please share with us your announcements. >> if you wish to submit a copy of your presentation to the committee, please submit a copy. >> please call item one. >> item 1. resolution authorizing the office of treasurer-tax collector to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $240,000 from the earned assets resource network for kindergarten to college program participant incentive funds. supervisor avalos: great. >> good morning. i am with the treasurer-tax office. this is an accept and expend for the initial pilot years of the program. one of them is the dollar per dollar match funds up to $100, for a famine that saves up to $100. we will provide a dollar match

for that. the second is the $100 saved steady incentive. when a family has direct posit, we are going to provide another $100 to that account to provide an incentive. this provides the funding in order for us to have that. we would like to think the current assets resource network and the san francisco supervisors for doing this. supervisor avalos: is there any other general fund support? in last year's budget there was. >> there is a general fund support for the program, over all, but not for the incentives. in fact, the incentives are provided because the city is doing the $50 per student, $100 for students to qualify for free or reduced lunch. supervisor avalos: last year, it was a bit of a hot potato in the

budget. this year will be smooth sailing? >> that is my understanding. there have been no issues. supervisor avalos: the question last year was new program while we were cutting other services. in the end, we approved the program, which i think has great value for initiating savings in families. i thought it was a worthy program to support in the end. this year, it looks like it is going forward. very good. any other questions from the committee? public comment. >> good morning. my name is douglas yepp. i would like to speak out in favor of this item, but i have some cautionary statements. some of my neighbors were

concerned that the government was expanding its reach a bit too far. whatever explanation i gave them did not satisfy them. one of the concerns they mention is that there should be more emphasis on primary and secondary school education, rather than trying to expand the government's scope to college education. so in a sense, i tend to agree with them. if a child does not get a good primary and secondary education , whatever dollars you give them available for college will probably be wasted, even if the child showed interest in going to college. the other concern i have that some of my neighbors mentioned to me was whether there was any emphasis on vocational education. it is no secret we need more plumbers, engineers, etc., so i would like to offer some of my neighbors suggestions, that some

of the money be used for vocational education. by the time they graduate from high school, it should be clear sailing through the apprentice program, and then they would have jobs that could support their families in the future. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. motion moved forward without recommendation. voted to the full board with recommendation. please call item two. >> this will also go as a committee report. item 2. resolution authorizing the port of san francisco to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $7,783,556 from the department of homeland security, 2009 port security grant program fund, for the pier 27 cruise ship terminal security system at the port of san francisco.

>> good morning, mr. chairman. director of homeland security at the port of san francisco. i come to request approval of an accept and expend of $7,783,556 to install and maintain the infrastructure. supervisor avalos: thank you. public comment. >> good morning. my name is douglas yepp. i would like to speak in favor of this item. i know this may bother some people but in my discussions, it seems san francisco has been overlooked as a target for terrorists. some people think that no one would dare to damage san

francisco's reputation as a tolerant city, but i, among others, feel like our enemies might be bold enough to use our tolerance against us. this item should be approved, and it would be well-used, especially when there has been some emphasis on the federal level to inspect incoming cargo containers. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you. we will close public comment period moved forward as a committee report with recommendations. item three please. >> item 3. resolution authorizing the port of san francisco to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $1,612,357 from the department of homeland security, 2007 supplemental infrastructure protection port security grant program for homeland security improvements on the port's waterfront.

>> this is a three-part accept and expend authorization. pier 50 emergency power. there is no emergency power at this point. high-security sensing, phase three. that is continued installation of fencing throughout the court. and finally, building occupancy function program. this is a resiliency system to get our system on line after a disaster. supervisor avalos: thank you. we will open this up for public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues? motion moved forward with recommendations as a committee report for tomorrow's board meeting. without objection. thank you, colleagues.

