edition the government where the person has sought confidentiality, would adding the language would disclay. (audio cutting out) discuss matter within the scope of representation that representation has been defined, by the california government code. 30514, or disclosed from state law, we shawl disclose members, from the labor organization, we meet with as wl, that would require disclosure, the next section we're requiring for provide clarity for organizations, is line ten, page two. a large section, i will read. [reading] inside or outside of our offices, attendees, subject to subsection a of this section,

67.295 shall attempt to identify names of attendees, present in the organizations they represent. provided that an official shall not require any attendee, to identify themselves so we're not foring anyone to identify themselves unless they're campaign consultants, under campaign and government conduct code article one chapter five lobbyists, with the [inaudible] article two, chapter two. permit consultants, conduct code, article three, chapter four, and developers of major projects, as in campaign and government code 3.510. is discussed at the meeting, in this case we're only asking for a major donor we're identifying

the major donor, when they're discussing the project that's before the board of supervisors, and the subject of that meeting after this meeting or event the official shall update the attendees, by the officials of the organization they represent. that is the new language we have in here. we want to make sure we're following what is elsewhere in our ethics legislation, identifying consultants lobbyists, developers, and developers of major projects i think this is actually is able to not saying we're casting a wide net, but con porming with existing legislation, most recently, under former president, david choose major developers, were

identified in this case sh and supported by the full board unanimously, as keeping to disclose and identify themselves, so we're just making sure when there is a meeting, specifically about a project they're interested in getting se port on they're mentioned in that meeting. so those are my amendments part of the amendment of the whole a motion we would like to accept. >> chair? >> thank you very much i agree with this legislation, even without this new regulation, our office has complied with the request for a calendar and provide the information to everyone. i don't have a problem with that i do have a problem with the implementation with that i appreciate the

amendments were made for example, especially that you will need to identify people at our meeting, if it's ten or less -- i sorry, you don't have to disclose if it's ten or less however, we attend events with large amounts of people, do we have send a sign-up sheet for the amendment, that might be an over site in the language, so i wanted to address that. >> let me respond to that in that language, we're not requiring any attendees, to identify themselves to me since there is no requirement there, i think the rile requirement is, we say what the meeting is about, who is at the meeting, but i don't think it's

onis, on anyone's prooifty to come forward and say who is there, to us it makes sense we're providing information about what the meeting is about, and generally, who is at a meeting that is outside of, you know a large event we might attend in our district or around the city. >> okay so in your amendment, page two, line ten, any meeting or event with ten or fewer, the officials shall attempt to identify the the name, maybe this is a question for the city attorney, do you feel we need to include the language to distinguish, between a large event, we're not discussing a particular topic, it's just an event. >> deputy attorney john gib ner the goal of this ten or fewer is

to try to address the concern you are raising, which is if you in a large event and you recognize a handful of people you are talking to those people should be you know who they are -- put them on your calendar but you don't have to circulate a sign in sheet, if it's an event with more than ten people, if there's 15 in the room if you know john gib ner is one of them you should put job begin ner's name on your calendar but you shouldn't have to ask anyone to sign up to add their name to the calendar >> this again would apply to telephone call, if i'm on a conference call with ten or fewer people i would have to ask them to state their name and write them down with the calendar >> yes that's what the amendment would require >> in terms of page two, lines

12-21, where it talks about you know we're not going to compel people to identify themselves if they don't want to, however, we have to identify campaign consultants registered etc. this list what if i don't know they're registered on this list? i try to disclose as many people as possible. i can't help it if someone doesn't show up or they change -- swap out a person i don't anticipate that how do i know these people are registered? some i know some i don't. >> it seems like the issue you are raising is a policy implementation type question i think what this ordinance would require is if you are in a room with say six other people that you say i'm handing out a sign-up sheet. you don't have to

sign your name but if you are a consultant lobbyist campaign consultant or manager, you do. whether that is something that is feasible, that would be implement i will leave that to your judgment >> there is also the requirement that you made the attempt to say who is there, people identify themselves, you have the name on the record, you may not know that that person is um, a consultant or lobbyist, but if they're registered, that can be compared to what is presented in the ethics commission when they register >> for example, it says can't compel, require attendees, to identify themselves for whatever reason they decide they don't want to disclose themselves, we don't know they're on this list or not, and they don't identify they had a

contact with us. again, i mean this is just a situation where someone may be playblatantly recorded they don't want to identifying themselves they're are on one of these lists, what happens, then >> we recorded the names that is on our calendar, we share that with the public that's what we're expected to do i think in our role as supervisors, there are a lot of places where there is a lot of gray area, we do our best to match the letter of the law, we doe that. that's what the law requires to do we share information about who is in our meetings. some might give a different name we provide the name that is given to us that's what we have to do >> i'm not disputing what are

