selfish love all, are you going to put up those signs on broadway? it would be great to direct folks to the garages on friday and saturday night. especially if it were possible to lower those rates because our garages are empty on those nights. it would be a real public service to get people off the street and into parking garages. >> there are 15 garages. they're not part of the first round. commissioner dooley: it would be great to see those in high traffic areas. especially on weekend nights. that would be a public service.

commissioner clyde: do you know when other parts of san francisco will be put into this project? >> the first stop is -- step is finishing the project. expansion will depend on building a proposal for that next summer or fall. it is meant to coordinate with the replacement of meters to upgrade all of them to take credit cards. we are preparing for a -- looking to start replacing meters at the end of calendar year 2012. >> i know that north beach would benefit so much from this the type of parking management. people say there is no parking

in north beach to see how much parking we actually have. during different times of the day or weeks. the other question is, the cost of taking credit cards. how is that priced into the parking rate? >> the new meters come with new costs and that includes communications cost because each one has a modem in it. as well as a credit-card processing fee. this city, and tsa, we pay for those processing costs. they vary by transaction. i do not know -- it is hard to generalize. they do qualify as micro payments so it is a smaller payment then you typically see.

>> de know how much it has been so far? >> we have -- we did an evaluation of -- we are about to finish the evaluation. new meters vs old meters and letting people pay with credit cards and having a longer time limits. we saw that revenues increased substantially by letting people pay. even once you deduct the cost of the new meters, we make more revenue, making it easy to like what happened in the past. our meter revenue has gone up. our citation revenue has gone down. that is great. commissioner riley: it is illegal to use a phone when you

are driving. are you going to include directions for drivers when they tried to use the iphone to locate a parking space? >> of course. that is a serious issue. we are dealing with it as a society. the way we have dealt with that, there is a disclaimer that reminds people that it is illegal. it is not the right thing to do. that same disclaimer, this is innovative, if you are moving more than a few miles per hour, it brings the reminder up again. that was an issue we grappled with. we wanted to make sure the data was available for passengers to use before they go to their next? destination. in the future, as this

information starts. as the stars to get integrated into vehicle navigation systems and becomes more automatic and less of a distraction, it should be more ubiquitous. commissioner riley: more and more have -- more cars have navigation systems. president o'brien: when you sit in your destination, the audio proms you where to turn and where to go. i have to believe that technology is there that you will not have to book you can just listen. commissioner adams: i notice you do have signs in the financial district where i never saw them before. i do see those new ones out there now. i had not seen them like off of

columbus. i never saw parking. you guys actually list the parking garages. u.s. street mary's and that is not a public space. >> it is a public garage. 100% of the bay area drivers prefer to park in municipal garages. zero percent we had any. commissioner adams: i saw st. mary's, they have a bunch on columbus for the one underneath the building between clay and washington and battery. there is a building on top. >> is an opportunity for us to let people know, even people who have lived here, where some of these spaces are.

many people do not know. it is another way to get people matched up with a parking space. so far there is an iphone, and george, and windows 7. other people have in making applications. i believe there may be a simple blackberry interface. >> for america's cup, i know we have designated some parking on the perimeter. while it sounds like the rollout plan for replacing all of the meters will be done by early 2013, for the world series, is there any plan to do the parking

garages that are in those designated areas? that we want people to part in to add those to -- is there that kind of integration? i do not think all of them are privately operated. >> i have not seen the latest but it is far enough out, all of the places on the waterfront and fisherman's wharf are already part of s.f. park. there are no public garages. our system, the technology behind this, are able to take on real time data. it is possible. i need to check in with the people who are been working on that part of the plan. >> that would be great. it is trying to discourage

people, even though it is in the northeast, not to be driving there and to stop before you get there. peter is working on it. commissioner dooley: how does it work in terms of the cellphone? are there still time limits? >> there are. four our time limits or sometimes in no time limits. in other parts of the city it is one or two hours. we have been giving all of the meter configurations. one of the cool things is when you pay, if you add an hour of time, 10 minutes before, it will text you and ask would you like

to add time? you can do that remotely. that is convenient for people in meetings or running errands. it is exciting. other cities have done that. it makes for a better experience. commissioner riley: is all the information on the web site? >> sf park.org. we have done the best to share all that we can. policies, and details about the project, there is also a book we put together for a conference. we hosted a conference of -- most of the big cities wanted to review the lessons learned. so we put a book together and a pds is available on our site -- pdf is available on our site.

