crossed the right t or .ed the i and the issue is let them go to public meetings and let them speak and i went to the police commission and told by the the president you're not allowed to talk about certain things. i was told the same thing by the president of the arts commission. and the library commission and they all knew it wasn't true but they did it anyway. why? because they got away with it because they knew it would go to the task force and for some reason you want people to believe that the sunshine ordinance task force is a group that doesn't know what they're doing and you're more clever than they are because you can find a way there is something they did in some way that made it wrong and you're unwilling to do anything to correct the situation and there's never anything on this report that indicates you ever

will. >> david pilpel again speaking as an idea. the report is good, comprehensive as usual. i think it would be helpful for the next few months up to the november election to include a category here for public financing. i believe there is only one candidate qualified but i think reporting on payments under the finance program would serve the public's interest and if there is anything else to report on the disclosure for november. i anticipate a lot of activity for . >> candidates and ballot measures and heightly contested so if you can provide that in addition to the website and the dashboard with all of that that would be helpful. thank you very much.

>> all right. turning to agenda item number eight. items for future meetings? commissioners have any items that they would propose for future agenda? >> well, i am a newer commissioner so hearing from the public how often we talked about the commission and the sunshine ordinance task force is talked about this referral process i am wondering if we just can't have a conversation about it, and see if we can get to the bottom of it because in less than six months we had this issue come up twice and i feel like we never get to the actual substantive component of what is being brought before us because we're busy trying to figure out who to attribute it to, the violation. >> unfortunately chairperson hur isn't here but he would indicate we talked about

possibly doing that and he indicated he would schedule something before the end the year we would have that discussion. >> is it possible to have a joint meeting with the sunshine ordinance task force? >> it's been done but they're difficult to schedule. >> could you try? >> of course. >> i speak for myself. i don't know whether my colleagues would also be in favor of that. >> well, we had joint meetings with them. i certainly wouldn't oppose another to see if we can smooth out some of the problems. i guess one of the questions i have though a lot of the procedural things we deal with i would assume that the city attorney who is advising the sunshine ordinance task force is dealing with those problems. >> well, we heard tonight that

whoever that person is -- >> we don't know. we have hear say about it. >> the hear say indicated that the advice given was not the greatest advice in the world. >> i guess i could ask the city attorney do you think it would be beneficial to have a meeting -- >> you weren't here when -- >> i apologize i wasn't here. >> -- for the counsel assigned by the attorney to for the sunshine ordinance task force meeting with that representative to find out who that -- we had two cases in the last months that have come up where the sunshine task force has charged

the department head even though in the proceedings the department head was never named but gets named or she gets named in the referral up to us, and then the question comes what is the due process? the department heads never had a chance to respond to it. all of the people responding are people below them and the argument is made with some merit that the department head is responsible for the people working for him, but insofar as dealing with the task force the task force has never confronted that issue and we're making a finding against the department head for this reason. simply finds there is a violation and names the department head at the end of the game and not the beginning so what i think commissioner andrews and we're talking about is there some way that we can

smooth out, so that we don't have the procedural problems to deal with but dealing with the substance of the complaint. >> right. deputy city attorney. i wasn't here for tonight's sunshine referral but was it represented during that matter that they had weighed in on that issue? >> it was represented that the deputy city attorney at the time with the task force advised the task force to name the particular underlings in the department as being the responsible ones for the violation, and that's what they did and i see in the language itself of the ordinance it says specifically that the underlings cannot be held to be the responsible parties. it says that. that the responsible party is the department head, so

then at some point it's understood with this well, we should really name the department head and the representatives of that department come here before us and say you're violating due process. our department head is just named now at this stage of the proceedings after the task force has already made a finding of the violation relating to those underlings and he was never named so we had it twice. we dealt with this tonight but last time we punted it. we shouldn't have. >> sounds like an issue that came up several times and certainly in conjunction with a future agenda item on this issue i am happy to coordinate with my office and get to the bottom of this. i am certainly happy to do that whenever this is calendared. >> i would recommend that we

consider putting how the staff -- how we want to address the agenda item, but you know what the problem is we want to try to resolve and see what is the most sensible way to resolve it and put it on an agenda item and take public comment on it. >> yes. >> and get comment from the sunshine task force. all right. yes? >> [inaudible] jack, do you keep a record of requests or recommendations that we make? >> yes. . >> microphone please. >> do you keep a record of requests and recommendations for future agenda items? >> >> yes.

