let me reiterate make that clear my motion to transmit a letter signed by the chairman of the commission and i have no view as to who should participate in the letter but i would over my time and attention to the wording of letter it is not the motion for a resolution it is a simple letter. And then ill have a couple of other points to make maybe ill make it now since it will safe some time im not sure clear from the reports as to whether the City Attorneys opinion was written do you know if it was written. So i think im not in a position at this meeting to discuss the advice i may or may not given to another commission. Why is that. Itself respect the Attorney Client privilege and the confidentiality ill do for any of you. I watch those remarks in shine in some plays tonight ill be making a motion i would also like after that is disposed of a letter sent from the commission to the City Attorney mr. Home share asking if that voices was writing and if so a copy of the written advise. Is that at form of a motion. We have to dispose of the motion. Lets work own a pending motion commissioner kopp would you in terms of comments that were made will you accept the friendly amendment to our motion in the letter i would write sign which will be drafted by you and director well see a preamble as suggested. Yes. We said this is an extraordinary matter extraordinary thing were doing and doing that because of x perishes that is necessary to get it we dont have time to agendize and substantive maertsdz coming up by the city and county of San Francisco before we had a chance to agendize that. Yes. Well have that that then will be the motion with the friendly amendment and with the second will you accept. Second. That will be the motion at this time any future Public Comment by commissions in regards to the action were about to take okay all in favor, say i. I. Opposed . That item passes unanimously so commissioner kopp your work with. Yes. Director on that and ethic sign the letter and make the section motion refer to which is that a letter be sent by chairman of the commission on behalf of the commission asking the City Attorney if the relevant opinion to the Planning Commission commissioner is written and if so for a copy of that advise. Is there a second to that motion. Ill second the motion. I think we have a written go opinion on that matter since a matter of substantially importance to a ethical question by the commissioner and the Planning Commission has to do with are city business if there is something this commission as an Ethics Commission should know that indicates that that is okay. I think that is as weve seen in our first vote on the previous message well have strong feelings not okay if we can be corrected on that by a written City Attorneys opinion if there is a written citys opinion we should have it so our knowledge should be increased as to whether or not were doing something we shouldnt do and as if we are doing something we shouldnt do why it is we shouldnt be doing it we as the Ethics Commission of the city and county of San Francisco should be apprised of the City Attorneys opinion in regards to the fact that commissioner johnson could be going ahead and doing this and voting in this way and no ethical problem with that thats something we definitely should know about because obviously a a temporary opinion we should know if were wrong ill second that commissioner renne. The difficulty with the motion the Attorney Client privilege is not solely with the City Attorney but also with universe the commission that asked for it or the individual commissioner and absent a waiver by vote i dont think that the City Attorney is in a position to deliver it to us maybe the happy to give it to us im, huh . I know we as a commission have jealously taken the position that the Attorney Client privilege applies to us and that the City Attorney cant wave it that probably applies to whatever information or instructions or advise that the City Attorney gave to either to ms. Johnson or the Planning Commission perhaps commissioner renne raise an important point perhaps commissioner kopp we can urge the City Attorney commissioner renne suggested a situation with the City Attorney think reflection might be happy to give it to us we should urge the City Attorney to consider whether they want to give it to us and we tell them we want to urge them to give it to us in light it will be helpful and necessary to us in carrying out the functions if we are carrying out our functions if an incorrect manner commissioner kopp would that i say idea is worthy and i would expand the idea and in doing so i will safe us time later to make it clear what i intend to do the City Attorney serves the people of the city and county of San Francisco as well as this Ethics Commission and the Planning Commission, the members the Planning Commission to me the people of the city and county of San Francisco are preempting ment and rated higher than any commission of the city and county of San Francisco this discussion highlights what i intend to do and that is make a motion for this commission to formulate a simple Charter Amendment that removes from the law the provision that the City Attorney is the attorney for the Ethics Commission and nbld the law to state that the Ethics Commission shall have the power to retain its own council ive had experience with transactions like this as a civil grand jury judge with Council Counsel representing various districts special use district in san mateo could not one was the subject of a grand jury investigation from violations of the brown act and a consequent report it took me a year and a half to obtain a change in procedures so that county counsel no longer sat with the grand jury through all the deliberations a similar episode isnt santa clara about 15 years ago and the civil grand jury combaementd its own attorney there is a conflict of interest which cant be