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--

>> so, welcome to city hall, i am supervisor scott wiener. thank you for coming to this press conference today to show our city pose a continuing and renewed commitment to a jedd b/aids services and prevention and treatment. i am going to turn it over to mayor lee to make an announcement. before i do, i want to thank mayor lee for appointing our wonderful new colleague, supervisor christina olague, who is here today. thank you, mayor lee, for increasing the size of the lgbt caucus by 50% of the board. [laughter]

with that said, mayor ed lee. >> thank you. good morning, everyone. we have a very serious challenge for us. as i had said in not only the speech that i gave on that sunday, but i have been talking with members of the board, and i really want to thank supervisor wiener and supervisor campos and supervisor olague for joining me today for this announcement. i said earlier through the year that i always have to watch out for what is not occurring, but that the state level and at the federal level. one of those challenges has been fiscal. we're not hearing very good news. one of those news items that i was fearful of was lynnette supercommittee that congress created to try to come together and make an agreement with all the different parties, cells in their objectives, our cities across the country were hurt by that. one of those programs that we

value so much that our leader pelosi has been at such a stalwart leader in in helping our city is our aids funding. i want to take this opportunity to thank leader pelosi for all three years commitment on this. she has showed us the way time and time again how valuable this program has been, how remarkable, world-class standards that our public health department in our community service providers have had in creating and sustaining an effort to help our victims of aids and hiv in a standard of care that has met no match throughout the whole world here in san francisco. because of that, we are announcing, and i am introducing, with the help of our sponsors here today, a $1.8 million supplemental to be introduced to the board today,

to help fill that gap of what was to have been a federal responsibility that is now transferred on to the city of san francisco. in support to us to maintain the level of services and to put out their the quality of the services to our common not only are a lesbian, gay, and bisexual community, but all of the community of san francisco. this is one of the most important programs we have had introduced to our city, and it will continue to be so. this is a reflection of our commitment. this $1.8 million supplemental will be aimed at making sure the level of services that had been promised already this year will be maintained to the end of the fiscal year. while we figure out what the long-term challenge is for all of us, and we have got to figure that out. we have got to do it together. we have to bring everybody to the table to figure out what we do in the next year.

but it is one of the challenges that i and my staff, working with our budget director and all of the different community-based agencies and our public health department, along with the board of supervisors, are willing to meet, willing to take on. because it is a program that we know has been effective. it has saved lives. it has increased the quality of life for so many people because of the kind of care that week reflected in it. it is important to us that we do this. but i do it also, again, as i said earlier, under the context that leader pelosi would want us to do no less. plan and now, when so many of the years she stepped up to help find the federal funding to save it, it is our turn to step up one hour congress is not able to make that task, and we're stepping up. i want to say thank you to everybody behind me. we have representative reynolds

here on behalf of congresswoman pelosi. i value his work with us on a local basis. and then all of our community partners who have been with us for many, many years. i want to thank them, too, for their invaluable service to us. thank you. scott -- [applause] >> thank you, mr. mayor. when supervisor campos and i went to merely to ask him to work with us on this -- went to mayor lee to ask him to work with on this, he was enthusiastic and rock-solid in his support. i had the honor of representing district 8, which includes the castro and surrounding neighborhoods, and my district has been the hardest hit by the hiv/aids pandemic. and it has the highest number of people living with hiv/aids. and i see, every single day, constituents of mine who

absolutely depend on these services, whether it is access to housing, legal services, to health care, to mental health services. these are not optional services. these are not luxury services. these are basic bedrock services for a significant number of people living in this city. you know, over my dead body are we going to retreat from our commitment to the people living with hiv/aids and those at risk. and i really just want to emphasize how grateful i am and how grateful we all are to nancy pelosi, who went to congress in 1987 and in her maiden speech on the floor of the house talked about how she was there to fight hiv/aids, and she has fought it in an incredibly heroic manner for the last 25 years. we all owe her an enormous debt of gratitude for her leadership on this issue and for the

unending funding that she has brought into sentences go to allow us to maintain our commitment to those living with and at risk for this disease. so, thank you, a leader pelosi, for standing with us and continuing to stand with us. i now want to bring up my colleagues, supervisors david campos and supervisor christina olague, as well as dan bernall speaking on behalf of the leader pelosi. >> thank you very much, supervisor wiener. let me echo what he said about leader policy, who will always be speaker pelosi, but we have been very lucky in san francisco that we have had representatives -- representation in washington d.c. -- washington, d.c., that has advocated for the agency community, and has made san francisco an example for the rest of the country in how to treat that community. as scott indicated, we, in san

francisco, have a lot to be brought up, and we should not go backwards. i want to thank mayor lee for the fact that when supervisor wiener and i went to him, there was no question, no hesitation. i think those of us or members of this lgbt community, we're very grateful to you and want you to know that we appreciate that commitment that you have made. i want to thank our director of public health who also was instrumental in making this possible, barbara garcia. i am very excited about our newly appointed lgbt supervisor, christina olague. i think this is her second -- second press conference as is supervisor cohen that might be her first co-sponsors of providing it is a testament to her commitment to our community that she is here. i think that it says the very clear message also about the unity that we have on the board

of supervisors. we, the lgbt supervisors, understand that we have to make sure that we are united in trying to protect our community. and this funding literally will save lives, has saved lives. we're talking about protecting the most vulnerable in our community. so i am proud to be a part of a city government that makes that investment. again, i want to thank speaker pelosi, mayor lee, supervisor wiener, supervisor olague, and we look forward to the full board approving this matter expeditiously. finally, i want to thank the advocacy committee for those who are working with people living with aids/hiv, who brought this to our attention and pushed for this forward. he could not have happened without their support. so thank you very much. [applause] >> i want to thank mayor lee and supervisors wiener and campos for inviting me to participate in this action today. it is my first action as a

supervisor, a member of the board of supervisors. i am very proud to be here as part of that, as part of this effort. i have worked extensively with low-income tenants in san francisco. i have worked with the seniors and people living with disabilities. i have seen, also, folks who are able-bodied have, you know, reach points in their life where they are no longer able to work, due to the devastating impact of this disease. it is unconscionable that we can do all that we can to make sure the people who are suffering from the impact of aids still have some ability to access the senate quality of life housing and health care. i first moved here in 1982, and that was really at the very beginning of this devastating

disease. and i had many friends that i lost, as we all have here in san francisco. many of my friends i lost in the 1980's. i remember one year we were having thanksgiving dinner with friends, and is started out with 10 of us at the table. by the year 2000, only three of us were left. and it was all due to the impact of aids. so i know that we're all familiar with those losses. again, i want to think supervisors wiener and campos for inviting me here. i also want to let knowledge the efforts of the lgbt community and all of those cbo's that do work daily, delivering services and to the committee. so, again, thank you. [applause]