>> thank you, the meeting will come to order, welcome everyone, goods morning, this is the thursday, june 5, 2014, meeting of the that i hader services and safety committee of the board of supervisors, my name is eric mar and i am the chair of the committee and we are joined by norman yee and our chair person, david campos is out today and our clerk is mr. derek evans and i guess before we start, could i just ask if we could excuse chair campos from this meeting, can we do that without objection? >> thank you. >> mr. evans do we have any announcements? >> yes, thank you, mr. chair, silence all cell phones and electronic devices and completed speaker cards and copies of documented should be submitted to the clerk and items acted upon today will be appearing on the june 15th, agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you. >> please, call item number one.

>>hearing to consider that the transfer of a type 48 on-sale general public premises license for the expansion of premises located at 246 kearny street (district 3) to brian sheehy for future beverages inc., dba rick house, will serve the public convenience or necessity of the city and county of san francisco. (neighborhood services and safety committee) >> thank you. and we have a report from staff? is that right? and this is not a traditional transfer of the liquor license, it is the expansion of an existing premises, which is a bar on kearny street and

>> it resulted in us losing 40 percent of the square footage of the bar, and exchange for that square footage we are offered basement space and space at the rear of the existing bar, that space has been renovated and it is the same license. the size of the bar is increasing by about 30 percent and this is required, it is required by the abc that we go through this formal process to expand the license because of the additional square footage. but all conditions, and all aspects of the bar continue as is. thank you. >> i am one of your customers and i love the bar and amazing drinks. could i just ask that there the main bar area and then there is the speak easy type of place in the back with the barrels, i think. is the new expanded space that space, or is it a different space?

>> the new expanded space is below that space and to the rear of that space. >> okay. >> i know that there is an area where you can walk up the narrow side of the stairs to another area and it is almost like a three level bar in the back it sounds like. >> yes it will be. >> great. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> and we have a report from the police now. >> okay. >> good morning, supervisor mar and supervisor yee. with the san francisco department abc liaison unit. and very simply he has applied for a transfer and technicality and it has to be that because abc requires him to do that and however it is a simple expansion and i did visit the location, like he described and it is towards the rear and below of the main floor area. and it is a little bit larger rather close to about five or 600 square feet and i may be off by 100 or so. but, simply said, that it is

just a simple expansion. and let me just go through the stats here and what we found when we ran the report and the plan is simply that the police calls for service from february 2013 to 2014, and the police calls for that location. and share the police reports as well and the plot is located on 160 and as defined, with the 2013, high crime calls, anything over 99 calls is a high crime area. and the plot had 178 police reports, reported calls for that location. and it is located in the high crime area. the states census track, 117, population track is 1783. the on sale license is authorized for the track six and however there are 106 active, but once again we are not adding a license to that location, we are just simply expanding a current location.

and there were zero letters of protest recorded and zero letters of supports recorded. the alu recommends approval and there are statutes you that he has aherd to in the past with the current license and we have never had the problems or had the license brought under any kind of disciplinary action. >> thank you, officer. >> if are there know questions, let's open up this for the public and is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? >> seeing none, public comment is closed and i would like to thank mr. sheehy for being here and for running the rick house and the new trend of bars that are really interesting and speak easy history type of places i think that local addition and others are really amazing too, but rick house is a great place that is very popular and so i can see how the expansion will really benefit many people from the neighborhood as well. supervisor yee, could we get a motion on approval of it?

>> sure, i will move it. >> can we do that without objection? >> thank you. >> thank you. mr. evans please call the next item? >>hearing on the implementation of civil service rule 115 for the employment of disabled individuals for the city and county of san francisco. >> thank you, and this is a hearing that i have called along with organizations led by people with disabilities, and the current day movement for civil rights and equal opportunities for people with disabilities and this is focused on employment. and i just wanted to thank the community-based groups that are here today, and we will have a number of speakers from our local and state departments. but also, from community advocates and community based organizations. and the hearing is specifically

on what we call civil service rule, 115, but i think more broadly it is about understanding and acknowledging the history of the movement of the 1980s, of people with disabilities for equal opportunity in employment. and breaking down discrimary barriers that were preventing people from having an equal and fair chance at employment opportunities in the city and also, i think that it is also a fight and a movement for dignity and not only equal opportunity, but equity in how the city looks at disadvantaged groups of people as well. so, we are 115, we will hear from the department of human resource and mayor's office on disability is one of many tools that we use in the city to allow equal opportunity and to promote employment

