might be watching sfgtv and when mr. saint croi said that he considered considered all of the input and i would like to stipulate you late that he considered the input from the commissioners and the staff and however even though the members of the public gave the significant input at the last meeting i don't think that was even considered let alone included and i myself in writing and orally, gave such suggestions and after review of the annual report and i feel that you have confused the activist with the accomplishment and and the report is filled without any incomes without anything that i can find, it says that the commission is pledged to a high account of accountability. city lie breanne was found guilty by the ftpc by failing to report the gifts that he

received in multiple years with no belief that this body would take any action, the speaker took the matter to a state agency. after multiple training called the multiple sunshine declarations and trainings in ethics rules and statements all under the penalty of perjury and that he took those trainings and then proceeded the year after year file annual statements with the fdpc form 700, and that all said that he got nothing. and he did those under penalty of perjury, now. his amended filings showed that thousands of dollars of such gifts and the library commission most recently and illegally statement and it was illegally produced and illegally revised and illegally

approved and released it to the media from the lie brae on the stationary and did it all out of the site of the public and multiple and not only violating the sunshine ordinance but the brown act because they did not have enough courage to talk about what they wanted to say in a public, open meeting. >> and so what they did is they went behind the public's back, and they directed a city employee to commit an illegal act by issuing this statement to the san francisco bay guardian, knowing full well and then that they had the gal to say yeah, even though, we didn't realize what we were doing was illegal and restrakt the statement and after it had been printed in the press. and now either you have a bunch of morons who take this training and have not got the faintest idea of what is going on or you get the people who take it and don't give a... what it says. >> may i ask you a question.

you provided the staff with some language that you wanted to include in the annual report? that they failed to include? >> yes. in my public testimony, regarding the report at the last meeting, i gave a number of suggests as far as what it is but i heard the suggestions from the other members of the public and i looked to see if any of those were included. and this is where they would do the minutes and what you wrote about what i said is wrong. and it they will change everything, but would not change a single thing what we said and even though what we said was incorrectly represented. >> my recollection may be faulty because i am getting old. but i don't recall but we specifically dealt with the annual report at the last... and have you looked at the

minutes before the september 23rd meeting. >> it is not that one. >> page 7 of the minutes under public comment. >> and it is a 150 word summary and only a few minor modifications for acceptance of this report. and i went on to list those. >> do you want to make a

comment considering the report? >> moif that we adopt the draft report that has been presented to us >> i second, and you heard commissioner king that want to be recused because he is not familiar with the report and is anybody opposed to, and it has been recused and we actually have to do this as an official action. the commissioner will make a motion that he will be recused and someone needs to second. >> i asked to be recused from voting because it is my first meeting although i have read and looked over the materials i

don't feel that i have been privvy to the substance that is give and take on it to make an informed decision on this point and given the fact that the commission does not have a procedure for abstaining, and i think that recusal is important for me to do. >> and you can view that request that any public comment. >> first we need a second. >> i just want to read a question, i have no objection to mr. king's request. but i just want to make sure that the city attorney is comfortable that that is appropriate. >> i think that it is fine given the circumstances here and given that there is a quorum. without commissioner king, i think that it is fine. >> i second the motion. >> any public comment? >> commissioners ray hartz, director of san francisco open government and i would like to

thank commissioner king for starting out on a good foot. i think that when a commissioner member approves minutes or any other document approved by a body, he or she is not producing or voting on the nakt it be issued but they are actually stipulate you lating that they have reviewed with the contents others there is something contrary to your beliefs in that report and you will be approving it having not read it, i think that, the commissioner is well within his rights and i commend him on that because, without knowing what, you know, it is like, finding those form 700s. and you are signing something and you don't know what is in it, or if you sign something and you know what is in it and you know that it is a lie you know that it is a problem.

>> all of those in favor? >> aye. >> and any opposed? >> all right. reflected. three to nothing. >> actually it is four to nothing. you have to vote on that. >> and aye. >> okay. and now there is a motion on the floor. go ahead. >> and this motion on the floor to adopt the draft report which we have before us with the corrections, that i pointed out or the typos. all those in favor. >> aye. >> aye. >> opposed? >> it is carried 3-0. >> and turning to item 4 on the agenda, a discussion and possible action on the minutes of the commission's meeting of

september 23rd. anybody have any suggested corrections? >> public comment? >> ray hartz and, they were all unfounded comments and that was made earlier in the earl comments. and this is closely followed by chair hayon agreed, and when in the presence of the public, these members are silent. and after the public leaves, however, they find the courage to speak out. i hope that the staff realizes they are being damned with faint praise and commissioners

indicate support only when there is no one around to hear and so when we are hear making our statements they don't challenge us, and if there are statements about you, they don't challenge it and it can be hurt by the members of the public and wait for the members of the public to leave and then they screw up their courage and make the comments and one thing that i would like to point out they tried to make it sound like it was the staff that we are criticizing and it is almost, 100 percent mr. saint croix and usually what it is is a result of his management and supervisor style. and the commissioners, and i hope that the public realizes that they are dismissed out of hand, and most of the comments are negative is that the members of the public see nothing positive. only those who really have the grievance, and i am the only meeting that is here.

