City and County of San Francisco Thursday, September 22, 2011
supervisor campos: good morning and welcome to the September 22, 2011 meeting of the board of supervisors government,, audit, and as a committee. My name is david campos. I am the chair of the committee. We'
re joined by President Chiu.
we will be joined shortly by supervisor farrell. The clerk is andrea. We want to thank the following members of sfgtv for covering this meeting. We want to thank them for their continued good work. Carolyn and nona.
Do we have any announcements? >> yes.
I would like to ask that all cell phone ringers be turned off. If you wish to speak during public comment, fill in a speaker card and place it at the podium. Items acted upon today will
appear on the October 4 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated.
Supervisor campos: pete -- please call item number 1.
>> hearing on the 2010-2011 civil grand jury report entitled " hiring practices of the city and county of san francisco."
supervisor campos: thank you very much.
In the next few weeks, the government audits and oversight committee will be holding a
series of meetings on various reports from the civil grand jury.
I want to begin by thanking the members of the civil grand jury
for their service to the city and county of san francisco. This is important work, and we know it is very time-consuming.
Again, we want to thank you.
With that, I will turn it over to the civil grand jury for their report.
>> good morning.
my name is linda, and I served
as the foreperson of the 2010- 2011 san francisco civil grand jury. Initially I would like to abolish several members of the jury who happen to be sitting on the back bench this morning. They' re here with us today. In an addition, there are several members of past injuries and a member of this year' s current jury. I would like to welcome all of them here today.
Our initial reports this morning is on the civil service commission, and I would like to turn that report over to the juror who chaired that committee, richard rothman. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you
very much, Madam 4%. Good morning. >> thank you for having the hearings today.
My name is richard rothman, and
I happen to serve as the said committee chair of the report
about civil service commission. Just a little background about the grand jury, because I found that there was some
misinformation that the grand
jury is composed of 19 members, and it takes 12 members to
approve any report topic. Someone said that we hired a consultant. Just to let you know, all this work was done by the members of the grand jury.
We pick the topics and do all
the writing ourselves and do all the interviews, with some
support from the staff of the courts. But for the most part, all the writing and everything is all
done by the 12 members, by the
19 members, and it takes 12 members to approve a report.
One of the subcommittee' s, the members of the subcommittee was
myself, a retired steelworker, a
retired banker, lawyer, and a
gentle man who is in the
newspaper industry, a reporter.
We decided to look about -- in
1905, civil service and human
resources -- and civil service approved a reform which cover many areas.
Due to our limited time, we
decided to focus on the hiring process.
And also, we just focus on the miscellaneous workers, and we
left out the police and fire
intentionally, because they have
different rules about hiring.
So, basically, our report was
about the hiring process in the miscellaneous workers.
The purpose of the civil service reform was to speed up the
hiring process and to do with provisional appointments, which
are unfair to the workers and
unfair to the department. We do acknowledge that the
departments of the altman hiring
authority but that human resources in the civil service commission are in place to see
that the rules are followed and the procedures are followed.
In our report, we asked for some
letters, and we intentionally did not want to know the names
of the people on the appeal letters that we review.
This was a deliver it on our
part that we did not know the names -- this was a deliberate on our part that we do not know the names of the applicants.
In preparing for our committee
report, I want to thank all the
departments, from hr to civil service and public health.
also, we interviewed a wide
variety of people.
Although I cannot list the
names, we did interview -- tried to interview all different parties who have stakes in the
hiring process, from union
business managers to rank-and-
file city workers who work for the city.
With that, I would like to read our findings.
We have five findings.
The first finding, under the
traditional class-based testing, an applicant has the right to
appeal to the commission at almost every point during the
examination process.
An applicant taking a position
based testing can appeal only three points in the process. These differences can be confusing to the applicant.
Recommendation one, on all job
applicants -- applications,
there should be a single link or a single sheet of paper outlining in plain english under
what conditions the job application can appeal to human
resources and ultimately to the civil service commission.
Finding two, dhr is not always in forming applicants of their
rights to appeal decisions of
the hr director to the civil service commission.
Recommendation two, dhr should establish tighter procedures to
ensure that all letters sent to applicants and denying their
appeal are mailed properly. Where appropriate, they should
apply applicants of their right
to appeal the decisions to the civil service commission. As a further back up, the jury
urges the commission to include
in these letters to the applicants, setting the date of
their hearing, a reminder that they are entitled to copies of
the dhr report free of charge.
Finding number 3, training and
education testing realize too
heavy on training and experience, listed on the applicant form in evaluating whether an applicant is eligible
for the position. This is an inefficient method for evaluating job applicants.
Testing in education does not verify whether an applicant can
actually possess the training
and education and experience claimed on the form.
dhr as indicated that is in the process of reducing its reliance
on training and education exams.
Recommendation three, the city should continue its move away
from testing and education exams and return to the more knowledge-based examinations.
finding number four, besides a job applicant' s description, position-based testing
applicants -- pbd job announcements sometimes advises
applicants of the eligibility lists from this examination could be used by other city
departments for hiring staff.
However, the advisor does not identify those departments.
This process can deny an applicant the information
required to become aware of an application for a position
within the city government.
Recommendation four, position-
based job announcements should
identify each city department
that might be used -- that might
use the examination eligibility list. this would assist potential applicants in deciding whether
or not to participate in the
examinations and to get on an eligibility list.
Otherwise, a list should be used solely by the departments designated on the job announcement.
Finally, finding five.
as the hiring process in the
city becomes increasingly decentralized and position-based testing becomes more prevailing,
there is a growing doubt among some city workers that the
commission, as currently
staffed, is able to protect their rights.
the commission should be
authorized to hire one additional senior analyst position.
And just to comment, as far as I know, we never received a
response from the mayor' s office about recommendation five.
and two, the current positions
in the civil service budget, one
is staff, one paid for by puc, and one paid for by the mea.
Since the airport' s enterprise
zone, there' s no reason why the airport cannot find this new position. that is my report. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer them.
Supervisor campos: thank you very much for the report. There May be specific questions, but I wanted to get a clarification from the city
attorney in terms of the process. My understanding is that with respect to this report, the
civil grand jury has asked the board of supervisors to respond
to recommendation 5, to find number 5 and recommendation 5,
and that the way that the rules
work, that we in this committee as a board would have to
respond to specific items. Ok.
Great.
colleagues, any questions for the civil grand jury?
Let'
s do it this way, if there' s
someone from the department who would like to present the department' s perspective, and maybe we can follow up with questions. >> that would be fine, thank you.
supervisor campos: thank you very much.
>> good morning,pervisors. I am from the mayor' s office.
I wanted to actually correct one thing that the grand jury mentioned.
We actually did respond to recommendation 5.
unfortunately, it was mislabeled in our response. So if you do look at the mayor' s response, we did address that particular recommendation.
Supervisor campos: supervisor farrell.
Supervisor farrell: committee
May be read into the record so people are aware?
-- can you May be read into the records of people are aware? >> yes.
The recommendation was deficient and the commission should be onerous to hire at least one
additional senior analyst, and the mayor' s response is the recommendation requires further analysis.
The determination of appropriate
staffing levels required an analysis by the mayor' s office and the department as to whether the department is able to
perform core functions, as well
as a consideration of the budgetary resources available annually.
The commission has stated that
it takes seriously its role and responsibility to oversee the city' s merit system and does
believe its staff response to complaints and concerns in a timely manner.
