my personal financial interest they could request my paper form 700. under e filing they could see everything i have an interest in. that won't be go away. additionally you will have a powerful tool to search all of the forms at once, which this is the future. this is the direction we are moving with, all forms. this is important to have this form included with that kind much progress, too. >> commissioner, i have a question. just to be clear, the database will be all encompassing for the city so you don't need to know the name of the department, you will be able to do a name entry or something like that? >> that's correct. >> larry bush in some comments raised some interesting questions that i am going to want to follow up on.

i can understand that we wouldn't necessarily want to modify the form 700 because it is a standard form. it comes from the state, right? but that the cross-referencing other databases about statement of incomof -- of various reques. can you have an opening page that if you wanted something that you had a database on you can go to these other places. there is some whatever, just a footnote or reference to allow people to tie it together. then this is to the city attorney's office. you raise some questions about a conflict between the code and

state law. i don't know if you have seen any of these since these were directed. these were comments that come in 2018. we don't need to follow up now, but i want to get an answer to that and if we need to come up with a solution to it, then we can work on that. >> i can briefly address that. if you are referring to number three on the list? >> i am 64308 problem. >> he is conflating charitable contributions with campaign contributions. those are two different kinds of payments subject to different rules. he is confusing them as a single type. >> all right. i will think about that. i will read it. thank you. i didn't want to lose the thought because i am still trying to understand all of the moving parts.

anyway, thank you. >> any other questions for mr. ford? >> okay. i would move that we -- i'm sorry. public comment. >> commissioners, director of san francisco open government. in management i talked to the university of hawaii for 14 years. there is the preto principal. 80% of what a body or individual or business does has very little impact or effect. 20% is important. i have often over the years it

is like rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. you basically don't do anything to make the city any more ethical at all. i have called a number of times for any commissioner to point out one single thing this ethics commission does that makes our politicians more honest, open, transparent or anything else. all you have to do is look at the last case this body chose to deal with. that hearing regarding former supervisor mark farrell, which you screwed up so badly, the only thing to do was come to an agreement he would pay a little fine and he got away with it. that is one of the reasons the former commissioner quentin kopp resigned. it doesn't make any difference what you do. in fact, i think what you do

discourages people. i am a member of men sa. i looked at the election laws. i would have to be insane to want to run for anything in the city. you have so many rules and regulations that no normal human being can understand them, let alone meet them. the only cases you choose to go after where people violate them are little petty things where somebody owes the city $1,000 or $1,500. those drag on for years and years and years. i haven't looked yet. we are probably going to get to the cases and the same cases there three years ago are probably still on the list. you can it is here and you can shuffle papers or whatever. i think the preto principal as it applies to this body is 99-1%. 99% of what you do doesn't mean

jack. 1% is only meeting the legal requirements. i really do regret the fact i haven't had a chance t to do my 150 word summaries today. starting next month given you are moving to an earlier time i will devote every friday to come to every meeting. >> thank you. any other public comment? i would like to move to approve these proposed amendments to the regulations related to article iii chapter one of the governmental conduct code. >> second. >> in favor, aye. opposed. the motion is approved

unanimously. thanks to staff for your work on this. i know with all of the union meetings and explanatory conferences it was a lot of work. i think it will be really helpful. >> item 8. discussion of monthly staff policy report. >> thank you commissioners. agenda item 8 is staff policy report, and right now the e filing regs this is wrapping up on the policy side now that you have approved the regulations i will transmit those to the board of supervisors today where they it is for 60 days.

the board can veto them or call a hearing or veto the regulations. if that doesn't happen they will be in effect in 60 days. there are different parts of the regulations with e filing starting january 1 next year and the procedures starting in september. this project will kind of drop into the background. i will be advising, but now that the meet and confer and the regulation process is concluded, really this project along with the public financing review project is in its final stages. that is a good update. i had originally forecasted bringing the policy plan to you this month, but after consulting with the commission leadership, i am going to wait until a later