that is our agenda. we are adjourned. >> hello. welcome to "culturewire." we are here today with bay area artist jody chanel, and we are here to see the plaza where your piece has just been

installed. >> i have been doing large-scale paintings in the galleries and museums, and the idea that in the future, i could do something that would hang out a little bit longer than the duration of the installation the kind of appeal to me. i quickly found out about the san francisco arts commission school and realized there was a pre-qualified school you had to apply to, so i applied to the. >> how long did it take you to develop this work for the plaza? >> this was a fast track project. design development was about a month. >> let's look at the beautiful mural. i have never seen a mural created on asphalt. >> the heat of the asphalt, a new layer of asphalt. then, these wire rope templates

that were fabricated for the line work get laid down and literally stamped into the asphalt, and then everything was hand-painted. >> maybe you could talk about some of the symbolism, maybe starting in the middle and working out. >> [inaudible] the flower of industry. >> it is like a compass. there's an arrow pointing north. >> within the great bear consolation, there are two pointed stars here. they typically lead one to the northstar, otherwise known as polaris. so i thought it has a layer of theme. >> let's talk about some of the other elements in the peace. we are walking along, and there is a weather vane. there's a sweet little bird hanging on the side. what kind of bird is that? >> [inaudible]

the smallest of the gulf species, and it lives around the bay area. >> you want to talk about the types of flour patterns that you send? >> [inaudible] around 1926 or so by the dahlia society. >> what is this bird here? >> that is the california quail. >> coming up here, we had a little blustery theme. what is this area here? >> this is supposed to be the side view, the expense of the golden gate bridge. >> there it is. >> there are really beautiful elements of architecture still around, i would say that it gives that feeling over to the

work. >> what are your hopes for it? >> that in a way it just becomes part of the area. i think it is starting to have that feeling. people utilize it. they sit and, and have their lunch and play on -- they sit and, and have their lunch and play on that -- they sit and come and have their lunch and play on it. just for it to be part of the neighborhood. that is my hope. >> is such a beautiful addition to our public art in san francisco. thank you for joining us. it was nice to meet you. and thank you for telling us about your beautiful mural. thanks for watching "culturewire."

supervisor kim: good morning and welcome to the special rules committee mindy and for thursday, june 23. i will be chairing today's meeting their i am joined by supervisor elsbernd and supervisor farrell. we're also joined by supervisor scott wiener. the clerk today is linda wong. we would like to acknowledge the staff at sfgtv, which record the meetings and make the transcript's available to the public on line. we have a big meeting today. we have a lot of folks that will be presenting to us. i want to quickly let folks know that i will be giving a maximum of three minutes to your actual presentation. we may have a followup with questions. so be prepared to give a statement that is three minutes or less. the committee would greatly appreciate it. madam clerk, are there any announcements? >> the items on the agenda today that are recommended will go to the full board on tuesday, june

12, unless otherwise indicated. >> number one, supervisors mirkarimi, john avalos, and more to the association of bay area governments. supervisor kim: thank you. is there any public comments on this item? simenon, public comment is now closed. >> make a motion approving supervisor mar john avalos, mirkarimi, and mar. >> thank you. we can do that without opposition. we will move forward with positive recommendation to the full board. thank you. please call item number two. >> hearing to consider appointed two members for and if it turns to the bay area regional interoperable communications system authority. there are two seats and two applicants.

supervisor kim: thank you. my understanding is that and -- they are here today. there no questions. if you like to see something briefly -- >thank you so much for being here. >> good morning. i would very much appreciate being appointed to the board. i think interoperability is critical to the region, especially as it applies to public safety. i would leave it at that. supervisor kim: thank you so much. at this time, we will open it up for public comment for item number two. if there is any public comment, please step up to the microphone. seeing none, public comment is now closed. supervisor farrell. >> motion to appoint to seat one

and to seat two. supervisor kim: we have a motion to move forward with these appointments with positive recommendation to the full board. also, a motion for a residency waiver for seat number two. >> committee reports. supervisor kim: and a motion to move this forward as the committee report. i think we can do that without opposition. thank you. colleagues, as a courtesy to our colleague, supervisor wiener, we both sit on the budget committee, which actually starts at 10:00 a.m.. the committee unfortunately will not have quorum until at least one of us goes into chamber. so i have been asked to move item number four. is there any opposition to moving up this item? simenon, call item number four. >> treader amendments to amend

