The candidate controlled ballot measure committee of Libby Shaf.

The committee and Libby Chef are not admitting to liability.

However, they are willing to settle this case with us.

And there are two counts they're willing to settle without admitting liability.

The first is as usual the um count for failing to register as a candidate controlled committee.

In this case, we are recommending a penalty of $4,500, which is $500 less than the maximum for two reasons.

Number one, as I mentioned earlier tonight, we did have a previous case involving the principal officer of the Measure AA campaign, Susan Montauk, who paid a $500 penalty.

So we're deducting that.

Also in the course of uh speaking to another um person affiliated with the Measure AA campaign, its treasurer, uh Gene Zahas.

He informed her that the Measure AAA campaign had done something similar for another elected official in a previous election.

And so based on that information, Libby Shaf thought that this was legal and there was no issue with it.

Um so in light of again that was incorrect, but in light of you know her perhaps good faith if negligent um reliance on the word of a non-attorney um and uh Susan Montauk's prior payment were recommending a 4,500 settlement on count one.

And for count two, uh count two involves a contribution uh given by a development firm called Orton Development and its um head Julian Orton in the amount of 100,000.

Um I believe it was actually Julian Orton himself who made the contributions, uh totaling 100,000, but his company at the time was negotiating a lease of city owned land with the city for purposes of a development project.

Um we are recommending here that Libby Shaf pay and the committee pay a $5,000 uh settlement amount uh without admitting liability.

Um for much the same reasons that uh we arrived at similar numbers in previous cases.

So saying that, uh, that's the agreement for you tonight.

I strongly urge you to approve this agreement.

This is something that we've negotiated over a long time.

It is, I think very significant that Libby Shaf is willing to at least not contest these allegations, and we've which means we've gotten these facts out to the public.

She will be paying some money in this case.

And um I think that's the best that we can hope for um under the circumstances, given our giant caseload, our extremely small staffing, and the fact that we need to get these cases done with.

So I would strongly urge you to approve this settlement with $9,500.

That brings Libby Shaf's total that she is jointly liable for to over $51,000 across these three cases.

Again, that's roughly three times the next highest penalty that an elected official has ever paid to our city.

Thank you.

Good morning now.

Uh Gary Winnick representing Libby Shaf.

Um, given the commission's previous actions, we're gonna withdraw our agreement on this.

Uh and we ask that the case just be remanded back to the ethics commission enforcement staff.

All right.

Um is there uh any questions for uh any of these entities, any of these individuals.

Uh is there public comment?

All right.

Um I will entertain a motion, or I will just actually make a motion to uh remand this back to enforcement with similar instructions to um uh hopefully have it uh to uh enumerate the amount of uh uh fines for each entity for each respondent.

There's no more agreement, right?

Yes.

Yes, but that's well, we can still provide direction on it, right?

I mean, is there anything that's uh yeah, one moment, hold on.

Chief Russell, can I ask uh what the balance of funds are for the Oakland fund?

I believe similarly Oaken Fund is zeroed out.

I believe similar to Oakland fund is zeroed out of the okay.

Let me just want to make sure we're clear about what's happening.

So is the is there a withdrawal to consider the stipulated agreement at this stage.

Again, Gary Winnick representing Mayor Schaff.

I don't presume to tell you what to do in any way.

My suggestion is since there is no stipulated agreement anymore, there is nothing to vote on since there's no stipulation.

But again, I'm not a city attorney and I don't deal with those issues, so I'll leave that to you.

And Chief Russell, is that also your understanding?

That is correct.

As of now, there is no settlement agreement to vote on.

Does one question on that?

Does council also represent the Oakland fund?

I mean, is the Oakland fund technically still part of a stipulation, even though the settlement agreement, I assume no longer is Carrie Winnick again.

Um to the best of my knowledge, the Oakland Fund is not represented by council.

I do not represent the Oakland.

That's your question.

So technically we may have a stipulation with the Oakland fund, but effectively there is no settlement agreement because it was a joint stipulation.

We'd be most pleased if you please uh approve the stipulation as the Oakland Fund and drop Libby Shaft for it.

Right.