that when he wrote making the expenditures, the idea was that it would be made so health care could be provided to the employee. we are trying to clarify that in a common-sense way. president o'brien: thank you. commissioner o'conner: a couple of questions or points to you, supervisor campos. some people here in the room were involved with the development of the legislation. some much more so than others. i at the time served on this task force the mayor created. i would like to address a couple points going back to that time. i think they are relevant to this time and to making healthy san francisco work as best as possible. i am not sure to what degree you

followed it before you became supervisor. the process was ridiculously fast. it was set with a 60 day window of time line by the mayor and supervisor amiano. among the various hearings we have here on this commission, i do not know if any commissioners here were on the commission at that time. there were a lot of hearings here, as well as -- i do not actually think there was much of a hearing at this board of supervisors. various things that i brought up at the time are that the weight it is written we are not going to raise the amount of money we need to provide the spirit or the goal of the program. there were way too many loopholes, many that i brought

up. i think the 20-person marker has a lot of issues. the lot of businesses want to make sure they stay under that cap. that is loss of revenue. this was so predictable, this one. the other issues of how many of these businesses have skirted right out to south of san francisco -- i know several. it was all predictable. it was all done way too fast, quite frankly, so that our former mayor had some trophy for his statewide campaign, in my opinion. i keep it real. there are some anythings in this legislation that need to be reworked to create the best possible healthy san francisco

for san franciscans, for workers. if i am going to pay into it, like i do -- i do not know if any other commissioners pay into it. i do not know how many people in this room pay into it. i pay into it. i want it to work. i want it to be good. also, the people who are behind the scenes -- none of this is transparent. it all got written behind the scenes. every issue i brought a at this task force was completely ignored from a small business perspective. and here we all are, as i knew we would be. i knew i would be able to sit here and say what i am saying right now. do it right. make something that works so that -- it was great that it got done. it was great there was the political will at the time. but now is a time to take a look

back. you are going to be a supervisor for i do not know how many years, but you will be here for a little while. you inherited the seat of a supervisor who did a lot of heavy lifting. keep your eye on the ball with this issue. this is not going to be the last time this issue comes before you. it is going to keep coming before you to make it as good as possible. supervisor campos: i appreciate the perspective, commissioner. i think it is important for us to have these discussions. what i would say is i understand that we need to go back and look at these issues. it is important to clarify that i am not here tore- debate the question of whether or not we should have -- i am not here to re-debate the question of whether or not we should have helped the san francisco. -- healthy san francisco.

that ship has sale. for me, it is how we make rules that make sense and are fair and how they are applied. but clearly, the issues around health care are big issues. and by the way, it is not just this specific issue. we have spent a lot of time working on these issues. we put forward a health services master plan so the city could do a better job at looking at the entirety of our need not only as a city, but neighborhood by neighborhood. we are looking at some of the practices that hospitals are engaging in. that in turn is impacting health-care rates, which are a big reason why some of the businesses are facing some of the challenges they are facing. we need to continue to deal with this issue as a city. but from my perspective i have to represent the entirety of my district, all of district 9, and

i have to make sure there is a level playing field so that all businesses are following the same rules and competing under the same guidelines. that is what a big part of this is about for me. commissioner dooley: i was wondering how this would affect an employee who would leave san francisco. supervisor campos: by the way, i wanted to acknowledge that i know the room full of people have been waiting to speak. i want to thank the people on both sides of this issue for taking the time to be at this meeting. >> with respect to the money that is placed into health reimbursement accounts, the ordinance clarifies requirements about the amount of money put into these accounts. the employer puts the money into

the account for the worker and that remains available. that would be true if the worker is no longer working there or if the worker moves out of san francisco. essentially, the employer put that money into an account for the worker. it essentially would be available to the worker into the future. it is analogous bank accounts. commissioner dooley: is that a lifetime benefit? >> as written, yes. help savings accounts work the same way. that money is held in trust by a bank. it is yours in perpetuity, regardless of where you live. commissioner kasselman: i have to follow up on that. what about members of healthy san francisco that leave the

