her staff, we have been working with them, but we really haven't had the time to fully analyze sort of the prescriptions that are -- that are in the virgin -- in the version that you all have had in front of you today. >> commissioner kopp: i think in the meeting on friday where you're going to be present, i understand, and commissioner chiu and i are going to be there, as well, with supervisor kim, we'll get this more crystallized at that point, and we can proceed from there. >> it sounds like a good plan. >> commissioner chiu: chair keane, if i may? >> president keane: yes. >> commissioner chiu: i think on that note, just because she has mentioned looking at public finance, and you'll be getting to it -- i don't mean to steal your thunder, but as a policy agenda, we had before us also looking at the public financing system here in san francisco, so what i would like to ensure is we have a comprehensive process and we don't work to

reinvent the wheel and she does something and goes down the track and we're trying to play catch up or undo or mitigate the things that she's been doing so that if we can join forces and work collaboratively together to create a holistic review and assessment and changes moving forward, i think that would be something that that would be important to me. >> president keane: maybe if you both can think of that before friday's meeting and sort of brief us on any thoughts that you have as to how we should approach supervisor kim regarding those things. >> certainly. we can definitely provide you with some preliminary remarks. >> president keane: that's great. >> so switching over to page 4, the other planned projects, again, these were sort of things, again, why we sort of need to revisit our where you would like us to focus our

attention going forward because we have the annual policy plan that had these items setup. we've had to push them back a couple times now. i think these are sort of the major projects that are pending down the line for us: the review of the conflict of interest code. we've heard complaints about that code in interested persons meetings, from filers, so we know there's issues us as staff, just reviewing the legislation -- i think there's areas that can be improved, and some of those areas are improved with your anticorruption ordinance, but there's certainly room for further improvement there. then, again, you have all just voted to put -- put towards the -- the board of supervisors a number of new ordinances and amendments regarding the campaign finance reform ordinance, so in order shortly -- shortly hereafter will be -- i think we'll have to go back and look really hard at the campaign finance

ordinance regulations. i don't think any of them have been modified for sometime, and they will need updating and will require updating if and when the anticorruption ordinance passes. and then, the third item, again, as commissioner chiu just highlighted, we need to do a more comprehensive review and determine whether and/or what changes, if any, need to be made. how well our public finance system is working, and how well public financing systems -- there's a whole sort of body of policy documents and case law that have sort of made some changes as to how people are looking at public financing, so we really need to look at how our system's working in the current sort of regime that exists. we certainly have a number of localities to look at to see which and how certain other systems are operating, and so again, i think we need to really get into that. it's an important issue, in

addition to sort of the -- what people call the supply side restrictions of campaign finance, restricting people's dollars into the system. we have to sort of reduce the demand fore thos demand for those dollars, and one way you do that is by having a public finance system back abundant. and again, any direction related as to how these item sit is much appreciated. >> president keane: so commissioner. >> commissioner chiu: so just to my fellow commissioners, we started tonight with a policy agenda, and we've made progress against some -- many of these items, and that lots of things come up in the interim, so i think it would be helpful to me, and also, what i think i hear from staff asking to is for a lot of these things coming at -- coming out

unexpectedly as things in life always do, but we are -- we have finite resources and finite time. we only meet 11 times a year, so what are the -- what are those -- what are those policy matters that are top priority i think is the question that staff was asking us. so i think it would be a great opportunity now since we have new items, old items, it's the end of the calendar year and that we're heading into a new year next year to get clear on what -- you know, how do we want to be spending our time? >> yes, thank you, commissioner. that is well said. and again, i know i'm sort of belaboring some of these points here, but i just want to run through these sort of recently identified projects on page 4 here. these have been recently identified or there's been requests for staff, again to sort of use their limited

resources to evaluate some of these other proposals. so again, the social media and election integrity item, that's something that supervisor kim addressed. commissioner chiu has expressed, commissioner lee has expressed an issue in this item. it's something that's very apparent as a current item in front of everyone, so it's certainly something that is important to everyone that we need to continue to evaluate. something that was asked about last time was the misuse of public financing funds. we've had a number of conversations internally about this. there are a number of laws that currently exist requiring the auditing that's required to be placed on publicly financed candidates, so again, i think we need to continue to review whether we need to go forward with a -- a -- any provision in addition to what we have now to just ensure that there isn't

