johnson with the task force. have been i'm here to speak on item 6 even though it was held over it is way at the end of the agenda that's coming close to 0 closed session i might not be able to stay so it would be nice to be in front of newer items i want to encourage you to hear this item in open session it's about public policy surrounding the sunshine ordinance and it's connection it's specification that things related to the sunshine ordinance are not falling under the television station attorney-client over and over their exempt and that's something that the public needs to hear especially in a time right now government is trying to be as private and secretary active as possible while we're making the public have to

disclose everything even without us giving your permission to please consider having this in open session we would greatly appreciate it when us of on the task force we were shut out from what the ethnics was doing along the lines of sunshine complaints that's something that the public should know how the ethnics is handling it, it's in the sunshine ordinance that the city attorney and the deputy city attorneys want help departments withhold documents interest then the other thing i wanted to brungs in the documents that you did referee know you received a

lot of the appellant documents it didn't appear you received the order from the supreme court that grants mr. gross man the right to review the documents and i think that's probable something that would be benefit to the public and commissioner. thank you >> good evening chair and commissioners. i'm gilbert. of new district 8. i just wanted to make a comment how come i don't understand why you're names are not on here to list it's important to have all did commissioners names on here per i'm speaking about public financing for this coming election in november for the supervisor races and you know, i

ran in 2000 i don't know if they had public financing back then but i didn't make that kind of money where i got public financing i don't think they had public financing in 2000 but i'll hearing from other candidates they're having problems are the ethnics with the calendar when their supposed to do their reporting and whatnot. and i think that would be helpful for the candidates inform have that. i'm not running new treasurer foyer candidates campaigns but when i ran back then the ethnic commissions had a calendar of dates so you could be your own treasurer and turn in the filings according. but for what i understand

there's been problems with candidates not getting the public financing and if the public financing is there and they meet the requirements the city should definitely back up the candidates even though their not the incumbent a maybe an unknown candidate but that's what public financing is for. thank you. >> i guess this one, too. my name is yeah. my name is michael nolte. dear commissioners and executive director well, that's the

overhead. my name is michael nolte i'm here to talk about the procedures for the candidates one for 2a. of which is on the attachment here. of what i just submitted. on may the 27 i went to department to ask for the forms for a candidate for the november 4th election i received a handful of documents to be filed i filed out all the documents and established an online filing. i then asked if there were other other remits upgrade my filings and an f pc number. another candidates on june 12th informed mayor edwin lee me

informed me that there was a problem he was having problems with the 142a public financing deadline. and wanted to know if i knew something about that i said no and then i went to the elections dependent on june 13th to request a form 142a and tried filling it out but the clerk would not accept my form i went to your staff on june 14, '17 and the 19, 3 times and each time i was told i couldn't. your staff tells me he can't accept the form after june 10th but they failed to acknowledge what procedures to take and again, the form is a neutral form whether i want to or not have public financing so therefore i should have been

handed that when i was at the office. i will be attending the training on june 27th and finding out this information then and it would have been too late then to file on june 10th. so that's why i'm here today and again, i'm michael nolte i'm running for supervisor in district 6. thank you. >> next item on the agenda discussion regarding legislation passed by the board of supervisors on june 17th that all the times the cities lobbyist ordinance. >> good evening deputy executive director the last

meeting the committee asked question discuss the lobbying ordinance those amendments were passed by the board of supervisors last week and we provided you with a memoranda briefly outlining the provisions of the ordinance passed last week. start by saying the most significant change that was made with those amendments was a change to the qualification threshold to become to quality as a registered lobbyist the current threshold you have to have one lobbying contact and earn 3 thousand for the period in an fester to establish a bright line test because that threshold the current threshold is difficult to understand by the regulated committee and

encompassed by staff. the board of supervisors established a one contact test if you're lobbying on behalf of a client a a 5 contact test within a calendar month if you're lobbying on behalf of a employer like the director of affairs. this was the main change and again, the effort is really to make the rules easier to understand and enforce so there are a number of other changes that were made that are laid out in the memo we've included the reporting by so-called permit expediteers people that get permits and quarterly reporting not exactly the same as loiftsz but similar information and then

