Thank you. Other Public Comment . As i recall, when these allegations were brought up, i think the staff has provided i dont think it was a memo but it was a letter to the commission that was open to the public and so may i request that if that was still my recollection that we include that in todays deliberation . Staff have communicated over the concerns in which she brought those before the commission and those have not attached any agenda items in the past. But torn attorney chen looks to be expresses concern but effectively if staff have sought to resolve her concerns, and our belief have not received adequate followup from her end. And im happy to provide additional clarification. I remember one of the former commissioners that read into the record a certain aspect of the staffs research. I know that in previous discussions, when the same question has been raised by the public speaker there was comment and im happy to go back and check the records to see what information that was that the commissioner was operating from. Certainly theres communication we provided to the commission well provide it to you as well. So let us do research and get back to you that anything that is available ob on that. Thank you. Commissioner ambrose . Regarding the other public governor were dr. Kerr, i think you raise an interesting question and im not sure how would one could about an audit and thats not what im asking for but the question from the other commissioner about the judicial review of our decisions i think it would be useful for the staff to understand what decisions were made, presumely by staff that preceded you because i know you havent all been here that long. And whether or not those decisions were overturned or rejected or set aside by judicial review and on what basis. So im not asking for a formal report but im recommending that you look into that and if youre not familiar with any Court Decisions you know, finding retaliation where this city had previously found none, then maybe the City Attorneys Office can identify some in the last few years and i think we can get better at what we do with respect to investigations and if there were failings, because it was upheld in court but not administratively then we should learn from that process. And i to thank you for your Public Comments. If you. Thank you. Thank you commissioners. Im pat ford the legislative Affairs Counsel and i have a couple items on agenda 6 on ongoing policy projects and other projects that im working on that arent strictly policy items. And the first one that you see here is the Electronic Filing of form 700 and this project is one that weve been working on for awhile a few updates and this is to have all filers in the city who filed the form 700 statement of economic interests do so electronically. And most file on paper. This project seeks to have all filers file electronically through net file starting in 2021. And the big update for you this month is that we met with five representatives from employee bargaining units and i would say that the meeting was very successful. We had a very constructive dialogue with the Union Representatives and they really engaged with us. They asked a lot of very helpful questions that helped to guide our thinking on what would be helpful to filers. And they were especially interested in the kind of training that our office would be providing both on the efiling system itself but also on form 700 filing generally. What kind of information do filers put on the form and whats best practises for filing this form . And so it seems like theres a lot of outreach that we can continue to do and include the Union Representatives more so than we have in the past. It seems that they want to be included in our outreach and training and thats definitely something well do. That seems like it wont be helpful to employees that they would look to their unions as a source of guidance and any time we find a channel to do that, well definitely make full use of that and that was a helpful take away for us from that meeting. And in terms of the outcome there may be information requests that the unions ask for and they may ask for a list of fuelers or other information. Its not clear at this time, but for all intents and purposes, it appears this was the first and last meeting we will be having with the union. They were fully supportive of the project and said it seemed like a good idea, that they think efiling will be a big step up from paper filing and that they were persuaded that this is helpful both for the filers as well as for the public which is what we were trying to communicate to them and we firmly believe thats true of the project. So we left the room, basically in agreement, that the project was a good idea and that they didnt see any major issues, assuming that we could provide training to the level that they were asking for and were confident that we can. And so at this point dhr sent a followup email to the union reps who were there thanking them for their participation and letting them know at this point we would move forward with the project and so right now, it appears that meet and confer is certainlilyessentially finished and at this point, well move ahead full steam on the project and i will be bringing a set of regulations before you most likely at the january meeting. I think i would like a little more time to really get these flushed out and get them watertight. So i think december might be a quick turn, but january would give us plenty of time to meet that jan1, 2021 goal. Thats fantastic thats wonderful news that it went to smoothly and there was a great meeting of the minds. Please keep us updated on the rollout and we look forward to the regs and also, if you could brief us on the training materials and consider also whether they would be useful for the broader population, as well, as a refresh as this is an annual effort that everyone has to undertake. Absolutely will do. Another thing we discussed at the meeting, which is a good segway into another project, i want to update you on. We talked about the binding code review which is something that happens every other year, in evennumbed