with an emerging residential neighborhood to the south. many of the aspects of this plan include increasing heights, insures one of the highest affordable housing mandates of any plan that we have seen, 35% of affordable housing. a key part of this plan is the funding of this transit center. this district plan will allow that to happen. by generating $2.7 million in additional public funding, both for the center and dtx. it includes pedestrian safety and public parks. i want to thank the planning department, and the former redevelopment agency for all of their work, for the many years of their work.

if there are any questions, i believe there are staff here. the planning department is here to address them. i ask for your support today and i also want to thank my co- sponsor. supervisor olague: i do not have much to add to that, i think it is an excellent plan and long overdue. i hope we get the support today. it has been something in the works for several years. i do believe there are some parts of the city and they cannot afford additional height and density. with transit first always at the forefront of these plans. eventually, we may want to revisit some of the issues are around parking requirements to make them more consistent, but

that is a conversation we can have in the future. supervisor mar: i want to add that the land use committee heard this item. i want to thank the great staff from planning that explained it so clearly. they did address the shadow issues. it really did seem that the shadows were not compared to the huge amount to the open space created throughout the area. a 5.4 acre aboveground part that should be a treasure. tremendous public benefits.

a tremendous project, i wanted to congratulate everyone that has worked on it. president chiu: additional discussion? supervisor kim: one quick comment. i know there are many concerns and surrounding communities that would be impacted by the shadows. the tower would rise to 1,000 feet and would be the tallest building in san francisco. much of the impact was in the chinatown neighborhood. it is a very small impact, the largest impact was seen in the neighborhood. i was happy to hear the city and planning has committed 9 million of the $12 million dedicated to master plan and a new park in chinatown on top of the new central subway station. it would run when year to the

elementary school park -- linear to the elementary school park. president chiu: i appreciate all the work that has been done by stakeholders to address. further discussion? aye. [roll-call vote] president chiu: this ordinance is passed on the first reading. item 26? >> item 26 is a motion ordering submitted to the voters, a policy declaration that

supports limits on political campaign contributions and spending and opposes artificial corporate rights. supervisor avalos: i ask for your support to send this measure to the ballot. it is a measure that would the voters of san francisco the ability to ask of our elected officials at the national level of a quest to look at amending our constitution that is not aligned with the current ruling of the supreme court around citizens united. we are living in a time of trickle-down economics, tax breaks for the wealthy, a great divide between the rich and the poror. we are seeing some of the richest corporations playing havoc with some of our democratic institutions.

on january 21, 2010, the supreme court in the case of citizens united versus the federal elections commission ruled that corporations have the same rights as people and they allowed corporations to have the rights of free speech and declared that unlimited financing is a free-speech and ushered in what we are seeing now in terms of the deepest pockets and corporations in the united states are able to find the vast amounts of money for a super pacs that can put on the airwaves about candidates and issues and really determining that money can be the greatest influence over the outcome of elections. this is something that is putting our democratic

institutions in great crisis. there have been statements from elected officials. we have done a resolution ourselves. it has been done in sacramento as well. we have not given the people a chance to respond and have their voices heard directly. this is what this policy measure would be on the ballot, giving the residents of san francisco a chance to say that we need to look at our constitution and have it amended to ensure that we're not counting corporations as living people, but a separate entity. we're looking at how we can make sure -- that we can find -- colleagues, i would like to ask for your support. president chiu: further discussion? i was happy to sponsor the

resolution that we passed earlier dish you're on the same subject. i did like to be added as a co- sponsor. >> [roll-call vote] there are 10 ayes. president chiu: why do we skip over our special orders? >> reported to the board as committee reports. item 36 was not afforded as a committee report. item 35 is an ordinance

authorizing the settlement of the lawsuit for $275,000. the lawsuit was filed on december 27, 2010, in san francisco superior court. president chiu: could you please call items of 37-40? >> the lawsuit was filed on august 20, 2010. item 38, ordinance authorizing the settlement of a lawsuit filed by maura moylan against the city filed on october 14 and the united states district court. item 39 is an ordinance authorizing the settlement of a lawsuit filed against the city and the recreation and parks department for $100,000 filed 1914. i am 40 is the resolution

approving a settlement of the on the litigated claim filed against the city. president chiu: item 41? >> item 41 is the motion approving the mayor's deployment of -- appointment of ann lazarus. president chiu: i understand item 42 was not sent to the board. if we could move to item 43. >> item 43 was considered at -- was awarded to the board --

supervisor this item was heard yesterday and enjoyed unanimous support for it to come to the full board of supervisors. this is a long time coming for district four. there are many neighborhood commercial districts across the city, whether we're talking about the inner and outer clement, fillmore, the haight, castro, broadway. the sun set does not have any of them. we wanted to start help that -- to about that committee dictate and provide additional controls. it creates for the first time neighborhood or named neighborhood commercial districts on noriega streets and it does a couple of other things that allows for additional ground floor height. this has been done in other places that help to make the