cured with a City Attorney in San Francisco law representing every commissioner representing every commission, representing every employee who is accused a violation of one the laws for which well have responsibility as the Ethics Commission i would add to the letter mr. Speaker, which you have outlined a request that the City Attorney act immediately before thursday april 27th to obtain the scent of his client commissioner johnson of the Planning Commission publication of new written opinion. Okay so lets understanding exactly what the motion is commissioner kopp i think i understand that we are urging the City Attorney to consider to reconsider and to consider whether or not they would inform us of what whether or not there is a written opinion and what the written opinion it is and if they feel some sort of an impede were ask them to request the account of their client whether or not the client in this case ms. Johnson i guess who the client will scent to waiver of the Attorney Client privilege so that we can on that report. And the public can. Of course. We and ill add the footnote should be included in the letter whether or not the opinion was written or not written is a part of new claimed Attorney Client privilege relationship we video a number of things to talk about but as i see the matter before us for vote it is whether or not commissioner kopps motion to urge the City Attorney to consider telling us whether or not a written opinion and if so allowing us to have it and if the City Attorney feels that they cant do that because of the Attorney Client privilege to ask the City Attorney to consultant with the client as to whether or not the client will wave that privilege so we can get the advice those are the substances of matter. Mr. Chair, i have a question for the City Attorney think chin in the following short of sharing any advise whether written or oral is there any other way for the fellow commissioners for the City Attorney to enlighten us in terms of interpreting of the ethics rules you can incorrectly and you know that we can get the points of law that we might not have. Yes. A way to speak about conflict of interest laws and so forth for the Ethics Commission we can have that discussion at a future meeting subject to common places and body camera those policy discussions that thats why im here to help aid those discussions but i think the best arena for that to occur it began at a future meeting subject to this. Understood but given the urgency and the shorted timeframe of upcoming meeting on thursday nothing that can be done now and thursday morning that can help to educate us. Subject to the brown act and the sunshine ordnance certainly i can do make myself available for the individual discussions for members of the commission and the Commission Staff about the concerns that have been raised by the public and have individual discussions with any of you to the extent you want to discuss before thursday. Commissioner kopp i dont quite understand weve made the decision to advise ms. Johnson to recuse herself if she choose not a decision shell make but what advise to what the City Attorney may have advised her arrest may or may not and advised her once the letter goes out to her telling her she should recuse herself and may want to talk with the City Attorney recreation and Parks Department the commission to get advice as to whether she ought to follow our instructions but i dont see what difference it makes what the City Attorney told her we made the decision regards of whether it was right or wrong we made the decision to tell her she shouldnt sit and through the chair makes a difference to the public it makes a difference to the commission, this commission it makes a difference to me theres a difference between a written opinion and which an attorney sets forth in writing the rational including the certification of case raw for that opinion and an oral opinion which can as you may know we all know on the panel can be a conversation in somebodys law office or somebodys office in this case at spur i dont believe the fact the simple fact whether an opinion from a public attorney is written or not written it is not written it is oral is subject to the Attorney Client privilege. Including the laws of this commission the fact of whether it exists is not a part of a confident communication between an attorney and client sufficient to thwart the public which has an boyd interest as you can tell the testimony people like mr. Salmonella and others that testified this is a vigorous contested issue with Affordable Housing and any development of land in San Francisco i wanted to know future just how the City Attorney operates with respect to other commissions and other commissions members because it is certainly will be pertinent to what ive announced i intend to introduce with respect to this commission having its own attorney with the. Limitation to this commission and the public this Commission Works for a. Commissioner kopp and commissioner renne you both make persuasive points in regards to a number of things as the chair i will make a suggestion to commissioner kopp sort of partially goes with along with commissioner renne is raising and that is, we have the letter going out relating to our feelings related to ms. Johnson that is unlawfully statement of this commission i Public School is very important i think the questions that you raising relating to whether or not we are preceding correctly there is some knowledge that the City Attorney has that would change our minds about the fact weve taken whether or not the City Attorneys opinion has been issued, and whether or not we can see that those are all important but they dont have the effects that of the vote coming up at ms. Johnson is about to take part in ill suggest commissioner kopp with all due respect we can take what commissioner renne said and agendize for the next meeting a full discussion