technology. that is a matter of fact -- as a matter of fact, what he does professionally. so i think that that should merit strong consideration as you go forward. again, i think, you know, mr. wolfe has served on the task force. he's done so in an admirable fashion. thank you. >> chair kim: thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is diana d. matthews, a small business othe owner. i'm here to speak on behalf of my colleague and friend, kai wilson forsley. every day, kai works for public access, the citizens of san francisco, the underrepresented, and usually the undersupported for public access to key cultural, financial, and political information. she mentioned voter registration. this is what she does every day

for the 99%. and if the one shows up, them too. one of the great critiques that the average person has about government is that government isn't working and we don't know why. so we need greater public access to critical government information and that's one of the things the sunshine ordinance task force is very good at. i know that if kai wilson forsley is appointed nothing will get in the public's way of getting this information because she's breaking down critical information for us every single day, through the san francisco public library, and the many nonprofit areas that she's responsible for. so i give her my highest recommendation. thank you. >> chair kim: thank you. >> ♪ the appointments have begun, before the rising sun-shine will fly, so many city roads to choose.

♪ they'll start out walking and for office they will run. ♪ and, yes, we've just begun. ♪ and thus we've just begun -- pick some appointments, pick many, won't you. ♪ little city, big city, i feel the ice is slowly melting. ♪ little city, i feel that you're gonna pick some good ones here. ♪ here comes the city sunshine. ♪ here comes the sun. ♪ here comes the sun. ♪ and i say pick some appointments, pick some good some this time. ♪ little city, big city, i feel the city. ♪ ice is slowly melting. ♪ you're going to pick some good ones here. ♪ here comes the sunshine

ordinance appointments. ♪ and i know you'll pick one good one ♪ >> chair kim: thank you, mr. paulson. >> members of the rules committee, ray hartz, san francisco open government. for a body whose membership has many law degrees board of supervisors seems to be lacking in the rule of law. the sunshine ordinance task force has been unable to meet for months, denying due process to the san francisco citizens. this was done in retaliation for task force decisions against certain members of the board of supervisors. the full board changed the recommendation of this rules committee and failed to take public comment before removing the only representative of the disabled community from the task force. despite what was said by supervisor campos if you followed the sunshine ordinance there were several in the audience who could have told you that what you were doing was

something that was going to shut down the task force. supervisor wiener substituted a personally drafted candidate with no interest or knowledge of government matters. for the experienced representative of the disabled community. this retaliatory action denied the disabled community representation on the task force, opportunity to be chair or vice chair of the task force or its committees and violated rights under the americans with disabilities act. for you to go back and pretend like nobody knew what was happening is really, really outrageous. very frankly, you have a responsibility to fill the seats of any committee with qualified candidates, and that includes knowing what the qualifications are. and to come back after denying people the right to appear as i have three cases before the task force, and have now been delayed for months, and to come before the public and tell them oh, we didn't realize what we were

doing was wrong, is really, really egregious. and i think you really must think we're a bunch of dumb bunnies to be polite, to fall for that kind of garbage. and here's 150 word summary included to be included in the minutes. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and hello, san francisco. my name is paul courier. i've not appeared before the rules committee before. i know all of you, except for mr. wiener. and i have concerns here with all the hundreds of illegal evictions that are going on at parkmerced that were enabled by violations in sunshine case 1148. mr. wiener's been charged by the sunshine task force with misdemeanors, along with david chiu, malia cohen, and eric mar.

for scott wiener to go ahead and legally block sunshine from the sunshine ordinance, and sunshine task force, from operation, is anathema to good government. and you know that, mr. wiener. shame on you. the playing illegal games to cover up your own prosecution due to official misconduct in sunshine case 11048 is good cause for your recall. there are others in office who need to go as well, and i've mentioned this as the ethics commission, i've mentioned this at the board of supervisors, before you went out on break. i call out to san francisco, and i'm speaking to the television audience at this point, to please organize saturday morning meetings in your home so we can organize the whole city quickly in order to execute the recall of the machine here in san francisco. my own sunshine case no. 12033

cannot go forward because the sunshine task force is not meeting. and i filed sunshine charges against the mayor for this crazy bomb threat that happened while i was in the room on the mirkarimi matter. nobody was rewho have had from city hall except the mayor and everybody is in this coverup mode and it's time to put an end to it. enough is enough. here's my 146 word comment for the record. thank you. >> chair kim: is thank you, mr. courier. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm peter warfield, executive director of library users association. i do hope that you will be able to come to a decision that's reasonable with respect to enabling the now-paralyzed sunshine ordinance task force to be able to meet again. certainly the previous speaker,

