you'll have people here sitting in these shares who will not have been a part of this process. so, to the extent that we can institutionalize in any kind of mechanism that allows for the best kind of review and analysis, i think that is something we shouldo8íbc consid. those are the kinds of things that i hope we think about between now and the time that ] there will be an opportunity for us to make changes at that point. i am not saying that we necessarily should, but at least consider those options. with that, i support the motion. supervisor kim: thank you, supervisors. i would have liked to have forward this with a understand, and i would rather this go out unanimously with no recommendation to the full board. i will motion. i want to thank all the parties that were involved in this. at the full board, we will have an opportunity to speak about

our thoughts about this again. i do appreciate many of the comments that have been made. sacrifices were made on all sides. i think that a key part of this charter amendment, as supervisor campos and supervisor farrell pointed out, is the revenue- generating ordinance that will move forward to the voters in november. and we look forward to full support from the housing trust fund coalition for the revenue- generating measure as well, because i think that they are key partners as we move forward in november to ensuring that we have a permanent stream for of affordable housing and, of course, for down payment assessment -- assistance for many of our residents to like to live and afford to live and buy a home here in san francisco. we have a motion to move it forward. we also have a motion to move this forward as a committee report so we can hear it tomorrow. any amendments made, because it is a charter amendment, will

force this item to be continued. i believe the last day we have to submit this is july 31, assuming that there are no other charter amendments that need to be approved prior to that date. so i am hoping that this will be the only one that is remaining after tomorrow. we have that motion. we can do that without opposition. thank you. madam clerk, item number two. >> item two commotion ordering submitted to the voters a policy declaration that supports limits on political campaign contributions and spending and opposes artificial corporate rights and giving corporations the same rights and title to human beings at an election to be held on november 6, 2012. supervisor kim: thank you, madam clerk. the sponsor of this item did want to come and speak, and he is here. supervisor avalos. also, supervisor campos is a co- sponsor. of like to give them an opportunity to speak.

supervisor wiener would also like to say sending before he leaves. and if folks can take their conversations outside so we can continue with this item, that would be great. supervisor wiener: thank you. i just wanted to i am support of this resolution. i want to thank the sponsors for bringing it forward. i look forward to sending it to the voters. supervisor kim: thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor avalos? supervisor avalos: thank you, chair. thank you for scheduling this item to be heard. this is a policy statement going to the voters, and it is in support of the constitutional amendment that would overturn citizens united and also look at addressing corporate personhood. and i have some talking points. so, we live in a world of trickle-down economics with tax breaks for the wealthy, diminishing union power, and

privatization of the public realm. we're witnessing the greatest concentration of wealth in more than a century. this concentration of wealth is playing havoc with our democratic institutions. on january 21, 2010, the u.s. supreme court ruled in a case called citizens united versus the federal election commission the corporations of the same rights as people. this ruling flies in the face of common sense. we know that corporations do not breed. we know that corporations do not give birth, go to war, or pledge allegiance to our flag. in many cases, they do not even pay their fair share of taxes. but under citizens united unlimited corporate spending on elections is now treated as a free speech and is protected under the first amendment of deeper -- of the constitution to do with this decision, the supreme court and our national democracy is in crisis. the supreme court got it wrong when the world that unlimited spending on political campaigns is a form of free speech. by striking down sensible limits

on campaign spending, the court has allowed the voices of a few wealthy interests to speak louder than the rest of us. is it any wonder that the people to like government does not listen to them anymore? since the ruling, corporations have been legally allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money in our elections on behalf of federal candidates. many of these contributions are made in secret. with no telling who is paying for the so-called social welfare organizations which front corporate political donors. the citizens united ruling has green lighted unprecedented campaign spending in the rise of super pacs. these committees have massive war chest funded by banks, insurance companies, oil corporations, agra business centers, a corporate giant eager to elect public officials that will protect our corporate bottom lines through deregulation and cutting public spending. the change in national politics