ground floor retail more attractive. there is also a requirement -- we have required that all uses the active -- that are active. if it is something that is not, we would allow for a process for conditional use, planning process to go forward. we have thought a lot about the efforts around sf [inaudible] and small business is trying to create additional business opportunities and figure out the best way to move forward in business models. looking at the empty storefronts we have, how is it that we can encourage more of these businesses to locate in our neighborhood commercial areas? when we thought about doing that

was to amend the definition of trade shop. trade shops exists already in all named areas or mc districts. what we did remove and what we tried to do was create more flexibility about how trade shops could operate. right now there is a limitation on any trade shops that have mechanical equipment. to relax that to allow for two- thirds of the space to be open and available for mechanical equipment. we wanted to remove a hp limitation just so right now there is a 5 horsepower limitations. a blender is one horsepower. there is a limitation on that. we were very cognizant of wanting to make sure as we relax these measures that we had control to mitigate content -- potential issues with noise arsenals. one thing we did do as a result of public comment is we added language in their that does

regulate for noise, water, and garbage. we had some comments about whether we could do more to regulate for vibration and that is something we want to look at 3 storelli legislation. that is something we did discuss during the land use committee and we're committed to do -- vibration control exists for entertainment situations. we wanted to think about it before we applied it to trade shops. this would create a significant wholesale or manufacturing use in a place that is not appropriate and that is not what we're trying to get out. for a trade schaub, you can exist within a facility that is 4000 square feet or smaller. storelli for large manufacturing entity, they would not be moving into a business of that size or location of that size. we did go through a number of different channels to make sure we are vetting the process.

planning also recommended it with modifications. we have adopted many of the substantive components of their recommendations, the areas where we did not is where they wanted us to consolidate to three named areas as opposed to four but we thought it was important to keep the names together. we have the support of the outer sunset rewachand's association and also the -- merchant's association. kate is support of this legislation. we have reached out to the office of small business to many of our local neighborhoods, small businesses to make sure we were not missing something. i do hope that you can support this legislation in addition to the benefits it would have for the neighborhood commercial districts in my neighborhood. i think that it creates an exciting opportunity for trade shops to locate across the city.

with that, i ask for your support. president chiu: any discussion and? roll-call vote. >> supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mark, aye, supervisor at delonte, aye, supervisor wiener, belotaye. president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, aye. president chiu: this passes on first reading. >> item 45 is an ordinance amending the planning code to make various clerical autumn --

modifications and item 46 as an ordinance amending the planning code regarding limited commercial uses in residential districts. president chiu: the three pieces of legislation you have in front of you are technical changes to adapt the needs in the northeast neighborhoods and impacting the northeast zoning laws we have on the books. item 46 which is supported by supervisors avalos -- baldy and campos and i want to thank them for other cosponsor ship, it would allow the activation of limited use with -- even if commercial uses have been inactive for three years and allows limited commercial uses on slightly larger corner lots. item 44 would allow for the conversion of auto service stations on transit corridors without conditional use authorizations and exempt bike parking from ratio calculations

and expand bike parking requirements. 45 are a number of clerical modifications to help fix 120 clerical errors and other issues within the planning code related to the northeast areas of town. i do have teterboro small clerical amendments on top of the clear goal modification -- two small clear commitments on top of the modifications. page 24, it should refer to subsection 5. and then on page 39, line 24, that section has been deleted. first, i would like to ask if you could first adopt those amendments. supervisor campos: can we have a second? seconded by supervisor mar. could we take that without objection? without objection.

any comments or questions on items 44 through 46? supervisor olague. supervisor olague: i would like to add my name to a co-sponsor -- as a co-sponsor of 44. supervisor campos: these pass on the first reading. president chiu: what do we go to roll call for -- why do we go to roll call for introduction? supervisor chu, supervisor kim. supervisor kim: i am introducing a resolution to form a citizen's advisory committee for the golden state warriors arena project. any development they might want to commit to. we are following through with the strong commitment to ensure

the committee members who have expressed a small car -- a strong desire to advise and the mayor's office on workforce development and the board of supervisors on this proposed waterfront plan. this calls for a member -- 15 member committee comprised of the majority of residents and small business owners located adjacent to the project as well as representatives from various specific -- of specific expertise such as youth programs, housing and open space, labor, maritime uses, and the environment. the board intends to appoint this in august and we look forward to working closely with the port. the warriors are under a specific time line if they are open -- able to open this a win in 2017 and that is why we are rushing to form a cac to advise and give feedback on this