who mentioned your supposed ignorance about the qualifications is right. i think that's a very, very poor performance to supposedly not know what the requirements are for a seat, and particularly when it's explicitly written into the law. there shall, at all times, be a member of the sunshine task force who is physically disabled. it speaks to a severe failure on the part of the board of supervisors and/or its clerk and/or the city attorney. this is something that you can fix today. with respect to the candidates, certainly you have one with the requirements that you list in your agenda, who stands far above the others in terms of demonstrated interest in/and experience in issues of citizen

access and participation in local government. and i certainly would recommend that you appoint him. one of the candidates unfortunately i don't think it was explicitly stated, but she is an employee of the city, and more particularly of the public library. the public library has been one of the worst violators of sunshine and there will come cases before the task force, that not only involve the library directly, but indirectly, for example library users has won five cases against the arts commission and one against a supervisor regarding library matters namely the mural destruction at bernal heights branch library. thank you. >> chair kim: thank you. >> good afternoon. my name's rita -- and i'm standing before you to use my first amendment rights to petition the government for

redress. the board of supervisors' actions regarding existing sunshine ordinance task force has been called everything from absurd and arbitrary to petty and punitive. it's completely shut down. you're denying us the rights to open government. the inability of this committee not to recognize one member of the task force needed to be physically disabled is until now unacceptable and inexcusable. it's your job to know what the requirements are when you put forth appointees to these petitions. your attempt to replace members to the board your uninformed or green cronies or supporters, some documents that are required for consideration is beyond insulting. the removal of bruce wolfe who meets all of the requirements

for the seat of the task force intended to satisfy perhaps, i don't know, the fragile egos of you who have been found in violation of the very charter that you've sworn to uphold to give you a task force that you can control is not acceptable. this is not -- sysco. with the power to open government to citizens again you can start by reappointing bruce force so that the sunshine task force can begin immediately to operate legally.

>> i've been a grassroots worker since the last decade since 2002 when i worked on the animal guardian ordinance. i've known bruce wolfe for eight of those years. and i want to take a little bit of a different course here. i don't think that this hearing is a place to use for any side to accuse any other side of misdealing, or playing games, or, you know, he said, she said. i think this hearing's a place to decide on who the best person is to next seat on this body. i've watched bruce wolfe in action many times and i'm not exaggerating. he is the most honest, direct, and straightforward person i have ever witnessed in action in this building. that is not an exaggeration. i've even seen him when -- in

meetings with solely progressives, admonish other progressives to be careful not to steer clear -- steer away from ethics and sunshine rules. he doesn't play favorites on this stuff. he puts the hammer down on everybody. and most importantly, the internet is becoming a big deal. bruce and i have worked together before in campaigns. and one of them was internet democracy. so not only does he have a deep understanding of the tech issues, but has a deep understanding of what it means to bring democratic access to the public of government activities. and that is absolutely crucial. and so i think you can guess by now that i wholeheartedly support bruce being appointed to this position. thanks. >> chair kim: thank you, mr. brooks. >> good afternoon, chair. i'm patrick -- shaw, here as a

private citizen today to support bruce wolfe, who's clearly the most qualified of the two candidates, given that the third candidate, ms. forsley, is a city employee, should not even be considered by this committee for this appointment. to support a false claim that the sunshine task force had engaged in official misconduct and had undermined transparency in government mr. wiener failed to provide evidence and presented misinformation at least four times during the board's full meeting on may 22nd. wiener wrongly claimed the task force had exempted itself from the san francisco charter, wrongly claimed the task force had said how dare you, sunshinelight us end quote when the task force never claimed such thing. wiener claimed he asked for a,

quote, audit, in compliance with this ordinance when in fact he had asked for a survey. wiener also inflated the average number of times city employees had to attend hearings to resolve sunshine complaints. mr. wiener also claimed the sotf had ignored the city attorney's opinion but the fact is the city attorney's website that -- city attorney opinion, that have been issued lists no such opinion, and it's not posted. what was vice chair wolfe's crime to -- be removed from the task force? supervisor kim, mr. wiener claims mr. wolfe had been part of the task force when all these things had happened. ostensibly including when it found mr. wiener guilty of official misconduct on september 27, 2011. wiener presented no specific charges -- mr. wolfe, just that wolfe had been around.

