improvements, tenants were guaranteed we would stream line and modify our tenants applications hardship and the tenants wanted us not to consider assets at all. we're use cents the bmr schedule that housing uses. we're not using at our equity principals. that took affect this last january and we have just finished those forms. for all tenant hardships for operating maintenance and water bond pass throughs, the tenant hardship application, we ask about clothing and we ask for dumb stuff just like we ask the landlords. as i said in committee, i don't think that's relevant any longer and we'll stream line that and get rid of the criteria. we went to the rent board and asked them to make the criteria the same because it's confusing to people, that they can be poor but win here, lose here depend ongoing on the rent increase they're

passed with. our board has landlord and tenant -- they refused to stream line until they see the outcomes, but i believe we'll move into the area of having uniformed hardship criteria and the criteria will be different for ten ands and landlords. we'll always look at the landlord's picture. we embraced the amendment that passed because we would look at bank accounts and medical bills and assets and the look at the whole picture. we would look at landlords and tenants. you're going to have competing equities and you're going to have small landlords who have one asset and you're going to have tenants who are being displaced. it's the war of the equities and the landlord will always come before us with a significant asset.

>> thank you very much. >> any further discussions? colleagues on supervisor wiener's amendment, why don't we take a role call vote. >> supervisor cohen. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> aye. >> supervisor kim. >> no. >> supervisor mar. >> no. >> supervisor tang. >> aye. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> supervisor yee. >> no. >> supervisor avalos. >> no. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor campos. >> no. >> supervisor chiu. >> no. >> there are five ayes and six nos. >> supervisor wiener. >> mr. president, i've given a result there, i do have an additional amendment that's a modified version of the last one. it's identical except it removes subsection c relating to real property and so it would be everything else will

be identical. i have paper copies but it's stripping subject c that starts real property. that's a primary residence and so forth. i make that motion. >> supervise wiener is making the motion. is there a second. >> seconded by breed. any discussion? okay. >> i'm sorry, could you repeat the amendment again. >> the amendment is identical to the last amendment we just voted on with the exception that it strips out subsection c relating to real property since that last amendment fails, i'm removing the real property prevision. speaker: thank you supervisor wiener for picking out the c part of the original amendment. i'll support this amendment, but i

want to also say that intuitive of an answer about the limitations and so forth, if i find out the limitations are harder than i had thought, i would -- i would like in the future and take that thing out of there, but for today, i will support the amendment. speaker: supervisor kim. >> actually to address the supervise yee's question, it would be great to find some type of resource to address retirement account issue, but i'm not sure who can provide us that answer so we can have some finals in the terms of including or not including this in the hardship. i'm open to the retirement account issue excludeing that from the assets, but non liquid

properties is not considered. if you own expensive artwork or $203,050,000, that should be considered as part of what you own, and that is exactly what personal property includes. i gets it sounds unreasonable to go to clothing and hopefully the board can work on non liquid property, but this includes high valued property like painting and jewelry. as far as the retirement issue, i'm open on this issue. i want to understand it better. i understand why you may not want to include that because many individuals are depending on that in their retirement, but i understand supervisor's campos opinion is they can screw everything into their retirement account. i'm not sure -- i don't think

anyone in the city is going to respond to that. i think that's the main issues we have before us is we don't have an expert here to address that point, so i'm wondering what the options are to get some answers to that question. >> supervisor campos. >> yeah, and i appreciate the nature of the discussion. i guess for me, the analysis is a little different in the sense that i can see why -- if there are limitations on how retirements work, that maybe that exception could make sense here, but i think that instead of including the exception and then finding out whether or not the limitations exist, i think it's better to do it the other way around. i think it's better to know what those limitations are because if those limitations are not what we think they are and you lose it in there, then you're creating a

loophole that could be ex mroited. >> we need a vote. >> supervisor cohen. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> aye. >> supervisor kim. >> no. >> supervise mar. >> no. >> tang. >> aye. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> supervisor yee. >> aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> no. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor campos. >> no. >> supervisor chiu. >> no. >> there are six ayes and five nos. >> the amendment passes and with that, are there further discussion. supervisor tang. >> thank you supervisor chiu. i wanted to kind of echo some

of the comments that supervisor farrell made earlier and we've been focusing on the amendments that has taken place and that shows how varied these situations are. i think none of us feel good about anyone being evicted as a tenant, so thank you supervisor campos for spear heading this. a lot of my concerns has to do with the overall idea of this . there is no guarantee as a tenant if i'm going to receive this increase relocation payments that i'll use it here in san francisco to continue renting here in san francisco. and so that is something that definitely does concern me. the other thing is that i'm not sure -- i want to appreciate the controllers office and making sure they come up with a neutral and the most clear way they

possibly could, i think, formula for determining this, however, it is based on a two year period and what happens after a tenant receives this relocation payment and after two years, they cannot have the income to sustain themselves in another unit that is higher rent than what they were paying previously. there's a host of other questions i have and not sure about the impact on this legislation, our goal is to make sure that tenants are stay here and live in san francisco. i'm not sure that this will achieve this. so that's why i'm uncomfortable with supporting the underlining ordinance today. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president. so i will support the legislation. and i appreciate all of the dialogue that we've had in committee and also here at the board. i know that

