formal investigation of mayor ed lee regarding these things many of them anecdotal but certainly in regards to us having the power to conduct an audit and i hate to agree with mr. hart he gets my obligate on most of the things he says the questions that are raised i think are substantial and since say is not something that will be a lot of effort or hassle for us to do i think there is sufficient justification for us to toss ed lee's name inlets do him as as audit i think we have things that call for some

questions that might be answered so in that sense what's the harm i see nun i see also a certain degree of credibility coming to the commission for stepping forward and doing that and it is beyond the protocol but i'll say in terms of my own observation of the city government it is anecdotal for me, i see a lot of corruption that is soft corruption from the top down and i think many other members of the public the editorial boards of newspapers do it is more us of sticking our toe the water and put him in the audit so mr. chair, i respectfully move we audit mayor ed lee.

>> so i think there is two pending questions me to take them one at that time for the general powers to audit the subsection the government could code provides the ethics commission shall audit the committees in addition his or her description to take a the ram selected members eir receptionist from the committee gets the local fund that's what we prescribed. >> but mayor ed lee's committee didn't receive the public funds i know that some of the public funds did he receive. >> it's not a mandatory audit subject to the audit by the selection process like the one you saw the second issue in terms of the agenda notice or

description i think that is beyond the scope to talk about commissioner keanes motion. >> do i hear a second to the motion. >> i'll second it. >> any public comment? >> charley for the record i remember seeing something when ed lee considering electing public financing i'm glad that we do audit public finance cadets he only spent a million dollars and a half not a robust election i don't know what we will see if we did audit him what will be better so look at

some of the independent expenditure committees with the city contracts and 3 would be taken generally because that is always an issue the city but i support frankly the position of executive director i'll think that given the questions that have been raised by the public tonight on some of the processes that it may be that the new executive director might have some perspectives on the process that states 2008 before they are tenure and that there maybe a different process for instance, for the f p pc or los angeles that she maybe aware that i know she is active in other organization over the years this year might be a better way to

approach than the past and the past traditions have fallen short of where we may want to be as we move forward i can assure you you've not been expresses with the audit process and not sure that is shaken out very much as a as a result maybe the time to look at audit the audit process and see if this is meeting our exceptions and the extension of our public and the technical dynamics that are occurring the city contracts. >> commissioners ray hart for san francisco open government the reason i didn't want to participate the process my lucky would have drawn mayor ed lee and wouldn't have obtained

eating it glad to eat it to get him audited bottom line the person responsible like mark farrell who came in and wanted to deny the one and 93 thousand an amount equal to 60 percent of what he spent on his campaign that is the same thing with mayor ed lee it was a bunch of my flung easy was the united states navy and the bottom line if you want to end our career as an officer go to a hearing board and saying our ship was sunk or damaged you're responsible you'll out the door in 5 seconds if you're in charge you're responsible the mayor is in charge and ought to be audited as far as commissioner keane this no the popularity contest

not here to get our friendship i know those things mean absolutely nothing unless you're a member of city government i call you the backroom like the chair was called for the fine or supervisor farrell and we don't know who was said or the problem is and you go the back and hide it the bottom line the mayor needs to be audited this campaign needs to be audited one reason he has 2 to 3 opposition that's the reason he didn't take public comment that was an easy out the bottom line is this is really a test before the public as to whether or not you have what it takes to hold sfopg audible i'm predicting that there fail on a 3 to 2 vote and there will be no audit of the

mayor that simply shows that you are the pocket of people that appoint you and you can sit there and shack your heads no or what you usually do no comments and especially lawyers that silence is consent so go ahead vote this down don't audit the mayor and let the insistence of the san francisco feinstein see what i see and many others we come to those meetings and listen to your stuff trying to justify doing nothing and i'll say it again, if you can show me anything this committee has done the last 10 years to make this city better i'd like to see that. >> before we vote that commissioner renne i'm in

support of commissioner hayons motion on the floor. >> i'd like to think that mr. pelham having heard the district attorney indicate she has the horticulture to make that decision without you that that will get you off the backside and take the leadership role and prove mr. hart's wrong there will be a 3 to 2 vote all right. but a 3 to 2 vote to audit the mayor campaigns for 2015 san franciscans expect you to do the ethical thing and conduct the audits because if he didn't have anything to hide he shouldn't be afraid for audited

even in la you have pelham; right? if you've done nothing wrong don't be afraid of an audit it is only when the - and the keiths get caught on federal that the mayors start worrying about what will happen on an audit you can doing the right thing with a 3 to 2 vote and audit did mayors campaign or ms. pelham so consider ord the audit independently based on the city attorney information san franciscans want to welcome you with open arms ms. pelham that's

because we've had too much corruption at city hall for too many years. >> thank you. >> dipped again speak as an individual sometimes things happen that are not scripted that makes it interesting i think i would agree with the comment from the deputy city attorney northern california that process only selects audits randomly other than the law that was quoted i don't i'm not sure i see a problem making a sort of start selection based on at criteria and frothe commission chooses to audit the mayors campaign based on what we've read the paper i'm not sure there is a problem i don't know

what an audit will reveal we believe that the higher value campaigns hire the also and account it's an i'm not sure we'll find material problems through an audit but not sure i could be wrong and maybe the audit is the best course to answer any outstanding questions relative to the mayor's campaign 2015 an intriguing question and - good luck on this one thanks. >> any other public comment? before we vote i want to ask ms. pelham if this motion passes if it pose any problems to your point of view at the staff level to add this to the other audits

that will be done >> thank you for the question commissioner renne my concern not whether this pose a problem for the staff in terms of doing an audit or looking at the level of the audit that will result if it were to add the mayor ed lee ed lee for mayor of 2015 for mayor to the mix i want to be clear about my general concern about establishing a process that is not predictable for the public or for candidates we we select for example, important to be able to follow through on that selection process there is certainly, if the commission choices and feels a need to audit that is the

direction to me i understand that i think that is very important as an organization, however, it is about transparency and about process and about other holding others accountability to the process my concern will be simply from the commission feels there is a level of committee and there are issues raised i think that is something that will be very important to create a new policy going forward so we share the candidates if they spend more than $50,000 but the last thing to have the public have's the miss prospective it is based on individual rather than policy concerns i know that is not the intent of anybody on the panel but make that point and encourages us to do things in a formalized process i think that ultimately benefits the work of the commission and the integrity

