following language on page 5 line 24. and i quote, "the city will not disclose any information contained in the equal pay report that qualifies as a trade secret or proprietary information." the concern that was raised to us by the san francisco chamber of commerce -- and we welcome the feedback -- is that there might be proprietary information that they do not want to see disclosed as part of the report or as part of a government records request. the language that i move to include in the ordinance addresses that concern. i want to just end my remarks by noting a couple of points that have been raised. we introduced this piece of legislation more than a month ago. there has been actually a lot of media that has been given to

this legislation, including an article in -- front page article in the san francisco chronicle. this piece of legislation has been available to anyone who is interested in the issue. we have spoken, as i said earlier, to the san francisco chamber of commerce and mr. lazarus who spoke on behalf of the chamber of commerce indicated that he supports the aim of the legislation and that he feels better about it with the incorporation of the amendment that i just moved. we also set up a meeting with a number of contractors who during the hearing indicated some concern or desire to meet. we set up the meeting, but that meeting -- they did not attend the meeting, but we continue to extend our offer to meet with them whenever they're willing and able. the small business commission heard this legislation and supports the aim of the

legislation, but it decided that it did not want to take a position on the legislation without actually knowing what the recommendations from the equal pay advisory board will be. again, without actually knowing what body is created by this ordinance will have to say in term of the specifics. one question that has been raised is the question of whether or not we want to do the same for city agencies. and let me say that we don't need legislation to make that happen. i believe that as we require contractors to provide us information, that we in the city and county of san francisco should do as well. my understanding that about 20 years ago there was an audit that the city conducted, but we are happy to work with any city department to make sure that this is not only something we require of vendors, but again, that we make sure that this is incorporated into every area of

operations of the city and county of san francisco. i want to thank my co-sponsors for their support, supervisor kim, supervisor avalos, supervisor mar, and supervisor farrell, and i especially want to thank supervisor kim and her staff who had been working with us. and, colleagues, i look forward to your support of this legislation. and i will close by noting the incredible work that has been done by hillary rhonan from my office who has been working on this for months, and it's greatly appreciated, hillary. thank you. >> thank you. >> sorry, i do make a motion to amend along the lines that i described. >> supervisor campos has made a number of amendments, seconded by supervisor kim. colleagues, can we take the amendments without -- okay, let's continue discussion on this. supervisor tang. >> did supervisor breed --

>> why don't we go -- >> i guess i have a question about the amendment to the city attorney, but i don't know if anyone else has a question -- >> >> we haven't voted on the amendments yet so we're open to discussion on the underlying amendments or the ordinance supervisor campos has made. so, supervisor tang. ~ >> thank you. first of all, i do want to thank supervisor david campos for bringing this attention to the board of supervisors. i think it's a very important one. and as a woman, i support equal pay for equal work, absolutely. i also agree with data collection and the important role it can play to figure out if there are any disparities we need to address in issues. of course, i also want to take the opportunity to acknowledge all of the work that's been done by past generations, by current generation of people on the national level to address these issues and make sure that there is equality for women in the working world. however, i do have a couple of concerns with the legislation. again, not with the goal and the intent of the legislation,

but a couple of process issues. for one, the requirement that you must submit this information for compensation for all of city contractors, 20 or more employees worldwide, and with contracts $50,000 or more, i think that this would significantly impact many of our small business he and more importantly, many, many of our nonprofits in the city that contract with us ~. these are the same nonprofits that this board ha fought to provide funding for and under this legislation the way it is currently written will apply to them, it would apply to organizations such as old school cafe, wu yee children services, [speaker not understood], asian women shelter, mission neighborhood centers, the african-american art ask culture complex, [speaker not understood], self-help for the elderly, the list goes on ~. as we all know, many of these organizations, they really struggle for every little bit of funding that we can provide to them to be able to carry out the services that they provide

for our community. i think that this reporting requirement will be a huge burden for them, not to mention some of the training that will have to take place in order for them to all comply with this requirement. currently, i did want to point out that there are reporting requirements that these nonprofits do have to comply with if they contract with the city and those that receive grants through departments such as dcyf, currently for one, they must submit their payroll registry to the city to match against their invoice and they must also submit through our city database the name of staff, the positions, and the cost. all of this really just to say that there may be information right now that those organizations that contract with the city that we can use actually and potentially repurpose for this reporting requirement and that it would have been great to involve departments such as dcyf in fleshing out some of these requirements. in addition to the nonprofits, most of our city contractors do have stringent requirements for equal pay as well. for example, for public works

contracts throughout the state of california, contractors and subcontractors are required to pay prevailing wages for all of their field labor. state requirements also dictate the required hourly wage levels for each trade to be paid directly to the workers whether you are a female or a male. so, although i do agree with the data collection as a useful tool, i just question the group and organizations that's included as part of this because i think that many of them actually have many requirements they have to abide by already. other issues that i believe should be sorted out before hand -- and i do appreciate there is a nine-month what we've been calling a gestation period before they take effect, i think a lot of thesev things should be addressed up front at the beginning. furthermore, many businesses, especially those between 20 to 50 employees, a lot of them don't have in-house hr support staff and, so, this reporting requirement will be something that will pose many resource challenges as well as some privacy concerns.

