and in wishing her the best in all her future endeavors do here by proclaim today, ~ january 28th, 2014 as melanie nutter day in san francisco. (applause) >> can we all get a picture together maybe? >> yeah. >> we did that before over here, right? we have a nice camera. [multiple voices]

>> where should we look? >> look both ways. >> wow, thank you so much. can i just say thank you so much to our mayor ed lee for this wonderful honor of getting my very own day and for this proclamation. as i said before, it's really been a fantastic honor to serve and be part of the city and county of san francisco. and, again, thank you to all the commissioners, but really thank you to the mayor. this is really a really fantastic surprise. so, thank you.

(applause) >> okay. so, where do we go? >> so, thank you all. >> thank you. >> carry on with the rest of the meeting. thank you so much for the surprise. [multiple voices] >> i second that motion.

>> melanie is the only person i've ever known who got a day. >> whos was the first person? >> john [speaker not understood]. [laughter] >> what day is it today? >> melanie nutter day. >> we tried -- we got i think in 2009, we got [speaker not understood], we had one of the days under gavin, and it was late at night. and we used it -- my board and i -- to see if we could get a free beer from one of the local establishments since it was our day and it didn't work at all. [laughter] [multiple voices] >> and thank you also to the

staff for the beautiful flowers. >> all right. so, again, i think there's a couple other things we'll be together on stuff. dave is going to work us through the last pieces on this, on our agenda, which are number 13, if we can move to item 13. >> 13, public notice of 2014 subscription and renewal of commission on the environment and committee notices and agendas as required by the commission on the environment bylaws. and in the packet is a copy of the subscription request form, and this is new information and discussion item. the notice was issued pursuant to the commission on the environment's dialogue article 13, request for notice and agendas as follows. request a member of the media or public to receive notice of the agenda for agenda packets for commission or committee meetings must be in writing

[speaker not understood] what the person would like to receive and whether e-mail is preferred. such request shall be valid until the following january. january of each year the commission will ask each person to reaffirm their desire to stay on the list for another year to a notice on the commission's january agenda so that requirement has been met through the notice on this agenda. >> okay, thank you. >> could i ask a question about this? remind me, do we have to have this requirement in our bylaws? and if we don't have to have this requirement in our bylaws, perhaps we should consider not having it in our bylaws. but i don't -- i think we've talked about this before, and i don't -- i don't remember.

monica or tom, is there some kind of city-wide requirement that obligates us to ask people who are on our mailing list who can, after all, unsubscribe at any time they want to annually affirm if they want to be on our mailing list? >> i see that the good government guide is being consulted. >> i mean, you've got it down now, monica, so, it probably doesn't take that much of your time. but it still takes time. >> it does, and i just want [speaker not understood] there is no requirement to send it to the mailing list. it just appears on the agenda. the agenda goes [speaker not understood]. there is no requirement to send the form itself to the mailing list. >> go ahead and read it. >> it's a real good word,

commissioner stephenson. it's superfluous. so, we may not need it? no action here today. >> no, i know. but if we don't need it -- >> we do it every year. >> i still request that at our next meeting we have a proposal to amend our bylaws to eliminate this requirement. >> if i may. >> or article. >> commissioner gravanis. >> while looking it up, quick question off the top of your head, roughly, how many people want to get information through snail mail as opposed to e-mail? >> two. >> two, okay. [multiple voices] >> 200 or two? >> two. >> it's the same people for 10 years. >> so, is it the will of the commission at a future date to look at removing this from the bylaws if deputy city attorney ellen says it's okay? >> yes. >> yes. >> okay.

he'll find out for us. he's diligently looking it up. maybe we can then deal with that and is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, any other discussion? all right. [gavel] >> can we call item -- this is where we now have item 9. >> department of the environment director search process and candidate qualifications. sponsored speaker is commissioner joshua arce. this is a discussion item. >> okay, colleagues. so, david osman is our acting director for this meeting, but melanie is still with us through the end of the week. we wanted to use this as an opportunity to bring the commission up to speed on the process of searching for our next director of the department. and for those that have been involved in the past search that led us to melanie and 3-1/2 great years of working with her, it's going to sound

familiar because in many ways it's patterned after that process. it's also been -- we looked at a couple other processes particularly in regard to a search that commissioner wan was involved with with the juvenile probation commission when she was commissioner over there. and they went through a search. but what i wanted to kind of share is where we currently stand in terms of the process. and several commissioners really wanted to be active in having this conversation here to talk about what questions we want to ask in this process and what we think we're looking for as we go out there and try to find our next director to build upon the successes that melanie has delivered for the department. so, just in a quick summary and acting director osman can help me with any details that i might miss as i try to just be to the point. there was a look at using the

search firm. i know that last time there was not a search firm and it was great deal of work, safe to say. he had a search committee. and, so, we did look at three different search firms that the city has a list of folks that are involved in doing a search as a search firm. and what that basically means is taking a job description, helping to get it out to the entire nation and look at everyone -- anyone and everyone out there and also help to save on administrative time of trying to cull through folks that might not hit the mark with where the commission might ultimately want to go because as you know, we as a commission are in charge of selecting finalists that will submit consideration by the mayor. so, the three different firms, there is one that kind of really stood out during that process. they weren't -- there were three that applied. the firm was not the most expensive. they were not the least expensive. so, you guessed it, they're right there in the middle of the three. they're called alliance. a group of us sat down,

