of the director of the commission from seven days to 15 days which will include two weekends which is important in terms of being able to quickly respond to violations, serious violations by night clubs. it gives a director and commission the power to require a sound test to the condition of the permit and it also for the first time allows the entertainment commission to cite someone who is operating without a permit. currently police can only do that. in addition the department of public health to cite noise violate ors in the street. for example drummers in union square are sometimes playing late at night with incredibly loud noise where hotels are having to give refused to their patrons. we work closely with

president chiu and folks on union square of this aspect on legislation. originally the legislation removed a section on the prospective moratorium on extended hours permit so the entertainment commission can be bring late night services to compliant. we did remove this in committee, my understanding is there has been some work and we are going to try to reinclude that today with some clarified languages. so colleagues, this legislation is a very positive step forward for night light in san francisco and the effectiveness of the entertainment commission and i ask for your support. >> thank you, president chiu. thank you, first want to thank supervisor wiener for this legislation which does a very good job to help ensure that our entertainment law is more

stream line and easier to use. and i want to thank supervisor wiener for working with my constituents and union square for an issue that we have been looking to address. these are noise that are created on our city streets. colleagues, i have circulated to you an amendment which addresses the fact that there are extended hour premises permits that have been asked, not for entertainment venues but places that serve food and beverage and a particular number of pizza parlors that passed legislation that i sponsored that presented a 15 year, we wanted to clarify this amendment that cap is to only apply to premises where entertainment is provided but would allow the commission tore

grant more of these services that serve food and beverage and don't provide entertainment. i want to thank the entertainment commission for their work and ask for your support. >> is that a motion? can we get a second? . second by supervisor wiener. you want to comment on the amendment? >> no. i support it and i know that the entertainment commission has worked closely with president chiu on it and i am in support of it. >> colleagues, any other comments on the amendment? can we take the amendment without objection? on the item as amended can we take that same house and call? same house and call. this ordinance passes on 1st reading. >> madam clerk i would like to be added as cosponsor on this

item. >> colleagues, why don't we skip forward. why don't we go now to roll call for introductions? >> first roll call, supervisor cohen, i'm sorry, could you -- supervisor ferrel? >> thank you, madam clerk. colleagues, as we all know rising health care cost and the abilities for individuals and employers for paying for these cost have been a problem for decades. health care is now 3 trillion dollars a year and rising and it affects all public sectors. in the next three board meetings i will be introduce a number of legislation affecting our city and residents. the first is a charter amendment which faces

san francisco retiree health care liability. in 2004 as a result of cost nationwide they put in place requiring to account for their liability. last year they bench marked the kurnd liability at $4.4 billion for liability for retirees. it provides retire health care benefits earned by current employees and retirees. like many cities san francisco's liability which breaks down per household is funded as a pay as you go basis out of the general fund. only 1 percent is saved to date. with proposition c in 2011, city employees are starting to contribute more to

their retiring health trust fund. with the proposed legislation with proposition b and passed. it's allowed to be drained by 2020 and ultimately reduce general fund annual contributions. currently we are paying out of our general fund and this number will rise to over $500 million for the next few years. today i'm introduce a new charter to fix this problem without decreasing employer contribution and benefits. the goal of this charter are straight forward and will put our city on stable ground for years to come. this is a fully funded model to help refund our major cost. and

through this measure we will secure and protect our retiree health care trust fund and ensure that our controller, our treasure, the director of our retiree health care system as well as the two elected service board continue to sit and govern this body. this unfunded liebltd has accrued over generations of time and will solve our problem in one generation. we will ensure that our children aren't paying for our health care benefits in the future. this has many positive implications. it will eliminate our 1.4 liability in three years. it provides more balanced generation equity which the current pays for the current benefits this will save cost in san francisco. it will be used to pay portions of the

benefit cost reducing the cost of future taxpayers and employees. as an added benefit, the city's management of liekts -- liabilities as a major factor and strong bond lower cost which saves taxpayers. today i'm proud to say this measure has been endorsed by a number of business and labor organizations. local 21 led by bob mascot and the police officers association, the alliance for jobs and sustainable growth and chamber of commerce and district merchants and protect our benefits which is one of the leading retiree advocacy groups in san francisco. i want to thank a number of people for their hard work over the last six months for bringing us this introduction today. march go kelly for her work and rosen

field and his staff for their incredible work and mickey callahan, kate howard angd the various leaders for their support through the last few months. i want to thank mr. lee and i hope this will help the last remaining. the rest i submit. >> supervisor kim, supervisormar? >> i would like to invite my colleagues to the balboa theatre what some might feel brings back a lot of memories. some are saturday movies. there is popcorn palace that began