It has indicated that any
additional staffing would only enhance operations. Any discussion related to increasing staffing will have to be made in the course of the budget development process.
Supervisor campos: so that i understand the point, does that mean that you do not believe
that staffing is needed?
I guess this was still not clear. >> we have not had that
discussion with the civil service commission. Over the course of the budget
process, we do take into account
what the purpose staffing level
may be to have the department meet its core functions. With respect to additional staffing, we have not had that discussion yet.
This is the first I am hearing of an additional staffing.
Supervisor campos: I mean, the finding is that as the hiring process becomes increasingly
decentralized, or release that is the finding, that there is
concern about the ability the commission, as currently staffed, to protect individuals' rights.
I mean, what is the civil service commission' s perspective on that?
>> I have anita.
what I would like to point out very quickly with respect to the
finding is that the finding that the civil grand jury mentioned
is based on a misreading of the
2005 dhr report on civil service reform. I can give you a copy of the actual reportdhr.
But on page 6 of the report, under the heading summary of
findings, dhr listed the
following, the centralized authority for personal
positions, especially for hiring. With the civil grand jury did
was they concluded that that was a recommendation that was
implemented by dhr, and that is not the case. I have jennifer johnson here
from dhr, who can further elaborate on that.
Supervisor campos: thank you.
If we can hear from Ms. Anita
sanchez.
>> we thank the grand jury for
their review the hiring process of the city. the civil service commission takes a very seriously the findings of the civil grand jury.
And to ensure that there is a fair and impartial process in
that the hiring of our city employees who are permanent civil servants.
With regard to the
recommendations, I will address item number 5.
The commission agrees with the
civil grand jury' s recommendation of an additional staff person for the civil service commission.
I do, however, want to assure
this committee that our office
is ensuring that any concerns or issues brought to the civil service commission is being handled in a timely manner.
We would be able to expedite our
analysis and review the concerns that are brought to us in terms of the appeal or whether there
is an appeal process available
to the employees or whether this can be handled through what we call and inspection service,
which we look into matters that are not appealable to the commission. However, we would discuss with the department in the department
of human resources whether merit system principles, rules, and
policies have been followed by and that employment transaction.
And an additional staff person
would expedite our analysis and
also give us an opportunity to review the department' s
analysis or reports that they present to the commission, and we can advise the commission whether merit system principles and policies have been followed.
Supervisor farrell: thank you.
To get your opinion on it this, you know, is the second edition,
from your point of view, is this nice to have or need to have?
As you talk about expediting processes, I completely
understand, and I would want to support it really respect what the civil grand jury -- all of their work.
I think about our process and the board of supervisors, everything else in city hall, and our city government. Obviously, we' re in a huge budget deficit times. And we' re all having big austerity measures.
So is this completely necessary to function? Or can you bucshon without it?
>> I think all of us have cut our belts and tighten our belts.
We do with what we have. This department can certainly do
that, and it is not the
recommendation that we thought
that is what the finding of the civil grand jury is, and the commission agrees with that. But they do feel that there should be additional staff for
the commission. But I also want to assure
everyone that anything that is brought to our office is
addressed and not put aside.
Supervisor farrell: ok.
>> it is not absolutely necessary, like a lot of things.
But it would be nice to have.
Supervisor farrell: thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you.
I know there was someone from the department of human
resources -- I do not know if you wanted to add anything.
>> good morning, jennifer johnson from the department of human resources. We have nothing more to add. We think the civil service commission does an outstanding
job of insuring principles are
followed, as with dhr.
There is one misconception bit of the civil grand jury was operating under the assumption
that it was the civil service commission that oversees examinations. It is actually the department of human resources. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you very much.
I am wondering if there is any additional information or comment from the civil grand jury?
>> sir, we knew that the civil service commission role is to
make rules and to edifies, you
know, to see that hr is following its procedures.
hr does the operational and sets
the, you know, is the one who
monitors the exams and the
decentralization process is hr
to ensure that departments follow the policies and
procedures of the civil service commission and the operation
rules of hr.
Supervisor campos: thank you very much. Why don' t we open it up to public comment? If a member of the public would like to speak, please come forward.
Let me see if there' s anyone for
-- I know Mr. Da costa signed up
for item number one, and if there' s anyone else who would
like to speak, please come forward. Mr. Da costa, good morning.
>> for those people at home, I am in addressing this to you,
because really, we get no representation here at city hall.
And to you here, you know your
responsibilities doing legislation.
You have the executive branch, and by 1996, billy browned clipped the wings of the city
administrator, so we really have
the ying and the yang.
But when we few advocates come here, all we get is a ding dong.
Having said that, the only vestige in this adjudication
process, giving the constituents
of san francisco some sort of representation is the grand jury. While some departments
acknowledge that a grand jury, what they do is right and things
are going to be implemented. Today, you have seen at the mayor'
s office spew hot ash.
So if we have a separate mediator or something, he' s
going to say something else, on whatever type of analysis we
need outside the realm of the close circle. Having said that, the population
of 816,000, we have 26,000 plus city employees, and it is left
to you who are representing the
11 districts of this city and county of san francisco to do what is best.
[Bell chimes]
We do have budgetary problems in
spite of having a budget of $6.8 billion, and it is left to you.
some of you are in the financial realm.
Some of you have been consulate to whatever, the san francisco unified school district. Some have had experience with smart business.
Put your heads together and do the right thing. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
>> good morning. My name is douglas, and I have
lived in san francisco 59 years. I am glad to say that I survived
20 years working for the city of san francisco and san francisco general hospital. In regards to the hiring practice of the city.
I would like to point out how
the system is manipulated for my direct experience at the hospital. Many of my co-workers kept
telling me, and eventually I
experienced where our superiors basically verbally discouraged us from taking any tests,
because they basically said between the lines that the person was already chosen.
Now this is from my experience. I have taken one test. I finished with a near-perfect score.
And you tell me in 20 years how
a person with my qualifications and never was promoted and never
took another promotional test.
So I would dare, department of
human resources, to tell me that it is not an ongoing and
longtime practice where applicants are verbally discouraged to taking tests because, basically, the appointee has already been
chosen by management. Second, I would like to point
out that the civil service commission helped me in regards to my problem. i would like to give credits to kate.
After her departure, I hate to
say that I was given the cold soldier by the current civil service commission.
[Bell chimes]
Roughly, an appeal through the civil service commission took close to three years to go through the process, and I was forced to go by their rules. Let'
s put it this way, how does
it 20 years city employee have
to wait five years and is still
undecided, undecided whether it
was legal to put that employee
on mandatory sick leave with no process of appeal? Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you server -- thank you, sir. Next. >> good morning. I am here are my own time as a private citizen. I would like to put the record straight.
Mr. Da costa noted that we have 26,000 employees.
you all know, because you are
keenly involved, that that 26,000 figure is a lie.
And it comes from the controller'
s office.
We have 26,000 fte' s, but there
are another 11,000 or so full
and part-time employees, such
that we have 36,644 city employees.
So the other lie beneath -- being promulgated during the
pension reform debate, our
friend jeff adache claims city employees average $93,000 in
salary.
So if you forget the fte thing and actually look at the city controller'
s payroll debt, than $93,000 average salary is salaryhooey.
As you consider changes to the
civil service commission, I beg
you to start using the real
number of city employees and stop this pretense that there
are only 26,000 fte' s.