of the commission i appreciate the opportunity. >> as i understand the thrust e.r. the basis of this request made is that there is at least some public perception that there may have been problems with the mayors campaign and clearly if any campaign not a question of over one million dollars any question were to rise the newspaper than mr. exes campaign was accepting illegal payments or whatever else it would be a justification for the commission to say let's even though not randomly selected i understand the random was so that there isn't the sort of fastenerism picking on someone that is not popular but the

randomness to show we're not selecting and making in any determination that the committee should be audited in our random selection the question if there is a perception public that a campaign committee may have violated the law isn't that sufficient justification for the commission to say let's add that to our random selection as a policy matter but this is a thought. >> commissioner commissioner andrews. >> i'm sorry mr. chair we're creeping we're actually getting into the discussion i feel we should have i do have to say i probably will not support that i'm one for process i believe in transparency and protocol i believe if we are amended or

justifies over and over adjust our protocol or policy we've been blamed in the past first, i want to say yes. i think - in terms of an audit we should definitely do more audits if that is messing campaign this is not our only chance next month seems to me we can do that but i've seen at least the last 23 or years i've been on the commission we jujd to a conclusions and don't have all the steps laid out and we get tripped up and try to put band-aids i'm thinking about a few situations i want to think this through so it is not mayor ed lee we're take into account

we're targeting any candidates or many particular a campaign that has an allegation we need to talk about that a little bit more and continue this for next month and after that discussion or ms. mroem bring some policy revisions or suggestion we'll think about where the commission would think about moving forward with a audit that we come up with some developed policy first and give it good thought at the end of the discussion say not only did mayor ed lee campaign meets the threshold any other commitment meets the threshold and coming for you as well as in that campaign you were spending

your dollars it feels like one of and feels chief executive officer reject i didn't or that we need to be more thoughtful about that as we move forward this is not our one and only time to call for an audit we can do it a time and place of our choosing within our regular meeting i think we should exercise both the opportunity to have good discussion and make a good informed decision about that. >> commissioner hur. >> i agree with commissioner andrews and the executive director when you talk about backbone especially this commission what is important it is equitable and fair, i think to have to throw for a commissioner to start throwing out names of people that should audited without the policy

descriptions there are forhat policy makes us vulnerable to a political process we're supposed to be in support of so i'll agree the motion should not carry. >> i agree with everything many was said by commissioner hur and commissioner andrews and our executive director i think that lets set a policy maybe needs to audit every single campaign committee over a certain amount not just the random ones but if we think we need to audit go anything over one million dollar and let's agree that we'll do that it appears to be fair the last thing to be having a witch-hunt and total urban fairness i'll not support the motion at this point but, yes let's come up with a policy if that's what we want to do and you know look at how much work that will be given

all the other committees that are being audited as well but maybe a separate category where it is called for . >> commissioner keane do you want to reconsider our motion. >> i don't want to reconsider my motion with all due respect to the colleagues it disagree when we're not coming up with that one on sort of a toss of a coin we're coming up with this one there are substantive things the appearance of substantive things out there and surfacing in the publics mind as viewed here and the press and in the prosecution of a number of people that appear to have on their claim have been plugged in

with the mayor and the mayors people in terms of being able to deliver pay to play type of situations now, i'm not prejudging that but and there is an active - as i said an active investigation going on by district attorney george gascon he said it several times so this is not just us saying someone myself saying out of the air ed lee is a big shot and has more than a million dollars he is spending maybe we don't like ed lee let's audit him we're doing this with real substance behind it ear auditing all sorts of other characters minor characters for the random on the random basis we might

have been auditing mayor ed lee if h he had mr. hart's finger the jar or something else happened we're not and so i think in terms of the fact we can do that we have all those reasons in terms of public credibility to go ahead and do that we should do that. >> and i think it wouldn't be a big deal if we did certainly not a witch-hunt and in regards to going after poor mayor ed lee in regards to the allegations out there we're not picking him out the fact it is unusual and protocol is something that has not happened before there are times in history you say protocol is

indicated that something different should be done watergate investigation i'm not comparing ed lee with nixon but a complete parallel type of process to the usual processes there appeared to be dirty things going on in government and i'm - we're doing something much less than that and there's no big deal about what we are could go that is a question of dignity we should go forward and do that. >> i'll call the question. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? >> no, no the motion is defeated 2 to 3. >> all right. turning to item number 6 discussion thought possible

action on craft regulations terms used the city whistle blower protection ordinance i will i'm going to turn it over to tom and commissioner hur. >> thank you chair this is the agenda item continued from last month's meeting contains the recommendation on the memo and commissioner hur and acting decree jessie look at the end of last year and put together a memo outlining recommendations building on the comments and concerns of the civil grand jury report issued last in 2014 to 2015 regarding the san francisco whistle blower ordinance in need of change this memo is presented with a recap of those grand jury recommendations provide a recap

the analysis and the responded from the earlier memo in january and recaps proposed language for the issues that were that report identified and an attachment one and two as drafted language in attachment one these are draft regulations for your consideration assuming the whistle blower ordinance stayed as it currently is with the statutory language and attachment 2 takes that a bit further and looks about the changes to the ordinance itself along with regulations and that will come with that to clarify and address some of the issues that were raised the report i'm not sure in commissioner hur want to jump in and happy to walk you through and i'll take the direction how you wanted to proceed. >> sxhour. >> thank you commissioner renne and director pelham the memo was well done i want to

focus the commissions attendance on the attachment on the meat on the bones that is the actual language for the proposed amendments to the actual ordinance i also thought of president to thank the grng thank you for your recommendation and friends of ethics it was helpful in working out and the public was quite helpful i think it is worth paejs to the two attachments attachment one we as the commission can pass the ordinance amendment obviously will require help from the board i think of we jump past attachment one it will be a significant step in the right direction but the ordinance can

use some work and i like the proposed language the ordinance it's the one section that i think maybe we can use city attorney help on this cancelation of restrictiony but we can put in there we'll have the authority to you know it is workable that would i think that is maybe worth a particular focus. >> we also tried in here to get at contractors who were working for the city in a fairway and share they'll be covered and subject to the ordinance. >> any discussion generally

