pitch. i don't know, like speak out of place. >> this is one of the -- this is the point of the forum. until we have a noticed meeting, there's -- as president of the commission, i can't have but one, you know, conversation. and, so, i don't know what folks are thinking here. so, this is a chance to shape it. you know, i think it's great. and i think when we sat down and learned about some of the different kind of ways that this has been done, there was -- sounds like there was a certain tact to do it. you know, if candidates -- you know, you have to have it set up a certain way because folks might not apply that may not necessarily want everyone in the world to know they're applying. >> i was thinking maybe we could do it over video conference and not have to bump into each other. i don't know if that's possible. given it's going to be a closed meeting, we don't need to have it sort of -- >> there's also the winner

involved here. >> we don't want like 12 people -- [multiple voices] >> there's also the winnowing process. you may want to use the search committee to reduce the number of candidates because the search firm could come back with six good candidates. you have to figure out how do you narrow that down, how do you most effectively narrow that down to the finalist [speaker not understood]. so, there are a few logistical things to work out. the logistics, obviously be in closed session, it will be done in such a way that we would not have candidates see each other. we went to great lengths the last time. we did them on 14 separate days. >> and they came in one door and went out another. >> so, the fortunate thing about doing it -- >> we do have video conference now, right? >> fortunate thing about using a search firm is that takes care of some of the initial screening. we won't have to look at 14 candidates hopefully.

>> one of the reasons i asked commissioner wan to work on this search aspect is because they, i think more than i think may have occurred in the past, maybe in certain other experiences, the way they set it up at the juvenile probation commission, all 7 commissioners were engaged. and, so, there was this very good process, i think it will be helpful to learn from, to do that. so that there's active direct commissioner engagement through it. that's the trick. as our city attorney would tell us, we can't get in the serial meetings, but there is a certain art and we start learning how they set it up with juvenile probation. i think one of the quick easy ideas was search team can just have individual conversations in a silo with each commissioner and incorporate that into the conversation because they're not sharing, hey, your colleague said this

and your colleague said that, so, we're good, right? deputy city attorney owen? >> that is part you have to be very careful about is not accidentally indicating what a colleague had suggested. >> got it. >> there is also the logistical part about how many interviews you want to do at a march 25th meeting even if they were a half hour apiece. you would soon end up with multiple-hour meeting. >> we're going to lose commissioner wald. >> i had the same questions for everyone. i just want to say as someone who participated in the last search that i really appreciate the attention that you have given -- all of you have given so far to engaging the full commission to the maximum extent possible. that was one of the criticisms

that my fellow commissioners gave me the last time around, that we did not engage them enough. already with the search firm talking to the commissioners, i think we have exceeded the amount of, you know, interaction. we had the last time -- i think there may be more things that you can do and that you can do them -- you can do them legally, including possibly or potentially circulating the applications of candidates. but, so, i just want to encourage you to explore those things. a month or is it two months, is

a short period of time in figuring out how to do it and bringing people along is going to be a challenge. but i'm glad that you are committing yourselves to doing that and i look forward to seeing what strategies you come up with to achieve that goal. >> and, commissioner wald, before you leave, do you feel like whether you've had chance to engage with the search firm or when that happens you'll have the chance to express ideas and qualifications? >> i'm assuming, then -- i mean, i'm assuming i'm going to do that on friday. >> that's the point. [multiple voices] >> but i also think, you know, just let me say one more thing based on my past experience. you can, you can have your qualifications and you can have your qualifications and you can even really prioritize those qualifications which is something that we tried to do

very hard the last time, but you have to trust -- in this case you have to trust the search firm to kind of balance those qualifications because in my experience in this job, you are never going to get anybody who possesses all of the qualifications you want, even the ones you made public. and it's a balancing act. it's sort of a go with your gut. at some level, who -- who you end up with when you narrow the field and who you end up with when you do the interviews. so, i think the fact we're all talking to them is a really great first step because it means that they will have a

