always be driving defensely, and i think that those shifts will impact the ability to achieve vision zero and we got to hear from one of the chiefs in sweden and he talked about how they were able to cut the number of deaths in half by 50 percent and actually have the speed limit has been key to that and what they have been able to do to enforce the speed limit is what they, and what they don't call them speed cameras they call them safety cameras. and they have been able to implement that throughout the country and it is effective in lowering the speeds and therefore, reducing the we have a lot of work to do, but we are far behind and unfortunately

the countris in asia and europe but we are doing well in the u.s. but we have a lot more work to do and we are able to learn and share the best practices. if we can go to the public comment on this item. >> commissioner mar and yee? >> there were a lot of take aways for myself, and i mean, that it was nice and comforting that we had really the largest con tining ent and i felt like we were in san francisco, even though we are in brooklyn and it is one of the boroughs that are larger than san francisco and it was interesting to hear

some of the streets and the pedestrians itself and the message that they are trying to get across is that the human beings make the mistakes and pedestrian ans will make the mistakes and they can be distracted and we should pay attention to that. and one of the things that was interesting, was the opening sort of keynote address, in which the professor there talked about streets in a very different way, and just prior to i guess, in the maybe, in a 1920s or so, and the streets were, quickly changed because of the auto industry. and in which they made and they

basically had a campaign, the tree belongs to the car rather than the pedestrians will we get back to that notion? probably not, but it is interesting to know that history, and that the streets were not made for the cars originally, but we have to keep in that mind, and as we talked to in particular, the drivers who have this, and the streets belong to them. >> and i have noticed to a lot of people, over there from san francisco, and that is what we have already, in san francisco. by the way. and it is a default speed limit. and i would really like the

idea of the safety cameras. in swaoed sweden, what they said besides the cameras is that they really didn't have that many, but, what they did not have were movable cameras. and so, they were able to move it from one place to another, and every so often. and so if it felt to drivers like they had a lot of cameras up. and maybe that is something that if we don't have enough funding if we pursue that avenue, we may want to look at that strategy. i think that one of the things that really, we have like advocates we have walk advocates, and these organizations, and one of the things that struck me is that we didn't have families involved. and in an organized way, and the as commissioner kim was saying, the familis for safe

streets, that group was really to me, the power behind the advocacy and i am hoping that people that went to the syposium will talk among themself and see if we can form a similar group. and the point about the black box and so forth, i will, and i am already pursuing seeing what we can do in staoet for that, and it is just such an inexpensive tool for us. and to, and 250 bucks a crack, and for, and, the approach will be whether we could monitor to see if we could save gas, but it also, the residual of that was that they were able to detect the bad drivers and not doing the right thing. and so, muni supposedly has a

black box and others, and so i am trying to find out who else, or what other department haves that and which one don't and we will find a way to hopefully mandate that and we have that in the city cars. and so, those were some of the take aways. and i am glad that i went. and i loved their messaging. and in regards to the education piece, and pedal safety. and i took a cab, and a few times. and in the back they have the stream, and about 25, 30 percent of what they were showing they kept on saying visions zero, vision zero and so the messaging was really powerful and they had the street signs all over the place. and i understand that clear channel donated a bunch of signs for them to put up or to send these messages. i am hoping that we could, our

education piece could be as aggressive as that. and i know that it was just starting with, and i love it to be that way. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner mar? >> yeah, i just wanted to thank commissioners kim and yee, and i wanted to remind the body that there is a budget legislative analyst report on reducing speed limit and looking at model and other cities and so i will do my best to try to integrate what you have learned and brought back with the budget analyst report, which i think that we will having the hearing later in the new year. and i wanted to also say that just remembering now, in austin, unfortunately they were not able to pass a one billion dollar transportation bond. a spread out city, verses a dense city and, we were able to pass our prop a there is a lot of differences in our

electorate supporting transition, i know that a lot of effort went into proposition a and i want to thank tang and others for the support and the mayor as well. and i want to give a plug for chair avalos and i will be in new york city for this gathering of city council and local leaders called local progress. and we will be in city hall, and believe that it is on thursday, of next week. with different panels participating on a economic justice panel, with city council folks from philadelphia, and dc and other cities as well. but, we will do our best to learn about the transportation issues as we are there with progressive and liberal council members from around the downtownry as well. thank you. >> thank you. >> so we can go into public comment. >> any member? >> seeing none come forward. we will close public comment and move on to the next item. >> five, accept the audit report for the fiscal year,

