Ins this measure would still be within your purview. Thank you. Thank you. Thats c3 6799 c3 69911. Im david, im a member of represent us and i would like to very much thank you guy, thank the commission for taking into consideration this action to try and bring some conference back to government, we formed our group about a year back, this is our first full reign trying to see how Government Works and how we can make our mark on it and attempt tog make sure that every person in the city of San Francisco has an equal voice and no one is given preferential treatment because of the amount of money they can contribute, in what way and what manner and what rules they circumvent is important to us, weve been working to make sure that peoples perception of government which is currently rock bottom both in the city and the state and nationally in terms of corruption and in terms of undue influence of money, we seek to curtail that, and we are very glad that you are helping us in trying to pass legitimate reform that is address this issue and helping turn the boat around and getting voters confident and excited about the direction that City Government is facing. I would like to thank you from my heart that what youre doing is bringing a lot of hope to us and we hope that you stay on the right course. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners, my name is jonathan and im a marital elections law attorney mere in the city, i have two minor comments to make with regard to the gift prohibition and the to the Campaign Contribution and bundling prohibition. Reflecting on a comment i made last month during this meeting, i believe you guys should consider amending the gift prohibition to only apply to contact lobbyists as oppose today expenditure lobbyists, the reason for this is reflective in the kind of government purpose for passing this regulation, and that we want to ensure that those who contact city officials cannot curry favor with them through gifts, as i discussed before, an expenditure lobbyist is indirectly urging others to contact in the public usually to contact Public Officials for purpose of influencing legislation. There is no risk of quick pro quo in this situation and corruption in this situation, i feel by having a broad definition of lobbyist for the gift prohibition, you may run some constitutional or legal issues in that respect. I cant see the reason for this legislation and i encourage you to look at that, if a small nonprofit spent 125 thousand dollars to say contact your legislator, your sports supervisor about Affordable Housing, that should not have them have a gift prohibition, the state prohibition that applies to all local and state officials, i dont see much of a difference by limiting a nonprofit to 460 versus 0. Another kind of just very, very technical cleanup and i believe theses the purpose of law and i wanted to make sure that its clear, with regard to the Campaign Contribution prohibition, this is page 13, subdivision e, line 4, it says no lobbyist shall make any Campaign Contribution and it says if that lobbyist is register to city elected afflicting or have been [inaudible] in the past 90 day, expenditure lobbyists do not contact officials directly, they will never register to contact an official director, a small technical cleanup that miektd provide more clarity to the law, its also more noting that there is a corporate ban on contributions in San Francisco, so most expenditure lobbies cannot make contributions to begin with as well, thank you very much, i appreciate your time. Thank you. Hello again, michael petrelis, i would like to see this move forward and i am really concerned that if the matter goes forward before the voters and its approved, it doesnt make effect until 2018, thats what im reading in your documents, okay, and i think that is a reason why you need to move this forward now, you need to get it on the ballot for this november because by the time 2018 rolls around and these changes go into effect, were going the discover that the lobbyist and some politicians have found new ways to get around whatever it is thats hopefully going to be approved in november, like many of us have been reminded in the past few days thank tos the hillary leaks of all these emails from the Democratic National committee, the system is rigged, the system is rigged against the public and when we have that as our philosophy with were looking at what this commission is doing or wants to do and then the proposals that come from the supervisors, every step of the way and every person whos involver in your process is part of the system that is rigged. These changes that youre going to bring about, theyre relatively minor in termser of bundling and funding and things like that and you know what its also telling me . Its telling me that the supervisors are not doing their jobs, that they are trying to put this matter before the voters and again i hope it passes when the voters get a chance to weigh in on it but if we had the supervisors doing their jobs and creating the laws that we need, we wouldnt be putting the burden on the voters to weigh in on what is going to be a pretty complicated issue i believe for the average voter, so you guys, i believe here at the Ethics Commission have to look at radically changing how you do business and that also goes for the supervisors and all their aids. They need to figure out a way to address our problems, modify the laws especially in terms of ethics at the board of sups and i hope we get to see that change happening very soon, thank you. Thank you. Hello, im alex kaplan, the policy directly with first national, i want to thank you for your time and devotion to this, the open process of crafting this correctly and to give a big thank tos the staff who have done an enormous amount of work on this, i want also to do a quick cleanup of my own, page 12, line 11 televising assist a doubling up of the word less, it says less 25 or less per occasion and