Supervisor campos: thank you, sir. Is there any other member of the public who would like to speak?
Seeing none, public comment is closed.
colleagues, as was indicated earlier, we have been asked to
respond to find number 5 and
recommendation number 5, and we
have before us a motion , a
proposed response, that calls
for a specific position with
respect to that finding and that recommendation. Supervisor farrell.
Supervisor farrell: thank you.
First of all, again, thank you to the civil grand jury for their work on this matter, and thank you for those who came before us today.
i think, at this point, I would
be prepared to accept the
finding. I have no reason to doubt that
their hard work has kind of really gotten to the bottom of what some people are feeling
about commission and city workers right now.
however, on the recommendation,
I am inclined to disagree here.
It would be great to hire more folks, but we at the border faced with the budget for next year.
And hundreds of millions of dollars of deficit already.
So I would be happy to consider that next year, and we can think
about it as a board next year in terms of our overall budget process.
But to recommend it right now, when we heard it was not a
necessity, you know, we' re in
austere times in the city and city government. We need to be very careful about that. So I would be prepared to agree
with the finding and disagree with the recommendation.
supervisor campos: so that is a motion by supervisor farrell. I do not know if you have any thoughts or comments, President T
chiu?
Thank you.
i certainly understand the perspective that supervisor farrell has and can supported or suggest in the language that we
state that the kit -- the commission should consider the hiring of personnel. But in the context of the budget, I am happy to hear more
on that this.
President Chiu: are we allowed to amend the language?
>> yes, you are allowed to amend the language.
President Chiu: I see the point
that supervisor farrell makes.
i think that if we can have a language that leaves the option
of hiring open, I would be -- that would be my preference.
The reason I see that -- say that is that I do not want us to
take a position where we
disagree with that finding or with a recommendation and later,
you know, find out that, for some reason, in fact, this May be needed.
I think that to the extent that
there is a need, that there is an understanding that we will
get the expert advice from the civil service commission, and
that they will let us know what is appropriate. And of course, all of that has to happen in the context of the budget. So I and understand the
hesitation, but to the extent
that this finding is in error,
it is important for us to leave
some flexibility in how to respond to that.
I get the point of what the
civil service -- what the civil
grand jury is trying to say.
President Chiu: I have no problem with the language in the
middle.
I am not comfortable with what is there now. If there' s language in the middle that would make people more comfortable, happy to do that.
Supervisor farrell: I suggest and the like, with respect to recommendation number 5, we' re
comfortable saying that, within
budget realities and within the assess the needs of the
commission in the future, something to consider if you want to go forward, something like that.
Supervisor campos: ok, so can we clarified the motion for the language? It would read that we agree with
finding number 5 in respect to the recommendation -- what exactly?
Supervisor farrell: with regards
to recommendation number 5, you
know -- I do not have actually any language specifically right now.
Supervisor campos: I do not know if the city attorney' s office has suggestions.
Supervisor farrell: the point is to reflect budget realities as well as the needs of the commission.
supervisor
campos: Ms. Campbell.
The budget analyst to the rescue, again. >> good morning.
we could take supervisor, President Chiu' s language and say something to the extent of, with respect to the recommendation, the board of
supervisors will evaluate the
need for additional staff, a
senior personnel analyst, constraints of the budget and that requirement to the commission.
Supervisor campos: that sounds good. That is perfect.
So we have a revised motion by supervisor farrell.
Can we take that motion without objection? Thank you.
Madam Clerk, please call the next item.
>>
we are going to item number 3.
The hearing -- tabled here in number one.
Supervisor campos: we can table hearing never won without objection. With respect to item number two,
we can repeat the motion, which is a motion to agree with the
findings, and with respect to
item number two, and this is something we already did as part
of item number one, but if there is any member of the public who would like to provide an
additional comment on item
number two, which is the
response from the board of supervisors, including this committee, to the finding with respect to the civil service commission. Is there any member of the public would like to comment? Mr. Da costa.
>> normally the constituents at
home rely on some of the
information that we get from the controller'
s office.
What we have here is the board
of supervisors in the course of
the year not having hearings on
something as important as hiring practices.
And one of the things
missing in how you evaluate yourselves is
that we do not have an
entity that gives us some sort of
quarterly analysis.
You presuppose that the city' s
hiring practices are the best.
And billy brown was there.
Thousands of administrative
assistant entered the system.
So here we have the aid of the department of human resources
making statements, but a lot of them participated in those shenanigans.
so my input, besides what I said
on item number one, is that you
represent us, but we get very
little representation in terms
of adjudication, process, and
some sort of help to the constituents when it comes to the hiring practices.
So we fall back on the grand jury'
s reports.
And the least you can do is put
a timeline, a sharp timeline, to
see that something is done that balances the constituents of san francisco. Thank you very much.
Supervisor campos: thank you, sir. >> I am patrick.
So, interesting to hear supervisor farrell'
s attempt at
comedy.
austere times -- you just give a $20 million tax break to twitter.
You just issued $110 million for t
certificates of participation for the missoni convention
center -- mosconi convention center. I am sure supervisor farrell
read the article regarding this issue.
While it is welcome to supervisor farrell, it is finally addressing part of the problem. You cannot claim that we have austere times if you' re not
going to require require --
require it being approved by the voters.
In addition, if you would do
salary reform before attempting
to do pension reform, you would
not have such an austere time of things, and you could easily
fund that one position. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you, sir. Next speaker.
>> good morning, supervisors could I am douglas.
In regards to item number two, I would like to know whether you
had a chance to talk to micki
callahan and bill ginsberg?
According to my information, the
two of them are very influential on the current hiring practices.
I think that it is only prudent
that the two of them be consulted. i am surprise the both of them
are not here, especially Mr.
Ginsberg, given that there was a
demonstration against Mr. Ginsberg on west portal last sunday. Somehow the mayor did not show up in time to see it.
Anyway, in regards to the hiring
practices, I am still wondering,
what ever happened to the public demonstrations that happened at the department of public works on army street where there were
many minority workers who claimed that they were
mistreated and were not given
the proper hiring practices?
Also, I would like to know what
ever happened to the x-ray tax
which was involved in a so- called wildcat strike, which
resulted in a secret meeting
upstairs at general hospital and
later that night the suspicious
death of a union leader?
I am kind of wondering if the
hiring practices were ever fixed at san francisco general in
regards to the x-ray tax, and were the complaints of the workers at the department of
public works on army street were ever resolved? Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you very much. Any other member of the public that would like to speak?
Seeing none, public comment is closed. with respect to item two,
colleagues, I wonder if we can
go back to the motion, and I apologize for failing to do it in the right sequence.
If we can take that motion again by supervisor farrell, which is
a motion to accept finding number 5 and to expect a
recommendation to number 5, the language that was provided to us by Ms. Campbell. We have that motion. If we can take that without objection.
Gatt thank you.
Madam Clerk, please call item number 3.
>> item 3, hearing on the 2010- 2011 civil grand jury report entitled " san francisco's ethics
commission: the sleeping watchdog." >>
supervisor campos: thank you very much. I would like to call again on
the foreperson at the civil grand jury.
Before I turn it over to you, i
wanted to say that, you know, I have been dealing with civil grand juries for a number of years in different capacities
before I was elected to the board of supervisors. I was an attorney for the school district, and there were various
reports that, over the years, that were submitted by the civil grand jury that implicated my
client that involved the school district. And I really believe that there
is a very important role that civil grand juries play.