last weekend and continues this weekend with a showing of assortment of kids movies. you get popcorn and a bottle of water or juice for a really good admission price. it's made possible by the independent film makers of the northwest film festival. also beginning june 1, saturday morning are filled with children's classics. i would like to invite a number of you to attend these events. some of you know that friday nights in district one at the museum is a great opportunity for family and art making for kids, but there is -- every friday is an amazing time for art, music, creativity and for families. a

performance of dances. her name is l e n o.r. a lee. it's called escaped. it's two performances this coming friday. i encourage everybody to come out. it's all free and amazing food and art together. the rest i will submit. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor mar, supervisor tang? >> thank you. i would like to an adjourn the meeting in honor of listen. her body was found several days later and she was a student at sunset elementary school in district 4. all of the teachers from sunset

elementary school went out to clear lake in searching for make kal a. she was a joyous child who had a knack for simple joyce of life and giving and receiving giant hugs. she was loved and appreciated everyday. she had lovely friends and the most caring teachers and her family, teachers and friends will miss her dearly everyday. her family and friends have launched a memorial website which can be accessed. she is described as beautiful, determined, fear less and proud. she is surrounded with those with huge kids and affection. a writing

program which mckalla loved. >> thank you. supervisor wiener? >> thank you, madam clerk. today i'm asking the controllers office to -- we've already begun preliminary work on this to study and analyze what a small ticket surcharge or large events held in stadiums, large venues would be able to generate from munis as a transit related ticket surcharge. sporting events, concerts and live performances are the heart of san francisco. we want to make sure we are fully supporting these events with a robust and reliable transportation system. currently when a large event is held at the large park, the munis metro system is

completely overwhelmed and effectively defunct for everyone else who needs to use the system. we don't have enough vehicles to accommodate this influx of transit users. it's important to free up munis to ensure they are serving the city as a whole. right now munis doesn't have any spare light rail vehicles. if they need to be concentrated in a certain area for an event, that means we don't have enough for the rest of the city and as you know colleagues, munis has $2.2 billion in deferred maintenance and 404 is on the vehicles alone. we don't want the transportation to slow to a crawl because we have an event going on. we should be

accommodating an event. i asked for a study for the variety of the fee between $1-3 surcharge for concert venues and also to consider venues with 5,000 seats or more or 1,000 seats or more. a preliminary analysis has identified that this potential fee range would generate somewhere between $3 million on the low and and $2 million on the high end. it could purchase four brand new lrv's each year or rehabilitative 16 broken down lrv which will extend their life. munis as the subway is at a breaking point right now. the system is not meeting the needs

of 2013 san francisco and with a significant increase in population, economic activity and potential stadiums, all of which are good thing, that breaking point is going to get worse. if we don't begin planning now for how we are going to fund and grow the system, we are going to be in a world of hurt. i have already communicated with and will be meeting with the various stake holders who would be impacted by this fee and i look forward to working with them and the controller and others including the mayor in addressing this critical issue. i also want to note that yesterday i signed a letter as did six of my colleagues, thank you for that. condemning ads that are running on munis buses asserting that

israel is an apartheid state. we recall a resolution a month ago and saying that they were savages. we asked them to give up the money rather than take the money. they asked to do the same thing for this divisive ad. it's approximately $5,000. i hope the mta will do it. i think the mta should take careful look at their policy or ads. chicago has changed their policy to avoid this kind of situation to having hate speech on the side of buses and i hope that the mta will take a similar look because this is

starting to get challenging having continually respond to this kind of issue. people have a right to free speech, but i don't think our buses need to serve, carry hate speech. the rest i submit. >> thank you. >> thank you. just a couple items for introduction. i want to thank the analyst legislative office for the support that my office has called for and analyzing equity across san francisco and later we'll have a second phase for how we make decisions that affect equity and disparities in the city moving forward. i would like to introduce a hearing on the report and also want to use the report to provide a lens for the analyst to analyze our budget as it comes forward to us and i'm speaking once it's public i

want to share with the budget committee to also confirm that request with the budget analyst who have that lens and looking at our allocations moving forward. that will be helpful for neighborhoods across san francisco that are considered to be more affluent than others. i do feel that it's important to respond to the latest about how our munis ad space are being used. i have received a number of letters and calls to my office as well. i think there really needs to be to be a distinction between ads that are hate speech and ads that are political speech. i want to make sure that there is not universal consensus for supervisors here that believe the ads that were on the bus

shelters constitute hate speech. what we had for sure in august it was consensus about the ad s that were before us on munis with muslims and savages. that was clearly hate speech but the ads we have on shelters now are not considered to be hate speech. i don't believe it makes sense to have the same process of proceeded from these ads as if they were similar to the ads considered hate speech. there are many people around the world and israel and part of the world called palestine and occupied territories and who do feel it's defactor

