tv Government Access Programming SFGTV August 16, 2019 2:00pm-3:01pm PDT
commissioner ambrose is under the weather and not able join us. public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda? >> well, thank you, commissioner. i am a public social worker for more than ten years in the city and i am a storer for the government employees and the director of public regulations, the san francisco chapter. i have been a resident for san francisco for more than 33 years. i love my city. i have been coming to you as the commissioners many times with other government employees in in room in different dates in 2016,
2017, 2018 and 2019. the last time i was here was june 28th, 2019. i came before you demanding you as ethic commissioners to investigate government corruption within the public officials. fails policy makers fail to protect public employees, tourists and residents. prior to june of 2019, i have been reporting to you within the public officials through election fraud. no other political parties such as green party, libertarian, non-partisan or constitution. democrats only pay to play through funds for 45 years. for example, in 2018, san
francisco taxpayer pay $4.16 million for matching funds to only one party, democratic parties only. the matching fund and super pact, it's a scam. it's a scam to enable debt policy makers. june of 2018, issue wa i was one candidates for san francisco mayor but not allowed to join more than 20 public forums that took place in public, libraries, city hall and many public areas. and those forums and debate supported by super pact and democrats only. i was discriminated because i am not a democrat. i am still not a democrat. i'm a proud republican chinese american. today with the failing policy maker dominating city hall, we
have 21,000 homeless people dying on the street and 25,000 drug abusers and dealers and car break-ins everyday and crimes that target minority people like me, chinese american and asian americans in san francisco. we have 50,000 empty apartments and we have so many people and no housing. you are a public employee representing the government and you sign up to represent the government as ethic commissions. i am here today to remind you that you personally sign up to do and you are personally reliable sworn in and reliable for what you do for san francisco. the united states constitution, article 6, constitution right, the supreme court, which states the supreme law of the land is the highest law in the united
states. san francisco has been violating so many laws, us, you and me at risk. so i'm here today to ask you to evaluate the officers in its process, election fraud and their policy makers dominating city hall that created a city with crimes and nobody is able to feel good or safe in san francisco. thank you. and this is my public record. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> other public comment for agenda item number two and moving on to the consent items in item number three, draft items for june 28,, 2019 regular meeting. number 4, proposed stipulation and order in the matter of richard matthews, san francisco ethic's complaint 09-150331,
agenda 5, proposed stipulation decision and orbed i in the matn peskin, 1516-11, item number 6, proposed stipulation decision and order in the matter of living wage for educators, san francisco commission 118 118 11c and 1818-026 and item number 8, supposed stipulation, decision and order in the matter of the san francisco community college board 2018, san francisco ethic's commission complaints number 1818-050. call for a public comment on any items.
>> yes. >> the items that you have read, it's only supported by democrats. there's no people's voice, no other political voice in san francisco. it can be said that san francisco, it's a government controlled by no rule of law. thank you. >> thank you. other public comment on any of the agenda items? otherwise, i will move to approve agenda items number 3-8. and a second from commissioner lee. all in favour aye and motion is carried unanimously. so on the nonconsent items, i would like to take some items out of order after item number 9. i would like to call number 12, the discussion of the monthly
staff enforcement report and then agenda item number 10, discussion on enforcement process review so we'll take those two items together and then we'll call the policy item. so agenda item number 9, information of presentation and discussion regarding anticorruption and accountability ordinance, the implementation overview. >> thank you, chair. commissioners, good afternoon. i'm rachel gauge, the principal programme manager with the compliance division. just a quick recap. at the last monthly commission meeting on june 28th, the executive director announced that the anticorruption and accountability ordinance, acao, specifically, the forums associated with the acao were launched and made available on
the commission's website. scentsly chair chu requested a presentation on the acao at a future commission meeting and today's commissioner is responsive to the request. >> thank you. thing title of today's presentation is the anticorruption and accountability ordinance, legislative implementation overview. just a bit of background, at the april 18, 2017, special meeting, they approved the ordinance, acao, a comprehensive imagic's ordinance is partnership with
communitstakeholders. they approved the acao on may 22 and may 30th, respectively. they amended two requirements which became privilege january 1, 2019. this slide offers is summary of all of the newly implemented forums, both new and amended. those forums that are amended have been flagged with asteris asterisks. the following requirements applicable to committees. >> i'm sorry, miss gauge. to clarify, all forms are available online at the ethic's commission website so any members of the public would be able to navigate to any of the
forums that they would immediate to fill out and do it all online? >> absolutely. all forums were made available june 22nd. i mean all of the electronic forms. the forms were made available prior to them in paper format and some of the forms were launched earlier than june 24th, but june 24th is when all forms were made available. >> ok, thank you. >> the requires for applicable committees. form sfc114.5, contributions receive bid certain committees. this is for ballot committees and committees making independent expenditures, the triggers to file this form are the committee received contributions totaling $5,000 or more in a single calendar year at the behest of a city officer.
