are there should be ways for the public to speak to that. and so i'm vehicle itsed to get thagoing to get thatgoing. if anyone has appreciate being a part of this and thank you. >> thank you so much. it looks like you have your biggest proponent in your house right next to you.

i don't believe they were able to make it and she's been a fantastic member of the committee and she has been part of the pueblo program of the organization and she works for huckle berry youth and has just really broad and perspective. despite the fact she couldn't be here today that you will support her work and her continues and enthusiastic support and advocacy on behalf of youth and biking in san francisco. with that we can open up this item for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public should call on this item.

the meeting i.d. is 146 961 606 o and press pound and pound again. if you haven't done so, you can unmute and begin your comments. do you have any members of the public for public comment on this item? >> we did not hear that? could you repeat yourself, please? >> public comment is closed.

i will ford the seat to 3 and seat 9. bicycle advisory committee to the full board with recommendations. supervisor stefani. >> aye. >> supervisor mar. >> aye. >> chair ronen. >> aye. >> motion passes without objection. >> thank you. >> thank you, mark. appreciate you. thank you for your work. >> mr. clerk, can you please call item number 3. >> clerk: item number 3 is a hearing to consider appointing one member term ending august 1st, 2021 to the south of market community planning advisory committee. >> thank you. and we have one appointment, mary claire to seat 2 nominated by supervisor haney. is mary here with us today? >> hi. >> hi, how are you?

>> i'm good. good morning. >> good morning. is there any information that you would like to share with us about your work and why you are a playing for this position? >> i'll give a quick run down and who i am and why i want to serve on this -- >> i'm here today to ask for your support in appointing me to serve on the soma planning (inaudible). i was born and raised in the tenderloin and i moved back and fourth between here and soma. i'm in school for urban planning at san francisco state university because i want to be a education planner and i want to serve on the cac because i watched my district change, be gentrified and i walked down the street and i see some of the wealthy 69twealthiest parts of n francisco next to the poor parts. i want to serve on the cac because i believe in centers

racial and social equity where community voices are leading this process. when i was 18-years-old i was hired by the community network to be a pedestrian safety coordinator where i worked on the fulsome street scaping project for two years and that brings much needed biking infrastructure for the neighborhood and that was just recently passed by the city last year and that my last few years i was there transit organizer where we were worked on a campaign with the goal (inaudible). a campaign that was successfully one this year with the support of the board of supervisors to not include fares on working class people so for the last five years i've worked on (inaudible) and transit campaigns and district 6 and this work continues in my current job where i work at the san francisco bicycle coalition as their downtown community

organizationer where i get to work on more sf street scaping projects in the tenderloin and bringing programs like (inaudible) to the south market where there's been zero slows streets as of right now. it's a pointed to serve some of the safety and i promised the center city planning processs in equity and.

>> yes, we can hear you. please, proceed. >> thank you, good morning. my name is kathy di luca and i called in and i saw mary claire on the agenda speaking up in favor of her appointment.

i've worked with mary claire as an advocate for transportation in the city for years and she's a fantastic add ver advocate. she gives so much back to the community and i wanted to say you all would be crazy not to support her in this so thank you for considering and mary claire, i'm super excited about you. >> thank you. >> can we have the next caller, please. >> i'm calling to support mary claire. i've worked with mary claire in a number of context for years and south of market and she's extremely came able and the

definition of a true community members. she's a part of fabric of this city and she's been instrumental in the filipino community's response for grocery delivery during shelter in place and i know that she's an excellent advocate for many positive things in this city outside of her work in bicycle coalition and the south market community and the filipino community and this is a -- we've fully supported this as an organization and i support her appointment as well as an individual. thank you.

that completes the queue. >> thank you. public comment is closed. i was wondering if supervisor mar wanted to do the honors for this one. >> yeah. i'd love to. thank you so much, mary claire, for all of your incredible leadership and activism. on behalf of your community and transit and transportation issues. so i would like to move that we -- actually, amend the resolution to delete the word

reject and -- >> supervisor mar. this is starting off as a hearing so all you need to do is make the recommendation to appoint. >> i would move that we recommend the appointment of mary claire to the south of market community planning advisory committee. >> that would be for seat number 2. >> thank you. >> yes. >> yes. >> on that motion, supervisor stefani. >> aye. >> supervisor mar. >> aye. >> chair ronen. >> aye. >> motion passes without objection. >> thank you so much mary claire we're excited for your work. mr. clerk, can you please read item number 4? >> clerk: yes. item number 4 is a hearing

pointing one member term ending october 19th, 2021 to the earn neighborhood citizen advisory committee and one seat one applicant. thank you so much, kelly cobeck is being nominated by supervisor mandelman and.

>> she's a long time community activist and a mom and is exactly the kind of person we want to serve and we hope to have your support for her nominations. thank you. >> thank you so much. kelly, hu here and do you want to say anything? >> >> it you hear me ok. >> sure. i did prepare a little statement and i wanted to thank supervisor mandelman for the consideration to the post. i'm happy for the opportunity to be of service to my community and the committee and city at large.

i'm 47, a mother of three, co owner of burnal cutlery. we've been in business for 16 years. we were established in 2005 and and we founded the business and utility room at the back of an apartment of important avenue using $40 to buy an center stone and print flyers and selling knives and after years working from home workshops we opened our first brick and mortar shop and what used to be the 331 court land small business incubator collective in 2010. we've moved twice due to out growing our shelves and we're now at home on valencia street in a mission district. i've been a resident of san francisco for 23 years and i'm happy to call it home and i'm proud to raise san franciscans and i'm thinking of ways that

would be a service to such a position and perspectives and life experiences i hold to include a deep understanding of the difference between cultural competency and the contribution i offer is gaining economic independence by being a small business owner for over 16 years and a member of the recovery community, sober and clean for 18 years. and it's never lost on me each day when i go to work on valencia street that i won't suffer as an addict, and alcoholic on the same street that i now own a small business.

they give back to their community and as such maintain the fabric of our local communities. this is never lost on me and as an owner and i'm very happy to step up again here for the cac and to add the voice of small businesses. so keeping it brief, i'm happy to answer any questions you might have and i wear so many different hats in the community as a food justice activist and researcher and i'm happy to answer questions with that as well. thank you for having me. >> chair ronen: thank you so much, kelly. as you know, i'm a huge fan of you and your work in the community and your store. i wish i could not imagine a better appointment for supervisor mandelman to make. i just echo everything tom said about you and your statement said it all. you're someone that i just

deeply admire and look up to so thank you for everything you do and i know you will bring that same passion and deep experience and love for your community that to the eastern neighborhoods committee so thank you for your willingness to do this. it's really wonderful. since i see no other comments, i'm going to open this item up for public comment. members of the public should call -- press pound and pound again. if you have have not done so dial star 3 to lineup to speak and the system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand and please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. do we have any members of the public for public comment? >> yes, we have one caller in the queue.

>> hello everyone, i'm chair of the san francisco small business commission speaking on my own behalf as an individual. i want to echo tom's comments and chair ronen's comments, kelly is a wonderful member of the small business community. we're very lucky to have her. she's an excellent choice for the appointment to the cac and i support it wholeheartedly, 100% and kelly, i got your back. feel free to give me a call if you need anything, i'm here for you. thank you. >> thank you. do we have any other callers on the line for public comment? >> hi, this is (inaudible).

i'm calling from valencia street we've been there over 50 years and i'm calling manny's behalf and just to say that i think it's really important to have a small business owner and -- >> i don't think we're taking public comment on that item yet and is it it will be the next item. thank you. >> so sorry. my bad. >> no problem. >> are there any other callers for this item? >> 201338 regarding the appointment to the eastern neighborhoods for the advisory committee. >> that completes the queue. >> >> thank you so much. public comment is closed. and i would be quite honored to make a motion to forward the appointment of kelly to seat 5 of the eastern neighborhoods citizens advisory committee to

the full board with positive recommendations. >> on that motion, supervisor stefani. >> aye. >> supervisor mar. >> aye. >> chair ronen. >> aye. the motion passes without objection. >> thank you so much, kelly. >> see you soon, take care. >> thank you, tom for coming to committee. >> mr. clerk, can you please read items 5 and 6 together? >> yes, item number 5 is a motion the mayor's combination for the appointment of manual to the municipal transportation agency board of directors term ending march 1st, 2024 and item number 6 is a motion improving the nomination for appointment of fiona hennessey term ending march 1st, 2024. >> thank you so much.

so, first i will call up each of the nominees to speak and perhaps answer questions and from the supervisors and then we will call public comment together for the two appointments so, anybody who calls in can make comments about just one of the appointments or both as you chose. so, first, we will welcome manny, good morning, hi. >> >> good morning, can you hear me. >> yes. >> caller: awesome. thank you so much for bringing me on this morning. my name is manny and i'd like to thank london breed for this nomination. my name is manny, like i said, i'm the owner of a small business on the corner of 16th and valencia, i'm in my small business right now and a little bit about me, i'm originally from los angeles, california, i first moved to san francisco about 10 years ago. i've worked on a couple different presidential campaigns and local campaigns.

different advocacy organizations and i'm currentl current on thef the merchants association and on the board of the jewish community center of san francisco and i'm an appointment of the small business commission in san francisco. i came to san francisco over 10 years ago. my first time here i spent a summer working as a street canvasser. i lived at third and irving and i would take the palo station everyday and get my assignment from my clipboard and i would transit out to different corners of the city. i fell in love with san francisco in that summer and it was through transit i explored and understand this amazing city of ours, taking the n into powell station and all sorts of bus and money' trains so all different corners of the city to raise money for same-sex marriage reforms. same-sex marriage equality. for the first five to six years of living in san francisco i relied on public transit to get around and i lived at the corner

of 24th and castro and i took the 24th or 48 to castro station or the 24th street bart station to get downtown. chair ronen, supervisor, mar, and supervisor stefani, i'm honored to be considered to join the board of the san francisco municipal transportation agency and i ask for your support. i believe i would be a good addition to the board for three reasons. the first, is small business owners deserve a seat at table and i come from a small business families and my mother's family escaped in poll ant and the holocaust to move to brick lynn and opened up a store and a store that my mother grew up in and my father is holl cop and small tablecloth and waking up sunday morning pack up family truck to sell at festivals on

the weekends. i understand very much the hard work that goes into opening and running a small business as a small business owner myself and it's in my blood. and the relationship our transportation the streets, workers and small businesses have never been more important and we've lost 3,000 small businesses and unimaginable numbers since march in our city. and i've seen firsthand how decisions made by the sfmta in closing streets to cars and allowing the shared spaces program to on three presidential

campaigns and i would bring an organizers' perspective hearing all voices, bringing people together and advocating. i am a advocate and small business owner so that experience is useful on the board and my third my role at manny's and my small business as a connector of people to politics and it's allowed me to be the start of the funnel for a lot of folks who have no idea how our city government and politics in general works and i think the sfmta really needs more people, right now, to bring them into the process of government. especially considering the very dire economic straits we're in and the big decisions that will be needed made o'er the coming months and some personal notes, my father was almost killed by a bus when he was a young man on his motorcycle in israel and he was in the hospital for a while

and my grandfather was run over by a drunk driver coming own early morning from synagogue one sunday and he was told he was never going to walk again sevenly he was able to walk and so, these issues of pedestrians and car safety is important and personal to me and i've met with 12 union reps and democratic clubs and community groups in the richmond, chinatown and mission and more and merchant associations and anti displacement and gentrification groups, taxi advocates, the coalition to end poverty as well as all 11 supervisors. i'm staying this role seriously and i'll end by saying to me, mobility is freedom and it's my believe that a city like ours should create access to that freedom for everyone everywhere. it's given the opportunity to serve, i promise, to be a fierce advocate on this board.

it will bring my community to the board. thank you so much for the consideration. >> thank you so much. colleagues, do you have any questions? >> chair ronen: what is your most common way of transport? >> i took the 24 to castro station and i took the 48 to the 24 loss and i live in a couple blocks so i walk and because the way bus routes work from where i live to where i have here it would be a lot quicker to just walk or take a moped and as i

need to go downtown and home i take the underground muni from castro station. >> chair ronen: great. you will be the first small business owner to be on the mta board. can you talk a little bit more about how you see that new role and particular role and what concerns the small business you might want to highlight on mta board governance? >> for sure. i just want to, not to correct you too much but gwen is a small business owner and she represents the dgra for a while. the only distinction it's important that i own a physical space on the street which because of -- i don't want to take credit away from chair borden. >> chair ronen: thank you for the correction. >> so, there's a couple things.

one, hiss tryingly there's been a lot of tension between the small business community and the sfmta and part of it is a lot of big projects at the sfmta ha undertaken to accomplish its goals and have in many ways felt left out of the deliberate process. i want small business brought in the middle, not after a project is vetted infernally. to understand how a particular project might impact the small businesses on the ground. for instance, i'm on the 16th street bus improvement project construction mitigation task force. it's a long name. as you i'm sure snow, chair ronen, sfmta is considering a lot of improvements to 16th

street and it may involve a lot of construction and i wanted to get involved in that because i didn't want to have another long multi-year construction process that would potentially kill businesses on 16th street, many of whom are legacy businesses and they've been here for a while and are barely hanging on by their fingernails so and the pandemic has at the sfmta in ways we've never seen before because we are required to basically utilize the space outside of our businesses if we're going to stay alive and i'm looking to succeed and and the sfmta still is one of the

main ways that employees of small businesses, my employees included, get to their places of work and if we have unreliable muni trains, if we have buses that are not picking up there and if i can be a good board member and help the sfmta be strong, it will have effects on small businesses. >> got it. thank you. >> i wanted to let you know ex let my colleagues know i've been getting text from organized labor from the trades council and the san francisco labor council saying that they support your nomination so i wanted to let you know that and congratulate you for working with labor because i know specifically the twu250a that

dua andhow you could make deciss which lines to restore and how and with which priority and how we're going to get back -- get people back on to public transportation as we begin to recover from covid. it's something that as our mtvc representative i'm fretting on and i would love to hear your thoughts on that. >> two very big questions and questions that i've been thinking about a lot as i've prepared for this conversation i'll take the second one first. right now, public transportation, what is filtered down to the average person like myself is that transportation should be taken for essential

trips and if you are not taking for essential trips, you shouldn't take it and so, we have not officially end the shelter in place order and we're telling the san francisco public it's ok to use public transportation again first. i think vaccinations will help. getting people back to school will help and reopening our downtown, our convention centers, our events, all those things are going to meet to first happen in order to feel comfortable again taking public transportation. so i think the next three to six months will be very critical and there's been a cooling effect on not just people taking public transport but everything and of course we know this in our commercial corridors. you can get take out delivery and you can shop at retail but because of the news, not just in our city but around the country, folks are trying to do their and many cases mean staying home.

