resolution and most likely will support that, but i think not to discount what supervisor elsbernd has put out there. i want there to be strong consideration of what the message supervisor elsbernd has shared with us not to go unnoticed. it is not just about the relationship with the national park service has applies to this question of whether they are pulling rank in a way that we find intrusive and that we want to resist. the total quality that i think has ensued in response to the national park service, such as the earlier version of this resolution, is something that had me quite concerned as well. we are working closely with them on ocean beach. the whole reason we are going through a complete master plan process in ocean beach was stimulated by both federal agencies, coastal commission,

one of which i participate on, and from the national park service's -- that is part of our jurisdiction as well. they have been incredibly helpful for us to envision an area that literally expands not just the beach was the golden gate park area, and we need them. the other sharp part, which has been on our radar for quite some time, and really a hot topic, as an undercurrent in us determining whether we want to strike a relationship that modifies how we govern sharp park, which is to the south of us in pacifica, because that is also adjacent to nps property, and could ggnra have a role in helping us with that. and other areas around san francisco, not to mention america's cup, which a number of us here have really helped tried to champion and help secure this. the bottom line is if we want our voices to be heard, i think

the tone is not simply to turn of the very people we are trying to compel into collaboration but look for the kind of tone that will sincerely bring him to that the killer table. that is what i like to see that discussion, and i think perhaps we might be there. supervisor chiu: any additional conversation, colleagues? first of all, we have supervisor wiener's motion to amend. can we take a roll-call vote on that motion? >> chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd no. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye.

there are 10 ayes. one no. supervisor chiu: motion passes. >> i believe the next item you will be calling the roll on were the amendments proposed by supervisor elsbernd. i would like to divide up items on page 3 and four, lines 24 and 25, on page four, lines one through 10 -- supervisor chiu: could you repeat that again? supervisor chu: i would like to divide out on the amendments proposed by supervisor elsbernd, beginning on page 3, lines 24 and 25, and also on page four, lines one through 10. these are lines pertaining to the board's urging of our recreation and parks department, improved response to the plan, and i think that is reasonable, given what we think the impact on our local parks. it also talks about asking the ggnra to provide a similar

response to this commons and it urges the recreation and park department and nps to work collaborative lead. i do not see anything wrong with that. supervisor chiu: you are asking us to vote separately on the last result clause? supervisor chu: to separate the items on page 3, lines 24 and 25, and page four, lines one through 10. i would like to vote on that separately. supervisor chiu: in other words, the last further resolved clause? is that correct? supervisor chu: i believe there are additional clauses that have amendments. i'm just talking about lines 24 and 25 on page 3 and 1310 on page four. -- and one through 10 on page four.

supervisor chiu: if we take a vote on supervisor elsbernd's proposed version except for everything that supervisor chu laid out. >> chu no. cohen no. elsbernd aye. farrell no. kim no. mar no. mirkarimi aye. wiener no. avalos no.

campos no. chiu no. their artillery or aye -- there are two ayes and nine nos. supervisor chiu: that motion fails. now, on the balance, as supervisor chu has asked us to vote on this. supervisor wiener: just a point, i am fine with adding the approach -- the additional language. i think it is appropriate to encourage dialogue with recon part and ggnra -- rec and park and ggnra. for clarification, if we could indicate where those three results would go, just for the benefit of the clerk in knowing how this is being amended.

i would suggest that those three go right before the final result in the current version, which indicates that the resolution should be sent to a number of people, so they should be right before that final period supervisor chiu: that is the motion we will be considering. if you could call the roll on that motion. >> chu aye. cohen aye elsbernd aye aye. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye. there are 11 ayes.

