we are the ones who do dirty jobs, who do the cleaning. we are the ones who take care of the elderly. even including myself, to take care of patients. this is a country of immigrants. we come from different nationalities. different backgrounds. different walks of life. but we need diversity in this country. therefore, i am asking you to please consider when you designate the new mayor, the one who is going to include the city and help us, we the latinos are part of the country. we are the ones who contribute to our culture.

to this nation which is the greatest nation in the world. thank you. >> i'm a district aid voter and not worry about which one of you becomes mayor or what color you are. i have two issues about this mayoral succession. first, gay genocide. in case you haven't noticed, there is a mounting global consensus for gay genocide. expressed in a u.n. general assembly resolution on november 15, which removed lgbt people from the list of populations in need of special protection or rather equal protection from extra judicial, arbitrary, and summary execution. most of the declarations of policy and resolutions and so forth that you pass here have no teeth and are meaningless. but this is harvey milk's town. this is a town where let's face it, it is politically

indefensible, the political cost is too high, to oppose lgbt rights. if you speak to this, the world is going to hear. i want a mayor who will do that. second, i want to mayor who will change the terms of the conversation here. all year, i've been listening to you talk about the budget and you're out of money, you're out of money, you're out of money. money is an abstraction. it's not like coal. it's not like oil or natural gas. it's not like water. you didn't run out of it. money is a social intersubjective construction of power. and it has been hugely reconstructed upward. the next mayor needs to be honest about that in this debate about the budget. president chiu: next speaker. >> supervisors, first, let me tank outside counsel in this deliberation.

because it's -- you helped us some in crafting the language to choose the interim mayor. and i want to thank our president and the clerk of the board for doing the same. you supervisors should understand that this is an important decision. and what do i see when i look at the chairs? i see some of the supervisors missing in action. and this is very disrespectful. unless, you know, they have emergency. which i doubt. supervisors, a lot will be said , but basically when some of us come here to testify, we want to testify on behalf of those

that need help, on behalf of those that cannot defend themselves. and foremost, we want to see that our health, our safety, our education, all those quality of life issues are addressed by supervisors who are educated on issues. now, many of the speakers have spoken about david campos. i know i am pretty well. -- i know him pretty well and watch him from a distance. and he represents my district. my district was carved out from silver to bacon, and given to district nine. so that's the can dailt.

-- candidate. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm abraham simmons a pleasure to meet you all in this context. the board president, and members, i have two thoughts. one, if you're struggling for someone, i will accept the nomination. [laughter] but short of that, short of that, a couple of other things. there has been a lot of discussion about whether you should or should not pick someone. and i think that's a ridiculous conversation. of course you should. and of course you should give -- pick someone with enough time for them to figure out how to handle the financial and other problems of this city. they are tremendous. and there are things that need to be attacked with as much -- as soon as possible. and with as much confidence as possible. but aside from that, there are other issues. of course you want to pick

someone who will survive the resulting shenanigans that are sure to follow if you choose anyone at all. that's one of the things that you want to focus on. but should you decide to move forward, and should you decide to do that today, and should you decide to pick someone, there's one more thing that i don't think enough attention has been paid and that's the only reason why i'm standing. i have not heard anyone articulate a real vision for where this city is going. for what we really want to achieve in the next coming years, not just in terms of fixing the financial crisis or in terms of how they're going to survive the next -- you know, january, past january 5. but also, what we're really looking forward to. so i urge you to at least give us your thoughts on what you're doing or what you hope to receive, what the marching

orders are for the next mayor, if that's what you're going to do today. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> i'm actually going to translate for her. ok. her name is juanita martinez and here from an organized city college group that is transgender latinas at city college. and she's here to tell you -- here to express her support for david campos as interim mayor. and also to get your unconditional support for her group. thank you. also going to try to translate one more. david campos, you can jump in if i'm messing this up.

my name is jorge. and i'm in agreement. >> i'll try and practice my english now. i remember many face of you before i was a supervisor. i remember when many of you walking on the street, walking in the store, walking in dark doors for the both. this is a very serious moment. many of you leaving this place and come back to the real life. and i think so. this is a big compromise. for this one. we elected many of you.