opportunities for people with disabilities and other disadvantaged groups. i wanted to also say that it is not only about hiring it is also about recruitment, and hiring supporting people while employed and retaining them to be successful in their jobs as well. i wanted to acknowledge that we will be hearing from our department of human resources, the deputy director, linda simon but i wanted to acknowledge that dana kuitaki is here and also we will hear from carla johnson the director of the mayor's office of disability and also from the civil service commission, jennifer johnson the executive director and then followed by our california department of rehabilitation which makes the determinations on whether somebody is severely disabled or not. and that is im casy who is the employment coordinator with the california department of rehabilitation, and from the community side and i will just say that the movement to

advance, equal opportunity and equity for people with disabilities in employment has been led by many different organizations, and individuals, but today we will have representatives from the fdr, democratic club, the president also from the light house for the blind, cath williams and julie mccarthy, and terry goodwin, and san francisco independent living resource center, jessy lorens and we will also have different examples of employers like the california academy of sciences with a great model employer for hiring and giving equal opportunity for people with disabilities as well. and so with that, if there are know questions from supervisor yee, i would like to open it up first with our department of human resources with leslie simon the deputy director. >> overhead?

it is pretty high, i am a little challenged by height here. so i am going to bring this down a little bit. thank you very much, supervisor mar and yee and i am the deputy director at the is department of human resources for equal opportunity and leave programs and i welcome the opportunity to present to you today on civil service rule 115, and more importantly on the city's commitment to equal employment opportunity as it relate to employees and applicants with disability. is the overhead on? so what i have on the overhead is basically bullet points of my presentation. and i would like to start off and by saying that while this discussion today does revolve around rule 115, i would like

for us to understand the city's effort in reaching out to our community of disabled applicants and employees. and there are many different avenues, by which we employ individuals with disabilities. for example, one of the avenues is that our on-line job application system is ada compliant. we also at the department of human resources in our lobby have computers that are ada compliant. and every one of our job announcements on the dhr website also stipulate that if an applicant requires accommodation, who to contact for that accommodation, and we do routinely provide those for the applicants and in addition to that all of the announcements also provide contact information, regarding tty access. and in addition to that, we also have donna kataki who you have identified as leading the

effort to work with the cbos in the community and particularly we have been very happy to work with kate williams for light house for the blind in reaching out to those and advising them of positions that are available that are listed on the website and also asking the cbos that if they have clients that meet any of the minimum qualifications for those positions please send us their resumes. and then we can reach out to those departments and have them identify those positions, as rule 115, so that those candidates can be considered. so we do have right now, a process, for reaching out with our cbos and reaching out with our hiring managers that designates the position as rule 115, in addition to that, we also attend fairs that are specific to our disabled community, the last fair that we attended was on april the 13th of 2014 and that was a fair that was sponsored by the san francisco mayor's committee for employment of persons with

disabilities. it is not affiliated and i want to clarify that it is not actually affiliated with the mayor's office and it is a non-profit that designates itself as with that title. but at that fair, there were over 200 individuals who attended that fair, and some who submitted applications with us. in addition to that, we are also committed not only to attracting and hiring new employees, who have disabilities but we are also very committed to retaining our employees that do develop disabilities, either industrial injury, or outside of work, develop some type of disability. and one process that we have for that is our reasonable accommodation process. so one of our employees does develop a disability, then we will work with that employee and the medical restrictions, we will review what the medical restrictions are and we will try to locate another job that is in compliance with the medical restrictions within

their own department. if that is not possible, then they are sent to a city wide search. so we actually look in all of the city departments and our 60 city departments to try to find a position for that employee so that if we can continue the city employment and so this is for the retention of our disabled employees. in addition to that, we do have reasonable accommodation coordinators in every city department. and so that employees do have a disability can go to those coordinators and request accommodations and also, any types of systems that they may need such as dragon speak, or anything else that might assist them, again, to retain their position. and in addition to that, i would like to mention that the city and county of san francisco because of our efforts in this area was recently recognized by the department of rehabilitation as being the employer, or with the employer of the year award. and so i think that this speaks volumes as to what the city has

been doing in reaching out to applicants and also to retaining employees with disabilities. with today's hear is about rule 115, so i would like to provide a little bit of history regarding rule 115 n1985, there was a ballot measure that was called proposition a and it was to amend the city charter so that the qualified individuals with disabilities could answer the city workforce outside of the competitive merit process, the goals of proposition a were to provide increased employment opportunities for qualified individuals, with disabilities. and two, to allow the departments to fill the vacant positions with qualified individuals. and three, to increase the diversity of the city. and now turning the page on the overhead, and i am continuing with the bullet points in my presentation. so proposition a was approved by the voters and the charter

