be was 4.1 million, $4,100,000. we have asked the budget and legislative analyst to conduct a separate and independent review with the idea that the more information we have about this item the better. and i'm going to talk a little about some of the findings by the budget and legislative analyst. first i want it remind my colleagues that any costs that we're talking about are costs that would come from the airport's revenue budget, not from the general fund. and unfortunately there is a very clear difference of opinion as to what the actual amount implicated is. the budget and legislative analyst -- and i want to thank him and his staff for the very detailed and thorough report that they have provided -- indicated that the 4.1 million budget that the airport is estimating is certainly not consistent with what they have

found. and, in fact, they have found that baseline costs of adding harvey milk's name to the airport can be as little as 355,000. that many of the costs that are attributed to this effort are costs that would not be incurred by the airport, but, in fact, would be incurred by other government agencies like caltrans. unfortunately, in providing an estimate of how much caltrans would actually end up spending in this effort, should they be asked to change some of the signs that are involved, it was reported to the budget and legislative analyst that the airport, in fact, did not bother to ask caltrans for their perspective or their opinion on that matter. and, so, the cost of the estimate that is related to caltrans was as a result

overestimated by $2.5 million or nearly 350% of the actual cost. the cost of changing highway signs, according to caltrans -- you'll hear it from the horse's mouth -- would only be $20,000 per sign, which is actually six times lower than the $120,000 per sign that was estimated by the airport. as we noted from the very beginning, we as a city have a lot of control over what signs are actually changed in this effort, and our objective, our goal has always been to minimize the cost and our goal and objective here is to make sure the cost is no more than 500,000, which is consistent with the report that was provided by the budget and legislative analyst. but we believe that there are many reasons why harvey milk's name should be added to the airport. but i think that at the end of the day, the issue of cost when it comes to this issue is truly a red herring.

and i would hope that, that whatever you think about the issue, whatever you think about the idea, that this issue of cost does not get in the way. the reality is that given the amount of money that we're actually talking about and the numbers speak for themselves, if there are reasons to support or oppose, they should be disconnected from that issue because we have a great deal of control and we have the ability to minimize the costs. i think it's unfortunate that when a projection is given by a city agency, that that projection is actually not grounded or founded on an actual numbers given to them. my hope is that something like that, you know, will not happen again. the reality is that the facts should speak for themselves, and we are grateful to the budget and legislative analyst for actually giving us the actual numbers that are implicated here. the second point that i want to talk about, the second issue is an issue that is very important to my district, and it's

actually an event that is one of the most important events that the city and county of san francisco has, and that is carnival, which is about to happen in about ten weeks from today. there had been a number of reports that point to some financial issues with the entity that is currently running carnival, and i want to thank the mayor's office and specifically joaquin torres, but the mayor's office who has been working with my office, so that we as a city ensure that this event goes forward. and i want to make it very clear that the city and county of san francisco is doing everything we can to make sure that this event continues to happen, notwithstanding some of the issues around the financial problems faced by this entity that has been running carnival to the last few years. we are also grateful to the controller's office, to ben rosenfield and his staff, because they are providing technical assistance, reviewing information to make sure that we have a better sense of what it takes to put on a successful

program. not only a successful program for this coming year, 10 weeks from now, but also a successful program going forward. carnival has been an institution in the mission and the city for many, many years. it's something that reflects the culture and the richness as the latin culture in particular, and it's something that we want to preserve. and i again want to thank the mayor's office for working with my office on this very, very important matter. the last item that i have is an item that i would be introducing today, is a piece of legislation that is a very important piece of legislation that we have been working on for actually quite sometime. and i want to begin by thanking stephanie ashley from my office, who has been staffing me on this and has done a tremendous job in putting this complicated piece of legislation together, as well

as hillary rhone an, who worked on this prior to stephanie's arrival. i also want to thank my colleagues who have signed on as co-sponsors of this legislation, supervisor avalos, supervisor kim, supervisor mar, supervisor wiener, supervisor cohen, supervisor breed, and president chiu. i think that the fact that eight of the nine members of this board who are here today are supporting this legislation will send a very clear message of where the board of supervisors is in term of protecting the right of women to choose for themselves what to do with their bodies. i'd like to provide some context for this legislation. in 1993, dr. david dunn was actually shot and killed on his way to work at the pensacola women's medical serve is he clinic. that shooting occurred in the midst of an anti-abortion protest that was aimed at the patients and staff of that clinic. that same year dr. george tiller who was serving as the medical director of women's health care services was shot