should the committee file this form, they must disclose certain information about the officer who made the behest, as well as information about the contributions at the behest at the direction of that officer and this will be the campaign statement that must report the contribution that makes the cumulative total of the behested contributions 5,000 or more. >> once it's filed online, would that be searchable by elected official or at&t, for example, different vendors to put in a search term to find out how much someone has contributed? >> as soon as it's filed, it's available in real-time, not the filing itself but extracted from the doub document.
i do want to make sure that he's implemented some additional dashboards and is extracting information to now add to the campaign finance dashboards and they're available as well. >> so in theory, come election time, we could do a search to see how much any given candidate is requesting payments to certain organizations and total it? >> absolutely. the dashboards are very comprehensive, searchable and multiple ways to filter out information per candidate, per committee, per election cycle and per race. there are various ways an interested party could review that information. >> fantastic, thank you. the form 124, contributions made by business entities. this form is applicable to any
committee required to file campaign statements with the ethic's commission. the conditions that would trigger this filing requirement, the committee received contributions totaling $10,000 or more from a single business entity and a single election cycle. should this occur, the committee must file form sec 14, disclosing information about that business entity and disclosing the name of one of the business entities principal officers. in addition to contributions received by that business entity. and this must be filed no later than the deadline to file the semicampaign statement to report the contribution to make the cumulative total of contributions entity of $10,000 or more.
a committee receive receives contributions $5,000 or more by a single individual. should this occur, should a committee receive contributions that total 5,000 or more, the committee must file format 125, disclosing information about the contributions bundled by that individual and the filing is due no later than the deadline for the preelection campaign statements that must report the contribution that makes the cumulative total bundled by that individual 5,000 or more.
this next section includes the forms that are applicable to city officers and city departments. and i'm going to do something a bit different here. the form 126 f-2, i want to show there's a relationship between this filing and the one that follows this and so i'm going to build a scenario that helps to establish that and i think that will help to understand the relationship to the two filing requirements. this form is applicable to city departments. the condition receive ag proposal for a contract with a value of $100 or more in a $100l year and a city officer. and so a scenario would they put
out a request fo for evaluation valued at $1 million over a five-year term. or 200,000 per fiscal year. the contracting department receives proposals from several contractors and responds to the rfp. due to the value of the contract, it will require the approval of the mayor. because the amount of the contract exceeds $100,000 in the fiscal year and the contract requires the approval of the mayor, the department must file form 126s2 within 30 days of receipt of the proposals, disclosing information about the sub contractors as administrate of the submitted proposals and the filing is due within 30 days of receipt of the qualifying proposal.