meeting so that we can coordinate the policy plan with the change in commission leader slip. i hope that that is okay with you, and i would be glad to hear your feedback on that idea. we have been talking about bringing this plan for a while, but i want to do it at a time that makes sense for everybody and that will be most effective for you. feel free to give me feedback on that, if you would like. i would like to also highlight some work that is going on office wide that i am part of. that is the biannual review of form 700 list. i anticipate recommending this to you as policy project for the next really for the next year. this will probably be about a year long process that involves our office, the city attorney's office, the clerk of board of

supervisors, and department of human resources all working together to help departments review their list of filers, which is required under state law every other year, and to especially with the department of human resources facilitate involvement of any employee bargaining units that want to give feedback to departments about filers that they think shouldn't file or should time different disclosure category. that is going on now and warrants our involvement for much of the coming calendar year. aside from that working with other folks in the office to identify areas that would be good candidates for policy projects and hoping to bring that to you at the next meeting or the one after that. i will stop and turn it over to any questions that you have. >> one question about the

biannual review form 700 filler list. would the work be done in 2020 in order to update or revise the required list of filers to be ready for the 2021 filing? >> that's correct. state law creates some deadlines and essentially by i believe the first of july the board of supervisors has to send out a notice to the departments to tell them to start the review and provide the board with any changes to their filer list. actually it is by march of next year that the ordinance has to be in effect, but i think traditionally the city attorney's office has urged the city to complete that process much earlier, which i think is the right way to go. typically that has been done in late summer or fall. this year we are looking at

really changing a lot, moving it much earlier. in fact, the clerk of the board is hoping to send out a notice this month and send out another notice in april so the departments get two notices. they get them early. we hope to get people thinking about that. so they have a meaningful time to engage and himself we are anticipating. e filing will start that the employee unions will have greater interest to give feedback who should be filing since you have form 700 readily available that may incentivize them to pare down the list of filers. that remains to be seen. that is why we are moving the processor not move it but start it earlier so there is more time to have that happen. >> good to have more runway.

comments or questions, commissioners? public comment? >> ray hard director of san francisco open government. the electronic filing of form 700 what difference does it make if you get the forms and do nothing with them. a perfect example. for three years the former city librarian was receiving $5,000 or more each year from the friends o of the san francisco public library. he filed the form 700 saying he had got nothing. i brought it to the ethics commission, the former directory fused to deal with it. i and two other members of the public took him to the fpbc in

sacramento. they found him to have violated the law in the three year period which is as far back as they could go. they fined him a few thousand dollars and he was to put in new forms stating that he had got even in each of those three years $5,000 from this group and then lied under penalty of perjury saying he had not. you can get as many 700s and fill out as many sheets of paper and kill as many trees as you want, but if you are not going to do anything with what you have, what difference? i will go back to the mark farrell case. that dragged on for three years until it got to the point where they said this is so screwed up there is nothing we can do except bargain with him to pay i think a 30 or $35,000 fine. i will bring it next time.

that was just, i think, 15% what he was originally charged for. you can fill out your paperwork and rearrange it and whatever. all you do is make it difficult for people who want to run for public office here and for citizens who are honest, which is 99.9% of our citizens who fill out their forms only to send them in with people like formter city librarian who was a crook. you don't seem to care about that. it doesn't seem to, you know, register on your radar at all. as far as the policy prioritization plan. i have been here a dozen years. it doesn't matter who the staff or executive director is. i had high hopes for the correct executive director. mr. st. croix was a crook.

he was nothing but, basically, i have been disappointed over and over. i don't think this ethics commission has any intention of doing anything to affect the ethics of this city. >> thank you. any other public comment. >> agenda item 9. discussion of monthly staff enforcement report, including an update of various programs and operational high lights of the enforcement program's activities since the last monthly meeting. >> thank you. this month's report provides highlight of one of the new protocols that we have implemented within the enforcement division, and by way of background, the goal of the enforcement division, something we have spent a considerable amount of time over the last 6 to 12 months evaluating is how

to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the work that the enforcement division does to implement the enforcement mandate that is assigned to the commission. we have certainly heard the feedback of the public, heard the feedback of former members of the commission and current members of the commission but independent of that feedback, our division wishes to increase efficiency and effectiveness. one of the weighs in which we sought to do that is to diminish the amount of time investigators or staff spend interfacing with complaints where it is clear the complaint would not fall to the jurisdiction of the ethics commission. this is the protocol we described to you in the presentation in august of 2019 when we presented to the commission an overview of process improvements the