was amended and a new civil service rule was implemented, i think that those are my notes. and but any way, was implemented and that was civil service rule, 34, that later became civil service 115, which is what we are speaking about today. and civil service rule the title of it is rules related to the employment of persons with disabilities. and so what are the requirements of civil service rule 115? >> and it will allows for the applicanted to be appointed to permanent exempt positions and entry level classifications and it is important that i stipulate right here, that when we say entry level positions, that disnot mean that these are you know going to be court positions only, for example, or secretarial positions, or positions such as that, we actually are referring to the

first level of a position in a classification. and so for example, in my division, equal employment opportunity, we hired an attorney through rule 115, and so this and be, engineer, or attorney and at the highest levels we can appoint the individuals through rule 115. and so, also, those individuals served a one year probationary period as a permanent exempt employee and they are evaluated every three months and at the end of a year, of successful performance, we are converted to permanent civil service status. and so that those and the criteria for rule 115, and so how successful has the city been with rule 115? in implementing rule 115, i am happy to say that we have appointed over 224 employees to the positions within the city utilizing rule 115, of course, we believe that more can be done and so we welcome the opportunity to meet with our cbos, and so that they can

advise us as to whether there are any barriers that are keeping their clients from applying or being selected by the city and county of san francisco. and we also believe that with working with them and also, we are hoping to have a recruiter in our budget that is in our budget and if the board of supervisors approved our budget and approves that position, then we can do more in reaching out to our cbos and we can do more in facilitating the communication between the cbos and our hiring managers in the departments. we can do more as far as attending job fairs, and making this a more productive and successful program. i would also like to recognize the department of public health, who has been very instrumental and successful in appointing individuals through 115. most of our city departments have utilize the rule. the other thing that we are going to be doing in order to continue improving our processes is that we have

spoken with carla, with the mayor's office of disability and she is going to be attending our hr professionals meeting, this happens once a month and we invite our human resources professionals from all of our city departments to attend that meeting so these are the individuals who are critical to the hiring of employees within our department. and so carla has kindly agreed to come and speak to them and to discuss employment how to employ persons with disabilities what we need to do, to effect that. more successfully. in addition to that, we are also going to revitalize, what we had before, in 2010, which was advisory panel, and the advisory panel was composed of cbos from the community and the disabled community but also included micky the director of human resources and others, and also johnson who is the

director of the civil service commission and we want to work with our community partners to find out what we can do to continue to be successful in the area of recruitment, and retention, of our disabled employees. the one thing that i would like to bring up though, that the city and county cannot do, and that is to have carve outs of positions for the disabled community this has been one of the items that was brought up before by the task force and we have been advised that ta would be a discrimary process because we would be limiting the positions to only one type of employee and we would not be able to, you know, appoint anybody else to those positions so that would be discriminatory towards everybody else. in addition to that, another question was that we also identified hiring goals and again, we don't believe that we have the authority, we also don't believe that it would be legal to establish a hiring goal. and we all, know that we have

proposition 209, and proposition 209 does speak to any type of hiring goals, or quota, etc. and someone may bring up the fact that the federal government, recently passed legislation, with a hiring goal of 7 percent. but it is interesting to note that that hiring gel is specific to contractors. and it is not to the federal government. and i wonder, i am not sure, but i wonder if the reason for that is because it would be deemed discriminatory by employees and all right? and then the other item that i would like to say is that we cannot survey our employees or applicants regarding a disability, under the advice of our city attorney and that is an invasion of privacy and even if we were to stipulate that it was voluntary, the question would come up, who is going to have access to that data, because someone has to have access to the data if you collect it. and so there could be a presumption then, later on in litigation, that that information was used and a no one selection process and

increased the liability to the city and so we don't want to conduct a survey of our applicants or employees regarding do you have a disability. in fact, some of our employees who are disabled were not hired through rule 115 and don't identify themself as as being disabled and so the data is only as good is what is given to you and we don't believe that everyone will identify who is disabled. and as we know, under the ad, triple a, most of us have some type of disability. so, thank you very much, for giving us this opportunity, and we look forward to working with our partners. >> let me just ask if there are any questions supervisor yee? and we are joined by our president, david chiu as well. >> thank you, supervisor mar. thank you, linda, for presentation. quick question, the 244 employees, that were appointed, >> yes.