let me ask you commissioner hur any reason why we shouldn't adopt the task of one the regulations and also move forward with the attachment two in terms of that the way the board acts any down side with our enacting these regulations. >> is that duplication of effort or confusion here. >> director pelham should weigh in this we pass attachment one we'll do some good it is not redundant to the changes to the ordinance i think that the

ordinance changes separately should be adopted as well don't believe we can do that tonight but vote to send it. >> oh, i was kevin with the city attorney from the commission passes that they would have the effect of - yeah effective one 60 days after the commissions acts that does provide some improvement as commissioner hur said seller to know whether the commission direction to move the discussion about the statutory with with that would be helpful will be require the board of supervisors to weigh in on this regulations that will be in place either way whether it takes the wind out of the sales the changes are not statutory

changes that is hard to predict but a case for wanting to improve the bill with not the perfect with the better of the good i suppose. >> so would the board if we were to pass it and send to the board the board can pass it and send to back send it back. >> right? >> yeah. so in terms of the legislative process for the owners inu unlike the changes within our purview there is no requirement that it be sent back certainly the sponsors of the ordinance wish to do that as a courtesy or seek other guidance from the ms. pelham we can make ongoing dialogue but no

legal requirement. >> so they'll make whatever whangz and if it passes it is law. >> although i imagine a lot of opportunities for the mayor to get it to more formal sort of looking legislative proposal i'm sure they'll have further questions in the end and certainly hearings about the prompt changes at least one committee meeting and potentially more which the director can participate again informal was for the commission to participate. >> isn't the process can't the process you know - we're talking about the ordinance changes is working collaboratively with the board in terms of at least of the one or two supporters on the board that will chair carry the water when it comes time for

approval in terms of our drafting didn't have to be this is it and the board sit down and drafts it with staff meets with staff from some of the supervisors and here's the language as to what is feasible. >> yeah. my recollection on that point in terms of the board of supervisors considered this the civil grand jurys report several supervisors on that board committee spent a lot of interest with the protection ordinance with the protection there is probable some represent certify activity from the board of supervisors. >> so tonight might be a good opportunity to you know for folks to vet this and it makes sense and hopefully send it along. >> i'll propose we deal with attachment one whether we want

to go through each sections are deal with that as a whole and then have a motion either to approve regulations or not. >> would be my professional go ahead and commissioner, i suggest we deal with it as a whole it is integral. >> you mean one. >> yes. it is fairly sdwral and go ahead and have discussion and agree on that take it as a whole. >> any comments? i guess the question i'll ask you commissioner hur is that we did get a draft or an e-mail i think from larry bush with some suggestions for example, taking issue with 4.1 is 0 that the

complaints must be 2, 3, 4 writing i know we discussed it the last time but you would not be open to making a change to - >> i think that is a balance and i talked to mr. bush about this direct a balance between having some something that is concrete and insuring that all complaints with adjudicated i think that one thing mr. bush said i thought was a good i included all communications reported by a recipient should account we have something in writing it is concrete whether or not someone submits it and frankly mr. bush not here to explain his part of conversation

but you make a complaint to someone in the department you know it becomes quite it can be hard to determine what happened and i think that on the sort of burden benefit scale weighs in favor of not including things such as those. >> are there any other comments? do i hear a motion >> move we approve attachment one. >> all right. >> motion to made and seconded call for public comment? >> i brought a handful one for many pelham and 5 copies for the board i would hope that you would

adopt both amendment one or attachment one and attachment 2 almost four years claude i didn't ruled the wrongful termination a major flaw in the conduct code the code provides no retaliation protection for employees to experience first amendment speech rights i'm san bruno an a strange of the ruling between seven hundred and 50 solicit and $450,000 to the city attorney expenses trying to stop dr. occur the city dished out $1.8 million that should incorporate for that amount of

money incorporate concerning argue w p l o amendments of the grand jury didn't report the glaring problem passed prop c directing the board of sups to say a meaningful pio and the basic human rights has not been added it is time to do so today what does it say about this commission in san francisco's city government itself to continue to allow retaliation against city employees that simply exercise their first amendment amendment rights the employees want to serve the say they have a relinquish their

voting rights which jurisdictions require the government employees to forego a first amendment protection and enjoyed by all americans insistence in order to gain government employment i testified to the board of sups the oversight committee september 3rd, 2015, city employees expect this body and the board of sups to amendment the w pio for the first amendment protections for the city employees it is its been a long time coming it is long overdue i encourage you to have the human rights protections while you're taking this tuesday night but urge you to advocate with the board of sups and the mayor to incorporate that protection the f dot one a 7 c. >> you thank you. i think

your time has run. >> thank you. >> any other comments >> good afternoon, commissioners and director pelham i'm dr occurring over 20 years the ethics commission has never sub granted a whistle blower exclaim one reason that the ethics commission is a dead end for whistle blowers is that whistle blowers threaten power structures to which this commission is connected i i don't see a procedural fix for what is a political impasse but since we're addressing fixes tonight i'll make some suggestions 4 the first so consider alternating the burden

of proof by requiring proximate cause rather than a clause of - this is what the whistle blowers protection whistle blowers don't have access to 41 percent of evidence the wrong doors are 100 percent percent of the evidence of wrongdoing your staff lacked the resources and the courage to get the evidence so users a probable cause standard is more appropriate given the circumstances and number 2 i'm worried about your defining a complaint as solely written it tends to did he leg missing misses other complaints that written complaint is reasonable for a whistle blower retaliation claim but not for

the primary initial whistle blower containment most of whistle blower complaint with made verbally to a supervisor but what the boss is compliant the misconduct the whistle blower is doomed and has no prove of having filed a complaints it whatnot written it is usually verbal it is on this after retaliation that people write things down and send them in also nowadays workers will report complaints on their cell phones or misconduct so if somebody brings you a video of misconduct or a video of their complaint will be dismiss that because it is not written suppose the whistle blower brings you documents that show

fraud are you going to about g ignore those without a written complaint that goes with them will you dismiss someone like deep throat that discovered nixon containments because it was observe the phone september e expect the documents or written i'm concerned about setting a time limit on investigations it not enough because it doesn't insure that the investigation will be adequate it is very easy to do a substandard investigation under the time limit. >> thank you. your steady your time. >> i'm sorry. >> thank you. >> david pilpal the motioned is on attachment one to death penalty the four proposed regulations.

