recommendation and move the adoption of the regulation. >> second. >> motion's been made and seconded that we approve the recommendation. is there any public comment on that? mr. bush? >> thank you, commissioners. one comment is that the form 700 is filed annually. although there are changes in people's financial interests in the course of the year, and i would recommend that you adopt the policy that when there is a significant change in the financial interest of a commissioner or other person filing a report, that they amend their 700. the ftp said that's certainly something that's doable, but there's no guidance that says specifically what those circumstances should be, so i would urge that in a passing thpassing

-- in passing this, you would urge the staff to provide guidance, and urge the city attorney to provide an updated guide to government which explains what the procedures are for a issuing a new form 700 between reporting periods. >> can i just ask for my information, mr. bush, in terms of your proposal, are there particular situations -- i don't want to talk names. >> i can name names. >> but have you seen circumstances where there has been specific change and people have gone -- and it would be something in the public interest. >> we had a planning commissioner who was hired by sfur, and it was for december 31st, so it didn't show up in the report that she filed in april, but you wouldn't have

seen it until a following year. meanwhile, she would have been on the planning commission and a sfur employee the entire time without a public disclosure. and it's certainly true, as you know, that you also have to report your membership on a board. and as a board member, you cannot vote on issues that may affect other board members. so we have some commissioners who are on commissions make policy that affects a broad group of people, including some who are on their own board in the private sector. so there are a number of those. >> thank you. any further public comment on this? same question procedurally. can such a suggestion be amended to this regulation?

>> not to this regulation specifically, but again, mr. bush's point is well taken. i think the fepc in particular holds the form 700 in high regard, so they would be preempted from taking action to require the information that he's asking for is a question to work with the fepc on. otherwise i think it would take an ordinance change to do that if we are allowed to do that. but i think we have a couple of open questions if we're allowed to do the activity in question, and it's definitely not for this regulation. >> i am thinking out loud. >> actually. i think my suggestion was that you ask the city attorney -- >> pull the mic closer, please, mr. bush. >> i think my suggestion was to have you ask the city attorney to update the guide to good government. in terms of what the ftec

allows, i talked to them and there's no prohibition on submitting updated forms 700 throughout the year. >> and you're talking about having that in the good government guide so that would just be advisory and a recommendation, right? >> yes. i'm always happier if you could enact it into law and include a death penalty, but -- >> but perhaps in a step towards that, i think what we're hearing mr. bush talk that is the guidance we can provide people immediately to help them understand what the current laws require. just as a note, we are moving into the annual forms ftime fo processing the forms 700, and we can ramp up our guidance to help people with those requirements, so thank you for that suggestion. >> i'm interested, mr. chairman, in what would be a practical and feasible period

for changes of the nature described by mr. bush. >> and we can do some further investigations. >> yes. >> okay. so we have -- and with regard to the matter, is there a motion to approve it? >> so moved. >> second. >> we have a motion to approve and it's been seconded. any public comment? all those in favor say aye? opposed, no. passes 3-0. we go to item number eight, discussion and possible action on monthly staff report and update of the commission's annual policy plan. >> thank you, chair.

sorry. so i'm just going to run through now that the commission and the public has had a chance to see our new format over a couple of sessions, i'm just going to run through a couple of updates and changes. so agenda on page 2, the san francisco and antiaccountablity ordinance, it was introduced in front of the board on january 9th. i believe it was originally submitted subject to the 30-day rule to the rules committee. however, we have subsequently received a waiver of that 30-day rule but because of a potential budget impact over $30,000 it has been transferred from the rules committee to the finance and budget committee and it will be heard on february 1st.

