of number one here. i have a small business in san francisco snoen as solar power, it is dormant, but i hope to turn it into a wonderful small business into the future. and also, i will convey a message over the phone to a great friend of mine who has influence over one of the largest mutual fund companies in this country thank you very much. >> next speaker please? >> good morning, thank you supervisor avalos and everybody else. i am (inaudible) i am the resident (inaudible) of the theater in the tender loin and i want to give a national perspective on what we are living, i spent most of last year in new guinea which is in the south pacific and it is the most diverse place on earth and

there are over 80 languages and it is tribal country. and quite a few people that i met there spoke to me about the changing weather patterns there. there was always a clear, dry season and a clear rainy season and now things are jungled and the temperatures are out of whack and the rain is coming down when it is not supposed to and when it is supposed to. and people are live entirely off the land growing crops and it is hard with the average culture to plan when things are no longer as they have been forever, and i bring this up because these people like ingenious people and the people of poor throughout the world are the ones who most immediately would be strangely impacted by climate change and they are the people with the least resources to effect this issue and that is the country

that gave birth to the auto industry, which is not the only but a huge factor in what is happening with the climate and we as americans, we have, as i said, that the people have talked about the moral duty and we have key partners and it is definitely up to us to be key partners in the solution. thank you. >> thank you. let me call a few more cards. and if you hear your name line up. >> the first person called can come up. >> pat gerber adam (inaudible) and nick (inaudible) we already had. and michael sanbrono and gina luna and aaron stomreston and tom mcduna. >> good morning, and thank you again, mr. supervisor. my name is adam sherman and i am also a member of the san francisco state university of fossil free divestment and i am

the chairman of the under graduate committee which is to put simply is to preserve the integrity in the impending graduation of the senior members and first of all i want to commend everyone for showing up and you are showing an incredible amount of support what i want to say is that a lot of the activities that happen on the san francisco state campus are often concurrent, recent report within our environmental studies says that we are on track for within the next five to seven years, both the city and the university to achieve 0 waste, this is incredible and shows how the great minds are thinking alike and i highly, commend it and i urge that this continues, both parties are doing an incredible job. there is also a clause in the sfsu foundation policy that says that we as the university do not in any way con donor invest in the social

responsible and civil right abusers and in many cases these big oil and gas are, whether subtly or not. >> i want to commend everybody for coming out here and showing the support and believing in the same thing, i highly urge that we great minds and we parties continue to think alike and continue forward. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please? >> hello, my name is michael sombrono and i am here from the university divestment and i want to thank those who showed up and especially those from sf state and i want to give a sigh let applause to that. >> i am here to support the fund from divestment. as mr. avalos said the climate crisis is only getting worse with the fossil fuel emissions that we are releasing. it is something that we can do locally and make the impact globally, we need to lead the way and take the strength away from the fossil fuel industry.

i appreciate your time and it is inspiring for what we are doing at sf state so see that our city is also taking on this plan and we must never forget to divest and give rest to the wounded world. thank you. >> my name iser on and thank you so much for taking the time to sponsor this our planet is at a cross roads, just last year the world bank agreed with the findings of the international payment on climate change from the united nations, and stated that we have about 3 years to enact sweeping legislation on climate change before we reached a tipping point downed which there is nothing to do. and in 2006 as a graduate student, i was on a reporting

team that branched out across the planet and went in to places where the impacts of climate change were being experienced by human beings up to that point much of the reporting and climate change was reported on the science and we had not heard much from the people, i went to an island called kirabos and met a man who was a village elder and they described a number of the facts that they have been experiencing as a result of climate change. that with the obvious ones like the sea level rise which causes the intrusion on the fresh water, where they get the fresh water from which is the corral nations. and also we saw a coastal erosion and disruptions to the patterns of migratory fish and that was in 2006 and since then we have seen so much in the united states from the super

storms and fires and droughts and more. and you think that with such obvious evidence, staring our culture in the face that it would be less of a disconnect in this country, but unfortunately there still is. one piece of intrusion is there is a recent poll that showed that 73 percent of americans do believe that climate change is real. unfortunately in that same pool, the majority of people expressed a greater concern about the cost of gasoline than the impact of carbon emissions. i think that the governments have a duty now, more than ever to lead a people that have this disconnect between knowing that the climate change is real and not value enough it do anything about it. i think that the legislation that you are sponsoring is an important step in that direction. possibly there is plenty of evidence to suggest that switching you are investment from the fossil fuels to green energy is a smart investment.

