you sponsor and number of individuals that speak on various topics supervisor x is someone who is invited you have had no contact with supervisor x but supervisor x by consequence is spend two weeks in the south of france in about how far weather enjoying the amenity of the four seasons and comes back you've had no dealings with supervisor x but it you're doing it clearly to influence his legislation. >> i use on strom but you see within the extremes you might be able to pick out certain things that have happened in san francisco with other individuals

in power if somebody to this may have to be disclosed if someone were to finance a rally purportedly a ground swell on some piece of legislation that some entities or some individuals and the city was interested in and his or her financed putting this together his or her is a lobbyist. >> if they're going it for the purpose of influencing the actions of the city official. >> they can do it fine if we want to spend the money fine but the public should know about it.

>> you want to state your motion as to what you want the commission. >> i'd like the commission to approve the process going forward that we continue the drafting of the measure with myself the staff and other interested members the public and that our next meeting we then will come back to the commission with language with a proposed ballet initiative for the commission to vote yay or nay on i ask the commissions to approve that process. >> second. >> second seconded

public comment? >> hello larry bush from the friends of ethics you asked for a example of a lobbyist as you meet it the democrat working party on the agenda is the question of the mission moratorium i have articles that have appeared recently in the paper on examples of expenditure law in october of 2014 airbnb having hired a lobbyist to quote so recruit people to rent out their homes for supervisors to vote on a bill they were not contacting the supervisor they were paying other people to do it i have a copy for each of you. >> you're saying they paid they

hired who contacted. >> wouldn't the lobbyist have to be imposed. >> the lobbyists into have to be quoted but reaching out for example, a group called row sf along with another group sf behavior i'm not trooibt value the bay area renter federation what they do they are helping people prepare to give public comment at upcoming center meeting they're having a for turtle having to do public comment this is happening in part because of the growth of the share community of the sharing destroy which has a lot of people that are individuals they come you've heard as home

sharers they're one of the groups and other groups that show up and they are not disclosing what it is they're being paid and who is paying them, in fact, in the business times they write about the fact they don't have to disclose who is paying them over and over how much is spent those are articles for you folks. >> just to recap the history in 2010 this was what provision in san francisco's lobbyist laws and what the commission met at this point the staff suggested the lobbyist law do could be citywide by reporting to the public they were asked the deputy city attorney san francisco do those changes have to act in the minutes there is no requirement

when it comes to lobby laws that changes the purposes of the act only to simplify the process has nothing to do with with who you're providing the public or the commission. >> your time is up. >> i have a p.s. if i could. >> good evening, commissioners i'm paul i served phone number on this commission for 8 years from 1995 to 2003 and it was during that period for the first time the ethics commission put a ballet measure on the ballot i want to aid why the public depends on the ethics commission to take the leadership and the ethics commission to put this measure on the ballet rather than going to the board of supervisors i'm the commissioner who made

the motion to put the motion on the brake light proposition o and also for the first time regulate extend contributions to independent expenditure committees it was judged the president of the commission urged me to make the motion initially she thought oh, out of respect for the supervisors we should go to the supervisors and present this proposal and get their input we unanimously allowed judge grant to make a presentation and to our surprise she was rebuked by visually all the supervisors i found it shocking those of you who are letters know that judge grant was not an activist type a

distinguished mild-mannered person but the reaction of the supervisors how dare those non-elected commissioners we're subject to corruption by money they gave no positive input the reason i realized all the supervisors across the spectrum have interest groups and constituents that like to spend money on lobbying but don't want to report that is precisely the types of issue that the commission needs to take the lead on you commissioners are not subject to not depending on campaign tricks from those interest groups and i'm also the conspires that worked with the city attorney's office and it

was resoundly passed by the voter so i urge you to move ahead as quickly as possible to put this measure on the ballot and thank you for all your service on the commission i know what a thank also position it is. >> hello, i'm vivian i strongly support moving forward with the ballot measure to require the disclosure it is the apparent many citizens are unaware that powerful forces are behind what seems to be lobbying we need to know what financial and political influences are at play behind the action of what seems to be well intended groups acts

on their own on behalf of may not any resistance for full disclosure is superintendant in itself let's change the pub picture as the pursuing public has a right to know the financial investments thank you for your work on this. >> any other? >> charley again i wanted to report what i sue in the sacramento boo not more than 3 would weeks ago they did a first page report on the current quarter of lobbying activity in sacramento and the numbers were very large but that was not role what caught my use this large

