ethics commission for january 23rd, and i will call the roll. vice-chair keane. >> here. >> commissioner hayon. >> here. commissioner chiu. >> here. >> commissioner kopp. >> here. >> all present and accounted for. i will ask item -- agenda item no. 2, public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. is there anyone who wishes to make public comment? seeing none, we'll turn to item no. 3, which is discussion and possible action on draft minutes for the commission's december 19th, 2016 special meeting. any of the commissioners have any comments or corrections? >> i have got a couple of

-- either grammatical or literary additions. one suggested rearrangement of language and one question. on page 4, >> commissioner could you speak into the microphone? >> on page 4, under "discussion for enforcement and report." the end of the second paragraph there's a reference to ms. blome noted that bdr attempted an assetb search of mr. chris jackson and the court's investigation determined that there are no assets.

is the "court" the right word? do you remember? i didn't think you said court. >> it should be bdr. good catch. >> bdr, okay, may i propose that change, mr. chairman? >> you may. >> then on page 5, above the words "public comment," and maybe should ask what -- how we phrase this as a customary practice, is present tense or past tense? because that sentence says, "the individual commissioners acknowledge" in the present tense.

and i'm going to suggest this change: the individual commissioners acknowledged, and congratulated. of the executive director pelham on her election to the governing board of the council on governmental ethics. i have written this out. and then also above that, the last emphasized point in the first paragraph in conjunction with the controller's office, it should be present tense there "develop definitions of the types of activities." not past tense "developed." >> all right.

any other commissioners' comments? corrections? assuming those corrections are made, i'll take public comment on the minutes, if there is any public comment? if not -- >> i will move approval as amended. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? hearing none, the minutes are accepted unanimously. turning to item no. 3, no. 4 -- >> i'm sorry, commissioner, did you ask for general public comment? >> i did ask. >> you did? >> yes. >> no comment. >> my apologies. >> thank you. no. 4 is -- come to the microphone. >> because i was trying -- excuse me, first, my name is alpha

buie and i'm mentioned in item no. 3 and i raised my hand and i think, if i'm looking at the agenda correctly, this is the item that you are speaking of right now? >> no, that is item 4 that we're coming for. 3 was approval of the minutes of the last meeting. >> i beg your pardon. >> no problem. >> all right. thank you. >> i will call that item. >> thank you so much. >> and that is hearing on the merits alfalfa buie treasurer and the african american democratic club sfec no. 13-13 111 2, and ms. blome, do you want to outline the complaint and i'll take testify from you, ms. buie. >> thank you, chair. actually, the oakland ethics commission is here to represent staff in this hearing because it

involves a presentation of evidence and he is barred in california. so he has been kind enough to come over and i will ask mr. daju to present the staff's case. >> we worked through -- >> come before the microphone. >> as far as the process goes, did you want me to present our hearing and then the respondent will have an opportunity to respond to it? or make any kind of statements? >> yes, you each have ten minutes, and then ms. buie will have an opportunity for her presentation after yours. >> good evening, commissioners, mala daju representing the san francisco ethics commission enforcement staff. as you know in the matter of alpha buie and just as a little bit of background, the african

american democratic club is a general purpose committee that was active in 2011-2012. in 2014, the enforcement staff had -- opened up a case and found that there was three failures to file semi-annual statements for 2012 and 2013. commission staff reached out to the respondent, and when i say "respondent" i mean ms. buie and the commission she is treasurer for. unfortunately the semi-annual statements, delinquent semi-annual statements were never filed, and the staff didn't -- wasn't able to reach out to the respondent anymore. since then, commission hasn't been talking to respondent. they have attempted to resolve this matter, and in 2014 because the matter -- they weren't able to resolve the matter with the respondent, a probable cause hearing

was held by the commission. the commission found probable cause that the respondent did, in fact, fail to file the three semi-annual statements. an accusation was issued by the commission for those three failures and that is what the brief is here today about. the respondent in this matter was served with this brief back in december, and also with notice of this hearing would be held today. the relevant statutes were also served on respondent and she was given the opportunity to submit any evidence to the commission staff for this matter. and also, to respond to the brief. until now the commission staff did not receive any evidence or response brief or any type of communications from respondent. based on the evidence that was issued or that was submitted to the commission in the brief, we recommend that commission find that respondent did fail to file three

semi-annual statements and that the commission issue a $1,000 fine for each failure to file semi-annual statement, and also, that the commission order that either the committee or the respondent file some type of paperwork indicating what the status of the commission -- of the status of the committee is right now? whether one -- one of the issues was whether the respondent in this matter was still the treasurer? in order for her not to be the treasurer, the state law requires that she file a form 410 which would delegate the power of the treasurer to somebody else. or if the committee is no longer active, if they would like to terminate the committee so that the semi-annual statements don't continue to be due, they can file a terminating 410, but it would require them to file the semi-annual statements all the way up until the date that they indicate in the 410 that the committee was

active until. i have one matter i would like to address with the brief. unfortunately, in the brief we have both ms. bui and the african american democratic club as respondents. the probable cause and the accusation that was issued by the commission only applied to ms. bui as the respondent and therefore i would like to strike the african american democratic club. i would be happy to answer questions. >> doesn't the club have an obligation to file the termination statement? >> all filing obligations by the committee that the treasurer -- the treasurer and the principle officer is liable for any failure to file campaign statements, including form 410 to terminate.

>> any commissioners have any questions? >> i would like to hear ms. buie's testimony and obviously ask her a question or two. >> thank you. >> ms. buie. >> good evening once again i'm alpha buie and thank you so much for giving me this opportunity to come and speak. first of all, going back to 2012. during that time, it i was asked to turn over the books. now the only thing that i'm probably guilty of is not being aware that i needed to file this form that he spoke of, to remove my name of being the treasurer. there wass a period of time where the african american democratic club from the time i was asked to hand over the books to the incumbents, there was a period of time at that point in time between that moment and the time that

they actually had the election, which i haven't had time to go through, because i'm going through some stuff with a whole bunch of water damage in my home, and displaced and a lot madness going on in my personal life like now. so a lot of this i haven't been able to address. but there was this period of time. and so when i contacted after first being aware these filings needed to take place, i contacted mr. saint croix and he was on the phone for me, we probably spent an hour on the phone, trying to get the records from the wells fargo bank, where we had done business with and our banking. so that i could reconcile these records, and then file the reports that needed to be filed. at that point, wells fargo told mr. saint croix and i at that

time that they had no record. they couldn't go back and find the records. so i asked mr. saint croix, who signed on one of these things, what am i to do at this point? he said, i don't know what you can do if wells fargo can't give you the records. at that point in time, i handed over the books, in 2012. the reason i know it was 2012 i was also runing a phone-banking campaign for president obama at that time for him to get elected. re-elected. so i had my mom checking on a ill month and the phone bank and when they asked for the books i gladly handed them over. i called this -- this gentleman indicated that i didn't contact anybody. i called the ethics commission, mr. saint croix and a couple of other people, just trying to figure out in

this time what can i do to make this go away? what can i file? i don't have what you say you need. i haven't been the treasurer -- i haven't been involved with the african american democratic club really since 2012. so all i wanted to know was what do you need me to do to make this go away forever and not come back? and nobody has responded to me. from the time i got the first one until now and at the time that i got the first one, had i not been going over to my house, where i can't live and checking my mail and picking up stuff, i wouldn't have even known this, because i haven't been able to live in my home where my mail was been going since may of 2016, based on other damage that is going on. so whatever i can do to make it go away, i am here today, because that is what i would like to do is to be able to get rid of this once and for all. i don't feel in any way,

shape, form, or fashion, that i should be penalized and i certainly don't have $3,000 to give anyone something i'm not totally responsible for and even if i was responsible at this point in time in my life i don't have $3,000. >> commissioner kopp? >> what took so long for you to appear? this has been on our calendar, what? two times. four, today. >> when i actually read through it, i did see something that said if i wanted to respond, if i wanted to file something, and i did call somebody, and they said that i didn't have to appear earlier. >> the form notice does say you don't have to appear.

>> when i got -- when i got. >> if i'm going to face a fine, i'm going to appear. >> i got the second one, the second thing, then, i'm like, okay, it's not -- i'm not -- it's not going to go away. then i saw mr. saintcroix's name at the top of it and i really felt because he was the person who was on the phone with me to wells fargo. an hour. so i was really surprised to get this, and see that his name was up there whether when he was on the phone with me to get records or to try to direct me as to what i needed to do. >> when did the club end its activities? >> that i really don't know. as i said, i did not have any real

involvement after 2012. >> after 2012. >> yes. the reason i didn't have any real involvement after that, as i said, i was running the phone-banking and then from that, i was back and forth from san francisco to memphis, tennessee, where i was caring for my mom, who later passed away. so i was not trying to keep up with what was happening with the club. i was trying to keep up with what was happening with my mother and unfortunately i didn't bring that. it's in my car and i left the funeral thing and i'm not standing before you just to say here is that. i had some real-life crisiss that you needed to deal with and i couldn't be here dealing with that. >> as far as you know, does the club still exist and is active? >> you know, i don't know. all i know is that the

person that i last know who came in as the vice president, i did get just a text message from her about this, saying you need to handle this. so i don't know what -- i have not -- i have not in any way been involved. >> how did you initially get involved with the club? >> initially i got involved with the club because i really wanted to have a voice in what was happening in the local politics and in terms of being able to hear what people's platforms were, and to just be able to be a person that had some kind of input and stood up for something in terms of trying to make my community better. it should be known, i mean,

i am not only am i a responsible citizen, i am a san francisco peace officer. i don't go around ignoring and not obeying the law and i have been since 1989, i have been. so i am not a person who walks around and just takes things so lightly. my plate during this time was very, very full, as it is overflowing right now. it is overflowing. and i just, as i said, with everything that i have got going i really am here because i would like this to go away. >> well, one of the problems is that the club has not terminated insofar as the ethics commission's

records show. can you shed any light on why that hasn't occurred? >> no, i really -- >> let me ask it another way: who was the president, or the leader? >> when the 2013, 2013 the election, which was supposed to take place in 2012, the 2013 eelection, i think it actually took place in 2013. i went back and found an email to that effect, but i didn't bring that in today. but that email suggested that the election actually took place in 2013 and at that time mr. karl williams would have been the president and joe eli jackson would have been the vice president. >> are either of them here tonight? >> no? >> hmmm? >> no. >> no. anybody else you can tell us

who was an officer? besides them and you? the only other person who is here this evening was the outgoing president in 2012 and that is mr. charles spencer and he is here. >> i have a question to somebody on the staff: how did we get rid of an organization that no longer functions and nobody appears to sign documents to terminate it? >> ms. buie continues to be the treasurer, so she continues to be responsible under the campaign finance reform ordinance. so she can file a termination statement. >> i know she is, but nobody is doing something. >> right. >> can we do something and say you are no longer recognized? >> we don't have that power, but that is something that is on our list of things to add to actually.

>> if i may, sir, i just want to be clear? if there is something that i write or something that i say? >> you fill out a form? >> i fill out a form. >> to terminate. but if you are not treasurer anymore. >> fill out the form and terminate it. >> i may be wrong and staff correct me, but i think one of the problems is which you file to terminate, you have to say you have no funds or if you have funds what you have done with them? you have to have a financial statement about it and that is what i understand she is saying the problem that they had initially to get wells fargo to cooperate and she says wells fargo didn't cooperate. >> right. >> i share your frustration. it just seems that we have a number

of these cases where the party being charged is told that you have to do x. and they don't do it, and we penalize them every six months, because they didn't do it. just seems to me there has to be some way not to keep up runing up the fines to get it closed? >> chair renne, may i ask a question? paul? >> sure. >> ms. buie, can you go back to the discussion you had with wells fargo along with director saint croix and shed a little more information on what you were asking for and what they were not able to provide? and then what director saint croix's advice to you was? >> yes, what i was asking for -- i had bank account numbers from when we had accounts during the time

i was actively acting in the capacity of the treasurer. and during that time, when i was calling to get that -- one of the things -- let me back this up a little bit, so i'll real clear on why. when i was not acting in the capacity of the treasurer, the whole books and all the binders and stuff that i had, there was another person during that election, when they asked me to turn the books, that was transferred to. if i had brought that box with that stuff, i could show you the box, where it was shipped back from the person was out-of-state who was elected as treasurer. that box was shipped back to me with all that. i still have that stuff in that box. it was shipped back to me. in the meantime, this time that you are speaking of, had already passed and was already delinquent. so i didn't have anything. with the information that i had, the

old bank accounts, i was asking wells fargo to give me bank statements. so that i could go back over the bank statements for the period in question ? if i could go back over the bank statements to reconcile with statements to see what was spent and if anything was taken in and deposited? and wells fargo along with director saint croix on the line with me said they had no records of these accounts. so when we were on the phone as i said approximately an hour he was on the phone with me and from one person to another person to another person and they still said they couldn't -- they had no record of these accounts. >> so then as far as you know, you do not have and wells fargo does not have any records of the accounts for the african american democratic club for the time in question? >> the time in question, yes. the only wells fargo statements that i have, i have them in a binder, which i didn't bring, which was up to

the period when i was no longer acting in the capacity of the treasurer. so that is all i had was what i had shipped off and what came back to me in a box. i didn't have anything else. other than, the only thing i got was communication from the ethics commission. i hadn't gotten anything since then. >> after your conversation with wells fargo with director saint croix and they indicated that they don't have any of this information regarding the accounts or accounts statement, what was his advice to you? >> he said if you can't get the statements, i really don't know what you can do. he says, because you need to be able to show what the balance that you are showing, the cash balance that i showed in the last statement i filed, what happened with that money? i said i don't know. you know, i want just going to make up something to put on there. i didn't know. >> thank you.