And I think it is a good thing
for all government agency, all levels of government to have private citizens who are
volunteering their time, who
come in with a fresh set of eyes
and provide their perspective on how government agencies are doing or not doing things.
And I think that is a very, very and valuable.
-- in valuable.
I cannot emphasize that enough. From my perspective, the best
thing that a government agency can do when dealing with a report from a civil grand jury
is to really keep an open mind
and really try to understand where the civil grand jury is coming from.
There May be agreement or
disagreement, but I think that is important to hear that
prospective.
So I want to reiterate my
appreciation for the work you
do, and this item relates to a
very important function in not just of this government but any
government, and that is the role
that such an agency plays.
So this is a very important item.
Again, I want to thank you for the work that was done.
With that, Madam Foreperson -- >> thank you. We appreciate your kind words about the civil grand jury. In some ways, you sort of usurped what I was going to say, which is to reiterate what mr.
rothman said. We' re 19 individuals, citizens of san francisco, who are
working only for the remaining citizens of san francisco to review the various departments and their operations.
Again, to reiterate, we do act independently.
We do not have consultants assisting us.
We have access to the city attorney, should we need it.
But other than that, these reports are totally
investigated by private citizens, the 19 members of the grand jury, and the reports that they write are solely the reports of those citizens based
upon the information gathered by the various committees of the grand jury.
I think it is important to remember that.
our report that we' re going to
review now is on the topic of
the ethics commission, the sleeping watchdog. I am going to turn this report
over to Mr. Bryant clemmons, who was the juror who chaired that subcommittee for us. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you.
and thank you for your service, and welcome to the meeting.
>> thank you, supervisors .
When I started on the grand jury, and never thought that I
would be investigating the ethics commission. Initially, it was not even anything we were thinking about investigating. We were looking at something
else, and that investigation brought us into the ethics commission for part of that other report.
Some of the things that we saw other kind of surprised us.
Because the ethics commission is supposed to be the organization
that is watching out for the citizens and making sure that the rest of the government is functioning in the way we expected to.
We found a number of things, and like we said in our report, we' re not trying to be a complete review the ethics commission.
This is just a small part of the ethics commission. It was not the main focus.
But we found a few things that seemed, looking at it with a
fresh set of eyes, as you said, just did not make sense to us. so we thought we would bring these things separate from another report to make sure that they got enough information.
One of the things that really
disturbs us was relating to the
sunshine or dance task force.
And whenever the sunshine ordinance, whenever the task
force found a problem, we
noticed that there items have to
get sent to the ethics commission for the hearing.
From 2004 through 2010, in all of the cases that got sent to the ethics commission, every single one of them got dismissed.
for various reasons.
Facts did not supported. Yeah, one group of individuals found that there was a problem. Yet, another group found there was not. I could see it happening
sometimes, but every single one
has seemed a bit excessive.
And it seemed like the sunshine
or dance task force was being
suppressed by the ethics
commission because of the lack of a public hearing on the discussion topics that were brought forward to them.
Some of the other elements that
we found were the membership of
the commission and the way that
the commission functions, while
not directly towards your area, the scope and size of the commission, all the commission members are appointed by the people they are supposed to be overseeing.
And while its -- there were not directed things that we could see, there were items that were not brought up that we thought
should have been brought up, but they got sidelined due to the processes that are currently engaged in the ethics commission. And we looked at a number of
ways to try to rearrange some of that, and one of the approaches
we came up with is one of our recommendations, which is number
four, to add an additional members to the ethics
commission which are not part
of -- not appointed by the people they are overseeing.
That they are appointed by independent groups.
We feel that adding additional members to the commission would allow the commission to function better, and it would provide
additional oversight within the
structure of the commission to
provide the transparency that
the public is expecting with the ethics commission.
And then, finally, the last item
i want to talk about is the recording of the commission meetings. Currently, there audio recording, which is better than a lot of the commissions, but we
feel that as the voice for the citizens and the ones that are supposed to be providing open government, that they do not
provide and cannot find money in their budget to televise their sessions.
It just seems disingenuous that only one-half of 1% of their
total budget -- they cannot find that much money in their budget to spend to broadcast in their meetings, as opposed to
providing an audio recording. With that, I will keep my comments brief, so thank you.
Supervisor campos: ok, thank you very much. Why don' t we now hear from the
ethics commission?
I do not know if -- or from the mayor' s office?
>> thank you. I am from the mayor' s budget office. Thank you for letting me speak briefly about this report.
The ethics commission, in conjunction with the offices of the district attorney and city attorney, have and will continue to work diligently to approach
all complaints received. The ethics commission does
investigate a variety of matters on a case by case basis.
But the commission does strive to address all complaints in a timely manner. The mayor' s office believes that
many of the recommendations of the civil grand jury are reasonable. However, either because of limited resources or competing jurisdictions over subject
matter or because some recommended changes require voter approval, certain
recommendations May not be appropriate or feasible in all instances. With respect to the
recommendations needing mayor' s
office responses, the mayor' s office is believes, for recommendation four, that it
would require further analysis, as this recommendation requires voter approval.
With respect to recommendations
7, this also requires further analysis. But the mayor' s office will work
with the ethics commission on broadcasting meetings on the city' s television network.
Supervisor campos: I would like to ask a little bit more about that.
i mean, why does that require further analysis?
From my perspective, if you are
going to have the kind of
robust agency that you want to
see, then one of the key elements of that is making sure
that the public is aware , you know, of what the agency is doing. And that is why, with respect to
the board of supervisors and many commissions, the meetings
are televised.
And I think that any supervisor here on the board can tell you
that we definitely here, from time to time, as we' re walking around our neighborhoods are our
districts, around the city, people provide specific comments about something we said or did
or did not say or deny do, and I think that is important.
so why should that level of
transparency and scrutiny not apply to the ethics commission,
which plays such an important
role in making sure that
government functions with a degree of, you know, the highest ethical standards possible?
what further analysis do you need to have on that?
>> well, one of the main things in our response is there is a budgetary impact or the department does have to find
money in its budget to fund the services of the city' s television network.
But more importantly, and this is for the further analysis comes in, is that there are a finite number of rooms in city
hall that are available at certain times.
So we would have to look at what
time the ethics commission meets in which rooms are
available that are hooked up for broadcast.
You know, this is the first time
that I am hearing of the particular recommendation, so we will work with the ethics
commission if this is of the end of the board of supervisors wants to push forward to find
the available space that has
broadcast capabilities and work with the ethics commission to see what can be done with its budget with respect to funding this particular service.
And that is why it requires further analysis.
Supervisor campos: ok.
I am sure that is something that can be worked out. I think that finding a room in city hall should not be that difficult.
but in any event, I do not know if there'
s anything else we see the executive director, I did not know if you want to add anything?
>> did you want me to talk specifically to this?
supervisor farrell:
campos: it is up to you. >> thank you, supervisor.
If I could just very briefly address each of the recommendations.
>> each of the grand jury
suggested a fixed fine structure to have some continuity.
In this particular case, the ethics commission does disagree
with the finding, because we
believe that there are a host of
different reasons were identical
infractions occur, and the punishment needs to fit the
crime, and that we need to analyze these.
