>> deputy city atty. john given her. the term was left intentionally somewhat openbecause the fact it is always good and on the back. i anticipate that this ordinance passes, my office will probably work with you all in any of the department who had who wanted to repair standard sign in sheets, worth you have a meeting with 10 or fewer people you can hand out sign in sheet language at the top that says, please sign in. you are not required to identify yourself unless you fit into one of these categories. campaign consultant or with supervisor farrell's employee representative a city contractor or grantee. the idea behind the good-faith effort provision is that, if you take steps in good faith to god

tried to comply with the ordinance, as a circulating that have sign in sheet, he would not be in violation of the ordinance if you end up with a incomplete list of names. >> thank you. i would imagine at some point some future body will probably come back and put some meat around the term good-faith. i think certainly when we talk about local hire without about local higher ordinances of punters and contractors getting work, good-faith effort was always called into question as to being ambiguous and vague, but i think it is a great first step . i am glad this measure passed. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor avalos >> thank you. if you are willing to do that now we can perhaps consider amendments that could strengthen it, but to me good-faith is also like if you are neglecting purposely neglecting the new not practicing good-faith. so, good-faith is really making an effort. i look forward to seeing

what language or what framework the city attorney can provide this to make sure we can actually conduct good-faith fairly effortlessly. become a routine part of our work. i can actually trying to recording my meetings as best i can, who is in a geico rates by todd during that during the meeting sometimes. -- also hopes me to try to remember them as well. so i think it is really worthwhile procedure to go through to make sure there were providing a level of transparency for the public who is interested in what kind of work were doing. >> pres. breed >> thank you. colleagues, i am not necessarily a fan of this measure. i want to make some amend. primarily, because of some of the challenges that implementing these sorts of requests. i have never had a problem with this sunshine request that comes to my office when an individual makes a request. more specifically

asking the question, who i met with, who is in the meeting, what was the subject matter, and things of that nature. i do think it is important members of the public are interested in knowing about a specific subject matter or whether not we met with a lobbyist, or whether or not we discussed a specific subject matter that it is definitely appropriate for us to articulate that to the public at their request. the problem i have with providing my calendar are a couple of things. number one, establishing a pattern of my whereabouts. we are not department heads with hundreds of staff people were able to help us manage our daily calendars. we have three legislative aides to assist us in that task, and i know that when i was requested to provide my calendar it took my staff several days to separate my public and private calendar. i am not necessarily the most organized person in terms of

being able to look at two different calendars to figure out,, what it is i am doing throughout the course of the day. as a result of that, i would ask my colleagues support a amend to this ordinance because i think the technology may exist, but the technology does not exist in my office to actually provide in good faith, the calendar or to manage my calendar in such a way that i have the technology to make it an easy task for my staff. so, what i am asking colleagues is that members of the board shall not be required to keep a calendar under this section unless the department of technology certifies that it has developed a system to assist members of the board to comply with the requirements of this section. the other concern

that i mentioned is the whereabouts and establishing a pattern of my whereabouts. more specifically, i have had concerns about my personal safety, especially with notifying the public my whereabouts, and i am not comfortable, necessarily with doing so. i do not see a reason that we would need to tell someone specifically where a meeting place is. i do think it is appropriate that we articulate whether meeting was in city hall or outside of city hall. i would understand the purpose of why we need to be specific about where our meeting took place. so, the other amend tech that members of the board of supervisors should not be required to record in a calendar to place of each exact meeting that took place. the fact is, it is my understanding that the goal of this is to notify members of the public that we are meeting with individuals about subject

matter pertaining to business of the city and county of san francisco. i am comfortable with doing that, but want to make sure that the city does its part in providing us the tools to do so, that it does not take up significant staff time and then, secondly, so that it does not impact our safety. so, colleagues, i would ask that you support me in those two amendments to this ordinance. >> pres. breed is that a motion to adopt these two amendments >> yes. >> may i just a typographical error or error on page 3, line 16. it states pricing that is a system >> yes. thank you supervisor. >> will take a motion with the addition of that one word. pres. breed has made a motion to amend it is their second to that motion to amend?see no

second the motion fails >> supervisor avalos. >> colleagues, i appreciate your patience with this ordinance. this is something i think is really crucial for us to actually be clear about how we serve our public and i really appreciate your support. also think my cosponsors supervisors mar and supervisor campos for supporting this ordinance as well. i hope you can support it. thank you. >> supervisor campos >> thank you. i want to thank supervisor avalos for bringing this item forward. i know that they can meet challenging with all the requests that have been with their offices and i know that given some of the length of the increase that command that can be challenging, but i think it is really important for us to move in this direction. i think the more transparency we have, the

