2021, regular meeting of the san francisco ethics commission, being held teleconference pursuant to the governor's executive order and declaring the existence of a local emergency dated february 25, 2020. before we proceed further, i would like to ask commission staff member acting as our moderator to explain procedures for the remote meeting. >> clerk: thank you madam chair. to protect commission members, city employees and public, the meeting rooms of city hall are closed but we will be participating remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the local orders and

directives. public comment is available on each item of the agenda. each member of the public is allowed three minutes to speak. comments or opportunities to speak during the public comment period is available via phone call by calling 415-655-0001. again the phone number is 415-655-0001. access 187 131 7460. again, access code, 187 131 7460. followed by the pound sign.

and then press pound again to join the meeting as an attendee. you will hear a beep when you are connected to the meeting. you will be automatically muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial star 3 to raise your hand and be added to the public comment line. you will hear, you have raised your hand to ask a question. the line will be silent as you wait your turn to speak. be in a quiet location before you speak, mute equipment around you including television, radio or computer. it is especially important that you mute your computer if you are watching via the web link to prevent feedback and echo. when the system says your line has been unmuted, it is your time to speak. you will hear staff say welcome caller. we encourage you to state your name clearly. as soon as you start speaking, you will have three minutes to

provide public comment. you'll hear a bell at 30 seconds remaining. if you wish to withdraw from the public comment line, press star 3 again and you'll hear the system say you have lowered your hand. once the three minutes is done, staff will thank you and mute you. you will hear your line has been muted. attendees who wish to speak during other public comment opportunities can stay online and then press star 3 when the next item of interest comes up. public comment may be submitted in writing and shared with the commission after the meeting has concluded and be included as part of the official file. written comments should be sent to the ethics commission. >> chair ambrose: thank you.

i call the meeting to order. can you proceed to item one, the commission roll call. >> clerk: commissioners please unmute your microphones so you can verbally state your presence after your name has been called. (roll call) madam chair with five members present, you have a quorum. >> chair ambrose: thank you very much. i want to welcome everyone back to the commission meetings in remote format and i'm assuming since we all heard city hall is reopening that we'll get some further direction from the mayor and others about what the future holds for commission meetings, but as far as i know, through the summer, we will continue in

our remote meeting format. i want to remind everybody, when you're not speaking to mute your microphone so we don't get the feedback and with that, i'll call agenda item number 2, public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. members of the public on the line and wish to speak should now dial star 3 if you haven't done so already to be added to the public comment line. mr. moderator, please proceed with public comment. >> clerk: the ethics commission is receiving public comment on item 2. each member has up to three minutes to provide public comment. if you joined early to listen to the proceedings, now is the time to get on the line to speak. if you haven't already, please press star 3. it is important to only press it

once to be moved into the queue. once you are in the queue and standing by, the system will prompt you when it is your turn to speak. it is important to call from a quiet location. please address to the commission as a whole and not only one person. we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue. if you have just joined the meeting, we are on item 2, public comment appearing or not appearing on the agenda. you have three minutes to provide public comment, six minutes if you are online with an interpreter. you will hear a bell when you have 30 seconds remaining. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please wait until the system indicates you

have been unmuted. madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: thank you. public comment is closed and now call item from ascent calendar, items number 3, draft minutes from the regular meeting. if any member wants public comment, they should dial in now and if a commissioner objects,

an item can be removed and considered separately. before i ask the commissioners, i don't know that i need to sever the draft minutes, but i did want to note first thank the executive director pelham for following through on our request and sending the letter to the mayor concerning follow-on to the investigative work and reporting back to us. but i know it was commissioner bell who really made the motion that we should take action in response to the item, even though i guess maybe technically i restated the motion before we voted. so it shows that i was the one who moved that the commission send the communication to the mayor. which i was just trying to restate the suggestion that commissioner bell -- i just

want to make it clear that i think whatever credit where credit due -- if that can be whatever a clarification for the minutes that we all understand. don't need to continue them unless someone else thinks we should get them formally corrected. with that, is there anything else anyone wanted to pull off of the consent calendar? commissioner bush. >> commissioner bush: as a general rule, at this time and in the future, i think it would be good if the minutes showed which person wrote the minutes and gave it to the commission. if it was the executive director, it should say executive director. if it is someone that has been delegated to that, it should say. i think it's a good practice to know who is the person who compiled the minutes and provided them to us.

>> chair ambrose: okay. for the record, who does draft the minutes for the commission? >> minutes are drafted during the course of the meeting and usually captured by legislative affairs counsel pat ford. >> chair ambrose: thank you for that. i'm getting feedback. is that my -- can you hear okay? okay. sorry, i'm just looking to see if anyone else has their hand up. with that, then i'm going to call for public comment on the consent calendar. mr. moderator, can you please

read the instructions. >> clerk: thank you. the ethics commission is receiving public comment on item 3 remotely in the meeting. each member of the public has up to three minutes for public comment. you will hear a bell when you have 30 seconds remaining. if you joined the meeting early to listen to the proceedings now is the time to get in line to speak. if you haven't already, press star 3. it is important to press it only once to enter the queue. pressing it again will move you back into listening mode. once in the queue and standing by, the system will prompt you when it is your turn to speak. it is important to call from a quiet location. please address your comment to the commission as a whole and not to individual members. we are checking for callers. stand by.

if you have just joined the meeting, we're taking public comment on item 3 draft minutes of the may 24th 2021 regular meeting. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to be added to the public comment queue. madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. i do want to clarify, i wanted to make sure -- i apologize, we are taking public comment on all consent items, is that correct?

>> chair ambrose: that's correct. >> clerk: okay, there's no callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: public comment is closed on the consent calendar. can i have a motion to adopt the consent calendar. >> so moved. >> chair ambrose: that would be commissioner chiu. and a second? commissioner bush or commissioner lee. either one. i did want to say thank you to the staff too for preparing the stipulations. i think it was a good demonstration of the streamlining process at work and i didn't want to just let that pass. so with the motion and second, can you please call the roll on the consent calendar. >> clerk: a motion has been made and seconded. i will call the roll. (roll call)

the motion is approved unanimously. >> chair ambrose: thank you. and now we're going to jump ahead to consent -- no. what number are we on to get -- >> i think agenda item 8. >> chair ambrose: thank you. all right. page turning here as we get through my script. i'm going to call item 8, discussion and possible action on the ethics commission annual report draft for the fiscal year ending june 30th, 2021. before i turn it over to director pelham, i wanted to say thank you very much to director pelham for the draft. i did want to emphasize since we

didn't talk about this before, the charter requires that the chair and the executive director prepare a draft report annually. we had come up with a rough format with the annual report last time around and haven't really talked about it since then. i want to encourage the commissioners who have thought about how best to convey the message that the commission wants to send to anyone who might be in the audience for the reports. feel free to share your insights. i know the draft we had, it's not even a final draft, it doesn't have the chart and final data that is still being accumulated because it is a

