>> my name is ace and i'm on the case. >> reflect i'll start off with an introduction i'm here specifically to talk on issues about part about the honorable cop the double dipping in the city here but my name is ace and i'm on the case. some of those people out there they want to be all ♪ mass but no mystery just check the black history i been working on case and ball

with a lot of conspires and some people don't like me cop i'm here for my 3 kids and community ladies and gentlemen, i'm for out migration at least believe me that was passed through our lieutenant governor newsom the next governor anonymously and made it institutionalized about the black population going on down he's saying would what is going down in this town the black population going down and when the benefits come we might not be no where around you know what 50 percent hiring is a bunch of stuff we can't afford

to pay that high dog on rent in city hall it gets silly what you see in city hall is r it gets so silly you all call it city hall i call it silly hall. once i'm going to tell you cop i'll be here at city hall don't you want to know what goes on down here in city hall don't you want to know >> anyway, i'm here today basically to make statements and this is my first time here i thought i'll come down accuse my appearance i'm here to express but the city of san francisco i city and county we as african-american negroes are are

in a state you find answering despite the city by the bay newsom put a mechanism together to out migration i'm here to talk about that my name is ace and i'm on the case. >> thank you hello, i'm larry bush for friends of the library i have two issues not on the agenda one is the issue of whistle blowers between city agencies and not had a return to the ethics commission i'd like to hand you from the expect essay in the west side observer highlighted what it changed from the past to where that is now we're urging that you all have another hearing to look at the

changes the changes are significant we have a damp eagle effect different from the commission approved a year ago but needs to be revetted and go to an interested persons meeting the other issue i think we want to bring up the question of the planning commissioner accepted a full-time position at spur as an advocate a position on a matter that is coming up this thursday on inclusionary housing she has taken the view not consistent on this issue they've not directly lobbied the planning commission that is a crappy conflict of interest and disappointed to see in the corresponds with the meyers that was advise that came from an attorney who is also an attorney here and ethics commission and

here's a copy of correspondence back and forth from the mayor's office they're interested in seeing that she doesn't have to recuse herself on issues important to the administration that would be this coming thursday meeting the fact she's now the advocate on spur on behalf of san francisco policy and they building that she should resign from the commission we think that the commission should send a notice to all commissioners about what constitutes the appearance of a cultivating in discussions at a meeting she said that she's not paid by spur but a foundation but when be couldn't remember the pay - at this time she

couldn't resigns until the mayor allowed her to resign that's not the basis how people serve so we're going to bring this to the attention of the commission to whoever is watching. >> chairman i will wait until public comment has ended but want to make a motion on that subject. >> very well. >> commissioners thank you for having us. green house us this time and thank you, larry bush on everything he said a do the best we can conflict of interest on that commission but i'm interfering a district 11 resident i'm the treasury for the bureaucrats and a volunteer field organizer for the money campaign going on 5 years we've

working closely with organizations that often o move on and many outvoted in and the campaign finance reform oblique last year's prop c x one and the state initiate to overturn citizens united i'm here to support the commissioner keane ethic you can see proposal this corruption is at a heart of politics in the america and whatever the interpretation citizens u 234i9d allows the groups to used money to influence candidates in policy decision cool and in particular san francisco is a leader in campaign finance reform thank you for that a concurrent influence of money in politics is equivalent we live in the richest and yet have the inequality gap in america we're

in a full-blown housing crisis and can guarantee you some of the policy decisions and contracts we've grand that led to the crisis were by campaign contributions and promises in mind rather than the merit and what is most beneficial to the people in public common good so i'm here to urge you to pass commissioner keanes proposal in its entirety thank you. >> thank you good evening, commissioners mark solomon i wanted to go ahead and comment on larry bushes comments we have a major policy decision that will affect the east side for decades to come in our form of government a place for san franciscans are basically

completely excluded a commission from the government nicole the developer form of government we're looking a major decision where san franciscans are not at the table with the affordable housing people that are dumping this question into the planning commission not thought about it cutting us up for a shift from affordable housing they can't execute a charlie brown but to make sure that san franciscans r front and center in the commission 0 progress and spur that as basically been knocked it out of the park for policy and work within the membership to get campaign contributions for officials the work i'm going on the prop j not the developers the main go contributors but their consultants their architects, they're associated people that sit around from projecting that is what spur is

it is associated sector of the economy that makes their money off the project that on the planning commission is where the agency that will be regulated by the planning commission has been captured and no negligental independence not serving one master ms. johnson is serving spur and the architect and supposed to be serving as a representative we can't have that for the commission council to recommend to that that's okay means is ethics commission didn't have independent counsel if in their council serves the city attorney that serves the mayor and the planning commission for independent council for the ethics commission so not only does our counsel serve one master but independent advise so the commissioners can serve one master that is they'd the move the needle of it's been with the

pay to play cultivate we need you to step up and this will change the accountable policy moving forward so neighborhoods in the mission will see a change in the neighborhoods worse than in the past attempts to mitigate they're not mitigating the problem it a complete mess thank you. >> (clapping.) >> thank you any public comment on matters not appearing on the agenda if not commissioner kopp. >> mr. chair fellow commissioners, i agree with many bushs comments and the supporting comments of other members of the public who taken the time to give us the benefit of their effort and attention.

>> and it is bother some with with respect to the issue not the procedural issue respecting commissioner johnson of the planning commission but the substantive issue about which i made no statement whatsoever and would be in appropriate for this commission to make that statement but i note the record shows that commissioner johnson was announced last month as the executive director of spur san francisco chapter and the public

records demonstrates some of the donations matters of which resulted in positions of opposition or support the various ballot measures in 2016 and probably before that i strongly believe commissioner johnson should recuse herself from the item which is on the planning commissions agenda for thursday which is april 27, 2017, and therefore i will make a motion that the ethics commission transmit a letter to

combhoks requesting she recuse herself if any item dealing with the subject matter which i will characterize as low income housing and other sponsors can probably refine it in a technically appropriate way. >> is there a second to the motion. >> second. >> all right. >> if i can interject not a matter it is agendize for tonight meeting beyond the scope the brown act i want to not that for procedural but nothing about the brown act for the individual commissioners like commissioner kopp and yourselves may want to

separately send a letter to commissioner johnson. >> noted for the record in regards to the substance of what you're raising mr. chin that is educated this is a matter coming for vote rather soon and it is something that is clearly within the purview of the ethics commission something that the ethics commission shouldn't speak to because of the importance of the ethical issue involved so i think that i'm going to rule that common places motion it in order and that we should go forward with the discussion and debate on it. >> we have a motion and second any further discussion by the members of the commission? i'll just want to associate mitchel with commissioner kopp's

remarks and motion and also i'll associate mitchel is it so germane to say things that were raised by the members of the public it seems no further comments in the commission we'll take public comment >> good evening david pilpal a couple of thoughts while i certainly agree with commissioner kopp's underlying concerns i do give worth to the city attorneys caution this is not prove or disprove on the agenda and think nairns the timeline perhaps a way to graft the findings that you this came to the commission attention subsequent to the posting and defer this matter to the following meeting will whatever

the appropriate brown act and sunshine findings you're in a good place to take this action absent that a problem setting this conversation from the full commission could do this is as individuals and the other caution i'll suggest there could be a complaint or investigation if commissioner johnson does recuse herself i'm not sure the commission is in a good place to send this advance warning even if it is coming from a good place inasmuch as you have to do not future to consider the merits of an investigation enforcement action should that come out those are many real concerns you may want to been in the next couple of minutes who to proceed i'm currently with the underlying concern it is well founded tough place. >> any future public comment.

