tv Government Access Programming SFGTV March 4, 2019 12:00am-1:01am PST
15, 2019 meeting of the ethics commission. [roll call] agenda item number two is public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. >> good afternoon. i'm not sure if this two minutes or three minutes. in front of me, two minutes. >> chair chiu: it should be three minutes. we'll change that now. >> good afternoon. my name is ellen lee zhou, e-l-l-e-n l-e-e z-h-o-u. i am an seiu 1021 union member.
i am also the director of public relations for california civic grand jury association, the san francisco chapter. i am here today as a former nonpartisan candidate running for mayor for the june 2018 election. i was discriminated because i was not a democrat. i was not white, i was not black. i was not allowed to go into the many of the debates and forums, and those took place in public places, such as the city hall right here with televised programs, public parks, and many other occasions like 401 vanness -- south vanness. i have been coming here and asking you, ethics commission to start investigation to stop possible unfair election and possible election fraud. the last republican mayor in
san francisco was 55 years ago. that was george christopher. the last board of supervisor who was non-democrat was 45 years ago. san francisco, the electoral officers have been bought and paid by super pac, controlled by people who have money. san francisco should not and no longer for sale, but the ethics commission has to be on board and take care of the public. uroponent here to standup to the public. i believe the ethics commission has a duty to reform the city government, to create a balanced government by allowing the public form of government so that our social problems can solve effectively by a balanced party like republican,
libertyarrian, and independent. but san francisco has one party, democrats, who are paid by superpacs. i am here to ask you to stop corruption for the last many meetings that i have been coming in here. for years, san francisco has been controlled and bought. it's about time for you, ethics commission, to stop corruption and fraud. you were elected to stop public elected official corruption. and for the last many years, california has been controlled solely by many of the party, democrats. san francisco is about balanced governments and decent parties. i urge you to do something so our government can be reformed and run a government by the people, but not by the few
elite and who bought super pac and paid for the electoral office to be in office. >> chair chiu: thank you. >> and to be the correction, because you obviously do it on purpose, i've never said things the way that it was coded in minutes. i'm going to give it to them for correction. >> chair chiu: thank you. any other public comment? okay. we'll move now to the consent calendar items, which are the draft minutes for the ethics commission. [inaudible] >> chair chiu: oh, okay. >> so i'm here to speak -- i don't see it on the agenda, but i know there's a proposal to eviscerate the matching funds that candidates must follow. will that be heard today?
>> chair chiu: that will be agenda item number eight. >> so i'm commenting on agenda item number eight officially. i'm a lifelong san francisco resident, and i oppose the option that would remove ceilings for independent election candidates. i'm here today to urge the commission to reject attachment one and to instead pass attachment two but amended so as to only increase the ceilings incrementally by 25 or $50,000 at a time instead of the enormous increments that are in the current draft. i also -- this is my first time at an ethics meeting, but i also question the timing of this meeting on a friday afternoon before a long weekend, something so profoundly impactful as public financing is going to be discussed. >> chair chiu: our meetings are scheduling on the third friday of each month --
>> okay. i'm just questioning the timing of it on a friday before a long weekend on something as impactful as public financing limits, so just want to put that on the record. thank you. >> chair chiu: thank you. any other comment? >> hi, commissioners. a my name is edward wright, and i'm a legislative aide to supervisor gordon mar, and i'm here to speak on his behalf. >> vice chair kopp: i'm sorry. on whose behalf? >> supervisor gordon mar. as he announced at the last meeting, he's been working on reform to the current election finance system. the supervisor does have concerns with some of the proposals in front of the commission today. in particular, the proposal to completely lift the individual
