From Pacific Islander berry want to make a few comments on the property ballot for the regulation of expenditure lobbyists as ive testified month lobbying is accomplished through the compensation of people to lobby city officials dribble the category was deleted from the law in 2010 because in part very few entities qualified since it appears that you have decided to move forward with adding back the expenditure lobbyists category to the ordinance i would like to thank commissioner renne and city stiff tar stimuli simplifying the definition of city lobbyist it provide for clarity over the previous versions and is consistent with the terminal in the lobbying laws i want to bring your attention one matter not previous discussion since the term expenditure lobbyists will apply inform any person pa makes payment of 2,500 to urge others to lobby the city officers this law my a apply to vendors of major projection in San Francisco that may file 5 reports with the notification approve or disapprove under the developer disclosures law a major project as a real estate project in San Francisco where the Planning Commission or other lead agencies are certified an eir under the cool environmental ceqa and the estimated construction exceeds one Million Dollars within thirty days of the eir certification or the adaptation of a final environmental determination the developer must pay the 5,600 following fee and disclosure a nonprofit to whom the developer and others have may donations of 5,000 or more since the date one year before the environmental application was filed if that nonprofit massachusetts has made more than one contact with the city officers or testified regarding the projections projects theyll file 4 querulously recorded recorded and since the developers are required to file reports it will impose a tremendous burden on developers to file reports as expenditure lobbyists i urge you to exempt from the proposal proposed ballot measures those restraining order who are subject to the developer law and woven finally comment the nonprofit there was a consensus and a at the meeting all individuals and nonprofits had equally quality as expenditure lobbyists and the burden not only on profit making thank you. Thank you. Commissioners with nelson i urge you to continue this great constitution regarding this legislation and not rush to place this on the ballot immediately i have no issue going to it eventually but the meeting shows how important to talk about the law how it impacts different lobbyists commissioner renne youre the legislative body your drafting while i get we shouldnt get catch up in all nuances those are big issues were discussing with respect to the ballot awhile i get targeting the ubers and airbnb the oneus on nonprofit need not maintains in the long run those are things we should continue to discuss the implications discussion about the pretty sure lobbying regime were picking parts from the previous liquor regime and those parts dont fit well, were hearing issues of double reporting i think in some ways the airbnb that hires hires the big fancy lobbying firm putting those ads and doing this information their filing as contract lobbyists and only closer the conversation for the firm whereas the nonprofit has to itemize all expenditures at one thousand delores were not on equal footing i urge you to continue the discussion no rush i encourage you to take a few more months maybe only another meeting and hash outlets put things with work on the ballot or before did board thank you. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners my name is chris wright the executive director of the committee on jobs and registered contact lobbyist just to i guess refer to some of the comments before im concerned about double report as a contact lobbyist i have to file which is fine i love the net file system it is great i would hope that the commission and the staff are combrrnd in this legislation to make it as seem also as possible not to file another paper reports or have to pay another fee or whatever it should be incorporated within the net filing system we currently have i also want to point out that an issue on section 2. 110 which is payment 11 lines 11 and telephone it refers to the corporations the name of each officer of that corporation that could be a lot so lets say youre a tier one bang have offices all over the gloib want to put two atms under the district you have to file or do a get a conditional use permit having meetings and getting people involved and engaged im not sure it is necessary to have all 2 thousand offices to be submitted to the Ethics Commission unless youre the head of Human Resources to be listed theres probably a way to russet that so we know who you are going after this is going to the comments by commissioner hur that plain clothes say you dont want all 2 thesis officers at a bank to go be filed under the initial draft any less closer gloss hurdle it is important to get this done right the first time and ill ask you review that one portion a comment on the airbnb i know there are a lot of the commercials im an attorney but the commercials as played will not be included or covered by this legislation and. What would you propose instead of current language the name of the officer that controlled the expenditure or who authorized the expenditure or the name of the company but you dont need ever officer of a large business. Thank you. Good evening im sharon agency a form ethics director from 2003 and friends of ethics and in the interest of time commissioners i strongly urge support of this measure for the November BallotEthics Commission has