fiscal year -- end of fiscal year report that doesn't happen until the end of june. but i do want to thank you for assembling all of the various facts and acknowledging the events over the course of the year. so we have what i think is the bulk of the material to work with. so with that, i'm going to turn it over to director pelham and then i'll take comments from commissioners and then we'll go to public comment. >> director pelham: thank you chair ambrose. commissioners, this is meant to reflect information as we know it at this point, a couple weeks before the fiscal year ends. there are a number of initiatives and work underway this year that are reflected here, though not likely to change over the next couple of weeks but we wanted to make sure when we have the final report

for you and the public, it captures all the information we have through the fiscal year. the difference between the report last year, this really focuses on the past fiscal year that started july 1st. it does capture some of the changes right at the beginning of the pandemic, but we did make a conscious effort to be mindful and responsive to the questions raised last year in wanting to convey as much data as we have for the work the commission is doing and has done over the past year. this morning, very interested to hear your feedback, suggestions, anything you might like us to take back and work with the chair to finalize for you. a document for the july meeting that can reflect the commission's adoption of an annual report for the past fiscal year. i would say one last night, looking back at the activity that went on during this year, i

want to acknowledge the work of the staff on the ongoing drive we're making to continue to improve operations and impact of our program. it has been a particularly challenging year as it has been for everyone in government service. i was happy to see the hard work that went in by staff to try to get the information to you timely to make this report something that the commission feels strongly reflects the work and vision you all have for the past year that we have been working together. with that, i'll turn it back to the chair and any questions or suggestions, we are open to that and will be taking notes. >> chair ambrose: i'm going to defer to everyone else after i say this. i will help take in comments and work on the edit, the one thing i thought with respect to the final section of the annual

report, where the commission looks forward, i'm not entirely sure that we'll have an opportunity to fully flesh that out by the july meeting because we won't see sort of the next level draft. but as -- if you're not prepared to do so today, then certainly for the meeting in july, if you could all focus on that and think about what sort of focus we want to set for the commission in the coming year. i do think there's more work we need to do in terms of reflecting on where we have been and it's important for the reasons you stated, too, if for

no other reason just to understand why it has felt like people have been really striving this year. i do think it's important that we also set a focus for the future. with that, i'm going to turn to commissioner bush if you wanted to start with some comments on the draft report. >> commissioner bush: thank you chair ambrose. a couple of things i think could be inserted into the annual report. one is director pelham's letter to the mayor, which i think was in the last 10 days or so, in which the outline action items with the time table which i thought was an important statement and one i would like to see circulated more completely to the commissioners

as well as to the public. i would like to see that included in the annual report. as part of that is also to include commissioner pelham -- or director pelham's response to the board of supervisors on the board budget panelist recommendations. in that, chair pelham innumerated the time table and action by us. i think we need to surface that clearly in the annual report. beyond that, we're talking about creating some sort of listings,

i would like us to include information on how many lobbyists are registered with the ethics commission, how many permit expediters, how many major developers, how many consultants, and then in that, should include how many this year in each of the categories and how many clients they have. i think that gives a sense of the scope of what we face as a challenge as an ethics commission. thank you. >> chair ambrose: all right. thank you. i'll go down the list then. commissioner chiu. >> commissioner chiu: thank you chair ambrose. i would agree with commissioner

bush and i think that as i look at this, and i know this is just a draft format. as we present the numbers i think last year we had very clear charts. i think that would be a wonderful way in the beginning, just a year at a glance. these are all the -- to commissioner bush's point, these were the number of requests, the number of audits, the number of public funds dispersed through the revised program and then in terms of organizing the rest of the report and the summary of the key highlights, i always like to think of what are the key themes that emerged from the year. on page 2, the focus was improve program impact and ensure service excellence. we take those three as the

guiding organizing principles for the report, we can say here's what we did to improve programs, impacts and for that, i would say off the top of my head, the public financing campaign was tremendous. the results we had, we had the highest number of candidates turning to the public financing system ever historically. and we dispersed more money. i would love to highlight the impacts of that program. and then what do we do to heighten awareness of the laws. if we organize it in that way, it becomes -- there's a lot of tremendous work done this year, but if we organize it along those themes, there's a line for all of it and how it is all connected and i wanted to call out the fact that commission staff has been working remotely from their kitchen tables and

living rooms and bedrooms for the past year plus and will continue to do so for another, you know, three or four months and i just want to call out that that is -- the fact that we have increased the number of people we have served and supported candidates in an election season is really important for us to recognize and celebrate in this report. so i can -- i can follow up off line with director pelham, with some thoughts on how things can be organized and worded for maximum impact. thank you. >> chair ambrose: thank you for that.

and i would agree. i know in the last year, i think it was, commissioner chiu helped us with that sort of whatever, year at a glance highlighting some of the important information in a much more readily available and readable form. and i know in this one there's a really long bullet list of various accomplishments and i will note, the first one you mentioned, i was appointed chair and commissioner bell joined the commission, which is hardly the priority item we want to grab people with. i think a reordering of that as you were saying along those lines with more subheadings so if you're looking for a certain area you might be interested in,

you can more readily -- it will pop out at you better. nevertheless, the effort was to just gather all manner of information and get it on a page so we can start with it. and then i did see -- i thought i saw commissioner lee's hand up. now it's not. i don't know if that is intentional. i hope you really are at the beach with a palm tree behind you and it's not a phony back-drop. >> i wish we could all be at the beach. that's a good one though. >> my mind and body is. >> chair ambrose: no further comments. commissioner bell, please.

>> commissioner bell: thank you. this is my first time reading one of these. i don't have last year's as a point of reference. i thought it was extremely comprehensive, but as we were reading it -- as i was reading it, i was wondering who the audience was and i was begging for pie charts and graphics to show some of that. i think the comments by my colleagues are right on point and it just seems like those percentage numbers that we are such a graphically oriented population these days, that some of that stuff was just calling out for some kind of graphics to demonstrate what it was. i join my colleagues and what they suggested but i do want to say, it is very comprehensive. if you read it, you really got a sense of what happened during

the year. job well done but i think if we could show some pictures, i think it would be helpful. >> chair ambrose: absolutely. all right, thank you for that. and with that -- >> i'm sorry i wanted to add one thing. an additional thought if i may. to the point that we are -- you made earlier about how do we communicate the work we have done in the past and how does that connect with the work we'll be doing in the future, i think the hanging over the city and over the commission is this ongoing corruption investigation. i think it would be beneficial for us to consider that as part of the back drop and how do we communicate about it. i know we'll get to it later, the terrific news of the funding for the ethics network.

