which are invaluable in doing our homework for the meetings. and i would say we, you know, mostly -- we consider the deputy city attorney's advice certainly and most often i would say follow it. but very often it's not -- the advice is not -- doesn't have the standing of a legal opinion, you know. it's very often, you know, this is what i tend to think should happen or this is a gray area or, you know, really kind of throwing it back at us. this is how i'm looking at this. this is what you might do. we also -- and very often a frustration we've had is because of budgetary constraints. that deputy city attorney is not always able to stay for full meetings. i've been chairing the compliance amendment committee

and we never had the deputy city attorney there. so, we often don't have the benefit of that person. one problem we've had for the past two years is we have not had our own -- seat number 1 has not been filled so we have not had the benefit of our own member attorney. his opinions would also be important for us nonlawyers to hear. although we did have former member [speaker not understood] was an attorney, too, and it was often -- he wasn't in seat 1. he was in another seat, but he was very important as well. >> i guess one of the questions i have is a simple one. what keeps you motivated for this? >> well, first of all, this is -- somebody mentioned, i think former chair grant, there is a very steep learning curve here.

so, for the first year or so, i really was constantly just having to do my homework, to listen to members who had vastly more experience than i did, and it took me a good couple of years to really feel that i knew what i was doing in most respects. so, then, after investing two years, of course, i wanted to put this knowledge to use. then the past two years i've done what's called a hold over member because i was not officially reappointed and i stuck by this because i saw the league supported me on this. but it's important for a body like this to have some institutional memory. and at that point i was [speaker not understood] had been serving quite a while. i thought i was able to be helpful to newer members. and now i, you know, for the next two years, i decided i wanted to be reappointed because, again, i feel that i have, i have the institutional

memory. i understand the ordinance at a very deep level. i see -- i've come to see some of the ambiguities in the ordinance that our city attorney is finding, other attorneys are finding. so, this is a way i can make a contribution to the city that is my home and that i love and meetings tend to be shorter now. it isn't a burden as it has been. so, i would -- i feel like i have another good two years in me and i would greatly appreciate a reappointment. thank you so much. >> thank you. next person, david pilpel. >> good afternoon, david pilpel. i think you both know my background pretty well. i've been involved in city government for going on 30 years since i was a teenager. in a variety of agencies, all

kinds of places. i have served on the task force. i'm on my third nonconsecutive tour of duty, as it were. i've served for 10-1/2 years out of the 20 years that the task force has been in existence. i was involved at the time when the ordinance was drafted, when the prop g was on the ballot in 1999. and a number of the amendments that were made in the late '90s before prop g was on the ballot. i certainly support meaningful public participation and open government. i look for practical solutions with city agencies and [speaker not understood] and others. i know that the -- i know very well both that the task force is not perfect and that i'm not perfect and that we can all do better and try to make this work a little better. i have said a number of times that i'm interested in fewer complaints and i'm actually

less interested in our resolution of complaints and i would rather that we be more proactive. we tend to be incredibly reactive in dealing with this work load, as you've heard. i would like us to be more involved in legislation that comes before the board of supervisors and sacramento and really do more of the thing that i've taken the time to do, education outreach and training. the committee that i've chaired the last few years, to work with the public and with departments to get them to comply and understand the laws and how they work rather than being more punitive and dealing with enforcement. i have proposed changes to the bylaws to address some of the concerns that i think were referenced and changes to procedures to try to focus on the things that matter rather than all of the complaints that we receive to exercise more discretion on those thing that are important. ultimately, i think we're going

to need to rewrite portionses of the ordinance. there are things that are unclear and inconsistent. it's been 14-1/2 years since this was on the ballot and we've been trying to live with it and it's difficult, as we all know. and just to conclude, i have sat in seat 6 and 7 since the task force was reorganized. so, i think i meet the consumer advocacy test. i would also meet the general public test for seats 8 through 11. i know that i can be difficult and very tenacious in how i approach things and not everyone appreciates that. i do try to be respectful in how i go about thing even when i disagree with others. and i think it would really be great if the entire process could be more respectful. there is a lot of unhappiness

amongst the members with members of the public, with representatives from city departments. it's -- you know, we're trying to put a good face on it right now, but it's not always a very positive experience for anyone involved and i'm sure when we get to public comment today we're going to hear some of that. unfortunately, [speaker not understood]. so, if you support public comment and you support the right of others to say what they will about you and i've developed thick skin. and i'm being honest about that. i'm happy to answer questions you have. >> sure, if you're up for reappointment, i'm going to ask the same questions about the staff attorney complying to the task force, how much do you value their role in conjunction with the task force itself and the members and in terms of their opinions that they might offer, any advice, et cetera? >> absolutely.

