our mini drivers we deserve to be treated with respect and fairly and they deserve to be compensated fairly in terms of compensation and benefits and mini drivers need to rely on the system so colleagues, i ask for your support it arose after the agenda went out so we didn't couldn't get it on the agenda in terms of the harm it is causing our city so colleagues, i ask firing support >> thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor avalos. >> thank you president chiu and i want to thank supervisor wiener for bringing this imperative agenda item forward. i oppose is mini drivers sick

anti their handled this ineir responsibility and shown disrespect for the passengers and the city and county of san francisco, however, it's important to look at why they're upset this current labor upset is the fix mini now charter that was charged and supported by gavin newsom and the chamber of commerce among other groups pr the main component was to remove the requirement that the mini drivers be paid the similarly of the highest charter folks in the country but it is an antagonistic for every other union charter section a 8.409 dash 4 instructs them to find the ash traitors to decide that

they newly conform to the factors in the determinations of wages and hours and benefits and terms and conditions of employment. but instead of referencing this charter section prop g puts the burden on the machining operators so that my board discretions are justified. this anti worker language made prop g created a lot of mistrust we're seeing from the transport folks we know this didn't fix mini or provide my new fupdz or did nothing to provide the oversight in an attempt to avoid a fight we had a charter reform

provision that would note needlesly hurt the working conditions and the supervisors will have the appointments for the mta board and create an office for the mta, however, it was failed to be masz on the ballot it was supervisor campos and others that were able to supervisor david chiu and supervisor carmen chu and maxwell so this looker dispute is not reflected in the resolution i'd like to offer some amendments. there are very things i don't think that people could be opposed to the amendments would be start on line 18 on page one. the first whereas clause would read and there will be 3 consequence whereas whereas the

needing g created a contract dispute with mini drivers in charter sections which puts the burden open the machining drivers unions to justify their contract provisions and whereas the representations for city employees which does not place a burden of proof on either party and whereas my mini drivers union members fell they're at a disadvantage because their arbitration process is different from on the contracts with the city. those are my amendments i also want to change the place of the whereas classes on the current form between lines 18 and 23

that goes to whereas courthouses to go after the whereas clause that is in the is line 25 on the first page of resolution. so those two whereas clauses makes sense they'll go after that line. so those are my amendments and i will gladly support the resolution when those amendments are adapted >> supervisor mar do you have language i know that supervisor wiener gave those out. >> i didn't have a change to get those on paper but if you pause the meeting we'll have a recess it will take me 5 minutes. >> why don't we continue the discussion and maybe our staff can bring copies we'll discuss that. >> supervisor wiener.

>> thank you, mr. president. so i wanted to you appreciate the comments that supervisor avalos and i understand that not every member of the board of supervisors and not every member of the previous board of supervisors sproptd proposition g. everyone has a right to their opinions by the fact is unless my memory served 55 percent of the san franciscans supported prop g and put it into the charter and prop g is the law of the land and governors o governors those impasse in arbitration and one can agree or san diego but 2/3rd's of voters in san francisco passed in 2010 so i don't know see what the

purpose is of the lapsing in the resolution that basic is criticizing prop g i'm not going to support the language i supported prop g and most important the voters did so i don't think it is proper to put the language effectively that we disagree with prop g and switching the current language it doesn't matter what order but in terms of the additional whereas clauses that supervisor avalos read i respect pious point of view i don't think they're appropriate for the resolution >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. i just wanted to seek clarification of the language which i know we're waiting on he just wanted to

explain why i have a real problem with moving this forward and adding additional whereas clauses associated with the proposition when this is from my prospective as a sick out and sick time is used for purposes of being sick. one of the mini drivers expressed to me sick time can you used, of course, for children's and doctors appoints but that's not what is at stake the mini workers conspired to use sick time to technically have a strike i have a problem about that that's not acting in good faith but to do this to the public in such a way there were no warnings and clear

communications inform ability to deputy any kind of last minute contingence plan doesn't leave me as a supervisor with much sympathy for on the workers are management i have a real problem with the way this was done and we as city leaders need to take action we have a problem. yes. i sympathies 0 they're saying to me they're getting a cut because there being a asked to contribute their pension and given a racing raise is not a raise a pay cutie understand they're fighting but the sickout is wrong and neons a strike and illegal i don't support it it's imperative as members of the board of supervisors we make it clear we have a problem with this we do not support of the

drivers we just do not support of the method this is wrongly wrong what we we need to take action >> supervisor avalos. >> yeah. i don't need to be convinced for the line resolution and the amendment i've provided doesn't take a position on prop g it just states why the machining drivers are upset i don't know approve of the action it has put me in a great disadvantage although i got to ride my bike yesterday, i think this is the context we need to have that gives a sense of what's gone on and the operators might feel their disadvantages because of the fix