the disclosures by developers of major city projects like donations of $5,000 are more to nonprofits that are lobbied are may lobby on behalf of the be developers project those are the main provisions i'm happy to go through the rest of the memo or answer questions we have the benefit of deputy city attorney josh who worked on the ordinance as well so between the two of us we can answer questions >> commissioners questions. >> assuming the mayor signs the ordinance what's - how are we intent to educate the community as to what the changes are and how they respond. >> sure yeah. commissioner renne there's a couple of answers first, we do have drafts

we're drafting regulations to implement the new changes. and those we hope are before you at the end of july for your july meeting and with the passage of those regulations we're going to update the lobbyist manual that we have then we'll distribute that to relocated lobbyists addresses update our online trying under the new rules the lobbyists will be filing a statement certifying they've done that would be one year >> as i understand under those regulations if joe blow private citizen goes to his supervisor and urges him in support of this legislation is he a lobbyist. >> no he'll have be to

compensated for that. >> the level is no longer compensated. >> that's right. >> can you talk the costs on the commission enforcing the ordinance. >> well in terms of administering really the probability main costs we do anticipate based on some feedback from the regulated community that the number of lobbyists will increase by virtue of the new threshold that will take time for the staff getting people signed up and problem bes and issues there will be the fees collected with the lobbyists but there's no staffer time. and then there's the issue of for the permit expediteers the permit requirement going into effect january one of 2015 and

getting that online will obviously you been a cost because we have to amend our contract with net file, etc. >> what about the cost of of the audit? >> well, yeah that's correct. well, right now the costs for the audit fee they're obviously staff time dedicated to quiet frankly getting up to speed with the lobbying requirement but we don't know how many we're going to audit immediately which is for the first year but that will be staff time >> so they're saying at least one and hopefully to do more. >> that's correct. >> and the idea is what that how will we determine how many are feasible. >> well, we'll look at the number of registered lobbyists i

don't know off the top of my head we'll look at the capacity and the workload we're trying to get through the number of audits we have for the campaign financed we're optimistic so a lot of it will be making sure we're looking at it and take into account our staffing and our workload. >> any questions? public comment? >> commissioners ray heart for open government. first, i'd like to is that the conversations so far has me disturbed you seem to be treating this lightly they're to change their law and you have nothing no ability to do

anything but implement it you have a moral obligation to look at the laws and see if the changes are appropriate and to raise any issues as far as the implementation of the law and simply accepting it and saying we're going to teach people to do whatever is unacceptable i'll be following this agenda item and subsequent action taken. 3 examples as long as contacts can exceed 48 per year so if i have interest in the city and have something that works for me and sends them to talk to them i don't have to report them to the lobbyist how many thousands of lobbyists do we have none of the

visits will be recorded arrest in section 3 adding an exemption for nonprofits those groups receive millions of dollars per year as their results of contacts with the city officials it must be open to public scrutiny. that's been a devious and hidden operation last time they snuck it in and none of us that obtained to the tricks wouldn't know to show up. in section 4 random audits of one per year a what a joke oh, saying we'll probably do more is a joke there should be a reasonable amount like 20 or 25 so the public understands it's not up to our pull it out of the

air of how many eager to do the true legislation is nothing but an effort by dpooufd to hide the contracts and documented by supervisor campos campaign. the board of supervisors will pass those amendments to hide the overwhelming impact particularly on this board of supervisors. the lobbyists i've said before you don't approach the board of supervisors unless you have a check in our hand or votes in our pocket or an attorney none of us have a chance >> patrick private citizen. i would counter mr. hearts you don't have a moral imperative but an ethical one i get it you

guys have problem with that coalitions. one audit what size of a needle in the haystack is that. i was glad to hear commissioner renne raise the same southern i had over what a private citizen sending a single e-mail to the 11 board of supervisors that constitutes a lobbyist violation where you're going down a slirp opening that door for instance, if i send all 11 supervisors a single e-mail on a tuesday claiming that the in effect executive director had withheld

the entire case in mr. gross man's lawsuit and you only got the appellant portion would i be sued of being a lobbyist because of the court case. what about on the next day i sent a different e-mail to all 11 supervisors? say over bicyclists on the sidewalk in my neighborhood would that be considered lobbying. actually, i'm only writing about my pedestrian safety. you need to urge the mayor to send that legislation back to the supervisor chiu and make sure it's clear that the 5 contact limitation will not

apply to private citizens commissioner renne. because when i first look at it that was my immediate concern i haven't seen any of the amendments that were tweaked but that needs to be crystal clear. citizens have every right to petition their government and not be misconstrued as lobbyists. >> good evening, commissioners anita. the only comment i wanted to make it's very important that the commission reach out to all lobbyists and potential lobbyists and developers given the fact this legislation changes the thresholds for qualifications as a lobbyist. the legislation imposes joint and several liability that can

