applicants. we need to get clarity whether it's about equity applicants. i believe it's equity applicants based on my conversation and reading what he has given us today. we can get clarity on that. and i know supervisor kim has one she wants to talk about. we're not -- supervisor mandelman has made a motion to accept his amendments on the duplicated file. not the additional ones that supervisor kim, myself, supervisor peskin have talked about. we have the ability, if there's things in there, because you are saying you haven't had time to review them all, and i've only had a little bit of time to review them. we have the ability to take them out and amend them out. as well as amend additional things at next rules meeting that we have this conversation. >> one process clarification.

if you decide to make your motion, the motion changing the equity criteria next week or on november 7th instead of this week that will be substantive to another continuance. the same is true to changes to 3222e. >> about the cut off for the -- >> correct. >> that's fine. that's understandable. >> supervisor kim, do you have any additional questions, supervisor yee? >> go ahead supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. so, i know this is up to the will of the committee but i suggest you adopt supervisor mandelman's amendments today so the public can view the amendments and later if the committee choses to strike out or amend his amendments you can do that at the following rules

committee. >> we did that. >> no, he held back on -- >> he held back on that cut off date. that was not written -- >> page 29. >> that was not written correctly. it is not written correctly, supervisor mandelman? >> my understanding is we want to get an understanding of what this actually meant. >> we had an initial reading it's additionally 10 on top of the ones we had tried to get. we need some clarity. we need that could be redrafted. >> nicole elliott. to that issue, a couple of things. we will gladly run the traps on which m.c.d.s are caught in the existing language and which would be impacted by what supervisor mandelman would like to do and what supervisor safai

would like to do. i think what deputy city tone was pointing out, if you strike this today and add it back in at the next committee it's non substantive, meaning it will take less time over the course of this discussion to take that path. i think quite frankly, what i'm hearing the supervisors discuss, there are different interests for this section. >> since i was the author of this particular section and we went over it very diligently, and had conversations with those in the pipeline and those impacted by the federal prosecution, it was intentionally written to ensure that certain amount of applicants in the pipeline, and that was kind of a joint conversation we agreed upon in terms of negotiated dates, there was thought that we were not capture every person to have an

application permit reviewed. those that had been much mother along in the process, which that's why that language is in there about submitted a complete application for cannabis dispensary to the department of public-health prior to july 20th, 2017. there were additional individuals that had not a conditional use hearing at planning department. that was a specific date that we had decided upon. striking it opens up the -- it also increases the number of -- it effects the equity applicant pool as well. in my interpretation. >> can i ask a question to deputy city attorney. if we were write a or in there leaving it as is but leaving an or instead of and online 16 --

>> >> so it's page -- >> or following sub section e1 or an or following subsection -- >> line 15 to 16e2. it's awarded permanent under this and any time prior to december 31st, 2018. provide the medical dispensary and then on that second line, submitted a complete application permit prior to july 20th, 2017. or demonstrates the satisfaction of the director it operated a cannabis, blah, blah, blah. remainder of that sentence. can we do that? >> can you make a motion to make that amendment today. keep the language in and replace the end with an or.

>> i would be more comfortable if we did that today and adjust it later at the next hearing on this. i would feel better doing that. would you be open to that supervisor mandelman? >> my preference would be to leave in -- to take the amendment as we wrote it with the language delated and then add it back in later because then it facilitates going forward. if we're not going to do that i would rather just leave it as it was and negotiate over that section going forward. >> this is being proposed today to strike it. it wasn't written initially. this got struck yesterday. >> we didn't have it as part of the original legislation that we introduced. >> supervisors, i will just point out that regardless of if you were to strike it today, i think what i'm hearing is an interest in negotiate regardless but it would keep it on the same timeline as if you were addressing it today. that is i think the goal. there will be -- >> i understand about keeping it

on the same timeline. if we left it in and added the word or it would stay on the same timeline. it would be part of the original package being proposed today. >> if you struck it, it would be the same timeline as if you added it back in and amended it in or for the and as well which would allow for all opportunity sort of conversation between the supervisors on this issue. i understand what you are both trying to accomplish. i think the one outcome that will get both of you to the point you want to get to, would be to strike the whole thing and address it at the next committee. >> i'd like to ask the deputy city attorney that question. >> since this was amended today, if we chose to leave that entire section and add the word or, isn't that the same thing as striking it? it's going to keep it on the same track? >> process wise it's not the same as striking it.

