>> line item #5, vote to whether hold items 6 and closed session to go public comment on all matters related to items below encoding public comment on whether to hold item 6 in closed session. >> ladies and gentlemen, line- item 5 throughout his disciplinary matters, this is confidential and privileged. any public comment regarding this? please call item no. 5. >> vote whether to hold items 6 and closed session. >> all in >> please call item no. 7. >> vote to elect whether or not to disclose item six held in

closed session. >> i move we not disclosed. >> second. >> line item #8, adjournment. >> second. >> thank you very much.

>> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco's board of supervisors meeting for tuesday, june 5th. madam clerk, please call the world.

supervisor avalos: present supervisor campos: present. supervisor chu: present. supervisor cohen: present. supervisor elsbernd: present. supervisor kim: absent. supervisor mar: present. supervisor olague: present. supervisor weiner: present. mr. president, there is a quorum. >> could you please join me -- president chiu: could you please join me in the pledge of allegiance? i pledge allegiance to the flight of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. we have the meetings from may 24th, 2412. could i have a motion -- 2012.

could i have a motion to approve those moments -- those minutes? >> a charter from mayor edwin lee announcing his plan to reorganize and were run is it -- to reorganize the executive branch. this will become approved unless not approved by the board. items one through 11 comprise the consent agenda. they will be acted upon by a single roll call vote. president chiu: would anyone like to sever any of these items? roll-call vote on the agenda. supervisor chu: supervisor avalos: -- supervisor chu: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye.

supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. president chiu: aye. there are 11 ayes. president chiu: items 12, 13, 14, and 15 related to puc water issues. >> item 12 is for wastewater capital improvement at the public utilities commission for fiscal year 2013 and 2013-14. approximately $171 million for water improvements. item 14 is 4 hetch hetchy water and improvement of the public utilities commission. and item 15, approval of the water revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $163.4 million to finance various projects.

item 16 is an ordinance approving the issuance and sale of revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $12.3 million to finance various power capital projects. and item 17 is the real issuance and sale for the waste water bond in an aggregate amount not to exceed $22.8 million. president chiu: any discussion? roll-call vote. >> items 12-17. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor campos: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. v farrell: aye. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye.

there are 11 ayes. president chiu: ordnances were passed on the first read. item 18. >> services previously approved can be performed by a private contractor at lower costs for similar work provided by employees for various services for fiscal years 2013 and for 2013-14. president chiu: this resolution is adopted. >> item 19 is adopting the approval of market street for seven years. president chiu: item 20. >> an order into establish a lesbian, gay, by sexual and it transgendered task force. >> i'm really thrilled that this legislation is before the board

today and i want to thank the supervisors combos and olague for moving this forward and supervisor cohen for cosponsoring with us. we have a growing lgbt population in san francisco, which is a positive thing, particularly considering we had a generation of gay men in particular who died as a result of the hiv aids epidemic. the fact that we have more lgbt people who are aging and continuing to be key parts of our community is terrific. but we need to come to grips with the needs of this growing lgbt senior population. this community has needs that all seniors have, of course. we know that we need to address the needs of the seniors generally, but there are some unique needs ranging from hiv to

the stigma and some senior facilities and programs that are not necessarily embracing and sensitive to the lgbt community, to the fact that there are many aging without adult children to help care for them. it this legislation will create a task force that will exist and then expire after 18 months to formulate policy act -- recommendations to the board of supervisors of that we can move forward with appropriate policy to take care of these needs. colleagues, i ask for your support. president chiu: supervisor campos. supervisor campos: i want to thank supervisor wiener and his staff, along with supervisor olague and her staff and my staff for working on this. i think it is important for us to look specifically at the needs of the lgbt community as people are aging. the challenge right now will be to make sure we have right diverse body of people to work on this -- a diverse body of

people to work on this task force. i look forward to working on that. i think it is great that the lgbt caucus at the board of supervisors has worked together on this. we certainly appreciate the co sponsorship of supervisor cohen. thank you. president chiu: colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, this item is passed on the first written. item 21. >> an amendment with the san francisco 49ers regarding candlestick stadium. >> as i articulated it very for, a very -- supervisor avalos: as i are ticketed before, it is very moving to watch our 49 years. we'll need to see the construction crews off of 101 to

make sure that is a reality. we need to see how we can preserve our relationship with the 49 years going forward. this lease and then it does what i number of things, and it grants $1 million to the park department budget, whether or not the option is exercised or not. if the option is exercised ahmad any income will be whole of -- if the option is exercised, and the income will be whole for the season. and most important, the san francisco will partner with the 49 years for the lead super bowl bid, which will bring hundreds of millions of dollars in economic activity to san francisco. that is the principal reason why we should support it and we should be excited about it despite the fact that the 49ers are leaving, to be excited about this agreement. i would appreciate your support. supervisor cohen: since this is a family show, i have to make my anger and disappointment at the 49 years leading, i have to keep