so i think so. you are nothing without us also. thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> hello. i'm ed malari. as a mayoral candidate in this audience, i know what it's like to be an official candidate. and i have -- last week i nominated gays and lesbians for the mayor. today i want to see this lady right here, her name is diane wesley. i think she should be a great candidate. i think also the doctor who ran for mayor, who graduate waited from stanford university, because if we are going to have a care taker i would love to see a gay or a lesbian or

transgender. you've been talking about america's cup and everything and we were the first to come up on all of those ships. i wonder why they call it the america's cup in all those countries. i think that's because the ships came from many countries to bring ancestors here. but today, i don't want to be a mayor. i want to work for the mayor. you get a lot of things running for public office. all the candidates who ran for office, i'm asking them to consider putting -- being here for the mayor nomination or putting yourself in there. because when you run for office, you have this on public as much as. you have did your country well. and what they're trying to do in d.c. is take you back to the 1920's and the 1930's. 1% of the 4% of people who own so much in this country do not want you to have anything. 34 seconds left. just like oprah winfrey found out probably in australia, that they say, why america don't want everyone to have health coverage? and i'm sure she found that out

when that plane got stranded, too. and australians are look at us. and they didn't enslave people. and a care taker mayor here, we don't know what we're going to do when chris leaves. you know, he's been a people person. and many of you over here. but we know that if we don't get someone, the new boy will be coming in and we don't know, do you want to be a freshman? thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> a translator. [speaking spanish]

president chiu: next speaker.

>> good afternoon, folks. my name is del seymour. and my idea, there are two people in this chamber that we would like to consider or should be considered. and bayview hunters point. and we didn't think a train would go out there 10 or 15 years ago. and opened up the examiner and a full page ad for a conned menium on third -- condominium on third and oakdale.

we might come up with a surprise. congratulations sophia maxwell and good luck to you. president chiu: are there any other members of the public that wish to comment on this item? seeing none, at this time, the public hearing is closed. colleagues? item 58 is the hands of the board, supervisor maxwell?

supervisor maxwell: i ask that we continue this item. i think we have three weeks to have somebody just floating out there for that amount of time is not to our best interest and i think it will give us an opportunity to really think about what's ahead of us. president chiu: supervisor maxwell has made a motion to continue this item seconded by supervisor dufty. supervisor daly? supervisor daly: it's like deja vu all over again from last week. it seems like the maker of the motion and seconder did exactly the same thing as last week but we've been sitting here now -- is this the fourth public hearing that we've had on the topic of transition. and, colleagues, i think that we

are doing an incredible disservice to the people of the city and county of san francisco because i am somewhat flum,ed sitting here as a 10-year veteran who understands who understands procedure and understands the innerworkings of the board of supervisors, i'm flumoxed as one of the most senior members of this body. i can only imagine how confused, how distraught i would be in a, you know, dragged myself over to city hall the last few weeks to try and give me input on who the mayor's going to be and then nothing from my elected representatives, not even acknowledgment of my input. not everyone is saying the same thing. it's crazy enough that my name came up once or twice today. so, i mean, it's not -- it's not as if the people of san francisco have a singular

message that we're not responding to. it's perhaps not that bad, but it is us saying to the people of san francisco, you can come and you can try and participate, but we're just going to move on and we're not even going to acknowledge that participation or say anything and, you know, i actually agreed with one of the comments, i think it was mr. abrams, where he said, at a certain point, whether or not i agree with you on your selection or what your values are, at a certain point, we need to be putting forward a vision for san francisco and -- [applause] -- and again, having been here long enough, i know that my vision for san francisco is probably not shared by every member of this board of supervisors, but until we put our visions out there and i'm

comfortable putting my vision out there, although i think i've tried a few times over the course of this process -- until we put out our competing or tangential or collaborative visions for san francisco out on this floor and start discussing, until we start comparing those visions of actual names of san francisco electors that we could consider, we are not going to make progress and if we come here on january 4th, is it? if we come here on january 4th and who knows if gavin newsome is sworn in on january 3, or not, are we going to do the same thing? are we going to take our charge to appoint a successor mayor if the mayor has sworn in the lieutenant governor the previous

day? are we going to go ahead and take a pass and punt again and put our hands up in the air if there are shenanigans in terms of not getting sworn in? i'd like to hear answers to that question today. for my part, i was ready three or four weeks ago to make nominations and to start testing out the voting patterns. i was ready before we even discussed the process, which we have yet to implement. it may even be, colleagues, that if we pass this motion and then pass a like motion at our last meeting of this session that that month-long debate, arcane and frustrating and complicated and disempowering for the people of san francisco who are interested in participating in this process, that arcane debate may have been for nought and i

think that would be an incredible disservice to the people of san francisco. it's almost as if -- it's almost as if the members of this board don't even want to be here. well, if you don't want to be here, you can leave. if you want to engage in the work at hand, if you want to use the process that we unanimously adopted, if you want to talk about the future of this city, then please say something and not just, "we're going to punt. on second down." [applause] even if you're not prepared to vote for a name or talk about a

