struggle, that they are part of the 1% is not accurate. it is also unfortunate that we have a group of restaurants that have been charging a surcharge and not using that money for health care and. that is wrong. i'd think we have unity around that. but too broad a brush that to all businesses, either restaurants that are charging in using it for health care or restaurants that are not using a surcharge, it is unfortunate. i would encourage anyone, whether it is for the ballot or whatever direction it goes on, not to demonize businesses that do not deserve to be demonized and to be very specific when we are criticizing the conduct of a

relatively small group of people. i will be supporting the amendment. supervisor mar: i would like to thank president chiu and supervisor cohen for making an effort to try to find some common ground and compromise. i also want to thank the chamber and the restaurant association and the small businesses that have spoken as well, especially on the struggle that many small businesses are going through in this current time. i am appreciative of supervisor campos' courage to improve access for the lowest income workers of the city. i am not willing to support the amendment at this point. i do appreciate the effort of supervisor cohen to find ways to improve the situation for our lowest wage workers carry it but the legislation simply does not closed the loophole. in fact, it is codifying and legitimizing the concept of the hra's that, as some said, is

putting us in a position of taking a step back for our lowest paid workers. it is a bad concept to formalize. i realize some officers have to use that system. in the long term, it is moving away from the broader objectives of improving access to health care for everyone. i want to make one other point that health care professionals and others have brought up. from a health perspective and policy standpoint, health insurance, in some ways, for san francisco, is much better than help the san francisco is and how the san francisco is much better than the hra accounts. are we try to improve health care for our lowest paid workers in the city? in my analysis, and i did have an open mind going into this as well, i think that the amendments are bad for workers and their health. some informants are being made -- some improvements are being

made and the majority will probably pass today, but it does not solve the underlying problem that the coalition has identified for over one year. that is why i am voting no on the amendment as well. supervisor elsbernd: seeing no other comments, could we have a roll call. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. supervisor farrell: aye. supervisor kim: no. supervisor mar: no. supervisor mirkarimi: no. supervisor wiener: aye. supervisor avalos: no. supervisor campos: no. president chiu: aye. president chiu: this ordinance is passed on the first reading as amended. at this time, we do have one

3:30 special commendation to. i would like to ask supervisor mar to make the presentation. supervisor mar: i would like to honor the 2009 hired chef of america amazing chef and one of the neighborhoods that is celebrating its 10th anniversary in our cities. this has been chosen by zagat's has one of the top 10 restaurants of the decade. it contributes to the incredible culinary diversity of our city with traditional moroccan cuisine. the chef who opened the restaurant 10 years ago blends modern and sophisticated interpretations that combine authentic more often flavors with fresh and local ingredients. i really appreciate the staff and the workers as they support

local agriculture by purchasing their materials from local farms and orchards. they are committed to sound habits. there are many awards that this chap has been given, but i also want to say that he is a true moroccan american pioneer. he has also released a new cookbook that documents and share is the story of him and his work with an international audience to. in honor of the release of that book, there is a great event happening on saturday, november 19, 2011, at green apple, one of our independent bookstores in the district. he will talk about his work. we are voting later today and are calling it aziza day in san

francisco. i would like to ask him to address us and if anyone else is here, addressed the board. >> i did not come here prepared. i did not write a speech. i want to thank everybody here. it is a great honor to be recognized by the city and support of this great community. we always try to do the right thing. we always try to be an example in the city. we will continue to do that. what has been done here could not have been done in any other place. the city has been -- the city has provided us with all the tools to be successful. i always think the san francisco is one of the best places in the world as far as restaurants are concerned. i just want to thank everybody

for giving us this honor. we are very honored. [applause] president chiu: supervisor kim, do you have a commendation? supervisor kim: today, on behalf of the entire board of supervisors, i would like to congratulate the arc san francisco for their advocacy of people with developmental disabilities and providing programming that empowers san francisco residents to self- determination, and dignity, and quality in our never goods. since 1951, that have provided

the resources and tools that and power adults with dead duck -- with developmental disabilities to live a productive lives through services and unemployment, independent living, housing, and advocacy. in the 1980's, they pioneered the supportive employment movement, which you see from many nonprofits that are supported by the city. they created opportunities for housing for those with developmental disabilities carry it more recently, they have created a model to address a new need -- the health and wellness of an aging population of adults with developmental disabilities. today, they are they're making sure that health care is funded throughout the state.