i certainly do, i value their opinions. i have talked to staff attorney at meetings, outside meetings. i think i understand very fully the role of the city attorney both under the ordinance and under the charter, section 6.102, et cetera. we are subject to the charter in terms of board and commission and the voting requirements. i think i understand very clearly the roles of the various actors in city government. and, so, if the city attorney says we can or cannot do something, i certainly respect that. i think that if that actually suggests another line of discussion, but we could do more -- i think it was pointed out we could do more internally with training examine in particular on due process. there was one instance last month where a referral we made to the ethics commission was sent back to the task force because we failed to name the right person.

that may happen again next month. it's not just finding a violation where that's appropriate, but it's also finding the right person and having the right process to get there. and the task force, in my opinion, has not always understood where that due process attaches. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> um-hm. samuel mccormick. >> hi there. my name is samuel mccormick. i'm [speaker not understood] at san francisco state university. i'm happy to be here and honestly a little bit concerned about all the comments about the sunshine i've heard up to this point. but fundamentally i'm here because i agree with the basic principles of this ordinance. open government and transparency, citizen access to and participation in local government and fundamentally, i read both of these a tenets of

democracy, participatory deliberative democracy. on principle the commission sounds great. one of the reasons why i think i'm qualified for this is that i have been thinking, writing, and teaching about these principles for well over a decade now. my first book was on local citizens interacting with public officials, won two national book awards. and the book i'm working on right now is on local citizen participation in public meetings. now, i don't know as much as people who are committed to and have already been on this commission before. but what i do bring to the table is a serious amount of fresh ideas and definitely some expertise on some of these topics. but i'm not just a professor. i'm also a committed servant of my profession, my community, and my campus. i serve on seat 1 of the graffiti advisory board appointed by eric mar. i'm copy editor, assistant copy

editor for the richmond review in sunset beacon. i have way more professional service to national organizations, journalism, publishers than i care to admit. at the level of the campus and departmental committee work, i've served on regulations, review committees, grievance committees, assessment committees, strategic planning committees, budget committees. i've been on almost every committee that's out there and i've been on several committees that have needed some of the things that it sounds like the sunshine ordinance task force could also benefit from. and specific things that i have in mind for that would be meeting efficiency. i liked what david was saying about being proactive. fresh ideas sound like would be very helpful moving forward. education outreach is obviously something that i'd be qualified for and willing to move forward with and sounds like the commission would also benefit from. increased competency and professionalism, i think that might also be something to

consider here and the issue of perspectives come up on numerous occasions is something i'd be able to assist with. but every task force is different. every committee is different. and until i would be nominated and get involved, i wouldn't know exactly how i could move these issues forward. but i've done it before on other committees. if given a chance, i'd like to do it here, too. thanks. >> listening to other people's comments and you have some concerns, can you elaborate? >> well, i definitely gather just from my training as a communications scholar that there is indeed some tension between members of the commission and also, more importantly, tension between how the sunshine ordinance task force is perceived by its members and how it's perceived by the public. i have masters and ph.d. training in rhetorical theory and one of the things that i'm trained to do is to help with public relations and public

image issues. i think that in addition to clarifying maybe some of the ordinance, putting more stuff up on line, i think that maybe the task force would benefit from a public relations campaign of sorts. that's something i could probably help with. >> okay, thank you. >> thanks. >> let's see. next up is lee anthony hepner. >> hello. >> good afternoon. my name is lee hepner ~. thanks for the opportunity to speak before you today. i am a civil rights litigation attorney. i'm a community organizer with the harvey milk democratic club. as an attorney much of my practice focuses on freedom of expression and in many instances my clients have

