to -- must be presented to the human rights commission and in what format. before any provisions of the ordinance related to the equal pay report go into effect, the equal pay advisory board must be fully impaneled which will take three months. it will hold several public meetings, and it must ultimately return to the board of supervisors with recommendations on the best data collection methods as well as whether any trimming legislation is necessary to achieve the recommendations. ~ with passage the advisory board has six months from its inaugural meeting to bring its recommendations to the board. therefore, nothing will go into effect until the earliest nine months after passage of this ordinance if it indeed passes and it could take any longer depending on the recommendation of the advisory board. finally, one last note. and this is an update from the information that director [speaker not understood] had put in your packet.

in talking to the controller's office, it appears that there are 14,000 vendors with the city and county of san francisco. that was in fiscal year 2014. and that the controller's office estimates that only 11% of those 14,000 vendors have 20 or more employees, meaning that they would be subject to this ordinance. so, of those 14,000 vendors, we estimate that a little over 1500 of those vendors would be required to the reporting requirements in this law. and with that, i'm happy to take any questions. >> so, commissioners, i just want to make it clear because i had -- relistened to the hearing over the weekend and it sound like supervisor campos said contracts, not contractors. so, it makes a little more sense around that 11% in relationship to contractors, not contracts. >> thank you. sorry. >> any commissioner comments?

>> i just want to thank your office for taking the lead on this. i think it's important work and we'll just have to see how it rolls out and work out the bugs along the way. >> absolutely. thank you. >> all right, thank you for your presentation. [speaker not understood]. i have a question about the report and the privacy that you just mentioned. >> sure. >> so, you'll have two concern. one, the privacy of the employee -- >> right. >> -- as to his or her pay. >> yes. >> and the privacy as it applies to the business and the trade secrets. >> right. >> could you please tell us how is that going to be protected? >> um-hm. >> you just mentioned it and i'm interested in hearing you out again. >> sure. and in talking to the city attorney about this point, the language that they felt comfortable including in the

ordinance itself was particularly protecting any data -- sorry, i'm just trying to get the exact language that i read earlier -- that qualifies as a trade secret or proprietary information. so, that's the language that will be included tomorrow in the ordinance. what the city attorney mentioned is that it's unclear -- that the law is very complicated around what type of information the city can shield from the sunshine ordinance or from other laws that allow all the city information to be accessible to the public. this second point i what trying to make, and i'm not sure if this made sense, is the only other governmental entity that's doing this in the country is the state of new mexico and they've been doing it for sometime. and originally when we were putting this ordinance together we thought, well, the only way to identify if wage

discrimination is taking place is if we have individual rights data on every single employee so we can make apple to apple comparisons and try to figure that out. well, in talking to the experts that put together the new mexico laws, they disagree and they feel like the easiest way to identify wage gaps is by collecting aggregate data, data in the aggregate on all employees and ewing categories that employer are used to reporting. so that eeo1 federal categories, and that's the easiest way to both prevent employers from being able to fudge the data in terms of presenting compensation and job classification, et cetera, to the city, and it's the easiest -- it's least burdensome for employers and it's the aloiest way to identify the gap. after talking to her i realized, wow, this is really complicated, as you mentioned, commissioner dooley.

collecting this data and all of the, you know, all of the issues that go into determining a workers' compensation, years of experience, education, job title, job classification, et cetera, there are many variables. and that in order to do this right we didn't want to legislate exactly what data needs to be collected because we didn't feel that our office, or even the city attorney, or even the board of supervisors had all of that expert knowledge to say exactly how to collect data in the way that was going to be most effective and meaning the [speaker not understood] legislation and least burdensome. so, what we did is we put the equal pay advisory board together and have tasked the board to do this. and if you look at the legislation on page -- on page 9, we have required that