>> yes. ace on the case i'm supportive of commissioner kopp's investigation double dipping is gingko in the city after you finish them go to ocii look at their executive director executive director of what is it public finances and go to the housing authority over and over the president the commission the depend upon of oewd that tells me mayor ed lee didn't have enough qualified people i'm speaking specifically dealing with the african-american community in a state of emergency and the mayor has people double dipping and in the fillmore particularly i got to mention it read the papers i'm looking other people i've known for 15 years and fbi with the

mayor ed lee knows me knows me now the mayor thank god he didn't want to see me once the paper said over 5 hundred agents ♪ investigation from 2011 to what is going on now all that money spent when we finish this we need to go down the list i'll be coming here and telling you what i see at city hall and trying to tell you that is against the law what i horde is so absurd in the history in front of me i've been here for 25 years yeah 24 years and through the administrations i worked on the frank jordans with the first black marijuana ace in our face and evolved to what i am 63 years old and done

died of surgery for 24 years and now double dipping and double dual you need to context that my name is ace and i'm on the case. and here to evaluate i'll bring you a list ed lee shame on you man i've not be able to see him skews the way i'm looking not dressed to impress but here to have clarity in the way they do government i'm 63 years old and been around when commissioner kopp was on the board of supervisors and doing what people are doing now checking government i was a young pickup and now 63 i've done - you know my friends leave that alone i'm here on the act of god move on

with a new era i don't have time for new eras >> speaking on behalf of friends of ethics we support this to commissioner johnson i think david pilpal suggestion of preamble this was an issue that arose since the last ethics commission and the fact that the vote is coming up on theirs was only noticed i think over the weekend but it is shouldn't be a prisoner of the calendar should be speaking out on behalf of the city's interest and would be an opportunity down the road when you take a review of conflict of interest policy in the city to deal more fully on the appearance of a conflict because if you go to the city

attorneys gallows government guide about a financial conflict with money coming into to you this is a indirect payment according to commissioner johnson is problematic to make that claim off the top no problem with saying a conflict of interest pretend to be an advocate and no conflict as long as no lobbying the fact they've gone on that pubically and made a recommendation and the mayor's office is saying they want her to boost because it is impactful to the administration because there is a swing vote on this that the outcome has been baked into the process outside of public view what you're doing bringing this to greater public view thank you.

>> yes. commissioners mark the worse that can happen with a resolution irregularly mr. johnson someone can go do court and make and sting and get not corruption i doubt that will happen you'll have to come out and take the risks and stand for the right thing. >> thank you chair. >> i'd like to make a suggestion i do believe the commission needs to be able to express it's and encourage the commission encouraged about taking formal action if not agendize and not an open mall one and alternative approach with the commission opinions expressed with samaritan to communicate whatever you wanted the commission implicit comments and have a letter sent to the

commissioner to raise whatever question or points busy think that is one way to achieve without compromising this to the open government when we do that are important to the court so offer that as an alternative approach to achieving the plan. >> mr. chair. >> let me reiterate make that clear my motion to transmit a letter signed by the chairman of the commission and i have no view as to who should participate in the letter but i would over my time and attention to the wording of letter it is not the motion for a resolution it is a simple letter. >> and then i'll have a couple of other points to make maybe i'll make it now since it will safe some time i'm not sure

clear from the reports as to whether the city attorneys opinion was written do you know if it was written. >> so i think i'm not in a position at this meeting to discuss the advice i may or may not given to another commission. >> why is that. >> itself respect the attorney/client privilege and the confidentiality i'll do for any of you. >> i watch those remarks in shine in some plays tonight i'll be making a motion i would also like after that is disposed of a letter sent from the commission to the city attorney mr. home share asking if that voices was writing and

if so a copy of the written advise. >> is that at form of a motion. >> we have to dispose of the motion. >> let's work own a pending motion commissioner kopp would you in terms of comments that were made will you accept the friendly amendment to our motion in the letter i would write sign which will be drafted by you and director we'll see a preamble as suggested. >> yes. we said this is an extraordinary matter extraordinary thing we're doing and doing that because of x perishes that is necessary to get it we don't have time to agendize and substantive

maertsdz coming up by the city and county of san francisco before we had a chance to agendize that. >> yes. >> we'll have that that then will be the motion with the friendly amendment and with the second will you accept. >> second. >> that will be the motion at this time any future public comment by commissions in regards to the action we're about to take okay >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? that item passes unanimously so commissioner kopp your work with. >> yes. >> director on that and ethic sign the letter and make the section motion refer to which is that a letter be sent by chairman of the commission on

behalf of the commission asking the city attorney if the relevant opinion to the planning commission commissioner is written and if so for a copy of that advise. >> is there a second to that motion. >> i'll second the motion. >> i think we have a written go opinion on that matter since a matter of substantially importance to a ethical question by the commissioner and the planning commission has to do with are city business if there is something this commission as an ethics commission should know that indicates that that is okay. i think that is as we've seen in our first vote on the previous message we'll have

strong feelings not okay if we can be corrected on that by a written city attorneys opinion if there is a written city's opinion we should have it so our knowledge should be increased as to whether or not we're doing something we shouldn't do and as if we are doing something we shouldn't do why it is we shouldn't be doing it we as the ethics commission of the city and county of san francisco should be apprised of the city attorneys opinion in regards to the fact that commissioner johnson could be going ahead and doing this and voting in this way and no ethical problem with that that's something we definitely should know about

because obviously a a temporary opinion we should know if we're wrong i'll second that commissioner renne. >> the difficulty with the motion the attorney/client privilege is not solely with the city attorney but also with universe the commission that asked for it or the individual commissioner and absent a waiver by vote i don't think that the city attorney is in a position to deliver it to us maybe the happy to give it to us i'm, huh? i know we as a commission have jealously taken the position that the attorney/client privilege applies to us and that the city attorney can't wave it that probably applies to whatever information or instructions or advise that the

city attorney gave to either to ms. johnson or the planning commission perhaps commissioner renne raise an important point perhaps commissioner kopp we can urge the city attorney commissioner renne suggested a situation with the city attorney think reflection might be happy to give it to us we should urge the city attorney to consider whether they want to give it to us and we tell them we want to urge them to give it to us in light it will be helpful and necessary to us in carrying out the functions if we are carrying out our functions if an incorrect manner commissioner kopp would that -