in both arms by an anti-[speaker not understood] protester. dr. tiller went on to survive that shooting but only to be shot and killed 16 years later by another anti-choice activist. ~ that same year the san francisco board of supervisors enacted the access to health care facilities ordinance which was an effort to ensure that the men, women, and families that walk through the doors of any reproductive health care facility are safe from threats, violence, intimidation, and harassment. it has been 20 years since these incidents took place. and while much has happened, sadly, not enough has actually changed. last year we saw the bombing of two reproductive health care facilities and a third that was burnt to the ground. the national war on women is reaching the boiling point. and here in san francisco,

unfortunately in my district, we have been dealing with this issue for more than a year. patients of the planned parenthood clinic have been intimidated. they have been harassed. they have been screamed at and videotaped as they try to access the services of this clinic. the neighborhood has been shocked by the level of harassment that we have seen. and over the past year, from the moment that we first heard of these incidents, we focused on making sure that we began implementation of the loss that is in place. my office has worked closely with planned parenthood as well as our police department, our city attorney's office, and other city agencies, including the department of public works to figure out a way to properly implement the laws that we have in place to protect the rights of the people involved. we have, as we noted, a bubble ordinance that has been imposed for quite sometime, and we enacted as a board last year a

white zone ordinance which we offer to provide additional protections. unfortunately the laws that we've had in place have not been sufficient to protect the women, especially here. demonstrators continue to not only harass and intimidate, but they try to find loopholes in the existing laws. and what we have right now is a last resort attempt to provide some protection to the patients who want to access this clinic and to the men and women who work there. the ordinance that we have -- we are introducing creates a buffer zone, that it provides protection of 25 radius within the entrance of the clinic. it amends the bubble ordinance that was passed by this board in 1993. that bubble ordinance was a good start, but this is needed. let me say that what we are doing is something that we don't do lightly. we recognize the right of

people to express free expression, to express their speech. we protect the first amendment in san francisco. but the buffer zone ordinance that we are introducing is one that recognizes that we need strike a balance between the right to free speech and the right of women, especially to access health care. no right is absolute. and the courts have found that buffer zones like the one that san francisco -- that we are introducing today, in fact are narrowly tailored and survive legal scrutiny. the narrow scope of this ordinance ensures that the facilities we're talking about, and we are talking about freestanding health clinics which are the most vulnerable when it comes to being targets of this kind of activity, that those facilities are indeed protected. i want to talk a little bit about what the law in this area is. the right to free speech is not absolute. the effort to regulate this

kind of speech is something that has to be done carefully. it has to be done in a way that is narrowly tailored to achieve an important government interest. we believe that we are doing that precisely here. the analysis of what is narrowly tailored does not require that we actually follow the least restrictive tool, though, in fact, i think we are doing precisely that here. there is a [speaker not understood] of circumstances that are examined by the courts, and courts throughout this country have actually looked at the kind of law that we are proposing and have held that it is constitutional. recently, in 2013, actually just a few years ago, the first district -- the first circuit actually upheld in boston, massachusetts a buffer zone ordinance that was very similar to us -- to ours. and, in fact, that ordinance created a 35-foot buffer zone. ours is actually more modest. it's actually smaller, it's only 25 feet.

and the key and the analysis for the court at the time is that these kinds of regulations are appropriate so long as the speaker has an opportunity to reach their intended audience in other ways. and a buffer zone context there is no prohibition in terms of the speaker expressing their views outside of the buffer zone. it may not be exactly what they would like, but the constitution does not require that. i also note that the court made it clear that the united states supreme court has recognized that there is an interest in protecting the rights of people, in this case many women, who are trying to access health care facilities. the supreme court has ruled that there is an interest -- that clinic patients have, in both avoiding unwanted communication and passing without obstruction.

the united states supreme court has recognized that right and that interest, and we are making sure that women have that right and that interest protecting. more recently, in 2011, the 9th circuit court of appeal upheld a similar ordinance in oakland. and in that case, that ordinance, like our ordinance, provided an exception for general hospitals, noting that it was completely appropriate for the city to provide added protection to freestanding clinics because the offices and facilities that we're talking about, these freestanding clinics, have patient stays that are of shorter duration and may as a result be more vulnerable on account of the layout and design of the facilities. the last thing that i would say is that i look forward to engaging in a discussion about this very important subject matter, but i want to take this

opportunity to especially thank the workers of planned parenthood and the many women, especially, and families that have been impacted by this harassment. they have been waiting for quite sometime for more than a year to finally have in place the tools needed to have their rights protected. they are, many of them, risking their lives on a daily basis. government has a responsibility to protect them and i want to thank them for their willingness to do what they do and for their patience in dealing with this level of harassment. the fact is that if the right to choose and the right to access health care cannot be protected in san francisco, where could it be protected? we have always led the way in protecting civil rights, and this is an opportunity to continue to do so. thank you. the rest i mitt. -- submit. >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor kim.