>> i'm sorry -- >> in regard to that box with those materials in it, did that show the existence of a wells fargo account and checks and numbers? or a number of an account on there? >> yeah and i had those when i called them and if i had brought that box -- in that -- i created a binder, a zip binder. and everything that came to me when i was acting in the capacity of the treasurer, everything that from filings to statements, to everything is categorized by the month when i was acting in that capacity. >> so you had materials that indicated accounts such and such exist? >> ah-hah. >> at the time you and mr. saint croix were on the phone with wells fargo and you are telling them this it is the account and they

are saying -- -- those accounts are no longer in existence and mind you it's 8-9 months since that time since there was any activity on this. what they had done was closed out the account. and what i needed them to do was go back, like where they kept it on laserfiche or whatever they kept it, even though they closed them out to, go back and get me copies of what they had up to the point that they closed the account out. >> i'm a little confused. did wells fargo tell you and mr. saint croix they didn't know anything about any such account? >> they didn't see they didn't know anything about the account because i had the account numbers, but they said they no longer had any records pertaining to the accounts. they didn't have any records pertaining to those accounts. >> okay. >> i wonder if you could

just -- on the calendar, clarify some things for me. so you were treasurer of the local african american democratic club in 2012? >> um hm h. >> with a what was your periods as treasurer? >> i think from 2011 -- at least 2011-2012. >> so you were treasurer for one year, is that correct? >> i may have been longer. i'm sure it was 20 -- i see i filed something 2011. 2012. 2011 is when i took it over

and looks like the first one i filed and it's in your package, because i didn't bring any of the documents that i have. the first one i filed was in 2011. so i would have been doing it 2011 through 2012. >> so during that period, where you did not file these forms, and where you accumulated this debt of fines that -- of forms that you didn't file and therefore, have been fined during that period, is that correct? >> no, the period i didn't file is after the period that i was no longer -- see i'm looking at your packet. >> who succeeded you as treasurer? >> the person who succeeded me was sun seri -- i can't remember her last name. and i don't remember her last name because as i said, i was not

-- once i was no longer active in that capacity, i was not active with the organization and i was not active because i was running a phone bank. >> okay. i understand. is this club still active as a political club in san francisco at this time? >> i have no idea what they are doing. i just know i haven't been active since 2011. a thousand things could have happened since 2012, i just don't know. >> okay. for me, i mean as i listen to this, it seems to me that no. 1, i don't know how well we train entities of this nature in terms of what they have to file and what they have to do and do they understand the kinds of fees that are going to be applied to them as fines if they don't comply

with either the dates in which they have to file information? and otherwise it's just this morose of people that nobody know what is going on and i don't understand why wells fargo wouldn't have records of that bank account. that to me is completely bizarre. i'm just completely at a loss what is going on here and how we're going to resolve this? >> ms. buie, you at one point went to somebody at the ethics commission to say that you were no longer treasurer? >> exactly. >> and you were told at that time, were you not, that you had to get something from the club saying that you had been relieved as treasurer before they could -- the ethics commission and its staff could treat you as no longer the

treasurer? because that is the way it was originally when the committee was set-up, that you were identified as the treasurer. and they wanted you to get something from the committee telling them, telling us that you were no longer treasurer. why didn't you do that? >> no one ever told me that i needed to do that until all of this stuff came up. no one has ever -- had i known that i needed to file something, to say i was not and that is the first thing that i think i said when i came up here, the one an only thing that i'm guilty of is not knowing that i needed to file whatever it was to remove my name as treasurer. i didn't know i needed to file paperwork to remove my name. somewhere in some old emails i have some emails that said that the election took place -- the

election actually took place in early 2013 and list who had the incoming officers were in 2013. but i don't have that with me this evening. >> mr. chairman? >> what i would like, i would like an opportunity to submit that information to you and whatever else that is in that box that you need to see. i would like an opportunity to submit that to you? >> i'm going to sum up as what it looks like to me, but first charles spencer was the president in 2011; right? >> [inaudible] >> in 2012 as well; right? >> [inaudible] >> do you know if he is still the president? >> i know he is not the president. >> he is not the president. all right. then ms. elias jackson was

president by 2014, is that correct? >> you know what? in 2013 i know she became the vice president. i don't know if she actually became the president. she may have at some point, but i didn't have any contact with her or the african-american democratic club. >> if you read one of the documents attached to the file, this is from jo jackson, dated august 22, 2014 -- >> is that in the packet that i have? >> huh? >> what page is that on? >> exhibit 6. >> exhibit 6. >> respondent has been given all of these documents? >> yes, she is looking through them.

>> all right. in there it states that you met on july 1, 2014 with garrett chatfield, who was -- i don't know -- an investigator or something with the commission. and and indicated that to him with documents that the committee's documents were forwarded to a new treasurer, remember the name of that new treasurer? ? sunseri -- gosh i can't remember her last name, sunseri something. >> anyway, and you assertedly agreed you would attempt to get the

bank statements at wells fargo to determine how the committee used the balance of $5216.51 to file the form for to termainate and august 11, 2014 is elias jackson identified as the president contacted mr. chatfield. mr. chatfield met are her on august 22nd, 2014, went through these issues, and nothing happened. you are still on the hook, so to speak, because on the public record you are still the treasurer, which makes you a respondent. the club is the other respondent.

now it's recommended that because of a technical omission, the club be deleted as the respondent. which leaves you as the remaining respondent and as far as the record shows me, it leaves about $5213 or something in a bank account somewhere. in the meantime, it's probably eaten up about $100,000 of staff and taxpayer time and money to go through this. you know of any other individual in or out of the club, who could provide information on its current status? >> i really don't.

>> you don't? >> i really don't. as i said, i have actually, honestly, sir, so much chaos in my life with having lived in a hotel for four months after water damage to my home and then in an apartment and trying to make sure that i get asbestos and mold and everything out of my home. my life is -- the last thing on my mind other than this right here has been the african american democratic club. i have just been trying to bring some peace in my own personal life. >> i'm curious, is there anybody else here who is a member of this club? i desist. >> any response that you want to make? >> no, i'm just here if the commissioners have any questions. >> you have to speak into

the mic. >> i don't have any comments unless the commissioners have questions for me. >> why did you arrive at $1,000 per violation? >> so i'm happy to let staff respond to that if you like to, what do you think? >> we can. looking at past fines for this type of violation, when folks entered into stipulations, the penalty was about $500 per violation. but we felt that since the case had to go to a hearing we would at least double that. we did try to make it as reasonable as possible from our perspective because we did have some information to indicate these mitigationing circumstances and we did not think that the maximum penalty was appropriate and that is why we recommended $1,000 per violation. >> any other comments or questions by commissioners? >> just another question to staff to make sure that the only way

to terminate the committee would be to file the form 460. there is no other way to terminate the county? >> it's form 410. >> 410. >> yes, i think that as a practical matter the commission could probably and maybe josh could opine on this, the commissioner would probably accept a letter from ms. buie that the bank accounts are closed and there is no way to account for the money that shows on their last form 460. in conjunction with the form 410 to finalize the case. i would be willing to accept that. is that okay? >> well, the problem with that though is how can she sign such a letter when she doesn't have any idea whether there is still $5,000 or whether the $5,000 is pilfered. >> she doesn't know how it

was spent, but we at least know that the account is closed? >> the account is closed? >> it sounds like there is no record existing past the year she was treasurer and i would assume that the account she had control over is closed. [ inaudible ] >> i can't hear you, can you talk into the mic? >> i'm sorry. the accounts that i had control over and that i had any connections w they have been closed for years. >> if the african american democratic club started conducting any activity, after the closure of the club through the termination statement, then we had have another enforcement action against the new commitment for not formulating correctly. >> when you were treasurer and the account did exist, were you the one signing the checks that the club would expend for various things? >> yes i was. >> okay. was anyone else authorized

to sign the checks besides you? >> the president. mr. charles spencer. >> okay. so one would assume then, in regard to that $5300 whatever it is, was that in the account at some point, did you write any checks on those amounts? >> you know, when we had elections and that is why i don't ever recall there being $5,000 left in there, when we had -- when there was ever a politician running or anything like that, we paid for ads. we paid to have, like copy people to brint print out door knockers to put on doors and gave kids stipends to pass out things.

so usually we were in the hole, but according to the dates that the cut-off fell on, if i filed it according to the cut-off dates for the monies taken in and money spent and it looked like there was money, but in essence the money was gone. it's just the checks came in, or checks went out after a lot of times after the cut-off date, the terminate date i should account for. so it was always on the statements -- it may have looked like there was, but a week or so after, i filed coming up to the next time to file the next statement, then that cleared out the next money, but there was never any money leftover for anyone to do something with. we were always in the hole for something. >> did you ever see a balance of

$5,000 on account on any of the materials sent to you as treasurer? >> not really on a bank account. >> well, on anything? did you ever see any kind of documents sent to you by wells fargo that said, ms. buie, treasurer of this -- in this account, which you are the signatory of, there is now $5,000 or any kind of statement, do you remember seeing? >> a statement -- not with a balance of that amount. what i probably remember seeing is we took in a check for $5,000, we showed there would have been a deposit, but on that same statement the money would have gone out almost as fast as it went in. so statement could show the deposit of whatever it was, $5,000, would have shown that deposit, but immediately from that $5,000 would have been withdrawals of the monies that were spent. so it would not be a balance ever of $5,000.

i don't know if that make goods sense. >> >> listening to the discussions earlier, i don't know if it was your statement -- it was shown at some point that the club had an account with $5,000 in it >> it's the last form 460 showing $5,000 -- >> exhibit 3 in the brief -- >> right okay. >> it's the very last form 460 filed for that committee. >> okay. >> it was filed by ms. buie. it was received on october 25th, 2012, a week before the election. >> okay. >> it shows $5,000 and some change left in committee's funds. >> so ms. buie filed that and said we have got $5,000 in this account? >> yes.

the exact amount $5216.51. and that was for the october 1st-20, 2012. >> that was filed october 25th, and ms. buie resigned in november 2012, so a month later. >> i will call for public comment in a moment. thank you. october 1st through october 20th and that is the ending cash balance there. that was filed -- >> i have in mind, let's see, how would we accomplish this? writing to wells fargo asking for a history of this account and a, did it exist and b, if it did not

and wells fargo says that is not permitted by law, but i would like to see what wells fargo does, and maybe the city attorney can figure out some way we can get that. i'm sure you would consent to it, but i don't know you have standing to consent. >> i'm not sure that would be germane to the issue here and that is whether there should have been a filing? to close it up? >> it's clear there should have been, what are you going to do? >> i guess before i call for public comment, does anybody want to make a motion, either to accept the staff's recommendation or object it or some other alternative? >> i'll make a motion to accept it, but i want to include the

club and he says that we can't do it. >> i have an issue. are we going to discuss the staff's recommendation? >> pardon me? >> are we going to discuss the staff's recommendation now or no? >> well, >> well, i will make the motion and call for public comment. >> okay. is that motion seconded? >> i'll second it. >> any commissioners want to comment on the motion? >> what is the motion? >> whether or not we should i accept staff's recommendation? find the violation and impose the $3,000 fine. >> my view is that i think $1,000 per violation is excessive. i think that during her time as treasurer, ms. buie discharged her responsibilities in filing

form 460 as required. the last one october 25, 2015 and she resigned thereafter and believed she didn't have any further responsibility as treasurer. so therefore, didn't file any additional statements. and then there when contacted by the staff in 2014, i believe it was, i think she worked in good faith with executive director croix to resolve this issue and then when she was told by the director i don't know what you can do, she didn't take any further action. until now, when she received the information and has come here. and she said very clearly i'm here to make it go away and take responsibility and the amount in $5,000 in a committee that only raised $13,000 i, believe n total and was intended to go campaign

outreach and as ms. buie said to make further contributions to the community and have a say in what is happening in our political life, i commend her coming here after so long to take responsibility for this. it seems like she is the last one stand based on her testimony and i would find that $3,000 is disproportionate to the actions she has taken and the gravity of the violations that have occurred here, i think our commission has considered violations of larger dollar amount and also with much more sophisticated players. and so i think that the punishment really does need to fit the crime here and that i think to your point, my fellow commissioner point, i think

commissioner hayon said what is our responsibility based on the facts of the case and outcomes and i think piling on with a $3,000 fine doesn't serve that purpose. so i would recommend and would feel comfortable observing the letter of the law with a $1 per violation. >> you are proposing to amend the motion? >> yes. >> to reduce the fine to $1. >> yes, per violation. >> commissioner hayon? >> the only comment i want to add to this, i totally agree with what commissioner chiu just expressed. but the problem for me at least is two-fold. one at the beginning, where i questioned how we educate people especially small groups. we're here to see there is ethical conduct in the raising of

money for particularly in elections. and the have big groups are very sophisticated and now how to deal with this and you have this massive groups, small groups that don't know what they are doing and unsophisticate treasurers -- not an excuse, but we need to make sure that they know what they have to do prior to beginning these groups or these efforts. at the other end, we have this problem with not enough staff, not enough personnel at the ethics commission to deal with things, with these issues from a timely manner. i mean this is 2017. i mean, this woman barely -- if i am to believe you, barely remembers who was in the african american democratic club at that time. these things need to be resolved

quickly, and efficacy and what kind of advice the executive director was giving ms. buie in 2012, this is not what we should be spending our time on. there are far more serious violations and issues that we need to spend time on. this is not one of them and i'm fine -- fine her $1 and this whole thing is ridiculous and embarrassing. >> i will call for public comment. >> hi. my name is charles spencer. i was president of the african american democratic club -- >> sorry i didn't hear you. >> my name is charles spencer. >> mr. spencer? >> right. i was president of the african american democratic club during the

period that alphabuie was treasurer and she administered her role in a way that made me feel comfortable and we had an election and handed all the information and po box keys and twitter and handles and handed off everything and expected the financial wells fargo account information would have been handed off and taken care in a similar manner as the website. i had a couple of follow-up meetings with the subsequent president and vice president. we discussed strategies, priorities, and we -- i assumed that everything that needed to be taken care of would have been taken care of, with the new president and vice president. i am at least a little bit concerned that alpha buie is being held responsible for not filing

for the club's obligation when i would have expected the subsequent president and vice president to take care of the file filings. >> who are they? >> carl william and joe jackson. >> pardon me? carl william and joe jackson. >> i have a question n terms of the group's fundraising. >> yes. >> how did you fundraise and from whom? >> we tried to raise from members, and our primary financial activity would be to prepare state card and fundraise with candidates and prepare and disseminate cards and put they will on car windows and we had pretty much never had a net free and clear balance of $5,000 and were were pretty much zero all the time. >> so most of that money, $5,000, or whatever the amount was, was

money that the members contributed? >> that is correct. >> let me ask you this, is there any explanation -- one of the investigative documents indicates that the committee had raised about $9200. i think it was the year 2012, that january 1-october whatever it was -- and spent over $13,500. does that ring a bell with you? >> i can't tell you the exact balance, but i know that again, during each election cycle, we would go out to candidates and members to raise money and our primary expenditure would be the slate cards. we would use spotlight

printing, and other than a po box and website. >> do you know if the club still exists? >> i do not know. i know a do you know a couple of years ago joe jackson was trying to organization the club -- i don't know at that time if she was still president or vice president? but no, i do not know if the club still exists. >> do you know any of the people who were officers after you? do you know them today, so you can say to them, why don't you go down to the ethics commission and filed a statement terminating the club? >> i have telephone and email address as of a couple of years ago and i will do that tomorrow. i will call them tomorrow. mr. williams and miss jackson. >>

i'll do it tonight. >> all right. any other public comment before we vote on this? did you have a question? >> good evening. david pilpel and i had a couple of comments on this matter. four things specifically the woman referred to as jo elias jackson i met her several years ago. at the time i believe she was a city employee and she still may be. so perhaps some outreach could be done to her through the city to determine her status and if she has any information that might help in this matter? the second point, the exhibit 1 of the packet indicates that the 410 filing was an initial statement, the first 460 exhibit 2 doesn't list the id number, but the second 460, exhibit 3 lists id number

