supportive, and we are happy being able to work with the collaborative in their outreach efforts to make sure that in particular in the restaurant community, they are aware of this issue and are complying with the law. president o'brien: thank you. director? >> yes, i just wanted to -- how do i want to say this proves to bring a thought you just hit if there is any additional comments you would like to make. while i think director of love it said that we could perhaps you some creative ways in dealing with -- director levitt said that, if this does add to their time, could it possibly then affect the cost of the

permit in fees that the restaurant pays to the health department in terms of their increased costs and time as far as doing inspections in the department? so just to noted there is anything on record you want to make in relationship to any potential impact on fees. president o'brien: all right. >> that may not be necessary, but i am just noting that since in our permanent committee, we are very conscious of how fees become increased, i just wanted to make a note of that. >> and i just wanted to clarify that there is nothing in this that requires them to work with the department's public health to investigate restaurants in any particular way, so to the extent that that is a concern, then we are already partnering with the department public health in order for the

department to look into wage that issues when they are doing health inspections. president o'brien: commissioner clyde? commissioner clyde: i receive my and will notice of the wage increase, and it says right on it that it needs to be prominently placed. i do not know if inspector is looking at those or not, but it is already very clear. i also know that the health department is charged now with inspecting workman's comp insurance. i think we have to provide proof if requested, and it has never been requested, but i believe that is now the case, it and it did not incur i believe any change in our feet, at least at this time. i guess that is something we can ask. >> a note for the record. president o'brien: supervisor campos: -- president o'brien: i

totally get what you are saying. i think we are all going to support this legislation, and i am looking at how we will phrase it. >> you do not necessarily have to. i did not want to redirect the direction the commission was going in, and you do not necessarily have to note of it in the motion, but it could be just an additional comment. president o'brien: right, and i think what i am hearing is a concern, which is why i asked about the budget in aspect, because i do not want the cost of government to increase and then have that translated into costs to businesses and an inflation. this is one the most expensive places, so i do not think we can phrase anything, but let's just have it on the record that we

want to try to have this work more efficiently, with the emphasis on efficiency with the resources available -- that aren't available as opposed to incurring more costs is, i think, what we're saying. but region >> when we have noncompliant employers, there are fines that good to them for their ongoing enforcement efforts, and should a business been noncompliance, there would be funding and there to offset the fee. >> the fee is going up, so it is going up to $1,000. >> the fine for retaliation specifically. >> director, would you mind clarifying that for us? >> recovered for violation of labor laws from the city general fund.

ok. i stand corrected. interesting. cost -- president o'brien: is that what you're talking about? >> yes. >> the money will revert back for use to enforce the minimum wage laws. that is one of the parts of our ordinance. president o'brien: ok, well can we get a motion? anybody object? seeing none, the motion is passed. next item.

clerk: commissioners, you are on item number nine, a presentation by cost -- by zoe polk. >> on april 14 of this year, our commission voted unanimously for

a proposal to at a convention records to the nondiscrimination ordinance, and since that time, they have been working with community groups to put together a forums where we get input. in addition, we have been working with compliance. so we looked at models in other jurisdictions, including seattle, washington, madison, and the states of massachusetts and pennsylvania. all of these have similar legislation in place. we now know that in order to best meet the needs of those of san francisco, i am here tonight to us the small business commission to co-host a forum with the purpose of getting input from small-business owners and employees of up to best craft it compliance guidelines. this is just the beginning of an

outreach effort that is being done in order to get proper input. i understand that the commissioners have received in their pocket a couple of documents that outlined the action item, so i do not want to take up too much fine -- time. second, i want to go over the draft language of the proposal which i distributed to you, and then i want to talk about getting input for the compliance guidelines. so the general mandate over this issue. the human rights commission works to provide leadership and to procure, protect, and promote human rights for all people. it includes mediation, implementation and enforcement of the equal benefits ordinance, insuring compliance with the

business enterprise ordinance, development and administration of the city's hate-violence. in san francisco, discrimination is provided on the basis of race, gender identity, miracle status, weight, height, among other categories. -- marriage status. there are several reasons why we are committed to this issue, including alarming recidivism, which will in turn reduce the costs to the city, and public safety, but for our purposes tonight, i want to focus again on the conviction records and what that looks like. first, a couple of statistics i want to share with you. almost 7 million people in california have a misdemeanor arrest or conviction record. they often face blank denials for employment or housing.

