you. >> good evening, commissioners i'm alex thompson a representative with local 21 we represent over 4 thousand employees at the city and county of san francisco many are part of that tier two fielders we openly respect rebecca's concerns about the problems because of this i want to highlight one thing as an example we represent the housing inspectors at the city and county of san francisco an important job we understand someone might have to file a form 7 hundred in case they were told to inspect one of our properties when information is online it is easily seasonal the potential of having someone retaliate against that inspector for an inspection and tell the

public you have to spend money telling them something they don't like the public can google that inspectors name and also because of a lack of training there's a potential that inspector could be disciplined by the city for not having filed out tracer form you minimal for our members we have concerns and look forward to having a discussion we think this needs to say vetted properly and have questions questioning of the list we support the process and our members filed out this form the main issue once again it is outburst felt bag in the way the public can easily get access to that information it causes a lot of the concerns about the member's privacy and the spouses privacy and the impacts on the

livelihood most of the folks were not told to fill out the form 7 hundred to work here ntd not part of the condition of employment now your private information is on the online for anyone in the public to find this important thing to continue the discussion but you've heard a lot of our concerned we think that a meet and confer with the city is appropriate and look forward to having that meeting. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners charley off the record and i'm representing myself and not the common cause an organization i once represent but i did want to revisit some previous history the commission had a conflict which they is what we are

talking about and actually fined the individual $15,000 that person asked for a waiver of the fine based on the fact then not able to pay it and they demonstrated to the commission satisfaction that was the case and the fine was largely waived in not entirely waived i got wind this employee was an employee of the state i went off looking for any s e i evidence for this individual and encourage you for fun looking a state employee where you don't know if they've filed american people s e r ii 2r5kd down a document we found evidence i brought that to the commission that individual was,

in fact negotiating the purchase of two homes they were pleading poverty to the commission there was no remedy for the commission except that fact so for the people that are here tonight i wanted to recount this story how valuable an s e i is and how accessibility of that information is also excelling important in a timely way so i thought i'd give you that story that's an old one i'm sure we don't have this problem but i don't know. i want to thank everyone for being here i know that took an effort to bring you 5 out for this night thank you for coming. >> good evening, commissioners i'm mark southern california planning man live in the north

district this is technology possible to insult online data sources from the sources by google are there is no problem to take this information but to make sure that the people are closet to the elected officials with conflict of interest the management of the city is held account to the folks i've sown there my advocacy the management is eager to please those who are exposed but want to make sure there is transparent i like the union and the managers that is a fun thing to watch in the city if there is a possibility of people having hardships have people file and go ahead and get the records they were easy to

delay get them in pdf file we've seen the powell result and embed and take the unities interest into account. >> good evening. i'm here with the friends of ethics a number of fast points there are circumstances you want to redact the information on a filer for example, a filer living at a bearded women's shelter we don't make the addresses possible but an employee or a person that has an restraining order you don't want that information exploded

to the point when you talk about having redaction's and exemptions he need to spell how out with clarity the basis so it is not true this is one thing the second thing in terms of training i was a form 7 hundred filer with the city and a federal employee who had to file federal forms all of those are done by train online that is mentioned a quiz you take and didn't answer everything so if you have a whole lot of holdings at ida b. wells do you have to list all of them those kinds of questions readily pop to mind that kind of training didn't take a lot of staff time this is a state form no reason why ethics can't move

forward with other agencies across the state to develop a protocol and training people can assess at their homes or office and have a group meeting we have a case people have to file under perjury people signed statements they knew were not true people came before this commission in the past year who filed without disclose or not disclosing they have a conflict of interest and had funding to an agency that funded them the commission if this it those things were not filed with the commission but at the departmental level later a situation people were not required to file like aids to supervisors that's been changed because of the grand juror but a

periphery that accepted free cruz cruise to the ref i can't remember and met with rec and park to get a waive of the rules there are things you really do have a significant and serious reason for president the information i suggest that you send it back and when i send that back do a robust outreach to include groups with the sunshine task force and those who are transparency oriented not to see only did filers. >> thank you. >> i'm bob to be specific i do support the expansion of requirement that everything be filed with and through ethics there's been a lack of concreteness here tonight and a

lot of ab straktsdz so i'm going to talk about of the experience i've had you've already heard training can be online a dozen years ago it was film training in herb's auditorium but it needing not be a bumping for the ethics staff or departmental staff the state training is a specific training you've got to spend x amount of hours i knew it i flunked because i turned in my time before the x hours was complete a state requirement it is simple city can amplify that or specific some training this is a red herring that is going to be burdensome on staff let's