much broader sense of how we weigh these various qualifications and ideals that we want in the person who is going to be the next executive director. >> i just want to add one quick thing. that i will obviously as everybody knows, if we get candidates who are interested, whom to refer them to because it will be up on a website and there will be a public facing announcement. so that if a member of the public wants to go and apply, they'll be able to do so. >> so, i'm able to distribute that information so if you get inquiries, you can say here's where you go to apply. >> i apologize. >> thank you. no, thank you, commissioner. thank you. commissioner stephenson. >> i just want to float the idea that i personally would like to see that we -- we're

adding a meeting in february. so, if we had a sooner meeting in march to do some interviewing to see some of the candidates, i think that would be great. i think if we looked at it as the search firm, when is it -- the search committee winnowses it down further and folks can come in for even 20 minutes each, i think that would go a long way toward making us all feel very personally involved. >> okay. and it sounds like this idea of having -- we're going to get the search firm to do a degree of screening and then names that go from the committee to the commission. part of the deal, i think, is that when we do do the deliberation, that we've got enough of a pool to say, if there's candidates that are kind of in the top tier and here's a second tier and it's a number of -- just throwing numbers out there -- of 8 to 10 that we're able to deliver and say, actually i think this candidate based on the

interviewer, based on the application, i think they're actually -- they're more of a second tier. this person might be first tier as we do the winnowing, right? i think that's something maybe i heard a little bit of feedback is to not -- when we get to the commission deliberation, be saying, okay, so, we need to forward three and i'm looking at three, what do i do with this, right? so, i think that's something to have in mind. >> i don't know, i'm just going through a search for successful ed that i'm on the board of. when we sit down for the interviews of, if the search committee could have written up a memo or something like that on the candidates or something like that so that we don't have to go through all the questions that you've already asked them and that we can maybe focus on things which may be less kind of, a, qualified, and what's your vision for the department,

things like that which may be a bit more kind of touchy, feely. >> i would assume that we'll be getting profiles from the search firm and that that would be one of the things we would share with the commission so that, yes, when you do come into -- >> but when you guys are doing -- i'm getting the $terms mixed up. is the search committee going to interview the candidates before the commission meets the candidates? >> yes, yes. >> yes. okay. >> yes, i would assume that's necessary. >> no, totally, totally. >> and from whatever profile the search firm puts together, we would add our comments and whatever to that before forwarding it to the commission so that you get the benefit not only of the search firm screening, but also the benefit of the search committee's input on those candidates. and then there are always kind

of natural bright in first, second, third tier candidates. you never know the numbers, but you see pretty clear once you start the process who is really a top notch candidate, who is a so-so candidate and who shouldn't go to the next step. so, >> commissioner? >> i also wanted to suggest that i think, you know, one of the key jobs of the executive director is sort of interacting with the mayor and interacting with other departments or rather the mayor's office interacting with other departments. i don't know if this is creating additional work, which might not be necessary, but it would be valuable also to get input from the mayor's office -- the mayor and also maybe the heads of the other key other departments that we have to interact with like the puc and rec and park and, you know, as you guys can put together a --

sort of a limited list. i mean obviously the department at one point [speaker not understood] every other city department, we've got 77 different people commenting on it. but i think that would be a really helpful way of getting them into the into the process as well. and also seeing how we can deepen those relationships. >> i think that's smart. and the broad picture direction that we have from the mayor is he wants to do a national search and he wants to also -- the second thing i think the mayor is looking for in the mayor's office is obviously similarly looking for is kind of community feedback. the trick there would be -- it was even kind of thrown out, suggested as an idea, i think it's a good one, i think it could be some logistical stuff to work through. but the potential to have a meeting in the community before we make our decision to get some kind of sense from