again, we -- we are -- supervisor cohen is the share of that committee, and you know, working with her and her staff to make sure they have all the information regarding the process of the aao and giving them an outline, we will potentially work with chair keen to setup a meeting with that office, but that was an update reco update regarding the aao as it currently stands with the board of supervisors. moving onto the nonvoting ordinance, that was originally submitted to the board of supervisors with supervisor peskin sponsoring that legislation. there was a technical modification that was presented to supervisor peskin by staff, and it was -- that ordinance was reintroduced on october 31st, 2017. i just want to update the committee that that is still pending committee action. there is no update on that. i would suggest maybe as a policy directive that you allow

staff to reach out to sponsor and supervisor peskin and attempt to move this item forward as there has been no movement on it since late octob october, so that is the only update there that it is sitting and pending action in the rules committee. the ethics and sunshine training, the e filing form 700 project and the e payment and sunshine ordinance, those were systems, forms and training materials that was updated for all of those items, so proposition t and d passed the payment ordinance. took effect on january 1st, and we just wanted to update you that we prepared and implemented electronic systems for those, and they're up and in place, and we're still finalizing a training and updating schedule. the same is true for the ethics

and sunshine training. so all of the sort of i.t. procedures and databases that are required so people can comply electronically are being used. we're still at this point finalizing a schedule so we can be sure to get people updated on that. moving then onto agenda item 8, page 4, the planned and pending -- >> before we forget just as a point, if you could just send me an e-mail reminder to get in touch with supervisor peskin. >> certainly, the nonvoting ordinance? >> yeah. >> certainly. >> and a memo on that, that would be very helpful to me. >> okay. moving onto item 8, page 4, the legislation from supervisors cohen and supervisors kim, we are currently working with both

of the staffs to update that legislation based on recommendations made by ethics commission staff, the city attorney's office, we are working with them in particular to work on the cohen legislation that's regarding the retirement board system, so we will continue to work with those offices to update that legislation and i'm sure both of those supervisors will be eager to present these items to you, but for now, we're just monitoring and there's no action required. moving to part b, the other plan projects, you will note that items two and three, the review of the refined campaign ordinance, and number three, we have set dates for those projects to begin. these are large comprehensive projects similar to what we've done with the account eye corruption accountablity ordinance. because of the sort of emerging nature of major elections in

june of 2018, november of 2018, and then again november of 2019, the executive director, interested persons and number of others have highlighted the city's public financing system as something that people would like to see reviewed and potentially modified, so we plan to begin or formal review of that on february 1st and to begin the larger process of reviewing that program and ensuring its effectiveness is still in place. in addition to that, we are planning on definitively starting the campaign finance reform ordinance regulations review on april 1st of 2018. those regulations, as far we can tell, haven't been substantially reviewed since at least 2009, so we think that this is a long overdue review of those regulations. and we know that there is certainly some current areas that just aren't up to date and have procedures and policies

that are no longer based in law, so those are sort of the two large programatic updates that we would like to begin. i think our plan is in february to present to the commission with sort of a more scoped out project plan for the public financing program just so you can see a timeline, and we will then attempt to set interested persons meeting, and when we'll bring it back to the commission for its initial review, so we can keep it better on track than the aao, just so the public is aware. moving lastly to page five on agenda item eight, the recently identified policy projects, the social media and election integrity, this has been a hot button issue. we are hoping to provide you with a more formal update in february , but we are reaching out to interested person,

subject matter experts and reviewing the information that's coming up about social media and election meddling. we have word that the city of seattle actually had a public file archiving requirement and they've had it in place for several decades, and recently they told the likes of facebook and twitter that they will have to comply with this public filing requirement that the city has. facebook and twitter had 30-days to respond, they have not yet done that to tell the city of seattle whether they will comply with that, so we are watching that closely to see how those -- how the city of seattle and those interactions with facebook and twitter and other social media sort of websites and platforms are operating, so we are keeping an eye on that closely as we move forward. moving to the other items, the prohibition on the use of the

cashout proceeds, we had the opportunity to meet with kate hartly from the mayor office and the office on urban housing and requirements, and based on that discussion, we are tabling this item for now, they have a number of policies, procedures and practices in place that make the cashout proceeds at this time probably something that the commission doesn't need to take up. it seems that the mayor office and the office of community development have that well in hand. the last item -- and i believe this needs an update, but the independent city attorney memorandum or update was originally scheduled for this meeting, but i believe that has been pushed back or tabled at this time. i will look to my executive director for an update if that is incorrect. >> no. we're preparing the memo. if the commission's interested,

next month. we simply weren't able to calendar it with the election. >> so we'll work on that for next month. i have nothing else, other than i will point in particular judge, we do have in particular on page seven. i understand it's very small here, but on attachment two, page seven, this is the new pieces of state legislation that i've been able to identify. obviously this looks better in electric format, but there are links to all the proposals here. these are all in very early stage does, but i ju stages, but actually a lot of them are reconsiderations from last year, but there are a number of things at the state and legislative level that we're tracking. this is the updated calendar for 2018. i don't have anything further.