any duplication that has been addressed that has been a concern of the commission. >> so question, if i may. >> president keane: yes. >> kyle, in regard to these specific items, c2 on page 4. >> yeah. >> is that something that wocod be rolled into a broader public finance review and assessment that could incorporate looking into these issues? >> yes. i think that's appropriate. as you'll see in our recommendation, you'll -- thank you for pointing it out specifically. yes. i think it's an item that may largely be already addressed, but i think we would want to do a fuller evaluation, but i think appropriately as you stated -- >> on the specific narrow issue for looking broadly at public finance, it would be incorporated broadly into that public review. >> yes. another sort of similar issue here going on that was raised at the last meeting was the

prohibition on what are known as the cashout pros. the board of supervisors as you know when we addressed this previously had an ordinance in front of them. they voted that down. we were asked to re -- sort of evaluate what we could do here, but in our evaluation, in reaching out, we've been informed that they do have a policy on this item. it is still an important issue that may warrant further action, but i think it would perhaps behoove us to set aside some time for further review with the mocd people to further clarify what is on the books now and what we can do, if anything, going forward. so i think that's -- staff's recommendation is to set it aside but maybe have a subset of the commissioners sort of sit down with mocd and other interested parties and flush out sort of any additional items that are necessary for this matter.

the two remaining items were also proposed last time, the sunshine ordinance task force removal. staff -- >> before you get to that -- >> sure. >> -- i note this paragraph, quoting the office of housing and community development. i would like a copy of that -- what is it? a memorandum or a letter? e-mail? >> yeah, we'll call it -- we will call it -- it's less informal than a letter. it's a statement of sorts. >> i place less credence in that. i want to see it. >> fair enough. >> okay. >> so just quickly, the last two items. they were proposed last time. we'd like -- we'd like further direction on this, just, you know, with the number of items, again, that we have in front of

us. there was a request for -- to -- for a -- >> kyle, if i can, on those last two items. >> yes. >> if we could just, for a moment, address the second one first, because i have a personal specific reason in terms of my schedule. your recommendation on the discussion about an independent city attorney, that that be discussed at our december 2017 meeting. we -- the special calendar that was set last year and because of the holidays coming up, the christmas holidays coming up, we don't meet on our regular date. our regular date for meeting is december 18th at 1:00 p.m. i'm unavailable then, and i definitely want to be in on this discussion, so if it's okay, i'd like that

recommendation regarding the city attorney, that we discuss that at our january meeting rather than our december meeting. >> well, wait. aren't we having a tuesday meeting in december? >> no, no, we're having aymo a monday -- >> yeah, monday. >> what time? >> it's a special time. >> oh. >> it was a special meeting set on last year's calendar to accommodate, and i'm not available. >> all right. so you want to put it over, and that's, what, january ... >> whatever that january meeting is, that's fine with me. >> fourth monday. >> oh, that's right. january 12th. >> january 12th? that's fine. okay. >> is that okay, commissioners, that we do that in january ? okay. now, you can go back to, kyle, that first one.

>> what about the other one? what do -- the sunshine ordinance? you say table or set aside, what do you mean, set aside? you mean table, as in bury is? >> well, i think it's -- if we're going to consider what -- all the current things, there's a large and comprehensive review that needs to take place for that, and considering the other -- >> okay. >> -- necessary projects, i'm not sure. >> so do you want to kick it over to january ? >> i don't know if we have a timetable for this item. >> let's not do january , because i think the discussion relating to the city attorney, that'll probably take up quite a bit. >> all right. how about february . i mean, you're getting close now to the june primary. >> i think we would like the commission's policy take on it, honestly. >> well -- >> i think commissioner kopp, the reason we made the

recommendation that we did is because we do unbalance all the other items that we need to tackle, and they're very substantive and complex matters. in order to do those justice, taking on number four would really threaten our ability to do that well, so we -- again, as a staff recommendation for you all to react to and have a different view about it, if you think, is that we don't think this should take priority over those other issues, and we want the commission's sense over time about where you all as a body see the priority nature of this item, given everything that we need to be tackling. >> well, what's the deadline to submit matters to the registrar of voters? >> i believe for -- is it february for the june ballot? >> yes. >> february for the june ballot. >> so what you're doing is killing this until possibly