>> i say idea is worthy and i would expand the idea and in doing so i will safe us time later to make it clear what i intend to do the city attorney serves the people of the city and county of san francisco as well as this ethics commission and the planning commission, the members the planning commission to me the people of the city and county of san francisco are preempting ment and rated higher than any commission of the city and county of san francisco this discussion highlights what i

intend to do and that is make a motion for this commission to formulate a simple charter amendment that removes from the law the provision that the city attorney is the attorney for the ethics commission and nbld the law to state that the ethics commission shall have the power to retain its own council i've had experience with transactions like this as a civil grand jury judge with council counsel representing various districts special use district in san mateo could not one was the subject of a grand

jury investigation from violations of the brown act and a consequent report it took me a year and a half to obtain a change in procedures so that county counsel no longer sat with the grand jury through all the deliberations a similar episode isn't santa clara about 15 years ago and the civil grand jury combaementd its own attorney there is a conflict of interest which can't be cured with a city attorney in san francisco law representing every commissioner representing every commission, representing every employee who is accused a violation of one the laws for which we'll

have responsibility as the ethics commission i would add to the letter mr. speaker, which you have outlined a request that the city attorney act immediately before thursday april 27th to obtain the scent of his client commissioner johnson of the planning commission publication of new written opinion. >> okay so let's - understanding exactly what the motion is commissioner kopp i think i understand that we are urging the city attorney to consider to reconsider and to consider whether or not they would inform us of what whether

or not there is a written opinion and what the written opinion it is and if they feel some sort of an impede we're ask them to request the account of their client whether or not the client in this case ms. johnson i guess who the client will scent to waiver of the attorney/client privilege so that we can on that report. >> and the public can. >> of course. >> we - >> and i'll add the footnote should be included in the letter whether or not the opinion was written or not written is a part of new claimed attorney/client

privilege relationship we video a number of things to talk about but as i see the matter before us for vote it is whether or not commissioner kopp's motion to urge the city attorney to consider telling us whether or not a written opinion and if so allowing us to have it and if the city attorney feels that they can't do that because of the attorney/client privilege to ask the city attorney to consultant with the client as to whether or not the client will wave that privilege so we can get the advice those are the substances of matter. >> mr. chair, i have a question for the city attorney think chin in the following short of sharing any advise whether written or oral is there

any other way for the fellow commissioners for the city attorney to enlighten us in terms of interpreting of the ethics rules you can incorrectly and you know that we can get the points of law that we might not have. >> yes. a way to speak about conflict of interest laws and so forth for the ethics commission we can have that discussion at a future meeting subject to common places and body camera those policy discussions that that's why i'm here to help aid those discussions but i think the best arena for that to occur it began at a future meeting subject to this. >> understood but given the

urgency and the shorted timeframe of upcoming meeting on thursday nothing that can be done now and thursday morning that can help to educate us. >> subject to the brown act and the sunshine ordnance certainly i can do make myself available for the individual discussions for members of the commission and the commission staff about the concerns that have been raised by the public and have individual discussions with any of you to the extent you want to discuss before thursday. >> commissioner kopp i don't quite understand we've made the decision to advise ms. johnson to recuse herself if she choose not a decision she'll make but what advise to what the city

attorney may have advised her arrest may or may not and advised her once the letter goes out to her telling her she should recuse herself and may want to talk with the city attorney recreation and parks department the commission to get advice as to whether she ought to follow our instructions but i don't see what difference it makes what the city attorney told her we made the decision regards of whether it was right or wrong we made the decision to tell her she shouldn't sit and through the chair makes a difference to the public it makes a difference to the commission, this commission it makes a difference to me

there's a difference between a written opinion and which an attorney sets forth in writing the rational including the certification of case raw for that opinion and an oral opinion which can as you may know we all know on the panel can be a conversation in somebody's law office or somebody's office in this case at spur i don't believe the fact the simple fact whether an opinion from a public attorney is written or not written it is not written it is oral is subject to the attorney/client privilege.

>> including the laws of this commission the fact of whether it exists is not a part of a confident communication between an attorney and client sufficient to thwart the public which has an boyd interest as you can tell the testimony people like mr. salmonella and others that testified this is a vigorous contested issue with affordable housing and any development of land in san francisco i wanted to know future just how the city

attorney operates with respect to other commissions and other commissions members because it is certainly will be pertinent to what i've announced i intend to introduce with respect to this commission having its own attorney with the. >> limitation to this commission and the public this commission works for a. >> commissioner kopp and commissioner renne you both make persuasive points in regards to a number of things as the chair i will make a suggestion to commissioner kopp sort of partially goes with along with commissioner renne is raising and that is, we have the letter going out relating to our feelings related to ms. johnson that is unlawfully statement of this commission i public school

is very important i think the questions that you raising relating to whether or not we are preceding correctly there is some knowledge that the city attorney has that would change our minds about the fact we've taken whether or not the city attorneys opinion has been issued, and whether or not we can see that those are all important but they don't have the effects that of the vote coming up at ms. johnson is about to take part in i'll suggest commissioner kopp with all due respect we can take what commissioner renne said and agendize for the next meeting a full discussion of this matter

and all of the ethical aspects relating to it whether or not we have done the right thing substantive in the letter and learn whatever information that the city attorney will enlighten us who we should be preceding the way we're preceding i think we are better off doing it that way rather than taking a vote on the motion looks like it could be will unanimous and i - respectfully request you consider wroou our motion and we go ahead and at the end the agenda and talk about calendaring this all those things we've talked about for a full discussion next time. >> i see your suggestion mr. chair and note that i will have

a letter to the city attorney tomorrow asking if there is in writing i will predict it is not a written opinion some deputies sitting down with the planning commission said oh, that's okay to participate that may be the state of law that means that such contradiction must be added to the prop j material and the other items that i've advanced last month. >> commissioner kopp i appreciate you're taking my suggestion and you have raised important points which we'll have a full discussion next time do you have a comment. >> no, i don't. >> so - we'll hear public

comment. >> i'd like to make public comment typed we don't know there was of a city attorney written oral or otherwise we know ms. johnson says there's one the gentleman says no opinion and he said from the mayor's office getting involved he didn't say there was actually, one, and, secondly, if you look at the commissions own policy when someone is seeking an opinion on whether they can have a way that campaign the only protection is an opinion in writing that's the same action for the city attorney to take there should be an opinion in writing the third point this raises a serious issue avenue firewall between difference parts of the city and how their advised this is not first time

and certainly in this case as a consequential issue that will effect what gets built in the city and who gets to live here for the next 20 years we're talking about a policy that puts on a low end the affordable housing set aside that will be available to school teachers and restaurant workers and hotel people people that make the city run makes a difference to the city versus the process that goes to developers we know the developers are the ones essentially paying for what spur gets if you look at spur their budget is $6.8 million and if you look at what they're doing politicking they make the tax but spend $150,000 on campaigns in the last 24 months and in

