woman that spoke about two thirds funding and gasby changes in rules opposed to being fully funded 10 years over time. could you -- it's a broad statement i just made. i actually didn't ask a question but maybe you can give some background on two thirds versus fully funded and what that means and how it relate to the proposal that supervisor farrell put before us? >> sure. ben rosenfield controller. as i understand the comment was made it's suggested that the kind of escape valve as described could be triggered only once the funds reach two thirds fund status. i think the implication of that -- assuming all assumptions are met, we expect the shift from zero percent to 100% and roughly occur in that period and reach

two thirds funded and if those assumptions are met around year 20-25 and that would effectively say there is no possible modifications to the rules regardless what happens with medical inflation, with health care in the u.s. or in california, with any of the assumptions that are being made here. if any of them behave drastically different than we expect there is no ability to amend the rules absent going back to the voters and i think what this escape valve that requires multiple parties recommending and approving acknowledging that fundamentally we are using assumptions for protections it's difficult to estimate what will change in the u.s. health care industry in the next 30 years and acknowledging there is need for flexibility in the measure. >> thank you very much.

>> in listening to the possible or suggestion of further amending this i realize, and your comments were well taken supervisor farrell. i feel like what you put together was well thought out, and like any pot of money you guarantee 100% but in reality it doesn't happen, and i think that the escape valve that you put in is prudent. i don't anticipate that, is something that the committee will choose to do year in and year round; however, i know a few years back no one would have predicted the economic downturn so those

things happen in life and we need to make sure we're prepared for that, so i'm inclined to support your amendments as presented today, so colleagues can we have a motion to move to the full board? >> so moved. >> is there a second? without objection so moved. thank you very much supervisor farrell. madam clerk item two. >> item number two motion reappointing supervisor eric mar to the association of bay area governments executive board for a term ending june 30, 2015. >> okay. this is for the reappointment. okay. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues any

thoughts? can we move this -- have this motion go forward to -- this appointment to the full board with recommendations? there is a first. is there a second? is there a second? >> second. >> thank you. motion is moved without any objection. madam clerk item three. >> item number three motion appointing supervisor jane kim to the association of bay area governments executive board for a term ending june 30, 2015. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none public comment is now closed colleagues any thoughts? can we move this? thank you. is there a second. >> second. >> thank you with no objection motion passes. i think -- can we have a little pause? i was

expecting supervisor -- either supervisor chiu or supervisor wiener might want to come in here. >> would like me to give their office a phone call?

>> okay recess is over. [gavel] . there. madam clerk could you call items four and five together? >> yes mr. chair. item four ordinance amending the municipal elections code to specify that it will not have the legal text that exceeds 100 pages. item five amending the elections code that the voter information pamphlet will not include the

legal text of any ballot measure that exceeds 20 pages. >> okay. supervisor -- president chiu is here to join us and he will speak on this item. president chiu. >> thank you mr. chair. thank you colleagues for consideration of this item and let me first thank supervisor wiener for his consideration of a very similar item. turns out great minds were thinking alike dealerring with an issue around a inordinately large handbook this year and we will likely to save the city 1.7 million dollars with the proposals that we have and i would like to recognize supervisor wiener's aid that is here and i recognize our colleague is in budget committee and has a conflict today so colleagues the legislation that i have introduced and the

legislation that supervisor wiener introduced both had the same goal of reducing the amount of material that is required in the ballot handbook to each of our half a million voters and in the instance of what is coming up this fall and november 2013 could save the city up to this amount and we had a debate about the washington lukts luxury condominium project and increase the height on the waterfront. the ordinance was five pages but included 500 pages of technical and environmental reviews. since we knew a ballot that big was possible i tried to amend the legislation to reduce the number of pages as part of the handbook to avoid the possiblivity phone book size