>> that's correct. >> on that the first 3 start out with the sub a that suggests a b and possibly a c i'll suggest not including that unless that are b and c the writing is what inconsistent and include the language shawl and some have will i will standard device that to shall throughout perhaps on the second right point and other similar adverse employment shall include effecting the last one of the regulation staff shall initiate, etc. the third 1-b one i'm not quite sure it is titled b-1 is refers to one one a i'm not sure that is the correct reference i think that sub b that the hearing or

the adjudication of complaints. >> i'm sorry under the third. >> either b-1 and then line 24 referring to b or if it is a maybe it is a too i think that suck b and so maybe 24 that needs to get fixed i think staff is on this i think in general going on to page 2 the nonetheless quarterly report to the commission make sense i assume those had been confidential reports not entirely clear and i think in keeping the complanlts up to date about the status of their primer review make sense one of the things that people make

complaints and don't get an immediately acknowledgement so i think in summer those regulations help you will make those minor housekeeping changes and i'll offer comments when we get to the next item thanks. >> commissioners ray hart for san francisco open government attend the ethics commission is similar to watching people rearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic whistle blower protection in this city is non-compliant any person involved the city government possessing even a motor intelligence they're on their own and rewriting the rules is meaningful when the commission lakes the resources to enforce their own finding each must be of this commission is appointed

by the people over whole their provide the oversight with the whistle blower are the responsibility felt 5 individuals each one that reported you and if that happened in their department under our watch your j judging them with the whistle blower complainants the past the most sub certainty is placed in charge in investigating or handling that regardless of effort to rewrite the rules whistle blowers no idea to be aware that they are solely and completely on their own they will get absolutely jack crap from this commission or another at commission to protect them or to support them. >> this ethics commission the past as far as i'm aware has done nothing nothing to support

those who have the encourage and sdrit to speak up when you woenlt protect the people with the courage and the integrity your own lack of encourage and lack of integrity people don't like my comments you should be polite but i tell them when they make that comment that i'm being exterminate to file under the marcus keenzburg rules while the commissioners and starch is using mixed marshall arts rules you'll not do a damn thing to protect the whistle blower pass the legislation like the sunshine ordinance you spent 5 damn years rewriting how you'll handle 9 sunshine referrals have you ever had one that is

meaningful stuff you put out there to make people to think you're doing something and fool them i'll be honest is rises to the level of defrauding you're doing something meaningful i ask mr. occurring subject to one of the things the one and something the million dollars that 33 had to pay the city will rather pay is ousted don't try to cut me off when you give everybody else 10 more seconds. >> i didn't. >> you started to. >> hello commissioners elaine friends of ethnics commissioner hur tutor all the effort for the whistle blower regulations together and for acknowledging

larry bush sent information i've been dealing with him i just wanted to speak specific to the idea about the written comment and as i understood our introductory comments you're saying it may not have to be in writing but there should be some kind of record if we could find of using the way record instead of written that then allows phone video you you know just a little bit snip even though of a video that is a record of someone saying it is written it could be a language barrier problem or the dr referred to something else by use the word written we have had a strong reaction to our using basically a standard technology now a number of other technologies

that can provide the record that you're after thank you. >> charley again with friends ever ethics i thought that at the bill back meeting the general obligation bond committee meeting that mr. bush happens to be that a member that was recorded in their recent hearing last week on the whistle blower ordinance that the state does not require a written notice do you remember mr. bush making that statement or - >> you don't remember that being raised it is possible that was raised by the chairman or

the yeah, the acting chairman 9 civil grand jury committee that made the presentation before go back by the way, i'm sorry you pissed missed that that was an excellent presentation we may not be totally in conform as an with the states concept they allow non-written reports so i would agree with my colleague on f o e we might want to fudge that definition and include some record that complaint was filed that was broader this is an written i thought that mr. bush's that there are an unanimous training because i know the city employees receive those as a matter of course in a great many

areas and could well be this added to that program about basically make that contrary to the city committee the need the best mechanism would be the need to put it in writing and if this is problematic it didn't preclude others means the best and highest standard to protect all concern would be to put it in writing as suggested and then indicate that it is writing presents a problem on language or some people really can't write or express themselves well in writing then that another measure could be utilized but that that is important that a record be maintained in that of that meeting and the fact that the complaint what in a documented

form i don't know if i'm totally clear i'm giving a hive standard of prove. >> commissioner hur. >> i like ms. smith and the mr. currency suggestion i wonder we should - i'll give you an examp example. >> maybe if you're going on with our examples you ought to put some example electronically something that shows whether it be a cell phone or video or whatever. >> might be concern with

putting in an example of video or audible so, yes i think if a person were to record an event happening that could be sufficient evidence of the complaint that would comply with the regulations this is again tending to prove or disprove i hadn't thought about that but don't want to make a suggestion that people are recording it is illegal under california law i mean i'm open to including example i'm not sure you need examples i think that will open it up and not to make it meaningful distinction. >> i'll kept that as friendly amendment to approve attachment a that sxhour has suggested to

end the words and record or reco record. >> i think he had other language in there. >> we may need to delete written at the end of the first line have to be i mean a written communication do you have any thoughts on that. >> director pelham. >> or you that that is okay. because it is just an example. >> i think that you were to strike the written at the end the line 10 i'm not sure we'll losses anything it is informal writing or record it has the balance of some recognize i agree if someone is standing on the street with video capturing and people taking good ideas out

of a whatever they'll want to capture. >> let's take out written at the end of the line sorry to interrupt you. >> you accept that amendment. >> i do yes i'll call the question. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> of adopting attachment one as amend amended>> i. >> opposed? let the record reflect. >> this is in response to mr. pilpals comment we looked at 24 that should reference so let's talk about that minor anti or take a separate vote.

>> city attorney advising if you could take a quick vote. >> maybe vote to give me her discretion. >> thank you anyone else you find. >> die have a motion to that effect. >> so moved and. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> i guess i'll call public comment? all right. >> i like an opportunity to comment on a motion on the floor particularly it gives ms. pelham is discretionary authority to add to section 4 dot 114 a romania numeral 3 and insert roman numerical 3 to comply with the judges recommendation to add

first amendment rights protections why would you not do that. >> why would ms. pelham not use her discretion to amend editorial issues and attachment one why should my neighbor in and apartment building have freedom of speech rights and as a than current city employee i didn't what was that all about? simply because you become a city employee you can be retaliated against and that's okay do my managers did any managers add laguna honda hospital and

substantially department of emergency services no, it would be okay to retaliate against me using my first amendment free speech right and you'll be okay with that if one of you don't make that motion to add it - i think you should pull out the red editorial pen and add that g before i windup in front of the board of sups begging them to put it in there so the next judge wilkins didn't have to noted a serious flaw in the city chapter and in your regulations that you write with our red pen can change >> thank you.