division was undertaking at that time. this particular protocol takes advantage or acknowledges a distinction the charter and enforcement regulations provide between formal or sworn complaints and informal or unsworn complaints. the charter requires the enforcement director consider review process formal complaints that are sworn, but it provides discretion to the enforcement director whether to consider informal complaints. as a matter of general practice we have not distinguished, we have considered all of them. certainly the commission understands that anonymous complaints can have as much merit as a sworn complaint. there are those instances in which we receive informal complaints where we can tell from the face of the complaint

whether or not that is a e-mail or phone conversation some other body would be better equipped to deal with that complaint. we have a process called consultation and no further action. that means instead of adding that complaint to the docket and requiring investigators to analyze and provide a report to me to the executive director, in most cases as the enforcement director i interface directly with the complainnents. if they reach out by e-mail, i respond by e-mail. occasionally i respond by phone. if i think there are benefits they reach out by phone and we have that conversation over the phone. there are other instances where complainants called and i have not been available until the front office would direct those calls to any of the investigators, in particular who is on duty that day.

in short, if we know at the outset that the ethics commission is the wrong place for this informal complaint we will do everything to explain our jurisdiction and direct them to another body better equipped to serve their interest. since we have started tracking this, we have received over the last four months or so at least two dozen complaints through this protocol. that means on average six fewer reports staff are writing every month and i and the executive director would have to review and process. if you look to the statistics this year or this month rather you will see we have fewer than 50 complaints in preliminary review. as a reminder that is the process whereby staff conducts a triage to determine whether there are enough facts in the

complaint, if it is colorable and allegations violations within our jurisdiction. we have fewer than 50 complaints awaiting that triage. 70% of those we received in the last six months, and 40% of those complaints awaiting triage we received within the last six weeks. we endeavor to diminish the time it takes to get through that triage and the goal of the division is to ensure that triage is provided within a six week period for all complaints that come in. that is the goal we are working toward this fiscal year. if you look at the statistics regarding open investigations, you will see that we have approximately twice as many complaints now under investigation as we do awaiting triage. half of the complaints are in

the campaign finance context. i think given that much of the enforcement work the commission does is driven by complaint it may make sense there are a considerable number of complaints in the campaign finance because that is where the public is paying close attention and individuals are motivated to file complaints in that area. among the 90 odd complaints under investigation, two-thirds are two years old or younger so the majority of the complaints are within the last two years. it is the goal of the division to resolve all investigations within a two-year period at most. that is like the six week period for triage and complaints. two years is the maximum we hope to resolve investigations. that is the goal we are moving toward.

as a reminder from data we presented in august. it is an industry average. if that is the right benchmark is the question. it is the average that the time that passes between alleged misconduct and the resolution of the particular matter among several of our peer agencies is approximately 2.3 or 2.4 years. we hope to diminish the time it takes us and we will come back to you in the future with additional methods that will be employed to accomplish that. quickly, on the status of can accounts before the bureau of delinquent revenue, we were unable to provide an update in time for meeting materials to have been finalized. we did receive that from the bureau and a couple items of note for your benefit would be that the bureau as to mr. chris

jackson is preparing a wage garnishment which they intend to serve. i believe they will serve that on mr. jackson's payroll office and not directly upon mr. jackson. i don't 100% know the procedure there. as to ms. sweet. you will remember from from prior meetings we were optimistic about settlement. she has stopped communicating with the bureau legal department. they have to pursue an entry of default judgment against her. maybe lastly, another highlight would be that the bureau has mailed an intention to file a lawsuit against the arlo smith committee at the bottom of that particular table for you.

then lastly, the commission collection officer referred six additional accountings to the bureau. those will be in future updates. >> thank you. any questions from commissione commissioners? >> commissioners ray hard director san francisco government. if i heard directly, a complaint is filed on average we are going to do 2.3 to 2.4 years to come to a conclusion. i have served in the last 11 elections as a poll inspector. i know elections happen much quickly than every two years. so we are talking about having complaints that just drag on and drag on and drag on.