from your behavior that you don't give a... what they think and you just went ahead and said it. after a while many don't bother to attend as albert einstein said the best definition of insanety is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different out come. this is politics. we all know it. you are appointed by different city agencies and you are here to defend their interests. and you have no real interest in defending the rights of the public, and we can see that in your or your complete absence in the previous report of the sunshine ordinance and your responsibilities in the sunshine ordinance and the fact that over these 13 years, you failed to do anything to enforce it. and in fact, i would like to hear one member of this task

force all right, this commission actually point out something in that report to point it and say that i think that we made a substantial improvement in the ethics of this city. >> do i hear a motion to adopt the minutes? >> i move that we adopt the draft minutes as written. >> second. >> mr. chair, on this, i will vote on this, there is nothing really substantive here and i looked over the minutes and i do not need to be recused on this. >> all of those in favor of adopting the minutes as written? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> all right. and adopted unanimously. and turning to item number six, >> just, number five, and the discussion of the executive director's report.

>> two highlights and i point out after a very long time, we finally, have filled the educator position and so last week, the new person started and we are going to the training for that person and additionally we did offer the open auditor for someone who accepted it and we will have someone else on board and so then next we have an open investigator position and so we will start working on that and the other highlight is that we finished with all of the various departments that handles all of the on-line filing and that final approval. that comes through just today and on the mind of the different agency and so that contract has been extended for five years which is a good

thing. >> and under the record requests, john, you mentioned that there is an increase on the public record requests and what do you account for that? is that just seasonal? >> it is really hard to predict when they will come and when they will not. we have one record request last week that took two staffers, the better part of three days. to fill in. and then and then we had a second record request. and in the previous weeks. anda say that it is seasonal, and it is just, there are so many different motivating factors behind them. >> yeah. >> thank you. >> mr. saint croix, willing terms of the file comparable to the terms that we had with them previously and i know that we previously gotten a good deal from them. and for the first time, since

we have had the contract the actual dollar amount of the contract has increased and i think that the file has held it down low because we are san francisco is the anchor tenant and i think that after 6 years, the costs have increased, and but we ammortized it over the life of the contract. and additionally we still have in place the agreements that there is a certain amount processing that they will do to create the forms for us as we develop the new needs and again this is the kind of thing that they will normally charge the other entities for but we are san francisco tends to be ahead in moving toward on-line filing of documents that other places don't, and so once we have our system for example, form 700 up and running that is a process where they can go and then market to others. and so there is a good benefit for us and the people, and in this contract. it is a very good one.

just one other comment that i have and i see under the revenue report we budgeted $100,000 for the year and last year if my memory may be off and we hit that goal and exceeded it. >> by more than 25 percent. >> yeah, i thought that this was great and kind of divided it out by quaut and her generally a quarter. >> and i see that we have nine and that is comparable to what happens year off year where you are slow going and it builds up over time. >> yes, it was the first quarter of the calendar year because a great many of the finds and not finds but excuse me, the fees and stuff that are due annually will come in and there is always a big bump there and additionally, a lot of the late filings and everything, that happened during the election cycle which we are in now and the election in november and so the

processing late fees and late fines will happen after the election is over. >> thank you. >> and i also wanted to echo the commissioner renne and thank the staff and you mr. saint croix for the hard work reflected in the report and not just in putting it together but the actual work that was accomplished in the last fiscal year, thank you. >> any public comment the executive director's report. >> commissioners, ray hartz, director of san francisco open government and i am only to comment on section 7 and 10 of this report. the first section, number 7, discusses the filing of form 700. and some focus needs to be placed on the fact that the filing of such reports are done under the penalty of perjury, the city librarian failed to figure that out. and he also didn't seem to understand that finding such a statement is perjury, even when it is not done in front of the

public official under oath. and i have to believe that someone as intelligent does not understand those matters and there must be many more city employees who do not understand, and potentially a lot of other were filing and complaints with the ftpc against the members. >> and it is the same as mr. herrera in similar amounts. >> in section ten is says that due to the records involved. and it has been side tracked from the regular duties end quote, under the sunshine ordinance and the san francisco public records act. and responding to public records requests, they are among the regular duties of every city employees. this mistakingly represents this as something that they are being taken away from their

duties. it is part of their duty and any city employee who is asked for a record is a requirement and part of their job duties to provide a job response. and putting this in a report saying that they are taken away from the regular duties it is simply a ploy and the record request to something and it is a legitimate legal request from a citizen of san francisco. and the control and the supervision or a record and not getting it. and it is my own experience after chasing him for two solid years and going through the city attorney's office and a petition that the supervisor of records to continue to records

