March 12, 2007

Approval of minutes of April 18, 2006.

Speakers: None

Motion to approve the minutes of April 18, 2006.( Comstock / Chan )

Ayes: Wolfe, Chan, Comstock

Proposed rule regarding withdrawal of complaints: How withdrawals are done, when withdrawals are allowed, and refiling of withdrawn complaints.

Chair Wolfe said that since this item does not state a clear action that the Committee can only have a discussion since the public will not have sufficient time to comment.

Member Comstock said that the Committee should be able to make a recommendation to the full Task Force.

Chair Wolfe asked DCA Llorente if the Brown Act requires that all public comment on an issue be done at the Committee level as is followed by the Board of Supervisors?

DCA Llorente responded that the process mentioned by the Chair is unique only to the Board of Supervisors; that Policy Bodies that oversee Committees also provide public comment. He said that the Committee does not have the authority to bind the Task Force, but it is appropriate for them to begin the process and make recommendations.

Member Comstock asked that a discussion regarding the by laws in Section 7 be agendized.

Chair Wolfe, asked the Administrator to agendize a discussion regarding quorum for the next Rules Committee meeting.

Speakers: Allen Grossman said that to keep the playing field level, a complainant should have the option to waive the 45 day requirement, if not done frequently on an item, to postpone his complaint for a month to the next meeting.

Motion adding Sub-Section B. 8. (a) and (b) to the Task Force's Complaint Procedures: (a) A complainant may waive the 45 day rule and a continuance shall be allowed. Should the complainant again wish to continue, such continuance would be approved by a simple majority vote of the Task Force.

(b) A respondent may request a continuance, however such continuance would be approved by a simple majority vote of the Task Force. ( Comstock / Chan )

Ayes: Wolfe, Chan, Comstock

Public comment for items not listed on the agenda.

Speakers: Allen Grossman said that the 6 vote requirement for a matter to be approved is not fair to the complainant; that posting of the meeting agenda 72 hours prior to the meeting conflicts with the 5 day deadline for items to be submitted. He said that the agenda should be posted 6 days prior to a meeting.

Announcements, questions, and future agenda items from Committee members.

Speakers: None

Member Comstock noted that there are technical errors in the Complaint Committee procedures.

Chair Wolfe, by consensus of the Committee requested that the Complaint Committee authorize the Administrator to correct the errors.

Chair Wolfe, by Committee consensus, asked the Administrator to agendize for the next Rules Committee meeting, a discussion regarding possibly changing the six-vote affirmative vote requirement for all substantive matters as required in Section 7 of the Task Force's By Laws.