be in san francisco. visit the website to get information on all of the performances. ♪ commissioner kim: good morning

and welcome to the special rules committee for thursday, june 28. my name is jane kim. i am joined by rules committee member sean elsbernd and supervisor mark farrell. i just want to thank sf gov tv for taping this early in the morning and making the transcripts available on-line. we have only one item on today's agenda, which we had heard last thursday. please call item one. >> item 1. charter amendment (third draft) to amend the charter of the city and county of san francisco by -- regarding city retirement benefits and health care benefits. commissioner kim: because we heard this item last week, we are just going to hear public comment. please line up if you have any

public comment. good morning. -- >> good morning. i have a question for the board for which i have no -- i do not think i will get an answer. why should we expect our representatives to do any more to live up to this agreement than you have in the past? the reason i say that is, in past years, boards of supervisors have entered into negotiations with city employees on retirement, the different things that accrue over the years, and they made commitments to those city employees, saying we would give you this and that. they entered into what i considered bad faith agreements. in that same budget year, they would pass a budget that would pay for immediate expenditures and put almost nothing assigned for the items that were accruing over the years. each year, it got further behind and they would go back into negotiations and create more

problems. higher salaries, a better retirement. then they would go back into the budget process and pay for the current year's expenditures and then have little or nothing aside, depending on the stock market. somehow all of these benefits would be paid for. you are our representatives. we, the people, send you here to represent us. when you enter in these agreements, you do so on our behalf. you give the words of the citizens of this city to its employees said they are entitled to certain pay, benefits, etc. you also make a commitment to meet those obligations. unfortunately, success of ford after successive board has failed to do that. not because of this recession, we are in this position. i cannot see that you are going to do anything different with this. commissioner kim: thank you very much.

>> united public workers for action. we are here to oppose this sham agreement proposed by mayor ed lee. it is interesting, the supervisors are continually voting for tax subsidies for corporations, the millionaires in san francisco. this is supported by billionaire warren hellman. when it comes down to this, you want to attack city workers. this ballot proposition will be an attack on city workers' rights. you are eliminating the need to power of city workers and their representation on the board. you will have an increase in city workers and you will put it on the back of the public workers. this is an anti-labor, anti- working class tax that you are putting on the retiree's of san francisco. and you are doing it secretly. unfortunately, some union leaders and this is the best way to go.

we will take the lesser evil from a dodgy. this is the wrong thing for the labor movement. -- from adachi. let's attack the public workers, let's attack their retirees. that is what you are doing. you are fraudulently telling the people the problem in this country and in san francisco is the public workers have too much benefits. the average pension is not that high for the average worker. do you know who it is time for? the bureaucrats that you support in the city. these other officials, they have high benefits in their pensions, but the average city worker does not, yet, you are going to attack them and make them pay even more than they are paying. san francisco is one of the wealthiest cities in the world. why are public workers being blamed? why is this ballot proposition being put forward? you are basically shells for

these billionaires and corporations who want to put it on the public's back. that is what we're doing today. i would urge all public workers and retirees to go to their unions to demand that they fight both propositions. commissioner kim: thank you very much. >> good morning. my name is richard. the only thing i have to say about the supplemental cola is the city attorney has written a memorandum about that but i do not see why they do not want to share the big secret. what can they not sure about the public? now to the hhs board, last week, supervisor elsbernd said it takes four votes. if you read the language, the language only says a majority of the board. what is a majority? that is up to interpretation, and could be four members, three in one. i have been attending the health

service board meetings for a number of years. i have never seen any conflict there or any vote dividing the act, elected over the non- elected. i do not see what the problem is. they have never explain what the problem is. when ed lee came around to it seiu in district 1, i told him not to pass off the retirees. well, he certainly has. the city did not have -- the unions did not want to meet with the retirees, make them part of the process. i suggest removing the supplemental colas and the issues about the health service for changes, starting over, why can summary from the city come out to the retirement board meeting and talk about these changes and say what the problem is? maybe we can work out these

changes. commissioner kim: thank you. if he would like to speak for public comment on this item, please step up. >> good morning, supervisors. 12 years ago, i retired from the controller's office. in fact, my office was near where supervisor elsbernd is sitting right now. let me give you a history of the health services system. when it was formed, until 1957, it was governed by a nine- member board composed of all employees. in 1957, when the system was about bankrupt, the city came in and picked up part of the administrative cost, premium cost, made in a city department, and restructured in with four

appointed board members and three elected by the membership. it was not until 1987 that retirees were even allowed to vote in health service elections. in 2004, the board composition was changed from 3 to 4, 4 to 3. frankly, i have looked at the legislation, all 302 pages of it. i see a change in that. naturally, we do not want to give up our supplemental cola, but given what city employees have given up, it is little in order to help of the city at this time. the other point, as far as health services are concerned, you have retained parity with the active employees, as far as premium rates go. you have kept the 50% pick up

for our out-of-pocket cost, which helps a great deal. i see nothing in this that is injuries to retirees, as a group. i urge you to pass this. commissioner kim: thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is douglas yepp. i agree with the first three speakers. in my opinion, i think the city, in a certain sense, has been using a certain form of creative economics in their past agreements with the union for salary and benefits. even my own union, 10 to one could not adequately explained to me how come -- 1021, could

not adequately explain to me why i was not receiving my benefits. firemen and policemen are now finding out that all of these negotiations were basically back room deals. one of my favorite subjects that i study now is voodoo economics. i suspect the city and county of san francisco, and many other cities in the rust belt of the east coast have been practicing that creative kind of financing. let us put it this way. it did not work with enron. it is not going to work with anyone else. thank you. commissioner kim: thank you. >> good morning. my name is kay walker, seiu. the west bay chapter of retirees have decided to oppose both amendments, at this point.

