if january 8, 2021 regular meeting of the san francisco ethics commission to be held by teleconference pursuant to the governor's executive order declaring a local emergency dated february 25, 2020. before we proceed further i would like to ask commission staff member who is acting as moderator to explain procedures

for today's remote meeting. >> the minutes will reflect due to covid-19 health emergency and to protect commission members, city employees and public meeting rooms are closed. commission members and staff will participate remotely. this is taken pursuant to the various local, state and federal orders, declarations and directives. commission members will participate to the same extent as if they were physically present. please note today's meeting is live cable cast on sfgovtv and streamed live online at sfgovt sfgovtv.org. once again sfgovtv/ethics live. public comment will be available on each item. each member of the public will be allowed three minutes to

speak. comments or opportunity be to speak are available via phone call at 415-655-0001. access code 14688167488. followed by pound and pound again to join as attendee. you will hear a beep when connected to the meeting. you will automatically be muted in his senning mode only. when your item comes up dial star 3 to raise your hands and be added to the public comment line. you will hear you have raised your hand to ask a question. wait until the host calls on you. the line will be silent. you will wait your turn to speak. ensure you are in a quiet location before you speak.

mute the sound equipment around you television, radio or computer. it is important to mute if you are watching via web link to prevent feedback when you speak. your line will be unmuted. this is your turn to speak. you will hear welcome caller. we encourage you to state your name clearly. you will have three minutes to comment. six minutes online with interpreter. you will hear a bill at 30 seconds remaining. if you change your mind from the line press star 3 again. you will hear you have lowered your hand. once the three minutes expired you will be muted. your line has been muted. if you wish to speak during other comment periods stay on the line to listen for the next public comment opportunity and raise your hand by pressing star 3 when the next item of interest comes up. public comment may be submitted

in writing and will be shared after the commission is concluded and part of the official meeting file. written comments should be sent to the ethics commission. ethics.commission at sfgovtv.org. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. with that i will call the meeting to order. moderator would you proceed with item 1. roll call. chair ambrose. >> present. >> commissioner bush. >> present. >> commissioner chiu. >> present. >> vice chair lee. >> present. >> commissioner smith. >> commissioner smith is excused from this meeting. in fact, commissioner smith that

decided to resign from the commission. she has advised the district attorney that she will resign effective february 1st. we want to thank her for her service and appreciate her membership on the commission. i am sorry that the tenure of her being on the commission has been remote. we really haven't had a chance to get to no her personally in the minutes before or after the meeting. we wish her the very best and we look forward to hearing from the district attorney to find out who he will appoint as her replacement. with that i would like to -- >> sorry, madam chair. you have a quorum. >> thank you very much.

>> chair ambrose: the meeting is official. i do want to welcome everyone to the first meeting of 2021. we are going to have a busy year this year. we have a lot of challenges with the city's financial situation being what it is. we have to also work really hard to restore the public faith in city government given the corruption scandals that keep coming to light. i know we are all up to it. i look forward to working with you to accomplish the commission's business. with that i want to call agenda item 2. public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. members of the public who are online and wish to speak should

dial star 3. to be added to the public comment line. please proceed with public comment, thank you. >> the ethics commission is receiving comment on item 2 remotely. you will have three minutes to provide public comment. if you joined early to listen now is the time to speak. if you have not already please press star 3. it is important that you press star 3 only once to enter the queue. as pressing it again moves you back to listening mode. when you are in the queue and standing buy the system will prompt you to speak. calm from a quiet location. please address your comment to the commission as a whole not to

individual members. we are checking to see if there are callers in th in the queue. if you have just joined us we are on agenda item 2. public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. you have three minutes or six minutes with an interpreter. if you have not done so press star three to be added to the queue. if you are on hold wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. standby.

there are no callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: thank you. i would like to call agenda item 3. draft minutes for december 14, 2020 ethics commission regular meeting. if any member of the public intend to offer public comment they should dial now and enter star 3 to be added to the queue. it is on consent. this is considered routine. as a commissioner any item can be removed to consider

separately. any commission member wish to sever any items? commissioner lee did you want to sever the minutes for discussion? >> commissioner lee: yes because i want to make a request. >> chair ambrose: all right. do we have a second for the motion to sever? i don't think we need a second. any commissioner can do it. i don't think we need to vote on that. given there is only one item on the consent calendar we move to discussion of that item the draft minutes for december 14, 2020 meeting. commissioner lee, you have the floor. >> commissioner lee: thank you. i want to change item 6. i want to replace noninc. learn

to be bilingual speaker. i thought that is what i thought i said. that is it. >> chair ambrose: if there is no objection. commissioner bush please. >> commissioner bush: i have another point on the minutes to raise. two questions. the materials submitted to the commission for consideration by the members of the public is it in writing or other ways, is that noted? i don't see it in the minutes. i am not sure whether or not anything was ever submitted. i rarely see anything submitted. i know people have submitted things in advance of the meeti

meetings. >> if i might respond. when we have documents we receive from the public, they are in advance of the commission meeting and related to a commission agenda item general comment or others, we put it on the agenda item in the packets to the commissioners. if it is after the fact i will see. we usually put a link to them if they are -- to reflect in the minutes. last month we did not have public comment and did not receive documents. i can confirm at the next meeting or prior. if you are not comfortable approving the minutes we can carryover to the next meeting for action. i believe we didn't have documents or public comment received at the last meeting. >> commissioner bush: i am looking for polecommission

rather than raising the issue. in the past there have been times when there was material submitted in advance then not in the minutes. i want to know what the policy has been. it is submitted in the packet to commissioners. is that a packet the public also sees? >> yes, that is the items des contributed in advance of the meeting. i am searching here. we have language on the website regarding the materials for commission meetings. the staff members can point that out as well. >> it has been my experience that we not only receive the comments or letter submitted,

the actual letter, not summary, in the packet. when you go to the website, my understanding is that any communications concerning the agenda items are included there by a link. i am assuming that means in december we had not received any communications concerning the agenda item. let's face it. i don't know what happened. people have many challenges in this pandemic world we live in, but we are not seeing much engagement, if any, with the commission. that is a separate matter of concern that isn't on the agenda right now. i don't think it is necessary to put meeting minutes over. i would like to get a motion to

