and then, you'll see subsection d was added at the city attorney's languaadvice to mak that we include language that we don't include the board of supervisors there. so i will turn it over to the city attorney. >> thank you, pat. this is something that we took a very close comment following a comment from the first budget and finance committee, and also hearing comments others made around the time about that. i think in hearing the questions, there were a number of questions about what is the reaccusal view's purpose, and how would we count this 1% trigger for a review, so i just wanted to provide a bit of background on that. this language and thrust of this is really a basic tran parency issue. it would provide a way for these who recuse under the law, to do so for a good thing, in order to avoid conflicts. it would give the public a chance to understand repeated recusals, so there would be an opportunity to engage. if there is a repeated recusal, and we'll get into how this would calculate that, there is a process for the ethics commission to review those recusals, and determine if t

and then, you'll see subsection d was added at the city attorney's languaadvice to mak that we include language that we don't include the board of supervisors there. so i will turn it over to the city attorney. >> thank you, pat. this is something that we took a very close comment following a comment from the first budget and finance committee, and also hearing comments others made around the time about that. i think in hearing the questions, there were a number of questions about what is the reaccusal view's purpose, and how would we count this 1% trigger for a review, so i just wanted to provide a bit of

and then, you'll see subsection d was added at the city attorney's languaadvice to mak th