We are, however, going to more formalized the nature of the
criteria that we determine the
kinds, so there is an
explanatory process about how we reach the decisions. on the side of finding regarding
sunshine -- second
finding
regarding sunshine, in August of 2010 the ethics commission adopted a series of proposals to treat this differently, including sunshine hearings and public and expediting the
process by which the researc
y reach the full commission for hearing.
We refer to the task force and their comments.
This past August they issued the
response to us.
In addition to commenting on our
proposals, they suggested a large number of their own.
We are currently reviewing
those, in the ethics commission plans to consider them at the November meeting of this year.
That will, I believe, dissuade
some of the concerns regarding sunshine actions.
supervisor farrell: do you
disagree with the language?
-- supervisor chiu: the language we' re being asked to consider is
all sunshine ordnances deserve a time when hearing. Are you ok with that language? >> yes.
The third recommendation regarding the investigation
should begin immediately upon
the close of the 14-day reply
window offered to the city attorney, this the commission
agrees with and will endeavor
to get to investigations in a fast and efficient method.
Using the best way it has to prioritize cases.
Finding for the ethics commission is neutral on.
Elected officials appoint the ethics commission.
obviously the elected are the representatives of the people. If the voters choose to make
this change, the ethics commission will switch up the case.
Finding no. 5, the ethics commission has already acted on
prior to this report. two members of the ethics
commission had to request that I am become entered for dismissal or settlement. The ethics commission has
adopted a new regulation that a
single member of the commission
can cause these to be countered for consideration by the full commission.
finding number six, we take seriously our ability to track issues efficiently. We' re always upgrading our system, trying to make it
interactive and user friendly. We certainly continue to do that.
We do have a system in place to track records and record request
that we think is working, but we
are talking with that to ensure request for documents of information are handled properly.
Finally, on the television
issue, the ethics commission has
decided to endorse televising its meetings.
in the past I understand we' re
talking about $24,000 per year,
which day -- May not be a lot of
money, but my the commission has been a shortstop since I got there.
My priority has always been when we got budget request for additional staff, we have reduced every other account we have except salaries.
even so, we had 18 staffers a few years ago and 16 now.
It is not a case of I cannot
find $24,000 on my budget.
I will be able to do that one way or another.
It was not again -- the ethics commission did not have this of
as a priority. Supervisor chiu:
ampos: you and I have talked about this in the past.
In terms of good government, $24,000 pays for itself in a matter of minutes.
if I introduced something on tuesday, but this coming
tuesday, and I would ask the city attorney, the comptroller' s office, anyone who could help us
put the requisite resolution or
ordnance together, that would require the ethics commission
meeting speech televised the link for work. The commission in your perspective would be supportive of that? >> sure.
What the mayor' s office brought up is something that I am already working on is that we work the second monday of every month. There is not a slot available in the current meeting time that
would offer a stability to be televised, because you' re only
meeting at that time. We will have to find another slot where that is available.
I have not been able to go
through every single agency' s monthly calendar and find where the slots are.
Supervisor campos: May be between now and tuesday you could work with my staff and we could work with the good folks
from sfgtv to make this happen,
but I think that the importance
of this is such that I think we
need to move expeditiously --
whether you agree or disagree with the specific findings or recommendations, the one thing that is clear to me is we can
all benefit from that added transparency. Maybe we can work together between now and tuesday so we can introduce something at the next board meeting to move quickly to make that happen.
>> we intend to make it happen.
If this will make it happen more expeditiously, I am sure my commissioners will be grateful.
fifth supervisor campos: please continue if you like anything
else to be continued.
i think doing that has helped to bring about a lot more transparency and community support for the decisions of the commission, and I hope and think that might be the same with yours. Whenever my office can do to
help with that, we have gone through this discussion before with regard to very similar
issues are around budget, and we figured out a way to deal with that. More than happy to support that
effort and co-vaunted that effort.
With regards to recommendation
no. 4, just so I understand, and
maybe this is a question of the city attorney' s office, this is
a question of chartered change, so stating this as a recommendation does not make this change happen.
I understand the impulse to want to have non-elected officials be
involved in this, and I love the organizations that are listed here, but I can imagine there might be lots of folks that would have different questions
as to exactly which non-person community organization should be selected. I was wondering if you have a perspective on that. I'
m a big fan of uc dating -- uc-davis law school, but I' ve a feeling we have a couple of other educational institutions that May want to be part of
that, and I want to get your feeling on the challenges of selecting specific community
organizations and individuals that would be responsible for the apartment of members to the commission.
>> I am not sure what to say, because my commissioners have
decided to be neutral on this, and so have I.. There is a lot of wisdom out
there, but those voters also
have wisdom, and this is set up this way for a reason.
Supervisor [Inaudible]
: would it be helpful to figure
out why the specific
organizations are listed here,
and completely agree with and echoing President Used comments when I understand there is a
desire that it makes sense to somehow remove it from people
they are overseeing, but why these folks and not others?
>> if you look at the wording,
it is such as, just possible suggestions -- suggestions for elements like this.
We were looking at the sunshine ordinance task force membership and the appointment of the members of the sunshine ordinance is where we came up
with the idea for appointing
people that were not from --
elected officials to get the extra level of independence.
That is where the idea came from.
Specific organizations -- we
book the other organizations from other cities, and some did
have outside appointments, and where they were made there were similar to these types of
organizations, but we mapped out san francisco organizations on to appointments that were made by other ethics commission' s.
Supervisor campos:
I do have a couple of follow-ups.
i understand there have been some financial challenges in dealing with some of these
issues, but there are a couple of questions that come to mind.
With respect to the enforcement
of this sunshine or dance task
force, it seems to me that that
in a way is a larger issue that
needs to be addressed, and I see
a member of the commission here , and from my perspective, I
think it would be helpful for this committee to follow up on
that issue and to really have a
hearing and discussion about
how the process currently works,
to have some dated information
about the level of action or enforcement that has taken place of the ethics commission so that we have an understanding
of what the numbers are, and
also have a discussion about some of the proposed changes you
have submitted, and you not only
hear from the ethics commission, but also to hear from the sunshine task force and its members. That would be my suggestion.
i think it is a larger issue, and it is one that is also very
critical, and I do not know what
the timing of this process that
you described where you sent
some changes to the sunshine task force for comment and perhaps recommendation, but if we were to have a hearing of
that sort, what would be inappropriate time for us to do that?
>> I think you would probably have the best information to go on if you were to wait until
after we consider the changes we
propose, the ones that they included, and we intend to do that in November.
Supervisor campos: we will introduce a hearing requests, and maybe the timing is
something we can work on, not only with coordination in your
office but the chair of the sunshine task force to make sure
we take their schedules into consideration. That is the point I wanted to make on that.
With respect to the district
attorney, and I see Mr. Piper
fiefer
in audience, and I do not know
the direct title, but waiting
for the district attorney or
city attorney to inform the ethics commission they will not
pursue a case causes unnecessary delays, and then the
recommendation after the 14- state ethics commission
investigations should start.
-- 14-state ethics commission investigation should start.
>> each time we enter a formal
investigation part of our investigation requires us to
notify the city attorney and district attorney.
In case they want to presume
jurisdiction over that particular investigation.
at the end of the 14-day window
they usually send us a window saying they are or are not going
to pursue the investigation themselves.
In general are custom is if they pursue an investigation, we do
not, because is duplication of
effort, and we have constrained resources.
