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 already done.

>> i'm sorry. i'm getting punchy. >> that passes can we take 22 and 23 together. any comments from the commissioners? >> mr. chair yes in regard to page 15 where we have recommendation 23 the parallel language the ethics commission and take out the language and the director the ethics commission is willing to discuss. >> i also had a comment on 22. i would change this to might be or may not be implemented. i think the last sentence should also be moved up after that so that it says the commission will

use the money as an at needed basis we should do that to act more efficiently and act on business for expeditiously. i think the point that was included? memo is valid with the 5 member board it's sometimes less necessary but that doesn't mean there won't be instances we can't use subcommittees. any further comments on 21 or 22 >> i have a question. >> commissioner hayon. >> question about committees are we talking about committees topping made up of commissioners. >> yes. >> or could we appoint other people to members of those committees. >> i don't believe so. >> because we're a small

commission we're limited in how often we can meet with one other and when we can meet with on other because of the brown act and the other sunshine ordinances so i i don't know how we would easily implement a committee structure given there are only 5 people that on the commission if anyone has thoughts i'd like to hear them. >> we'll take opinion. >> you said. >> we'll take public comment but while we're doing 22 does anyone have anything for 23. >> yes. on page 167 the first full sentence the ethics commission hass and the director take out the words and the

director and put in the ethics commission is will. >> okay. >> i also wanted to delete the sentence this is exaggerated from finding 23. commissioner andrews sorry >> so we have here in the finding that it's say conflicts every risen repeating not a number but in the finding response we say that we've done this 3 times. does the civil grand jury agree that repeating 3 times did you come up with that same number as well or was there a number that was greater than 3 that drove this finding >> i didn't have a number but during the last mayoral race the city attorney executed himself

from quite a few meetings their might have been 3 matters but we realized there's a lot of lawyers sitting on this commission but in terms of, you know, council sitting out in the well, i think there's been times you haven't had council. and at times there are issues where you're looking at city agencies and city attorneys representing the city agencies as well it gets tricky for everyone involved at the same time the charter says the city attorney will be your attorney and the chapter sets up council so there's no quick action but it's worthy of exploration and in terms of some of other cities

we've talked to one has outside council and is happy with it >> any other comments from the commissioners? public comment on 22 and 23 >> commissioners ray heart from san francisco open government. to the commissioner hayons concern about establishing committee i don't hear people talking about a committee meeting that has to meet my love waits there in san francisco it is an appropriate rules of order to have temporary committees to identify a problem and say gee it's hard for us 5 to get together and come back to us with a recommendation it's the same thing similarity to

having a hearing officer the hoff doesn't necessarily have to be a separate person for example, the police commission the hoffs are the police members it's one of the members are appointed to be did hearing officer they come back and report to the full police commission so you can have your cake and eat it, too and really it comes down to some of the things if you have a subcommittee that could deal with certain things not requiring 5 of you to get together and they could arrange their schedule to meet. again those things are not difficult to do if you really want to achieve a purpose but if i simply start out with the idea

of setting up a mechanism and we have so many restrictions on our time it is going to be impossible - it is kayak of like heinecke i didn't philippines and the sky is falling pr i agree with commissioner hayon. want to appoint a committee and come back and report to the if you commission it's a great way of handling it >> all in favor the changes proposed for recommendation 23 and 22. i >> i. >> opposed. hearing none. passes. i would say if possible to take 24, 45 e 25 and 26 together is there an objection in the 5 e25

an objection in the commission? commissioner keane >> yes. mr. chair for the language on page 16 recommendation 25 in the middle of the paragraph the director notes i'd change that to the commission notes. >> anything else? i would - i have a couple of amendments on 24 on the recommendation it is sort of seems like it's not responding

to the recommendation i mean that be directed to the mayor and the board of supervisors if that he direct it to the to court we should provide it to them but it is nonresponsive as written in my view. i would propose an amendment in the mayor or board makes a request i ask we comply with it. on 25 the recommendation i mean, i think to see what commissioner keanes comments that is sort of apple pie here, of course, if we had the resources shouldn't we do the things that be suggested in recommendation 25?