pamphlet printed at taxpayer expense and have grafs and analysis and redundant memorandum that wouldn't inform anybody but unfortunately at the time the developer wanted the full text included to make it harder to gather signatures. i think you know colleagues what happened there were very heavy books that were circulated to collect 31,000 signatures to qualify to place the measure on the ballot to reverse our decision last year, the first referendum on a board ordinance to qualify in more than 20 years. now given this measure has qualified i think the city will incur massive cost for these handbooks and supervisor wiener and i introduced legislation to reduce the material required to be in the ballot handbook. my legislation would allow the department of elections not to include the

full text of the limits and supervisor wiener had the other motion. i have merged the gaps and let me describe what the amendments would. do first it state that's new rule that we're talking about would not apply to charter amendments. the idea is if we have charter amendments we should include the entire legal text regardless of size in the voter information pamphlet but these would apply to ordinances and declarations of policy and then the amendments that i have introduced state that for measures with legal text over 100 pages the voter information pamphlet, the ballot book would include the first 100 pages and exclude the remainder and for over 100 pages the board could adopt a resolution to include the full text and the resolution would be need to be effective,

ie signed by the mayor by the last day and if there are certain measures that we want voters to see everything we could pass a resolution to do that otherwise excerpt the first 100 pages and the rest excluded and then the full text must be available on the department website and at the library and on request and i want to thank supervisor wiener for language that included that and the director of elections has no discretion to add more or less text. that's the gist of the amendments and i know supervisor wiener's aids is here and we haven't talked. >> >> about it and i think it's appropriate to hear from supervisor wiener's aid and i want to thank the department of

elections that flag thursday issue for both of us and committed to what we need to do. >> >> as you know we are going through the throws of season of the budget and no offense to mr. ernst. i don't think he wants us to give him an additional 1.7 million dollars to deal with the graphs and the technical memorandum we're talking about here. from my perspective i think this is a once in a generation problem. we have a situation with a ballot measure that is larger than anything we have seen in years and part of what i am trying to do is address the problem in front of us and with that i would like to turn it over to mr. chair and recommend that we recognize supervisor wiener's aide and mr. ernst. >> thank you mr. chiu. at this moment if supervisor wiener's

aide jeff crittenden would come up and speak to his amendments. >> thank you supervisor. i am jeff crittenden from supervisor's wiener's office. the amendments just described and combine elements of our legislation which we are supportive and appreciative he included as well as new amendments his office drafted and we have generally in supportive it. the supervisor does have one issue with the amendments that president chiu's office drafted. he disagrees with the language in the event that a legal text breaks 100 pages that pages one through 100 be included and the others excluded. we believe that if the board is going to make the policy decision to omit legal text it should omit the entirety of the legal text and to give equal measure to all pieces of

the text. the supervisor feels this is misleading to include some parts of the text and not others and emphasizes that page one is more important one page 101 and from a matter of policy if the board makes a decision to omit text it should be consistent throughout the whole measure and not only pieces of the legal text for each measure that gets in, so the supervisor as a matter of policy can't support partial inclusion. he would prefer and his legislation does to have full exclusion of any legal text if it trips the 100 page mark. thank you. >> thank you. mr. ernst. >> good afternoon supervisors. i am director of elections. i'm not here to speak on either one of the proposed willings. i am here to answer questions. i

want to thank supervisor chiu and supervisor wiener for bringing this forward because this would be a significant hit to the department's budget and have a negative impact on the election if the voters were to receive the full effect of the referendum in the mailboxes come november so again i am here to answer any questions and respond to any concerns that you have. thank you. >> i don't have any questions except to thank mr. ernst for his efforts and the supervisors for theirs so colleagues to focus the discussion -- >> can you hold on a second? >> sure. >> is the president of the elections commission jill roe like to make a comment? >> thank you chairman yee. i am jill roe president of the commission and one of the them in the goal