for instance, on november 7th, you wanted to strike one of the options, that would be a substance of amendment. the way to keep your options open is to strike the whole thing. if you replace and with or it leaves options open and it's possible on november 7th you reach a compromise and make another amendment that will trigger another continuance. the way to most it fastest is to strike it today and negotiate what you want to put in. you don't have to do that at all. it's a choice for the committee. >> what i'm trying to understand is we're proposing to strike this today. we could chose not to strike it and it would still stay there, correct? >> right. if you chose not to strike it, it would stay there and on november 7th, you could chose to amend it or not and if you chose to amend it on november 7th, that amendment would likely trigger a continuance to the

next. >> if we leave it and add the word or isn't it the same thing as striking it today? >> no, it's not. it doesn't leave as broad array of options to make on november 7th without triggering another continuance. >> that's fine. i'm fine with striking it then. >> i have the floor. by the way, supervisor safai, i'm in agreement with you. you remember those conversations. >> i do i'm in agreement with you and i'm proposing you adopt all the amendments today. i'm with you on this. i want to really limit the number of applicants that fall in under this and we'll have that week to examine what the strike out means. for the sake of time, but i was proposing that we adopt all of supervisor's mandelman. i have three other items.

>> this is what i wanted to ask, i'm not trying to cut you off. i want a point of clarification. don't we have an amendment on the floor to step all of supervisor mandelman's amendments as proposed. >> no. >> wasn't that a motion? >> supervisor mandelman's amendment was to adopt all of his amendments except for strike on page 29. what i was proposing procedural, is we adopt all of supervisor mandelman's amendments. i'm not on the committee so i was making that as a suggestion. >> can i withdraw my motion. >> ok. >> there's no motion then. >> go ahead. >> now that's what i was trying to get clarity on. >> go ahead, i'm sorry. >> supervisor mandelman, would you like to mission motion befo on to mine. >> i would love to make that motion. >> yes. >> so you made the motion to adopted your amendments including striking out that clause. can we do that without objection? >> supervisor yee? >> yes.

that's where i was going anyway. it makes more sense to just do it all. we can have a discussion. >> ok. so we'll do that as supervisor mandelman. all of your amendments don't include supervisor kim's, minor supervisor kim's or pose exhibi. >> thank you. now that supervisor mandelman has made his amendments i want to concur with chair safai on two of them. one is the ownership percentage, this argument about 50 versus 49 versus 40. i'd like to understand that more. the second is the and/or and what that versus the strike out and what supervisor mandelman has put in. in the course of the week i'd like to understand those two issues. the third is actually the amendments of supervisor peskin will be introducing. i'm also very interested in limiting the number of applicants that can be considered equity.

i'm very concerned about the fact that we had over 100 equity applicants in a program i thought was a difficult criteria to meet. hearing that there are equity applicants that have seven applications, i think that should be limited. on a certain level, when you get an application approved, you are no longer an equity applicant. i know that discussion will happen when supervisor peskin comes in. finally, i would like to make an amendment today. i hope the committee will adopt the amendment and then perhaps again strike it out next week. i understood some of supervisor cohen's concern on my expanding the definition of housing security. i will argue this, this is not the only requirement that allows you to meet the equity applicants criteria. you have to meet three or more of the criteria. and if we're -- i think it's a narrow definition of defining

housing and security as only a vision or foreclosure or revocation of housing subsidy doesn't meet the spirit of what i consider housing and security. housing and security includes you living in an s.r.o. hotel owned by the city or staying in a navigation center or a shelter or supportive housing. if that expanded definition is problematic from a policy perspective from this committee, we should just strike out c because i don't understand why only people that have been evicted or for closed on should be granting housing and security definition when those that lived in supporting housing and a shelter are not. i think the question is not whether we should expand the definition or whether this definition meets the original spirit of the equity application concept, which is we're trying to benefit those that were the -- i don't want to say the victims of the drug war but were

