follow the recommendation what's the point. there has to be a way to get people to obey the filing of their seven hundred forms and i don't know what it would be to me maybe it's shaming every month we should have a press release that goes out naming city employees that have not come pitied with the filing of the form 7 hundred in my opinion we'd have more power than certainly firefighter if you're on the list somewhere and can get you know the papers the different media that are out there to carry that notice and

hey you're the delineate employee. but that's one thought i guess i feel, you know, one of the things we're constantly criticized for we have no power. so then what is the point of implementing something which once again underscores the fact we have no power this is not to say that filing our form seven hundred is not important we should get employees to comply but i think it is silly >> well commissioner andrews. >> mr. chair i'll say this and so i'm not sure where i'm going to land if we're talking about employees that are within departments sometimes there are a culture within the department different levels of accountability and if we want to

effect change and effect an outcome to have a higher accountability i completely hear and understand commissioner hayons point on shaming and that may work for that particular employee but not address the larger culture of higher accountability in a department in which case the department heading head or particular individuals title is we get to hold them accountable that will help to train the employees to help them do a better job of more timely filing. a that's often what i see a culture that possible lives within one the entities that has to be changed and often changed at the top. so that's a point of observation

>> did you want to say something. >> right now, we're down to 4 non-filers so you've spent a great deal of of time talking about four people but we have an hour and 15 minutes left before we vacate the room. >> is there a motion to make any amendments? >> mr. chair, i move that we implement the - that if someone has failed to file within 90 days we recommend to the appropriate authority body or person that individual should be suspended from city employment.

>> is there like a public comment? members of the ethics commission ray with open government i served 3 years on the commander fleet we dealt with human resources issue and spent time teaching management in hawaii. i made clear the purpose of taking action never to fire an employee i don't think confronting that the grand jury should be fired it will take an action just to get them to comply with the law then we would not have to suspend. if at a 60 day point you send out a letter here's a list off people in our department that haven't filed their statement of

economic interest and failed to do so in the next thirty days we're vote to recommend their dismissal or termination i'll bet 95 percent of the people we're talking about will file? next week. that's the purpose of this to get them to file. and the departments going back to councilmember kersey comments are smoking gun sometimes the problem if there's no really atmosphere if the department that filing this is even worth an effort or even worse someone senior? department didn't file their own and everybody else is saying why should i that's a real problem that employees have to confront so what i'm saying i agree strongly that to be the

the recommendation or the proposed change i don't know you should recommend an action it should be up to the authority they should be the one to look at the human resources or the city attorney or the unions the contractors or whatever to simply say we're going to recommend this if they fail to meet the requirements of the law it will be a big enough issue to the body. i'll give you an example they don't want someone like ray heart of the san francisco government walking in with a list saying here's the people in your department that have not filed your statement and why is it and why are you not doing something about it we're talking

about public shaming it's sometimes appropriate. but it is always a recognize of the people in charge that are not enforcing the rules rather than the employee who fails to follow them >> hello larry bush from the civil grand jury there's no g question the ethics commission has gotten people down to filing the fact they're down to a few is a strong statement but this is the people that filed with the ethics commission not the form seven hundred with the departments that's a much, much larger group of people you'll soon see in the electronic filing of form seven hundred but if anyone in the department who

makes the decision but we've seen in the past are city employees and officials who have outside employment that is a direct conflict with their position in the city you wouldn't know that until you see their form seven hundred and you have a case from someone from puc they didn't file with the ethics commission they filed with the department but it opportunity they were accepting money from a contractor that they themselves awarded the contract to. they are not the only one in the example that's why knowing what is in form seven hundred an important we need to know the conflicts that's not just a state requirement because here in san francisco we have a requirement that says city officials can't be compensated

and we've had cases where they were doing that. the f p pc thofrts is to not act open the fact they were in violation of local laws. that's our responsibility. well done in part >> can i ask the city attorney's office whether there are legal concerns about making recommendations of suspensions? >> i don't think there's a particular legal prohibitions but to conform their recommendations the ethics commission didn't have a policy to enforce those recommendations. >> and to clarify the motion is

it for all those who file with the ethics commission is it commissioner keane. >> it's under the recognition of filing forms seven hundred. >> okay in favor? i >> opposed. i oppose the motion passes. the finding 16. any comments from the commissioner commissioners? 17?