form 126 f4, borrowing from that same ski scent scenario, that cs been awarded and all negotiations have ceased and that is at the mayor's desk and requires the mayor's approval. using that same pattern because the contract is valued at $1 million and requires the approval of an elected official, the elective officer now has the filing requirement, as well. the elected official within five days of approving the contract, the elected official must file form 126 s4 disclosing information about the contract,
the contractor and listing any members of the contractor's board of directors, principal officer and any subcontractors listed in the bidder contract. and this filing is due within five days of approving the qualifying contract. >> so miss gauge, i have a question about this, because with imagine there'iwould imagie volume of contracts that flows through the city at any given time. what communication have we done with stakeholders and montreal,e contracts because they're quite tight in some cases and i want to make sure they have the filing requirements and that they're aware of them so that they would comply in a timely way in. >> sure. i do want to emphasize that 126 f4 is not a if you filing requirement and it's been in
place for quite some time. aco only extended the thresholds. and although we still target the outreach for that form, letting the departments know it was available and just reminding departments of the filing requirement, that is not news, so the amount of interest that has generated is not what i -- it's not what has benefited the other forms. not they have two, however, 126 f-2 is new and essentially extends that prohibition that has a relationship with the contributions, prohibition and it is now extended that on to essentially prior to acao if it was only applied to those contracts after they were approved. it's now applied to a contractor once they submit a proposal so
at that point in time, they're negotiating with the city. >> they may not be selected but if they're in the pool. >> correct. >> the question i have for the form 116 f-2, since it's new, implemented since january, so have you received any information between january to now to see how that has worked out? >> absolutely. i actually will say that that form has received the most interest and generated the most calls for engagement and compliance. specifically, they've been general in nature, more about the politicia application and gg clarification of the specifics, and i nothing that's been challenging for us to answer and assist with. we did a very comprehensive memo
that went out to the departments and city officials. , announcing that the form was available online now to file electronically and all of the supporting resources. the regulations that were adopted, i think july 30th, those also helped to implement 126 f-2. out. >> does that answer your question. >> yes, thank you. >> i have a question. >> yes, commissioner gray. >> what is the difference between this version of 126 f4 and the previous version? >> so aco extended the threshold, so prior to that, the contract value was $50,000 and it's now $100,000. prior to aceo, the time frame at which the prohibition was applied to the contractors was
six months and now it's 12 months. the form is due within 15 dates of the recusal occurred. i'm going to demo this forum after the conclusion of the power point of this presentation, just to give you an idea of the filing experience. there are several steps that are required in order to recuse for a member of a board or member to recuse themselves and that is not a new law associated with
aco, just the filing requirement is new. as of yesterday, there were 19 filed this year. >> is there a repeat frequent flier? >> i have noticed a repeat in some case, yes. >> thank you. >> sure. form 3610-b, paymen payments byy officers. so i'm going offer a similar scenario like i did with the 126 forms. with this form and the form that follow this, there are two forms that follow this in the same
series are distant relatives, so i'm going to start with the general information about the form and give a bit of a scenario and build. this is applicable to members of a booke board or commission with interest. they are solicit payment totaling 1,000 or more from an interested party that is made to a third-party for legislative, governmental or charitable. so a scenario for this form, which would require a commissioner or elected officer to file this form would be a commissioner who serves on the planning commission, asking the developer to make a donation to the red cross and the developer makes a donation in the amount of $1,000 to the red cross at
the behest of the commission every and two months later they apply for a building permit and it must be approved by the board that commissioner serves. because the amount was $1,000 and occurred within 12 months -- excuse me. and occurred within 12 months prior to the commencement of the proceeding, the commissioner must file 36 10b that the officer knew or should have known they became an interested party and just to back up, once that developer had a proceeding in front of the planning commission, that developer became an interested party. and so building on that
scenario, form 3620, changing a few of the facts, that developer who is the donor in this situation, who made the behetsed payment, instead of $1,000, payment was $10,000, which triggers a requirement for the developer who is the donor. the donor is required to file form 3620 with the ethic's commission within 30 days of the payment that makes the total $10,000 or more in a calendar year and must disclose on that filing information about the officer who made the behest and certain ask about the payments made. if they're a party that behested, they must report any
contacts that the donor had with the city officer who behested the payment. >> so miss gauge, let me ask you a question, if i said on the ethic's commission and do some fundraising for my son's school and asked them to contribute to the school fund for, you know, art and music and one the other families in the community made a contribution, under what circumstances would i need to file if they became an interested party and came before the ethic's commission or any body of the city? >> in front of the ethic's commission. >> right. >> any proceeding that you're involved in, the behesting officer would be qualifying in
this situation. >> thank you. >> sure. >> any other questions? >> i have one. >> commissioner gray. >> would that trigger a recusal on the part of the officer? >> only if the officer had a financial conflict of interest or potential financial conflict of interest with the developer and/or the -- in this case, it would be the third party, the red cross, the recipient of the donation. this is the final form in this series, 2630, major behested payments -- oh, yes, commissioner lee. >> so if the planning commissioner also sits on the red cross board, that's a financial interest, right,
conflict of interest? >> the planning commission as a body in the red cross? >> if the planning commissioner also sits on the red cross board and the donation was made in the behalf to go to the red cross, so that -- >> ok, i understand. >> that would be a recusal in. >> the commissione commission sn both, would it trigger a recusal? >> a conflict of interest. >> or a conflict of interest. i don't know if that would constitute a financial interest but i'm not sure. >> i'll jump in. i think it would be relevant as to whether or not that person was paid by the red cross. they were serving and unpaid capacity, likely no financial interest.