addition ms. johnson was a members of the board and when it was issued in fall she have is in negotiation on who had a conflict of interest i think commissioner kopp's suggestion you request whether this was a opinion and well within the bounds of what is allowed that's my opinion. >> thank you when you say board you mean the board of spur; is that right. >> do we have any further public comment. >> this is educational to me and very informative i'm sure very interesting because you know without this commission and leadership of the - we wouldn't be even think about this this has to be at city hall this is

going on for years pay to play you can name the situations there needs to be a commission like this and doing what we do i'm going to leave i have another thing to study and research mine because i know that i mean i don't know what the issues are but imperative that happens on all the commission that happens everyday florida the administration which i'm scared to say that the outreach the willie brown commission the pay to play but it from you don't stop was going on inside the commission look at all the young people people here commissioner kopp i'm 20 years young young people city hall you know all the commissioners the chief the staff and the

department heads their retirees because of corruption or getting older or whatever the case it is the term of the leadership of the service so all i have to deliver to the city and county i've been in the scopes of 20 something years big deal the outsider and document i've been doing the same thing for 20 years people say ace has no video and tape i have so many tape and video in history i don't have to take other photo i can relate to the story as i mentioned the honorable cop was doing it and trying to figure out what was the corruption and the lrsz and judge know what is going on i don't give a darn when the city attorney says and all that investigations comes if that way and this way we colonel

together and show us donald trump can come to fillmore and tweet, tweet tweet on all the things a i'm sick and tired and i'm a non-positive but i did vote democrat you can see i agree with trump what have you, you done for us this city a run by the democrats the longest and all is doing the same thing over and over no accountability but now they have ethics commission, and son this will be turned over but something i'll you'll be seeing me you're only here once a month but ed lee knows me thank you. >> david pilpal again i reiterate my caution about the brown act and i think where a bit at the old for all these reasons from public comment and

if someone brought a sunshine complaint about this board or go compilation we'll have to hear the merits and here we are nevertheless, there are a lot of issues that were raised i want to address them briefly the best i can at a anytime i think the letter you agreed to send if this means in the next few days should be attached to the summary of actions after the meeting and that letter should be posted on the website for everyone to see and not just commissioner johnson whether or not there was an opinion issued by the city attorney in writing orally there are a lot of issues indicated and ask they craft a public opinion that addresses the conflict of interest ♪ circumstance it could occur wlefr in the city and guiding

principles some maybe obvious how to parcel the situation and staff maybe instructive in the manner of public comment that the city attorney can post that was perhaps alluded to the city attorney has set up for due process for ethics and other kinds of circumstances that arise that i'm aware of most people are not aware of and having understanding how the office does screen off individuals and how advise is given in those kinds of cases that would be helpful and i don't know i'm aware of some of that but not well documented and in addition the city attorney website has at least that opinions that address one with

the city attorney broadly in terms of giving advise to various actress in the city government and the attorney/client privilege who holds the privilege and how it is waved and dismantled and how others are posted and finally the document to larry bush i'm interested in getting copies from the office tomorrow but important issues here and should have a thoughtful process to delve through it as suggested work out later with the city attorney whether you agree with her advice or not having the information made public we can all benefit whatever analysis in the advise if any thanks >> thank you okay there are being no further

public comment move on to agenda item 3 item no. 3 - discussion and possible action on draft minutes for march 27, 2017. >> my comments or corrections to the minutes. >> i judge have to one on page 9 through the discussion discussion and possible action for future meetings go down 5 lines i did not say that conflict of interest prosecution exists but such as a member of the planning commission being a member of spur is that being the executive director of spur san francisco chapter? >> we'll have that correction

and i'd like it. >> any future comments or corrects. >> on page 9 about the middle of the page whereas, commissioner renne asked a clarifying question that's the continuation for show cause not no cause and director pell ham says it is show cause not no cause that should be corrected. >> future corrections or comments? mr. pilpal >> thank you. i went through them with my fine tooth comb and that could be appropriated thank you very much. >> okay. we'll now to move to i'm sorry. >> amended.

>> >> i. >> as >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? the minutes are approved we've got to agenda item 4 item no. 4 - continued discussion and possible action on commissioner keane's campaign finance and ethics introduced and march 27, 2017 meeting and executive director pell ham. >> thank you commissioner keane we have an online for the public and here agenda item 4 a memo by our new senior in fact, kyle i'm delighted to introduce you to him this evening he had a first day on april 10th and memo the 19 so he's here to provide an overall the memo so everyone in the audience can hear from him and about us from the next steps we'll be proposing i want to introduce

kyle to you and the members of the public here this evening and i'm going to turn it over to walk us through. >> very good thank you. >> hi good evening here i'm trying to just fine if we have a clickerer no i have a little power point hopefully, you'll see that on your screen i mean, i'll walk us through bus good evening commissioners and members of the public i'm kyle i'm here today to talk about or continue on the prop j that has spoken about in public comment was had at the last commission meeting so at that last meeting on the 17 commissioner haney introduced the caging finance reform

ordinance designed to reverse the november 2000 voter initiative prop j in a revised former that proposition seeks to eliminate corruption in the city by prohibiting officials from accepting personal campaign vantage from persons who have or about to get a public benefit what follows is staffs research to date and the next steps regarding the prop j and the large review of ceqa so let me begin. >> so introductory remarks and give you a little bit of background everyone was see we'll provide the power point on line tomorrow for individuals presentations since we didn't provide it beforehand so prop j was in california was part of a large project called the oaks project

that was sort of proposed by the foundation for taxpayers and consumer rates in 2000, 2001 the initiatives appeared on california 57 cities in 2000 and 2001 the projects sort of main goals somewhere to reduce the conflict of interest limit the corrupt influence, etc. and to limit public fund to be extended by bias that initiative was passed in some former in all 5 of those cities now two of those cities san francisco quickly sort of overrated those clrlts of laws i want to point out that despite some pro transacted legal battles in california their instituted in some former that

is just give you a little bit of background on this initiative before we move on forward to the revised proposition so the revised proposition day as currently drafted and again, the attachment to this i'll be citing to in a memo begins on page 14 we didn't add a table of contentious but begin on page 14 and as a note here yet this summary or the power points meant to be a summary of the laws with the list of laws the memoranda i'm refer to the members of the public to the memoranda this is a summary of the major items that staff highlighted the rise prop j is drafted a few of those large items it broondz the scope of

officials covered and public benefits enkumthd stated goal in the declaration of prop j that is attached in two extend and strengthen the goals of the original prop j into a revised version to reduce as far as the corrupting influence of money generally so the rise proposition seeks to close those loopholes and protects the officials from the vantages and based on the fund-raising by elected officials that board members and department heads and additional enforcements mechanisms including debar time and -- excuse-me. and expand prohibition percent for

