to the likes -- to the life of the city should not be ignored, and should be at the table. we would appreciate the board acting on this issue. it is very important that this be represented. i do not want secret diplomacy affecting my pension. thank you very much. president chiu: before the next speaker, i want to welcome back rev. and former supervisor amos brown to our chambers. good to see you here. [applause] next speaker, please. >> i am a software engineer for about 15 years now. i have worked my entire life at start-ups. the first job i had as an intern was in brisbane. we used to call it the armpit of silicon valley. i am here today to talk a little

bit about -- everyone is calling it the twitter tax cut. basically, i think it is ridiculous that they would actually move to brisbane. i think it would have to cut their staff. that is sort of a threat. i definitely can see, as a startup bounder, why there is some concern. it is a little bit difficult to step in the city. the salaries are higher down the peninsula. probably, payroll taxes a factor. the fact is that in san francisco it is really great to have a small startup in its young stages. when a company gets to where it is 100 people or more, it makes a little more sense for them to look somewhere like palo alto. if they are not going to be contributing tax money to the

city, why would we care if they stay? a good example is on my way to work in mountain view every day. i passed the original headquarters of sun microsystems, which is a complete ghost town. the bill such a big complex it is not useful to anyone else. it is probably a public safety problem. it is very dark, poorly lit. we have to think -- is twitter going to build a huge headquarters that they are going to abandon in five years and no one else would want it, and we will not have gotten any tax money? i am out of breath. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. peter warfield, executive

director of library users association. i am speaking about the fourth branch library reopening. it is always good to see opening a library, or to reopen one, and especially park branch, which is embarking now on its second century of service to the public. while generally i support the resolution and item 38, i am a bit disappointed that in the midst of many names of individuals and organizations in the community that worked to improve the design, some that worked on that are not mentioned by name, but only generally as community members or members of the haight-ashbury community. it would improve this resolution, were you to include the names of the haight-ashbury neighborhood council, the library users association, and

the historic preservation commission. all of them worked to approve what ultimately has been produced. i am proud that the library users association alerted the commission about library renovations. they reviewed a number, including park branch. those efforts resulted in one of the parties that is mentioned being brought in to provide architectural presentation of guys, when neither the architect nor the floor of yours included architectural preservation experts. this is the oldest of the san francisco public library buildings. the original wood floor was not restored, nor the original stairs or original skylights. there were a number of excellent improvements. president chiu: thank you.

next speaker. >> happy black history month. i want to talk about black history, medical marijuana, and lgbt. this is a picture of glory. you cannot go see the african american gis. i want to thank new village for kwanzaa. today, we learned that black history is actually american history. the month of february, we celebrate our chinese new year, black history, medical marijuana week, president's day, the super bowl, groundhog day. it is women's heart month. it is important to everyone. i saw this lady.

she got nine months before rosa parks. if i write a book, it would be called diversity in justice while black. we have heard a lot in this city. i think giving these owners to everyone, that we should bring these people together to work on a concrete situation, to give people these recommendations but not bring them back through the year is in vain. as we know does, our country in a civil war. in washington, we are waging the third civil war. it is up to everyone to be at this table. this is something else that is going on. we are going to talk to the president on president's day about cutting uppe ssi. call cara. this is something.

black history month, all you supervisors the finale did a great job today. but we had lgbt people. president chiu: thank you very much. any other speakers for general public, and for today? seeing none, general public, is closed. we can now return back to item 32, concerning the proposed charter amendment. i understand madame clerk has already read it. supervisor kim: apologies to my colleagues for not attributing the amendments in writing. i am proposing three amendments to the charter amendment for the june ballot. the first amendment is the board

of education shall set the compensation for its members not to exceed 1/2 the the annual salary of a first-year teacher in san francisco. we are striking, "beginning july 1, the chief a new officer shall adjust the annual salary amount to reflect cpi, providing that cost-of-living adjustments to not exceed 5%." the third amendment is striking all of subsection d, which outlines how the city would fund the board of education salary in the future. the school district would like to include this in their own budget.

