office that that is the type of gift that the city received that benefits an individual official as should be reported on the 801. there may be situation where both an 801 and 803 are appropriate. the form 803 is a filing requirement that derives from campaign filing law, 801 is derived from gift and conflict laws. if a gift is behested or solicited by an elected official exceeds $5,000 goes to a department and benefits an individual in that department then both are appropriate. >> are we passed any deadlines for passing 801 for this department? >> the 801 is due within 30 days of receipt of the gift.

snow terms of how the fppc enforces that requirement, i would have to refer to it. i don't have any personal experience. >> that's well passed that time. >> that is my understanding. >> i guess another question is it too late to pass an 801. it seems like that process should have been taken and it wasn't. i would feel much more comfortable approving the expense following the requirements in terms of the reporting for the department of the individuals benefitting the department. >> as you might imagine situations like this come up, not that in frequently with departments or with individuals who miss the deadlines on items forms 700, 802 and 801 and 803.

yes, if the filing is required, you should file it even if you have missed the deadlines. there may be consequences from the f ppc from the general filing. the best thing to do when you realize that you need to complete a filing is to complete it even if it's after the deadline. >> mr. gaskin would you consider filing an 801 along with the 803 you have already filed? >> no. i would not. i believe the 803 meets the requirement. this is not a gift for my personal benefit. some of the furniture is for the lounge and the other one is from the executive office where i conduct city business. i have been advised and i believe i had appropriate advice given the fpcc decision. the 803 was

a process and i would not be filing and 801. >> another question for mr. gibner. just a question about personal benefit. does that mean that you can actually receive a gift for a department that benefits an individual and that gift could be situated in the departments building and perhaps the office of that individual that could be considered that gift does not necessarily benefit that individual is that possible? that seems to be an interpretation that the fpcc is taking on this. >> i haven't spoken to anyone at fppc about this. they issue advice letters and they have a catalog of those letters. some of them are informal and some are them are more formal. they

have issued written advice in the past that is available on their website and legal search engines indicating that a gift of artwork say that is to a department that is placed in the head officials office is a gift that could be a gift of personal benefit to the official that is to the department. >> okay. thank you. >> i'm going to move this over. next. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you, i just wanted to get some clarity because i'm looking at the list and my understanding is that reportable gifts are of $10,000 value and in this case there are several individual gifts that are underneath that amount

and i'm just trying to understand why are these packaged in such a way that they are over the $10,000 threshold which require board approval. i don't understand that. i just need clarity to why does this need board approval in the first place especially since it comes from individuals and in this case it's been packaged as one thing. >> a good question. originally we didn't think we had any reporting requirements and we were told as much as this process evolved and to make it clear, not all the gifts came at the same time. there was a period of time, someone came in at the latter part last year and the early part of this

year. during this process there were discussions and in those discussions i elected to be for full transparency, the reality was that there was an alternative opinion and that would have been that we are here today because not all have exceeded. the people that gave them were out of the understanding of their own rules. i'm here on my own to make sure there is transparency. they have exactly the same information. i took it upon to layout every single gift.

>> who were the checks maid payable for the gifts. i don't -- >> i don't have an answer for you. >> and did you ask this to be done directly from these individuals? >> i did not. someone might, there were others that thought by other people like charlie schultz herself offered to go out and help. what occurred here is when i moved into office, my office had no furniture. the previous occupant of that office owned the furniture that was there. >> and she purchased that furniture herself. >> she owned it. i'm not sure how that process worked. so initially we put some

secretarial furniture there. there was some talk about putting different furniture and i saw needs around the victims services lounge where we serve about 5,000 victims every year. >> i'm familiar with that lounge. >> you know it generally hasn't been a very welcoming place. we are trying to make it. there was a discussion with charlotte and others and she took it upon herself to take up the project, i believe she's the one that went out after most of the funding for this. >> okay. i can just make a few comments, i know as someone who just started office, one of the challenges for me was good furniture, having a nice office and having quality furniture in my office was really important to me and i actually purchased it myself and plan to take it

with when i leave as well. i want to make sure that we are not being redundant about following the laws of reporting things that only require maybe one reporting mechanism or things that don't even meet the requirement threshold. it's clear that this information is here, it's available to the public and i think what i'm happy about is that regardless of who the district attorney is in place, that this furniture will remain in that office for others to continue to use and yes, i probably would have liked to have seen this before it actually happened but in this particular case it hasn't and i think that we just move