city? >> if a medical reimbursement is established for an employee and that employee moves, it does not matter if they reside in san francisco or another county. that account is still eligible to be withdrawn by that employee. they can go online in any state or county they live in and pulled down the information and submit a form for reimbursement respective of the county they live in. commissioner kasselman: and the hillary ronen -- healthy san francisco portion of your program? >> that is only available for individuals who reside in san francisco. if they move outside of the county but are still working for that employer, what will happen is that any future deposits on behalf of that employee will be subject to a newly created --

will be put into a newly created mra once they have left the city as their city of residence, if they are still working for that employer. commissioner kasselman: the onus is on the resident to notify of address changes? how does the account follow them? >> the account follows them because it is an online account. an account was created for them on line, so they can access information on their account at any given time. if they have an address change, so that they have to inform us of a change in the address for the quarterly statement, they can make that address change on line, or they can also call our dedicated employee call center and give us the updated address. commissioner kasselman: if it is

never claimed, does it refer to the bank? >> it does not refer to the bank. if an account has been inactive for more than 18 months and the employer has not made a contribution and the employees have not withdrawn, those funds are then sent tothe employe egoe opportunity in the future to contact our nmra. >> in the meantime, if the unholy allows it to lapse, is the money used -- if the employee allows it to lapse, is the money it used by healthy san francisco? >> we can only use it for

healthy send francisco purposes superior -- healthy san francisco purposes. >> so that money is utilized by healthy san francisco? >> is utilized by healthy and san francisco. >> thank you for being so patient. that is one of the longer segments, so to echo supervisor campos, thank you for that. we will keep it to two minutes as much as we possibly can. there are quite a few people here, and it has gone on quite a bit. >> public comment will be limited to two minutes.

with the exception of one request, we will go in order that they are received. [list of names] you can line up on the side wall there. welcome. >> good evening, commissioners. i am with the workers alliance. i am speaking on behalf of this to -- miss hu. she has been restaurant owner for over 10 years. she is the mother of two. she never had health care, and she developed a pain in her leg. she was not able to be a doctor,

so the pain got worse. she was not able to -- only able to work part-time. my aunt died because she was not able to see a doctor for a curable disease. she is also an immigrant worker. low-wage workers need health care. everyone needs health care. when it is too late, people died. they are invisible, and that is why we need health care. we want to close this health care lupo, because we want to even the playing field. -- this health care loophole, because we want to even the playing field. thank you. >> two months in a row we have been here after 8:00. thank you.

a couple of words were used by the speaker's earlier. good thank you for your own legislation. gooone word you used was unintended consequences. there are some unintended consequences. small businesses as far as we know we're not even contacted to discuss this prior to the legislation. we do have some meetings scheduled going forward. i would like to paraphrase a little section 14.3 of this legislation, which indicates this carries over not only to the employees but to anyone else

related for future health-care expenses. i am paraphrasing. i do not get the. i think it is difficult. we need to do some long-term planning of how the legislation has been done. if you currently have 21 employees, what if times get tough? now you are down to 17 employees. do you still have to practice this going into perpetuity famines -- now perpetuity? i do not think small businessman. >> i am from the chamber of commerce. thank you for the time you have committed to this.

i was involved in the process six years ago, and the legislation was designed to give the legally required discretion to employers so as to not violate federal law. there was litigation on that point. the law was upheld as not violate the employer's right to create health insurance plans for their own use at their place of business. this will change that. this will raise the question of whether or not the city is compelling everyone to potentially redefine their health plans. in 2006, we had a 4% unemployment rate. we have over 9% today. last year showed san francisco had the highest population in

its history, yet we have 40,000 unemployed people in san francisco. business cannot afford this legislation in this economy today. if small business is the driver of economic growth, the reason we had 600,000 people employed in the year 2000 is because small business cannot carry on with these burdens and employ a san franciscan at the numbers we need to grow our working population. we look forward to meeting with supervisor campos in coming days and to see if there are no other ways as the benefits employers -- to see the benefits of employees -- employers give are

possible. are we leveling the possibility for small businesses to go bankrupt? [list of names] >> i am a small business employer very good i started my business 18 years ago, and my telephone calls and e-mails were never returned. i would question that they do enjoy use it or lose it. they spend 55%, never to be returned to the employer and the employee.