better. with respect to the amendments from pres. breed, the reason i would not support those amendments is because i think that what we have seen is that folks like the city attorney, the mayor, have been able to comply with the requirements that are in place without those amendments and i think that we should be able to do so as well. i think that it is important for people to know where we are, what we do, and to the extent that there are concerns about safety, i think there are things we can do to address those concerns that something that should be taken very seriously, but again, i want to thank supervisor avalos for bringing this for. >> and quick supervisor wiener >> thank you. puppy supporting

this legislation. i want to thank supervisor avalos budgets for moving the legislation forward, but to being very cooperative with various members of this board in terms of making sure we have legislation that is very clear in terms of what is required, so that we are all able to comply with the ordinance because the last thing you want to visit ordinance were people are not sure how to comply with it. we have always produced a calendar upon request and i think that numbers of the public are entitled to know what were up to in terms of the actual conduct of city business. i do want to, so you know pres. breed motion failed for lack of a second. i want to acknowledge the concerns underlying the amendment in terms of the safety and security of the members of the board of supervisors. i say that as someone who has been stopped in a bathroom and is a restraining order against someone. i say that someone is at my building

multiunit building protested for different times including once i am with the protesters try to break into the building. i say that as someone i know not the old member of this board, when we see some of the vitriol and completely unprofessional and over-the-top behavior that exhibited the board chambers. we sought a week or two ago. we have seen in committee. we start a few years ago and hearing regarding the sheriffs. there are times when i think that i do not think our city government necessarily does enough, in terms of the security of members of this board of supervisors. being a public official, we do open ourselves up to criticism and aggressive criticism that is appropriate and wanted. i do not think any of us to bomb being aggressively criticized, but i do think that concerns the pres. breed raises are

legitimate concerns. so, i just want to make those comments, but i do think this is important legislation and of the voting for it to ship thank you. supervisor farrell >> thank you. alluded to accu e supervisor wiener's comments. the two amend amendments i think i had little mortgage i think the second one of the open to discussing [inaudible]. certainly supervisor wiener mention he had had some incidents with three children about instances as well and if anything you protect your kids. that is not something i take lightly at all. we continually vigilant on. there is things we need to work on going forward on this, more than happy to do that and will absolute let my from a voting only for >> see no other names on the roster medical or can you please call the roll call >> >> before we go to that >> supervisor avalos >> i just want to reiterate my thanks to deputy city atty. john -- this work on ordinances were.

>> thank you. see no other names on the roster, madam clerk can you please call. >> and 32 is amended supervisor tan aye supervisor wiener tech aye yee aye avalos, aye, breed, no campos aye, christiansen aye cohen aye, farrell aye canepa aye aye object.10 aye and one know with has agreed to ship this ordinance passes on the first reading >>[gavel] >> can you please call items 14 through 17 to ship items 14 to 17 are the interim proposed budgets in the appropriate organs and 15 is the interim annual salary and is enumerating positions continuing or establishing all-time work separate positions in the annual appropriation ordinance and

specifying a fixed compensation and work schedules for the fiscal years ending june 30, 2016 june 30, 2017. item 16 is a resolution to approve the interim budget of the treasure island of bowman's authority for fiscal year 15 and 16 and 1617, and item 17 is a resolution to inter approve the interim budget of the office of community investment and infrastructure operating a successor agent to the symphysis go read about an agency. until the skiers on the 15 >> supervisor felt >> colleagues, there is a simple items we visited recently at this time as we continue to complete our budget that allows us to continue to fund our government operations being the new fiscal year until july 1 and would pass a budget and the mayor signs. atlanta one support. >> madam clerk can you please call >> items 14-17, supervisor 10 aye, wiener aye, yee, alice, aye, breed aye, campos aye,

christiansen aye, cohen aye, fell aye kim aye aye of 11 aye to ship these items passed unanimously. >>[gavel] >> template can you please call the next and please >> automating is an ordinance to amend the mr. go to extend the film rebate program expiration date to june 30, 2019) only increase the authorized financing for the film rebate project account two $4 million subject to annual appropriation. >> same housing call. supervisor felt >> i just wednesday for a few dojo view comments on this item. colleagues, we currently have eight overview for women please that we have amended and updated a number of times over the past few years since i have been in office. we seen the program grow to successful incentivize more more film production here are city. the program recently of this legislation front of us today

