as i have been council for the ethics commission, my interpretation of what the ethics commissioner would do when it comes to you is provide you with a written record, be here to describe the process that they went through if you have any questions about the process that they went through, answer any questions. i think it would justifiably be uncomfortable trying to explain or expand upon any recommendations or findings made. those findings were made by the body as a whole. as a background, the fundamental issue is the party is being provided with due process. i do not think this issue is a due process issue. whether you want to hear from the ethics commission, whether you do not want to hear from them. whether they talk to you for 5 minutes or 20 minutes, i do not think it is a due process issue. >> if i could follow up with one question, you said the amount of time, five minutes or 20 minutes, does not necessarily affect the due process issue. you could have a 5 or 810-minute presentation instead of a 20- minute presentation. i would throw that out there as a possible idea. supervisor t

to be blunt, i look at the ethics commission as a lap dog commission. and that is not healthy for san francisco's democracy. please, my take-home message for you today is develop strong watch dog principals. carry them out. start enforcing the power and the decisions that are coming here from the task force when we're not getting documents or being able to -- not adhering to the law. i have a statement for the record and one copy for the chair. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. oliver luby here. regarding a package of campaign finance reform amendments proposed by your staff and passed in november, the report does not fully describe the rejection that the amendment package effectively received of the june 7 meeting of the board of supervisors rules committee. the report summarizes the outcome in rules by asking they were engaged in another public process regarding the amendments and that the frequency of disclosure should not be reduced. it did not mention was the strong public outcry about the amendments. not only did the amendments decrease b

taking out the ethics commission presentation in 20 minutes. allowing the ethics commission to answer questions they may have. >> supervisor avalos made a motion that instead of having a potential presentation of up to 20 minutes that there not be an opportunity. that is seconded by supervisor campos. >> i would like to speak to the motion a little bit. >> we have an established pattern here. we have a formal way of doing business. planning would make a presentation. a lot of the time is regulated. i would not have an opportunity to listen to some of the reason that the ethics commission may have. that they would be able to articulate that there written document would not reflect. their written document would not necessarily reflect. i would be interesting to -- interested to hear from the ethics commission. >> i raised this issue because, as i noted, we have a process. what we are dealing with is something that is very unique. i don't know that the same process applies. maybe this is a question for our

taking out the ethics commission presentation in 20 minutes. allowing the ethics commission to answer questions they may have. >> supervisor avalos made a motion that instead of having a potential presentation of up to 20 minutes that there not be an opportunity. that is seconded by supervisor campos. >> i would like to speak to the motion a little bit. >> we have an established pattern here. we have a formal way of doing business. planning would make a presentation. a lot of the time is regulated. i would not have an opportunity to listen to some of the reason that the ethics commission may have. that they would be able to articulate that there written document would not reflect. their written

the question is of ethics. i am sure you are all ethical persons.even an unethical person thinks that he or she is an ethical person. the question of ethics is not what you think. you have to be in a position to act as an ethical person. i watched mirkarimi during the whole process. i have seen him be very ethical, very gentlemanly through the whole process. i have not seen anybody even coming close to him as his actions being ethical. i hope that you can see him in action. follow what he has done during the whole process. he has seen a lot of injustice, but acted very ethically. ithanks very much. >> good afternoon. my name is barry. i live in san rafael, but i have been following these hearings on line. and at the same time, looking at your background. on the web site you have your biographees. each of you were appointed by a different entity. three of you were appointed by parties that have a very important concern in this process. i think it is important, whenever your decision, that you talk about the fact that the person who appointed you may

you a going to get a recommendation by the ethics commission.say one thing, the first thing to do is to fight it. i will tell you why. there are so many things going wrong. there was a talk about it. it was excellent. there are many things that need to be said over and over again. last time i was here, you were in a very tenuous position. it's very difficult position. you a going to be receiving a recommendation to begin work. there were notes charges. there was a minor criminal offense. he was charged. he wants to not only fight him, he wants to bar him for life. he suspended him without pay. his wife, his son without any money. that is wrong. how far as a human being can be to do that, not a human being. a monster. the ridiculousness. he calls the sheriff and a woman be deaater. i am waiting for an apology or a sanction. i will sit down. >> thank you, next speaker. if i could ask folks, we need have only one person speaking at a time. >> good evening. i am his student of the city college. i am here to speak for the noncredit program. my husban

you a going to get a recommendation by the ethics commission.say one thing, the first thing to do is to fight it. i will tell you why. there are so many things going wrong. there was a talk about it. it was excellent. there are many things that need to be said over and over again. last time i was here, you were in a very tenuous position. it's very difficult position. you a going to be receiving a recommendation to begin work. there were notes charges. there was a minor criminal offense. he was charged. he wants to not only fight him, he wants to bar him for life.

ethics code.s meant to keep conlficts of interest from affecting how the city does business. and prevent nd abuse of tax dollars.12:05:41 "so i think that there are other issues on ethics that once they hit the mayor's office, how these tickets are allocated." today the debate is over tickets. free passes to jay z and beyonce concerts,.given to the mayor and council members by a contractor running the city owned 1st maainer arena the questiin today...is okay for top city officials to accept free tickets to sold out concerts.and not let anyone know about..a debate that goes to the heart of what "it's not a miiues of city :37 property"in the case of the tickets... the board debates if the freebies consitutute a gift from a firm doing business with the cityeven though the mayor says are simply a perk that comes with the office.14:11:54 i think when your outlet and other are focusing on practice that's been going on since 88 it tells me one thing.. that crime is gone down,but the ethics board has doub