have had and the discussion in september, i would be more comfortable with a 1.75 as opposed to raising in all the way without more data supporting that number. >> i support the lower number. >> i am inclined toward the lower number. one of the voters purposes here was to try to restrain spending. in to restrain limits on spending. in the absence of a record that

gives us some of the number to work from, that is the one. i would tilt in that direction. >> as we approach the next mayoral election, are we able to revisit the amount and change it? is it basically written in stone at that point? gosh we are free to go back and change the ordinance, but as always, you need a super majority of the ethics commission and the board. these changes are going behalf very simple. >> i still favor the lower amount. >> this will be speaking with a soft cap, right? it would make more sense to me

if we did the lower amount. >> there are concerns, constitutional concerns about the soft cast. in light of what the decision says, where the president has come out today, it is a risk worth taking. and what about the issue of equalizing the amounts for incumbents and not incumbents? are we an agreement that the number should work out so that an incumbent would earn $2,500 less on publicly available funds? so that the total amount that they could spend would be the same, and there wouldn't be a campaign surplus to deal with

assuming there was no expenditure khafre's? the action that makes sense to me, too. and >> so then is there a motion to amend the thing as proposed with the following recommendations, before an incumbent for the board of supervisors race, there would be an adjustment in the matching funds? and to the adjustment to the one-to-one match from 35,000 to 32,500. whereby an incumbent candidate,

they would both be able to raise a maximum of $250,000 subject to the ceiling being raised? with a further amendment and that he may borrow a ceiling at the similarly adjusted to reflect a total cap of 1.7 $5 million. -- $1.75 million. it would apply to both an incumbent candidate in the non- incumbent candidate for mayor. >> so moved. >> all in favor? >> you have seomthi -- something to day? -- to say? >> i think it should be made

clear, i am not trying to influence the vote, but to clarify, the charts here don't take into account contributions that are unmatchable. in practice, the total theoretical matter of 155,000 never really gets achieved unless the itc is raised and there is more contributions because you will always have friends and family from out of town or other contributions that are not natural. some of the other proposals that were looked at in november and december had a line for the type of funds and not subject to match. >> i think we understand that it would be only matching funds. >> if you're going to 1.75 on the mayoral race, what amount is the public fund cap that is now 1.225?

that is important for you to make clear. i have not done the math. >> i think it goes to 1.075, but again, i would leave it to the staff to make the corresponding reduction based on the motion. >> they will figure it out, i am told. >> demotion was seconded, justice of the record is clear. all in favor? opposed? it passes the post. thank you for all of you that came. and we thank the staff and supervisors and all of those that participated. this was a helpful process that we engaged in pretty quickly and godspeed.

the next item on the agenda is the budget discussion. would you like to introduce this? >> the recommendation has become somewhat customary for our commission. the city has had quite a difficult budget situation. at issue, we have been requested to make cuts by the mayor's budget office, and at the same time, the ethics commission is an independent agency that has a slightly different status. because we are moving to a two- year budget cycle, the target was cut 5% of of this year's budget for next year. another 5% for the following year and to provide a 2.5% contingency.

the five-year plan of the ethics commission would require more staffing among other things for us to be able to leave the entire mission because of the budget situation. it is extremely unlikely. out of respect for the budget process and acknowledging the ethics commission's independence, i am recommending we put in a request equal to this year's budget and would allow us to go forwarrd with the same staffing level as they are now. there are no other accounts with insufficient funds to meet the targeted cuts. it would mean an immediate loss of staff for next year and an additional loss for the following year. we would respectfully work with the mayor's budget office and

the board of supervisors. >> thank you for our working -- for working very effectively with the staff, considering the budget cuts. >> i would mention that the budget analyst was here for a while but i guess he had to go. >> public comment on this matter? >> this is a two-year budget. the memo is not so specific. the calendar item is not that specific. there is a public hearing

requirement for the budget and the caption is not that clear. if you are intending to act tonight rather than in february since the deadline is prior to your next meeting, i would support the staff recommendation. i think it is important to include narrative for the transmittal that explains to some extent what the existing resources permit you to do. and what reducing the level of resources would mean in terms of loss of staff. and on the other end, what additional resources would allow you to do. it makes a good argument for the middle position of keeping things roughly as they are.