>> because i think we made recommendations at different times and i would like to see what those are and know when they're agendized. >> they're agenda diezed at the discretion of the chair but i can go back and look and see what's out there. >> all right. is there a motion to adjourn? >> you have to have public comment on this item. >> all right. public comment on the discussion that we just had? >> new agenda. >> ray hart. i will keep repeating it. i would like my case against louis herrera brought back before the commission. i filed another complaint against him for the same exact reason so i don't think the task force having decided he was in violation. you unanimously -- well, not

unanimously. mr. pilpel voted against it, will have problems getting it back here. the bottom line is mr. herrera as i talked about this oofng evening hid funds he was receiving from friends of the library and gifts he knew he had to report and we had to take him to the f bbc in sacramento and find him in violation and he's a convicted perjurer and said he got nothing when he got $5,000 a year and he lied to your faces and you don't seem to be worried about that at all. he told you this isn't a first amendment issue and it's always been from the 150 word summaries they started six years ago to telling people they weren't allowed to talk about certain things at library

commission meetings to our criticism of the financial relationship with the friends and with holding documents and using the public position as city librarian to violate the law and with holding documents for more than two years. hi t -- i had to go to the superintendent of records twice and found in violation of the task force for not doing their job and says if they don't comply it's supposed to be sent to the district attorney or the attorney general and they pretend like that isn't happening so basically what i am saying is this is not the first time you've had a case against the library commission or somebody with the library that was referred here. this is the fifth time and every single time you have found a way not to have a hearing or to find the person not in violation, and i have to ask you honestly do you want the

public to believe that the sunshine ordinance task force is so inept and vote five times that the person is in violation, order them to follow it and they not follow it and refer to you and every damn time you find a way of kicking it out. the reason i think you do that is because of what happened to jewel gomez that you recommended unanimously she be removed to the mayor and he ignored you. it's hard to have authority when the person you recommend to ignores your recommendation. doesn't even give you an answer. >> and if you have refiled your complaint and it comes back to us i assure you there will be a hearing and you will be present. >> [inaudible]

>> it's awfully racist of you. >> [inaudible] >> mr. pilpel. >> david pilpel again speaking as an individual. just as clarification yes, there have been joint meetings between the commission and the task force in the past. there can be in the future and i believe one that one of the grand jury findings and recommendation i believe number 20, talked about the relationship between the task force and the commission so you might address it in part to the responses to the grand jury report if you intend to do something in the future you could indicate in your responses that the task force is certainly considering the responses to that grand jury report as well. thank you. >> thank you. now can i have a

motion for adjournment. >> i move for adjournment. >> second. >> all in favor? opposed? stand adjourned. [gavel] >> [gavel] the commission will please come to order and the second will call the roll. >> commissioner singer. >> present. >> commissioner taylor-mcghee. >> present. >> commissioner chow. >> present. >> commissioner sanchez. >> present. >> car da. commissioner karshmer. >> applicant.

