support the family friendly ordinance. more than 80 percent of our attorneys and staff come to our firm because of that flexible arrangement. the legislation as amended to date has provided for a fairly low impact law that will help create a more modern workplace here in san francisco. ? one off the a piece of in the puzzle. i know the concerns by supervisor breed raised about yet another layer of regulation. i see this is completely easy to apply with and i don't know if i call it free but it certainly gives the employers flexibility it's a

>>right. to respond and cure. and finally putting ♪ the decision in the city and the board national conversation is very good. i support it thank you very much >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. i'm julia i want to thank you for your leadership on this issue. and how important it is for first names in san francisco first year we have a health hotline and we got over 6 thousand calls this is a huge area i have need and as the previous speakers said offering those benefits to the employees is a good thing.

it can be done especially who someone's willing to hear others needs. this moves the conversation forward and to protect those employees who are afraid to ask. i spoke to two parents in san francisco she never approached to ask for any kind of flexibility and ended up losing her job and allegeded up taking care of of her child. another woman decided not see an avenue to help her >> this isn't just an issue for

women. we hear about folks who have family with serious medical needs this needs to be addressed so the workplace can be more productive and thank you, president chiu. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm todd david i'm the co- founder of the action committee. i'm here to say that the legislation completely supports this. we're happy to lend our name to the endorsement. i want to say what an amazing city we live in. so many businesses are doing the right thing. if you look at the business leadership in san francisco note

the chamber of commerce last week they were standing here as partners saying we're not going to oppose this legislation any more and i think we live in a special place where we have folks like the business community that recognize go that a happy worker is a more productive worker and they're willing to take that extra layer of bureaucracy to help families prosper in san francisco. i want to thank supervisor yee as one the co- sponsors and we hope we'll get other supervisors to support this well >> good afternoon. i'm a mother from the bay view.

month after month caregivers are leaving san francisco their racing home from work because of the childcare. their leaving to go to other states that have more flexible job schedules. it's been a proven study that caregivers give more and help the organizations with revenue and they stay with the organizations. both my parents stayed with their employers over 40 years and my mother went in at 10 and got off at the 6 and they were both engaged to helping with the children. thank you.

>> next speaker and any other members of the public wish to speak. >> thank you for having me here again. i'm with the democratic women in action and a resident. i'm obviously here to talk about the flextime. i saw the difficulties when my father got sick. this week i want to talk about something else this will although, my husband and brother to allow for flextime. they oppose it. but i take care of his mother when which he was dye. men don't seem to think they have the prowl but if you depreciate this legislation

passed we'll see how supervisor yee took time off to help with the family. especially my husband who has a right to take time off and it's an acceptable no more in san francisco first year i want to tell you - i do this don't i. i'm here to a talk about the reason the one employer who supported me in flextime was the city and county of san francisco. so i changed my career i worked with homeless connect and i've been around those halls ever since and i'll be loyal to you in our initiatives and efforts. are there any other members of

the audience wish to speak? >> public comment is closed. so just so we have classification last week at the last meeting we had a lot of amendments we approved and commissioners just to be clear in wanting to move this week's all the times i'll read it off the form. there are the health and safety added language including the collusion in the health and safety progressions. the office of labor standards

enforcement penalties added language that they may issue a warning instead of a fine. the third amendment s that on refinancing the policy rationale for policy. and the fourth amendment is for records reducing the amount of time that the employers have to keep the records audience i have asked for the city attorney to look at the typos and eye i want to read them into the record. on page 10 line 4 t it show read to define health continues. line 6 there should be the word or and on page 24 it should read

12 z period four and one last thing around health and safety and functions on line 10 it should read non-citizen employees into the health industry sprirsz let's see if we have a motion to make those amendments. so supervisor breed >> thank you supervisor too thank you for your meddles. i wanted to clarification around the inclusion of categories of public safety and safety health. for clarity anyone has the right

to ask for flextime; is that correct >> what we're saying to your point everyone has the filipino-american right to ask but our legislation sets out a procedure when this ask is made. if i we were to work for you i would make a request in writing if you deny it i have the opportunity to ask for a request for consideration. those would not apply in the human resources were to determine for public health and safety functions that, you know, as a general or the police department or for the st. francis hospital if these were to go in effect they wouldn't

apply in certain categories >> i think this demonstrates really how great san francisco is fro my prospective whose had employees for many, many years you just do this. luckyly i've worked around organizations that have this done and it has to be with the fact felt community we've served and the challenges we continue too fast. i realize there are other changes and other employers who don't meanwhile provided the same that kind of support but by what is the compelling is the right to ask and i feel it's - i want to make some other comments there are still some issues i

have. it has nothing to do with the need you have for greater laws it's just, you know, in this capacity and how we're approaching this and as someone whose had to care for a grandmother who had a disability. i'm not opposed to have health issues. my biggest objection is at this point has to do more with one of the things i've mentioned is why are we putting this on the ballot and not doing there this through the general process.