november , and that's satisfied. i think this, mr. chairman, ought to be on the january calendar, and the way that miss pelham is scheduling these matters, it's for discussion and/or vote, correct. >> yes. >> again, it's up to the commissioner direction as to what you would like to see. >> so i have a process direction to the city attorney. as this item is agendaized, is it -- and i think staff is asking for policy direction, so could we discuss -- i'm assuming the answer is yes, but i wanted to clarify. could we discuss, as a body, whether or not as a policy matter we wanted to pursue this item now? we don't have to wait until the january meeting to discuss it?

>> well, i mean, it sounds like the questions are sort of how you want to proceed from a priority perspective, so you know, i think you could give advice about how -- how you wanted staff to, you know, to prioritize the different item., and i think also, just some substantive discussion, as well. >> thank you. so if we could, you know, on this item -- you know, commissioner kopp, i'm not sure what the genesis of this proposal is. >> well, i'll tell you what it is. it's a duplicate agency. it's a reason the city has a record budget of 10,

600,000000, and it cams some five years after the voters established this commission because of the then supervisor didn't trust the ethics commission, he told me, which is not a strong reason to create another bureaucracy. >> so thank you for that. so in considering this, however, i think that the sunshine ordinance task force conducts a body of work which i think is very important to the city in hearing the issues raised by the citizens. and that the removal or the abolition of the task force doesn't make that work go away, and i don't think our staff is equipped with the resources to

be able to take on that work. and to go to the voters, so ask them to amend -- is this a charter amendment or would this be just a ballot measure. >> it would be an administrative code. >> okay. so it would be a ballot measure to address the -- the duplicative nature of bureaucracy. i don't know that that is the highest and best use of our good will, if you will. >> well, then, prepare the legislation. its responsibility is the same as one of our responsibilities, which was enforcement of the government code of the state of california al california, and enforcement of

the ordinances of the city and county of san francisco. what do you need more agencies for? so if more staff is needed, that's part of the budget for the fiscal year 2019. >> i think that given the other matters before us as a commission and a staff, this is the lowest priority in my -- in my -- in my view, and i wouldn't support putting time and resources into it because i don't know, like, what -- what would it accomplish if we did this? >> commissioner kopp: it would allow this commission to vote on whether to submit abolition to the voters of san francisco with some of the reasons that i just set out and others. >> i think that as a practical matter, i don't think that you can -- that it would be wise to

submit something to the voters and say let's take it away without providing something in -- in -- >> commissioner kopp: yeah, you can have a sentence saying all duties performed by this commission or whatever it's called, task force, shall continue to be enforced by the ethics commission of the city and county. >> president keane: commissioner, commissioner kopp, with all due respect, i think i have to agree with commissioner chiu for other reasons, and that is, i'm no fan of the sunshine ordinance task force. i think -- having seen it in action, i think it's pretty dreadful up close and personal, and i agree with you that many of the things that it does are probably duplicative of what we're doing.

at the same time much of the stuff that -- from what we've heard that it does take on is stuff that if they were done away with, we would wind up getting it. and to be as polite as possible about what i've seen about the things that they have on their plate for the most part, it's -- 90% of it is burepure >> that's a legal term. >> president keane: yeah, that's a legal term, and i would hate to try and have to impose that on our staff, no matter how much the city is unfortunate to have this -- this creature that would -- this hydro headed creature that was created back in the 90's by a couple of your former colleagues. >> commissioner kopp: no, no. it came after me. >> president keane: after. >> commissioner kopp: related to a former mayor of san

francisco. >> president keane: so i find myself agreeing with commissioner chiu on this, that that's not something that really, we should get into or take on. and that's not a place i'd want to go, any way, and i'm -- >> commissioner kopp: all right -- >> president keane: you want to put it on a vote. >> commissioner kopp: all right. i read the tea leaves, and i will subside. >> president keane: thank you. >> commissioner kopp: for now. >> president keane: all right. >> that's all i have. i guess if there's any other points of sort of direction or -- or orders of priority that you'd like to see addressed, as far as -- [ inaudible ] >> yes, so i guess we would suggest that you adopt the recommendations as we have in here, i guess, if you're going to take a vote on the matter, the recommendations that we've