14706 for the committee and that suggests to me this was either mishandled by the secretary of state, or there's something else to this story, because an id number starting in 98 would suggest that the committee was initially formed in 1998 under the previous numbering system. and that the -- that either the initial filing was for a new organization that should have been issued in a different number, or this was actually treated as an amendment to a prior statement of organization form had 410 with that id number. so i'm not sure about the history of the organization, but it trigers the question based on that id number. i didn't hear about outreach to the fppc and how they would handle a similar matter involving non-termination of an

entity, when there are missing files or some disarray in the record keeping. i would suspect over the 40-plus years of the fppc that they might have some suggestions or protocol for how a committee can -- how termination can occur if there isn't a responsible officer that can file the terminating 410, and finally, i think i heard from a couple of commissioners that training for entities like this, general purpose recipient committees really is needed. that i think we have a good system for training treasurers and other officers for ballot measure committees for candidate committees, but these entities jprcs otherwise known as pacs, it's difficult because you have a lot of volunteers and a lot of turnover and perhaps some

additional effort in training and resources to do that through the commission would be helpful? they also mentioned slate mail activity, those are regulated under state law and not local law. so there is some confusion there and often confusion in not filing statements. hope that is helpful. thanks. >> any other public comment? >> that is a good thread of an idea, but ms. pelham must know, how are situations like this handled, los angeles or elsewhere? you are on the board of governors of this famous organization. >> so this case -- you know, i was as frustrated as you all are with the circumstances. so i did reach out to the

fppc and learned and read their current administrative termination regulation, which allows the fppc to administrative terminate those committees non-responsive filers with activity below $3,000 and also reviewed their proposed legislation to increase that amount to $5,000 and so non-responsorive filers with $5,000 in bank accounts or less and i reached out to the enforcement division to express support and ask them how we can refer our non-responsorive filers to be terminate by state and we're working on that right now. it's assigned to one of our staff members, johnny hosey to go through and refer all of the non-responsive filers who meet the criteria for termination. i thought why not give our commission the authority as well? so that is something on our list of amendments we would like to ask to cfra to give you the authority to administratively

materialinate a committee that meets certain criteria, so this situation doesn't happen again? as it is right now, we don't have a really good option, because these strict liability violations. as a staff, we can't really make decision about just letting things go. that authority will come as we bring policies to you that gives us that, but right now we don't have the policies in place, which is why it's before you. >> all right. commissioner kopp, you were the author of the amendment, which ms. chiu proposed amending our accepting, but reducing the fine to a dollar -- to $3? >> that is commissioner. >> you had the original motion.

>> mine is the original motion. >> and you don't accept her amendment i will call the question, all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? >> no. >> wait -- what are we voting on? on the amended motion? >> the motion without amendment. in other words, the motion without the amendment. >> to accept staff's recommendation and impose a fine of $3,000. >> i don't know why commissioner kopp is voting no on his own motion? >> i thought you were calling the original motion. >> yes. >> my vote is aye. >> and mine is no. >> no >> so the original motion does not carry. does anyone want to make another motion? >> i would move to amend

staff's recommendation to reduce the fine to again $1 per violation for a total of $3. >> so that the motion is that you would find that there was a violation? >> yes. >> impose a penalty of $1 for each violation. do i hear a second? >> second. >> i will call for public comment on the amended motion. hearing none, i will call the question, all in favor of the motion? >> aye. >> opposed? motion is carried. 5-0. that the commission finds there has been a violation, but imposes a fine of $1 per violation or $3.

>> okay, i just want to be clear on what i need to do other than pay $3? do i need to file form 410 and 460? do i do that? and then pay $3? is that what i do? >> that leaves the legal question if you are no longer treasurer. >> counsel? >> i just want to be clear. >> why don't we extinguish this entity. >> she just wants clear instructions, legally she is still treasurer because the club has not filed a form 410. if you file 410, which i can give you a copy of when we step out. so just a 410, which is

terminating and put in the date you believe it was terminated and file the 460, up until the date it was terminated and i can talk to you more about that if you like and help you. >> thank you all so very much. >> how can she do that? she is longer an officer. she hasn't been affiliated since 2012. she doesn't know if there is money in another bank account. >> i'm sorry, the reason we just found in her violation because legally she is still the treasurer. we find three violations. she can terminate the committee, if she would like? >> i mean, she is still obligated to work with whoever was around the committee, who was in the charge of the committee it was term innated in order to produce documents and we can accept a letter of explanation for that. so she just needs to carry

out her obligations to conclusion and file form 410 and pay $3. >> hopefully the staff will work with her to get that accomplished. turning now to item 5. which is presentation and discussion from the bureau of delinquent revenues about its collection process, status of the ethics commission referrals. >> yes, thank you. commissioners, this presentation is in response to judge kopp's request last month for more information about how the bureau of delinquent revenues operates and an opportunity to have specific questions about our cases answered. three individuals from the bureau of delinquent revenues have come tonight to present that information to you and i will let them introduce themselves and explain more about their roles. >> thank you very much and welcome. >> thank you. thank you for having us.

>> i'm sorry you had to sit for a while. >> very interesting case to listen to. my name is jeff michaels and i'm one of the assistant directors for the bureau of delinquent revenues and this is sheila, one of our collections supervisors and supervisors the collectors who handle the collections on the ethics commission debts and we're here with our policy and reservation manager, amanda freid, who you probably already know. >> welcome. >> i promise to keep this short and respect your time and give basically a high-level overview of the collection services that we provide on your cases, and try to address any questions that you maybe have about the work that we do. so really briefly, the bureau of delinquent revenues being the official collection agency for the city and county, has multiple departments who are referring

delinquent accounts and accounts age to 90 days of delinquency and after that 90th day, we'll have that department notified the debt or referral or email communications. once we received them for your particular cases since we don't have a very large inventory at this point in time, we manually enter them into our collections system and do our immediate collection follow-up process. normally opinion the accounts being referred to us, letters are automatically generated by our collection system. so normally within the first 3-5 days they are already getting a letter from us, welcoming them to the club, and we do all of our initial collection reviews. so the collectors will also if we have phone numbers available and email s available to initiative contact with the debtor. normally after the first

letter goes out we get a response and get them to pay the entire amount in full. if they are unable to pay the entire full amount, we probe and continue our collection efforts including setting up payment arrangements or giving them extensions whenever they can pay the entire amount? there many cases we also get bad address information like some of the information that you may have could be old or from six months, a year-ago. so we'll also do skip -tracing if that is needed and add them to our auto dialer. that is part of what sheila does and we dial on these accounts all day, from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the evening. for people who have not responded to our initial welcome to the club, we will send out a final -- affirm financial notice that contains stronger language as far as the actions we can take [tkp-rbgs/] they are not compliant. so for debtors not

compliant, we do advise that can refer them to a collection agency if the balance is not large value. but still pursable or cases that they are higher balances that are owed, or there is a higher propensity to pay in case where we take them to court. the general -- i guess i would say the general guideline we follow as far as value is concerned we look at cases $1,000 or greater. these cases will receive a more in-depth review by collectors and we'll pull their employment information and property that may be owned. any information that we can find on assets. that review is pretty much done extensively throughout the course of our collection process, from the very beginning making phone call and sending out letters up until whatever the resolution for that debt might be?

so for candidates that are qualified, let's say they owe $2,000 on a bill, and we find that the person is gainfully employed and/or owns property or runs a business in the city, we will send them a demand to advise them that our intent is to sue them. if they don't comply. we normally give them ten additional days to respond to that demonstrate. demand. and if they fail to do so, the collectors are extensively trained and they are trained to file the case in small claims court, and will handle the entirety of the process. so making sure that the debtor is served, appearing at the hearings. we try to do negotiations even at the hearings. sometimes if debtor try to avoid having a judgment entered in their record because once it's obtained it becomes public record and could affect their credit reports and could hit them in a number of ways, they

tend to be pretty client there. ompliant there. if not -- . yes, i'm sorry? >> i may have missed this, how long from the time you initiate collection proceedings against a debtor to the time that you would file in small claims court? >> normally we'll try to do that within the first six months. >> first six months. >> yes. >> thank you. >> we'll do what we can to try to work with them and make multiple efforts to contact. we do what we call "sloppy payers," that they make a payment arrangement and we'll work with them who are working with us, but those not compliant, normally within the first six months we're looking to obtain a judgment to enforce it. once we have obtained they are trained for post-judgment work. the main criteria for any cases that we choose to take to court,

there has to be an ability to pay and enforcement of judgment. if we find there is employment information, our first action is going to be doing a wage garnishment against them. if we receive any payments via check, looking to levy their bank accounts. we do find at the very lisa least, if there is not enough information to give us a clear picture of what their assets look like, we'll record that typically in san francisco we'll look to see if they own any property in any other counties and have it recorded there as well. our goal is that in the event that they try to go into escrow transaction, we'll do what we can do collect on the lien through

the escrow process. for large-balance cases, where they may owe $2500 or greater and have assets we have attorneys within our office to work with to file civil action against them. so the similar review process happens on our anne. normally they want to see all of the active we have done up to the point of the referral to our legal section team. what information we have found that makes it clear this particular debtor is a candidate for legal action at that level and from there they do post-judgment enforcements to collect on the judgments. the judgments are good for ten years. and we'll renew them twice. so for a total of 30 years. so we're not going away any time soon. we try to pursue them, as much as we possibly can.

sometimes you can't find information on them immediately and may not be able to enforce the collection right away, but over the course of the time to make efforts to for collection efforts on that process. in addition to that, we also have quite a few of these case that are city employees. if they are city employees we'll do offsets against their wages. other points to make: we have cases if they are uncollectible and these are cases that we have already hit the wall with our research. there is no property. there is no employment. they don't have a business. we made 6-7 passes of reviews and not finding anything on them and for cases like that, if they are low value, a few hundred dollars those cases are not going to be able to be fully pursued. it's not

cost-effective to pursue them. we have cases that they file for bankruptcy and in that case we have another team that handles all bankruptcy proof of claims and will handle that depending on which chapter the debtor has filed? so that includes if we're going to do a reorg and be able to get installments from assets in the trust account. many cases they file for chapter 7 because there are no assets and we're waiting for the debt to be discharged. so once the court says that is the case, that will terminate our collection efforts at that point in time. for debtors who are deceased, we do the research to see if they have any probate that is estate and the collectors are trained to file creditor claims to collect through probate as well. that is very high-level.

so forgive me if i wasn't detailed enough. if you have any questions for me? >> commissioner kopp . >> did i hear you mention orders of examination? >> yes. so i didn't mention it here, but i mentioned to jessica in our discussions. >> you can see it in the agenda report. we have got a case we acted on last october/november -- what was it about $75,000 penalty item just puzzled why you won't use order of examine of judgment? ? } if we obtain a judgment

against them, the order is an option to pursue. i want to say the last case we got for that size was a real recent transfer -- the last several weeks, maybe two, three weeks. so it has not reached the stage of a judgment just yet. we're still in the initial contact phase, if we're talking about the same one i'm thinking of. >> when a matter is presented to you for collection from an agency, whether it's the general hospital, or the ethics commission, what involved, if any, do you expect from the agency who has referred the matter to? >> normally we have a liaison or contact within the departments -- the referring department that we will work with. so periodically we'll still check-in to see if you received email address? did you receive a mailing address or any recent phone number information? or if they made any payments

to you? a copy of a check? so we'll still collaborate with that department to get updates that may help progress the collection effort. >> how about negotiating a settlement? some settlement? does the agency refer the matter to you have to approve the settlement? >> it depends on the nature of our mou with them. so some deferring departments like the hospital, for example, they give us the authority to settle on those obligation as we deem appropriate. and then we have some clients that we'll consult and get their approval on all settlements negotiations that we do. >> any commissioners have any other questions? thank you very much. >> actually. >> go ahead. >> are you prepared to take specific questions on the outstanding matters that have been referred to bdr from the commission? >> i'm hoping so. >> so in the matter of the committee

to elect normal for supervisor, and bob squarey for district 7, isabel and chris jackson -- two from 2015 and the latter two from 2016. have you filed in small claims for these matters since it's been more than six months since the matters were referred to you? >> okay for chris jackson, yes. so we have three different obligations in total for him. one from -- that was assigned to us in 2011 and one assigned to us in 2013. both of those have judgments against them and liens filed for those obligations. >> okay. >> the third one was referred to us in september of 2016. and that one is not yet suit just yet. so we have communications out to him and do our normal collection process and looking to sue him in the next couple of months if he is

not responsive. >> which was that? >> chris jackson. >> isabel irbano, the difficulty is finding good contact information. we haven't had success finding viable numbers or addresses and won't be able to sue until we achieve that. bob squarey is pending asset review. so we sent him notices. have not located good phone number contact for him just yet and he is currently under asset review. before we had the collectors commit to taking a legal action against him, we want to make sure that they found something to ensure it's cost-effective to take that action. >> and then the committee to elect norman for supervisor. >> is there jacqueline norman? >> we have collection calls

that have been made, but as of today, we have not found assets for her just yet. >> i see. >> which one was that? >> the committee to elect norman for supervisor. >> any public comment? >> thank you. >> thank you for your time. i appreciate it. >> thank you. don't leave yet. >> okay. >> thank you very much. >> hi i'm larry bush for friends of ethics. on occasion the commission will accept the stipulation for a payment over a period of time. i think you had julie ellis, i believe for payment of $500 a month

for a period of time, but i have never seen in any of the subsequent reports whether those payments are being regularly made? so i would like, if in the future, when those kinds of arrangements are made, the report will show it being paid-down as the agreement was made? thank you. >> thank you. >> david pilpel again and i agree with larry's comment and i think it's very well-taken and would be good to follow-up with those stipulations, and payment plans. i just wanted to comment further on the chris jackson referral matter. i heard from the bdr staff just now that they have three different items related to mr. jackson. i only see on the chart page 4 of jessica's report for item 10, two items. so perhaps they broke it up into three, but it would be

nice if the two staff had similar dates and all that? my understanding is that mr. jackson just ran this past november for school board in oakland and is currently a resident of oakland. so i don't know if that helps or hurts their ability to discover his assets, and attach anything? i have nothing personal against him or any of these other actors, i just hope they would pay their debts and get out of the doghouse and be back with the rest of us in a better place. i have talked to staff before about having a larger way to figure out who has fines, forms, fees, et cetera? that are overdue, or have other outstanding obligations to the commission, and find some way to sort of tag all of these people. so that we can publicize them, maybe encourage folks to contact the commission, and provide the funds or forms or whatever is outstanding and get out of that bad place?