negatively impacted by the drug war. i'm not sure why, if you were negatively impacted by the drug war, if you are evicted on meets that drug war definition more than living in a homeless shelter or s.r.o. hotel. so, i just wanted to make that policy argument as to why we should expand it. i think if you were arrested for a drug conviction between the period of 1971 and 2016, and instead of being evicted or forclosed on you were homeless or lived in an s.r. hotel you should be considered eligible for this program. i would like to make the motion to adopt this amendment. there was a question ms. elliott has made that she would like to keep as evidence by and i only want to ask the city attorney if there's a reason why they added through instead of as evidence by. that was not a request that i

had made. i'm agnostic to through or as evidence by. and some of my colleagues mentioned they didn't like the overnight definition and they pointed out i have spent the night at a homeless shelter so i'm willing to expand that to 90 dies. 90 days. it's a typical access point that many people that are chronically homeless get. >> deputy city attorney on your question on through obviouses as evidence by, that just happens as it went through our grammar review machine. as evidence by works just fine. we can leave it there. >> so, i can't make a motion but what i would say is if the committee would like to make the motion, i would like to adopt this amendment. keeping as evidence by and striking out through. adding in 90 days at navigation center and 90 days at a shelter. i hope that' that the committeel

consider it over the week and continue that policy discussion. >> so just before we talk about any motions or anything, what i would feel more comfortable with, because this is the first time i'm seeing this along with supervisor peskin's language along with my language as it pertains to one of the criteria and this is also a criteria thing, i would feel better, since we're going to have more robust conversation at the next meeting that we have this that we introduce any of those amendments at that time. i'm withdrawing my amendments. i know supervisor peskin is not ready for his. i know that we need to have a little -- we need significant -- mine as well as yours and as well as supervisor peskin's are impactful on the equity program i would feel better if -- if we move forward by supervisor mandelman's proposed amendments,

and these that are require a little bit more in-depth conversation i would prefer to wait to accept these amendments until next meeting we have on this and we can make that at that time. this does not slow down the process in anyway. it will help to clarify the equity program. we moved what was important today about moving the timeline for adult cannabis temporary applications. that's why we duplicated the file. i would feel better not doing that today. that would be my preference. >> i only argument is i had my language drafted unlike supervisor peskin. i'd like to have it on the record for the public to see. and provide feedback to the committee about whether they liked it or not. i think for the sake of public transparency it's always great for as much language as possible to be there and if the committee should chose next week to strike it out again, that is the will of the committee.

>> let me make my comments about this. >> supervisor yee. >> that's why i asked earlier, are we going to be able to strike out whatever we amended today. unlike supervisor peskin's possible amendments, which i haven't seen at all or no one is here to discuss it, i'm actually comfortable -- i see the language, i don't know if i agree or disagree. it's straight forward. we're going to -- i'm comfortable making a motion to adopt this amendment and have a thorough discussion on this. if you are comfortable with your amendments i would do the same thing. >> right. i mean we had the language for supervisor peskin and for mine as well as his. i would prefer not to do any of them today. that would be my preference. i'm only seeing yours. i understand you had them drafted supervisor kim. i only saw it right now. and so, i understand your

argument. i would prefer not to accept any amendment outside of supervisor mandelman's today. deputy city attorney. >> not a supervisor. >> sorry. >> now or ever. >> just to be clear, all three of these amendments, yours, kim and supervisor peskin, if you adopt them at the next meeting will trigger another continuance. you adopt any of them at the next meeting it will be another continuance. >> along with the and and the or and -- >> right. >> so there's going to be -- no matter what, there's going to be a continuance from the next meeting. that's my point. >> i'm going to go ahead and make a motion we vote on it. most of the times we agree on things but this is one where i just feel like i'm seeing the language in front of me for the first time and much of the supervisor mandelman's a menments i only saw right here or right before the meeting.