the power and i urge you to eye our authority and place the measure on the ballot thank you. Thank you any other comments i will call the question and i will say off the record that the reason why seconded why i support it primarily because it only brings us in line with the other local Ethics Commissions and jurisdictions in california and does reestablish what was the rules in San Francisco prior to the simplification of the lobbyists any other comment before just a couple commissioner renne one represents to the proposal that was made i get it i see a lot of sense to a situation you have to put down the names of 2 thousand officers what if we had an amendment to lines 11 and telephone that limited the officers to the sea level officers youre getting the main officers of the corporation and the people that actually were directly involved the authorities. Just to clarify you when say sea level im not familiar with and like executive liquor the ceo or the cfo or a chief Financial Officer the fees. What would be effective. Would you recommend putting in the language sea level . We would need Something Else less parochial i apologize. You could do who authorized the expenditure id like to put sea level. My intent to include both but im not sure that sea level will be an appropriate term i am not it that something we can workout. Well, theyre officer is what they are. Corporate officers. Corporate officers thats clears enough their corporate officers. Like ceo or cfo. Like the directions and officers are generally all the ceo, cfos a corporate officer. Should we put the joy and danger each of corporate officer for example ceo, co o, cfo what line your proposing to modify. Lines 11 and 12 of page 11. Just by way of suggestion i know generally in terms of California Law for corporations i have to have a cfo and ceo and secretary i guess. I dont know if you want secretary but is it could be those 3 for example, and audio in the person that actually was in charge of making the expenditure it wouldnt quality of life you ct o. Or c i o. Yeah. I think that makes sense it is maybe the ceos or the cfo e. R. Secretary and the authorizing officer that authorized the expenditure. Sure a friendly amendment mr. Chair. My other question for the Group Comment i accept what commissioner Vice President haney said we cant fix everything or legislation late everybody or everything in the actual ordinances there will be regulations that are implemented but as a direction to the staff and amending the regulation we have to think about how employees of nonprofits and for profits whoever are counted in this clearly that contemplates but give sufficient direction to for profit and nonprofit how to be counted and 31 how they should count properly. Call the question, 2013 opposed . Hearing none it carries unanimously 5 to 0. Turn to item number 4 discussion and possible action regarding commissioners responses to the 2014, 2015 civil grand juror reports reporting to whistle blower reporting. That report was issued a couple of weeks ago and the Ethics Commission is required to respond that is fairly 12r5ur8d the service grand jury is recommending to make improvements to the whistle blower ordinance in the Commission Adopts the language the draft language ive presented the commission will be xhimentd to taking on this project i expect of well have the corporation of 4 departments we will dealer to do this in 2016. Any commissioners are any comments on the proposed responses that the staffer is prepared to the recommendations . Call for any Public Comment good evening commissioners and mr. Sincroy im a with his i will blower i brought any complaint and my retaliation complaint in the Ethics Commission in 2010 all of them were dismissed i sued the city and got a 750,000 and the city had to pay 1. 2 million hit for the taxpayers notice of violation records show that whistle blowers claims have been investigated since june of 1995 some 60 retaliation complaints through the notifications not one zero have been substantiated it is for the benchmark issued by the Big Corporation that studies 8 thousand whistle blower hostile line it is 10 percent internationally here zero percent so this staggering statistics suggests the Ethics Commission is complexity in the repression of City Employees with break ranks in order to serve the Public Interest this commissioner is a dead end for whistle blowers first of all you whistle blowers have threats not assets your investigations are sfoishl and theres aimed at exordinarily respondent thats the intention instead of being have not you do submit to city its third reading whos duties to defend city officials that are exposes by whistle blowers are that the City Attorney is opposed to whistle blowers those your staff is afraid to substantiate retaliation allegations if they did they would face budget cuts and laugh offends and traded the same things it where in relation he will blowers are treated as threat so nevertheless, if you continue to relocate and buyer retaliation claims the whole operation is unget california and incredible start bid implementing the civil grand jury recommendations we need a change in attitude naming started to view whistle lowers as potential assets instead of liability until that happens i would recommend avoiding the Ethics Commission and taking whistle blower concerns circle to the public to the media or the courts thank you very much. Thank you and im patrick shaw im hoping the Ethics Commission will find a way since you passed putting a ballot measure on regarding expenditure lobby that youll find a way to put a measure to strengthen the whistle