experts in quantitative gender analysis, including statistics, a person who work in a small or medium size business that has contracted with the city and county of san francisco, a person who is responsible for human resources, responsible for diversity, person with expertise on discrimination, against women of color, a person whos ha worked as a discrimination or employment lawyer with emphasis on gender equity, that there be a representative that have all of the requisite knowledge and expertise to be able to put a data collection system together that is going to meet these twin goals of being able to identify whether or not discrimination is taking place, but at the same time minimize burden on businesses he. and, so, that's why he we set it up in this way because we realized that it's complicated. but the experts in new mexico who have already done this and who want through a year long process to get there have told

us aggregate data is the best practice in this area. so, if aggregate data is indeed the way we're going to do this -- of course it's the equal pay advisory board that's going to come with the recommendation, and the individualized pay date aft employees will be protected. we won't know -- we won't have any individualized data so that could never be revealed to the public and we would protect workers privacy. >> so, the content of that report will be set by the people that you just mentioned with the profile? >> that's right. so, the equal pay advisory board will have a six-month, six-month long process where they will have several public meetings where they discuss and figure out what sort of data collection system they're going to figure out and there will be plenty of time, all of those meetings will be public just like your meetings where people can come and give feedback and can express any concerns, et cetera. and then at the end of that six-month period they will report their recommendation to the board and it might be that

this enabling legislation isn't sufficient to put their recommendations in action. and, so, we also ask them to come with recommendation about whether any trailing legislation is necessary. >> and eventually, these reports -- just clarification. the report would have to be submitted to an agency in the city? >> that's right, the human rights commission. >> they have to process that information. >> that's right. >> and that process would keep the information confidential? although they have to make decisions as to whether the law was violated or not, and equal pay -- and that's the balancing issue that i'm -- >> that's right. so -- [multiple voices] >> the only thing the city attorney can guarantee to me, because that's what he we would like. the sunshine laws the city is required to keep any information in these reports

that would qualify as a trade secret or proprietary information. that's what they have told me. >> okay, thank you. >> sure. >> commissioner dwight. >> has there been any assessment of the financial impact on both the contractors that will be affected by this and on the city? because you talk about experts and we're talking about consultants and, so, someone is going to be paying some money for this. >> the short answer is no. every member of the advisory board will be a volunteer. so, there's no compensation paid to the members of the advisory board committee. like yourselves, they're going to be members -- residents of the city who care about this issue and so want to volunteer their time. in terms of the cost to the human rights commission, because this legislation doesn't go into effect until the soonest nine months, we plan to work along with our co-sponsor supervisor kim who we put this legislation together with through the

budget process this coming year to adequately staff the department to be able to adequately enforce this law. >> commissioner riley. >> hi. >> hi. >> you mentioned that you have not determined what kind of data you're going to collect. so, once you decided that, would you come back and show it to us? >> sure, absolutely. after the -- we're happy to do another presentation after the equal pay advisory board comes up with their final recommendations. we can also perhaps ask the board -- the board chair him or herself to come and present that data if that makes sense. >> yes, thank you. >> sure. >> any other questions before we go to public comment? >> and this would be monitored by the human rights commission.

so, the office of small business would have no involvement in this? >> not in the -- not in the receipt and analysis of the equal pay reports, yeah, that's right. and one last thing i'll just add, the real impetus for this which i didn't mention in my comments in the beginning, data showed that even today in 2014 women on average are earning 77 cents for every dollar that a man earns, and that women of color are earning even less. african-american women, the data shows -- this is nationally -- earns 64 cents on the dollar and latino women are earning 56 cents to the dollar to men. this is a pretty serious issue and we thought it was important that san francisco does its small part with at least a portion of the $5.2 billion that we spent last year in contracts, in city contracts to vendors to ensure that at least

that taxpayer dollar was compensating women adequately for their work. >> great. >> thank you. >> okay, let's go to public comment on this. do we have any members of the public who would like to make comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners, do we have any recommendations? i personally would like to continue this until we hear back from the advisory board on what their actions are going to be. i think this is good. this is something -- and i really respect the supervisor on this. i think this is something we can all get behind, but i really would like to know what the advisory board comes up with before we, as a