so perhaps we'll have a larger discussion of that when we get to enforcement. i appreciate that we have now heard from board of bdr about their process and better communication between the commission and bdr and treasurer's staff. thank you. >> good evening commissioners, my name is ace washington, better known as ace on the case. this is my first time coming before this commission and i have read about this agency and i see you are on the case. the reason i said i came before the ethics commission some five years ago, and the dates that you were all talking about -- excuse me -- about the african american democratic party -- you had charles spencer back

there and the deal is i'm just trying to get some information here. i know i have been to a lot of commissioners' meetings and the agendas i'm familiar with and this long agenda it looks like i'm here until the 12th item. i am african american as you can see here and i would just like to identify myself. i was on the outmigration task force and i'm the czar of the outmigration. i am 62-year-olds and my kids got kids and my question to this commission, i will probably come back at a another date to ask for help from you on some discrepancies on the fillmore, the outmigration and efforts going on. i was surprise to see charles and other people here and i'm

trying to find out what is the function of this junction, what you really do? do you really have backbone you will go after people who make complaints about commissioners, and other issues here? i'm not -- how can i put it this way? i'm not sure what the ethics commission -- i know what ethics is about and i know we need change at city hall and you all call it city hall and i call it silly hall. i just wanted to compliment quentin kopp, a no one sense who will bring credibility to the commission. what i was coming to find i read last year and find out what the mayor is doing, ed lee? because it seems like ed lee has no problem doing anything in the city and county and nobody wants to bring him up on any charges.

i have seen some things happen in 2012 with the elections with some people i'm not going to mention right now that i know personally. but i just want to know if this ethics commission is going to be from a-z up-and-down city hall to make sure that the things that have been going on for a number of years be corrected? because i'm going to be watching. i'm ace on the cases and i'm watching now and i will wait for another time to speak. thank you. >> thank you. all right, turning to -- again i thank the people who came over from the brt bureau of delinquent revenue and good luck and continue with the good work. turning to item 6 that

matter will be determined to the next meet due to health issues -- because of his failure to get notification that would enable him to appear earlier. >> mr. chair? >> yes, david pilpel, i wanted to point out in one of the attachments, exhibit 1 to the warning item. there is an email to mr. warne, and i couldn't find it in the packet and perhaps the packet for next month could include staff's response to the hearings request? that would be helpful thank you,. >> you'll note that jessica? >> yes. >> turning to item 7, discussion and possible action on proposed enforcement policy for investigation

suspension, and parallel proceedings. ms. pelham, do you want to address that? >> okay. thank you, chair. so in the past couple of meetings, judge kopp has requested some discussion of a policy to potentially refrain from indefinite suspension of our administrative investigators while district attorney or city attorney investigations proceed. that effectively is a request for parallel prosecution. so that the ethics commission would proceed on a track that is parallel to a district attorney or city attorney investigation and not concurrently. there is a lot of excellent policy reasons for doing and this most

important preservation of evidence and freshness in mind of memoris for witnesses and just to prevent the staleness of investigations that we're seeing when the district attorney retains an investigation and prevents or least requests that the ethics commission stand down on their investigation for long periods of time, sometimes multiple years and judge kopp suggested a period of 90 days for an ethics commission suspension of investigation at the request of the district attorney and city attorney and we considered that timeframe and think it's a good timeframe and the district attorney should be able to get off on a good start for the investigation at that time and we would support that suggestion by judge kopp and set forward the policy reasons and just justifications and policy for you today.

>> any discussion? mr. kopp? >> i refer to page 4 of the report and the specific language under "ethics commission investigation suspension policy." i have one addition on item 11. which now reads "that the city attorney or district attorney's request, staff will suspend its administrative investigation for 90 calendar days." i recommend adding, "and then resume such investigation." period. secondly, in the following unnumbered paragraph starting with the

words "the executive director reserves the right to decline any request." i ask other commission members here, and of course, the director, and ms. blome and anybody else who wants to offer an opinion on it? the executive director and/or commission. which raises the question of whether the commission has such authority? if it does, then i would recommend that amendment to add those words. if it doesn't, then that's the end of my suggestion. >> yes, the commission doesn't have the authority to initiate an investigation.

so you are not informed when an investigation suspension is requested. so i don't think that -- i don't think that is practical. >> it's not feasible? >> right. >> i'm sorry, i'm not following here. >> well, i would recommend, if it's legal, and it's feasible and practical, the executive committee and/or the commission reserves the right to decline any request to suspend an investigation. >> okay, but we're not saying that commissioner kopp's original observation that as to no. 1, that we should add the language "will suspend it's administrative investigation for

90 days," and add the language "will then resume the investigation." we're not saying that is inappropriate? okay, i got it. that is fine. >> chair renne, i had a question. is there a definition of "good cause?" >> no, it would just be the general standard applied as a term -- like, if there is -- like an example of good cause if we have reason to believe that an employee is about to quit and their emails might go away? just certainly imagining circumstances that could decline a request for investigation. we didn't want to make it absence. absolute. >> thank you. >> commissioner kopp.

>> page 4 refers to the fact let staff continue negotiating with city attorney and district attorney to develop strong parallel proceeding practices. on that point, you are going to let us in on how those discussions are going? >> yes. absolutely. i will include updates in the enforcement report and if you would like to be briefed more often than that, feel free to call me personally. >> okay. >> the idea generally is that as our relationship becomes more built on trust and mutual trust, and mutual respect for investigative techniques that perhaps we would be invited to sit in on interviews or they could be invited to sit on our

interviews and information-sharing would occur cognizant of due process and 4th and 5th amendments and to proceed jointly on the investigations and nobody has to sit on the sidelines. i did mention in the memo there is sometimes justification and quite frequently naturally a criminal proceedings of disposition, like the actual trial would occur before an administrative hearing, just through the nature of how criminal proceedings occur and the speedy trial act and things like this. so we do recognize which investigations would -- i'm sorry, not the investigations, but the actual legal proceedings. but in terms of like the early investigative methodologies of interviewing witnesss and gathering information and collecting emails or data through subpoenas, this is all things -- types of the investigations that can occur parallel. there is no reason to

suspend investigations in our opinion, and we support judge kopp's suggestion for this 90-day policy. >> commissioner keane? >> i think there is no way to actually articulate it in the language, but there certainly should be a recognition of a couple of realities of the interagency relationships. and that is, for example, district attorney's offices. someone who is a line prosecutor involved in investigating something is almost by nature going to say no, no, don't get in my way. your agency should stay out of it. and i think recognition of that should be important and i'm sure will be by the executive director in terms of the fact that no, no, we have a

whole different set of criteria and priorities, and you are proceeding upon the fact if you determine you can't prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, you are going to stop. whereas, we may well be able to prove something far beyond a preponderance and we have established our case. so there should be -- just to shorten this -- there should be a lack of deference to those actions. i mean there should be professionalism and all of of that, but the idea, particularly in the past, there wasn't just deference, but oh, they have told us to not do anything. so that is the end of it. that state of mind should not exist, and should take a critical look at these matters every time you get a request from either the district attorney or the city attorney that

it's important that we stay out of it. because i think in most situations they do it reflexively and without thought. that is just one person's opinion here. >> one thought i had of the amendment that you wanted to make to paragraph numbered 1, it would make it mandatory that the staff would have commence or continue its investigation at the end of 90 days, and there may be circumstances where in the judgment either of the commission, if it came to us, or to the executive director; that we ought not to be immediately proceeding. in other words, 90 days is sort of our default, but there may be good cause why we don't want to? and i just wondered if we

shouldn't just say, "assume its investigation unless the commission or the ed decides otherwise." so it's a default position. >> that is acceptable. >> yes. so add "unless the executive director determine otherwise?" >> and commission. i'm prepared mr. chairman at the appropriate time to make a motion to adopt the recommended suspension policy. i associate myself with commissioner keane's prior remarks. >> do i hear a second? >> second. >> all right. >> commissioner -- >> i will ask for public comment.

any comment? >> commissioners may i just make a point as well for additional consideration and discussion? i think one of the balances we're trying to reflect in the language is the way the enforcement process and investigative process and authority is structured under our existing laws. and part of that is a balance of the commission has a role to adjudicate matters, but doesn't have a role in directing investigations. there is say strong oversight that you have to ensure that we're doing our job appropriately, but i would suggest that the recommendation that you just made, it isn't in alignment with the language that i think we have in the charter and the ordinance about how we go about investigations and probably shouldn't refer to the "commission," but refer to the executive director and you continue to use your oversight role for this policy to ensure we're doing it properly. >> i will accept that. >> mr. chairman, i stated

that is certainly acceptable, but i reflect on the fact that you've got a 10-day period of time before the da or the city attorney says suspend, we're going in. i mean what do you do in ten days? i don't think as a practical matter you have done much in ten days. that is why i said that maybe "resume" isn't even the right word? or "proceed with such investigation?" >> commissioner kopp i'm not suggesting changing that at all. i'm just suggesting that the language not refer to the commission. >> because the commission is prohibited. >> we would support that. >> okay, i will subside. >> any public comment? >> larry bush for friends

of ethics. two points, the recommendation no. 2 deals with the fppc, but i didn't see any real discussion of the fppc in the body of the report. had this been in place, we might not have had the problem we did with a recent case that lost itsability to move toward because of timeliness. so i'm glad to see this. it's also true in my understanding that the fppc's action and enforcement doesn't match in every respect what san francisco law has. that we can take action simultaneously because we have more authority in some cases? for example money-laundering is really a separate san francisco offense, even though it's also a state offense. you have a separate thing to do. on the first thing of resuming after 90 days, i immediately am

reminds of the fact that the district attorney filed charges in february against several members of the commission or staff of the human rights commission over illegal acts that were also illegal under the jurisdiction of the ethics commission. and that has been 11 months. and there has been no action that we have seen during that period of time, undoubtedly they are busy compiling their case. but the public hasn't seen it and i don't know how long it will go on? it seems to me at some point, the ethics commission has a role to step in and say we're expecting some action or we're going to be undertaking the part of the action that relates to our authority as ethics commission. >> mr. chairman, to reply to that, does no. 2 finance bar us

from proceedings? or no. 1 bar us from proceeding in that kind of situation? you are saying it's 11 month, the case hasn't gone to trial and we're sitting here and doing nothing and who knows it will be another continuance, et cetera, et cetera? that doesn't stop us from taking it into consideration and the executive director says we're going proceed to the extent that we can. you are not going to get anything out of defendants, but maybe other avenues of investigation that can be done? do you think that no. 1 prohibits that from happening? >> i do not and i think it's probably time to do it.

thank you. >> from the fppc, i haven't dealt with the fppc in 100 years. >> any other public comment -- i'm sorry? >> i gathered the executive director is satisfied with that language; right? >> yes. >> david pilpel again. a couple of comments. i think this makes a lot of sense and i think it shifts the default to concurrent investigation rather than sequential and potentially reduces some of the problems or potential problems that we have seen or might see. i agree with leeann's comments about the executive director and it's in his or her orbit to determine how to proceed with this particular phase of an investigation. and that the commission retains jurisdiction for overall oversight of the enforcement program, but has specific roles at later

stages of enforcement. it also occurs to me maybe adding -- either adding language or just having a practice that the executive director shall report to the commission any time when the suspension policy is implemented? so that you are aware that there was a request for a delay and that you are just informed that the executive director has chosen for good cause to implement that delay. that seems appropriate to me, i don't know if you want to codify it. and the final point without referring to a specific investigation, i think this language as you have amended it, should be either codified into the procedures for handling investigations, or just exist as a stand-alone policy and be posted to the website. so there is knowledge that this is the new practice going forward? it may not make a lot of

sense to anyone who doesn't otherwise understand the procedures of the commission, but it's certainly a worthwhile endeavor and all to be congratulated for their contributions to it. thank you. >> thank you. >> ace washington again. you know, i'm just sitting back and trying to feel what this commission is and how the process is and see if it goes like the rest of the commissioners' meetings. so i guess i can speak now. talking about investigates and suspension of investigations, and i just talked to the gentleman from oakland, because i didn't know he was from oakland. he informed me i should talk to you afterwards. i'm not sure if i'm going to -- because it looks like this is going to go after 8:00 and i will speak my peace now. i'm interested in next time on the 4th tuesday coming back with some evidence and also complaining and requesting that this commission look

into some of the city's commissioners like for instance -- let me start as i said before i'm the czar of outmigration and i don't know if you know about the african american outmigration and our population goes down to less than 3-4% and the budget has gone up to billions of dollars. when newsom was here and put the committee together we were in $500 million deficit and all of the recommendations and everything that we had put forth in that report just went blank. and all of the department heads they have not reported to no one and last -- it's been ten years since the outmigration and newsom i think is going to run for governor and i know he will be one and i'll be knocking on his door and this commission, i will ask that you open the investigation or find out how i do it into the human rights commission? now this outmigration was turned over to ed lee. ed lee turned it over to the human

rights commission, which he was a director and i worked closely with him. i know ed lee real good and he knows me, but since he has been in office he won't sit down and talk to me. he has put money towards every segment in the county, but not for the african american community. he is in violation and i'm going come to this commission to help me put them on-track again. i go to board of supervisors, which london breed is the president and she was on that committee, too. i'm not going say nothing bad about her, but she is the president now. i'm going to try to put her in line, too and put together a reunion, to find out what is going on with that? i only got a few more seconds, but i'll be able to speak a little bit longer when i have a chance. right now i'm just very concerned about my issues and what do i do to file whatever papers i need? i would like to open up some investigations on the oecd ocii, san

francisco commission housing authority. i would like to invite whenever trump put downs the new director of hud to find out what they are doing. so i got 8 seconds here. my primary objective this year is dealing with the african american community, specifically. moved as amended and seconded by commissioner -- >> i'm sure ms. pelham will let us know in her report. you give us a report every month and have space in there for that. >> i will call the question, all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? it's carried unanimously. turning to agenda item 8.