>> in response to finding no. 3, and maybe the city attorney has
some thoughts on this, the city attorney' s office response that the ethics commission does not have to wait to undertake its
own investigation, wait for either the D.A. Or city
attorney, so is that different?
Does that mean you are waiting even though you do not have to? Is that what is going on?
>> bill law does not require us to wait, the regulations do.
-- the law does not require us to wait, the regulations do.
supervisor campos: Mr. City attorney --
>> good morning.
What the director said is correct.
If he feels and the ethics
commission feels amending the regulations at that point is worthwhile, we' re certainly happy to do so and streamline the process even further. >>
supervisor campos: it seems to
me the threshold for the district attorney to pursue an
investigation and file a charge is a different thresholds
legally, and certainly the burden of proof is different in
that there May be policy reasons
why, even though the district attorney' s office May not be
pursuing a specific case, that
you still want action, or from the ethics commission, or even when a case is pursued, you May
still want action from the ethics commission. I am not sure if we are missing
something by making the two mutually exclusive.
That is my point and concern.
I would ask you to at least
reconsider the existing
regulation.
i want to give Mr. Piper an opportunity to say something. I do not know if you want to add
something, but for those of you
that May or May not know david piper, I have had the opportunity to work with him in the past, and you will not find
a more ethical and diligent
public servants, and I know that he takes these matters very
seriously, and I want to thank you for being here today.
>> thank you, commissioner compos, for the kind words.
We have no position on the actual recommendation.
we always tried to respond to
essex within 10 days, pursuant
to the board' s wants.
Our feeling is if the regulation
was changed, that would be fine with us.
If the commission wanted to proceed after there
ose 14 days, there have been a couple of
instances where we have had a very complicated situation where
we were about to a thin -- about to begin an investigation where
it would be preferable when the ethics commission deferred for a little while while we were completing something.
there are a couple of cases that
have resulted in substantial criminal charges beyond the penalties.
As a general rule it the commission wanted to start the
investigation in 14 days with the disk -- the district attorney' s office has no objection to that.
supervisor campos: so if the regulation were to be changed,
there is still on opportunity by way of communication between your office and the ethics commission to make sure there
are steps taken to the extent they are proceeding with their
own matter, that that is not in any way negatively impacting your investigation?
>> correct.
Supervisor campos: thank you very much. Ok. I think that is it for me. Thank you very much.
I am wondering for the members of the civil grand jury there is anything else you would like to add? Thank you very much.
colleagues, any other questions? Why don' t we open it up to public comment?
Let me just read a few leaves here on this item.
Francisco
decaste, and anyone else would like to speak on this item, please come forward.
>> supervisors, the list you could have done today is because we have a few people commenting that have given us three minutes. You choose to give us two minutes.
Supervisor campos: I thought we had given you three minutes. I am sorry.
>> now that it is three minutes, you make my heart happy. I have been listening very
carefully, and from the year
2004-2010, we appear before the sunshine task force on many
issues, primarily with the
shipyard, and you heard all the deliberations of the sunshine task force were sent to the ethics commission, and they did nothing about it.
Thousands of our children were
impacted, the city attorney was involved, the district attorney
was involved, and other entities were involved, and they
did nothing about the adverse impact to our children.
Ba
the majority of the board of
supervisors gave it to arroba
developer who is now biting, laid to rest.
I am here to state to you that
we need the deliberations of the ethics commission on the
television, and we have,
according to the latest
reports, 23 billion in our city. We can get money from other
sources to make this happen, and
there are numerous places, not
only here at city hall, but the port authority were things can be televised and other areas, too.
Supervisors, as I stated to
you, many of us are fed up
coming here talking to you
supervisors, but you guys are not listening.
I hear some comments from one or
two of you that you do not like what the grand jury is saying because they represent us, and
they have stated very clearly
they do not use legalese and lying attorneys that come over
here in use, belated -- and use convoluted language and say something but it means nothing.
there is -- we have reached a
stage in this city, and you stated recently of the board of
supervisors that people are simply fed up.
They' re taking their grievances on line, and when you take it on line to the internet, it spreads everywhere, but I know, and i
hope those who went to harvard
or some other higher institution will do the right thing.
Those who are just what products, I am one, they will be able to discern.
i am asking you on behalf of the people of san francisco. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: think you. Next speaker, please.
>> good morning.
I became a whistleblower in shortly there after I was forced out of my job.
two years ago we made three whistle-blower complaints to the ethics commission, and I would like to tell you about each of them. The first one involves a conflict of interest between a
contractor and the department of public health. Two years went by before we took matters into our own hands and
covered the Dr. John had
received a $1.9 million contract
from the comptroller' s office and the department of public
health, but his wife, high-level
department of health manager had written and was intimately involved with.
After sending numerous memos to the comptroller' s office and ethics commission, the contract
was revoked and the city save $400,000.
Then we reported the gift fund, a charitable trust for patients
that was plundered by the book could haunt the administration to pay for staff amenities.
-- by the lagunahonda
hospital administration to pay for amenities.
Last week, we complained to
ethics about the financial relationship between the health
director, and another for-profit
consoles that help management.
This was a straight forward violation of the city charter.
The health director was working
for a paid consultant while they were given the sole source no-
bid contract by the department of public health.
After two years, the ethics commission is still investigating the conflict of interest.
It has been our experience that the findings of the civil grand
jury are true, that the commission does not conduct
timely and appropriate investigations.
What about using some of the
monies that are complaints save to televise the ethics commission meeting?
In times of austerity, should the ethics commission look the other way while there are sweetheart deals going on
between the director of helping
contractors and why -- while the contracts are being awarded to
members and families of high- level managers? >> think yo
thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you. That speaker, please.
>> good afternoon. My name is there occur.
I give a whistleblower and was laid off.
-- name is david kerr.
We filed the conflicts of interest report with the ethics commission and. We found the health director had
collected over $30,000 from a
city contractor named health management associates.
At the same time, help manage
and associates had received a hundred thousand dollars no-bid contract from the health department.
After one most -- month the ethics commission sent are complete to the D.A.' s office and city attorney, and then they stopped looking at it.
Meanwhile, I was terminated.
i then filed a whistle-low or retaliation complaint and was told to get a lawyer.
After nine months, the d a decline to press criminal
charges and referred the criminal complaint back to ethics that have not done nothing.
they told us our policy is not
to investigate it the D.A. Is involved.
I said ok, show me a copy of the policy.
There was no record responsive to my request. It was just what they were doing.
Two years after we filed the
complaint remains under investigation.
The sleeping watchdog moniker is
appropriate the ethics commission is either unable or
unwilling to act on complaints against high-level city
officials. There is increasing public concern that the ethics
commission carries out such complaints.
Our only recourse thieves to be the media or the courts.
It really should not be this way.
Please attempt to fill the grand jury' s recommendations. Thank you very much.
supervisor campos: thank you, doctor. Next speaker.
>> this particular grand jury
has inspired me.
When I retire, I am going to apply for a seat on that body.
Given what has transpired during
this hearing, I have changed by it remarks.
I appreciate you introducing a resolution of some sort next
week, but I ask you to expand how the debt burden of televising commission hearings to also include the health department.
It consumes 16 of the city budget and they should be
required to hold their hearings
in city hall and televise them.
It is just as important to have
that the commission meetings on tv. I would also ask you to consider the process of drafting language
for city charter change to increase the commission membership by four.