paragraph of health care reform activists and the picture was illustrating essential steak what we're talking about a grassroots effort that is supported by a lobbying organization for the purposes of influence administrative and perspective action by the elected officials under the guys it is a grassroots currency they wanted the elected officials to know about the truth was that this was expenditure lobbying and i'll be happy to send mr. sincroy this picture i thought about blowing it up and bring it in i was advised by my computer people that the pictures will be distorted as it got larger i

should have sent to you by e-mail i'll go ahead and and do that now. >> good evening commissioners i'd like to clarify the information and the history section of the report to the proposed legislation it appears because san francisco lobby lieu didn't regulate the expenditure loicht the city is not capturing hundred of thousands of dollars in lobbying activities it is not the case in the prior position in all of the jurisdictions listed in the report sacramento snowing and language it is an entities that spends 5 thousand dollars in a calendar year on public relations activities to urge the public to lobby the

public officials like adds and, etc. their commonly referred to as grassroots lobbyists it excludes compensation by lobbyists. >> i think did you say payment by organization the expenditure lobbyists in all the jurisdictions noted in the report are not required to register and in addition those reports are only recorded when a 5 thousand dollars threshold has been met it typically includes the matters the lobbyists thought to influence sacramento and santa fe doesn't require the payments and others los angeles and san diego and the state require disclosures the payments the definition of the proposed legislation is not the typical definition it appears to add the element of some sort of payment

rewards or gifts for lobbying this is typically xhutd included from the definition such a definition will create concussion it imposes a regular monthly reporting regardless of activity that de8s from the jurisdictions and finally that's now understanding if when the lobby law was amended and the category was deleted from the law it was done because of you individuals or entities qualified as lobbyist most lobbying is a payment of compensation to individuals to lobby officials directly that's exactly what the current law captures it is noted noted and it will create concussion you,

however, if you proceed with the expenditure lobby i urge you to adopt the versions that is similar to the lobbying laws of sacramento and san diego and language for the state of california california. >> good evening. i'm an attorney with messenger sincere our firm represents a lot of lobby registers with the city and county with two primary concerns with the law amendments we're concerned with the recommendation that those changes be implemented through the ballot process as opposed to the ballot process this will effectively tie the hands of the commission and protest you from impacting clarifying language and he did the law maybe for an

distinct purpose the interpretation outside the original intents of the thorough it is necessary to subvert loopholes or unforeseen law this will likely require a requirement to insure the statutes are, if you know if infected the ballot measure needs to go through the process again of us blue cross the commissions ability to remedy any circumstances under the law and further take another election conditioner to make sure that the public is aware and second we roll call request that the commission opens up for additional comments to determine if there's an sufficient way to

achieve the proposal it could critique redundancy a group would be required to foil this is confusing for the public to navigate through multiple layers that are redundant and a common period will provide the commission with the opportunity to consider an alternative option for capturing this information without creating a complex and confusing reporting sxoem for example from the commission were to adopt similar to the state whereby the information that is going to be captured in the lifted proposal could be captured under one single report there is much easier for the public to interpret this lobbying information if it appears in one report those for these reasons

we respectfully request the commission precede through the legislation and not the ballot process as well as to find additional opportunity to comment on the legislation thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening form civil grand jury member i think that would be from if you guys put something on the ballot that's been a long time if there is concerns about the language being properly drafted i think at some point you need to meet with the drafting people in the city attorney's office for the drafting for the supervisors i think you're in the shop they're in so it is is an important step

for you to take if there's concern about placing someone know the ballot and not being amenable in the future this is one chapter of the conduct code that doesn't have the prerogatives you see in the campaign section and conflict of interest sections it can be amended to further the chapter by 4 votes of ethics commission and you 2/3rd's of the board of supervisors this is an excellent opportunity to add this is to the lobby ordinance as well and then put it open the ballot in corrective measures can be taken it will go through a similar process with the finance and the conflict of interest ordinance that language is standard between those two sections so i think that is something you can lift and drop

into this charter so that's my suggestions thank you. >> thank you. >> david pill pal i strongly suggest those who are pushing this concept i believe i remember in 2009, 2010 that was changed i believe the reason the primary reason the draft didn't want to simplify and make most of the provisions similar to other jurisdictions in the state interest and i recall that there were issues with the definition of an expenditure lobbyist and how to track that there were expenditures made and this could be implemented, regulated and enforced so i feel strongly that the language drafted here needs