commission, make a decision. commissioner dwight? >> i agree with you. i think also it's clear here two important constituencies have not been conculted yet, the lbes that are going to be affected and the chamber of commerce. i think my questions he are what data are we going to collect and what is the cost to the city and what is the cost to the companies. and i think we're here to protect both the city and companies from, you know, or to at least ensure that they know what costs are confronting them. and i think we don't know that. i also would like a little bit of information about whether we have a problem here in san francisco. i think it's interesting that we have sort of national data, but it's not clear to me that this is something that is front and center for our city. so, i'd just like to know that information. >> i would, too. so, do we have a motion to continue this item until we get the data? >> i move to continue. >> i second.

>> roll call? >> all right. commissioner, we have a motion to continue the item until the data is gathered. so, president adams? >> aye. >> kathleen dooley? >> aye. >> commissioner dwight? >> aye. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena? >> yes. >> commissioner tour-sarkissian? >> yes. >> commissioner white? >> yes. >> and commissioner irene yee riley? >> yes. >> all right, so, commissioner, we have 7 votes to continue to hear the item once the advisory board has put together its recommendation. >> great. thank you. next item. >> next item is discussion and possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on bos file no. 141006 [administrative code -

legacy business registry, rebate program, and establishing fees]. ordinance amending the administrative code to direct the small business he commission to establish a legacy business registry, authorize an administrative fee for the registry not to exceed $50, and, for the next five years, provide a rebate to qualified legacy businesses that purchase the real property from which they operate and to qualified landlords that purchase the real property from which legacy business operate if the purchaser extends the term of the legacy business's lease by at least ten years, in an amount equal to the transfer tax levied on the purchase. >> welcome. >> thank you, commissioners. my name is laura lane. i am a legislative aide for supervisor david campos. you're getting quite a bit of

our legislative agenda this afternoon. thank you so much for having me today. and to present on our legacy business legislation. i'm sure as many of you know, so many of our city's valuable businesses, those that have served our neighborhoods and enlivened them for decades are struggling to survive. these businesses have become cultural institutions, created the character of the neighborhoods, for generations thriving business he have played an essential role in defining our communities. [speaker not understood] sky rocketing rents for retail spaces, unprecedented development are causing san francisco small business he to suffer and many of the long established businesses have been force today shut their doors. it is with this spirit that supervisor campos believes that something needed to be done. he believes that the city has a responsibility to protect the successful businesses he that are suffering through these unnatural economic pressures that have created the economic affordability crisis in san francisco and we cannot afford

to lose established independent business he. there is no one solution to this. supervisor campos is work tog create a series of concrete steps to stabilize our neighborhoods and keep small business he in san francisco viable. the first part of this initiative is to establish a legacy business registry for local businesses. this would include bars, restaurants, retail establishments, art spaces, performance venues, and manufacturers that have all served san francisco for more than 30 years. these business he must also demonstrate a strong connection to the neighborhood and the community in which they operate. throughout the world programs have been developed to protect bars, restaurants, and retail establishments. san francisco heritage who is here with us today is going to provide a little bit of additional information on these programs throughout the world and their legacy bar and restaurant program here in san francisco. san francisco, with this legislation, would be the first city in the united states to codify a legacy business

registry. designation of these cultural assets la victoria's bakery, green apple books, the rock see, gallery [speaker not understood], the list could go on and on, will provide some is civic recognition of the importance to the community of these establishments. one additional piece is that we would like to begin this process with one tangible benefit. this legislation would provide property owners purchasing buildings in which a legacy business operates a rebate of a transfer fee if they extend a commercial lease to the legacy business for ten years. additionally, if a legacy business is able to purchase its own property, then it would also qualify for a rebate of the transfer fee. there is so little data that exists regarding the number of legacy business he in san francisco. we don't know how many there are, what their status is as property owners or tenants, the size of these business he, the ownership models, et cetera. therefore, this legislation