the way the sfmta handled which lines to cut, to me, seemed like the right framework to thinking about bringing them back. which is, if you live in an area, with a high concentration of people who rely on our public transportation system, exclusively, to get around and especially to get to work, those are the areas that should be prioritize and with existing services and quality of service and consistency of service and you know, you have seen that with the lines that have been kept. a lot of these lines have been kept, including the 14 and 14 1r take worksers to their jobs and

reopen and we should go backwards and what areas have who require our public transportation system for economic mobility and freedom and bring back service to them. the case of the 27 in the tenderloin. which had a critical purpose in bringing folks north/south within the tenderloin and served as specific senior community and it's going to be brought back on january 23rd so we also need to think, we can walk and chew gum and we can be surgical in some of the improvements that made in communities where people need them most. >> i just have one more question before i turn it over to my colleagues. i know many -- i know because i've been contacted by many members of the latin x community

that feel frustrated that despite being such a large rider o.p.p. ship oridership of muni t have latin x representation on the mta board and not to say that your playing the role of being the rap of the latin x community but given your connection to the mission, i'm just wondering, what specific outreach you've done to that particular community and how you feel like you are represent the latin x community on the board? >> well, representation matters as you know and i'm not latin x. so, i won't be able to represent the latin x community as a latin x person. as a mission, small business owner, before -- a year before i even opened manny's and i think the meeting i had was with you chair ronen, i went through a year-long community engagement process. i believe i asked, we were at

charlie's cafe in bernal heights and i said who in the community do i need to meet before i even start looking for a place. you give me a list of people and i met whom all of them. i say, when it was announced i was being nominated for this, one of the first conversations i had was with eric, peter to talk about the nomination how i can represent needs of their community. i've been serving with close proximity who wrote a letter of endorsement and i've gotten to know roberto hernandez through popping into meetings at the mission merchants and advocacy around carnival and i will say that my advocacy for small business has had a disproportionate impact on essential workers in the mission, who are, like we know, disproportionately latin x.

there's small business owners have kept their jobs until the this past weekend. i've had to go through the gauntlet as most people know, and ordered and begin earning the respect of the community around me. it's not something that i've asked for without walking the walk and that doesn't mean i'm not very much learning and asking questions and listening. i do think that the gauntlet of the first two years of trying to run at civic space in this community, has taught me much and in some cases have earned the respect of folks who need representation on this body. >> chair ronen: thank you. i appreciate that. >> thank you, chair ronen. first of all, thank you so much, manny, for your willingness to serve an the mta board and step into this really incredibly

important role in bringing all of your expertise and experience of activism around a wide range of issues, particularly small business issues in our city to the important work of the mta board that has going to be even more challenging at this moment of unprecedented budget deficit. i just, chair ronen asked a number of the questions that i had but i did have one other question and that is, as you know, sfmta has moved quickly during shelter in place to implement a lot of new innovative strategies for adapting our streets. the shared spaces program is important and the slow streets initiative and in my district the closure of the great highway or really the opening to pedestrians and bikists have been incredibly important and during this pandemic.

at some point, in 2021, the emergency authority for these measures will likely end and so i guess my question is, what are your thoughts about how sfmta would approach this transitional period, what's the right level of outreach and for keeping any of these long-term programs and. >> i know it's of supreme importance to you. >> i think a lot of the -- i think the pandemic provided us an opportunity to rethink how our streets serve our communities. and i think in general, the opening up of our streets, pedestrians, cyclists and small

businesses has allowed to us see each other again which in a moment of extreme anxiety and trauma and i don't think can you put a price on what it's like to just be able to experience community in a safe way and it's good for sustainability and safety so i think a lot of boxes have been checked by the slow streets shared space and some of the larger changing of art streets. there's been consternation for some in particular residents of neighborhoods and freeways that have even changes to the amount of cars street closure and the profession specifically and the process should be happening right now and it is and what is

the design process look like for them. the community, as a whole. want to keep them both the folks who utilize these closed streets i did with the outer avs, and they're not inconveniences too much and they could hold a lot of beauty for our town and to inspire pride and accomplish the goals have been at the score of sfmta and i'm excited about them and proud of many of them and i have enjoyed page to keep them

in the future. >> thank you. actually, i had one other question. it's a follow-up to supervisor ronen's question and your response around your given their lack of representation on the mta board and your deep decision connectioconnection to the miss. i did hear from organizations and leaders in the latinx community that they haven't had a chance to sit down would you to talk about transportation and transit priorities for the community. for example, the latino democratic club so i just wanted to i guess make sure that you are committed to continuing to engage in the community with the

latinx community immaculate. >> it was did two hours long and if there are specific organizations, other than the latino democratic club, i would be more than happy to sit down with them. >> great. thank you, manny. >> i don't have any other questions. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. supervisor stefani. >> thank you, chair ronen. i do not have any questions, as we've had spoke about your

nomination earlier and i've known you for -- it seems like a long time because you are one of those people you meet and you feel like you've then them for a long time because of the person that you are and what you bring to civic engagement in san francisco. i was absolutely thrilled to see that the mayor nominated you, manny, for this position. your experience is a small business owner in this city speaks volumes to your experience and what you've lived through. not only with transit but recently having your window smashed, i think that you know you absolutely know what it's like for small businesses to try to survive in this city. also, your outreach and the way you view neighborhood and community involvement, i think it's extremely important as we discussed around things like bike share and how you went through that. you've experienced that and so i

really can't think about someone better for this job in civic mind and i want to do more others who want for the city and i think you don't capitalized division and amazing quality and i can't thank you enough and in san francisco and i look forward to seeing what you are going to do on the mta board of directors. thank you for willing to serve. >> thank you so much, supervisor. i really appreciate that. >> now we're going to hear from

ms. fiona hines. >> can you hear me ok? >> we can hear you perfectly. >> good morning supervisors and clerk young. good to see you all. thank you for having me this morning. as chair row men mansioned and i'm i'll give you some recent information on me. i'll be brief and i'll also try to incorporate some responses to the questions that you asked manny. i want to thank the mayor for her nomination and tyra for believing in me and shep shepheg us through the process and for those who don't know me or haven't met me, my name is fiona and i currently serve as the director assistant at

independent loving resource center which is a disability rights and advocacy organization. i oversee all of our policy work, including our transit work. i am a native san franciscan who lives in the outer richmond. my main form of transportation is transit. touching on some of the experiences that i have in the transit world, as i mentioned, i oversee our policy portfolios. that includes active work with the vision zero coalition and the senior disability work groups, who has created in the past a accessibility guidelines

tools kits for protective bike lanes which is used by the mt a and our next project will be hopefully a guideline for best practices with regards to open spaces like the great highway and so, i also serve on those. i have experience in advocating for programs such as the essential trip card and also holding our transit and making sure that system runs as smoothie ansmoothly and efficies possible. paratransit and taxis are also a key part of the tranc transit sm

that seniors and people with disabilities rely on. most recently in terms that i've been active in the different tenderloin work and so again, the restoration of the importance of really holding down some community outreach in cards to that and i will i believe that when it comes to covid recovery, and restoration everything at the mta should be viewed and with the equity and restoration of service we should be looking specifically at

restoring lives that serve our communities of concern and ask not just that serve our that are well served and by transit so looking at that and also communities are concerned at making sure everything related to the mta is equitable. manny mentioned in his remarks the shared spaces and closed streets programs and those have undoubtedly saved some small businesses that there are there are concerns in the visibility community with how, as we get into more creative ways of using our right-of-way, right, with

the slow streets and open space and shared streets programs, how do we make sure that the right-of-way remains accessible and the pass of travel for also accusing all kinds of mobility devices whether they're even a new mobility like it's scooter or a how do we all share the right-of-way and so looking creative creative solutions, and also getting into there's been transition to looking at new ways of mobility and how do we make sure that and it's possible

and i also want to adjust that i think that equity is key in all areas of the sfmta and i strongly support there's a position added in the office of that equity hopefully here shortly and communication to you as the word of supervisors and to the public is i think they do a good job on the whole but it always could be done better and so making sure that the mta is held accountable and knowing as

transparent to the public as things can possibly be as it relates to both the large capital projects such as the central subway or i know that there's been a lot of controversy around that and also the restoration of the communication that could be better to the public so making sure that that happens and that as mta does good out, good outreach to under serve communities would be a priority of mine and i think another priority of mine would be we know that recently, a couple of large capital projects have been in the news for not running on

time and all the sources various running overdue to and such, i think particularly in an era of budget short falls, i think that looking hard and dealing with our capital projects, and making sure we are deliver on those and really making sure that we go into accountable and not just the rubber stamp for the mta and really asking the questions and that would be a priority of mine as well and also i have relationships with a lot of advocates in the disability community and other communities

as a whole so i would be good at doing the on the ground outreach that machine' talked about in his remarks. i think i will close my remarks since i'm unable to make public comment and with my support for milmy fellow nominee and who wod be an excellent member of the mta board and also i think in the era of the chair safes streets program i think.

>> to manny head of time. you are very organized and honest. with that, i see that supervisor mar has a question. >> yes. >> thank you. even more so now with the challenges we're facing with our transportation and the safe streets work. i appreciated the opportunity to meet with you recently and i was so 'em criesed and your deep

commitment to not just advocating the needs and for all vulnerable communities and populations in our cities and yeah, and i thank mayor breed for pullin putting forward your nomination and you are such an incredible important leader and activist and voice in our city and so, yeah, i don't real fifth have any questions and i think your remarks really touched on some of the questions i have. thank you for what you do and the willingness to step into this important role. >> thank you, supervisor. >> agree. i have one question for you. which is about -- how am i

blanking on the name of this. vision zero. it's not working. we're having a disturbing amount of death and serious injuries as a result of collisions. do you have any thoughts how we can improve vision zero. >> with the, let me say the vision zero clock is ticking and i appreciate the board of supervisors has really tried to double down its commitment to the bureau and i think a community engagement process and safety education is key to vision zero so any pedestrian safety education efforts we can do, it's also been shown that

any guy and feed enforcement and and he also created street skipped design and using scape design and using it on our streets but i think it's really education both in (inaudible) and really excited to see the

great work you do on the mta board. supervisor stefani. >> i want to echo your concerns around vision zero. we had an excellent discussion about this, about enforcement and speeding and especially with regards to my concerns along the

geary corridor and i value that and i know it's something we're not doing well on and she said the clock is ticking on this so, i appreciate your attention to this. we discussed paratransit. i worked on that a lot when i worked for supervisor peer and the a mention it needs to be geting and i value your experience and your advocacy on that and your ideas so, i just am thrilled with this appointment as well and i think mayor breed definitely has given us two nominations two appoint's that will girlfriend this city well. >> we will now open this item up for public comment. every member will have two minutes to speak on either or both candidates.

>> yes, members of the p p p p p

>> i'd like to welcome everyone to the december 14 regular meeting of the san francisco ethics commission. this meeting is being held by teleconference pursuant to the governor's executive order 2920 and the 12 amendment to the mayoral proclamation regional emergency declared on march 12, 2020. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. the minutes of this meeting will reflect that due to covid-19 health emergency and to protect city commissioners, public health, and the public, members of this meeting and the meeting is being held remotely.

commission members will attend the meeting through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. please note that today's meeting is being live cablecast on channel 26 and being streamed live at sfgov.org/ethicslive. public comment will be available on each item on this agenda. each member of the public will be allowed three minutes to speak. comments or opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available via phone call by calling 415-655-0001. again, the phone call is 415-655-0001. access code is 146-619-6608. again, 146-619-6608, followed by the pound sign, and then

press pound again to join as an attendee. please note, to members of the public, that if you look up the global call numbers that have been updated on the agenda, we -- there was a mistake on the agenda. we. if you're calling, and you need access, rather than the 415 number, please visit our website at sfethics.org. you will hear -- to the public, you will hear a beep when you are connected to the meeting. you will automatically be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest come up, dial star, three to be entered into public comment line. please wait until the clerk calls on you. ensure you are in a quiet location. before you speak, mute the sound of anything around you, including television, radio, or

computer. it is especially important that you mute your computer if you are watching via the web link so prevent feedback and echo when you speak. when the system says your line has been unmuted, this is your turn to speak. you will hear staff say, welcome, caller. you are encouraged to state your name clearly. as soon as you begin speaking, you will have three minutes to provide your comment, six minutes if you are on-line with an interpreter. you will hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. if you wish to withdraw from public comment line, please press star, three again. you will then hear the system say you have lowered your hand. once you have provided your comment, you will hear staff say thank you, and the system will say your line has been muted.

public comment may also be submitted in writing and will be shared with the commissioners after the meeting has been concluded and will be part of the official meeting file. written comments should be sent to ethics.commission@sfgov.org. thank you, madam chair. >> and i'm so sorry. i will do that again, after i've unmuted myself. i will call the meeting to order, and if i could ask your moderator to call role. >> commissioners, please unmute your microphone so that you can acknowledge your presence after your name is called. [roll call]

