limits we have being able to put the kind of change into effect that we would like and not be able to. supervisor wiener: i want to thank president chiu for his leadership on this issue. it is an important one. it is a very important issue, and even within the political realm, i got a lot of feedback, and i'm sure others did as well about the unending volume of paper that people were getting in the mail, and a lot of people approached me and asked me to sponsor all sorts of legislation to deal with that. what i like about this ordinance is it does not have any impact

on people's ability to either male or personally deliver pieces of paper. all it does is it requires that it be a fixed. it can be defined broadly. it can be in the doorjamb, on the doorknob, in the gate, just to be placed in a way that it is not going to blow away, and friendly, if it is on the ground or in the bushes, people are not going to read it anyway -- frankly, if it is on the ground or in the bushes, people are not going to read it anyway. this is pretty narrowly drawn has an ordinance, and i think it is a move in the right direction, and i hope we will be able to adopt it. supervisor campos: colleagues, we have a motion to continue. can we take that without

objection for two weeks? >> item 12 is a resolution authorizing and directing execution of a quitclaim deed from the city to the universe it -- the unified school district. supervisor chiu: thank you colleagues. the last item being unanimous, can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, the item is adopted. why don't we skip over our 3:00 34:00 orders and go to the committee report, item 17. >> item 17 was considered by the land use and economic committee, was forwarded as recommended with a new title and resolution declaring the intention of the board to vacate portions of the public right of way the law and/or above several streets within the transit

center project area and setting the hearing date for march 1, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. here in this legislative chamber, room 250, in city hall. supervisor chiu: can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, the resolution is adopted. why don't we proceed to roll call. >> supervisor carmen chu is first. supervisor kim. supervisor wiener. supervisor wiener: thank you. i have several introductions today. the first is i am requesting that the controller conduct an economic impact study with

support from the entertainment commission on entertainment and night life in san francisco to determine the size and scope of this industry, the number of jobs it creates in san francisco, the taxes that it generates for the city, the rhythm rigid the tourism it brings to the city. there has been a lot of discussion in recent years about entertainment and night life in san francisco, and it often comes up in a very reactive way in terms of policy making. something bad happens. someone gets shot. there is a crowd control situation. something terrible happens, and we then scramble and say, "how do we address this?" what i want to do is take a step back so that in the future when we are making public policy that

impacts entertainment and night life, we know exactly what we're dealing with so that we know the size, we know the economic contribution so when we are making policy, we can look at the downside and also look at the up side. and this is not just about violence in night clubs. i know that is what makes the papers, and that is what some folks focus on. this really is about something that is part of the cultural life blood of this city and finds so much of what this city is about. whether we're talking about our street fairs and the pride parade or chinese new year or con about, whether we're talking about our neighborhood bars that are such integral parts of our neighborhood community -- chinese new year or carnivale, whether we're talking about the lgbt community and the key role

that nightlife has played, particularly for young people, so i'm asking that the controller perform the assessment and report back and once we have the report completed, that the present at a hearing before the land use and economic development committee so we can hear what those results are. my second introduction relates to -- it is a resolution relating to the metropolitan and transportation commission. i know my colleagues are very familiar with what the mtc is, but for members of the public who do not know, it is a regional bay area nine-county commission that plays a significant role in distributing transformation -- transportation dollars throughout the bay area. it is a significant project. when we look at san francisco, and has played a key role in funding a lot of different

projects, whether we are talking about doyle drive for the central subway or a number of different projects. there are currently 19 members. we have two of them. last month, the commission voted, over san francisco's objection, to ask the state legislature to amend state law to expand the mtc from 19 to 21 seats by giving an extra seat to alameda county and to santa clara county, recognizing the significance of oakland. i have no dispute with recognizing the importance of our sister cities, san jose and oakland, but what this will do if enacted is further dilute san francisco's role in the mtc and our ability to obtain adequate transit funding for this city, which is so critical in our regional transportation system. the mtc request ignores the fact