people with a conviction record do not need to apply. further, a disproportionate representation of african- americans and latinos in the justice system has resulted in discrimination of communities of color. according to the department of justice, one-third of felony arrests leads to a conviction. the human rights commission has a concern boat. it is despite whether the crime is a violent are non-violent, a misdemeanor or not, that they are not fit to join the work force. this is contrary to those who have served their time and paid their debt to society. background checks. often people do not know that they have incorrect information on their background reports, and it may take significant time to correct them. in adopting this type of

nondiscrimination ordinance. i will talk about this in more detail in a minute, and now i want to highlight that it is already prohibited to discriminate against people with conviction records under title 7 of the discrimination act. it already requires, federal legislation, it already requires an individual assessment. employers will be complying with the san francisco ordinance because it requires an assessment, much like title 7, and performing the background check after the individual is already qualified. the human rights commission compliance guidelines will outline a process to help with the enforcement. we have an excellent track record of negotiating solutions.

i want to emphasize that we have several community partners and government partners who are working with us on that. the office of work force development. a list of the financial incentives for small business, and i want to enumerate those now, but what i am hoping with the action items if the commission approves it, laying out those specific incentives to the small-business owners who might come to a forum. so this ordinance would be cost savings because a background check would only be done for qualified applicants. it would create a forum for employers and help assure that they are hiring the most qualified people and are not limiting the applicant on all by saying those with a conviction do not need to apply. special programs exist for people who hire those with past

convictions. it protects against employee dishonesty, which includes theft and investment. it also makes tax credits available, which reduces the employer federal tax liability per worker. they can clean this tax credit for two years, and there is no limit on how many people they can claim. this is within one year after being released from prison. i want to emphasize that this has not been introduced. this is just a proposal. my understanding that this is language that supervisor mirkarimi and his office are reviewing. what this legislation basically says is it outlines a couple of things. i do not want to go into detail, but i did want to go over the mentality. employers would be prohibited

for relying on arrest records. number two, they can inquire about a conviction once and output has been determined to be otherwise qualify. 3 come on they cannot base the employment on the conviction is that is substantially related to the job. the applicant must be provided with a background check report. 5, this law would not apply to businesses with five or fewer employees. 6, nothing in this law would prohibit an inquiry decision which is based on local, federal, or state law. now, my purpose here tonight is to talk to you a little bit about what we are doing. our work is primarily hosting forums in the community. these are married efforts in that we are hoping that these will go to help determine these

guidelines. looking at other jurisdictions i listed before, pennsylvania, wisconsin, we are looking at how do you make this assessment? how do you determine if the conviction is substantially related to the job? and then we have concrete examples, and then also kind of laying up the process. in addition to speaking with you and other stakeholders so far, we have met with the housing authority and the office of housing contractors, and there was the san francisco chamber of commerce. i actually spoke with them this morning, and i believe we will be meeting with them by the end of the month. the small business advisor council. so i shared with the small business commission staff what we put together with the stakeholders, and they actually gave me input about the forums,

so what i want to ask is if the commissioners would be willing to co-host the forum with us, to make sure that they give their input on this kind of legislative proposal, and i just want to highlight the simple forms, sample application form, a sample letter requesting additional information if you want to obtain more information about the rehabilitation process, or letters of recommendation or anything that might give you more information or evidence of how a conviction is related to the job. we can hopefully provide those forms with in the compliance guidelines. again, we are looking for stakeholders to give us what they need in the compliance guidelines. in conclusion, i want to take

any questions from the commission. this is to ask you to cohosts the forum to find out what the need is in terms of the employers and employees. thank you. president o'brien: any questions from any commissioners? ok, thank you for the presentation. >> thank you. >> commissioners, we agendized an item. the commission cannot just direct staff to work on the outreach with them. president o'brien: yes, i do want to make one comment. i do not want to make it long because it is late. the tests that some of the conviction is somehow related to the job they are applying for. i do not want to see an employer having his decision being questioned as to whether he thinks a conviction is

relevant to the position of the job that he is applying for. i think it would be more important that they have the latitude to determine whether or not the conviction is a serious enough offense to say they are not comfortable working with the person. just a comment i want to make. i think you should work on the program, and we will work more on it. >> we need to move to public comment. president o'brien: i am sorry. public comment. clerk: i have one speaker card. >> i am wearing more than one hat. i will be brief. i have been a small-business owner for over 40 years, if you include deliver the bulletin, and i do not think any of you are old enough to remember that. my second hat is i am formerly incarcerated. i served years in federal prison for a marijuana conviction. last year, a worked with the reentry council on civil