it's a presentation and discussion on new ethics commission website and plans outreach activities. do you want to go ahead? >> steve massey, electronic disclosure and data analysis manager and for those on the commission in 2015, you may recall that i gave a presentation about a new vision for the commission's website, and i'm pleased to announce we launched the new website last year and i'm hoping that we can get the presentation up on the television. perhaps we could call -- there we go. so the new website is really complete rethinking of the way users

interact with our site. we wanted to make the site more user-friendly and more user-centric and as far as the homepage we wanted users to be presented with relevant content pertinent to the particular filing season or election going on, rather than bombarding them with all potential services and offerings on our website. so just to reflect on where we have come from, this is our website as it was in 2005 when i started. and was pulled down in 2009. it's hard to see there, but there are a number of choices on the screen. it pretty much represents all of the potential services we had at that period of time. what we found users would go to the site and would be lost in the sea of links as far as which section pertained to them? and during a particular filing season, the most pertinent links were not really brought to their attention. they just had a choice of

all of our services. now in 2009 we replaced the website with the department of technology, and we did reduce the number of choices on the website, but over time our mandates have changed. we brought on new regulated areas such as permit consultants major developers and expenditure lobbyists and tacked that on to the existing website and also the way people file statements has changed. back in 2009 most forms were filed in paper format and most people downloaded the compliance information in paper. manuals were printed. and now most users file their statements electronically. they pay their registration fees or late fees electronically online, and they can even sign their campaign statements electronically. so that has all been tacked on to the existing website as well and it's been disorganized and

somewhat difficult to use. in december we replaced the website and unfortunately it's difficult to see on this screen -- you may see it better on your monitors. i wanted to focus on the top-section of the page, because that what most people see when they pull up the website -- they wouldn't see the entire website all at once. so this is the main section of the homepage that would appear on most people's monitors and there is a great reduction in the number of choices on the screen. at the top here, we reduced the number of sections on site to just five. there is the commission's section, where we have all of the information about the activities going on at the commission-level. we have a new compliance section. this is to try and educate those in the regulated community about the actual actions that they need to take to comply with the law. we have a new disclosure section,

targeted towardses the public, who are consuming the statements filed with our office. we have an enforcement section where people can go to file a complaint or learn about the activities or enforcement division. we have a law section, where can you learn about the pertinent local laws that apply to the commission and research advice letters. then on every page we have added a new e-file button, where can you can go to log into your account or pay fees or sign your electronic statements. the main focal point is the banner section. this is what the website looked like december 21st when we launched it. what we plan to use this section for is to draw attention to the most relevant information for this period of time. so it may be difficult to read on the screen there. but the banner on the homepage right now is targeted at users who

need to file their final semi-annual statement due january 31st to close out the activity for the campaign -- for when they were active during the election. that is why the banner there is the "campaign is over, but disclosure is not," meaning that you have disclosure obligations even after the election has ended. the learn more button you can click there that tells you what you need to comply with the january 31st deadline. over time we'll change this banner, depending on the filing season. for instance you can imagine that before the form 700 filings are due on the april 1st deadline we'll have a banner that is targeted at those users. so people do not have to hunt and peck around the website to find the most relevant content. we have also added four links at the bottom to target our most

frequently used services. the old website didn't really have very much information on requesting advice from the information. so we added a section to get guidance from the commission, whether it's informal advice or formal advice and we discuss how to request that. we have a section here for e-filers to set up an account to register as lobbyist for form 700 to open a new campaign committee and to log into accounts and to sign their campaign statements. we have a button here which says, "view disclosures." as you may recall there were changes made to the campaign finance reform ordinance that requires campaigns in mailers to put a disclaimer on the mailer that says that you can view financial

disclosures at sfethics.org to find that information in any of our data formats. and finally we also wanted to provide a more obvious "file a complaint" button on the homepage. the complaint section on the previous website was really lacking. so now we have a new complaint's section that i will go over in a few minutes. another thing it has changed about the users would come to our website since 2009 in 2009 most users used a desktop computer. according to our statistics, no users had mobile phones who were accessing our site. at this point, one in ten users are actually using a mobile phone to consume the content on our website. and so if you pull up our previous website on a mobile phone, what it will do is scale the website, which is designed primarily for a

computer with 10-15" computer to 4" size and becomes completely unreadable. so the site is now designed to scale the content to appropriate font size and interface, depending on the device that you are using, tablet, phone or very large screen. we have actually imported all of the content from the previous website. there were about 4500 pages that were brought in. we reorganized it and rewritten a lot of the content. we have also add new sections to the site related to the commission's activities. we have added a section on our budget requests, that we made last year and we'll be making going forward. we have a new policy issue section. that is a page that will be maintained by our new policy staff. it's really targeted at

making the public more aware of the different policy discussions that are going on at the commission-level. one thing that i have become aware of over time is sometimes when the commission has a policy discussion that spans multiple meetings, sometimes folks come in late to the discussion, and they want to get up to speed on the current status that policy discussion. what are the relevant documents? what is the current proposal? and going back and researching prior agendas and minutes is very time-consuming. so we want to put all of the relevant documents on that policy page and get someone up to speed quickly, so they can participate in the discussions at the commission-level. we have also added a staff page. so there is no mystery now as far as whatever's role is at the commission. there is an organizational chart there. we have listed everyone's working titles, and email addresss

for all staff. so if you need to contact a particular person, that is now listed on the website. we have a new complaints section, which i will talk about in a minute. we have also added a new compliance process walk-through. so before we had these printable manuals to be downloaded on our website. now we have come up with a more standard template for how to proceed with going through start it finish for any of the different disclosure processes. for instance for lobbyists, there is information about how to register. how to pay your fees? how to comply with the filing requirements? and then how to terminate as a lobbyist, and following that, what happens if you are audited? or what happens if an enforcement action is brought against you? so we have documented this for each of the different types of regulated entities that file with our office.

we also have reorganized the disclosure section on our website. back in 2009, when our previous website was put up -- most users came to the website and downloaded the pdf versions of basically paper financial statements. and now there is different types of users who access our content in very different ways. some people still access the more traditional financial statements, but other people will also download or content in spreadsheet formats and various data formats. they may also be sort of the citizen programmer or researcher, who makes actual queris in our databases and using an application interface and we documented each of those sections and we'll continue to work on that section of the site over the course of the next year. one of the requests was made

at the last meeting when i initially presented the website was to add a searchable advice letter section. so we have gone about and done that. you can now search all of our past advice letters by category, by law, by section, by data range and key word to help you find any relevant advice letters that may have been issued in the past. the site is now being transmited securely. before we only securely transmitted sensitive information such as credit cards or your actual forms that you are filing. but now we have secured all transmissions with our site. there are a number of security benefits to this, but one of the primary ones is that a user goes to our site and sees they are secure connection and knows they are on the official ethics commission and not a fake website or another

website mimicking our content. we have also added new sections to our site to be in compliance with the language access ordinance. now we have sections for content in chinese, spanish and filipino. we have translated information about the commission and our contributor guide into these languages, and as the new content is written, and resources are made available, we'll also be adding that content to those sections as well. now going back to the complaints section of the website: on the previous version of the website, if you went to the complaints section, you could download the form to file a complaint and you could also download the ethics commission regulation for investigation and enforcement proceedings which is about a 20-page document of regulations about the process that a complainant can go through to file a complaint and what

happens after that? and it's a confusing document. the first page of that document just goes over definitions, defining with "city" means, what "credible" means et cetera and it's not the most user-friendly document to get through. so we approached uc hastings and some of their students were tasked with drafting a plain-languaged version of these enforcement regulations, and we took that document that they worked on, and we made some additional improvements to it, and we posted that to the website. so we now have a new section on filing complaints, which goes over general information about filing a complaint. what types of complaints can be filed with our office? and then also, a deep-dive -- it's hard to see here -- but there is a submenu where it talks about what is involved in preparing a complaint?

what happens when you submit the complaint? what happens after you submit the complaint? what happens during an investigation? what happens during a settlement or a probable cause hearing? and hopefully that will demystery the process for some folks. some of the feedback we received over time is sometimes people are confused after they file a complaint, what their role is as being the complainant and what exactly is supposed to happen after the complaint has been filed? so hopefully this will help. before complaints are filed, and if it doesn't, at the bottom of the page, there is a button here. i'm just going to zoom in on this section that says "was this page helpful?" there is a button to provide feedback to the commission and if you click that, a form will appear and you can provide feedback about that particular page.

when staff receives that feedback we'll know what page and when we received that feedback to provide very targeted improvements to the site. just in the past month since we had the site up, we have received both critical feedback and positive feedback. we have also received feedback via our social media pages. some of the positive feedback we received hallelujah, motto: ethics on the movie. love the site. so easy to use on mobile, much improved website as part of the reboot of the ethics commission and i want to talk about some critical feedback we received. on the commissioners' page, someone wrote less helpful page and user those scroll to find that information. on our lob ist disclosure page, someone said they couldn't

figure out how to view the actual filed reports and found the links confusing. on the homepage, someone wanted us to list the up coming meetings rather than just listing past meetings. so these are actually very targeted feedback that we can look at that page and if we start seeing a lot of feedback about a particular issue, we can prioritize it and start to make improvements to that section. and so at this point, the website project is not done. it's a project that will always be under continuous improvement. we like to incorporate a lot of community feedback through a variety of different methods, and so this year, we're really blessed to have a senior fellow working on our staff. that person has been added to our staff through the senior pello

fellow program and will work on the website until next october. in the past few months she has brought a lot of new ideas and energy to this website project and i would like to give her a moment to talk about what she is working on the website through next october. >> thank you, steven. good evening, commissioners. i want to provide a brief update on the different initiatives that i'm working on. over the last few months i have been working with the staff to learn more about the programs that we administer and also the online tools that we make available to filers and the public. based on our current priorities, we have identified three key areas to work on in the upcoming months. the first one is form 700. we're currently working on preparing for outreach and training

for the filers as part of the our upcoming filing deadline. in the process i'm looking at our online content on the website. our communications strategy, as well as guidance and detail. so i'll be looking at ways to redesign the content, to make sure that our filers and filing officers are able to find the information that they need to comply with the filing requirements. the second area that i'll be working on is data disclosures. we have a lot of data available on our site. but then sometimes it can be challenging to understand and interpret the data. so i'm going to be looking at understanding the user needs and identifying different types of user groups who consume our data? and look at ways in which we can supplement our data with additional documentation and content? that will help them better understand the data. so make it more

readily available and easy to use. the third area is continuous improvement of our website. as steven mentioned earlier in his presentation we have a feedback option imbedded with every site and i'll be figuring out how to incorporate them in our site? in addition to that i'm working with coit to participate in a tech program that they are working on called "public voice program." i can go deeper into that on the next slide. this is a coit initiative to bring together city agencies and local partners to facilitate users' testing session where local residents can provide feedback on city services and websites. we're really excites that

they have selected the ethics commission as the initial candidate to conduct user testing sessions. right now we're working with a few local partners and civic makers in the civic innovation and they will be coordinating the program, logistics and management to conduct the user testing session. lighthouse for the blind is an organization that provides accessibility services. they will be providing us guidance on how we can make our site more accessible for persons with different abilities. we're also working with microsoft. they are going to be providing us technology support to support the user testing program. to give some more context on the [ao-urgs/] testing section to give you an idea: what we're trying to do is reach out to a wide

range of public members from the communities with different backgrounds, different digital skills and different understanding of local government. and get them to sign up to participate for testing sessions and we're going to be conducting the sessions in our san francisco local libraries and we'll identify certain test scenarios to identify on the site and testers will get that information to us. we can then look at the feedback and test results and identify improvements to the site to sections on the site and hopefully that will make it a better experience for the community at-large. apart from this, we're also looking at our website accessibility. so accessibility is ensuring that our content is accessible to differently abled persons. and as a part of our launch, we did some accessibility testing.

we have also taken into consideration different things that we need to provide, different types of support we need to provide for accessibility. for screen readers and making sure that the content is displayed in a visual manner that is easy for people to consume. we're also going to be getting professional consultation with lighthouse for the blind later this week, where we'll have more feedback on how to improve our site with respect to accessibility. so we're excited and looking forward to these initiatives working with local partners and continuing to improve our site. later on once we have more feedback we'll come back with more information. we're happy to answer any questions you may have. >> any commissioners have any questions? i went on the site and i did find it easier to deal with than the

old one. so much of what you are telling me is wonderful. commissioner keane? >> i just think what you have done is very commendable. it's a big improvement on the site. it's a big improvement on the way the commission is able to facilitate things for the public, and i want to thank you both very much. >> i would like to echo that. i think that now in 2017, people access information not through paper, but going online and looking things up on the internet and my kids and i do it and it's important for us as government to keep pace with the innovations coming out and the accessibility of information that you are literally have at your fingerprints and i think the site is

a great leap forward from 2009 to now, eight years ago it was launched and revamped. so i say thank you, and kudos for the hard work and keep it up. >> i feel the same way. particularly like the complaint portion of it. that is great. that is really important. >> thank you for that feedback, commissioners. it is really notable, i think from the staff's perspective that this is intended to be a work in progress. so we're very excited about having our executive director fellow to lead that effort and outreach and we're looking forward to getting more feedback how the site can speak to users need it in the way in which they need it? the other observation i will share, it's been wonderful for us as staff to be challenged to start thinking how we communicate? not in the way we think about delivering services through programmatic channels, but again, how does the user want to find the information that is most useful to them? so it really is

kind of provoking all of us to think fresh with this tool that is so important. i did want to underscore all of our appreciation for the work that steven and gija has been leading us that started prior to my arrival and hat's off to staff who did a great job getting it started. thank you for your comments tonight. >> commissioner keane. >> i just want to add one observation, as to how much things have changed. i think it was about three years ago or so, where the suggestion was made that we put all of our materials in the various languages that we have in san francisco, spanish, and chinese tagalog and all of that and i

remember the executive director being bitterly opposed to that and being able to get the board at that time with commissioner renne and myself and commissioner hayon were able to vote that we do that. but somehow that was grudgingly done and certainly the attitudes relating to the changes and the modernization of something has important a multi-lingual city like san francisco having the materials in all those different languages and you did it automatically and no question in your mine you were going to do that and you did. it's just an observation and i think the things are changing quite well. >> did you say you also have it in chinese? i heard spanish and? philippine?