>> commissioner cobb? >> mr. chairman, i have a couple of actions that i would like to seek approval. first of all, i would like to move approval of the commission proceeding with those projects set out under roman numeral i ,

as recommended. >> second. >> okay. the motion has been made and seconded that those matters be approved. any public comment? >> i have just an inquiry. in the past, the commission acted to have reports that are now filed at the department of election transferred to the department of ethics on campaign finance reports, some of which are filed there and some of which are filed here, and i didn't see that in the list of policy initiatives, and i'm not sure what the status of that is. >> are you talking to us about the slate mailers? >> yes, i am. >> it's still -- it's a still ongoing project. it's admittedly been moved back behind these other larger

projects. >> i would express a hope that that could happen before the june election. there'll still be a lot of slate mailers. [ inaudible ] >> okay. any further public comment on the motion? all right. all those in favor of the motion, please say aye. opposed, nay. motion carries, 3-0. >> further, i note the description of time and attention devoted to the use of so-called cashout proceed -- proceeds, and i am satisfied

that i was misled because i'm satisfied that city money, city loans for low income housing construction has the safeguards sufficient to prohibit the use of any excess cash for ballot measure campaigns and similar campaign activity. that is not the case, however, with respect to federal housing administration loans, but we lack jurisdiction over those. so i deem and -- for myself that the matter has now been concluded, and it's too bad we spent so much time for that --

on it, and i want to make that announcement public because i had two visitors to my office on west portal avenue on this week who didn't know it was going to be a moot subject or in that particular field. and then with respect to number three, the independent city attorney, i thought we already had a model for that in san diego law, but i would specifically request that that be on our agenda next month for actio action. and i'm satisfied with that san diego ordinance. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, commissioner cobb. and if you'll bring that up when we get to -- again, when we get to new business. >> okay. >> or setting future agenda matters, that would be helpful.

>> i want to refer you to page two, the first item, the san francisco anticorruption and accountablity ordinance. the reason i bring this up is because during the staff oral summary, i thought i heard the staff a aao. aao is standard acronym for the standard proposition ordinance to city budget. though that term, aao, is not in the text, i thought i heard staff say it, and if you're going to use it, i would suggest you say acao, because if not, you're going to confuse people when you say it.

>> thank you. any further public comment? okay. we have any action to take on this? if not, we'll go to -- >> chair, we have a request for a quick ten-minute break. >> oh, sure, benedict. >> we're back in session and we'll now go to item nine which is discussion of the enforcement report and discussion on various program highlights and various activity since the last monthly meeting. >> thank you, chair. we had a productive month. received nine new complaints. we opened 11 new investigations, and we dismissed 23 complaints which put a significant dent in our outstanding preliminary review matters. the details for which i can --

oh, no, i have it in here. 58 complaints only remain in preliminary review. so when we started this process, when we were down all investigators, we had almost 190 unreviewed complaints, and we're down to 58, so i'm proud of my staff. they're doing a great job. and thanks to everyone in the review chain that has to get through all that information. it's a heavy lift. i also wanted to highlight that you'll recall the sunshine ordinance task force received a complaint that this commission violated the sunshine ordinance regarding taking of vote of doing -- yeah, taking a vote of something that wasn't on the agenda, and the task force decided that you did not violate the law. the sunshine ordinance committee has decided to repope that complaint even though it was decided in december with the final issuance of that