of this matter and all of the ethical aspects relating to it whether or not we have done the right thing substantive in the letter and learn whatever information that the City Attorney will enlighten us who we should be preceding the way were preceding i think we are better off doing it that way rather than taking a vote on the motion looks like it could be will unanimous and i respectfully request you consider wroou our motion and we go ahead and at the end the agenda and talk about calendaring this all those things weve talked about for a full discussion next time. I see your suggestion mr. Chair and note that i will have a letter to the City Attorney tomorrow asking if there is in writing i will predict it is not a written opinion some deputies sitting down with the Planning Commission said oh, thats okay to participate that may be the state of law that means that such contradiction must be added to the prop j material and the other items that ive advanced last month. Commissioner kopp i appreciate youre taking my suggestion and you have raised important points which well have a full discussion next time do you have a comment. No, i dont. So well hear Public Comment. Id like to make Public Comment typed we dont know there was of a City Attorney written oral or otherwise we know ms. Johnson says theres one the gentleman says no opinion and he said from the Mayors Office getting involved he didnt say there was actually, one, and, secondly, if you look at the commissions own policy when someone is seeking an opinion on whether they can have a way that campaign the only protection is an opinion in writing thats the same action for the City Attorney to take there should be an opinion in writing the third point this raises a serious issue avenue firewall between difference parts of the city and how their advised this is not first time and certainly in this case as a consequential issue that will effect what gets built in the city and who gets to live here for the next 20 years were talking about a policy that puts on a low end the Affordable Housing set aside that will be available to School Teachers and restaurant workers and hotel people people that make the city run makes a difference to the city versus the process that goes to developers we know the developers are the ones essentially paying for what spur gets if you look at spur their budget is 6. 8 million and if you look at what theyre doing politicking they make the tax but spend 150,000 on campaigns in the last 24 months and in addition ms. Johnson was a members of the board and when it was issued in fall she have is in negotiation on who had a conflict of interest i think commissioner kopps suggestion you request whether this was a opinion and well within the bounds of what is allowed thats my opinion. Thank you when you say board you mean the board of spur; is that right. Do we have any further Public Comment. This is educational to me and very informative im sure very interesting because you know without this commission and leadership of the we wouldnt be even think about this this has to be at city hall this is going on for years pay to play you can name the situations there needs to be a Commission Like this and doing what we do im going to leave i have another thing to study and research mine because i know that i mean i dont know what the issues are but imperative that happens on all the commission that happens everyday florida the administration which im scared to say that the outreach the willie Brown Commission the pay to play but it from you dont stop was going on inside the Commission Look at all the young people people here commissioner kopp im 20 years young young people city hall you know all the commissioners the chief the staff and the Department Heads their retirees because of corruption or getting older or whatever the case it is the term of the leadership of the service so all i have to deliver to the city and county ive been in the scopes of 20 something years big deal the outsider and document ive been doing the same thing for 20 years people say ace has no video and tape i have so many tape and video in history i dont have to take other photo i can relate to the story as i mentioned the honorable cop was doing it and trying to figure out what was the corruption and the lrsz and judge know what is going on i dont give a darn when the City Attorney says and all that investigations comes if that way and this way we colonel together and show Us Donald Trump can come to fillmore and tweet, tweet tweet on all the things a im sick and tired and im a nonpositive but i did vote democrat you can see i agree with trump what have you, you done for us this city a run by the democrats the longest and all is doing the same thing over and over no accountability but now they have Ethics Commission, and son this will be turned over but something ill youll be seeing me youre only here once a month but ed lee knows me thank you. David pilpal again i reiterate my caution about the brown act and i think where a bit at the old for all these reasons from Public Comment and if someone brought a sunshine complaint about this board or go compilation well have to hear the merits and here we are nevertheless, there are a lot of issues that were raised i want to address them briefly the best i can at a anytime i think the letter you agreed to send if this means in the next few days should be attached to the summary of actions after the meeting and that letter should be posted on the website for everyone to see and not just commissioner johnson whether or not there was an opinion issued by the City Attorney in writing orally there are a lot of issues indicated and ask they craft a Public Opinion that addresses the conflict of interest circumstance it could occur wlefr in the city and Guiding Principles some maybe obvious how to parcel the situation and staff maybe instructive in the manner of Public Comment