sometimes people don't want to get caught up in the details. i think it actually is whether one supports this legislation, or doesn't support it, this is significant legislation. it has an impact on tenants and landlords and one can support it or not support it. it's important to get the details right even if those details are reasonable affecting a sub set of the universe where the legislation can come into play. i think it's worth it on having those discussions and i'm glad we did that at committee and at the full board w that said, i do think that looking at the big picture, this legislation is important. and we, as i mentioned last week, it seems like hardly a week goes by

where i don't learn about another eviction in my district and i know i'm not hearing about them necessarily in other districts, so i can only imagine what is really happening and i know there's been some discussion about there aren't as many evictions now than in 2000 or the overall evictions, and it's a small number. whether it's a small or large number, it's having a huge impact on people's lives and when these evictions happening far often than not in my experience, you have seniors being impacted and people who are not going to be able to find other housing. people who may have lived in a neighborhood for decades and they're not going to be able to stay there. and so if it's a large number or if

it's a small number in a way that's not really the issue. the issue is these folks are being impacted and it's important for us to take action, i think, that moves us in that action so i'll support the legislation. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you president chiu. i want to thank supervisor campos for bringing this forward. all of us colleagues, not a day goes by where we hear from resident who are asking us to do something dramatics. we have the lee direction families or direct homes where people are occupying themselves to save them and those who have been living in their house for years and a 90 year old woman had just had a

birthday will be evicted and she's been in her property for 50 years. this legislation is the dramatic things that we can do to stem a tide of these evictions happening at an epidemic rate. i want to thank supervisor campos for taking leadership on this and i want to thank the colleagues who are supporting and this will make a difference. it will be one tool and many teals we'll need to stop the affordability crisis here in san francisco. >> president -- i >> want to echo the comments that there's no silver bullet to our crisis, but i'm happy to support this legislation because this is one piece we need to help stem our

pride. we have moved forward with policies. with this ordinance with votes today around legalizing in-laws and with other new ideas, collectively i think we're coming together to address the concerns we have, so i thank supervisor campos on this and i'm happy to support. >> thank you. supervisor campos. >> thank you mr. chair. i want to begin by thanking my colleagues for all of their comments and what i believe has been a very well informed and very great discussion. i understand my colleagues not supporting this legislation what their concerns are. but i want to thank my colleagues who are supporting it because even though there is no such thing as a perfect piece of legislation, what this legislation does is it gives san franciscans a fighting chance to

stay in this city. it is not a pancita or a silver bullet, about you this provoids working and middle class people in san francisco a fighting chance to afford to stay here if they're evicted. i do think that it's important for us to focus on the work at the state level, but i don't think we can be happier or satisfied until locally we're doing everything we can do because if all we do is wait for the state to change the ellis sack and some of the laws that needs to be changed, by the time those laws changes, it will be thousands of san franciscans who will no longer be living in this city. this helps all those facing eviction today that they have a fighting chance to stay here. i'm proud of this legislation. i want to thank

the tenant community which has organized around the issue of displacement in which through a series of conventions identified the issue of relocation costs and increasing the relocation assistance as the top issue in terms of ways in which we can stem the tide against its basement. this legislation reflects that grass roots movement that has brought us to this point where we finally have in city hall legislation that is being passed that quite frankly a year ago, six months ago, if you had asked me, there was no way that some of this legislation would get through, so thank you very much to those tenants, and i also want to thank the landlord community and the apartment association and others who provided feedback and we want to continue to work so that we can make sure that all san franciscans have an opportunity to remain on this city.

>> item 6, supervisor cohen. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> no. >> supervisor kim. >> aye. >> mar. speaker: aye. >> tang. >> no. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> supervisor yee. >> aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor campos. >> aye. >> supervisor chiu. >> aye. >> there are nine ayes and two no's. >> it passes as amendment. why don't we go to our 2:30 special accommodation. our first is offered by supervisor breed. >> okay. giving right to it. i want to have matthew ball come up and his family and the 911 dispatchers. if you would all join him. >> matthew is here today. here's one of our great 911

dispatchers, his wife melissa is here with him, his father in-law and former police captain of northern station, al casedo is here. we celebrate -- who doesn't have a week in san francisco. it honors the great work of our 911 dispatcher in san francisco and the work they do national wide. san francisco has over 100 dispatchers working at our department of emergency management and as we know, they're on the job 24/7 answering 911 calls and coordinated police officers and firefighters and paramedics who respond. unlike our police officers, firefighters and medics, san francisco dispatcher was the first responders that we have -- hi, chief, i didn't see you. chief

joanne and one of our -- i don't know your title now, chief saragosa. thank you. good to see you. we have a lot of our emergency response family here today. so back to my notes. i apologize. they provide the first response to help reassure people on their worse days. they give instructions in cpr and help deliver babies and they're the first responders to provide critical information that gets them to decide if people in crisis to keep people safe in our city. today i'm pleased to honor san francisco's dispatcher of the year for 2014. mr. matthew raball. you can clap. [ applause ] >> matthew is working at fire dispatch, the day the airlines

