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

. >> andrew schenn. just to briefly clarify and refocus so the private right of action in the campaign of government of conduct code not affected by commissioner kop's proposed amendment and a want ta if adopted it would require continuance and whether it would be required would require another joint meeting and ethics committee or some other route towards passage. >> okay. thank you, mr. schenn. chair chu. >> thank you, madame president. other commissioners? commissioner lee. >> on this issue or to present another amendment? >> either. >> add -- madame chair and madame president i rise for to amend section a, subsection 1 on line 17. sorry, cain see -- by deleting the last sentence or an organization with which he or she is associated. i agree with chair chu that we are here with a common gold of eradicating -- goal of erad -- eradicating corruption and pay to play and his ordinance, especially this section as currently written will have unintended consequences on non-profit organizations. i started my

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

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

>> reporter: schenn shally.n you get into the conversation with people that are immigration hawks, they apply the term amnesty to anything and you may see a sloppiness that the daca program con flats to some future amnesty or some program that may or may not exist and you get into this slippery slope argument but that is the most reason i would think of where the president would inflate these thing because as you point out there is no such thing as new daca recipients from people crossing the border today and tomorrow and any time in the future. >> growing up i can't remember telling my parents i was just being sloppy when i as lying. that wouldn't be a defense. that is just me. who knows. >> i wouldn't argue. >> thank you very much. appreciate it. >>> and joining me now is joaquin castro of tax. congressman, thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> you told kasie hunt you did not want to fund the border wall and in exchange for daca was not going to happen. republicans control kog. do you think

increase in arrests coming out of the criminal alien program because the individuals will be able to schenn 100% of the people that get arrested in those jurisdictions. not only that, it's a force multiplication benefit because our own officers, our deportation officers right now working those jails will be able to redeploy to other facilities to do additional at-large apprehensions, to work on things like the docket to move that docket along faster, and also to take people off the non-detained docket and put them back into custody so we can effectuate removal. yes, we expect that this number is going to be -- to put us right where we need to be for fy-'19. >> thank you. >> ms. roybal-allard. >> let me begin by saying and i agree with my colleague dr. harris that we should take into the account the lawful officials and respect the dangerous situations that they face every day. however, based on the rhetoric of this administration it seems not to appreciate the concerns that many state and local government and local law enforcement officials have regarding their more direct association with