wind, solar, and bio fuels, renewables are expected to rise, 8.2 percent compared to only a 2.1 percent rise in natural gas which is the fastest growing fossil fuel. new investment in the new roads to a record of 260 billion dollars in 2011. it is a smart investment and i encourage you to divest in fossil fuels and thank you. >> i am out of speaker cards, so anybody who would like to comment, please come forward to the podium. >> thank you, i had not intended to speak today but nigh name is susan green and i am the member of business and finance development and we are

a privately held company in san francisco. and i wanted to speak to the risk of not divesting and the time frame regarding that? and in the past, a number of speakers have recovered to the tobacco industry, the asbestos industry comes to mind, when the industry seems to become harmful, our society has come up with regulation to regulate them and in particular, if we look at them now in the market capitalization is much smaller than it would have been otherwise if those political solutions were not put in place to mitigate the dangers from their products. in this case, i think that young people today really get the issue, that the science is clear, five years ago we did not, there was not much of a climate movement in existence, now we have organizations like

350.org that are leading an international movement and have chapters all over the world. a year ago, there were 1200 people, who are arrested at the white house over the keystone pipeline, now, through the activity of my company's on-line activism program and groups like 350.org, we have 60,000 people who have pledged to be involved in civil disobedience and this movement is growing rapidly and going to have a quick impact in the next few years because young people today really get the urgency of this issue and understand the implications for the future, so i would urge the retirement board to consider the risks of not divesting portfolios in the coming years. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker please? >>

>> and my name is julia kitchal and i am a resident of san francisco and i was not going to speak today either but after hearing the break down of the sf retirement fund i feel like i should say something. and while acknowledging these rules of the institutions that hold the pensions, private assets, if you really interesting to me to make a moral argument for the deinvesting from the fossil fuels but we have almost half of the fund and presumable half of the pension funds and fossil fuel assets untouched because they are privately invested. so perhaps the pension fund should also be considered deinvesting from the private holding that preclude the moral restrictions from the investors as well. >> thank you. next speaker please? >> my name is len sky and i have a couple of comments, i am a san francisco resident.

we going to the 6 biggest (inaudible) and the three grievances of climate change, habitat destruction and the oposition of the hab habitats (inaudible) and we are just one species out of a noble role and we are causing all of these... one of the biggest extinctions in the planet and (inaudible) to humans (inaudible) you know, to do everything that we can to stop the killing of species and take our place in the universe. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please? >> hello, my name is jed holsman and thank you for this opportunity to speak and for

this hearing, i am a resident of san francisco and i wanted to echo everything that has been said before me. and i want to particularly mention what we learned in this hearing about perhaps half of the fossil fuel investment of the retirement board being in private equity which would not be touched and encourage the committee and the board to look into options for policies that could complete the process. i just wanted to point out that although we don't often think about it these days, economic activities require functioning systems and every economic transaction is traced to the foundation and begins with natural capitol. and the natural resources into products that we can use. i have wanted to point out that i want that it would be penny wise and pound foolish to worry too much about the risk of

divestment in a hundreds of a basis point when the status quo of not divesting will leave the planet and the investments rs meaningless because of the pressures on the company and the position that it support and thanks very much. >> thank you very much. >> speaker in >> hi. thank you very much. >> my name is aparan and a san francisco educator and musician and the member of the troop. and i just want to say that personally as a san francisco resident, i don't feel like it makes sense to put a lot of money into something that when we see all of the problems with it when there are plenty of wonderful things out there that there is not enough money to go towards. when we hear the arguments against giving money to fossil fuel companies and all of the harm that we know that they do and the only reason that we might do it would be because it might cost us potentially, we are not sure, we have not seen

the data we might lose money by not investing in the long term that does not seem like a trade off that makes any sense to me thank you. >> thank you, very much. >> and any other member of the public who would like to comment? ? seeing none, we will close public comment. and i would like to call up mr. huish one more time. >> thank you, for staying here. there is come a few comments about our private investments and i am wondering if we the retirement board can actually summarize by the time ha it comes to the full board what the investments are in the fossil fuel companies in the private equity side? >> you were the one that mentioned the billion dollars, our research and i don't know exactly where you got that