and so i would change the recommendation to say provide with sufficient resources the commission could and would do the work - do more work as indicated by the findings of something to the effect. any comments from the commissioners? is there a motion to amend 24, 25 as proposed by commissioner keane and commissioner hur? >> yes. so moved. >> second. >> second. public comment? >> a couple of comments on 24 t

it is where the grand jury made a recommendation go you should be doing an annual report to the board of supervisors. i want to talk about that part. remember commissioner keane talked about it earlier you're also kind of the example of what should be happening in showing what good government it ethnics is incredibly important to the citizens they don't get a chance to hear the represents voted often and on the state and local level the citizens don't get any kind of report on what that means if >> saying let the board of supervisors excuse and we will give a report remember it's a in the chapter to do an annual report that is helpful to the public here are the requirements those are new and those are not

new andtolysis will the one pending it could be an important part of the legislation i would ask you to do an unanimous report we know find nothing that was recorded to the board of supervisors in terms of the effectiveness of the laws and what was happening with them. i'd again saying it's worthwhile to think about an annual report. thanks >> larry bush from the civil grand jury just to clarify this is not the not to my knowledge report this is a special report specified in the charter you are to report to the board and mayor on the focusness of san francisco ethnics laws there are issues having to do this and they've not been recorded for

example, of the march 2008 memo outlining the problems you found and adapting new policies about enforcement is an example never report to the board or public. in which changed the enforcement policies of the department. so i think it would be a really good idea to comply with the charter. thank you. >> as brown mr. bush pointed out this is separate from the annual report and that's required for the boards. we understand we've seen opinion from city attorney that the form of this report is not specified and it could be prepared the in a lot of different wausz ways but we've seen no evidence it's been present at all it's a violation of the chapter. now we did ask the mayor and

board of supervisors to request it but i think you should think about being pro-active it's an important policy for the commission to render on an annual basis how the laws are doing. and it, you know, provide the fraction for changes you might entertain in the future you're looking at one piece of the law at that time, and not looking at things in a board sense so this report is very important. and the republicans to the recommendation so say prelims is not up to the ethics commission is just i don't really quite get that >> to be fair the recommendation does refer to the mayor and the board making the requests. >> yes, but ultimately you/have to prepare. >> right. >> we should prepare it anyway

but i'm not it's fair to criticize us on that particular point i understand your point. >> okay. >> commissioners ray open san francisco government. i believe that the prior speakers were all correct there's nothing requiring you to do something or prevent you a as we've talked about this wouldn't it be endangering if mr. syncountries list indicated one or two of you had not filed your forms that would not wanting to be embarrassing and this is if anyone in the city is going to republic a meeting in accordance with the sunshine ordinance it augmenting ought to be you, you

set the example for everybody and your whole basis for credibility is where you follow the things i tell others to do. you can't have a city department coming in and following a violation of the law and having krebltd and they can simply say if it's so important why you, you doing it i found members of the sunshine task force that this is a good argument. so putting this report out >> giving it to the board of supervisors and mayor on the volunteer balances sets an example for other departments we're to go be pro-active and something the chapter requires something that the civil grand jury recommended and as members of this commission i would hope you'll feel it's an important

and appropriate thing to do. >> interested? view of my fellow commissioners commissioners but i'm becoming persuade we had had a report like this i could see the benefit for our own, you know, regardless of what this board and mayor did with that on an annual basis to look at this on an annual basis. is there any concern from the staff about doing something like that? >> no. no >> i agree with the chair in light of the comments and the concerns are very valid points

expressed in regards to us telling the public and what it is that is involved if ethnical matter we should put out an annual report. i move we do it >> so perhaps you can amend our response to recommendation 24 to say that we will provide on an annual basis of the report regarding the focusness of san francisco's ethnics laws. we need to renotify on that? >> yes. >> sorry to interject to be consistent you may want to amend the last recommendation to 26

commissioner keane talks about the director should be removed. >> yes as at recommendation 25 as well. i think i've already spoken to that >> yeah. yeah. >> is there a motion to further amend our responses to 24 and 25. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor. >> i. opposed >> hearing none that passes 4 to zero. >> recommendation 27. any comments from the commissioners?

