overwhelmingly the people who will be impacted, who are impacted by secure communities or who would be impacted by this legislation have not committed violent crimes. probably never done anything violent in their lives. they find themselves in the criminal justice system for whatever reason and what we don't want to do is have them get caught up in federal immigration systemses providing families causing all sorts of problems for our community. ~ dividing families i was very happy to see something in writing that we received a little while ago in the meeting. i look forward to reviewing it carefully and i'm hoping that we can have something where we can all move forward together and send a very powerful message from san francisco about the need for immigration reform and about our deep desire to support and to keep our immigrant community in san francisco together and united. >> supervisor tang. >> thank you, president chiu.

first of all, i do want to thank supervisor avalos for introducing this legislation. for the most part it is something that i actually do agree with. like supervisor wiener said, would love for the board to support unanimously at the end of the day. but we all know san francisco is a city that embraces people from all walks of life and certainly as a product of immigrant parents myself, i truly embrace the diversity of our residents. however, i do believe that there is a fine line and a very important distinction between being a sanctuary city and a safe haven for serious and/or violent activity and whether you are -- boo. [gavel] >> if i can just finish. whether you are a citizen or undocumented immigrant, i think many of us can all agree we have no tolerance for serious or violent crimes in our community. and again, we as citizens as well are held to very high standards. and like supervisor avalos, i do represent a district made up of many immigrants and many of whom which also care very much about public safety. so, today i really just want to

say that i want to thank supervisor kim for bringing forth the ideas for proposed amendments that we will consider at the next board meeting. and again, although it is not something that, you know, i agree with every single aspect, i think that it has reached a good balance and compromise where all of us can hopefully eventually agree. so, with that, again, i want to thank supervisor avalos and supervisor kim. >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much. [gavel] >> i'll ask for people's respect here in the chamber, please. thank you. supervisor cohen. >> the beautiful thing about being in this country as such you have the right to articulate your views in a safe space. and as advocates, we need to protect every person's rights even when we don't agree with them. supervisor avalos, thank you very much for stepping up and bringing this legislation before us. i'm happy to be one of your supporters. several weeks ago.

i will be supporting the proposed changes today. also wanted to take a moment to acknowledge the immigrants right commission, public safety partners, office of 3xi i can engagement and immigrant affairs, the san francisco immigrant rights, the french community, puov, domestic violence partners. one of the critical pieces that i'm most closely aligned with is making sure that victims of domestic violence are protected and they feel safe and they're able to report crimes as well as continue to heal. i also want to acknowledge and thank the african advocacy network for their leadership. oftentimes we'll talk about immigration in this city. we talk about it from an asian perspective, pacific islander perspective, latino perspective. we often forget our africans, west african brothers andess is at therx who struggle with the

same debilitating experience of living in the shadows. ~ sisters so, i'm grateful. i their numbers are very small. i thank you very much for being here. i also want to acknowledge the staff persons, number of hours alone today i think have racked up. [speaker not understood] from my office, ivy, supervisor avalos' raquel in your office. thank you, ladies for being a part of this. i, too, share the comments of supervisor wiener and desire to see a unanimous vote. if you stop and think about what a powerful statement we would have an opportunity to send not just to the san francisco bay area, but the entire country if not the world. wouldn't that be powerful? all of our collective voices coming together making a statement. i was an early supporter of this ordinance because i believe that for the vast majority of undocumented residents in our city, this policy will provide them with a more protection against [speaker not understood] they

may have ever had. i also support the proposed changes that supervisor kim is proposing today and look forward to our continued work as partners of not only law makers and policy makers just this body, but the collective body of san francisco, each and every one of us have a role to play. and it's important and incumbent upon us to continue to push and to continue to ask questions, but also creating a respectful environment so that all of our prospectives can have voice and so we can create pieces of legislation that is inclusive for everyone. thank you. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you. i do appreciate the comments from my colleagues and i do think it is important to be respectful. we have different opinions and i think that everyone here has articulated legitimate concerns. i do want to make a couple of points, though, and one of it -- the sad things about these

kinds of carve outs, if you actually look at some of the cases that have transpired, not only in california, but in the country, these types of carve outs actually have unintended consequences because what often happens is that you send individuals to ice. those individuals end up being deported and they're deported, by the way, to countries for their own criminal justice system is basically dysfunctional and those people are basically free not only to do whatever they're doing in those countries, but what often happens is they actually come back to this country, reenter the country, and yet again find themselves doing some of the same things that they have been accused. by actually not deporting them and actually keeping them within the criminal justice system, you are in fact providing more protection to the residents of this city and of this country and there are

many examples in the undocumented youth scenario where that happens, where we actually deported individuals that went back and came back and yet again posed a threat to our city. and, so, that's the sad thing about these carve outs and what we're doing here today is that in many respects we're doing something that in the end is going to have the opposite effect of what we want. i understand where people are coming from. i respect that. but i think it's not just about the intent. it is really understanding how the system works and at the end of the day the key here is to make sure that a criminal individual remains within the criminal justice system. the carve out in my view is going to have the opposite effect down the road. >> supervisor yee. >> thank you. thanks for everybody's comments.