you trying to do here i'm saying in terms of the reality of what may occur, it may be difficult to enforce what you are trying to achieve here so i will try my best to comply with what you have laid out here, knowing we're trying o dress all the types of situations that may come up. one other question i have. let's say someone say it's part of a meeting, you have to disclose if it's ten or less people. people with partial time have you to disclose as well? >> yeah most meetings i have people don't stay most the time, there is a lot of coming and going, >> i want to clarify so we know what we're supposed to do. some of us are trying to comply with this >> you dimensioned conference calls, i think generally the

you are on a conference call, you know who is on the conference calls, most conference calls i'm on i know who is on there, and i ask who is on the conference call so to me, it doesn't seem different meeting of people face to face in your office in your cones frens call there say certain goal you are taking part of the public should know what you are working on >> all right. one other question that i had was about page two of your amendment, line two where it says in a case where something, revealing your identity to petition -- government and confidentiality, i wanted to clarify what that really means, >> well that could be like a whistle blower or someone who

perhaps has information about experience that person has had with a particular service the government provides they need to get advice from our offices, and ourselves, i think that person's anonymity is important for this their security safety or sense of well being that happens, quite frequently i get a lot of people who want to talk with me about how they have been treated, i don't assist anyone in trying to sue the city but i do assess people to make sure they get the best service they can, or have a complaint how they were treated, they can be heard about that and i can provide advice about how they can proceed, that happens, quite frequently, with matter, how they're treated by the police

or human services agency, or the mayor's, office of housing, those are common occurrences, that is happening, in all of our offices, >> through the chair to the state attorney if a constituent comes to us they have a matter, they would like to report, and act on their behalf and they don't want to identify them as per the language in the legislation, we don't have to list that >> that is right. my office suggested adding this particular language in because there is individuals, have the right to pe edition their elected representatives, and doing anonymously without having their names disclosed. this is the same rule that applies to e-mails you received from con stish want say a a constituent emales you i

includes their name and said, i don't want my name to be public but they're selling drugs, in my neighborhood, and i'm concerned, you receive information about drug sales on that corner you apply the same analysis there, to determine whether to redact that individual's name from the e-mail because that person has sought and received assurances of confidentiality when contacting you. so it's the same kind of analysis that i think supervisors and departments engage in regularly, although under this ordinance, you have to engage in that a lot more often because you are going to have figure out whether to list individual's names every day. >> thank you. again, i'm not questioning, your intent or goal for this i want to make sure how we can comply with this it

can be burden some and complicated for certain sit weighings, again i have always turned over my calendar when people asked for is even though i was never required to. >> okay. so we will save the votes on the amendments until after public comment, any member of the public would like to comment, please come forward. >> hello, i'm larry bush for friends of ethics i'm also the civil grand juriy, that made the recommendation to the ethics board, i think avalos amendments are important and worthwhile, i understand supervisor tang's point if you have a constituent come in with a dispute whether or not they qualify for some sort of health care, and the department says no, and the supervisor says, can you help negotiate that with

the health department that is under the privacy issues in the language here. obviously, the point of this is not to enact. a, "go you", we met with supervisor weiner so we're not caught in a bind if somebody doesn't sign up. there is a group of 20 people, you have 15 name, and somebody files a complain, and suddenly, we're in sunshine court i think supervisor's avalos amendments address that well it is important that members of the regulartive commune are identified, that's why campaign consultants, or people that handle permits, where they have to make a disclosure lobbyists of who they meet with would be a way of checking that everything is fully disclosed.

last night at the ethic's commission meeting, there say closed section, with a lobbyist who did not make those disclosures, this is a way to help the public to make sure everything is done in a transparent way. thank you. are >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon, supervisors, susan guard, i'm the chief of policy, with the department of human resources, we did submit a memo, which you have in the committee packet i wanted to speak to a few points today. first of all i wavented to say thank you to supervisor avalos your staff and the city attorney's office for working with us on some of the concerns we have. of course we do support transparency and open government initially, we had two concerns with the changes, one was about labor meetings that are governed by the myier's

brown act, that is the change to the language, we really appreciate that. we also had a second concern which is around confidentiality, of personal meetings, we continue to have concern about that, unintended consequences, we might have as a result of that. there was some language that we proposed that you graciously considered. and propose different language, for the sake of clarity, our language that we proposed would have said would reveal personal information not subject to disclosure. so the language that originally your office proposed had the phrase "would interfere with an individual's right to inte tigs government" and also would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal prooifty,