benefited from use of the california public records act, use of the brown act as well. which mandates open public hearings. in my experience on the harvey milk club, i participated in public comments before the board of supervisors and various committees. i've also provided forums for public comment. i have myself admittedly grappled with occasional member complaints about incidental failure to post agenda in advance of a meeting and i'm very familiar with dealing with and addressing complaints. to put on my advocacy hat just a second, i think the importance of open government is twofold. on the one hand citizens have more trust in the government when they know what that government is doing. it is as simple as knowing how many potholes local government fill in a year. i believe truly showing in the

past harvard business school study, fundamental trust happens when people see efforts made by government entities. the other element of openness in government that i think is very important is enabling citizen access to government. it's a fundamental tenet of democracy, creating a forum for citizens to have their voices heard, encouraging people to be more involved in their communities and empower citizens to better their own spheres of influence. in both instances, local government benefits and the people of san francisco benefit. and i think the task force should be a win/win on all levels. advocacy and ideology aside, the challenge becomes how do we achieve the basic goals of the task force and i think the answer lies in, one, making sure that procedure is efficient. and on the other hand, making sure the communication is effective. on the note of efficient procedure, i think the first thing to do is make sure that the complaint being made is dignified.

as an attorney, i have a lot of experience cutting through a lot of superfluous fact and getting merits of a claim. i think that could be an asset in this context. and at targeting the complaint, needs to be addressed and that lead me to the second portion of the effective procedure, which is making it easier for respondents to respond to the complaint. it should be easy for the respondent to resolve the problem at hand and i think that reducing challenges for respondents will be a fundamental improvement in the next term of the sunshine ordinance task force. if it means the bylaws, i think that's a conversation i would like to be a part of. i would be an asset to the rules committee and that's something that i would like to continue with. on the other hand, good effective communication is another skill that i hope to bring to the table. i believe i am a mediator at

heart and i know very well too often poor communication gets in the way of process and bogs down otherwise simple issues and matters that need not be raised at the time. i think the possibility of mediating disputes prior to bringing them before the task force is really important and necessary. and to the extent that i can bring my skills to the table as a attorney and try and dispose of basic issues like jurisdiction prior to the task force meeting, i would like to, i would like to do so. i would also be very excited to work in conjunction with the city attorney on their analysis and, and be able to ask questions, pointing to ambiguities and analysis. lastly, and i think very importantly, i'm excited to work with the other members of the task force, many who i've met, many who are up for reappointment. i've had a number of great conversations and i'm ready to be as productive as possible at achieving the goals of the task

force while minimizing the frustration that can result from unnecessary bureaucracy. in sum, i think i bring things to the table. i think i bring a fundamental belief in open government as a means of building trust in government. i believe that i bring a pragmatic approach to analyzing and mediating complaints towards effective resolution. and i think that i bring a desire and willingness to make sure that the task force functions as effectively as possible. thank you so much for your time. i'd be happy to respond to any questions you might have. >> okay. supervisor tang? >> i think you answered my general questions about what you would like to achieve if you were appointed. so, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. next person is louise fischer. >> hello, supervisors.

yee and tang ~. well, i'm louise fischer. i am a current active chair of the sunshine ordinance and i've served as the vice-chair for two years. so, yeah, go ahead and hit me with all the questions at the end. i'm ready for you. [speaker not understood] with chair grant several mooedings. i know how the sausages are made, so to speak. also prepared a presentation that the chair pretty much went over most of it so i'll try to go in a different direction. i am really proud of some of the accomplishments we made on the task force. at the end of the day or more appropriately, the end of the evening or the night, our role is to get the complainants the information that they're entitled to, that they're asking for. people -- it's like a co-op. people come to us for two reasons. if people want something, these people have to give it. or they disagree and we're there to make sure that at the end of the day that the people get the information that they're entitled to and that they ask for if there is a violation they're supposed to get that information.