ended june 30, 2014, this is an action item. >> any comments or questions? >> seeing none, we will go out to public comment. >> and public comment will close and roll call vote. >> on item five, avalos? >> aye. >> breed. >> aye. >> campos. >> aye. >> chiu. >> aye. >> cohen? >> absent. >> farrell? >> absent. >> commissioner kim? >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> tang. >> aye. >> weiner. >> aye. >> commissioner yee. >> aye. >> the item passes. >> okay, let's go on to the plans and programs item. item 6... >>allocate $6,795,385 in prop k funds, with conditions, for eleven requests, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules and amend the relevant 5-year prioritization programs. this is an action item. >> okay. colleagues, comments or questions? >> no, we will go on to public comment, any member of the public that would like to

comment? and seeing none, come forward we will close public comment and have another roll call vote. >> 6, avalos. >> aye. >> breed. >> aye. >> campos. >> aye. >> chiu. >> aye. >> cohen? >> absent. >> farrell. absent. >> kim. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> tang. >> aye. >> weiner. >> aye. >> yee. >> aye. >> aye. >> the item passes. >> item 7, introduction of new items this is an information item. >> colleagues, any new item issues to come before the transportation authority? >> seeing none, we will go on to public comment on this item. >> and seeing no member of the public come forward we will close public comment and go to the next item. >> 8, public comment? >> okay. >> general public comment is now opened. and seeing no member of the public, we will close general public comment. >> and our next item?

>> nine, adjournment. >> okay, colleagues we are adjourned and we want to wish, everyone a happy holiday. thank you. >> >> please stand by... >> >> >> government and audit and

oversight committee will come to order. i'm supervisor london breed: and joined by >>president david chiu: and we would also like to thank sfgovtv.org for filming this meeting today. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> >> please silence all electronic devices. items already placed on the agenda. >> today we'll be taking item no. 2 out of order. please call the item. city clerk: [contract agreement - recology san francisco, recology golden gate, and recology sunset scavenger - refuse collection - not to exceed

$44,000,000] resolution approving under charter, section 9.1188bb, a contract agreement between the city and county of san francisco and recology san francisco, recology golden gate, and recology sunset scavenger contractorss, for refuse services, resulting in total compensation to contractors in an amount not to exceed $44,000,000 for the term of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2020. city clerk: sf 21234 >> i have j d fong who will speak ton this matter today. >> good afternoon supervisors, jackie fong from contact of administration i'm requesting an mou from the city andy -- ecology from november 24th #shgs 2014 to december -- november 30, 2020 , to not compete the amount of $44 million. this amount negotiated 11.4 percent increase in refuse waste in the

agreement. the average annual increase for years 1-4 is between 8.25 percent and in addition the mou grants annual cost-of-living judgements to the rates beginning july 2015 through november 20th. this table indicates the city's estimated spend for the term of the contract. the recology group of companies are the only license use of refuse in sfrabs. san francisco. the company has served san francisco since 1932 granting recology then known as sunset scavenger

garbage rights in san francisco. the ordinance remains in effect and a proposed vendor remains the only company that has provided residential customer service since 1932. the proposing mou was not competitively bid. as city residents or by ordinance still legally required to purchase residential services from recology. recology is uniquely positioned in the san francisco marketplace. it would be i am mpractical to duplicate services throughout the city for traditional and government customers. it does not provide the rate, reasonably

provides the rates increases to base commercial rates. some commercial clients have negotiated adjustments to these rates. oca there negotiated with recology on behalf of city departments. we appreciate the budget analyst the approval of the mou and lca is willing to incorporate the budget recommendation to amend the resolution by reducing the mou not to exceed amount by $4 million to $40 million. this will still allow the 1 $1.2 million for fluctuations for refuse by city department. it does not obligate the city to spend that amount. it's the amount

determined by the budget which has already been approved for fiscal year 14-15. representative from recology are here to answer any questions you might have. the office of administering is recommending approval of the mou with a not to exceed amount recommended by the budget analyst. >> okay, thank you. can we have the budget and legislative analyst report, please. >> good afternoon, chair breed, supervisor chiu. budget legislative office. as noted on your report reiterating what ms. fong said under the new contract agreement the cost increases will go up by 4.4 percent in fiscal year 2015 considered what the

city paid in 13-14. the city paid $5 million and will pay $6 million. it's $37.9 million. therefore we are reducing the not to exceed amount contract to $40 million that will still allow for $2 million contingency. we recommend approval for that amendment. >>supervisor london breed: okay, we are going to open for public comment. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed.. okay, president chiu is there a motion to make the amendments based on the suggestion based on the budget and legislative analyst? >> so moved.