>> thank you. today i'm introducing a resolution to rename an alley way here in district 6 just a block away from city hall, the [speaker not understood] alley. and i am introducing this resolution with supervisor campos, wiener, and avalos. many of you may have been following in the press some of the recent comments that our former [speaker not understood] leader has made regarding lgbt members of his parliament. due to some of his strong comments and his unwillingness to apologize for it, we have been [speaker not understood] request in our office to consider the renaming of this alley way. it is just a one-block alley way in between van ness and polk street. and after looking at it and determining some of the cost and the scope of the work, we decided that it was worthwhile to move forward with this idea. as we consider what the renaming process would look like, the street's name was

originally ivy street. we noted there is only one physical facility on the street which contributed to the low cost of this action. and that is the [speaker not understood] health clinic. so, we are proposing today to rename this alley way the tom odell place. now, the renaming in no way takes away from [speaker not understood]'s achievements. we recognize he is an important figure globally and that he has done much as a laboringer and a political leader. however, his recent comments has not represented the city that i'm part of. the city is a refuge for many members of our lgbt community and we didn't feel it was appropriate to continue to have his name on one of our streets. but a little bit on tom odell. dr. tom odell was adopted by his neighbors, jean and hazel after moving in with them at the age of 15 following his parents' separation.

growing up in new jersey he was encouraged by his adoptive parents to pursue gymnastics and discovered that he exceled in athletics. he continued his gymnastics career while attending springfield college in massachusetts, and changed his mainly before switching to premed. after graduating he attended medical school in the new jersey college of medicine where he put his degree to use as a preventive medicine officer and paratrooper and he was drafted into the army in 1966. when he found out he would be shipped to vietnam, he protested and was sent to train as a [speaker not understood] for the 1968 olympics. after the mexico city olympics and serving his residency, he earned his medical degree from stanford. he established his practice on 18th street in the castro neighborhood and also participated in the olympics for a second time, this time as a saudi arabian olympic team physician for the 1976 montreal olympics. after returning to san francisco in 1972, he joined a

gay bowling league. this league inspired him to consider organizing a gay sporting event modeled on the olympics. following through with his idea, first the gay olympics was to take place in san francisco in 1982, but because of legal trouble he renamed the competition into the gay games and these events were a great success. and this is where tom also met lesbian athlete sara low enstein with whom they shared a child. their daughter, jessica, was laterborn in 1983. between returning to san francisco and the olympics, tom and his partner charles became the first gay couple to appear on the 1976 cover of people magazine and was also featured in the main article of that month's edition. in 1985 he was diagnosed of aids. he was able to participate in gay game, too, in 1986. even winning a gold in the javelin event. he lived until age 49, passing away on july 11, 1987.

the city clinic in civic center was renamed to tom odell to honor his work in previous years serving as an employee there. and to speak a little about the clinic and why it resonated with us, the tom odell clinic is an important resource both for our city and for the tenderloin neighborhood in particular. it serves our most vulnerable and low-income residents, and also hosts a transgender clinic on that block. even some of the our constituents that are most critical of city government and the work that we may often pursue loved him and considered a place where they felt accepted and they were served with respect and dignity. and i do want to in particular thank department of public health for supporting this amazing institution. barbara garcia on good start, her days as a nurse at tom odell clinic, i know certainly have had a great number of physicians and nurses that have come through that clinic as well. and we look forward to its

expansion in the newly renovated wide building on goad engate, new tnbc affordable housing housing site which will have a ribbon cutting in two weeks. and the rest i submit. >> thank you, supervisor kim. mr. president, that concludes roll call for introductions. >> thank you. at this time why don't we go to general public comment. >> now is the opportunity for the public to comment generally for up to two minutes on items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board, including item on the adoption without reference to committee calendar. public comment will not be allowed on those items which have already been subject to public comment by a board committee. speakers using translation assistance will be allowed twice the amount of time to testify. and if you would like a document to be displayed on the overhead projector, please clearly state such to sfgtv and remove the document when the screen should return to live coverage of the meeting. >> let's hear from the first speaker.