how do we show in the past year we have laid the foundation for the work that's going to be coming with ethics to address a culture of compliance here in the city. i think there's an opportunity for us to frame the work we have done in a way that shows that we are -- we're on this. and we have done a lot. look at our comprehensive scope of initiatives we have undertaken in the past year and ongoing support we have provided to the city and then we're going to build on that in the coming year with the ethics at work initiative so we can -- instead of having just a discrete set of accomplishments in the past year, we can show how we're pursuing the specific objectives and goals and it is connected with what we'll be doing in the

future. and benefit more transparent and accountable government. >> chair ambrose: great, thank you. that's exactly what i was trying to get at with the thought that we might not exactly be in a position in july to finalize the forward-looking statement. the board, three chairs that were the mayor's recommending we get the funding we need to start that effort on building ethics at work. but it won't be in the bank yet by july 9th because the board won't have acted on the budget -- i don't think. maybe they will. >> director pelham: i think that's unlikely. >> chair ambrose: that's the direction i think we need to go in. if we're going to recognize sort of the unsung heroics of this

year, of getting the positions -- getting the requisitions and advertisement and filling the position, if anyone who has tried to get something like that done in the city, you can't imagine what an achievement it is. i'm sure she's -- the other directors and department heads are probably in awe that she was able to get that much support for staff and now we're going to have more. but the points you were making commissioner chiu, that's what i want everyone to think about how we're going to frame that forward looking statement and i'm sure when it comes back in july, that the graphs and charts that director pelham, they'll finalize as part of the numbers, hopefully in the draft we see. with that, i'm going to ask the moderator to call for public

comment. >> clerk: okay. i want to double check. i see hands raised for commissioner chiu and commissioner bell. do you have other comments? >> commissioner bell: yes, i appreciate commissioner chiu's sense in that. i think chair ambrose can restate my motions any time for me. i was joining in what i think is in her remarks, in addition i should say to being a recitation of what happened, this report i think director pelham could be an opportunity to brand. to actually say -- i don't need to repeat what commissioner chew chai said but it prompted in me not just a thinking of we did this and that. here's why we're here and here's

what we're intending to do and here is what we have done and will continue to do. >> chair ambrose: we need to roll up our sleeves and get it on paper. i have been in so many settings where there's a lot of great ideas but when you're the person sitting there, you're like did i capture all of that. help me out when we get back here in july or in between, feel free to contact me if you have some precise way of communicating. with that, i know we have a big

agenda today. please call for public comment. >> clerk: we are checking to see if there are callers on the queue. we are on the motion of agenda item 8. please press star 3 to be added to the public comment queue. you will have three minutes to provide public comment. you'll hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. please stand by. welcome caller. your three minutes begin now. >> good morning commissioners

and director pelham. my name is dr. kerr, a whistleblower. i am calling to address my appreciation to the staff who compiled the section on whistleblower protection in the annual report. this is the first time that sf has disclosed a number and explained the outcomes of the complaints. we now have some idea why none of the cases resolved this year were substantiated. the finding that 55% of city officers have failed to complete the required training in whistleblower protection. this degree of transparency

helps to dispell the reputation for years. hopefully it increases beyond zero. it should be closer to 23%. that the international standard recorded by 3,000 organizations surveyed in the benchmark report. thank you very much. >> chair ambrose: thank you for your comment. i concur that that information was important and it is going to be one of our priorities to focus and review our whistleblower process. thank you for your comments. are there further comments in

the queue? >> director pelham: as you know from the document we provided in

connection with the item, the mayor -- you'll recall we submitted the budget request to the mayor's office in late february as required by city departments over the past several months, we have been able to answer questions and provide additional detail to the mayor's budget office in discussing the commission's demonstrated priorities the way we are achieving our work and plans going forward and demonstrated need for the work. with that, the mayor's office in releasing the mayor's proposed budget for the coming fiscal year identified and recommended the full package of our recommendations for the coming fiscal year, very well come news of course. the budget that we proposed as reflected in the mayor's recommended budget that was issued on june 1st would propose fiscal year operating budget of

$6.5 million, roughly 23% increase in the current operating budget, it would have a staffing level that would be increased by 8. importantly, the reason those resources would exist is to fund new outreach and support for the city's work force, all city departments on our new ethics at work initiative designed to build in a framework and support on a practical basis to help folks navigate ethical issues that apply. it would be a program funded for what the city calls a limited three year term process, that

means we would be hiring on exempt basis before the end of this three year limited term project, evaluating the program to see what we think the needs are at that time and converting the positions if the need is still there or changed to different positions to continue those into a civil service per nate basis. this is extremely good news to hire the positions as we have in the past year through temporary, exempt process. the work we know is essential to provide the kind of support in a different way at a different level with a different focus is i think a first for the city and very important role that we'll be able to play with the support. we are looking forward to talking with the board of supervisors about the project as well starting next week in the budget hearings. separately, we have also seen in the mayor's proposal, a recommendation to embrace additional requests.

this would include three new investigative positions and funding to help us develop a case management system, if you have two investigators historically, it may not be that necessary when you have the volume of cases and significant of cases and number of investigators we have. this becomes critical to manage the work effectively. that is something that would be included here as well. and also importantly, we just finished talking about the annual report, but both were purposes of improved consistent standardized public reporting about the work the commission does and help ensure we continue to build into the fabric of our very operations, data driven decision making to the greatest success possible. and we have seen a recommendation by the mayor to fund our proposed program performance and reporting analyst. this position will work directly

with chief operating officer thaikkendiyil and myself and other teams in the office to build in the fabric what we do on a regular basis, reporting indicators of progress and help know where the challenges exist and maybe keeping us from the achievements we're outlining. it helps to strengthen performance tracking in a way we think will be helpful for the public to understand the work matter. with that, that's where we stand in terms of recommendation by the mayor's office. this didn't take cuts initially faced by the city in the midst and depths of the pandemic. we're grateful to see the opportunity to advance our work in a significant way in the coming year and we'll look forward to talking with the budget committee and full board of supervisors in the coming

weeks starting next week as they consider the city's budget starting on the 14th and considering it on the 21st. i'm happy to answer any questions. i should make one last note as i indicated in the report before turning it back to the chair, that is one of the interesting developments, budget chair haney has as part of his letter to the departments asked the departments to report back during the budget discussions what their efforts are going to be to help change tone at the top, help strengthen integrity throughout city government. there's a particular focus i think we'll see in the budget discussions by all departments about what works, what they're doing to align closely with recommendations we have seen coming out of the controller's office that have stem friday the corruptions investigations for the past year and a half.

we'll communicate as we did in the past week with all departments to be supportive of that and we'll be closely monitoring that and following up to report back to you further as we know more. i appreciate your time just to walk through the highlights and happy to answer questions. and our deputy director thaikkendiyil is also online and can answer questions if you have more specific questions about the detailed line items. >> chair ambrose: thank you. i'm going to turn to the other commissioners before i hit my points. i see commissioner chiu, you have your hand up. >> commissioner chiu: thank you and first off congratulations, we first started the budget discussions last year, cuts of 7.5% and really just cutting straight to the bone. i think this is a fantastic

outcome. i'm heartened that the mayor and hopefully board of supervisors are in support of the work we're doing here and it's one thing to say you're for compliance in government but it's another to fund and put resources to the work. so very, very heartened for that. i have a high level object observation. it will be important to have as many metrics as possible to measure the impact of the program and the work we do so we can have a baseline that says this is what it was like before. i'm not sure how to measure compliant culture or what the issues are, but if there's a way to quantify and say here's where

we're starting from and then the ethics commission delivers a set of training, interventions, programs, train the trainer, communication that can start to create this culture of compliance. and then we can measure afterwards. measure along the way. i think that will be really important to help us tell our story as to at the end of the -- the half way point and tail end of the three year mark, say look how we have moved the needle from left to right. this is the impact and here are the groups we've touched so far. we project is that if we continue to do this work and roll it out, based on our track record, we think we can get to a higher point so we have data to back up the impact of our work.