i think that would help. it doesn't detail the existing staff and a non-staff costs. and actually, if you're having to produce a contingency cut, i would immediately offer televising the meetings as being something to offer. i continue to think it is a bad idea and a waste of funds. as we have seen tonight, everyone is gone. >> but we have no idea the scope of the audience. >> thousands are watching and people, and say every day, i see you on tv. >> perception, david. >> comments or questions from the commissioners on the budget request?

commissioner studley: these are tough times, but this is for respect for the city's budget situation. commissioner hur: is there a motion to approve the city's budget request? commissioner studley: i move. commissioner hur: second? it is approved. minutes from the december 11, 2011 meeting. any comment? >> david. it was actually the meeting of december 12, so it was correct on the draft minutes but not the agenda. i can mark up the minutes if you would like. there were a couple of instances of some other typos, page five, a decision 6, i think that

should be executive director st. croix. i think there are some other instances that could be made slightly more clear. the attached 150-word statement, i think that is fine, but i would suggest adding what agenda item each statement was in relation to because there were several from an individual that do not track easily, just to indicate that that was submitted in connection with the item whatever, and finally, the closed session does not have the detail that is required under the sunshine ordinance as to who was present in closed session, so that, too, could be added. again, i could market up and give it to the staff, but they are just minor. commissioner hur: commissioner studley? \] commissioner studley: i

agree, and if they could be referred to by the roman numeral. on page two, there is a were missing. i believe that it should say it to pass the exam, and two comments were evolving -- involving my remarks. on page 3, third from the bottom. i think it would be a little clearer it said it would allow the commission to provide a $5,000 match to the candidate who raised $5,000 with a larger number of contributors than currently required, or while increasing the number of contributors, something like that to indicate that mechanism, and then if you would indulge me on page 8, items for future meetings, i believe or at least

intended my comment under that item to be a suggestion, so the vice chair person suggested that the ethics commission consider that a future meeting whether to initiate, so i was not stating that we should but suggesting that we bring it up for discussion. thank you. commissioner huyr: -- hur: any other comments with respect to the minutes? commissioner ?s -- studley: i will move it with respect to the revisions. >> what is the requirement with respect to indicating the individuals who appear before us in closed session?

i assume that there is no issue identifying the people, but i want to make sure before we do. it is not confidential who appeared in private session proof commissioner studley: if it is a case of probable cause and that it is found that it is not probable cause, then there is an issue of confidentiality? >> the sunshine ordinance says those appearing in closed session need to be identified except where their identification would interfere with other things, so you may rewrite that to save that it was the members present, staff, the city attorney, and identified or something, but just some language about who was present. that would work. >> if it was legal advisor, i understand it might be different, because situations.

>> yes. thank you. commissioner: commissioner studley has made a motion. all in favor? opposed? it passes. next item, the executive director's report. executive director secory -- st. kohring -- st. croix: i anticipate this being either a daytime meeting or a meeting early in the meeting starting at 4:00 or 5:00, something like that. but we first have to identified the dates that rooms are available and the dates that

commissioners and members of the sunshine task force, so it will take a little doing, but now we are in the new year as stated, we will move ahead on that. commissioner hur: thank you. >> the next as public comment. >> legislative proposals. the toe and legislation that was referred to reegie corona and legislation -- the code and legislation -- cohan legislation. they could apply for and be certified for public financing. does the staff have an intention or need directions about how to proceed in the event that a candidate does raise funds and

seeks certification while that legislation is pending, because in theory, they would be subject to the current rules. that was kind of an open question. i suppose it depends in part on when that redistricting task force gets their work done, but, anyway. thanks. commissioner hur: the next item on the agenda is items for future meetings. commissioners? public comment? public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda which are within the jurisdiction of the ethics commission. is there a motion to adjourn the meeting? commissioner studley: so moved.

commissioner hur: commissioner -- seconded. opposed? meeting is adjourned. [gavel] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org--

>> is my pleasure to introduce our first speaker. in addition to making it possible for us to use this beautiful ballroom for the dedication ceremony today, he made great contributions to the dragon dance you just saw performed moments ago. i felt very under-dressed after seeing him. please welcome mr. palermo. >> happy new year!