individuals receiving public benefits they add a reintroduces a transfer ban and tracks the public benefit recipients the next portion you're following generally with our memorandum so staff has analyzed myself and deputy director bloom with a number of other individuals have addressed in our research or come across a number of leg contacts and considerations for the commission to consider at a future date it rise with interested parties with rising the proposition and insuring that it is sort of moose the constitutional legal standards that are going to be required the first of those are the first amendment issue as we know the campaign - the

sort of the framework the campaign finance lieu in the first amendment for citizens has changed that is not in the memorandum and sort of the stems that the supreme court as well as the lower courts stated that we can limit in the campaign finance that is ultimately the first amendment is sort of narrowly a particular since citizens united so the question we have so address with the interested party what can we legally limit as far as the contributions go and when and part of our ongoing research to figure out what those are and how we go about doing that you know we can't sort of just invoke a pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. claim that all of those things will pass the constitutional muster we create our established

facts in a record we support and allows us to pass any constitutional muster that we must additionally or along with that point there were concerns by other jurisdictions hoping to have some of the material from the case this is d tract this is the city of - one count cities that passes the initiates and overrode it constantly with another initiative by filed suit to attempt to keep the original prop j off the ballot and and the some the constitutional concerns are we as a staff yet to receive the arguments in that case and immediately filed but like to get it to assure to address those legal argument in

the case and jumping down another consideration to take on is the like i said earlier the provisions of civil penalties or what is called the civilian suit there is a provision in the political format that allows the civil suits to be had and for people to collect a percentage of those actions but we say to sort of address under the context of the eight amendment some of the clause issues that maybe had under the eight amendment here jumping over to due process and the administrative procedures speaking with oliver need in the memorandum we spoke with him and notes the definition of public benefits extends to the public

entitlements and address whether that he can clarify the skiementsz to make sure we're not extending those things to sort of recipients of public welfare and low income receiving a public benefit under the law that we restricts if giving trying to evaluate that provision and whether or not we can clarify that definition or move it from the law potentially but hopefully clarify to make sure that it is a look at standard sort of our last leg consideration we noted here is the debar proceeding the department is excluded if enjoying the rights and privileges of a public benefit so this is a provision that was based on the city of san francisco ethics commission law so want to work with the individuals to make sure that we incorporate the debar time ohio

we have a question other to the city attorney's office regarding where and how to enforce that provision. >> so monkey off my back to the left slide that is procedure items moving forward as we've said we're looking to harmonize the approaches in the provision of prop j with a large review how can we strengthen and continue to improve the enforcement mechanism of c grow with the revised prop j and other sponsors finance issues seeking to expanding the finance laws in the sfoivenlgs to insure we're reducing as far as the

corrupting influence and conflict of interest taking these are large considerations not only about the revised jackson playground but ceqa review staff is looking at to be the policy matters and evaluate the legal strength we see and present those and evaluate the administrative responsibilities as you may know many of the things don't just involve the ethics commission by the controller's office, they involve the city attorney's office and they involve a number of other players we want to bring them into discussion to make sure we have a cohesive plan to bring them into this forward and next implementation on the cost and timeframe we want to brings in interested parties and players and understand who has what duties and the costs associated with those and again redundant and contrary predict for the interpretation

generally a matter of redrafting the provision and lastly just a local reform conformity we have a hierarchy of laws and make sure that anything we do has a provision complies and reforms to the local ideals and finally our strategies going forward we generally want to work with the toward party to create an impossible provision that fits within the larger goal of both rising or reviewing c grow and hold those meetings we can get to in the next slide and draft reviews public thoughts and concerns with the policy and make available an memo for the project plans and draft for implementation once we have presented those items to you as

a way to sort of move forward and keep a contract. >> all right. so summarizing here the individuals we do plan to have two interested persons being both at our office on 25 van ness on may 9th one as 2:30 p.m. on the 9 and may 11 at noon to hopefully incorporate everyone's schedules to show up and generally there is a time it circulates but let individuals read those tomorrow so our last item here is i want to opening for comments and concerns from the commissions regarding what you like us to address of the interested persons regarding the questions or comments about this memorandum. >> yes. first i want to compliment you and also the on

the people that worked on this is the an excellent analysis of what we talked about last time and an excellent analysis of prop j you've done an excellent work on the history and seen as problems in other jurisdiction and the things that are raised as potential pitfalls one of the things that is clearly illuminating in terms of the history you weigh out is that in regard to what the essential thing that prop j did and prop j does no constitutional question about that because even under citizens united all the cases with the supreme court the recently in the last generation narrowly the ability to regulate campaign tricked or tricks relating to public officials

none of that is involved in prop j because the essential element of buckley versus allay was the first case has to do with that we can regulate and regulate substantially any kind of payments by people to tell you public officials in terms of either campaign financing or caption tricks or anything else they're the quid pro quo in terms of someone something to a public official that has provided something that that person. >> to the person who's actually making the contributions giving small business directly in terms of a person benefit any of the things

we've talked about those are fine we can do that we can't limit political speech in terms of someone that wants san francisco spend money on something but we can and regulate that and prevent that person if giving it directly to that benefit to directly to the public official who is involved and all of, huh? much of the litigation has taken place in the early part of century that says well constitutional questions have really not recognized that essential speak of buckley versus vallejo i think you did a great job and looking forward to you going forward with writing the ultimate prop j revision

we're seeking with all the lunge we had in that and with regards to the other matters you raised relating to things like the environment and other types of things that might duplicate other things like in ceqa we might want to tighten things up those things will be welcome i look forward to the interested persons meeting and you've deposit a fine job and hopefully next time have the actual language of the prop j ordinance that we we desire and talked about last time we, vote on. >> thank you commissione commissioners. >> i was going to say also commissioner renne compliment you on the analysis we're

counting on you to come to the next meeting with the draft i saw at the read the trust fund you've coming at june meeting and yes. >> that's fine i don't mean by anything to rush i think that is a big job and as pointed out out by commissioner renne i was give this task and it took me as a year and a half. >> i'll try to be a little bit quicker a than that. >> i want to join any commissioners that was excellent work and it was helpful and with the constitutional issues and the substantive issues and the constitutional issues my only observations you know take all the care and times to do the analysis to make sure it is

drafted that a way that passes the muster we don't want to put something forgot that is struck down and what is important to harmonize with the ceqa laws and the conflict of interest so we're not creating more confusion in our attempt to, you know, create a better prop j and lastly i think that resources and actually practicality can be doomed or propel any measure to success so having a clear understanding of what it requires on our end at the time ethics commission and the controllers side to be able to make something operational when we go out of the gate we can turn it on at that time it will be successful and will be a real shame if he were to do all the work to design but.

