>> good afternoon. welcome to the board of supervisors meeting for october 18, 2011. >> supervisor avalos? supervisor chu? supervisor chiu? supervisor elsbernd . supervisor farrell? supervisor kim? supervisor mirkarimi? supervisir weiner? all members are here. >> can you join me i nthn the pledge of allegiance?

>> mayor lee and members of the public, i want to welcome you to the chambers of the board of supervisors. we're on our way to a fully accessible city board chamber. now when we have a legislative aide with -- everyone will be able to get here quickly and easily. when the goal of this conversation came, with access to this historic building to maintain the chamber, they will have finally -- file postings

during december, this is no 18 inches lower and the clerk's desk has been lowered and moved forward. you can still see echoes of the old stairs visible in the works. i also want to point out that the historic preservation work was done with this, and we have fiber optic wiring to improve the sound quality and lays the groundwork for future audiovisual upgrades. we will have a small ceremony and invite everyone who did the hard work to make this happen to a celebration. with that, why don't we go to the approval of the meeting's minutes? you should have copies of the september 6 the board meeting. the motion by supervisor

elsbernd and are there any communications? >> i have no communications. >> item 1 is the engagement in formal policy discussions, representing the odd districts, 1, 3, 5, 7 and 11. the president will recognize the supervisors and the odd district will have their own questions for the mayor and this will not exceed five minutes for the supervisor. the public comment will take place during general public comment. >> the questions will come from a colleagues from the even- numbered districts. >> good afternoon, members of the board of supervisors. thank you for coming. i wanted to express -- express my appreciation of the

questions asked this month. these questions for this month, covering pension costs and health care costs and first amendment rights are very important and we should get started. >> for the first question, we go to supervisor farrell. >> assuming proposition c passes this november, the city is anticipated to save $1.30 billion from the higher pension fund contributions among other changes. this will continue to be an issue as projections indicate the pension costs may be over $700 billion by the year 2015, according to the most recent estimates. what plans do you have to continue the conversation with

potential reforms? >> thank you for that question. retiree costs include pensions and health care. as daunting as these costs are, we are in a better position with the pension benefits than retiree health care. we have the unfunded liability for retiree health care to the order of $4.40 billion. this will create a balance on the health service's board that we expect will lead to more responsible designs that will slow the rate of cost in the near future. we also require that active employees work towards finding health care. not with the minimum contributions but allowing the city to negotiate the on the minimum. more specifically, changes to the pension system can only be

made by san francisco voters in the city charter and we can manage the workforce in ways that help to control pension costs and one way to control pension costs is to control the cost of salaries. in the labor negotiations in the near and long-term future we must not grant wage increases that are not justified by the labor market. the other way is to have a lower salary base, and for us to learn to live within our means. as health-care costs grow, we cannot afford to provide those benefits to more and more employees. for that reason we have a strict approval process for all of the vacant positions that impact the general fund. the request to fill vacancies are scrutinized with cost and

necessity and public safety implications as well as classification and level. we know the hard freeze does not work but the diligence and robin for full process can help us to trim the size of the work force. all of these efforts will require cooperation and collaboration with you, the board of supervisors. the whole board has been a tremendous partner so far with your unanimous vote to put pension reform on the ballot. thank you very much. >> the next question is from supervisor carmen chiu. >> this pertains to health care in san francisco. the health the san francisco program has experienced steady increases in enrollment over time. what impact has this had on the

health impact on the city in the utilization of this and reducing costs. given the new requirements of policies at the federal level, will you recommend any adjustments or changes to that program. >> this is a complex issue. bear with me. the health the san francisco program was implemented several years ago and has a steady increase in roman over time. at the end of the fiscal year, 54,000 uninsured residents were enrolled in health the san francisco. this was honored by the harvard tennis -- kennedy school and is premised on the notion that by providing participants with primary care, or they can receive preventive and primary care, over time, you will see

changes in where they seek service and provide care more affectively to slow the growth and cost. and this is working. we have completed an analysis that find out -- found out the following. 85% of south -- of san francisco members -- the rate of people with diabetes or asthma with the insured medicaid population -- when asked on an annual survey, participants of the program state that their health status improved when they received care from health the san francisco. one of the key service questions was, to what extent has held the san francisco lead to a decrease in emergency and non-emergency visits and avoidable hospitalization.