president o'brien: anything else? thank you. that was a wonderful presentation. thank you for bringing that before us. next item. >> item 10, a discussion of action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on file number111030, administrative code, health care security ordinance. amending the code regarding the health care security ordinance. we have a presentation by the director. we did hear this item previously. in your binder is the amended file number.

>> commissioners, i am going to walk you through the amendment that supervisor cohen submitted the week before last. these are amendments that have come from our office, small business leaders, we have had discussions with members of the commission. what we now have is a policy that has the support from many stakeholders. it is not comfortable. there are elements that are uncomfortable to all of which means it struck the right around. -- ground.

tomorrow this is being he heard by the committee as a whole. the amendments that supervisor cohen word sensitive enough that it required a public hearing. -- were substantive enough that it required a public hearing. part of that is because of the request from supervisor cohen and her colleagues acknowledge in the fact that, due to some of the criteria in the legislation, the timing of getting this passed and into law before the end of the year is critical. so, what we have -- so,

supervisor david chiu started out with the hra. the mayor introduced as legislation which have the 18 months, the business community came together and said they were fine with 18 months. but now the accrual period is 24 months. it is not cash, it is a cruel -- accrual. the policy committee and other small business leaders, they did a recommendation to make sure that we and the january problem. this is one of the reasons of the importance of having the legislation passed and be enacted into law before the end of the year to demonstrate we were very serious about making

sure that our employees, the businesses had access. we recommended that on january 1, 2012, what the balance is in the military account. those months will be attributed to the 24 month rolling time frame. does that make sense? then, it does require that the amount collected for the surcharge, if it is no kid -- noted as health care expenditures, those are spent on health care expenditures. so if more money is collected than is expanded, the business will be required to expand that difference on health care costs.

one other provision that the mayor, 90 days after separation, the employer is required to provide written notification of the balance. no later than three days after the employee separated. the other component is that 15 days after -- where is this? 15 days after an employer has made, put funds into account, the employee needs to be notified of those funds being put into the account. so it is 15 days. those are some of the primary elements.

a couple of things for a little bit of cleanup in review of this, i have this in the front of your section of the binder. i checked with our city attorney. under section -- under section 14, line at 6, to change the ordinance required to notify employees of their unchains benefits from three days to 10 business days. this would allow if there are any holidays because most employers have a third-party administrator, the time to get that information and be able to give it to the employee. especially if somebody it separates with short notice.

also on section 14, enforcement requires that the health care expenditure on behalf of the employee is done -- excuse me -- the intent is to change from five days to five business days. i am not reading it very well. number 2 and number 3 is to add five business days. last is, that if an employer and poses a surcharge on customers to cover part of the cost of the health care requirement under this chapter, the employer should provide on an annual basis the amount collected during. this is what i checked with the city attorney that during the

12th month a time, it is matching up that businesses have to report on a 12 month basis. making sure that the itemized amount, they are reporting on the same amount in relationship to the recording period. so does not 24 months for the surcharge and 12 months for the report they have to provide. does that make sense? those are amendments that the commission can approve and then we can see if we can get those amended into the legislation. are there any questions? commissioner dooley: no, i had a comment.

