machine, what do you produce in limited edition? >> there is the slot machine. if you win the super jackpot, you have saved the world. >> what about work? >> the right design, it was three volumes with lithographs in each volume. the cab of count dracula with 20 lithographs inside and lined with beaver fur. really special. >> let's move on to the print shop. >> ok. the core of what we do is making things. this is an example. this is a print project that will be a fund-raiser for the contemporary music players. we decided to put it in the portfolio so you could either frame at or have it on your bookshelf. >> so nonprofits can come to you, not just visual are nonprofits, but just nonprofits can come to you, and you will

produce prints for them to sell, and the profits, they can keep. >> the return on investment is usually four times to 10 times the amount of investment. this is for the bio reserve in mexico, and this is one of the artists we represent. >> you also make prints for the artists that you represent. over here are some large prints by a phenomenal artist. >> he writes these beautiful things. anyone who has told you paradise is a book of rules is -- has only appeared through the windows. this is from all over coffee. we are contract printers for all kinds of organizations all across the country. >> thank you very much for showing us around today. i really appreciate you taking the time to let me get better acquainted with the operation and also to share with our

"culturewire" team.

president chiu: good afternoon, welcome to the board of supervisors meeting for tuesday, june 21. [roll call] mr. president, all members are present. president chiu: ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, would you please join us in the pledge of allegiance?

colleagues, we have our number of meeting minutes from the main tent and mail < meeting minutes. if i could get a motion to approve those minutes. without objection, they are approved. are there any communications? >> i have no communications, mr. president. these items will be acted upon by a single roll call vote unless a member requests discussion of the matter, which of be removed and considered separately. [roll call vote]

there are 11 aye's. president chiu: the ordinances' are finally passed. we have special guests in the chamber today. if we might be able to take item 55 out of order? >> of like to seek consent to waive privileged to have some very special guests. president chiu: wishes to waive the privilege of the floor, can we do that without objection? it shall be the case.

is there any public comment on this item? >> i like to welcome to the chamber is president chiu: -- the chambers -- president chiu: the clerk has to call the item. >> and designating june 21, 2011 as a summer learning day in the city and county of san francisco. president chiu: are there any members of the public that wish to make comments? supervisor mirkarimi: supervisor mirkarimmr. president, if i coug to introduce the people. it is always a pleasure to have young people involved in civic affairs. they got quite a lesson in the first amendment trying to produce this particular resolution with the taxis

glaring outside of city hall. -- blaring outside of city hall. >> my name is chardonnay. >> my name is semari. >> i'm kayla. >> [inaudible] it is the chant we made for summer learning day. >> what are you going to do this summer? i am going to have some fun.

what you consider fun? fruits and veggies make me strong all summer long. bmi friends are going to connect while working on our summer project. [applause] >> i'm david. >> i'm deon. we are from the summer program. [unintelligible] it is funny to me that they needed four hours to prepare for this meeting.

>> the money should be saved for student education. i agree with that statement because i feel the same. >> school budgeting. [unintelligible] and thank you for your time. [applause] >> just quickly, thank you again, supervisor mirkarimi, supervisor avalos, and supervisor mar for putting

forward this resolution. over the last few years we have focused on learning projects throughout the city, learning over the summer. that is a huge impact over the long haul. just today, if anybody had the opportunity to look beyond the stairs into the front door, we had a thousand kids from all over the city out celebrating and doing things for summer. we appreciate you doing this and we look forward to many more years of celebrating learning during the summertime. [applause] supervisor mirkarimi: mr. president, related to this particular item, it might be opportunity to take a roll call on this. president chiu: public comment on item 55 is closed, and at this moment, let's take a roll-

call vote on item 55. [roll call vote] there are 11 aye's. president chiu: the resolution is passed unanimously. colleagues, why don't we go to item 4? >> a doctor in the 2009 housing element of the san francisco general plan. president chiu: roll call vote,