while the recent one, constitute an unt warranted invasion of personal personal privacy, is taken out of the language. pardon me on behalf of the human resources correctordirector, if there is an equal opportunity director, we know handles the complaints for the issues with the city -- say there is a meeting in the calendar with the hr the er director, the labor director and specific manager, anyone requesting the calendar, can make an asewages rightly or wrongly why they're meeting, so we have concerns about the effect it could

potentially have on our ability to hear and remedy any of those types of discrimination complaints retaliation complaints or any of those types of personal matters within our purview. >> thank you. with gib ner on this legislation, and want to prose posed by human resource on the subject. >> deputy attorney john gib ner. the personnel, was not submitted to me as a request. i worked on the scope of representation exception that is currently in the ordinance, some of the information about the personnel is covered by the disclosure, our state or local law, it sounds like it's broader, you

would like to accept all meeting, regarding personnel matters, from avoid looking at the attendees, all together. >> yeah, everyone to know who is at that meetings there are meetings specifically where ared to equal opportunity issues, where we need confidentiality, if we don't, it would deteriorate, our abilitied to adjudicate those type of issues, those are something that we don't think the right to petition, we thought about whether the language the right to petition government and expect confidentiality, whether that would cover those situations it doesn't seem like it really does hearing from the city attorney's office we don't think it does that is a matter that i think we need to address as we go forward with the legislation. >> thank you. is there any language you might be able to

work out with mr. gib ner that might assist in strengthening, clarifying that area >> in the next couple of minutes, >> thank you >> thank you >> okay neekz speaker please >> good afternoon, supervise rs i'm richardneath supervisor of the news guild. local 39521, our local member, include scores of journalists, some in our city the associated press and the bay city news service, the journalists job is to be the eyes and ears, of our viewers, and government transparency is an essential tool to do that properly. the sunshine ordinance before you day will strengthen the increase in transparency in this law -- strongly endorses

this and we thanks, avalos, and chair mar, for bringing it i want to propose additional language page 1, 917, after the a, in parens insert all elected public officials -- including but not limited to then you list those, the mayor, city attorneys, etc., then after the board of supervisors, you have another dash and continue and every department head. thank you. >> thank you next speaker please? >> good afternoon, chairman avalos, and supervisor tang, brenda g. friend of ethics thank you supervisor avalos for

you and supervisor's mar's legislation. in relationship to page one line 19, the addition of the word electronic is that going to be an electronic calendar so the public has easier access? it reads currently now, keep a daily calendar, i was wondering, if the addition of electronic calendar might make it easier for public access. thank you. >> next speaker please? >> good afternoon, my name is hope johnson a former chair of the sunshine ordinance task force that is the body that makes recommendations to the board of supervisors on best implementation of sunshine ordinance, which is what you are trying to change. i'm here to

say, this is an amendment, that has been needed more many many years, while it's true that the majority of the supervisors do comply with request for their calendar, as you know, there is after all this time public really wants to know who their elected officials are meeting with it's becoming more and more in public awareness, that is very meaningful a good example is your last item because president brings, has refused, to turn over a calendar she doesn't keep one, and we heard a lengthy discussion about amendments to the campaign laws nobody can have access to who she met with about that. that is really important to people. i'm surprised the the board couldn't agree in some manner to take it upon themselves, without changing the law. i would also like to say, there are a couple of issues here where this is not

like an oral information disclosure, it's still under the public records disclosure. so some of those personnel issues are going to exempt on the california public records act, it's not like they have to address every thing, because of the city disclosure, which the city may address on that level, you still have the option of redacting, and making a reasonable explanation, why you redacted that person's information to protect them. i would like to quickly add, this is also going to be a personal record of each supervisor's true value -- (off the mic) >> thank you. seeing none we

will close public comment. mr. gib ner, if you have language for us to add >> sure. just addressing dhr's, concern, i agree with mrs. johnson, that the catch-all exemption at the end might do the trick but to make sure everyone's on the same page and i think make dhr most comfortable with, we propose adding would reveal personnel information, not subject to disclosure, which i think would address that concern as one of the now, list of maybe five different bases to not list attendees, and meetings >> would reveal? >> woeld reveal personnel information not subject to disclosure after california government goad section 3504,

would reveal personal information, subject to disclosure comma or disclosure under state or -- law. >> can we add that to the amendment? >> so moved >> i will take that without objection. then on the amendment of the whole supervisor tang? >> i made a motion to adopt the amendment as a whole as submitted >> okay we will take that without objection. and on what is the language you wanted to add? no? i think we're good. and on the motion to move forward with recommendation >> so moved >> okay we will take that without objection. thank you. and that's our meeting. >> concludes our meeting for today, >> i want to thank sfgtv, staff,

jesse larson for their work. meating ismea -- meeting is adjourned.

>> good afternoon and welcome to the may 28th joint city and school district select committee i'm jan