this is a constant hub of activity for everyone and our neighborhood. neighborhood meetings are constantly happening along with art openings and workshops on top of these services that they provide and the community is very involved in the development. we would like to commend you and congratulate you on your 60 years here and our city and your service to our neighborhoods. >> thank-you very much. i am the advocacy community organizer for the organization. this is why we are here. we have the first person with developmental disabilities hired by any mayor's office in the country. she has had the job for three

years now. i would like to thank you. we have an 80% unemployment rate for people with disabilities in our country. we have 220 organizations hiring our people and we need more jobs. that is one of our keys. we want to thank you and want to thank the support of the city of san francisco. [applause]

>> i would like to say thank you to all the supervisors, you help us. think you for your support. i am happy for 16 years. i would like to think all the supervisors. thank you. [applause] >> congratulations. why don't we go to our other 3:00 special orders. could he please read items 14 and 15? >> pursuant to approve file approve november 8th, the board

of supervisors has agreed to sit as a committee of the whole for items 14 and 15. people interested in the in or rejecting the proposed resolution approving an authorized in the redevelopment agency in the city serves as good to execute a lease of land. >> at this time, we will hold a hearing regarding the 474 natomas street. >> good afternoon. i am the acting deputy executive director. it is my pleasure to be before you to request approval of a gram please forward the affordable housing project located in the agency south of market redevelopment area.

this will be comprised of 60 units of affordable rental housing for very low income households. the developer of this project has worked to finalize all of the funding necessary to construct the project and this is scheduled to begin this january and is estimated to complete in the fall of 2013. we are requesting that the board approved the ground lease between the agency and the developer for a term that can total up to 99 years. the agency's structure is to ensure that there is long-term affordability for this project and remains in affordability for the long term. this contains language that this was injured in two prior to the statewide redevelopment agency and is considered enforceable

under state law. that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> thank you, any questions. many see if there are any who wish to speak either in favor of or in opposition to the proposed resolution. if there are, please stepped up now. >> we are excited that we're moving forward with the transit plan. this building is being led by community housing partnership. this will include at least 25 units of two to three-bedroom

units. what was mentioned was the long- term affordability and at least 35 of the units are below 50 per 5%. -- and are below 55%. i would like to make a motion to make an amendment. can we take the motion without objection? without objection, that shall be the case. >> on item 15 as amended.

>> this resolution is adopted as amended. item 16. >> item 16, a public hearing on the disclosure responsibilities of public officials under public securities law pursuant to the file on november 8th, 2011. >> our public finance director and are comptroller are scheduling a hearing to conduct a training session on the responsibility for disclosure imposed by federal securities law. at this time, i would like to turn it over to the office of public finance. >> president, members of the board. we're the deputy city attorney.

before we began, i would like to thank the board the opportunity to for making a brief and very important information. bush john is joined by his former partner. keep provides data the advise.

we are doing this in service. the comptroller has made a commitment to make these to the board of. many of you have seen the various is super articles and commentary. some of the commentary has been quite alarming. among the more frequent and public commentators of the u.s. securities and exchange commission, which is frequently expressing a concern about the quality of municipal disclosure. you should know that the fcc views board members as critical

as gatekeepers. our aim is to keep you informed about your legal obligations as board members and quite frankly to keep the city ahead of the curve in our disclosures practices. with that, i will turn it over to john. i would encourage you to answer any questions you may have and we are available after the presentation and it anytime during which an offering document is approved by this board for advice and counsel. thank you.