number, however, i do not have the information that there is another half of a billion dollars on the private equity side i will be happy to get that information to you on our holdings that are restricted based on the contractual obligations that we have but i did not want anyone to leave thinking that half, i don't know the number, but it is not, i didn't want anyone to think that that was a hard number that half of the investments that the san francisco trust has would not be touched by this policy. we will get you the real number >> if that is possible to get, i think that we are looking for the 23rd to have this to the full board. this resolution to the full board and if any time between next week to be able to provide that beforehand? >> we will do our best. >> thank you. >> okay. this item is before us. and just want to thank everyone for being here. and you're very, very thoughtful and beautiful words, protecting our planet and looking at how these kind of solutions that we can apply

here at the local level. just hearing comments, i was really thinking about i go back a long way, i know that (inaudible) song that everyone is crying mersy and justice, just as long as there is business first and that is not how we want to do business here in san francisco. i think that we want to make sure that we are allowing our values and our concerns around climate change with our investment policies, that is what this is about. and there is a growing need toward the beginning of it, but if we were to take action here in san francisco, urging our retirement board to divest, we know that other cities will follow, and we will start a steam rolling effort across the country to really work towards holding these companies accountable. and really saying, you know, definitively what we need to do and moving forward around climate change as a nation. so i wanted to thank everyone for being here, this resolution is not a sure bet, of the full

board. but i hope that we can actually use about two weeks to help to get some education to members of the board, to be able to pass this. and i would love to see it unanimously, but with the strong majority moving forward. i do believe that we know that it is the right thing to do, and we know that the signs are all around us of climate change and also the signs that are with us now about how desperate we are, or fossil fuel companies are in seeking oil and the impacts that it has on our environment whether it is the gulf coast or the tar sands or the habitats around the world like in ecuador and so we have a responsibility to apply to the people of the world and i hope that we can take that action here as the board of supervisors of san francisco. >> thanks, supervisor avalos for the hearing. i want to thank everyone no came out and spoke today. i could not agree more about

climate change and the urgency that we have to act as a country and a nation, internationally and locally. and this is certainly one way to have that discussion. and so, i firmly believe in the idea. and i want to thank the people who came out to talk about that and i think that everyone really respects the passion that everyone has, especially the students that koim out, thank you all if you are all still here and thank you for taking the time. so, in terms of resolution, a few concerns. one, i especially my colleagues know and they have... we pass on resolutions but this is on the level that this is a larger matter that we will have to deal with here and something that impacts us greatly locally. a few other issues, one, i do have a concern about that investing returns for the retirement fund and social policies and i thank the

director for being up here today for speaking. and i don't know if you are still here. you know right now, we have a target of 7 and a half percent expected investment returns from our retirement board. and as i have expressed many times to the staff and others, i think that is a completely unrealistic expectation. and our investment returns effects so many things to employees to retirees and how much we have to pay in the pensions and for healthcare which we will talk about later today and it has a huge impact across our city and these investment returns and for everyone involved in the city and county of san francisco so we can't take that lightly, i am also mindful of the legal restriction and we don't want to be putting anything into the resolutions or in favor of them passing them or that are contrary to the legal restrictions that the board has as fiduciaries to its members. and likewise, you know, this is

maybe, something or a topic for the full board of supervisors and i think that there is asome hypocrocy that the full board approved the contact with shell oil last year, and (inaudible) but, however, we are to vote in favor of shell oil on one hand, and it was for clean power that the people could argue for that. however, i think that is a good discussion to have. >> however, two things, let me discussion this, supervisor avalos? something where i could like to get this out of committee. and we were not planning on having just two of us here. adding two causes in here, and let me suggest these amendments and see if you are okay with those. >> one adding a resolve clause that perhaps could do with second resolve clause abesinger

further resolve clause that the city and county board of supervisors understands that the policies supercede the retirement fiduciary to its members. ... >> no i am not really, kie entertain that, i don't know if we have to put that because we talk about legal constraints that the board is under and so it would be a moot point. but if you feel that it has to go in, i could consider it, but i think that it is already the fiduciary responsibility of the retirement board to have those considerations. >> i think from my perspective it is important to acknowledge, i think if you read this text alone, it does not account for that and for me it is important to acknowledge that the retirement board has a separate duty and so i would suggest that we put that in one in there. >> let me suggest a second one as well. >> i want to appreciate the economists who came out and talked about the implications if we could have a better

