president chiu: good afternoon. welcome to the board of supervisors meeting. please call the roll. supervisor avalos: present. supervisor campos: present. president chiu: peresent.

supervisor chu: here. supervisor farrell: present. supervisor kim: present. supervisor mar: here. supervisor olague: here. supervisor weiner: present. >> all members are present. president chiu: please join me in the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] colleagues, we have the february 28 board meeting minutes. can i have a motion to approve? without objection, those meeting minutes are approved. are there any communications? >> i have no communications. president chiu: could we go to

our first agenda item? >> an ordinance amending the city code to establish city policy regarding participation in federal counter-terrorism activities. supervisor kim: thank you. i know this ordinance is now back to us for a second vote. i want to speak again about why i support this ordinance is strongly. as i have stated before, this ordinance is a product of years of work by our era, middle eastern, muslim, and south asian constituents in communities. what you have heard at our allies -- rallies are truly emotional, but this is not reactionary. women to a process with our human rights commission and police commission. we spent several months working on that draft before we introduced it to the full board. i truly believe the policy is

the best policy for the city of san francisco. what it was helpful it would come to a compromise, we were not able to both stand against racial profiling -- which we are all against in this room -- as well as stand against mou have in our departments and federal agencies. this is a policy statement that san francisco believes it is wrong for any employee funded by the city and county of san francisco to target muslim americans, asians, and asian americans for secret intelligence gathering purely based on their race or religious beliefs, and not any reasonable suspicion of criminal or terrorist activity. daniel redmond, at the national center for lesbian rights, stated it best in an op-ed. "let us be frank.

when there is not reasonable suspicion, it is unreasonable suspicion. good police work does not require racial profiling and throwing civil-rights aside." this ordinance restates that local privacy laws and the san francisco state constitution must be respected in any surveillance work that sfpd does. it is not ok to rifle through someone's garbage just because your skin is brown, or merely because you are muslim. the real debate, and i stated this a couple of weeks ago, is that, because i believe everyone at city hall agrees with these ious, is whether we should codify these values. i believe we should. i have not heard why we should not codify these protections, beyond a philosophical idea that this is under the purview of the police commission.

why does a philosophical argument carry more weight than the safety and civil rights of who we represent? if you believe in this legislation, you believe it is redundant, another argument i have heard -- what is the harm in codify in this for the future? another argument i have heard is this is not an issue in san francisco today. but we have evidence released recently. the fbi has been covertly gathering intelligence on individuals and religious leaders in san francisco purely based on their religious beliefs. this is in the tales from the 30's and 70's, where something that happened in new york city and new jersey is happening here today. we want to ensure to date and in the future that our san francisco employees will never engaged in this type of racial profiling, which does not make our city and the safer, but instead engenders mistrust, fear, and the anger and

frustration you have all been hearing from our community members. innocent members who would not have been targeted if not for the color of their skin or their religious habits should be angry and insulted that they are being surveiled merely because of that. i really do believe we have strong leadership at sfpd. i believe our chief is committed to sunshining future mou's. i know the chief personally, as many of you do. i appreciate his commitment to the safety of the city. this ordinance is about -- is not about the chief. and it is not about terminating the mou. it is about the community. not all our residents have this personal relationship with sfpd. we also do not know what future chiefs would do, as we could not have predicted the change between 2002 and 2007, when sfpd

did secretly changed the conditions with the fbi. this ordinance would assure our communities that we are protecting their civil rights, the right not to be investigated because of their skin color or religious practice, today or in the future, because we were willing to codify this in our ad man code. i want to thank again the community that is here. i was hoping you would stand, if you were here in support of the safe civil-rights san francisco ordinance. it is also the broader pan- asian community, the lgbt youth , and the latino communities that stand in solidarity today. i also want to thank mayor sam adams, of portland, who wrote about how he was able to do the same work in portland. i really want to thank all the

members. i know a lot of work and passion went into it. it took a lot of courage to come out and speak about your personal experience, regardless of fear of retaliation in the future. i thank my five co-sponsors, and office staff, who divorced incredibly hard on this ordinance. thank you. [applause] president chiu: thank you. supervisor avalos: i will be brief. i just want to thank supervisor kim for clean this forward, and the community for fighting for it for so long and so hard to get up to this point. i really do think we are codifying the law of what our partnership by the police department will be with the joint terrorism task force. i think it is important we have extra oversight from this body, developed with the police

department. we, all of us, have stood against racism, oppression. and we have stood with people who are oppressed and persecuted. i think this is one of those times where we can do that with a hard vote today. also, last friday, there was a press conference with a lot of pastures in the african-american community, protesting the murder of trayvon martin in florida. i was heartened to hear of that event. to join in the prayer service with the muslim community, standing in solidarity with this ordinance. that tells me the great unity we have together in fighting against oppression and persecution. with that unity, i would like to propose we all joined together, boating in favor of this ordinance. -- voting in favor of this