i just want to make a quick comment. part of me considering possibly supporting these amendments is the status of limitation piece and also the annual review piece which is really important for me to under what real impact these consequences that supervisor campos is talking about. i hope that we consider, since we are not voting on it today, when you say annual review, i really would feel a lot more comfortable if this review came within six months rather than waiting for a whole year because if there is any types of issues with what we just did, i'd like to be able to correct it sooner than later. >> president chiu. >> thank you. first of all, i want to take a moment and thank all the advocates who are here and

everyone in this room who i know deep down in all of our hearts we know that we are a city that stands up for immigrants. the very first time i came to this board chamber, i think this was about 1998, and i stood up at that podium was to speak in support of the sanctuary city ordinance. and i know that everyone here does believe in the importance of that and what we need to do to move that forward. i think a folks know, regardless of how any of us felt, regardless of how i vote or anyone sitting here votes ~, i don't think there is support at this time for the legislation as it currently stands. and because of that i first want to thank supervisor avalos for his leadership in moving this forward with advocates to really allow us to contemplate how we pass the strongest possible ordinance to protect the due process of our immigrants. i also want to thank supervisor kim for working with our immigrant advocates to craft the narrowest of circumstances under which we might consider

whether or not our sheriff or law enforcement has the discretion to consider communications with the federal government. i do think that what supervisor kim has proposed does address and go a long way to dealing with some of the unintended consequences but what we're talking about is statute of limitations in the amendment, annual review, a sunset provision. and i think many of us believe that within the next few years we will show that this policy of not turning individuals over to ice makes sense and has not jeopardized our public safety, but that being said i think that what supervisor kim has proposed is the narrowest of circumstances to ensure that we are considering the issues in front of us. i know that this is -- these are amendments that we'll need to sit for next week, but i look forward to continued conversations on this. i do think that what we are trying to do today is to craft

the strongest possible protections for our community, to ensure the rights of our community and the public safety of our community. and i do hope as others have said, that we'll be able to move forward with unanimous vote come next week. >> thank you. supervisor kim. >> thank you. i just wanted to address supervisor yee. i will add in the language that we will do a review within six months of when the ordinance goes into effect. so, we will add that on top of the annual review. i think that makes a lot of sense. and just understand, the report is really going to give the board an opportunity to monitor how this very limited carve out is going. is it having the public safety impact that some of the advocates have stated, or is it over reaching? on the other side, we may find that it actually is decreasing people's ability or people's trust because of the over reaching nature of the discretion. that will give us another

opportunity to continue to refine this legislation. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you. i do want to thank supervisor kim because i think you are trying to sort of narrow the carve out as much as possible. i would simply urge that between now and the time that this comes back that there is a continued dialogue with the advocate community, and also with law enforcement. and i think that we know that supervisor avalos has engaged our district attorney, but i think that they have some legitimate concerns that have been raised. but i appreciate the spirit in which this is being done. the last thing that i would add is that i do think it is possible for us to have a unanimous vote and we can do that today by simply voting it as is. [cheering and applauding]

>> supervisor avalos. >> thank you, colleagues, for all your comments. i'm not sure we actually can vote on it today, so, it looks like it can be next week. and i know where we got to today was through a lot of close discussion and negotiations in the morning and there are many amendments that came forward that just aren't going to be ready to be written into form that we can actually vote on today. so, that's why we're going to be -- not be able to vote until tomorrow. but i do want to caution against, you know, adding other elements to [speaker not understood] being provided today because it seems like what we have here in terms of what was negotiated today between the board of

supervisors and the mayor's office, with the community who is here is something that can actually be supported all around. and if we're going to add other things, it could actually make it more complicated to get to a vote next week and i just want to caution against trying to make any more, you know, changes that are significant or in terms of writing things up next week. (applause) >> i do want to thank supervisor kim for her work in making sure that we can minimize the impact of unintended consequences for these carve outs. and, so, i know it's not easy to actually come forward and make these amendments. i just want to thank you for doing that. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you. and, supervisor avalos, i appreciate your desire to try to move forward with what's here. this may end up being perfectly fine. i want to note i literally received this on the floor of the board of supervisors during this meeting. i and i'm sure others have not had a chance to carefully