mini measure that many of the people in the public while they voted for it didn't see the details. i'm still waiting on the amendments from my staff >> supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president i don't have a problem with the context. i speak as someone who opposed prop g and who had a counter proposal because i believeed that i still believe that the way in which prop g in terms of reforming mini it wasn't the right approach and would i want get to the result he actually think that those of us who opposed it have been proven right anyone that's happy with the way that mini is being

governed step forward. i want to be clear that the voters spoke and passed prop g we have to respect the voice of the voters and whether one argued with that or not i am very mindful of the fact that the voters have spoken and we have an obligation to respect them. i'm pernicious someone who has a history of supporting organized labor and supporting workers and certainly support the fact there are certain things that the union in this case wants to see and we want them to have a fair contract but i'm very upset on what we've seen a i'm especially up set that the sick identity is happening today on protection day i'm upset it's there's

something special about election day and no thought put into the way this can actually disfranchising voters we're going to have a appeared e harvard time to vote this is upsetting. i i don't think this is how we want to see things unfold. the main thing for me bodies need to go back to vbt a resolution of this dispute. and i don't believe that the actions that have been taken here in terms of the sick anti there that have stranded thousands and thousands even if riders it happens on election day is consistent with who weary will be supporting the resolution but open to context.

i think it's important for us as the board of supervisors to speak with one voice here. >> colleagues further discussion i'll have comments but safe them after public comment. >> supervisor avalos. >> i have copies that i passed out and mr. pollack and my office thank you for putting those together. again, this takes a position on prop g it's got an arbitration process some don't think it is but it's utilized that context provides a sense of why many of the beginning operators are doing what they're doing i don't agree with what they're doing but provides the complexity e context especially, if we have a resolution condemning or you're going them to go back to work.

besides those 3 whereas clauses i'd like to actually rearrange one whereas clause to move that or it from line 20 and 23 to the to go after the succeeding whereas clause if lines 24 to 25 just deposit down one line >> you flip those two and yes perfect. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you while i respect what supervisor avalos is trying to accomplish but we shouldn't try to justify what the mini drivers are doing we need to send a strong message we don't appreciate what they're doing this language didn't have a

place in this particular resolution for that particular reason because everyone i mean ultimately they want a good contract and we respect that and can look at a resolution at another time or even prepare resolution now to ask or say that we support that but for this particular purpose i don't see its overall place in the resolution. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you. i want to agree with supervisor breed. but i want to clarify that i don't support adding the whereas clauses i have no problem flipping the two clauses >> supervisor avalos. >> okay. again, i don't support of the sickout i think it's irresponsible. but i those are people that work

inform the city and county of san francisco and have one of the toughest city job and there's 0 black, brown and asian this is probably one of the ears places to fund the stable employment in the city and it's important we acknowledge not only, you know, the difficulty they have in facing putting money or food on the table and paying for the rent but some of the aggravations they might have in this work i want to propose a motion to accept those 3 whereas clauses and vote own the underlying resolution >> i believe i want to acknowledge the city attorney to the amendments flying motion mr. gibner. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney. first, you should open for

public comment when it is closed you should take a vote on the imperative finding which is the necessary prerequisite to asking and then vote on the single or two motions and the underlying amendments as amended >> supervisor campos. >> just wondering if there's any openness to having a different way of saying providing the context that supervisor avalos is saying. i would think that maybe the whereas it describes there are two perspectives on prop g but the other prospective of people that felt it was necessary maybe that's the way to address it

maybe the board could factually describe there's a difference that opinion on that >> colleagues, any more discussion at this point. why not open this up for public comment and supervisor wiener >> so there are several whereas clauses that's are very, very clearly laying out not only the important roles of the mini drivers that's a difficult job and that there's a lot of, you know, challenging contracts it mini drivers have everyday and the vast majority perform that job very well so i don't think it's necessary i don't it's appropriate to dissolve into prop g it was passed by the voters unanimously. >> any further discussion. >> supervisor kim. >> i was going to say i

understand the perspectives i understand there's a feeling there's a position for the backdoor board on proposition g. could there be a way to say that proposition g has a different aspect for other non-union employees so we can highlight the point that supervisor avalos is trying to get across this is a police radios that is different from arbitration but not making an opinion about whether or not its burden some >> supervisor campos. >> if that's a motion i will make a second. >> again, we can't resolution those amendments until after public comment supervisor cowen

and to supervisor kim. >> just want to understand the whereas a it is for the machining drivers in charter section is that a period or do you did this sentence continue with the rest. >> thank you supervisor cowen. >> i didn't put a lot of thought into that but i suggest if this helps us to get a unified position where it created a unique position for mini drivers in sections different from every other union representing public safety and governed by charter section. comma and then striking the last whereas clause >> supervisor wiener.