supervisor chiu: the motion passes. supervisor elsbernd: just on the item itself, the reason why i will continue to vote no -- i think what just happened is a perfect example of why i have real concern about this showing true dialogue. nine members of this board just voted against a whereas clause that says the ggnra has one of the highest numbers of engages species in the park system here nine members of the voyages voted against that. what does that tell the national park service? when nine of us disagree with that whereas clause? i have real concerns that this resolution as amended in showing this board of supervisors wants to work collaboratively with a basic whereas clause is rejected. i urge a no vote on the

resolution. supervisor wiener: i have to disagree with supervisor elsbernd's remarks. what was voted against was not a single sentence talking about that. it was a series of things, including eliminating our opposition to the current proposal and in terms of a number of other things as well. it is sort of like when you run a hit piece on a politician saying you voted for x when there were really 20,000 items in a big budget bill. i do not disagree -- excuse me, i do disagree with that characterization. supervisor avalos: i would agree with scott wiener. my vote was not against reality.

>> in response when supervisor chiu starts opening the door and divides was appropriate and what is not. is he simply voted no amendment, -- what did you park at exactly what you agree a way you did not. supervisor chiu: any further discussion? colleagues, if we could take a roll call vote on the underlying resolution as amended. >> chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd no. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye. there are 10 ayes, one no.

item four, resolution authorizing the exercise of an option to extend the lease of 1449 webster st. for three years for the office of economic and workforce development of foreign assistance programs. supervisor mirkarimi: a little change of tone. -- development employment assistance programs. supervisor mirkarimi: a little change of tone. i want to go very quickly in the fact that we are delighted that our one-stop jobs training center which i had mentioned in the committee is now being administered by goodwill and an organization called manpower. this is important to understand that this is a post- redevelopment world in the western addition, the fillmore, and japan town, and a lot of the job training and placement that had been the custom for several decades in this area typically result -- revolve around

construction jobs, around fast food restaurants, brown grocery stores like safeway and little vision for job-training and placement had existed in trying to get people of our community into permanent job tracks the on maybe just seasonal work or work that would pay less than a living wage. so i am pleased to see that we have some real pros in the western addition fillmore area who are really taking the center. we had a soft opening last week. very exciting, but it is also exciting, not just about those looking for a job, but those coming out of a prison system, the jails, who need an effective as for to help them gain effective reentry, and that, i think, is why it is essential to celebrate the opening of a job training and placement center like this. i think this is obviously a no- brainer, but i just want to preface that we are excited that this is happening. supervisor chiu: any additional

discussion? roll call vote on this item. >> on item four, chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd aye. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye. there are 11 ayes. supervisor chiu: this resolution is adopted. >> item 5, ordinance of many public works code declaring illegal dumping on public property a nuisance and providing a mechanism for abatement and enforcement. supervisor cohen: thank you very much. i just had a few minor amendments to offer today, which actually come to me at the suggestion of various city staff. the amendments before you are simply to clarify that a variety

of municipal codes and agencies may be employed in the city's effort to combat illegal dumping. this insures that we potentially have the services of either the district attorney's office and the city attorney's office at our disposal that any potential litigation stemming from this ordinance, and i humbly ask for your support today. thank you. supervisor chiu: supervisor cohen has asked to amend her ordinance. seconded by supervisor campos. any objections to the amendments? without objection, the amendments will be adopted. supervisor chu: i would just like to be added as a co- sponsor. supervisor chiu: any further discussion? avalos i would like to be added as a co-sponsor as well, and i want to thank supervisors cohen for her work on this. supervisor chiu: can we take the same house, call?

without objection, the ordinance is passed as amended. >> item 6, ordinance amending the public works and police could regarding posting of signs on city property and increasing penalties and enforcement. supervisor mirkarimi: i wanted to thank supervisors wiener for his co-sponsor ship. -- thanks supervisor wiener for his co sponsorship of this. i think this helps streamline what the law should be. department public works has been looking for this enhanced tool, and that is exactly what this ordinance does. supervisor chiu: colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, the ordinance is passed on first reading. why don't we skip across the 3:00 special orders that we have, and it 3:00 -- the 3:34 " special orders for the a corporate time, and to the