in fact, i referenced this earlier. if you look on page 3 of the document, you will see the referral date for chris jackson. july 2013. seven years ago. another one for chris jackson september 2016. four years ago. committee to elect norman for supervisor, our present board of supervisors president, may 2015, five years ago is still there. elizabeth urbano mar2016. lynnette suite, december 2016. basically, it is just like a board where it kind of you drop one in one end and pushes another one out the other end and nothing happens. this is exactly what happened to the problem with formter

supervisor -- former supervisor -- just lost his name. who was in the similar circumstance and former executive director let this same thing go on until it got to where they couldn't do anything to him, and he only sent h settd because he was up for re-election and wanted it off the newspaper headlines. your own president called him dishonest in the newspapers. ir will bring that with me next time. you shuffle papers. you make a list, push people in one end, they bump off. it is like the game on price is right. you push the little blocks and they drop off the end april you wait until you get the price of the prize before you win it. that is what you do with all of these things.

very frankly, why shouldn't people cheat the city when they know the only people watching them are you, and you all fit under the thomas acquire nuss rule. willful ignorance is a mortal sin. boy, are you sinners. >> for the record, those are collection matters. those judgments were secured long ago but getting the money out of the pockets is a longer legal process. thank you for that. >> can i ask for clarification. the speaker had alleged one of the items involving a current supervisor. i don't think that is the same.

>> that's correct, commissioner lee. >> i would like that on record. this is not. >> i believe that is right. he made a reference to an account that refers to the committee norman. that is correct. thank you. >> any other further public comment? agenda item 10. staff over view presentation and discussion ofth third quarters commission budget proposal for fiscal year 2021. >> i would draw your attention to item 10. the memo reproride option ride -- provided. we have our co-pilot to make sure we are providing full information analysis for you in

the budget process. we are here for questions. i want to highlight a few things from this agenda item and the reason it is on today's agenda. you may recall at a resent meeting i indicated city budgets are due to the mayor's office on february 21st. there is also an ordinance approved by the board of supervisors this past year upping the city game in terms of public engagement about city budget preparation and wants to move towards much more public awareness -- awareness in discussions city departments. for us we have a regular commission meeting. we wanted to make sure we were able to put on this agenda for your discussion and input the recommendation that we have developed at the staff level for what we anticipate are our needs for the fy-21 budget process.

other departments will do that over the next several weeks. the mayor' mayor's office asked everyone to do that no late they are tathanfebruary 14th. we want you to comment on it before it is submitted before your next meeting. that is why the information is here. we will be continuing to refine this document, and i will speak later about responding to the budget innstructions that the mayor issued for departments this year. there is a direction issued from the mayor's office all departments produce cuts for this budget year of 3.5% in fy21 beginning july 1 and 3.5% the following year. the report at the back shows what those figures would be for

our department. that is what we will provide more detail to over the course of the next month as we meet with the mayor's office about the impact of those cut, were they imposed on the commission. first and for massachusett fores important to bring to you what we have as a real world assessment what it takes in the coming budget year to do the job and the mandate we are asked to do by the voters when they created the commission as that has expanded over the years with increasing opportunity but also demands of legislation and new programs. we have taken a look over the last year of the staff and the office assessing where we have come over the past several years. we have put together a budget proposal that is a 15% increase over the fy20 base operating

budget of $4.5 million. this is a process that is building on a strategic foundation that started in 2016 when i first joined the commission. the commission embraced the document to focus on very specific goals, and first and foremost were organizational efficiencies to make sure we had the structure and tools and approaches to better serve the mission that we have and better accomplish the goals that we had establishing the charter and other provisions of law. obviously, as we spent time talking about effective enforcement we worked through additional resources and new structures and processes to clarify and strengthen that area so we have timely enforcement and case resolution. we have been focused over the last couple years with being on

the executive fellow and mayor's office to being the department director to development an expended team. we know that over time the commission has done a very good job of assisting people to understand campaign finance laws. we have not spent as much time really reaching out to city officials and employees on ethics issues, helping with statements of economic issues so that city officials are comfortable they know the rules of the road. that is something we have been working to build and have some success doing that with the works that has been led. we know the stakeholder base is much broader than the folk we say are usually in contact with. there is a broad world and part of the budget is broadening the impact of the work we have to

