Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Govt Audits And Oversight Committe

Additional feedback from various parts of the city and requests for future further amendment which are before you right now. Theto summarize these additional amendment responding to a request from the mta reedit members of the Parking Authority commission as form 700 filers. Even though the mta board sits at the Parking Authority its our preference to not remove those positions from the code altogether. Ive deleted the members of the Produce Market Corporation Board of directors and executive director from the code. They were actually removed from the code altogether [cough] i needed to be changed in the cycle. I also needed to make some additional changes that dph had previously requested and needed to be reflected in the person before you. These are merely deleting positions. It sort of part of their effort to streamline their section of the code. Fourth, ive added a few positions to the Public Utilities commission that i initially missed adding when i was behind the legislation. These are the positions of industrial hygienist or safety analyst, Senior Administrative analyst, senior i industrial hygienist and i has engineered an fifth and last, i remove the Commission Secretary position for the retirement system. After further conversations with that departments and their general counsel, the Commission Secretary only performs ministerial and clerical duties. The body and we thought it was appropriate to remove without thats a summary of additional amendment that before the committee today. If the committee has any questions i can certainly try to answer them. Certainly, dhr ethics can weigh in as well. If that would be appropriate, to get thank you very much thank you, counsel. Ms. Pelham on behalf of the Ethics Commission and its department. Good morning commissioners. Supervisors good members of the department and the members of the public that our commission assisted a bit in the process is it primarily to help inform what we can employees and departments about the purpose of the form 700 the purpose of the Disclosure Requirements and how they are 17 state law they apply to employees and how important that is for public discourse. We have been working with departments and plan to continue to work with departments in the coming months as our Department Works towards broader public transparency about forms and the information required to be disclosed by Public Officials in the city and county of San Francisco. We have our planning in the coming months to work with departments to provide the information to guide their filers to help expand information also that people can comply easily and timely with the requirements under state law. We look forward to providing assistance Going Forward and providing answers might have for us this morning ms. Pelham its a minor sandy Ethics Commission department are attempting to move forward to allow all form 700 filers to other information accessible on the internet. Is that correct . Yes. The city enacted a regulation that apartment heads elected officials and members of the boards and commissions who currently are required to file form 700 under state law would file them online through a Online Technology so its easy for them to comply permits timely compliance and also provides the public with transcript about the information required to be disclosed. Our Commission Last year began some discussions to expand that citywide to all roughly 2700 filers. So that is a process that we have been working with departments and employee organizations to understand how to make the process work well. So we are planning to move forward in the coming year with the goal of enabling all Electronic Filing and Public Disclosure by the filing of april 1, 2018. Ms. Pelham over out of the universe of 2700 employees required to file, what is the subuniverse of individuals elected officials, commissioners, etc. , you have to file online . Currently, i believe theres over 500 did maybe between 5600 filers file online under the requirements of the law. This would extend it to all individuals are required based on the citys conflict of interest code been updated that pinning before you for the benefit of the public and for those watching, as to the 2100 or 2200 individuals who do not file online, how does somebody go about obtaining that form 700 information if youre interested in seeing it . Is dependent on departments. They are public files and public records of the member of the public has the right and opportunity to review that information on request. The departments are required to provide that upon requested but they are kept currently in paper format as i understand it departments. As to how each department retains those files is probably a question for each department. If they have employees that are not filing online. Which would be the bulk of their designated filers. How does the Ethics Commission in its staff determine that those 2100 or 2200 people dont file online are actually filing within those apartments . I dont think we have a good answer that. We dont right now. We would have to traditionally we had a complaint work reason to believe we can subtly inquire with the departments. Departments do report to us i believe its within 30 days after the filing to tell us whether or not their filers of five and a toast which filers not filed on time. I should say i should correct myself. Theres a report the providing to us but i do believe the detailed report of all those who filed by name. It would be a report of those who have not