also asks the office of small business to conduct a study and make substantive recommendations for the expansion of this program and provide additional ways to financially incentivize and encourage the stability of legacy business he in san francisco. this study would be due to the board of supervisors in june of 2015. assistance for this study will come from the gallery family business resource center and the university of san francisco, dr. monica hudson is here today who will provide you a little bit more information on how we're envisioning this going forward. maintaining the unique and independent spirit of san francisco is so important. this is an opportunity to celebrate the businesses that serve our neighborhoods and provide for our city. supervisor campos would like to thank supervisor farrell for co-sponsoring this legislation. additionally, we've had enormous input from san francisco heritage and cannot thank them enough for their commitment to this issue. additionally, the gallery family business resource center, the university of san francisco, and so many of the

merchants associations and businesses throughout the city have participated and commented and are willing to continue to comment and participate as we move forward. with that, i'll take any questions and turn it over to san francisco heritage and the gallery family foundation. >> great. >> commissioner white. >> this is fantastic, by the way. >> thank you so much. >> just quick question for you. is the qualification for legacy business, is this 30 years in business >> 30 years in business and a small statement ~ that would demonstrate their commitment to the neighborhood, how they've been connected to the fabric of the neighborhood. we don't want it to be a large hurdle for people to go over at this initial stage, i mean, become a part of this, help to form this a we offer more incentives later on, whether they be financial, et cetera. then raise the bar perhaps a little bit higher, but to become a part of the legacy business registry, we want to

kind of welcome folks with open arms. >> great. >> i have a question about the rebate for landlords. >> um-hm. >> the extension of the lease for -- from -- >> ten years, um-hm. >> is that only the length of the lease that is taken into account in your opinion? >> it would be an extension of 10 years from the point of the landlord a sold to landlord b, landlord b extending the lease for additional 10 year. >> under the same terms, different term? what would be the -- i'm just curious -- >> i think the term investment legislation, i'd have to double-check the language we use, i believe it would be -- we wouldn't want them to, you know he, increase the rent too much. >> so, at least an additional ten years -- >> correct. >> -- shall be entitled to rebate, did you it mention other term? [multiple voices] >> a lot of that, when he we

consulted the city attorney, we have some difficulties in interfering with contracts. >> okay. >> between -- >> that's the reason -- [multiple voices] >> it's a little bit loose in what we can and cannot control and step into. we can say, you know, you can get the city benefit by extending the lease, but there is question as to interference of contract there. >> that's why you depth mention it. >> right. >> thank you. >> commissioner dooley. >> i just wanted to clarify. if a business, say, ha more than one outlet -- >> um-hm. >> -- does every outlet qualify for the legacy based on the original opening one? like if the first one has been open for four years but they opened one last week in another neighborhood, how did you that apply to this? >> it would be -- i mean, it would be business location determinant. so, it would be the oldest business had to have been there for 30 years. so, i'm just going to use

[speaker not understood] a an example. so, say that all of their business he, because they are a business that has existed in san francisco and expanded, they would be a legacy business because they have had at least one shop that's been open for more than 30 years. >> thank you. >> and, laura, correct me if i'm wrong, but that is -- some of those details are thing that are under the purview of the office to maybe clarify and refine and so for staff to work with you on? >> yeah, this is an initial step, but we want to grow. we want to make this program as successful as possible, as broad as possible, and as stabilizing as possible. and so we are looking forward to collaborating with director [speaker not understood] and you to make this the best possible piece of legislation and program that we can. >> this is great. i'd like to hear from our other two, the san francisco heritage