community members, you know, the tricks about doing that is we have two weeks to do that, or two months rather to do that. it's a lot of work obviously for the department to set a community meeting, flip side is we could do a light agenda and basically have, you know, one or two topics only. and then this idea of what community members want to see out of the future of the department, and future leadership of the department. so, we also did our community due diligence, but then the trick would be we also need to have a type of vehicle to have the interview process because that will be the time and place to do that unless we had a separately notice. >> i mean, yeah, it would be something great for the search committee to do because, you know, it's kind of more nimble. if you guys want to do a community meeting, i don't think you have to have all 7 of us up there at the meeting, especially if it's something where it's really to collect -- collect information and you guys are going to be the ones

who are best capable of managing it. by the time it gets to us, it will already be a bit -- it will be a step further. if you can have all that community input and bring it into sort of the short list selection, i think that would be really valuable. >> yeah, i just think it's going to be -- there is going to be a distilling process that has to happen after that community meeting because i think you're going to hear a hundred topics that are going to distill into two or three things that are really important that kind of fall under the same umbrella, but then we will apply to what you're looking for. [speaker not understood] earlier, too. >> that helps me. they have to be done [speaker not understood] while recruitment is still going. >> okay. and then that would be we're serving on the same committee. that would be a good notice, tom? >> [speaker not understood].

>> anyway, good form would be to do a good notice meeting, whatever we call it. the ad hoc search committee of the department of environment -- the environment commission seeks community input during our search for [speaker not understood] director. we can share that back to the commission. >> [inaudible]. >> that's good, that's a good one. all right. >> i just want to add that i think, you know, it's great that you're taking this on, josh, and i think, you know, we all really appreciate you putting in all this work and interviewing all the search firms and putting together the plan. i mean, god, doing this right now, it is a huge amount of work, so, thank you for taking that on. >> thanks, commissioner. and i've just been looking forward to sharing this stuff because we get ideas about how much we can talk and obviously easiest is do notice meetings

and have a conversation. really, david has been the one driving us forward to get through the process and helping us to understand, and sarah's insight having gone through it recently with the juvenile probation commission and the department led to [speaker not understood] was a good process. i don't know that we would have thought of this idea of, hey, we did there what we can do here as every single commissioner has a direct conversation what they're looking for for qualifications. i don't know if we would have stumbleded on that one. any other thoughts? did he he already go, commissioner josefowitz? commissioner stephenson? commissioner gravanis? >> i just want to pole dowries i have to leave now. if there is anything you need a quorum for, let's do it in the next 30 seconds because you're going to lose a quorum now. >> we're good. we did go through our action items and just a couple reports and whatnot. all right, so, folks feel

comfortable, ideas after interviews, search committee goes out, gets community feedback, goes back, able to incorporate community feedback into the process, making sure it's iterative and that we're able to get a sense of the pool as we come down to the commission making the final decision by what names to forward. >> sounds good. >> okay. any public comment on this item? seeing none, [gavel] >> can we go to the next item, please, monica? thanks, commissioner. >> actually policy committee report, it's a possible action about the reporting that commission of the environment committee resolution in support of proposed san francisco mta commuter shuttle policy and power program. there was a discussion and possible action. >> you're looking at me. >> you're the ranking member. commissioner josefowitz. >> we're taking it out of order. >> i'm sorry, operations. did you do operations?

>> operations committee chair's report. >> okay. >> commissioner king is gone. i'm going to give her report on the last meeting. we had a good meeting. you guys should come -- well, you guys can't come, but public should come to the operations committee meeting. we had a public meeting on green purchasing, it was great. spent a lot of time talking about some of the challenges that face us in green purchasing across the city. and also it has a chance to talk about some things i wanted to reiterate for any public that might be watching. had some feedback on compostable bags and green purchasing around compostable bags. and one of the challenges that we see is that people are using compostable bags to throw away their landfill waste and that that is a no-no, and that was something a lot of us didn't know when we were there in the meeting. so, that was great insight for us. also, talked about green purchasing for hand sanitizers across city departments and that hand sanitizers that