adopt them. >> thank you. it is on our commission meeting page on the website. there is a section identified as public comment below the references to where the meeting can be accessed. we do have the policy in practice identified there. it speaks to providing public comment in person and written public comment regarding matters that appear on the agenda. we have identified or described here public comment received by the commission by 9:00 a.m. on the monday before the commission meeting, which would be the posting date for the commission meeting material, will be included in the packet of agenda material distributed publicly for that meeting. it describes the packet of materials includes. public comment received after that cutoff deadline will not appear in the packet for that

meeting, however, the comments will be provided to the members of the commission and made available at the commission meeting. this points out a need for us to revise this language and this policy and practice in light of being in fully remote meeting because we might have had this in the back of the public meeting room. if we take this feedback and look back at the process and ad just this so people know clearly where to access those materials that may not have come in time for the commission meeting packet. >> commissioner bush: i know in the past before i was on the commission i had submitted material in writing and that it was on the table but otherwise if you were not in the room and able to pick it up off the table you never saw it. i am not sure other commissioners saw it at that time. i was not the only one in that

situation. >> that is good to know. i assumed it was scanned and available electronically if you weren't in the room. yes, if you can clarify where to find the information should we receive it. >> commissioner bush: i approve the minutes for approval. >> chair ambrose: second? >> vice chair lee: second. >> chair ambrose: can you call the roll please. >> motion is made and seconded. i will call the roll. commissioner bush. >> commissioner bush: yes. >> chair ambrose: we need public comment. thanks. we need to call for public comment on the consent items.

if you would please read the instructions for public comment, thank you. >> clerk: the ethics commission is on item 3 remotely in this meeting. each member of the partl the pus three minutes. if you joined early to listen to the proceedings now is the time to get in line to speak. if you have not already, please press star 3. it is important that you press star 3 only once to enter the queue. pressing again will move you out of public comment back into listening mode. the system will prompt you when it is your turn to speak. it is important to call from a quiet location. address your comment to the commission as a whole, not to individual members. we are checking to see if there are any callers in the queue.

please press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. if you have joined the meeting we are taking public comment to item 3, draft minutes december 14, 2020, ethics commission regular meeting. if you have not done so press star 3 to be added to the public comment queue. we have notice callers in the queue.

>> chair ambrose: public comment is closed. please call the roll. we have a motion from commissioner bush and second from commissioner lee to adopt the minutes of the december 14, 2020 meeting. thank you. >> clerk: i will call the roll. commissioner bush. >> commissioner bush: yes. >> commissionecommissioner chew. >> aye. >> vice chairly. >> aye. >> commissioner ambrose? >> clerk: with you are not muted every movement you may being is being heard. i am sorry with four in affirmative and zero opposed the motion is approved unanimously. >> chair ambrose: i will now call agenda item 4.

discussion and possible action on informational items scheduled for presentation at january 5 and 7. interested persons meeting on proposed revision to the fixed final policy and new streamlined administrative resolution program process. of course, those meetings have been rescheduled. i assume that executive director that you are going to proceed with the presentation on the underlying subject matter. >> yes. thank you, chair. the item here we wanted to make sure the commission had the opportunity to have access and information about what we submitted with the interested persons notice to the public so you can see the full range of discussion items and we will enlist public support and comment on. this is really an informational item so you have the same

information the public has as we move towards the interested persons meeting. because of the year end scheduling and holidays we wanted to move it further out to have participation in these meetings. we have not yet had rsvps for the meetings this week. we want that input. we have the information here and it is on the agenda for discussion and possible action. that is not required because we have not brought back public feedback on the proposals. >> chair ambrose: commissioner lee, a question? never mind. director powell, proceed with the presentation. >> happy to turn it over to jeff for overview that might be

useful to you and questions you might have at this point. >> jeff, if you want to provide an overview and also if you know the tentative dates for rescheduled meetings, we can announce those. >> thank you. good morning, commissioners. as director noted we hoped to have interested persons meetings this week. we had intended to bring feedback to you on the basis of those interactions with stakeholders. as the director mentioned we didn't get rsvp in time for those meetings. they are rescheduled for the last week in january. we kept the same tuesday, thursday structure. thethey are now tuesday jan 26 d thursday january 28th. we have gotten some rsvps now

for those rescheduled meetings. we will proceed with them. then bring before the commission a substantive proposal that incorporates feedback that we might receive at the meetings as appropriate. apart from that i had not intended to present the substance of our proposal at this time. i have investigator eric willett at the meeting today. eric is overseeing the creation of this program primarily. we wanted to ensure we put it on the agenda so that you would have a preview of what the proposal looks like and to make sure the public knows this proposal is in process and to ensure that the public are aware of the meeting scheduled for later this month. we would welcome public comment on these proposals now.

that wouldn't be necessary and we would welcome commissioner feedback on these proposals now but similarly in light of the fact the meeting is rescheduled and we will come back with a revised draft, if you wish to weigh in now you can but it is not necessary. >> chair ambrose: thank you. do i have comments on this item from the commission? commissioner bush, your hand is up. i think you are frozen. did you wish to speak? >> commissioner bush: no, thank you. >> chair ambrose: what i would like to do is go to the moderator to determine if there are any members of the public. i am sorry, commissioner lee. i didn't see your hand. >> vice chair lee: i found the

icon. >> chair ambrose: you arrived. >> vice chair lee: i have a question. i understand you mentioned the meetings have to be rescheduled because of lack of rsvp. i wanted to review my suggestion with the outreach so that i understand these are really challenging times, but through zoom and other means of virtual meetings maybe we can broaden the potential meeting universe that we currently have. if we can make it an invitation to the press also, especially the community-based media so that they can start following what we do, that would be really

helpful. i don't know if they would all come, at least we need to take that initial step. >> thank you, commissioner lee. >> chair ambrose: i would like to ask the moderator to read the instructions for public comment and let us know if there are any members of the public that would like to comment. >> clerk: we are checking for callers in the queue. if you are on hold wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. we are currently on the public discussion of the motion of agenda item 4 discussion and possible action on informational items scheduled on january 5 and 7707 -- 7 for the administrative

resolution program process. press star 3 to be added to the queue. you will have three minutes, six minutes with an interpreter. you will hear a bell with 30 seconds remaining. please stand by. awe have no callers in the queu,

