May have been some liability that we ought to have caught. We have a handful more matters under investigation. We are up to 93, twice as many matters under investigation then waiting for our triage. The amount of time that it takes investigators to get through those has either leveled off or begun to decline coming in now at 14. 5 months. Excuse me, mr. Pierce. On the preliminary review matters there was some Public Comment that came in on agenda item number six. I would just note for our discussion next month, and also for your consideration as you think about this, the comment had suggested adopting the practice of using warning letters. I would like to make sure that we include that as part of our discussion Going Forward where it would be i think its in between so you are not doing outright just so. It does not lead to a fullblown investigation either. Is it a good middle ground that i think is worth discussing and employing explain the benefit of adopting get thank you for flagging that. I am familiar with that Public Comment. We can speak about it in greater depth at the next meeting. I would just note at least one, and i think more of the ordinances under our jurisdiction indicate our ability to use running letters as a tool of enforcement. I think the ability of the division to use warning letters is certainly implied in the charter, if we can seek penalties. I dont see any reason why we cannot issue a warning letter in any instance. I am not sure that we need a regulation. It would define our capacity to do so. I would add that we do in fact issue warning letters. I issued one just two weeks ago. The public would not be aware of those, because we do not publicize them in the same way we do stipulations. We can talk and maybe get advice from the City Attorneys Office about whether publicizing a warning letter would violate the confidentiality provision in the charter which state that all investigative documents prior to funding of probable cause are to remain confidential. Issuing a warning letter on the heels of a dismissal would be prior to a determination of probable cause. It would reveal, for example, the existence of complaint where the investigation it may be under the law of this jurisdiction were not able to publicize those warning letters. It doesnt prevent us from using that tool and potentially from using it more often than we do currently. Could you please work with mr. Pierce, and be able to provide clarity for us next month . That would be great. Lets see. The commission science collection officer continues to advance her sweep of on late unpaid late fees. She is conducting a wholesale audit late fee program. She is finalizing another set of warning letters to delinquent filers. I note that since the beginning of her effort, to collect unpaid fees she has collected Something Like 7000 in previously unpaid fees. That is separate from fees that continue to come in as a result of an initial selection letter. That is in response to warning letters that she has sent out to filers who prefer to not be referred to the bureau of delinquent. Turning to the bureau, fortunately there are not up dates as to mr. Jackson, or ms. Norman. One update on isabel or bono is that he or she resides or works in new york. The bureau has decided we do not have jurisdiction to sue somebody who resides in new york area admittedly it has been a while since i have taken civil procedure. I cant recall whether tag jurisdiction would allow us to bring a suit in california. Effectively they sought our provision to refer that matter, too. We gave them permission. That is the next best step. From that point, i noticed that it has now been assigned to an outside collections agency. I think we have been trying to locate mr. Jackson, at his place of residence, employment for at least three years now. I have been on the commission. This is been an item that has not regressed in any way, shape or form. I will take it up with the bureau. My most recent communications with my contact there, or that mr. Jackson and ms. Norman, as he put it, live off the grid. I think that might be the thing. If they were to refer to an outside collections agency, it is possible that the agency would not be able to locate them either. It may have less to do with who is trying to collect and whether it is possible to collect. It is a fair question and i will follow up with them about that. I am assuming when you refer to an outside Collection Agency that they take a cut . I noticed this position that we have of assigned collection officer, which is great, because obviously somebody doesnt have the responsibility of chasing all of those bits and pieces, and it is hard to, you know, make that a priority. Do you also look at how much it costs to go after the money. A lot of times, you can end up spending more money on staff time, and collection agencies than the actual money that you are potentially going to recover. If you have been looking for 6000 for three years longer since it was 2013. You might have already wasted more than that. I know it is the bureau of delinquent revenue. They are a separate entity that you probably have to work order money too. Anyway, just something to think about. We are happy to look at a rationale, like every other debt collector, in america, you know, the cost benefit analysis. I know that we did get a judgment in the second Chris Jackson matter. It looks like you have a judgment in both. Oh, i see. Okay. I defer to you on that. The last one though, if i can ask about. I got your note clarifying that the petitioners request for bankruptcy was rejected and its out of bankruptcy court. The civil suit that the city and county filed originally now is no longer stayed. That will no