it's in the same category. i'd like to make a motion. as i accepted supervisor mandelman's amendments because i got them as i walked into the chambers. i really didn't get a chance to see it. give me a chance to discuss it. so my motion is to accept supervisor kim's amendment on the page 3c, 4c? >> any further discussion? supervisor mandelman. >> i'm comfortable with doing that. >> ok. >> roll call vote. >> we have two ayes and one no. >> ok. >> great. >> any other discussion on this

item? item number 4? ok. seeing none. we'll move to the next item. thank you. >> you will need to continue. >> this will be continued to the call of the chair. thank you. >> next item. >> next on the agenda is item 5 a hearing to appoint seven members term ending april 27th, to the sunshine ordinance task force. call them up. >> first applicant. i think is josh wolf. >> i believe that mr. wolf indicated that he was not able to attend today. >> ok. >> leuwam tesfai. >> one moment. >> before i begin, i just want -- >> three minutes or less. >> before my three minutes, my

name is misspelled. i believe mr. young has the correct spelling of my name. >> ok. >> great. >> proceed. >> good afternoon, rules committee members. my name is leuwam and i'm seeking reappointment to seat number 5 on the sunshine ordinance task force. seat number 5 is designated as an nominee put fourth by the league of women voters of san francisco. i have had the honor and privilege to serve on the board of the league of women voters of san francisco for over four years. the league is a non partisan organization that encourages informed and active participation and government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues and influences public policy through education and advocacy. through the league, i've had the opportunity to register, educate and empower voters. outside of my service of the league, i am an attorney at california public utilities commission representing the people of the state of california.

my practice is energy law with a focus on infrastructure financing, procurement and climate change. prior to representing california on federal matters, i served as a legal advisor to a commissioner, which required diligent adherence to the brown act to ensure that meetings were open and transparent as well as responding to requests for documents, requested pursuant to the california public records act. before serving on the task force, i attended meetings to observe challenges the task force was facing. the meetings of the full task force would get drawn out because of missing documentation critical to support the complaint. i noticed evidence being presented at the last minute without being included in the packets, preventing task force members from having the opportunity to review it ahead of time and preventing the opposing side from having proper notice to analyze the information being used against them. i saw this to use my experience in administrative law and use

the complaint committees a venue for pre-hearing conference to determine the issues and make sure that all of the documentation have been gathered and presented to support a complaint under the sunshine ordinance. the support of our chair, i was assigned to the chair to chair the complaint chitty and roll out this new process. this allowed the committee to ensure that a case was ready before being presented to the full task force and could allow us to use our time more effectively. in my next term on the task force, i would like to serve on the education outreach and training committee. a few city departments have started to use the next request system which is a web portal to request a document. i'd like to be able to assist other agencies with implementing this system from being mishandled and to provide paper trail of a request is purchasing

mishandled. this includes my statement. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> just a quick question. so, you've been on the task force for how long? >> i served a two-year term and i started this next term in april. >> ok. and then, how is your attendance? >> pardon? >> have you been able to make the meetings? >> i have been able to make the meetings. >> have you missed any? >> i have missed on occasion because of work. sometimes i get called to sacramento or d.c. i have a very good attendance. >> so, like in the year how many did you go to and how many did you miss? >> i believe i missed one meeting. >> thank you. >> who is replying can answer the same questions. this is important for me to know that people that are reapplying

they care enough to go to the meetings. >> we have had quorum issues. >> sometimes people don't go to meetings. >> yes, i agree. >> if we have questions we'll call you back up. >> mr. bruce wolfe. good afternoon, committee members, commissioners, supervisors. my name is bruce wolfe. i'm currently the chair of the sunshine ordinance task force and i have enjoyed serving on this and enjoyed your support of the sunshine ordinance task

force. we've had a very good couple of years. we've been able to get through many, many hearings, many cases and been able to solve a lot of issues and problems and make a lot of corrections and help the public in many ways. i've missed maybe one meeting due to illness in two years. and i'm open for any questions you might have. >> what's your attendance record? >> i've missed one meeting in two years due to illness. >> great. that's good. i know supervisor yee likes that. [laughter] what do you think the value that you bring to the committee has been? i know you've been on there and active but particularly what perspective and value do you think you bring? >> well, in this seat, is reserved for the consumer advocacy. i work for a organization that