[applause] i would like to welcome everyone to the hilton financial district and the u.s. postal service stamp ceremony. we are honored to share this opportunity and proud to be part of the dedication ceremony. happy new year, everybody. [applause] >> thank you, jeff. i am pleased to introduce the honorable edwin lee, the first asian-american mayor in san francisco history. he was appointed unanimously as the successor mayor by the board of supervisors in 2011 to fill the remaining term of mayor news who was sworn in a s lieutenant governor. mayor lee won the election and

will serve a full term as mayor. prior to his employment with the city and county of san francisco, he was the managing attorney for the san francisco asian law caucus. he worked there from 1979 to 1989. he was born in seattle. he was born in a previous year of the dragon. he is a summa cum laude graduate of bowdoin college and san francisco school of law. please help me welcome san francisco's mayor. [applause] >> thank you. happy new year. [applause] it is my delight to be here. i want to add my thanks to the u.s. postal service.

i look forward to this every year to see the postal officials delivered the artistic beauty of these stamps. this is the fifth stamp set the we have enjoy. thank you for being here. i really enjoy the camaraderie of everybody on the stage. he represents a much of what we're proud of in the city reduced represent so much of what we're proud of in the city. -- you represent so much of what we're proud of in the city. it was in the earlier years when we started the tradition of designing the stamps. claudine, thank you very much. [applause] tommy ing, officials are here today as well from the u.s.

postal service. thank you very much. to my good friend who will follow me. we were law school roommates at berkeley. he is also a dragon. we have two dragons in the house. he is now the federal judge for the ninth circuit. he is enjoying himself. i know that. he fought hard for that judge ship. we're so happy to see him there. you should have been there during our law school years having two dragons in the same house. it was a hot house. [laughter] anita and i have done all of the traditional things. in the last two weeks, we have clean our house. we have done all the things we're supposed to do. we're getting ready to host the

new year. what a wonderful year this will be. it is a year of the dragon. it is the most powerful of all the zodiac animals. it also represents with this city is all about. it challenges us to make sure that we take the risks and meet our challenges head-on. we do not fear change. we make those changes. we are bold and innovative. we will innovate our way to solutions. that is what is wonderful year of the dragon will mean. i am so proud to a been elected your mayor of this great city. it is not just the chinese new year. it is celebrated through the vietnamese and the japanese,

korean communities, the african- american and latino communities. they're all here in this room joined by many different agencies, including our school district. norm is a new member of the school district board. thank you for being here. [applause] so many of you have joined in looking at the stamp. it is artistic and rich with heritage. the art director is here. thank you for being here as well. there are so many students. i want to put forth the theme of education. we have an opportunity to educate people about the themes of our culture. we can unite the city and bay area as much as we can in

celebration and in the boldness and innovation that the dragon calls for. we will need it because so many things are happening. this is the time we take on the challenges before us. the art history of this design is so rich and intricate. i have seen the others, but this one is really special. you have done a great job. thank you very much. [applause] and so it is that i want to welcome everyone on this very prestigious day. earlier, we had members of the board of supervisors. everybody wants to do something special on chinese new year. i understand that david chiu has officiated a marriage for one of his staff. we will now have many dragons

running around. [applause] there are so many other things happening today. it is wonderful. i could ushave used more red at the game last night, but we will move forward. thank you to the postal service and all of the groups. individuals have stepped up like jeff and walter and so many individuals stepping up and using their own time and efforts. the parade in the events leading up to it are about the community coming together to utilize our time, talent, and resources to celebrate and reinvigorate the city. [applause] >> thank you, mayor