engagement, and i do not want to give you a litany of anecdotal experiences, but i am coming to truly wearing two hats as a san franciscan, because i would urge you to participate in this process. as a small-business owner, the legislation that will be proposed, i would be covered, because i have the five employees or less legislation -- it would not be covered under the human rights commission. above five employees, there is a process we are working. so i think what my main message to the commission is the case you are the small business commission for our city, and you do have a tremendous influence among the small business community is that there is nothing to be afraid of. one of the primary concerns of

any small business person is the unknown deaf ear, and i am coming to you today, and i know you were all tired, to assure you the process that is being undertaken is really for the benefit of small business -- small-business owners, not a detriment, to give them the best possible pool of not only competent but exceptional workers. that is my contribution to your consideration. president o'brien: thank you very much. next speaker. >> thank you. i did not realize how late you guys were , so the thank you. you guys should put that in the public record or something. i am here to speak on this legislation are possible legislation because i, too, have two cats. i am the convict and a small-

business owner. when i got out of prison, i could not find a job. i would work, you know, cash jobs, and sometimes i would not get paid. what are you going to do? fortunately, i had the opportunity to get a line level hospitality job. i worked my way up through management, and when i got out, i did not even know how to use a facts machine. i to though can attest as a small-business owner how hard it is for businesses in san francisco, and i definitely do not want this to be another burden to my fellows in the small business community. i do want to of communication to assure that this action becomes an additional resources to myself and the small business community and the work force. thankfully, i was given the opportunity.

if i was not given the opportunity, i may not be here right now. i might be in jail. i got a shock, and that shock has me here today. for the city of san francisco to allow a small box on a piece of paper to dictate who has a chance at their life into does not, so we're just too smart in san francisco and too compassionate to allow a little box on a piece of paper to determine whether or not you get a second chance in life, so thank you, and thank you for staying up so late tonight. president o'brien: thank you very much. any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i would suggest that we work with your office because i do feel this is important legislation to move forward here, and i appreciate these two gentlemen coming to speak on behalf at this -- behalf of this this late-night.

there are other associations in san francisco that would like to participate. >> so, commissioners, can we may be direct this to the legislation and policy committee for taking a look at it on a deeper level for the commission and and also possibly for the outreach committee vote to work on the outreach and working with hrc? >> .thank you. president o'brien: ok, next item, please. clerk: commissioners, item 10, an update and discussion on the san francisco planning department pavement to parts program, which will be continued to a future meeting. just to note, inside the left front cover is the legislation page report that you have requested.

>> commissioners, due to the late time frame, i will just submit to you the director's report in writing. clerk: commissioners, item 12, the letter is dated and policy committee report. commissioner: we have nothing new that was not discussed here tonight. clerk: item 13, the permitting committee report. commissioner: i have nothing. clerk: item number 14, the outreach committee report. commissioner: i will submit. clerk: item 15, the president's report. president o'brien: i have nothing to report. clerk: item 16, the vice president's report. commissioner adams: we had a

good event. janet. we had a great board of supervisors meeting. " i have been attending -- i went to the opening of super duper, which is a hamburger place in castro. it opened up their second location, which was fun and exciting, and i went to the 75th anniversary party a couple of weeks ago. family unscrewing clean family, same street. that is my report. commissioners, item 17, commission report. commissioner: just one last

thing. i met with people from chinatown, and there is a program for chinatown and north beach, so we are excited to get people out in visiting our local merchants. president o'brien: commissioner clyde? commissioner clyde: on may 23 with commissioner njn -- jane kim, they were meeting about the licenses for abc and a way to clarify those conditions when conditions are met. i did find supervisor kim very responsive to the needs of both the residents in the community as well as the business owners.

i also attended the mid market arts kickoff on at the 20th with mayor ed lee, and that was just a great get out in the street with music in the streets, even a a little bit of wine and beer in the streets. it was great fun. i also attended an awards party of the company on market, and i just want to note that it has grown in a year from four companies to know 160 companies that are a part of that. thank you very much. president o'brien: thank you. next item. clerk: item number 18, general public comment. president o'brien: seeing none,

next item. clerk: item number 19, new business. president o'brien: seeing none, next item. clerk: item number 20, adjournment. we are returned -- adjourned.