forward and approve this and from my perspective as a new supervisor, let this be a warning to anyone who wants to raise money to have furniture or anything else in this particular capacity that they look at what the laws are and look at what the requirements are which i did to make sure it was okay for me to purchase that stuff and bringing it into city hall before i took those steps. i think it's important for any department that uses this as a way to do business should do that. i'm happy to move this item forward. >> supervisor mar. >> it's helpful to know that fppc is not taking action on

that. when i see a $9999 contribution, it raises my eyebrows. the gifts were some were requested by you for support from your office you did initiate them and some of them came i think from some of the chronicle and the guardian coverage from some individuals that might have had some questionable activity, but i think ms: deberry, there is no on going conversation right now. my eyebrows are still up. i think there is a public perception if you take something for your office. there is something from the chronicle, i don't even know if the desk that you are sitting in are the chairs from the gift

or not but i think there is a perception that there is a personal benefit because it's your office. i totally support the victims lounge but i think there may be a personal benefit there. so filing an 801 form is the least to me for you to show that there has been some acknowledgment of the gift and some personal benefit based on that you are getting a benefit as opposed to your whole office. that to me would be the way to clear up any public perception of issues of this # $9999 gift. i think it was october when the gifts were requested. that's my take on this. i feel like it's a small amount of money before this

budget committee. i wish you didn't have to come here as well. it's a certain precedent how much coverage is received in the press and how much questions are asked in the neighborhood as well. that's my well. i appreciate you being here. my eyebrows are still up. >> thank you. >> supervisor avalos? >> thank you, supervisor breed talks about since the paperwork is the same, it's kind of redundant. the paper is not redundant. there are two reasons to do the paperwork. i would feel comfortable to support this if you filed an 801. i feel it's expected and requirement and described by mr. gibner that it would be most appropriate. i feel like you followed the proper procedures. otherwise i feel like i'm approving something

that wasn't quite done in the most correct way. i think it's fine about the 803, but not with the 801. i would feel most comfortable if you could file an 801 before i can prove this accepted expense. i'm fine with the victims services. clearly it's not benefitting an individual within your department and clearly i have been to your office and to the department, i know the condition of the furniture that is there and i'm really glad you saw the to get the support for the victims services and clearly for your office you need it as well. i would feel most comfortable if the proper paperwork was filed. >> i appreciate your concerns. we disagree. i believe an 801

have checked with council as the final fpcc and therefore i will not be filing an 801. prch your concern. >> i thought i heard from mr. gibner that you are required to file an 801 but you didn't do it on time. >> no, the fpcc is the final arbitrator and they believe we followed the rules as to their perception and i will not be filing an 801. >> thank you. i appreciate that you have been put in a difficult position. i feel i'm put in a difficult position here. that's why i'm making the request. my request is there and i have told you what my conditions are for voting affirmatively on is.

te that. if you feel should you vote against it, then you should. thank you. >> supervisor wiener? >> thank you. just to be very clear on something. my understanding is that you received advice, information from the f pcc stating that a form 801 is not necessary and 803 is sufficient. >> no we filed an 803 and there was a complaint and we immediately approached f p krchl c and my attorney worked and the fpcc came back and said we are comfortable. we feel you have not violated any rules. this has been given for the purpose of use. this is a gift and they have indicated that this is appropriate. >> in other words the 803 was the appropriate form and not an

801. >> we filed the 803. the 801 never came up. we fully disclosed the process and the gift and we filed the 803 and have posted all of this information on our website and all the disclosures that we are required to. i feel comfortable with the decision. >> i have looked at the complaint and says an 801 should have been filed and the fpcc responded to this complaint that saying that you are okay? >> correct. >> okay. so, also i'm being advised than an 801 would not

qualify because i requested the furniture to go for a specific purpose that's why the 803 is the appropriate vehicle. i believe that's why the f pcc, the complaint indicated that i should have filed an 801. that was a complaint. they have ruled that wasn't the case. >> the point i'm trying to make is at from what i'm seeing that it appears that you are being told one thing by the fpcc and by your attorney whoever that is and the city may have a different perspective on it and in my view that is an issue either you are complying with the ethics laws or not. you based on the cult at consultation that you are. if someone believes differently

file complaints or whatever they want to do. but ultimately from our perspective you have filed a form 803 in your mind and the mind of others that is sufficient although some people may disagree with thachl in terms of what is before us we have an issue of whether or not to prove the acceptance of furniture with self disclosure of these are the people who have contributed to the effort and the amount and the dates from which they have contributed and the purpose is for public disclosure so members of the public can draw whatever conclusions they want about different done donors or different amount. i'm comfortable of supporting the acceptance of the gift. everything is out on the public domain and people can have whatever opinion they want to have about that. and given that, it would be one thing if