it clean i think we should be kicking and screaming trying to keep them here. in the very least, we should be trying to keep the name. but the reality of the situation is that is what it is. none of us sitting around the border supervisors are happy about their decision to move to santa clara, but the entire city family and residents have been working to plan for the revitalization of the communities around the stadium with or without the 49 years. is no secret that the neighborhoods surrounding the stadium have tremendous needs and have borne the brunt of traffic and noise impacts of the stadium for decades. and in particular, the resident of the alice script public parking site. they have suffered from years of isolation as well as neglect. however, i am pleased to see that this lease amendment contains a number of provisions that benefit the city should the

49ers' choose to terminate their lease early, including a payment of over $1 million to the rec and park department for the youth program. however, as with any project or agreement in our duty, if elected as decision makers, is to ensure that any payments or community benefits as it is heated with these transactions are administered responsibly. and in a public manner that takes into account the needs of our city and surrounding community. it to this end, i have a clarification i would like to put forward. to our deputy city attorney, mr. rawl adams. ms. adams, could you please clarify that is your reading of this resolution that the rec and park department would be required to come back to the board of supervisors with an appropriation before the

spending of any of these funds? >> that is correct, supervisor. if the forty-niners were to exercise the option that you described, then before the department could spend that money, the money would be to be appropriated by ordinands of the board. and in fact, the resolution before you expressly says that the funds are subject to the budget and the preparation of the authority in the charter. brecht's thank you very much. you heard it here first. colleagues, the 49ers are 18 and brenda have represented all of san francisco. they have also had -- are of a team and brands that have represented all of san francisco. with his clarification i support this item and look forward to working with the rec and park department and the mayor and interested parties in the community to ensure that if the 49ers' thterminate their lease

early, we have an opportunity to see how these benefits should be utilized. that is it for me. president chiu: thank you, supervisor cohen. any discussion? can we take this same item, callbacks without objection, -- same call? without objection from the item is adopted. item 22 peter >> -- item 22. >> mixed used districts. gregg's -- supervisor mar: makes use areas have been of concern to neighborhoods and businesses throughout the city. i drafted with the support of supervisor olague and of a list -- avalos this ordinance will allow -- that will allow

neighborhoods a stronger say in the retrial finance -- retail financial services. the good planning ordinance would amend the section to include planning code, which are subject to retail control and require a conditional use permit. they would bring them under the same requirement that voters approved in 2007 when we passed proposition ji -- proposition g. currently, banks do not fall within the definition of financial retail. it would make banks, credit unions, savings and loans that have 11 or more branches -- those are formula retail financial services -- and they would be subject to the ordinance. they would be required to move into areas where there is

committed to support for their presence. where there is already an existing ban on financial retail services, then 11 or more services would be captured also by the band. the intent is to provide an additional measure of protection to small businesses, which are especially threatened by the proliferation of formula of retail businesses. it also allows the planning commission to assess whether the savings and loan or credit union is necessary or desirable in the community. and in particular, whether there is an overconcentration of banks within the community. this ordinance was recommended unanimously by the small business community and recommended by the planning commission by a 5-1 vote and unanimously recommended by the land use committee. at the land use committee, support was provided by supervisor wiener that would

grandfather in permits that had been submitted by the date of this introduction of this legislation. i believe the land use committee supported this unanimously because it seems unfair to change the rules on these businesses with little notice. others raised concerns regarding the out reached to those in district 10. it is my understanding that the office of small business has worked with supervisor cohen's staff and this issue has been resolved. we should always do very broad and multilingual out reached to stakeholders in all neighborhoods. finally, the state farm insurance agencies testified at the hearing that mixed use banking products with lump them in with other types of financial services that this legislation is intended to address. but it was explained by the planning staff that this business model was excluded from our legislation. the zoning administrator is issuing a letter to this effect

and we're working with him to clarify that. the ordinance as drafted has the support of many neighborhood groups and small business leaders throughout the city who want a small -- a stronger voice in the planning process. i urge your support. president chiu: supervisor olague. supervisor olague: i believe this furthers our commitment to small businesses in san francisco and in the keeping of commercial neighborhood districts unique and diverse. i believe it also helps to protect the integrity of neighborhood commercial districts. it is a small task. it is not a mandate. it simply makes conditional use for financial institutions to move forward in neighborhood commercial districts. it is basically trying to encourage public process and participation and allowing members of the public to have some say in what the

neighborhood commercial districts will include and will look like. there will definitely be instances where the financial institutions will be welcomed in commercial districts and in some instances, they will not be. again, i think this is just trying to continue in the spirit of san francisco neighborhood planning discussion by making sure that the public has a say in what moves ahead in their neighborhoods. i am happy to be cosponsoring this with supervisor mar and i hope we have all of your support today. president chiu: supervisor wiener. supervisor weiner: i will be voting for this legislation today. although, i think in part for different reasons that at least some of the proponents of the legislation. for me, it is not about whether we like banks or do not like