be imposed on the employers and the lobbyist disclosure is requiring the developers to report their animations of 5 thousand or more they've made for nonprofit if it the nonprofits have lobbied the city and the late penalties can be imposed it's important that the commission reach out but they reach out to everyone regarding the changes. thank you. >> thank you. the next item on the agenda is constitution and possible action regarding proposed stipulation and order in connection with the complaint received by the ethics commission. i want to make an announcement

to do a procedure with the 3 closed sessions temples that will work with the consequences we plan on having public comment on item 4 and a vote whether or not to go into closed session and we'll have a second public comment on item 5 and have a vote whether or not to go into closed session and have public comment on item 6 and vote on whether or not a closed session and one long closed session with all 3 decisions so we don't have folks out in the hallway for one closed session and go out again and come out and go in a third time and that's if we agree to go into closed session >> correct. >> so the first item. >> is there any problem with that. >> no so long as you said

there's an agreement to go into closed session. >> the first item is public comment specifically on item 4. including whether or not to meet in closed session. >> any public comment on that item on item 4. >> commissioners ray heart san francisco open government. agenda items especially relating to sunshine ordinance b reads as follows: quota description is meaningful it's it specific to alert a person of average intelligence who interests are focused by the items he or she may have a reason to attend the meeting unquote how would anyone know if their interests are effected by this description end of story if you go back and look

at the ordinance it specifically says there's reasons you can't place information about what the item is only the temps things it might allow someone to flee the district and other things it says nothing more than a anticipated legislation telling the public some information like the specific case to be discussed would not in my way breached the attorney-client privilege that would on the other hand, alert a person who interests are focused which is a requirement of time law. i sincerely hope this commission will not attempt to not have matter in full view of the public. i'll say it again, mr. sincroy has been do executive director so long as the sunshine ordinance has been in place he

knows the requirement of the law and puts those generic meaningly descriptions so no one will know what you're talking about. you can be discussing a case related that was referred to the sunshine task force related to a matter and i won't know whether or not to come here and no one else if you can't put an agenda item on there that a person of reasonable intelligence can look at it and have an idea then it's not properly agendized you can dismiss it but the bottom line your obligation 0 is to enforce the sunshine ordinance, in fact, your violating it by putting generic descriptions it don't talk about it and we raise the issue and you treat it like it's a joke it's not frankly i'm

getting sick and tired of coming here and pouting pointing out with the millions of dollars of staff time to even follow the basic points of the law the alone the intention that we need to have information to know what it is you're going to be discussing to make intelligent. >> patrick. i'm combine my public comment for items four and five i see that agenda item 6 actually lists the name of the court case and mr. gross man's case but four and five to say anticipated

litigation as plaintiffs would be helpful to the members of the public if you would broadened those descriptions so people of older intelligence can figure out what part of charter section 3 c dash 99 you're referring to. and what type of case you're considering entering into anticipated litigation. the public has a right to know what it is you're considering. >> is there a motion? >> sorry to get up here i've been looking at the brown act i

don't think the description is accurate in one respect of anticipated litigation is actually covered separately in both of the sunshine ordinance and the brown act. and the brown a act says that lets see - litigation - anticipated litigation okay in a emotion to the information notice on behalf of the agency maybe required to produce an oral statement pursuant to the paragraphs of the law but there's an earlier provision that the input fact that you have to demonstrate that discussing providing that type of information name the name if possible litigant and so forth

you have to justify it by showing there is prejudices of service of progress or to your case. and i don't think that's been done here. i can't put my figure on it bylaw but it's in here i'm sure with your high price lawyers you'll find it. thank you >> is there a motion inform move into closed session before we do that is the city attorney or staff have anything to say whether or not it's appropriate to go into closed session for an agenda item. >> i'll say it's mandatory for item four and five under with respect to item 4 there's the chapter section 3 plus if you'll look at the final paragraph it

basically states that any member of the compligs commission that dloez information before the probable cause so the commission has to go into closed session for the proposed settlement a that's a violation of the proposed chart similarly with item 5. under that provision as well as the commissions unregulations probable cause hearings have to be held in closed session there's incrimination we have to vote even though their notice latitude as item 67 i think that