>> my name is jorge garcia. >> [speaking spanish] >> i am here representing various latinos that found out about the legislation supervisor avalos has put forward. >> [speaking spanish]

>> we wanted to express our voices and we want people to know that we want to be part of this historic moment and this legislation to be passed. we want to make sure that this next representative continues to preserve the policies of that families don't live in fear. >> i represent the retirees, and i am also taking the place of the delegates so that we have a retiree delegate. everyone has made great points and i agree wi÷i agree with eves been said.

and you should keep the board. i am for support of the amendment turned dowt? organizations is not enough.

and i don't think that this has ever happened to it except when dianne feinstein -- keep the process open and do this with this board, not the new one. >> the new board might have office hours. how astonishing is this, we can walk in and there's no contact with the public except for phone calls from their funds to help elect them.

that is stunning in cannot have an office tower and to make a decision on who will be the mayor. i understand why you might want to give this off to the new board because this is a huge responsibility. at the end of the day, who wants to appear soft your friends? we elected you to make irresponsibility -- a decision and that responsibility has not gone away and i'm asking you to make a lot of decisions. there is a lot of feelings involved. no one here is saying one person or another, we are saying that we need you to show us that you

will take this seriously so that we can have a mayor that has a transition team that will think truisms is -- that will think what it is. i asked you to show the courage to put aside your personal feelings and think about the good of the city. on people who have never held one office hour in their lives should not be making this decision. thank you. >> i am fascinated by what i am witnessing.

many people are looking forward to this decision. thank you. >> good evening, supervisors. >> i am here to speak in support. thank you for letting the public have a part in this. i know that this will be foremost on the mind on the new mayor. thank you. >> high-rise and support of the

motion for the following reasons, we are facing critical issues and we are at a critical time. this is not a time where we aggregate leadership or we wince when we need to act. the urgency of the time reflects the need to have the committee. what we need right now is a timely decision, a transparent decision, they deliver to of decision, but most oil this was same body that was elected while there is anger in the streets of

san francisco. by augmenting your experience with the knowledge that comes from those who are affected, you can make the right decision and you can make it transparent. you need to make the call and do it right and do it now. thank you. >> think you. -- thank you. >> good evening. >> i am part of 100 plus business owners in san francisco and we rise in support of the motion and we support you leaders in the city. that will also increase the ability to work with the

programs that we have so far. >> thank you. >> hello, everyone. i came here at 1:30. i wanted to be part of this moment. i was waiting until 2:00 when they opened the door. i had been sitting for a lot of hours. this group has not been mentioned, i represent the unemployed. i have been unemployed for almost a year and i would like to get a mayor appointed as soon as possible. the situation will get worse. this is a beautiful experience. this is the first time that i have been here.

i think that we are working as a team and i loved the idea that the public is involved and i support this. i hope that we do this soon. thank you. >> good evening, supervisors. i think that the three supervisors have to find the situation pretty well. there is an adequate process in place for selecting the idea of the community as a whole. i think that public comment is appropriate. i would say that if you want to have a process that is in accordance with the sunshine ordinance, he should give the full three minutes that the

shunned sign ordinance normally allows -- the sunshine ordinance usually allows. this is something i will not forget what dianne feinstein said on the momentous occasion, she chose her words and spoke with great gravity and clarity. this is the to the to inform you. with that in mind, i think it is your duty and your job to take a decision, i think that it is important but you do so as suggested by the motion made by supervisor avalos. >> thank you, next speaker. >> the children should be

allowed to walk in peace. we need more law and order, more long and order. the with the ocean moving steadily through the night. the spring that research for is somewhere in the murkiness. a candle awake in a cold and dish. do not sync below the cracks. look around. i encourage the full moon process, i encourage this to the nth degree. i would like to see a way of getting hollywood in to broadcast what the situation is. i have been left out of the process. i am regularly wondering if i will live or die because i am

hurt by the hospitals, hurt by the statistics show to pass in the system. -- statistics so should pass in the system here, and i'm available, i have money, i and i made good tenant. there is so much input and there are so many people who have good input, strong elders and our community. what do we do in our case, we let people throw you into squad cars sit can't have a living for yourself. we need safety and protection and being able to have input. i might need a bodyguard because of the times on my life. >> are there any other members

of the public which would wish to speak? public comment on this is closed. colleagues, we have two items in front of us. i need to clarify, i was told by the clerk that supervisor avalos made a motion to attend-to amend the whole. supervisor avalos has made a motion to substitute for his initial hearings, the public consideration. it is that we convened on today and to have public input on what we may supervise. this is the exclusive jurisdiction of the charter to appoint the mayor of the city of san francisco.