provides consumer advocacy and harm reduction and i have a good iin sight how the sunshine ordinance provides that. i'm also very keen to the ordinance. i enjoy the transparency and disclosure and for the public's interest. to make sure that we all know what is happening as people's rights. >> great. any other questions? i just want to say for the record, that for seat 3, josh wolf had called and said he was unable to attend today. he represents press and electricitelectronic media and e expressed to my office his desire to continue serving on the sunshine task force. i want to read that into the record and i'm supportive of

that. let's hear from frank cannata. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is frank cannata. i've been a member of the sunshine ordinance task force since 2016. i wanted to serve on that body because i believe that open transparent parent government and those appointed to govern. my time on the task force is only reinforced this belief. i take this responsibility seriously. i have attended 28 out of 30 full task force meetings, missing one due to illness and one due to a family medical emergency. i have also attended all of the compliance and amendment subcommittee meeting which i chair. i've been fair and impartial in my rulings and take each case individually. i have been a neighborhood and small business advocate since

2006 when i co founded the mental health neighborhood association due to a large uptick in crime where i live. i served on the board for 11 years and continue to be an active member. we work with city departments and agencies on crime abatement, clean up and beautification, planning and development and social engagement. we also work with our local merchant groups to keep the corridor vibrant, interesting and unique. i would love to continue serving on the task force. in my two and a half years, we have started discussions on issues that were not for seen when the ordinance was originally written. i would like to continue to work on these issues such as, the access to public records created by the use of social media for government business and also the use of drone video taken by government departments. i respectfully ask for your support so i can continue my service on the task force. i'm here to answer any questions you have. >> thank you. you answered one of the big questions. and i know that we received

words of support from supervisor peskin on your behalf. >> i was the supervisor when the neighborhood association started. we had a lot of interaction and creating that. >> great. supervisor yee. >> he talked about his attendance. >> say it again. >> your attendance. >> 28 out of 30 full task force meetings. one due to my illness and one a family emergency and the other one, i chaired the compliance and amendments committee and made all of those. >> if you have any questions we'll call you back up. >> the next person chris hyland. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i have served on this task force

for six years. this would be my fourth term if selected again. that would make me the longest consecutively serving member. in the absence of a best practices data base, it's incumbent on the long-serving members to be that repository of institutional knowledge that keeps us balanced and consistent and more about that data base later. i've also been the vice-chair for the last four of those years. i've served on subcommittees and also our version of the rules subcommittee. i have also chaired full task force meetings when bruce wolf was not available to do that, which was rare. i consider myself an accomplished parliamentarian after these years of service. i wanted to highlight a few things, which i believe continue to make me a valuable member of

this team. it was something that past rules committees were focused on. perhaps supervisor yee remembers four years ago when you were chair of this committee, we talked about that and i opened my introduction of four different languages and at risk of speaking in tongues, i won't do that again. i just want to underscore the fact i'm from a missed race. my mother is from turkey and my father is an american and he was a diplomat for the united nations. we lived in lots of foreign countries including africa, turkey, bangladesh and it's helped me deal with a lot of the people that come before our committee. i remember talking to a taxi driver from the middle-east, he was half english and half arabic. i was able to understand him and it was nice.

my information technology background will continue to be an asset and i have training as a parallel in my early years which helped me navigate issues, which you have done today. in summary, i'm proud of the work i've done. i'm proud of the capital i've helped build over the past six years and i would appreciate your vote to continue to do that. in anticipating your questions about attendance, i have the strongest attendance over the six years. i was away this past summer for family matters overseas. i believe i missed a meeting there. but over all, i'm proud of my attendance. and my ability to continue to app tend these meetings. >> great. supervisor yee. >> ok. i think if we had questions we'll call you back up.