>> what period or length of time does that then happen? >> so, the majority of those employees were appointed from the beginning or the implementation of rule 115. and that was from 1985 through 2002. and i want to remind myself, and everyone else here that in 2002, we had the dot com bust and so at that time, the city was retracting as far as employment, and we were not only retracting, we were laying off employees and so there was also the same happened with the recruitment, and appointments of the individuals under rule 115. >> so, if you were to take, just the period that you just named, 85 to 2002, >> yes. >> was there a pattern of how many people were appointed each year? was there an increase as you were ramping up? >> you know, it is interesting

because it actually took off a little bit slow. so for the first year, we know, we had a few appointments and then after that, it really picked up and in 1987, for example, we had, you know, 21 appointments and in 1990, we had 46 and so it really took off, right? and we had a lot of appointments and then, again, we have the dot com and it stopped. and the number of appointments were much more limited. and smaller numbers from 2002 to the present. >> so given that it was sort of getting better before the dot com bust, were there things that the people learned that made it more successful, you know, as you were wrapping up? >> i believe that it was through education of our human resources professionals and letting them know about rule 115. and also, reaching out to our cbos regarding that process.

and i will say that it is also important to note that in 2006, we used to have someone in my division in eeo, who was passed with reaching out to the cbo and working with our hiring managers. and in 2006, we lost that position, again, and you know, through budget. and so, we have not had someone who has been dedicated full time to this effort. and so, that is why, we would realize that we need a recruiter, and we have put it in our budget so that we can start that process again. and be more active in that arena. >> was that, or was there a d a recruiter during the... >> there was a decline in the number of appointments after that. >> 1985 to 2002, was there a recruiter? >> i am having difficulty hearing you. >> 1985 to 2002, was the staff that was...

>> yes. >> that is correct. >> thank you. >> so, before i let president chiu speak i will just say that as a member of the budget committee i think that your recommendation for the staffing that the adequate for strong recruitment and equal opportunity for the people with disabilities that should be a priority. and if you could get that un. and i would like to acknowledge the work of the advisory panel and group and i know that a number of speakers, and others will speak about that experience too and some of the recommendations that you have already gone through. but in explaining the history of the numbers of the use of 115, and how we might raise awareness through your monthly human resource professionals meeting that karl l johnson and others will attend and you are

suggesting that an advisory panel, reestablishing an advisory panel and it is good with dhr, but also with the community based organizations. >> right. >> i want to thank you for presenting for the presenters and we want to see if president chiu will make some remarks. >> i want to thank supervisor mar as well as advocates from the seniors and disabled communities to come to this important hearing and i want to make sure that we are implementing civil service rule 115. we now in san francisco are blessed to have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country and we are leaving too many communities behind and in particular, with unemployment rates, for individuals with disabilities nearly twice that, of people without disabilities. and with the fewer folks, with disabilities being counted as unemployed, because more than the leading labor force, permanently and with the reality that over a third of all individuals, the people on

incomes based on government assistance have disability. and we need to do more. and one of the interesting things that we know about our disabled community is that when we are working, they are more productive in the workplace and they have a lower turnover rate and i think that we need to do everything that we can to move this forward. and i am very open to a number of the proposed solutions that have been put forth around staffing and with the proposal around the disability coordinator and i do know that there is some question around whether we can set the san francisco hiring goals for people with disabilities and i am open to considering that if we can do it in a legal and constitutional way and my question on this topic is certainly after prop two, we are not allowed to set the quota or other factors to establish, to establish, certain requirements there is nothing that will prevent us

from taking in the voluntary information and tracking that. could you address, what we are allowed to collect, and what kind of data we can track verses what it seemed to me from you to be possible, objections to why we can't move forward with certain kinds of goals. >> so the federal law does allow us to track race and gender and does not allow us to track sexual orientation. >> that would be a violation of privacy. >> for the commission appointments we do track voluntary data around sexual orientation so that we have a sense of when someone wants to identify as part of the lgbtq

community, and so how does that distinguish from what you are talking about. >> i know that from the advice of the city attorney, we do not ask applicants to identify the sexual orientation and we do not track that. we don't have that, and even for our race and our gender, that is voluntary. and we are allowed to track it because we do receive federal dollars and as a result of federal dollars and transportation dollars, etc. we need to provide statistics to the federal government specific to race and gender, if you are tracking it and it is voluntary and i am sure that you are tracking it or you have a conversation with the city attorney regarding that. i know that our city attorney is telling us not to track that and not be asking for that information. >> it might be interesting to get all of those attorneys in the same room. >> exactly. >> i think from my perspective, if we are talking about