>> i'll call the question oh, any public comment. >> just one more thing commissioners i'm worried about the preferential fix of having timely investigations that would be an empty procedural represent rationed what is needed a quality review mechanism to insure that an investigation is an investigation whether it is done in thirty or 90 days didn't matter the quality of the work that matters to the chibz and the public also i strongly support amending the whistle blower ordinance the protection ordinance so that contractors are covered one of them recorded miss

appropriations the central subway accounting system a contractor there they were fudging the budget she went to the whistle blower program and met with the city attorney and was told oh, we can't protect you, your a contractor so the ordinance should be amended to so that fraud in contracts which take hundreds of million dollars of public dollars every year could be imposed and the whistle blowers will be protected in some way thank you. >> commissioners ray hart for san francisco open government and i will repeat on this section the same as the section before what damn difference does that make you pass you have no intention of enforcing and you don't this law has been on the books for how long and not one time has anyone been

protected an effort made to protect them and city agencies rare on a regular basis retaliate take job actions and the only defense that most of city employees is their own union that gets a bad name their oh, i can't firefighter an city employee you can photographer a city employee if you do paperwork that is justified and supply get rid of of an employee that does something which discloses the fact you were doing something illegal and they in an effort to hide it retaliated now, i'm not an city employee but alicia the city larger than and the jet of the library commission used and abused their position to withhold records from oar period

of two years i appellate the city attorney's office to force them to disclose they denied two positions the first one after a year and the second one after the second year i took them to the sunshine ordinance task force they found them in violation for supporting on public body that was with - for acting as their council for a public body withholding public records you won't do a damon thick to enforce this you can sit and reangry the letters on a page but the citizens of san francisco anyone who is ever been protected by this law he said no, he couldn't so it pa what you're here to sit around and just a second our yauz and make changes to things that are irrelevant have no

intention of enforcing them the very people you have to go after the people that put you in our seat it is hard to convince a man when a man's job is not united way that's what you do you sit down and do everything that you look at 83 the desk and don't pay attention you make funny noise and funny faces and when the public comes and calls you out you sit down silently they'll not finally come to the conclusion you don't work for them despite the oath. >> thank you i'll call the question to give permission to the executive director to make the changes for the tip graph errors things of that nature.

>> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? that motion carries 5 to nothing turning no 80 now to attachment number 2 which if i understand correctly what you're seeking from us here is direction to whether or not we want you to proceed with drafting amendments to the ordinance for the board of supervisors approval; is that correct? >> yes. this has the entirety of the ordinance and to clarify some of the issues with the civil grand jury and commissioner hur and others commissioners original january 20th memo there are some items in here we'll be looking for the policy commissioner policy direction to like us to continue on with conversations with the board of supervisors and is as you said we've had a

collaborative process and possess on the officials of controller to xiem the contractor that the policy decision that commission time to explore further including the contractor that work for the city under terms of the contracted for to say city and county of san francisco that that works in pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. practice will be some requirements further input from a the departments that are experience working with the city contractors i think we're looking for policy direction on all things probation officer purchase. >> you very specific issues that you would like directions on you mentioned the contractor. >> if we start at section 41 hundred for example, there is language that addresses the language of contractors start on line 17 it would state the language is mirrored through the

employment places i'll highlight this was will create a new reference to the protection of the whistle blower ordinance extends to contractors operating within the scope of a contract with the city and county of san francisco from retaliation and but also expands the language on line 20 to file complaints what about beyond just those filed with our own agency that recognized an employee's they're more comfortable bringing complaints elsewhere and extend to the individuals that want to bring complaint outside of their own agencies if to a supervisory employee and decided to do something with that that is in section 41 hundred to expanding the base or the points of contact for actually receiving a

complaint that actually provides protection for the whistle blower protection ordinance. >> do you want me to continue. >> section for example, on line starting at line 15 there is some language that would clarify what are the types of activities that improper government activity means and so it strikes reference to violations of the california penal code because that seems to be a very high standard for what can be alleged in other words to get protection under the protection ordinance but not fits language about engross raised fraud and abuse of city resources that adds clarifying

language for those types of irks are appropriate subject matters for the retaliation if their information is brought forward that should be appropriately covered. >> if i can forward to let's see - sections 4.115 you'll see the same language we get to the language it talks about the retaliation it prohibited it talks about the contractor operating outside the scope or contractor has in good faith filed a complaint elsewhere define it with supervisory employee with the at the individuals department or

another city and county or federal agency so again, this language is trying to provide the actual protection on the bottom of this same page in the administrative complaints the notation that in order to provide some accountability that doesn't currently exist the ethics commission may refer matters to the dhr and require that any other board or officer report to the administration that is referred for a followup that will introduce some language that is spectacular to the controller's office elsewhere that says 90 a day within receiving a referral the commission or referral from the administration for investigation and possible disciplinary action the department shall report back

to the administration if so a power tool what happens on the issues when their properly referred to another department that's the language we're proposing to include and get our feedback on. >> there is clarification on the next page on line 7 to 9 under the burden of retaliation to clarify one of the points that commissioner hur and staff member addressed that clarifying where the burden of establishing what pivots that will clarify to establish the retaliation occurred a complaint in a civil action demonstrates or the commission in an administrative proceeding must determine by the preponderance of the evidence that the complainants engagement was a motivating factor and trying to clarify the standards for the procedure that are used

under subsection c we're proposing to include under subdivisions 5 underlines 25 through 29 accident requested that the commissioner hur mentioned earlier that the language for cancelation that following an administrative hearing for the existing authority and making a vbldz many or that a violation happened may doll for call for the interpretation or other adverse employment who exercise their voting rights under the protection ordinance that was directly referenced if the civil grand jury report. >> so i think that and combined with the civil penalties thinking about what makes sense maybe that

massachusetts make more sense for not the retaliation but it is worth the commission consideration how best to implement some sort of penalties and remedies for violations. >> if i could directing your attention to section on the next page on lines 26 through thirty we're included new language for the sanctioned for the disclosure of the whistle blower that was through no the addressed in the civil grand jury report i think on point as we went through this there is not a specific sanction for someone it disclosed a identify of a whistle blower of the perimeter of the law and those individuals that knowing are subject to a sanction as well.