that san francisco is the destination for about 500,000 people every weekday, which is almost the size of the city of oakland, above and beyond our population, and more than half the size of the city of san jose. when you add to that the number of people who come here in the evening, who come here on the weekend for entertainment or to shop, eat is even bigger. transit funding should be allocated based on the number of trips into a city, not just on who is sleeping there at night. san francisco has about 800,000 people, but our daytime population is much larger, placing significant stresses and strains on our already limited transportation system. the structure of the mtc which makes these funding decisions should take that into account, that we are asking the state

legislature through this resolution to reject the proposal and that we are going to make changes to make sure that those changes reflect san francisco's daytime population. my final -- yes, my final introduction for today is a resolution being co-sponsored by president chiu and supervisor kim to support the janitors of local 87, 1, south, van ness, which was a local 87 property and is owned by the city and county of sanford says, had a contract that was recently awarded to a non-union shop, which will result in job loss for the local 87 members. we want the board to look at that situation, and we would like to go on record supporting the members of local 87 and assuring the janitors in the city get not only good wages,

but good benefits, which the union has injured, so i'm submitting that as well, and the rest i will submit. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor cohen. supervisor cohen: submit. >> supervisor farrell. supervisor farrell: thanks. today, i have one in memoriam. stuart was the son of sarah and dr. marvin broughtman. he was working with youth and adolescents for over 20 years. after earning his master's in social work, he gained extensive experience their individual family and will work with teams and families, both mental health and educational settings. he was a proud founder of the coyote coast youth and family

counseling center. he was most recently working at the child development center in a private practice. he was a past board member of can newman in santa rosa and worked as a can newman psychologist during the summer. he also taught at religious school for many years at various congregations. stewart is survived by his loving wife and their daughter and was taken from us way too early in his mid-40's and will be sorely missed by our bay area community. the rest i will submit. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i have several in memoriams. first for dr. mildred phyllis prudham. she was the supreme guidance director, mother, an organizer of john coltrane and church. it is right on fillmore.

it is cool. she was a teacher and traveled the world as an evangelist, one of the founders of the first black the logical seminaries in vegas. she had her own tv and radio program in san francisco in the 1970's. she was the -- she leaves behind her loving family, her four children, 12 grandchildren, and 23 great-grandchildren. one of her grandchildren is the new pastor and director of john coltrane and church. she will be missed by the community and her family. next, an in memoriam for sherriff deputy marla denzer. she died earlier in january. she joined the department in june 1994. after completing the core

course, she was assigned to county jail 7. she graduated from the santa rosa trading center and return to county jail 7, after which she embarked on a varied career. county jail no. 9 in the transportation unit here at the time of her death, she was assigned to county jail one. she was well respected by her fellow deputies for the team spirit and work ethic, and i know the loss is devastating to many in the department. next is somebody that many of us knew through his tireless activism. it was quite a shock because he was here at the swearing in of board members just recently of his unexpected passing. james howard pi, jr. he lived his life as an engineer in the net states navy and community activist. he was a strong servant of god,

to his family, his church, his community, and the city of san francisco. he was a resident of the fillmore for over seven years, a member of the uptown church of christ. he is survived by six children. a proud veteran in the u.s. navy, he was often heard quoting president john f. kennedy -- ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country, and he literally kept saying that to me every time he visited my office. he will be laid to rest in tennessee, and i know us in the community will miss him and his incredible activism. next, an ordinance. at the committee hearing on the publication of notice ordinances, which i had submitted so that we would be

able to amplify the public's understanding of what occurs with departments and commissions and their agendas, we want to make sure that we are putting on our san francisco government website all the notices of all the commission hearings and department actions so that people understand that they have access to information and not have to hunt for it. as it currently stands through committee hearings, the noticing of what those commissions and committees do is publish in the newspaper, at great expense to the board of supervisors and the city and county of san francisco. we wanted the site to modernize it. at the committee hearing on the publication of notice ordinances, the ordinance was amended to require summary of the notice to be published in the official newspaper in order to address the concerns of the newspaper. the idea was to put something brief in the paper that directed people to the full of information on the san francisco