is it to sunset at the end of this june so it is imperative that we continue this program. the legislation front of us that i offer to extend the program is for an additional four years and raise the amount that the commission is able to offer qualified productions by $1 million. this rebate program is showcasing our city on a big screen providing longer-term employment for crews and actors and artists community and was in a local coming what i can additional tourism. it continues to be a win-win program. for every dollar approximately 6 dollars are spent here locally on wages and other expenditures. what is even more encouraging than early data shows the film commission expects return on investment from the rebate program to grow over time which means more benefits for local crews, actors and our local economy. i do believe that

extending this ask successful we be program is a no-brainer and the successor program will grow you have here and continue showcase will custody the world to see. i saw mention a few of the programs that event recently come to have taken advantage of this program. hbo's looking series seasons one and two and season two is currently filming airing on hbo. tvs real world season fran came back after 27 year hiatus. netflix web series ghost and have their contents diaries of a teenage girl were also filmed here is debuted at sundance this year. the program has been a real success. the benefit for our local economy are artists community. i specifically wanted think suzanne robbins are second dropped her about film commission for terrific work on this issue for everyone in the film department in the film commission worked tirelessly in this program as well as -- in my office for helping with this item. to ship thank you. college committed this item? same housing call.

without objection the ordinances passed immensely on the first reading >>[gavel] >> item 19, please >> and 19 is an ordinance to amend the business impact circulation code to -- to be showed on the base of the recorded document to conform to declaration of tax code to existing law. >> same housing call. without objection this ordinance is passed unanimously on first reading >>[gavel] >> item 20, please >> item 20 two expected standard of grantor parsley $1.8 million from the symphysis go back alliance. we have the south park improvement association for the design and construction the renovation of south park bird to your junk >> same housing call. without objection this resolution is passed unanimously on first reading >>[gavel] >> item 21 >> item 21, resolution to authorize the office of the comptroller to enter into two contracts. the first with

oracle america for a one-year term of nine options to extend for up to one year each in the amount not to exceed 27.8 million. the second contract is for professional services agreement with adventure. to your time with option to extend when you are in amount not to exceed 23 million to implement and contributor placement for the obsolete financial accounting and management information system. >> supervisor caminong >> a quick colleagues i want to express my reservations but the contract that is before us today. first of all, i do want to thank the controller and is office for a thorough exploration of a completely new and revamped financial system with this software license maintenance and professional services contract. was able to sit down with our controller today and i am convinced that the decision was rational and safe. miser reservations, however are the following. the system were voting today would likely be our system for another 25 years, similar to the phoenix system we have right now. given that our expensive investment into the

system, how difficult it is to transition to a different system, and in general, how slow government is in moving in this quickly evolving technology environments, where any aspect i am now using is simply out of date because i am using it, the system we are sucked into date, oracle, or justice. updated if elmore given a much more quickly when i am living with the next 25 years to the images of the controller's office display for the budget committee last week of our current system which looks like it has a shot taken from the 1980s the box screen and the green font. i am just not prepared to make this 25 year commitment today. it is cumbersome and buckley to -- i know will be restrictive and inadequate in only a few years. we are investing a tremendous amount of dollars, resources, staff training into a software system whose cost will we already know bullying in the years nine and 10 as we try to maintain a system also may be outdated. this in fact, is

part of our oracle's business plan. to get you when you just cannot get out. the arty know it is. knowledge is be exponentially more expensive than 25 years. i know a third piece i want to bring up as a concern is that i know the opposite comptroller's office engaged in extensive conversation about post the system on our server or on the cloud given the decrease cost of maintenance if we went with a cloud of version, but also may, with hosting our servers for now because they could save. i am not disagreeing with this assessment come but am worried that were continuing to fall behind. the private sector in our thinking regarding technology and this will only further burden of public dollars. $50.5 million is not a small amount of our budget and more than anything, with today, i really want to push the city to explore real open-source

alternatives come which are free, and in many cases just as secure as licensed software. we should examine how much money we spent on license software that could be effectively provided by free open source software. it may be that the first systems we explore for this alternative is not our financial system, but it could be our e-mail system, all my e-mails or sunshine about the book so not worried about security there. microsoft outlook, there are equivalents to word and excel that are free and open sourced. it could save us significant amount of dollars to help wean us off our dependence of some of the giant juggernaut companies out there. government, i know from talking to many my friends and technology investment is increasingly look as the profit target or license software companies. due to unfounded assertions that often come in these large bureaucracies that license software is safer and more secure. there was a recent business article that came out last week in bloomberg talking about a private sector companies are also moving away from ic products, specifically oracle and ibm and replacing them with open soft software