some of my ion thoughts about supporting women in the workforce, i think it's really important that he we think about our younger girls, our students, our younger women right now. ~ my own and think about how we can create opportunities and mentor ship programs for them in fields such as science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. those are fields that have been shown to have incredible disparities between men and women right now and it's something we can do to address it for our younger generation. it's something that i heavily support. it's why i through our budget process allocated funding to all of our district 4 public schools to provide them grants so that they can support efforts in stem. so, again, i just really want to reiterate think absolutely support the intention of this legislation. i just feel there are some other departments or commissions that could have been consulted more thoroughly before hand. i know that there's been a lot of talk about process, but i think that not the department

of women, but the commission in particular could have been -- would like to see this ordinance some more and think about it more thoroughly, so, i'd like to support that. i think that dcyf, for example, which issues grants so many of our nonprofits in the city would like the opportunity to comment on this. the small business commission did see this last night on their own initiative and i'm really glad that they did so. and as well as the hrc, i do understand that they weighed in on this also in support of this legislation even though they did bring up some concerns. so, with that said, again, i just really want to see us work together to make this an even more impactful legislation to really look hard at some of the information that's already provided to us currently, and see how we cannot reinvent the wheel but just repurpose some of the information so it's not an incredible extra burden for many of our nonprofits or public -- public works contracts that do business with the city. so, with that said, i'd like to make a motion and see if we can refer this to committee with

reference to the commission on status of women to dcyf and to hrc as well. thank you. >> okay. supervisor tang has made a motion that this be referred to committee with reference to those various commissions as seconded by supervisor breed. i was just told by our board clerk that the motion to refer to committee takes precedence over the motion to amend so we'll take it in that order. but why don't we continue discussion. supervisor kim. >> thank you, president chiu. just speaking on the policy itself, first of all, i do want to recognize the work of supervisor david campos's office for bringing this forward and i wanted to speak as to why it was really important to me on a personal level to co-sponsor this ordinance. i am lucky and fortunate that here in the city of san francisco that my salary is set by the city charter. i know that i'm paid equal pay as my male colleagues on this board of supervisors.

however, i'm fully aware that if and when i leave city hall that i may make less than my male colleagues after i leave for the same work. and i think it's ip credibly important that as we take this major policy stance that we believe in equal pay for equal work, that we really do that, particularly with the actual entities, our contractors that are paid public dollars, our taxpayer dollars, to make sure that they are pursuing the work of making sure that women get equal pay for equal work. these are organizations and for profit and nonprofit entities that are getting public taxpayer dollars and i believe that we absolutely have a right in those cases to know whether or not women are getting paid the same rate men are for doing equal work within the organizations. i also want to really emphasize the parameters of the ordinance that we are approving today.

this ordinance nearly knishates this process. it sets up the equal pay advisory board which will then spend the next several months actually defining the specifics of the final recommendations that would put together how we would do the data gathering for this work. everyone in this room agrees with this policy. in fact, it's something that has been called as one of the top national priorities both by our president and, of course, by our leader pelosi most recently in her luncheon last monday with previous secretary of state hillary clinton. it was one of the biggest calls that our country is making to make sure that 50% of our population make the same pay for the same work that they do here in our country. often on a national level we find that things move to a gridlock in d.c. and that often things -- policy calls like raising the minimum wage have to be taken on at a local level

because it can't be taken on in washington, d.c. because of the gridlock at congress and senate. here in this case the president was actually able to move forward the same policy for contractors to the government to make sure that they report whether they payee equal pay for equal work, and i think it's absolutely appropriate for san francisco to follow and do the same. now, if this ordinance and legislation actually embodied the recommendationses and the specifics of how we do data gathering, ~ i would support a continuance. i absolutely believe in a full fledged process to make sure that all stakeholders are heard and that we are able to incorporate a lot of different concepts, whether it's from dcyf, the chamber of commerce, our small business commission, department of women and status. if this ordinance just knishates the process and sets the equal pay advisory board who then over the next couple

