going to speak today, but i really want to urge you to continue the support that this board has shown for these workers in this really, really difficult struggle. we know we're going to win and workers are commit today keep fighting. your support mean a lot to the workers. thank you. ~ >> thank you. next speaker. ~ committed to good afternoon, my name is nancy lee. i have been hired at fisherman's wharf almost 19 years. i'm the server in the restaurant. i have two sons, one that's attending u.c. davis. the other has been service the military two years. he just returned home from afghanistan. six months ago, fisherman's

wharf was [speaker not understood]. we face many changes for the worst -- for the worst. before i worked 8 hours five days a week. now i have no hours no days. this week i got lucky. i had one day work because one of my coworkers asked the day off. otherwise, i have none. our hotel is just as busy as ever. [speaker not understood] only to save money. i am a cancer patient, too. i need insurance, but for this situation how can i meet the requirement to keep my insurance go on? and how can i pay for my

mortgage, my insurance, my son's tuition? this is not only my problem. many of my coworkers facing the same as me. we are the one who are suffering and struggling for this problem. myself put my 19 years life into this hotel. now i'm going to the [speaker not understood] end. i have nowhere to go without your support, supervisors. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. my name is [speaker not understood]. it is true that there has been a very great improvement in market street. it was kind of an extraordinary -- i viewed it as an extraordinary thing to do attacks deduction for those companies, you know. it's kind of nonlinear if you want to get revenues. and the basis for that was that it was claimed to be the most

lighted neighborhood in the tenderloin. i mean, entire city. well, everything you say is true. in fact, it's more than that. that status changed two years ago, not now. it became a much improved city neighborhood very, very quickly. and i know that we cannot -- ask also, you know, there are negative effects from that. we've had the complaints about the buses, the displacement, all of that is a product of that. so, it seemed to me that i know we cannot change that benefit to the companies that we've already given it to. but it's always seemed to me we could have cut that benefit off to new companies coming in and i don't know why that there is anything legal stampeding in the way of that, you know. ~ standing whichever one of you -- however many of you are going to stagnate and still not be in this body [speaker not

understood]. i'd also like to offer that up as a possibility, something we ought to get done. >> thank you. next speaker. hello, my name is larry edmonds. i want to say go giants first. and i'm here to speak for philadelphia, the city of philadelphia has decriminalized cannabis and saving the city $350 million. also you know [speaker not understood] you always hear the black widow is [speaker not understood]. [speaker not understood] cannabis club in alaska that sells all the good white winter cannabis. i hope you'll be able to pick this article up and read it called edibles. also, we're here to talk about why we need good housing and jobs in this city. i hope that smart people get out and vote because the mayor in ferguson, the men in the

bayview, the lgbt men in tl and we are joining along the band tomorrow to speak at glide about what is really going on in america, you know, when it comes to housing. just like the troops [speaker not understood] they said they are not going to take back just the nurses to treaty bowl ~ ebola patients [speaker not understood]. ebola has been out 38 years ago in [speaker not understood]. we noe bowl a is connected to aids and to the civil us [speaker not understood]. ~ know ebola [speaker not understood]. i do know [speaker not understood] black soldiers who refuse to kill the women and the children during the war in the philippines, and that's why i understand when [speaker not understood] the mayflower and

they made houses available at the bayou hotel. we have a great history. you can't have a history without african-american men who have been serving this country. and i hope house can bring back president jimmy carter [speaker not understood]. it will be a better world. vote. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> either one will work for you. yes, i hope you can hear me all right. listen, sorry. mr. president, jane kim, on behalf of [speaker not understood]. my question is about the sros [speaker not understood] s-r-os

and we have ~ infestation going on where i live and we clean it up a little bit more. [speaker not understood] clean up our job, but the [speaker not understood]. and when the park opens up i think we should have more security around the area. the park, outside the park, inside the park and not finance s-r-os because s-r-os are going to be [speaker not understood]. i think security should cover the whole area to make it safe for senior citizens and old people in the area and they need to clean up the drug dealing at the -- at 216 hotel because we had an incident [speaker not understood] saying

a resident where i live at got hit in the face with a bottle saturday night. so, we need to clean this place up a little bit. and it's going to be dangerous over there. well, we have an investigation going on with the cameras, too, i heard. we don't need any drug dealing over there with infern owe hotel because [speaker not understood] with the hotel -- the trouble in front of the hotel -- >> thank you very much, sir. are there any other members of the public who wish to speak in general public comment? seeing none, general public comment is now closed. [gavel] >> colleagues, let's go to our adoption calendar. madam clerk? >> items 34 through 43 are being considered for immediate