28. i have some proposals on 28. i would in responded to the recommendation i'd delete the second sentence and the last sentence. where's that >> recommendation 28 and page 17. i would also delete as troubling in the second to last sentence.

any other - commissioner hayon >> i want to comment on recommendation 28. not necessarily our response but i just want to say for the record that this feels like a star-chamber procedure or a game. and i think that hass as noted in our response at any meeting people certainly the public is free to bring up any issues of this nature has it is but i would be hesitant to have this

be a form aspect of the commissioner hearings. >> i agree i don't think it's we should include that. in our formal hearings. any further comments from the commissioners? >> (inaudible). >> yes. well, i'm proposing we delete the second sentence for recommendation 28. i next propose i would propose this is a politically troubling idea for the views are astonishing and i'll delete in

the second to last response as troubling and finally, i would delete the last sentence. i'm not sure how my fellow commissioners feel about that or if there's a motion. is there a motion to adapt recommendation 28 as amended >> so moved that we adapt. >> is there a second. >> second. >> public comments?

commissioners i'll make that brief is changes are appropriate and i'd like to point out that that commissioner keane and others have done the executive director a huge favor they've taken him out of my line of fire i put it on your own shoulder. all of those changes where you take out the directors decision really lead to the impression you are being directed by him rather than you directing him and taking his name and position out of this has done him a service. and also really does make that clear you sent the responsibility to which you've agreed when you take the

position. >> well, with respect to recommendation 28, you know, congress does that all the time this is what protective bodies do when things are not sure what's going on there's a lot of a.m. bigger things in the campaign finance earring easier and frankly whments the city family looks like it is scratching each other's back and it is worth putting it out in the public and letting people talk about what they're doing because it's that light of public discussion that clarifies a lot of the issues. and you know the fear the abuse we're not saying that just because someone senior housing shows up and says you ought to

have a hearing we do it by not everything rises to the level of opening up a confidential investigation but there's a lot of things that are unethnic that may not be illegal you're the ethics commission you, you should be lighting e hitler questionable behavior. you know there are so many examples i don't know where to start we've put in the traffic disclosures and payment disclosures. those are raising questions with what's really going on here. in terms of why are people giving this kind of money and expecting in rupture. this is just how business is being done in the city and sometimes it's good to have a public hearing on that. you can do it or not do it or in response to the recommendation

or decide you want to do it in 6 months it doesn't matter a star-chamber is a closed kind of secretive hearing where no one else comes in to here that is more of a public forum. i think there's a lot of instances where the public sees things that are represented in the papers about who is important at city hall and things like that and they wonder why they're not registered as lobbyist and what is going on people are concluded there's nothing illegal going on and public sxhechl continues to grow and its important to put 24 out there and let people defend themselves. i guess i dispute the idea this

is something that's totally abused oar i've had to live with congressional investigations yeah, they drive you crazy it's part of life. in terms of 27 you know when the state assembly acts on things to amend the police practices act at least put a pro forma a finding at the end for the clause that fortunes the purpose of the actress we see it with the ordinances at this point and the performer a finding is not impressive with the details of some specific ways how people know that further stipulates the purpose of the acts rather than seeing why it makes sense to do

this permit. anyway, thank you >> thank you. further comments from the commissioners >> all in favor of adapting 28 and amended. >> i. opposed. hearing none that passes. finding 29 comments from the commissioners? i would invite someone from the