>> clerk: madam chair, with five members present and accounted for, you have a quorum. >> thank you. i will now welcome everyone back to the remote commission meetings and hope that we have some public participation today. i know that, hopefully, we've all been reaching out to folks to encourage people to

participate and attend in the ethics commission on-line and by telephone. i want to remind commissioners that when you are not speaking, please turnoff your microphone to avoid audio feedback, and with that, i want to call agenda item number 2, which is public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. members of the public who are already on-line and wish to speak should now dial star, three, if you've not already done so, to be added to the public comment line. moderator, can you please proceed with public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. the ethics commission is now receiving public comment on agenda item number 2 in this meeting. each member of the public will have up to two minutes to provide public comment. if you joined the meeting earlier in the proceedings, now is the time to press star, three to speak. it's important that you press star, three to enter the queue as pressing it again will move

you out of the public comment line and back into listening mode. once you're in line, the system will prompt you to speak, so it's important that you call from a quiet location. please address your comments to the commission as a whole and not to individual members of the madam chair, we are checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. >> thank you. >> clerk: if you have just joined this meeting, we are currently on agenda item 2, public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. you will have three minutes to provide your comment, six minutes if you are on-line with an interpreter. if you have not already done so, please press star, three to enter the queue. please wait on-line until the system indicates you have been unmuted. please stand by.

madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> all right. i understand we're supposed to wait 90 seconds, or have you already waited 90 seconds? >> clerk: yeah. there was -- from the moment that i -- yeah, because i'm keeping an eye on it, but if you want to wait a few more seconds. >> no, that's fine. if anybody pops in, feel free to interrupt me. give everybody as much chance as possible. >> clerk: okay. >> but with that, i'm going to hit the gavel and ask you to close agenda item number 2 and call agenda item number 3 -- or actually, i'm going to call agenda item number 3, and that would be -- sorry. losing my place here. the ethics commission is now receiving public comment on

consent calendar item number 3 in this remote meeting -- okay. hang on a minute. i need, like, a script of this here. here we go. i'm not seeing -- okay. i see it. never mind. okay. i'd like to call agenda item number 3, consend calendar for the november 13, 2020, meeting. this item is considered routine. if a commissioner objects, an item can be removed and considered separately. does any commissioner wish to sever any items from the consent and call it for a separate discussion? seeing none, then i would ask the moderator, would you please

proceed with public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam clerk. the ethics commission is now receiving public comment on consent calendar item number 3 remotely in this meeting. each member of the public will have up to three minutes to provide public comment. you will hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. if you joined the meeting earlier to listen to the proceedings, now is the time to get in line to speak. if you have not already done so, please press star, three. it's important that you only press star, three once to enter the queue as doing so more will move you back out of the line and into listening mode. it's important you call from a quiet location. please address your comments to the committee as a whole and not to individual members. madam chair, we are checking for callers now.

if you have just joined this call, we are taking public comment for agenda item number 3, draft minutes for november 13, 2020 meeting. if you have not already done so, please press star, three to enter the queue. please stand by. madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. moderator. with that, public comment on consent item number 3 is now closed. commissioners, do you have a motion to approve the minutes

from the november 13 meeting? >> so moved. >> thank you, commissioner smith. a second, please. >> second. >> thank you. and with that, moderator, can you please call the roll on the motion to approve the consent -- oh, i'm sorry. commissioner bush, your hand is up, and i missed that, please. go ahead. >> two things. one is that i'd like to thank the people who prepare the minutes for including the links to -- what is it? sfgov -- so they can see each meeting that took place including links to specific sections of the minutes. the second question -- second issue i have a question is there are some things that are said in the course of the meeting, and it says no action was taken. is that because the item -- the

agenda item was for information and did not allow us to have action? because otherwise, it gives the impression that issues just faded away, rather than it was under a category that didn't permit commissioners or others to make comment? >> i think the notation that no action was taken simply means that there was no vote, so, i mean, if you want, i suppose you could change it, like, there was no vote -- no vote was taken on this matter or something like that. >> if you look at our agenda, the minutes, as well as today's agenda, some items are saying presentation, and others are saying presentation and potential action. so if the item just says presentation but does not say potential action, does that mean that we're precluded from taking any action? >> i'm going to defer to the

city attorney. i have my guess on the answer to that question. >> hi, good morning. deputy city attorney andrew shen responding to your question, commissioner bush. yes, the item did not indicate that any action was taken, then it would simply be an informational item. how we queue it up is if any action was taken on the item. >> and the importance of that is to let some member of the public know that while they could come back later and watch the informational presentation, but if it was calendared as a possible action item, then it would be important for them to participate in real-time because the commission might move forward without having a second opportunity to sound off on that particular issue, so it is important when you calendar it that way. >> i think it's important to

keep in mind that when the minutes are put down, and it says there is no action, it's because it was in a category that allowed no action. otherwise, it just appears a lack of interest in the topic, which may not be the case at all. that does not hold us up from going ahead and approving the minutes as they've been presented. >> well, i appreciate that. i think your perspective -- i've written agenda items that way for so long, i never would think that anyone would think that that's what that meant, but yeah, i can talk with the executive director and think about how better to phrase that so that it's clear. but with that, then, moderator, can you please call the roll? >> clerk: my turn with the

unmute. yes. a motion has been made and seconded. i will now call the roll. [roll call] >> clerk: with five votes in the affirmative and zero votes opposed, the motion is approved unanimously. >> thank you, commissioners. i'm going to now call agenda item 4, action on proposes commission regular meeting schedule for the calendar year 2021. can executive director [inaudible], can you speak to this item, please. >> good morning, commissioners. thank you, chair ambrose. this item, typically at this time of year, the commission puts forward a schedule for the coming calendar year so it can be circulated on the website and in other meeting materials as necessary. last january, 2020, you might recall that the commission

approved a bylaws change that the commission be meeting on the second friday of each month except in the case of unavailability of commissioners [inaudible] and of course over the past year with the shelter in place and the public health emergency orders limiting public gatherings, the commission resumed its monthly meetings in approximate august remotely, and that is, for the foreseeable future, is what we anticipate remotely, until we have been given the notice that we can meet again in public buildings. so this schedule that we've given you is still based on meeting the second friday of every month remotely. so if this is amenable to the commissioners, we would ask for your approval on this item so we can post materials and updates accordingly.

>> moderator, would you please proceed with public comment? you're muted, ronald. >> clerk: okay. i'm going to need some more caffeine in me. madam chair, we are checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. for those on the line, please wait until the system indicated you have been unmuted. if you have just joined this meeting, we are currently in discussion on agenda item number 4, action on proposed commission regular meeting schedule for calendar year 2021. if you have anot already done so, please press star, three to

enter the queue. you will have three minutes to speak, six minutes if you are using an interpreter. please stand by. madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> all right. thank you very much. with that, public comment on agenda item number 4 is closed, and can i have a motion to adopt the schedule for the 2021

calendar? commissioner bush, i have a motion. commissioner smith, i'll take that as a second, and moderator, please take the roll -- oh, commissioner bush, you have a comment. i see your hand. you're muted, commissioner bush. >> the february meeting is set for february 12. i was going to suggest that we look at a time more like the 26 on that particular month because i think that, in march, we're going to be putting out a report looking back at the 2020 election and doing an overview of the campaign spending and so forth, and it's also became as we use that as a basis for pursuing our budget request, mayor's office, and so i was

afraid if we are not having a meeting from february 12 to march 12, that those incidences would fall between the chairs, and that we should have a meeting on the 12 and 26 so we can discuss everything going on on the commission. >> and i'm going to defer to executive director pelham. is there anything about the calendar overall, and then, i would ask the other commissioners, to the extent that you have memory of what you might be doing in february, you know, understanding that we are going to have another meeting in february, although if you have a conflict, we can reschedule this item. i think there's a certain amount of notice that needs to be given because of the bylaws? >> no.

chair ambrose, since there wasn't a bylaws change, there isn't a ten-day notice required for this. you could do so with just changing that date within this calendar that you're adopting. the one comment that i just wanted to make that would perhaps clarify with commissioner bush, it is typically the case that the budgets are due for submission roughly that second or third week of february, so if the commission were not to meet until the 26, you would be meeting after our budget is submitted, in all likelihood, unless our budget changes. but if the commission meets on the 12, that would give the commission advance opportunity to see the budget submission before it is submitted. again, assuming the past practice is how we're going forward, so i just wanted to provide that context, as well,

for your consideration. >> yes, certainly, that's important. >> well, to be honest with you, we could, if it's sort of an intensive need for it, we could calendar a brief special meeting at the end of february or march to address commissioner bush's concern because i would not want to have the commission miss an opportunity to comment before you submit your budget to the mayor's office. >> that's fine with me. >> won't be able to do that by january 8, clearly, so thank you for that note, and then, commissioner bush, we can keep an eye on this. if we need to, we can either do that or we can move up the march meeting so that, as you say, something doesn't fall between the chairs. with that, then, we have a

motion and second, correct, for this item, so i'm going to ask the moderator to call the roll and keep an eye on this. clerk cle>> clerk: a motion h made and seconded. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: with five votes in the affirmative and zero votes opposed, the motion is approved unanimously. >> all right. thank you for that, and then, if we do have any public listeners, i want to advise you that we are going to take items out of order now. we are interested in having

commissioner chiu particularly participate in agenda item 7, and so we are going to temporarily skip over the presentation on form 700 filing and agenda item number 6, and i am going to call agenda item 7, which is the discussion and possible objection on an update regarding ethics commission responsing to date to ongoing corruption allegations. -- responses to date to ongoing corruption allegations. >> chair ambrose, if i might jump in for a moment, i wanted to introduce the item and let you know we have a variety of staff members present on agenda item 7. >> yes. i didn't talk to you about that, but please, executive director pelham, you have the floor. >> thank you. thank you. i'm here with actually the entire complement of our

staff -- staff memory, who's contributed to the work in this area as well as to this memo. our director of enforcement, jeff pierce is here, as well as one of our investigators. pat ford, our senior legislative and affairs director. we have a number of hands on deck that have been responding to the corruption scandal that we have seen continuing to emerge in 2020, and we thought both in conversation with the chair, and noting that this is the end of the calendar year that has been dramatic on so many fronts, we thought it would be helpful to provide an update for you as well as the public about the kinds of activities that the ethics commission is engaged in across the range of our work in response to the allegations that we have seen continuing to unfold or unravel over the course of the past year. as you know, just at the end of november, since our last commission meeting, most recently, new charges were

revealed with a public announcement of the then-director of the city's public utilities commission allegedly taking bribes on charge of fraud. he subsequently resigned his position, but this is just the latest of a number of very aremain laing headlines and troubling work. we know from the city attorney's office, from the controller's office, as you've heard from reports that they've done over the last several months, [inaudible] with information about, there is much work going on in the city to dig further, to understand where there are practices or policies or laws to be strengthened to prevent this kind of activity, if true, from happening again. so as you know, from conversations that we've had over the last several months, there are a number of investigations ongoing from a policy perspective, making sure we're digging into our government ethics law to see

what needs to be strengthened, what policies need to be strengthened. we have some very specific views on that, and work that the outreach staff is doing. obviously, because of charter mandates, we take very seriously and abide by practice and in our work, the ethics investigations are always conducted confidentially. we also don't comment on whether we're undertaking an investigation or not which can be frustrating to the public because they want people to be brought forward and held accountable for their actions. we take those confidentiality requirements very seriously, and we don't comment on whether we're investigating or not because we do want to protect the due process interests of potential respondents and, importantly, make sure that the public can and respondents can

have confidence that the ethics commission is fair, neutral, and objective involving any kind of investigative enforcement that it might take. so that stems from whether i, as your probable cause hearing officer, may make the determination that probable cause exists that somebody violated our law in a jurisdiction. now, we also know that public comments have been issued, and so our investigative staff, like others, are looking at those documents and combing over them to see if there are things that we should be spending investigative time on. so we wanted to do with this memo is just provide a range of activities, the kinds of things that we're doing, and identify

where we're going over the course of the year with this work. we know there are significant things that should be happening in our own work, and as you look at different areas of this report, you'll see that there is an area a job that we can see that we have -- i'll talk about that later, but this -- you know, we've identified these positions, we're able to backfill them, and those positions ensure the work that we have been doing in each of those areas. i'm going to let you know our lens, our field of vision in the next year going forward,

and we want to make sure that you and others are confident in the work that we're doing with whatever resources we have and that we're doing in the coming here. with that, i'm happy and my staff are here to to speak something if needed. >> so anyone in the public who might be listening, i encourage you to take a look at that, and i'm then going to open it up to commissioner comments.

this is a presentation and possible action item, but before, if there is any action, i want to go to public comment, if we could. so before we jump in, are there any commissioner comments before we begin? i don't see any, so i'm going to start -- and i don't know, at the end, if you wanted each one of your staff to specifically speak to the work that you're doing. the question that i have, while some of the matters that are in this panoply of corruption indictments, there are at least four individuals who pled guilty, and i don't know what

the formal term is, but they cut a deal. i don't know if we're authorized to move forward on any actions on enforcement investigations -- i realize that none of these people were former city officials. these are all private contractors, right? all four of them were outside public parties -- [inaudible]. >> commissioner bush, you're

unmuted. >> thank you. >> any way, that's my note. and i know you're already scouring the disclosure information that we have available to look at those points. >> we are. and i would just say that to the extent that there are matters that we do identify that are actionable and that the commission think we should be taking action on, we would bring those to you in a different setting. i would also comment, something i think is helpful to underscore, when we're talking about civic organizations in the press, there is a lot of work that goes onto helping identify tools that can exist to help factually report on or understand the kinds of disclosure reports that we're seeing, because one of the things that we recently did was

update our home page banner that tries to direct the public who might be interested in these items on our websites to see that the kinds of disclosures that city officials have to make under existing law. they might not be perfect, but there is a strong appetite for understanding this, especially when these types of incidents are unfolding in the press, and so to be able to have access for this to the public, and to walk them through this information is important. that's something that doesn't get a lot of attention, but

this is something that we want to have as a tool so the public can be aware that we have all of these ways that public officials can be held accountable. >> yes, and i appreciate all the changes that you and steven made to the website to best get the public access to the information. and how, for those of us that are not technically as savvy as some computer geniuses, how it's easier to get to a pay and view collectively information about a particular set of public officials and what their reporting has been. so i really appreciate that, and i think that, today, is that is it tyler is going to

give us what i really appreciate, which is a status on demonstration on what these webpages look like and how you click through them to get into the nitty-gritty, because it is fascinating. i think commissioner bush, maybe some of you longer veterans of the commission are more familiar with that, but it's incredible how many information is available. i took a walk-through the major developer disclosure because of my long-standing work with planning and land use development departments with the city, and there's a lot of information there. it was really useful to see the organizations that they interaction with and the donations that they have made.