>> we can now support chinese, spanish and filipino. we have translated some initial content. there because also content that was previously translated that is no longer relevant because those elections have passed. so the information that is currently posted is just information about the commission, and the contributor guide, which is really relevant to any election. and as new guides and new information is developed for upcomeing elects, and new programs, as resources are made available through the budget, we'll have those translated as well. >> are you talking about cantonese? >> i think it's more the issue of traditional or simplified chinese and i don't remember which it is. >> i believe san francisco is mostly cantonese. >> it's the spoken language, not the written language. >> thank you very much. appreciate all your efforts.

turning to agenda item 9, discussion and possible action. >> we have public comment. >> i guess i didn't ask for public comment. >> i didn't wait for you to ask. i just wanted to suggest a number of changes to make this specifically valuable to larry bush -- -- your page could include a link to sfgtv's when you have the videos of your commission meetings, it would be nice to see that link on our page. i would like to see a one-stop search. so if i were going to follow an action, let's say the larry bush development corporation has got a development going and i would be able to put in that entity, and follow the lobbying that was done for that entity? where it goes to the board

for votes, contributions, any behests and gifts so i can follow actual the way in which city decisions are made and each of the steps that they are going through? in that respect it would be good to include on the commission page links to upcoming board meetings where the commission is providing input. the executive director is mentioning three different measures that are pending before the board. supervisor farrell, supervisor breed, supervisor peskin, and i know there will be input coming from the commission. so if i could go on the commission page and immediately see here are pending issues at the board of supervisors that the ethics commission has scheduled a discussion of those issues so i could see those right on. i would like to see links to the enforcement actions taken by other jurisdictions affecting san francisco. for example, when the fppc

fines somebody that is a san francisco entity, i would like to be able to see that in one place. and finally in that same respect when other jurisdictions are taking up issues that are relevant to us -- for example the fppc announced an ip meeting on rewriting the cal access web pages that woefully out of date and woefully probatic. that data is certainly important to san francisco people trying to understand the flow of money and other issues. if you would put on your web page, something like the upcoming cal access meeting under related relevant information, that would satisfy me for this month. thank you. >> thank you. >> david pilpel of. a again want to thank steven

for all of his work over the years and we talked about this september, october, 2015 and it's been more than a year and thank you and thank you to the fellow i haven't met and name with of i would screw up and would just say thank you. i would assume the website continues to evolve as things change that they are highlighted interest persons meetings, draft, all kind of fun stuff. it will be great. i also assume particularly with the translated materials and disabled user enhancements there is coordination with ocea and mayor's office on disability, so whatever the city standards for translation and for accessibility are used here and that we're not sort of doing our own thing? and just finally to the extent that the staff learns both

through feedback and experience what works for outreach, if that is useful to be shared with other city departments. so it's not like you are doing it well and the puc and port aren't. if you are doing it well, share it with others and hopefully everyone can be up to the high steven massey standard and i'm encouraged to hear about the larry bush development corporation. that is a positive development. [laughter ]. >> any other public comment? i have been requested to take a 10-minute break and we'll come back and complete the agenda.

recommendations for fiscal '18 and '19. >> good evening commissioners, yes item no. 9 is presented to you for your consideration and possible action this evening related to the development of our budget submission, which all departments are required to submit this year, february 21st to the mayor's office. i would note that the commission's next regular meeting is february 27th and so wanting to make sure you had an opportunity to weigh-in on policy direction for when our budget submission should look like. i put together a report that reflects the staff's recommendation where we are at this point in our

development and our progress toward as achieving the blueprint that is approved by the mayor and board of supervisors and adopting the fy'17 budget. so i wanted to walk through briefly the key areas as we see them and our hope this would be a frame work with recommendations that the commission would be supportive of that would give direction to me and staff to prepare the document to submit next month in accordance -- unlike last years blueprint for accountability we have estimates in this budget and we would want to take advantage of time and i will get into that in a few minutes to make sure the numbers we're looking at are as accurate as possible, based on policy

direction you give us this evening. with that, i will walk through a recap. first of all, last year, which the commission submitted its budget, i had understood that it was a request for a two-year budget cycle. as it turns out, we're not on what is called a fixed 2-year budget as a department, unlike some departments are and the city apparently. so our office like many are required to submit a budget for the coming fiscal year and fy'18 and 19 together, which in a mind is not a bad thing with a year of experience at staff-level to reflect on what our continuing resource needs are, and where we best need to apply additional resources in the coming year to continue to try and meet the goals that the commission established last year. the areas that were intended to guide our work. we have talked about organizational efficiencies and more effective enforcement program and supporting

compliance with stronger information for those who are required to comply with our laws. and a strengthened policy direction. when he look back at the year we establish a number of key pieces for that blueprint to be furthered development. as this document reflects where we still have work to do and those are the recommendations that i would like to highlight for you. the first is that when we look at our recommendations overall, one the key recommendations that we have it's important to align our staff positions and resources with the nature of the work that we actually have to do. what that translates to in specific terms is a request for two new positions. that i believe are necessary to provide the level of oversight day-to-day in management of our programs. in our core education and outreach work, and in our audit programs. i'm proposing that we recommend two senior administrative

analysts, each of whom would be tasked with oversee and working with the day-to-day program delivery of our education and campaign finance lobbying and ethics arena and also to strengthen our audit program. but we realize when we do that we're looking at delays that we need to correct and part of this, i think, needs to have additional resources to support the day-to-day management of the program. what we find as we have in many program areas when we have to have staff multi-tasking too much, we're not able to focus on the work that they need to do because they have got split responsibilities. so one of the key areas is recommending that we have that appropriate level of staffing that can actually manage programs. the classification of the

positions need to match supervisory and programmatic responsibilities that we have and that is not currently what we have and we have challenges delivering the services that are core to our function. secondly, i think it's probably clear to you and many in the room that the commission had a significant underfunding of the tools and training and staff development resources that again the work we're doing really does require. this budget framework proposing to change that historic underfunding by recognizing through specific line items that have not existed to-date, things like improved outreach and training resources for our staff, ongoing investments that are required in our technology to make sure we achieve the policy goals that new legislation proposed -- is

proposing to accomplish. so this is an area where technology, we are looking at things like case management software. so we can better track our enforcement cases. that we can better use that information to monitor our own work and to understand where we're coming into pinch points? as we're increasing our staff and have more robust investigations and enforcement and more serious cases we really need to be able to track that information, and spreadsheets are probably not the best way to go about doing that. so looking at jurisdictions like the fppc to see where we might be able to find programs that will help us? that is again getting our work up to the level that it needs to be to do the work that we're required to do. that for example is -- initially estimated to be perhaps $20,000 one-time cost. in addition the report notes the variety of policy initiatives that

have been either adopted or are being recommended by the board of supervisors so far where there has not been funding in the ordinance, in the legislation, to enable the disclosure requirements to happen in an online setting. we know that technology -- that disclosures are really only as good as the filers' ability to complete the requirement easily, and as ensuring it's easy for the public to access that information. transparency through online filing tools is critical in our view and need to make sure that any ordinance that may be proposing or enacting changes actually comes with the resources to enable our system to be modified to accommodate the expectation that we create by having new laws and new disclosure requirements on the books. when we look at some of the recent policy initiatives initiated with my the board we're estimating a ballpark

of $150,000 for fy'18 to accomplish implement those. we had a conversation about translations. one of the things that we have not done a good job at historically is identifying line items and cost it's will help us translate our information to communities that may not have english as first language we have identified ballpark of $5,000 a year that would enable us to [skpa-pb/] expand on a regular basis that on line is updated as they need to be, working with the appropriate offices in the city to do that. we have sort of had to play catch-up over the past years with where is that money going to come from? it's a pressing need and to continue to reach out to a broader community it's important to have the

resources in the budget and funded to reflect that work and to support that work. in our staff development and training again having the right staff positions is critical and having the right staff with the right skills and training and refreshers is really christ. critical. jessica and i know at the council on governmental ethics law a tremendous resource for our staff to understand and build up skills and auburn new ideas and making sure that we have some staff each year attend the conference something in my judgment is very important for our agency. and also providing the kinds of skills training, on-boarding for new investigators, deposition training is one of the things that jessica identified for new investigators who come on-board some of these may be one-time costs and other areas where we have identified $1,000 a year, for example, per staff person to go and really strengthen their

skill areas is something that we would like to identify. we have identified some specific areas, but we also need to take a hard look at supporting staff in recruiting exceptioning and keeping exceptional staff. in the third area is something that is a bit broader question that we're trying to get a handle on over the next month. i'm not interested in coming to you with a blank check request. but i think it's important to recognize that as we have expanded our staffing, to 22, we have now saturated our existing office with one conference room. if we were appropriated and authorized for two additional people we're asking the bottom-line for that space to make sure that we

have the space with the work we're required to do. so we're thinking big and we know that may be a longer term effort, but in my view it's important once you have the right people and right skills to doing right work to have the kind of support to deliver the kind of work in the way that we expect it. so that going that we're going to talk to the department of real estate and other departments in the city to understand what that involves and what those costs are. it's something that needs to be recognized as a cost and cannot be an afterthought. it will mean we're hampered in perhaps expanding our staff to the right level simply because we don't have chairs to put people in. so i want to think big and pressing for the idea to have appropriate staff for staff and training and for the work that we're required to do. lastly i want to come back to a fourth point and that is making sure that we continue to extend the use that we have been planning to be key

performance indicators. one thing we're happy about to track in baseline ways for example, our enforcement caseload. how old those cases are and what nature they are? that has been critical for us to ask questions for whether we're going about the work in best way? it enables the public to ask questions and enables you to have proper oversight and ask questions. we need to expand that kind of process to all of our areas, when we start restaffing in some new area. so those are the kind of indicators that we need to develop and put in place, so we can tell the public and you all, how we are using these very important dollars to accomplish the goals that voters have set for us and we believe that is going to be an important piece of it, too. we don't want that to get lost. it's something that we have started to do but not seen through because of competing priorities, but we're committed to in the coming year. because we know that the city has

very important choices where it's spending its money and we'll hopefully be able to make the pitch in the next month's budget with your approval. that this is the sort of budget that we need to continue to build on. so that we can see our work through in the way that we have identified and the vision that you set forth last year. so that a bit of an overview. i would say in sum, the request that we're looking for at this point is approximately $513,000 for fy'18 and approximately $338,000 in fy'19. again, ballpark subject to some refinement, but to give you a sense that is about 15% increase and about 10% increase based on current operating budget figures. so i just wanted to give that you overview and happy to answer any questions that you and get your

direction for next month's policy submission. >> what surplus is present in the budget that supposedly we were going to have four investigators on-board. we don't have any of them, and maybe it will be march? so that for a period of from july to march we didn't pay any salaris for those. does that result in our having a pot that we can shift over to '18? >> no. >> in '18? >> no, unfortunately it didn't work that way. if departments are saving money one year, it's the use-it-or-lose it. to use it for other

appropriate functions we'll do that. but it's clear that when we have salary savings, that is not a question of whether we're going to fill the positions, but a question of when? they are all on-track and i don't want to get ahead of myself, because i was hoping to talk about that during the executive director's report, but it's something that affects our enforcement work, as well as our work generally. the delay and time it takes to hire staff. >> i'm just curious in terms of what we budgeted for '16-17, we aren't going to be paying the salary amounts that we budgeted. and you say that just goes by the board. so we'll have spent less money than we were authorized? can we use that as any kind of carry to the city and saying look,

we didn't spend all the money we had, so we ought to get some more? >> unfortunately i don't think they see it's a carrot and i will make available to you and the public what is our salary savings. we went through the exercise of our salary savings and encumbrances and some costs we have been deferring. to the extent that some of the costs are deferred are appropriate to be used through salary savings we with do that. i want to make sure i have that information, but i don't have it and don't want to state it inaccurate. >> for example, there is $20,000 worth of case management software that would be a potential expense in fy'18 would that be pulled forward? >> i think it's possible if we identify it and i want to make sure that the salary savings can be used for that function? i don't have that information sitting here, because i know there are some restrictions what that money

can be used for. i think last month when the commission heard from the mayor's budget analyst, there was recognition that the fact that we have not been yet able to fill positions does not sound like that is going to be held against us in terms of obviously you didn't need those positions? i think there is wide recognition that the process of city has to go through non-exempt positions which is more than half of what we have been hiring and there is a process and time it does take. so we've been able for example, to use salary savings this year to bring on-board through a work order a senior personnel analyst from the department of human resources who is dedicated solely to our department's hiring processes for the next six months. so we have been able to use -- again, i don't want to misstate the dollar amount, but using significant amount of salary savings to pay for someone who primes the pumps to get that staff in the door. >> i had a question about the guidance that the mayor's

office has provided about the possible 3% reduction. what is concerning to me is that we're just getting started with this new fy'17 budget and trying to hire the four additional ftes, and that if the 3% reduction is going to be required, that would effectively eliminate half of those; right? and i would suggest in the budget submission that we put forward, i think it would be unwise for the city to require us to eliminate those positions. the biggest savings that we would have is from staff positions. because i think it would send a terrible message to the people of san francisco that we'll give you money in fy'17 and take it away one year later and that means they are not serious about ethics and i don't think that is the message that the city wants to send and i don't think that is what the mayor

certainly believes. but by virtue of requiring across the board 3% reduction, in that passion, that fashion -- that is in effect what will happen. and second two ftes you mention on page 3, that would be two new positions. so that would bring the total staff count from 22 to 24, is that correct? >> correct. >> okay. that would be the cost of -- $500 and change in fy'18 and $338, so all of these initiatives. so the net effect would be an additional to the budget. >> at this point what we have identified. >> commissioner keane, i just want to associate myself with commissioner chiu's observations and i agree with her very strongly in records to that -- regards to not allowing

any of those cuts to take place and i'm sure you are up on it, but you are still somewhat new to the city in terms of the games played in the budget process in the mayor's office and board of supervisors and commissioner kopp long-term member of the board of supervisors. you have some confidence that the mayor is not going to look at the salary savings because we haven't used the positions. you have some confidence that the mayor is not going to do that. that is great. probably your confidence is correct. but you have to watch out for the board. because the board, they can't add to anything, but they can cut. and so when particularly they see harvey rose's office and

they haven't used that and you are likely going to have a recommendation from the budget analyst's office that they haven't used it and they will cut it and maybe -- i don't presume, if i am, to be lecturing you on something that you already covered -- you may want to start lobbying the budget analyst, and getting in the ear of the budget analyst for the board in aspect of not snatching away that part of your budget, our budget that has not been spent because oh, well you didn't spend it, you didn't need it -- to me that would be a big concern. i did the budget for the public defender's office for 20 years and these are the things i really had to watch out for. >> i appreciate your wisdom on that and think it's an important

note to underscore. so again, with the policy direction that hopefully we can come out tonight's meeting with, very much making a priority getting in early to these conversations about the budget. demonstrating very clearly what the ongoing need is and the expanding work is that many of the board members are looking for us to provide. so i think there is a good basis to make those arguments you are suggesting. >> you have to get it from budget office because the members of board are dealing on massive stuff and rely on the budget analyst and if the budget analyst says they don't need it, cut it. no matter what the presentation you make, you go with the budget analyst. so you have to have the budget analyst wired on these things or else it's not going to happen. >> commissioner kopp. >> i will just add for informational purposes that the charter

has been changed so that they'll take the mayor's budget, budget analyst for the board will examine it and make recommendations of reductions. the board will effectuate those roductionsreductions and then the board has the legal right under the new and improved charter to add money back to substitute from the reduction from the mayor's and in effect you have two opportunities. the recommendation of course of conferring with the budget analyst is one. but after that you'll have certain

champions on the board of supervisors if something needs to be rectified. >> we expect all the open positions will be filled by the end of the fiscal year? >> yes. >> by when? >> by the end of the fiscal year. >> end of the fiscal year is june 30th. >> yes, the answer was yes, we did expect to have it filled by then and sooner, i believe. >> terrible. >> let me say, i think that the groundwork that ms. pelham and i assisted with the mayor and a number of the supervisors talking about the budget, there was real enthusiasm for what you were presenting and i think what you outlined here, that they will be receptive to.

because i think they were receptive to what we asked for even in the face of the mayor at that point wanting 6% over two years. so i don't think we should be bashful and i think we keep moving forward. i think there is a sense both from the mayor's office and at the board that the commission is much more active, and is much more effective than it was in the past. and i don't know if any of them in the face of our 85% on prop t are going to say we're going to start cutting the ethics commission. so i would go forward in the direction that this memo says.