>> form 3630, this is, again, the final form in that series and that is applicable to the recipients of behested payments. the difference here in addition to the filer being the recipient in this case, is that the qualifying threshold is $100,000 or more in a calendar year. so in this scen scenario, instef one donor, the developer, let's say that officer behested payments from multiple donors, multiple developers and the cumulative total was $100,000, that would trigger a filing requirement -- excuse me, that was made to the red cross. all of the payments made to the red cross. so you have one officer, multiple donors, one recipient. that would trigger a filing requirement for the recipient of
those donations. they would be required to -- the business would be required to file form 3630, disclosing information about the behested officer and the contributions officer and within the fire filing woulthe first filingwoulf $100,000 or more. there's a second file for the recipient, 12 or 13 months, they have to file that same form disclosing how the funds were spent. in addition, if that recipient became an interested party within the 12 months, within that 12-month time frame, they have to doe disclose information about the proceeding.
>> how would the recipients of the behested payment know they have in. >> there's a notification requirement at the time the payments are received, they notify the recipients that the payments were made and named the officer who made the payment. >> and have we seen any forms filed at all? >> no, the 3620 and 3630, no filings yet and these were launched in february and march. we prioritized the launching of the forms and made sure we had the forms available to have the more immediate filing requirement, made those available early on. the last, the forms that are relevant, the political committees, those were the last that we complete and we knew
that the earliest would be 7 7/31/2019 of this year. this is a summary of the roll-out, just with key milestones. again, as of june 27th, all aco-related electronic forms and resources were deployed and made available on the ethic's commission website. a notice was disseminated to all candidates for political committees, announcing the filing requirements relative to campaigns. we included 12 126 f-2 and f4 because they were related to campaign activities and we wanted to make sure we mention those. on july 19, a notice disseminated to all board commissioners and department
heads with the requirements for departments participating in activity. contracting activity was sent out. july 30th, allegations implementing aco became operative and notice was sent to the interested party's list on that same day. >> miss gauge, are there any plan or have we reach ou reacheo the public or press, for example? i know that last year in the busy election season, mr. ford did tutorials with members of the press to walk them through the dashboards so that they could look at the different filings and how many candidates were receiving public financing because i think that was set around recusal and it could be of great interest to the public, as well as reporters following
different races. any plans? >> i think that's a great idea. subsequent to the roll-out, the june 27th, roll-out, we have not targeted the public in any situation, at least not in the engagement and compliance. i'm not sure of any plans to do so but we could have a conversation about that, perhaps, after today. >> that would be great because i think that making it widely known that the tools are available to the pull and press, i think would be a good thing. >> thank you. >> this slide, the implementation cycle, this is just really an overview of the processes as an organization that we had in place in order to implement acao. as you're aware, it was a major
project and so we wanted to -- i think we had to be more strategic in our planning and coordination in order to implement all of these form and filing requirements quickly, as quickly as possible and so, interestingly enough, in the beginning, we didn't have a form process for implementing new forms. i think this evolved organically and i would say midway through it was relatively seamless and this gives an illustration of what that process looked like and i can quickly go over the different phases if you're interested in this. >> sure. >> so the initial phase is analysis and discussion and so what we would do is assemble a tax force just for lack of a better term to describe the