is voter integrity and elections are fair and politics aren't playing into these types of issues and the commission met last week and unanimously approved that i present to you their position and overall the position is any fix that you make today as a result of these discussions today not be made permanent solution. that it is a one time fix that sunset following the november election. the three basic reasons that the commission feels this way, and they all relate to voter protection. the first is transparency to the voters. the second is impartiality of the department of elections and i think some of the amendments are addressing that and the third important point the commission wants to make is we need to discourage the manipulation of the elections process by political consultants. briefly i will go into each one of

those and let me say the commission recognizes to have a fix and it's back breaking and we're not suggesting that you fix it for the one election but the reason it should be temporary. first trandz appearance. the current municipal elections code requires that the full text is include in the voter information pamphlet for a reason and the petitioners and the voters are looking at the same thing when deciding on a petition and amendment and shouldn't be limited and you should look at the same thing. we toment make sure that the beginning and the end of the process look the same. secondly we were very concerned about preserving the impartiality of the department of elections and the director of elections. i think one of the

proposals included discretion in the director which parts to omit and i think the amendments are addressing that. we think that's a bad idea. we don't the director exposed to allegations he did that unfairly and end up with challenges on the basis of that. the last point and one that is particularly important here is that we need to discourage the manipulation of the petition process and it sounds like this is the issue that supervisor chiu was addressing additionally when you were debating the eight washington project. because of this issue when the supervisors are voting on supervisor expecting to be controversial and challenged by petition if you can -- if your campaign consultants can build into the process a burdensome mechanism on the petition it's harder to get that petition circulated in the first place. it's going to

be it more expensive and the people paid to get the petitions out there to get it out. that's a big incentive to the consultants and tack on extra legal text into the ordinance you're including and have to be included in the petition so making this a permanent change you're inviting that type of mawpz to occur over and over again. if you make it a temporary change at a minimum you have to think of the same thing that supervisor chiu thought about when debating this and the voter information pamphlet, unless you take a separate vote and debate like you're having today, is going to have this problem, so for this reason we think making this a temporary fix will help to discourage that mawpz and we are urging you not to do something

that is a permanent fix. >> i have a question. so you're just setting up general parameters of things you want us to consider when makes a disismghtz you as a commission don't have a recommendation between the two proposals. >> we don't have a recommendation of the two proposals -- >> [inaudible] >> those are the concerns. our elt mat recommendation that is sun sets and the reason we think it should sunset and transparency and lack of manipulation. >> you're the project sponsor. >> legislative sponsor. it's a big project. >> can you speak to that. >> absolutely. i wanted to talk about that and how to make it a temporary measure. it's my understanding

we can't place a sunset clause on this provision but what i am happy to commit to and i don't want to put jeff on the spot, but i am prepared after the november election pass another ordinance to rescind this ordinance. we need to pass something out of committee today to save the 1.7 million dollars but if we can't think of the rule for the precise purposes for the president of the election commission i am happy to rescind that. i want to ask the city attorney if that is an option to consider. >> john gibner county city attorney. so you're suggesting not amending it today in committee but in the future based on the response in this election to the removal of some of the legal text in one of the measures potentially adopting a new rule rescinding this

ordinance or adopting something new. >> what i heard from the commission and what we are trying to do is solve a once in a generation problem. the fact of the matter it's been a generation since a referendum qualified for a ballot and we haven't seen one this large. if you wouldn't mind just holding up that book again? colleagues this is a fraction of what will land in people's mailboxes and if we can avoid that and if the camera pan to him. maybe hand it to me so people understand. this is the size of the 500 pages that qualified for the ballot and it's pretty heavy and would cost our city close to $2 million to move this forward and both supervisor wiener and

i believe we should amend the elections code to avoid this. if we can put a sunset clause we should do it but i understand from the city attorney it's not something they advise. >> the better option is adopt the law of applicability going forward and based on the experience and feedback of this election to reconsider the rule in the future you do that. >> and what the commission suggested i would suggest that we make the amendments and at the end of the year i will work with mr. ernst and the city attorney and supervisor wiener to introduce another ordinance to make sure this was temporary for this one situation. now i do want to address the one difference between supervisor wiener is and where i am, so what i have proposed is that for measures that have a legal text over 100 pages the handbook include a portion of the text and i proposed to include the