adoption without committee reference. single roll call vote may enact these item. if a member objects a matter can be removed and considered separately. >> colleagues, would anyone like to sever any of these item? supervisor campos? >> 34. >> and i'd like to sever items 35 and 36. madam clerk, let's take the roll on items 37 through 43. >> on 37 through 43, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. there are 11 ayes. >> those resolution are adopted and motions approved. [gavel] >> and item 34. >> item 34 is a resolution urging the city and county of san francisco to support the rights of worker to unionize

and boycott the le meridien san francisco and hyatt fisherman's wharf. >> thank you, colleague. just briefly, i want to thank the workers from member of local 2 and the workers at these two hotels who have been working very hard to protect the very basic right that every worker should have to decide for themselves whether or not to form a union. i think it's important for us to support their efforts. these are sometime lowest pay workers and they're working under the toughest conditions and i think it's really important for us to send a very clear message that we're not going to tolerate this kind of mistreatment by this company of these workers. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor campos. can we take this item same house same call? this item is adopted. thank you. [gavel] >> next item, madam clerk. >> item 35 is a resolution urging the city and county of san francisco to make go solar sf a permanent program, to require solar installation on

all new construction or substantial retro fits in the city, establishing solar vision goals for 2020, and establishing an overall megawatt solar energy goal for the city. >> thank you. president chiu. >> first i want to thank all the leaders of our local solar movement here in san francisco that have been really leading the country in how we as a city embrace solar energies in these new sustainable source he. colleagues, i ask for your support today on this resolution to take our city's leadership in solar to the next level. in 2008 san francisco launched go solar s.f., and we received $65 million in private investment, the headquartering of major solar leaders in san francisco in the bay area, and over 120 solar jobs for many diverse residents who otherwise would have faced significant employment barriers. our city has seen firsthand the benefits of solar energy, keeping housing affordable, increasing property values, creating jobs, and promoting environmental justice. the question that is in froth of us today is how do we expand and sustain these efforts ~ as we aspire to reach a greenhouse gas-free electric system by 2030. the resolution we have in front

of us lays out a solar vision 2020, a road map of how we get there. this vision has three components. first, it propose he he the permanent establishment and funding of $5 million a year annually to go solar s.f.'s incentive program after the program's previous funding expires in 2018. secondly, it establishes a 50 megawatt solar panel goal for san francisco with at least two megawatts for existing tenant occupied residences annually. and thirdly, it supports a requirement that our roofs be sustainable, that solar panels and rooftop gardenses be installed on all-new construction or substantial retrofit where feasible. and for the department of the environmental to convene stakeholders to work on this implementation. solar vision 2020 will help san francisco uphold our reputation as a leader in the solar movement and again i want to thank the san francisco department of the environment as well as the commission. i want to thank members of the

industry, members of labor, our nonprofit organizations, our solar industry worker and advocates who have really come together to move this forward. with that, colleague, i ask for your support. >> thank you, president chiu. colleagues, can we take this item same house same call? this item is adopted. thank you. [gavel] >> madam clerk, please call the next item. >> item 36 is a resolution standing with muslim and arab communities in the face of anti-arab and anti-muslim bus advertisements. >> president chiu. >> thank you, colleagues. you may remember a few years ago unfortunately there were too many antimuslim bus advertisements on our muni buses that were put in our city. we at that point announced to this body that i have a resolution to do that again with the most recent round. colleagues, i have circulated an amendment of the whole with a couple of techv any cal clean-up amendments and i would ask that we amend it and that we continue this item for one week. there are a number of community members that did wish to speak about this and hope to do this next week. >> thank you. so, there is a motion to

continue this for one week. colleagues? >> and to amend. >> and to amend as well. so, can we take the amendments without objection, colleagues? same house same call. [gavel] >> >> that will be to november 4, mr. president? >> and can we do that without objection? [gavel] >> thank you. please call the next item. >> mr. president, would you like me to call the closed session item, item 31? >> yes, if we could call the two item related to jpa. >> item 31 is a motion that the board of supervisors convene in closed session on october 28, 2014, for the purpose of conferring with or receiving advice from the city attorney regarding anticipated litigation relating to the potential negotiation or adoption of a joint power agreement with the city of richmond to establish a homeownership stabilization authority to assist homeowners with troubled mortgages, in which the city is a potential defendant; pursuant to california government code, section 54956.9(a), and san francisco administrative code, section 67.10(d)(2), which permit this closed session because discussion in open session concerning this matter would likely and unavoidably prejudice the position of the city in anticipated litigation. as it pertains to item 32, a resolution authorizing negotiation of a joint power agreement with the city of richmond to establish a homeownership stabilization authority to assist homeowners with troubled mortgages. ~ stabilization authority. >> so, colleague, at this time do we need to go into closed session? supervisor avalos. >> thank you. i've actually hoping that we