longer be calendared and that is what the case conference the reference in before. When you say negotiations with debtor are ongoing, is that the City Attorneys Office negotiating that . Under the charter, do you have authority to negotiate settlement of litigation outside of the City Attorneys or board of supervisors process. I would be surprised to learn that, if we do. I have had conversations with tax attorneys in the bureaus office. It may be that those tax attorneys are embedded within the bureau, but that they otherwise belong to the City Attorneys Office that they are vested with full authority to seek settlements in the suits that they have filed. I dont know the particular civil suit. The tax attorneys handle tax assessor matters, a lot of times there is a mixed bag of property tax payment and a water bill. Out of whatever, inner Agency Cooperation because the tax assessment and the attorneys are separate. But, in this instant, this lawsuit was filed by the city and county of San Francisco was it only filed to collect a debt . Anyway. Anyway, the bureau fired it. The bureaus own attorneys filed a. It. It is effectively a suit that the bureau itself has brought. My understanding is that the suit is to reduce the commissions order to a judgment. Once it is a judgment then it can be enforced against the debtor. Okay. Again, you are saying it is the bureau of delinquent revenue that is handling the settlement negotiations . We are the client effectively. They are seeking our input into what that settlement might look like. Okay. Im curious, because ive always thought of a settlement as requiring board approval and City Attorney approval, and Government Audit Committee approval etc. Etc. Does possible and using the wrong word that it is not a settlement per se but some kind of mediated outcome. It is not the kind of settlement that goes before the board of supervisors. This is my own personal education. Thank you. I will seek additional clarification. I think, with that, if there are other questions im happy to feel them. Any other questions . I have a question regarding the secondary employment training. We have various levels, various rate of employment in the City Civil Service system. For the training, and the review process, review and approval process, is there a different level of review based on the employees responsibility. For instance if youre in the Management Level, the scrutiny and the review ought to be much higher than someone at entrylevel, is that correct . There is no onesizefitsall. I think that is true on and off i have worked with the department of Human Resources in reviewing the secondary employment authorization so what you say is the general approach. The department of Human Resources is much more circumspect, much more higher level, Management Level kinds of folks. In terms of, does the additional appointments actually prevent a conflict of interest . Does it take up so much of their time to the actually cant carry out their city duties . Those inquiries are much more demanding as you would expect of higherlevel folks. As to those who may be our sort of more, you know, outfront who are doing different kinds of things for the city. I would expect them to provide a little more leeway. It is a process that does apply across the board. All throughout the organizational chart. Yeah, i think, they do take the situation into account. Is there a dollar figure that triggers disclosure, or anything at all . Even if it is a one time consultation during the year. Or anything that could be called additional compensation . It is established in the Civil Service rule. It does not provide for any dollar thresholds. It is my understanding, i dont want to speak to botsford dhr. It is my understanding dhr, for example, would review someone who is a freelance consultant who may not have an ongoing gig but have occasional clients and would still need to get this authorization. Thank you. Sorry, dont meet to drag this deeper into the rabbit hole. Would this be for any work that City Employee does whether or not its during city business hours, or on the weekends. As long as they are compensated but not volunteer work . That is correct. It applies to any, whether there is actual interference in the regular workday. Of course they would look to see if the employment would interfere with a 95 and duties of the person. It really does apply across the board. There is other issues that could be triggered by this kind of process. It could be a genuine conflict of interest issue. It could be a confidentiality issue. It is a process to allow them to vet those parts concerns. In 20 thank you. Is it by a committee, decision by committee, or the immediate supervisor of the individual applying for secondary appointment. On the schedule, government level, its all by committee. There is truth, transparency, and there is no subjectivity. There has to be done by a committee of three, or whatever. In this case, the citys case, is it up to the supervisors to follow the rules . Yeah, so, i hesitate to say too much about the dhr process and certainly we can invite them to come to a meeting and speak about this issue if the commission so desires the my general understanding of the form is that the employees actual supervisor within his or her department actually signs off on the request. And from there it is forwarded to what we call central and Main Department of Human Resources. Which is actual separate department under the city. There is considered by various staff people. I think the staff at dhr that refuse it kind of depends on the employees ask of authorization. Request from a high level person probably to a high level dhr for example. Its not quite the formal Committee Process