order, and we have declined to participate in that process. so i sent them a letter at that we had fully complied with our obligations and provided all the facts and arguments that were available to us regarding the incident previously in the first hearing, and i asked them for a citation to hearing that allows them to reopen the adjudicated matter, and i have not heard back. the additional statistics regarding the open complaints are on page two. we now have 63 open investigations, and that caseload is growing as we get through the remaining 58 complaints, we'll have more and more investigations, but we're also working towards stipulated resolutions in several of them, and you'll have some findings of no probable cause and findings of probable cause coming before you over the next couple of months, as well. and you can see the matters that are with the bureau of delinquent revenuer, and people

are keeping up on their papymet plans, so with that, i'll answer any questions. >> commissioners? any public comment on that? >> i'm bob planthold. as a veteran of the sunshine ordinance task force, i want to comment on that. some weeks after the hearing where the decision was you didn't violate, i contacted the administrator for that body to s say what's the basis and what's the timeline for any appeal and reconsideration. you folks haven't mentioned that in here. there was a timeline, a relatively short timeline after the decision is made for

reconsideration. i believe that timeline is long passed, so even if there was grounds for somehow taking the d.a.'s decision into account, they missed the deadline, and that hasn't been stated in here. maybe it's been stated in the letter. it just bothered me that suddenly the task force seems to be saying well, somebody else differed with us, so we'll go along with them. and that's why the procedural issue of the timeline, it can be as important -- and i'm m t mystified why the task force said somebody else's decision made after is a different analysis? because my understanding, they can only reconsider a different understanding of the fact, not a different analysis. who knows who's going to go to

the media and paint the picture their way, unless you can go to them and quickly say, it's not new facts and they missed the deadline. thank you. >> thank you, mr. planthold. >> i have to say that my one experience with the task force they continue to underwhelm me by what they do. yes, sir. >> my name is douglas whepp, and i would like to thank the commission and its staff. i think they're doing a wonderful job especially compared to the old regime. i'm making a prediction that this is going to turn out to be another #metoo movement. when the public is convinced that there is enough momentum

that their complaints will be seriously considered and correct correctly handled, there's plenty of people sitting right now, watching the tv, waiting to be convinced, and all of a sudden, those complaints will come one, two, three, because most of them know who the obstructionists are. some of them will be exposed, and ultimately, the ethics commission up in the sky is going to be issuing more penalties. and maybe, if we're really lucky, if we're really lucky, there'll be some death sentences handing out to some deserving people. >> as an opponent of capital punishment, i don't like you to keep saying that.

any further public comment? all right. we'll move, then, to agenda item ten, discussion of executive director's report. >> thank you, chair keane. my report provides some information on some significant operational developments. i won't go into a lot of the details, but kyle kundurt's report mentioned that with the new year, we have new tools to help people comply with some of the new requirements that took effect january 1. we have now information on-line, new tools for lobbyists to register on-line to comply with prop t that was passed november of 2016, and some other refinements for the lobbying program. i do want to note that we are getting a lot of good feedback from our engagement and compliance team from filers who are working through the system as we identify any hiccups or

bugs, we are working with our i.t. staff quickly to try and resolve those things. so we do appreciate the candid feedback that we're getting from people, as well as the filing comments. that's something that steven massey and other team members in his office put a lot of time in. obviously folks that have to file with these mechanisms are also going to be giving great feedback. also as you know the election called for the mayoral race called for june 2018, we've done a significant and unplanned ramping up of our activities. we did have a first session for candidates focused on the 2018 june mayoral race, an information session that we had about 20 attendees and we're updating information and supplemental guides to help that process. we will be doing that more as

we move into the eligibility and we have started that with our staff, as well, and we will he arepo report on that as we go forward. i do have a significant note that is unusual and not a frequent occurrence for us, but as i also report in my report, this week -- actually, last week, on january 11th, we were -- papers were filed in superior court by one of the mayoral candidates, angela alioto for mayor, and angela alioto for mayor 2018 committee, seeking to enjoin public financing for the mark leno for mayor 2018 committee. those papers were filed in an initial hearing held last friday in superior court department 302. we were represented as a named party by the city attorney's office, and this morning, after