government website. in implementing these new procedures, the clerk found that she needed clarification of the question of "summary," but thanks to the clerk and city attorney's office by coming up with an elegant amendment that i am submitting to the supple -- as a supplement to the original ordinance. supervisor chiu: colleagues, today, i will be introducing legislation to help save environmental resources, promote green business practices, and save money for san franciscans by reducing unwanted yellow page phone books for residents who do not want them. this is a topic i started thinking about a number of years ago because of an experience in my apartment building where i noticed that every winter, there would be a large pile of phone books, including the book that i have right here back in this bag, that would be left, and abandon, and the pile of phone books would simply sit untouched

for many months until someone decided to lug all of them out of the building. i think all of us have seen on our city streets, on our sidewalks, doorways and abandon and unwanted yellow page books. so i started the conversation with my friend and my agent began to look at the statistics of how many yellow page books are left in san francisco. san francisco received over 1.5 million unsolicited yellow page phone books every year. the -- if you were to staff up all these yellow page phone books on top of each other, you would have a height of almost 300 transamerica pyramids for over eight mount everest. this is a staggering amount of natural resources. it is estimated that over 5 billion trees a year are needed to make phone books in our country. in addition to the environmental

impact, though, this has a real cost to san franciscans. the total cost to dispose of or recycle foam books in san francisco is estimated to be over $1 million a year. this is a cost borne by residents and ratepayers. the ordinance i am interested in using would allow all phone book distributors to distribute yellow pages to any san franciscan resident who wants them. it would also allow distributors to contact every resident the it -- via mail, phone, or e-mail so anyone who wants a phone book can have an opportunity to receive it. this ordinance, though, does not allow distributors to leave unwanted yellow pages in front of buildings or doorways without permission. this lot is not a ban on yellow pages. we simply want to make sure that everyone who wants the

information can get it, and it is good for business. businesses will know that they are paying to advertise to actual customers instead of to a giant circulation number which does not represent the truth of who is actually using these phone books. if we are serious about our environment, it's time we recognize that phone books are a twentieth century tool that does not meet the business or environmental needs of the 21st century, and i look forward in the coming weeks to having a conversation with you and the public about this. i also have an in memoriam for two individuals who were slain on a tragedy -- in a tragedy on sunday on fisherman's wharf. they were tragically shot to death in a rivalry between opposing gangs. the individuals will grow 30 years old, who lived in san francisco, and our hearts go out to their families and loved ones. the rest of my items i will

submit. supervisor mar: thank you. in introducing a resolution today joining a number of organizations like the organization of chinese americans and various civil rights groups around the country condemning rush limbaugh's racially insensitive and derisive remarks mocking the chinese president and his people. on his radio talk show, rush limbaugh mocked the chinese language and culture by doing a gross misrepresentation impersonation of the chinese president during his visit to the united states. this is an effort the -- to hold accountable mr. limbaugh is supported by a number of community-based groups. the following day, after limbaugh's comments, he arrogantly stated that he did a "remarkable impersonation" and

he was doing a service to the american population. it is incredibly offensive not just to chinese-americans but to everyone who believes in language equality and multicultural diversity. a california state senator who receive hate letters because of this has issued a petition demanding an apology from mr. limbaugh as well as sponsors to pull their advertising from his radio show. also, an assembly member and many others are calling for apologies and other action. community organizations and civil rights groups also are building a movement around the country to demand an apology from mr. limbaugh. by mocking the chinese language and culture, his actions have the little chinese americans as well as chinese people throughout the world. his remarks also undermine the base of our immigrant community's efforts and struggle for language equality and multi legalism and how the cultural diversity brings strength and richness to san francisco and the whole nation.