it is more likely -- we wanted to reverse this trend and we are doing just that. we see a steadily designing emergency group, and most did not make the emergency room visits. they have the routine primary care. we have the eye exam and adults with these hospitals. and the avoidable -- we want to provide care more efficiently

and effectively. we have our participants go to medical homes for care where they went to the emergency rooms before. meaning less emergency room visits and hospitalizations. this may lead to hopscotch -- to those who are more in tune with the medical home. it is important to distinguish between a reduction in cost and reducing the rate of growth. they are not premised on the program that will reduce costs, and the federal health reform is not seeking an overall reduction in costs.

from fiscal year 2000 -- 2009- 2010 to 2010-2011. there was the additional cost. there was the employee spending requirement, so why -- this remains a great thing for the city we have a lot of work to do. we have the affordable care act and any changes we need to make in light of the federal level. >> thank you. excuse me, sir.

you are out of order. [applause] [applause] >> i want to remind members of the public that we have rules of order in this chamber. we want to do this officially and have public comment. there are times in the agenda for this and time for public comment by anyone who wishes to speak. there is a rule that states that in times and are not public comment, that individuals from the audience may not express support or opposition to any statements that are made here. we need this in order to conduct the meeting. with dignity and civility and

respect to the public. the next question will be asked by our colleague from district 6, jane kim. >> first, mr. mayor, let me thank you for keeping this time, and having your staff work with our office, and i want to knowledge that many members and participants that are here today as well, share your response. and also speak of public comment. thank you for being here. please describe the plan that our offices have been talking about given the projected long- term nature of this protest. how can the city including the -- the department of public health and recreation and caught -- parks address public health concerns and the costs associated with that as they approached the first amendment

right supporting people's right to speak and assemble. >> let me remind you, from the very beginning, i have supported the. -- the spirit of the occupy movement. this is their real for the country in the city and that is why i am wanting to create jobs and opportunities in san francisco. i have partnered with all of you. we don't want to see the residence in the economic hardship. we were to fund programs like you if programs cut by the state or launching jobs that employ -- employed 200 people of san francisco last month. the city services are stretched thin and we need to target our

scarce dollars to keep family strong, and helping the 99%. i began my career as a public advocate, fighting economic injustice and fighting for the civil rights of people in dire need. that was in san francisco, a city that protect protect the right -- protect the right of people to assemble and protest. for those who have come every day from this movement, let me say that we stand with you at expressing outrage at the large financial institutions. we are working -- >> you are out of order. [applause] >> we are working with you, to help raise your voice

peacefully, and we will protect your right to protest and your freedom of speech. that is not the same as lighting fires in public places and parks. but we can make accommodations and we have. and we can do this without jeopardize in public safety in any way. this is for the safety of protesters and the general public. cities across the country are responding in different ways, and the very real question of strange city resources is a good one. we spent $100,000 of, that -- accommodating protest. we give protesters the ability to continue their protests as we know what is it good -- what is needed and not needed. a march was facilitated --

facilitated by the police department without incident. after receiving requests from participants, the police have clear rules about how to protest with them block. we also made littering receptacles available, is it -- it is unfortunate that all a small number -- a small number cannot comply with a reasonable request like removing their tents from the public right of way. longstanding loss on the books do not interfere with the right to peaceably protest and occupy space. let me reiterate to the supervisors and the public, i support the spirit of this movement and not believe that the intention is to negatively impact the city in any way.