expenditure ceilings after they've been raised initially and the proposal to move away from tracking contributions towards campaigns towards tracking expenditures. he also wants to let the commission know that we do have a set of alternate proposals that we have prepared. i e-mailed them to the commission before this meeting, and we are happy to consider them as amendments should any of these move forward to the board of supervisors or introduce them as freestanding legislation should they not. >> vice chair kopp: i have a question. >> chair chiu: yes, commissioner, i have questions, as well. unfortunately, the ordinance that you send over was not able to make the deadline for agenda purposes here, so i don't think we'll be able to discuss that in full as an agenda item. however we do have a lot of
procedural questions as well as substanti substantive ones and wanted to get better understanding of your supervisor's intentions with regards to the ordinance. deputy city attorney chan, is the there -- is this something we can take up now or wait until the agenda item is called? >> it would be better to wait until agenda item number eight, and it's not an agendaized item. >> chair chiu: if we could wait until agenda item number eight, it would be greatly appreciated. >> and i'll stick around. >> chair chiu: thank you. >> vice chair kopp: i have a question. i recall reading a couple of days ago that there were eight supervisors who were sponsors of that proposed ballot measure. >> so there's actually two --
two different things, that question. one is a ballot measure that has been introduced to the ballot. >> vice chair kopp: all right. i'm talking about the ballot measure. that's been sponsored by peter king, john gollinger, and others. >> yes. >> vice chair kopp: how many supervisors are sponsors of that, or authors. >> there are currently eight signatories on that. >> vice chair kopp: and did the board -- well, the board meets on tuesday. did it act on that, to place it on the next municipal election ballot? >> so that was not acted on at the board of supervisors meeting. it was filed with the department of elections. >> vice chair kopp: well, is it
going to be acted on? >> i apologize, if i could jump in. we're still in a public comment item, and this matter's not been agendaized for this committee meeting. >> vice chair kopp: okay. can you stay until we reach number eight? >> yes, i'm happy to stay until we reach item number eight on the agenda. i would note that the ballot measure being discussed right now is not a part of item number eight on the agenda, it's a separate issue. >> chair chiu: any other public comment on agenda item number two? moving onto the consent calendar for agenda item number three, draft minutes for the commission's january 18, 2019 regular meeting, and agenda item number four, proposed stipulation, decision, and order in the matter of joseph certain, ethics commission complaint number 1718-012. >> vice chair kopp: on the
problems," etc., the sentence in question is "he further stated that if candidates did not have to report their contributions in relation to the public financing system, that would diminish transparency in the elections because it would require candidates to report" i think the word should be contributions, not "contributes." and then, on page six, program begins "larry bush urged that the commission consider adopting a policy regarding the freedom of information act." did he say "freedom of information act" or public
records act? freedom of information act is a federal statute. anybody on staff answer that or can we just leave it, that you will verify. >> we will be happy to confirm that, and if he did not say freedom of information, we will correct it to say public records. >> vice chair kopp: all right. and then, later on, next paragraph -- or two paragraphs down, mr. marstellar recommended federal legislation by a request to the honorable nancy pelosi to include in the bankruptcy code a bar against discharging a debt arising from
use of taxpayer funds or public financi financing in local and state jurisdictions. and i think after the word bankruptcy, there's no way for recovery for these documents, i was referring to mr. m marstellar's recommendation. and i would insert "staff stated it did not have time to do so." and then, i stated he would have such time to provide it to staff, and i'll give you those insertions.
>> chair chiu: okay. >> vice chair kopp: and with those corrections, i'll move approval. >> chair chiu: okay. is there a second -- >> vice chair kopp: well, i guess we vote on the other items, too. >> chair chiu: well, as a procedural matter, deputy attorney shen, can you advise us what the proper procedure would be. >> since commissioner kopp has commented on them one at a time, it's probably best to have them included in public comment. >> chair chiu: but is it possible to take public comment on all of the consent calendar and vote on all of them at the same time? right. under the ethics commission's bylaws, either a member of the public or commission can separate an item. >> chair chiu: thank you.
