mr. gibnor. >> on this last amendment, if i can jump in, offline discussing with supervisor fewer's staff, just two -- two quick thoughts. one, this is -- this new language states i think for clarity what is implied in the text of the ordinance. this body, like all advisory bodies that the board creates, will not have decisionmaking authority over the executive branch, including the decisionmaking authority over any employment matters? >> that's clearly laid out in the charter of the city. >> right, right. so the language is legally unnecessary, although certainly up to -- up to the committee if you want to add that language. if you do, i would suggest not specifying the second piece of that clause about the -- that authority. i think that it's fair in this section of the code to simply say that this body does not have the authority to hire, fire or evaluate employees. >> got it, thank you very much. yes, that was strictly included for clarification. thank you very much. and, chair, also you ment

mr. gibnor. and every person on this committee will be a san francisco resident as per required by article 5, unless waived by the board. and so i want to thank everyone for coming today and giving us your comments and i think that we first thought about having a commission and you're right, we got a lot of pushback on it. so we heard from the community and we think that this oversight committee is so needed now. i will not say that this might be needed in five years but right now when we are rolling out a program and i think that the supervisor knows that when we wrote this ordinance that we were both on the rules committee together and a lot of ideas came forward and a lot of thought. and, quite frankly, that we did not have the expertise on the board. but we made that legislation and that ordinance anyway and created it. but now we really want to hear on the ground, is it working? does it need amendment? how should we amend it? how should we meet the needs of our equity applicants? , quite fra