a subsequent hearing and subsequent papers filed this week, the judge issued a tentative order denying injunctive relief. and i'll leave the details for the city attorney to provide you with, but i just want to convey our appreciation and thanks to andrew shan in particular for really getting some terrific papers in and being she soliticious -- very soliticious of us i'll turn it over to andrew. >> i'll be very brief. i just wanted to clarify, even though the document is titled a tentative order, the judge did adopt it as the final order from the bench as this morning's hearing. i also want to thank on behalf of my office, i want to thank the staff of the ethics commission for being so readily available. as you can imagine in a tro context, you do need to collect information very quickly, provide information very

quickly to the court, and so they were always very helpful and responsive and quick to answer amy question so thanks o them. >> commissioner? >> what was the issue? >> the sole cause or complaint in the petitioner's complaint was mark leno's campaign was violating the campaign ordinance by not defining what constitutes a matching donation for the purposes of the financing program. >> congratulations, andrew, and thank you for that. we had hoped to have an initial presentation about the budget today for this agenda. the budgets will be due to the mayor's office february 21st, i believe, and that does follow our next submissiocommission mo we will have a full packet of information before that was

submitted to our office. we are keeping an eye of all cuts, but we will come forward with items that we know that we need to continue the work that has been started through legislation as well as operational changes at the commission over the last several years. finally, i do want to introduce you tyler field who is our newest new guy. a mantle no longer worn by the policy staff. tyler joined this office this week as our new information systems business analyst. he's working with jared flores are and steven massey to continue to develop or filing systems for operational need and access to electronically filed disclosure information --

[ inaudible ] -- i think we've got a good -- we've got a good team that we're putting together here. he's also got experience related to coding and other campaign related data, so it's a terrific fit. we're really delighted he's joining us, and i wanted to introduce him to you today. >> very impressive. good to have you, tyler. >> lastly, we are continuing to work with the department of human resources on our remaining hires. we have two positions that have been through -- actually, three that have completed or virtually completed the oral interview phase, so we have three other positions that are going to be posted, but we are continuing to work with the department of human resources closely to make sure we can be as aggressive as possible to get the remaining seats filled in the next number of months. so again, i'm happy to answer any questions that you have for

me. >> one comment i would make in connection with your comments on the mayor's office having to do with the new budget. since we have a new mayor, i think it would be good to remind the mayor and the mayor's budget people what we emphasized with mayor lee, that we have the power, and we would think very strongly of doing it, of putting on the ballot taking away the mayor's authority to set our budget if they were to cut us in regard to our needs because all of those years when mr. st. crois was here and never asked for anything, and everything went down and went down. we're finally getting up to speed and we're seeing people like tyler and the rest of you. it's working right well. we would not welcome any kind of cuts, nor would any kind of

cuts be in any way deserved given the history of the commission and the fact that we're finally in a position to get the commission running as it should. so i -- i hope that in either a diplomatic or as undiplomatic a fashion as you can that you bring it to the mayor's people when you petition for the budget that we want to keep. commissioners? >> well, i would appreciate it if you would sort off enlighte the other commissioners and the public that we're setting up a telephone system -- >> thank you for that question and my oversight. we have a meeting set with january 24th next week with the administrative and technology people in this building. it is the case that there is

apparently only one meeting room that allows for a telephonic input by people remotely, and that is a meeting that happens at the same time this one does, so there is not currently technology that we can use in this room to simply sort of patch in public comment by phone. we are meeting with -- we've started understanding the issues. we're meeting with the technology folks to identify what would it take to enable that to happen, whether it's through new technology that they can need, or whether it's something we can do through the voip computer technology to get folks in on conference calls or something of that sort. so we're going to identify what it would take to accomplish the goals that the commission mentioned in establishing the meeting days that we have, and that our plan will be based on that to fully make a request through our budget as necessary to try and make that happen. >> thank you. any public comment?