That is a long, convoluted process to write the language
and move it through the board. the sooner you began writing
that, I ask that you consider
including in such a reform
measure, not just the
membership, but other aspects that the family has been trying
to move through the sunshine task force and to find a sponsor on the board of supervisors to
deal with several transparency issues in city government.
Finally, the recommendation that
you delay holding a hearing at this body on enforcement of
sunshine actions , I respectfully disagree with them.
I think the board of
supervisors should try to be
involved in the process of the process sees that will be worked
out between the ethics commission and that this is an opportune time for you to be involved in that, rather than
waiting until the end of the process.
Finally, your resolution today indicates that the board' s response to the grand jury
states that you are urging the
mayor to response -- to respond before this commission.
I urge you to ask him to come before this commission.
Why he has taken no action on the ethics commission recommendation to remove her from the library. That is long overdue.
Supervisor campos: thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
>> walter folsom.
"
find a slot of sfgovtv.
And when the day is cloudy,
there is still a sunshine
task force that shines on me.
Shine down on the ethics won' t you please.
Whisper words of wisdom and
find a slot on sfgovtv.
And when the day is cloudy,
sunshine task force shines down on me.
Supervisor campos: thank you, Mr. Paulson. next speaker, please.
>> that was hot from better of
humor -- was one of the better ones.
I think you very much for the comments you have made here today. Televising the ethics commission is a crucial element.
people of san francisco would really like to see that. They are concerned about it and want to know what is going on in city government.
Change is not easy.
If you read the original report
from Mr. St. Croix it was not very nice.
In fact, it was very derogatory towards the circle grand jury.
He has changed over the past couple of months, he has changed because of public opinion and because many of the remarks of
the civil grand jury just makes sense. Change is not easy.
No one likes change, except for maybe the baby with the bad diaper.
Think of the ethics commission as the bad diaper and make changes. I really feel good about what
you folks are doing here today, the comet to amate, and please continue that and hold them to accountability. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you. Next speaker.
>> my name is douglas yep.
I am glad the constitution but people like me be politically incorrect.
Number one, the ethics
commission should be headed by Mr. Joe quinn
lynn.
I am sure he is looking down from heaven and has plenty to say.
Secondly, I am wondering by Mr. Oliver no longer works at the end of this commission.
That in itself deserves an ethics commission.
thirdly, a director says he does not have the money. Where does he get all the money for the tony hall case?
I am still wondering what ever
happened to the controversy will check?
I am kind of figuring that
somebody is stonewalling that aspect of the case.
on the title
it says it is a sleeping watchdog.
I would like to suggest a more
appropriate description of the ethics commission.
I would describe it as a lap
dog that kisses too much.
one word was left out because it is a family tv show.
Now here is the bomb shell, and I am sure a lot of people know what I' m calling to say.
The ethics commission uses
loopholes to stonewalled since 2008.
An investigation they claim is
complete, the question is, it is my district supervisor are
residents during the 2008 election cycle?
it ed chu
was investigated
publicly and chris daly was
investigated publicly, then what happened to this sitting supervisor? There should be no difference between the three of them, and I
take the viewpoint of is it is
-- it is a simple question -- yes or no?
for three years the city attorney' s office has sat on it without doing anything about it.
I was told on the phone that the
same investigators that handle chris daly were supposed to handle this one.
They were totally uncooperative with me. i basically just gave up.
My parting words for everyone in
this room, that in the future everyone should remember the
following three ideas -- #one,
obstruction of justice, never to
come a dereliction of duty, and number three, abuse of power. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you.
Any other member of the public?
Former commissioner. Good morning. How' re you?
>> I am an attorney who lives and practices in the city.
i am a former member of the ethics commission. I served from 2004-2010.
The proceedings here thus far almost make me Miss City hall. [Laughter]
I came on to the commission during a time of great turmoil
in 2004 and had a different executive director, and I have
to say -- I think I am in minority with regard to the
public, but the commission has
experienced a period of growth and stability.
Essex has a relatively small
staff, 16 now, much smaller than when I first became chair.
-- ethics has a relatively small
step, 60 now, much smaller than when I first became chair.
At least some of you know, perhaps from first-time
experience, that there are works in connection with campaign finances that are quite remarkable. i hear from folks in the community how helpful and
professional the staff of the ethics commission were to them when they had to file their campaign finance disclosure statements.
Our improvements needed? Their course.
What city agency does not?
Speaking specifically to the
findings there were too, for come in seven. Should hearings be held in connections with sunshine complaints and should be open
and held in a timely manner? Absolutely. So much of what we' re talking about has had to do with capacity.
We of two investigators, maybe
three at one point, what we did not always have that capacity.
Whenever you have less
resources, it is hard to have things happen in a timely manner.
With regard to increasing the number of commissioners, I think
it makes that a little and willie adenine, but I will leave that to you all.
-- unwilly, but I will leave that to you all.
At least one of the suggestions I think was.
You May be looking at retired
judges, government studies come other entities that are also in this space.
With regard to the televised
hearings, if there is money for it, absolutely. When we first looked at the
issue, I looked at $65,000 per year.
We have to make hard choices, we chose not to do that.
I am happy to take any questions if you have any.
supervisor campos: thank you.
The to buy much, and thank you for your service.
Public comment is closed.
In terms of proceeding, we have
a resolution before us that as that the board of supervisors in
this committee included to take this issue with respect to
finding 2, 4, and seven and
adjust to reiterate, basically
go back to what the findings
are, finding no. 2 is stating familiar of the ethics commission to inform us -- and
forced task force actions and reduces the effectiveness of the sunshine ordinance. There is a recommendation
attached to that of all sunshine
ordinance task force actions .
the recommendation is to maximize transparency.
>> before we go on what would you like to table --
supervisor campos: we are still on item number three.
Item #3 is the hearing.
Can we table that item so we have a motion to table? We could take that without objection. we now go to an item number four.
>> item number four, resolution responding to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations
contained in the 2010-200011 civil grand jury report entitled san francisco' s ethics commission, the sleeping watchdog."
we
supervisor campos: we have before us a decision with regard to the findings of the resolutions. Before we turn it to public
comment if any of the commissioners would like to say anything. If there are any members of the public that would like to comment on this item, please come forward.
>> I have not quite finish my comment on the discussion earlier, but the mayor needs to
be held to account, whether at question time or before this
committee, about why he has
taken no action on removing
jewell gomex
z
from the library
at the recommendation of the ethics commission. When you begin drafting language
for a charter change on the composition of the ethics
commission and additional
changes to increase transparency
in city government, there needs
to be an enforcement and
penalty added to the powers of the ethics commission, such that
even the mayor should be penalized when he fails to take
action on a recommendation that
has taken years to wind through a hearing of the ethics
commission, two years before
sunshine task force member sue clausen'
s case even had a hearing. You May or May not at the conclusion of the ethics
commission hearing that found
Miss Gomez had violated the sunshine ordinance, I went to
congratulate her being the first
person in city history to have
been found violative by the ethics commission, in the first
person in city history to being referred to the mayor for removal of office. When I approached her to
congratulate her, she flipped her jacket at me trying to strike me.
there does not need to be an
actual strike to constitute an assault. She is salted meat in the hallway of city hall, and the
mayor trying to run for elected
office has no business doing so
unless he is going to enforce referrals sent to him from the ethics commission.