and then the second question is because timing is everything and we can only start to make progress when we have the team in place. great news that the positions will be able to be hired on exempt basis. do you have a rough city of when the team could be assembled. when they can start on the work itself. >> director pelham: thank you for the comments and question. the first year of any project, the funding that the city provides is what they call a 0.77. that means funding doesn't happen for that position until roughly september or october of the first fiscal year.

that said, in theory we could have people in seats immediately to pay for nine months of salary. our focus will be between now and the beginning of the summer, i guess we're in the summer but over the next couple of months even as the budget is finalized. we're going to take the processes we had in place this past year, clarifying the project list we know to be out there for investigative risks. having those positions as soon as we can, hopefully before the fall to be able to put people in seats as soon as we can when the funding is actually made available. that's a process that can take several months. i would hope we could say we'll have people hired by the end of the -- into this calendar year in december to have 8 positions

filled, that would be ambitious. but we can only make progress when we have seats filled. >> chair ambrose: thank you for that. it's just because we have an expiration date on the three year program term, the longer it takes and i know everyone is aware of this, just to say the longer it takes to fill the seats, the less time we have on the 36 month window to deliver results. >> director pelham: to clarify one point on that.

i think the clock starts once the positions are filled but the goal is to get them filled as soon as we can. appreciate the support. >> chair ambrose: okay. i'm going to move to commissioner lee. you had your hand up please. >> vice-chair lee: thank you madam chair. i wanted to add great job for the director and team, they have put together -- it is really great to hear that we don't need to phase budget reductions. i'm really excited about the ethics at work new initiative. i know that the primary target is to work with government

employees but to create a clean government culture, it's two ways. the public also needs to be engaged. i'd like to see us highlight the outreach effort under the new initiative to bring together the communities. i think i asked this question before, because now we're looking at six new employees to join the team at least, the city department demographics has changed and we need to reflect that if we are to serve our city ably. i do know that the city also has

language access policy. i would like to see especially the four specialists that of course we cannot require them to have additional language skills but i think there are ways you can encourage people who have additional language skills that compliments the population to encourage them to apply so that our commission staff can reflect the city population that we serve. so i would renew that request to make sure that number one, can legally do it and number two, we really make an effort to bring in folks who have the additional -- not additional, but the

cultural and linguistic set of skills to reach the currently under -- invisible population so to speak. the second thing in building the ethics at work culture, i would like to see -- and maybe we can start building it right now, to really bring in a broader community engagement than we have right now. i would love to see us reaching out to in addition to the mainstream groups and media, we need to target independent

neighborhood media, ethnic media, community-serving organizations. civic as well as social service to really let them know what this program is. what are did commission's programs the really bring them slowly into our partnership to really build a broader stakeholder community. i don't think we can achieve it overnight but at least we can start now to build up a plan and i think that the board of supervisors would love to see and may even want to help us in

one of their district meetings. i hope we can emphasize with the new staff, we're really going to build up our community engagement public outreach. >> chair ambrose: thank you commissioner lee. i concur with your remarks. one thing i was thinking about when you were talking about our public outreach position, i think it will be important that that also have a very strong listening element to that person's job description that it's not going to be meaningful if we just push out a bunch of information to an audience of none. it is really important that as commissioner lee was saying, that we try and actively engage with all of the various district communities within san francisco

and figure out what they are saying about ethics and what they want to see from the city. and i also wanted to say, there's 30,000 employees in the city and county of san francisco. the fact that we're going to have a few training specialists to help engage with that work force is great, but if we don't enlist the entire city leadership in this exercise, then what we're going to have is just on the impact scale, it's going to be miniscule.

i want to make sure you have had an opportunity to talk particularly with the city attorney and for that matter, the district attorney given how engaged both of those offices are with the corruption investigation and have gained new insight into how wrong the work culture can go in terms of ethical compliance. and also something that commissioner bush sent me highlighting in a jurisdiction, i can't remember which one, trying to improve their ethics culture. they looked at having each department identify an ethics officer. i know in our city from having been council to various departments, there's no uniform role that someone has within a department to be the person that

somebody goes to to say i have this issue, whether it is personal or something they observe in a co-worker. i know you're doing outreach to various departments on that. because frankly, to me having watched the culture of the city change over the years, it's that each department has its own culture. if we don't tap into that individual department's structure and key it to compliance, we won't be effective.

so having both your public outreach person be in an engagement and listening mode with the general public and also with the 30,000 employees of the city and county of san francisco and having those three people ethics at work people working with them to draft a training module that is going to be completely different for a public health worker who is constantly dealing with nonprofit contracts opposed to someone who works on a lot of capital projects and dealing with major engineering companies. i think it's a huge task and you have the beginnings of the effort but it's going to be really important that we get everybody involved and we're not just trying to help the giant from three little people. commissioner lee. >> vice-chair lee: thank you

madam chair. i just want to emphasize, when i say public outreach and engagement, i don't mean us talking to other folks. i appreciate what the chair said. it is basically listening because without understanding where people are, we really should not just tell people, these are our plans, what do you think. it needs to be the other way first. and secondly, i wanted to raise a very successful federal program. the federal government is so huge. any time you have something not one department can get the message across. so many initiatives we try to push through, we put together interagency working groups. every department, you have somebody assigned to work on ethics whatever. so when ethics commission has

something happening, you meet with the 20 people every month. how can we work together on the whistleblower program, what works and doesn't work for you. i do think that given the fact that we only have -- yes, we have new staff but you're right. with the four additional staff, it is impossible for them to reach one or two agencies affected. so we can put together, bringing in all of the resources, like-minded folk. put together these working groups. it's worked really well. it takes a while to put it together but after six months or a year, you have your own team.

that's part of the extended ethics family or so to speak. and that's one of the best practices coming up on the federal government and i really think that could really work in the city government. and that would really address not having four people reaching out and building a broader team. >> chair ambrose: thank you. and now commissioner bush. you have patiently waited with your hand up. >> commissioner bush: hi. i don't know if patiently is the right word. thank you. director pelham, how many staff were there when you came on board as the director?