has been immediate. corporations dilutes the 2010 elections with close to $300 million in outside spending. this year, billions of dollars will be spent on corporate-from the candidates who will fight. this spending will very likely overwhelm candidates who are more oriented around the public interest of universal health care, clean environment, education, and taxation. put this together and our democracy is a being flushed down the drain. we can correct these errors by passing an amendment to the u.s. constitution clarifying the corporations are not entitled to the constitutional rights of people in authorizing limits on campaign contributions and spending that promote a level playing field and ensure that all citizens, regardless of speak. by placing a policy statement on the ballot, san francisco voters

will have a chance to call upon elected members ofykblñ congreso support a constitutional amendment to restore government by and for the people. this policy measure has four main parts. a statement that the bill of rights are intended to protect the rights of individual human beings. a statement that citizens united posts a serious threat to democracy by allowing unlimited corporate spending to influence elections, candidates election, and policy decisions. a stiffer san francisco voters to affirm that corporate -- corporations should not receive the same constitutional rights as natural persons and that corporate money is not a form of constitutionally protected free speech. also a statement for san francisco voters to affirm that they support efforts of congress to pass a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood, reversing the decision of citizens united case and calling on to other jurisdictions that passed similar measures and resolutions. i would like to thank common cause for their support, public

citizen, my friend, a san francisco citizen and resident, linda, an intern in my office, raquel from my office for her work in crafting this resolution in mobilizing support. i would like to thank my colleagues, supervisor campos for his co-sponsor ship, and it sounds like supervisor wiener is a co-sponsor as well. and i feel like at this time when we're saying the rise of great corporate influence over what is happening in our public realm, that we need to be of a fight back with statements like this from the public. san francisco is right for making such a statement as november on the ballot, and i would urge that we send this forward with your recommendations. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. supervisor campos? supervisor campos thank you.

i want to thank supervisor avalos for bringing this forward. i am proud to be a co-sponsor. we put something like this on the francisco to make a policy statement about something that happens at the u.s. supreme court. it is not something that we do lightly, but it is something, i think, that we have to do. because what has happened as a result of the citizens united position is that there has been a fundamental change in the way in which our democratic process works. one of the things that i found really fascinating in the ruling by the court was some of the points that were brought out in the descent. and the four justices that voted against the opinion noted that corporations, as it is in our legal system, enjoy benefits than natural people, natural individuals do not enjoy.

you know, if you compare what a corporation has the ability to do against, vis-a-vis, a natural person, corporations have limited liability, which is not something that any of us can have. they have the possibility of perpetual life. they can exist forever. and they also get pretty favorable treatment in terms of the kenya -- accumulation of assets. again, something that individuals do not get. you have also the ability of corporations to act in a way that of cs get -- of two spades for the public and in common law, there are reasons why you can pierce the corporate veil, because we have seen that corporations sometimes act in directly so as to avoid illegal activity, like what happened

here in san francisco during the energy crisis. you had pg any -- pg&e utility use it as a way of of funneling money out of the utility. there are so many examples where corporations are not taken the level of responsibility that an individual takes. and for that reason, to elevate the rights of the corporation to of the natural person is not only something that does not make sense, as supervisor avalos eloquently put it, but in terms of the law and the way in which the u.s. constitution has been interpreted until recently, it is not sending that has not made sense constitutionally either. the reality is that we should not be in a position where we have to seek a constitutional amendment because the u.s. constitution has never truly given corporations that level of legal rights. but the fact is that, because of the makeup of our supreme court,

we have this ruling. and i think it is important to undo what is happening at the u.s. supreme court for jurisdictions, cities like san francisco, to take a clear stand up to say that we're not for this. we are against this. it is something that goes against the very fabric of our democracy, and it is something that we want our elected officials in washington, d.c., to do everything they can to change the system. and, let's be honest, the way the system works, it is unlikely that the system is going to reform within the system. the people who work part of the system, even those who want to change it, are going to have a difficult time changing it. that is why it is support for the people of the united states to step in and say this is not aware that our democracy should work. this is why this policy statement is so important. and san francisco has always led the way in standing up for what we believe is right, for what

we believe is a democratic and inclusive. we are in peril as a democracy if someone can write a $10 million check and, by virtue of wealth, determine who gets to be not only the nominee for a presidential party or who is elected president. that is not what democracy is about to the fact is that the vote of every individual should count as much as the vote of any individual. and the fact that the $10 million check can be written by a billionaire is a direct result of what happened with the citizens united case, and we have to stand against it. i think it is really important for san francisco voters to take that stand, and that is why i am proud to be cosponsoring this with you,,.ñmx supervisor avalo. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you.