that you and imagine exist in the committee level. Its a little bit more flexible, i suppose. If i may, share to schedule future for us to better understand. This comes into both ethics, whistleblowing and other commission issues. I would just like to know more. Could you schedule a person from hr to come and do a presentation and to have them specifically address the questions that commissioner lee has raised so far, and anything else that would be helpful. That would be better for us to understand the overall process and outcomes and transparency. Certainly. Any other comments or questions . Public comment on agenda item number 88 . I have been coming here every month, i am a Bargaining Team member for [inaudible] we have 52 workforce, a 52,000 employees, i am responding to the item discuss in here. You all know that anybody who makes less than one 20 one 20,000 it is called poor people. 120,000 people hundred 20,000, is called poor people. We have parttime jobs, weekend jobs. I can tell you, i personally, some time ago i have a parttime job because i have a family. Okay. According to what i know, we have a contract. We mean the city and the union have a contract with hr. They require us to report. Unfortunately, management had a lot of side jobs they are not reporting. A lot of things are targeted small potatoes, but not management staff. I am a Government Employee i am here to report and ask it today to ask of the Ethic Commissions to restore law and order to protect San Francisco. You and i know Ethic Commission was created to stop government corrections. We have many Public Employees that have come here many times. I am here to follow up one thing. You as individuals understand that you sign up for Ethic Commissions. I am telling you right now as a Government Employee, as a mother, decent employees to file complaint with Ethic Commission department is useless. It weighs a lot of government money because they are not doing the same. I came here i ran for mayor last year. I was not allowed to so many public forms that is happening, in public building, libraries, recreational parks. I reported to jesse right here, and he said nothing they can do. The problem is, the Ethic Commission is a an aid to super pack. San francisco is flawless and no rule of law for many years we had democrats only, no matter what you say today, it is not a republic form of government. We the people have no control. That includes Public Employees. Anything related to public and Public Employees must be addressed with hr. Because hr and us have the agreement to meet and confer. So you Ethic Commissions talking in here without the Public Employees on site is unethical. I am here to ask you to do your jobs before the people take action. We came here i reported to you many times about Ethic Commission is not ethical at all. Thank you. [reading items] this months report highlight some ongoing operations. There is a quick note. Of course, we look forward to meeting with commissioner gray. We had an opportunity to meet with him and the office and provide introductory meeting. We look forward to working with him when he is able to join the meeting next month as well. The budget update, the Budget Hearing was held on june 12. We were present to provide an overview the Budget Committee had asked for civic information to be provided by all departments. We provided a slide deck with all of that information that we have attached to this report. We have been in further conversation with the Mayors Office about specific funding that comes through technical adjust in the budget. We may be having some of the items that were not funded through the fy 20 budget made additionally requested may be covered with that. It was stay tuned and provide you with more information on that next. We still think there might have been additional items that were not additionally covered in the line item. As soon as we know more things with specificity specificity and finality. I also want to provide on this report engagement and compliance group. There has been a lot of progress on implementing the reporting disclosure requirement for the anticorruption ordinance, as of this week, all forms are now live and available for people to use for filing. I want to acknowledge the massive team effort and the offer and what that took putting information together to help the public understand and filers understand what the forms are and how they can use them and where the information goes. Our policy shop as well. Many hands have been shaping the trade we really appreciate that work. The work continues to evolve. Materials and guidance continue to be made available. We are pleased to see that we are able to have an Online System for these forms. I would like to ask, at our next meeting, if rachel gage could do a presentation for us, for our benefit, as well as the new commissioners. I will go in and check the website myself, but i think the public can see, as we have broadcast, and certainly we would have the benefit of hearing a live voiceover, that would be terrific. We included information about the status of the Public Financing. There are two candidate in district excuse me three candidate that participated in the district 5 race. To agree to participate excuse me three in the may oral race trade all that the chart speak for itself, and obviously stumbling through it. We have been providing information as well. Dado visualization for the Public Financing application and certification claims. Those are all online now. This edit team having creative visualization for Public Financing. Campaign disclosure information will be online, as it continues to come in in the coming months. We are officially fully in election 2019. I also provided