>> i have some questions. in front of us, have the proposed rules before the nomination and i'm wondering biff these really are proposed special rules or if they are an interpretation of existing rules of order.

this seems like every other time, existing rules for use in the charter is largely the same. i think maybe some of the conflict walls have been enhanced or adjudicated but that might be legal advice and not actually new rules. this would require an additional piece to prepare which would not necessarily put us out until december 7th or something like that. noi am wondering if instead of

erecting a clerk to prepare new special rules, maybe we should ask the clerk and the legal counsel to distill the actual existing rules under the current rules. it seems like this is an acceptable find of what is under the process and the question is, what happens when members here are involved. this seems like an interpretation question. >> a first, but i think today there was a originally emotion to consider nominations and potentially boat and appoint an interim mayor. the reason why that was premature is that we need to lay out a specific process by which

we do this. it is my understanding that there are four authorities said could govern the process we are talking about. most importantly, the california political reform act is the body of state law that governs how we think about a number of issues and how nominations are made, complications that occurred when in nomination is made. the california political forma -- aligned this document is a very interactive way. i know in the draft, a number of those items are required by the california state law.

others are required by the city charter as well as the board rules. i have zero perspective on what the process should be. that is a discussion that we have to have. if the board chooses to go as closely as we have, i think the challenge is that we have a process by which we can selected board president. we also have a process by which we have the rules committee. right now, the city charter is silent on how we would select the interim mayor. this is really met to set up the conversation for us. i asked outside counsel to let us know which aspects of that process, from the various

governing authorities that take us through the day. that is something that we need to consider in the coming weeks. >> i don't know if you really answered my question which is if our advise from the legal counsel is that under the current rules of order we can effectuate an appointment for the successor mayor, all be this with council, questions that may arise and if an individual has a conflict or a state law or if there is a charter provision. just like any other discussion or debate that we have, we basically can't go and we can look at the lock.

we are looking at a process by which we can amend the board rules. not only is this cumbersome that i think that this is -- i'm looking for the language in the county council's opinion that maybe you can find it. we should be able to effectuate an appointment. i will look forward to it and can have this cited specifically. that seems to be the cleanest way forward. we heard from members of the

public and we look at a debate over language or maybe terminology but it seems like we don't need a new process, what we need perhaps is a bigger -- that may be the clerk can work on with council to tell us where the pitfalls are potentially and that kind of thing. according to the original process outlined, in terms of actual process and appointment, that is satisfactory as long as we in that process, we cannot --

i am wondering if perhaps we can go in that direction. i don't want to make a formal motion to amend promotion but perhaps if we can prepare this. we could continue the motions to continue to have this discussion. i think we have one more board meeting left. >> is this a question to the supervisor? >> what i propose was a

stripped-down process. there might be a different way for us to move this closer to what we are talking about. i am not exactly sure. this came through the rules committee or the president. >> i was talking about the process which was best displayed by the supervisor of a los's two motions. specifically to have the committee as whole and then to have nominations and a point and mayor under that committee. this is a process that we can lead forward with. if we can have the asian which

you are concerned about in terms of asking the clerk to prepare for a narrower process, we can have those issues building needed more and we can delineate them through and more open process and having the committee as a whole and the nomination. >> one lydgate the progress on which she has asked the consul just in order to get everyone on the same page. the mind? this is a good time for you to update the body. >> i think what we have is an opportunity to marry the two processes to get there. the work we have done in anticipation, we started a process already which is what you have in your hand.

what i will deal with outside counsel is to further delineate which authorities are responsible? >> i think that we can marry the two. you have a document in front of you which has the board rules and the political reform act delineated as well. >> if it is ok, i will turn back to the roster. >> i think what i would like to have is both of them in front of me. we can then start to strip out what we want. i think it is important for us to have the full process so that

everything is covered and then we can determine what is more important. it is important for us before we can stop-start stripping things off the car. >> i would not be moving anything off. this is not before the board. i will make sure that after we finalize this document that it will be made available to each of your offices and to the public. >> if i might note a couple of things. i don't think that the motion that president shoe has introduced with the motion, the supervisor avalos has introduced, there is a way that we can find a middle ground that actually gets to this.

up to the extent that we can all be on the same page, that is to the benefit of this process. the one concern that i have some, this is to counsel, is that i understand that would council was doing through some of what i've seen in terms of the proposed process seized or rules is trying to make sure that in the process of making the selection that we don't run foul of the legal requirements that we have to comply with. it is important to be mindful. at the same time, compliance with those legal requirements this not necessarily require that the process or rules be

followed but that in fact there are different ways in which compliance can happen and my main concern is making sure that the process is not so descriptive that it might lead to complaints. that is the balance of you have to strike. in a way, this makes sure that we are aware of what the law requires and making sure that that compliance actually addresses the concerns of having a process that will lead to something. i don't know if that makes sense but this is what of the rules requires. i think that we can get there with the objectives of