>> everyone deserves a bank account. in san francisco, anyone can have a bank account, things to an innovative program, bank on s.f. >> everyone is welcome, even if you are not a citizen or have bad credit to qualify for a bank account is simple. just live or work in san francisco and have a form of id.

>> we started bank on s.f. six years ago to reach out to folks in the city who do not have a bank account. we wanted to make sure they know they have options which should be more low-cost, more successful to them and using chat catchers. >> check cashing stores can be found all over the city, but they're convenient locations come with a hidden price. >> these are big. >> i remember coming in to collect -- charged a fee to collect a monogram. >> people who use check catchers, particularly those who use them to cash their paychecks all year long, they can pay hundreds, even a thousand dollars a year just in fees to get access to their pay. >> i do not have that kind of money. >> i would not have to pay it if i had a bank account.

>> bank accounts are essential. they keep your money saved and that helps save for the future. most banks require information that may limit its pool of qualified applicants. encouraging to turn to costly and unsafe check captures. >> i do not feel safe carrying the money order that i get home. >> without a bank account, you are more vulnerable to loss, robbery, or theft. thankfully, the program was designed to meet the needs of every kind, so qualifying for a bank account is no longer a problem. even if you have had problems with an account in the past, have never had an account, or are not a u.s. citizen, bank on s.f. makes it easy for you to have an account. >> many people do not have a bank account because they might be in the check system, which means they had an account in the past but had problems managing

it and it was closed. that gives them no option but to go to a cash -- check catcher for up to seven years. you want to give these people second chance. >> to find account best for you, follow these three easy steps. first, find a participating bank or credit union. call 211 or call one of our partner banks or credit unions and ask about the bank on s.f. account. both -- most bridges will have a sign in their window. second, ask about opening an account through bank on s.f.. a financial partner will guide you through this process and connect you with the account that is best for you. third, bring some form of identification. the california id, for an id, or your passport is fine. >> now you have open your account. simple? that is exactly why it was designed. you can access your account online, set up direct deposit,

and make transfers. it is a real bank account. >> it is very exciting. we see people opening up second accounts. a lot of these people never had account before. people who have problems with bank accounts, people without two ids, no minimum deposit. we are excited to have these people. >> it has been a great partnership with bank on s.f. because we are able to offer checking, savings, minimarkets, certificates, and loans to people who might not be about to get accounts anywhere else. even if you have had a previous account at another financial institutions, we can still open an account for you, so you do not need to go to a check cashing place, which may turn to two percent of your monthly income. >> you can enroll in free educational services online. just as it -- visit

sfsmartmoney.org. with services like financial education classes and one-on-one meetings with advisers, asset smart money network makes it easy for you to learn all you need to know about managing, saving, investing, and protecting your money. the network offers access to hundreds of financial aid programs. to help their eruptions, fill out the quick questionnaire, and you will be steered to the program you are looking for. >> who want to make sure everyone has the chance to manage their money successfully, keep their money safe, and avoid getting ripped off. >> it sounds very good. i think people should try that one. >> to find out more, visit sfsmartmoney.org or call 211 and ask about the bank on s.f. program. >> now you can have a bank account.

open one today. (clapping.) the airport it where i know to mind visions of traffic romance and excitement and gourmet can you limousine we're at san

francisco inspirational airport to discover the award-winning concession that conspiracies us around the world. sfo serves are more 40 million travelers a year and a lot of the them are hungry there's many restaurant and nearly all are restaurant and cafe that's right even the airport is a diane designation. so tell me a little bit the food program at sfo and what makes this so special >> well, we have a we have food and beverage program at sfo we trivia important the sustainable organic produce and our objective to be a nonterminal and bring in the best food of san francisco for our passengers. >> i like this it's is

(inaudible) i thank my parents for bringing me here. >> this the definitely better than the la airport one thousand times better than. >> i have a double knees burger with bacon. >> i realize i'm on a diet but i'm hoping this will be good. >> it total is san francisco experience because there's so many people and nationalities in this town to come to the airport especially everyone what have what they wanted. >>

>> good afternoon we're going back from recess for the special meeting of san francisco ethics commission. we were about to begin finding and recommendation 12. a couple of things want the record would reflect that is commissioner is executed and sfgovtv that the touching of the microphone at the podium is causing a lot of noise for the viewers on tv i understand but try not to touch the microphone >> finding number 12 any questions or comments for commissioners.