>> director pelham: i believe there were 19 positions. >> commissioner bush: and now 33? so nearly a doubling. that speaks to the effectiveness of the math you have brought. the issues i wanted to bring up here in terms of the budget and looking at it, i would like to see us develop a plan of

outcomes, what we would see as the outcome of these issues. that's one of the things the budget analyst recommended that ethics do. develop specific outcomes that are expected. if you're going to do ethics work training, what are the outcomes of that? that's one thing. secondly, in developing ethics at work program, i think it would be good for the commission itself to have an opportunity to see what is going to go into the training. i don't think it should be just fill out a form 700. i think it has to be the broader arrange of ethics requirements and some of which are done by the sf commission and some done by commission secretaries or department heads. but there are a variety of others and i think we need to

see the universe of all of that in one place. and i think the commission's participation in that process adds value. at least that's what i would like to think that we do. i would love to speak a specific plan to address a larger audience audit. i saw that you had received a staff memo on how to proceed on a lobbyist audit. i don't know if that has now been put into place pending staff to accomplish it so you have a road map ready to go or if you need to still review it and add a road map to it. we definitely need to have a

specific plan and timeline in this budget that we are looking

at. in looking at facebook, the most recent facebook posting from the

ethics commission was in april of 2018, april 17th, 2018. which is a long time to go without speaking up. and if we did nothing more than just post the agenda for each of our month's meetings and the minutes that followed, that would be more than we have now. i know that there are equivalent to facebook not in english. there's a whole list of things that i'm hoping that we are going to get brought up to date with this year. for example, the lobbyist data

sets, which has not been changed since 2017. i know there are hiccups about how to create automation on the data. but we have been looking at that for four years. it seems like after four years, we have to find another provider because that's a long time to go without being able to do that. same thing, i noticed that when we put up the people who did not file 700s, it just said they didn't file by april 8th. we don't go on to say they have filed since that time. i looked through a number of them and they filed on april 9th. yet they are still showing on the ethics web page as non

filers and some of them are elected officials who probably would like not to say they didn't file. ethics at work, it seems to me that we may want to pick up on the budget analyst which is that we provide a target of starting off with those offices. for example, building inspector. they become the first group that we try to put together. there's a sequence that we look at instead of just saying we're diving in and we have 3,000 people to train. let's start off and train all

the building inspectors or all the people who inspect nursing homes or whatever it is where there's a risk of not complying with things as fully as we would like them to do. those are some of the points. there's one additional one, that is that in the agenda for today, we talk about audit reports that have now been completed and submitted to the commission for approval. it says the audit reports have been posted on our web page. i couldn't find any place on our web page where the audit reports are posted. there's nothing labelled audit reports and maybe it is buried under another category liken forcement or something like

that. >> you have a very thorough list. i think they are helpful. a quick note about the audits and i'll speak about this in my executive report, audits that

are posted publicly on our website. they don't come for approval, they're posted publicly when completed. i'm happy to walk through or follow up with you after the meeting to show you where it can be found. >> commissioner bush: maybe you can say now so everybody in the public knows it. >> director pelham: one moment please. on the commission's home page, there's a tab for compliance and when you identify that drop down menu, it shows campaigns. when you click on campaigns, it

shows another menu that shows campaign audits. that page in two clicks takes you to a page that explains the audit process, the audit selection process we have used over the years. it explains the required records that campaigns are required to keep for their audit and it links directly to a page called audit report. on the audit reports page, that lists all audit reports from 2018 we have issued back to 1997 and prior. 1997 and 1998. it is available through campaign and campaign audit page. >> commissioner bush: as a general rule if you have to click three or more times, it is useless. it sounds like we're clicking about five times to get to audit

reports. >> director pelham: i counted three but we'll take the feedback. >> commissioner bush: in general, it has to be public access and transparency. it's not for us. it's for them. our listing of enforcement actions for example, it has the date and entity but it says under the enforcement, it is just some government code. it's like, why don't you just put letters. they don't know the violation that took place. was it a failure to report, was it a failure to report fully.

a government code doesn't tell people what they need to know. i would urge whoever is working on this stuff would look closely at how accessible the information is to a member of the public. and also as a rule, whenever these things are posted, if it's possible to update them on the facebook for those who are english speakers and on social media for other languages, that that be done as well. that's where people go for information. thank you. >> chair ambrose: i don't see any new hands. i don't think. commissioner chiu, that's a new hand. >> commissioner chiu: thank you chair ambrose. i wanted to just comment on this

idea of an outcome and i think that's a very important device and useful device to think about the ethics at work initiative and a couple of things i wanted to say about it. the outcome i think we need to be focused on is around a culture of compliance and i think it's going to be critical to communicate and convey to the city stakeholders that culture compliance is not something that come from ethics. we can help each department. we can help leaders and individual employees but each department leader owns the culture of their organization and responsible for creating that culture within their organization. when i think about this -- the goal is not that we should train

every single employee so they know all the regulatory requirements of their job. because i think that's trying to boil the ocean. successful outcome would be as a result of the ethics at work initiative, all city employees know in their capacity as a city employee, they have enhanced or special obligations for compliance around gifts and political activity and travel. they know there are things they need to abide by so we're not going to require they know every single one of them. that would be ultimately unsuccessful because we can't train 30,000 people to know all of the legal requirements. but i think what we can do is we can train and communicate and leaders can reinforce and hold them accountable for knowing they have these higher level of

obligations and that they can -- they need to know when and how to identify the need to go seek further advice from the city attorney, from the ethics commission, from hr. then that way, they creates the culture of compliance. the culture is the force that directs and influences what people will do. if the boss is not there, is the employee going to do the right thing. culture is what helps keep everyone within the guardrails. so, i think the highest impact ethics at work could have is building that level of awareness or heightened sensitivity to these issues but not to hold them accountable or require that

they know what all of the issues are, just that they have to ask the question and find out more from the experts who are tasked with knowing all of the rules and regulations like the ethics commission and public integrity department. all those different departments. that i think will be a partnership with the ethics commission and the leadership. i think what would to me not be as successful is for us to develop a training program for 3,000 people to take and at the end of it, how much do they remember. it's because all the details, people can't remember all the details but they can know travel maybe i should ask someone about that. a gift, let me double check before i accept that. that i think is the level of

impact that would be most effective. because then you have -- well, you got a gift from someone? it seems like an expensive gift. are you sure that's okay? that's how you create a culture of compliance. >> chair ambrose: thank you. i'm going to ask the moderator to call for public comment on the agenda item. just so you know, once that happens, i'm going to go ahead and take a 10 minute break before we move into the enforcement report and then on to closed session. so if you could, mr. moderator, read the notes for public comment. >> clerk: we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we are currently on the public discussion of agenda item 9

annual budget aproposed by the mayor's office for fiscal year 22-23 and discussion and possible action by commission. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to be added to the queue. you will have three minutes to provide public comment, six minutes if you're on with an interpreter. you will hear a bell with 30 seconds remaining. please stand by.

we will inflammatory jeff piers. >> i the investigation and analysis in that matter. >> all right, thank you. >> thank you, good morning, i'm the investigator and i'm here to speak on the settlement with mr. walter. before i do start speaking as a reminder i'm limited about what i can talk about today.

one is the charter probable to the issuance of probable cause report. in this matter since a settlement was breeched we are bound by the charter's confidentiality. we were not party to the settlement. any discussions with the city attorney's also i'm also unable to speak about. i'd be happy to give a bit of background on what was required and the violations were as far as the settlement and answer any questions you might have. so, permit consultant laws. permit consultant is any individual that has paid for contacting the department of building or planning or public works that require permit or contrusion project that requires a permit.

also permits from the entertainment mission. they are required to file reports with us monthly. they are required to disclose the information for consuntant services as well as contact with city departments the employees they are congress tacting and permit they are discussioning and description of the project. they also must report campaign contributions. city ballet measure committees as well. all of that is required to be on the monthly dischoice sure

report. for any information there is penalties for that. there is one mandated by the charter--i'm sorry listed in the charter. per violations it's three times the amount required to be reported in cases of campaign contribution to report contributions 3 times the amount. they also allow for late fees. any information that's notice closed on the report. that's in addition to or above. just for the admission of the

required information he admitted to 12 violations in regards to projects and how fair it was to disclose the campaign contribution. they had the maximum administrative penalty. >> you know the settlement is recommended to the did attorney it goes to the board of supervisor. has the matter been heard.