madam chair. >> chair ambrose: public comment on item 4 is closed. item 5. discussion of executive director's report. an update of various programs and operational highlights of the ethics commission staff activities since the commissioner's previous meeting. >> commissioner chiu: the report contains attachment and information that reflects a very busy year in our office. our commission meeting was mid-december on the 14th and there are a number of developments that the report includes. as we all look to 2021 and i think the commissioner lee is emphasizing the need to reach out and be creative in engaging the community of individuals and

organizations that care about our work, we have to be much more creative and flexible and patient in using a process we haven't tried before. it is a case this week has shown us that there are a number of ongoing challenging issues for those who follow and care about government, to say the least. that is something that getting the eyes of potential applicants or people to engage on complex policy issues like fixed fine penalty can be additional taxing exercise. it is our job to make that information acceptable in a way people can understand it and engage in it effectively. even though the continuing climate that we are operating in local government and government at all is challenging, that the staff and i know your commitment continues to figure out how to do the work in the most

impactful way possible. i think in the information that is in the report gives you hope we are moving in the right direction as we continue on in the 2021. i want to start briefly by giving a hiring plan update. we have very good news. we were moving toward recruitments for positions that we have to fill this year that the mayor's office gave the green light to continue to work to fill. we have made two hiring decisions. those speak to our technology staff who are going to be continuing to help us expand and maintain our e-filing and data systems, departmental operations, application interfaces and dashboards and broad range of work that we do. i am happy to hear that tyler field who has been the information systems analyst is assuming duties as information

systems engineer. he will be focused on a lot of the all-around work to help us sustain our technology work. he is moving to a more defined field as if engineer. jerry florris who has been the information systems business analyst will be the new senior information systems analyst. jared and also tyler are moving in these new rollings. there is a position that has been posted that is accepting applications. the deadline for that role is january 15th. with regard to the other positions. the client support services position and engagement and compliance we have that position has been posted since mid-december.

the application closes today. we will be moving ahead with completed reviews of candidate applications and inviting the candidates in for interview in the next few weeks. we are happy that progress is being made and will be guidance of rachel with the team and dhr colleagues. the other three positions policy analyst, investigator position, compliance and manager position each we realize due to the focus on other issues and our ability to juggle recruitment we have extended the deadline for these three to the 15th. they were planned to close today. with the other positions we anticipate that ones those deadlines have come for the

application, we will be in a position the following week or two to begin scheduling interviews with candidates for those positions as well. we will be on track with that. we are hoping to have the seat filled by march 1st. we are continuing to move ahead with all priority on that work. separately, i have provided an update as you requested last month regarding the racial equity action plan. the last month all departments were working on draft plans for submission by december 31st to the city office of racial equity. we submitted the plan on december 29th. i have linkedin my report to the plan. when you have a chance to take a look through it you will note there are revisions that are significant in the sense it is a longer document than what you saw at the meeting last month. following conversation was the

office of racial equity it was clear to me that they would like the racial equity plan framework to be responded to buy departments to explain the action steps ongoing. this report reflects entirety of the emplate on the city racial equity action plan framework and vision, and we supplemented with additional information, areas we were undertaking action items in each category and noted where ones were not yet determined to be continued to be assessed as we involve our work in this area. as discussed by the commission last month we fully anticipate it will be a living document for our office. as the commission and staff that it is going to continue to expand and evolve over the coming years as we continue to reflect the full breadth of commitments and experiences together and aspirations and practices. that will be something that

looks different than last month. it is good it reflects in a full way the commitment and work of the commission has identified to date. i will continue on and come back for any questions to the commission. the other eye stem i wanted to reflect on was the report on the implementation of the legislative analyst and budget audit recommendations from the august report. there is an attachment linked to my report to a powerpoint slide, two page document that shows recommendation to date. you will recall the august bla report issued 16 recommendations to help strengthen and improve operations in several areas. as detailed in our report to the bla and that report our department fully embraced and

implemented the recommendations they sited with the insight to the report provided to us. it is shown on the attachment 1. there are 16 recommendations from the bla report listed as they appear understand the report and as we shared with you the presentation in august at the commission meeting at that time. here we have added two specific columns. one to indicate in shorthand the status. the recommended deadline the audit included and the status based on where the work is to date on those recommendations. we also then added a section on notes to provide detail what that means when we say something is underway or planned. in summary of 16 recommendations contained of those three items the audit recommended be completed by december 31, 2020, two were fully completed.

the training plan and closure plan linked from the status sheet. with regard to the recommendation 4 and hiring, the top to ensure adequate staffing. it should say partially complete. that recommendation was that we secure the expedited filling of say can't positions to move ahead with filling positions. those were completed the ad what staffing part depends on the hiring plan. that is underway. we marked the item as such. there are five other items initiated and underway and eight are planned for completion by the recommended deadlines shown. under recommendation item 5, 7, 8 regarding the audit plan. those depend on filling the position of audit and compliance

review manager. i want to point out the status of those recommendations. the work is underway and i will be happy to come back to answer specific questions about that work now or after i touch on this status of the budget process. lastly, in the report we included discussion of snapshot where we are with the budget for fy22 since the last commission meeting. the mayor's office distributed its budget instructions for all departments that are coming year -- for the coming year. it references the city's two year budget shortfall of $650 million. it identifies the mayorial priorities that are specific to what the mayor wants to see

contained in department priorities. it provides directive to all departments, instructions regarding their operating budget and how to meet the instructions contained in the december 16th information from the mayor's office. for our office and all departments they cite that there needs mandatory reduction of 7.5% and 2.5% continue beginnin. departments are to prioritize core services, identify clear trade-offs, reduction proposals can include in these instructions the reduction in

personnel costs including reduction in filled positions. this is not like last year when the city was considering how to manage under be the current climate. this is something specifically referenced in these instructions and new revenue sources. the question about racial equity and departmental proposals looking through an equity lens and prioritizing that with an existing budgeted level. these cuts would also be on top or in addition to what is called the savings target that require departments to plan for their salary savings they expect to see from attrician from the position. anticipate vacancy. in sum for our office based on the instructions provided, for us what we believe this could translate to at this point, 10%

reduction total combined with attrition savings could require elimination of approximately 6 to 7 commission positions. which would represent roughly a quarter of the commission staff. >> this is a fairly significant impact, to say the least. as we discussed in the past. when we submit the budget to the mayor's office the system requires the numbers departments submit reflect the cuts that are being instructed. we will do that as we have in the past. we will have to make clear choices about how we achieve those cuts. we will be as transparent as we