provided, just in terms what we'll move forward with. [ inaudible ] >> yeah, with the amendments that have been proposed, just because of -- regarding the meeting times. [ inaudible ] >> so just to my fellow commissioners and to the staff and to the public, for me, i think that the social media and election integrity policy item is -- is, i think, really important because supervisor kim talked today about the importance of not looking backwards but looking forwards, and this was the scene in the conversations that we had last week or the week before with ann revell, who the the former s.e.c. director. i really believe with the advent of social media and the targeting and the specificity with which campaigns or hackers or you know, others can send

out inform and send out messages and influence, and that we have no idea that it's happening, that we have no record of such -- of those communications or of those ads, and i think that this is a problem that we have just recently discovered in -- as an issue for our -- our national election. but i believe that it is only going to grow, and i feel like we as a commission are very uniquely positioned to study this issue to invite public comment to invite, you know, stakeholders because i think we all have a stake in this, all of us who vote. because the information that we get is only as clear and transparent as the disclosure that comes with it. we know where it's coming from and who's paying for it, and the immediacy of social media it powerful, and it doesn't take a lot of money to reach a lot of people.

so to me, i think this is kind of a burning house that i would -- i think we should turn or attention to, you know, with with all deliberate speed, as the saying goes. so i would, you know, just ask for your consideration that we do proceed with the recommendation on item number c1 for an update at the december meeting, in addition to the balance of the recommendations of staff. >> so i think, just to reclarify it, the motion would be all the recommendations with the amendment to section c, item 5, and moving that item back to january , correct, commissioner? >> president keane: that's right. >> commissioner chiu: yes. >> president keane: okay. is that -- that seems to be the sense of the commission, so that's what we'll do.

>> the commission isn't required to act. i think we're looking for your policy direction. you've been clear on it, so there's no need to take objection. >> take public comments? >> president keane: yeah, we'll take public comment now. >> i'd say just lastly because supervisor kim is also considering social media-type regulation, i also don't want that train to leave the station without our input. >> larry bush, friends of ethics. a comment on the sunshine task force, one of the things that's going to have to happen is a rewriting of the sunshine ordinance because it calls for one of the appointees of the task force to come from the new american media, and you've just seen in the paper today, they've gone out of business, so they're going to have to

have a new formula. >> well, they won't even notice. >> well, i can say about that that i worked a year and a half ago with supervisor campos and several others on a rewrite of the sunshine ordinance task force, because even the people who proposed it released at the it's did it's defunct in the way it's operating. >> commissioner kopp: it also has to filter out a lot of the stuff it does because it's essentially assist essentially it's a meeting that's besieged by every screw ball in san francisco. >> that's because that's the way it's setup now. my point is the commission has the thofrt to setup committees, and you can setup a two person committee to look at that, since it's going to have to

come back one way or other about who is the makeup of the sunshine task force, and what are the duties, so i'm just suggesting that since the charter and the or the nance for the ethics commission allowed you to setup a committee, rather than as you say take up all five members in the time that you have, designate a committee to look at that one issue, because it is timely. thank you. >> commissioner kopp: thank you. >> commissioners, ray hart, strikers of san francisco. i'm going to address several things. one is the efficacy in the ethics and sunshine training. you had the city librarian, lew lewis -- luis herrera sepg thousands of dollars of gift and filing statements under penalty of perjury where he said he got nothing, and we presented you with evidence, and you did jack.