it's not a general chart the board of supervisors has the authority to pass in legislation or similar legislation. i know we've talked about taking this to a, you know, larger he level because it's being looked at but we can still do this through a variety of reasons. i do know there's the votes to moving this forward but $35,000 to put this particular item on the ballot and as someone who doesn't like to spend money on unnecessary items i say he look at doing this ourselves. the board of supervisors is elected to pass legislation it reflects the will of the people

and the only directly to the people horrify there's nothing preventing the process from working. it will take supervisors to put it on the ballot why not pass it here. and putting the legislation on the ballot unmeanwhile is not good voters have to work they can't read pages and pages like a new york city for the purpose book. so it overwhelms voerlts and discourages turnout. so it's important to me open both sides from the small

business owners we need to go thereto deliberation process involving all the stakeholders and clearly craft legislation and not rush a measure to the ballot in the closings weeks of july. i guess you know, i don't have is a problem with it but i want to make sure i put the point of concern out there because i think from my prospective the public is better served if we do this there the regular legislative process. i'm happy to move forward and be supportive of the measure but i wanted to make sure you understood where i was coming from and my constituents as well >> first of all, supervisor bead i appreciate that. this is your last remaining

concern and you're not the first person who said it should go through this process. this is american people issue i do think would be helped with public discussion and public debate and public conversation. it's important for individuals both employers and employees to know about the benefits of flexible work arrangements for employees and employers. that's been national conversation then ted kennedy and hillary clinton and a president obama talked about this. in the last few weeks when hillary clinton stepped down she talked about the importance of flexible and work arrangements.

there's just an article that come out today that nan pelosi said he's going to announce a number of proposals in helping families. increases a discussion happening around this nationally and it's important to have in san francisco participate as mentioned by todd david, we have a community of messengers and employees who are doing the right thing. and particularly about november's ballot this will be one of the shortest ballots in recent years. i passed legislation in a couple of weeks that will save the department 1 had the $6 million because we shorthand the procedures. and let me suggest not all employees know about this and

not all employers because there hasn't been a campaign. we could see families pickup other confidence around this. they have actually, the potential of saving millions and millions of dollars for employees when i have productive employees they're not absent and literally by reducing turnover rates you're saving our economy billions of dollars. so this is an average ballot measure i think it will help again to educate employers and employees about those possibilities but i appreciate our comments about the possibility of the ballot over the other route i'm be contemplating that.

>> i appreciate supervisor breeds comment. i think when you first communicated your intent i was questioning whether this should be a ballot measure or should we do there this through our regular legislative process. and after thinking about it and realizing there's been other national public discussions i realized this is something like that where it will impact any employer that would have 20 or more employees that the majority - the vast majority of them would not have heard about that. and my guess is that we'll experienced modern 35 thousand to educate folks.

i'm already seeing the benefits of the process where all those groups are come back and saying we've had this discussion within our organization and had some dialog around that and employee groups are aware and the small business owners are aware. i've reached it out to a couple of mentor groups and initially they actually didn't hear about that and now they know. i think the benefits of having this on the ballot out weeks ago the 35 thousand we'll be spending. i'm 1 hundred percent behind doing this >> when he started working on that we thought we'd be the only jurisdiction in the country doing this so vefrment has

passed the law. despite vermont passing the law we didn't hear about it and we want to be the second jurisdiction we're starting more of a conversation around that you but all that being said i'll be talking about more about it. >> okay. so no further discussion on this. there's a motion on the floor and second to pass the four new amendments as described by president chiu. and without any objection the motion passes. now colleague because those are new amendments we will not been able to pass this legislation out of the rules committee until our next meeting.

so, now i'd like to have a motion to continue this item to our special rules committee to july 23rd at 10 o'clock >> are there other items we'll be hearing. right now this the only item on the agenda >> okay. i second. >> so without any objection the motion passes. so item number 4 madam clerk >> supervisors yee item 5 through fourteen is items regarding a system litigation. before we interference a motion to convene in closed session any

members of the public wish to speak on those items. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleague is there a motion to convene a closed session. without objection move forward. members of the public we'll be convening in closed session we ask you, please leave the committee room at this