>> it's burden of proof assigned to one committee. >> we don't know which one that is. >> the government audit an over site. >> the bill approves they will hear it in close session and hear it in open session. the terms of the settlement are public. it will be in there as far as the settlement. >> there is an element for

permit consultant for the bribery which is also against the law. that's not what it's the element of that. >> that's no the reason the settlement in addition to nontarry fines. this is to sever a contractor if the city for the maximum allowable period which was five years.

what i read in the chronic call and settlement agreement about the agreement. i thought that was the bases for cities seeking that this is from engaging that. it's not recited there. it's being pursue part of the criminal indictment. >> mr. wong there is pending matter and as far as the bribery part of the city's attorney decision to bar him as a permit expediter.

>> uh-huh. >> the when of the things that concerned me about our efforts is that exit that work. what we refer to it the tone at the top the problem we are trying to remedy is corruption at the top. in the access and the private sector is a consultant. the leadership in several different departments in the city. much more quickly than our three ethics compliance trainer conveyed it. this is from that cheered

down. there was no point in bringing forward any concern about ethical behavior it was the problem started at the top and how we go about reforming that is a challenge for everyone in the leadership position in the city. i'm glad the individual pled guilty to the criminal charges i support this particular agreement. it sufficiently robust in terms of the fines and penalty to display any other perment consultant to think these rules, unfortunately, doesn't have consequences with that if

there are any other comments. that would be commissioner lee. >> thank you, madam chair. i have a few questions. do you know if there is any movement if ill's from the city or statement this is definitely a growing industry and currently, there is no checks and balance. it doesn't align with the requirement. the second question is or suggestion is right now, we really don't know whomitt

expedite error consultant. for the different departments, is there any communication because if they represent a client we won't know. is there communications between those departments to check with us. there is this person on file with ethics because they are representing a client as an expediter. this way we will have more to know who is out there.

right now, it isn't a proper way of knowing who is out there claiming to be a permit consultant. >> sure, thank you commissioner lee. i'm not familiar of the reporting agency for permit consultant other than the reporting structure. if they meet the requirements they have to file and register with us. i have to work farther with some sort of regulatory body they get certified through and get back to you. off the top of my head i'm not

familiar. you will try to foster out. one of the staff members is the expediter. you do a wonderful job perment consultant. that is something we are seeking to do more in the future. we don't know how often the city employees are there. let me no if there are some sort of requirements. i have seen this in other jurisdiction and educations for the department as far as what reporter requirements are. things get reported. this is among the reporting requirements. this is something we will do

if we hire that ethics at work we help with the outreach and it's something we are trying to do more. it's gratified early in the meeting. >> all right, thank you. >> i did, thank you very much. i have a few questions along the line in this specific case. the perfect consultant. the disclosure outside to

making gifts to people who they are seeking permits on behalf of clients. they are making payments. >> sure, so, my understanding as to the gifts question, no, i'm no familiar with the prohibition in the permit consultant law as to the making of gifts. i don't believe so when it comes to permits. in my review of the law i didn't see that in there. >> each department has people in that department if you go through some of those you can

seek contribution to a nonprofit. the relationship between the parks alliance and reck come i don't think there is a relationship between departments i think that is an open door for permit consultants. i would urge you to take a look at that and the doors be closed so that doesn't happen

again. have you sent them to all of the permit conadultants? >> well, as i speak to the settlement here it was agreed to earlier in the meeting. this has been announced publicly. as far as we have something we can take into consideration. >> i would recommend it. they need to know they are hearing from the ethics commission. why was ethics not a party to these issues and why didn't we act under our authority for

the violations involving permit consultants? why were we not involved in this? >> sure, so i think the decision to get this matter settled was the most expa dishcious route and try to bring them and handle them fully within the ethics commission. they were pursuing other matters. they were able to have that resolved. >> if i were me interrupting what you just said you stated it wasn't done because of

administrative convenance. >> i wouldn't say administrative convenance but just a decision that was made to do it. we could have brought it on our own. >> it was with the city tern. >> i was just the investigator handling the investigation arrest far as decisions on how the matter might have been brought one way it's branded is how it acts rather than watching from the sidelines. that's legally what happens in

the cases. i raise that as well as an issue. >> okay, go ahead commissioner, you had your hand up. >> go ahead. i'd like to go onto commissioner bush's remarks regarding the purchase. it's of the ethics commission in the industry not even a party. it's troubling and disappointing. in that way that this is

enforcement action. >> this is penalties. the ethics commission and authority and enforcement. i think that was a lost opportunity. my second question are more smaller. you act as a perment consultant going forward the second is the bases of the case against him was disclosed. the authority and violations.

how would the ethics commission. we put it another way. in the absence of the investigation and wrestle blower moving forward. how can we uncover this. how do we know when bad things are happening from a reporting stand point. >> without giving away the playbook we have a few ways.

they try to uncover the evidence. obviously, we did have a whistle-blower. you have contacts and yes, i will give them quiet a bit in the absence of it and you can investigate these. there are violations and something we are working through now and seeking to pursue in the future. yeah, you know, in a self reporting scheme it can be difficult but there are ways that we can uncover the evidence we can bring someone into compliance. >> thank you. i actually wanted to make a

point. one of the first things you learn as a deputy city attorney there is only one city, there is only one party. so, the city and county of san francisco is the party to the settlement agreement of violater. my reading of it was that executive director was engaged and part of the press release and announced the resolution of the case and not administrative convenience on the way. one from the city attorney office and the other from the ethics commission and looking at a smaller part of the violation of city codes. i unfortunately learned, you know, repeatedly as general

council to both report in the puc. when there is an investigation that involved the fbi and d.a. the control of that investigation. you make information available to them and screw up the next persons strategy. so the idea a lead takes this when i'm sure the ethics commission was involved and knowledgeable. going back to the larger issues. we have communication with the permit consulting community in

someway. we will forward the steplations stipula. in light of recent enforcement action i'll communicate this is where you find the information. san francisco is a big high school and everybody knows what's going on it's someone with inside knowledge on how to get your document from the election trick call division to the plumbing division. they know about these actions. if we want to remind them, we

are the engagement officer and we will be enforcing that. this could be an opportunity and send out, you know, informational item to them and remind them how they can get more information from us about how to comply. i don't believe we were sidelined in achieving this settlement result. i'll move to public comment because we do have a fairly substantial agenda item in closed session and we have the executive directors report. i don't want to runout of steam or loss the quorum. i'm sorry. commissioner bush. you are muted.