that the City Attorney can post that was perhaps alluded to the City Attorney has set up for due process for ethics and other kinds of circumstances that arise that im aware of most people are not aware of and having understanding how the office does screen off individuals and how advise is given in those kinds of cases that would be helpful and i dont know im aware of some of that but not well documented and in addition the City Attorney website has at least that opinions that address one with the City Attorney broadly in terms of giving advise to various actress in the City Government and the Attorney Client privilege who holds the privilege and how it is waved and dismantled and how others are posted and finally the document to larry bush im interested in getting copies from the office tomorrow but important issues here and should have a thoughtful process to delve through it as suggested work out later with the City Attorney whether you agree with her advice or not having the information made public we can all benefit whatever analysis in the advise if any thanks thank you okay there are being no further Public Comment move on to agenda item 3 item no. 3 discussion and possible action on draft minutes for march 27, 2017. My comments or corrections to the minutes. I judge have to one on page 9 through the discussion discussion and possible action for future meetings go down 5 lines i did not say that conflict of interest prosecution exists but such as a member of the Planning Commission being a member of spur is that being the executive director of spur San Francisco chapter . Well have that correction and id like it. Any future comments or corrects. On page 9 about the middle of the page whereas, commissioner renne asked a clarifying question thats the continuation for show cause not no cause and director pell ham says it is show cause not no cause that should be corrected. Future corrections or comments . Mr. Pilpal thank you. I went through them with my fine tooth comb and that could be appropriated thank you very much. Okay. Well now to move to im sorry. Amended. I. As all in favor, say i. I. Opposed . The minutes are approved weve got to agenda item 4 item no. 4 continued discussion and possible action on commissioner keanes Campaign Finance and ethics introduced and march 27, 2017 meeting and executive director pell ham. Thank you commissioner keane we have an online for the public and here agenda item 4 a memo by our new senior in fact, kyle im delighted to introduce you to him this evening he had a first day on april 10th and memo the 19 so hes here to provide an overall the memo so everyone in the audience can hear from him and about us from the next steps well be proposing i want to introduce kyle to you and the members of the public here this evening and im going to turn it over to walk us through. Very good thank you. Hi good evening here im trying to just fine if we have a clickerer no i have a little power point hopefully, youll see that on your screen i mean, ill walk us through bus good evening commissioners and members of the public im kyle im here today to talk about or continue on the prop j that has spoken about in Public Comment was had at the last Commission Meeting so at that last meeting on the 17 commissioner haney introduced the caging finance reform ordinance designed to reverse the november 2000 Voter Initiative prop j in a revised former that proposition seeks to eliminate corruption in the city by prohibiting officials from accepting personal campaign vantage from persons who have or about to get a Public Benefit what follows is staffs research to date and the next steps regarding the prop j and the large review of ceqa so let me begin. So introductory remarks and give you a little bit of background everyone was see well provide the power point on line tomorrow for individuals presentations since we didnt provide it beforehand so prop j was in california was part of a large project called the oaks project that was sort of proposed by the foundation for taxpayers and consumer rates in 2000, 2001 the initiatives appeared on california 57 cities in 2000 and 2001 the projects sort of main goals somewhere to reduce the conflict of interest limit the corrupt influence, etc. And to limit public fund to be extended by bias that initiative was passed in some former in all 5 of those cities now two of those cities San Francisco quickly sort of overrated those clrlts of laws i want to point out that despite some pro transacted legal battles in california their instituted in some former that is just give you a little bit of background on this initiative before we move on forward to the revised proposition so the revised proposition day as currently drafted and again, the attachment to this ill be citing to in a memo begins on page 14 we didnt add a table of contentious but begin on page 14 and as a note here yet this summary or the power points meant to be a summary of the laws with the list of laws the memoranda im refer to the members of the public to the memoranda this is a summary of the major items that staff highlighted the rise prop j is drafted a few of those large items it broondz the scope of officials covered and Public Benefits enkumthd stated goal in the declaration of prop j that is attached in two extend and strengthen the goals of the original prop j into a revised version to reduce as far as the corrupting influence of money generally so the rise proposition seeks to close those loopholes and protects the officials from the vantages and based on the fundraising by elected officials that Board Members and Department Heads and additional enforcements mechanisms including debar time and excuseme. And expand prohibition percent for individuals receiving Public Benefits they add a reintroduces a transfer ban and tracks the Public Benefit recipients the next portion youre following generally with our memorandum so staff has