was mentioned and the idea around fees. you also probably saw my quotation in "the wall street journal." i said, if a business is misrepresenting their charging for health care costs and not providing it, that is wrong and we do not support that. however, i will use the one market example of the restaurant. their fee did not say it was for help the san francisco. it was for employer-mandates like kelsey san francisco -- healthy san francisco. there was a little -- litany of new costs. he did not say costs created a 60% increase in the cost of labor for minimum wage employee that oakland does not have. now all the pastry shops, bakeries, are moving that way.

the restaurants are outsourcing forces -- functions to other towns because of increased costs. this is a defining moment, as you have said. as to whether or not we want to find solutions are political wedge is, whether or not we want to find solutions or false choices. that is what is being presented here. there are other ways to solve the problems we have identified. brighterchiu's efforts -- supervisor chiu's efforts have gone a long way in that. there has been the erroneous information regarding fees. do we agree with that language? i will not say we do. we will respect his efforts to try to address if it is a consumer fraud issue. that is language that addresses the issue you have been raising. this will cost thousands of

jobs. it is not disputed that we are 30,000 jobs short where we were two years ago. don't do something that will hurt the economy when it could be solved without hurting the economy. supervisor campos: can i ask you a quick question? i appreciate comments. one thing that is reported as their companies -- is there are companies that are actually accounting and marketing their services as a way of employers exploiting this loophole to make money. this is what "the wall street journal" reports. there's actually a brochure of this company has circulated that said the funds are not needed and the employer wins because the funds to stay with them, not the city. do you think that is right? do you think what that company is doing, specifically marketing itself to restaurants, to these

businesses, for the purpose of using this loophole to make money of consumers, do you think that is correct? >> i would disagree that they're trying to make money of consumers by the statement you just made. what they are saying, my understanding is, and i am not familiar with the language they may be using, if they are saying there's an official way to meet the mandates required on your thehcso, when an employee does not use the benefit, that the unused portion could return to the employer, i don't think that is an incorrect thing to say. supervisor campos: final question, because there are many authorities, people watching and will be looking at this issue, has the restaurant association referred people to beneflez? -- beneflex? just so we know. >> i don't know.

i believe it is an associate member. we have many members who provide various types of human resources, third-party administrative consulting. i'm not familiar with their marketing in this regard, personally. supervisor campos: can you verify that they have had no involvement with the efforts to market these things? >> what do you mean? supervisor campos: have you been associated with the efforts of beneflex and appealing to businesses to use the service? >> we provide a service to our members so they can communicate with our restaurants. whether it is a dishwater -- dishwasher, insurance and other products. i cannot say there has not been an e-mail that did go out. supervisor campos: that is fine.

thank you. i want it to show that the record shows they have had some communication. >> i would not describe it that way, sir. it is up to your discretion. >> thank you, supervisors. i am an employee at tenderloin housing clinic. i've worked in the tenderloin community as a rights organizer. i think we're all very clear that we're talking about hra's as the only option, not in addition to insurance. you have all been here the last several years. we have cut sf general to the bone. workers are constantly going to give up in order to fund our

health care system. it is not fair. it is not a right to have consumers pay once and have taxpayers pay again for services that are supposed to be covered under the law. if the business community wants to promote and tell each other they need to provide full health insurance, wonderful. that is not a reason to delay. it is extremely important we close this loophole. when i was working, the families i worked with, no one reported having health insurance except for folks who worked in union jobs that had contracts that guarantee it. everyone else, janitors, restaurant workers, room cleaners, they knew hra's existed, but had no idea how to access them and they were afraid to ask. many are afraid of retaliation. the reason they're afraid of retaliation is because they see

intimidation every day, not when they're asking to have health care coverage paid for. to have people have to go, whether english or -- is or is not their first language, having to argue that is unfair to put on an employee. second, and i have had this experience myself, there are issues of medical privacy that can be violated when an employee has to go to a chart and has to try and argue about what they need and how often they need it. for anyone who has ever worked as an at-will employee, giving any impression to your employer that you may not be healthy for some reason is uncomfortable. it can be scary. i think it is important, and our union stands behind it, and our community stands behind closing this loophole and closing and

now. thank you for your leadership. supervisor campos: thank you. speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm director of the office of small business. i am here this afternoon, want to thank supervisor campos for continuing to identify the need that we need to close the loophole. just wanted to note, the commission has not heard of the new piece of legislation and will be doing so on monday, along with supervisor chiu. the new draft still has some of the issues of concern for the commission, which is the potential millions of dollars out of the economy, and the immediate job loss. i will not reiterate much of what is said in a relationship to what has already been stated. a couple of things need to be

taken a look at better economic analysis report did not address. types of jobs in the income of the jobs that will be lost with this. with the current health care security ordinance, there are many businesses i have spoken to that have sort of stunted their growth and chosen not to grow past 19 jobs because they cannot afford the bump up into the 20 or over employees with the ordinance. i think what i want to request is that our small businesses need to be part of the discussion to address the need of what we want to accomplish in san francisco around health care and be able to keep businesses and jobs in the city.

