>> i'd like to sever item 37. if you could call the roll on items 33, 34, 36 and 38. >> supervisor kim i, mar i, tang i, wiener i, yee i, avalos i, breed i, campos i, chiu i, cohen i, farrell i. there are 11 i's . >> motions are approved. >> item 35 advanced accurate and about women's reproductive health. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you very much.

i want to take this opportunity to thank all the speakers who came out and supported this item and i think it is really important for us to sends a very clear message about how we trust women and how we respect the right to -- i think the points have been made that this is not about free speech, that this is about misinformation that has been put out by these fringe groups that have no backing for the claim that somehow abortion hurts women. i think that the medical evidence and the scientific evidence on this point is very clear and i do think we need to carefully look at the policies and procedures that got us to this point. i think that we need to revisit

those prosee your injuries to make sure -- one of the women made that these kind of tactics are especially negative when it cams to the disproportionate impact on poor women. i have seen that myself because of the work we have done with planned parenthood where you have these anti choice extremists who come out and target working class middle income women as they're trying to access rights. using whatever proceeds where are coming in to educate women, but also proactive in putting out the correct information about the safety of abortion as a procedure. and i think that if we allow these groups to put up this

kind of misinformation that we should also have our own information presented and that we make it clear by posting similar banners that clearly say that we trust women. i think that would be something that would move us in the right direction and again, i want to thank the women and all the people that have come out to support this resolution. i think that what is happening is really bad and it certainly does not reflect the values of san francisco. >> thank you supervisor campos. on item number 35, can we take this colleague's same house same call without objection? thank you. madam clerk could you please call item 37? >> this is a resolution suspension and end to firing of

undocumented workers. >> thank you, supervisor chiu. >> i want to take a moment and thank the community that came out today to speak in support of this and the work that's been done on this in the last few weeks, from our janitors, from labor, and i want to thank our young people and dreamers who have been so your courageous over these years. i want to thank supervisor mar, yee, kim and avalos. i know this is a topic that is personal for many of us as the sons and daughters of immigrants, the grandsons and great granddaughters of immigrants. the first time i ever came to this board chamber was 15 years ago to testify and support our city's sanctuary policy. part of why wanted to move this resolution and i know many of

us did and it's because of the many stories of immigrants who are having their families ripped apart. in particular, i want to mention we have heard 1200 of our janitors families have been tragically impacted by the fact that we have not been able to pass con hen sieve immigration reform. this calls on our president to stop our immigration deportations, close to 2 million under this administration to extend the deferred action for childhood arrivals program to all eligible members of our undocument family because it doesn't do any good if we have a dreamer student who's allowed to stay whose mother and father are being ripped away. this should call to an end.

los angeles and other cities are stepping up because we haven't been able to see action in congress and we need to really take leadership from our urban cities to stand up for our immigrant families. secondly, tonight president obama is going to be speaking about this topic and we really, as much good as he has been doing in our country we ask him to do more, to make sure that while republicans in congress have been unable to move have agenda forward, we are not victimizing innocent men, women, children and families as we move forward and this resolution is important to reflect our shared values of saying we are one city and the technical issues around citizenship do not impact that we are all human beings and none of us are illegal. >> thank you, supervisor

campos. >> thank you. i want to take this opportunity to thank our brothers and sisters from local /# 87 for the leadership they have played in this item coming forward. i want to thank all of the immigrants and as a former undocumented immigrant myself, i'm especially proud to see the young people who came out to testify about their own experiences. it's not easy to do that and so i'm very proud of you and appreciate your courage. and i say -- [inaudible]. i was reading online that it is reported by the white house that president obama is supposed to make an impassionate speech about immigration reform and i'm very grateful to that and as someone

who has admired and respected the president, i'm grateful to see that, but we need more than just an impassional speech. we need action. that impassionate speech without any action is simply not going to cut it and it pains me to say this, but when it comes to deportations, barack obama has a worse record than george w bush and the idea that so many of us fought so hard to get him to where he is and that we would face that reality is shameful and i really hope by taking this /po position that san francisco, los angeles and these other cities make it clear that what's happening right now is simply unacceptable. thank you. >> thank you. with that, colleagues, could we take this item, same house, same call?

without objection, this resolution is adopted and madam clerk, could you read -- [applause]. >> could you read the in-- this meeting will be adjourned in memory on behalf of the for the late mr. tom pate and mr. barry leblanc, for the late mr. tommy smith and on behalf of supervisor avalos for the late mr. pete seger. >> is there anymore business in front of the board. >> that concludes our business for the day, mr. president. >> ladies and gentlemen, we are adjourned.

>> ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the monday, january 27, 2014, meeting of the small business commission of the city and county of san francisco the meeting is called to order at the 2:08 p.m. roll call commissioner president adams. commissioner dooley. we have a quorum with 5 commissioners.

general public comment. any public comment? for this period during the meeting is limited to 3 minutes unless established. the speakers are not required to state your name for the record. this will help to have the speaker cards that are to the right of the electorate turn at your early opportunity. >> any members of the public that want to bring up my items not on the public agenda seeing none, public comment is closed. this is for the minutes this is an action item >> move to approve. all in favor, say i. any notices. item 4 presentation of a small business commission recognizing

one of the members of the committee. commissioner o'brien is not here so i want to defer item 4 until he arrives if everyone is okay with. item 5 discussion and possible action to make the recognize for the board of supervisors file 13192 police and the administrative codes for the housing code this is an ax item. >> welcome andrea. good afternoon and at the commissioners for hearing this today, i know that councilmember marcason gave a presentation so i'll try not to duplicate that. supervisor kim and supervisor cowen began working on this

location a year ago today. and they approached it from the districts 6 and 10 actually of the highest portion of population in the city with people who have a conviction hearing. and both the rebefore a data tells the biggest carts of recidivism they saw this as a piece of legislation. we take a look at other models that have coward throughout the country where san francisco is not the first to look at criminal history and a employment positions. we take a look at the cities like seattle and beautifully and philadelphia and the state

legislation that passed something for their hiring practices and the city and county of san francisco went through a process of resint their process. their has been clearly federal guidelines on the hiring decisions largely protecting user against the discrepancy claims. we had the robust lengthen i didn't documents. if you have questions about the housing or cathy portions they're very similar so most of the mechanisms are pretty consistent throughout the entire dochlt. so the key sort of objective this ordinance does it - the goal is to get individuals with

a criminal record through the process. we've seen unconscious bias if people have a prior conviction they'll have the weed out tools for the providers in the city. it's a goal to get the person through the goal process and get the employers to meet the person and then conduct a background criminal check. we've heard from the councilmember brooks that the vast majority don't do a background check it's comprehensive and i'll do it later on in the process when you that this is someone who wants to hire them with a cash function.

so this ordinance requires employers to do a number of things remove the disclosure so they'll no longer be a check box of whether or not you have a criminal history on the materials your attorneys for. it also asks employer to delay a background check after a conditional offer of employment or a live interview. this was discussed because theirs distresses that hire quickly. after you've thank you for the opportunity to get a person through a process the employers conduct a background check with state law to the employee and i believe in the legislation that you saw in your packets and i

think ivory may have mentioned this that's a lengthen i didn't process of a question in her in her if you decide not to hire someone it becomes a cumbersome process. similar to the housing provisions we've eliminated the questionnaire with the employer to specific early on in the process the conviction if anyone has bought a piece of property you get a background check and you indicate a that's completely inaccurate it's on the background you checks some incategorize and that's an you want to be to provide some evidence of rehabilitation or mediation so we've asked the

employers when they've provided a background check to specifically what the issue is whether that's evenly kirng the background the case scheck check or your dui is a problem because i run a trucking business. the employers provide them with the information and the employee can show a record of inaccuracy or other mitigating factors. the employers have the opportunity to decide not to hire someone but we do ask they do a direct related analysis that's spelled out in the ordinance to take a look at the conviction and the type you have job their applying for if you

have a commercial trucking company you may not want someone who's been convict of a dui because of the job and the type of conviction but some other convictions may not be a problem. we spent a great amount of time on the provisions of the ordinance with the small business community and with the chamber of commerce. you'll see that the l s c is the enforcing agency. so if there's a box on your application you ask someone to disclose their background and after a significant amount of conversation one of the things an additional requirement that looks at whether or not the directly relate heness what

applied at all. we may miss a blanket of employers that maybe misinformation. so they'll have the opportunity to see if whether or not our conclusion was correct and whether or not the steps were committed with. we have a one year provision to give people ample time to flush utility the aspects of it really educate employers the goal is to bring people into compliance there's a one year compilation so there's $50 for the first

violation. there's no private right of action which is another pretty detailed conversation that we had in both our qualifications the small business community so i sent a menu for the conformity changes throughout the document. it includes the change specifying of what the conviction was and a couple of the things in the incredible section which in the original ordinance there were conflicting things related to the other seconds for the contracting section that were a suggestion of legal council that's for the city the way they do

counteracting that is. it's been a long process. we'll have had a number of meetings with the small business commissioners and so that gave us an opportunity for feedback early on and bring us to a point to have the support of the public community and the business community >> commissioner white. >> can the job application document states whether the employer will conduct a criminal baugsd. >> yeah, we left it a little bit there should be some fester active discolor for people who have a conviction we left it broad because the city for