analyzed myself and Deputy Director bloom with a number of other individuals have addressed in our research or come across a number of leg contacts and considerations for the commission to consider at a future date it rise with interested parties with rising the proposition and insuring that it is sort of moose the constitutional legal standards that are going to be required the first of those are the First Amendment issue as we know the campaign the sort of the framework the Campaign Finance lieu in the First Amendment for citizens has changed that is not in the memorandum and sort of the stems that the Supreme Court as well as the lower courts stated that we can limit in the Campaign Finance that is ultimately the First Amendment is sort of narrowly a particular since Citizens United so the question we have so address with the Interested Party what can we legally limit as far as the contributions go and when and part of our Ongoing Research to figure out what those are and how we go about doing that you know we cant sort of just invoke a pagers and similar soundproducing Electronic Devices are prohibited at this meeting. Claim that all of those things will pass the constitutional muster we create our established facts in a record we support and allows us to pass any constitutional muster that we must additionally or along with that point there were concerns by other jurisdictions hoping to have some of the material from the case this is d tract this is the city of one count cities that passes the initiates and overrode it constantly with another initiative by filed suit to attempt to keep the original prop j off the ballot and and the some the constitutional concerns are we as a staff yet to receive the arguments in that case and immediately filed but like to get it to assure to address those legal argument in the case and jumping down another consideration to take on is the like i said earlier the provisions of Civil Penalties or what is called the civilian suit there is a provision in the political format that allows the civil suits to be had and for people to collect a percentage of those actions but we say to sort of address under the context of the eight amendment some of the clause issues that maybe had under the eight amendment here jumping over to due process and the administrative procedures speaking with oliver need in the memorandum we spoke with him and notes the definition of Public Benefits extends to the public entitlements and address whether that he can clarify the skiementsz to make sure were not extending those things to sort of recipients of Public Welfare and low income receiving a Public Benefit under the law that we restricts if giving trying to evaluate that provision and whether or not we can clarify that definition or move it from the law potentially but hopefully clarify to make sure that it is a look at standard sort of our last leg consideration we noted here is the debar proceeding the department is excluded if enjoying the rights and privileges of a Public Benefit so this is a provision that was based on the city of San Francisco Ethics Commission law so want to work with the individuals to make sure that we incorporate the debar time ohio we have a question other to the City Attorneys office regarding where and how to enforce that provision. So monkey off my back to the left slide that is procedure items moving forward as weve said were looking to harmonize the approaches in the provision of prop j with a large review how can we strengthen and continue to improve the enforcement mechanism of c grow with the revised prop j and other sponsors finance issues seeking to expanding the finance laws in the sfoivenlgs to insure were reducing as far as the corrupting influence and conflict of interest taking these are large considerations not only about the revised Jackson Playground but ceqa review staff is looking at to be the policy matters and evaluate the legal strength we see and present those and evaluate the administrative responsibilities as you may know many of the things dont just involve the Ethics Commission by the Controllers Office, they involve the City Attorneys office and they involve a number of other players we want to bring them into discussion to make sure we have a cohesive plan to bring them into this forward and next implementation on the cost and timeframe we want to brings in interested parties and players and understand who has what duties and the costs associated with those and again redundant and contrary predict for the interpretation generally a matter of redrafting the provision and lastly just a local reform conformity we have a hierarchy of laws and make sure that anything we do has a provision complies and reforms to the local ideals and finally our strategies Going Forward we generally want to work with the toward party to create an impossible provision that fits within the larger goal of both rising or reviewing c grow and hold those meetings we can get to in the next slide and draft reviews public thoughts and concerns with the policy and make available an memo for the project plans and draft for implementation once we have presented those items to you as a way to sort of move forward and keep a contract. All right. So summarizing here the individuals we do plan to have two interested persons being both at our office on 25 van ness on may 9th one as 2 30 p. M. On the 9 and may 11 at noon to hopefully incorporate everyones schedules to show up and generally there is a time it circulates but let individuals read those tomorrow so our last item here is i want to opening for comments and concerns from the commissions regarding what you like us to address of the interested persons regarding the questions or comments about this memorandum. Yes. First i want to compliment you and also the on the people that worked on this is the an excellent analysis of what we talked about last time and an excellent