>> that's been moved and seconded without objection. the motion passes to amend the current contract. and is there a motion to move this item forward with positive recommendation in >> i will make that motion. >> thank you, we move this item to the full board. >> madam chair, as a committee report? >> as a committee report, yes, thank you. okay. can you call item no. 2, please, madam clerk. city clerk: madam chair would you like me to call item 1? >> >> yes. city clerk: agenda1.140999[administrative code - 14b local business enterprise program]sponsors: mayor; chiuordinance amending the administrative code

city clerk: agenda1.140999[administrative code - 14b local business enterprise program]sponsors: mayor; chiuordinance amending the administrative

that first law represented our committee to longstanding committee to economic justice. this represents a strong network of very small micro businesses in san francisco. now it helps all small businesses offset operating cost. it's local businesses

competing against larger businesses located outside of san francisco. the ordinance as we had initially proposed it including an established citywide goal of no less than 4 percent starting a first program that requires departments to make good faith efforts to contain three bids from adding a bid discount of two 2 percent of lbe's and current contracts that we have and expanding requirements that require an agreement, increasing the thresholds for certification of lbe and creating a partnership for established contractors and local business. today i'm introducing a number of additional amendments which are not

substantive which includes separating out lebs from our operational goal, requiring timely online posting and not just quarterly reports and that happened to stream line the ordinance 14 b of the human rights commission to the city administrator. there are a number of ordinances the city will call out for future study this year first is the payment program to make sure the contractors receive the revenues in a timely way and second we are calling out for a study and expansion for lbe participation in leases and concessions and thirdly i'm going to be asking for an amendment to convene

a working group to investigate whether there are barriers to participation by l lbe firms and that will report findings to our mayor by -- september 1st, of next year. a common of things have come up the threshold for lbe certification we raised them in certain categories. i also heard from some lbe's that had some issues around the appeals process the selection panel make-up anti-retaliation and while i'm sympathetic to the concerns raised, i hope these issues are addressed and if someone addresses them and thirdly ieshgs want to thank naomi kelly and the contract monitoring division they will

monitor rules and regulations if this ordinance is approved. i know the lbe community including our lbe advisory committee will play a role in that process. colleagues, i look forward to hearing public comment and i want to thank madam chair again for holding this hearing again. i have one more thing. i understand the clerk of our board has additional information. >> thank you, supervisors. i would like to make just one additional clarification to the amendment in front of you as a standard business we make the remgsz we recommendations, we would like to change item

19, line 19 and line 15, where it states notice shall state the hearing, the department must be prepared to respond to the directors report. that's it >> thank you, i'm prepared to make those amendments at the appropriate time. >> great. thank you. so we will now open this item up to public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment at this time. please come forward. and lineup to my left. you can go ahead and get started. >> good afternoon, supervisors. oh -- went from office of civil rights. i would like to that can the city attorney's office for their work on this ordinance. overall we are very supportive of the ordinance and we were pleased at the version it was in

last week and thank you for calling this special session so we can work on refining it. the major significance report of this city for micro businesses and application 14b for private development to fund temporary loans for lbe's and many additional provisions. we agree there is more work to be done as there always is with this ordinance. in particular we are concerned about the issue of lbe architects that are not competing on an equal field. we are pleased for the amendment to recommend that. to make recommendations as to that issue. we have concerns in addition about the cmd's authority to intervene in selection panel. that's another issue we would like to look at going forward and many of these as

supervisor chiu said can be worked on in the future amendments to this ordinance. we would that -- thank you for this ordinance. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, am -- alex chiu. i would like to thank you for this legislation. we realize it's a complicated legislation and we do look forward to working further with how to improve the legislation. i just want to point out a couple of things. we represent the minority organizations and even though they struggling with the economy, we feel it's important. a lot of members of our organizations, a number of firms are micro

lbe's and we have a strong interest in making it an opportunity to compete on an equal basis with other firms. i just have a couple of other things. this legislation meets a number of our concerns but as mentioned there is a lot of areas to be worked on. in one area supervisor chiu was the area of anti-retaliation and as firms happen to be retaliated against and what we thought was a more stringent mechanism for enforcing anti-retaliation. we have proposed provided stronger remedies, also provide for a proper right of action and also the

legislation refers to a section refers to the campaign government code for it's provisions and we are not sure how that field applies in a lot of provisions in this applies to the employees in the city. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, next speaker, please? >> good afternoon, supervisors, my name is darren davis and i have a business in san francisco and lbe and sit on the advisory committee and also a member of cee and i'm glad to be here. thank you very much for bringing this legislation forward. there are a lot of great things in it and i have to say that you have come a long way in a short period of time and a lot of issues have been covered. however there are a couple of issues that i would like to raise