you know, it's interesting. my dad called me this morning and asked me two questions about the task force. one which he he thought was more important, do they pay for your parking? i [speaker not understood]. and two, they asked me, what is your purpose? and i just keep drilling that home. my key focus when i'm looking at complainants is did you get what -- did you get what you asked for? did you get what you're entitled to? if they're coming back around again to either compliance and amendments or education outreach or if they're coming back to the full task force, it's like a broken record. many people behind me can say, first question i always ask is, did you get what you asked for? did you get what we said you're supposed to have? if not, i ask the respondent, why not? [speaker not understood] our jurisdiction is pretty narrow. it's open government. it's transparency. but did you get what you were asked for? i'm going to anticipate your

first question, supervisor tang, and talk about the city attorney's role. again, it's crucial. i'm not an attorney. the ones on tv [speaker not understood], i think that role is crucial and one of the first things that this board did two years ago, we started was we reversed the rules for these [speaker not understood], the 6-vote rule. you know [speaker not understood]. it sounds good on paper. in the back of my mind, that's pretty good. but at the end -- bottom line it was a violation of city charter. to me it seemed sort of ironic that here we have the sunshine ordinance. in charge of all of these rules and yet you were violating a rule. whether i agreed with it or not, [speaker not understood], i absolutely would not violate that charter [speaker not understood]. so, let's see. all of these thing you heard from kit. we missed several meetings, that's problems we had. we only had 9 out of 11 members. i'm not going to go through our

statistics again. but i want to mention the good news that many of our complaints [speaker not understood] many of the complaints are solved by the administrator and don't even come to us in front of the task force. and if i can anticipate your next question, though are some of the things that i would like to focus on if i were to be reappointed. so, i'll go ahead and say now, the biggest issue is volume and backlog. the way the complaints come, the reason i came to this task force was to give people that don't have a voice, to give them a chance to have a voice. and [speaker not understood] at the end of the day, i want people to get what they're entitled to. and i would never, ever want to deprive anybody of the due process that they're entitled to under the task force. however, when i look at certain complaints and just keep coming over and over, i'll back to the 35, 28, 24, we have to be more

efficient with those. we've got to combine those. there is a way and we can do that to make -- we can combine complaints against the same respondent. unless they're distinctly different. we have 7 or 8 complaints against the same respondent and they're all in the same realm, bring them all in at once. let's get these done. maybe let's even have our administrator look into this a little more further in some of the successions he's made. so, i think that would make it a lot more efficient. and the other issue on that, if we've got three people giving multiple many complaints, i worry about the people that really only have one complaint and pushed all the way to the back of the line. and i'm not saying that there is any difference in anybody's complaint, but i want to get as many people through there as possible. and if we've got 7 or 8 complaints from the same respondent that are similar, let's bunch them all up so we can get to that other person who has that complaint that he he or she needs to be heard and many of those are [speaker not understood].

planning commission, [speaker not understood] planning commission has to make decisions. i'm just pulling that out of the air because that's generally one that's time sensitive. okay, you got that. what else have i got? so, what i would like to see is for changes to the bylaws, things that we started to talk about, things that victor, our administrator helped us with. i'd like our administrator to be able to apply and enforce regulations, get much more involved in the mediation. i really think mediation should be our first solution. we really need to focus on that more. and, you know, let's look at possibly setting limits on how many times the same complaint can be heard over and over and over. again, i'm not an attorney, but i've spoken to a few attorneys about this. that doesn't work in other courts. i'm not sure why it's happening in ours. again, i'm not -- i don't want to deprive anybody of their right to be heard, but let's get this more efficient.

the ordinance itself, it's 20 years old. it would be a sophomore in college right now if it were a nephew or something. a lot has changed in 20 years. i have a cell phone because [speaker not understood]. we didn't have the -- i'm an engineer by trade so we didn't have the wide area network dsl that we have now. we have to start using the technology. get everything up, get as much online as possible. and maybe even mitigate the need for a lot of these cases to come up. something else that bothers me that we're not doing, as i mention this, we all have cell phones now -- >> please. wrap up, please. >> we all have cell phones. maybe some people come in and they sat here for four hours, let's say, okay, you're fourth, you're fifth on the item. we're going to text you when it's your turn. maybe you can't go home but you can go to a coffee shop, you can go out in the hall, you can talk to people. that's pretty much all i've got.

did i answer any questions or -- i really tried to. >> i think you did. thank you very much. next person, chris hyland. >> supervisors, thank you foser

city [speaker not understood]. thank you. >> okay. >> any questions? >> great. again, just for all the reappoint ease, wanted to ask your thoughts about operating within the parameters of the sunshine task force in terms of your role in conjunction with the city attorney and confines of operating within the city charter. >> absolutely, the city attorney was invaluable. like said before, he or s