review it. when we make legislation, it's important for all of us to have an opportunity to review things and to be thoughtful. so, i completely understand the sentiment, but we did just receive this on the floor of the board. so, i'm sure over the next week we'll all have an opportunity, yourself included, to carefully review this and to. further dialogue. >> any further comments is it, colleagues? okay, supervisor kim has made a motion to continue ~ which has been seconded by supervisor cohen. can we take that motion to continue without objection? without objection, that should be the case. [gavel] >> mr. president, that's to september 24th. >> that will be one week to september the 24th. madam clerk, item 18. did we call that item already? okay, all right. at this time if i could ask members of the public to please leave silently, we still do have other business in front of the board. and why don't we go to our

adoption without committee calendar. madam clerk. >> items 29 through 32 are being considered without committee reference. these item will be enacted upon a single roll call vote. if a member objects, a matter can be removed and considered separately. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. i just wanted to sever item number 29. >> okay. supervisor campos. >> 30, please. >> madam clerk, can you call the roll on items 31 to 32 and if i could ask members of the public -- [gavel] >> if i could ask members of the public please leave quietly, we still have business we need to conduct today. madam clerk, item 31 and 32. >> on items 31 and 32, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim, on items 31 and 32. kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye.

supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the resolutions are adopted, motions approved. [gavel] >> item 29. >> item 29 is a resolution reiterating the board of supervisors's support for cleanpowersf, citing the board's role as the preeminent policymaking body in san francisco, urging the public utilities commission to set not-to-exceed rates for cleanpowersf without any further delay, and promising further action if the public utilities commission fails to set rates. >> supervisor breed? >> thank you. since this item is up for adoption without reference to committee, i'm going to try and keep my comments as brief as possible. but this issue really addresses two things. the first is the merits of clean power. the second is the board of supervisors's role as policy maker -- as a policy making

body for the city and county of san francisco. on the first point i would argue and i don't think this is an exaggeration. the cleanpowersf is the program is the singlemost important environmental initiative in san francisco. we have the opportunity here to provide 100% renewable californian and union made electricity. that is a major, major achievement. according to the epa production and transition of electricity is the single largest source of greenhouse gases in the country. more than transportation, more than industry, far more than commercial and residential sources. cleanpowersf will create hundreds of local jobs, dramatically reduce san francisco emissions, bring us closer to our established climate goals, and help us leave a better world for the next generation of san franciscans to come. community choice is what makes the clean power program possible. that is why cleanpowersf is so important. even if you don't agree or don't like the program, even if you think the pg&e should be

our only option, consider what this process says about the board of supervisors. for nine years the board has consistently and overwhelmingly issued its policy directive in support of the clean power program. the votes have been unanimous on some occasion and the super majority on others. yet now the board's directive has been stopped and because of procedural delays by the puc and we have asked if the board is willing to stand up for its policy directives. this is why i've decided to introduce this resolution and i don't think that unaloe liquiditied commissioners should have the authority to rule elected body members of the san francisco board of supervisors. so, i hope you will join me in urging the public utilities commission to set not to exceed rates in advance cleanpowersf without any further delay. thank you, colleagues, for your support. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president.

i want to thank supervisor breed for raising or for introducing this resolution. when we approved this by a vote of 8 to 3 i think it sent a very clear message that this was the policy direction that the board was given. and, of course, there has been extensive history leading up to that vote. and what we did was it was important in term of establishing this new program, but it also for the first time created a choice for consumers and competition and in fact have seen positive results because pg&e moved forward with its own clean power alternative. so, that's what competition does. it encourages innovation and encourages actual attempts to give consumers more choices and that's a good thing. and, so, i was very disappointed first when i think there was a campaign that unfortunately i think led some

residents to believe there was somehow going to be forced into this program when it's as easy as easy can be for people to opt out of the program. even after the opt out period and so no one is going to be forced into this program. anyone who wants to stay with pg&e will be able to do that, but it will give consumers a choice if they want that choice and that is a positive thing. and, so, when i cast a vote to support this program, i did so because i wanted to provide that consumer choice and i thought that it would be a valuable thing for us to try this program which i think will have positive results for the city in the long run. so, i was very disappointed when the puc declined to set rates. i thought that that decision -- i believe that decision flies in the face of the super majority policy directive from this board. you know, in the past i have