filed. So how do you or we know who the 2700 individuals are . How do we know who they are . I think right now by nature we know them by their working title. By name i think we dont have a complete list citywide thats easily transparent to the public. So somewhere mr. Chen or ms. Pelham there is a list that has always approximately 2700 individuals by name . No. Currently no such list exist but ill be a potential benefit moving to Electronic Filing system that they would gain visibility as ms. Pelham mentioned who is filing under specific positions with specific departments. Debbie a benefit moving to an electronic system. Then this is really a question for ms. Callahan but will keep you up here for another minute from our department of Human Resources, itthere seems to be a disconnect between the working titles that are set forth in the ordinance and the underlying job classifications. Soi wrote the Mayors Office of letter last evening which just documents before five they got it this time. I understand it might not be able to respond to the specific questions but we can continue at the government audit and Oversight Committee to visit around this issue. But the working titles are not actually job classifications. So for instance just to make up a title, deputy chief of staff, doesnt show up in the department of Human Resources as a position. It shows up maybe as a managers 0923. So there is no real way to determine that individual who has an name and has a working title is actually captured under dhrs classification system. That is correct. The practice is generally to use working titles and a believe that the state practice as well because thats what the public most readily identifies its employees to be. To their working title. It certainly the case job classifications are not used. Some justifications may not be filers. Others may. It really depends on the duties the individual performs which will what drives whats requiring somebody to be a form 700 filers and submit in a comic interest statement. As we look at our Online Filing system, our goal is to make it as easy as possible to connect the dots and put information together for the public. Our goal would be to have added a field that has a job classification number that should not be a hard act in my view. That something as we move towards Online Filing, i think our office would welcome having that additional piece of information thats easy for the public to understand what level classification employees are. But i think the working title for my expenses one most useful because it somebody most of the public identifies employees by. Rather than specific job classifications. Thank you ms. Pelham. Ms. Callahan could. Good morning supervise. Pres. Breed. Happy to answer any questions. You and i had an offline conversation earlier that sounds like there may be a way that you can true these two disparate things up and i wanted you to address the committee as to what you intend to do Going Forward. Yes. This is the question about how do we generate a list where you can the public and a late else can look at the chief of staff, let say or the policy chief of the department of Human Resources and milk that individual is and what the job class of patient is. It is easy for usthere are certain classifications everyone in them is required to file. Thats the easy one we can generate a list at the department of Human Resource good theyll be for Example Department head hundred and one in that classification is a filer. Theres also i think perhaps every building inspector must be a positive we dont have to do that i position. However our management classifications in particular are brought based management three as you say and we would need to reach out to departments hopefully with the assistance of the Ethics Commission to link goes up and have them report to create a database that says the chief of policy at dhr is the own 923 susan gard is not the 0923 as jenny white. Because the other one doesnt have to file and the policy one does have to file. Thats right is there some way the public to know that i would be very very helpful i think the Data Collection enterprise which i would need to sit down with my it and hr folks and figure out how we do that and we would probably need a little time. Again the easy ones once where everybody in a Certain Department in a certain class is a filer were everyone in the city is a filer, that we can do relatively rapidly and we are happy to run it probably do that today or tomorrow. The deeper dive particularly in the broadbased management classifications is quick to take period of time and read required cooperation of the permits who the individuals are with those titles it will be very helpful going for. This will be resolved when and if ms. Pelham pelham is able to get done this done april 1 22 but in the interim it be there in a teleconference of list on the internet where people can have an idea of who it is that they are asking for. What department they are in so that they can go to the City Attorneys Office and ask for the City Attorneys particular form 700 if required to file. In the case of the board of supervisors, all of our legislative aides are required to file a form 700 but one of them may have a working title of chief of staff. But everybody in the classification has to file. I anticipate our labor partners made some questions about producing this publicly on the internet and we will be aching sure theyre aware of that. They may wish to weigh in as they have today. On both the question of Electronic Filing and on the question of why certain individuals are classified or asked to file. Understood. I dont want to butcher your last name. I just ask supervisor breed how to pronounce it. So we will for the First Time Ever get your last dime on the record. Thank you. Board liaison. Yes, thank you for having me here. Just as you mentioned i did just get this letter handed to me at 9 35 am. Reached out to our Human Resources director for the list of names that you requested and have not been able to speak with her directly but we are working to get that list and looking forward to working with you on this. Thank you so much. Are there any members of the public would like to testify on item number one . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] i believe we have some amendment in front of us. Is there a motion to move those amendment made by supervisor breed we will take those without objection. Colleagues and the one before this to the full board with a recommendation as a Committee Report for hearing on december 6. Without objection that will be the order [gavel] clerk please read item number two item number two a ordinance amending the campaign and governmental conduct Code Commission to file [inaudible] of charitable contributions thank you. Colleagues we heard this once before. Weve heard from the public some request to add 527 section 527 filers in other words independent expenditure filers and so i would like to make a motion and i just handed to my colleagues a hard copy on page 2 , to make two small changes. Line 3, to delete the words, excuse me a nonprofit, and insert the work, and. Then add add the word either on line 404 section 1 and add, or section 527, so the definition of charitable contribution shall mean any monetary or nonmonetary cultivation to a Government Agency but if i public or private Educational Institution as defined in section 203 of the california revenue and taxation code or an organization exempt from taxation under either section 501c or section 527 of the United States Internal Revenue code. I would like to move back amendment and then continue this item as required by the City Attorney to our next meeting and whether we open this up for Public Comment. Chairman peskin members of the committee on larry bush here we have a friends of ethics. We support the changes that the supervisor is proposing. With two additional things we would like to point out. One is that the threshold for reporting is 1000 but if youre asking people to make contributions to a candidate the candidate limit is 500. Therefore this would leave off the table while the behest requests for candidate contributions. In that case i think the threshold should be 400. We so we should capture those. Thats one point. Secondly, to make sure those behest and payments on a timely schedule since normally those forms are not filed until some period of time afterward. As if were talking about behest and payments that go to areas entities when a window is closing like a campaign is going to close, it should be on a 110 day cycle when they turn on just for any other contribution in the last 10 days. I would also like to just say personally, im a form 700 filer because im a member of the citizens bond Oversight Committee. I would think this would be a very helpful thing because otherwise i will hang out my shingle become a shakedown artist. Thank you. Thank you mr. Bush. Next speaker, please. Good morning supervisor. Debbie lerman from the San Francisco Human Services network. I just am here to again express our support for this Good Government legislation. Early in the process we raised some concerns about the dilemma this withoutcould have created for nonprofit fundraisers who also serve as commissioners and or raising money that they wouldve had to report in their day to day jobs. We work with supervisor peskins office or the past several months. We are thankful that our concerns were heard and we believe the final legislation is now limited in scope and has allayed all our concerns about this legislation get we are happy to support it. Thank you thank you. Any other members of the public alike to testify on this item good morning seeing none, becoming [gavel] b was supervisor breed thank you. I know we have a lengthy discussion about this legislation. The last time it was heard at gal and appreciate you making changes could also go look at it could i know little, before the committee and decide at that time. Again i want to just mostly express my concern for those folks who are associated with nonprofits in raising funds for nonprofits in that i dont want there to be extra layers of bureaucracy that get in the way of the ability of those individuals to raise funds that are much needed for these organizations. I dont also want to discourage good people from continuing to serve on commissions as a result of this legislation and saute amendment indefinitely take it into serious consideration consideration make appropriate amendment but so far it looks like you answered the call to make adjustments and i do appreciate that. Thank you. I want to thank my staff we have dinner for working with ms. Lerman and the regulated community with a potentially regulated community, to make revisions that they saw fit that are in keeping with the concerns that pres. Breed has expressed and without objection we will adopt those amendment and continue this item to the call of the chair within the intent of hearing it at our next meeting [gavel] mdm. Clerk please call the next item yes. Item number three resolution urging the San Francisco Employers Retirement system board to review executive compensation evaluating best