commissioner hayon: that seems pretty straightforward, unlike some other parts of the charter. chairperson hur: when commissioner renne raised this two-step inquiry idea, i like it in part because one of the difficulties here is that in some ways the sheriff was a guinea pig. if the charter provision was so difficult for us to parse, in some ways, it does seem -- it gives me some pause for him to be removed, based on a provision that we took quite a while and had a hard time deciding exactly what it meant. but i kind of think you are right. i am not sure we have any leeway to do anything other than sustain or not sustain the charges. did you have any further thoughts on the matter? commissioner renne: we could address the question of whether or not we think that the mayor exercised his discretion in filing the charges and in proceeding in an unreasonable manner. t(as has been pointed out, it is either the charge of official misconduct is sustained by us, on our recommendation, or it is not. commissioner studley: but if four of us are inclined to believe there was official misconduct, doesn't t

commissioner renne: that it was a private matter? chairperson hur: iraq 9 and 14. -- paragraph 9 and 14. commissioner renne: i understand that he was not denying it. the response that he gives was that the surest private family matter was in a statement given to him by his attorney. still his statement. he is not disputing that he made the statement. maybe he got bad legal advice. chairperson hur: any dissenting view towards that? i am not asking about the bad legal advice, at, just in general. -- bad legal advice comment, just in general. in my view, 9 and 14, to the extent that they are factual, some of them are not, i think that the mayor did establish that the share of made a joke about -- sheriff made a joke about the press conference -- the press coverage he was receiving at his inauguration. i personally did not think that that was a joke about domestic violence. ultimately, i do not think it matters. i do not think any of these allegations, whether proven or not, could sustain a charge of official misconduct. but a curtain -- i certainly cou

commissioner hayon: that seems pretty straightforward, unlike some other parts of the charter. chairperson hur: when commissioner renne raised this two-step inquiry idea, i like it in part because one of the difficulties here is that in some ways

chairperson hur: ok, i think probably -- i appreciate the views of my fellow commissioners.i appreciate also that i am clearly in the minority here. i think they are very informed and wise use. i will say one thing, in response to commissioner studley. you are right. the language is all over the place. it could be interpreted as the people wanting to be broad. one reason i think people did not want to be so broad is because the power it gives the mayor to suspend an elected official without pay while this entire process goes on, i think, is pretty in store -- pretty extraordinary. we might become more efficient, going forward, but it is still going to be disruptive. i want to protect future mayors and elected officials from a provision i am concerned will be too vague to be applied. but i think we have pretty much settled whether or not official misconduct occurred. i think the next thing we should discuss this is what our next recommendation should be, and whether the recommendation will include a request that the sheriff be removed from office or not. i am going to put you

chair hur: i think that would be preferable. any views to the contrary? commissioner studley? vice president studley: no. i have a different point as long as we are looking at the findings, so if he wanted to conclude your point -- chair hur: that was the conclusion of my point. vice president studley: going back to a moment ago, this focuses on the staff burden of the current system, and in both number two and number four, and for me, this starting point is that the information is available more quickly and in a more usable format. it is there. it is and number four, .consistent with the comment i made a moment ago about the requirements of, at advancing the purposes, my suggestion may be as simple as changing number four to flip the two substantive elements of that sentence, to make the information publicly available in a shorter time frame and a more usable format and to conserve staff resources. i believe that is how it belongs. the commissioner -- is there any reason that would be -- >> i do not see that is a problem. chair hur: any problem with that? >> i think that is an

commissioner renne: would it be sufficient to just transmits the transcript to our discussions and our determination, without anything else? chairperson hur that could certainly be done. i think it makes the job of the board harder, because there is a lot more to read. anybody else? what do people think about the proposal? commissioner liu: that is what i was envisioning, but were you envisioning, in terms of a written summary, how we came out on the findings of fact? chairperson hur: i think we would want to explain to the board exactly how we interpreted the statute. i think if they receive this transcript, it will be difficult for them to determine what the basis was. obviously, we are deliberating in public, which is highly unusual, if you are adjudicating the matter. i guess i worry that the new ones of the arguments that have been provided -- the nuance of the arguments that have been provided would be lost if we sent them a 500 page transcript, with 300 pages before-- pages today. commissioner liu: the salian findings would be the specific findings of fact, how we came together on that, and what we decided on the two options? chair

commissioner hayon: thank you. chair hur: the other question i had was about the electronic version of schedule d. >> says schedule d, the way the state constructed electronic format for the is complicated, and as a result, the way needed to complete that is laborious in the electronic system. we are actually working on a revision that would speed up the entry of schedule d to get around some of the state format issues, but i do not expect that to come out until early next year. chair hur: i am glad to hear you are working on it. that is great. ok. any other questions or comments? is there a motion to adopt 0.1 through five, with the two amendments proposed? vice president studley: so moved. chair hur: it passes. the next item on the agenda is for section 1.126. mr. st. croix? >> when we have is to clarify some issues that have been raised dealing with the extent of the campaign finance reform and ornaments, and basically, many of the changes are technical in nature or are linguistic in nature. the one thing we wanted to do

commissioner hayon: here. chairperson hur: commissioner renne? commissioner renne: here. son hur: when we last left off, we were hearing the testimony of eliana lopez. can the staff bring ms. lopez and her attorney into the hearing room? while that's happening, just a reminder, any disruptions, we're going to have to ask the sheriff to remove anybody who makes noises that are inappropriate, any disruption, i'm asking him now to please remove somebody even without direction from me. we're trying to pay attention to the testimony. you're free to do whatever you deem necessary in light of what we're trying to accomplish here and we thank the public for your cooperation in that. obviously, the testimony is sensitive and we're really trying to pay close attention so thanks in advance for your cooperation. i will ask the attorneys the same question i asked yesterday evening, whether there are additional seats that you had reserved that you're not longer using. if that's the case, please let the sheriff know and we can allow a few more people in. if you're still waiting for other