we haven't been taking public comment unless we were going to do make changes to the particular recommendation response or findings response. mr. bush if you have a clarification >> just a clarification. the state law is that you have to disclose if you're contributing $500 or more but now how much more he city business at the same time, if you're making a contribution to a city officials campaign traffic some have expensive and tricks - contributions we have

no problem looking at local golfs can specify you have to disclose 5 thousand or 10 thousands and also disclose whether or not they have city policies this is incredible not only in san francisco. >> okay. thank you mr. bush and commissioner keane you want to say something about 17. >> yes. mr. chair. in regard to public finding 17 where the recommendation is where the official calendars prepared under the sunshine ordinance and convert them and post them o'ly ago with the recommendation that is just too

big a task for us to do with every department and that for us to do it and the city attorney and the ethics commission to insure that, however, it is a good idea that those all of the departments do collect their official calendar and convert them to electronic form and put them online. with regards to the recommendation 17 a i would change that elite leave advertise the fact we have the resources we don't have the resources other priorities are president all right. but i would say we recommend to all departments that they did noiths recommendations to all departments they should collect

their official calendar preparing under the sunshine ordinance and convert them to electronic and post them themselves. i think it's a good idea this material be out there to the public and be there out in electronic form and the departments should do it, it's only our recommendation but it's a good suggestion by the grand jury. and i think we should recommend that to all the departments >> any other comments from the commissioners. >> is there a motion. >> yeah. i move federal and state that the ethics commission recommend to all city departments very collect their official calendared prepared if under the sunshine ordinance my love waits there in san

francisco and convert them electronically and post them on line. >> is there a second. >> second. >> public comment? >> ray for open government. i don't know anyone that used a paper appointment everybody does everything tyrone so we're not talking about - some people do still but when it comes to city offices i do think they're using a paper dairy they call up their boss and say oh, i have an appointment time or sending him an e-mail i don't think we're talking about anything a brown burden to take what they're already doing and putting it online for people to see it. and that's all it's been

recommending here recommended to the city department that that people have an interest in the calendar of the department heads and it would be behove and show a spirit of openness to put those out without having people to beg for them and unfortunately people if they want to get information they have to go to the department the department reviews to give it to them and we go through the instant motion. so calendar like it or not are public records. i shall be able to know what 31 my representative or my city employee spends their time i should know who has access to them and their demonstrated by calendar where this it's i hits the fan is around election time i'll give the perfect example

sfgovtv met about 5 hundred and 7 lobbyists over a certain period i read that and said 5 hundred and 7 it's a lot of lobbyists and how hard supervisor david campos had to fight to get that information from supervisor chiu's office i know how hard i would have to fight i'd fight very hard and not get it until after the election. they'll all that's been recommend in this case is i couldn't the departments to simply faxing take you know what they have available so far as the self-employed e schedule and post it for on the members of the public. that again cuts down on the workload no more requests to get appointment books.

i've said this to the police commission all those complaint you spent in resources compiling with the records request would go away. >> all in favor of the motion proposing amendments. >> i. >> i. >> opposed. hearing none that passes unanimously. let's see take 18 and 19 together >> you have to respond to 19. okay. does anybody are comments on 18? 19? >> yes. >> commissioner keane. in regards to number 19 i don't have any quarrel it should be implemented the recommendation of the grand jury should be

pledged and will be implemented, however, just as a point of information and since we have the members of the grand jury here i do want to ask about the assertion or the allegation in 19 in at least one instance the ethics commission inappropriately interpreted to grant a restriction waiver i made that assertion there's language but united states staff there's a disagreement what are you, you talking about >> the woman that negotiated the arrangements on behalf of the city for the benefits of the america's cup was granted a waiver from posted employment restrictions to work in a leadership position for america's cup. >> and .