>> i would be fine about adding that whereas clause and when we first drafted it we had a separate whereas for proposition g just describing it and merged it into one so supervisor kim a proposing a much more neutral way i'll be fine alexander that whereas clause so just to be clear i'll support that and supervisor avalos suggestion we flip the two whereas clauses. >> president chiu. >> supervisor cowen. >> actually, i thought i heard supervisor kim edit out the last whereas clause that supervisor avalos proposed whereas the members of the union i'm sorry did you say take that anti. >> my suggestion my guess is that for individuals that don't

support those amendments that's the 3 whereas class to combine the two whereas clauses there's an arbitration process that's differences from non-nonprofit employees there's a different arbitration process but to take out the third whereas class and combine the first two. >> thank you. i support that. >> thank you supervisor farrell. i'm happy to port this resolution offered by supervisor wiener the changes makes sense a lot of us spent times on the streets and talking to hundreds of everyday san franciscans trying to get to work and the school and doctors and i don't think this is appropriate the

sickout i thank the ones that stayed and we need to work this out not to disruption of the san franciscans. 27 other unions have come to an agreement we ask the other ones to follow suit. i want to take a mom and respond to the (off the record.) discussion around supervisor campos charter amendment. i think there were only 4 of us here at the present time, and supervisor avalos and others gaming opposed the chapter and we could move forward or gavin newsom was willing to agree to add backs for the most vulnerable populations during the budget discussion time and the supervisors will remember we are that supporting that with

the charter maechlt or agree to the million dollars of add backs we agreed to move forward with the budget add backs i was asked to cast a vote against it even though i was going to support of the charter moment i want to remind people we had the decision in our hands not to move forward that's why we're where we are today, i want to clarify that history with that said, i think we should moved with the amendments as discussed >> okay supervisor wiener you're still open the roster do you want to speak? okay supervisor avalos >> thank you president chiu i remember very well what was going on i was chair of the budget committee it was like herod cats i actually didn't cut a deal with gavin newsom i urged the colleagues on the board to

not ask for million dollars and millions of discolors for the ad backs and not to make the deal we could moved with the rec and park charter amendment and you cut the deal and voted for on the charter amendment you actually remember that way and i actually i appreciate it because upper the fall person 0 who actually be enabled us to move forward so i appreciate that i told you about that was that a difficult thing to do it moved things forward but i didn't cut a deal with gaming that's the resolution so we had an opportunity and didn't go forward at that the there were a multiple of reaps and points of

views why we didn't. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you. i want to respectfully disagree with what president chiu said and thank supervisor avalos for talking about what actually happened. we a number of us made it very clear that what happened was a mistake. and it was a mistake because it was basically setting a really bad precedent and president chiu you and i have a different prospective because the idea that a mayor can hold a budget hostage in return for the board giving you it's right and responsibility to put a charter amendment on the ballot is simply wrong we would allow a mayor hold us hostage and basically play with this game that show you the only way to

get add backs forces the people we represent is for the board to give up it's right and responsibility to reform mini we said this was a meaning. it was a meaning and it's been proven to be a mistake because what happened is the rochlz we proposed for mini that would create a separate independent body that actually lawed the ridership to say how mini is governed because right now everything has to go through a board that is only appointed by mayor and we also have language that created the inspector general to give a voice to the ridership that's lacking today. i think it history is clear and it's unfortunate be being

rewritten but anyone who buildings that cutting a deal with gavin newsom for budget restorations that the mayor was required to provide that somehow this was a good idea i don't know that anyone can say that. thank you >> supervisor wiener. and, you know, i understand today is election day and there's a lot going on but i'll say this vote today is about ending the sickout not whether or not to split the mta appoints i'm glad 2010 this board didn't supplied the mta appointments because in 2005 proposition d that board did just that and the voters overwhelmingly rejected the charter and the

appointments. personally i don't think that splitting the appointments is going to be better and the voters rejected that and the fact that the board is really to i trying to putting this on but this is noted germane this is the desire to end the sickout colleagues i hope you'll support that >> colleagues, any questions or comments okay. at this point, we'll open this up for public comment is there anyone who wishes to speak on the item? on item 42. >> i don't really care can you guys put forth it's immaterial