including commissioner wan, myself, and deputy director osman. and to kind of review this process, one thing that jumped out about the firm alliance is and commissioner wan noticed this, there was one firm that is owned and operated by women that had applied and one firm that had diversity of principles at the firm and one affirmative action that really talked about including diversity in all the different things that it means in the process of its search. and it also had a really good reputation working with other departments, most recently the department of building inspection with respect to their search. so, that firm is engaged and in this process, but where we kind of stand today is the notion of just like in the past having the search committee that dialogues with the commission, that looks at the applicants that come through the process,

ultimately this commission will be the body charged with submitting the final list for consideration by the mayor. and some of us, i think all of us, have received an inquiry from the search firm who indicated they made the time to talk to us individually as commissioners, as well as to review this conversation here to take anything and everything that we put out there that we want to see in the process. the application period is expected to be open from the first week of february through the end of february about a four-month period -- >> sorry, four week. i was on a roll, too. >> four week period, and then the goal would be during that subsequent period afterward to go through the process of culling down the process as an iterative process with the search committee and the commission. the idea of the search committee in the past has now been around the idea of two commissioners and the deputy

director, the search committee has come together to this point, also has two advisory members in this. and this is a result of these conversations not only commissioner wan and myself and deputy director osman, but two really, i think, individuals that have a lot of insight into the department, into this type of process. and i think they are folks that we really value. i don't want to project too much, but i think i can. the names of the two individuals i think we put a lot of faith and trust in terms of helping us informally in that, it is -- you know them as saint jared, former director jared bloom enfeld, and also the former not only leader and member of the team here department of environment, but mayor knew so many and for a time mayor lee in climate change initiatives johanna

parton has agreed to be a part of helping through this process as well ~. but i think one of the things we're obviously putting these ideas out here now, get your sense as commissioners, what you want to see in the process, what kind of back and forth both during the application period and the follow as well as the candidate qualifications that folks want to see. anything i missed, david? >> yeah, i think you hit all the highlights. i can give a little more detail as to the specific timeline. the firm has been engaged. they are spending this week talking one on one with commissioners. i'm meeting with them twice this week to provide background information. they will have an announcement ready to go by february 7th at the latest, take application through the 28th of february. during that time period we'll have weekly check ins to make sure there is a robust pool of candidates.

in march they will be narrowing down the pool of candidates so that the search committee will have a smaller pool to choose from. then the intent is to have the commission meeting of march 25th be the time at which the finalists are selected to forward to the mayor on march 26th with the intent, then, of having the mayor make a selection in early april. so that we can have somebody on board no later than earth day this year. there has been a survey of staff at the department asking them for the qualities they would like to see in a director. we've gotten very good response to that ~. probably 25 written, in some cases four pages of qualifications that they're looking for. those are being compiled and will be shared with the search

committee, with the search firm, with the commission, and ultimately with the successful candidate which is something we didn't do the last time, which is something that we feel is important so that the staff viewpoint is well represented in the whole process. i think that's kind of the other areas. i don't think there is anything else missing. >> and david will be our acting director as long as we have him to also do two things to help with the transition of bringing our next director on board as well as to work to train his successor as deputy because, as folks know, he is retiring in june -- >> at the end of june. >> at the end of june. so, we have from earth day to the end of june for a transition working with david. and he's been involved in transitions in the past, as folks know, and he's -- we're very fortunate to have him

during this transition. >> this will be the fourth time i've been in the acting director position. i should also add that the intent is to initiate the search for a deputy concurrently with the search for the director so when the new director comes on board, the director will have a group of candidates to choose from and we won't have to start the search process at that point. so, that should expedite the process. so, we'll time it so that when the new director is on board, one of the first things they'll get is a list of candidates for the deputy director position. >> all right. thoughts? commissioner gravanis. >> so, when the job announcement goes out on february 7th, it will include, of course, the official job description. but will it also include some of the qualifications that we are giving input on to the alliance firm? >> yes, but it will be two

parts to that because there's a lot of things that we'll be looking for in a candidate. part of it will be part of the announcement process and part of it will be part of the screening process so that the firm doing the screening will know that we want a, b, c, d, e, f. not a lot of those will be listed on the job announcement. >> the candidates won't know everything that we're looking for necessarily? >> correct. >> okay. >> and that's a technique as part of screening to find the most qualified. if you give somebody everything you're looking for, they're going to -- >> they'll provide you with everything. [multiple voices] >> if you give them most of it, you'll be in pretty good shape and you can make sure they also have these other things. >> commissioner josefowitz. >> will the finalists be coming in to interview? >> yes. >> in front of the whole commission? >> that's something that still needs to be determined as to whether how many we can actually present either to the search committee or to the full commission. that's the last to be

determined. >> i don't know again, i'm not on the search committee. i don't want to speak out of place here. but it would be great if we could have at the march 25th meeting, is it, if we could have the opportunity to maybe schedule some more time and kind of clear out the rest of the agenda and have a sort of number of different candidates come in front of us so that we can make -- we can actually sort of interview them [speaker not understood]. kind of release, hear their 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 t 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