>> fall down on the elements element and not just up to us we'll get to that in the budget process but they're taking a process and think about how we pay for in and not just to stop us but josh in terms of what we're setting ought to do and was it requires. >> we'll take public comment on the matters then if no further comments by the members of the commission. >> commissioners larry bush for friends of ethics we're impressed with the quality of the analysis that was presented a sea change we're not seeing a

lot with the new executive director there is a few points we would like to suggest given some consideration the report did a good job of looking at the cities that passed the oak versions a few years ago but other cities that have under gotten efforts to address those issues one is the city of berkley with the city attorney rapidly who was the city attorney that wrote the charter for the ethics commission and so we can make a copy available of the draft that was done for the city of richard and i don't know of other cities in california but on the issue of debarment one way we can provide the city contracts as we do with the prohibition on contributions a statement that says in addition

to other penalties with in one penalty could be debarment and reaches the issue of adequacy i want to encourage a rofblthd wraefrp for the it in the past groups like unions have not been included except an afterthought and i'm confident this commission will do better a very urgent issue and point out that in general this comes at the same time with the indictments with the 8 cases some involve san francisco businesses with san francisco contracts the indictments are for rigging and bribery and those are pending the trial is ahead at

the same time the records at the controller's office shows that hundreds of thousands of dollars are paid for those indicted under the current city contracts i know that is difficult to reinvite a contract but another reason to make sure that putting something that is gone wrong and it results in legal action by the enforcements people that we're able to not stand on the sidelines thank you. >> thank you good evening. i'm dementia with the san francisco human services agency and association with 80 human nonprofits with time contract with the city and county of san francisco i realize fully that some of the folks think about prop j and what is into effect and not into

effect your deeply seeking this on a regular basis those are transmittal honorable goals having said that, our first look at this was in the last 72 hours and what we see a 50 packet of a legal let me see with a piece of legislation over 20 pages and tonight i'm confused it is complicated and overwhelming to me, i'm a person that deals with legislation on a regular basis can't speak for the general public comment but far-reaching impacts ♪ legislation constitutional questions for the first amendment and advocacy and i frankly don't come close to understanding how this effects the legislation that has been passed as well as campaign contributions not been to your knowledge this body of what this

ordinance about do and i don't know what is there for the clauses or to put it for specifically better unforeseen consequences i'm here solely to talk about the process not the content prop p was a success we had opportunity for review and interested persons meeting for an extended period of time and lots of times for written comments i'm disgusted i heard at the last meeting rushes to the board before you a public hearing and i'm so relieved there will be persons meeting but good or don't understand such a rush the floor will not take this up to the fall and no election 90 to june of 2018 why

is that pushed through and why a iconic deadline for the interested persons meeting the first time opportunity for a detailed review how the heck will we sit down and collect the thoughts into writing and share that with our constituents and other stakeholders and put together a well recent piece of of public comment i would suggest stretching this out at least another month through july scheduling more i p meetings and longer deadlines for written comments and ask you to please consider that it will be a better legislation for the board of supervisors if we can work together as a team thank you >> thank you. >> game-changer commissioner i fernando with the counsel of the housing organization similar to h s n a group of coalition that

represents 24 affordable housing developers and community advocates on a number of issues so, of course, we're very much interested in the this legislation and commend you for moving forward like deb said i think we're much more interested in raising the issue of progress and how much time to look at it this legislation read it carefully and be able to provide you with our understanding of this i think that on page 12 you have the timeline that you are looking for as you can see a total of 19 days if now until the mind when public comment written comment is due as dementia said that deadline is the day after that interested persons meeting the way the large coalition of groups work we'll come to an i p and ask

questions and gather the folks to discuss that there are issues of concern and be able to write something to bring back preferring in a written former in the written comment section deb said we need more time between the ideas and where the comments are due and again as mentioned before the because of their recess have not likely to take this up until the fall we wonder why a rush to move forward if not june then july looking for a final vote for the board of supervisors they will probably not be back in session until september anyway you have time to be able to get public comment on this thank you very

much. >> thank you. >> good evening commissioners yeah. i think the figures in the analysis of the mayors diversities was 8 it times and 24 months trying to procure gifts for some sort of business in 24 months so if this is what he's reporting than i imagine the fingers of what is going on to be much, much worse god not only with the mayor but other areas offices and commissioners and people doing business at city hall that is absolutely governmental to the dogs in the last 50 years people that

are small business owners, mom and pop's, non-corporate finance up to the ying yang don't have a voice anymore in the city and i think maybe this proposition sounds so good didn't have the teeth that it should have maybe it kind of sugarcoats and plays with the issue i wonder if our city attorney office is not in bed with a lot of the key players in the city here it seems like is a cozy relationship i don't know if the city attorney's office has the gumtion or the where about these

to really prosecute and go after the people that role offend our democracy in the way we do business in the city it is so apparent you look around and see the landscape which is completely changed and you know hardly anyone can identify or plan think you know making something because the gap is so gotten so wide between the people that are connected and the people that are not connected never used to be like in the city but that's the way it is gone anything goes nothing matters until you pay. >> thank you.

>> david pilpal. >> i agree with several the previous comments about getting this right and not rushing it some particular thoughts there is a difference between discretionary approvals and by right for minute steering wheel approvals and there are pitfalls with anyone steering wheminist l ministerial. >> it is important to understand as much as one can the breath of the type approvals and contracts and licenses and contracts that the city grants and the potential for problems and really narrowly tailoring

those restrictions to those kind of actions that one wants to restrict or prohibit and less so on the other things but that's a complicated area you've already discussed briefly legal rifts and some operational and practical considerations there maybe instances disclose is more appropriate and restricts for prohibition less restrifkt instances where the prohibition makes sense and untended consequences are important and certainly building a huge building whether a nonprofit housing developer or for profit a nuke ever things certainly provide this possibility of the problems in disclose and

reporting contributions to officials and candidates whereas a reservation at the rec and park or a picnic stable in golden gate park for someone birthday party it shouldn't raise the issues but you can call and get a table and call no ifs, ands, or buts a day in advance but a process for you know people for other types of things around town that skrern are available for other sponsors and list the examples that shouldn't rise to the same level of concerns as the $20 million building so to summarize i agree with the comments so far and need to work through the i p mooepgz and a few drafts and shouldn't rush that but get it right kyle did a great job.

>> thank you any further public comment on this all right. then move to the agendas item 5 item no. 5 - discussion of staff's enforcement report. an update on various programmatic and operational of the enforcement program's activities since the last monthly meeting. an attachment of april 2017 enforcement report with other attachments director pell ham. >> oh, thank you thank you chair so this month i was busy work on the prop j and the memorandum with kyle and proposing for his arrive with research so for o format that's what i did for the month of april and squeezed in retention work with the controller's office and the mayor's office has issued new

gowns and revised language for the policy and continue to rework that and submit it to the parties if need to approve it for their prevail otherwise the investigative matters - the complaints have slowed down we're not receiving has many before so the number of matters for preliminary is not raised xoshl so leann will talk about the new hires i'm excited about this and get counsel and get all those in complaints. >> a couple of notes on page 3 of the agenda item 5 a table for the status of obviously penalty installment payments i note that the outstanding balance for the month will be announced at this meeting because the office was

out sick while this report was present and the amount is $500 so $500 is remaining outstanding under the stipulations we'll continue to monitor those but the good news the payment are in desire it and will no more appear on the reports. >> who isn't. >> stewart we went through a stipulation. >> paid. >> paid in full. >> yes. >> i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> about the new of the charts we've attached with the number of matters with the preliminary view or that are logged a formal complaint as you may know we'll discuss those in closed session. >> i apologize for not recognizing you with our agenda item. >> oh.