of months go through the process of getting all of this input, specifics on how we can treat nonprofits, how we can treat organizations with 20 to 50 employees or 20 to 100 employees, how we can treat larger organizations that may have a greater capacity to report, all of this will get worked out in the next several months. and the actual date by which we request these reports won't be until september 2015. so, i think being that this ordinance just sets out the process, i think that it's important that we start it as early as possible so we can give maximum time to the process to make sure that we can maximize our input from our stakeholders and make sure that we have a really good process in place by september by which we can collect this really important reporting. women deserve to be paid for the work that they do and they deserve to be paid at the equal rate that men do. and i feel like we just can't wait to get this process

started so that we can make sure that those that are making -- our taxpayer dollars are absolutely accountable to this revision we all believe in. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you. i just want to thank supervisor campos for bringing this forward and for all the co-sponsors as well, and i want to thank supervisor campos and his staff for doing the work to bring this together. i know it was a very involved process, did a lot of work working with many, many stakeholder to make it happen. i actually have worked over the years in nonprofits and i've seen women don't get the equal pay that men get in a setting and i think nonprofits should be held accountable to be able to follow this legislation. so, i don't see a real problem in that whatsoever. and i'm not going to speak much longer than this, except that a continuance really doesn't make any sense especially when this should have happened 20 years

ago, so, we can't wait any longer. >> supervisor yee. >> thank you, president chiu. i want to thank you -- thank supervisor campos and the other author, coauthors of this legislation. i'm going to be fully supporting the intent of this and it really is an intent to get going, further momentum to really figure out how we're going to collect data. and if it were a little more complex in terms of what we're asking, i would say yes, let's continue it, but what i'm reading into this is that everybody believes that women are getting the same pay and we could just go as slow as molasses on this. i come from the nonprofit world. i did it for 40 years. some of us in the nonprofit world would feel very proud to

actually show that we give equal pay. so, whether i came from the ywca or attending clinic or children services, the people that i'm surrounded with would be proud to say that, yeah, we give equal pay and we can prove it. here it is. what i like about this legislation that's built in is that you have an opportunity to express or articulate some of the difficulties that one group of business or organizations might have, then hopefully this group of people that's putting this together will take that into consideration. but it's very upsetting. after all these years we're still dealing with this, so, i'm supporting it. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. i have a question to the city

attorney on clarification of the proposed amendment to the legislation and wanting to understand whether or not that's possible. and can you explain how it's possible to avoid, for example, all of this information is subject to the sunshine ordinance from my understanding, and i just want to get a clear understanding of how it's possible to ensure that some information isn't. >> sure, deputy city attorney jon givner. but before i get to your question, supervisor breed, just one clarification on the amendment. supervisor campos, i believe, had circulated written draft of the amendment. the language in the written draft doesn't exactly mirror the language that you had, supervisor campos, but it reaches the same point, so, i just wanted to clarify for the benefit of the public.

the amendment essentially says that when contractors turn over information to us, if the information they are providing to us is a protected trade secret or proprietary information that's confidential under the law, the hrc or any other city agency cannot disclose that to the public. so, this ordinance can't override the sunshine ordinance. whether information -- whether a particular piece of information that's provided by a contractor is a trade secret or is proprietary is really a factual determination. so, the hrc will be looking at whatever data they have if there is a sunshine request, working with my office to determine whether any -- whether that information is protected trade secret or protected proprietary information. and if it is, hrc won't disclose it. so, this amendment, i think, could be described as

clarifying that hrc will not turn over information that's protected from disclosure, but the ordinance would not override the sunshine ordinance. >> thank you. and i have some questions about the legislation. from my perspective, it's clear that this is a board of supervisors that supports equal pay as supervisor kim ha stated. i just want to make sure that whatever we choose to do it's responsible, it's substantive and it doesn't just pay lip service to the problem. ~ has i know that several years back when sexual harassment cases were coming before the courts there were a number of sexual harassment cases, a number of changes to a lot of policies in the city to now require that we go through i think a 2-1/2-hour sexual harassment training to ensure that we understand what the rules and regulations are as it relates to sexual

harassment in the workplace. and i think that it is appropriate that we look at doing something that significant as it relates to equal pay in our city. a couple questions i guess i had, this is unclear to me because specifically as a former nonprofit director who ran one of the city-funded nonprofits who would be -- who would fall under the category to report, i don't understand what's expected of me or what would have been expected of me to report. so, i guess i've been -- supervisor campos explained that part of this process involves this committee or task force or advisory committee being put together. i don't see a nonprofit agency representative listed, but more importantly i guess i'm just not understanding how the

systems will be put together in order to actually collect the data in a way that builds a case against someone who is violating the law. so, i'm trying to understand where that exists in the legislation. i'm also trying to understand the specifics of the resources from the various departments who will be required to actually implement what we're asking to do. so, it would be helpful to know if hrc is going to -- are we going to add another fte to hrc in order to help facilitate this process? i don't want to just pass legislation to pass legislation. i want to pass legislation that actually works for the people that we're trying to make it work for. i think that i'm unclear as someone who is being asked to support this, i'm unclear as to how this is actually going to help with the situation.

