check and get zero local higher. we ask you to sponsor an apprentices and let's billed the pipeline so next time you call there will be somebody there >> good evening board. james bryant institute of the region director. just this past week i sat on the board for the mayor for the local hiring groups. mr. han i didn't participated in that process. we didn't ask that there be a separate process. and i just want to mention that the separate process back in

20054 if you all remember there was this process called separate but equal. folks that's what you're doing here. your going back to the synoptic separate but equal. you need to be strong just like the folks who passed the brown versus board of education process. they had unanimous support they had to sport each other. separate but without. we want everything to be equal we don't want any divisions. we want to make sure yes our trade brother and sister that are participants we don't want any divisions. if you allow on your legal for this to have a division you'll

go back to brown vs. board of education. i want to say this final thing. you all are present with the responsibility of doing the right thing. and for 90 percent of this process you have done great maybe even higher than that 90 percent arrest as josh said there's a couple of caveats you need to address. i ask i address it and let's move forward because we've support you all and we appreciate all of your help so let's do the right thing. >> good evening. again with local 261 i represent over 6 thousand members. i want to echo again, we don't

want a car vouch the 43 projects under one million one of them is done and 3 is to go. under one million. it's like you have a full class of kids and you single only the 3 kids those are the ones who need on the hope help. to have the contractors bond like everyone else. i don't see the problem to get a car vouch. we have been saying the local hires in the city we have a big help with city build to help us and they can do that. 50 percent of apprentices and it should be to all the trades. i hear some of the trades they

say if even if they don't have a project the longer the individual is willing to traffic some one will employ them. let's get our schools going the kids like the supervisors said let's get our schools done. let's vote it the right way >> thank you. mr. terry initially when we call an item we don't accept a speaker card if you want two minutes to speak i'll give you that opportunity. thank you >> thank you. i appreciate the currency. first of all, i want to say that i agree with the gentleman we're comfortable by trade and with

the off-ramps are fully fundamentalal. i do want to actually praise mr. david goldman some of you whodunit were here before you will know that the bond construction program at the district was not just a matter of chaos but of scandal p and david has cleaned up that. i want to disagree with him last week with minority contractors. we have many, many mom and pop contracts ourself they all pay into our trust funds and pay into pensions. this is a tax advantage to them. they don't have to pay takes on the wages.

that would - sometime ago prior to one supervisor coming i distributed on one table during that summer 1 fixture of the contracts went to those contracts arrest now the district didn't keep tracking track of how many asian or african-american or latin-american contracts there were. so my affiliates are asking that there be no car vout and i'm repeating that request for them >> okay. thank you. comments from the board. i neglected to acknowledge and visit supervisor yee former

commissioner yee the author of this resolution to come up to the staff table and give any remarks before we have discussion supervisor (clapping) >> thank you. >> you have to say it on the mike sir. >> (laughter) >> you know i'm just here to support your decision and i trust that just from my conversations with several of you that you're going to do the right decision tonight. >> (clapping) >> thanks for coming supervisor. all right. comments? questions from the board? >> yeah. i would like to talk about this by trade piece and to make the amendment just by trade but i'd like to hear the practice behind the 7 and i'll

hold off the meeting. >> the bond program uses somewhere between 25 and thirty different trades on our projects. and the 7 rerecommend for inhabitation in the specifics of the program they probably account for 70, 17 percent of the total working hours. my certain with regard to expanding it to all trades is volume of this process is the prequalification of firms and we have no idea how many firms that

is. it may slow the process down or make it tougher for the contracts to put teams together. i'm relating the 7 as a way to start. if we find out during the initial remedies of this program the numbers are not there then we can modify the program to add more trades. >> so i am not i guess the certain there is there's also a process involved in focusing on certain trades rather than treating everyone the same. do you for saw it being slowed down. we originally choose the 7

trades because that represents the number of work hours on the job 70 to 75 percent of the hours on the job in respect many of the 28 trades that have one person on the job for one day or two people on the job for 3 days and come back three weeks later. we don't want to be perpetuately finding people in non-cinnamons. so the goal would be to focus on the general contractors across the board to comply to focus on the largest trades, to not be in the business necessarily of sanctioning everybody all the time. and if he find it's working and we need to expand it we will.

but it's a good place to start >> commissioner and i was wondering how many people - how many trade unions find the lp a. we need to remember we can only do this within the context of the p l a so if we propose to include trades that didn't participate the last time we can't negotiate for the cover groups they don't represent. i know we had two unions that signed that were not members of the council last time. >> i think it all the labors union and there might have been one other one not an affiliate. >> if all the trade unions that

work on our projects were signaturey. i think so we not monitor to keep track of small groups but also it is not a question of them being part of the group in negotiating >> commissioner and we can track all of the smaller trades. i mean, that's already an inherent part of the software. but in terms of getting into this process of preconvincing firms and maintaining those records it becomes i think a burden on contractors to try to meet this because if they don't have a pre-qualify sub that's only going to contribute one

hundred hours to that operator job and they can't get them on board it's hard to get teams together arrest >> possibly a compromise is rewe monitor but make a decision later whether compliance related to them. i'm concerned about the complexity and we are just because we don't do the work we are i'm agents fearful we're po