we took it to the state, and the only reason they were restricted is because of the statute of limitations, so i think you're confusing activity with achievement. yes, you can have everybody fill out the dam form, but if they lie on the form, and then, you ignore the fact that they lie on the form, what darn difference does it make? and as far as the sunshine ordinance task force. there's why commissioner kopp doesn't like it. they dared to find him in violation of the sunshine ordinance. that's the same thing that happened to the board of supervisors. they didn't like the fact that they found against the board of supervisors, so they left seats -- four seats vacant for two years, so when a complainant went in, they had to have a majority, they had to get six out of seven votes, or six out of six if they just had a quorum, and the reason commissioner keane doesn't like it is because he doesn't want

to answer to anybody. he doesn't want to go before somebody like the task force where they ask him a question and he has to actually explain itself. he likes it the way it is right now. the public asks the questions, and you ignore them: deaf, dumb, blind, mute. you look at what you want to look at, and the idea that you would get rid of the task force is only because you won't enforce it. and you're tired of people coming here and pointing out the fact you won't enforce it, so what do you do? you just get rid of it altogether. two thirds of the citizens, when that vote came up, passed that, and i have to say that the will of the voters seems to me pretty clear that they wanted that ordinance. fixing it one thing, getting rid of it's something else, but it serves your purposes, doesn't it? you don't like to have to answer to anybody, and you like

it just the way it is, where you sit in these boards and commissions, and someone brings up a question, and you either don't respond at all or you make some sort of ignorant comment like 90% of what the task force does is b.s. that's an ignorant comment. that's the only time you've ever been there. how would you know? you don't, but that suits your narrative, so you'll say it without a twinge of guilt or acknowledgement of the hypocrisy. >> commissioner kopp: well, allow f allow me for a moment to associate myself with the chairman's remarks. >> president keane: thank you, commissioner. any further public comment? all right. we'll move onto the next agenda item, which is item 10,

discussion of the executive director -- no, i'm sorry item 9, discussion of enforcement reports. >> thank you, chair keane. unfortunately our deputy director and director of enforcement of lela fairs, jessica blum is not here. she is under the weather, but it on-line and on your table for highlights of most recent enforcement statistics, a status of cases pending before bdr and related information on several matters that were pending before the sunshine task force. also, just a quick note, this does update on a stakeholder engagement process for enforcing our advisement regulations. jessica and i have been meeting with interested persons formally and informally to elicit information in providing draft language that will come back to you planned for the december meeting, and i realize as you note, chair keane, that

you won't be at that meeting so if there's any interest in moving it to january , we can certainly do that, but we'll -- as scheduled, are preparing to bring those forward in december for an initial presentation and discussion, at this point. >> president keane: and that's fine, and vice chair chiu will do a fine job in shepherding all that along. >> commissioner chiu: okay. no pressure. i actually have one comment, if i may. on page 5, i would like to convey my, i guess, thanks and would like to note that based on the numbers here, of 89 matters in preliminary matter, 68 are less than 12 months old, and 21 are more than 12 months old, so congratulations to the team for working through that ba backlog. i think with a full complement of investigators and auditors now, we can get -- start to

make headway against these matters that have been pending for a long, long time, and i'm just really delighted to see that, so thank you for that hard work. >> president keane: all right. any public comment on... >> commissioners, ray hart, spec tor san francisco. governors like to point out the one page that nobody seemed to mention, and i can understand why you don't want to mention it. it's the letter from the office of the district attorney to miss pelham regarding what you neglected to act upon and had to go before the task force, and from what i read, the district attorney said you did violate the brown act, and i admit. i was wrong, i kind of went in there and took up the bat for you and said well, i don't think they really did. well, i got it wrong, too. so i'm not perfect.

i never pretended to be, but the bottom line is, somebody held you in account and you don't like it. that's one thing that i've found is very common on boards of this city, is if somebody says something to a board or commission, they just ignore it because they don't want to -- number one, they can't give a response. you never get a response, you get a reaction, and you ask why i behave the way i do? it's because you don't get a response from anybody. what you get is a reaction, and if getting a reaction is the only thing you can get, you become a provocateur. b.f. skinner, the father of behavioral conditioning said any behavior that is rewarded will be repeated, so if i come here for public comment and can't get anybody to engage in dialogue, then, i'll become a

provocateur. but here, you have something that the district attorney said you broke the law, and nobody mentions it. the executive director doesn't mention it. she'll say oh, because miss blum isn't here, some other bizarre excuse. the bottom line is you broke the law. the district attorney said so, and now, you want to go back, and you want to hang it on the sunshine ordinance task force, like they're the problem. and you want to get rid of the sunshine ordinance task force like they're the problem. the problem is not with the task force, it's with you, because the law says you're supposed to enforce what they find. the good government guide, as i pointed out to you earlier says you're supposed to make your decisions based on the evidence and the law, but when we had my hearing last month, you didn't even look at the law. the task force did. that's why the task force ruled 11 times that in the minutes means in the minutes, because they read the law.