committee reports. item 15. >> items 15 and 16 were considered by the rules committee at a regular meeting on april 1. 15 is a motion appointing supervisor david campos, a term ending february 10, 2015, to the metropolitan transportation commission. supervisor chiu: ken will have a motion to excuse supervisor campos -- can we have a motion to excuse supervisor campos? colleagues, can we have a roll call vote on this motion. >> chu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd aye. farrell aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. chiu aye. there are 10 ayes supervisor chiu: chiu this motion is

approved. item 16. >> item 16 is the reappointment of gary lead to the minister of transportation board of directors, a term ending march 1, 2015. on item 16, chu aye. cohen aye elsberndaye aye -- cohen aye. elsbernd aye. kim aye. mar aye. mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. chiu aye. campos aye. there are 11 ayes. item 17 was considered by the city operations and neighborhood services committee at a regular meeting on monday april 25 and was recommended as a committee report. it is an ordinance waving the public works code which imposes temporary street space occupancy fees on saturday, may 7, 2011,

and saturday, may 21, 2011, for certain streets in san francisco as part of small business week sidewalk sales. supervisor chiu: colleagues, same house, call? supervisor avalos? supervisor avalos: just wanted to say that this resolution will make possible an earlier date for the arts walk festival, which will be the first event for small business week, a week before small business week. it will be may 7 at 6:00. our district 11 arts what event is really a wonderful event. lots of artists from the neighborhood come out. we have hundreds of people on the sidewalks. we have done on the mission street, two on mission and one on ocean avenue. this will be the second on ocean avenue. what we have achieved in terms of participation from local merchants, resident artists and young people who are volunteering has been a tremendous success. if you guys could all come out,

it would be wonderful to see. supervisor chiu: colleagues, can we take this item same house, call? without objection, this ordinance is passed on the first reading. we could now go to roll call. supervisor chu: i will submit my items. >> thank you. supervisor wiener: submit. supervisor farrell: thank you. just one item, following up on my legislation i introduced last week regarding our stock options here in san francisco. i have spent the last week in a lot of dialogue with our technology and business community. obviously, the goal is to protect the future of our city while at the same time making sure we do not have any budget implications in the near term. i want to thank all the executive investors and members of both our private technology community and the public companies i have spoken with,

and having a dialogue about what is the best option moving forward. i am submitting legislation and an amendment today to ensure that we do not create a hole in our budget going forward, but again, continue to protect the future of our city, future of our technology community and where our jobs are going to be. thank you very much. supervisor campos: colleagues, i have a number of items. the first couple of items are hearing requests -- one is a hearing requests on the budget and legislative analyst's 2011 audit work plan. the second is a hearing request on the performance audit of the city advertising practices. this was conducted by the budget and legislative analyst, and i am asking that these hearings is that the government audit and oversight committee. the last hearing request is a hearing request that i am submitting along with supervisor mar.

i want to thank my office as well as supervisor mar and his officers have been working on this a long time, as well as the progressive workers alliance, especially the chinese progress of workers' association and young workers united, who have been working with us on this issue. this hearing request is being sought for the purpose of addressing the crisis with in san francisco. common forms of wage that are non payment of overtime, not paying for all hours worked, not paying the minimum wage, making legal deductions from workers' paychecks and not paying a worker at all. academic studies have found that wage that costs not only workers, but the entire -- our entire society billions of

dollars in legally mandated wages each year. wage death also harms responsible businesses and governments by creating unfair competition -- wage theft. national studies report that it is the pervasive problem that disproportionately affect immigrant and low-wage workers. for example, a national study of 4000 workers in chicago, new york, and los angeles conducted by the national employment law project found that 26% of those workers had been paid less than minimum wage in the preceding week and the 76% had either been underpaid or not paid at all for their overtime hours. likewise, a recent report by the chinese progressive association here in san francisco focusing on workers in chinatown restaurants found that one of every two workers was not earning the minimum wage. according to the nlp, as stated