can about that process as we go along. as we have in the past we will continue to use the budget process to identify what resources and work this commission needs to do to fill the mandate the voters established us to do. the commission as a body has a strong desire to make sure we are clear about the kind of expectations you have for the work we are able to accomplish and how to accomplish that. we will do our best to reflect that in the documents we submit to the mayor's office for the data into the financial system. we will not be shy to ask for those items necessary for the commission to do the work people expect us to do. we identified in this report this month that part of our obligation and responsibility is to engage the public in the budget development process. ordinance was approved last year by the board of supervisors

while the case at this time last year a new ordinance. this year it is clear there are requirements that apply to departments for public input. unlike ways the city has felt that in the past. we initially thought we would be able to meet the requirements of the ordinance by establishing interested persons meeting if we held this month because of timing constraints, departments need two meetings, one to provide opportunity to receive public input on the budget priorities. subsequently, public meeting on the proposed budget. we thought that might be accomplished through interested persons meetings and the commission meeting in february on february 12 prior to submission on february 23rd of the department budget. that is the deadline. further complication after the report with the city attorney's office i stand corrected.

the way it is written it contemplates the commission as body will meet to hear the departmental budget priorities. in consultation with city attorney's office we identified a rather than holding the interested persons meeting we identified all commissioners would be part of a special meeting on the departmental budget priorities and at this point we will be scheduling that for january 21st. we plan to notice that next week. we plan to provide as we do with all commission meetings and interested persons meeting put together information to frame up the questions are and the issues we would provide the issues for the public. it will be a single item agenda to hear the commission's -- to take public input on the

priorities. that is a work in progress. i don't have a document at this point. that is the plan. i would very much welcome further direction from you about how to see that meeting or the timeframe play out given constraints to operate under as the ordinance sets forth, the timeframe for public engagement. lastly, the revenue information. one note not in the report. we look for the support that we have from the attorney's office and time changing. i want to acknowledge jenica. she notified that she is leaving employment on january 15th. she has providing advice and council to our office over the last couple of years. she is joining the firm of.

[indiscernable] as council to help develop the government practice group. i know that you have worked with her and i convey thanks and gratitude for the expertise she brought to our work. it is awful to say good-bye to wonderful people but we know she will do great work as she continues to make positive impact on local government through her inwrought. -- her new role. with that i will pause. that is a lot of information and i will handle any questions you might have. >> chair ambrose: i want to add my thanks to jenica. sorry to lose you from the city family, but glad you are staying with government work. that was a lot to unpack there

and i do see a few hands. i will start with commissioner chiu. you have the floor. >> commissioner chiu: thank you very much, jenica, for the contributions to the commission. we will miss you but best of luck. we are glad you are staying in government work and know that yoyou will be successful at the law firm as you have been here in the city. thank you for that. about the budget. i understand that we have a pandemic. there is a budget shortfall and that everyone has to tighten their belts. for a small department like ours it is disproportionate to ask for 10% decrease. i think it is interesting on the

racial equity plan that there is not the concept of equity applied in the budget. when you have departments of hundreds of thousands of employees in revenue sources with we have no revenue sources. 10% will not be as impactful to the operations of the department to fulfill its commission and mandate, in our case the mission and mandate as set forth in the charter required by the residents of san francisco. i would like to be on the record as saying that as we go into these budget discussions to fulfill the procedural requirements of the budget but would urge staff to engage with the mayor's budget office to

make sure they understand the impact of the requested budget costs on the commission's ability to do our job. in particular in light of our continuing public corruption scandal that has not ended, and has undermined faith and trust in transparency and accountability and the government and we have a significant role to play in fostering and creating the culture of compliance, and for us to have to reduce by a quarter of our staff, to me it says that the city is not serious about routing out corruption. the one agency whose task it is

to create and foster compliance and ethical culture in the city is being hamstrung. despite the fact we have criminal indictments and guilty pleas from multiple people in a scandal that has yet to come to an end. i have two requests. one is for our special meeting if in complying with the requirements of the budget instructions and we would need to propose these position cuts, what programs would be impacted at the commission? what would we not be able to do so that both we as commissioners understand but also that the mayor's office and the broader

public will understand that we are not currently staffed to where we need to be based on the bla report, and the positions we needed and we are on the cusp of filling them by march 1st and then to have to eliminate them is ludicrous. what would that mean? what would the impact be? would we not be able to? what would we not do if we didn't have this quarter of our staff? secondly, i would ask the commissioners, what can we do as a commission body to put this issue front and center in the dialogue with the city residents

and with the city hall and the mayor's budget office? does that take the form of an editorial highlighting we have this ungoing corruption scandal and ethics commission is not the only agency but it is specifically tasked with ethical culture in the city. if we have to reduce, as have all other departments, to reduce staff by 20%, budget reduction of 10%? what does this say about priority that city places on compliance? in making that ask? i will stop there. i will wait for my fellow commissioners and the public to weigh in on this. i feel that if we quietly just

go about our business and work behind the scenes to make sure the budget cuts can be softened or minimized into reduce the harm that we need to do that. i also feel that it is incumbent to ex -- incumbent to create dialogue with the city in this fiscal year. thank you. >> chair ambrose: thank you for those comments, commissioner chiu. i agree. i think that this upcoming meeting, 21st and 12th it is important to highlight those equity issues as you have framed them. i do want to confirm. these budget instructions are

the generic instructions going out to all departments in the city so in terms of tone this is our opportunity to highlight the importance of our mission although i see it doesn't really fit within the mayor's priorities because she didn't include raising the sort of ethical profile of the city as one of her top priorities. i guess she just takes that as a given. i think that it is up to us to frame the work we are doing as critical to the city's legitimacy and ability to carry out other mission and i think we will have an opportunity to do that before we lose hope. i will turn to commissioner

bush, which i realize no now tht you are next. >> commissioner bush: thank you very much. i concur with commissioner chiu's comments. i would from my standpoint as person who wrote in the press and other government stuff i drill it down to very specific information. for example, we have the board budget analyst reporting that it takes two to three years to conduct an investigation in ethics compared to six months at fppc and other jurisdictions with ethics commissions. i have talked to our enforcement office, and i was told in order to get to six month benchmark we would need six instead of four

that we currently have to investigate. that is a cut back as a result of the budget stuff. i would suggest that we spell out that unless we have additional resources for investigator that we are unlikely to see results of any investigations until the year 2026. people need to know we are talking years away to see any kind of results. they need to see that in very clear terms. i think that we need to point out in this coming year we have at least five senior department officials who are going to likely be on trial. they are facing criminal charges. they will be on trial for behavior they conducted themselves as officials in this administration. among those it includes a senior adviser to the mayor herself.