do you want a motion on that regard? >> i don't know if it's necessary, but if the commission feels inclined, it's welcomed. i leave it up to you. >> you have to do it by february 21st. >> yes. >> any public comment? good evening chair renne and commissioners and executive director pelham, i'm a friend of ethic and just wanted to say friend of ethics strongly supports the commission's framework for the operating budget for the coming year. the new and improved website, which was discussed earlier is a demonstration of funds well-spent. additionally, it has been reported in the media lately that this commission has an enormous backlog. however, those reports failed to mention that that backlog is due in large part to understaffing and

inaction of the previous executive director and his lack of enforcement. the budget requested will be in the long-term, a cost-savings for this city. and this commission and its staff are to be commended on the exemplary jobs that they have been doing to put things on solid footing. thank you all very much. >> thank you. any other public comment? >> larry bush, also with friends of ethics. any career has been spent a lot with elected officials and i have learned that they learned something from position papers, but learn more from anecdotes and just talking to steve massey about the major donors filing on the ethics page. it's a paper filing, because there was no money to make an electronic filing. and if you were to use that as an example, of the kind of things that could be done with this budget and should be done, you would

probably find 11 supervisors who would immediately agree that yes, major developers filing should be electronically filed. so that they are much more readily researched. so a few examples like that, underscore what is in the position papers, but excellent work. thank you. >> thank you. >> david pilpell again. a couple of comment points i will admit i haven't been if that building, but last i recall room 70 was a large conference room and perhaps that can be used for staff meetings. i support the direction that is proposed. i think you do need to take a motion. the charter still requires each commission to have a budget hearing and i think this is it for next year, tonight, right now. so i think a motion of support is in order and i support that.

i hope that the staff report for this item will be posted on the website, and ultimately the budget submission with a summary of the 24 positions, 22 base plus the two. the $500,000 to $800,000 increment and the whole nine yards there and to really support both the current budget and proposed increase in anticipation of commissioner keane's perceptive view is more data on the backlogs in audits and enforcement and that really more than anything, i think, makes the case for funding the existing staff and funding the expansion. so that we're right sized as you have properly used the word. and the more you can get that out there, attach it to the submission to the mayor's office, support that with the budget analyst, be around in june for all of the fun and games, et

cetera. that is all to the good. and just finally, we originally had three now we have four new supervisors. if the staff perhaps with chair renne haven't had the opportunity to sit down with then and explain the history and backlog and talk about the priorities and translation and other stuff floating at the board and the need to fund new programs, et cetera, et cetera is all to the good and hopefully will be as supportive as others have been in past for doing the right thing. >> thank you. >> i have a question, mr. chairman, of ms. blome. why do you -- on page 2, with the graph refer to non-grant funding? >> thank you for the question. this is a term that is kind of a term of art used in the budget document. that essentially means operating stuff. the grant funding as the

budget refers to is allocation for the public financing program in our instance. >> thank you. i learn something every meeting. [laughter ] >> i tend to agree with mr. pilpel and would welcome a motion to endorse the proposals that are outlined in the staff memo. >> so moved. >> second. >> i will call the question. all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? motion is carried unanimously. turning to agenda item 10, discussion of enforcement report, and update from various programmatic and operation highlights of the enforcement program. ms. bloem. yes, thank you, chair. so i'll try to be brief, but

i have been busy this month, doing some policy development and some research and analysis, and a little bit of investigating as well, which we'll talk about later. i drafted and researched the suspended investigations and parallel proceedings policy that we talked about earlier. we're also looking at the best way to move forward with the weekend filings deadline policy. that has become somewhat critical as we work with net file to do improvements to our website. and our filing system. and to input deadlines for the year's filings. some of our ordinances give grace periods for weekends and holidays and others do not, which makes it somewhat confusing for the coders and our fines collection officer. so we want to be consistent, and so we're probably going to do it as a matter of regulation in our

enforcement regulations and you should be doing that in next month or two. i spent a good deal of time preparing for and attending a sunshine ordinance task force committee hearing. as a result of the michael petralis complaints related to the sign he brought to the meeting in a believe it was september. and then the second was regarding the meeting decorum paragraph in november. that was read aloud. mr. petrelis believes that we violated the sunshine ordinance in a couple of ways. the to affect disagreed with him with regard to the sign -- i'm sorry, the committee did, but they referred to the full panel of the to affect. so to return for a meeting on february 1st in the evening. and then the task force committee fund we did not violate the

sunshine ordinance in some ways, but did in others with regard to the meeting decorum paragraph. essentially their argument is that we did not require or provide public notice and comment on the meeting decorum paragraph and that it was a policy that should have been noticed and made available for public comment. we think they are wrong and we think it's important to continues a hearing, even though that violation is fairly easily remedying it. in terms of operational update and investigational caseload data, we provide the average complaints in the time periods, their age and when they were first brought to our attention as complaints -- sorry, i'm starting to get tired, so i'm losing it.

some key takeaways, that the complaint numbers have started to taper off post-election and we have been able to get to some of the older investigations. you saw the hearing on merits and i have gone through a couple of older matters and presented cases for dismissal at this meeting. so we have been doing good work in terms of getting those investigations moving which has result in the a plateauing of our complaints and intakes. as we dispose of cases and add case it's sort of staying level. i would expect that to increase when we get investigator because we have so many matters in preliminary review and a lot of those matters in preliminary review are there because they are not easily disposed and would want to do digging

before we recommend dismissal and once those become complaint we would have a pretty good caseload. we provide year-end data to see how many complaints. if they were dismissed they just weren't tracked and if they didn't become formal complaint so this data is a baseline for what happens next year and next year to see if our outreach efforts are resulting in more complaints and where we're failing, and what areas of the law and what to do better to improve public participation in the process? >> i have a question, chair renne, if we installed that software, would that make it possible to know how many complaints come in? what actually get dismissed? >> it's a good question and

the case tracking software is necessary for so many reasons and that is one of them. as a matter of your information we're keeping track of that on excel spreadsheets now and that can be subject to a lot of human error and it's a little bit chaotic for people -- for us who are trying to maintain all of this data and all of this information. for every complaint that we received we have to enter preliminary review tracker and becomes an investigation, it goes on the investigation tracker. if it's ever- and also on the master complaint tracker. we have another spreadsheet keeping track of adeline s it's all manual. >> it's all manual with calendar appointment it's probably nothing like you have dealt with before, because it's just -- the magnitude and the lack of technology available to us to manage it is overwhelming. and so that is why we really conceived of the case management system. we're actually going to the

ftcp to meet with the enforcement division who spent the last year developing a case management system that is tailored to state ethics law to use it for san francisco and link it up with net file. our vision is that each filer from the time that they are participating as filers through an enforcement action would be represented in the same system. so that we can sort of see all at once their compliance history, their fines history, their enforcement history and we would know that if they filed again; right? because like right now it's all based on memory of. if i have seen that person before? so it would be good to have one person with one number that is their identification number. as you saw, i met with the -- i have met with the bureau of delinquent revenues with our

fine collections officer to do a deep-dive with how the collections process work. it was very informational and informative meeting and they very nice offer he there. as you saw, they are on top of it and know what they are doing. they seemed to have the right answers and i was pleased with the out come of that meeting. you see nevertheless our delinquent filers are apparently don't have any assets. so they just remain on our delinquent filer list. with that i will open for additional questions >> any questions of any of the commissioners? thank you for the report. i thought it was very complete and any public comment? >> larry bush for friends

of ethics at our friends of ethics this week we discussed an option that we respectfully request that the commission consider at a future meeting and that is an ability for low-budget committees that have committed violations to satisfy the penalties by community service, as well as with dollars. when you have a well-funded committee, they don't have much problem coming up with the money to pay off a penalty. but if you have a committee that raised perhaps $5,000, $10,000ing and hit with a significant fine they have a hard time raising it, but community service is the kind of thing that most of the these smaller committees actually do. and there are ways in which they could provide a community service, either directly to the ethics commission, or into a pool that the

city would have. and then the ethics could apply for some of the community service hours. it just recognizes there is a world of difference between high-value committees and community-based groups and each has a strength and community-based groups have an ability to do outreach. whether it's outreach for upcoming policy meeting that is on your agenda or developing something in another language, to augment what the commission has, or some other things. there are different ways of doing it so it does not become an increased political asset to them, but just becomes an asset to the community. so we're respectfully requesting when you look at the question of enforcement, that you look at an option of community service

under certain circumstances for lower-budget groups, not for big-money people. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment? >> david pilpel again. two items here. on the sunshine ordinance task force with mr. petrelis, i did not attend that meet, but would agree with staff there is nothing in my read of the sunshine ordinance or the brown act for that matter, that requires you to take comment and have a scheduled item on meeting decorum. a legislative body can have and should have reasonable regulations regarding public comment, but it doesn't speak to how that occurs. and for the task force to read some requirement that you had to have a calendared item before you could talk about appropriate meeting

decorum, seems excessive to me. you certainly could choose to do so. could you amend your bylaws and do any number of things, but i don't think there is anything in the sunshine ordinance or brown act that requires that. perhaps staff will say something along those lines at the february meeting. regarding the charts that continue to be totally helpful, just one point: the open formal complaints does track from the first chart to the second in terms of the aging and the detail by age and type. the second chart, the matter in preliminary review doesn't track and for example show ones case that is 24-plus months and moves over to 22-24 in terms of the detail. so somehow that didn't align perfectly. it was close, very close. anyway. never mine -- mine, this is very

helpful and the chart at the end shows the ongoing status of enforcement caseload and hopefully it has grown to this point, but hopefully it will diminish over time and we'll see important things before you, and other things maybe dismissed, et cetera. and then of course, and wasn't clear since it shows 28 current cases open informal, why the agenda for the closed session item later refers to 30 cases, but i'll ask that later. >> they are cut-off dates. >> they are close just so you know, people do read this -- maybe i'm the only one. thank you very much. great report. >> turning to agenda item 11, the executive director's report. >> thank you, chair renne. in the interest of time i'll

try to be brief, but i did want to spend a few minutes on some very important news. the first of which is that we covered the budget discussions. thank you for that, in a prior item. in terms of staffing news, i included in table 1 an update of where each of the positions are in the process. there is a bit of additional news that i wanted to announce this evening in terms of one of the positions: we show on the table 1 the information systems business analyst as is underway and that position has now been filled. i'm happy to report. i'm particular ly happy to record jarrod flores will work very closely with steven massey on all things related to e-filing conversion process and jarrod brings a lot of experience having hands-on, hand-held guidance on our campaign

finance and other systems over the past ten years he has been with the commission. so we're very excited he will be there to really help from the user perspective and moving into that role very soon, on the 30th. we're going to transition him away from pulling the questions, but pull him in for the up coming filing deadline by the end of the month. it's a critical function to be served to help our electronical filing process get underway and you will hear more about that next month as well, but it was very good news. i'm very hopeful we'll additional news on another position for your commission meeting next month. there is -- i was asking -- i did an analysis for our positions and on average, looking at the positions that we have both exempt and non-exempt, if you look at

the position -- the process from posting a position to filling a position, the exempt positions, starting with deputy director and our education and compliance assistant and the position jarrod is moving into on average have taken three months once they are posted to have a person in the office. when you look at the from the date that the position was created or became vacant it's about a 6-month process, five-and-a-half to six-month process, which is a very slow process and not so hard to believe when we have so many position in thes place. so one of the challenges that we had for all of these positions is the nature of our staff currently is that we don't have a personnel person in-house. we don't have a finance or budget officer in-house. so these are the roles that we sort of learn to do and manage as we can. with that said, we're working through

it and very happy to have the support of doris from the department of human resources working with us to get the positions through the process. the three investigator positions, the senior investigator positions are going through the exam process as we speak. we expect to rate the exams the first week of february and they will be consolidated on to a list and we have to select from the list, the rankings and bring in people for panel interview. so i think the best guess is looking at mid-march as optimistic, but it's on-track. we have two other positions, i don't want to say "junior," but investigative analyst position and application closed for that on the 30th and the application closed for the policy analysis position on the 3 1st and those will be working through the same process of

exam-based testing to determine who is on the eligible list and to bring in for interviews? those are working their way through the process so i'm happy to answer any questions about this. i share the frustration over the challenge of getting folks from the door. we want them there yesterday and it doesn't happen fast enough for us and i think it's important for you to know the process is on-track and we have been aggressive with the department human resources general timeframe and they have been very willing to work with us to keep things moving. recognizing that any time you have 8-10 positions you are recruiting and examining for and selecting, there will be a pinch-point and we're making progress and happy to answer any questions that you or members of the public have about the process and where we are? so just to finish -- i'm sorry. >> a question about the auditor position, the one that

became vacant in november. >> yes. >> when do you expect the recruitment documents to be posted? >> we're working to have that posted by the end of this month and we're in process to get those documents approved and that will again begin the exam process. any other questions on that? >> i just wanted to ask could you send me the job description on the investigators? >> happy to. another note, i have listed as legislative and policy items moving through the process and with attached language. two of the items relate to proposals that would address the campaign finance ordinance and on the policy plan, you'll see at this point i tentatively placed them in sequence with a broader review of the campaign finance laws to early part

of the spring. again, if you have feedback individually or comments on that, i'm happy to talk with you individually what your sense is with timing. it makes sense for us to incorporate in the discussion of the moving parts of the campaign finance law to get a handle on how they fit together? i just wanted to highlight that for you. one other note, the audit program as we'll discuss more next month and laying the groundwork for alternative thinking about how we might select audits for this year: we have met with the auditors from the controller's office and the controller has been very cooperative and helpful. his office will be assisting our office with audit resources this year. so that we can get through the campaign finance audits that are required to start by roughly april 1st. so we're partnering with that office to obtain additional resources and

leveraging their expertise. they have helped our office before a couple of cycles ago and earlier we had a member of the oakland ethics commission and there is a result of a memorandum of understanding that we worked and collaborated with the city attorney's office on to develop. we have an mou, where we share resources periodically, whether it's for position hiring panels or for instances like this to provide some assistance on various topics, we just wanted to make sure we were clear it's a reciprocal sharing of resources on work when those resources might be needs? so we were very happy to avail ourselves to that and something to report to you that we're working with the oakland ethics commission. we're trying to take advantages of experts where we can. we have a visit with katy hinckley kelley the state and local programs director at the campaign

legal center who is in town this week. we have met her at in new orleans and she was gracious and very interested to stop by and spend time with our staff. so we'll have a meeting with her inoffice on wednesday and she is interested in hearing what we find that works and challenging about enforcing our ethics and lobbying and campaign finance laws. we're looking to hearing from her organization in washington and very is happy to hear froms and happy to have that opportunity. with that i'm happy to answer any questions about report or anything that is happening in the office? >> on the revenues report, we look to be in great shape, given we're about halfway through the fiscal year and we're 90 -- almost $91,000 on the budget, but looking at lobbyist registration fees, they are significantly less than the half of the 85, if you just do the simple math.

you with expect to be. do you have any insight why that number is so low? >> i would need to follow-up with you, there may be a question of cut-off, registers coming in january and they may not all have come in. so that numeric i anticipate to go up next month to reflect a higher percentage of that budgeted amount. i'm happy to get that information back to you, if that is not the case. >> commissioner keane? >> just on your meeting with the lady from washington to have questions about the constitution. >> thank you for that head's up. >> any public comment?