some more work to the extent it may go forward should have language that's workable. >> i don't have a strongly held view as to whether this is a huge problem that needs to be address through regulation i guess it is my belief that people with money or financial interests be the developers are people with policy interests and others will spend money to make their views known dribble through contacts or indirectly through grassroots work or advertising or some other maples it didn't surprise me that airbnb and others spend money to get their way in this building i'm just a guy that didn't have money only goes to meetings and speaks up i don't have a big corporation so there's that i agree with the couple of

comments you've heard about including provisions to allow right now the board by a 2/3rd's and the thirty day period to make clarify or infuriating amendments that's consistent with other provisions in the law but not in the lobbyist ordinance that will be in order here thank you. >> good evening, commissioners my name is john wood i live in north beach i've been there 50iers or years never appeared before your commission i'm usually busy arresting before the library commission or mta or rec and park and it is usually unsuccessful

but you're the ethics commission it applies a better chance of being heard i'm not hundred percent clear about what was happening i think in 2009 a previous group of ethics commissioners gave themselves oversight over a lobbyist and defined what a lobbyist was the oversight became eir rotated i see the definition currently the lobbyist is that the person that's giving money are trying to influence the decision has to have one physical contact with a city employee i think that is kind of ridiculous on the face of it what i gather mr. cain was authorized to prepare a report about what should be done to broken down the exemplification of a lobbyist that can't be a

bad thing can it it can't be all i heard he be given a month to rise the report i hope for the sake of people that have been trusting you you'll agree to that thank you. >> call the question. >> i apologize if i could make a a couple of points to follow up on this comments certainly i and my office are happy to participate as pretty much all ballot manufacture our office drafts the final ordinance and certainly happy to cooperate with commissioner president keane in the drafting process and, secondly, and this is because commissioner hur made a

comment hose to the available in june something for the ballot requires a 4, 5 vote so as june without commissioner hur here obviously wool we'll need a unanimous vote and if someone else can't make the june meeting that should be taken into consideration as well. >> commissioner president keane. >> thank you, mr. chair i'd like to indicate for the record in regard to the materials that have been sent i've been send them to mr. shimming and had some february from mr. shin if his words he's in the loop on whaelz so the it don't make any difference being involved this

is over the course of the last couple weeks has indeed been part of the overall process and they're aware of it and aware of the differences in the languages and are invited along with mr. minority to go ahead and make their own submissions as to the changes and certainly this is the progress we'll continue over the course felt next month the city attorney's office is part of the package here i just like to add one other thing in regard to one of the things that commissioner hur said with all due respect i am glad that mr. mel stack is here we ought to let the board do this i don't think so we heard mr. mel history of the

very unfortunate incident that is going to be characteristic of the way the board of supervisors as a perspective body with they are own actions to ground and their own constituents i say this their own payoffs from interest groups or other things they're not the group that can look at this neutral it is asking the fox to ensured the chicken come up that's and one of the reasons one of the main reasons as indicated here that this commission is unique is that we have this independent power to pit things on the ballot where we know that if we go ahead well we'll submit to the board of supervisors they'll grind it up like hamburger and

put it in the waste basket and it's not going to happen not happen we all know that so i think that should be taken off the table right away the board is not going to do it we have an obligation we've leader from the citizens of the san francisco and lots of people we see that something was revolt when this change was made by this commission we have an obligation as a commission in the interest of transparency the interest of the ethics we go ahead and do this thank you, mr. chair. >> commissioner hur. >> mr. chair, i have a couple of follow-up questions to what mr. shin raise and commissioner stephenson can you describe the difference

in the amended process if we were to put in the proposal that mr. ravages way offered in terms of how to amend this legislation if approved by the voters versus if it was entered into by the board of supervisors. >> the purpose of restriction that mr. ravens way mentioned both the ordinance and the governmental ethics ordinance were enacted by the voters as many of the commissioners are aware by the voter it can't be amended by the board of supervisors it needs to go back to the voters it can't are reform for the ethics ordinance as mexico's to allow for later perspective fix so lobs as those changes indicator the provisions

so in a way it allows you to not have to go back to the voters as long as their consistent with the spirit of the original ordinances it allows to you e rattle to adjust 2:00 o'clock and make slight fixed by something that was voted by the voter you try to extract a perfect ordnance about it is difficult having that option is a good thing. >> i agree so if alternatively we propose to did board and they infect it how is the amendment process differ. >> if you go through the normal legislative process that provision is not as i guess necessary because any board and