she did not reveal her growth plan, so what those she use? i have over 100 employees. we have always use the services appropriately and paid them out very good -- pay the knot. what we do is provide services for seniors. right now the service is so expensive that they are looking elsewhere, such as an independent contractor or someone who is not criminally background check, so we are able to reduce our cost to our consumers. you are driving businesses out. i think you have responsibility

to look everything, not things that happened so quickly that is as did not participate, and i ask that we do participate in this. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i am a third generation small business in sandford cisco. and i own an agency that -- in san francisco. give my own an agency that takes care of seniors. youi used that age are a -- usee hra. the average age of my workers is 50 years old. the person is going to cost me $600 a month in insurance. gooi am considered a large

business, so the difference is huge. i did not have an extra $30,000 -- $34,000 a month. you want me to come up with $34,000 a month to take care of seniors so they can stay in their home. i do not even make $2 million in billings. my expense is labor. i take a short as mark crup. we let our people use hra for anything they want. they have got a debit card. the insurance company sends them

on a quarterly basis how much they have in their accounts. some of those people only work five hours a week in san francisco but they put me over the threshold. i am considered a large business. i do not have the dollars to put up francois -- up front. >> thank you. >> we have been doing business for 25 years where a small company with slow growth. we have six stores. we cannot charge 4%, so we comply completely with the regulations.

we informed our people every quarter, and i am here to give a face to what this all means. this would cost us an extra quarter of a million dollars. the last thing is the city constantly creates legislation that is incentivize those -- dis incentivizes. we are actually at the 100-

employee number, and the first thing we have to do is to retreat from that. this legislation -- what it does is it takes jobs away from san franciscans in a real way, and i am here to represent that. 40 jobs will be lost. i can guarantee that. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i also own of home care business, and thank you for the opportunity to address you this evening curio -- this evening. we observe the experience of the law. we have never had a complaint about the ability to collect. we assist them with a computer in office if they needed. we roll their funds over. we use an administrator for

distribution of funds, but when you talk about consequences, the third-party administrator is that way for free. before you pass on additional expenses, i would like you to look at it carefully, because there will be consequences. our administration costs will go up to keep track arafat and to submit it to the third-party administrator -- keep track of that and submitted to the third- party administrator, and when you talk about unintended consequences, it has gone and every year for three years, but my rate of service has not been able to go up, and my competitors are sending

caregiver's into the city at a lower rate of pay. i am losing market share, and some of those are going to the underground. the city is not getting any benefit outside the city or in the private sector. i can send the caregiver's out there. i can make the same amount of money, but there will be no hra funds going into the city. i am asking you to take a look at what is going to happen. >> thank you very much. go ahead. >> our family has been in the sporting goods industry for three generations.

we comply with health the san francisco. we have never had any problems, and i think it is very important to not focus on the restaurant business. and we are not able to raise our prices. if you want to come into our store and buy jordans, they are $100 all over the country. you are not going to be able to sell them at $111 in san francisco. we have 50 people signed up for a healthy seven francisco. they are all over -- all over 18. most of our employees has been with us a decade full-time common so they comply -- full time, so we complied. and really we have to enforce

the laws we have, get everyone involved and make sure the city spends money to make sure everyone is getting the right to notifications and the right dollars a. if you get sick in january, we are fronting employees who need money. there are ways to help your employees. people who care health their employees. let's not punish people. you cannot take an industry like us that is 3% to 5% net profit and imposed a 10% to 15% wage increase. >> if you can state your name clearly so we can have it for

the record. some speakers were not here, and we need to keep track. >> i will not echo the same things my colleagues mentioned, but i see how the san francisco wants to make employers as a last resort, and we are ok with that, but to make san francisco healthy, you need to give the opportunity minister -- to manage that risk. give them incentives to put in employees that are healthy, but are sweeping off all the money and sending but off into a permanent new lifetime pension fund, you are asking the employers to