which is freely available and can be modified to their needs. companies are even converting all of its operations to free database software. oracle sales actually are declining for a license software for seven straight quarters to june, demonstrating the private sector is moving away from pricey and cumbersome products. comedies like apple, netflix, are moving in this direction. i know in order for the city to do the same really have to rethink how we do this. we would have to have higher entire juniors in result was modified open-source, or with open source companies to modify their software for us. i understand that there are not a lot of it is about is doing this and if this was done san francisco would be the first, but san francisco, being at the center when the most exciting and dynamic regions the technology should absolutely be the pioneer for this for governments. again, i do want to recognize the work the comptroller's office did that

understand our financial system has a lot of different security issues. well i am not convinced this in equivalent of open-source option that is just a secure and sophisticated and its capabilities to provide us features as oracle did, this would push the city to really explore these alternatives with software that is maybe walmart risk or maybe two breakup systems and the matey in accounting we would go to open source with financial reporting we would not. i think this will allow the city in the future to be more nimble to a modified system over the years and not be weighed down 25 years later with a system that works justice. as -- >> thank you. supervisor campos >> thank you.. i do want to thank supervisor kim for raising the issue about open source. if i may, i have a question.

first, for budgeted legislative analyst, if i may, to the chair and meant for our comptroller's office. mr. rose, thank you very much for the report on this item. i just want to make sure i understand what is being done here. as i understand it, there was a competitive bid, a competitive process that was followed, i want to make sure i get this straight, that the the final contact was actually a lot larger than the request for proposal that went out. i just wanted to see if you could give me does confirm that and what the numbers were? >> ivy rose budget analyst for the board of supervisors. supervisor campos, that is correct it supervisor campos, the competitive bid -- there were three beds in the controller selected the oracle

center. i am a which was approximately 26,000,000, $26.9 million. subsequent to the acceptance of that bid, there were negotiations between the controller and the contractors, which raised the day to 50.9 million. so, the difference between the 50.9 million and the -- which is a 61 percent increase and the 26.9 million was not competitively bid it was determined that it would be to the advantage of the controller the city to negotiate that increase, and i was to provide for additional time for software and software maintenance. >> i guess what concerns me about that zero point of a competitor process is that you

set out, a set of services that you want provided, with the idea that you are going to get a specific proposal in response to that request, but when you increase the amount of services in the contract to negotiations, it could be that if you had done it differently where the competitor process was broader in scope that maybe it could have led to a different outcome. is that sort of how this works? >> we did call that out. we had concerns about it but we finally concluded -- and let me just quote what we stated in our report: we recommend an approved to the board of supervisors the proposed legislation was the eccentric oracle bid cost of 26 million 97 556 with 10,000,029 226

1.6% more than the second-place bidder. the total cost for both contracts was subsequently negotiated upward out of competitor process to include additional software and technical support for total but to exceed cost of 50 million 863. the comptroller's office went to a competitor process. initial contract of 2697 556 and in their professional judgment, the proposed contracts represented the best option to replace the city's financial system. for that reason we recommended we still recommend to the board that you prove this legislation. >> so now question for the controller if i make.if i may. what about the issue, the issue of the size of the ultimate contract, which was double what you started out with in response to the rfp. if you had started out with a broader scope

that resembled what you end up with in your contract, maybe you could have got a different outcome in many scenarios would have given you a better deal. is not that true? release of possibility? or at least a possibility? >> thank you for the question. todd -- deputy control. as mr. restated, we went to a very diligent competitor process, and also he went to two years of development what the needs and specifications were to make the comparisons as apples to apples as we could. yes all proposal orders to include five years worth of licensing and support, so we did not do it negotiated because we were very happy to negotiate receive a 5% discounting on the licensing, so we negotiated twice as long as what was requested in the proposal because that benefited

the city. so, to take advantage of the 85% discounting to also take advantage of optional functionality, which we knew would benefit the city including the purchase at contract conception of the business intelligence and analytics reporting, we wanted to make that opportunity at the discounted price to do so. we also had whichever system we were to use in which you were to award all of them would have needed database licensing and support because that is required for any system that is run. so, regardless of the system chosen in order to benefit from the discounting that we negotiated, including that in this proposed contract before you that affected the

city significantly. so that is why you are going to see that. that would have been the case that system, that database, regardless of any proposal with a needed for all of them. as with the contingency pricing that included here, being able to include contingency which would be needed under any proposal so those are the key excavations of why it is larger and the principal one as well that we are going to for twice as long on the main support at the discounted pricing. >> just a final question. i want to make your comments. did you ask any of the other vendors whether or not they would give you -- were kind of deal they would give you on the expanded scope? >> those terms and conditions were included in the bid. we saw all their price discounts in their bid, and the one before you today was ranked highest to the proposal process. >> i understand the bid, but in terms to the extent you expanded the scope of the contract negotiations, those negotiate did you check with any of the other vendors