analysis of prop j youve done an excellent work on the history and seen as problems in other jurisdiction and the things that are raised as potential pitfalls one of the things that is clearly illuminating in terms of the history you weigh out is that in regard to what the essential thing that prop j did and prop j does no constitutional question about that because even under Citizens United all the cases with the Supreme Court the recently in the last generation narrowly the ability to regulate campaign tricked or tricks relating to Public Officials none of that is involved in prop j because the essential element of buckley versus allay was the first case has to do with that we can regulate and regulate substantially any kind of payments by people to tell you Public Officials in terms of either Campaign Financing or caption tricks or anything else theyre the quid pro quo in terms of someone something to a public official that has provided something that that person. To the person whos actually making the contributions giving Small Business directly in terms of a person benefit any of the things weve talked about those are fine we can do that we cant limit political speech in terms of someone that wants San Francisco spend money on something but we can and regulate that and prevent that person if giving it directly to that benefit to directly to the public official who is involved and all of, huh . Much of the litigation has taken place in the early part of century that says well constitutional questions have really not recognized that essential speak of buckley versus vallejo i think you did a great job and looking forward to you Going Forward with writing the ultimate prop j revision were seeking with all the lunge we had in that and with regards to the other matters you raised relating to things like the environment and other types of things that might duplicate other things like in ceqa we might want to tighten things up those things will be welcome i look forward to the interested persons meeting and youve deposit a fine job and hopefully next time have the actual language of the prop j ordinance that we we desire and talked about last time we, vote on. Thank you commissione commissioners. I was going to say also commissioner renne compliment you on the analysis were counting on you to come to the next meeting with the draft i saw at the read the trust fund youve coming at june meeting and yes. Thats fine i dont mean by anything to rush i think that is a big job and as pointed out out by commissioner renne i was give this task and it took me as a year and a half. Ill try to be a little bit quicker a than that. I want to join any commissioners that was excellent work and it was helpful and with the constitutional issues and the substantive issues and the constitutional issues my only observations you know take all the care and times to do the analysis to make sure it is drafted that a way that passes the muster we dont want to put something forgot that is struck down and what is important to harmonize with the ceqa laws and the conflict of interest so were not creating more confusion in our attempt to, you know, create a better prop j and lastly i think that resources and actually practicality can be doomed or propel any measure to success so having a clear understanding of what it requires on our end at the time Ethics Commission and the controllers side to be able to make something operational when we go out of the gate we can turn it on at that time it will be successful and will be a real shame if he were to do all the work to design but. Fall down on the elements element and not just up to us well get to that in the budget process but theyre taking a process and think about how we pay for in and not just to stop us but josh in terms of what were setting ought to do and was it requires. Well take Public Comment on the matters then if no further comments by the members of the commission. Commissioners larry bush for friends of ethics were impressed with the quality of the analysis that was presented a sea change were not seeing a lot with the new executive director there is a few points we would like to suggest given some consideration the report did a good job of looking at the cities that passed the oak versions a few years ago but other cities that have under gotten efforts to address those issues one is the city of berkley with the City Attorney rapidly who was the City Attorney that wrote the charter for the Ethics Commission and so we can make a copy available of the draft that was done for the city of richard and i dont know of other cities in california but on the issue of debarment one way we can provide the city contracts as we do with the prohibition on contributions a statement that says in addition to other penalties with in one penalty could be debarment and reaches the issue of adequacy i want to encourage a rofblthd wraefrp for the it in the past groups like unions have not been included except an afterthought and im confident this commission will do better a very urgent issue and point out that in general this comes at the same time with the indictments with the 8 cases some involve San Francisco businesses with San Francisco contracts the indictments are for rigging and bribery and those are pending the trial is ahead at the same time the records at the Controllers Office shows that hundreds of thousands of dollars are paid for those indicted under the current city contracts i know that is difficult to reinvite a contract but another reason to make sure that putting something that is gone wrong and it results in legal action by the enforcements people that were able to not stand on the sidelines thank you. Thank you good evening. Im dementia with the San Francisco Human Services agency and association with 80 human nonprofits with time contract with the city and county of San Francisco i realize fully that some of the folks think about