we'll call for public comment on agenda item number three. we still have a pending motion for approval of the minutes. we can do that at the end. was there a second? i didn't hear a second on the motion to approve the minutes, but we can -- we went to the procedural and didn't have time for a second. so is there a second on the approval of the minutes? >> commissioner smith: second. >> chair chiu: there is a second, thank you, from commissioner smith. public comment. mr. marstellar? >> regarding the idea of writing miss pelosi about the -- essentially or problems
with the bankrupt ski -- our problems with the bankruptcy law and regarding public financing, the thought is that with ab -- i'm sorry, hr-1 before the congress in such a robust and visible way, which is the major reform for essentially campaign finance and all other related ethics matters, it's a very large bill put forth. in any event, that -- that was my thinking, that ms. pelosi would be probably interested in amending her own -- the bill hr-1, which she had helped to craft, and adding at this timely phase this mechanism to
make sure that the public -- the governments in local level have the ability to recover lost funds that were absconded from the public finance campaign fund, which was the case in one particular instance in san francisco in 2010, when i think about 68,000 or something was not recovered. so this is very timely, this letter we're going to send, i hope. thank you. >> chair chiu: thank you. >> i'm charles marstellar, former head of common cause, and friends of ethics, and been following the commission for over 20 years. >> chair chiu: thank you. any other public comment on agenda item number three?
calling for public comment on agenda item number four. okay. there being none, is there a motion to approve agenda item number four? do we need to -- >> commissioner smith: so moved. >> do you want to go ahead and vote on the agenda item? >> chair chiu: agenda item number three, all in favor? [voting] >> chair chiu: okay. agenda item number three is unanimously approved. agenda item number four, we had a motion and i believe was there a second to approve -- there's a second to the proposed stipulation decision and order in the matter of joseph certain, ethics commission complaint number 1718-012. all in favor? [voting] >> chair chiu: okay. motion is approved unanimously. now moving onto agenda item number five --
>> sorry, chair chiu, did you have public comment on item number four? >> chair chiu: yes, and there was none. >> okay. >> chair chiu: item five, acknowledgement in the former commission member paul a. renne, whose term ended february 1, 2019. thank you, paul, for coming. it's unusual to see you in the audience here as opposed to up here next to me. i want to thank you for your thoughtful leadership and steady analysis and insightful comments always on all the matters coming before us. and you are a great role model for me because you always sought to understand and to listen to all who came before us and to also all of us here on the commission. and it has been an incredible pleasure and a privilege to serve alongside you here on the san francisco ethics commission.
i want to, on my behalf, and not speak on behalf of the commission, but extend to you my heartfelt thanks and appreciation for all that you have done for me as a new commissioner, but for importantly, for the city and people of san francisco. i would invite -- [applause] >> commissioner renne: chair chiu, thank you very much for those kind words. commissioner lee handed me this as she came in the door, so i will thank her, as well. let me just say that my first feeling is why am i here because i no longer sit on this commission? but i appreciate your comments, and i want to say that probably the three most important things that happened while i was a
commissioner which had made the job so much easier. and the first was when we hired our present executive director, leeann pelham, who has made the job of a commissioner so much more -- not necessarily easier, but so much more meaningful in terms of getting things accomplished. and the other two things were the two ballot measures that we put on, proposition s and proposition t -- proposition c and t, both of which i think are some steps forward. but as i said at the last meeting, my one wish as a commissioner, and i hope that the staff will pursue it, and i want to say the staff has been very cooperative, and leeann has managed to put together a very professional staff.