i wanted to give you a copy of this for supervisor mandelman. >> you can put it right there and the clerk will grab it. >> all right. >> thank you. >> great. let's hear from our next applicant mr. dean schmidt. you are applying for seat seven or 10? >> it's my understanding, my name is dean schmidt, that there are five seats that would have been listed on my application. six, seven, eight, nine and 10. >> right. seven and 10 are the only two that are not people seeking reappointment. anyway, proceed. >> i understand. i'm not sure how that works. again, my name is dean schmidtment schmidt.i believe it

doesn't get to answer your special question about pasta pat attendance because i'm not a not incumbent. i have been a litigate oror, i'a civil litigator for 28 years. i've been living in san francisco. i live in the mission district. that is my home. the areas of my work as a litigator, that i want to bring in at this point as being especially relevant. one, i've done a lot of work representing consumers in litigation. a wide range of cases, california superior court, federal courts, and also in some

administrative proceedings. two, i have done a lot of work representing counties, special districts and also a couple of cities, not here but in the east bay and the north bay as outside council, litigation council. the third thing that i think i bring, with the period of time i've spent in litigation, i've had a lot of experience with difficult document evidence and privilege issues. i think it's something that is very common and fre very importt to get nailed down in the types of cases that can and do go before the task force. i've been following these issues

for self-years with increasing interest in involvement with the issues that come before the task force issues that drive the existence of the task force. government accountability, free speech, freedom of the press in the first and 14th amendment and citizen access. i believe, now, i do have the time necessary and appropriate to do the job as a task force member and i'm ready to make the time and take it out of my other areas where i do my work. some of the things that i would wish to emphasize and working at the task force professionalism, respect for all parties involved, efficiency and to

reduce delays. i'm sorry, i went overtime. >> that's ok. i just want to make sure you had time to answer questions. which subcommittees are interested in working on and why? >> well, actually i would be interested in any of them probably, i have gone to see the compliance and the complaints committees. i had would be interested in those. i know rules doesn't meet as often. that's something i would probably, when the discussion came up, i would probably feel sort of a rules geek, i would leave that up to the people who are more veteran to determine what i should be working on.

>> when you said you are retired now? >> no, no, no. i'm not retired. i just feel like i can juggle my schedule in what i do. i practice law. i control the amount of time i put into my business. >> ok. i just wanted to make sure you understand the time commitment necessary to serve on this committee. >> yes, sir. i take it very seriously. >> great. any other questions from members? we'll call you up in we have questions. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you. >> next applicant mr. rodman martin.

>> i've lived in san francisco for eight years now. a little over. i live in district 2. i rent an apartment there. i began practicing law. representing the injured workers who were injured on the job. i still do that. i help people out during a dumb difficult time in their lives. they've been out of work for months and support. and they need how the process works. i think it's also part of what sunshine ordinance task force provides. i found myself having to get documents, obtain them, explain why it cannot or can get them. i inform my clients about the

law and help people vote in college. i volunteer time at the asian law caucus. they should have provided you a letter of support i'm hoping. i find it rewarding. i do it a couple times a month down near columbus street. it's a good location. i'm applying for this task force because i believe in access to government and government transparency is important for citizens to be heard when they're making a question and to have a due process mechanism. a supreme court justice said the sunlight is the best disinfectant, i believe it's true today. that's all i have. >> great. >> supervisor yee, any questions? supervisor mandelman? >> can you elaborate on your

volunteer work with asian law caucus. >> i've been doing that since 2011. with them. they give you dinner which is really nice. until about 8:30. you help people that need interpreters who are lost and it's very rewarding work. i really enjoy it. >> can you say that again? so you help them with what? >> they'll come or there's no record they worked there because

it was all under the table. so you go through what they're experiencing and what their options are. sometimes you are able to help them outside of the clinic. that's where i focus on. the asian law caucus has a wage issue about this and stuff like that. >> thank you. we'll call up mr. matthew yank ee. >> thank you, supervisors. i've been in the city for about seven years. i moved from ann arbor in michigan. i worked with the auditor controller agency. i've the chief of the clerk office. we do a high level of contact