i was going to say that this has been a tough call for the small- business community. it is asking a lot. it still comes down to having to punish most of the good people and did the if you evildoers have brought this on everyone. i would like to acknowledge that this current incarnation is less punitive than the one we heard before. at this point, we have to move on and see how this one works. i want to make the comment that this is going to cause some hardships for some businesses. we should not underestimate that when we are moving forward. commissioner adams: i want to echo commissioner dooley's statement. i agree with you.

that being said, i would like to acknowledge the small business office regina for all of your work and support and letting small businesses be heard at these meetings. there have been a lot of them. i want to acknowledge on behalf of myself and the rest of the commissioners the job you have done, not only from us. i hear from people all over this town, the work you have done. we feel like we have somebody in our corner. thank you. i want to reiterate what commissioner to be said. you are right on.

commissioner clyde: i would like by starting to thank supervisor cohen. and also supervisor compost -- campos for bringing the problem forward. it is a problem that needs to be addressed. from different perspectives, people have their ways of addressing the problem. i have to recognize supervisor cohen with working with a contentious issue. that being said, i support the recommendations from the director because they come from a lot of thoughtfulness and giving clarity. i, i don't see -- for the

businesses that are applying in the spirit of the law and correctly, that this will not be a hardship for them. that i know. for businesses that are applying it as well as they can, some of these requirements will be difficult. i do not think it is impossible. i do not see any way not to support, going forward, i think it is the best we can do. when we say hardship, it will be a hardship for businesses. it will actually be a hardship for employees who may not be employed and to tell them that san francisco made a change in the law that took their jobs away.

i think that is the most difficult thing for me as a sam franciscan. i hope it is not going to be that onerous but i know that when we talk about a hardship for business, it does not stop with the small business owner. the hardest thing is going to be for the employees who may not have a job. that is my trepidation. the lower income business people, the lower income businesses. that being said, i will support this. and the support to the work of supervisor cohen and president chiu. president o'brien: do you know what the legislation has, i am

trying to remember, which would not be the first time. did we have anything to monitor the impact? i seem to recall there was something to do reporting to see how this affects things. >> correct. i brushed over what was new but in terms of the amendments, supervisor david chiu did have in his legislation for businesses to report on their expenditures. so, so that is still there. businesses will still be required in the amount of what they are making. the defined the details of what they will need to report on is still yet to, but the idea is to stay with your hra account, what

are reimbursable expenses under your plan so that we can monitor and track that. we want to reiterate to the fact that the employee notification, the time of the employment and on a regular basis as also codified in the legislation. i want to thank the mayor as well because he brought forward his legislation and he convened many meetings to bring the stakeholders together. i think with the mayor and supervisor chiu and others, this is what has been developed. we will continue to thank supervisor campos for bringing

the issue. this point has not indicated whether he will support the legislation. >> i want to acknowledge labor standards and their work drafting the noticing. i think it is important that we have this language from labor standards for the what we give our employees as they -- when they leave. i would like that to be not just left up. i think for the business, we should have a template that this is your notice just like cobra language is codified, state language is codified, i would like the city's separation language also clarified so we have no confusion.

>> it should be uniform. >> absolutely. >> may i ask -- perhaps what we want is guidelines. we do have the waiver form that is very -- you know, that waiver form is -- it is a little confusing. so i don't -- could we suggest they work with your office? >> i think maybe that would be the suggestion to ask them to work with language. or set out their recommended guidelines of what needs to be in it but to really -- i just want to caution because i think that the waiver form is somewhat confusing and so -- -- >> thank you. >> i think everybody has

mentioned everything that has been said. this has pretty much come to a hard line in the sand. the sideline pretty much i think going to be defined tomorrow. i think this has a good chance of passing tomorrow from what i hear. it is more productive to just move on and everybody swallows a better pill because they all didn't get exactly what they want. at least we can move forward. so i would support what we're doing here at this stage and see what happens tomorrow. >> i would like to make a motion that we -- >> there is no public comment. public comment is closed. >> i would like to make a motion that we support the health care security ordinance with the recommended amendments from the office of small businesses. >> do we have a