but that the attempt to try and limit independent expenditures and the impact that they're having on politics in this city and in the country. we didn't get it listed as a prior item. the staff has -- has indicated that it has done some work on it. there is some proposed legislation that i would like to see moved forward. and i will say finally that i have complete confidence that the district attorney has appointed on my recommendation judge smith as a commissioner, and i think you'll find that she will be a more than worthy successor to me, so thank you
very much. [applause] >> commissioner renne: you're going to have to have public comment on this agenda item. >> chair chiu: we absolutely with going to have public comment from the commissioners as well as the public. and we have a resolution to approve, if the commissioners would so like to do so -- is now a good time? so i would like to read into the record resolution of the san francisco ethics commission. whereas the people of the city and county of san francisco have declared that public office is a public trust, and that the proper operation of the government is that public offers the independent and responsible to the people. and whereas the ethics commission has been charged by san franciscans to impartially and effectively administer and enforce the city's governmental ethics, campaign finance and lobbying laws. and whereas paul a. renne has served with a member of
distinction to the san francisco ethics commission since he was first appointed in 2012. and whereas he was reappointed in 2013 to fulfill a six-year term of office as an ethics commission during which he was elected to serve as commission president in 2015 and 2016. and whereas commissioner renne completed his full term of office on february 1, 2019. therefore be it resolved on this 15th day of february 2019 that the ethics commission acknowledges paul a. renne appreciation for his distinguished service and leadership and gratitude for his enduring commitment to accountability and integrity in san francisco city government. >> vice chair kopp: i would move approval. >> commissioner smith: second. >> chair chiu: i have a hearty second. okay. i would love to take public comment -- and also, commissioners, as well, i'm so sorry. don't mean to overlook my fe y fellow commissioners.
commissioner lee? >> commissioner lee: thank you. i had the privilege of serving alongside the other dynamic duo public service in san francisco, police commissioner lewis renne, and it was a pleasure for me to serve alongside commissioner renne on this commission. yes, he's also a role model for me, but one thing i would always take from you is the open-mindedness, that every time you walk into this meeting room, your core principle has always been well grounded, but you've always kept an open mind, looking for common ground to make sure we come to a workable resolution for the best for san franciscans, and
especially for those who are less visible and left siss represented by the city. so for that, i thank you. and you are a role model not only for me but for many public service members in this city. so thank you very much. >> commissioner smith: i'd like to just add something. i clearly have not had the privilege of serving on the commission with paul renne, but i have known him professionally for many years. i've been handed a very large pair of shoes to fill, and i don't know that i'll manage to do it, but i'll do my best. i may have to stuff them with socks occasionally to do that, but i consider it a privilege to follow you, and i thank you for the recommendation, and thank you for all you've done for this city. >> chair chiu: commissioner
ambrose? >> commissioner ambrose: i just wanted to, in the interest of brevity because i always appreciated how clear your analysis was, how focused your comments, how you got to solutions, and i really appreciate the guidance that you provided to me as learned the ways of the commission, so thank you very much, and best of luck to you. >> chair chiu: commissioner kopp? >> vice chair kopp: i associate myself with the remarks of my fellow commissioners and the words which give expression to our gratitude to paul renne, esquire, for his service and leadership, and with the hope that the matter of independent
expenditures, which he raised last year will be considered and acted upon by this commission. >> chair chiu: public comment? >> i was just wondering what your shoe size is. but in any event, obviously, after serving a full term now, we've gotten to know each other pretty well. that's a long time, and it's a lot of meetings and hours. and i want to say that i for one personally will miss you, mr. renne and your smile. you have a nice smile. i can see why louise married
you. but i was going to say also that i'm sure your successor will do a very good job in filling your shoes, given her credentials, which are extraordinary. our second judge on the commission is amazing. we've only had one before, and that was judge grant. so we'll miss you terribly, and i -- i'm hoping that in some way or fashion, we'll see you, certainly, with the measure coming to the ballot this year by the board and mr. king. it's peter king, former chair, that we'll be seeing each other on the campaign trail later this year. so it'll almost be like you haven't really left. thank you. >> chair chiu: thank you.
>> i'd just like to thank you mr., now ex-commissioner renne for your service. and all of you. you're doing this voluntarily, because you believe in the city and public participation and civic involvement. and i just really admire that spirit that all of you bring to this, and so thank you for your service in doing that. it is an example for all san franciscans to follow. thank you. >> chair chiu: thank you. and so now, we have -- naubl -- [inaudible] >> chair chiu: so the resolution having passed unanimously, i know have something else for you.