trades that contribute 4 percent of more of the labor on the jobs

collectively. >> thank you. so mr. tom, i just also want to make it clear that at the last meeting you specifically asked the board so this is for the 7 trades; right? and we said, yes to you so i understand why this is written in here you asked specifically. today, we find ourselves with a different prospective. it's not you doing it on your own. so i think that because we heard from the labor council representing many of our labor partners and we also i would also like to see it by trades. some of our sanctions allow them to do jobs. so if you can't comply with the

job an sf gov. job you can hire someone on to our bigger city jobs. so the off-ramp is something that's doable. the more we expand the trades for a local residencecy remit our young people may want to be a landscape motorbikes worker are repair are things of that nature or awe by itself abatement because it's danger. so i just feel like the more we open it because i think this spirit of this was to open up

opportunities for our students. now i have a suggestion that we can add under one of the sanctions might make this more agriculture able to the board. and this comes from any tainted a meeting with the mayor's construction workforce advisory committee and what i heard from the regional directors the electricians and the carpenters and also from the other krashts is that the reason they have open apprenticeship. there wasn't enough work hours to have an apprenticeship there. that's why they have not had the

open apprenticeship hours. under number 2 and i'll reader read this. the contract is able to provide written xhichlgs that despite a concerted forever - oh, i mean involving their project and at least one city graduate or successful graduate of the sf internship program has been sponsored to work on the duration of that contractors work that despite the work the qualified on

an apprentices and a >> oh, i'm sorry, i forgot one thing doctor. which was as we are mentioning this i would say the second amendment i think we should higher veterans at 10 percent to be included in this policy >> commissioner and then doctor. >> i have just a few comments i actually don't want to make them yet i want to hear from our legal representative and how the addition does it solve the problem. i'd prefer not to have the 7

number there but then have us work with another number and deal with the issues we have to manage by the way. if we need to tweak this policy to do so but not from the smallest number but from the largest number possible. and discover those are not workable options. >> commissioner with regards to the proposed language involving the 7 to 28 piece from a practical prospective i'm not in a position to commit but from a legal prospective it doesn't want seem like with the commissioner is proposing is legally problematic. it could be addressed on.

practically with the rules of apprenticeship and all that could be followed and i don't see that the sanction is a problem. i'd like to have the language repeated >> maybe something for mr. tom here. >> i'm trying to clarify the proposal. you're saying then that if a subcontractor since our talking about by trades is unable to meet the 25 percent target they could demonstrate or use the term off-ramp waiver if they can demonstrate they have hired a san francisco resident in any of their jobs and that they have to work it through the academy;

right? >> so to clarify the off-ramp to work on another 9977 job is a separate sanction that i'm proposing the amendment too arrest to the number one if they can demonstrate their hiring san francisco residents at another job that is not a sf project but they're working in admission bay a that's an off-ramp. the second amendment i've proposed is bullet point number two would then state you can get writing confirmation there wasn't enough san francisco residents to work the project but you could get the waiver only having after you are

willing to take on an apprentices on that job >> on a district job or non-district job. >> a district job. >> again, if i apply this to all 25 or thirty traits this means adding workings to every trade? >> so it is the intention to add workers to every trade. it's the intention to have more appends working jobs on site jobs getting apprentices hours so if you can't hire an san francisco job but you hired someone from our apprenticeship program as an apprentice on your

job that's an off-ramp for them >> but if they hire that person haven't they filled the quota. >> well, there's a local participation rate and there's a local resident apprentice participation rate so they would be taking on the apprentice but they wouldn't be meeting the local hiring richlt. don't that make sense? >> you did mention he early on in our suggestion that this principle this off-ramp principle would apply to non-sf jobs so a contractor or spashth

didn't hire a resident but. >> i'm suggesting that the first off-ramp is that you can hire another san francisco resident on another job a and non-job could be in oakland. i understand that >> the second sanction that allows you to get the waiver you can get the waiver because there's not enough people to work the job as a local requirement but that can be waved only after you demonstrate that you're willing to have an apprentice on your current job with us. >> that makes it so you would you're making the subcontractor to to hire workers they don't need.

>> or in substitution of its - an apprentice is a learning opportunity and it's not a local resident labor participation. it is - i guess i'm proposing is that they would over an apprenticeship to someone from city billed or one of our graduates and a instead of fulfilling the hiring requirement >> i'd like to study the proposal i can't give you an adequate response to that. >> i have a question for commissioner and a statement. the question about the amendment to the recommendation for now

and then cinnamons. isn't it true they have to sponsor two internships. i don't understand the language. so for clarification in the sanction it says that the contractor is able to provide written confirm but despite a concerted for the local residents were not available at the time. we're saying in order to get the waiver you must comply with the preapprenticeship program or city build >> so mime statement is that we had a lot of discussion about the body of the proposal before us. so i'm not comfortable making a

decision on new language together. we heard from the community there was a lot of work done and i'm not sure i medical grasp the prelimss of some of the new language. i want to say this has been a good process. we've heard a lot of from the community and staff has put in many, many hours. we have a budget analysis for this proposal. my inclines is to support the proposal as it is now and, of course, we're going to go down landmark path and we can't anticipate every single implementation of what we're doing so there's 0 going to be adjustments a year from now. i'd like to look a year from now

where we're at. but i'm comfortable to work with it is 7 trades. i want to revisit it in a year from now. i'd hate to see that postponed. i think we're prepared to take action tonight and i'm prepared to do that >> commissioner. >> thank you president norton. i'll continue. >> okay. >> so i guess that we're and he appreciate our honest and candor mr. tom. just about what you're trying to grapple with. i also get as conspires has said and