don't have to go into closed session and through some discussion that we had here on the board of supervisors, i think there might be a pathway to resolution that could be supported by everyone. i really hope that could be the case. i still think it helps to move the city forward on an issue that's affecting a lot of middle class, working class households that are struggling with their mortgages even in our economic boom that we're experiencing here in san francisco today. colleagues, for many years i have been talking about the need to support household that are struggling with mortgages, a lot of household that are under water, a lot of household that have mortgages that are not ideal in order to maintain your wealth. some of them are based on predatory practices, some of them are held in private labels, securitization trusts that are really hard to get at when you want to do loan modifications. in the past we've actually, up

until the present, what we've done is we've resourced a number of community-based organizations to assist households and counseling and looking at how to modify loans and the track record haant been all that great in terms of really able to provide a large number of households to present the need to modify their loans with actual loan modifications. and then also when you get a loan modification you have a reduction in your interest rate that's temporary and then it balloons up in years to come and your mortgage is extended another ten years or so. they aren't ideal situationses. they aren't one that take into reality the longevity people have and maintaining a steady income well into their 70s. i don't believe that they work well for san francisco and we need to re-look at what our programs are providing as a city to city residents around supporting distressed mortgages. i have talked a number of times

with the mayor's office of housing. i've actually talked to the controller's office about this as well, this issue of distressed mortgageses and trying to come up with a plan for it ~. i even put language into the housing trust fund prop c in 2012 that would address the need to support households in the seventh part of san francisco where you have single-family homes, where you have household that are working to maintain their mortgages. at the last minute, the housing trust fund section that was called homeowner stabilization fund was changed to the housing stabilization fund and the idea that we had around supporting struggling homeowners with mortgages was really alleviated with that language and taken out. and, you know, the mayor's office of housing gets a lot of credit from me for their work

around affordable housing, development, and working with numerous communities across san francisco in trying to maximize local dollars. i give them a lot of credit for that. but there's a real blind spot when it come to providing support for households that are struggling with their mortgages. and, so, i think -- i actually believe -- i haven't been doing the best work i can in trying to move this forward. i have talked till i was blue in the face. but i wanted to move towards action. one of the problems we have in our loan modificationses why they're so difficult to achieve, because there's a lot of resistance from the banks that help make them happen and we need some tools to have leverage over the banks to actually negotiate with a stronger presence so we can get better results. i looked at the s.f. care's program, joining jpa with the city of richmond to get us in that direction. i don't believe there is

support to get there today on the spot, but i do believe it's possible to get the city to look at this issue more deeply, to invest in possibly this approach, the sdsf cares approach [speaker not understood], using private investors who can negotiate the purchase of mortgages with the eminent domain as a backstop to help make that happen. there are other approaches as well that haven't been looked at. so, i have an amendment of the whole for this resolution that is really more looking at how we can as a city go deeper into studying the issue, what's working, what's not working in terms of supporting households with distressed mortgage, how can we explore more deeply the potential for partnership with the city of richmond and their

principal reduction program, and this is a resolution, it's urging rather than making anything happen. and, so, that's why i believe it's possible to get your full support. so, as a member of the whole, i want to go over quickly and i think once you hear the language for it i think it's really possible that we could all support this and moving forward. ~ amendment of the whole you all have a copy with the chart changes before you. from establishing homeownership stabilization authority, we actually have an establishment of joint powers authority, we have [speaker not understood] homeowner stabilization authority, and other approaches he to assist homeowners with troubled mortgages. so, we're moving from actually negotiating an actual jopa to looking into establishing a jpa ~. and i do want to emphasize that we've worked closely with ace,

the alliance of california communities for empowerment on this approach overall and they are okay with these changes that we are proposing and i wouldn't actually make these amendments without their understanding and recognition. so, then, we're moving into the resolution as is described in the bold language, resolution urging that a study of a potential joint powers agreement with the city of richmond to establish a homeownership stabilization authority as well as other possible approaches to assist homeowners with troubled mortgages. so, now we're moving away from this shall be done by the controller or the mayor's office of housing, but that we will look into [speaker not understood] that they study the issue for potential joint powers authority. of course, i want there to be a study in earnest and i want there to be actual work in addressing whether this is a real thing with the

controller's office analysis, [speaker not understood] make happen. so, i'm hoping that the controller can oblige all of us if we vote on this resolution. then in the amendment of the whole you have before us, i'd like to make an amendment to this because i found we were rushing this together, on page 2 lines 18 through 22, and i want to thank supervisor norman yee for pointing this out to me. we have language that's duplicated elsewhere in the resolution. i would like to take out that section, to delete that section, lines 18 through 22 as part of page 2. i'll move on, the rest of the resolution is the same up until the third page when we get to our first resolve clause which says that, resolved that the board of supervisors of the city and county of san