president chiu: supervisor kim has made a motion to amend, seconded by supervisor c ampos. can we take these without objection? supervisor cohen: for a point of clarification, what is the impact going to be for striking these subsections will it disrupt the process? supervisor kim: it does mean this will have to come back to us as a committee of the whole next week for us to have a hearing on these amendments. if it is approved next week, it will be done in time for the june ballot. i am sorry. in two weeks. next tuesday, we do not have a meeting. we do not have a board of supervisors meeting next week. supervisor cohen: i do not know

the entire policy. is there a way we could have it a little more time to review some of these? president chiu: we would need to accept these amendments today in order to consider them in two weeks, and we would not be able to change it. that being said, if individuals are uncomfortable with these amendments, we could take a short recess, or we could adopt them, knowing that is what the charter sponsors want to do, and have a discussion next week on the charter amendment. supervisor kim: that has been to the rules committee a few times as well. supervisor mar: i appreciate the amendments. i would like our legal counsel to give some input before the committee as a whole next week on the funding. if the school district is going to cover the funding, we do not have the authority, if it is

passed by voters. it is the authority of the board of education and the superintendent. i know that jill wynns from the board of education and others were here. there were mixed ideas when it first went forward on the board of education with supervisor dufty's version. i would like supervisor kim to talk about the discussion of the members of the board of education. president chiu: there is a different option we can pursue today. we could split the file, and and one version, and send both versions to next week, with two different hearings. >> you do not need to have two hearings. we can consolidate them. that way, we have plenty of time to look at both versions.

i think that is appropriate, considering the way this is being trimmed forward. it is not enough time for members of the board who are not on the rules committee to analyze this. that way, you would be able to do both in the next two weeks. supervisor campos: i was going to make the same point. maybe we could split the file so we have two versions of the same document going forward. what i would say about this item is, and i know that supervisor dufty was in the chambers before, in a prior like i served as general counsel to the san francisco unified school district. i have seen firsthand the work that goes into being a member of the board of education. that is very difficult work. you are asking individuals to spend a lot of time overseeing a very complex and significant operational budget of close to

$0.50 billion. what this charter amendment is trying to do, the reason my supervisor -- why supervisor dufty supported it and by supervisor jane campkim, a formr member of the board of education, is moving the port -- we want an opportunity for everyone to be able to serve on the board of education. it is prohibited if people are basically not able to put food on the table. it basically allows people who are not independently wealthy to be able to meet their obligations, and that we serve on the board of education. in the end, i think it is an investment worth making. it will pay for itself many times over. we want board members to have the ability to put the time and energy, as some many board members already have done, but

it is also recognition that serving on the board of education does not mean that you have to subject yourself and your family to extreme poverty, which i think is a real possibility unless we make this change. i think it is a very modest proposal. i hope we get as many supporters of this as possible. i would encourage the rest of the board of supervisors to be supportive of this measure. many of us would not be here today, but for the fact that at the time supervisor magnus allis made it possible to increase the salaries of members of the board of supervisors. for many of us, without that change, as much as we wanted to serve, it would have been very difficult for us to serve in this capacity. i think the same is true of members of the board of

education. it is important as a matter of equity and good public policy to support this policy. thank you. president chiu: thank you. supervisor elsbernd: if i could procedurally hope this move along, if supervisor kim would withdraw her motion, i would like to motion to duplicate the file, and then amended version b -- and then amend version b and send both versions forward. president chiu: are you ok with that? supervisor elsbernd is making the motion, seconded by supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor elsbernd: we can move supervisor kim's amendments for version b. president chiu: again seconded by supervisor mirkarimi.