apartheid policy. it's not necessarily understood in this country, so these ads actually provide no matter how people might be offended by them. they add to an accepts to the conversation that's happening outside of the united states and outside of san francisco and that's under our better than of free speech that these banners go up. i will be putting on a statement and perhaps my colleagues might join me on that stating these ads do not constitute hate speech and i don't think we should be moving the proceeds present these ads which is $5,000 to the human rights commission. we should be trying to maximize every precious dollar we can for the mta that is possible. the human rights commission has not initiated the study of muslim of hate speech on the muslim community

as they have been asked to do. so it doesn't make clear sense that this is a useful or sense of project for them to work out. i will be put that go -- putting that statement out today. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor breed? >> thank you. today i'm introducing an ordinance. the hayes valley a long term leader on local controls and the small businesses is a consequence of those controls thchl ordinance makes two small changes specifically in hayes valley. first formula retail is confined to 11 or more locations in america. this is a global retail economy and we should not limit our criteria to the domestic market. this

defines formula retail for businesses with 11 or more locations anywhere in the world. second our formula reat an ill do not account for large corporation. gap can call it athletea. 7-11 can call it 12 and it has no restrictions. the corporate entity and the rent they can pay do not change simply because the company changed the name. so this ordinance defines formula retail as any entity that is primarily owned by an existing retail company that is apparent. even if it has several locations, the entity will count towards this banned. these are two model that affect

the global economic realities we all face. i want to thank the members of the hayes valley merchants association and the neighborhood associations for their advocacy for their support. i most land use policy reflect with most with the community and continue to the area they serve. in this case, the hayes valley community is clearly very supportive of these formula retail revisions and i'm happy to help them realize them. i have heard from merchant groups and my colleagues who are interested in incorporating these changes to their districts. accordingly my office worked close low to craft language to enable others in my district or other supervisors to emulate these changes. we have district 5,

hayes valley, film more visit droe. each has their own needs and no single solution for a right fits all. i hope to protect the small businesses they call home the rest i submit. >> thank you, supervisor breed. supervisor campos. >> thank you madam clerk. i want to make a very brief comment of the issue that has been raised by supervisor wiener and avalos regarding the ads. first let me say that whatever policy we have we have to be very careful to make sure that we are not infringing on 1st amendment rights and that you have ads that you do not condone, do not like, but the whole point of the 1st amendment is that people have the ability to express themselves and i would imagine

that whatever policies we have now will go forward to crafted with that in mind. anytime you talk about what's happening in the middle east and the israeli palestine is a very complicated issue and i had an issue with the prior ads and i can see the take from people who have an issue with these ads the realities is that the situation in that part of the world is a lot more complicated than one single ad can capture. and so i do have a problem with the ads because of that. i don't believe that it is as simple as equating what's happening there with an apartheid even though there may be some reasoning to justify that. for me it's a lot more complicated. so, i do

believe that whether you believe that the ads are a political speech or something else. that there are matters and this is one of them when you talk about israel and palestine areas, we as a government agency have the responsibility to promote dialogue. i like the idea of respect of what you label these ads of mta using the proceeds from the ads to promote dialogue and that's one of the things that our human rights commission does and so i certainly support the idea that the proceeds from these ads be given to encourage dialogue. i think something as complicated to these issues, the kind of

dialogue that i think will be productive and useful is not from the dialogue that comes from these ads. there are more constructive ways to communicate on this important issue. >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor wiener, you asked to be referred. >> thank you. i appreciate the dialogue and i understand that people have different views. while calling muslims and savages and calling israel is an apartheid state. i don't agree that calling israel an apartheid state is something, is different in a meaningful way. i think it's important to focus on the context and the history of why israel exist. it didn't just happen. it happened

because six million jews were exterminated in the 1940s in europe and that was after many many other jews were exterminated systematically in europe. after the six million jews were murder nd europe in the 40s, there was a recognition of the need for jews to have a homeland. while the extermination was happening and before it happened, other countries like the united states turned away jews, jews tried to escape europe, and this country much to our eternal shame would not let them in and they were returned to europe and they were butchered. so the world came to view many people, many countries came to a consensus that the jewish people needed a

homeland somewhere where they would always be able to go no matter what was happening in the rest of the world and that is what the state of israel is. the state of israel is a democracy, it's until recently was the only country in the middle east where arabs could vote. it is currently the only country in the middle east where gay arabs can be open and not be a great risk of physical harm or death. so to suggest that israel country where arab countries can vote for office is somehow an apartheid state and not only completely ignores the history but ignores what is currently happening in israel. i know there are some who believes and that was what these ad