>> thank you, commissioners, i apologize for the brief did el. in your packet is documentation that provides some background from the bylaws as well as the process that the commission has used in the past. so we just wanted to provide thats aa back stop for your proceeding today to determine who officers for the commission will be in the coming year. >> chair chiu: okay. thank you. so per the process laid out in the bylaws, i will now open the nominations for chair, so any
commissioner who wishes to nominate a candidate for chair will state that person, and if that person agrees to run, that person is nominated. >> commissioner lee: i wish to nominate chair chiu as the chair. >> chair chiu: thank you, commissioner lee. i agree to run. any other nominations? so now, i'll call for public comment after which the nomination process will be closed. public comment? >> i'm confused. i stepped out in the hall a minute. have nominations been made? >> chair chiu: well, yes. [inaudible] >> right. i just wanted to say that i --
personally, i've always been inclined to see rotation among the members of the bench, so to speak, but i did think back to the fact that we elected judge grant twice in about 2000-2001-1999 or so, and i was there. and judge grant was not happy about it. i don't know if you know judge grant, but she made it clear that she wasn't thrilled to be renominated, and she said she wouldn't do it again, meaning, a third term, and that this was her last time. well, unfortunately, it was very much her last time because the new board came in, and they misread the situation, unfortunately, and we found ourselves in the position of seeing that the ethics
commission was fired in toto by the board in prop e, which was later clearly considered unconstitutional in many respects, not so much the firing of the commission. but judge grant says this was the first job she's ever had that she was actually fired from, which i thought was a bizarre sequence of events. i had gone out and campaigns extensively against this. it's a terrible abuse of process. i thought i would mention that because we've never, with this one exception, elected a member twice. and i just thought i'd mention what happened to poor judge grant because obviously, that was not deserved, and she was still a senior judge on the bench, i think -- maybe not.
maybe she did have to go off at that point, but it was a tragedy. so in any event, congratulations on your renomination, and i -- >> chair chiu: thank you. thank you. any other public comment? there being none -- >> vice chair kopp: call the roll? >> chair chiu: commissioner ambrose? >> commissioner ambrose: i just wanted to -- for the record, i did look at the bylaws, and it did say in the bylaws that the chair can serve for two consecutive years. i think i heard that chair renne was chair in 2015 and 2016, so it is tradition if the chair is willing to serve. and i would also note that commissioner chiu, you haven't
actually even served a full year because you stepped in right in the middle of the -- or after february last year, so in any way, all that to say i vote aye in favor of your assuming the -- i guess. thank you. >> chair chiu: okay. commissioner lee? i'm sorry, just to recap, we're doing a roll call on the question of the nomination of commissioner chair chiu. commissioner smith? >> commissioner smith: excuse me. my reading of the bylaws is also that the chair can serve if she's willing for two years, and having heard glowing comments about your chairmanship from former commissioner renne, whose judgment i have great faith in, i'm quite happy to go along with that. i hope that you will continue
to serve and would vote for that. >> chair chiu: commissioner kopp? >> vice chair kopp: no. >> chair chiu: thank you for your confidence in me. and i hope to serve to the best of my ability and to the betterment of the city and people of san francisco. so agenda item number seven. vice chair nominations would be in order. >> oh, yes, i'm sorry. >> chair chiu: so now, we have the nominations for vice chair. any candidate who wishes to nominate a candidate for vice chair, they state that name. and if the person agrees to run, that person is nominated.