i've got commissioner chiu and commissioner bush who have questions, so i'm going to take commissioner chiu. >> commissioner chiu: thank you so much. i want to thank you for taking the time to investigate the corruption allegations that we have ongoing here in the city. it seems to me that there are three prongs to this approach, and that they are, you know, on the policy front, you're looking at new laws and regulations to address gaps in the regulatory schemes that govern in this area, and the second is the enforcement of current laws, and then, the

third is around engagement and compliance to educate on [inaudible] and to really build a culture on compliance. so i think on the enforcement front, we are bound by confidentiality, and we can't talk specifics about what's happening, but i think there's an opportunity to plant a flag in the ground in terms of what is important to the ethics commission, because i think laws and regulations are only going to be as strong as the enforcement that follows them. for example, speed limits. if speed limits are not

enforced, people can drive five, ten, 20 miles per hour over that without fear of impugnity. that said, i know that there's a pandemic continuing to rage, and the d.f.w. duties fall to all of the city, but i think one-third of our city staff has been funded to help out with the emergency. so my question is is there a way to shift the load to others in the department to be able to free up more resources within the enforcement department to be able to get at this really critical work? i think anecdotally, when i see

next door, the ability of the neighborhood, people that post the stories of the recent allegations coming out of the p.u.c., it's like a shrug, all those corrupt politicians, all those corrupt city workers, but what can be done? basically nothing, and i think that is one, unfortunate, and two, doesn't need to be true. i'd like to have a discussion and hear from staff, without directing enforcement priorities, but i think enforcement actions can send a message about what the ethics commission thinks is important, what the ethics commission is going to say. we're going to plant our flag here, and these are the things that we are going to go after because it's not okay, and i

don't know if we -- if we have -- if we have done that in this instance, and obviously, this takes time, but i also think that the time is a double-edged sword. we need the time to conduct the investigation, but these things are unfolding and continuing to unfold now in 2020. it's going to bleed into 2021, and for them to be an investigation and some announcement in 2020 -- further down, the enforcement becomes attenuated from the violation, and i think the enforcement becomes not reduced, but i think the impact can be blunted, so that's one observation. and then, the second would be around engagement because we already have a policy around travel and gifts and

disclosure, so this goes back to enforcement. how do we enforce a law that we currently have already on the books, ask what do we need to add? so i think it's important to keep a focus on the longer term and what needs to occur, but also what we have in our current tool set to be able to bring to bear. and thing, the -- the cultural compliance piece, i'd really love to hear more about what we're doing in this area because the whole phrase, see something, say something, what is our culture of that in the city? are people simply, like, i'm going to keep my head down or if we see something, we're not

sure if it's right or wrong? i'd like to get more information. and i don't know if you know the answer, but i'd like to know what efforts we can do in terms of outreach because people comply when they know what the rules are and what the consequences are for obeying or not obeying. so as we think about this, how do we, as an ethics commission tasked with creating, helping to create ethical culture -- we have laws and rules and regulations on the books already about gifts and travel, and they weren't followed, you know, as evidenced by the

allegations -- not proven yet, but these are the allegations that there were restrictions on gifts, there were restrictions on travel, but the allegations are that these city officials did not follow them. and so how did that come to be, and how do we fix that because we can add more laws, and we can -- and we can have enforcement action, but if the people who are subject to those laws and subject to those regulations do not care to follow them or choose not to follow them, there will continue to be violations. in the corporate world, people always said corporations eat culture for breakfast. i think we can add more laws, but in the absence of a culture of compliance, it's going to become very difficult, i think, to -- to turn the shift of city

to become more compliant, and so i would really like to hear miss gage, if she's available, so the question would be, from an overarching standpoint, what would be the point to build a culture of compliance here in san francisco in city work because training is only the first step. and secondly, what can we do in this year of reduced budget and resources until we get to that point of having more money and funds and, you know, hopefully people to be able to do this work? how do we bridge it until we can get to -- until we can get to that place and get to had a

headway, and how do we measure whether or not we have been effective? i know that's a lot. >> commissioner chiu, if i might make a couple of responses, and then, i would obviously, love to hear from rachel and jeff and staff chiming in more. i heard a number of things, and i want to confirm idea as enforcement about a way to change culture, i couldn't agree more. we all agree that that is essential to help capture people's attention and know where the guardrails are very strong and exist. so that's something, in terms of prioritizing our work to accomplish where public trust is most damaged. to get public trust, that is something that is top on our radar from all the work that the commission and staff have been doing over the past year.

there was a certain ah-ha moment when reading the latest charges that came out on november 13, they related to behaviors that allegedly took place in 2016. so in some ways, it is a sad reminder that impact of this sad behavior doesn't always come quickly, but it isn't a reason to take our foot off the gas pedal or to keep it there. the notion of doing outreach and how we address the tone at the top, absolutely. those are steps we have to be taking now. one of the things that rachel

and her staff have put out is a reminder to all department heads and staff [inaudible] and here's what public disclosures are available, and so that's what we have on our radar to keep doing [inaudible] and if they have to do fundraising at the end of the year. so we hear those needs, and we are responding to those. and i'll pause there, but i just wanted to provide some of that context because there are a number of ways where the work that we're doing is happening.

it's not a matter of detecting or prohibiting behavior because sometimes no rules will prevent people from making a bad decision or taking bad action, but i think it's important to come alongside of staff people, employees who are in those processes, to help them know that we are relevant and that we can be helpful to them in making decisions and support them in making good decisions because i don't know how many people are comfortable saying something when they see something? that is something that we all have a role to play in dealing with that, so that's something that i think we're going to get a better handle on, but we have to figure out, and we can't wait for a grand plan because we'll be losing too much time, and i think that things can take over if we're not on top

of it [inaudible] let me see if jeff has anything more to add or rachel or pat ford want to add anything about the work that's ongoing in their [inaudible]. >> so -- and i just would like to add, director pelham, that the work that [inaudible] and i know that tyler and his team have done a tremendous job to create that transparency and make it accessible to every day san francisco citizens to understand, well, how much -- how much money is my elected official receiving and the work that they're doing? another linchpin.

>> as this item notes, our division meets weekly with a number of counterparts within the -- the city family, including the controller's office, the city attorney's office, and the district attorney's office. we also note both here and in the enforcement report, which we have noted in an ongoing way that the commission adopted a couple years ago this parallel proceedings policy where our office shares jurisdiction with other offices, and we had conversation with the commission in the past, in the recent past about what we might view as kind of a hierarchy of enforcement, given the three kinds of penalty being

criminal, civil, and ad str administrative. as we evaluate which matters to bring before the commission in that context, we are constantly thinking about the finite number of resources within the city at large and whether sometimes it makes sense for the district attorney solely to pursue a criminal prosecution or the city attorney solely to pursue a civil litigation, similarly here, with the feds bringing a number of matters of their own. as we brought before the commission last august, one would be the severity of the allegations, and certainly, what we're seeing from the u.s. attorney's office are extraordinarily severe allegations, but another of the

factors that we contemplate in deciding about how to exercise our discretion is the impact of a commission decision. so collectively, we have to think about, although you're absolutely right, commissioner chiu, that absent enforcement, the laws lack teeth. delayed enforcement can mean both diminished punitive value and diminished deterrent value, but i would appreciate input from the commission about what role you think we might play. by that, i mean, part of our work so far has been to evaluate, obviously, due to the allegations that are coming far from the federal prosecutor's office or district attorney's office or city important's

office, the impact of misconduct. some of those violations are identical to violations being brought by the u.s. attorney or identical to violations that the city attorney may pursue in plea deals or settlement agreements of its own, so the feedback from the commission that i would seek is does the commission wish for the commission to apply enforcement resources to duplicate liability that's been identified by other offices or would the commission prefer that we liability, so to speak, around the edges of what those offices are already pursuing, to so see what the broader scope of liability might be, but to focus our own resources

on the conduct that has not been addressed by other offices to date. i would also invite senior investigator jeff zumwald to add any feedback, as he's been conducting investigations and been conducting an investigation on his own. >> i think that's a really critical question for the commission to discuss. and i'm not sure if you want to jump into it now or i see that others have also raised their hands, but i'd like to --

commissioner chiu, if. >> commissioner chiu, if i can jump in, it is a very good question, but when we get there, we're going to have to talk about the specific violation. yes, we don't want to do anything in terms of our investigation that's going to interfere with a federal criminal investigation, for example, interrogating somebody and letting them know something that might interfere with the investigation that the federal government or the d.a. is doing, but there are other aspects like what i was raising before, for people that have already pled guilty to the federal charges. if there are violations of local law, there's nothing about the federal case that precludes the ethics commission from pursuing it. but i don't want to get too far

down into that specific request. when we get back into enforcement, maybe we can address that more specifically in the context of streamlining and how you address your work. because commissioner chiu and director pelham had raised so many issues, i wanted to come back to what we were focusing on, culture and sort of do people know what we're doing? in my 47 years of city government, the vast majority of civil servants are extremely affable individuals who seek out input from the city

attorney's office and ethics commission to make sure that what they're doing is what they're supposed to be doing. i also think that, in some departments more than others, there is a culture of going along to get along that is more problematic than ten years ago. it's not a question of the entire city. like, the things that you're seeing, commissioner chiu, that people are putting up on nextdoor. that's something that i want to have a discussion about because god, if that's what everyone thinks, how do we expect our city employees who would be

potentially speaking up in an environment where retaliation was a very real concern, but if they think that everybody just figures, you know, if you work for government, that you're crooked, so any way -- before i go off on my own issues of concern, i'm just going to go down my list. commissioner lee, you have your hand up, and then, commissioner bush, so we can hear some other viewpoints and then come back to the staff and then come to public comment. >> vice chair lee: all right. i would like to hear commissioner bush before me. >> hi. thank you very much. >> clerk: commissioner bush, could you wait one minute?

commissioner chiu, when you're talking, just be aware that when you move, your microphone is rubbing and is providing some feedback. commissioner bush? >> thank you. i want to say, you may be hearing my dog and i talking at the same time. it seems to me that a lot of this comes back to the question of resources. issues that need to be dealt with are beyond the ability of staff and the resources that we have at this time, and i would like to put that in the highlights of the minutes that get recorded and in the way we respond. for example, the b.l.a. report that was given to the board of supervisors the other day

included a chart that showed how long it takes for an investigation to be completed according to the type that it is, whether it's campaign finance or ethics law and so forth, and all of them took between two and three years. sometimes, that's because we have rigged the system that it it doesn't get acted on. i noticed that city attorney dennis herrera put on the record [inaudible] didn't seem to merit a slap on the wrist. well, it didn't merit a slap on the wrist because the only person that had the authority to do anything about it was the mayor, who appointed him. in fact, there was a detailed report done by the city attorney's office. there was actions done by members of the board, but all of those were forwarded onto

the mayor for his decision to act, and he chose not to act, and so there was not a whole lot that could be done about any of that. one of the things that you wrote, is the ethics commission is committed to timely investigation and case outcomes. well, two to three years for an investigation is not timely. that takes you right into the middle of the next election season, even for supervisors, who run once every four years. so if we're going to address any of this, we have to address issues of staffing and budgets. the rest of it is just whistling past the grave yard.

i have a lot of other comments that i could make, but i think you all know where i'm going with this. >> yeah. i think we all share the opinion of the d.s.w. work and the ethics commission staff and the funding concerns -- >> what i'm looking for is not just a blanket statement that we don't have enough resources. for example, director pelham, in a report to the commission a few months ago, pointed out a list of things that we're not going to be able to do with the budget. of the people that are now

facing criminal charges, six of them were filing form 700s. have we ever filed -- ever done an audit of the form 700 filings? do we have the staff to do that? i don't think we do. i have never seen anybody faulted for anything other than not getting their report in on time, and i've certainly never seen anybody take an action that they've failed to take action on a disclosure that was required. >> yeah, i've never understood how you would audit that. if somebody is taking an illegal bribe, and you audit them, they're not going to say oh, did i mention that illegal gift that i got from a restricted source -- >> excuse me, but there are things that they do have to report. they have to report travel. you can't get around the fact that travel is not being reported and it's taking place.

they have to report other positions they hold which receives economic compensation. for example, nuru held other positions that received other economic compensation requirements. >> okay. i don't want to get into the details. i'm not sure that nuru did have other compensation for those governmental roles that he had on the transportation authority or the -- you know, the rate setting functions, but in any event, i definitely agree with you that, in terms of, especially as we moved into the form 700 filing, publicly, universally, among all form 700 filers on-line, that having more audit capacity there would be great, and i think we're

going to have a presentation later in this meeting on form 700. i -- i totally agree with you, having more money for staff and doing more compliance and enforcement work would be key, and given that we're probably not going to get all the money and staff, and given the fact that we need to figure out what we're going to do in the meantime, i do want to move things along because we're going to -- if we have any public wanting to weigh-in on this item, we're going to lose them. commissioner lee? >> vice chair lee: thank you, madam chair, and i want to thank the director for a really thorough report.

i think we have an honor system, based on what commissioner chiu had mentioned, it was a three-pronged approach. it was based on the honor system that we all embrace an ethical culture for the city, and a vast majority of us do embrace that. so the challenge for us is how do we identify and have active enforcement oversight on it, active enforcement, whatever you want to call it, on a few bad apples who abuse the system? resources are going to be -- continue to be limits, and i think that we're going to have

some discussion, and i would like to have us discuss a near team and long-term step that we can look at taking now, number one, on what we have, and, more importantly, to really restore the public confidence. [inaudible] number one, on the 700 filing it's true. likes after they file it, they

have to do it. my understanding is, again, with the limited resources, there's no way they can audit every single filing.