>> hi. charlie marceller for the record. i'm wondering if we could maybe switch rooms with the other people? nope? and i also noted you have two auditor positions coming up since oral interview have been completed. and i imagine they might be hired in the first half of this next calendar year, which is probably because we are obviously going to have some draw on the public financing. so for the emphasis of concurrent and proceactive aud and enforcement, i think it would be good to go full blast as we can on the auditors, so we don't lose those resources within house. and it would be a good training

opportunity i think as well. and i'm wondering if there's any moneys that are given to the department or involved with the special election process. is there any discussion about the special election and the department of ethics receiving additional funds? >> i would like to say i wish, but not that i'm aware, no. now one clarification is there is a provision in the law for a public financing program that does require when there is a vacancy in the mayor call an and election call that an additional $8 perresident be accounted for in our election campaign fund. and so we communicated and confirmed with the controller's office that that level of funding does exist in the current funds balance, so for example if all mayoral candidates, the six who have

qualified to be on the ballot and have indicated that they want to be public financing participants, if each one of them wanted to receive the full financing of $975,000 for their campaigns, the fund would be able to withstand that draw, but come november 's election, there may need to be additional put in based on the language that's in the charter, but based on our ad stiff cost, based on the election call, there is not a provision that does that for us particularly. >> i would imagine that doe gets special consideration because they may have to setup poling stations and pay workers. and also, how many candidates have filed for public financing so far? do you know? >> well, there are -- in terms of what we mean by filing, there were eight candidates in the mayoral race that were qualified for the ballot. six of those eight filed

statements of interest to participate in the public financing program, and i believe out of the board of supervisors race for june of 2018, there were three candidates that qualified and two i believe expressed an interest in participating. i may be off on the board of supervisors race, but six of the eight in the mayor's race have filed to participate. as we came to the meeting today, there have been no requests by any mayoral candidate to actually be certified or to receive public funds yes. >> oh, so certification is still yet to come for those six, so that number may not be the full six. they're keeping their options open at this stage? >> no. to be clear, the candidates when they filed their nominating papers to be on the ballot, they were required to also submit a statement whether they intended to participate in the program. so six of the eight candidates filed statements. each of them indicated they wanted to participate in the program. the next step would be the

candidates requesting certification to be eligible to receive public funds from our office. and then, the next step after that would be to actually submit a matching funds claim once they have been certified as eligible to matching -- for public fund financing. the certification eligibility is relevant and important because it releases a first initial grant to candidates for their campaigns. after that point, they will then submit matching funds claims to have contributions matched up to the limits within the law. so i hope that clarifies the filing process a bit. >> yeah. so the -- i'm doing that in part for the public who's watching. but i'm also wondering, too, if by the next meeting of the commission, which is on the 16th, i believe and we'll have a cleer pictuarer picture as t been certified and their data.

great, and you'll also have a clearer picture of your staff demands, especially if they're all going forward big money. mayor's office requires considerable funds because you're reaching out to everybody in the city in a very robust and aggressive way, especially when there's a strong candidate base. thank you. >> thank you. any further public comment? we'll go on, then, to agenda item number 11, discussion and possible action regarding status of complaints received or initiated by the ethics commission and there's a possibility of a closed session. >> i have a request of closed session. >> all right. there's been a request for a closed session. is there a second? >> i'll second it. >> all right. all those in favor of the closed session. opposed? okay. we'll go into closed session.

-- yes, andrew. >> before we go to closed session, perhaps we should provide an opportunity for public comment. >> all right. any public comment on our going into closed session? >> how long do you think you'll be? >> 15 minutes. >> oh, quick. so you'll come back into session and there's really not much on the agenda, probably, so -- >> we'll sneak in a bunch. >> -- so we probably are going to leave you. >> there'll be some new business. >> but we'll wish you happy new year, and i also did want to say that in this agenda, i've seen evidence that you guys are putting some teeth in your toothless tiger, so i appreciate your hard work. >> thank you. >> thank you.