contain an element called triklosan are cancer causing. good knowledge for everyone to have. the main challenges that are facing green purchasing are the same as they've been when they came before the full commission, that was an older inventory management and purchasing system. it's very hard for us to stay as on top of green purchasing as we would like to. but we are all doing our very best. and then we had a really nice very in-depth conversation around the budget and specifically around some of the unfunded mandates that are here with the department. one of the things that came up that i also wanted to ask acting director osman about was we talked about potentially requesting general fund money to support the hacto work that we were doing and i didn't know if that was -- any progress had been made on that or that was something we were going to do in the future. >> i had a conversation with our budget analyst this

afternoon about that. it's looking difficult. let's put it that way. we haven't given up yet. so, it's actually -- for the green transportation team, it is essential for us to keep our existing team to get some support either from the general funds or from mta. we've also put in a request to the municipal transportation authority. we haven't heard back from the mta yet and our discussions of the general fund are continuing. >> keep us updated. i guess we can -- >> absolutely. >> great. those are the main two things we talked about and i would say come to the operations committee meeting. we get to dive into a lot of programs we're working on. >> just a note on that. the next meeting normally is scheduled for february 12. we had a discussion, and i can't remember if it was at that meeting about moving it to the 19th, which is the

following wednesday because we really won't have our budget ready for discussion before then. >> we have to probably wait until commissioner king can do it. >> our budget is due to the mayor's office february 21st, which is the friday. and the wednesday before is the ideal time because we're working on the budget till the very last. >> right, right. >> so, i seem to remember we had a discussion about that. i can't remember, it was at operations or -- >> it was at operations, yeah. >> i think both were discussed because there was the idea since the puc joint commission date worked with their calendar which -- after the budget, yeah. >> it would have been after the budget. so, then we talked about doing it in your committee, yeah. but here's the thing. if you're deliberating on the budget and committee, if we notice the meeting as a committee of the whole, which we may be doing already, are we

monica? at operations? >> we can. if there is interest by other commissioners to attend the meeting, we can on notice as commission as a whole. >> would you other committee members have objections just noticing it as committee of the whole just in the off chance? because then to your point about folks coming, if it's just as a matter of practice noticed as a meeting of the committee of the whole, folks can come there. and that would be good because there have been a couple things i saw and i remember thinking, oh, man i'd like to go, but it's too late to notice as a committee of the whole. >> so, the question is going to be february 19th is a problem for anybody? i think it would work for us as staff to have it any time that week, but it shouldn't be the week before because we won't have -- >> i'm curious on that point, too, if on the budget, if the work order with the puc was discussed because we have a $600,000 program that we do

together with sfpuc. and after they met on their budget, i exercised, you know, the capacity of the ambassador for the commission, their ambassador of their commission, their commission president. and i said how are we doing on our partnership, on our work order? and at that time we were striking out. goose egg, zero. and i'm wondering if that's still the case -- [multiple voices] >> actually, one of the things we looked at with the budget analyst, mayor budget analyst, was the sfpuc power budget. on an overall level it wasn't broken out. the work orders to other departments were at essentially the same level. >> so we're good. >> we're good. trying to get verification on that. >> okay. our bigger challenge is getting the clean transportation funding from the general fund and from mta as far as i know right now. >> okay. >> these things change by the hour. but right now -- >> okay. >> we did get a positive

response from the planning department. [speaker not understood]. department of building inspection ising us more money than they have in the past. we're having success in those areas. our remaining gap is around two things. it's around clean transportation. ~ we're somewhat short in climate renewables. clean transportation is a big hole in the budget. >> i'll be the ambassador for the thing over to the mta, then, to our friend. we have a friend over there, director tom nolan, i think. they're looking for ways we can work together. he's been great. >> so far we haven't gotten bad news from him. we just haven't gotten anything from him. we put in a request, we just haven't heard anything. all we heard is we're looking at it. >> got it, got it. all right. thank you, commissioner. commissioner josefowitz. >> public comment? >> public comment on operations committee, seeing none -- [gavel] >> can we go to 15? >> committee report, highlights