initial 100 pages of the text. the idea is just because we don't include the entirety of the text we don't include any of it i disagree with that. i think we have the objective of saving the city considerable money but my concern is imagine if you have a ballot and a dozen measures and 11 of the dozen measures have the full text and the 12th one doesn't have anything there and if you want to see the full text of the ordinance go to the library or the internet and from my perspective because there are digital divide issues, in part because aren't going to go to the library and read this, i think out of a spirit of engaging voters so if they want to see a sample of the ballot they read a couple pages or 100 pages i think that is

appropriate, and i also want to mention in the language that we placed what this will say is the following "the text contains the first 100 pages of this measure but doesn't include the remaining pages of the measure. the pages excluded could be useful to voters and the department of elections encourages voters to review that information and available at a certain website and every library. if you require a copy to be mailed to you please contact the department of elections and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you and what i propose colleagues with all of the other measures and you see a part of the text so there is at least the opportunity to get the sense of what you're talking about and know there are more possibilities. now out of a spirit to resolve this difference for you colleagues to make it easier to not make a choice here supervisor wiener

suggested a 20 page limited and i suggested 100 page so why don't i suggest the following to allow the first 20 pages of an ordinance to be published and that gets at supervisor wiener's cost issues and not the full 100 pages so at least a voter can have a flavor of what the ordinance is about i suggest that as a way to get to the chase here and move this forward. >> before i go to supervisor breed supervisor wiener's -- mr. crittenden would you like to respond or anything? >> again i am -- i appreciate what supervisor chiu is saying i think from our office's perspective this is not just a one time issue, but more importantly as part of policy we don't believe that partial is

consistent measure and it's misleading and not value one part of the text over another part because it's at the end and again the supervisor can't support that change. >> okay. thank you. supervisor breed. >> yes. i had a question about the implication that by only printing the first half or the first 20 pages and referring voters tol another place to find the additional information the implication that the information printed is more valid or more important or more substantive than the information not included and i just wanted to understand if there's a legal opinion about that implication.

>> john gibner deputy city attorney again. this is really a policy question for the board to decide. the board has authority to determine how many -- whether to include the legal text at all and how much of the legal text to include, and so it's really up to your judgment whether you think voters would be mislead by including only a portion. >> okay. thank you. >> mr. chair, if i could just respond briefly to this? >> go ahead. >> i agree with supervisor wiener's aide that that in his words this is not necessarily a one time issue but i think the intent of the legislation is to address the one time situation that we have here and i fully intend if we pass this at the end of the year to pass legislation at the direction of the election's commission to rescind this because this is i think a longer standing policy conversation that we ought to have about what is the most

appropriate way for us to educate voters, but i am really concerned that if voters receive a handbook that has the full text of everything but on one measure have no text whatsoever, not even 20 pages worth. i can understand why 100 pages is an issue but not even 20 pages. i think that will create more questions and providing the first 20 pages shows what we're talking about. let me also say when it comes to the ballot the 20 pages are the first five pages of the ordinance in question and page of supportive document so you're getting the gift of what the ordinance is about in the first five pages and a little more information and people could go to the library. they could go to the internet, et cetera, so i think we ought to explain and have that portion of the measure be

in the ballot, and i also think that 20 pages was what supervisor wiener suggested is an appropriate cut off and i am happy to adopt that as part of the amendment of what we're talking about today. >> thank you. my comments are that i think that it is important that provide a pamphlet that is more consistent and i do think there would be a little bit of confusion from voters, especially as voters you're used to seeing the ballot measure, the explanations. it has a consistency now and provides the supporting documentation and i don't think we can completely submit something to say if you want more information about this this is where you need to go so i am happy to support moving this forward with the adjustment