she is not charged, the fact is she did receive thousands of dollars in gifts from a city employee and did not report receiving that until it was called to her attention months after the fact. her excuse is that she had an ongoing relationship. does that mean we need a list of everyone's ongoing past relationships so we know whether or not they have to make the disclosure. that is ludicrous but it is the lodge scalconclusion you have to come to -- the logical conclusion. what about reporting actual expenditures of travel. we saw a lot of cases where travel is under written by people who have interests before the city. that is allowed. what kind of expenses? are they staying in hotels a thousand dollars a night? do we have a policy similar to

other cities that puts a cap similar to the federal cap on daily expenses for per diems when you are traveling in certain areas? do we have any requirement that people have to re-submit a form 700 if certain changes take place? they move residents or buy a new property or change an employer. that has a lot to do with conflict of interest. it does happen. the fppc allows those things to be updated and urges that they do. i have never seen anyone update a form 700. if you take all of those issues and spell them out in precise details anti them back to examples of current corruption trials underway which include travel, buying property, other

gifts, when i think you may being a pretty compelling case that is hard to resist on the merits. i would like to know, also, if the mayor's guidance one priority is supporting small businesses. i don't see why we can't make the case supporting small businesses means fair competition for contracts and fair access for permitting. that is what is hurting a lot of small businesses in san francisco. they cannot compete fairly for a contract because someone has a special relationship or they cannot have access to permitting because of special relationships pg&e hookups for a kitchen which

can delay businesses for a year or two. it is easy to get that kind of information. we need to look at other financial resources i got a copy and forwarded it from the district attorney saying he is going to ask people to make contributions to fund a research program into improved law enforcement. contributions to the district attorney's office. if the district attorney's office can do this, why can't ethics put out a request for contributions? we have talked before but not made progress on how to provide advisory groups that could address among other things funding sources and access to

those for our work. in that same vein, can't we work order the form 700 stuff to departments that have their own revenue outside of the general fund and not set by the mayor's direction. by my counts there are close to 3,000 form 700 filers with the departments without side funding sources beyond the general fund. that is a lot. one department alone has almost a thousand. i think that we could speed that up and take a look at doing them on pdfs. that would not be searchable but would mean we could do it now instead of a year from now. that would show the public we are moving forward.

in broader terms, when we have an agenda item like this one which is to brief the commission, that agenda doesn't allow action to be taken. it is just being told about things. i really would like to have a record that we have put forward an action item and voted and have the commission approve amendments to items like this one. in the past i have seen cases where we brought up issues and then later on nothing happened and we were told there was never a commission vote. if you don't have an opportunity to vote on an agenda item, of course, there is no commission vote. that is putting yourself in a straight jacket that we can't act. that is not acceptable in my view. those are the points i wanted to

make. >> chair ambrose: before i comment, commissioner lee, did you want to comment? please proceed. >> vice chair lee: thank you. i want to echo commissioner chiu's comments. i think that between what the commission mandated work is what we stand for and the public perception of what good government and government ethics is before this city. i really want to endorse her recommendation. the commission taking a more i

wouldn't say aggressive but proactive role especially with the budget being so competitive this year. to really with not just the elected leaders deciding the budget but more important the general public, what we do. what does it mean to have an ethics commission? tie into what commissioner chiu said, you know, with such a cut, it is not just the dollar amount, but it is the displacement of the core of what government ethics is, should be for the city. i do want to explore how this commission while meeting on the

sunshine requirements and everything else, how we can collectively call it a public awareness campaign. not public awareness, but maybe marketing campaign. to let people know what we stand for and why this year, particularly, is so critical to keep the commission small but mighty staff going to continue and expand on what we do. i know that, you know, we cannot do much with more than three individuals, but let's look at, you know, the media campaign, community engagement campaign

between now and the budget hearings because we all know 10% may seem, you know, small in large departments but for this department, for this commission, you know, that really cuts in deeply to the personnel, which is important to carry out our work. i would love to see what concrete steps we can do now starting today to really get the discussion going with the public. >> chair ambrose: i would like to make specific recommendations to follow up on this for comments you provided. that would be that at our meeting on the 21st, which is

supposed to be a public engagement over the budget, that we do certainly set it for discussion and possible action. i think it would be important in one of the concerns with all of this embedded in the 1-a agenda item under executive director's report, you have specific categories that come up in the executive director's report but they are not called out very clearly in the agenda. if we can work on this behind the scenes. if you look at other commission agendas under executive direct director's. >> reporter: executive executie director's report we put it there. if we have haaction item we

should pull it out of the executive director's report that is inconsistent with a substantive policy decision. we will have at the meeting on the 21st, that is a presentation and action on recommendations regarding the budget. if we can call out specifically commissioner chiu and lee, the community engagement. we are actively soliciting community engagement. i do think we should do a press release calling out that we are going to have a meeting on the 21st and we invite the public to think about the news outlets that we can put it in. i know i see in the community newspapers that i read and exam there are a little scrub in there saying you can go online

and join this public meeting. maybe we can garner a little bit of energy around folks in the public discussion. if we do that, then we actually have something to show the mayor and the board that we are engaged and that the public actually cares about the ethics commission having sufficient resources to carry out its mission. i also think that the item that commissioner bush shared with me from the district attorney's office soliciting public donations to the city for specific activity is something that we should keep in mind because why not? i don't know that we will see

how well he does. donations fro -- donations to te city are tax-exempt. if we articulate a specific funding for a specific activity, especially after we experience these budget cuts, we may well be able to generate sufficient support to actually fund that we might otherwise lose. keeping that in mind and putting that on the developing revenue sources. as you pointed out the mayor's office has a specific category. let's call that out specifically. then on the -- i am looking at my notes.

