mr. grossman's comments, not only has the sunshine ordinance been able to meet. and neither have the subcommittees which are to do follow-up on prior matters and decisions and so on. the sunshine task force has it knee -- shot in the knees and unable to function any way whatsoever for the public. and i would agree with prior speakers and say that the agenda item which i would have more to say on, particularly with specifics. should strongly, you should consider postponing action. it's a little dismaying to come into the room and find 12 items i counted on the table. and not one single one appears to be listed as an explanatory document. now are you telling me between the time that the agenda was posted and these materials were provided to the members of your commission and the public. there was nothing available at the time? this agenda went out. you are mandated to show what the explanatory documents are that have been distributed to your body. and to do so on the agenda. otherwise there is absolutely no way for anyone to know that there are documents available.

mr. grossman. >> i just mentioned it. >> okay. so the issue is -- >> no, i was going to see if you want to look at 6724. >> yeah, i would like it. do we have it? can we put it on the overhead for the rest of the commissioners to see it? i am disappointed that i left my -- at the office. there it is. >> at the beginning of it. and then after we get to "b" little 2. it goes over to the next page. (inaudible) personal information. all the lists. and that's seven. and then to law enforcement information. (inaudible) >> i think we are familiar with it and have read it many times. what we are trying to find is what the right source of law is to refer to. we know that the list is there. it's which is the right section to create that umbrella. >> 6720-b is the definition. you want to use that as the definition, that's fine. i don't think that staff has objection to that. what other public comment was 6724 outlines documents that must be disclosed. if you rather tie that into the definition, that would be fine too. >> okay. >> one thing th

mr. grossman will correct me if i am wrong. the sunshine task force is a quasi-judicial body. they have already conducted their investigation. you shouldn't be redoing their work. as to p, the definition reads, referral is a written document from the task force to the commission initiating an ethics commission complaint. that's not what the process is. when the task force forwards you a matter for enforcement, it's for enforcement of a complaint previously heard at the task force. it is not initiating a brand-new complaint [buzzer] with the etc. -- ethics commission. you need to rework the wording of 2-p before you adopt it. >> good evening, bruce wolf. two commissionary studley's question. we went over this in the april meeting. it was clear in the ordinance that there are two ways, pathways that the task force can ask for enforcement. one is through the willful failure misconduct path. and the other path it can choose any other appropriate entity, city agency or what have you, to provide enforcement. but to your additional question with regards to supervisor of records, in 6