>> chair kim: wrap up your final sentence. >> as mr. planthold has written to the mayor it's a simple matter ignoring the advice of the attorney is not grounds for action by any city agency or official. i recommend that you appoint and recommend mr. wolfe for this appointment. >> chair kim: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is dr. derek cur. the removal of bruce wolfe from the sunshine task force was an act of political retaliation. it was also a slight to the disability community. there's a way to resolve all of this to make peace torques put it behind us. thank you. >> chair kim: thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? seeing none, put is now -- okay. if you'd like to speak for

public comment, please do step up so i know that there are folks that would like to speak. if there are any others, please do line up. >> well, i just see even, when you appoint wolfe, the damage has already been done. you've already gutted the sunshine ordinance task force. i mean do we have any faith in the sunshine ordinance task force with the new members that you appointed? i don't think any of them or the majority of them know anything about the regulation of sunshine ordinance. so you've already destroyed it, even with wolfe on board. you hear the lady yelling at the public speakers? it's a violation. she's not supposed to interrupt the speakers when they're talking. she comes into this meeting -- see there she go again. could you have her -- >> chair kim: no. there is no back and forth dialogue. this is opportunity to address the rules committee. if you would like to speak with ms. wilson or any others talk to

them outside the committee room. >> you see how she acts toward the public. she's not qualified. you should have your sheriffs escort her out. this is totally unprofessional behavior. if you were at that meeting, where that last one, that when they first were appointed, it just -- the things i heard, a little bilt of what i seemed, it seemed more like a lynch mob because the citizens knew that the people that you all picked were not going to give us any sniglet of justice. >> chair kim: is there in he other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. i think for a number of reasons, because it's time for members of the public to comment i really try not to restrict comments people make but there needs to be a general sense of cordiality

and respect accorded to members of this room, whether they sit on the board of supervisors or members of the public that apply to serve on behalf of our city. i want to reiterate that. i really try not to sensor comments that are made because it's the right of the public to speak but i hope people are careful in concentration of what they say and really take time not to insult one another or make mispronunciations of things that have happened. i don't know if there's some comments i have on supervisor campos on the roster. i wanted to address one issue around the city charter which supervisor wiener pointed out to us regarding the sunshine task force and there was general consensus among the board and our city attorney that the task force violated the city charter and it came up with the previous appointment for the member of the task force. i know comments were made that it was supervisor wiener only but i think that was the general consensus among the members of the rules committee at that

hearing. supervisor campos. >> co-chair campos: thank you. i want to thank all the members of the public who have come out for this item. before i talk about the specific applicants, i do want to make a point about the issue of failing to appoint a member of the disabled community. i think that every member of the public who spoke about that is absolutely right, that ultimately it's the obligation of this committee and of this body, the board of supervisors, to know that. and i think that all of us, and i certainly personally take responsibility for the fact that i frankly did not know that when we were having that discussion here, in committee. and i think it's regrettable that something like that was not something that we were aware of. and i think it's also regretible that not only did it not come up with committee, but also when it was actually happening at the board of supervisors, the entire

meeting, that issue did not come up. i do take responsibility, as an elected official, for failing to know that. and i think that the only thing you can do when something like that happens is to say, you know, that we take ownership. it is something that we shouldn't have done. and the hope is that we can learn from that. but i do want to apologize to the public because i think that that was something that should not have happened in committee and have not have happened at the board of supervisors. and my hope is that we have learned from that, and that going forward, to the extent that there is any kind of requirement along those lines, or any other legal requirement, that we do everything we can to ensure compliance with what is required. and i think an apology not only to the members of the public who are here, who are watching, but also to the members of the disabled community, because there is a reason why that requirement is in there, because

we want to make sure that that community is adequately represented on that body. so i take responsibility for that. the last thing that i will say is, you know, any time that there is more than -- there are more applicants than seats that are available it's always a difficult thing for us because i'm always grateful to anyone who comes forward and wants to serve the city. and i think that each one of the three applicants should be commended because the sunshine task force -- sunshine ordinance task force does do very important work, and it's time intensive work. so anyone who is willing to give back by serving in that fashion i think should be commended. we only have one seat, and at the end of the day for me, in making the appointment, it really comes down to who is the most qualified individual for the position. and to me, the issue of qualifications has to transcend,