you can answer this question at the next meeting. the question commissioner bush raised about travel. i am sure the city has explicit limitations on the per diem. i think the problem with the gifts is that was completely outside of the city funding. those were not seeking reimbursement for the hotels that were $1,000 each day or whatever. that is the problem. they were getting those as illegal gifts from the sources. if you can answer that question. i am sure it is in the

commission's city policies. i am pretty sure there were restrictions. the work order. i know we talked about this last year and you had conversations how that might happen. in order to get the enterprise departments to work order money to the commission to fund form 700 work, those departments would have to at least at some level incorporate it in the budget. it is going to be such a small amount to them that they may have generic categories of funding that would allow them to work order money to us for their own staff code compliance provisions. if you can check in with the controller's office or whoever

your budget analyst is over in the mayor's office to make sure we are not mysing any -- missing anytime lines for being funded by enterprise departments through work orders for the 10% hit the mayor the trying to achieve. let us know what you hear back on the 21st. wait a minute, commissioner bush. i will get through my list. now, i forgot what i wanted to say. it had something to do with another agenda item i want on for the meeting on the 12th. i am sure i will be able to pick that up with new accident. i -- new business. commissioner bush, follow-up comment? >> commissioner bush: on the

work order it has to point out that while it is asking them to fund the form 700 filings. we are saving them money. it is not a one-way street because they currently have staff who has to file all of the form 700s for the people working in that department. that is staff time and staff resources and filings and all of the rest of that which they no longer have to do because it will come to us. in the meantime until that takes place, i do think we need to go to submit to us a pds of who is filing. at a minimum a list of whose filing submitted to ethics so we can post it. right now you have no idea what conflict of interest may be inherent in the mayor's own chief of staff. that is not something filed with

us. that is filed as the mayor's office. you can go through police captains, whether or not they have a side business in the jurisdiction where they are the captain. we don't have any of that information. if you could at least have a pdf you wouldn't wait a year, you would get it in april. >> chair ambrose: i will jump in there. that was the thing i was going to ask we calendar. we will talk about it under new business. i think that the ways that we can achieve disclosure on conflict of interest on form 700 as well along with an update where the board is on addressing some of those issues has to be a priority for the february 12th meeting where we can drill into just those ideas. i want to say i don't think that

it's true that the way we tackle getting all of these filers to e file. i don't think that the departments are going to agree that we are taking away from their filing officers all of the responsibility. i think quite the contrary because it is not conceivable that we can be the one on one inner face with 3600 employees. we are looking to those department officers as the liaison between the ethics commission and our e-filing system and their responsibility. going back to your point about the pdfs, i also think that is worth exploring along with what we are necessarily going to have to do is explore ways to achieve what you called ethics at work

without the benefit of three additional staff. now it is clear we are fighting to keep the resourceses that we have and we are not going to get a lot of traction on three new positions to do training and outreach. i see some other hands. commissioner chiu and then commissioner lee. >> commissioner chiu: thank you, chair ambrose. to your point about getting additional resources for training and funding for ethics at work initiative and building on commissioner bush's proposal to have the work done on the work order. what if we proposed to fill the gap onth third quarters and come -- ethics and compliance training that is evident via work order? that is where the problem

resides. instead of asking for ethics, those departments add arrest and indictments and criminal probe and district attorney and city attorney, if they were to fund by work order training to be conducted by the ethics commission and by putting that out there it becomes the responsibility of the department that issues cleaning up their own house with our help, it also creates this setup whereby then if it is not proved they have to go on record as not approving it. this is away and i think it is not asking more phone money for

ethics -- more money for ethics but asking the department in question to invest. they should be able to do so. that would be i would like to suggest that be proposal that we explore. >> chair ambrose: can you when you put together the agenda for the 21st call out specific sub topics so it is not just the budget. if you can put in a line item for discussion about soliciting work order funding for compliance with ethical compliance from various departments so we can talk about the point that commissioner chiu

just raised funding for training. the city attorney's office who usually joins us in the training would also, you know, weigh in and support departments allocating funding for that? every time i did that with staff, the staff are hungry for specific department related feedback about how do the gift rules or contracting rules apply within their divisions? there is always a limit on the ability of the ethics commission to end trainers out. in the city they are willing to do it but there is a limit on how many ask for it. pushing it out to the departments and building it in with the work order for teams to go out to do the training is a

great thing to talk about substantively when we get to the getting it on the agenda. if you can call that out and i can work with you on how we frame that. i think it will also help with public engagement when we look at the agenda item on the budget. there are specific ideas that may be thought provoking especially if we do community outreach and engagement to get people to engage in the meeting on the 21st, the more specific the better. i see commissioner lee, you had your hand up. do you have a comment? no. i do want to see if we have public comment. >> commissioner bush: commission er chiu pointed out reminded me that i wanted to restate for the record that we currently have a

system that every relevant city official has to take training on ethics and certify they took the training. that is step one. step two the city attorney issues a guide to good government with advice on ethical issues that are before the commissioners and department heads. that is step two. step three is that people can contact the city attorney's office for more specific advice. step four is that every department has statements of incompatible activities to provide guardrails so you don't fall off into behavior that is not compatible with the position. all of those are currently existing. can we just talk about strengthening those instead of adding $2.5 million in three years of additional staff?

the me it is a reasonabletuleternative to us. >> chair ambrose: i think that will be part of the discussion on the 21st when we calendar it specifically. i hear what you are saying, but i am concerned. i don't want to have substantive discussion about all of the various ideas we can engage in on the budget when we don't have a calendar for action and we are not specifically calling to the attention of the public that we are having these conversations. i do want to see if there is anybody in the queue for public comment. we will be back here in two short weeks to pick up this on the substantive level. put your thinking caps on between now and then and come up

with some strange arguments and action items so that we can ensure we have the resourceses we need to do our job. mr. moderator. >> clerk: we are checking to see if there are callers. please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. if you have just joined us we are on public discussion of agenda item 5. update of various operational highlights of the staff activities since the commission's previous meeting. please press star 3 to be added to the public comment cue. you will have three minutes to provide public minutes and six minutes with an interpreter. you will hear a bell go off when your time is over. please standby. you will hear a bell go off when

you have 30 seconds remaining. please continue to hold. please continue to hold.