please. [rollc al call vote] >> there are 8 aye's and 3 no's. president chiu: the ordinance is finally passed. >> item 5 is amending the planning code for the special use district located at 800 presidio avenue. and reflecting the boundaries of the presidio. president chiu: we need to

continue the site until later in the meeting after the four- o'clocks special. without objection, it shall be the case. madam kerr, items 6 through 9. >> the salary ordnance in the annual budget and appropriations ordnance for the fiscal years ending 2013. the enterprise department. item seven is the consolidated budget and ordnance for expenditures for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 for the enterprise department. item eight, resolution approving the interim budget for fiscal year of 11 and 12. item nine is a resolution approving the enter a budget of the island's development authority for fiscal years 2011 and 2012. president chiu: roll call vote. [roll call vote]

president chiu: supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim? [roll call vote continues] there are 11 aye's. president chiu: irresolutions are adopted into the interim budget is passed on the first reading. dodge the five-year information and communication technology plan for fiscal years 2011 through 2012 through 2015. president chiu: same house, same call. this item is adopted. >> state grant funds for the

department of public health for fiscal years 2011 and 2012. >> of this resolution is adopted. >> of this is from the budget and finance committee without recommendation. supervisor mirkarimi: i supported the program nearly three years ago, a number of folks here in the board did the same, who have since left of the board. sitting on the budget committee leading up to all of the anecdotal information i have been hearing about the status program led me to believe, like some many of you that i have been hearing through city hall that this program is a failure and that it should be dropped. that makes sense based upon the anecdotal information have been hearing.

the has made me take a look at another glance. the material that was submitted to us by the controller was limited in such a way that i did not think that it explained very well why it is not cost- effective or cost neutral. there is no division in the charter language or even in the city of what cost neutral means. it has been practiced, implemented in cities like san diego and los angeles. they have a--- definition of what it means. the limits our ability to be able to measure with the kind of accuracy what one would want. we are not planning any academy class is. it is pretty much mainstream bad. it is not likely to happen this

year and what is remaining in our budget process, probably even next year. the bill will affect of there being delayed opportunities in putting to work new recruits probably wouldn't even take form for almost three years in san francisco. we're looking at an attrition rate, probably 400 or 500 officers. this goes back to the original motivation of why we have given our support in the first place. without the kind of data, this is not cost neutral or is cost neutral. the fact that it is not be reasonable policy of justice that either help support it or doesn't, i think it only speaks to the need, and gives us a

better opportunity, the way it was scripted almost does a disservice onto itself because of how tightly wrapped that language was. itit was evident that when i wod ask questions, they could not extend the study because that was the interpretation of what was in the charter. in other cities like los angeles and san diego and houston, when we talk with them, they measure the efficacy much differently than we are today. so when i take a look at the numbers of what the l.a. cost is -- what the outlay cost is for us to not put a recruit through the academy, not be able to subsidize somebody on probation once they leave the

academy to the field training program, there is really no other mechanism to bring in new offices unless it is lateral hiring, which they will have to commit a significant amount of resources for background investigations, and they need to do that anyway. civilianization, which has been painfully slow, and which is probably a good move, but civilianization in the years that i have been on the board has been moving not at a very good pace at all in the police department or academy glasses. to me, we arrive at one juncture, which is that we extend the program that gives us better information and that we instruct conditions here today to the controller that gives us what that yardstick should look like in measuring much more effectively. by us not doing that, we have

the conversation about extending it, but to me, it seems premature that we would drop this or kill it now without answering some hard questions. i see a very senior member of the police department right there. supervisorpresident chiu: if yoo step up to the microphone? supervisor mirkarimi: your here just as the captain, correct? how long have you been with the police department? 40 years? how can you put the microphone a little closer to you. i think it is important, because except for the union representation that we heard