>> you know, this whole culture of see something, say something, or whether you want to just get along, i think it goes to the whole idea that if you say something, are you going to be the nail that sticks up? and i go back to the whistle blower program that we have. i was a little bit disappointed when the staff report came out, i was expecting a spike -- after all these horrific stories came out, i would have expected more people to call in

because they would say, who's bringing in the bottle of wine? who went on a nice trip with somebody. but if they don't feel confident to call in and make a complaint or bring to your attention, then we have a problem. we cannot monitor all the staff, but people who are working along with the nurus of the world, they would know. they would be the ones who could step up. but if they don't feel, if they don't feel that we have a system that protect them from further harassment or promotion or even losing their job, then, they're not going to come forward. so i would love to have not

just us, but again, engage with the stakeholder communities to really look at how we can strengthen those areas, engagement, enforcement, and the policies of the world. and just one more thing about engagement, i'm still learning about, you know, about how to navigate all the reporting requirements and everything else extend to a broader

stakeholder community the other folks who are -- everything that we do, the system, so ex-for instance, when we do the 700 report, whatever, i would love to see us put the information on our website, hey, these are the things that people have to report, but go out and talk to our stakeholders. hey, these are the people that are required to filed the form 700. these are the pieces of information that they're required to put in, so part of the education process to engage our community so they know hey, here are some of the things that may be a loophole, but let's have a discussion on how to close the loopholes. so the whole idea is yes, we have limited resources, but let's use the limited resources in the maximum way to address

the nature and along term objective to rebuild the public trust in the city's ethical and culture environment. >> one thing that occurs to me that maybe staff could look into, regardless of what happens with the indictments, we do have three positions in the city where the department heads resigned. department of public works, department of building inspection, and the p.u.c. there is a position for those

appointment, and if we wanted to influence the manner those persons are vetted in the, i t it's something that the board of supervisors doesn't have a role in. the mayor, with the strong mayorial government, we have an opportunity potentially to set policy. we could ask, for example, for -- in the same way when,

presumableably, an ethics staff is on boarded, we could ask for an opportunity to sit with the individuals in those positions and give them individual and intensive training and, you know, sort of education about the culture that we want to see established. so those are immediate things that we might be able to do at least for the three departments where we know that there's significant concern. so i want to say -- everybody's hand is still up. i really would like to see if we have any public commenters in the queue in deference to them sitting out there for a half an hour if they did want

to comment, so mr. moderator, if you could see if there's any public comment. >> clerk: madam chair, we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue. fore those -- hold on, please. for those of you already on hold, please wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. if you have just joined the meeting, we are currently on the discussion on agenda item 7, discussion and possible action on update regarding ethics commission responses to date to ongoing corruption allegations. press star, three to enter the public comment queue. you will have three minutes to present your comments, six minutes if you are using an interpreter. you will hear a bell when you have 30 seconds remaining. please stand by.

>> chair ambrose and others, in the event that my video goes off, i've got bandwidth challenges. i've got two kids also on the same network doing on-line school, so i may need to turn my video off in order to not lose connection entirely. >> that's fine. we'll note that your name is there. >> clerk: madam chair, we have no callers in the queue. >> okay. with that, public comment on agenda item number 7 is closed, and i don't know if the commissioners have any specific motions or actions that they want to recommend. i think that this is going to be a continuing agenda item for review and discretion. i think that director pelham is usually pretty good at picking

up the threads of our various ideas and turning them into action and direction, so -- but if anyone did have a motion that they wanted to offer, now would be the time. commissioner lee? >> thank you, madam chair. i just have a quick question to the executive director, which is something that we alluded to regarding the 700 audit. is there -- because we are required to do audits for the 700, so is there any way that you can, i'll say, select -- is there any way that the staff can focus on the certain area of 700?

so, for instance, we have identified certain departments that has a lot more public comments? is there any way that you can prioritize the auditing of the form 700 within the rule of law? >> yeah, thank you for the question, commissioner lee. just to clarify a couple of things. i do think it's important to clarify, when you say audit, it's facial review. it's required that the department conduct facial reviews. audit conveys there's some sort of further assessment and research of, say, the interest that's been reported and verifying those, in fact, are the interests that people have. so just to distinguish those for a moment, the facial

review, that i can tell you that that is something that, again, in the wake of what we've been reading about, our staff, we will be paying particularly close attention to the kinds of issues we've been reading about, and using that to inform how we proceed with facial reviews of documents in the coming years following the form 700 filings by supervisors, elected, and employee and department heads [inaudible] that's putting a program in place, but we will be paying attention to these issues, and i think we have to. it's incumbent on us to look at those issues in a different way than we have in the past. what's absolutely critical to commissioner bush's comments is having that audit manager role filled. if we do not have that auditor manager and compliance review

officer role filled, it's going to be possible for us to do what we need to do. i'm going to wait until the director's report to comment more on that, but the short answer is yes, we do need to be mindful of that, we need to be mindful of the issues that we've been seeing, and we have to have a more focused review of what we're trying to do on that front this coming year. >> chair, you're muted. >> thank you. i see commissioner chiu's hand is up, and since you only have a few more minutes, and then i'll go toition kmer bush. >> my limited time here, i just wanted to -- i'll go to

commissioner bush. >> my limited time here, i just wanted to ask, given the limited resources that we have in this current fiscal year, and the opportunity that we have receiving additional resources in the upcoming budget discussions, and, in my mind, the critical nature of the compliant work that we do, it's one of those things that we have in our control in how we deploy, and so i would actually appreciate hearing briefly from rachel gage in terms of what would be, given the resources that we have, the most effective way to deploy them. and given her work to date, does she have a sense of receptiveness to the community about the work that we're doing and what she sees?

what is the landscape that we're facing out there, and if we do deploy, is she optimistic that we can gain traction? i think commissioner lee made a really great point, that the alleged corruption did not happen in a vacuum, and while these major players were taking the trips and receiving the gifts and not reporting them, but there were major players around them that had seen the trips and are responsible, probably, for having prepared expense reports and other reporting, and so, you know, there are opportunities, if there is a culture of whistle blowing, and i think it's an important data point that commissioner lee brought in, despite the allegations that have surfaced, and the arrests

and the guilty pleas, the number of calls to the ethics commission did not go up. so i think it would be helpful to hear from miss gage on what she sees as the opportunities and the challenges ahead in the compliance work. >> okay. before we -- before we do that, i'm going to give commissioner bush an opportunity to respond to my query as to whether or not anyone had a specific motion that they wanted to make, and then, i'm happy to invite miss gage to respond to your question. commissioner bush? >> yes. the motion i would like to make it for the staff to prepare for the commission's use a list of outstanding issues with benchmarks and timetables for action on them. for example, at the last meeting, the controller's office said that there are

currently no requirements that prohibit a debarred or suspended contractor from making contributions or making behest payments. if you're suspended and not contracting, apparently, the door is open for you to go ahead and do it, which is proposterous. the report called for an action on lobbyists, which has not happened, so if you could create a list for the specific steps that are outlined in either the b.l.a. report or the controller's or the stuff that's come from the commission of a timetable or deadline for submission of either of those action items, or if you want to present a policy calendar that

says, in february, we will do this, in march, we will do that, that will give us a sense that things are moving forward. i say that from my experience working in the mayor's office. in 1990, we had major discussion about changing the culture at the police department. that is tha that happened 30-something years, and we're still having discussions. you can't just say we're going to do this, and outline in broad terms, what that means. >> thank you, commissioner bush, for that comment. i just would note that, in the report, i think number 9, we plan to bring a report in january back to the commission with an update on the b.l.a. items skprks happy to include that detailed information for you so that you have a sense of the momentum that is, in fact, happening. thank you.

>> okay. i'm going to -- we are going to run out of time for commissioner chiu to hear rachel gage speak to the issue that commissioner chiu raised, so i would like to just detour to that -- >> i was making a motion. did i get a second on that? >> i'm sorry. if it's okay, your motion is still pending on the floor, and we're going to come back, if it's all right with you. >> okay. i just need to clarify. >> yeah. i should have said that. i'm just going to defer discussion and action on your motion. it's just that it's 11:10, and i did want to give rachel a chance to speak to the question that commissioner chiu asked,

and then, we'll come back to our item -- or the motion. ra rachel, please. >> thank you. good morning, chair chiu -- or commissioner chiu. good to see you all this morning, and thank you so much for your question. graez question, and i can tell you that, you know, in the engagement and compliance division, we have a unique opportunity to interface with our regulated community quite a bit. obviously, we wear the hat as advice givers, but also in our filing officer capacity, and so we are, you know, currently tracking, you know, the types of advice questions that we get, and also looking for -- to evaluate and track the types of discrepancies and issues that we are -- we are seeing with -- with filings and looking for intends and opportunities to

further educate our stakeholders. and in that, you know, because of the role we're in, we are consistently sending out different types of reminders, compliance information, educational correspondence to the regulated community for matters of, you know, different filing deadlines that are coming up, and also to remind them consistently of their obligations, both recording obligations and also the roles that support those requirements. and so currently, we are looking for opportunities to expand our consolidated outreach. for example, monthly, we reach out to our lobbyists, for

example, and we're consistently looking for opportunities to also educate lobbyists on other requirements or laws that may apply to them and consolidate those efforts. we -- executive director pelham mentioned the election payments, correspondence that we have going out this afternoon. that is an opportunity for us to look for opportunities to remind supervisors, elected officials, those officials, and department heads now, with the -- as a result of the mayor's directive of their obligations reporting under the behest reporting, but also to remind them of their duties and goals. we are always looking for opportunities to expand our educational resource library, which consists of guides and fact sheets and so forth, and attach those to those correspondence -- e-mail

correspondence that go out. so again, always looking to expand and utilize our opportunities where we actually have, you know, very targeted e-mail correspondence and outreach going out and, at the very least, to remind folks of their obligations, but also to initiate conversations. you know, unfortunately, we don't have the opportunity right now, due to staffing issues, to have those in-depth conversations with different departments, those departments who may have, you know, specific duties or job responsibilities that could impose additional, you know, opportunities to perhaps, you know, engage in potentially unlawful activity and to understand what those -- what those job duties entail and

look for opportunities to kind of customize our training in our discussions with those departments, and that's what we would be looking to do through ethics at work, is just to sit down and have those in-depth conversations with those different departments, whether it be different of real estate, those departments that are heavily engaged in contracting, to have a more comprehensive approach and custom approach to the types of trainings that we developed that are specifically for those types of positions and job duties. so that, again, that is what we'll be looking to do once we have additional staff on hand. but for now, with the resources that we do have, we're looking for opportunities to look for different trends, whether it come through the advice line or

through other methods and our outreach, and combining it to remind groups, and so we'll continue to do that work. >> thank you very much. that was very helpful. >> sure. >> yeah, thank you. rachel. i'm assuming that you are, as mr. pierce mentioned, you also have opportunity to coordinate with other folks who are in the city attorney's office or possibly the folks who are doing the investigations in the controller's office to people in h.r. who administer the statement of incompatible activities. as you said, the more you can consolidate your outreach and

layer all the different subject matter that folks are -- need to be aware of and in compliance with, so i appreciate it. it's got to be a lot harder to do that with everybody working in their little silo on-line. we appreciate your efforts in that regard because it does, whatever, take a village to address those kind of compliance and culture issues. >> i want to return, then, quickly, to commissioner bush's motion, which would be to direct staff to compile a list of outstanding issues, which i think is pretty broad, so i

think we need to leave that somewhat to the director's understanding -- >> i was going to say, issues, based on the recommendations from the b.l.a., controller, and commission. >> okay. from the b.l.a., controller, and commission, and presenting timetables for addressing those specific matters. and i think we heard from executive director pelham that she is already, you know, incorporating time lines and setting priorities for her staff. i'm going to second that motion on the assumption that this is

just bringing forward something that she is already incorporating in her management of the department. and i have a motion and a second, and now, i need to ask the moderator to call the roll. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. a motion has been made and seconded -- >> commissioner lee, is your hand up? >> no. >> okay. all right. >> clerk: a motion has made and seconded. i will now call the roll. [roll call] >> clerk: it's five votes in the affirmative and zero votes opposed. the motion is approved unanimously.

>> okay. commissioners, i am planning on taking a break before we move back to agenda item 5, unless we can wait another seven minutes before commissioner chiu has to be temporarily excused, but i think this is a good breaking point, if that's okay with everyone, so let's all plan on being back here -- it's 11:19 right now. -- at 11:30, so you have 11 minutes to eat an early lunch. i'm see you back here at 11:30, >> i'm back in. now here we go. and let's see if we can get back in gear here. >> chair ambrose: i'm going to start by calling agenda item 5,

and so forgive me for a minute while i also try and to stop this from bouncing up and down. hold on just a sec. let me go backwards. all right, agenda item 5, staff informational presentation and discussion regarding form 700 e-filing for all projects. for all -- i mean, i think that my -- agenda is cut off here. anyway, i want to ask director if you could introduce this presentation. thank you. >> thank you, chair ambrose. i'll simply turn it over, and after reminding the commission this is an item that we had carried forward from last month and we ran out of a bit of time and so we're glad to have rachel back for this meeting following the budget adoption on august

1st, our project went back on track and so now we're moving as expeditiously as we can for a january 2022 launch date of the final program. so, rachel, if you're on deck to walk through some brief slides that give you an in-depth feel for the work that's underway to get us to that time period and that project in place. so that we have public disclosure filings for those other designated filers. with that let me turn it over to rachel and give her the floor. thank you. >> thank you, executive director pelham. and thank you chair ambrose and commissioners. again, good to be with you this morning. and as was previously mentioned, i wanted to take a few minutes this morning to provide an overview and project status update on the form 700 e-filing for all projects. the slides that i'm going to share momentarily are included in your materials. so in the interest of time i'm going to keep my overview brief,

however, i'm available thereafter should you have any questions. excuse me one minute while i queue up the presentation. can everyone see that okay? >> looks great, rachel. >> okay, great. forgive me for one moment. sorry about this. i had some technical -- technical difficulties.