the charter of the city to allow amendments or repeals of initiative ordinances and declarations of policy. supervisor kim: thank you. i believe supervisor wiener may have some comments about the charter amendment. supervisor wiener: thank you, madam chair. this is the fourth time we are in committee for this, so i will not repeat what i have said in the past. this is a very modest first step in beginning to reform our ballot measure process. i want to thank members of the committee and members of the public for the very valuable feedback that we have received, and the amended version submitted last week limits this prospectively. it does not impact any ballot measures passed before 2012. it is a purely perspective reform, and it is limited to ballot measures place on the ballot by the mayor or by the board of supervisors and has no

impact on initiatives. in other words, measures placed in the ballot by signature. it is a modest government reform, and ask the committee's support. supervisor kim: thank you. any call it -- comments? supervisor elsbernd. supervisor elsbernd: i have been relatively quiet on this. it is likely to move out of committee, so i wanted to share my thoughts. i think what happened tuesday afternoon is exactly what this charter amendment is necessary. three ballot measures were placed on the ballot at the very last minute, but four members of the board of supervisors. and i think in the last 48 hours, we have seen that those ballot measures were written rather hastily. there is all kinds of unintended consequences. this charter amendment fixes that problem. it frankly gives a bit of a

lifeline to those four supervisors into a major, if they ever do something like this again. so i think what has happened in the last week is perfect evidence for the necessity of this charter amendment, and i would like to congratulate supervisor wiener with moving forward with this good government reform. supervisor kim: thank you. at this time, i would like to open it up for public comment. >> sue hester. i did not speak at the last meeting because i wanted to read the language. i think this is an amendment that is in search of a reason. with the four supervisor rule allows is it allows a minority, or even a majority of the board of supervisors, to get something enacted but-48 votes to override a mural of veto, and it may not be enacted. i was involved with two board of supervisors sponsored measures involved in the 1980's.

one was dealing with open space. we had massively contentious hearings. but losing chinatown, open space sighed. we had massive contentious hearings about shadows on union square. these never got resolved. four supervisors put it on the ballot and resolved it. that. prop k in 1984 -- that was prop k in 1984. it enabled supervisors to avoid something were either the economic forces are so powerful or the mayor may threaten a veto. that was 1984. in 1986, prop m was put on the ballot. the issue for prop m was rationing the amount of office space. we head office boom and bust cycles in the 1970's and 1980's. we would approve $6 million in

the market would be going, and it would take. when we even that out, based on a study done by the planning department by economic consultants, and they said 1 million square feet. we said, ok, you can have 1 million square feet, but do not bring it up to 6 million in any one year, because it is making the market to crazy. we passed that limit, by the voters. and guess what -- when the market tanked in the late 1980's and 1990's on the office market and boston, a vancouver, new york, houston had massive economic weapons san francisco had gone ahead of the curve and hit dead son think reasonable. if you go back and read the print -- and had done something reasonable. if you go back and read the print from the time, it said it saved our cookies, financially, the city. if you are perfectly happy with allowing the board to have no power to put something on it to the voters that the voters agree

with but you might not have eight votes, you're cutting off your own power, and you're cutting off the people's power. if you want to solve the problem of initiatives going on to the ballot without a lot of thought, require a hearing on the them. that is a simple solution. require a hearing before it gets put on the ballot. i would support that. but do not do something that you have not thought through. i know prop k and prop m would have been dead. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? supervisor elsbernd. >> just a response, you know, there are a number of ballot measures that are not introduced legislatively and subject to a mayoral veto. the mayor can put measures on. it does not even have to go to the legislative process. there is a much bigger problem

here, and i appreciate that we can point to a ballot measure that was approved 25 years ago, but i think i can point to three ballot measures that were introduced 48 hours ago that necessitate the need for this charter amendment. i appreciate that there can be a couple kernels in the history of ballot measures over the last many decades, but i think if we look collectively at all the ballot measures that have been introduced by four supervisors or a mayor in the last 25 years, a vast majority have been those that have been written without a lot of input and i could absolutely benefit. let me throw out some that perhaps some votes in the progress of world would agree to. i think there would be a lot of members of the board of supervisors to like the opportunity to address some of the mistakes in this particular ordinance that as a talking about. this cuts both ways. there's a lot of good government in this charter amendment, and it should absolutely go forward. supervisor kim: thank you. any other comments? i just wanted to say that i