and those were the very records used to find him in violation of the regulations. and i did not blame him. and i would lie about the existence which he did. and i even denied, answering whether they did exist or not, when they responded or the company requestor had a legal document saying that you should have it signed by the respondent. >> agenda item 6, items for future meetings, do the commissioners have any suggestions as to items that they would like to see on the

agenda for the meetings in november? or subsequent there to? >> mr. heart you are the only mefm of the public, do you have a suggestion or items that we should put on the agenda. >> i do, ray hartz, director of san francisco open government, i think that this body needs to acknowledge that in your charter it says that you are responsible to a degree for the sunshine ordinance and its implementation and enforcement. and yet in every single document, i see coming out of this body, you just, you fail to address it at all. and in the civil grand jury report, the sleeping watch dog that was mentioned by the civil grand jury. and you simply dismissed that with the typical response to civil grand jury reports of thank you very much for all of the time that you put into this and how much that we appreciate all of this hard work and then proceed to disagree with

everything that they say. deny what they say and say that it is wrong and say that they don't understand and anything but accepting it. feedback, is the breakfast of champions that is something that ken blancardsaid, and anybody and any organization or individual or group of people who cannot accept the feedback and admit to the fact that occasionally they are not doing something that they should be doing, is willfully ignorant and saint thomas said that willful ignorance of what one ought to know is a mortal sin. the sunshine ordinance, task force hears dozens and dozens of cases each year and they sent you three or four or five and you dismiss every one of them. you take the city's side every single time. only one time, have you ever taken an action and that was to recommend to the mayor that the president of the library

commission be removed. and he ignored you. and so i guess that i can't blame you either, would i not want to take the action if i knew that the only thing that i would get is somebody saying that i am not going to do it. and you don't have any power and you don't have any control, people say that the sunshine task force does not and i will give them this, at least, listen to the citizens of this city and when they find a good case, they will issue a violation and i have 19 of them myself and just try to get them enforced. and you can catch people in a blatant lie and you know the most interesting thing about it, they never have the courage to show up and explain their own actions. and they send some city employees who does not really know what is going on say, here you go on and you defend this illegal action. and poor sue black man at the library commission, the secretary gets stuck defending

the actions of gomez and herrera because they do not have the integrity before a body and say that the reason that i did this is because of this. they send her there and the last time that i watched her, she was physically standing there shaking like a leaf because they were asking her questions that they didn't have answers to. >> i am not sure that i know what the agenda item is that you want us to put on. but if you want to submit some specific agenda item for our consideration, we will certainly consider it. >> i thought that i made it clear, the item would be to have an open public discussion at ethics commission meeting about what you feel this body feels about its obligations under the sunshine ordinance.

>> all right, i think that we spelled that out when we set the new regulations for hearing on sunshine complaints. >> but there are no further items? >> public comment >> i thought that we had finished public comment >> one more. >> and any, and anybody want to move to adjourn and then i will ask for the public comment on that? >> any public comment on that? >> agenda item 7 is general public comment. >> all right. the item 7, is sort of the flip side of two, public comment on the matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda that are within the jurisdiction of the ethics commission. >> ray hartz, san francisco

open government and there is that meeting is only about 30 minutes long and i don't feel particularly impolite to use the second opportunity. you can act like i am here just to be a pick on you and poor us and you know, all of this other, crap which you seem to want to present it as. but i have been watching the open meetings in this city for the last five years, attending meetings in the commission and the arts commission, and the board of supervisors, and the respect that people pay to the public as far as their ability to participate in meetings to make public meeting and to make the public records is ludicris and part that have responsibility falls with you, the city employees know that if they want to withhold the documents from the public

because it is going to make them look bad and because no one in the city especially this commission is going to do a thing about it. and you are going to come up with 150 records and in fact, mr. saint croix had to be defended in the superior court of california and just recently by a lawsuit by allen grossman for withholding records, about the sunshine ordinance, which clearly states, that any communications between the city communications and the matters regarding, open government issues cannot be hidden from the public uppeder the patient, and where the attorney, public privilege and the ruling came out, and it agreed with the argument and i think that reason is that the city attorney instead of being the kind of person who expects the city employees and departments to follow the law wants to allow them to do whatever they

want and then wants to advise the bodies how to avoid giving documents to the public which would expose it. and like i said, i fought with herrera and that man is an intelligent man and i knew that the documents that i was asked that we are asking for and were disposal under the public record's act. and they fought me repeatedly over the public comment. and i have at least eight in finding them in violation of the law because they didn't like what i say because i think that you can understand it because i am pretty clear, but i will say one thing for me, that i can't say that for a lot of people on the boards or commissions, and i will look you in the eye and say that to your face anything and i would not say it behind your back, but my impression is that you sit there and commission and any comments you wait until we

are gone and you wait until we are gone to make them. >> >> item 8, i will hear a motion to ayearn. >> and so moved. >> and second. >> all right. >> comment on that. >> all right. all in favor? >> aye. >> meeting is adjourned.