in their recent manual, wage that is not incidental or rare or committed by a feud broke employers -- rose to employers. it takes place in industries that span the economy including retail, restaurants, and grocery stores, caregiver industries like home health care and domestic work, blue-collar industries such as manufacturing, construction, and wholesalers, building services like janitorial and security, and personal services like dry cleaning and laundry, car washes, and beauty and nail salons. we in san francisco are fortunate that we have a local office of labor standards and enforcement that is in charge of enforcing our local minimum-wage of $9.92 an hour. our paid sick leave ordinance, and the employer expenditure requirement of the health care securities ordinance. in fact, since the minimum wage ordinance went into effect in

san francisco in 2004, the office has recovered $4,199,000 in back wages for 2500 san francisco workers. very impressive numbers. but while it is effectively recovering wages for a large portion of san francisco, the process has been less than effective where employers have refused to voluntarily settle cases with the office. i recently asked the budget analyst to prepare a report comparing the office's investigation and hearing process with the process conducted by the state division of labor standards enforcement. the report found fed has conducted formal administrative hearings in five cases during the last seven years that the minimum wage law has been in effect, compared to 402 cases during that time by the state

agency in 2009 alone. moreover, for the five cases that went to hearing, the average amount of time between the date of complaint received and the date of hearing that was actually held was 780 days, costing the city an average of $52,000 per hearing. furthermore, while wage that is a crime under both the california label -- labor and pill could, offices tell advocates that wage that is a civil matter that the department will not address. similarly, the district attorney has investigated very few cases and has only arrested employers after tremendous delay and after losing contact with many of the victims. finally, the office does not investigate claims of workers who do not have an obvious san

francisco minimum-wage violations. these workers include day laborers and other workers who have been promised wages above the san francisco minimum-wage but were not paid what they were promised. i want this hearing to focus on the following -- as the office investigate and as the hearing process that we have in place serve our workers, especially those who work for employers that do not immediately cooperate with the agency? second, how can the city improve the hearing process so it no longer involves such long delays and great expense? third, what is the san francisco police department and district attorney's office doing to address the crisis? fourth, why do investigations by the district attorney involving wage theft involve such long delays? finally, how can other san

francisco agencies like the san francisco department of public health, the city attorney's office, and the treasurer and tax collector help to address this issue? the rest i submit -- ashley, if i may just have an -- actually, if i may just have an in memoriam that i forgot. center work for the city at the public utilities commission and -- sandra worked for the city at the public utilities commission. for those of us who had the opportunity to work with her, she was just an amazing individual, one of the most professional people you will need in government. her work included regulatory issues related to ensuring reasonable rates for pg&e customers and protecting the city's right to serve electricity. very few people have done more

on that issue. she provided expert testimony on behalf of the city at both the california puc and the federal agency federal energy regulatory commission. she worked on many business issues related to the city's electricity service, especially the contract with pg&e, including the city's right to provide electricity to the ferry building. i, as a deputy city attorney, represented the city on that effort, and it was an honor and pleasure to work with someone of her caliber. in her work, she was smart, passionate, and highly motivated. she was highly valued and loved by her colleagues at the puc and at the city attorney's office. we will miss her and we sent her family our condolences. may she rest in peace. the rest i will submit. supervisor chiu: today, i have a couple items.

a number of weeks ago at weeksgao -- a couple weeks ago at our gao committee, we learned that over time continues to be an issue plaguing the city. as part of the hearing, we learn that our fire department exceeded their overtime budget by almost 1/3 of their budget. mta exceeded their budget by 10%. as we look to keep down our costs, we learned that in the administrative code, employees who work overtime hours that exceed 30% of a number of hours they are scheduled to work need to get an exemption from human resources. there are still scores of employees that work that level of ours. this is equivalent to an employee working 80 hours a week for almost four months before they need to get an exemption to continue to work more overtime hours. today, i am introducing legislation that would amend that number to