>> the -- present. >> the second item and i was on vacation and the minutes are an earlier version of the resolution you passed. the updated version should be in your pile so the minutes should reflect the final resolution. >> commissioners we're prepared for a motion to accept the minutes and with the fact that the final version of the resolution will be in the minutes. motion please. >> i move. >> there is a motion and a second already. are there any corrections to the minutes? >> i had a question. >> sure. >> on the request for follow up from human resources about progress on streamlining and making more effective hiring which seems to be a drag on progress in many of the departments in terms of meeting their objectives. when can we

get that update? >> i believe the hr director will speak to you. >> director. >> good afternoon. we have a event in the last week of august and mapping it out and making improvements and i believe i asked to come back in september to give an update and i will check with mark to make sure i'm on the agenda. >> perfect. thank you. >> you're welcome. >> okay. any other comments or questions on the corrections? if not all in favor say aye. the minutes are approved. next item please. >> the next item is the director's report. >> good afternoon. i am sitting in for director garcia who is on a well deserved vacation in hawaii right now and the first is the launch of the

san francisco health network, the sign is behind you and launched on july 30. simultaneous events took place at 28 sites around the city and staff celebrated the creation of the network and each other's contributions. i know rol an pickins is here and can talk about the launch last week. >> good afternoon commissioners. i am the director of the network. thank you. you will remember when i came to you in february and gave an overview of the development of the network i had slides on marketing and branding so this network launch was the fulfillment of the first part of the marketing and branding campaign which was an internal focus. we described we needed to do internal markets and

branding before we went out to the public so this launch event was a culmination of the last months of an internal marketing and branding committee and chaired and co-chaired by staff and our chief communications officer so they had 30 staff throughout the department from community programs, laguna honda, san francisco general and actually did a great job developing the launch activity itself, a description of what the network is. there is information on all the different sites that the network consists of throughout the city, the various clinics so this was our internal launch and we will come back as we get ready for open enrollment in the fall for covered california and other health plans to do an external marketing communications

program, but this was part one, and you will be be hearing more about part 2. i will be coming to the commission in september on an update on the network and we will talk more about communications and marketing. >> thank you. i am sure the commissioners would be happy to help also with our external approach to the public. >> okay. we will get your picture on the muni bus going by. okay. >> just a couple other items in the director's report related to open enrollment which mr. pickins referenced last thursday covered california and announced the rate for the exchange and the cost will go up by a weighted percentage of 4.2% and covered california region four which comprises the city and county of san francisco saw the largest weighted increase of

6.6%. the other changes in the regions were a reduction of 1% and those areas and increase of 6.3% in orange county. among the five health plans that will be available in san francisco and some blue cross has the largest weighted increase and those that stay with blue cross will have an increase of 10 to 14%. kaiser has the lowest weighted increase at one point 6% and those consumers will have a change of a reduction or a increase of 4% and blue child and health net and chinese community health plan also. finally the environmental --

supervisor cohen has introduced two measures at the board of supervisors to improve air quality in san francisco. one enhanced ventilation for sensitive use development is consistent with a resolution passed in 2013 by this commission commission and require ventilations for certain developments and multi-housing and others. clean construction is a companion measure to improve ventilation at sites to improve enhanced ventilation at construction sites that. concludes the director's report for today. >> commissioners any questions on the director's report? yes? >> colleen any -- what happened with covered california in terms of rate increases and where the providers for the city and county of san francisco came out relative to other places? anything remarkable about that or was that in line with what

you guys expected? >>i think it's in line with what we expected. i think the overall increase state wide was reigning in costs and it's not seen as a large increase. i think there is a wide variety of costs with the providers in san francisco so there continues to be low cost plans available in san francisco. even though we have the highest rate of increase across all plans most plans ranged within the 4% margin, the next closest county was orange county at 6.3%. i think given our cost of living and other things here it's not unexpected that we landed where we did. >> when you cite the averages are they straight averages of bronze, silver and gold plans or averages of bronze? >> they're weighted averages and consider the increases in the plan and the commissioners in the marketplace. >> okay.