ordinance. president chiu: unless there is any further discussion -- supervisor campos. and i remind the public that we have a role in the board chamber that we do not express support or opposition to statements, in order to permit the discussion expeditiously. supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president. i want to thank supervisor kim, the office, and all the community activists and members of the community that have been working on this issue. we have talked about this issue before. at the last meeting, i reiterated the point that there are some issues that are so important that we, as a city, actually codifies those issues as part of our local law. for example, the sanctuary city for immigrants being one example. but there are other issues when we have taken a stand because we

know it is the right thing to do. i am still trying to understand the opposition to this measure, because at the end of the day, what we are talking about is codifying principles and practices that i think we are all in agreement of. as supervisor ken indicated, even though we know and recognize that this police chief is committed to the protection of civil rights, the protection of civil rights is so important that it should go beyond one individual, and it should be embedded in local law and local practice to make sure that your respective of who is in that position those rights are -- irrespective of who is in that position, those rights are protected. i want to mention one of the op- eds that appeared in "the advocate." as a gay man, i was especially touched by what daniel redmond wrote.

if i may, i want to read a section of that, because i thought it was something that kind of hit the nail on the head, in terms of why we're here. this is what he wrote. "there was a time when lgbt people could not safely gather -- not in san francisco, not in new york, not in los angeles, not anywhere. our meeting places were subjected to police raids. our community members were intimidated and trapped. -- and entrapped. the rights groups were founded in cramped living rooms and windowless bars. people used pseudonyms, in fear of putting the name on membership lists. they were subjected to the fbi surveillance and harassment. lgbt people were once viewed as a threat to national security,

so we should understand what is at stake in a proposed civil rights ordinance in san francisco." i think that really is the point. unfortunately, at different times in our history, we have had different groups that have been targeted. as a member of one of those groups, i think it is important for us to take every step we can to insure that does not happen again. that is what i think it is really important for us to pass this legislation. i know that at different times there has been an alternative discussed, the idea that we just have the matter aired at the police commission and they have the opportunity to review whatever is signed. while i appreciate the transparency that comes with having an open discussion, at the end of the day, when proper -- prop h, which created civilian oversight of the police department, past, the idea was that a civilian body would be able to establish those

policies. the reason this ordinance is so important is that it insures that consistent with the police reform of proposition h, that the police department has the opportunity to actually vote and say yes or no. that is what real civilian oversight is. it is for that reason that this ordinance should be passed. president chiu: thank you. colleagues, any further discussion? supervisor elsbernd: no. supervisor farrell: no. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor weiner: no. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: no. supervisor cohen: no. >> there are six ayes and five

nos. president chiu: this ordinance is finally passed. [applause] thank you, colleagues. why don't we now move to item 2 below? >> ordinance authorizing the director of the port to execute an agreement with bae systems to install shoreside power equipment at dry dock north 2 at perce 70, -- at pier 70, not to exceed $5.70 million. supervisor campos: i have a question for the port. can you explain how this is different from item 22, which is currently on the agenda? >> supervisor campos, through the chair, brad benson, special

projects manager with the port of san francisco. this waves virtually all of the contract and requirements of the administration code of the city to permit the port to work with bae systems to build a shoreside power facility to reduce air pollution at the shore 70 shipyard. the current plan is that bae would use its own skilled workers to do a lot of the installation activities, and would contract with a subcontractor largely to build the electrical transformers needed for the project. item 22 is a narrower exception, just related to waving competitive bid requirements. supervisor campos: i see. i wonder if you can cite a little bit as to come from a business standpoint, anytime you have a fixed amendment, as we have here, why, from a business

standpoint, it makes sense to have that extension. >> there i think you are talking about the sixth amendment to the lease with bae systems. they are the port shipyard operator. the port has been in a lease contract with bae or its predecessors to run the shipyard since 1987. we are to have a bankruptcy along the way -- actually had a bankruptcy along the way. it is fairly difficult to find an operator to run a civilian shipyard like this. most shipyards of this size our military as opposed to civilian shipyards. the port has really worked to maintain this relationship with bae. we think they are a good operator. should they decide not to renew with the port, we would go out to a competitive process. supervisor campos: thank you.

president chiu: can we take a roll-call vote on this item? supervisor elsbernd: aye. supervisor farrell: aye. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. >> there are 11 ayes. president chiu: the ordinance is passed on first reading. >> item 3, approving the bond proceeds issued to finance various projects at the north beach branch library. president chiu: same house, col. >> item 4, appropriate in approximately $6 million of the fund balance and general

obligation bond proceeds interest earnings to the public library in fiscal year 2011-12. president chiu: same house, same call. >> item 5, resolution designating those agencies qualified to participate in the 2012 a joint fund-raising drive for officers and employees of the city and county of san francisco. president chiu: this item is adopted. >> item 6, equipment lease, revenue bonds not to exceed $10.50 million. president chiu: this resolution is adopted. >> item 7, authorizing the adult probation department to accept and expend a great in the amount of $40,600 from the rosenberg foundation, related to the implementation of the reentry