and i do appreciate supervisor kim's comments especially because, you know, it's definitely something we should be doing, we should be moving in this particular direction, but i also appreciate supervisor tang's comments in that -- in being responsible about how we implement this because we may not have to reinvent the wheel. and i just don't understand from my perspective, i'm not understanding how this is going to work and how it's going to work for making sure that we're holding those entities accountable for taxpayer dollars by making sure that they are providing equal pay to their employees, and how do we go after them if we don't understand what kind of data we're collecting. so, i have a lot of questions which is why i wanted to make sure -- which is why i seconded supervisor tang's recommendation because i do think it's important that women from the commission on status of women who are involved in

these sort of issues and the small business commission who made comment asking that the commission on the status of women as well as hrc have an opportunity to review and to make a recommendation because i look to them as entities that could help us understand how we can actually effectively make this legislation work because right now i think that there's holes in the legislation that may or may not allow it to be effective for the purpose intended. thank you. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you very much, mr. president. i do want to thank my colleagues for their comments and i just want to make a couple of points. first, i think that it was important for us to make sure that we actually followed best practices in the rest of the country which is why the legislation the way we drafted

it was to reach out to the president of the commission of status of women. that's why we emulated what president obama has done. so, you know, i am open and remain open to any specific amendments. we have asked for amendments and happy to incorporate any amendments today or going forward. the second point that i would say is that based on the experience of new mexico and other places, it was important for us to provide as much flexibility to the advisory board so that they could actually devise a data collection system that was impactful in terms of giving us the information in a way that we could actually ensure that it leads to women being paid equally. and then the second point to make sure that the concerns that businesses are taken into account, and to the extent that there are comments and thoughts

about the makeup of that board, i'm very open to that and i definitely -- my intention was always that a nonprofit person be included. if we want to specify that, i'm very happy to do that. but in term of responding to supervisor breed's question about could this be impactful, i think that the reason why president obama has gone down this path of trying to provide transparency and bring sunshine into this field is because the reason why this has been an issue is because we don't really talk about it, because it is, it is sort of -- it is a forbidden subject in the work setting. and by requiring the collection of data we are basically making sure that this is no longer a

hidden secret. and the second point that i would say is that it is not the first time that -- probably not the last time -- that san francisco will go down the path of actually creating a requirement for vendors that contract with the city as a way of actually impacting public policy. and the first time that we did that there was actually a great deal of success that came out of that, and that was on the issue of domestic partner benefits. the domestic partner benefits ordinance was basically very similar to this. supervisor ammiano essentially created requirement that vendors that do business with the city and county of san francisco provide the same benefits to same-sex domestic

partner couples and we actually fought by the city on that. in fact, united airlines took us to court. and when we prevailed, the way in which the business community not only in san francisco but in the rest of the state and the rest of the country responded to that, led to a very real and dramatic shift in how these businesses he interacted with these employees. it actually meant that companies doing business with san francisco provide -- started providing equal benefits to lgbt couples and because they had to do it in san francisco and saw the benefits of that, that actually led to other jurisdictions doing the same. so, i think that's the hope and that's the goal here. so, i briefly spoke to supervisor tang and i appreciate her comments. and one suggestion that i would have -- and by the way, you know, we believe that we want

to be -- have this be as effective and as successful as possible. we do believe that we have given an opportunity to allow these players provide their feedback. we approached the status of women 30 days ago and they actually met before we voted on this in committee, but did not discuss this at their meeting. in any event, i want to give them an opportunity to provide their feedback. so, one suggestion that i had, and i think it achieves the same objective, is that instead of sending it back to committee we actually continue this to a meeting in november to give the different folks involved an opportunity to comment on this. let me say this, i say that with a heavy heart because i know that many folks want us to move on this quickly. i believe that the way this legislation is structured, it

allows for the kind of interaction that we envision and, in fact, the point of the advisory committee is to address some of the questions that supervisor tang raised. if we're already collecting data, do we really need it to add any requirements? so to take those kinds of things into account. so, that would be my suggestion. and again, i thank my colleagues for their support. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i actually wanted to appreciate supervisor breed's comment about how there isn't a person on the advisory board with nonprofit experience. and speaking to what supervisor katy tang also brought up, i think it certainly make sense that we have a nonprofit member on this advisory board. and, so, an amendment that i would proffer is that seat 7, which was really a general seat, could be a perso