you came in and said you haven't filed anything and you said i don't know that i'm required to then i wouldn't feel comfortable with moving forward but you have sought council and found the form 803 is an appropriate inform. to file. >> i know i said this earlier. it's really important to look at what we are talking about here. we are talking about furniture that has been don't donated to the city, we are talking about furniture being used for city businesses and talking about furniture that will stay there forever until it becomes unusable. there is noing about this gift that has a personal gift. this furniture

is not going to my home. other than inside the city, the district attorneys office for city business. quite frankly i'm somewhat disappointed at some level of the discussion. i really appreciate your support. >> actually i'm very disappointed. you are responsible for enforcing the law. we have the law that is stated we have to file an 801. that is a local law. it's been requested of me to feel comfortable for approving this. i feel this is a great stubbornness about this unless there is some kind of threat, i don't understand why you wouldn't want to do that. >> supervisor, the d. a.'s office the f pcc stated it was an inappropriate form because we made a specific request for the offices and we designated

where it would be located. it's an inappropriate form and i respect their opinion and the analysis of this situation. the attorney we used in this matter 801 and 803 are state regulations. that agency has said it's not an appropriate form. 803 is the appropriate form. we filed that and that contains all the information. we have addressed the concerns that you are raising about filing the appropriate forms. the state and with the city and we've done that. >> thank you for the explanation. i expected it. mr. gibner, could you state one last question i have that whether our local laws about requiring filing around 801 whether that requirement should be followed? >> just to be clear, they are both derived from the political

reform act. her to both state requirements even though the 803 is filed locally. they are both state riements requirements. this is based on the language that would require them and the f pcc on an analogues situation. we advise -- our local officials with the state laws past written advice. in terms of mr. berry's, again, i haven't spoep with the fpcc. the rule regarding filing an 801, if an individual receives the benefit and it requires someone other than the

individual receiving a benefit mates the decision about who benefits from the gift, i understand the resolution that's been introduced for the boards consideration of the cfo of district attorney's office has discretion where the furniture will be placed. >> supervisor breed. >> okay. just for clarity's sake, you are saying that, are you saying that you would advisor legally that an 801 and 803 should be completed? >> my offices advice in a situation like this, is based

on the legal requirement. the question that i think the committee is discussing here today is whether the furniture, this is a personal benefit on h and it's clear from this discussion different people could reach different conclusions about that. based on the fpcc past advice in other situations we would advise city officials in this situation to file the form 801 because our reading of the political reform act is that 801 is required. >> so you are suggesting that the information that is being provided by the district attorney's office is not accurate? >> absolutely not. i have not had conversation with the fpcc about the complaint that was

filed. i can only tell you what our advice it's to officials in these circumstances. >> so the information on 801 and 803 are pretty much the same thing >> they serve different purposes. they both disclose that a gift was received. 803 disclose that an elected official benefited from it. here the district attorney has filed the 803 that he solicited the gift. he didn't file the 801 that he personally benefited from the gift and the office determined that it would be used for the executive office. >> okay.

>> any other questions. from my perspective, i think that i associate myself a lot with wiener's comments and i appreciate it seems to be different opinions about the forms that need to be filed. we mentioned all the information is out there. i believe they filed for a different purpose. i don't think there is any questioning about the information being out there in a public domain. i think that at the end of the day, these are state mandated filings and if you ask the state agency and they recommend one and not the other, that seems to me a very reasonable course to follow. so, and again, this is accepting a gift from a city perspective i will be comfortable moving this forward. one thing i would suggest perhaps before the full board what would be hopeful to

get the fpc krshs put it in writing so we don't have a full debate on the board to get the fpcc's advice. i don't think there will be much debate. >> i will talk to my attorney and try get that. >> anymore comments, questions. i have to get a roll call. clerk? we have public comment? >> is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> can a roll call vote. on the motion supervisormar, no, supervisor avalos? no, supervisor breed aye, supervisor wiener aye, ferrel, aye, the motion passes. >> okay. thank you very much.

item no. 9 passes. could i have to motion to rescind item no. 8. he was absent when we made the motion. could we have a motion on item no. 8 to move that forward with recommendation and we do that without full opposition from the committee. >> mr. clerk, do we have any other items? >> that completes the agenda. >> then we are adjourned. >>