council not work. president chiu: accepted. >> item 8, authorizing the department of public health to retroactively accept and expand a grant from the california department of food and our culture. president chiu: -- and acg griculture. president chiu: same house, call. >> item 9, authorizing the recreation and parks department to accept and expend an urban greening grant funded by safe drinking water. president chiu: this resolution is adopted. >> i contend, approving the form and authorizing the distribution of a preliminary official statement relating to the execution and delivery of its tickets of participation for various capital improvements. president chiu: same house,

call. >> item 11, adopt an amendment north 2 to the memorandum of understanding between the city and county of san francisco and the service employees international union. president chiu: this ordinance is passed on the first reading. >> item 12, amending the planning code relating to the public art the and establishing a public art work trust fund. >> i am excited that this will move forward the public arts requirement and that [ unintelligible] last year, mayor lee and i

introduced this legislation to provide flexibility in how the 1% fee can be used. sponsors of projects would now have the option to contribute all or part of their public art feet to the public artwork trust fund. developers could have greater flexibility to support more activities -- capital improvements to nonprofit art facilities, performance improving, and the restoration of various public art. this legislation also expands the area that the 1% public art program applies to, to expand to new commercial areas, mostly in the soma neighborhoods, and in districts 3, 6, and 10. i hope this will expand opportunities for the arts community. i want to thank the arts community, the planning staff that help on this, representatives from the development community, my aid,

and the mayor's staff for their assistance, and as for your support. supervisor campos: can we take this same house, called? this ordinance happens -- this ordinance is passed. >> item 13 amends the planning code regarding extension of time for legitimization of existing eastern neighborhood uses. president chiu: same house, same call. this ordinance is passed on the first lead. why don't we skip over our 3:00 p.m. special item related to the america's cup, as well as our 3:00 34:00 special items. can we now go to item 20? "item 20 was considered by the rules committee at a special meeting on march 29, boarded without recommendation. it is an ordinance amending the campaign and governmental conduct in municipal elections code to modify funding of the

city's public financing program, to increase expenditure ceilings for supervisor rod -- supervisoral candidates. president chiu: any discussion on this item? supervisor elsbernd: i would like to divide the question on this matter. i would like to have two votes. i would like to have a second vote on page 14. this is the specific section that grants a 75% increase to the campaign accounts of candidates running for supervisor, that creates a $60,000 campaign contribution of public funds to candidates. i agree with the rest of the legislation. it is the section that i spoke about last time. and i and which some have a

specific vote -- and i think we should have a specific vote on that section. if we could have two votes, i would appreciate it. president chiu: we will have the first vote on the majority of the legislation. the second will be on the section supervisor elsbernd referred to. is there further discussion? supervisor weiner: i will be supporting the legislation today. i want to thank the authors for being flexible, the ethics commission for its work. i had raised a number of concerns. the most significant was what i believe is the chronic over funding of the public finance and fund. -- financing fund. by putting in a lower cap, i think we have addressed that issue. we will have enough funding for the races without taking much- needed general fund money for the account. with regards to the $250,000 cap

for supervisor races, although that tap was higher than i wanted it to be, i am comfortable with it, keeping in mind there will no longer be any public matching of funds above that tap -- cap. this would eliminate the 421 match -- four to one match, and decrease the amount of public funding going into these campaigns. given the supreme court funding and lack of match above the -- finding and lack of match above the cap, i believe the race soon as appropriate. that is why i will be supporting this legislation today. president chiu: the first vote is on the majority of the legislation. supervisor elsbernd: aye. supervisor farrell: aye. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye.

supervisor olague: aye. supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. >> there are 11 ayes. president chiu: that portion of the ordinance is passed on first reading. on the other divided portion -- >> that is page 15, lines 10 through 13? that would be section 1.144. subsection b4. supervisor elsbernd: no. supervisor farrell: no. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. supervisor chu: no. president chiu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye.

>> there are 8 ayes and 3 nos. president chiu: that portion is also passed on first reading. why don't we now go to roll call? supervisor campos: thank you very much, madam clerk. i am submitting a resolution that is co-sponsored by eight supervisors a -- by supervisors avalos, chiu, kim, and olague. it supports the trust act introduced by assembly member amiano, which establishes that an individual in california will not be detained pursuant to an ice hold -- will only be

detained if convicted of a serious and violent felony. we have seen under the so-called secure communities program that a number of individuals have been detained that do not meet the requirements of the federal program that was supposed to go after individuals who engage in criminal activity. many of the individuals have been detained under the scom program, but did not engage in any criminal activity. it is important for the state of california to make it clear that we believe our resources at the federal level should not be expended trying to go after these individuals. i think it is important for the board of supervisors to take a position on this very important piece of legislation. we thank assembly number amiano for his leadership. it is great that a member of san francisco continues to mp