>> we have the sec speeches, there has been literally hundreds of actions against governmental issuers. we have been asked to take all of that and present a comprehensive and authoritative and entertaining analysis all within 30 minutes. as far as the entertaining, i don't think that will be highlighting the federal securities laws. i would like to think that we can address that. to make sure that the critical investment is not lost, let me give you the two minute version of this 30 minute presentation. as board members, when you approve the official statement, the document goes to the

investors, you have certain responsibilities imposed upon you. this is a personal liability and the city's liability. it really boils down to one issue, are there any current material facts that you are aware of where your concern might impact the credit of securing the bonds. i their current facts or are there any adverse material financial trends that you might be aware of that would impact the ability to repay the bonds. we are speaking to your unique position where you might have knowledge that we don't have.

muni to let us know of any material facts, and material trends, what do you know that we may not know, all so what do you know that we might also know? let's take litigation as an example. you have the obligation to be there read the official statement and see how it is addressed or to speak to us and say, why have you not addressed it? this is really that simple. if this is not followed, there are serious implications once again for both the city as well as ourselves. what we will be discussing today are the various contexts in which the city disclosure occurs, the standards that apply, the types of actions that

the sec can bring. therefore, the rules and regulations that apply to corporate finance to not apply in this context. even though there's no requirement to register this, the city is subject to the anti- fraud provisions in the federal securities laws. these apply to both those subject to administration and registration and not. in addition to the provisions uncommon the sec has jurisdiction not over the city but over municipal security service and dealers and we will

see how they use that jurisdiction to impose jurisdiction on you. the disclosures are made in three principal context, the first is primary disclosure which means we are coming to the market with new financing. as board members, that document comes to you and you approve that document. in addition to the primary disclosures come on this is referred to as secondary or ongoing disclosures that the city makes. this is where the jurisdiction comes into play. the sec has a role which says to the broker dealer acting as underwriters that they are not allowed to underwrite your securities, they cannot keep

these open unless you provide information. the sec has used this to make sure they you provide reports to the market. cash in addition to contractually, you can voluntarily make disclosure to the marketplace. the third context in addition to the official statements and the continuing disclosure i men's that you make, the sec has a broad concept that any statement that reasonably expected to reach investors is possibly subject to anti-fraud liability. here is the way it was phrased. a municipal issuer when it releases information to the public, it is reasonably expected to reach investors. those disclosures are subject to

the anti-fraud provisions. the fact that they are not published does not alter the mandate or violated the anti- fraud descriptions. what this means is that the investor information on the website was press releases from the mayor's office. all of those could be considered a reasonable investors. in addition to those being the three context, one of the standards that applies to these disclosures. once again, even though your securities are exempt from registration, the anti-fraud provisions apply. what they say is to save time, i

am not going to, at least on all of these slides, repeat verbatim what is in the text. in short, what it says is that there can be no material misstatements or omissions when coming into the market. no material mistakes or omissions. what is material? this has been defined as " substantial likelihood that under all the circumstances, the fact would have assumed actual significance in the deliberations of the reasonable investor. it is not talking about any particular investor was material but rather the investor would have met the objective standard of saying yes, that would have an effect -- that would have affected my decision.

fothese can be actions. the fcc has a number of forms they can use. they can bring it administrative action. -- the sec has a number of forms that they can use. they can bring a civil action in federal court. the sec does not have jurisdiction over criminal cases. they refer that to justice. in addition, if they think there has not been enough advice to the market and they think the people involved are not aware with their responsibilities were, they can issue a report by which they advise of the responsibility and it defies the orange county report.

they must show that there is a materially misleading mistake or omission that has been made or is committed which can be either intent or recklessness. for the ninth circuit, they have defined recklessness as an extreme departure from the standards of ordinary care which presents a danger of misleading investors that is either known to the defendant or so obvious that the actor must have been aware of it. they have to show the same three elements. in addition, they have to show those damages