get outside of the office to help people with the information that we have to understand the disclosures required of city officials, why important, how they can use them to be better engaged and informed participants in democracy and city government. we had a strengthened policy unit several years ago and staffing that. forward to where we are in fy21. a couple basic points. as a small department we have 24 full-time staff positions. we have currently a four vacancies around the office. audit, enforcement, technology and the other in policy. we are a small office. 87% of the budget is salaries

and benefits. we have a very thin resourced operation otherwise. we were happy over the last couple years to have a training budget established for the first time, meaningful training budget of $30,000 for the staff. it used to be $4,000. we know in order to support, to help develop and retain staff, who are terrific, we need to invest in them. that is something we have been able to take advantage of and we look forward to continue to do that. since 2016, by the time the positions are filled we will have two-thirds of the staff recently hired in the last two or three years. that again speaks to the need to continue to develop and invest long-term the skills and talents that folks are bringing to their work. page 3 of the memo gives you the overview what the current

structure of the commission staffing looks like for the program breakdown. this leads to the areas of specific budget request in this year's document in front of you. you can see the divisions we have. each of them under the blue boxes on page three of the memo highlight -- they are blue if you have color and gray if you don't. they show the positions of our work and various functions within those program areas. one of the things is at the bottom of the first column is items in bold. budget, performance, hr, recruit meant and staff training and development. these are functions that are very near and deer to my heart and to that of the deputy director. you can see those are currently under our deputy director in charge of our program areas, campaign finance, lobbying

program, economic interest, training, materials, outreach, web content. one of the things we looked at critically is how do we adapt our budget and operations to make sure we are applying the right resources in the right way to do the work necessary to do as the city department? one of the conclusions is that we can no longer use the model of absorbing these functions within the roles of the executive director and deputy director. these are ongoing,ness and critical functions that require special skills and assistance. we have not staffed ourselves at that level in my tenure and before i arrived that was also the case. our first goal is to make sure we were assessing the needs for direct services and support for the work we do on our core mission. what we we realized is that we

are compromising the ability to do that effectively by not having the appropriate resources across the bench to provide these services. we have been delayed in getting the positions filled. we are delayed whenmize time is not able to be devoted to getting the cases through. we are delayed in getting education and training to the level we know we want to and we can with the resources and talent that we have on staff to be able to develop an educational support program for folks around the city. this is one piece that we have identified. we are asking this year, hr finance and operations to focus those functions and leverage that work much more effectively and efficiently to make sure we get our work done as well in other areas. related to this we also have

been building a lot of -- you see it every month when we have presentations about our data dashboards and the technology to put this in a digital way so people can access it in a way that is meaningful. we have been doing a helpful job with support of the committee on information technology to go from paper to digital. one of the things we will be stopped dead in tracks doing is being able to deliver on the dashboards that need created for the data ditc digital. to know how they can use that information. we have a lot of work to be done. if we do not continue to fund information systems engineer position that we received funding on a one-year limited term for in this current fiscal year, that work will be stalled.

it won't happen. that is at a time when we are perfectly poised to make a difference in the city and outside of the confines of city government to engage people with information. thirdly, as we continue to realign and assess what work looks like and is evolving. one of the things we will do is not be shy about saying the nature of work is changing. we asked in this budget one other change would be to realign a policy position to reflect the work we are doing across the board. there are many complex policy projects. form 700, e filing for all or others that come along that we are developing, we are initiating with other city partners, and we are implementing. that takes a high level of

coordination and collaboration. those are beyond what we envisioned. one of the things we are doing is to be candid where we need to grow those positions to keep pace with the policy agenda and ability to implement processes across the city done in an effectives way. that is one thing in the budget as well. we have other nonpersonnel items. i draw your attention to dollar amounts. we are talking such small numbers. it is resources. we understand a dollar spent on our work is a dollar not spent on other work. we want to make sure we are using the dollar as efficiently as possible. two things to draw your attention to. we are initiating a request with