>> as i before he leave they are not required to register for permits. does that allow the opportunity for developers to team up with the nonprofit and avoid disclosures in any other actions. other consultants that are not nonprofits. >> is that something you think happened. i mean someone formed a nonprofit and advicing how to get a permit approved. >> i believe nonprofit seek perments and not required to disclose what they are doing and they are doing it with the partnership of a fore profit developer. >> they are not a perment

perment permit consulta. >> they are receiving permits but they are not being hired by a developer to get their perment for their office building. they are hired by the developer to help them by developing affordable housing i don't see that as somebody selling their access to city hall they might hire people. they might hire a permit consultant. why would they be a permit consultant? >> i don't think the disclosure requirements hinge on if you are your fulle

job is a perment consultant. it's if you receive perments worth more than a million dollars. therefore, there is a value to a fore a for-profit dever teaming up other than what is set aside and so forth. they will save a lot of trouble in obtaining permits if it's through a nonprofit agency. >> uh-huh. >> first of all, have you looked at that issue. >> um, that's to the staff. >> that's to the staff. >> commissioner bush. we have not devoted resources to that issue but we can

explore that if there is an agenda warning that. >> if there are not off-limits on gifts that perment consultants can make to city employees and off-limits concrete area the ability for a department official to seek of the behest we definitely need to open that door ands see what is behind it. they are like a lobby incompetence with that i'll ask for public comment to be called. then, if there are other comments we can take them after we see if there are any

public comment. >> we are checking to see if there are callers in the cue. if you just joined the meeting we are on agenda item tenement enforcement of staff report. if you have not done so press star 3 to be added to the public comment cue. you will have thigh minutes to provide your public comment. you will here a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining. stand by. madam chair there are callers in the cue. welcome caller. your three minutes begins now 6789. >> commissioners. i'm francisco. some of y'all have heard me speak before on the ramped

corruption that we have in this city. foremost we must remind ourselves that this investigation wouldn't have gotten there and the u.s. attorney not in california david aner southern. anderson. so he knows something about the investigation but he's allowed to say a little bit in front of the ethics commission. we, the people would like to know fully why the clocks while crooks operat

now. i sat in the meetings with the commission. it's a shame the ethics that you are more forceful and adamant. you have the ability to do the right thing and not tag along with what the so-called investigates are telling us. i know a lot about this case and the comptrollers office and city attorneys office. today, at another special meeting you will go behind closed doors and appoint a general manager and tell us they appointed the general manager. you don't know about that. that's against the brown act.

we speak and no one hear us. >> thank you. are there any farther callers

in the cue. >> yes, stand by. >> hello. >> the gentleman, i recognize his voice. you know what he just said about he spoke about nonprofits. this is exactly what's going on it's in the war.

they probably are apart of the company. it's a nonprofit organize that henry thinks so. the management company is part of bcs. just like i just heard. i told you guys in 2015 you just [inaudible] agave i gave you e-mails and phone

calls. you said some crap about circumstances. the corruption started and you were did there. there were applying this. it's like you guys are right now. i'm not happy about that. you act like you are confused you should have done that 40 years ago. so, that's why i'm really shocked. i'm shocked. all of these people that you [inaudible].

we are lucky that this is what i'm talking about. >> time has expired. >> i'm done. >> i'm not sure if the caller hung up. i didn't hear the name of the organize. i thought i heard dcs. i wasn't sure if that was what. >> the community services. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you and thank you for your comments. are there any farther public

comments. >> all right, i will close public comment and move onto it next agenda item. i there is a note that this is an important discussion and follow up on the consultant review i think we missed this in our over site. the commissioner liked the idea of having more focus on over site there. with that, i'll call reading item number 11. this is part of the discussion report. it's problematic and object rational highlight since the commissions previous meeting. director. >> thank you, chair.

the memo highlights a variety at the last commission meeting when i gave you an update through may. as i mentioned in the meeting by the chair the communication that they asked for last month to the various offices following the controller at the airport and what was sent over to those departments. so, that was attached as part of this report for your information. the budget we spoke about under item nine. we won't spend time on that unless you have other questions. we are talking about the efiling of products. these are the designated

filers this is the process and gives them enough where we are and the presence and it's youthful to them. it provides them a specific sheet for the process. they can begin with the plan for the coming year and a project that's successful. we were excited to get that out and work with the department. they spoke about the disclosure database. i'll take a quick note on that and there was a gap due to staffing changes san francisco hadage open port tool. we have been working over the past six months with the staffing we have to piece

together or the pathway of the information that will be completed this month. the information available to the public, you can correct me if it's online fill in the gap and the public can accident actively search the data fur their invest and purposes. we are glad they were able to be made. look for that by the end of this month i'll report back to you next month with specific information. also, it's up to the audit program commissioner bush you mentioned an audit. the lobbying audit program is something that's now actively in development with our new

audit manager and client review manager onboard. they joined us in the middle of april and i had been working with our audit that's on staff pending return of the other auditor that's a service worker on deployment this month. we started to put together a plan for the coming year and that's a priority we discussed with the bla office in previous meetings that's a process we are looking to keep you posted about that. one thing i wanted to highlight in the last month the audit cycle from the 2020 elections are completed. two of them discretionary

audits. we have opened them may 17th of 2019 we have not been able to make progress on them as of may of this year. two years after attempting to start those. rather than continuing to start the audits at this point the resources will be better focused going forward on the new audit program. we are launching the 2019/2020 audits that are mandatory. i communicated that to both of the committees we initially selected in 2019. we posted that as well. i wanted to highlight that and answer any questions on that point. i'm heap to report we have posted the position for the

auditor this position became vacant in september. we invite you to come to our website click on-the-jobs link and go directly to the webpage we have posted the investigator position. that window for application is closed and we are in the review process and we will keep you close to development. progress continues to get us back to the full staffing level we had targeted for the year. one note on the revenue report last month the commission asked for a clarification about one of the figures and in may, we had reported a under ethics levies by the

committee we had a $32,000 figure and the question was what contributed to that dollars amount. that was a clerical error on our part. we collected that in the revenue report other than that i'm happy to answerfy questions you might have and we can report that to you. >> thank you, i'll turn to the commissioners to see if you have questions or comments for the director. commissioner bush. you are muted commissioner bush.