>> on grounds it would be - it was like an important career movement that she would not be able to take this was also a situation where a number of the benefits for america's cup were being negotiated with rec and park and the chair of the rec and park commission was chairing the america's cup committee and asked for this waiver. >> this is something that commission did. >> this commission granted the waiver. >> at the hearing. >> at a hearing from the standpoint under the circumstances that's no good. >> thanks for that. >> finding 20.

finding 21? >> commissioner andrews. >> can we go back to 20. i was wondering in recommendation 20 b in the last sentence even if we've made the case for why we're not implementing it says firefighter there's no mechanism in the sunshine ordinance to do this do we need to say that or do we stand strong on the ethics commission didn't agree with the finding and believes this is in the public best interest to have the commission investigate and hear the sunshine referrals and complaints >> do we need further there is

no mechanism are resignaling if there were a mechanism we'll entertain it. >> i would say as a second reason why it is not being implemented. >> okay. >> finding 21. >> mr. chair. >> commissioner keane. >> there's one to put in in parallel with the language on page 14 up at the top on the first full paragraph the sentence where it says the director notes i would change that to the commission notes.

>> anything else on 21? i had one comment i'm a little bit uncomfortable with a response to finding 21 b in that i think it's too broad for us to say there's no basis for the finding how the condition is preserved. i'm not sure how to respond to that. i mean other people what weigh in on how we're conceived i'm not sure we can agree we're preserved in the way that the grand jury has suggested. i would be more comfortable

removing that second sentence >> i agree you i agree. >> is there a motion to make the changes as proposed for vblth 21. >> i'll move mr. chair. >> second. >> second. >> public comment there sorry finding and recommendation 21. >> yes. i'd like to say to comment on 20 b and 21. boss of those are designed to sort of clarify your own workload and i'm surprised you're not going to entertain it in the hearing officer on the sunshine ordinance matters ii think you're getting case records that are debar bewilder and you've spent a lot of time going through those the

ordinance said almost nothing about procedure so there's a lot of flexibility not ordinance if you wanted to go and attempt to go down the routed as far as secretary for the commission it didn't have to be a full-time position we spoke about a sharing of the task force i know there's a part time secretary for the board of elections in the a civil service sort pacific ocean position a professional position but didn't have to be a full-time position paid for by you it was carefully written to not be a full-time position so please be advised >> can you elaborate on the difference between a commission secretary and the executive director this is how do you see them operating differently.

>> a commission secretary is all about helping the commission operate through it's meetings. it's not about making any policy decisions. the executive director has a lot of policy administrator responsibilities that are separate prosecute from what the commission does. the executive secretary gets the agenda together and the materials together appropriate for the commissioners making sure the hearing rooms are in place and getting the minutes drafted and run did i staff sea run by the commission dealing with outside people things of that nature >> any further questions or comments for the dimensions. >> i wanted to clarify so you're the executive director

but who actually does that in the office. >> i do. >> you do all of that. >> yes. >> ray san francisco open government i would actually think that having secretary who would schedule those things would be an appropriate thing because of my own particular position because the last time i had a meeting and the hearing was held after i left the country and i think this was done intentionally and there is a clear conflict of interest between a person's scheduling things and having a personal ax to grind i think that someone

told the ethics commission i was out you have town the dates and it got referred and oddly enough it sat fore 8 months and all of a sudden two days after it's referred over it is heard before i get back i don't believe that was just a coincidence and i don't believe the disingenuous comment about the executive director i was surprised mr. 0 hearts didn't show up mr. hearts also shows up for any complaint it files i shows up for the hearing that are appropriate. and i think in some cases those things are scheduled in such a way to prospective a person from being able to come and receive due process of law.

i'll be honest i think my rights were violated by this commission by the executive director by announcing that the day i left and having the hearing the day before i got back and making no attempt to determine whether or not i received notice simply relying on the fact we sent notice but i didn't receive the notice. i think having a separate person to schedule and let people know what is going on separate from the staff who has a personal interest in making recommendations about what this commission should decide is a very, very important thing. it needs to be done so there's no perception as i have that the game was rigged. i've said it before and i'll say

it again, it was done intentionally with the purpose of mr. hearts keeps coming here saying things we don't like if we can schedule this while he's out of country it will be good. >> all in favor with 21. >> one thing on 21 mr. chair. on page 14 where it says recommendation 21 the language there in the exactly or the third sentence where it says the director notes it should be the commission notes. >> right that was part. >> that was