should say worth 25 or less per occasion, very quickly also i want to respond to the last two comments and urge the commission to retain and continue to apply the travel the gift pensioner especially travel gifts to expenditure lobbyists as well, the idea that an expenditure lobbyist who is in many ways augmenting their lobbying power to spend money to get other tos do lobbying for them could give a gift or a travel gift, a significant one, ask try to leverage their influence that way, i think the especially from talking to voters in the city and the many represent member that is have shown up today, the idea that one trying to exert specific influence by content or expenditure on a city elected official is really blows their mind that thats possible, to the travel gifts as well. I would like you ask you to apply the travel gift prohibition earlier than january, 2018, talking with the director, the january 1, 2018 start date is so the staff and so the Computer Systems can take enough time to make sure the registration tailoring can apply, because the gift ban is purposely and rightfully not tailored, it applies throughout should apply relatively immediately. Thank you. Thank you. Good eve nonlinear, alana smith with friends of ethics, i want to join the core lus for thanking me for what you have done and call out the work staff has done to get this in front of the public enough so they could hear comments, respond to comments and show us revised language. Its made a big difference in terms of your final product and you can tell from the comments tonight that getting that kind of very good public process makes a difference, so i thank you for that and friends of ethics obviously thanks you for putting this forward. Thank you. Again, for the record, im charles mar ston, i wanted to say theres a caveat to the question of aggregate expenditure limits and i realize that question is a little off topic, but i wanted to explain very quickly to the commission that on july 11, 2011, you considered the mckuchin decision and vote ted 41 to repeal our law, that was blocked at the board by a coalition that was formed called friends of ethics, and thats our origin and that explains why we are still here. I did want to say i left the room, that meeting was taped and i have strong opinion on that matter because im aware of other events that occurred with other commissions in the United States working with the bren nan center to develop legislation to be both constitutional and respective of local law dealing with aggregated limits, so its not as black and white i even though we were in fact sued, that would require a separate issue to be put on the agenda to be discussed so that we could get into the details, but i wanted to tell you at one point, i was planning to raise again the question of aggregate limits because there are constitutional ways for addressing the concerns of mchuchin, so i wanted to give you the headsup on that. Thank you. Good evening, anita mayo, as ive testified before t proposed lobbyist relates changes are not needed. The current gift limit of 25 per lobbyists is so low that it cannot possibly have a corrupting influence on a city officer, notwithstanding the foregoing, both versions prohibit lobbyists from making i any dift including dift of gravel to any officers, this is a broad prescription, it is not narrowly tailored and apply ifs the lobbyist will ever lobby a city officer. The proposed ban could prohibit the mayor or any city officer from attending city related meetings, if the city and bay area corporations are interested in bringing the olympicess to the San Francisco bay area and a for profitbacker Profit Corporation discussed the olympics, city officers would not be able to eat during the luncheon or dinner meet ifing the for profit contributed as an expenditure lobbyist. With regards to contributions by lobbyists, the proposed revised june initiative would prohibit a lobbyist from making a contribution to a city canadian kate exceeding 100 in an election cycle since the current 500 limit applies on a per election basis kh s clear and straight forward, introducing a limit based on an election cycle basis will create unnecessary confusion, both versions of the initiative contemplate imposing limits on contributions to lobbyists to candidate controlled committees including local bat lot measure milt tees, imposing limit on contributions to lobbyist tos a Ballot Measure Committee could be unconstitutional, regarding the ban on bundlings, the proposing ban is not needed since bundled contributions are subject to detail, Disclosure Requirements on the lobbying reports already. There is federal Court Precedents that a banning on lobbying and the green party of connecticut, the city court not only invalidate add ban but prohibited lobbyists from soliciting contributions on behalf of state candidate and is reach thirsting conclusion, the court stated that a limit on the solicitation of otherwise permissible couldnt bourses prohibits exactly the kind of expressive activity that lies at the First Amendments core. That is because the solicitation of contributions involve speech, to solicit contributions on behalf of a candidate is to make a statement you should support this candidate not only at the polls but with a financial contribution. Speech uttered during a Political Campaign requires the most urgent application set forth in the First Amendment for these reasons, i urge you not to impose a ban on bundling of contributions by lobbyists. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much, my name is joshua strong mansion im with artist of alliance with democracy as well as with represent us and i want today thank the commission and thank the staff for taking up this measure, and i really want to say ive heard a lot of comments, i came here in support of represent us and i come here in support of Good Government and i come here so that because were in a time where our citizens as we said earlier, do not have the fullest confidence in our elected officials and in our City Governments or our local governments to give us a government that we voted for and inspires us to believe in, to want to contribute to, making San Francisco and making the bay area a place where everyone will want to come and live and raise their families, this is about restoring integrity to this process. Now, ive heard many people come up here and talk about the various ban that is are already in place but obviously theyre not working so one of the things i wanted to stress to the commission and stress to the staff is enforcement. Now, commissioner [inaudible] brought up a good thing, those are questions that you should know, we should understand how these laws have failed z. You should know why all these people are in this room. You have failed. The ethics law that is are currently on the books have failed. Thats why we want this measure, were not ta ub asking for it out of the sky, it has failed so we are taking it upon ourselves as citizens would care about San Francisco, would care about the bay area, would care about our future to say, look, whatever you had going on first, whatever laws barer policies or protocols that were in place, they have not worked. I am strongly if support of this measure Going Forward in july, give the voters a xlans to vote on this. Its obvious the folks that have been elected to involve this problem has failed so its time for the voters to have our say on this. Im strongly in support of this measure going into the july ballot and thank you for giving us the time to speak and making our concerns known. Thank you. Thank you. Hello, my name is greg [inaudible] im with represent us and i wanted to say one thing add one thing, i think there is a sense of urgency, whatever the language is needs to be worked out tonight so something can get on the ballot, whatever the little nuances with regards to language, at least something can be agreed upon tonight so things dont get pushed out to 2018. Thank you, and thank you for all your hard work. Thank you. Hi, i know its against protocol to come up again, i want today directly respond. I cant . Okay, at all . Alright, sore sorry. Youre saying he couldnt if he used his three minutes the whole time. Not to say mr. Kaplan didnt have good feedback t commission would be obligated to provide everyone in the room with a Second Opportunity as well. Alright, any other Public Comment . If not, there is a motion presently pending and i take it that that grammatical error on page 12, line 11 where the word less should be deleted, i will call the question which is to approve the option the july option as presented by the staff, all in favor . Aye. Aye. Opposed . Alright, the record should reflect that it has been passed unanimously by four commissioners as required. And that we should now move forward to see that it qualifies to be placed on the ballot in november. [applause]. Thank you, mr. Chair. I would just like to acknowledge that the city of San Francisco and all of us owe a great debt to represent us. Its an organization said by you to have been formed about a year ago and the most refreshing thing to me is to see the vibrancy of a bunch of young people coming forward on Good Government measures. There are other organizations like friends of ethics and the civil grand jury and the rest of us who have been involved with it over the years ask have been talking about this, but for the most part, most of those folks have hair like mine, so to see all of you is really great and i just want to thank you and encourage you the keep up the good work. I think youre an inspiring group. Commissioner hayon. I would like to second what commissioner keane has said. The atmosphere in this room today is completely 180 degrees from the atmosphere when i first came on this commission, and i dont think this commission or its staff can do the proper work unless there is full involvement on the part of the community. I am an average voter and oncern is that my concern is that we passed this and it will go ton ballot but i hope you will do the same kind of work to inform and educate the a frmg voter. From my understand, its going to be at least 30 ballot measures, in situations like that, the average voter just says, im voting no on everything, so unless theres a real major concerted effort to educate vote and he iser to get them to vote particularly on this ballot which is of concern to you, then im concerned we may not succeed. And also a lot of this is quite arcane, so you need to find a way to get the message out in a way thats really comprehensible to the average person out there because otherwise they throw their hands up and say, okay, i dont understand what this is about so im not going to vote for it, so that is your challenge now and i think thats a much, much greater challenge than getting it on the ballot, but i wish you luck. Im sure you can do it and its great that its young people who are engaged and we need that because otherwise were in deep trouble which i think we are anyway, but so, thats another story, we dont need to address that, but thank you so much and its a huge difference having so many really well informed and expert members of the public participating in the process, so thank you. And i on behalf of the Commission Also join in thanking all of you for working with the staff and i want to thank the staff who spent hours getting this into the form, but for those of you who may be new to the pr kress, once this goes on the ballot, the first thing is theres a Ballot Simplification Committee that meets to word the way in which the description of this is put in the voters handbook and thats very important because thats really what people look at in the voters handbook, so that when that meeting takes place, i urge you to be in attendance to help draft the language, there are five members and believe me, they are very dedicated but theyre like your High School English teacher an