prop j and what is into effect and not into effect your deeply seeking this on a regular basis those are transmittal honorable goals having said that, our first look at this was in the last 72 hours and what we see a 50 packet of a legal let me see with a piece of legislation over 20 pages and tonight im confused it is complicated and overwhelming to me, im a person that deals with legislation on a regular basis cant speak for the general Public Comment but farreaching impacts legislation constitutional questions for the First Amendment and advocacy and i frankly dont come close to understanding how this effects the legislation that has been passed as well as Campaign Contributions not been to your knowledge this body of what this ordinance about do and i dont know what is there for the clauses or to put it for specifically better unforeseen consequences im here solely to talk about the process not the content prop p was a success we had opportunity for review and interested persons meeting for an extended period of time and lots of times for written comments im disgusted i heard at the last meeting rushes to the board before you a public hearing and im so relieved there will be persons meeting but good or dont understand such a rush the floor will not take this up to the fall and no election 90 to june of 2018 why is that pushed through and why a iconic deadline for the interested persons meeting the first Time Opportunity for a detailed review how the heck will we sit down and collect the thoughts into writing and share that with our constituents and other stakeholders and put together a well recent piece of of Public Comment i would suggest stretching this out at least another month through july scheduling more i p meetings and longer deadlines for written comments and ask you to please consider that it will be a better legislation for the board of supervisors if we can Work Together as a team thank you thank you. Gamechanger commissioner i fernando with the counsel of the Housing Organization similar to h s n a group of coalition that represents 24 Affordable Housing developers and Community Advocates on a number of issues so, of course, were very much interested in the this legislation and commend you for moving forward like deb said i think were much more interested in raising the issue of progress and how much time to look at it this legislation read it carefully and be able to provide you with our understanding of this i think that on page 12 you have the timeline that you are looking for as you can see a total of 19 days if now until the mind when Public Comment written comment is due as dementia said that deadline is the day after that interested persons meeting the way the Large Coalition of groups work well come to an i p and ask questions and gather the folks to discuss that there are issues of concern and be able to write something to bring back preferring in a written former in the written Comment Section deb said we need more time between the ideas and where the comments are due and again as mentioned before the because of their recess have not likely to take this up until the fall we wonder why a rush to move forward if not june then july looking for a final vote for the board of supervisors they will probably not be back in session until september anyway you have time to be able to get Public Comment on this thank you very much. Thank you. Good evening commissioners yeah. I think the figures in the analysis of the mayors diversities was 8 it times and 24 months trying to procure gifts for some sort of business in 24 months so if this is what hes reporting than i imagine the fingers of what is going on to be much, much worse god not only with the mayor but other areas offices and commissioners and people doing business at city hall that is absolutely governmental to the dogs in the last 50 years people that are Small Business owners, mom and pops, noncorporate finance up to the ying yang dont have a voice anymore in the city and i think maybe this proposition sounds so good didnt have the teeth that it should have maybe it kind of sugarcoats and plays with the issue i wonder if our City Attorney office is not in bed with a lot of the key players in the city here it seems like is a cozy relationship i dont know if the City Attorneys office has the gumtion or the where about these to really prosecute and go after the people that role offend our democracy in the way we do business in the city it is so apparent you look around and see the landscape which is completely changed and you know hardly anyone can identify or plan think you know making something because the gap is so gotten so wide between the people that are connected and the people that are not connected never used to be like in the city but thats the way it is gone anything goes nothing matters until you pay. Thank you. David pilpal. I agree with several the previous comments about getting this right and not rushing it some particular thoughts there is a difference between discretionary approvals and by right for minute Steering Wheel approvals and there are pitfalls with anyone steering wheminist l ministerial. It is important to understand as much as one can the breath of the type approvals and contracts and licenses and contracts that the city grants and the potential for problems and really narrowly tailoring those restrictions to those kind of actions that one wants to restrict or prohibit and less so on the other things but thats a complicated area youve already discussed briefly legal rifts and some operational and practical considerations there maybe instances disclose is more appropriate and restricts for prohibition less restrifkt instances where the prohibition makes sense and untended consequences are important and certainly building a huge building whether a nonprofit housing developer or for profit a nuke ever things certainly provide this possibility of the problems