the october 21, december 9 meetings, january 13 meeting in review of the agenda for the february 10 meeting. report on the commission on the environment policy committee resolution in support of proposed san francisco municipal transportation agency commuter shuttle policy and pilot program. copy of the resolution is in your packet and this is a discussion and possible action item. >> so, i didn't come prepared to talk about all this. i don't have the minutes of the policy meetings, but i must say that it is always a highlight to talk about the san francisco municipal transportation agency's commuter shuttle policy and pilot program at any public meeting. so, i think if i have to sort of point out a highlight, that would certainly be it. >> yeah. >> and i don't think just the two of us can take action on something, but it probably wouldn't be valid. >> we can read live tweets.

>> i think i'm going to skip over that and encourage everybody in attendance and all the other commissioners here to come to the next policy meeting. >> sounds great. where anyone can drop by, it's noticed as a committee of the whole. and if, monica, we could save minutes -- you may not even have to do minutes for the commuter shuttle policy item. you could just do a link to the league of pissed off voters live tweet series from that evening, can save some writing. yeah, it was good, good meeting. so, i don't have any comments. comments from the public? yeah, just make a line and -- [laughter] >> yeah, three minutes. let's go two. seeing none, next item. [gavel] >> next item is commission secretary's report and in your package you have a copy of the report. the statement form 700 is due april 1st. all the instructions are there

to all the commissioners. and just to notice it, the 700 is to be submitted electronically, not by paper. the sanction form and certificate of ethics training can be submitted by e-mail or by fax. the original signature is not required this year. >> all right. >> all right, we're making progress. monica, thank you also for the memo that you wrote on the board of supervisors legislative activity. i thought that was really, really helpful to have that. >> okay, thank you. and also -- >> am i on the right agenda item? >> yes, the commission secretary report. that section. >> i thought that was really helpful. i don't know, i can't remember seeing this before. maybe you do this regularly. >> it's on the secretary's report. the legislative activity from the board of supervisors. >> yeah. it is always there? >> [speaker not understood]. also, i did notice an e-mail

that was received today indicating that there is going to be a live ethics training for the officials on tuesday, february 25th starting at 5:30 p.m. at the north theater home of city arts and lectures and [speaker not understood] will begin at 5:30. the training will begin promptly at 6:00. they are also planning on giving the training on the city attorney's website. and i believe that will be available after february 27th. >> okay. that is an important one. thank you, monica. any thoughts? okay. other comments? seeing none -- [gavel] >> thanks again, monica. >> director's report. >> director's report, or acting director. >> yes, it is attached. rather than go through t i'm just happy to answer any

questions ~. there is one very interesting typo that i didn't catch in the third to last line on the report. it should have said 223,000 total on the carbon fund will be distributed. instead of distrusted. >> ooh, oh, my. >> splicing up the report, eh? >> should have said distributed. >> got it. >> didn't want it on european conscience. >> yeah, i didn't proofread this. ~ on your conscience i'd rather go through it. ~ rather than go through it, i'd rather answer any questions. >> commissioner? >> mr. president? >> i'm good. >> me, too. >> all right, let's do it. >> thanks, david. any public comment? seeing none -- [gavel] >> thank you.

>> announcements. >> commissioner josefowitz, any announcements? >> no. mr. president? your president's announcements. >> liverpool won earlier today. other than that -- >> must be unusual. that's an announcement. >> yes, yes. and other than that, just that, i think i've got some direction here to reach out to some of the other departments. i'll just double-check on our work orders around the mta, was 1.5. >> the mta request was $230,000. >> 230? >> $230,000 request by the mta. >> in partnership? >> everybody else, we more or less heard from, so, yeah. that's the one outstanding one. >> and then the