okay, can everyone see that okay? sorry about that. >> yes, it's very clear. >> okay, great. so this first slide offers an overview of a project life cycle and the programmatic work camp involved in implementing a city-wide program of this scale. shading indicates that a deliverable has been completed. so you will notice quite a bit of work has been accomplished to date and the bulk of the work that remains consists pri primay of data migration to the system, andout and reach and training and publishing training materials and content. also under the legislative category you will see that we still have the biannual review and adoption and the subsequent conflict of interest code update

that is also on tap. and we do anticipate that to become completed in the coming weeks and the conflict of interest code updated some time probably in january. and so that will also result in some obviously updating to our designated filing -- designated filers list, which we have underway right now and coordinating that with the departments as well to ensure that we have the most current designated filer list to migrate over to net file later next year. i think that is some kind of share that we plan to do with that migration. slide two we have a comprehensive training plan in place for both the departmental filing officers and designated filers which will consist of several components. first, the e-learning curriculum which will consist of a series of how-to micro tutorials.

each ideally will be 10 minutes or less. which will allow learners to pace themselves and also give the option to complete the training over several days as opposed to, you know, on a single day. which we're hoping that in turn will reduce information overload. tutorials will be intuitive and have guided systems where applicable. and training is mandatory for filing officers and is required to be completed before the access to the net file system is granted. and then, finally, we will be leveraging the city's learning management system which will allow us to track training progress and integrate surveys and extract attendance and performance metrics. so we'll be looking forward to working -- collaborating with the city controller's office who oversees the s.f. learning platform which is a learning management system, to upload -- to get our trainings launched

into that program. and so that will be something that is fairly new to us but that coordination is underway. next we have our instructor led q. and a. sessions which is currently in practice. this is something that we do routinely annually and usually the months preceding the annual filing season. this has been in coordination with the city attorney's office, usually they are present. in the past we have done these trainings in person but, obviously, the trainings will be held remotely, probably over microsoft teams for the foreseeable future. but it will be an interactive session, meaning the participants will also be able to engage us during the virtual meetings and to ask questions and so forth. and in addition to answering participant questions in real-time, these sessions allow for us to do a deeper dive into the form 700 schedules, cover

common doing and don'ts and provide fact-based scenarios and examples. so they're usually pretty in-depth and involved. in the past we have not had the type of participation from participants that we would like. i think that what we're hoping is that having these now being done over m.s. teams virtually that it will allow for more participation amongst filing officers and filing officers. we do divide these sessions, so we have one that is specific for filing officers. so, you know, it's much more administrative friendly, more about where, when and how as opposed to the sessions that, again, we do a deep dive into the schedules and common questions and offer a lot of examples and scenarios that filers face when thinking about or considering what they need to file on the form 700 statement.

also we are developing -- well, actually underway and developing user guides and fact sheets as well. so we'll have user define guides and we'll have one that is dedicated to filing officers and we'll also have one dedicated to filers. and these will be very comprehensive in nature. so, again, they will address the when, and the why and the how. and also offer visual aids. so, for instance, the filing officer training will not only inform the filing officer how to accomplish a specific task in the system, but also when to do it and why. san francisco has a few -- i'll say unique scenarios that come up here and there where it would determine whether or not somebody has to file and when someone has to file, for example, would be the state

considers the city of san francisco to be the agency. and so if you have a filer and an employee and an existing employee transferring from one position to another -- to another department -- that is within the city and county of san francisco, they actually do not have to file a leading office statement at their old department or a statement at the new department. it's treated as a transfer so there would be some updating that needs to happen, obviously, the position would need to be updated. and if the filing category changes as a result of the new position that has to be identified as well. so these are caveats that filing officers have to be aware of. so that is something, you know, that we would definitely cover in the filing officer guide. and then the fact sheets will supplement those user guides. so we will call out specific -- i would say probably more scenarios in these fact sheets and we would offer those, you know, as a supplemental tool to

user guides. fact sheets are, you know, friendly in terms -- they're usually much more condensed and have a more refined focus, easily, you know, easier to digest and read. and also easier to share. you know, over email and so forth. so we will definitely be including those as well in our informational resources. one thing that i want to add -- the filer training -- so the e-learning training curriculum will be mandatory for filing officers. but we will not make it mandatory for filers. however, we will work with the departments to encourage it, and, you know, because the departments do have the authority to require their designated filers to take these trainings. we have some leverage with filing officers because we are essentially adding or providing them with admin access to the net file system. in doing so we can require them to take a series of trainings, a

bit more difficult with filers -- with designated filers. but -- >> chair ambrose: can i interrupt you for just a second because i have a question about the city employees who will be going through this program to convert -- and this is really the question -- all of these individuals are currently filling out the same form on paper, so what we're really doing is just moving them into a computer-based form. so your program is that you're going to train the person within each department who those individual filers would reach out to for assistance on how to navigate the software program and then that person will then in turn about able to answer the hundred people in the department about their particular -- is

that your kind of tiered approach there? >> yes, absolutely. that is the approach. the filing officer will designate the filing officer will change substantially with the transition to e-filing. they will -- i mean, currently what they do is they disseminate information that usually is initiated by s.f. commission -- staff -- to the filers as they then circulate -- you know, a paper form usually through email to their filers. and then those filers have a deadline to return the paper filing to -- with the right investigate -- to their designated filing officer. with the inception of the net file system, those filing officers will now be required to create new filer accounts when they have, obviously, new positions coming in that are required to file.

and they also have to maintain those filing systems. they will -- the system provides for several different administrative tools that allows you to track the different notes and things of that sort within a filer account. it allows you to assess late fees. it also streamlines the 20% requirement review process, so 20% of statements that are filed on time must be reviewed by filing officers. all statements, 100% of statements that are filed late, have to be reviewed. they require a full review which moans that you're reviewing every page of the form, all of the schedules, making sure that information -- you know, the is are dotted and the ts are crossed, so to speak. and so, you know, we will be emphasizing a lot of that information in our training -- trainings as well and in our informational guides to ensure they know exactly what type of information they should be

looking for during this review process. how to administer that in the net file system, and so forth. and then we are also providing some guidance on non-filer protocol, what that looks like in terms of noticing the filers. and registering late fees should the departments, you know, opt to fine late filers. and then how to refer those late filers to the enforcement authority after 90 days. and then the enforcement authority for designated filers will be the ethics commission enforcement division. >> chair ambrose: um-hmm, and then quickly because we do still have the agenda. this universe of people that are required to file form 70 is are essentially people in policy and decision-making roles at the top levels of city government. these are the people that we're trying to get to help to improve the culture in our organization.

so as part of the communication -- and i know that i think that a lot of us are interested in looking at your implementation, your timetable for getting this finally online by next year i guess, so i'm going to let you move on to that. but as you're going through those next parts of the presentation, if you can just let us know when you might be communicating with that universe of folks and whether or not we can add in more of a pep talk about ethics work in that context. because i don't want to miss an opportunity to communicate with that key group about what our role is that we're here and we're supporting them, you know, that see something, say something, whatever we want to put in that. and i'll let you go back to your presentation, but that's something that i'd like you to

speak to. >> sure, absolutely. let me move on to slide two. now slide two, chair ambrose, should mention kind of our timetable for implementing this program. this offers a protective timetable for timelines for 2021. and i'll just kind of go over a few of the milestones here. the milestone service has significant reference points and more of the date of completion on major phases of work. first here -- obviously, in january we have our 1840, and our 2042 which are underway and this is the client support position that will help with much of the implementation work that's still remains with the form 700 program. but also to help to provide client support to filing officers and filers once the program is rolled out in january

2022. so the 1840 is again a critical role and, again, hiring is underway then. and then the 1042 is the implementation system, which is also an integral part of the form 700. the pre-rollout work that still remains in terms of working with the net file vendor to ensure that data is migrated -- not just the designated filing officers but also the filing officers -- excuse me -- the designated filers but the filers administering the system and that information has to still be all migrated over. it's going to be -- need to be overhauled to some extent because of the conflict of interest code update. so we do anticipate, obviously, new positions being added effective next year, so we want to make sure that information is up to date before that date it

is migrated over. and so then, you know, in march we will start really, really focusing on developing our user guides issue and, again, the 1840 position is an intgreat inl part working with me and the staff to really develop those user guides. i think that these user guides are going to serve as not only a framework for staff, ethic staff, to determine what our e-learning curriculum needs to be compromised of, but also it's going to serve as just resources for everything having to do with the system and the law in general. and so these are going to be really, really critical. and then in early spring i guess, late spring, we move into developing the online training modules. and these will be conducted and we will be using a software authoring tool that, again, allows for several different interactive elements to be incorporated in addition to

real-time software simulations. but also assessments as well. and we hope to integrate surveys where appropriate as well. and so we will be asking for feedback from learners while they're taking these trainings. so, i mean, that's going to be something where we can consistently look for opportunities to improve. one thing that i wanted to mention is that the online tutorials -- although they'll be mandatory before the system rolls out -- they will be available on-demand indefinitely. so, again, we'll always be looking for opportunities to enhance those and to improve upon -- improve upon those modules. so in june, chair ambrose, you had asked about our outreach efforts. and the bulk of the outreach efforts begin in june of next year. we have had some preliminary meetings with select departments. i would say that probably over a year ago we met with

representatives from the public utilities commission, the controller's offic, the city administrator's office and i believe the treasurer's office. so it was a pretty -- a pretty good sampling of the departments that met with us. and they had several questions, obviously, for us that we were kind of to address. some we weren't because we didn't necessarily have the answers for some of their questions initially. and so we looked to get back to those departments and address some of those questions that were posed to us that we were not able to answer in real time in the form of an f.a.q. that will accompany an initial announcement. a formal announcement that will go out city-wide to all department heads and filing officers of record announcing the transition from paper filing toto e-filing. so with that initial announcement, again, we'll have the f.a.q. addressing those

questions that were posed to us from departments and then also some additional information that we think that the departments will probably want to know. we also intend to include a filing officer fact sheet. i think that this is going to be key because i mentioned earlier that, you know, filing officers currently, you know, they disseminate information that is initiated by the ethics commission staff and then they receive form 700 statements and they file them. so moving forward -- and, obviously, their responsibilities are going to expand tremendously. and we want to ensure or we want to make sure that we inform those department heads who elect or designate filing officers within a department of the change in these responsibilities as we want to give them the opportunity to determine whether or not they have the staff currently -- the resources that they have will accommodate the

need, but also that the person that is currently designated in that role is the appropriate person moving forward. so we want to make sure that we provide them with, you know, the information with regards to how those changes on that and that responsibility, you know, how they will change so they have an opportunity to make changes at that point in time. and once we've had some time to digest that information, we will then have another coordinated effort going out to those department heads offering them the opportunity to elect or designate a filing officer at that point in time. and i think that right now i think that we have it kind of -- we're hoping to do it, and after that june -- that initial announcement in june. so somewhere june/july, we hope to have a follow-up and an opportunity to update the filing officer roster. so we're projecting that to be -- to happen some time in july. and that's going to be a

critical milestone because that will determine who we require to take the mandatory training. and then essentially commission net file credentials to that group. so that's going to, again, this -- these are two critical outreach components that will, you know, really be important moving forward. in august, we have the net file data upload. so by that time -- oop -- i left something out that i think that is key and probably also addresses one of your questions, chair ambrose. so once we have an updated filing roster, we would reach out to those filing officers to update the filing roster as well. so that gives enough time for the conflict of interest code to be updated following the biannual process. it will also ensure that we're working with the right individual within departments.

so we will be working with them, providing them probably proactively with a list of who we currently have as filers for their departments and give them an opportunity at that point to change and add and remove. because we are planning to do that initial migration of designated filers and send that file system, but, thereafter, the filers are responsible for adding new filers as they come on and terminating filers as they leave. >> chair ambrose: i will ask right now to see if there are any questions from commissioners because we do need to get to a number of other items on the calendar and i think that because your graphics are so good that it's pretty easy to see the program i think, you know, obviously you set out a pretty intensive work program for yourself there. so we're behind you 100% in trying to meet this agenda.

because i think that everyone agrees that this absolutely -- once we get those positions that we, you know, required to move forward with this we've got deadlines. but, anyway, any questions from the commissioners? if not, i'm going to actually to jump ahead and ask our moderator to see if there's any public comment on 700 filing presentation. and then before we wrap up, rachel, i'm going to come back to you for any concluding remarks. so i wanted to get the public comment announcement going there if you could, ronald. >> madam chair, we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue. for those already on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted. if you have just joined this meeting we're currently on the public discussion on the agenda item 5, staff informational presentation and discussions regarding form 700 e-filing for

all project. if you are have not already done so, press star, 3, to be added to the public comment queue. you will have three minutes to provide public comment unless you're online with an interpreter. you will hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. please, stand by. madam chair, we do not have any callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: all right, public comment is closed on item number 5. and, rachel, is there anything

else -- i see commissioner bush has a question so i'm going to allow that question first. and then get back to you. okay, commissioner bush? >> commissioner bush: thank you. am i muted? no, i'm not muted. >> chair ambrose: no, you're good. >> commissioner bush: i wanted to know whether or not we could have a list of people who file 700s now and then update it as the list changes. and post that on the ethics page. even though we're not going to have the actual filings posted until january, at least for now the public could know who is it that files and where can you get a copy of what they filed. can we do that now? >> i -- so we do -- we do inform the public of where they can access filing -- not designated

officer filing forms. we do publish the filing officers and the department heads for each department and the information so they know who to contact if they wanted a copy of a paper filing from a designated filer. in terms of the filer's -- actual designated filers to date, the list that we have to date, i don't think that currently we publish that information. i'd have to check, obviously, to ensure that is something that we can, in fact, do. but i don't -- i don't foresee any issues with that. >> commissioner bush: so if i wanted to find out the filing of the mayor's chief of staff, for example, or people in the city attorney's office who have filed, i should be able to know who they file with and how to get a copy of it? >> correct, yes. so, obviously, there would be some cross-referencing needed

right now, somebody would have to reference the conflict of interest code to see who is required to file. but if they knew specifically within each department -- but if they knew specifically who they wanted to obtain a copy of, we do have a published list of filing officers and department heads for each department currently on our website. so they'd know who to contact. >> i think that would be very helpful to the public to know that not only is it still coming as a virtual database, but the information that they can reach out for now. so that's why i'm asking if we can do that and you're saying that we could, you think that we can? >> again, i would have to confirm that, but in terms of if we're able to do that, i mean we have the means to do it. it's whether or not we can do it. i'm not aware -- i should say that i'm not certain of, so i definitely have to check on that. but, again, we do currently --