you know, what sometimes is our own individual preference in terms of some of the things that the task force has done. i'll be honest, there have been a couple of instances where i have disagreed with the outcome, the decision that has taken place at the task force. but nevertheless, i respect the role that the task force plays, and believe that even when we disagree, we have to follow the rulings that they make. the reason that i am proud today to support and make a motion to move forward bruce wolfe to -- with a positive recommendation to the full board is because i have actually gone to task force meetings, and i do believe that bruce wolfe has played a really important role, and can play and needs to continue to play a very important role in that task force. i actually think that you're not

going to find a more thoughtful, prepared, and well-informed member of that task force. and even though mr. wolfe may have a respect perspective on a specific issue, i do believe that he is the kind of individual that goes out of his way to listen to the other side, and to take the other side -- the other perspective into consideration. i have seen that time and time again. and i actually was present at the last task force meeting that took place, the first meeting following the appointment of new members, and i have to say that i saw, firsthand, the need for the kind of experience and institutional knowledge that mr. wolfe has. i really believe that the work of that task force can be a lot better, that the work product can be more -- a lot better and

more effective, if he is on that task force. i have not always agreed with everything that mr. wolfe has decided on the task force, but i have respected where he's coming from, and i understand why, you know, he concluded in a certain way. so i really think that we have an opportunity to just move forward. mr. wolfe, i think, is someone who will bring not only the expertise and the knowledge, but also a fair approach. i think it will be even-handed. and i really hope that we give him opportunity to serve. so i proudly make a motion that we move forward bruce wolfe with a positive recommendation, and lastly i will say that i make that motion without taking anything away from the two other individuals who have come forward. they each bring something to the

table. and, again, we are grateful to them and commend them for their willingness to serve. ms. simon, my partner worked with latifa simon so we recognize the history of your service. whether it's ms. simon or ms. forsley, that we have the opportunity to appoint you to city commission at some point because i think each one of you has something to offer that the city could benefit from. so i make that motion. thank you. >> chair kim: thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor farrell. >> supervisor chiu: sprank tra , chair kim. these are always difficult decisions but we have to move forward with someone. let me say a few things because a lot was brought up in the public comment and otherwise.

speaking as someone who did not vote to seat mr. wolfe, i guess it was a number of months now to the sunshine ordinance task force, there was certainly no intent to stop the task force from meeting, and agree that there was, as supervisor campos mentioned, a general unawareness of what was happening by doing so, and stopping the task force from meeting by our charter. i do have a bit of a different approach though. i don't -- just because of that, i don't believe we need to seat someone necessarily. we still want to find the right person, and someone that we believe in to sit on the sunshine ordinance task force or any other task force or commission that we appoint. i don't believe just because there's one requirement that we're going to have to appoint someone that we don't believe in that will do the right job. despite a lot of comments i think everyone who voted not to seat mr. wolfe wants to see the task force seated and see the

task force in action. we believe it's a vital part of our city government. similar to my reasoning before, this was not a -- although some of the appointments out of the rules committee and otherwise, that the full board have become political, to me the reasoning that i did not feel comfortable agreeing to vote for people on the task force before, was -- and we're talking about the rule of law here, when they violated the rule of law and amended their own bylaws in the face of our city charter relating to the quorum requirements and the voting requirements i cannot in good faith sit here and vote for someone to seat someone that voted in favor of that, whether they led the charge or just voted on it. to me it's not something that's appropriate and not something that i can support. however i appreciate the fact that right now we need to seat someone from the handicapped community. i believe that needs to be a priority of ours. i believe we had -- you know, it was ms. simon who i think would be eminently qualified.

i also know and am aware of that bruce oka, who was a former mta commissioner, who served with -- as a distinguished member there, someone that i didn't agree with many of his actions as well, but someone i would be very happy to support here at the sunshine ordinance task force, submitting his application today or submitting it in the next few days and someone i believe we could get full support. i think we talk about diversity here at the rules committee. someone that would bring the first asian member to the sunshine ordinance task force. i think that would be very important, and someone that i would support and i think would have the full support of the board of supervisors. to me, my approach, i appreciate the motion, it's not something that i would support today because, in my opinion, we're going to go through this same thing we went through a number of months ago, where