really appreciate supervisor wiener coming back to the rules committee several times on this item and also listening to members of the public and his colleagues on some potential ways to make this charter amendment more palatable as we move forward. i do think that as a charter amendment that is perspective, not impacting any past initiatives that voters had an impression when they were voting on would be permanent, unless overturned by going back to the ballot, but i think that makes this initiative stronger. i would have preferred if we had more conversations on ways that we can perform the system overall, so whether we talk about requiring additional signatures or requiring a hearing prior to going onto the ballot or requiring the mayor to have supervised signatures -- all of that discussion, it would have been nice to have more extended time. however, i do not see a reason to not put this forward to

voters. i would support moving this out with no recommendation to the full board. i did want to and knowledge that there probably members of the public that expected this to come later on the agenda. so, madam clerk, is there a way to keep public comment open on this item? >> yes, i do not see any action. >> ok, i just do not want folks to feel that they did not have an opportunity to speak on this item. but we will call you when we open up if there are folks who want to speak about it. supervisor wiener: that is fine. i will be in the budget committee. just let me know and i can walk over. supervisor kim: thank you. any other comment? ok, we will continue this item for public comment. madam clerk, can you please call item number 3? >> item number 3, hearing to consider appointing three members, terms to be determined, to the redistricting task force.

their three seats and 23 applicants. supervisor kim: i believe most of the 23 applicants are here today. i mentioned earlier that because we have 23 candidates, that we will be asking everyone to limit their presentation to 3 minutes or less. and we may be following up with questions from my colleagues here on the committee. i will be calling your name in the order that you are listed on the agenda. if for any reason there is something pressing about your time, please let our clerk know. i do know that anna yee was not able to make it here today. we did receive an e-mail from her, explaining she has a prior conduct of the first person to date is brigette leblanc. after brigette leblanc, this is carolyn squeri. >> good morning, supervisor kim

and supervisor elsbernd and to the listening audience. my name is brigette leblanc and i am in native of san francisco and a resident of district 10, and also a product of public schools. as a graduate of lowell high school leadership san francisco and also a small business community owner, a member of the city college of san francisco community, democratic and committed the clubs, i think that with my different involvement in a lot of different communities, that i actually bring in a lot to the redistricting task force. mainly as an educator, it has been a goal of my to inform the communities and encourage them to get engaged in any process that concerns them and to remain active. for years i have been involved in community meetings and forums, and through that process, i am strong enough to push back and temper what is

anticipated to be more political objectives. i am knowledgeable of a broad swath of neighborhoods and communities. as you know, it is important that the appointments at the same profiles, but as a whole, they embody the diversity and the spirit that reflects the city and county of san francisco. for these reasons, i feel that i am is strong enough to push back when necessary, and it is important to involve all of our communities in this process. i hope that you consider my recommendation from the letters of support i have received from all of the different committees in sentences go to be appointed to the redistricting task force. thank you. supervisor kim: are there any questions for the applicant? thank you so much. >> thank you. supervisor kim: next, we have carolyn squeri. are you here today? ok. then i am going to call up christopher elmendorf. after him, we have eric mcdonnell.

>> thank you for hearing for me today. my name is christopher elmendorf. as a a professor of law at uc davis school of law where i teach election law, and i am resident of san francisco, where i have lived in the mission district since 2005. i wanted to say a few words this morning about why i want to serve on this task force and the values i would bring to the task of the task force. i see this as a public service opportunity, no more and no yes. i am is a tenured professor. i teach and have relevant knowledge in this area that i think i could bring to the project. but i owe no debt to any candidate, to any interest group, and i have no interest in being into debt or having indebted to me any candidate or interest group that has a stake in this process. the u.s. stands alone among all