been very hesitant to support charter amendments that make changes to how each commission are appointled. i think we have a good system in san francisco and i'm very hesitant to start tinkering around with how these commissions are constituted. but it's important that the commissions provide that level -- i don't want to say deference, but when the board has set policy direction with a super majority vote, and we have something that's been enacted into law, i think commissions should pay a basic level of respect to that decision, that policy directive. i don't think that happened here. i know it's very, very frustrating for all of us, and particularly those who have spent so much time and so many years moving this program forward. and the most bizarre aspect of this is we have -- i don't even know if anyone has done an analysis of the amount of time

over the last decade that the public utilities commission staff has spent moving this process forward with directive after directive after directive from this board over time with different political compositions over and over again saying, please move forward, please get this done, please present us with something. and staff saying, i'm sure thousands and thousands of hours doing that and then this board adopted the program and then the very commission that oversees that staff, a commission that also repeatedly moved the program forward then says, you know what, we're not going to set any rates. i don't get that. it doesn't sit well with me. i think it flies in the face of a policy set by this board and i'm frustrated as well. i'll be voting for the resolution today and i just -- i really don't think this was the right way for the puc to

proceed. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you. i'll be very he, very brief. ~ i really appreciate the comments from supervisor wiener and i just want to add to them to say that this very public utilities commission in a resolution at the end of 2011, had approved the cleanpowersf program, the shell contract, and the basic parameters for the program moving forward. and, so, it's the same commission that actually voted not to approve the rates. in between 2011 and today is a lot of real troubling politics that i think has really skewed the mission of the public utilities commission and it's a bit hard to see that happen. i appreciate colleagues supporting this program and help it move forward. >> okay. with that, colleagues, do we

need to take a roll call vote on this motion? roll call, please. >> on item 29, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell no. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang no. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. there are 9 ayes and two no's. >> resolution is adopted. [gavel] >> item 30. >> item 30 is a resolution urging the california state legislature to pass assembly bill 1263, which creates "medi-cal: communical," a program that provide reliable access to language interpretation for medi-cal beneficiaries who are limited english proficient. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you. and i do believe that and i think president chiu was also a co-sponsor, just for the record. the reason why we're introducing this resolution

supporting assembly bill 1263 by speaker perez is that we want to send a very clear message it's important for governor brown to sign this piece of legislation. it will ensure that non-english speakers are people that have limited english skills have access to an interpreter when they go and receive medical attention. i can tell you from my own experience growing up as an immigrant who, when we first came here did not speak the language. you get sick, it's really hard to convey the right information to people when you go see a doctor. oftentimes, by the way, it means that the children of immigrant families end up playing the role of interpreter and quite frankly i think it's unfair to expect that of kid because you're talking many times with very technical

information in terms of what the symptoms are. and many things get lost in translation and unfortunately that loss in translation has resulted in many people being wrongly diagnosed and not getting the right treatment. so, this is really critical information that really goes to the heart of basic health care for the millions of californians that are limited english proficient. it's about 7 million in california and the 40% of households where another language is spoken. so, i think it's important for us to be on record and it is our hope that governor brown will be signing this law. thank you. >> colleagues, any other discussion? let's take a roll call vote on item 30. >> on item 30, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos?

avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. there are 11 ayes. >> resolution is adopted. [gavel] >> madam clerk, could you read the in memoriams? >> yes, mr. president. today's meeting will be adjourned in memory of the following individuals. on behalf of supervisor cohen, for the late mr. bill thread gill. >> and is there any more business in front of the body? >> that concludes our business for today, mr. president. >> i want to thank sfgov-tv for their coverage of tonight apt 1850sing and with that unless there is any more business, ladies and gentlemen, we are adjourned. [gavel] and check out our you tube page.

>> hello san francisco, here with the buzz worthy events and activists including a big one that is gearing up in golden gate park, this is the weekly buzz, on tuesday, september 17th, come and make the works of art with your friends and they will provide the pants and brushes and all you need is to bring your creativity and enjoy the live art by the local artist and obtain a piece of your own by a bike crews through golden gate park with fabulous costumes and entertainment, enjoy this one of a kind festival from ten a.m. to four.

and that is the weekly buzz, for information on any of these events >> like to welcome to everyone to the san francisco planning commission this is a regular meeting for thursday september 19th. please understand that the commission does not allow any disruptions and please silence any mobile devices. i'd like to take roll at this time (calling names)