pilpel. >> we're watching, mr. pilpel. >> that is right. in connection with the november, 2012 election, i would anticipate we're going to get a report from staff about the effectiveness of the public financing program. i assume, although i didn't see a survey that there was a survey after the november election, maybe? so i'm looking forward to hearing more about that. there was reference somewhere in here about -- or maybe it was discussed earlier about the number of audits. there is no discussion in the executive director's report about the status of audits, where we are, since we're halfway through the year? are we halfway through the audits that were scheduled? kind of the audit status? i continue to note that although i guess we got past the instant issue with chris jackson that we still have an outstanding balance that mr. jackson owes the city. i continue to believe that we should publish a list of all the bad actors that have outstanding fees, fines, forms out. and i wanted to note on page 4 the technology upgrades. i would like to

pilpel you may continue. mr. shaw, please give mr. pilpel a chance to speak. thank you. >> so to conclude, i believe that those three pages should be provided. neither memo discusses what the staff's rationale for non-disclosure at the time of the original request was. that may be something that is worth discussing. so i think it goes to the question of whether there was a willful violation or a different sort of matter? i believe mr. menat shaw is free to make a request at any time, particularly now that he believes that the matter is concluded and to the extent that there are records available post a concluded investigation. there may be additional records that are now subject to disclosure. it really turns on what was available at the time a request was made? so just my final point, i am particularly troubled by the fact that apparently the commission has received either all 24 pages or at least the three pages and is able to review and consider those, which the public obviously hasn't seen, because that is the subject of the matter before us. i don't find

>> david pilpel. one of my favorite topics continues to be the list of bad people. i really would love for the new year, if we could put together the list of all of the individuals who owe fees, fines, forms and other things starting with f to the commission and why and periodically update that and work to get people off that list. i know i have said this many, many times before the commission. it would just be great if we could do that at some point and the goal of course is not to shame or publicize, but to get people off that list. we would really prefer

>> david pilpel. one of my favorite topics continues to be the list of bad people. i really would love for the new year, if we could put together the list of all of the individuals who owe fees, fines, forms and other things starting with f to the commission and why and periodically update that and work to get people off that list. i know i have said this many, many times before the commission. it would just be great if we could do that at some point and the goal of course is not to shame or publicize, but to get people off that list. we would really prefer that the people comply and i think not compiling that and publicizing that makes it feel people can get away with stuff and if they ride out the statute of limitations long enough, there won't be any penalty? >> how long is that list? >> non-filers? >> i don't think we know. there are different people that or on the list? >> you are talking about [kpao-eupbg/] combining three or four different lists? >> correct. >> i think that is worth putting on our list on the website. >> and if i could conclude my last commen

pilpel's changes are good, unless mr. st. croix, there is something that we need know? any other changes? to the draft minutes? did you guys catch those? is there a motion to adopt the minutes as amended? >> so moved. >> second.

>> david pilpel, a number of items starting with memo. i don't know why commissioner renne fell off the letterhead here. i apologize and i hope he is still with us and perhaps it's just an oversight. plus the date should be 2013. this is actually not a lot of detail. it's like no detail. and this is actually a required annual hearing on the budget pursuant to the charter. i appreciate commissioner hayon's question and the director's answer. i think in whatever transmittal comes from the commission and the staff to the mayor and controller should include some of the that language about things that aren't getting done, could be done, could be done better. i think that very much supports the budget request. and i think that in general terms, that the commission should not acsaid accede and probably not make additional requests for funds, but note there is additional work that could be done with other resources. and hey, i will continue to say if there is a need for a cut, i think we should reevaluate the cost of being on sfgovtv and reserve

david pilpel. as you well-know complainants start out filing a complaint. they spend endless hours waiting for their items to be scheduled and calendared and they go through a rigorous process of evaluating alleged complaints, but when the sunshine task force finishes their determination they do not title and forward to you an alleged order of determination. they send you an order of determination. don't put the word "alleged" in your title of the new proceedings. because the point the sunshine case ends up in a referral for enforcement, at ethics, it's no longer an allegation. thank you. >> on the -- with respect to the title of the ordinance, or our response to the ordinance and our handling of the ordinances, i think the titles are fine. i don't know if any other commissioners have thoughts. my view is that we do handle some sunshine complaints directly. we handle some that the task force would have made a determination on, but ultimately i think the regulations are clear and the title accurately reflects more or less what we're trying to do with them. t

. >> david pilpel. i will remind the commission self years ago we had attached to the executive director's report a six-month forward calendar of topics and hearings that sort of withered away after a while. i think that would be helpful to list those things that we know or intend to have happen in the next few months, and those things that haven't yet been scheduled, but are intended to happen. there are some things that are on an annual schedule and other things, as-needed. i would really encourage you to develop that, and maintain it. i think it would be helpful for you and the staff. >> the next item on the agenda is public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda that are within the jurisdiction of the ethics commission. >> i beg your indulgence for speaking during public comment and i promise not to come again. the library commissioners are appointed by the mayor. one of the library commissioners, michael briar resigned june 11th. i visited the ethics commission's office in the