i understand that number 12 was not directed at the commission and perhaps is better addressed by the executive director in my event so i will propose removing the finding and recommendations since this really don't it was addressed to the executive director. so i would say that i think the recommendation for what did director will do, i.e., notify the downstairs and see if we can rectify it and i hope that's what the director has in mind >> mr. chair again, i understand and i don't understand why they would address something to the executive director who is an employee of the commission and

if this is a civil grand jury looking at the commission i think that in terms of the propriety of the responses on the part of the commission are with the civil grand jury the responses should be between the commission and the civil grand jury not by an employee of the commission to the civil generalizing. it's just a motivator of the prototype and adds to the unfortunate criticism that is often made which i don't agree with that by some members of the public i think they're totally wrong about this the commission is run by the executive director. that's not true we shouldn't do anything that foster any

indication of that and certainly in terms of of a discussion between a body as important and as a sill grand jury regarding the business of this body i think the response should be by the commission. >> commissioner. the commission has been asked to respond to the large majority of those finding and recommendations but not all of them. in 13 cases they've asked for a response from the executive director i don't believe i have a choice of not responding when they ask inform a response directly from me. >> well, i disagree with that, i think. >> you disagree with who they

ask. >> let me finish. >> okay. >> you'll get the answer. >> i'm sorry. >> i disagree with that in regard to the fact you do not have an option to respond i think it is improper of civil grand jury to make an inquiry relating to a particular that goes to a particular employee of a vice president in a civil grand jury has a question or some information it wants from the department it should seek that through a query from the department and a responses to the department. i think in regards to the specific questions specifically addressed to the executive director i think the commissioners we as commissioners should instruct

the executive director not to answer those but to have the answer be given by the commission. i think it's a violation of protocol by the department to try a address matters directly it an employee of that vice president and an internal problem for us in terms of the whole manner in which the commissioners and the executive director of this vice president carry out their functions. i'll say out of respect for the civil grand jury we should answer the questions even if in terms of answering them in the

words that mr. sincroy with answer them if we choose to do that but the answers should be that the commission responds as such not the executive director responds. >> other comments from the commissioners. >> i'm very much in agreement with that we very may well as commissioner keane choose to use the words of mr. sincroy but this is the governing body and there are secret responsibilities and functions that the commission holds and i do building this will go a long way we take a unilateral approach to the body to that 0 particular department. >> i was going to make the recommendation that if we do

respond to finding number 12 that the commission would instruct the executive director to direct his staff to notify all staff to notify the departments and make sure the information is on the websites that's the protocol with a governing body. >> mr. sincroy. if you are going to adapt that language the second sense i've have conflicting advise on the interpretation of that session and probably b would be best to delete that sentence. >> sentence the sunshine ordinance section sited doesn't apply to the vice president only

individuals. >> correct. >> i would welcome the views of the city attorney or the staff on commissioner keanes and commissioner andrews questions about whether it's even appropriate for the grand jury to direct inquires to an employee rather than the commission and therefore, whether the commission should respond to everything as asserted. >> deputy director i'll defer to the city attorney on this but i know that the governing provision in the pencil penal code it says the list of public entities that are required to respond to the judge. >> i on says it all it's not a

public entity we're the public entity. >> yeah. jessie i want to definitely see the actual language that i can look at a row this is a brief summer in the grand jury report. >> yeah. to in my experience at least my own experience i have not seen many grand jury report they seek a response from the department head and commission itself. perhaps mebsz members of the grand jury can shed light and speak to that >> and certainly i can just know can see if there's anyone in my office that has experience with that this seems like a global question that won't precluded the commission from going forward and i'll find out this information.

>> i think the general recommendation that the commission responds to finding regardless whether the executive director needs to separately respond this perhaps you can figure out but it sounds like the commission wants to respond and i understand the rational the separate question of the whether the executive director can respond i'll look forward to input mr. chair. >> sure. >> we don't have to go figure out that today. >> any other changes to recommendation 12 other than striking the second sentence of finding 12? is there a motion to adapt finding and recommendation 12 as amended >> so moved. >> second.

second >> public comment? >> ray from san francisco open government one of the problems i have with some of the issues it's we're talking about the sunshine ordinance and the brown act and you know the laws that have been in place for more than a decade and we're going to send out on the memo to the departments to tell them to follow the law. i mean einstein said it the best definition of insanity is doing the same thing with a different outcome we'll send out a memo to the departments to tell them what they ought to know they are to do how many times do you tell them to do it and they ignore it and you simply say let's sends

them other memo what do they do with the 5 or 6 or 7 or 10. it begs any sort of common sense to simply say to departments obey the law the department heads have to insure they carry out the duties i file the sunshine laws against the department head they're the ones that are accountability and their bottom line is they're accountable i don't care who don't or does do something in the navy if you walked into a board of inquirey and said

someone under my command i'm not responsible they'd laugh you out and find you in violation just for saying that and then make it clear our responsible if they did it under our watch whether you know about it or not you're responsible and the sapg e same thing with the departments. they know those requirements exist we didn't talk about 11 or 10 but we're reinventing the wheel telling me the departments to keep records and they do that with consistency. it can't be this arc try thing we're not keeping this type e-mail but not that one and getting into an argument whether or not private e-mails is before the supreme court that public

computers with public records ought to be from department to department and a citizen shouldn't be figuring this out the departments should >> in favor of the motion. >> it passes 4 to