banks. they are a mixed bag. there is good and bad. despite everyone's views on banks, they do provide a critical service for the community. i do not want to many banks, but i certainly would not want them to have zero banks. for me, is about preserving the integrity of our neighborhood commercial districts. a bank tends to close in the midafternoon and is not open for most of the weekend. when you have too many banks in a commercial corridor, it undermines the vibrancy of the neighborhood because it becomes dead space for a significant portion of the week. in some ways, i think this legislation does not go far enough, and in some ways it goes too far. i had initially proposed the idea that instead of classifying

banks as formula of retail, we simply have a citywide cu requirement and the rationale being that this only applies when you have 11 or more locations. to me, what you have one location or 1000, -- whether you have one location or 1000, you are still closing at 3:00 p.m. and still closing at 2:00 p.m. on a saturday and you are still closed on sunday. it still has a major impact on the commercial corridor. i also think this goes further than i would ideally like to go. it constitutes a ban on banks in north beach and wherever else the city has a ban on formula retail. i do not think it is healthy not to have any banks whatsoever. i propose this as land use and without voted on it. i believe this should only apply

to ground-floor retail. it should not apply to the second floor. when it comes to banks or insurance companies or mortgage companies, since they do provide neighborhood services, we should welcome them. but they should be on the second floor. and we should be encouraging them to go on the second floor and allow the first floor to be of a more vibrant use. i would personally like to see this only apply on the ground floor. i have been told that york city is moving in a direction where they are either encouraging or in forcing banks that come into the neighborhoods to go on to the second floor because they do not need to be on the first floor. that will be a broader conversation for a different day. i would like us to take another look in the future city-wide how we approach financial services and whether they should be on the ground floor. with all that said, i do support this legislation. president chiu: supervisor chu. supervisor chu: i will be voting

against this legislation. when you think about conditional use process anything about formula of retail, the original intent was to try to preserve the mom-and-pop shops, the unique characteristics of different neighborhoods. in many ways, i think banking institutions do not have that same environment. they are not necessarily competing with mom-and-pop banks. there are really no such -- or very few of those institutions out there. i also wanted to quickly comment that i know there are multiple folks who talk about pro- small business. this is pro neighborhood. there are some areas that have more banks and there are some that have too few. but many of the banks that we have in our communities have been active in the commercial organizations and have maintained their storefronts and kept cleanliness standards, which i think are very important for different areas. at a time when we are seeing

many vacancies, i would be loath to adding more barriers to some operations to go into neighborhoods. many of the businesses i have worked with have also used these banks for many things, whether we are talking about loans or something just very simple like making a deposit in the middle of the day. and to be able to not have so much cash on hand. i do not see a reason why we would want to create an additional barrier. for some of the reasons that supervisor wiener laid out in prohibition areas, we would want to take a closer look before passing this. again, i do believe that some of the banks do provide a service that is important not only to our residents, but to the neighboring commercial businesses, some of the small businesses that do rely on them. for this reason i will be voting against this. supervisor mar: i appreciate

supervisor wiener's and supervisor chiu's comments. when we passed the ordinance in 2007, when voters passed it and banks would be financial services that would be caught with a net, many people were surprised that they were not. i want to thank many drop the city for their support of this legislation and i urge your support. president chiu: any further discussion? roll-call vote. >> on item 22. supervisor chu: no. supervisor campos: aye. supervisor elsbernd: no. v farrell: no. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye.

president chiu: aye. there are eight eyes and three nos. correct this ordinance is passed on the first reading. item 23. >> code establishing a wage for task force to establish the duties and sunset date. president chiu: supervisor campos. supervisor campos: thank you very much. colleagues, as you may recall, last year we probably voted unanimously in favor of some changes to the wage that ordinands here in san francisco. the legislation before us today takes the issue to the next level. it recognizes that it is not just the losses you have in the books, buy you also have to make sure that you have an efficient and coordinated effort that brings all of the city agencies, members of the community, including not only workers and

their advocates, but also businesses together to make sure that we are doing everything we can to address the issue of wage staffed. and then to make recommendations to this -- wage theft. and then to make recommendations to this body. i know there are a number of individuals, supervisors, web -- members of the workers alliance and others who are here, and i would ask those individuals who are here in support of item 23, if you could please stand so that we could see that this is very meaningful to so many people. i want to thank members of the kuehne -- of the community. i want to thank you for the work you have done in making this possible. i also want to thank the co- sponsors of this legislation, supervisors mar, president chiu, supervisor kim, supervisor avalos, supervisor olague, and supervisor cohen. i respectfully ask for your