project. we are putting this resolution force today. the resolution also states our intention to have regular hearings once a month and also that every six months that we would receive a project update from city staff, the warriors, and the cac, so we can hear from the public as well. the rest i submit. >> thank you. supervisor wiener. supervisor wiener: submit. >> thank you. president chiu: on her behalf and per correspondence, the clerk of our board has advised -- is introducing a motion to establish a process in accordance with charter section 15.105 for the misconduct meetings. the court has provided counsel. the motion will be placed on our

adoption without committee reference portion of our agenda next week. where -- we are free to discuss it next week and demand it if we so desire. this outlines the process as follows that is similar to our regular land use appeals. first, the process would begin by providing the ethics commission with an opportunity to make an oral presentation exploiting recommendations and should the commission choose to make such a presentation, it should not exceed 20 minutes. then, the parties would be provided with an opportunity to make oral presentations to the board as follows, first as the charging party, the mayor would go first with a presentation not to exceed 20 minutes. the sheriff will make a presentation not to exceed 20 minutes and the mayor will have an opportunity to respond to the presentation, not to exceed five minutes, followed by public comment which will then be followed by deliberations by the board and a final decision. with that, i will submit other

matters. >> thank you, mr. president. supervisor campos. supervisor campos: thank you and i would like to first shot about a resolution that i am introducing and i would like to thank supervisor olague, of dallas, cohen, and more for their co-sponsor ship. when an immigrant parent is detained on immigration charges for that parent is subsequently deported, very often that parent leaves behind a child in this country and that child tends to be a u.s. citizen. unfortunately for that child, the child is no longer able to see that parent. many times, a family members of the deported parent including the other parent, him sell for herself would like to take custody but because of the way

the law works right now, that family member including the parent of that child is deemed unfit. because of their undocumented status, their immigration status. the sad thing is that when family members are deemed unfit, the court -- courts proceed to determine the child is abandoned. that leads to the termination of parental rights for that parent that has been double -- deported. one in four children is the child of an immigrant. if you look at the numbers, recognize the significance of this issue. the resolution that i am introducing is a resolution that supports two pieces of legislation. california bill sb 1064 and federal bill h.r. 6128 whose

primary objective is to keep families together in these kinds of situations where a parent is placed in an immigration proceeding. these pieces of legislation would do the following. that would make immigration status irrelevant for determining the placement of a child. it makes foreign forms of identification valid in potential proceedings including proceedings that require background checks. it actually extends the hearing time and custody -- in custody cases so that when a parent who is undocumented is deported, the loss of parental rights does not happen as expeditiously as it happens right now. it also creates an agreement between local governments and foreign consulates to achieve family reunification. at the end of the day, all of us should try to get to resolve

that is in the best interest of the child. the legislation provides waivers and certain requirements that deal with the placement of the child. it would also prevent welfare agencies from filing proceedings against the parental rights of the parent. let me give you an example of something that happened in 2007. >>the mother of a child was of guatemalans dissent and had a 7- month-old child. the child's name was carlos. this woman was working at a missouri poultry plant that was then raided by immigration. she was detained on charges of immigration violation. soon after that detention and after the raid, what happened

was her parental rights with respect to carlos were terminated essentially. the child was taken in for some time by a couple that was approached by this mother to see if they could help. the couple without the mother's knowledge proceeded to then six other couples that could adopt the child and in fact, the child was subsequently adopted by another couple in missouri without the knowledge or involvement of this mother. the courts then proceeded to rule that even though this mother was detained in voluntarily, she was deported not by choice, that she legally had abandoned her child. a long series of proceedings took place but essentially we are today is that the child in question is no longer named

carlos. his identity is completely different. this mother who was deported was deemed to have abandoned her child. even though she had no choice in her deportation. that is what this legislation was trying to address. i want to thank my colleagues for their cause sponsorship. the second issue is an important one that we have spent a great deal of time discussing here at the board of supervisors. that is the issue of the health care security ordinance. specifically the loophole that i tried to address to the legislation passed by this board and vetoed by mayor lee. as you may be aware, on july 19 of this year, a few days ago, the civil grand jury released a report entitled "surcharges in healthy san francisco: healthy

for whom?" owners are benefiting by surcharges on restaurant bills. the many -- money is pocketed by many of these businesses. the report calls upon the city and county to disallow the use of surcharges to pay for employer mandates on the health care security ordinance and paid sick leave loss and calls upon the district attorney to begin an investigation of possible consumer fraud by these businesses. the report concludes that a loophole continues with respect to the health and security ordinance in -- and that loophole continues to cause problems for employees attempting to utilize the healthy reimbursement accounts they are -- a health reimbursement accounts they're entitled to under law. the report found employers retain the vast majority of these f,