here, the limited conversation of data that we got, from the comptroller and various actuaries on both sides, coming what you think since you have been there 40 years, a long time. you must have joined as a child. what you think about where the program is right now. and what do you think will be the appropriate step to moving forward >> i have been through the cycles of the police department, and this is not unlike the cycle of the late 1970's early 1980's. it is basically a kind of a cycle that we get into where this kind of band if you do, damned if you don't. we created this, i would not have written the program, but

i'd think we have put ourselves , we are extended to get through this cycle that is occurring. the next thing we need to do is make sure that when we get through it, we will the engine of the city by hiring class is on a regular basis so that we don't get into this mass hiring, a mass exit cycle that keeps recurring. and during my career, it has occurred at four times. i can tell you that, that is my feeling. again, i just say that we find ourselves in a box and my thing would be to extend it not the full amount of time, but enough so that we get through the time of the economic slump.

>> i know you know a little bit about this, which is why i am taking it vantage of this. they actually have a different rule based on age in level of service that would be dissimilar from san francisco. if there was an opportunity to tweak this program, with the issue be cost-effective or cost neutral? will that make a difference? >> it is the secret that the asia should of been 30 years of service and age 55. of think there would have been any issue there. >> that hasn't been studied? >> i don't think so. >> i understand how easy this might be for a number of people, including myself and the discovery that i think it was

bad information, incomplete information. not bad. incomplete. my colleague was against this and i expect him to be consistent. i know that when that was the case, back then, the proof would have to be in the pudding in the burden, in my opinion, has not been established yet. continuing this on for 18 months, i think it is not correct. a year that gives us a proper reading like with what the other cities are doing would be to correct courts. it has been the desire to just tried to kill this. but based on the information, i think there is reason to put that on pause. president chiu: any additional

discussion? >> hall was going to give an opportunity to speak, but i would motion that there would be a one-year extension of this program and that is part of the findings. the information has been provided to us and is incomplete or vague. president chiu: he is making an amendment to the motion that this program be continued for a year out to june 21, 2012. is there a second to that motion? supervisor campos?

ok, he has seconded the motion. supervisor elsbernd: i was hoping not to stand up, i did not think there was going to be a second for a motion that is so irresponsible. the documentation is not there. i sit on the retirement board with the president, and every three meetings we get the exact documentation presented to us. how many people have applied, what age group they are in, how much for the they could have gone. the comptroller has tabulated all that information for us. it is in that report. respectfully, all of the information you need is right there. the notion that cost neutral isn't a fine, i don't need a definition to tell me what cost neutral means.

money comes in, money comes out, if it is neutral, it is neutral. i don't need a definition to tell me what caused neutral is. this program is not cost neutral. it cost us more money. it is not cost neutral. it will cost at least five or $6 million a year more. our employer contribution will go up by at least a quarter of a percent. there is no debate here, it is not cost control. to say that we extend it for nine months or whatever it may be, we need more information to demonstrate that is not cost neutral. respectfully, supervisor, this is not the way to go. and i think he really hit the nail on the head in budget committee which he appropriately set all the work that the city has come together to do on the

notion of pension reform and benefit reform, the massive liabilities to take us in this direction would be the exact opposite way to go. this is not a smart program and it needs to go away. extending it any longer and spending any more money on this would be a waste. if you want to spend fiver $6 million, put them in the lateral class's or let's put them into some of the health clinics we are closing. that put them in some of the park that will not have gardners. there are a lot of ways to spend those dollars a ban on a program that is proven not to work. >> let me explain my second. i second did it out of respect to supervisor mirkarimi. i disagree with his position on this.

i did support the program when it started, but i don't believe that this is the right way to go. i think that the issue of staffing is something that we have to look very carefully at. but i think this program is probably the last alterative i would support in terms of the kinds of strategies and i would support the maintain the level of staffing that is needed. i would be more supportive of going down the route of funding, supporting a proper program. there are requirements that have not been met. i think if you speak to the controller's office, and the efforts around yet, it is one of the areas where a lot more can be done. and the extent to get to this right level of staffing, those areas are the way to go.