>> i think those are the essential components the hangs that for the actual statutory language the last two packages of the attachment two there are draft regulations that very much anywhere the draft regulations of attachment one that you acted on to this to the extent that make sense the changes will be made consistent and to the extent they clarify the reverberations that are added or exist the revised ordinance those regulations will apply. >> is there a motion - what direction wishes the staff to proceed in attachment 2. >> that's a good question on the draft regulations on the

back of the revised ordinance do we need any of these now we've adopted attachment one. >> i think the idea was this - the language of the ordinance will change as shown in attachment two those regulations will still be useful because for example, as it is currently drafted it would not chaplain complaint as shown in promoted regulation 4.10. >> we've. >> if that were in place would it needs to be changed based on the language of ordinance actually no. those will be consistent thank you for that clarification i misunderstand.

>> all right. a so just to confirm mr. chair i'm assuming now we've gone over them it would be appropriate for director pelham to meet with key staff at the board of supervisors to review those and get their comments on it and possibly bring that back to the commission. >> for more discussion? >> i think if this is the commission desire ebt or if those are policy areas of interest and action by the commission to say we're on board with those in concept and want to talk with the board officers to see where the specific

language that's one way of approaching that don't think the lovely of comfortable with the concept that are embedded the draft ordinance i don't know from the city attorney has anything to audio. >> i mean that's the pobltd and the other possibility we're recommended and so the board know that is soft what we want to do and several a back and forth with the board no, we can't do this and that but i might be more helpful to send them language for them to device and deal with. >> i'm for one am consistent with the upgraded changes that were discussed and so whatever we can do to get this forward and get it before the board hopefully and adopt that. >> i think that makes sense mr. chair and also for us to -

the number of things we are addressed by ms. pelham to try to word smith we'll be here all night and whether or not we could i mean, i've tried to process as much as i can in terms of the fine presentation i think that commissioner hurs suggestion is good let's get it to the board. >> moved. >> i move we approve attachment two. >> all right. any further discussion before public comment >> i'll take public comment. >> david pilpal speaking as an individual my first is there a meat and cover as it effects the city employees the past and certainly i don't know

next very much appreciate the first of all, all the work but also in particular including contractors i'm not sure though this language actually ultimately does the tricky read this to cover the contractor. >> sorry starting on package one lines 17 and 18 the contractors operating outside the scope r beyond the scope that's the contractorism bus not an employee therefore so i'll strongly encourage adding the employees something to it effect if you're intent to cover not only the contractor but the employee and i like that construct of operating beyond the scope of a contract but for some reason that entire expect isn't on page 2 lines 14 it says operating

pursuant rather win the scope and not just the contractor but the employee there were other points in here - sorry these pages are not numbered i guess 4 about the one one 5 a i'm not surehy you're proposing 90 days the particular with the controller is 60 days you wouldn't days is a good amount of time i'll suggest that conforming that to 60 days on the next page penalties and remedies line 24 i like increase the amount from 5 to 10 through these but not sure indexing that to inflation is easy to do

unless the controller is the shoring the new amount it gets complicated reducing it to 10 and the next time it can be increased again, if it make sense i mean is seems odd the amount in two years is 10 thousand plus i have real questions about the cancelation retaliatory job commissions does that commission have the authority to do that overruling civil service that is an interesting question to me i don't know if you got advice on that i'll appreciate the rest of points in here i think there is a section - sorry just one more if i could the notice of whistle blower protections in e and 4.115 i believe requires the controller to post the notices

not require they're an employee handbook that seems like a good place and finally the ethics commission i think a handbook would be okay and equal time to run over mr. pelham. >> e mr. pilpal. >> i was line i when i was 23 i ran away to the army against my mothers advise they said i was gay you know don't ask no tell so at the end of the boat camp i sweated it knowing i didn't have upper body strength on adrian that get me through those camps so i won't have to repeat 8 more weeks of hell my

mother flew out to see me graduate any drill sergeant told her he may not make a good soldier the army but by god hesitate tenacious i'm back tenacious is helen this whole issue of free speech right. how much judges to point out to you that four dot one one 5 a hesitate your regulation needs a facelift rue paul would note it needs a facelift i'm going to repeat myself because i'm tenacious why should my next door neighbor have protections under the first amendment right but when i

become a city employee i lose it is that what the bifurcating is all about once you're a city employee you start losing protections under the bifurcating bill of rights under the constitution. >> you need to find our wholeness whether you have them or not you need to recommend to the board of sups that they add first amendment free speech rights and tie retaliation protections for city employees otherwise you will be over thank you for the opportunity e turning or our founding father in the bill of rights it is okay

to stipulate the employees of first amendment is that something you want to do to our grandchildren commissioner is that what we do the avenues why would you not give city employees first amendment protections because in their bad people earning a pension it is sufficient to take away their first amendment rights give me a break. >> good evening, commissioners and director pelham friends of ethics i have one comment first of all, thank you very much a lot of hard work has gone into this i thank you all but the one thing the section

4.120 to 23 confidentiality that i don't see one of the biggest problems on i discovered when i chaired the committee for the whistle blower program back in 2010 and 2011 other than the civil grand jury when the whistle blowers would try to find out the status of their complaint they were kept in the dark using confidentiality as the weapon to keep them ignorant of what is going on with their whistle blower complaint i don't see anything in here that might give them information whether it is thirty days, 60 days but dr occurrings complaint wu were used as a

ping-pong ball between the controller's office and this body i know that things are moving forward to improve i wonder i may have missed it if a whistle blower were to try to find out what the status of their complaint was they're entitled to know that thank you. >> we address it in the rags. >> commissioners ray hart for san francisco open government i left hand to these conversations and could have scorn if you send something to the board of supervisors they choose not to respond end of story and very frankly given the efforts from the members of the public have tried to get them to do things that is likely what. happen. >> you're happy the executive director as sitting here oh,