flight 214 crashed on its flight to san francisco international airport. it was a sad day in san francisco which made your job that much more important and the work that you did to help get first responders on the scene, so that much more incredible. while a separate dispatcher coordinated the crash scene, dispatcher matthew responsibility was to send fire department assets from the city south to the airport in support of firefighters assigned there. he relaid information to the responding units, dispatched back up resources and apparatus and assured safety for the medical that -- the dispatch source center had information from the outside information. matthew had to determine what information was essential

to relay to the incident command to keep the airways free from traffic. he did not an outstanding job. matthew has been an outstanding member of our city family for over eight years and it's a pleasure to honor him today, to put a face to all san francisco's 911 dispatcher and the amazing work they do every single day to keep us safe. and before i let you say a few words, i know you're joined by your family, i know you're joined by 911 dispatchers and other emergency folks, but before i let you speak, i'd like to ask chief joanne and his wife to say a few words because she worked -- i'm sure -- directly with the 911 dispatchers during that time and it was some incredible work going on behind the scenes. >> thank you supervisor breed, and to the board for

recognizing matthew. he recommends the department of management. they get the public safety members of this city where they need to be in stressful circumstances, so i would like to not only thank you for acknowledging him and thank you on behalf of the san francisco fire department. we had our hands full on july 6th with the incident as it unfolded down at the san francisco international airport. having worked in dispatch center, i can tell you it's a stressful environmental best. there's a lot going on, there's a lot the coordination and professionalism and that's what we get everyday. we work with the department of management. they're the heroes because if they don't do their job efficiently and effectively, we can't do ours. i'd like to thank you again supervisor breed for acknowledging matthew and all of the hard work and the great work that benefited the department of management. and thank you matthew. it's

great to see you. i'm here carol and will and on behalf of us, thank you for what you do and all of your colleagues. congratulations. it's well deserved. >> thank you chief. [ applause ]. >> and i know many of us probably in this room have had to make that call to a 911 dispatcher and often times it's during a tragic incident in our lives, and the folks that we have here in this city, their ability to keep us calm while sending help on way is just an art form, and we appreciate all the work that you've done serving the city. we appreciate the 911 center and all of the work that you all have done to respond crisis whether it's david going out to the community and dealing with

situations. we've been on the scene with fires and firefighters and folks and just to have the kind of support there to keep people calm, to help them move on from a tragic situation. it's one of those things that often times is not recognized, but we wanted you to know on behalf of the city and county of san francisco that we truly appreciate your hard work and we truly appreciate your calmness under pressure and all that you do for our city and thank you so much and congratulations. [ applause ] >> thank you very much supervisor breed and the board of supervisors very for at ward of dispatch of the year. i'm grateful for it. i've done the hard work for myself and the dispatchers and thank you to my family for being here

especially my wife melissa who is here and she's been supportive of everything i do and on this day that was not an exception. thank you to the fire department and joanne. i like to acknowledge chief sargosa. i don't know if anybody heard the recording, but they're the two that you hear on the other end. they were calm and professional the entire time and that allowed the three of us to focus on our work at hand. that was a big deal for me. i'd like to thank lieutenant robert lopez. he was sitting next to me during the incident and he was my wing man. i wouldn't have done a great job without him. he did a lot of help for me. i'd like to give a big thank you to my fellow dispatchers and there were so many that helped me that day and they did an outstanding job. they work in a really stressful

environment and with the exceptions of days like today, they do get thanks so we appreciate it. they're the first person you talk to on 911 and they're there for the men and women of the police department 24 hours a day and they do a good job and they move forward regardless of circumstances and this incident was a good example, a perfect example of what we do. i'm glad and on behalf of myself, we were able to represent our city and our department very well. lastly, i just -- the event was surprising. i think it was july 7th and it was a big deal, but it was one of those things where we didn't realize how critical this was going to be at the very first moment and i think when you make a big

connection and you saw things on the tv and the first responders make a big connection when they see things on scene and when i saw the images and find out what was going on, it was tragic, but it was interesting to see what kind of happened because i was working from one second to the next and not thinking about what i was doing. but my training kicked in so i was thankful. i just wanted to say thank you very much for the award and i appreciate it. >> thank you. [ applause ]. >> thank you very much.

>> thank you again.

>> thank you. >> thank you, supervisor breed. >> so i have the honor of making the next presentation and i like to invite the university of women, catherine is president and roberta bird. you should have in front of you a payday bar and you may be wondering why you have a payday bar in front of your desk. today april 8th is known around the country as equal payday which is the symbolic day when women's earnings catches up with men's

earnings. this is because the 23 percent wage gap that women typically face compared to men in the work place. on average, a woman earns 70 cents on the dollar for every dollar earned on a man. for african american and hispanic, it's worse. african women and latino women are paid less than their asian americans when at the have the same credential. in san francisco, the gap is less, but significant. women earns 82 cents for every dollar on men. this hurts family costing a woman's family at least $400,000 over the course of her career. four and ten mothers are the primarily bread winners in-house holds and 2/3 earners which s