in disclose and reporting contributions to officials and candidates whereas a reservation at the rec and park or a picnic stable in Golden Gate Park for Someone Birthday Party it shouldnt raise the issues but you can call and get a table and call no ifs, ands, or buts a day in advance but a process for you know people for other types of things around town that skrern are available for other sponsors and list the examples that shouldnt rise to the same level of concerns as the 20 Million Building so to summarize i agree with the comments so far and need to work through the i p mooepgz and a few drafts and shouldnt rush that but get it right kyle did a great job. Thank you any further Public Comment on this all right. Then move to the agendas item 5 item no. 5 discussion of staffs enforcement report. An update on various programmatic and operational of the enforcement programs activities since the last monthly meeting. An attachment of april 2017 enforcement report with other attachments director pell ham. Oh, thank you thank you chair so this month i was busy work on the prop j and the memorandum with kyle and proposing for his arrive with research so for o format thats what i did for the month of april and squeezed in retention work with the Controllers Office and the Mayors Office has issued new gowns and revised language for the policy and continue to rework that and submit it to the parties if need to approve it for their prevail otherwise the investigative matters the complaints have slowed down were not receiving has many before so the number of matters for preliminary is not raised xoshl so leann will talk about the new hires im excited about this and get counsel and get all those in complaints. A couple of notes on page 3 of the agenda item 5 a table for the status of obviously penalty installment payments i note that the Outstanding Balance for the month will be announced at this meeting because the office was out sick while this report was present and the amount is 500 so 500 is remaining outstanding under the stipulations well continue to monitor those but the good news the payment are in desire it and will no more appear on the reports. Who isnt. Stewart we went through a stipulation. Paid. Paid in full. Yes. Ill be happy to answer any questions you may have. About the new of the charts weve attached with the number of matters with the preliminary view or that are logged a formal complaint as you may know well discuss those in closed session. I apologize for not recognizing you with our agenda item. Oh. I also want to acknowledge you with kyle put in a tremendous mulch work on item 4 and appreciate it. Thank you the volume of your work each time is just very impressed. Thank you commissioners. Commissioner. So, yes so maybe leann youll get to this in our report i dont want to steal our turned about the staff that joined us i have a question regarding a general matter the number of complaints as you can see on page 5 i believe one matter that is greater than 24 months and other 13 from 16 to 21 most is it feasible to set a goal for reducing the number of matters outstanding and certainly to pack take the ones the most recent and move forward so we can measure ourselves against that. Yes. Absolutely so i had an investigator a little bit going into after she left i knocked out the inner matters 2014 is next on the the target list and went through and divided up the complaint and made assignments for each of the investigators coming on board to give them an equal amount of cases and obviously have them do the priority and hope a lot of investigative work done on the cases be for the most part ready for stipulation offers not too difficult to knock out so hopefully, well have a busy summary in that regard. Commissioner kopp. Thanks mr. Chair ms. Bloomer Chris Jackson writ of execution prepared by the attorney for the bureaucracy of delinquent. Correct. And then you got c s m1 number ive got one number for ethics what is the c s n. That i dont know. Oh, the proishth case no. ; is that right. That makes sense they have a judgment. Okay. On norman next step is escalated enforcement thats that. I believe that is they send a lot of lesbians or letters as you recall they spoke about their process. Whats the next step. Foiling suit. Yes. You i would and thats within the Small Claims Court jurisdiction. Right. Square mr. Square at least in my active years was a welltodo businessman this indicates that is this again, the bureau of delinquent revenue. Yes. From the bureaucracy of delinquent revenue. How to address the employment data. I dont know. I would like to ask you. Uhhuh. So ascertain for may what the address and employment are next is client agreed to the repayment agreements terms whos the client us . Not in that case no. Their referring to the person that collects. I wouldnt call that person a client but a defendant. Client agreed to repayment agreement we ascertained what those terms are. Yes. All right. And then weve got the famous mr. Jackson in here twice almost similar amounts of money id like an explanation of the enforcement efforts compromise and then the last one sweet client again has property what kind of property Real Property . Or person property . Real property why isnt it well, there is no judgment payroll is that accurate. Thats accurate. I want to know why no judgment. From i might this is oh, this is from december icy thought that was from 3 of but last december okay. I think from their presentation that they gave when they came to the board or Commission Meeting they indicated they wouldnt there are a lot of letters over a period of time and not to a escalated court action this month at least so within the six months period. Well, thats out of our jurisdictional powers not wait 6 months theyll get a judgment and if there is Real Property. Thank you any further questions or comments by members of the commission . Okay. Well take public