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 acted orientals can simply be amended so the board 3 votes also known as to the super majority or 4, fifths of commission you could certainly well- it yeah. it wouldn't be necessary any board to include that progression provision it is intended for the board manufacture. >> so the difference in terms of effecting changes a super majority is needed consistent with the purposes of the legislation if we go to the ballot if it goes to the board it's majority and any changes can be made. >> exactly you don't need that clause from the normal perspective process.

>> it looks like the gentleman wants to say something. >> if i may side board of supervisors anticipated it last year is it not come to the ethics commission in in any way, shape, or form i think perhaps comments by the commission. >> when i talk about is consistent with state law for pure political practices act that was approved by the voters from the sections of city ordinances that were approved by the voters if you make this change in the lobbyist law big sections will be approved by the voters at this point and you know the sort of process will allow the voters will approve that process to allow the engagements amendments in the

super majority. >> thank you, mr.tion. >> the only other thing i'll say i have no opposition to commissioner stephenson proposal other than the fact there will be a time i won't be here this will be the probation of my vote but i understand. >> call the >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> > opposed? >> no carried four to one. >> by way of clarification can i ask what ultimate will expected of staff for this project for planning purposes. >> i understand. >> a memo. >> commissioner president keane will be working with the staff and with the city attorney's office to draft a final version

that will ask the commission at june meeting to say yes let's go forward or not go forward or hold it off whatever it is and then that's my understanding. >> so no memo basically. >> that's right. >> just exclusively feedback. >> i'm sorry. >> exclusively feedback. >> as opposed to preparing a memo and drafting the language. >> those are fine. >> well, it is by way of clarification for the work plan. >> as i understand what comes back is not a memo but a drafted proposed piece of legislation. >> that's correct. >> right? >> that commissioner

president keane was asked us to yay or nay. >> right i guess what i was wanted clarification in terms of our workload and commissioner hur said often a memo there's something a copy for planning purpose want to understand is it the commission has feedback from staff on this it is an unusual process i'm trying to figure out what at planning process is. >> mr. chair at the time, we have the working document at this point whoever wants to weigh in on anything relating to the working document we should everyone should have it the city attorney should have at it and we'll make a decision yeah, that's okay. >> yes to a memo or?

>> who is taking the lead on this. >> i am. >> on drafting the motion. >> so you're taking the lead it sounds like commissioner hur sounded like did staff took the lead in the past i was wondering if i of the hearing between the lines does it help for the staff and the situation like this to continue to take the lead so it there in spite of appearance ever imagine about the process we can get to the same outcome. >> mr. chair if i may. >> commissioner president keane. >> this is something the commissioner commission or at least the commission has initiated the chair appointed an ad hoc committee me to go ahead and report on those things to

make recommendations i've done that and now i'm asking that the process go forward in regard to the work of that ad hoc committee me with the staff and will have some sort of outcome as a result of that i'm not sure what you're saying when you say should the staff just take over i don't know where our coming from. >> commissioner recount. >> my understanding is that if typically the staff does the drafting and write a memo why we're doing this the particular changes the pitfalls and then we'll make a vote on this is an unusual process again, i appreciate you know commissioner president keane's been able to

desolate so much times but the staff needs to take a role a memo from them and having involvement is more to my view i know that the staff has other things going potentially that's a problem but i'd like not wanted to go forward with the staff not fully vetted. >> if i could say. >> through the chair commission asked the staff to draft this in july of 2013 two years ago they've had two years to draft it and not turned it back the fact it is unusual the staff didn't perform what we were assigned to do by the commission. >> well. >>. let me say that as i envision

what should happen between now and june is that the draft and weather revisions they want to make based on the comments from the minority and others it should be submitted to the city attorney's office to draft a final document to say and presented to the commission saying this is the final draft that the city attorney's office is prepared to sign off on to go on the ballot and that's - in that regard, i particularly urge the city attorney's office to focus on enforcement prerogatives in that statute and

if there are problems to you would assume to the city attorney will present those problems to us and we'll have to decide what provisions to make if any based on those but what i would envision and i think what commissioner president keane has in mind where we have before us is the document that we're prepared to vote and a on and the four of us vote yes should go on the ballot >> and lemon to be clear i have no preference one way or the on the as commissioner hur alluded to we have another thing on the work plan i'm trying to anticipate to the extent to the amount of work and to the extent we'll have to be push other

things back this is simply why i'm asking. >> with the plan we approved two or three months ago for the year. >> all right. item number 6 discussion and possible action regarding complaints that are initiative by the nichgs for one government section and san francisco campaign and governmental conduct code a failure to maintain the committee records california government code section making cash expenditures and san francisco campaign code section exposing contribution limits and two san francisco

conduct codes failure to disclose lobbying contacts possible closed session and first public matters on all matters pertaining to the agenda items 6 including whether to meet many closed session >> any public comment hearing none do i hear a motion as to whether to assert the attorney-client under the section brown act section 549569 a sunshine ordnance 67.10 for the discussion the anticipated

litigation as explained. >> so moved. >> second. >> public comment? or the call the question >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> > opposed? carried unanimously 5 we'll go into closed session. >> mr. chair let me state for the record there are two matters and the second matter i'll be recusing participate. >> all right. we're now in open session and the question is whether or not the ethics commission was to will move to disclose it's closed session deliberations

and do i call another vote. >> well somebody needs to make the motion and second it. >> i move not to disclose. >> any public comment? hearing none call the question >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? hearing none 5 vote item no. 7 discussion and possible action on the which i guess april 27, 2015 draft meeting minutes. >> commissioner have any comments on the minutes any public comment. >> david pill pal on page 6 of the minutes motion 15 the