i urge support from all of my colleagues as well, and i would like to thank supervisors chu chiuchu avalos, and campos for cosponsoring with me, and supervisor mirkarimi as well -- i would like to thank supervisors chu, chiu, avalos, and campos. supervisor campos: in introducing a resolution calling for february 6 through february 12 as financial aid awareness week. this resolution recognizes that higher education is key to a successful future in our country, and as we know, the ability of many of our youth to access higher education depends on their ability to secure financial assistance, and as the cost of college and universities continued to rise and as san francisco family's struggles

through these tough economic times, having access to financial assistance becomes even more critical. i know that for all of us, we probably would not have been able to achieve a higher education without the financial assistance. that certainly was the case with me, and i'm very grateful for the fact that at the time, there were individuals who were helpful to me in giving me information about what kind of financial assistance was available to someone like me. we have in san francisco many great organizations that are doing the same for you throughout set francisco that are helping them and their families to have a better understanding of what financial assistance is available and something as basic but as really important as understanding be free application for federal student aid, which can be very cumbersome for some families.

we want to acknowledge the work by the economic commission development agency, mission graduates, which in my district alone are helping so many new -- so many youth, making higher education a reality for them. i want to thank the co-sponsors of this resolution, and we also want to acknowledge the work being done by the san francisco unified school district, which is working with youth to educate them and their families about financial assistance that is available to them. the rest i submit. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you. colleagues, today, in introducing a supplemental appropriation ordinance that continues the ongoing saga about non-residents. for the new supervisors, i want

to say welcome to the working week. we had this -- this discussion started back in 2009 when the non-resident fee was proposed. i heard earlier that the residency that was proposed for the botanical gardens, and that year, i have worked with my colleagues on the budget committee to reject that fee. there was enormous change with people's experience at the park in general but the temple gardens in particular, so i was very proud to be part of that effort to reject that fee. again, last year, the recreation and park department working with the botanical garden society brought forward the non-resident fee, and it was giving another budget deficit were trying to close, looking at how the recreation of part of farmers have already in the previous year closed at $11 million budget deficit on top of probably a $10 million budget deficit the year before and a $5 billion budget deficit the year before that.

i just felt that there had to be a deferred discussion last year, and there were also a lot of workers who came out, who were laborers or garden is working for the recreation of our department, were in favor of the residence fee, and it took that into consideration, but it was difficult for me to want to approve it. last year, during the discussions, added an amendment to the non-resident fee legislation that said if we had one new revenue at the ballot, then we would use a portion of that revenue to eliminate the non-resident fee. at the time, i was working on -- working with community groups to collect signatures on the hotel tax, a 2% temporary increase in the hotel tax, as well as increased to the property sold for over $5 million. the hotel tax failed, but the increase exceeded, and estimates

are that it will bring in $30 million in this current year and another additional not amount -- additional amount in the equivalent next fiscal year. i want to carry out my commitment that was embedded in that amendment last year and move forward with the appropriation that could eliminate the fee. how wonderful it would be to be able to eliminate a fee through the recreation and park department, through the mta, through many of our services. we have been raising fees over and over again, and that has been the way we have been contending with our deficit. we've not been looking at larger amounts of revenue. we've been looking at fees over and over, nickel-and-diming san franciscans in the process. this is one that i hope all of us can support.

i was talking with rachel gordon. she had done a survey of people who use the botanical gardens. many of them felt that they actually turn themselves away or that they decided not to for dissipate. i do believe the fee creates a chilling effect on people's enjoyment of the park, and eliminating it would ensure again that people could have no barrier to entering the park whatsoever. it has really taken probably the fee itself forced to realize how nice it is for us to not have one. in rejecting the fee back in 2009, i have been inspired by joni mitchell, in her song "big

yellow taxi." she said, "we took all the trees and put them in a tree museum and charge the people a dollar and a half just to see them." that inspired me not to approve the fee in 2009, but i have another part i want to quote -- "don't it always seemed to go that we do not know what we've got until it's gone?" supervisor mirkarimi: hard to follow that, but i have to say thank you, supervisor avalos. i know there is a few of us who have been staunchly against and continue to be against that gate fee. it was a mistake in my opinion. i quite agree with you that the