>> i also want to acknowledge you with kyle put in a tremendous mulch work on item 4 and appreciate it. >> thank you the volume of your work each time is just very impressed. >> thank you commissioners. >> commissioner. >> so, yes so maybe leann you'll get to this in our report i don't want to steal our turned about the staff that joined us i have a question regarding a general matter the number of complaints as you can see on page 5 i believe one matter that is greater than 24 months and other 13 from 16 to 21 most is it feasible to set a goal for reducing the

number of matters outstanding and certainly to pack take the ones the most recent and move forward so we can measure ourselves against that. >> yes. absolutely so i had an investigator a little bit going into after she left i knocked out the inner matters 2014 is next on the the target list and went through and divided up the complaint and made assignments for each of the investigators coming on board to give them an equal amount of cases and obviously have them do the priority and hope- a lot of investigative work done on the cases be for the most part ready for stipulation offers not too

difficult to knock out so hopefully, we'll have a busy summary in that regard. >> commissioner kopp. >> thanks mr. chair ms. bloomer chris jackson writ of execution prepared by the attorney for the bureaucracy of delinquent. >> correct. >> and then you got c s m-1 number i've got one number for ethics what is the c s n. >> that i don't know. >> oh, the proishth case no.; is that right. >> that makes sense they have a judgment. >> okay. on norman next step

is escalated enforcement that's that. >> i believe that is they send a lot of lesbians or letters as you recall they spoke about their process. >> what's the next step. >> foiling suit. >> yes. you i would - and that's within the small claims court jurisdiction. >> right. >> square - mr. square at least in my active years was a well-to-do businessman this indicates that is this again, the bureau of delinquent revenue. >> yes. from the bureaucracy of delinquent revenue. >> how to address the employment data. >> i don't know. >> i would like to ask you. >> uh-huh. >> so ascertain for may what

the address and employment are next is client agreed to the repayment agreements terms who's the client us? >> not in that case no. >> their referring to the person that collects. >> i wouldn't call that person a client but a defendant. >> client agreed to repayment agreement we ascertained what those terms are. >> yes. >> all right. and then we've got the famous mr. jackson in here twice

almost similar amounts of money i'd like an explanation of the enforcement efforts compromise and then the last one sweet client again has property what kind of property real property? or person property? real property why isn't it well, there is no judgment payroll is that accurate. >> that's accurate. >> i want to know why no judgment. >> from i might - >> this is oh, this is from december icy thought that was from 3 of but last december

okay. >> i think from their presentation that they gave when they came to the board or commission meeting they indicated they wouldn't there are a lot of letters over a period of time and not to a escalated court action this month at least so within the six months period. >> well, that's out of our jurisdictional powers not wait 6 months they'll get a judgment and if there is real property. >> thank you any further questions or comments by members of the commission? >> okay. we'll take public comment on this.

>> thank you friends of ethics. >> also want to acknowledge the report the clarity of the report and the fact it is out in the public and for the past number of months that we understand who is happening with the enforcements action i guess i'll like to add another association to the report as given that is section would be other public agencies that are in taking enforcements action that i think that adds to the public transparency of this act an enforcement community out there the f bbc and local and state agencies that taken enforcements action on ethical acres for the f b.c. took up the democratic clubz club if we can add a statement of this action

going on that will reinsure the public that in fact, not all the ethics commission has has to take the enforcements action but other enforcements agencies doing some work for the public so just a point of information for the public. >> thank you. >> david pilpal elaine makes a good point i looked at on the computer you can find the chris jackson case start with the court.org and went through the cases it suggests there was an abstract of judgment back in 2013 didn't yet indicate a writ of execution but steps have been taken in the b b r collateral. >> excuse me - will you check that, please. >> if i can.

>> on the b b r chart going forward that would be helpful in the status box a narrative of what is going on that the past month or two indicate the last action date i don't know that the b dr has to update this every month but certainly when something new to report to just indicate that last action date and if there is something clearly the commission is a lot for interested now in what is happening with the matters referred to d dr you're concerned as well, you should be attention to all of those things and hopefully, we get to the point and in the not two distant future people will get out of doghouse and turn in their forms and do all the things and get

off the list otherwise the report is great. thank you very much. >> commissioners city attorney's office, yeah, i'm an interested member of the public by my recollection of the matter for the civil grand jury finding that was rampant in city hall the pay to play politics need to be done and hence forth we're trying to do something about that you guys have done a great job but once again i wonder if there is a conflict of interest for the city attorney's office writing this legislation and you know they're close toys to the people in city hall that's why i think you'll see that are more important we have splenetic did commissioners to

make sure that this is not tor petted or and ultimately deceive the purpose - and give the underdog a chance to get his of a the assistant door and not jumped by the interest groups i'd like to show up at the meeting at the 25 van ness a short notice and like to make written observations and directions to the proposition because once again it seems like it is being hastily pushed through all of a sudden thank you for your time and thank you

for listening. >> thank you any future public comment if not we'll move to agenda item 6 programmatic issues covers a range of topics activities, audit program, and future staff these subjects may potentially be part of the director's presentation or discussed by the commission. >> that covers a range of mission policy public and outreach activities and audio and future staff reports 33 these maybe part of directors presentation for discuss by the commission as an attachment at the april 19th from the executive director's report. >> ms. powell. >> thank you under the first item a very, very busy month i want to say we were sad to say governor brown to one of the

longest deputy city attorney with the commission 19 years and moved to another department to help roll out a major ulth program for the city that will have an impact citywide so her last day in office was april 19th and we'll miss her but a phone call away that position is one you'll see on the chart that is added to the list of vacancies ahead so separately we have kyle coming to our office on the tenth and we look forwarding having his research and ability and my politically forward on all the political issues that come into our packets etch month and interested and happy to share the news on behalf of the cooperate bloom now 3 investigators that will be

joining us if i can ask connie smith has experience in this area worked with the political practices commission and joined us today, the good news she'll be back tomorrow and jeff pierce is starting on may 8th and eric one of our current audrey's will be joining and contribution with the audio program and join us in june that is a tremendous group of folks that will move through the competitive process and glad and excited to be getting to thorough and more timing investigations for your resolutions so we're optimistic with we'll be delivering our mission and table one is we mentioned two staff members also

working with us between now and the end of the fiscal year to get through the paperwork burden of proof burden and table one the positions available and continuing to work with as kyle joined us with our policy direction on prop j and others that across the board we'll take the at the policy plan for the coming fiscal plan to say in the layout is working and hopefully bring back a good sense of when interested persons meeting and other sponsors flugd into the issue we want to make sure that is working with the citations and any comments going forward will be helpful and the last note in terms of outreach we are planning to bring next month for you information a report on what we learned from