we can support this movement as we have done in the past month safely and with them along. we look forward to continue the support of members to do this. >> the rest is from superb -- supervisor scott weiner. supervisor weiner: we will never truly get people out of their cars without reliable taxi service but this has been over a decade since we significantly improved service. the current levels are inadequate and unacceptable. there will be approximately new -- 85,000 new permits. understanding the california environmental quality act -- analysis may be required to

have a larger increase in the number of taxis. how will you make certain that the look into the amount of taxi service. will the support a significant increase in the number of taxi permits. >> thank you for your sustained attention to the issues of the taxi industry. the taxi system is a critical part of the transit network and a key component to the transportation policy. having a robust taxi system allows people to travel around without having to hold a car. our taxi fleet is a key partner in reducing city-wide carbon emissions. in the past three years, this

has resulted in 35,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions savings, the equivalent of taking 400 passenger cars off the road. it is clear that the tax system has room for improvement. and i have spoken to people who have a hard time getting a taxi when they need one. including senior citizens and those requiring accessible vehicles. how do we fix this? we have to improve service in a way that works for writers and taxi drivers -- rider sas and taxi drivers. this public convenience and necessity study -- it will

determine the number of taxis required for an adequate level of service to the growing population of san francisco. we will have stakeholder interviews and the industry best practices, recommending changes in how we calculate the meter rates, and the contract is expected to be approved and awarded by january 1, 2012, completed by the end of next year. once this is completed, the level of environmental clearance can then be determined. and the mass transit authority will make certain of the adequate funding -- and i know you continue to watch this issue and i am happy to let you know i will be held at any time on this issue.

>> the final question will be from supervisor cohen. supervisor cohen: good afternoon. the approach to code enforcement includes the department of building inspection and the police department and the city attorney's office. throughout the city we continually see the vacant and occupied properties with significant housing and other code violations that go unaddressed for months, and quite frankly, in my case they go unaddressed for many years. how the you propose to improve the response to complaints to inspection citations and the enforcement of code violations, and additionally, what strategies can be used to increase the efficiency in

addressing these issues and the capacity to take legal action against the egregious property mayor lee: thank you. what we are addressing code enforcement issues, we need to divide the conversation into two conversations -- vacant buildings and occupied buildings. for obvious reasons, we -- within the occupied building category, we prioritize by buildings that pose the greatest risk to health and safety of the occupants or neighbors. for a vacant buildings, the city provides to pathways -- we give building owners and opportunity to register with our vacant building program. to register, building owners must pay $795 in annual fees and bring their buildings up to code. once registered, we do not enforce any more violations. because of this program, 85% of

the buildings on the vacant and the banding building list are registered and in good conditions. for buildings whose owners refuse to register or do not qualify for registration, they can face a fine of almost $7,000. if the building is not up to code, we initiate code enforcement process, which begins with a notice of violation. after issuance of the nov, we work with the owners to quickly and voluntarily solve the problem. this resolves the vast majority of cases. it also leads to quick, cost- efficient resolutions. but there are always those owners who refuse to and cannot take responsibility. for those owners, we refer them to a director's hearing where we issue an order of abatement if the building is non-compliant. if the owner refuses to cooperate, dbi can refer cases

for -- to the city attorney's office. as of the last report to my office, the city attorney has over 100 cases that he has not yet resolved. yet the city attorney continues to build dbi for these cases, discouraging departments from sending additional cases for consideration. my staff has already been talking about code enforcement issues. the leadership understands the need and are willing to work together on better identifying buildings that are structurally compromise and wrapping up code enforcement. as we move forward with this, let me point out a few things. in this atmosphere of dwindling resources, we will have to prioritize the list of what we can do. given this, i fully support the focus on buildings that impose a fee -- that impose health and safety risk to existing occupancy neighbors. any solutions will have to continue to support this

priority, but i'm happy to explore. i want to point out there is a category of homeowners who, due to social or economic reasons, are not able to pay for the repairs necessary to bring the buildings back to full compliance. to address this, the mayor's office administers a program which assists low-income homeowners in bringing their buildings backed into compliance with loans up to $50,000. not enough low-income residents know about this program, so i would their june -- i would urge you to revise your constituency. thank you. president chiu: that concludes today's formal policy discussions with the mayor. mr. mayor, thank you for being here. at this time, why don't we move to our consent agenda, items to the six. let me again but members of the public know we will