>> okay. well, we'll be in closed session -- >> okay. we're back in open session. is there a motion to not reveal what was discussed in closed session? >> so moved. >> all those in favor of the motion say aye. opposed no? motion carries 3-0. all right. we'll move now -- do we need any public comment before we -- [ inaudible ] >> okay. any public comment? we'll go to item 12, discussion and possible actions on items for future meetings. >> mr. chairman, i have two items. one is i should like to schedule for our march meeting

an item to submit to voters at the next possible election a charter amendment to provide for independent counsel for the ethics commission. and as noted in the prior discussion touching that subject matter, that san diego law is a model which, in my opinion, would be satisfactory. secondly, i would like a legal research and as appropriate

preparation of an ordinance dealing with a practice that has been commented on, i guess, previously, and certainly prior to my appointment to this commission of candidates for office in the city and county of san francisco using funds from a campaign committee for a county party central committee. and this essence of the democratic party central committee is the one that has come to my attention in which a donor can exceed the $500

per person contribution limit of our campaign and anticorruption law. and for example, contributions to a couple candidates for mayor, such as $1,000 from emerald fund, a real estate development corporation; $20,000 from salesforce, $5,000 from the labor union; $25,000 from the ceo of a corporation. $5,000 from boston properties, another commercial real estate developer and operator. green cross, $1,000, a

marijuana dispensary corporation; and in-kind contributions amounting to a value of $12,000 for parties. and, for example, one of the candidates used $7,000 on a parade float from a campaign for democratic county committee account. it's all for purposes of name recognition. that's obvious, and it's a form of what used to be called a slush fund. i'm not sure of the legal prerogatives of the city and county of san francisco because county party -- party county

committees are authorized under the elections code of the state of california. but if at all possible legally, i would ask, also for calendaring at the march meeting, a preparation of an ordinance to prohibit the use of money contributed to a campaign to elect a candidate to a county central committee -- a partisan county central committee, whether it's a republican party, the green party, or any other party of for campaigning for public office -- elected public office in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner.

i think on both of those, if the staff can work on proposed language for us to discuss at the march meeting, that would be helpful, so we can use that for our discussion. the -- at our next meeting, we -- as we had earlier talked about, we're going to be taking up the whistleblower ordinance, and also the corrupt practices ordinances -- ordinance in order to have both of those on the june ballot. so those are a couple of things that we should gear up for in order to vote on next time because we'll need the super majority in order to put those on the ballot. those are the only things that

i have. anything further? okay. any public comment? is there any additional public comment -- on item 13, is there any additional public comment on any matter appearing or not appearing on the agenda? yes, sir, mr. yapp. >> yes, sir. my name is douglas yapp. the first thing is i'm supportive of hiring more staff. basically, all those past years, we all know what happened, so we have to gear up, and we have to tell the public that this is like a football team. it's not the j.v. squad anymore. it's going to be like a real team, and when one person leaves, there'll be adequate backups, so in other words, the success will continue in an

ordinarily fashion. secondly is the example of harvey weinstein. when he started it, it just got bigger and bigger and bigger. i guarantee you there's plenty of viewers listening to what i'm saying that's secretly saying when those guys are staffed, i'm going to file my complaint. and then, people in the past, like oliver luby and joe linn will say we've waited and waited, and now the tide is turning. it's like water. slowly, it goes up, and then, it floats, a chunk, to the top, because basically, that's what people are waiting for. they want a real football team that's not playing with the j.v. like the previous director.

it's obvious you mean business, and people will come and complaint and give you the proof just like the u.s. gymnasts for the women's squad. one doctor was able to shut them up until a couple of women got brave, and another stepped forward, another stepped forward, and we see what's happening. so the same thing is going to happen in san francisco. people are not going to say well, chicago is corrupt, new orleans is corrupt. they're going to start saying san francisco's corrupt because we're going to make a difference. and let's put it this way: there's plenty of people that did all the legwork in the previous years, and they will be cheering you on. and let's put it this way: i think the commission is ready

to handle something so sensitive, nobody, not even a certain ex-mayor wants to even mention the name. the name is joseph malispen, m-a-l-i-s-p-e-n. ex-day city employee. last person i worked with. plenty to say, and he paid the ultimate price for what he had to say at the hospital. i think the time is coming soon that the city will look into mr. malispen and will find out the real truth, the real truth of what happens to a dead [ inaudible ] man in san francisco. >> thank you. any further public comment?

we adjourn. >> motion. >> second. >> all those in favor say aye. 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. >> good morning and welcome to the wednesday, january 17th, meeting of the govm