>> on the exchange programs here in the city part of the real key would be what premium is at and some are very high and some very low. do the premiums come closer together for each of the plans because after all in the first year it was a guess on the part of everybody about where to go, so the real amount is -- of concern is whether the premiums had also come close to each other or are they still at a wide variation? >> i would have to look -- the levels vary by age and family size but i think it was expected. chinese community health plan for example came in very . the cost of the premiums were very low in the first year so they were the second highest rate increase among the plans in san francisco which was to be expected to

level it out a little bit more. anthem was already a higher cost plan and the increase further -- >> further up, right. okay. and i guess are those now public? >> they are. >> can we have a copy of what you read out because that would be helpful. >> i will send my notes and the increases for the plan. >> okay. that would be very nice. thank you. any other questions? on the director's report though you didn't acknowledge -- in the sense the laguna honda survey came out very positively, did it? >> yes. i was just reading and trying to decide because it says that it had identified findings from two surveys, and you're waiting for a cdph so do we know that they did give us a clean

bill of health or they didn't? >> through the chair if i might. >> sure. >> as we understood it through the committee it was brief in size but they were not going -- and we weren't going to make any absolute either congratulations or due diligence or shore up until we got the written report because there were a couple of surveys not completed, other dimensions, so that will be forthcoming. that's our understanding and from there we will proceed but at this point it looked like we weren't zapped with that and others but we were written for the actual report which will come within i think 45 days. >> okay. all right. if there are no other questions then we're prepared for the next item please. >> item four is the general

public comment. i received no requests for general public comment. all right. shall we move on to the next item commissioners? all right. we will go on to the next item then. item five is the update from the finance and planning committee and commissioner singer chairs that today. >> commissioner. >> this was the first opportunity i had to chair anything. feel free to jump in and correct, amend, beat up my remarks here. so we met this afternoon for a few hours, and we heard very thoughtful presentation on sexual orientation guidelines and how to capture data, a theme we talked about in the last year, and you get a peek into the extraordinary thought of the staff and the department and how they go about thinking through

things, and then we had a discussion about the icb9 contract delays. it's replacing icb10 -- sorry. ten is replacing icb9 and it is a very complicated thing to implement that has been delayed a number of times including recently. nevertheless we will have to -- the bad news we will continue to spend money this year getting ready for it even though it's delayed a year. that's the bad news. the good news if it wasn't delayed it would have been a crunch on the staff and there is revenue at risk as a result of that so one year is good for us and the ability to do this in a slightly more thorough pace is going to be beneficial to the city, and then we had the monthly contracts report. nothing remarkable about that, and then we talked

about in-depth about three separate contracts, reasonably large, related to it infrastructure at sf general and in the city and i think the way to think about this is -- i am stealing someone's else analogy shamelessly but if you think of state of the art electron medical records and information systems for physicians and patients and nursing staff and everyone else in the ecosystem as cars you need a road to drive on before you can have a car so what these contracts related to basically is the infrastructure, the plumbing, if you will, of a network that meets all the codes which we're required to if you're a health institution which is much different than if you're a retail store for the

obvious reasons, and so we heard -- we approved those contract and recommended them to be approved here which i guess we need to vote on in a second, but i think what was most encouraging for me was the depth of thought from the team at sfdph regarding how they're going to stage the investments and how to prepare for the future and how they talked about it so that was super encouraging. >> if i may elaborate. briefly the sexual orientation guidelines commissioners will come before you for approval for the second so you will have an opportunity to look at that and the contracts will be folded into an it presentation at the august 19 meeting so you can hear about those two. >> and do we need to vote on those formally today? >> in the consent calendar next

item you voten mass for all of them. >> yes commissioner. >> yes. i was wondering if there is discussion on the siemens renewal. >> yes. >> and was there any conclusion pertaining to are -- we in fact -- i mean siemens has had a contract with the department for a number of years including certain different pathways that should have been done or done well, et cetera, et cetera and i am wondering if there are substantial discussions on what the outcomes have been and in particular i thought before we had a three, four year limit and when i looked at this initially there was a fairly long duration and i wonder if this was brought in the discussion. again i am not knocking siemens