portfolio, i think that we are going to be better off as a city and county, and i acknowledge the fact and i appreciate the acknowledgment but it is difficult to look forward. however, i do think that we can't as we seek to mandate or excuse me, urge our retirement board to consider divesting from certain sector and so forth for a social perspective which this one i will support. we run the risk of taking lower investment returns as a result. and, so i would suggest a second clause, saying that the san francisco, excuse me, the city and county of san francisco board of supervisors, to the fact accepts that divesting in fossil fuel companies, reducing the investment returns as a result and the city and county of board of supervisors believes that in the investment of fuel is an acceptable trade off for all current and retired city employees who are affected by

the retirement board. >> with those in there, i am happy to put that forward. >> i don't know why you would want to put in the second clause because it could go the other way too, it may or may not, see a reduction in investments being successful. it just seems, you know, that you are adding language that is pretty superfolous. but if you feel like you have to have it in there, and you know, consider it, i would actually consider possibly you know, if we add it to the full board and that could be a place where you could have the language there before, this is the first time that i heard the language myself. and so it seems like, you know, it would make sense that we would consider a possible amendment for the full board to

have there and i think that you probably have, you know, support from colleagues to do that. but if you want to insist, i will want to move this thing forward. and i am willing to accept those amendments to move it forward. but i want to say one other thing. you mentioned support for clean power as being some what hypocritical to support this resolution and to support the clean power sf program, i think that it is easy to be able to use the word hypocrocy for the full board of supervisors it is like giving out tickets to the indianapolis 500, i don't think that it makes a lot of sense, if you want to drill down to what we approve for the clean power program, and we approved a program that was giving 100 percent renewable clean power to san francisco and it is being brought to us by shell.

i believe that i could be called a hypocrite every day, for bringing a resolution like this forward because i drive a car and i put gas in that car but i do believe that i work very hard to minimize my use of fuel in a car. and my use of a car as well. when it comes to shell and the clean power, we are talking about the operations of the city. and we are talking about the way that we provide clean energy to people and talking about how to make the city run and the residents have the ability to use their computers and their appliances in the houses and that is the base of operations that we are trying to actually use a clean energy to do in san francisco. and when it comes to investments of the dollars, we have the whole other thing and we can make choices about how we invest our public dollars and what the power of our investments are and that could be a wholly two different things and i can live with that. and i can see how people can,

you know, claim hypocracy, you know, i think that it is easy to use those terms. and i would just rather that i did not get applied to intentions here with the full board when i work very hard to try and weigh all of the different trade offs that i have to achieve the goals around being renewed energy to san francisco and try to make an impact on climate change. >> and supervisor, i appreciate those comments, i agree that you did take more (inaudible) and was not directed to you personally, but to the full board. however, i think that when shell is a company out of the 200 and we are talking about divesting out of them and i don't agree that there is a difference between agreeing to do that and signing a contract with them with the full board of supervisors and at the same point in time we will divest out of a company that is two separate objectives and so i appreciate your comments. and i don't agree with them. and i think that there is a huge difference there and

something that should be pointed out. and i am not so sure if anyone approves of us signing contracts with shell oil. and however, that again actually stregtens my resolve and acknowledging that there are trade offs between social policies and investment returns. and as i said before, that is my big consideration here, i completely agree with the climate change movement but i think that we need to be responsible as well and acknowledge that the retirement members who depend upon it are acknowledge as well and have a part in this. >> so we already have except for my staff, we already have language and the whereas klous under 12.100 under the board of san francisco employees, to (inaudible) shall have primary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administrations or retirement system. so we already have in the clause but i will accept your

amendments and we can do those for the full board. >> okay. >> so, do we have those okay? >> all right. we have those amendments and we can do it without opposition? elet's move forward. >> and we can do this recommendation for the full board and do you want to the full board two weeks from today? >> the 23rd. >> and we can have a motion to move it forward to the full board for the meeting on april 23rd. >> we can do so without opposition. >> and mr. clerk, do we have any other announcements. >> just to an firm that the amendment was accepted and recommended without recommendation to the full board meeting on april 23rd. >> yes. >> that complete thises morning's agenda. >> okay. we are adjourned.