good afternoon, supervisor, [speaker not understood] for public library. don't give money to the friends of the library. don't accept money from the friends of the library. the underlying reality of what privatization does to our citizens in order to protect those who gain status from selling the public's assets and reduce the beneficiaries of society to a handful of the richest and most powerful. i have already explained that the friends of the library have expended 51.3 million in assets during the 12 years of the branch library improvement program. i have also explained that during the same period the friends of the library's executive level employees earned 6.6 million, which is 35% more than the benefit to the library. either directly or indirectly, that was only 4.9 million during that same period. the friends of the library are ripping off san francisco and its citizens for millions of dollars per year based on broken promises. let me tell you, the friends of the library don't waste their

time showing any respect for the principles of democracy, freedom of speech, and fair play. when david chiu has me arrested at a board of supervisors meeting, that is not the tip of the proverbial iceberg. it is a little peak of the huge mountain of abuse and [speaker not understood] that they use to suppress the truth. this is the way it always works. david chiu is just a part of the corporate forces that say we don't belong in a public institution. we are not a stakeholder because we have not given money. and driving the public out of public institutions is called leadership. money is so powerful that it buys influence even to break the law and to remain unaccountable. it is the law that costs more than money, and having me arrested does not solve society's problems. and it's always the same. the lies cost more than the

money. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> mr. president, if i could to the speaker, mr. chafee, we have a board rule in this chamber which requires that public comment be addressed to the members as a whole, not to individual supervisors. >> thank you, madam clerk. next speaker, please. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is keith dylan. i say god bless you and god bless the city and county of san francisco. today, mayors, i want to talk about a phone line for people with disabilities and the sick and shut in. i just learned that this is actually on your books for phone line to be offered for people who can't make it in to

-- who want to address -- address the board of supervisors. many a time when i lived in laguna honda hospital, i wanted to participate and say something to the board of supervisors, and i couldn't. all i could do was watch you guys on tv. but you have this on your books and, so, i'm asking you for the sick and shut in, the sick and the disabled who cannot make it, if it rains, me and my wheelchair won't be outside. and this is the city of san francisco. so, we know we get a lot of rain. so, thank you for addressing this matter. >> thank you. next speaker. the greatest miscarriage of justice was when jesus was

killed. the greatest miscarriage of justice was when jesus was killed. now, we see this typically portrayed as david when the two assassins appealed to the king and said, we have good news for you. you know who said this is? he said -- king [speaker not understood] said. you are now king of all the tribe of israel. how do you feel about that? david said, not too good. i'm pro choice and so i'm going to give you the choice of whether you want me to cut your hands and feet off before i kill you or after you're dead. and they both chose to be killed first and then have their hands and feet cut off and then he hung them up [speaker not understood] now. that was a prophecy. he didn't really realize what he was doing, but it was a prophecy because, you see, jesus died on a cross. he what hung up and executed for a crime that was being

homosexual or rapist or murderer. by the way, [speaker not understood] you're promoting homosexual status and going to punish you for that, you're going to burn in hell. you laugh at that, david. you're going to burn in hell. >> if i could ask you to keep your comments directed to the entire board, we would appreciate that. thank you. jesus said in matthew 18, wherefore if your hand or foot offend you cut them off and cast them from you. it is better for you to enter into life halt or maimed rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. now, see, that's why he cut their hands and feet off, see. and hung them up. so, jesus, when he died on that cross, he bore the wrath of god. not only the love of god that was manifest, but the wrath of god, the justice of god because it wasn't only the really bad wicked people like homosexuals and rapers and child molesters like michael akino that were executed. >> thank you very much.

very, very welcome. see you next week, lord willing. >> next speaker. good afternoon, president chiu and supervisors. i have graphics. ♪ winter, spring, summer or fall and it's city hall i will be there you've got a city friend and also good luck good luck to you, too and [speaker not understood] all these ipods stolen. if an ipod could sing, it would go... ♪ abra ka dab ra, i want to reach out and grab ya

abra, abra ka dab ra i want to reach out and grab ya i go down the road [speaker not understood] and it really scared me now i can't call the green, green grass of can't call home shall ~ that really lit up the bridge great, don't you think? after all, there's --♪ ♪ london bridge [speaker not understood] but the only bridge, then there's brooklyn bridge and the [speaker not understood] bridge that crosses the one across the bay san francisco you're gonna march yourself down on the new bridge here you come >> thank you. next speaker.

members of the chamber, once again i am before you to advocate on the behalf of seniors and seniors with disability who cannot be here to advocate for themselves. i think the time is more than ripe when something should be done positively for seniors who have worked hard and received [speaker not