look at the specification that are department that have people that score or evaluate proposals and requests for grants you really need to understand who those people are that may not be them but the commission people that generate those scores and analyze are the ones that in effect make the dignities maker tilt one way or the other. if you don't know who they are are maybe their spouse it's part of a company it is bidding or has some other bit of information that can be relevant so people at that level it is important to understand how much they influence the decision making when you here from ethics staff anyone can go to a department be real and concrete how eight hundred a person know that go of they said that from

ethic you know go there how many will take the trip to the airport and when you find out who the airport offends are that's a lot of labor the puc has mull, if you will departments some can be filed at hetch hetchy or a number of places you don't want people all over the place a common database makes is it easier to track what is going on at the depended with the executive director or the levy level that sits up the analyze it is worth sun shininging having consistent filing with you folks maybe you want to let the departments do it but you need to be the central depository thank you >> any other public comment in the or. >> any commissioners want the

gentleman said looking to us to see whether or not we had some concrete comments on the proposed regulations and where whether we think that is a good way to go or bad way or whatever comes. >> one question i want to go back to the point of ms. ryan how do we determine with any consistency who the second tier so-called second tier employees that are subject to this filing who determines that? >> so jack briefly alluded to this i'm sorry director sincroy so every two years every even number of years i work with the choifks and we send anti nos to

the department each department head or designee asking him to add and inducting and amend their section of the conflict of interest that designates it is up to each time difficult head there's a legal section and they don't need to to be the final person but someone in the process but necessarily it is somewhat of a somewhat of a gray standard who should or shouldn't file a form 7 hundred we felt my office and the clerk's office the department is the best place not to look at each departmental regulation who should be and not it is the departmental heads call. >> yet from what i heard there

are questionable individuals or job titles i mean, we don't need interims to be filing i question the jobs given to the informing for this kind of filing i want to see a process there are greater consistency and understanding who really has any kind of influence we should be concerned about we do audits and maybe at some point there can be a process you know not wanting to burn our staff but some kind of process time after time to audit different departments to the completed that have filed form 77 hundred and whether or not they're really necessary and

would it jack or jessie can you comment is that like a burdensome project for staff. >> i'm not sure it is an interesting idea as andrew said one of the things we're - we're relying on the department heads and their understanding of what their staff does interim most people how can an interim make a decision beyond that by a department by department basis it would probably take a decent amateur of ramp up northbound understanding all the classifications and certainly ms. ryan and other folks you might look to for help the departmental heads i guess but there would be sort of a ramp up

in understanding the department and the duties that sort of thing that's not much of an answer i'm sorry it is a decent amount of work. >> it is something to think about i'll agree with some of the other comments that there are detail to be sh8g9s and meetings with the units and get that interaction so we do this in a way that works for everybody. >> certainly one the things the commission can consider you know with the substance of the proposal as we put is it there the process for requesting compelling circumstances there could be a dignities to sort of how the process you think folds as we go forward with it for this year or wait until folks go have kind of addressed this

issue for filing and that sort of thing. >> i also have a question for it manage about big deal to protect information rededicated information and privacy you know the gentleman spoke about that go there recent systems we make sure that certain individual their information is protected. >> you know of your protecting against google are one step away from that the user comes to the site they'll run a research even though their not using google one step removed but still mr. chair i'm a little bit more on the side we're talking about a lot of abstract to the hard to

nail down the practice a cattle for the departments the mayor's office for the office of economic workforce development is 20, 22 $25 million and the did you want that is warmed up of $12.0 and hundred how many staff how you could come up with something that would uniformly apply so for me and i'll just say i'm approach this in a fundamental rudimentary way i'll see a document from the department heads on their procedures on their rational but dpw is not using the same rational another oewd i'd like to see from the departmental

heads or their delegate necessary though they internal contemplate that and ultimately come up with some kind of policy or practice that creates tier one and two individuals during public comment that was mentioned decision makers throwing a rfp process the procurement process that truly could have impact that is true as a community member through high-up and sometimes programmed that are deeply embedded between the department and not decision makers on any particular day except that day they need to make a decision on an rfp again there is an inconsistency within the department we talk about the procurement. >> commissioner hur