let's find a way out not have a conversation to respond to us let's sends this over if necessary keep it for 5 or 10 years or don't bother to respond that's what we wanted you don't really care about in whistle blower thing because if so none of you that will be in that position you don't care, he can stand here and say eave never helped a whistle blower you don't care i can stand here and say your historical and practice show that you have absolutely no interest in protecting maintain but the city and the city employees and the elected officials and you can sit here and go through this charge raid that's all it is a charge rad you send

documents into the netherlands and hope a member of the public again didn't found how ineffective you are willful ignorance is with your willfully ignorant of those processes you were willing to send is it to the board of supervisors and just sort let that hang out there i think you're all hoping to god our term of office is over before you it exams doss honestly i don't think anyone one of you want to deal with anything and certainly anything that protects a city employee that blew the whistle you wanted to protect the city departments from being discovered it illegal actions we talked about ed lee

he's been found by a federal investigation to have people under had his control and command engage in illegal activities on his behalf you don't think an audit of his campaign is even worth consideration you are the total slaves of the people who appointed you and the only thing you're interested in not putting their noticed out of joint and want to get our backside in at a hair on a commission. >> thank you. >> commissioner keane was trying to get me to declare a recess and stepped out - i'm prepared to call the question do

we have a motion - >> one thing that mr. pilpal raised that about contractor i think maybe that is something ms. pelham maybe that is something raised addressed by regulation we do get this implemented but sounds like you may have a suggestion. >> mr. pilpal question about the different phrasing under the section 41 hundred is certainly language that needs to evolve a definition to distinguish behind that language in 41 hundred start on line 17 we'll find that the charter protects those including contractors, operating within the scope of a contract so the protection is to those operating within the scope of a

contract with the city and county then when you read section one 05 this speaks to improper government activity so it uses the phrase with regards to the contracts when someone files a complaint alleging improper activity by somebody use the language operating employer contractors operating pursuant to the city and county uses instead of operating within the scroll but pursuant to the contractor presumably didn't involve improper government activity it could be lost and tweaked as we go forward but a conscious decision those were different things. >> mr. pilpal i feel better i asked the same question. >> how about the insertion of word employee. >> again, i should defer to

the executive director but starting to get word i didn't you have employee right before the contractor and so you know hopefully that is something we can address by regulation i will agree that is the intent as i understood to include the individual that work as a contractor or work for the employee or employer that is a xrashth not just the entity themselves. >> i'll call the question >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? that motion carries. >> unanimously. >> all right. turning to item number 6. >> item 7. >> item 7 discussion and possible action on items for future meeting

are there any suggestions? commissioner keane >> commissioner chair some hopefully, we will recall that last year you appointed me as a committee of one to try and rewrite prop j that was pretty much taken out by the board of supervisors pursuant to that we comp came out with one ballot for last year and prop c went i have with the help of the friends of ethics and the grand jury a proposed draft of restoration of prop j that i will be submitting to you mr. chair just by mail by e-mail

within the next few days with copies it ms. pelham and the city attorney for vetting to begin the process it is urban likely given what we saw last year that since there is so much involved we'll be able to do anything for the ballot this year if possible it is unlikely i want to get that process started that has been rewritten to i'll be send that to the 3 of you one the next week or so and so hopefully at some point we'll get the vetting of that. >> i want to thank the friends of ethics and also the members of civil grand jury for the help on that they were great in terms of they're the writing of it and also in particular - >> any other suggestions for

additions to the agenda? public comment or suggestions >> yes. charley our friends of ethics i'll recommend that you might want to put the audit item on the agenda whether that is next month or the months after whatever the time it facilities for the staff to develop some thoughts and some proposals maybe to bring forward i really would at this point look for public hearing on that topic to see where the public thinks the commission could be more robust in its approach where it needs to be more robust in its approach and i would like to recommend at some point look at when you plaza plaza place the measure on the ballot anything we place on the ballot should have an

issuance off finding to show how that measurer up and how we can, in fact, meet the specifications as addressed by the law that is that it has a further the purposes of the act because heretofore many of the items that we taken to the ballots or taken to the board under super majority we're less on and on the effects of the acts they were repeatedly sections of the law and now we're clean power a little bit with prop c and maybe prop j and those are not the only problems we've had so there needs to be finding when you modify the c or any of the other ethics laws regarding

conflict of interest where we have to demonstrate how it does, in fact, further the purposes of the act that is very important. >> thank you. >> commissioners ray hart for san francisco open government and i agree with the prior speaker that is the perfect opportunity to put up or shut up you have the procedures of fair notice and so put it on the agendas for the next time consideration as to whether a special audit to be ordered by mayor ed lee ed lee for mayor of 2015 on as acted as a special audit now you said you know either nothing or you sat there and - all those things here's a perfect place to put that

not two surprisingly this is the only item i approved gives an opportunity underlined for any member of the commission to place the items on the agenda for consideration i do wonder if someone will choose to exercise the opportunity and whether they will be allowed to place the item other than the agenda or you'll vote not to do it as far as the public is able to understand the agenda are formatted in square feet by the chair and staff in some cases to hide the cases from the public for my experience the leadership of the ethics commission operates outside of the public view we hear on this what the executive director cares to tell us and we never hear anything bad there are never any problems nothing needs to be fixed

everything is fine and end of story whether the members of this commission individually or collectively choose to dare quote bite the hand that feeds them unquote only time will tell microfilm i think of the history of this commission to indicate along with the probability this will happen you are here to protect the city against us you are here to energy them to do whatever we want with regards to the law and the recollections to fairness and to quality to anything and the reason i say that you never do anything otherwise and let them off the hook even after you went through what you did this donor mat with the supervisor farrell what it comes

down to authorize the chair to go back and make a back room diesel e deal bans god, only knows what the public still didn't know why it was on that agenda you know that. >> thank you dipped the next is the information of enlightenments that occurs to me whether the matter and the mark farrell matter that came up there hadn't been any closed sessions in the last few months to discuss pend complaints and i seem to recall i'm not sure there were matters that were held over at the end of last year pending the staffer transition so i'll thinking

there maybe pending complaints that maybe processed or presented in open or possibly closed session that would be in his to reduce the backlog so in terms of items for future agenda that there are scompliement items to be scheduled that would or will be good and discussion of overhauling the enforcement program with different letters to complainants notifying them something is received and i thought that was a package that the acting director had but not to the point of getting out there i hope that comes to you in the time the next few meetings i think that would be to the good unfortunately might be a reviewer e r referral from the task force we'll see

