mr. schenn? >> i think i would need a little more guidance from the supervisor which way we're going, whether we want to include the concept or not. i'm not sure i'm in a position to make that call. >> president breed: supervisor tang? >> supervisor tang: i'll go on the side to do that. >> president breed: ok. so we're going to hold off on the third amendment and we anticipate a particular change in that regard and supervisor peskin, let's go to your amendments starting with amendment number 1. >> supervisor peskin: madame president, just one second. making sausage is very difficult without having my colleague supervisor tang. i addressed 1.7, land use matters, this is the only place supervisor tang and i are not on the same page. >> president breed: which is amendment number 1? >> supervisor peskin: correct. it is my desire to get large developer money out of politics before a decision-making body whether it's the planning commission, the board of appeals, this body, to that end in effort to com

mr. schenn, do we need that language in order to do it? do we need to mirror the language of state law? do we need the language or based on supervisor tang's amendment, can we just do it and you'll figure it out? >> if only it were so easy. i think the way to default to state law in terms of the duration, would be to delete the last portion of subsection 5 on page 11, lines 5-9. and it sounds like, please feel free to correct me, you're comfortable with the disclaimer at the end of the ads, it's the duration you want to default to state law? >> supervisor tang: through the chair, i agree with the verbal part spoken at the end of the advertisement, but the duration would follow state law. >> right, but for video -- if i could clarify through the president, are you also proposing that for video ads the disclaimer would be at the end? >> for the video, it would follow state law which is flexible whether it appears at the end or the beginning. >> at the end of the day, anything we take out of this provision, thank you for the clarification, is going to default to state law. so if all you wa

mr. schenn. >> chair, briefly. if you refer to commissioner lee's amendment it's used in subsection 1 lines 4 and 5 page two. so it's the same as the conflict of interest prohibition but flush ought -- flushing outed the idea of use or office. >> ah. >> would overlap with conflict of from law but in some circumstances it can go beyond. it kind of goes both ways. >> again, i would respectfully suggest that we not take commissioner lee's amendments with regard to commissioner chu's amendments then i'll get to the amendments i have. i want it to affect every race as soon as it can affect it. as soon as there are provisions in file ending in 80 those i believe should be implemented on the effective date of the ordinance when it becomes law 30 days after the mayor signs it or it goes into effect without the mayor's signature. there's other provisions in consultation with staff will require formed to be create and negotiations with net file and to that end as one of my amendments, my seventh amendment, as a matter of fac

mr. schenn, does that mean we need to pass it and then send it back to the ethics commission for clarity? mr. schenn, just for clarity, so at this time, the goal was to pass -- to take the vote on the amended legislation and then to kick it back over to the ethics commission. >> now in the hands of the ethics commission? >> president breed: i'm asking you just to clarify. >> up to you, do you want a motion to return it? >> president breed: at this time, we are not going to vote to approve it, we need to forward this item to the ethics commission for review and hopefully approval. so can i take that motion? moved by supervisor tang, seconded by supervisor cohen, can we take that without objection? without objection, the item is in your hands. >> thank you, madame president. i would like to summarize the amendments that have been discussed so we can all be clear on what the ordinance contains at this point. commissioner cop, >> thank you, madame chair. i recommend that the commission consider the now broadly amended version at its april meeting. i would not vote for such version tonight. af