but you don't want to read the law because it results in you doing something that you don't want to do. you don't like my comments, and the reason i fought for eight years to get the 150 word summaries is because i was tired of people who didn't like the comments just edit them out of the official record, which is what the library did for years. it's what this body did for years. if a citizen has an opinion you don't like, you just edit it out or you do what you did to mr. petrellis did that one time. you said oh, you can't have a sign. city ordinance -- that was a lie, wasn't it? he and i had a meeting with the sheriff, and the sheriff said no, you're permitted to have a sign, and it can't be larger than a certain size. but no, you sat there with a straight face and set to his face, you can't have signs. that's the rules. you talk a lot about stuff you absolutely no nothing about.

you all took sunshine ordinance training? ha! i doubt if any of you has ever even read that law, and yet, you sign a statement every year saying you understand. yeah, you understand it only to the point where you don't like it because it holds you accountable, and if there's one thing that nobody is able to do in this city is hold anybody accountable, and that's the way you like it. and that's why you don't bite the hand that feeds you; in other words, the body that appoints each and every one of you to this commission. >> president keane: we'll go now to item 10, discussion of the executive director's report. >> i have a brief report for you, commissioners. we continue with our organizational -- or staffing updates. we'll be working with the department of human resources through the new year to

developing the positions with job postings. we expect three positions to be posted in december, but we'll be working closely with the department to be moving those closer to hiring completion. i also would note that the annual conference of the council on governmental ethics laws is taking this year in tlont. we are using salary savings to send two staff members -- three of them, actually. two of the three will be participating in panels, jessica blum will be comoderating the panel's discussion on monday. kyle will be on a panel along with others from wash wash d.c. talking about expanding conflict of interest laws in different areas and how elected officials raise funds, and i will be on a panel regarding measuring agency's success, so that should be an interesting discussion, as well, but we are

looking forward to providing you with a full report. it's an extraordinary opportunity for our staff and to learn from our peers, so we look forward to reporting to you about that in december. >> commissioner chiu: if i may, so when you go, i hope that you'll have the opportunity to ask questions about what other jurisdictions might be doing in regard to the social media and election integrity and if they have, you know, have any insights or ideas to share, that would be great. >> thank you, we'll do that. >> president keane: okay. any public comment on agenda item 10? >> commissioner, ray hart, director of san francisco open government, and i'd like the executive director to ask a question. what is the policy in most cities regarding open government laws? are they enforced or are they not enforced? in this city, we have a body that functions, the sunshine

ordinance task force, that does its job, and you may think it's all b.s., but that's your opinion, and you may think all the people are a bunch of cranks. that's your opinion. >> commissioner kopp: you use the term screwballs. >> okay. screwballs, but that's a personal opinion, and you know what? everybody has one, so the bottom line is why don't you ask them when you have a law that the body that is supposed to enforce it refuses to enforce, what do they do? i seem to remember a confirmation hearing when commissioner kopp was nominated where supervisor fewer asked him whether he would enforce laws that he didn't agree with, and he went through a long, convoluted explanation, never really answering the question, but we have the answer right here. i don't like the sunshine ordinance, i don't like the task force, so i am not going to enforce the law. and i dislike it so much, i

want to do away with it so that we can then shove it under the rug and don't have to go through the pretense of holding hearings. and that's all they are, isn't it? how does due process comport with the idea that you always come out with the same result: the complainant loses and the respondent wins? the citizen loses, and the city wins? well, i've said it before, it's because number one, you can't enforce any of them, and you don't want anybody to know how impotent you really are. one ordinance referral you did pass against the city librarian, and you sent it to the mayor, and the mayor ignore it. not only did he ignore it, he reappointed the person. shows you how much the mayor thinks of you.