and providing records to the public. i get up everyday and tries to figure out how we can make it easier for citizens to get what they need for government. cut through the bureaucracy and to make the process as simple as possible we've digitized records to retrieve them quickly for our residents. we record 300,000 documents a year. before i that i worked for the city of ann arbor is located. i served as the director of elections there. you need to obviously work with the citizens and make sure they feel that they have access to government and their vote counts. one of the things we dealt with was a election for a county board seat where it was one vote difference between the first place and the second place candidates. so conducting that recount is something that you have to do to make sure that everyone feels they're involved and it's a

process that went fair. at the end of one thing that the local tea party and the democrats agreed on is that the process was done fairly and that was important. i really became interested in this committee after working a lot in the community this past spring. sb2 was passed, it's building homes and jobs act, which sets aside funds for affordable housing. it also effects the recording industry a lot. these people that need their documents recorded. everything from trust for a mortgage to a child support lean. we worked with groups and explained how this law impacts them. the feedback i was getting was that, you've done a great job bridging that gap between government bureaucracy and the company you should really look to do some other volunteer work to go along that path. i woke with the controller and

received his support so that's why i'm here today. if you have any questions i'd be happy to answer. >> i'm just looking at your resume and professional experience. i mean, northern california chapter records education partners. >> yes. well, it's a workshop and it actually throughout the country but there's a local chapter here in northern california. it brings together people in the property records and all the people on the government side who they have to work with and figure out how we can collaborate better and how can we serve their needs and they produce and work with us to give us what we need to get their documents processed. >> i get it. i think there couldn't be a stronger applicant for someone that's interested in helping provide information to public records. >> i've been doing it for a decade. >> and you were the director of

michigan. >> yes. in washington county, michigan. >> you are currently the chief of the clerk recorders office in alameda county. >> i'm all about records. getting the public what they need with their records. >> ok. >> how did you hear about this opportunity? >> you sought it out? >> as i said, a lot of people said you are a people that helped us cut through bureaucracy and bring government to us. i was looking through the vacancy list and i saw it and saw wow, it's what i do everyday. >> that's your calling. i got it. >> any other questions? we'll call you back up if we have questions. next applicant. mr. glenn mar. tough act to follow, i just want

to say. >> i think it's fantastic you have such a wonderful selection of candidates for positions like this. i have been a resident most of my life. a homeowner and residents of bernal heights since 2003. my career has been in software development implementation and support. i have not been part of official city organizations so my experience in the city has been as a board member of the bernal heights neighborhood center where i served for three years and i have attended some city meetings on land use. what is my interest in the committee, i have been to a sunshine committee meeting this year and i read minutes from other meetings. >> great. >> how did you hear about this opportunity? >> my neighbor, lieu fisher was

the holder of seat 10. >> lou. >> ok, great. >> lou tells me about stuff like this. >> this is your opportunity to get involved. >> right. she said you should have a letter from her. my interest is in participating in local government. i feel like the world's changing a lot and the world is becoming challenging and i need to participate in ways more than voting and contributing. this is my effort to participate at the local level. >> supervisor yee, any questions. >> no. >> we'll call you back up if we have any additional questions. >> thank you. >> is trevor martin here? they had not returned the phone calls. i know they put in an application. >> ok. >> i think that's the entire list, correct? >> yes. >> ok. well, we'll call folks back up if we have any additional questions. any members of the public wish to comment on any of these items?

not on all but on any one? please come forward. >> thank you for the invitation and i accept it with great honours. we talk about city government and honesty. let me say my experience with sunshine years ago. the only one speaking. back then it was so weak i bought some community people to that afro american cultural center, you know what that board that was there at that time, they were so weak their job was to sunshine information that we want government, they failed us miss ra blee. here we are in 2018, what does this mean? i hope we can wipe it clean for