for the executive director's report? >> larry bush from friends of ethics. my comments on the whistle-blower are well-documented in minutes that are already voted on that runs through the specific things that i hope would be there. now that this is going to go through another round, at dhr and so forth, i urge that it also come back to the ethics commission. because you are the only body that is going to have a public forum other than at the board, the committee. dhr doesn't have it and the controller doesn't have it, only you have. and there are reasons why some of the other bodis are not as interested in a robust approach to whistle blowing as ethics would be. so i'm urging you to incorporate the things that we have mentioned in our last presentation, and that you also have an opportunity for public input. even if it's not a regular

commission meeting an i.t. meeting. because there are an awful lot of people in the city that care about whistle blowing. thank you. >> thank you. >> david pilpel again. several points on the ed's report. first regarding hiring. the old concept was that it took about 3 months for a new position to be hired. so new position in budget was only included at .75 assuming it would start october 1st . if it's now taking up to six months, that seems long. i'm not saying this is any of staff's fault, but if there are lessons that you are learning with going through the dhr person at the controller's office or the city process at-large to fix so it's back more to 3 rather than 6? it shouldn't take six months to classify and describe and hire. that just seems long. anyway, i'm sure you are feeling that

stress that i referenced. with regard to the audits, i think we'll talk about that next month, so i'll hold my comments until we have a full report. with regard to revenue, that was a good catch by commissioner chiu n putting the budget together, perhaps you could adjust the revenues so they more match what the reality has been? i think the overall number is about right, but more recent experience with lobbyist and various filers might suggestion suggest move something of the revenue numbers around a little bit? on the mou with oakland, page 2 was not included in the packet. we only have page 1 and page 3. so it's hard to read the whole document. i'm sure -- okay. i'm sure someone can share it and perhaps on the website we can have the full document? fine. i also wanted to note in the past the commission has had a reciprocal staff

arrangement with other public agencies, depending on the matter and staffing and what not? so we have had the san josé city attorney and san josé -- excuse me, santa clara county council and i think even san mateo city attorney in addition to oakland ethics and possibly even the oakland city attorney's office have aided on various matters. i don't know there was a written agreement governing those, but it was perhaps arranged through the city attorney's office and there is an arrangement from the past and staff should be aware of that. this is the first time anything has been codified in an mou to my knowledge. and finally, i provided staff with mark-ups on the minutes. i wasn't present at the beginning of the meeting and they are minor and non-substantive. thank you. >> thank you. all right.

turning to agenda item 12, i believe all of the commissioners have received the confidential information relating to the subject-matter of the status of complaints. does any commissioner want to have us go into closed session? or is there no need for it, having reviewed the materials? >> well, mr. chairman, we didn't get the table that i have gotten used to. or i didn't. huh? >> we think we need to clarify if others did not receive it?

>> judge kopp, i received yours, but didn't look at the label. you received mine. >> you are kidding? >> no. >> it's the same material; right? >> yes. >> logically i would have opened -- oh, i see -- >> you received one addressed to me. and you didn't open it because you looked at the label. i received yours. >> well i'm not going to take the time now. because it's late. i'll go through it. maybe i'll confer -- >> this will be on the agenda every meeting. so if there is something specific. >> our apologies for the mix-up. we'll endeavor to get it tot right people. >> so we'll not go into closed session. >> there is a couple i see

quickly. i have got one or two discreet questions and i guess i have to ask in closed session. i'm sorry, but i do. >> all right. any public comment before we go into closed session? >> that is fine -- david pilpell, that is fine, i won't wait. could you disclose are there any stipulations that have been agreed to other than questions about the status of matters? none this month? okay. if there is a way to formalize the announcement about stipulations, that don't require a closed session, so you could do that either during the ed's report or now in the future and any to disclose after closed session, just so that there is a better way to hear what stipulations were entered into? thank you. enjoy the evening. >> thank you. all right. we'll go into closed session.

>> all right we're back in open session, and a decision was made in closed session not to disclose what was discussed in the closed session. turn to agenda item 13, discussion and possible action for items for future meetings. any suggestions by in the any of the commissioner? hearing none and hearing none from the public, item 14 is additional opportunity for public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. any public comment? appearing none, do i hear a

motion to adjourn. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> we're adjourned. thank you very much.

>> okay good morning, colleagues and welcome to the first timma meeting of 2017 very exciting my pleasure and privilege to lead this board that includes treasure island i want to recognize and thank supervisor avalos and supervisor campos who served on timma committee with

me over the past year we accomplished quite a bit in 2016 and for the first time last year adopted on initial set of tool policies and congestion management policies to shape a total program that support robust and very transit on the isle for the residents and workers while the town hall level will be worked out we accomplished perimeters likes population direction of travel and the shape of the discount and at the exemption policy i time to recognize the many residents of treasure island that worked with us and concept the recommendations this address town hall burdens and for the low income resident by directing the transportation affordability witness told you free in the early years of the program and the county trait barriers for the low income travelers 2017

will condition to be busy as we design this transportation program and the island ferry surface expanded bus service and on island shuttle and car and bike you shuttle and entering into meta and funding from the state and regional grants in fact this is readily an initiative time and opportunity as we develop this new neighborhood for san francisco we imagine what a transportation heavy and transit first time neighborhood truly can look like speaking of grants i want to congratulate our staff with sfmta and uc berkley won a $6 million granted in the u.s. go department of transportation to support town hall and economic shuttles only the island i want to recognize, of course, our director tilly chang, deputy director eric and

michelle with that grant and matching fund will a town hall system and be able to work with sfmta related parking system with the mtc to bring the components together i look forward to working with all of you on the treasure island management program in the coming year thank you and mr. clerk, call the next item. >> we'll start with the role. >> off role commissioner breed absent a commissioner cohen is absent commissioner farrell present. >> commissioner fewer commissioner kim commissioner peskin commissioner ronen commissioner safai commissioner sheehy commissioner tang commissioner yee. >> we we have quorum. >> thank you mr. clerk and i'm sorry for going out of order

this is time for the colleagues to get to the women's press conference next item. >> call two and three, chairs 3 and those are informational items. >> ms. tilly chang want to thank chair kim for her leadership that was a busy year and as mentioned as the pa with the yerba buena island the westbound ramps was a huge accomplishment to continue on the grant award i was landline to join with colleagues mayor ed lee and director rahaim into the sfmta to meet with secretary fox two weeks ago to receive the grants that chairman shared from the department of transportation for the deems of the town hall

with the vehicle shutters that was mentioned in addition our staff works with the city and ripening staff from oakland and our own mayor's office in on the advocatvolkswagon program in tho we supported two applications four is $2 million i look forward to meeting with all of you to lay out to the opportunities and receive the input on this opportunity as well as all the opportunities around the treasure island mobility management this is truly an opportunity for us to be a laboratory for the sustainable development locally we were disappointed is not able to secure the museum location we work hard with the planning

department and that work will continue as we support the tida to further develop opportunities for this site on project delivery our engineering work continues with the grant we received we have funds to begin further design the town hall system and the shutters required for the interest would vehicles charging and hope to get climatic change funds as well as other potential electrical vehicles transit as well as for muni and this summary we'll be procuring that as we pass from the finance committees the ferry and operator agreements are operated with the tricker-treat this is our ferry agency in the region and we're looking for the electronic compulsory systems

we'll may or may not may i make a decision on the new island shutter and transit will tie to the charging system we develop on the island the mandatory transit program for those 0 who are the newest members and welcome to you all we'll be working with the tida as well as the developer on the island for the task programming for the cost of hours will be bundled into the hov fees for the residents and expect two residences below-market rate and the transportation will be programmed this is something we'll be working on to tie together the fund to be make it easy to implement the use of the system as well to implement the exemption and discount policy

the board adopts the task program we'll be working on together with mtc as and grant the transit systems that allows for the transit payment over the next few years with that, that concludes any remarks happy to take any questions. >> thank you director chang k chang do we need to open up for public comment we'll now accept public comment sierra mr. clerk, please move to item 4. >> approval of the minutes of the july 26, 2016, an action item. >> do we have a motion to approve the minutes of july 26th we have a motion from commissioner yee and seconded by commissioner peskin can we do a roll call. >> on this item seeing none,

public comment is closed. >> on the minutes commissioner farrell commissioner fewer i have clarification please chair am i able to vote on the minutes i was not there. >> you may vote but also obtaining stain. >> yes. thank you. >> commissioner fewer commissioner kim commissioner peskin commissioner ronen commissioner safai commissioner sheehy commissioner tang commissioner yee. >> the minutes are approved and that motion passes madam president can i rise without rising question to counsel through the chair i know that i've been advised in other

state bodies that on items that i didn't participate in i should abstain on the minutes is that different here? >> it is actually, you, if you've read the minutes from the members were here and read the minutes you can vote if you feel more be comfortable you can abstain. >> thank you commissioner peskin would you like to take a revote commissioners can abstain if they were not at the meeting 0 seeing no changes the approval of the minutes pass mr. clerk. >> item 5 election of chair and vice chair this is an action item. >> commissioners at this time we'll take nominations for the much desired chair of this committee do we have any nominations commissioner peskin.

>> i rise to nominate commissioner kim on a couple of theories in her incarceration as a member of the board of supervisors treasure island is within her district and in as far as treasure island is a lot more but linked with a series of transportation initiatives it is also a housing project which for those of you who don't know or remember was originally approved in concept by the board of supervisors in 2006 on the summation it will have thirty percent affordable housing substantially those numbers were revised downwards by actually significant percentage and in her role as a member of the board of supervisors supervisor kim has

been working diligently to increase the percentage of affordable housing on treasure island which again is linked to the transportation seconds by ferry and by what you see on the front of the engaged report that will appear from our director ms. chang with that, i'd like to place commissioner kim in nomination as chair. >> there is a motion to nominate by commissioner peskin and seconded by commissioner farrell thank you so much for your nomination. >> at this time seeing no further comment take a roll call vote. >> public comment. >> public comment. >> sorry yes take public comment one of the chair. >> thank you commissioner peskin we'll take public comment on the

selection item seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk. >> all right. the motion commissioner farrell commissioner fewer commissioner kim commissioner peskin commissioner ronen commissioner safai commissioner sheehy commissioner tang commissioner yee >> that item passes. >> colleagues thank you so much for your support on the chairship of this committee at this time we'll open up nomination for the vice chair of the next committee any nominations. >> please don't all jump up at once. >> commissioner peskin. >> this is obviously a very sought after position laughter and in as far as nobody is

offering themselves up in as far as commissioner low is my seatmate has generally agreed i hereby nominate commissioner yee to the vice chair. >> (laughter) thank you commissioner peskin thank you commissioner low. >> and there's a seconded by commissioner tang at this time open up for public comment on the election of the vice chair of the timma committee seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk can we take this same house, same call? >> congratulations commissioner yee. >> i want to make sure it is echoed by the west side of treasure island. >> we want to make sure we have quorum. >> all right. mr. clerk, call the next item. >> item 6 introduction of new items are there any new items for

introduction here today seeing none, we open up for public comment on this item. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk the next item. >> item 7 general public comment. >> thank you. good morning andrew yip so solely by the spreading of true principle on the society than ever of the topaz e people know of love and kindness of good deeds to be sought through the tragedy of procedural e unusual population and the wise men of improvements of virtues one can easily follow for the certification of e civilization of wisdom to accomplish the good works for self-rescue and holy rescue of human heart in defending the

holy principles one can expect to see the universe to let peace of with wellness only by the peaceful corporation can we insure the one quick way of wellness of the holy people and enjoying good time of prosperity the establishment of considerable works the establishment of virtues and the establishment of speak for on - the advancement for fishing for holy rescue to the society of the petitions would have a regarding benefit of personal family and personal results for principles thank you. >> thank you, mr. yip any other public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk may we call the last

item. >> item 8 adjournment. >> the meeting is adjourned. >> we'll start the transportation authority board meeting in a few -

>> san francisco is known worldwide for its atmospheric waterfront where spectacular views are by piers and sight and sounds are

xhanl changing we come to the here for exercise relax ball games entertainment, recreation market, exhilaration a wide variety of contributions easily enjoyed look up the bay the waterfront is boosting for activities boosting over 25 visitors every year the port of san francisco manages 7 may have million dollars of waterfront from hyde street and fisherman's wharf to the cargo terminals and name shoreline the architecture like pier 70 and the ferry building is here for the embarcadero and a

national treasure the port also supports 10 different maritime industries alongside with the recreational attractions making san francisco one of the most viable working waterfronts in the world but did you think that our waterfront faces serious challenges if earthquake to damage the seawall and the embarcadero roadway rising seawalls will cause flooding at high tides and major repairs to a safe many of the piers the port is at a critically turnl point time to plan for the future of san francisco's waterfront this year the port is updating

it's marts plan the plan working group to invite a wide variety of poichdz from the city and bayview and other advisory teams to share their expertise if intense and maritime operations the waterfront land use plan has guided the use and development of the lanes for the last 20 years major physical changes take place along the waterfront and now is the time to update the waterfront plan to continue improvements that will keep our waterfront vibrate, public and resilient the biggest challenges facing the waterfront are out the site an aging seawall along the embarcadero roadway and seawalls that will rise by 21 hundred to provide and productivity of tides seawall is built over weak soils and mud the next earthquake will

cause it to settle several feet without the urgent repairs that will damage the promenade and other things we've been fortunate over the last hundred years less than one foot of seawall over the next hundred years scientists say we'll have 6 feet of seawall rise imagine the pier 30/32 will be floated, the embarcadero will be flooded our transportation system is fog to be heavy impacts unfortunately, the port didn't have the financial resources to repair all the deteriorating piers let alone the adaptations for sea level rise. >> it is clear that the port can't pay for the seawall reinforcement or deal with the sea level rise on its own needs

to raise money to take care of the properties at take care of the maintenance on the properties no way absent anti funding the issues of sea level rise or the schematic conditions of seawall can be development. >> as studies talk about the seawall challenges the working group is look at the issues please come share our ideas about recreation, pier activities, shoreline habitat, historic preservation and transportation issues and viral protection. >> we know this planning process will not have one question and one answer we need the diversity of the opinions how people feel about san francisco waterfront and want to hear all the opinions. >> the challenges call for big decisions now is the time to explore now and creative ideas

to protect and preserve san francisco waterfront. >> now is the time to get involved to help to shape the future of our waterfront. >> we need the debate please come forward and engage in the process. >> this is your waterfront and this is your opportunity to get involved be part of solution help san francisco create the waterfront we want for the future. >> this is really to dream big and i think about what our waterfront looked like for all san franciscans today and generations to come. >> get involved with the planning process that will set the fraction for what is coming at the port. >> find for in upgrading dates on the ports website.

>> (ship blowing horn in distances) >> good afternoon, everyone and welcome to the tuesday, january 10, 2017, board of supervisors meeting welcome to your new it colleagues supervisor sandra fewer supervisor ahsha safai and conceptually welcome to the this is not our first meeting your second welcome and it the