i'll count those at comments on the next item which is the executive director's report. >> just a couple of brief highlights the report goes into budget and staff reach and other activities ongoing the office we have been continued to provide information to the mayor's office about the budget requests we are present this friday before the commission on the department of technology about the electronic filing project we've submitted a request for and two helpful notes a 3 additional as needed part time staff resources coming on board hopefully within the next week individuals that share quantity of two ftes because the election seen e.r. season a ramping up with our fingers crossed seeing

the additional staffing through june 30th want fiscal year funding the budget and separately i'm pleased to announce we'll encourage you to chair the denouncement u announcement of the job announcement for the deputy the deadline for applications is april 22nd i'm excited to look forward to that processed in bringing someone into the office to help in that capacity the audit process one question that came up the audit from the last election cycle the pre2015 as of mid month those are in sprfrl review and looking forward to having those out the door the cuomo or so and lastly as a

reminder april 1st deadline for statements of economic interest is due this friday elected officials and department heads are required under the city recollections to file online using a clean statement of filing system and we have stiff ready to assist with needs so as of today i believe we're at 49.29 percent filing electronically half of that electronic filing community to get them across the finish line by april 1st i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> we've been reminding folks to help to assist in full compliance. >> is there a place for the public can see the job description or - >> how the duties of deputy director are skiebd and the

easiest place good morning san francisco city jobs you'll land on the employment opportunities may be one the featured positions but if not search in the administration department it is the city director and the position was list on friday the job apps page but the employment opportunity page is city of san francisco. >> any comments or questions. >> mc in response to the deputy directors report. >> embraced by the job she's moved into this position seem lessly so well and picking up on american people enormous number of things much from her experience in los angeles she's someone that is part of fabric of doing this job so well, that i'm just feel we are fortunate i

want to emphasize that on top of that her report that you're pretty impressive thank you. >> thank you. >> public comment. >> you had our chance mr. mr. pilpal. >> you'll get us in big trouble. >> you talked about the executive director's report. >> i registered or referenced in place for future agendas that recent clever of me. >> you're a good lawyer. >> i'm not a lawyer. >> you should be. >> i'll try to be brief dipped as an individual two items again related to future items their used to be a chart we see ever foe months it deciphers from the indicator and policy issues and

all that could be made a regularly attachment then i'll not to have it is a this we'll know what is the out months and the other points on the revenues report that shows that the receptors are way above the budgeted amount i think that money into goes 0 both the general fund but the with mayor's office to recapture that as needed staff or on the initiative for the rest of the purposes it would be nice for whatever reason we'll have more lobbyist recorded and it would be nice if those resources are small the grand scheme for the city but large for the commission if it could help with the staffing needs thanks. >> thank you. >> commissioners ray hart for san francisco open government since a couple of things were

bought up i feel they're fair game commissioners comments to the executive director what a great job what a until i try to start talking with her and she fails to get back but to fail to let you know she needs for time they can't be taken at her word that is a basic fault with anyone that is in office of public trust i will comment on two items on the executive director's report the first item 5 investigation of enforcement program that almost always shows zero sunshine ordinance compliments i have 24 denominators finding people violated any freedom and not one only the one you managed to hold awhile i was out of the

state that was contrived by your staff it couldn't have accidently happened they announced it the day i left and held the hearing a day before i getting got back you have no pride and not say a word i intend that the number of sunshine ordinance complaints will grow i'll turn p them in writing i do not trust the executive director to not buyer them and the staff two of the inspectors and these are the people i'm popped to trust to investigate the complaint in an impartial way and the second item 7 the bureaucracy of diligent revenue account you're showing the willingness to take people to court for 5 thousand dollars and mark farrell for supervisor 2010 owing more than

one and $90,000 dealing that is a matter avenue backroom deal that ethics commission authorized commissioner renne to deal with that unquote using the power combrufd you by san franciscans you have decided to abuse that power by going after the little fish and please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, kate the whales it is little surprises that few people attend those it is nauseating to watch the abuse of power if you think that tonight is an exception stand by in a few summaries there the record and two or three years i can point out i told him some go that i am moral and unlawful and

illegal they ignored it thank you. thank you for speaking immediately when that my time rotundas out you're the most unfair person have to have the appearance of being fair >> you don't even try it is a big joke. >> next item is approval of the minutes draft minutes for january 25th, 2016, and february 19, 2016, commissioners have any comments or suggested changes. >> move approval. >> second. >> any public comment? >> this public comment on, on the fact those minutes our 0 january 25th meeting the agenda item was not clear to the

members of committee and as i've said before it is supposed to be clear to the public of average twinkies or could be complicated having a bunch of documents failing to say what those documents are on there is outrage over members found it was unacceptable in i like to hide things to do it in a way that people won't know what is considered and very frankly, i think that it goes down to the leadership is why he spoke against the commissioner been restate he wants to side thing the executive director want to do things behind even though scenes and hide from the public i think the reason commissioner hur is in office he's the biggest sneak of all

benedict. >> huh? >> benedict. >> benedict arnold works for me but the bottom line is i'm gotten sick of it and gotten disappointed by the fact when i first started to come to the meeting there were 50 or 60 people now, maybe a dozen it is because thankful give up they don't build you have any intention to make anything or support it you can smile commissioner hur but you can that is the truth and you don't say anything a back it is true you can look at our record what has this body done to make that city a better place nothing you try to make it look that way you write the history well, no more i have 12

hundred words in our anybody's probably more than you give me me for power than any of you have i would be pubically embassy want to would this term to get something meaningful done rather than having two or three terms and get nothing done make in change for the better rerearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic and simply rewrite the rules you know in our heart and soul you have absolutely no ability or willingly njs or integrity to enforce i can't think avenue simply person who is punished by you in all the time i've been coming here that would have any effect on city government. >> now you've sat down thank

you. >> did he hear a motion to adjourn no, we have the got to approval the minutes as outstanding motion to approve the minutes which was seconded. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? they're approved 5 zero i'm entertain a motion to adjourn. >> so moved and second. >> all in favor, say i. >> 3

minutes. >> all righty so we shall convene the board meeting all right. thank you all for coming mr. clerk would i like to call roll please. >> commissioner cohen will be joining us later commissioner meiberger commissioner bridges commissioner driscoll commissioner makras commissioner paskin-jordan