>> if you have items for future meeting, feel free to share them. >> commissioner bush: sorry, let me come back to you. >> chair ambrose: one of the things that aside from the budget items for the 21st that we discussed for the meeting on the 12th, i worked with the

executive director on this. back in the fall, we lost one of the foundational contributors to the accuracy of the ethnics commission. he was deputy city attorney who worked with commissioner bush in drafting the original charter language back in 1993. with the commission, i would like to put a resolution on recognizing his work and contribution so that we could send that to his family. i know -- lots of people who contributed greatly.

randy, not only was the attorney for the commission for many years, he has contributed after he left the office to the work of the ethics commission. i will prepare something for your consideration. i like to see if we can send just a commendation to his family, recognizing his contributions. for the budget item, we can talk further. when you calendar the meeting on the 21st, please do include as one of the agenda items, a discussion of items for future meetings on that in addition to public comment, which we will clearly have. if coming out of the budget meeting on the 21st s commissioners want to agendize items for discussion on 12th

before we approve the budget that gets sent over to the mayor's office. that will be a good plan. commissioner bush, go ahead please. >> commissioner bush: thank you. i want to add for future meetings, some discussion on transparency and accountability. there's a provision in the government code that requires city officials to disclose relationships including serving as unpaid board members of organizations if they are regularly in touch with people who are come before their commission. i don't know where those things are filed other than i know that the law says that there's a form and it has to be disclosed. i think i forward a copy of that to chair ambrose. i like to put on the agenda, where are the places that

information like is disclosed? i don't see it on ethics? that's number one. secondly, how are areas -- [indiscernible] disclosed. something does that is it disclosed publicly? as far as i can learn, it's not the disclosed publicly. it's something that goes back and forth between the department head and the individual. if that's the current situation, do we want to examine whether that should be opened up to greater transparency to the public. those are two topics that i would like to see added. they are very related to each

other. >> commissioner bush, thank you for that. >> chair ambrose: maybe we can talk about it at the end of the meeting on the 21st. getting off to the start for the new year. we have left some fairly significant business behind in 2020 waiting for the controller's report. we're waiting for phone call back from supervisor haney on the status of his amendments behested payments and gifts, new rule coming forward. i think these points that commissioner bush is inquiring about regarding disclosure from staff where they acknowledge any

personal professional relationships that should be on the record where -- that all comes under what i assume will be part of policy report on our ongoing project for conflict of interest. we're coming up to a review of the policy prioritization program in the spring. all of that, we'll try and get calendar if not all of that for the february meeting. i'm assuming we'll have an update at the february meeting on the policy prioritization staff work. then certainly, mr. pierce's work on the policy. i'm available on both days

whatever that was, the 25th and the 27th. if commissioners want to attend either of those stakeholder meetings, if you can let mr. pierce know and he'll let me know which slot is available. since only two of us can participate in that. i will let all of you know if we hear anything from the district attorney's office. that will be fantastic if we could have a full compliment of commissioners in time for the meeting in february so that commissioner can participate in these very important policy and budget decisions. i'm going to ask the moderator to see if we have any public comment on it item. if anyone has further comments here, we'll take them after he

reads the announcement. >> we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicate you have been muted. we're on public discussion on the motion of agenda item number 6. discussion possible action on items for future meetings. please star 3 to be added to the public comment queue. you'll have three minutes to provide your public comment, you'll hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. please standby.

as a reminder to the general public, public comment maybe submitted in writing and will be shared with the commission after this meeting has concluded. it will be included as part of the official meeting file.

there are no callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: public comment on item agenda item 6 is closed. call agenda 7. additional opportunities for public comment on matters not appearing on the agenda pursuant to ethics commission bylaws article 7, section 2. if you want to offer public comment, they should dial in now and star 3. sorry, i'm reading the wrong text. can we please have public comment on agenda item number 7? >> we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue. please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. if you have just joined, we are currently on the public discussion on the motion of agenda item number 7. additional opportunities for public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on

the agenda pursuant to ethics commission bylaws article 7, section 2. if you have not already done so, please press star 3 to be added to the public comment queue. you'll have three minutes to provide your public comment, six minutes if you're on the line with an interpreter. you will hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. please standby. please remember public comment maybe submitted in writing and

will be shared with the commission after this meeting has concluded. it will be included as part of the official meeting file. written comments should be sent to ethics.commission@sfgovtv.org. >> chair ambrose: i will call general item 8. which is adjournment. do we have motion to adjourn first meeting of 2021? thank you very much. the motion moved and second the to adjourn the meeting. please call the roll. [roll call vote]

>> clerk: the motion is approved unanimously. >> chair ambrose: the motion to adjourn carries. thank you, this concludes the january 8, 2021 meeting of the san francisco ethics commission. wish you all happy new year. we'll see you here on the 21st. bye. it.

>> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their shop & dine in the 49 within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services in the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so we're will you shop & dine in the 49 chinatown has to be one the best unique shopping areas in san francisco that is color fulfill and safe each vegetation and seafood and find everything in chinatown the walk shop in chinatown welcome to jason dessert i'm the fifth generation of candy in san francisco still that serves 2000 district in the chinatown in the

past it was the tradition and my family was the royal chef in the pot pals that's why we learned this stuff and moved from here to have dragon candy i want people to know that is art we will explain a walk and they can't walk in and out it is different techniques from stir frying to smoking to steaming and they do show of. >> beer a royalty for the age berry up to now not people know that especially the toughest they think this is - i really appreciate they love this art. >> from the cantonese to the hypomania and we have hot pots we have all of the cuisines of

china in our chinatown you don't have to go far. >> small business is important to our neighborhood because if we really make a lot of people lives better more people get a job here not just a big firm. >> you don't have to go anywhere else we have pocketed of great neighborhoods haul have all have their own uniqueness. >> san francisco has to all >> good afternoon. we welcome our viewers to this special day of the san francisco board of supervisors. good afternoon. it's friday, january 8th. welcome to the inaugural meeting

set pursuant to article 2, section 2116 of the municipal charter and this meeting will now come to order. as you know, former president of the board norman yee concluded his term and in the absence much the president, the clerk of the board called the meeting to order and assists the board as they conduct nominations and an election for the next board president. before getting to that business, i will begin with the land acknowledgement, pursuant to board rule 4.7.71, and the board of supervisors acknowledges that we are on unseated ancestoral homeland of the first nations. the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the first nations have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten as the caretakers of this place and as well as for

all people in their an ancestorl territory. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and the elders and relatives of the first nations community and by affirming their sovereign right as first peoples. okay, next is the roll call for attendance. for the new members when your name is called just please state "present." let's begin at the top of the alphabet... [roll call] all

members are present. will the members, are they prepared to say the pledge of allegiance with me? i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the public for which it stands, one nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for

all. now to communications. please bear with me, there are several. first i'd like to communicate the credentials for the newly elected members. and the returning members. the office of the clerk of the board is in receipt of the certificates of election for the newly elected who received the majority of the vote cast at the election held on november 3, 2020. and in addition to the re-elected members, the clerk staff have taken the time to frame these certificates for you and they've been placed on your desks if you wish to hang them right away. additionally, we are in receipt of the controller's official certification that the sure tee bond requirements are met for the newly elected and returning members of the board. mainly in district order. district one, connie chan. and representing district 3, aaron peskin.