we will do this publicly. this amendment could change, so it is not written in stone. however, here is my suggestion, in terms of being competitive with adachi, which kind of seems to be the m.o. here. if you remove the governance of the board, retirees will not fight that issue. we are bound and determined, most of us, to oppose this thing as it is now because of that item. a lot of seiu people, even though they do not come up and say this, are looking at adachi having a better deal for actives, in that there is a better sliding scale going on with contributions. this amendment does not.

some of the people that are active and employed will go to adachi's amendment because of this. this is happening in seiu, a lot of infighting. you may not hear it, but you will see it eventually in the campaign unless q adopt his scheme and put that in your amendment. another point, some of us are upset about the clause -- colas, even though it is not that much for retirees. some of us are under $25,000 a year. depending on when we retired, my salary as a social worker was ok. it is totally different outcomat outcome. those three items do away with

or change -- thank you. commissioner kim: thank you. police lineup if you have public comment. >> good morning, supervisors. i am the immediate past president of ifpte local 21. i am here speaking as an individual. i retired in 2009 after 29 years of service with the planning department. context. the city and county of san francisco is san francisco's largest employer and the pattern of health benefits and how the trust fund is covered affects huge numbers of people across the city, especially the eastern districts and district 6. with constituents who work for the city for school districts. citywide, however, we are proud for what we achieved with healthy san francisco, health benefits for hotel workers,

health benefits and insurance for city workers. there are three big problems related to fairness and honesty with this legislation, which can be cured by separating out the health services measure. , which affects the governance of the health service trust fund, to allow disclosure and discussion with those affected. we have heard this called the consensus measure. it is not true, in terms of the hundreds of thousands of beneficiaries dependent of health services. it is a multi-employer trust fund and not all employers, school districts were there. certainly, retirees and their dependants were not. rank-and-file members of the unions involved have not voted on this consensus package. second problem is it is just not

good government to hide measures, taking away fiduciary protection of health benefits in a larger measure changing retirement contributions. it is a disservice to democracy, a disservice to your own reputation for honesty, a disservice to your constituents. i urge you to do the honorable thing and separate the measure out. commissioner kim: thank you. is there any other public comment at this time? please line up? otherwise, we will close public comment. -- please line up. >> good morning, supervisor kim. i wanted to introduce myself to you. i did myself the other day with supervisor farrell. i am a resident of district 6, and i voted for you, so i want you to know there is at least one person who felt strongly

about you. commissioner kim: i hope there was more than one, but thank you. [laughter] >> i felt very strongly. following what the other members have said, i am a retired city planner, and i worked for the city for over 20 years. i was chair of the protect our benefits political action committee. at the time, we sponsored and passed prop c. prop c was put into place in 2004. since that time, it had done quite well. we have gotten rid of all the complaints that the beneficiaries had, not live

people answering the telephone, and so forth. i found this interesting. we put out a flyer that said yes on proposition c for a safer senior help system. we listed the reasons why. lo and behold, supervisor elsbernd was there for prop c. now what has happened between 2004 and now? i think it is because supervisor elsbernd has not been able to get his way on the board. all that is going to happen with this change is is going to be to the city's benefit, not to the retirees or active benefits. this is an absolute dereliction

of duty by fiduciary responsibility. we must take this out of the proposal. commissioner kim: thank you. >> i would like to put this into the record. commissioner kim: thank you. is there any other public comment at this time? again, if you do not stand, i will not know that you want to speak. >> my name is herbert. i am a retired city employee. one thing about this proposal, for the restructuring of health services, it is basically designed to cut cost containment, designed to hold down service costs, if i am correct.

it is designed to benefit the public, but we are also part of the public. we are your neighbors, we shop at the grocery stores, we are human beings. this will have a detrimental affect, potentially, on people who are critically ill, people on low income. this will work to the detriment of very vulnerable people. for that reason, i suppose this proposition. thank you. commissioner kim: thank you. is there any other public comment at this time? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, are there any comments or questions for staff? commissioner elsbernd: no, i would just like to thank everyone for coming forward to raise their issues. procedurally, what i would like

to do is move this item to the four board as a committee report, so it can be placed on the agenda. there would be no vote today on the full board, and then in the ensuing couple of weeks -- because there is no board meeting next week -- create opportunity to gather this input and see if any changes need to be made on july 12. commissioner kim: i see no opposition to that motion. we will move forward this item with recommendations as a committee report to the full board. it will be heard, i believe, -- today, and voted on, on tuesday, -- commissioner elsbernd: there will be no vote this afternoon and tuesday would be a potential opportunity for further amendments to be made. if that happens, it would be continued to the board meeting on tuesday, july 19, at which there would be an opportunity for members of the public to

comment once again. so no vote this afternoon. the earliest it could be voted on is the 12th. more likely, the 19th. commissioner kim: thank you. move forward with the recommendations to the full board. thank you. we are returneand turneadjourne.

>> 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."