person or an elector that you'd be willing to vote for and i think there are probably eight or nine electors in san francisco that i'm prepared to vote for today, and i think i've said this time and time again and i know i went out to ask my assembly member to consider the job because i think that he, in somewhat of a unique way, may have been our best choice. but i think that we have very good choices and we have many very good choices, and it is almost -- it is almost unbelievable that we would be unable to talk about who our top choices are and we can even use our r.c.d. system, say i like tom amiana one, we knock him

off. i like david campos, maybe you like ed harrington. put your names down, mention them, and, you know, if we want to order the vote or reorder the vote or restructure it to get to an outcome, fine, we can do that procedurally. we can withdraw nominations or remake nominations or vote down a name if it's earlier in the order because you want to vote for someone later in the order and then go back to the earlier of the order but we can't do any of that unless we actually have a vote to actually have that process happen. so let's have that process happen and if we are not going to have that process happen now, let us clearly communicate what our intentions are on january 8, and if you want to say you're not prepared to have this

conversation now, you're going to vote yes on this motion, but regardless of what happens between now and january 4, you want to have nominations and take votes on january 4, fine. at least you've said something. if you want to tell me you don't want to take motions and you'll play into the mayor's gamesmanship if he chooses to do that and you don't want to make a motion or vote on an item, or vote on names until the office is actually vacant, say that. if it's that you want the next board to decide, say that. if it's that you want one individual who is a member of the next board of supervisors who becomes president to also serve as acting mayor for 12 months and have, in one person, the most power ever consolidated

in a san francisco politician, say that. but say something. the people deserve that much. [applause] president chiu: colleagues, any further discussion? okay. supervisor maxwell, i understand you have made a motion to continue this, which you will interpret as a motion to amend. supervisor maxwell: january 4. president chiu: motion to amend this such that suggesting we will consider on january 4 potentially the motion to convene as a committee as a whole. supervisor maxwell: yes. president chiu: seconded by supervisor dufty. if we could take a roll call vote on the motion. madam clerk: supervisor alioto-pier, alioto-pier aye. avalos aye, chiu aye, chu, aye, supervisor daly, no.

supervisor dufty, dufty aye. supervisor elsbernd, elsbernd aye. supervisor mar, mar aye, maxwell aye, mirkarimi, no. eight aye's and three nos. president chiu: motion passes. if we could go back to our 3:00 special order regarding the ocean avenue benefits district. i understand that we do have complete tabulations and i'd like to ask the clerk to announce the results. madam clerk: yes, mr. president. the returned weighted ballots voting for the ocean avenue bid was 54.83% and the returned weighted ballots voting against the ocean avenue bid was 35.17% indicating there was no majority protest. president chiu: at this time, there's not been a majority

protest and thus at this time i would ask, unless there are further comments for a vote on the resolution. supervisor avalos, do you have comments you would like to make? supervisor avalos: i would just -- thank you, president chiu. i am trying to get a breakdown of the property owners who were supportive, what percentage were city property owners, was the city, or a public entity such as city college, and what were private property owners. i think, for me to be consistent with what i've been saying about the civic center crnd, i need to have a clear understanding of that. i have done with my calculator here, a calculation that didn't add up to what the city had calculated, department of elections calculated for the majority percentage of support, but i have 20% of the -- 20% of

the property ownership that in the entire c.b.d. is supportive and is a city entity or a city college and 19.15% of the c.b.d. parcels are in favor and are non-city property. so, it's -- you know, it shows that the city has had a very large part in assuring that there's a successful vote here, which i'm trying to mull over how much i want to support that or not. i haven't supported the c.b.d., but i'm concerned about the threshold we have here and i'd like to get an official report from the city about what they got calculated in terms of the city part of the ownership of the parcels that were favorable.

president chiu: if i could ask, i know ms. pagon from the mayor's office on economic and work force development who has been helping to manage this process this year, do you have an answer for supervisor avalos? >> the parcels owned by the city of san francisco represent 11.80% and that includes the feelin loop parcel as well as the library and a median -- a hard scape median. president chiu: supervisor? supervisor avalos: i added up all the percentages of the city properties that are in favor, that are all in favor, of course, because we asked the city properties to vote in favor of the c.b.d. i got 20.69%. could be an" error in there, i

don't think so. and i added up all the private property owners that are supportive and they are 19% of the total area of the crnd, all together, that's 40% of the c.b.d. i'm concerned about the predominance of the city property as part of it, although this has been a very, very difficult process to get support for the c.b.d. with the local economy. i think it's been difficult to convince people to be supportive because many of them are struggling businesses, many are them are actually doing okay, too, that are managing to get by, wouldn't say okay, but are managing to get by despite the economy and have been opposed. i do want to support this moving forward. i do believe that once we see what the benefits of the community benefits district are going to be, it will be something many will consider worthwhile to continue and so i want to urge