years and i have talked about this before in previous meetings. But essential, this is the process in which the city goes back and looks at the conflict of interest code and the lists of employees who are required to file. Essentially just reviews it and updates it and so that it reflects the current state of those lists. So if positions are added or discontinued or if someones job duties change, that list would be updated to reflect changes that have happened over the last two years. I think what the unions would find helpful and what we are more than willing to support them this is to do a little bit more of a rigorous review this coming year. So not just update for changes in job duties or adding or taking away positions but to also help departments maybe take a little bit more thorough look at those list. We heard the union reps express concern about some filers being included on the list that maybe shouldnt be in their opinion or filers that are required to file at a higher disclosure category, meaning disclosing more personal interests than their Union Representatives believe they should and thats not something that would get caught up if the departments were updating the lists for new or changed positions. But they would really need to go back and review their prior determinations. And so i think, in order to facilitate that happening, meaning facilitate the unions giving the feedback to the departments, we may explore next year doing the biennial code review and theres a process that ethics does not message manage and it will involve yard coordination with the citys office and the clerk. We are in the beginning stages of talking about how well potentially move up the timelines and try to involve the Union Representatives at an earlier starch stage so the feedback can be heard and they could be expressing concerns to the department at the time the departments are thinking about the changes. Well do our best to accommodate that. The form 700 Electronic Filing property, it will proceed in parallel and the two are not dependent on each other. Correct. Those are two completely independent projects, two completely independent pieces of legislation, too. The biennial code review will be an ordinance and the efiling for all will be a regulation. And those will proceed independently. But it was important to the unions at this past meeting that we did explore maybe a different way to do the biennial code review or include them in it. So yes those will be separate but kind of related and relevant to each other. I think the unions see the biennial code review in that the filing method will be different. So that is where we are. So good updates Good Progress on that. Another set of regulations that i will be bringing before you soon are a narrow set of regulations to implement the Second Public financing ordinance and that will be going into effect the first of this coming year. And these will be, basically just updates to the regs so that they match changes in the code and so put anywhere in the regulations that discuss the matching rate of 21 or the previous maximum amounts of funding that candidates could receive or the previous starting point for spending limits, those all need to be updated since those were change. So i think theyll be brief basically confined to updating where necessary not really doing anything beyond the scope of that ordinance. And i just wanted to make you aware of it, that thats something need well need to could and hopefully ill have that before you at your next meeting. And would your hope be for us to approve those at the december meeting . Or consider and then take action in january . I will certainly notice them, publically notice them so that you could take action on them. But obviously you can take as long as you need. If you would like Public Comment, you may have feedback or amendments that are appropriate to make during the meeting and i can bring them back to a subsequent meeting but they would be ready if you would like to approve them. From a time be standpoint, the ordinance goes into effect on january 1st . Correct. Of 2020. And then what is the timing for regs to become effective as as well . Once we approve, they go to the board of supervisors and theres a waiting period. What does that timeline look like . 60 days from the time we transmit them to the board they become operative assuming the board does not veto them. This hasnt not happened in the recent past, so typically it means theres a 60day waiting period. And so there would be a period of time during which the new ordinance will be operative but the new regs will not be. So there will be a period of time when the regs dont match the code. I dont think it will be a serious problem. There are numbers that dont match and we can advice people the principles in the regs are still the case, even if the numbers arent syncing up but we want to fix that as soon as we can. Another set of regulations before you, kind of in the same vane, will be to update because of changes from proposition f. As you know, proposition f was about measure that appeared on the November Ballot and it was approved. Souththe code will go into effect ten days after its certified and that should be sometime in early december. And so similar to the Public Finance ordinance since there are changes to the code, we need to update the regs to match the code. If i may. Yes. Regarding proposition f we know what it read and it passed but because it hasnt heard at the commission and went to the ballot we werent able to comment on it directly, i think it would be useful to the viewing public, people who attend the meeting if you can briefly review the provisions of proposition f if in the context of the implementing regulations youll be recommending and i think that would be helpful. As you said the vote will be certified by then so it will be enforced when youre putting out the materials. Thank you. Yes. I could definitely do that and that would be to see what changes of the code theyre based on. No, theyre fairly significant changes and we need to get the word out there. Also, mr. Ford if you can include what some of the opportunities and challenges