at the small business commission, the commission was interested and did state it wanted to see exact numbers of the businesses using the hra accounts that are not allowing the accounts to be used for health care or severely restricting the use. we will be interested to see what the mayor comes up with in relationship to that. just wanted to state that we want to continue this discussion with all three proposals together. supervisor campos: thank you very much. is there any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item? public comment is closed. ok. no more speakers. thank you to everyone who took the time to speak on this item.

i know there are very strong opinions. we appreciate you taking the time. colleagues, i want to make a couple of points. for the benefit of all the people who have been working on this matter, i wanted to read the list of organizations from threat san francisco that have come out in support of this legislation before you. i want to make sure their voices are heard. many of them could not be your today. there are dozens of organizations. these are those organizations. adolescents help working group, alliance of california for community empowerment,asset building strategies, vernal heights center, california nurses association, california women's agenda, policy for analysis on trade and health, central american resource network, chinese progressive

association, city college board of trustees, the clergy in lady united for economic justice, the coalition on homelessness, community housing partnership, san francisco de labor program and women's collective, the employment law center. the health access, health care for american now, homeless prenatal, jobs for justice, latina breast cancer agency, league of young voters, mission economic development agency commission house and devoted corp., national employment law project, national physician alliance, people organized to win and get -- when employment rights, people organizing for environmental rights, private work, a progressive workers

alliance, san francisco building, trades council, the medical society, the labor council, sci you tend to one, as sciu, unite your local to come a women's community clinic, young workers united, and the building construction trades council. that tells you the broad coalition that is behind this effort. i want to make two points in response to a couple of the things that have been said. it is easy to say this is going to cost thousands of jobs. it is the same parade of horrible things we heard when the ordinance was first introduced. facts have to speak for themselves. the one independent study on the health care security ordinance that was done not by anyone here in the city made it clear that the impact on jobs was not

what was expected. there was no job loss because of the ordinance. those people have looked at that amendment and reached the same conclusion. our economist has made it clear the impact on job growth is minimal and in fact, once this law is implemented, you will continue to have thousands of jobs created in san francisco in the next few years. the last thing i would say is that i do believe, and i do hope that whoever is out there who has the very important task of protecting the consumers of the city and county of san francisco takes a careful look at "the wall street journal" and some of the practices identified. if it is the case that there are companies that are marketing themselves by telling businesses that they can

essentially exploit this loophole as a way of making money off of consumers, irrespective of whether or not they meet the technical requirements of the ordinance, there are a number of consumer protection laws that are still applicable. it is my hope that whoever is charged with protecting consumers in the city and county of san francisco takes a careful look at this. it is not just about workers. it is about consumers being protected. is my hope that that happens. -- it is my hope that that happens. this is an egregious issue. if the facts that are reported in that article are true, that needs to have careful consideration. with that, president chiu, the floor is yours. president chiu: thank you. i want to thank all of the members of the public who have participated in this conversation about an important

issue we need to address. i don't think it will be a surprise that i do not support my colleague's legislation in its current form. that being said, at least with regard to this meeting, i am ok with supporting the motion that we move forward without recommendation. let me explain why. there are a majority of college that have expressed support. we would engage in several weeks of parliamentary procedures that i don't feel we need to do. i would prefer we move forward with an up or down vote on this and call the question. that being said, i also -- i do have an alternative piece of legislation i would like to be considered by the board at some time. i will request that our chair hopefully schedule that legislation in the coming weeks. i understand that will be the case. i do hope that as we have this discussion, it is pretty easy to

have both sides going to their corners in thinking about how this issue is described. i don't think it is as clear as thinking that this is a debate about health care verses no health care. everyone in this room, whether you are from one community or another, believes in the right of all workers to have adequate health care. for me, the issue is, how do we ensure that we provide health care but also minimize job loss? supervisor campos has quoted are city economist on the topic. apparently, we have lost 30,000 jobs over the past two years. 30,000 jobs. i understand some might think his analysis that this piece of legislation will result in the loss of only hundreds of jobs, that is somehow trivial. i don't agree with that. i think every person who loses a job, we have to figure out how to take care of them.