we do currently publish the list of filing officers, designated filing office for each department so that the public has, you know, they know who to contact if they want to obtain copies. but i don't -- nothing comes to mind now in terms of the law or that would refrain us or prevent us from being able to publish that list. >> commissioner bush: another question is when you put out your guide, are you making sure that the public is informed if circumstances change that they need to amend their filing? it's not just filing on april 1st, that if there's a change in their marital status or their property ownership or their investments, that is significant enough that -- and then their forms instead of waiting to april? >> yes, we will address amendment rules and requirements. and inform -- the goal is not to

leave anything uncovered in these guides. the more comprehensive they are i think would benefit all parties involved, including the ethics commission staff. >> commissioner bush: thank you. along those lines, is there flexibility to require more detailed information, for example, under "gifts," we now require form 700 filers to file if they've taken a trip or received money for a trip. but there's no place that i can see where you can see what was the trip and whether it was accomplished and all of the rest of those kinds of information that does appear in other jurisdictions. the same thing goes with on behalf of payments that are actually not directed to the officer but are requested by the

officer. and so, therefore, are relevant. and then there's a local ordinance that requires disclosure of relationships, even though uncompensated with people who are part of the regulated entity but interact with you in your industry as well as in the uncompensated capacity. that is a citation that the government put that i think that i have sent on to director pom and chair ambrose earlier. are the forms flexible enough to ensure that there's a one-stop-serves-all for that kind of information? >> chair ambrose: i think that i'm going to interject here because i'm pretty sure that we asked this question and had it answered that the actual form 700 being a state-mandated form,

that is the confines of the form 700 do not be amended at the local level. we could, of course, create our own form 701, and amalgamate information i presume in that realm. i'm not sure that it would take us all the way back through the meet and confirm process if we imposed that on all city employees. or it's just a matter of amending the government conduct code to identify where that information should be available. but -- and we do have a city attorney -- i know that they were tag teaming because of some other commission meetings, but i don't know if they have any comments because i recall commissioner bush asked that question previously about our

ability to amend the form 700 requirement. >> commissioner bush: yeah, actually, those are all requirements that are required by law. it's just as you say a question of where it is required to be disclosed. >> chair ambrose: um-hmm. we ought to think about -- i mean, because those things -- i think that some of them -- there is a big portfolio of work to do. some of that is maybe disclosed through their statement of incompatible activities and their request to the department head for authorization to have a professional relationship outside of work that may need to be disclosed but is, nevertheless, authorized or -- not authorized -- but, anyway, i'll let rachel and/or a city attorney that wanted to comment. my screen is not on grid view so

i'm not seeing. go ahead. >> hi. you are correct. it is state form and so we are not able to modify that form. it would require us to, you know, to identifying that we wanted to have a supplemental form prepared. >> chair ambrose: okay. i just wanted to clarify that. and, rachel, i did want to ask you to -- if you had any comments that we cut you off from by trying to move the agenda forward. but i did want to both thank you for all of your work on this and all of your good work generally being that link with all of the city departments and the staff who we want to encourage ethics that work with -- but, anyway, go ahead if there's anything that you think that we should be

listening to. >> no, actually, that really concludes the oral component of my presentation. i had hoped that the slides kind of, you know, told the story on their own. so i'm glad that we accomplished that. so, again, always -- always available to answer any questions or expand on anything. >> chair ambrose: okay. with that i'm going to actually close agenda item number -- where are we -- 5. and call agenda item number 6. and that is the discussion of possible action on ethics commission draft racial equity action plan. i would like to ask executive director pelham to present and i want to start off by saying thank you for your work on this. there's obviously -- this is not a one off product. we look forward to working with you on the implementation, but i

think that it was a good effort to date. >> thank you, thanks, chair ambrose. we -- the item here is something that is different for the commission that we haven't seen -- something that doesn't specifically deal with ethics and lobbying in most cases. i would suggest that this is a core of what we do and it's important and timely for us, given that we're engaged in our hiring plans for this year in particular. so this item -- there's a brief background memo that i provided as well as a more exhaustive draft plan attached to it. and this is work that the city launched in july 2019. as the memo indicated, with the board of supervisors introducing legislation in response to the city's growing racial disparities as a means to address structural and institutional racism in san francisco city government.

and i see san francisco as a leader in dealing with racial equity issues much more proactively. the plan is attached because we want to make sure that you and the public has an opportunity at this point to take a look at it and to see what our work involves. but also if the commission chooses and would like to take action on it in some way on the agenda, that it's on your agenda to enable to you do that at this point. this is a draft. and it's due by december 31st to the office of racial equity. and in the context of our work together as a staff leadership team and the hiring managers we've had some consultations around this and we have put in some action items that reflect the work that we have done in the past hires that we're continuing to do and this hiring process that build off other areas beyond the hiring and onboarding process. the specifics of this have been shared with our staff currently. you know, one of the things that

i would have hoped that we would have been able to do by this point in drafting this -- this work -- is being able to share it with much more in-depth focus among our entire staff team. and simply we have not been able to do that. but as we move into the coming year this is a doiment that is a living document, intended to continue to expand and evolve as our work does in this area. it particularly as we expect to bring on new staff opboarding in the first quarter of calendar year 2021, this is going to be something that guides our operations in a normalized way. and that also is something that we can really look to as kind of our organizational chapter in many ways to make sure that we're being the best organization that we can and we're doing everything that we can to make sure that we are taking steps to address racial equity in ways that we have the ability to do. one of the things that i'd

highlight for you in the document, you can see that it's broken down -- this is a template prepared by the office of racial equity and all departments from the same template. we've had input from d.h.r. and also some input from our city attorney colleagues and a meeting with the director next week to get further input before we submit a final draft. the template might be changing slightly but the content is what you are seeing here. the departments are asked to address work in their areas of hiring and recruitment, retention and staff promotion, and discipline and separation and diverse leadership and management and professional development. and inclusion -- cultures of inclusion and belonging is also identified. and lastly under section 7, boards and commissions, so that the departments that have working commissions, you know, to the extent that we have

actionable items that we have identified at this point, they are there. i would say this, again, it's a beginning document and it's a draft. we look forward to getting further input from the staff between now and the time that it's submitted and mostly to really start incorporating it and vetting it in our work in a more full way and broader way as we move into 2021. i think that i could pause there. i am happy to answer any specific questions that you might have about the work that we're doing or the draft itself. but, again, i wanted to provide the opportunity to have it and some of the commissions have any feedback or input that you have from your experience. and also to just to ensure that this is something that we'll continue to be working on as the calendar year 2021 rolls around with the expanding work and staff that we anticipate at that point. so i'm happy to pause there and to answer any questions that you might have or your comments and feedback. >> chair ambrose: i see hands up from commissioner lee and commissioner bush. if you know which one of you is

first i'm willing to defer to you. otherwise, commissioner lee, do you want to speak? >> vice-chair lee: thank you, madam chair. and i wanted to thank the staff and the director for this really timely and for this document. i wanted to say that i'm glad to hear that this is going to be a living document that we will continue to work on. and i'm glad to hear that the staff has a lot of input to help to put this together. i think that the key is that this should not be a number

counting document. i would hope that we would take a bold step to really drill into the broader issues on racial inequality and one of them is the institutional and instructional bias and racism that still exists. so without really understanding it and attacking it head on, it would be harder for us to do incremental stats. so i think that there will be ongoing interaction with the staff and bring in outside stakeholders too -- i shouldn't say outside -- external stakeholders because that's the community that we could really

benefit from their areas of experience. and we keep talking about building ethical culture within this city, government and, you know, employees and i really hope that with this that we could really build and create and build on the racially inclusive and ethical culture within the commission and also to share with other departments. and to see discussions and conversations to create a safe space for the staff to start talking about sharing their insurance, because only through that can we really tackle, you know, the structural issues and the institutional issues that

each of us bring to the commission. and, again, i know that the commission is not going to look at this as merely a numbers game, but, definitely, an ongoing living document. so i wanted to say to the staff and the director, thank you for putting this together. >> thank you, commissioner lee, and i will recognize commissioner bush. >> commissioner bush: thank you, thank you, chair ambrose. and in days gone by there was an additional group of city workers who spoke languages in addition to english. is that policy still exist? >> yes, i believe that there arr languages, i understand that there is something -- or has been something, i believe that

there is some sort of a stipend or for those who are certified to translate can accomplish or can secure. i will get that information back to you. >> commissioner bush: i'm wondering because the relationship between that and the equity policy that we're looking at, because if it encourages more -- more participation from people with different backgrounds than mine, that might assist in meeting some of these objectives. that's one question that i have. and the second question is that the entire plan seems focused on city workers and city employees. and not on the public. so to what extent are we acting in an equity plan to ensure that the public is included? so that when you have hearings that there's translation

services available, or other facilities to allow free participation. we know now -- i will just interject -- we know now by surveys done by rec and park division that those parks that are in lower income neighborhoods get less services than the ones -- that is by rec and park's own surveys. >> commissioner bush, your question is a good one, but clearly this plan is designed to first i would say in my experience in the committee to make sure that we're doing what we can to effectively to ensure that we're taking better steps to achieve equity. not just for hiring purposes but externally for services that we are providing to the city. for us this reflects the steps where we currently are and what we're able to do and that is

primarily at this stage in the hiring and the outlining of how we as an organization operate together. i notice that the city attorney -- has been raising her hand and she may have additional comments on the background for the framework and maybe on the language issue that was raised. so i want to make sure that she has an opportunity to answer as well. >> sure, director pelham. thank you. i thought they would just provide an answer to the bilingual question, what we're hearing since i do know it. there's a pay premium for the city staff who do speak more than one language so that is still in effect and if you are in job classification that is eligible for premium pay for that reason, you can qualify for that. as to the scope of the tempt late and the plan itself -- template and the plan itself, i'm afraid that i'm not -- i wasn't closely involved in

development, so i can't speak to sort of the public outward facing issues which are great, and the commentary and things it should be considered. from my vantage point this does appear to be focused on the internal workings of the department and recruitment that promotes racial equity and diversity and that commissions also reflect those same objectives. so happy to review it further and to get back to you. but that's my impression is that it's more of an inward facing document as opposed to outward. >> chair ambrose: so i want to actually jump in here because i think that while -- while both efforts are essential, that we apply those -- those object itches to our own operations and functions. we too are public serving

department, and so in terms of how we engage with stakeholders and people in political campaigns and public finance and outreach, education, is that everybody, you know, getting the same same questions answered, etc. because we're lucky enough to have four positions that we're hiring for right now -- and i don't know if you wanted to do it now or when we get to the executive director's report and you speak briefly about the hiring, because this is an opportunity to put into practicr now of the racial equity plan that speaks to your outreach, i'm particularly want to encourage aggressive, active and unique forms of outreach to

reach to individuals, say, who might have been active in the, you know, the political campaigns or just, you know, whatever -- whatever way that we can, you know, get to some of the -- i don't know, clubs -- the different groups in the city tend to organize themselves in with respect to campaigns. we have seen some of those, you know, maybe not somebody who has got a conflict of interest because of their political activity, but in any event, even outreach to those groups because they in turn might know people from institutes or academia who might be interested in one or more of those positions. so, anyway, just to let you know how we're going to -- how you're going to apply that element of the plan. >> if i could just add a point in there to assist with

discussion. as i look through the enforcement actions of the past few years, a number of them involved the disclosures that are in publications that are not english language publications. notably, chinese language publications. and i'm not sure if there's good guidance for explaining type size and all of the rest of the requirements that we have in languages other than english because i don't know how you do type size in chinese characters, for example. but people have serious fines for that. and so to what extent are our guides in languages other than english, especially knowing that our outreach and campaigns are going t to publications in spanh or chinese or other languages. thank you.

>> as you can see from the draft plan, the section that speaks of hiring and recruitment has several items on there that speak to making sure that we're doing -- as part of our hiring plan, as broad an outreach as possible. we have worked with the department of human resources and looking at diversity and inclusion working group to do outreach specifically through them. we ourselves are sort of looking at all of the lists and all of the contacts that we have that come through our office, we want to make sure that this week we're getting that information out to those audiences broadly. and we need -- we need the public and we need your help, right? and there may be other organizations or other networks that if you're aware of them, we want to make sure that people are notified. we certainly send it out to the council and the government ethics laws and i believe that they're posting that this this morning. so that goes to the usual

suspects -- recruiting is going beyond that. so we don't have an exhaustive list to give you today because the job announcements we just posted on friday. we tried collecting that information leading up to the posting and we're going to continue in over the next couple weeks to make sure that we're getting information out as well as we can. so, you know, with many things we're sort of in the moment doing this and i'm happy to, again, to keep you posted as we come into january with where we were able to reach out so that it is a diverse applicant pool as possible across many fronts. >> chair ambrose: okay, thank you. >> and the other to commissioner bush's specific question about translations and materials, i think that one of the growing frustrations that i have is the -- i would say the bureaucratic nature and the costs of trying to get documents -- timely translated to help to reach out. i think that the city has a lot of work that we could all collectively do on that. so we have just updated our web

page that sometimes requiring translation and that takes longer than most of us would think that is most helpful. but we're trying to get it in the hands of audiences who might find it useful and relevant and a source of great, terrific people to join the staff for the work that we have in front of you. >> chair ambrose: commissioner lee. >> vice-chair lee: thank you, madam chair. this question may be for (indiscernible). following up on the staff hiring, is it possible within the city law that you could put the preference in terms of hiring and recruitment? so, for instance, if we know that a potential number of the city's operations is, you know,

the first language is not english. so can we put in certain job descriptions that for someone who has a cantonese background, that could be you know, not a preference but maybe added consideration? can that be done? if we could justify -- let's say, if we look at the ethics commission, if, you know, we know that 33% of the population is chinese speaking and we don't happen to have a chinese speaker on staff, so can we put in, you know, as part of the job description that, you know, preference is given to someone who is bilingual in chinese?