>> do we have any acted for redistricting appointees. as far as ethics is concerned we let that beknown. >> i don't have an answer for that for you. i'd be happy to get that to you in july. >> good afternoon. i can briefly try to answer your question commissioner bush. regarding the task force it's before the board of supervisors they require them

to enforce that. they don't have direct authority over the redistricting task force. they don't have anything direct in that process. thank you. >> they don't make an appointment? >> that's correct. >> i wish we would, that would be nice if we did. >> i look at what's going on with that? i look at outreach to minority communities and engaging them fully. commissioner lee and chair ambrose a copy of what the community is doing statewide in trying to generate

participation in state redistricting. when i thought it was a model for an approach we might take we have an ongoing need to be involved in outreach the equity program. >> not at this time. >> okay. >> can you bring us something in july. >> we were planning to as an update. >> i read the comments from other commissioners because i'm concerned about our close

session discussion. i'll ask for public comment. i'll first hear from commissioner bell. >> very quickly, i think it's appropriate that the commissioner and staff do a follow up on the suggestion about orientation form 700 and addressing the issues in terms of culture. i suggest we do a follow up meeting and let the commissioner know that. we could put that on for

ethics at work this is important to make it effective. moderator, can you see if we have anyone that would like to speak about the director's report. >> madam, we are checking. please wait until you have been unmuted. we are discussing number 11 agenda item. it's problematic and operational if you haven't done so add this to the public comment cue. 6 minutes if you are online. when you hear the bell you

will have 30 seconds remaining. >> madam chair. we have no callers in the cue. >> public comment is closed on item number 11. we will close agenda item number 12. this is the discussion--actually. let me use my he can exee authority. i'll jump ahead to items 12 and 13 for farther public

comment and go to closed session. then we'll come back after closed session and decide if there are items for action on future meetings and or any farther beginural public comments. that's items 12 and 13. so i'll call agenda item number 14. this is discussion of possible action regarding probable cause for complaint alleging violations of the protection ordnance. article four of the san francisco campaign. possible closed session involving public comment in matters pertaining to the agenda item and then following any public comment about our going into public session.

i'll ask for a motion to assert that attorney-client privilege and we will go into section 3699-13 brown act 6.9 sunshine ordnance. we will discuss this. we will follow that and i'll have a conference with legal council about the act. the number of possible cases the instructions for any public comment on the map we intend to go in closed session to discuss.

>> you are muted mr. moderator. >> sorry about that. >> i'm jumping ahead on the script this is the closed session for item 14. >> so, you want to take public comment right now? >> yes, we are required to take public comment before we go into closed session. >> we are checking to see if there is any callers. if you just joined we are motion number 14. that's an impossible act regarding probable able cause for complaint. the wrestle plower protection

ordnance. please stand by. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to be added to the public comment cue. if you were online with an interrupter. a bell will go off if you have 30 seconds remaining. we have a caller in the cue. hello, caller. your three minutes. >> i'll be speaking about it. we are the taxpayers we are called upon to have the county

of san francisco and wasting millions of dollars. we have paid millions of dollars. this is because the ethics commission would like to have the resources. the ethics commission now should be mandated to look into what the comptroller's office is doing with the program. tons and tons of information.

the comptroller they have a disfunctional sunshine. we came to the ethics commission to get nothing done. in good faith regarding the comptroller's office. on the contrary he takes all of the information that and gives it to them. today he will be given another position in closed session. again and again they hear the ethic commission doesn't have resources. commissioners, let me tell you this. this city is separated with

corruption. you have right after the to go to the department of justice. every right to go to the department of justice. in fact, i'll approach them and i'll tell them how disfunctional our ethics commission, comptroller's office and city attorney. we cannot call ourselves if ail they do is make experiences. if all we do is get investigates that are beating around the bush. >> your three minutes has expired, sir. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, are there any farther callers in the cue? >> no, madam chair. there are no farther callers

in the cue. >> i'll ask for the motion to assert the attorney-client privilege and be in choiced section. in charter section 3669 and sunshine ordnance 57 d. do i have a motion. >> commissioner lee. >> i'll call the roll. [roll call]. 2 motion the motion is e video.

>> i'll give you a separate >> clerk: a motion has been made and seconded. i will now call the roll. [roll call]

>> clerk: that's five votes in the affirmative and no votes in the negative. >> further, announcement to the sunshine ordinance, in the closed session, the commission took two actions. in one motion, they moved not to ratify the finding of no probable cause subject to further investigation, and in a separate motion on another case made a decision to ratify the recommendation of no probable cause, and with that, i would like to move ahead and call -- >> chair ambrose, i'm sorry to interrupt. i think on the first matter, you should note that there was a dissenting vote. >> oh, i'm sorry. after i announced the vote, i apologize. and the vote not to ratify the

recommendation on probable cause, the vote was four in favor and one opposed. and do i need to identify the commissioners? >> clerk: no. >> so commissioners, bush, chiu, lee, and ambrose voted in favor not to ratify the recommendation of no probable cause, and commissioner bell voted against that motion. and then, the second motion on the other case, all five commissioners voted in favor of the motion to ratify the recommendation of no probable cause. does that cover it? so i need to go back because i skipped over agenda items 12 and 13. i am not going to call agenda item 12, which is where we

would discuss future matters, but i'm going to invite any commissioners who have future matters that they want calendared to call me, and i will work with executive director to get those on calendar. item number 13, which is required by our rules is request for -- to hear additional opportunity for public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda pursuant to ethics commission bylaws article 7, section 2, if you could, mr. moderator, find out if we have any callers in the queue. >> clerk: madam chair, we are checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. for those already on hold, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. if you are just joining this meeting, we are currently on the discussion on agenda item

13, additional opportunity for public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda pursuant to ethics commission bylaws article 7 section 2. you will have three minutes to make your public comment, and you will hear a bell chime when you have 30 seconds remaining. madam chair, we have a caller in the queue. >> thank you. >> clerk: welcome, caller. your three minutes begins now. >> so commissioners many san franciscans are fed up with the corruption that is going on on every level, and the federal

government has to stop it, much like a consent decree that is done with the san francisco police department or some other agency. now, y'all may not feel that that is necessary, but when you constantly tell us you're underfunded, you have no resources, you cannot do your jobs, and consequently, what happens in san francisco is quality of life issues are compromised. people wake up in the morning, and the first thing they have on their mind is how to rip off others? contractors, politicians, even

the clergy. even the clergy. so, commissioners, you need to reach out to the department of justice for help. this is an emergency. this first-class city is now known as a very corrupt city proven by some politicians at other levels, saying san francisco should redeem itself, and san francisco has a city has been compared to rwanda, a

third world nation. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, mr. dacosta. are there any further callers in the queue? >> clerk: please stand by. madam chair, there are no more callers in the queue. >> all right. public comment, then, on agenda item 13 is closed. and before i move for adjournment, i just wanted to say, commissioner bush, the further comment you had on the executive director report, if you want to bring that to my attention and director pelham, i'll follow up with you on that. i don't want to, i mean, go back and reopen that agenda item and public comment on that matter again. >> thank you.

>> and i don't know about you, but i'm hungry, so i'm going to adjourn the meeting, and i think, you know, i think it was deputy attorney shen that was asking do we need to vote on adjournment? who would not vote on adjournment? >> clerk: yeah, you don't have to vote on that. >> okay. thank you very much. everyone have a wonderful weekend, and the meeting is adjourned at 2:00 p.m. thank you.

>> all right, hi, everybody. good i guess afternoon now, right? sorry, i still have a city to run and things come up every now and again even when we have thinged planned. i appreciate your patience of way waiting. i'm mayor london breed. i am excited to be here at the children's creativity museum and formerly known as the zeum and which is a great place in yerba buena and standling in front of the leroy king carousel that was a good friend of mine and started on the san francisco redevelopment agency for many years and the significance of