number of divisions within ethic's commission that were involved in this round-table discussion. we had representatives from policy, engagement and compliance and disclosure and this was a comprehensive discussion where we discussed the law, its intent, the disclosure requirements and planned a project timeline to get through or conduct each phase of this cycle. from that meeting, we produced a fact sheet. typically this would be a document that engagement and compliance would contain all of the information, highlight key aspects of the legislation, filing requirements, triggers,
deadlines, identify storied st stakeholders. we look to that for guidance. we developed a paper form to circulate to the team for improve put until it was finalized. docu-sign conversion and testing. this was the paper form, now in the hands of the edit team and there was conversion from paper to electronic format and design and user interfaces and configure the system. after that, there was testing conducted by members or representatives from different divisions with an ethic's division. >> i have a question about the form development. over time, as of forms become
more widely used and deployed and as we are learnings from the lay-out and the fields, is it possible to update or tweak these forms to be able to more efficiently capture the information required? >> absolutely. >> or are we locked in? >> absolutely. we rely heavily on filers filing the forms to see if there are changes we need to make and we identify the changes and usually engagement and compliance and the edit team will make the adjustments as needed. >> is there anywhere on the website that seeks feedback from the filers i in terms of what their experiencing or what feedback they may have? >> they're not shy. they call an e-mail us and i can attest to that. so we do get feedback and things, but i think, for the
most part, with the exception of needing clarification of what's required in a specific field, the efiling process is relatively user-friendly. and we have also -- and commissioner ambrose is not here today. but i wanted to make sure that she knew that the may 29th, meeting, the commission meeting, she had mentioned it would be helpful to have a pdf-read-only version on the website and we have done that and that will be our practice moving forward, as well. >> commissioner ambrose is watching on tv at home. >> great. the next phase in the cycle is to automate the data publishing and this is where the programming takes place. again, it's in the hands of our edit team to programme the aud makes o'ingautomation and it's e
available in real-time and that is every filing that we have that's in place. the next phase, compose web content. the website -- and i'll demonstrate later in the presentation, just how the web pages that were established too support thtosupport the forms iy and i'll show the commission that in a few minutes just to give you an idea of what that looks like. and so, this is where we compose the web content that will support the form and include
instructions, summarize the law itself, how to file, when to file and who it's applicable to and all of the information that the filer will need at the time they are filing. and last but definitely not least is the roll-out, where we public the form, the web content and all of the resources on to the website. the public dashboards, the guides and resources as necessary, execute the outreach plan that we devised at that initial analysis and discussion meeting and provide ongoing filer support and oversight. and we're in that phase right now. >> congratulations. >> thank you. so that concludes the power point portion of my presentation. i did want to quickly -- before i actually get so the filing, i wanted to show you the website and i'll navigate to a couple of the forms and how a filer would
actually initiate a filing. >> great. >> if it's possible, at the end, could you pull up and is it possible to see from an administrator view, a list of the filings, for example, the recusals so we could see that? >> i'm not sure if i could log on from this computer, since this is not my computer. we're on a different server. i'm happy to demonstrate at the next commission meeting. >> ok. >> i had planned to do that. i can show you the data, after it's parsed out, you can see the pdf version, as well.