the controller's office for $30,000 to provide work order support for controller functions that we are not staffed to do. the controller has been very much a help and gracious with work and staff over the years. they can no longer sustain that model. we don't have funding to get that work done unless we establish a work order to provide the services identified. this is part of being a grown up city department but we don't have resources for that. we need to have that in the coming year as we staff up the other positions. one last position that i would mention is something we submitted a request for today. that is to the committee on information technology. this is on the last page or page 8. this is the customer support for e filing. it is a one-year limited term

position, but we have identified through working with city departments, department of human resources with the bargaining units as pat mentioned it is essential to provide technical support to implement this process soundly. we are proposing one year limited term position to get through that transition so we can provide that technical support and serviceness. we don't have the resources to make that support happen. it is something we recognize the importance of. one thing to come back to. this is important. this is a budget request we are proposing because we believe it speaks to essential needs that we center to have to do our work. not having this work, we will be forced to identify areas of things we have to stop doing. that is something to be in

conversation about internally and can raise as we know more. with 87% of the funding staffing cuts will eat into the staffing resources. it is through staffing we achieve the work we need to do on behalf of san francisco. the mayor has been clear in issuing budget innstructions about the priorities in san francisco. there are desperate needs for dealing with homelessness, clean streets. we know the mayor is committed to act ability and transparent government and makings sure we have a top-notch work force working as strongly as possible to support transparent government. our work we are not in a position to provide beds or to provide housing or to maybe clean streets we can do on an occasional weekend. our work is to support the

city's work force and make sure our decision making is of integrity and that our work is supporting equity throughout the city. decisions are made on the merits and not to self-interest or ordealings that we all find improper. i think there is alignment with our priorities and what we in our conversations with the mayor's office we look forward to talking with the mayor's team when that. come february 21st, the system that budgets our entries to submit them are restrictive. there will be a dollar amount permitted to be entered. at this point my guess it is not the dollar amount we are requesting in this proposal. that is the reality of the budget process every year. in my judgment it is our job to identify the critical needs.

we do not fluff the budget to hope to get half of it. we will make trade-offs. we want to be clear about the need. if we have to not be able to secure the resources then we need to be clear with ourselves with the public and with elected officials and others what we will not be able to do. with that i want to and if she has anything to add or if you yu want to have any comments i am happy to add at this time. >> commissioners. >> i would say that i think the commission is part of the city family, but it is also charted by the voters. understand that constraints that are facing the city and that under which it has to operate. we also have a public trust as

you noted to uphold. a mandate recently approved by the voters to implement, and that we need the resources to do that to be effective. i think that the proposal here and increase of 15.5% seems like a big number. in the large scheme of things, i think the staff has been the same size for the last five years? yet the work has expanded. as mr. pierce outlined to us during public comment it is taking two plus years to get through an investigation. that is a function of resources. there is only so many hours in the day and so many cases that someone can handle. whatever we can do from here to

help support you and emphasize the importance of funding and supporting the commission at this critical juncture, please let us know what we can do to do that. i think that the work that steven massey is leading and with tyler on creating dashboards to make the data accessible and searchable is the critical piece of making the government and campaign finance accountable and transparent to the voters of san francisco. i think the one year funding we received gave us a good start, but in the absence of additional funding through this budget proposal, i think that will grind to a halt and that the price to be paid will be by the

people of san francisco because they won't have access to the information. the form 700e filing rollout could go well or not. the prudent thing to do is to prepare for support to help 3500 people navigate a very new system so it goes smoothly and so that everything will work as intended. i think from my position i would hope that the mayor's office would consider our request in good faith and please let us know what we can do to help support your efforts in that discussion. >> any other comments or questions?