we will continue these two files to sit as a committee of the whole two weeks from today. before we vote on that, and the follow-up comments? supervisor kim: thank you for helping us move this along during the process. i want to actually recognize supervisor dufty, who was the original sponsor for this measure. i took over as sponsor after he departed the board of supervisors. i am coming in somewhat midway in this process. i am excited to see this finally going to the ballot. in answer to questions about feedback from the school district, there has not been a unified voice as to how people would like to see this amendment go forward. there have been several different perspectives, but also a look at how we could make this palatable for voters as well. some of the amendments, such as

allowing the district to set the compensation and putting in a maximum, so if the district wanted to be flexible about compensation they could decide that at the board -- i heard general support for that. there was also a strong, for some folks -- a strong messaging linked this would be linked to first-year teacher salary, kicking out the cpi indexing. i am open to keeping subsection . -- subsection d. this was put forward because there were concerns from supervisors about this coming out of the general fund. the school district offered to put this in their budget. if folks want to keep subsection d, that is something i would continue to support. i would still support the second draft of this measure as well. thank you so much for your

flexibility on this. if you have any questions, please contact our office. we are more than happy to answer questions. president chiu: can we take the motion without objection? that shall be the case. these items will be considered in committee of the hole in two weeks. can we now proceed to the adoption without committee reference text >> items 35 through 40 will be acted upon by a single roll call vote unless a member asks discussion of these items. president chiu: would anyone like to sever any items? supervisor elsbernd: 37. president chiu: if we could take a roll-call vote on items 35 through 40, except for item 37? supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor mirkarimi: aye.

supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. supervisor farrell: aye. >> there are 11 ayes. president chiu: item 37? >> resolution urging the governor of california to protect proposition 10 county funding, urging a permanent diversion of 50% of all future prop. 10 revenues. supervisor elsbernd: can i ask to continue this item to our next meeting? president chiu: seconded by supervisor mar. without objection, this item will be continued for two weeks. are there any in the mornings for this week? >> on behalf of supervisor

avalos, libyo cante and john ross. on behalf of president chui, jack baker. on behalf of the board, for the late carroll and marks. that includes the business for today. president chiu: we are adjourned for today.

th

>> we also have the chief of police and the director of the office of complaints. >> this is a regular meeting of the san francisco police commission. we have an lot of matters, primarily missing the matters. please call item number 1. >> the public is welcome to address the commission into tonight's agenda and within the

jurisdiction of the commission. oduring public comment, either police or the personnel or the commissioners are required to respond to questions by the public. the time limit is three minutes per person. >> good evening. i have been a resident of the county and city of san francisco for 40 years. i am here to speak about one item. i have a budget also on the line.

you can speak about police officers pay. this is a growing problem on the budget, not even in the city and county of san francisco but of course the state of california. i did not have benefits on this county and on this city to take care of cellulitis. i picked up an application for a federal police officers supplication at the va center and i will submit this copy to you to show that federal police officers have paid 20% less than san francisco police officers for the same job at the same qualifications. as you look for a new police chief, part of the problem is that you have submitted the

applications because every police chief including -- is coming here to get a paycheck. and he has taken $500,000 with him for 17 months of work. you have to start looking at that in light of the budget whole. when the biggest problems is that the police officers association pushing the 10% compound increases in pensions and salaries in this county that are impossible to meet in the next several years. i believe that you read a couple of days ago that it was caught with how police chiefs are leaving with half a million dollars and taking other jobs by cutting back pay. this is unconscionable with a commission of this nature. this is not stop of a repeat of

the county of san francisco. this is sickening compared with other work skills. i am leaving you with copies. >> my name is mr. harrison.

i was here and january 19th in regards to my brother who was murdered in the tenderloin district on january 2nd. as of this date, no one has been picked up or question in regards to my brother's murder. it is my understanding that there is video surveillance of the incident that took place and even with that information, still no one has been called to question as to what transpired in my brother's murder. in my family, we believe that this is a process that has taken a long time.

people seem to get more aggressive with police action when it comes to the committee. -- when it comes to police action. we would like to be continually updated on what has transpired. there are a few other weeks in which we don't get any calls. we keep coming down here and meeting with you all every wednesday until we see something moving forward with regards to my brother's death. that is all i have to say. if anyone has any questions or answers, please bring them forth. thank you.

>> i have passed on the concerns to the chief. next beaker. -- next speakers. >> -- took a $60,000 paid drop so the embellishment on numbers is very disturbing. and thank you. >> public comment is closed.