blower protection ordinance because my hunch is under the current assignment and at the board of supervisors theyre not going to take action i just finished up my menu article that focuses on the you go will i truth to retarlts keep their city employment awhile those who are wrongfully retaliated against dont i followed up with the City Attorneys office dr. Curry submitted a records request in 2012 seeking records on prohibited personal practice lawsuits that were filed against the city as time i wrote an article in april of 2012 hundred and 5 such cases in the last 3 years under mayor ed lee it has soared and another hundred and 87 cases have been added for a total of 2 hundred and 92 of those while they have been only 14 wrongful terms cases between 2007 and 12 there are have been 23rd settled in the last 3 years and 9 outstanding a total of 46 we have an epidemic of wrongful termination in this city you need to do something about this to retarlts shouldnt be coping their jobs awhile dedicated Civil Servant like let me find a few names like derrick occur and woman at the Police Commission that was fired by executive officer lost her job kelly ohare and then joanne helping in her over at the City Attorneys office you really need to find the ethical encourage to protect the whistle blowers yourself. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners alana smith a friend of ethics but the past floor person of the 20142015 grand jury not a representative of the current jury i appreciate that the jury that service ended up the 20142015 hearing picked up our recommendations to look at the whistle blower and to strengthen it and its a good step in the right direction i appreciate staffs draft this they presented in terms of responding to the recommendations and that the responseed seem to be positive responses that youre willing to look at the recommendations and side what you can do it is fairly valuable i want to remind you once you have at represents from the civil grand jury you have a certain obligation to answer with specific the way the penal code reads is that if you are not saying this is unreasonable if you are saying if youre not going to do if you, in fact, are saying youre going to do it the represents has not been implement within a set timeframe so if it has not been implemented you should be responding to have it implemented by such and such or 3 the recommendations requires further analysis and the agency must done the additional studies needed and the grand jury expects the recorded within 6 months as i read the elements you have in front of you thats basically where you are it needs further analysis you dont have the excuse me. The issues you should be looking at you need to lay out a bit of a game plan to basically respond to the grand juror and the other board of supervisors to say within 6 months this was were going to be able to do and move forward well give you periodic update. Thank you for the time. Thank you. Commissioners charley again i want to let you know in the past, when the consistent difficulties with the Sunshine Task force and how this body was going to proceeded to handle complaints from were referred to you by the sunshine finding body what you did was deliberated to commissioner harmon that was the form president and she went to work as a subcommittee won i believe and came up with a set of recommendations for you to as a body how to proceed with dealing with sunshine complaints that have been referred the same could be true with the witnesses he will blower that process can apply you can pollinate a subcommittee person to take into account what this body does with whistle blower complaints and what i could do better commissioner harmon spent some time on that question of the Sunshine Task force it may have been a year she the great job i think this is a loose end and now youre about 20 years old we should grow up. Youve anticipated im going to see if i can get a volunteer. Any other Public Comment . Any further discussion among the commission . I am going to ask if anyone wants to volunteer as commissioner renne did with the legislation we just discussed but would like to take on as a task to assisted in responding to and prep response to the recommendations . Youre putting us all on the spot. Hearing none at the moment ill see whether or not i can find a volunteer maybe ill have to take it on. Achiever i have a question maybe for the City Attorney one finding i had a question about number 4 the changing of the burden of proof for the complainant is that something we can implement . So my understanding the burden of proof set up it mirrors sort of a lot how did the statutory claims come up and i have preserve and interpret that as subjecting to the prelims of the preliminary interview stage that is something the commission can take up that is one of the project on the Going Forward calendar thats a reoccurring issue who is what should preliminary be so it showcase something we can take into account. Thank you. Turning to item number 6 on the agenda the discussion and possible for the matters subject under Chapter Three of the Ethics Commission report as the commissioners may recall this is a matter that was before us some months ago and is now came back to us from the Sunshine Committee after the Sunshine Task force after we sent it back to them. Thats correct but by way of classification did the commission approve the draft responses to the before i all right. Ive been requirement i didnt get a specific motions does anybody have a motion to approve the responds. Second. All right. Any discussion . Any Public Comment from we vote on this