i am trying to craft a solution that balance is those needs, make sure we provide the health care that we have to, but make sure that money is put to use to either hire folks come up with them to work, or provide health care. that is my goal. i appreciate this debate and look forward to continuing discussions on it. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you. supervisor farrell: thank you to chair compos and president chiu. like everyone here, i recognize there's a problem. there's a huge problem. we need to solve it. the question is, how do we deal with it? i like -- i do not support this legislation in its current form. i'm committed to finding a solution. my only biggest disappointment in this debate right now is that we are not doing it here in committee and we are shoving it on to the full board. that being said, we will play

parliamentary games if we don't do it. at this point, i will support the motion to send it to the full board on tuesday and have the up or down vote. i will say that i appreciate president chiu's amendment and i like what i heard from the representative from mayor li's office today. i look forward to considering those together and begin having that debate here in committee so we can vote on it as a full board when we are fully informed. the solution here is not to propose something that will cost jobs in the near term. that is not what we should be doing in economic times. i appreciate the debate. to be clear, i will not support this in its current form. i'm happy to support the motion to move it forward without recommendation. supervisor campos: thank you. i do want to thank the president

and supervisor for their patience in listening to a lot of the testimony. i know it has the long process. with that said, can we entertain a motion to move forward to the full board as a committee for the october 4 meeting? president chiu: i support that motion. supervisor campos: we can take that without objection. the matter is forwarded to the full board. is there any other business before the committee? >> there is no other business. supervisor campos: thank you. meeting is adjourned.

>> congratulations, chief. as you may well know, we were named the top in 2005. i thought that was wonderful.

>> that is the top irish- americans in the country, not just san francisco. >> they knew they could fire chief when they saw one. we thought we would do a nice irish song for you. we will not take long, we promise. ♪ , over the hills my money-eyed irish lad come over the hills to your darling you choose the road love and i will make the balancvows and i will be your true love forever red is the rose that beyond the

garden grows there is a lily of the valley here is the water that boasts from the spring but my love is [inaudible] ♪

♪ down by killarney the moon and the stars they were shining the moon shone she was sure she would be my love forever red is the rose that beyond the garden grows there is delayed of our valley there is the water that flows from

but my love is better than any ♪ [applause] >> over in the corner, and john's father. we are so thrilled that this long overdue that we hang your picture on our wall. you have supported our 1906 survivor dinners and luncheons over the years. i do not know what i always see you at 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning, but you are always there for us. 1983, there was a fire at jon's grille. your guys came in. in those days, i think it was guys. they got the bar out, they got chief bill murray's picture off the wall. but mayor christopher's picture

off the wall. we have been rebuilding ever since. but we are a little short on beautiful ladies. we are happy to have you on the wall. [applause] do you have something that you would like to -- >> lee and john, thank you for inviting me here. for all of you, fire commissioners, city family. i guess when joanne came, everyone said, first female. she has shown that she has

joined the great chiefs of our city. it did not take long at all for her leadership to come out, for her personality, a french ship, but also for that wonderful leadership. our great city sometimes, a lot of people focus on who is in room 200, but there are very special moments for many periods of the city where the city is defined by its great chiefs. today we celebrate one of those already. who is this movie star? that is a great thing. i want to thank john's grill for putting up, under their 40- year tradition, someone that we believe very much in our city, who has really led a great leadership and our fire department and has been a great leader on many fronts, helping us so much on anything -- everything from the toy drives

to community participation, to everything that reflects a modern fire department and all the men and women that served the department. really give them the pride for working for the great city. chief, congratulations for making it on the wall. lee, john, to have this tradition, welcome our great chief. [applause] >> since you are the last one that has been hung on the wall previously, you two work so closely together, could you say something? >> i am no where near as good looking as joanne. kind of down the line there. joanne and i have been friends forever. i played football with city college with her brother dan who was the coach. talk about a great person to be able to follow. she has been so supportive.

i have learned so much in my short time on how to be a good chief. she is modest, gracious, everything that you would want to have. i just hope someday people will think of me the way that i think of her. [applause] we have a surprise hear from senator mark leno, who i believe has not made an endorsement yet. would you like to make an announcement? >> speaking of better looking -- >> it is my pleasure to join mr. mayer and our chief on this auspicious occasion. i think all the kind and generous words have been said. if you look on this wall, joanne, you can see the threshold to get on this wall is rather high. withe