any other comments? no comments from committee members. at this time, i will open it up for public comment. please line up. two minutes. >> i wanted to start with a note. i came to the city was 22 years old. i was here when harvey milk and the mayor was slain and dianne feinstein was seated as mayor. i have been in politics ever since. yen i currently work for common cause. i work with the women sprites group for many years. i stepped down in 2008. and-- i work with women's rights groups for many years. i saw there was an opening at common cause to be in northern california organizer, and i wanted to work with young people. i have a nine-year-old daughter and i worry about her future. what i really want to work for

is a sustainable democracy where the air and water in all of these things are taking care of. i am very happy to be here today. in i am always excited about the beautiful things and the visionary things of san the politics. having said that, i want to say that this move to put this on the ballot, i am part of a national coalition that is taking citizens united as a common problem. we firmly believe that getting at the root of the money and politics is really the thing we need to do. thank you for this. thank you for this. >> think hank you? any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed.

normally on a philosophical level i do not support declaration of policies on the ballot just because they do not have a true policy impact and i generally support having something that has the legislative impact on the city to be sent to the voters, however, i very much support the intention of the measure and agree with the points that supervisor avalos has brought up. as someone who has studied the constitution and actually has a love of admiration for the document, it is something that guide our country's values and walls, i was incredibly disappointed to see the ruling of citizens united and the concept of citizens united do not act as human beings retreated as such and were given first amendment rights. for that reason i will support this measure to be put on the ballot and will support a motion

to citizens united do send this forward to the full board. any of their comments from colleagues? -- any other comments from colleagues? do we have a motion? we of emotion and a second. we can do that without opposition. thank you madam clerk, any other items? >> no, madam chair. chair kim:"xn seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. >> i love teaching. it is such an exhilarating experience when people began to

feel their own creativity. >> this really is a place where all people can come and take a class and fill part of the community. this is very enriching as an artist. a lot of folks take these classes and take their digital imagery and turn it into negatives. >> there are not many black and white darkrooms available anymore. that is a really big draw. >> this is a signature piece. this is the bill largest darkroom in the u.s.. >> there are a lot of people that want to get into that dark room. >> i think it is the heart of this place. you feel it when you come in. >> the people who just started taking pictures, so this is

really an intersection for many generations of photographers and this is a great place to learn because if you need people from different areas and also everyone who works here is working in photography. >> we get to build the community here. this is different. first of all, this is a great location. it is in a less-populated area. >> of lot of people come here

just so that they can participate in this program. it is a great opportunity for people who have a little bit of photographic experience. the people have a lot, they can really come together and share a love and a passion. >> we offer everything from traditional black and white darkrooms to learning how to process your first roll of film. we offer classes and workshops in digital camera, digital printing. we offer classes basically in the shooting, ton the town at night, treasure island. there is a way for the programs exploring everyone who would like to spend the day on this program.

>> hello, my name is jennifer. >> my name is simone. we are going on a field trip to take pictures up the hill. >> c'mon, c'mon, c'mon. >> actually, i have been here a lot. i have never looked closely enough to see everything. now, i get to take pictures. >> we want to try to get them to be more creative with it. we let them to be free with them but at the same time, we give them a little bit of direction. >> you can focus in here. >> that was cool.

>> if you see that? >> behind the city, behind the houses, behind those hills. the see any more hills? >> these kids are wonderful. they get to explore, they get to see different things. >> we let them explore a little bit. they get their best. if their parents ever ask, we can learn -- they can say that they learned about the depth of field or the rule of thirds or that the shadows can give a good contrast. some of the things they come up with are fantastic. that is what we're trying to encourage. these kids can bring up the creativity and also the love for

photography. >> a lot of people come into my classes and they don't feel like they really are creative and through the process of working and showing them and giving them some tips and ideas. >> this is kind of the best kept secret. you should come on and take a class. we have orientations on most saturdays. this is a really wonderful location and is the real jewel to the community. >> ready to develop your photography skills? the harvey milk photo center focuses on adult classes. and saturday workshops expose youth and adults to photography classes.