francisco is commit today assisting homeowners with troubled pos mortgages and here by directs the controller in consul tatetion with the city attorney's office, director of the mayor's office of housing and director of real estate to study a potential joint exercise of powers agreement with the city of richmond and possibly other public agencies that could contain the following provisions, and then that's listed below as they were listed below in the original version that came before this amendment of the whole. so, now we are moving from negotiate to study a potential thing that will be made. and then, again, based on supervisor yee's clear, well done proofreading, we'd like to change one of the second --

swap the second resolved clause with the third resolved clause. it just reads a little bit better that way. so, the third resolved clause is where we have the amendments that says, further resolved, and i take it, it say the following negotiation of the joint powers agreement by the controller -- instead, it will say that the board of supervisors urges the controller to provide the study -- again, it's a study -- of the proposed joint powers agreement and other possible approach he to assist homeowners with pos mortgage to the board of supervisors within 75 days of the approval of the board of supervisors of this resolution. and then we have another resolve clause later on that page that adds some language, takes out some language. i'll read it here. that the board of supervisors here by directs the mayor's office of housing to contact homeowner with pos loan to

assess their interest in participating ~ in a program to assist them. we also want to make sure we're getting an understanding of the breadth of mortgages that are out there that are in the pos category as well. so, to me ins a resolution that is really urging the city to look into the issue, to come back with possibilities one of which could include a jpa and i would like to submit this as an amendment of the whole with that one section taken out and those two other sections flip-flopped. to me this helps to move the city forward. it asks there to be deeper work whether the mayor's office of housing, to address a blind spot that it had in the past and that would be something that could -- a tool -- tools we could create in the future when we expect there will be a downturn that could affect people's ability to pay their property mortgages in the

future even though the problem that we've experienced the past five years isn't quite as bad a it what in the past. there still are household that are struggling and we know there will be many more in the future. i also have accompanying this as part of my throe he ducks today, a hearing request for the mayor's office of housing to come to the board of supervisors and report on new program that they will provide for household that are dealing with distressed mortgages, looking in particulate some of the different phenomenons we have of -- phenomena we have of how mortgages are in the distressed condition under water household, how difficult it is to get a modification even if you get into modifications with banks, and what the extent of private label securitization loans that are held in trust are in san francisco and what we expect those loans to do in future

years where they could balloon or be in interest rates or cause greater distress for homeowners. ~ introduction so, i would like to submit this amendment of the whole. colleagues, i would ask for your support. later we'll get more information on what the city can do to provide support for studies, the mayor's office of housing, the controller's office if we support this urging resolution and then i don't believe we need to go into a closed session, and we can tie it up in a bow. >> supervisor avalos has made a motion for an amendment of the whole. is there a second to that? seconded by supervisor farrell. colleagues, any discussion on the motion to amend? without objection, we will adopt the amendment. [gavel] >> supervisor farrell. >> thank you, colleagues. first of all, i want to thank supervisor avalos for his work on this issue. i think it's something we obviously support. given the revised lapping wa, hopefully again it is something that we all support here this evening. i would suggest that he we, unless people have specific

legal questions, i know many have been briefed individually. i might suggest we don't go into closed session this evening and would -- i could do it right now, make a motion to table item number 30 [speaker not understood]. >> supervisor farrell has made a motion to table the closed session motion. seconded by supervisor yee. without objection, the motion to table passes. [gavel] >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much. i wanted to also to speak briefly on this issue. actually a travesty how, how we as a city have addressed or rather have not addressed the foreclosure crisis in san francisco. i'm glad to see in the chamber the mayor's office of housing here as well as members of the controller and budget office here to listen to i think the small piece of public to comment that is here, but also to recognize the importance of

homeownership, not just in a small section of san francisco, but the entire fabric of our city. and, supervisor avalos, i hope this measure will do exactly what you've described and would bring the parties to the table so that the conversation can continue to move forward and so that we can see action. particularly when i think about the discussionses around inclusionary housing that's coming on the market, when i think about some of the debates happening not only in the african-american community, also within the lgbt community of fear that people have, that units are coming online and there will be no protections to ensure that people who have been long-standing members of san francisco will have an opportunity to qualify and/or get -- apply, get into these particular programs. so, not only do we need to discuss about foreclosure, we also need to have a more long term discussion about the lottery system in our city.

thank you. >> supervisor yee. >> thank you, president chiu. i want to thank supervisor avalos for making those amendments and providing the opportunity to look at one pathway to the solution. i actually went out to somebody's home this morning who is having -- who is being -- facing foreclosure and it really hit home again, reminded me the difficulties of homeowners who get their mortgages bought by a secondary company and then all of a sudden there's a lot of issues. whether the accuracy of the information is provided to the secondary mortgage companies and then all of a sudden you get a notice that you're foreclosed. i think we need to stand up as