2019. corruption. this is my third time at city government. yours truly ace on the case. i'm going to request that the federal come in and help the sunshine because this city government right here, and i'm not saying our current administration is involved, but our prior administration that is on down the line for years have been corrupt. particularly right now, i'm not going to mention no names. we all know who is the pickup puppet tier -- right now, i got 29 seconds. when i leave here today, i'm on tv. and i'm requesting and i'm asking federal to come back in city hall. when they had that thing with mr. lee, not ed lee but the other lee where they came in with corruption. the fib is still here. i know they are. they're all in the skies looking

around. we want them to come because you don't lie to the f.b.i. you lie to us but not the f.b.i. >> we got it. next speaker. >> executive director of library users association and i'm sorry not to see rafael mandelman in his seat. particularring but one of the candidates last time we wrote and spoke about chris hyland we gave our endorsement and this time we give our unqualified no endorsement. chris has done a number of things that have been very destructive to the public with respect to fairness and having hearings. so, for example, there were

repeated times when he combined multiple hearings that a single complainant would have into a single complaint. and he did that without any advance warnings repeatedly. in particular, he would do this when the item was called at the meeting. a person might be sitting there for a while, having planned their presentations and all of a sudden have to completely juggle around according to whatever rules were being made up. there was no clarity with respect to how much time would be given, whether the items would be heard one at a time. whether public comment would be given for let's say four hearings times three minutes. or whether there would be one public comment time for the four hearings that were being held. in a case that library users brought some time ago, he was on the side of not giving a hearing because supposedly the complaint

was to in the end we heard it ws not when the new chair bruce wolfe said it is if he just said no. all along, having claimed that it was. we oppose chris hyland's appointment. >> great, next speaker. >> bruce. i live at 2262 14th avenue in san francisco. famous sanctuary neighborhood. i was a former editor and publisher at the bay guardian and now retired. i'm in active retirement. i'm busier than when i was at the job. i can't give a guardian

endorsement because i don't own the paper anymore. i can tell you that the person i'm going to talk about would have gotten the guardianen golden horseshoement if we endorsed for these positions. it's my personal endorsement and i've known online as d3. because dean schmidt is a absolutely perfect candidate for the task force at this particular time. the reason i say this particular time is because the guardian and i were largely responsible for the ordinance and the task force. a series of stories in the guardian and scandals at pg&e, i could go through the whole list. we needed more sunshine at city hall. so we candidated at it for years. we got it to the board. we got three or four supervisors to move on it. we got it on 8-3 majority and the mayor at the time signed it. i remember saying to him frank, it's the best thing you ever

did. he agreed with me. then we did an initiative. here we are, 25 years later, long time. and we know those of us who are on the task force, those of us who were followers of the issue, we need to move ahead that's why i like dean. he has filed for public records request. he handled these issues. he knows this. he those this stuff. but he is also a seasoned and responsible and careful judicial person. in fact he is appointed as a judicial judge pro tem here. i can recommend him highly and at this juncture in the history of ordinance and task force.

>> thank you. >> i would be happy to answer questions. this is a historic meeting. >> we got it. we'll call you back if we have questions. we have to give everyone the same allotted a lot of time to speak during public comment. i'm not cutting you off to be rude. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for hearing me today. my name is don trenert. i live in direct 3 specifically within middle pope. i too am a founding leader of the neighborhood association working along with frank. we have both been involved since the inception of the idea of having our own neighborhood group. i had the privilege of playing an active role in that group. i can attest to frank's expertise as a neighborhood leader and his commitment is

very strong commitment to being a member of this task force as well as the leading the compliance and amendments committee. i respectfully ask for your support in reappointing frank to the sunshine task force. thank you for hearing me. >> any other members wish to comment. public comment is closed. >> it's fun to chose for a limited number of seats but that's what you signed up for. >> i did not sign up for this. >> you stepped into it it today. >> i did. >> >> i just feel comfortable reappointing the applicants up for reappointment. mr. wolfe who submitted a letter. i can read it if you like but i feel confident putting him back

in his seat. mr. wolfe mr. hyland. i would be supportive to reappointment to their seats. i know this is a lot of work. i think each and every one of them demonstrated a commitment and demonstrated a commitment to this very important body. i would be comfortable doing that. supervisor yee. >> i agree. in regards to the feedback i've gotten it's been functioning very well with these particular members. that is the easy part. >> right. i would just say, i think all of the subsequent applicants were very talented and all bring a certain level of expertise. they'll fit in nicely. i have to say, i was super impressed with mr. yankee and his level of