>> there are, obviously, local, state and federal laws regarding discrimination and non-discrimination in hiring, right? so if there was a job-related reason why we needed someone who spoke a particular language for a position, then for that reason we could hire someone who has a particular skillset. to otherwise say that this position is specifically reserved for someone who just fills this demographic, we couldn't do that. that would be discriminatory. but if we had a job related reason, let's say that we had a specific program that was going to engage in outreach to the cantonese community locally and we really needed someone who spoke cantonese, then that would be considered sort of an exception to that rule and we would be permitted to do that. >> vice-chair lee: so you cannot even say that this additional skill, a computer skill or what

have you -- you cannot say that that if that person has the additional skill in russian or spanish, you cannot list that as a preference? not that you're going to hire that person, but that person would be given additional -- >> you can -- you can include it. if doing so is tied to what that person's job duties would be. so if we're hiring someone for the purpose of trying to promote outreach into the chinese-american community in san francisco, and that is going to be a skill that we need for that job classification, then it's permissible. what we couldn't do is to just say we want to hire someone that speaks this language and not have it connect to something related to their job duties. that could be seen as an impermissible preference, right? and someone could potentially sue the city to say they didn't

hire me because i didn't speak cantonese. and the exception is that was otherwise available doesn't apply because you didn't need to be able to speak cantonese to do the job. >> vice-chair lee: thank you. >> chair ambrose: i wanted to go ahead, ronald, and ask you to determine whether or not we have any public comments on this item. and i want to ask the executive director if you can make a note in your executive directory report as we go forward to, you know, to sort of include this as a regular update item as you continue to work with the team and the city, as you achieve

certain, you know, milestones with respect to the plan. i think that it is important to keep it front of mind. and then commissioner bush, you know, back to your point, as we move forward as well, whether it's with the trainings that rachel is going to be doing or the outreach that pat ford on stakeholder engagements that jeff peterson and his investigators have with the general public, i think that, again, as -- to quote or semi-quote commissioner chiu, culture eats strategy for lunch every day. we need to have a culture of keeping racial equity front of mind and thinking of ways in which we can better serve our objectives that we all obviously share. so i think that it would help if

you incorporated that as part of a sort of regular notation in the work that you're doing. because i know that you're doing the work and i think that it is important to talk about it and to keep everybody thinking about how we can improve on both fronts, internally and externally. ronald, any -- go ahead with your statements. >> madam chair, we're checking to see if there are callers in the queue. for those already on hold wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted. if you're just joining this meeting we're on the motion of agenda item number 6, discussion and possible action on ethics commission draft racial equity action plan. if you have not already done so, please press star, 3, to be added to the public comment queue. you will have three minutes to provide your public comment, six minutes if you're online with an interpreter. you will hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. please stand by.

as i'm checking, just a friendly reminder to all participants, if you are speaking and you are done speaking can you please mute yourself. everything from ruffling of papers to taking notes to coffee mugs, all of that can be heard dependent where your microphone is located. so just make sure that if you can mute once you're done speaking. thank you. madam chair, we have no callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: i would like to approve the plan and subject

to our continuing engagement on this issue, if i could have a motion and a second. >> i move. >> chair ambrose: okay, commissioner bush. can i have a second? commissioner lee. thank you very much. can you please call the roll. >> clerk: the motion has been made and seconded. i will now call the roll. [roll call] >> chair ambrose: let the record show that commissioner chiu from excused from this portion of the meeting. thank you. i'm sorry? yoirk we're -- i'm sorry, four votes in the affirmative. and commissioner chiu is being excused. so four votes in the affirmative and zero opposed to the motion

as approved unanimously. >> chair ambrose: thank you. all right, and i'm now going to skip over and call agenda item 8, and as soon as i get to the right item. so this will be a discussion of the monthly staff enforcement report including an overview of the proposed streamlined administrative resolution program process. mr. pierce, if you can make your presentation. thank you. >> sure, thank you, chair ambrose and the commissioners. so this month's report highlights the development in our efforts to revise what the commission adopted in 2013, which is called "the fixed penalty policy." and just to remind the commission that we approached you in august of last year with a slate of proposals regarding improvements to process that we

were developing at that time. among those improvements was an intention to examine and to likely revise both subjectively and procedureally that policy that the commission adopted in 2013. as you know that policy provides for a -- effectively a scheduled set of penalties for violations of five kinds in the campaign finance arena. it was a reasonably limited policy and the political practices commission as you may know has a streamlined program that is significantly more expansive than the one that san francisco adopted in 2013. so in august of 2019, when we brought our process improvements before the commission, the

commission rendered its support of staff plan to expand this policy. we came back to you in september 2019 with a rough outline of what that process would look like, implementing that process. since we have hosted interested persons meetings. we have conducted internal and external consultations about what the scope and the substantive changes to the program might include. and you'll recall also that when the budget and legislative analysts issued a report in august of this year that they also encouraged staff to continue with this plan to revise the policy and specifically they asked that we come back in january of 2021 with a proposal that we might put before you for your consideration and action. so we have continued to work in

that process to identify how this policy might best be re-examined and expanded. staff have now developed a draft set of regulations that will greatly expand and we hope to enhance our ability to revise an enumerated set of violations through a scheduled set of penalties. the aim as we said before is to provide greater transparency and predictability to regulate the community to reduce the amount of time that it might take to negotiate the outcome to certain kinds of matters and as a result enable the staff ideally to

focus investigative resources on the kind of allegations that matter most, the kinds of things that we were discussing earlier today and in agenda item 7. you know, as we have contemplated what each substantive changes might look like, we have also had to anticipate what -- what process we might use to implement and expand the policy. the term that we have adopted for that will be the streamline administrative resolution program, which will be the process implementation of a set of regulations that you can advise us on at a subsequent meeting but, of course, figuring out how to make this thing a reality entails a number of considerations, some of which

are involving staffing, some, you know, are just structural in nature. so all of the senior investigator eric willett is invited to join us at this time. eric has been overseeing the process to consider the substantive review of this program and he has prepared for you today a kind of proposal about what the process of implementing this system might look like. >> thank you for that introduction, jeffrey. i can share my screen here. that did not work. okay. try -- okay. my powerpoint slide can be viewed?

great. thank you, ronald. well, good afternoon, chair ambrose and commissioners and colleagues. i'm going to provide a brief description of the enforcement process used within the division and the integration of the streamlined administrative resolution program otherwise known as sarp. when the enforcement division considers allegations an intake manager will review the allegations to determine whether there are sufficient facts as alleged and whether the conduct alleged falls within the jurisdiction of the commission. at which time they'll either issue a dismissal or a referral to the appropriate agency or department, and if the facts as alleged in the conduct is alleged within the division's jurisdiction, that conduct can be considered within the sarp program, and at that time the matter will become a complaint and intake manager will forward it to the sarp program and

administrator. if the behavior is outside of the scope of those in the sarp program, the intake manager forwards the complaint to the main line program for review by the investigator within the main line program. which at time will conduct a preliminary investigation. that investigation is to determine whether or not there's something there for an open investigation to be warranted. and also whether or not the facts as alleged fall within the jurisdiction. if there's not enough there, or this is not within our jurisdiction, the matter will be dismissed or, again, referred to the appropriate agency or department. now the preliminary investigation may also determine that the conduct falls entirely within the sarp program at which time the main line investigator can forward the complaint back into the sarp program. upon receipt of a complaint, the sarp program administrator conducts an initial assessment

where they apply general eligibility guidelines and conduct specific guidelines. and if at which time the conduct exceeds that scope, which is is considered within the sarp program, sarp administrator may deem the matter ineligible for resolution within the sarp program and forward it back into the main line program. after initial assessment has been undertaken, the sarp program administrator engages with the respondent and notifying the respondent that they're the subject of an investigation and providing them with a sarp program overview and the sarp program administrator may tuls direct the respondent to take corrective action. this may come in the form of supplying the enforcement division with documentation, filing or amending statements or reports or other corrective action that can be taken that also includes such things as forfeiting contributions that were in excess muc of the limit. now after the corrective action

has been undertaken the sarp administrator reviews the actions and determines whether or not the effects here can be covered within the scope of the sar prve program. if not, the sarp program administrator can deem it ineligible with the resolution within sarp and forward it back into the main line program. after corrective action is taken and assessed the sarp program administrator will apply a resolution guideline. and there's also instances in which the respondent does not need to take action, at which time they can proceed directly to the application of the resolution guidelines. these guidelines can dictate that a warning letter is applicable, and that this warning letter is confidential and not a matter of public record, but the administrator will keep it on file and it can be considered an aggravating factor in any future enforcement matter with this particular respondent. if the sarp administrator determines that the guidelines do not allow for a warning

letter in this particular matter, a penalty may be in order at which time the sarp program administrator will assess the penalty and provide a package to the respondent in order to enter into a settlement process. now if the settlement process is unable to reach a successful resolution, the sarp program administrator may deem the matter ineligible for sarp resolution and forward it back into the mainland perform. instances where this is applicable are where a respondent refuses to accept liability, or they are unwilling to pay the penalty and then at which time they are sarp program and back into the main line program. upon completion, a stipulated agreement is provided for consent. for contrast, the items within the mainland program that make it through the preliminary investigations toward opening up an investigation, one will be opened and the main line program

investigator will conduct that investigation, and resolve the matter and either a complaint closure or with a resolution by commission action. now that could include a stipulated agreement, or it may also include a hearing on the merits. regardless of the stipulated agreement came through the sarp program or the mainland program resolution, a public announcement is made and the case resolution is posted to the enforcement division's website, a web page within the commission's website. that concludes my overview of the processes with the integration of the resolution program. and i'm available to answer any questions that you may have. and turn it back to you, commissioner ambrose. >> chair ambrose: all right, thank you very much for that. i think that's really helpful to see the sort of step-wise

process and understand that one way or the other the matter is going to be assessed, investigated and resolved and disclosed. so that's what we want to see. so my understanding, going back to you mr. pierce though, is that we're going to see more of the particulars about this probably at the february meeting? because i don't know if anyone else has noticed but we have a fairly short turnaround between today and the way that the calendar works. we're back again on january 8th. and i know that you had said in your staff report that you wanted to have a stakeholder meeting to talk about some of the -- the characteristics that would determine where a matter was referred. and i wholly support you

engaging with the stakeholder community before we make any decisions about this. so are there any other questions from commissioners? yvonne, i see your hand up -- up from before. first of all, i wan wanted to sy that commissioner chiu is back as of 12:44 and i'm glad that you were able to rejoin us. and so i'm going to give you a chance to speak first if you would. you're muted right now. >> commissioner chiu: thank you, chair ambrose. sorry, i had some technical difficulties getting back in. a question for about this -- this is very, very helpful. is there a category of violation that would could be and if

there's any fines attached to the time stamp on the filing and you could not just proceed in a more streamlined fashion and you get a parking ticket like me meter ran out and you have time to pay so that there's -- that type of violation could be put into this program where, i don't know, would you need to engage with the respondent? if it's late. and it may not be -- i don't mean to get into the gory details of how it all works and i use the broader question, is there a category of violations and if we hadn't thought about it, you know, could we examine whether or not there are matters

that could be dealt with on an almost quasi automated -- automated basis in order to free up really precious investigative time to focus on those -- those matters that are -- that are -- don't lend themselves readily to easy resolution. >> thank you, and i appreciate the question and i appreciate, chair ambrose, your notation in the report that what we're attempting to provide here is a preview of the process in advance of a substantive discussion that we intend to announce tomorrow. so we'll aim to distribute a notice about those stakeholder meetings tomorrow. when we do we'll attach the draft regulations to that which will provide the substantive details that you're asking about now, commissioner chiu. and --

>> commissioner chiu: i'll hold then -- so we don't have to go through. it. >> no, it's a good question and i'm happy to address it in brief. i would just add that we'll be glad, you know, within the brown act that any commissioners want to participate in those stakeholder meetings in the first week of january, but the commission now has a program of late fee assessments. so the commission has the commission office already on a regular basis to identify which filings have come in late based on the timestamp as you were suggesting and she prepares analyses what the statutes might say about those late filing. and then we work to distribute late fee assessments on that basis. but you're right, that there may be parking tickets in area it's -- i think that the late fee example is the best of thos-

the process that eric has described -- does include a number of scenarios in which remedial action may be necessary but not every allegation in the program will require remedial action and there's a number for which the conduct is over and done. there is no remedy that might be made. and so all that remains to be done is to see if in an accelerated manner that we can reach agreement with the respondent about liability and what it might cost. we haven't worked out all together what the process will look like. but it's likely that we'll create forms and template correspondence that will kind of function in the way that you're describing, commissioner chiu, where we might check a box, send it off to the spenten respondend here's the process and we would love if you might agree sooner than later and we can all put it behind us.

>> commissioner chiu: well, i look forward to having the substantive discussion down the road, but thank you for that preview. that's very helpful. because i think that the more we can do to take off some of the more routine matters that don't require the investigative time and effort, then you'll have more bandwidth to be able to focus on those more complex potential violations. >> chair ambrose: thank you for that. commissioner chiu. if there are -- okay, commissioner bush. >> commissioner bush: thank you, chair ambrose. can you give us an estimate of how many of the complaints that you deal with are generated by staff compared to how many come to you from the public? >> i could give you that estimate. i would have to look at the docket and to do some analysis, i think that historically the --

and this is anecdotal but the majority of complaints have come from the public. what we've seen in the last year or so is that through the application of our discretion that we have freed up some time for staff to evaluate the potential liability independent of receiving any complaints. and, again, anecdotally, i might offer that a number of staff -- more important and more promising matters currently on the investigative docket have been staff generated. i know that the b.l.a. had some recommendations. (please stand by)

for example, let's say you have a permit consultant making contributions to the people who he approaches on behalf of a client for permits. well, that's not illegal. it wouldn't be illegal if they're a lobbyist. if you have situations like that, i'm just pulling that out of the air. do you then say we're dismissing this, then you forward it on to director pelham or to the commission or to someone to

consider whether or not this is a loophole or a gap that would be better off closing. >> we do, commissioner bush. you know, pat ford in his capacity as staff senior legislative analyst, consulted our division on a regular basis. so when he develops legislative proposals, that identify weaknesses in existing law, he will always ask us what we're seeing in a kind an anomized way to find exactly what you're describing, a situation we'd like to enforce, but it's not yet on point. >> thank you. and when you refer things on to other