>> commissioner ambrose: i would nominate commissioner kopp to run again as vice chair, if he would gracefully acce accept. >> vice chair kopp: i do not accept the nomination. i nominate commissioner yvonne lee. >> chair chiu: commissioner lee? do you accept the nomination? >> vice chair kopp: pardon me? >> chair chiu: commissioner lee, do you accept the
nomination? >> commissioner lee: thank you for your trust. because of my continued personal issues grieving for my lost one, i don't think i could devote that much time serving as the vice chair of this commission at this time. >> chair chiu: commissioner ambrose? >> commissioner lee: i wish to nomination commissioner ambrose for vice chair. >> commissioner ambrose: i want to come back to commissioner kopp. you do such an excellent job. >> commissioner lee: can we delay this one part of this nomination for another month? >> chair chiu: so the question i think is for the deputy city attorney is whether we need to
resolve the vice chair role today or if it could be deferred or put over to next month's meeting. >> commissioner smith: excuse me. might i ask if it's permissible to ask commissioner kopp if he could reconsider -- you asked him already. thank you. >> vice chair kopp: thank you, your honor. i will not. >> chair chiu: and i would like to ask commissioner ambrose to reconsider. >> commissioner ambrose: i will say yes, i will consider accepting the post. i feel a little sort of new to the commission to be in that position, but under the circumstances, i think i could happily learn the responsibilities. >> chair chiu: okay. wonderful. director pelham, could you --
seven, informational presentation on information campaign disclosure dashboards. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is tyler field. i am an analyst with the electronic disclosure and data analysis division or edda. i'm here to show you the analysis of the dashboards, and be happy to take questions at the end of the presentation. [inaudible]
>> when people come to the website looking for these disclosures, they have to go -- they could go to our databases, search through pdf copies of paper forms, looking somewhat like this. in 2018, there were more than 2,000 filings from over 400 committees. people coming in are probably most interested in the # 64 filings. those 964 filings represent 12,800 paper pages. after searching through them, learning about campaign finance reform is not a simple task. the first thing you need to know is what a political committee it is, which section of the form will tell you what you want to know, schedule a, b-1, c, f, and then, if you want to learn about independent
expenditures for that committee, you have a haystack of different forms to look for a needle with your committee's i.d. number in it. understanding campaign finance is not simple. the dashboards on our website take away most of that complexity and present it in a simple easy to understand form. over the past year, this was the most popular function on our website. our analytics show at least 31 separate news organizations have written articles linking back to these dashboards on campaign finance in san francisco. over the past summer, i conducted several informational sessions with members of the public and the press on campaign finance and how to use the research tools that the ethics commission offers. i don't know that we can completely take all the credit
for this, but it's clear that the press has come to rely on these to do their job. during the november election, the morning after filing deadline, i was double-checking numbers, and i had not updated the dashboards until 10:00 a.m. newspaper reporters already calling at 9 :00 a.m., when ar the dashboards going to be updated. the reason we've been able to create these and go beyond what we've been able to offer in past years is thanks to electronic filing and the technology infrastructure work that edda has been working on. now i want to shift to the computer to demonstrate in real-time what someone using this tool might be able to look for. let's pretend i got a political ad in the mail, and i saw the financial disclosures available
message. i'd come to the san francisco ethics commission website, where i'm presented by an action to discover the money behind the campaign. i'd click on this very inviting green button to view the dashboard, go to the landing page for the dashboard. this page shows contributions and expenditures for different political committees. let's pretend i live in district six, and i want to learn about district six. let's pretend the mail ad i got was for a supervisor campaign, and i was to learn about candidates. i'll use the filter on the side to limit the view to board of supervisors district six committees. now i'm presented with four committees that are active in
board of supervisors for district six. i can see by this green bar an easy representation of the contribution received by the committee and the expenditure the committee has made. i can see the three major candidates in this race: matt haney, christine johnson, and sonia trauss. i can see over here on the legend, the miscellaneous increases to cash includes funds received from a public finance program. i'm interested in the public finance program, so go to the public financing tab to learn more. i can see here from the chart on the left all the candidates who accepted -- or who are making use of the public financing program.