thank you. this is the page that's constructed for the form 114.5, the contributions received by certain committees. again, we usually have a brief summary of the law when it was enacted and so forth. we offer key definitions that apply to the form itself, what is the behested payment, what is the committee making expenditure and so these subheadings in blue are definitions. filings by committees is where we include the information about how to file, when to file and who's required to file. tand the filing deadlines and so forth. >> if i'm new to this as a
committee member, how would i know i need to file the behested payment because it's 144.5, but i may not know that's the form because it's a contribution. >> so obviously the outreach is a huge component here and we notify active committees of the filing requirements and the resources and filing requirements that apply to committees, rather it be expenditure committees, major donors, are all listed and we have a parent page that houses all filing requirements and what those triggers are to file. and that's to some extent the gateway to the parent page that is specific for any particular filing. >> so if you're an independent committee click here and then you'll be brought up to that
page. >> absolutely. and i can show you that if you want. i'm on the committee's paper pae under compliance and if i scroll down, there's treasure, disclaimer, filing schedules, restrictions and all are listed here and usually an order of priority and no numerical order here and 114, the new forms that are applicable to committees, actually 114.5 wouldn't be here. but let me scroll down. >> there it is. >> so the forms that apply to committees are listed here under local respiratories. requiremen. so above this are the state requirements and then local and everything is listed here and
these are filing deadlines that apply to the signature gathering period for ballot-measuring. so if you scroll down, the preelection statements, expenditure dates and here are the new forms that were added as a result of acao and this authors a brief synopsis, what the trigger is for having to file this and this link here, it goes right into the parent page i was in. >> great. >> and again, this serves as a gateway to actually file the form. this is actually where a filer would initiate that form and i'll scroll down, but before i do so, i want to show you at the bottom of each -- like i mentioned earlier, the bottom of each form, there's a pdf of the form, a preview so if a failer wantfilerwants to see the infor, what information should i be
collecting, they can review all of the form fields here and the requirements. >> but the only way to file is electronically? they wouldn't be able to download this pdf and fill out it by hand. >> no, we would reject that but we have a water mark that says for rearpreviewing purposes. we made sure to emphasize the fact they must efile or electronically file. this also serves as a gateway to file a form. in this case it's 114.5. if control down, ho scroll downa brief summary as to who can file, somebody can file on your behalf and we have forms that office staff can file on behalf of an officer and so forth and we will include instructions here. this is the entrance to the
actual filing. so here is where the filer would enter their name, first and last, and their email address. this is the first that's initiating the form, enter in this section and they would enter the person who would be signing the form. so the person who actually has signature authority. in this case, it would be probably be a treasurer, their name an e-mail address would be here. i want to men to mention, the ir and signer could be the same person. but the person initiating has to enter twice in this case. actually, i am going to quickly demonstrate, again, the filer experience for you. i'm going to be conducting this testest in a test environment because it's parsed out to the public portals. so if i were to file in the live
site, that information would -- we don't want that to happen. so the entry point is a bit different for a filer, but i just actually wanted to show you what it would look like for a filer in in situation and i'll demo the 3.209, notification of recusal. the recusal would apply to city officers, be listed in conflict of interest and there are two forms here, the advance written determination and the notification of recusal and again, this offers a summary of the law and the triggers that would information a board member or member of a commission or commissioner of the requirement, the filing requirements. this is a analyti link that woue
i'm a commissioner, ten days eight i recused myself due to a conflict of interest and i'm required to notify the commission within 15 days of there recusal and i'm sending down a file now. i entered my name an e-mail address and so this is an access code and this is verification process that's in place to ensure that the person filing is the person who should be filing.
so when i enter any email address, what happens an email notice is sent, so it's a security measure in place. >> is this unique to the ethic's commission or for all forms filed? >> it's in the docu-sign system. and i know in previous departments i've worked in, it has not been in place. although, we were using docu-sign for certain processes. so i'm going to just copy this verification code and add that here. and i can resume filing. if you don't have an active
docu-sign account, they don't recognize it and i used it for testing purposes. so i have to click this disclaimer, but commissioners more than likely, if you were filing this, you would not have this to check this disclaimer box here but you would see the same screen and click enable to continue. so i will start. and the form fields that are highlighted in red are required fields. anything not in red are optional and in in case, this will be the original filing. if i were to be filing an amendment right now, then i would have to -- you would see these fields here in red and they now become required fields because i have to reference the original filing date, the date of the original filing that this is associated with and the reason for the amendment. but in this case, i'm just going to file an original.
and here, in section two, name of member of the board of commission, this is where i would enter my name. and the name of the board of commission, i'm pickings on the planning commission today. then the work number and work email. and i'm just going to -- the recusal information is required in section 3, the date the recusal occurred, ten days eight, so that was august 6th. i believe this is date validated, so you'll be want to enter the date -- as you see
r.g. development. and again in this situation, it's a one-step process. the member who recuses himself or herself is also the filer and the signer. so that can all be done in one step. oh, excuse me, one more thing before i get to the signing. it's also required that the agenda be attached. so that's a required field. so you click here, upload a file. i've actually received today's agenda here and done. so now that it looks like it's disabled, that means there's a document attached to the form. i just click here to sign. it will adopt