you don't do anything except sit here, have meetings and shuffle paperwork. i've asked time and time again for any member of this commission to tell the public what exactly you have done that has made this city a more ethical place. never had a response. it's like rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. you shuffle papers, you fill out the forms, and that's the end of the story. and a city department head sepg $15,000 and then lying about it under penalty of perjury falls below your radar? shows you how good you are at what you do. >> president keane >> there's two points i'd like

to make from friends of ethics. if the measure that was passed today on anticorruption and accountablity is watered down at the board and that is what happens, then i want you to know that friend of ethics and our allies will mount a significant campaign and put on the ballot a robust version stronger than what you've passed tonight, and i don't have any doubts tonight whatsoever what the public will do with it since we've seen it in the past. it will pass with virtually no campaign at all. that's one point. second point in terms of the ethic commission's ability to enforce the sunshine ordinance task force, is only someone in authority has the power to remove someone they've appointed. we've gone through this time and again. that's the reason why the librarian didn't have anything done to her is because the mayor has the power.

only the appointing authority can remove a commissioner that they've appointed. that's how we ended up with mel murphy at the port board, even though the board of supervisors didn't vote unanimously for him. the president of the airport commission, who violated criminal laws trying to get a nephew appointed to a position at the airport. nothing is done, so if you are going to take a look at the sunshine ordinance task force, one of the things that you ought to take a look at is who are the lines of responsibility, and how are things held accountable? thank you. >> president keane: thank you. any further public comment on that? thank you. okay. is there -- on item number 11, does anyone wish to have a closed session? hearing none, we'll move to discussion and possible action on items for future meetings.

we had a fair amount of discussion of that already. does anyone have anything further to add to that? initial opportunity for public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on agenda. pursuant to ethics commission bylaws, article 8, section 2. >> commissioners, ray hart, spec tor san francisco open government. sunshine ordinance task force ordinary determination in file number 16116, ray hart v. commissioner quentin kopp and the ethics commission. findings of law and conclusions of law. based on the testimony and evidence presented the sunshine ordinance task force found that commissioner quentin kopp and the ethics commission violated the sunshine ordinance section

67.15. if a member of a commission wishes to unlawfully interrupt a member of the public, that's okay with you. commissioner kopp did it, commissioner keane endorsed it, and the rest of you sat silent. but when a member of the public speaks out of turn, that is he -- that's a no-no. what hypocrites you are. you would use the rules to maintain order because you don't like what's being said or you don't like the way people are saying it, so mr. keane's comment last time about mr. hart's we had a democratic process, why don't you respect it, was b.s. it wasn't a democratic process, it was a show trial, a show hearing. it was a joke.

particularly hypocritical was chair keane's comments last time that i respect the democratic process. frankly, i take quentin kopp's referral to me as quote, that person, unquote, a badge of honor. isn't it ironic that it comes from a person who has shown himself to be without honor? i mentioned the fact that under oath at the rules committee hearing for his nomination supervisor fewer asked commissioner kopp whether he would enforce laws with which he did not agree, and he assured her that he would. so what's with the sunshine ordinance? he doesn't like it so he wants to get rid of the sunshine task force and the ordinance, and to heck with it. so there's a vacuum there. that's fine with him because

all he wants it so get rid of it because it took him and called him on the carpet. so same thing the board of supervisors did when they found against them, they left four seats vacant for two years so that every person who went before the task force had to either get a six out of seven or six out of six vote to get a finding. and then, you portray it as being conflicting decisions. that's bull. >> president keane: well, i'll entertain a motion to adjourn. >> commissioner kopp: so moved. >> commissioner chiu: second. >> president keane: all those in favor? we are adjourned.

>> the office of controllers whistle blower program is how city employees and recipient sound the alarm an fraud address wait in city government charitable complaints results in investigation that improves the efficiency of city government that. >> you can below the what if anything, by assess though the club program website arrest call 4147 or 311 and stating you wishing to file and complaint point controller's office the charitable program also accepts complaints by e-mail or 0 folk

you can file a complaint or provide contact information seen by whistle blower investigates some examples of issues to be recorded to the whistle blower program face of misuse of city government money equipment supplies or materials exposure activities by city clez deficiencies the quality and delivery of city government services waste and inefficient government practices when you submit a complaint to the charitable online complaint form you'll receive a unique tracking number that inturgz to detector or determine in investigators need additional information by law the city employee that provide information to the whistle blower program are protected and an employer may not