that annual filing process for the form 700 wench been working closely with the groups to starting identifying concerns and ways about electronic filing our all designated filers for form 700 with helpful information over the past year filing processes and bringing this year's experience what we learned and hope to get out of if in terms of the policy moving forward so that's information we look forward to sharing with you next month as we see the proposal to bring electronic filing to all designated filers for the form 700 process and with that, i'm available to answer any questions and keep on moving on the higher for the next month or two. >> keep a record commissioners. >> commissioner kopp. >> i don't know that you have to be a specialist in civil

service why is the education and compliance officer exempt? and the other sponsors administrative analysis and senior administrative not exempt. >> that's a great question at the position that was vacated we call the 1844 was created as an exempt position so it continues. >> how long ago. >> in the 2000s when the campaign public financing. >> so it is historical. >> okay. >> any public comment on this agenda item. >> larry bush friends of ethics another good report this

reports mentioned a forth coming policy on documents intention and we like to recommend that advanced copies of that retention copies westbound circulated and subject to at least a visual interested persons do that at the transpired persons meeting to ask people to submit comments rather than bodies have to show up the world documents cabaret taped and releases has been changed with the california supreme court decision on e-mails an issue of text can be released and along with that the importance of timely thinks ♪ releasing those documents right now cases where e-mails have been released showing that

communications took place actually during the vote at a commission or board and people changed their vote as a result of this message they received good idea not to wait 10 days to plan that out because there will be a second vote before that will be done thank you >> thank you david pilpal i was lockup the chapter provision i think that is somewhere in article 10 with the exemptions for positions from civil service and probably category 17 or 18 exemption for director's report to the department heads but whatever it is just something reviewing the reports very briefly i appreciate the staff has been hired to support working with them i wanted to

observed for a second that i think a good mix of people from outside with relevant experience and interest and people from within the department hired and promoted and other people leaving for opportunities within and outside the city the incentive done a great job to attract and retain good talents in terms of of staff the one thing i nodded on the policy plan the record retention and construction update that should be record management policy i think jess jessica report will be back in june but don't disagree with larry's comment we should get that that

there so people have more than 3 days to look at it. >> thank you very much. >> thank you any further public comment? okay. i'm going to do now is even though we have the next one listed and agenda item 7 in other words, to deal with that co-inherently with the item a on all matters i'll take agenda item 8 and then 7 in closed session that will be discussion and possible action an annexations aforementioned for future meeting this will dovetail into what commissioner kopp said on some things you want to have agendize for the next meeting. >> sorry that is actually a

typo i apologize. i should have mentioned that but 7 a should be agenda item 7 and section subsection c one should be 42 a couple of types we caught i don't think that changes our decision but want to make you aware of that. >> thank you. >> yeah. mr. chair and members of the commission i'd like to request our attorney to prepare for consideration that our next meeting legislation to remove the city attorney as the attorney for the commission and language authorizing the use of you as our attorney

or if. >> you being ms. bloom for the record. >> if you're two busy than i guess we'll need another position out of the budget from the mayor and from civil services commission i've indicated and said earlier the time to recognize that the city attorney can't serve two masters we learned that rather earlier in law school and the city attorney shouldn't are forced to go into con tomorrow's to serve two masters so you'll work with the words on

that agenda item for the next meeting any public comment on or excuse me - commissioners any discussions for further - >> i believe correct me if i am wrong but the budget that be presented at the next meeting for the upcoming year. >> yep conversations will be continued more news to report and i'm optimistic we have tools to do our job in a stronger way. >> okay do we have any public comment on item matters pertaining to agenda items. >> larry bush friends of ethics just a quick note to commissioner kopp's point about an attorney that dedicated to the ethics commission exclusively i reluctant in the

charter this charter allows the ethics commission to name an outside attorney with the permission of the city attorney where the city attorney feels a conflict so you might do as a - otherwise you'll require a charter amendment with 6 members of the board for a ruling from the city attorney that when there will be a conflict that will allow the ethics commission to name an outside attorney and if necessary include the funding to pay for a contract i understand that john maybe available. (laughter). >> may i comment on that comment. >> (laughter). certainly thank you, mr. bush for your insight i don't want to spend

money outside for outside attorneys enough money spent on outside attorneys i want us to have our own attorney so the employee answers to the ethics commission and i'm aware of the fact that the departments i guess in existing city a law what can the city attorney for permission to retain an outdoor counselor i'm satisfied with our attorney >> thank you commissioner kopp any future public comment mr. pilpal. >> david pilpal a further it out on this certainly there are existing provisions that allow you to get outside council and circumstance of a conflict with the city attorney if what is suggested is an ongoing

challenge so there be a staff attorney to advise the commission in my view hearing tonight that will require a chartered change and note two probably no more than 2 departments in the city have that designated attorneys to advise in addition to the city attorney and those will be the treasurer and arbitration who has their own attorney and the sheriff that has their own attorney. >> not singular but 3 advertising attorneys. >> yeah. at great cost to the taxpayer mr. pilpal i said i contemplated that will require a change in the charter. >> absolutely. >> and that's a big debate is that should be had i look forward to that. >> thank you

thank you. >> commissioners city attorney's office members of the interested public i'm wondering what attorney/client privilege looks like if there is one what clauses and teeth that has a because obviously whoever is representing the ethics commission should sign off on the fact that they're not going to compromise, jeopardy or in any way substitute something else other than the legitimate mechanism you're trying to chief here and that should be maybe made available to the public that attorney/client privilege

contract and to be amended or so forth and you know if the attorney didn't seem to be blow board than they can be replaced or sanctioned arrest so forth and this is just one point of view obviously you know attorneys are to political and so forth so it would be a starting ground for levels the playing field thank you. >> thank you, mr. chair since this is thrilled i ought to make it clear no contract between the ethics commission and the city attorney no contract between any city department and the city

attorney the chapter of the city and county of san francisco it is san francisco makes the city attorney the city attorney for city business and city departments with the exception noted by mr. pilpal and that is consistent with the chapter section which established the ethics commission 19 or 20 years ago no contract. >> thank you commissioner kopp. >> any further public comment on this all right. with that we'll move to agenda item 7 and i would ask whether or not this there is a motion we go into closed sessions. >> so moved. >> okay >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> oh, we have to have public comment excuse me - public comment on this item?

>> there's no public comment so. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> we go into closed >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? that motion carries we're now in closed session. >> we'll 5 minuoh, we have to

>> we'll 5 minu we'll 5 minu

two minute break. >> this is pretty good. >> okay we're back in open session. and we have had public comment on agenda item 8 is there a motion to adjourn. >> first a motion to reveal or not reveal what we did in closed session. >> i move not to disclose what we did and. > all in favor, say i. > opposed?

that motion carries we're not disclose i move we adjourn and second >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> we're adjourned thank you very much very much. >> it's not