i share the concerns of any fellow commissioners one this problem already exists right their filing form 7 hundred and inconsistently piloted that is a problem that exists frankly, if they're going online managers will go look carefully and more education and people will be more selective in making sure in terms of noticing and the power of those not on the list some problems may soft themselves there will be some consistency if you're leaving it would the department heads that is hard for the people on the outdoor to look at this i'm okay with some consistentcy once again we you could or fshgd those those online is a big it is useful as

long as we have the redaction's that are proposed by staff i've not heard compelling reasons why we need things like phone numbers and addresses of tenants and that kind of thing so if we redact that workout 9 issues with the union but we should go forward. >> i'm curious that the letter that went out from one of the unions or a couple of unions talked about this being part of the bargaining agreement now what are they refer to say there an agreement between the unions and the employees in a given department if they don't file form 7 hundred what is the position that you have to meet and confer with the unions. >> yeah. so under state law i'm an expert i'll try to get the

broad outlines the state laws from the employer changed the conditions there's a requirement to meet and confer with the united about the changed in policy. >> but what's the change. >> the change would be exactly what wear talking about instead of having the forms 7 hundred and hard copies to officers having the 7 hundred posted on the website that's the change as we've discussed we've got some closer of the personal information those things are not changed but the question how to access the information going forward. >> that's what we want to discuss. >> from the department added with whatever union it was that is covering its employees that

we won't put them obama regardless of what we say that will be fine correct. >> i think that is just i mean, we certainly don't know what's going to happen but have a good discussion and none is looking at this thing that the commissioners is over ruled one way or another but our proposal staff is willing to have the discussion. >> because and guess where i come from if we think there's a need for a filing of form 7 hundred i don't know why there should be a tier one and two because the purpose of the 7 hundred is to pubically disclosure information which the public has a right to know to see whether the specific employee has a conflict and from the determination is made that

his or her didn't have the dignities making power then i don't think you should be filing a form 7 hundred that's a burden you put on them that shouldn't be there if you say you've got to file the form 7 hundred that person is a dignities maker therefore why treat them differently than any other form 7 hundred and that's what flies it proposal to get a easily assessable. >> with you i share the view that a lot of people are required to file the form 7 hundred that shouldn't be they have a right not to disclose that information but if a decision is made they're in a position they can influence the

decisions in the city then i don't why that's right shouldn't be online as well as everyone else's i don't have a problem with redacting information from the online file. >> any other comments before we move to the next item? >> item number had the decision and possible action on commissioner renne's action to place on the november 3rd ballot a mile-an-hour regulating the /* expenditure lobbyists the staff or city attorney want to comment or commissioner keane thank you it is a well-thought-out proposal. >> thank you, mr. chair and

just as background to you recall a couple of mission commissioner renne asked me to serve as an ad hoc committee of one in order to look at the criticisms and proposals relating to prop j and other changes that have been instituted that on this commission relating to report and other types of requirement with the view towards perhaps coming back to the commission as have been strongly recommended by the civil grand jury and friends of little with proposed ballot measures that might take some take into account some of the changes that have been made go back and perhaps fashion new ones that meet the krichlgz of

transparent full transparency regarding lobbying and lobbyists in our government and our governmental structure in the city was simply not there it was a rather kosz medic type of oversight of lobbyists we had when we slung the definition of lifted to o a contact lobbyists not ridging as a lobbyist no matter what sort of money they paid in order to effect the city policy and statutes and unless they had some constitutional physical contacted with someone whom they're trying to influence after discussed with commissioner renne i told him it was my recommendations that a full rewrite of a number of things relating to prop j for

the ballot this year was simply two ambitious it couldn't be done one of the things it could be done a more modest proposal and change going forward was to expand the dpivens of lobbyist to meet what was the definition of lobbyists there were three dpifgsdz contract and expenditure and another form of lobbyist to expand the definition of lobbyists to make expenditure lobbyists required to register as lobbyists with our commission and to file reports with that in my mind at our last meeting i made that recommendation that i be empowered as an ad hoc committee of one to go forward and write some a proposal for the ballot

commission voted 4 to one in favor of my doing that i went forward and spent a good amount of time with andrew chin and jessie who i want to compliment was their effort in regards to the writing of this and putting it in the particular form for the ballot have been really excellent they've put a lot of work and had several meetings both here and at other places we had an interesting persons merging which mr. minority put together that i attended a number of members of the public came and i think mr. minority support that was overwhelming support for the recommendation that this expenditure