and representing district 5, dean preston. and representing district 7, myrna melgar. and representing district 9, hillary ronen. and representing district 11, ahsha safai. and now i'll make a communication on behalf of the public for their access. the meeting minutes will reflect the board participated in this meeting remotely through video occurrence to the same extent as if physically present in their legislative chamber. the members are invited to keep their fam rafid on and particularly so when speaking. when not speaking, please make sure that your microphone is on mute to avoid audio feedback. the board recognizes that public access to city services remains essential during the health emergency. therefore, the following options have been made available for the public to be able to communicate with the board and access this meeting remotely. the written correspondence is received and made a part of the appropriate legislative file.

please send to the san francisco board of supervisors, number 1, dr. carleton b. goodwin place. san francisco, california, 90712. and send to bos@sfgov.org. you may watch the live stream on your computer by going to www.sfgovtv.org and watch on your television by going to channel 26. however, be aware of the signal delay when you are readying to make your public comment and it's best to turn down your television and just listen from your touch phone. it is through your touch phone that you will be able to be in live sync to provide public comment without delay. oftentimes there is -- no one is on the other line when it becomes their time to speak and we may move on to the next caller. we do try to circle back to the ones that were silent, the lines

that were silent. so, all right, now it's time for item number 1 on the agenda. to present the official investiture ceremony to the newly elected and returning members of the board we are honored to have with us the honorable presiding. >> samuel k. feng for county of san francisco. your honor, welcome to our remote chamber. thank you for providing this service to the board. the floor is yours, your honor. >> thank you, madam clerk. and, ladies and gentlemen, and to the newly elected supervisors, to the re-elected supervisors, it is indeed my honor, extreme honor, and privilege to be conducting the investiture and the swearing-in of all of you at the inaugural meeting of the board of supervisors of the best city in this world. before i do anything, i want to

just congratulate every single one of you and i am so honored and so pleased to see all of yow through some interactions and it is indeed something that i really look forward to last night. and, again, i want to thank everyone for being here. i will wish that we could all be together and i'm hopeful that we will be together soon. i was told by madam clerk yesterday that it is indeed a rare occasion when the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch are together at one time. and, again, it is indeed my honor and privilege to conduct the oath of office. so here's what we're going to do. i will conduct the oath of office and -- oh, before i do, congratulations to the re-elected supervisors peskin, preston, ronen and safai and to

the newly elected supervisors chan and melgar. and welcome. so for oath of office, i'm going to ask each person to state their name one at a time. and then after i'm done with that we will do the oath together. i will start with supervisor peskin. after the word i -- supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: aaron peskin. >> and aye, supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: aye, dean preston. >> and aye, supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: i, supervisor hillary ronen -- >> and i, supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: i, supervisor safai --

>> and i, supervisor connie chan. >> supervisor chan: i, supervisor connie chan -- >> and i, supervisor melgar. >> supervisor melgar: i, supervisor myrna melgar. >> and good morning. raise your right hand and repeat after me. i do solemnly swear... that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states. against all enemies, foreign and domestic. that i will bear true faith and allegiance.

to the constitution of the united states... and the constitution of the state of california. that i take this obligation freely... without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. that i will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which i'm about to enter... and during such time... as i hold the offices of the member of the board of supervisors of the city and county of san francisco...

at this time congratulations and it was -- >> clerk: judge feng. >> your honor. >> the commissioner of the san francisco county transportation authority. now congratulations. >> thank you. >> i want to do this individually. congratulations, supervisor peskin. good to see you again and i'm sure that the judge will send her regards. and supervisor preston, congratulations again to you. and supervisor ronen, it is indeed my pleasure to see you again. like i said, i wish i could see

you personally and all of you. please send my regards to your wonderful, wonderful husband and wonderful attorney. and your loving daughter. and also to supervisor and supervisors, i promise you that i will not -- i will not mispronounce your name, supervisor safai congratulations to you. and then to the newly elected supervisors, supervisor chan, good to see you again. welcome. and supervisor melgar, congratulations to all of you. and my wish to all of you is as follows -- i know all of you will work together great with each other, collaboration. i hope that this will be a year of tremendous peace, tremendous health, and may you act with wisdom and compassion when you look over all of us in this great city and county of san francisco. again, it is my honor and congratulations to all of you.

>> supervisor ronen: thank you so much, thank you. >> thank you, judge. >> clerk: all right, thank you to the presiding. >> judge feng, for your kind words to the members. congratulations to the new members. welcome to the new members to the san francisco supervisors. i look forward to seeing you all present very soon. so let's go to item 2, the nominations for the office of the president of the board of supervisors. item 2 is the business of nominations. on the 8th day of january in odd numbered years the board by a majority vote selects one of its members as the president of the board. while i read the principles for the nominations into the record, i want to make sure with my staff that the roster is clear, okay? so once nominations are declared open, the members may place their name on the roster which

is also the chat feature, to make their nomination. and they will be called on as their names appear on the roster to state their nomination. as there is only one seat to fill, members may nominate one person, however, if nominate does get reopened the members may withdraw their original nomination and nominate a different member. the nominations should state on the record a nom -- a nominee should state on the record they accept the nomination. a second is a nice touch, but it's not required. and, nominee, if you would keep your camera feed on, that would be great. the nominees may nominate and vote for themselves. nominees may also withdraw their own nomination without a second at any time. at the completion of nominations, the nominations are closed and the board will hear general public comment on the names within the nominations. and then public comment will occur and then general

discussion by the members on the nominations will begin. okay. are there any questions. and is there any objection to proceeding in this manner? okay, so, madam deputy, i don't see any name on the roster but i just wanted to check with you to make sure. >> i think that myrna melgar put her name above by accident. >> clerk: oh, okay. okay, great. so if the roster is clear and there's no objection to proceeding in this manner, seeing no objection, the nominations are declared open. >> so, hello, colleagues. thank you so much. it is my great pleasure to nominate my