on the chart on the right, i can see that mr. haney received 100% of what was available to him, and miss johnson, 81%. this chart on the bottom shows an overview of the entire public financing program, and i can see the total amount of funds disbursed as a part of public financing was a little over 1.2 million. an important feature of public financing is the individual expenditure ceilings. this tab may look familiar to you. the charts on the tab may look familiar to you. it was featured on the policy report last month. during this election, the dashboard was updated daily, so this represented the best way to come and see what an
individual candidate's expenditure ceiling was on any given day. >> chair chiu: excuse me, mr. tyler, you're saying that the individual expenditure ceiling screen was updated daily. how about the previous page on the financing? everything is updated daily as we get into the last stage of the -- >> i'm sorry. these are updated daily with -- during the 90-day election period before the election, these are updated daily to maintain the most recent numbers. third party expenditures or independent expenditures are very important, but they're very confusing to try to follow as a member of the public. third-party expenditures are reported by the committee that makes the expenditure, but the public and everyone thinks of expenditures as from the
perspective of the candidate that they're made on behalf of. let's continue my thought experiment of being in district six and wanting to know more about d-6. i'll limit the view on the left, show district six. and now i can see funds for each candidate, i can see the total amount of funds for the candidate, and the number of third parties making expenditures. over here, i can see the names of the pairs for the committees making those expenditures. and if i'm interested in a particular expenditure, i can click on the bar, in the expenditure detail chart, hover and see a little bit more information. or if i want, i can click on the c-filing page and be
directed to a pdf version of that filing. for just this district, there were 110 different expenditures on 62 different reports. keep in mind that i'm able to calculate those numbers with the benefit of hindsight. during the election, if i were interested in d-6, i'd have to look at every single i.e. filing that comes through the ethics commission. that is a total of 800 more pages of filings. >> chair chiu: i'm sorry. could you clarify that statement. so during -- this is a -- a retrospective view, so we can see where the funding was coming from and being contributed to the various campaigns, but in the last 90 days, when filings are made on a daily basis, what level of visibility or granularity would
we be able to see? >> i'm sorry. you would be able to see all the filings. >> chair chiu: okay. so it's aggregated here? >> yes. >> chair chiu: okay. >> another instance where you would have to look at, in the old way, every single filing coming in is late contributions. back when the ethics commission was accepting pipe filings, the volume was so great we could not keep up with the volume. so we'd have all the filings on hand. interested persons and staff,
press, would come into the offices, sit in the public room, and sort through stacks and stacks of papers for t. for the 2018 elections, that was more than 500 filings, over 800 papers. but on this dashboard, i can see the volume and total amounts per day very easily. for instance, on october 6, i can see the total number of contributions coming in that day were six, and they amounted to a little over $1 million. scrolling down, i can see that the detailed pane, mark bennioff gave $1 million that day. i can click -- similar to the third-party tab, i can click here and see a pdf representation of the filing. or if i don't know who mr. bennioff is, i can click on his
name and automatically google -- i see the little google profile. here's a wikipedia page. now, $1 million seems like a lot of money to me, so i'd be interested to see who else on the committee mr. bennioff is supporting. i'll switch over to the contributions page, where i can investigate a particular committee. i happened to remember that it was yes on c, so i'll limit the images on the left to only include, and i'm presented with a list of contributors, and the amount that they contributed. this is clearly a much simpler
way than looking through paper filings to see the true source of funds behind a political committee. one last feature that i wanted to highlight. let's say i remember there being a lot of news about ballot measure committees in the june 2018 election. i would like to know where all that money was coming from. i'd switch to the contributor locations tab, change the filter to the june date, and then look at ballot measure committees. i can see clearly $20 million in aggregates spent on -- or given to committees formed for ballot measures. i can see 18% came from individuals, and i can see almost show up there.
there's a short coming to that in that someone named john smith -- or joshua smith and josh smith would show up as different contributors because they're string matched. >> chair chiu: so is there a search field, and maybe this is another way of asking commissioner lee's question. is there a way to search by contributor? >> yes, ma'am. if i go back, and i'll use mr. benioff as an example again.