>> public comment? >> commissioners, ray hard san francisco open government. i have been following this and attending meetings of this commission since a decade or more ago. i have to say that under former executive director john st. croix he asked for a zero percent increase. i thought that was very appropriate because they weren't doing anything. giving them more money to do nothing was idiotic. he was honest about that. when ms.pel lum came in i heard about things about what she had done in los angeles. they asked for a budget increase. i had high hopes for what they could do. here we are years later. again, it is rearranging the

deck chairs on the titanic. if i am not mistaken there are 24 staff and so few people. do you know with this number you are looking at here, that is an average of $164,000 per person? how many citizens of san francisco make anywhere near that kind of pay and benefits? you have got 24 of them. except i am sure there are certain people that get more than others. again, when are you going to ever come here and any commissioners tell the citizens of san francisco exactly something that you have done that has made this place more ethical city? nothing i have seen. it is like the sunshine ordinance. all of these years and you have sided with the complainant in

one case. i have three dozen. what about the hundreds of other people who brought things before you. every single time you side with the city. that is what we are paying for. we are paying for a bunch of meat puppets who i honestly think somebody up there had a discussion with ms. calvio prior to that meeting. you can shake you your heads not i remind you $164,000 per person. you still can't get the job done. it still takes two and a half years to process a complaint. i mean i have been looking at these reports for years. the only thing to do each month is change the numbers. they all say the same thing in the same order in the same way. every agenda is item by item the

same agenda. what the hem do you o on what the hell do you do with all of that money? >> thank you. agenda item 11. discussion of executive director's report. update of various program and operational written report highlights of the ethics commission. >> i am happy to note the commission is selected for participation in the san francisco fellows program. that means we have a group of four young individuals who are within five years of having received the college degree giving their service to the city as employees for the next year. as part of that process they are working with departments on various projects. our projects is working on the engagement and compliance team to put together materials we

have not been able to put together and we can use in our outreach and translation services. i want to draw your attention to that. they will start january 22. we are delighted we have that energy and support coming on board shortly. there was also a question that you had last month for an update on the payments reporting. what i want to do is we collected the data and listed in -- summarized in the attachment tto the executive director's report. it is filed pursuant to section 3.3610p of the san francisco campaign of governmental conduct code for payment disclosures in calendar year 2019. also section 114.5.

this is also on our website. it is to show where the information is available on the website, where it can be found under the disclosure tab, then you can go down to the data sets, some people may call them databases. they contain the information disclosed. from there you can link to excel spreadsheets and play with the data to your heart's content. this is a summary. we wanted to provide it to you as responsive to your request from last month, and if there are further questions or if you would like u us to keep into ths we would be happy to do that. we want to high light that information for you. i think that is the summary of my report for this month unless you have other questions. >> any other questions from commissioners? public comment.

>> no public comment. agenda item 12. discussion and possible action on items for future meetings. >> anything from commissioners? public comment on item number 12? agenda item 13. additional opportunity for public comment on matters appears or not appears on the agenda pursuant to ethicis commission by-laws article vii section 2. >> san francisco open government. as much as you would like the public to think i am a malcontent who comes here to cause problems, i was very honest with every board and commission meeting i went. i walked in and said my purpose of being here is to ensure members of the public have a full right to participate and

comment upon the activities of this body and the meetings. i also have a second purpose and that is to ensure any member of the public who needs access to public records to support his or her efforts to improve government, they should get those records without hassle. as you see i have over three dozen determinations by the task force regarding public comment or access to public records. i see before me five people who i step back from late last year. i don't remember but i came in at one meeting i think in november and made a public comment which was typical what i have done so far today. then i thought to myself. i thought none of these people were here in my experience. so i went away for a few months.

i came back and thought maybe there will be a change, you kn know. hope springs eternal. but there isn't. you are all political appointees of the very bodies you are to maintain ethics of. one works for the mayor, one works for the board of supervisors, one works for the controller, one works for the city attorney. i can't remember the last one. you are policemen of the people who pay you, who put you on the board and keep you on the boards. how can a reasonable person expect to see any different from you than what we have? you are not honest people. you are not honest people because up silt there and let this city government do whatever it wants and you won't do a damn

thing. as i said, i am sorry i didn't do the 150 word summaries but i will next time because i intend to come back here and call you out. hillary mantling wrote about commas cromwell, chance lower of henry the eighth of england. bring up the bodies. you have a ton of bodies to bring up. >> thank you. i would note for the record that commissioners appointed to the san franciscotsan francisco ethn are not compensated. >> agenda item. motion to adjourn. >> second. >> so moved. we are adjourned. thank you.