are as a part of that implementation, as well and i think this may bleed into the executive director report, since this is not funded. And we dont have it in our budget what would the impact be to be able to implement these in a timely and effective fashion. So the regulations you would be proposing in december for proposition f those also have a 60day . Correct. And i think for the sake of efficiency in the meeting i may combine those regulations into one agenda item, if thats not too bizarre. No. Thats ok. I think that might be a little bit more efficient than having them be two separate items. And they are at least kind of in the same realm of updating regulations to match recent legislation, even if theyre not conceptually on the same topic. And then related but not necessarily the same is the communication and outreach portion, going back to some of the themes of this meeting and continuing throughout and how do we make sure that people who are affected by these regulations know what their obligations are and what they need to do to comply and updating us or giving an overview of what that engagement and compliance rollout plan would look like would be helpful as well. We could invite guy 3 tech, along with the regs. Thank you. Great. So the last two items i wanted to briefly mention are that in january i hope to bring the policy priorization plan before you for unupdate. As weve within talking about a number of projects are in their final stages. The efiling for all at least my involvement is reaching its end. And with the finance review, the amendments will be the last step in that project being completed, at least my primary involvement in it and so i think it would be an appropriate time to bring the policy prioritization plan before you and look forward to potentially what could be projects in the near term first half of calendar year 2020 for a spoil topolicy to work on. One that i will be working on is the biennial code review and that will be occupying my time, similar to the efiling for all. And ill be engaged with the department of resources to work with the bargaining units to discuss what i was mentioning earlier. There were concerns about the filer lists and how to get them involved in that process. And i suspect that will most likely be a little bit longer in the meet and greet and could involve multiple meetings, potentially more union reps. I can say from experience last year there were more Union Representatives involved in that meet and confer. So its something to occupy my time and i think it could be one aofficial policy project that i could work on in tandem with that one. So im hoping in january to help facilitate your discussion of that. We look forward to that. The last item is that staff is heading to cogel soon and im sure director pelham will update you but ive been working on a few things to get ready. Ill be panelists. Ill be work wig working with the moderator and the fellow panelists on what to present and getting that material ready. We had a conversation yesterday talking about our opinion and advice regulations and how we developed those and how thats been an improvement for our processes and something that they may discuss at cogel this year. And there were a newspaper of number of publy kegs likepublications like. And i submitted an entry about the Public Financing project about the legislative updates that the commission has done to that program. So hopefully that will be something included in that publication and people nationwide working at the Campaign Finance will be made aware of that project and then, next week, ill be doing one for ethics. So ill be looking at new ethics laws that are in San Francisco and so we have a few of those. So hopefully, well be able to put together information to keep everyone abreast of what were working on here, which is important to have the network of other ethics professionals that we know theyre doing and they know what were doing. Thats a part of our policy, the approach of looking at what our colleagues are doing learning from the experiences and a lot of the work gets done at kogel. And i think thats the end of my updates and i will be glad to answer questions. This is really really valuable and i hope you get a lot out of it and i think you do and the publication, and i think that we have made progress in Public Finance certainly and in other areas in San Francisco and please carry the flag forward over to kogel and we look forward to your report out on what the conference deny, what the team gets out of the conference and what you learned and new ideas to bring forward. And hopefully that can shape a part of our policy prioritization discussion in january as well. Yes we always come back with lots of ideas. Fantastic. Any other questions or comments from commissioners . Public comments on this agenda item . Agenda 7 discussion of monthly staff enforcement report, including a presentation no, we did that, on the citys whistleblower protection. And an update on operational highlights of the enforcement programs since the last monthly meeting. Chair, thank you for the youll tern this turn this over to jeff pearce but we left a reference to mr. Mcclains report but are is no further report on this item and strictly the report mr. Mcclain gave earlier. Thank you for the clarification. Thank you chair chu and commissioners and director pelham. What we hoped would be the main event for this agenda item this month was an appearance from the director of the bureau of delinquent revenue jeff smickel. He did come before the commission about 18 months eightago,to dress address a number of things and given the ongoing work, the Enforcement Division and the bureau to collect those debts it makes sense to bring somebody from the bureau before you to answer the very specific questions that you have about the process that they undertake. Unfortunately, director smickel had a scheduling conflict and was not able to join us. He should be able to join in december if we keep that meeting on the calendar. But he is aware that you have questions and he looks forward to addressing those with you at the next opportunity. Mr. Pearce for the r