retaliate against an employee that is a whistle blower any employee that retaliates against another that employee is subjected up to including submittal employees that retaliate will personal be liable please visit the sf ethics.org and information on reporting retaliation that when fraud is loudly to continue it jeopardizes the level of service that city government can provide in you hear or see any dishelicopter behavior boy an employee please report it to say whistle blower program more information and the whistle blower protections please seek www. >> manufacturing in cities creates this perfect platform

for people to earn livelihoods and for people to create more economic prosperity. i'm kate sosa. i'm cofounder and ceo of sf made. sf made is a public private partnership in the city of san francisco to help manufacturers start, grow, and stay right here in san francisco. sf made really provides wraparound resources for manufacturers that sets us apart from other small business support organizations who provide more generalized support. everything we do has really been developed over time by listening and thinking about what manufacturer needs grow.

for example, it would be traditional things like helping them find capital, provide assistance loans, help to provide small business owners with education. we have had some great experience doing what you might call pop ups or temporary selling events, and maybe the most recent example was one that we did as part of sf made week in partnership with the city seas partnership with small business, creating a 100 company selling day right here at city hall, in partnership with mayor lee and the board of supervisors, and it was just a wonderful opportunity for many of our smaller manufacturers who may be one or two-person shop, and who don't have the wherewithal to have their own dedicated retail store to show their products and it comes back to how do we help

companies set more money into arthur businesses and develop more customers and their relationships, so that they can continue to grow and continue to stay here in san francisco. i'm amy kascel, and i'm the owner of amy kaschel san francisco. we started our line with wedding gowns, and about a year ago, we launched a ready to wear collection. san francisco's a great place to do business in terms of clientele. we have wonderful brides from all walks of life and doing really interesting things: architects, doctors, lawyers, teachers, artists, other like minded entrepreneurs, so really fantastic women to work with. i think it's important for them to know where their clothes are made and how they're made. >> my name is jefferson mccarly, and i'm the general manager of the mission bicycle

company. we sell bikes made here for people that ride here. essentially, we sell city bikes made for riding in urban environments. our core business really is to build bikes specifically for each individual. we care a lot about craftsmanship, we care a lot about quality, we care about good design, and people like that. when people come in, we spend a lot of time going to the design wall, and we can talk about handle bars, we can see the riding position, and we take notes all over the wall. it's a pretty fun shopping experience. paragraph. >> for me as a designer, i love the control. i can see what's going on, talk to my cutter, my

pattern maker, looking at the designs. going through the suing room, i'm looking at it, everyone on the team is kind of getting involved, is this what that drape look? is this what she's expecting, maybe if we've made a customization to a dress, which we can do because we're making everything here locally. over the last few years, we've been more technical. it's a great place to be, but you know, you have to concentrate and focus on where things are going and what the right decisions are as a small business owner. >> sometimes it's appropriate to bring in an expert to offer suggestions and guidance in coaching and counseling, and other times, we just need to talk to each other. we need to talk to other manufacturers that are facing similar problems, other people that are in the trenches, just like us,

so that i can share with them a solution that we came up with to manage our inventory, and they can share with me an idea that they had about how to overcome another problem. >> moving forward, where we see ourselves down the road, maybe five and ten years, is really looking at a business from a little bit more of a ready to wear perspective and making things that are really thoughtful and mindful, mindful of the end user, how they're going to use it, whether it's the end piece or a he hwedding gown, are they going to use it again, and incorporating that into the end collection, and so that's the direction i hear at this point. >> the reason we are so enamored with the work we do is we really do see it as a platform for changing and making the city something that

it has always been and making sure that we're sharing the opportunities that we've been blessed with economically and socially as possible, broadening that ♪ ? an incredible program because we take regular kids teach them the love of the game. we have no emphasis on winning we only have an emphasis on learning and trying as hard as they can that's it and the chips fall where they may.

when students leave our program whether or not adults or kids they'll have a mechanical understanding of what they have. you don't have to be 7 feet tall or be super faster but you do need skwil. once you teach kids how to have control over the tennis courts they'll master. please invest