and the geller. i really like the work san francisco heritage has done. i've been to some of your functions in the past. i like what you do. you guys do amazing work, so, thank you for being here. >> thank you very much, commissioner adams. of course, you participated in our early work in june of 2013 when he we convene a community summit entitled sustaining san francisco's living history ~ that looked at these very issues about how do we provide assistance to struggling businesses he and nonprofits facing displacement in san francisco ~. and really that workshop, the genesis of that was recognition on our part as a historic preservation organization that landmark protection is ill-suited to provide assistance to these really cultural establishment that are so valued by the neighborhoods in which they exist, and that was really -- early our first step which culminated in the report that i believe you have

the executive summary in front of you, the sustaining san francisco's living history report, that not only discussed the community summit that you participated in, but also analyzes a series of international case studies of what other major city across the globe have done to recognize and provide assistance to these businesses to ensure their long-term sustainability. so, i'll be brief with my remarks. i just thought i would provide a little further context to add to laura's introduction. for those of you not familiar with san francisco heritage, we are a 43 year old historic preservation organization founded in 1971 with a mission to preserve and enhance san francisco's architectural and cultural identity. we're a membership based nonprofit organization, and we're so proud to be collaborating with supervisor campos on this legislation. it' really we feel a validation of our earlier efforts in this

realm ~. we feel that the proposed legislation is modest, but highly significant step towards recognizing these businesses he which are so important to defining the identity of san francisco ~ a. too often these places are taken for granted until we learn of their impending closure, which unfortunately in san francisco is almost a weekly occurrence. many of thea businesses are successful, long-standing business he that, but for the current economic climate, would survive and thrive today. as documented in our report sustaining san francisco's living history that was just released in september, one of the primary challenges facing these businesses is the fact that they do not own the spaces in which they operate and that they are subject to the economic force he that make

their lease renewal prohibitive or oftentimes result in displacement and we're really pleased that the incentive that is included in this legislation aims to assist business owners purchase their buildings, or if that is not realistic, to incentivize new buyers to extend those leases. and, of course, as you know in the legislation there is a requirement that the office of small business report back to this commission and the board of supervisors with further recommendations as to other substantive incentive and assistance that can be provided. another important part of, we feel of the legislation is the recognition piece. and the other case studies that we've evaluated in places like london buenos aires, barcelona, part of the program is to promote these businesses he in the aggregate as part of the history of the city and their

often cultural heritage destinationses and that has also been a part of the success of those programs. the legislation, of course, is also informed by our own legacy bars and restaurants program, and i think you have our pocket guide thats was handed out to the commissioners today. and it is really intended to be a public education program, to raise awareness about these places and how long they've been in existence and it's really had a phenomenal response by the public, both locals and out of town visitors have really had a hugely potive response to these places. and there is great debate as to which business he are not included in that map. i'm sure you'll look at that and say, well, why isn't this place included and that what really one of our primary aims in printing that, is to kind of stir dialogue and debate as to which businesses are important in my neighborhood and should be patronized and included and supported.

so, we're really happy to participate in this legislation, the first of its kind in the country, but as well documented in our report, there are many other global world class cities, and san francisco is certainly a world class city, that have taken meaningful steps to recognize and sustain these businesses and i hope that san francisco will follow suit. i'm happy to take any questions as well. >> commissioner dooley. >> i do have a question a was leafing through this large amount of potential businesses. so, there is a architectural component to this also, being qualified? >> not under the proposed legislation there is not. for our legacy bars and restaurants program we defined loose criteria that was kind of derived from the argentina program that required businesses be in existence four years or more, have significant architecture or interior features and are significant and have -- can demonstrate

significance in the community in which they are located. of course, this legislation does not reference architectural features directly, but it does have the requirement in the application form which will be developed by the office of small business to demonstrate in some way significance in the community in which they are located. and one of the case studies in the report, the assets of community value program in london which enables citizens to nominate -- pub have actually been the most frequent type of place that has been nominated in that program. they are also required to demonstrate community significance. so, there are lots of great models in term of existing application forms youed in london and other cities that i think san francisco could draw from and what types of evidence are relevant in establishing community significance. >> i notice that, for example, there are quite