Ed lee should not become mayor if he is going to willfully
ignored the recommendation made from the ethics commission. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: 6 speaker, please.
>> my name is jeff ente.
I was one of the complaints.
I want to give you first-hand experience of what that was like. It was my only complaint, and I
tried not to do it, but I heard
the supervisor talk of that document that did not exist.
I filed a complaint to the supervisors and let' s see these documents and it was ignored.
I want to frank darby.
I got an e-mail back from the supervisors that sang perhaps it would delete it.
I know about emails and knew they could not be deleted.
i filed the sunshine complaint.
The supervisor in question
ignored the task force. I would go and sit and do my homework and we would be called
and I would be there, and the
supervisors representative did not show up.
Finally after nasty letters from
the task force, they did show up and said about the deleted thing and the task force said you should not have deleted
them, and you did not believe them, because you can go to the court and get them back, so why don' t you do that?
From that fo
it was a bad deal. as I was there I noticed there was not the only one showing up.
I remember saying how can this be? How can the city on every page
of the website say we were right?
He said something very telling, and it applies to previous
remarks about being resource- wrapped. It it really was just being
resources-wrapped, they would better serve the public by saying we know what the obligation is, we will get to
it, but it May not be as quickly and timely or as the row as either one of us look like.
Perhaps you should look at alternative legal remedies.
instead they did not say
anything, and they give members of the public the feeling they will pursue it. For that reason the whole thing fell apart.
It went on for literally a year
or so for waiting for the supervisor to show up. From the very start people are telling me you are wasting your time.
People in the building know they
have nothing to fear from the ethics commission on sunshine.
I did not believe it.
I want up wasting a year or so, and quite frankly, I was the person who believed what I read that came out of this government
before that, in my interaction
with ethics is now I take -- think everything needs to be verified at this point. This fall
thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you. Net speaker.
-- next speaker.
>> my name is douglas yelp.
If Mr. Joe lynn was here the ethics commission would be far
different and actually accomplish something they would be proud of.
If they do not have the money to
televise, where does he get the money on the tony hall case?
In my opinion that case could
have been resolved in roughly 30 minutes of face-to-face
negotiation.
Secondly, Mr. Lynn mentioned to
me that the ethics commission
has the ability to refuse to
put its findings in writing
using different loopholes as he
told me over the phone, even joe live in that cannot stop him. Of course I had nothing to do after he told me that.
What I feel the ethics commission should be doing is to
protect the citizens.
In the case that I had mentioned
earlier, there were two witnesses committed. I asked the enforcement officer at the ethics commission for a
simple yes or no answer.
Number one, did you talk with the first witness? No answer.
No. Two, did you talk with the second witness, Mr. Phil ginsberg? No answer. To this day I still do not have
a written answer whether they
even talked to the witnesses. Obviously if they are not want to tell me they even talk to the
witnesses, I can see why the case is still unresolved.
You were telling me the city has the money to support an agency like this?
-- you are telling me the city
has no money to support an agency like this?
it the ethics that fell want to
do the job, they are free to go do another job. I hear they' re hiring in china, so maybe they can go there, and
I am sure they can lose -- learn chinese.
Back to the ethics commission --
it is not a sleeping watchdog, it is not a watchdog at all.
it is basically a lap dog, just
like are referred to the local press.
That is why there is very little criticism of what goes on in the city and county of san francisco.
If you have a lap dog press and
laptop ethics commission, obviously the citizens throw up their hands and pray we could vote for new President. Thank you.
Supervisor campos: thank you. Any of the member of the public that would like to speak?
Seeing none, public comment is closed.
Colleagues, we have heard
from the civil grand jury.
we have heard from the mayor' s office. The ethics commission. The public.
Now we have to take a position
with respect to findings 2, 4 and 7.
Supervisor farrell -- President Chu.
Supervisor chiu:
iu.
Supervisor chiu: thank you.
I think we had a good discussion. Colleagues, my perspective on these recommendations, as I
stated before, I am comfortable with the board supporting
recommendations 2 and 7 with
regard to time the hearings and
the enforcement action recommendations as well as moving forward around broadcasting meetings on sfgov
tv, although at
hope we can figure out how to do that with regards to the budget unsettling.
With regards to item
four, I am
not prepared to support specific recommendations that a laid out in the proposed recommendations.
What I might suggest is that of
language that states with
regards to item number four, we did not take a position with regards to the specific legislation, but we would be open to considering other
options to think about the ethics commission could
continue to not involve any appearances of impropriety and leave it open for the future if there will be other discussions by the board.
Supervisor campos: we have a motion by President Chiu.
Supervisor farrell: that is fine with me.
Vice thing was listing specific entities.
And -- my specific thing was listing specific entities. I would prefer we do not specifically name any
organizations here, so that
satisfies that and is fine by me.
Supervisor campos: city attorney.
>> the committee should also respond to the findings, as well as the recommendation. I am not sure that was it implied.
Supervisor campos: I think
president chiu to clarify -- does that mean you agree with
the findings 2, 4, 7, but have a different take on recommendation 4?
Supervisor chiu: I am fine with
finding member
number 7.
I would be curious to know what others think about that.
Supervisor campos: supervisor farrell.
Supervisor farrell: to be
honest, I have no opinion you can take it on face value, but
it does weaken the cool, so I am fine with it the way it is. And
supervisor campos: from my
perspective I agree with the findings. I think there are maybe differences in opinion as to
what some of the reasons maybe,
and I think staffing May be one
of those issues, but I do have a very real concern about what is
happening with respect to the
issue and find a number two in
the enforcement of sunshine or dance task force actions, and I think that needs further discussion, and I think the
recommendation as stated makes
sense, which is that all
enforcement actions deserve a timely hearing by the ethics commission. I do not think that it' s a radical concept. With respect to finding member
four, I again, I think that there is an issue there about the appearance of impropriety.
I agree with President Chiu, I am not sure the specific recommendation is necessarily the way to go.
It maybe there are some elements
here that can be emulated.
I think what we need to do is to
have a larger discussion about
what the makeup of the ethics commission should look like, and
I think that is something that
will take more time, and hopefully more input than only
from the civil grand jury, but from the community at large.
I think the language used
suggested that leads that open
it makes sense, but I think that
it is important for us to agree
with the finding, and I think an example where the civil grand
jury has been very helpful in opening a dialogue that needs to be had.
With respect to number seven, I
am fine with the findings and recommendation. It would basically be agreeing with the findings and agreeing with the recommendation, except
with recommendation no. Four as modified by President Chiu. we have a motion by President Chiu.
Supervisor chiu: with regards to
recommendations #four, it should
probably reap the board of
supervisors this topic of this is the -- specific position but it is appropriate to consider
future options to reduce the appearance of impropriety on the
part of the ethics commission -- something like that.
Supervisor campos: yes.
We have that motion.
Can we take that motion without objection?
Again, I want to thank the members of the civil grand jury
for the service to the city and county of san francisco.
There will be more reports hurt by this committee in coming weeks.
I want to thank the executive director of the ethics commission for being here. There May be differences of
opinion from different folks on these issues, but I want to
reiterate my thanks for your
responsiveness and presence and for the work you and your staff
are trying to do at the ethics commission. Mayor' s office for being here. City attorney. District attorney' s office, and especially to members of the public who have taken time out of their schedules to be here today. And to those of you watching.
Madam Clerk, is there any other business before the committee?
