mr. marquez. if i am wrong, i need to know this, but i understand he is an active person in san francisco politics, so i want to make sure we have someone here who is as non-partisan and unbiased as possible. >> those are good points, and we considered them carefully. our office, first of all -- we think that the preference for public entity law offices should apply here, so we looked at offices we have a reciprocal relationship with kind that should be in relatively close proximity to san francisco so as not to burden with travel or other things, and to provide this service at no cost to the citizens. of the three that we have, which we believe are all well- qualified, we think back -- i have no doubt that santa clara would provide independent advice. we have relationships with lots of different offices. we have had deputies, intense, many in our office who are in other public offices who are private firms. at this time, we have lots of dealings with these offices and the league of county counsel

mr. marquez. i keep mixing him up with the artist, so i apologize. but i do think that is a point that needs to be made. we're looking at a very specific person. also, i do want to say that, supervisor campos, we sit on the rules committee together. we have fun. wheat -- he thanks the city attorney's office for being proactive and having this conversation with us, and i'm grateful for that as well, but i will also say that i think it is his job to make sure that we are sitting here and having this conversation, so i do not look at this as an altruistic event. i think because he is running for mayor, the city attorney, he clearly cannot make these decisions or his office should not be making these decisions, and this is the kind of conversation we should be having here. supervisor campos: if i may, supervisor, i think you always have something very insightful to say, so i appreciate that. i think you make some very good points. the way i see this, for whatever it is worth, i do not think that any of us should have investments in who specifically ends