>> good afternoon everybody and welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors' meeting of march 22nd, 2016.

madam clerk, please call the roll. >> thank you, madam president. supervisor avalos. >> supervisor avalos? avalos present. president breed? >> here. >> breed present. >> campos present. supervisor cohen. >> present. >> cohen present. >> supervisor farrell not present. supervisor kim? kim present. supervisor mar. >> here. >> mar present, supervisor peskin present. >> tang present. supervisor wiener? wiener present. supervisor yee? yee present, madam president you have a quorum. >> thank you, ladies and gentlemen, please join us for the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you. madam clerk,

are there any communications? >> yes, madam president. from supervisor farrell, dated march 8th, requesting that he be excused from today's meet colleagues, is there a motion to excuse supervisor faler? motion by supervisor avalos, seconded by supervisor cohen, colleagues can we take this without objection? without objection, supervisor farrell is excused. [ gavel ] >> all right. madam clerk, please call the first item? >> item no. 1 is the consideration of the mayor's veto pursuant to charter section 2.106. of an ordinance amending the planning code to increase the transportation sustainability fee for non-residential projects. this ordinance was approved by the board on march 1st, and vetoed on march 11, 2016. the question before the board is shall the mayor's veto be overridden and the ordinance finally passed? the yes-vote overrides mayor's vote and no-vote sustains the mayor's vote.

this action requires two-thirds vote, eight affirmative votes despite the absence of a member. >> supervisor avalos. >> i will start with a quote from franklyn roosevelt, test of our progress is rather we add more to the abudance of those who have enough, but to provide enough for had those who are little? before us today is the choice to support those who have much, big developers, or those who have little, the working people of san francisco. as we come to the conclusion of the effort on the transportation sustainability fee, i want to thank all of the many people who worked to create this measure, that is before us today. the planning department, and the planning commission, the sfmta, the train providers union and equity coalition and i would like to thank by ladies and gentlemen ive aid jeremy pollack for his

tireless work on this version of the transportation sustainability fee. this veto underscores the economic bias of mayor ed lee, a bias that favors the wealthy at the expense of work people. mayor lee has you to thed his reputation to bring people together, however this veto calls into question the mayor's consensus approach. i would dual at the end of the concessions approach, get a bunch of people in the room and stack it with the rich and powerful and force the less powerful to make concessions. in the end the working people get less and end up paying more out their own personal pocketbooks for basic city services. the concessions approach, brought us a lower inclusionary-level in the housing trust fund, a lower-level that we're now trying to fix and gave us tepid gross receipts tax that left millions on the table for tech companies to pick up and you now the tsf.

when muni has an enorthrop grumman backlog of deferred maintenance, $10 billion deferred backlog as identified by the process, it makes no sense that the city concedes and leaves money on the table for big developers to pick up. the tsf that passed in december was not a consensus measure. , it was a measure that in december 7 members of this body voted as inadequate and it make stronger. the 7 voted to bank the revenue from the inadequate tsf and send a stronger measure to committee for approval in accordance with our board rules. the media especially the chronicle has completely blocked out the content of this stronger measure and reported the veto as some sort of political game rather than an effort to give developers a break or to increase revenue for the shortfall in our transportation system. one of our members called

the inadequate tsf fair. i asked again fair to whom? notice to the riders of muni who face inadequate funding and knot to the workers of muni, who have to contend with less and certainly not to the taxpayers that foot the bill that sub disses of rich and powerful developers are getting. there has been a long public process of the measure before us today and most noteworthy is the planning commission meeting where commissioners unanimously supported all of the amendments i recommended before them, and approved and even stronger measure than the one that is before us today. i also brought all of these amendments up at multiple board of supervisors' land use and transportation committee and here at the board of supervisors. despite the mayor's claim of consensus, with the extension of one letter from the chamber of commerce, i have

not heard from a single person who is opposed to this measure before us today. so why the blockout and why the veto? this measure charges $2 per square foot for commercial developments over 100,000 square feet. $2 more. up to $21 a square foot. for commercial property that is in the pipeline, but not yet received entitlement from the planning commission and also grandfathers in a new fee set at half the difference between the old tidf and tsf. this before us today raises $2 million annually and $30 million in one-time funds with our enormous transportation needs and huge demands on transit, san francisco cannot afford to turn this money down. adding to the wealth of the wealthy is no why to promote development, nor fulfill our transportation needs. i urge you colleagues to support this measure and be fair to the people of san

francisco, the taxpayers, the muni riders and workers and not just to the rich and powerful developers. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor wiener. >> thank you very much, madam president >> i'll be voting to sustain the veto based on merchant years' of work that went into crafting an excellent transportation sustainability fee and did it in a broad-based collaborative way that will significantly benefit our transportation system over time. i want to commend supervisor avalos for that. i thought it was just a really barn-burner speech that if you didn't know anything about what has land happened to-date, you might say wow how could i make a different position? the problem with the comments that we just heard frankly completely ignores everything that went before. the transportation sustainability fee is not a new thing that just materialized out of thin air. for years and years five years for me, and i know

there was work even before i got involved, we had been working to take our transportation impact development fee that has been on the books for 35 years, and to bring it into 21st century to have developers pay significantly more and that is exactly what we did. when you look at what the tif d the item that was passed by this board last yeah, takes the annual contribution of developers to our transportation system from $26 million, a year. to $45 million a year. it almost doubled what developers will pay per year into our transportation system, nearly a $20 million increase. that tsf, that $20 million increasing, the near doubling the transportation sustainability fee was achieved because what we did for the first time ever in

35 years we extended transportation impact fees to be residential development. residential development for 35 years did not pay a penny under our transportation impact development fees and we fixed that by including residential development for the first time. in addition under what we passed late last year, we significantly increased what commercial development had to pay compared to what they had previously paid and not only did we increase it, we increased it in what was initially introduced and supervisor cohen and i in committee increased it onn commercial development yet again. so for years we worked on this. we came out with an excellent product that will produce almost $20 million a year more than what they were paying otherwise. so to suggest that anyone, the mayor or members of this board of supervisors are trying to cut developers a break, frankly is ridiculous.

developers are going to pay almost $20 million a year more than they would have otherwise for a total of approximately $45 million a year in transportation impact development fees, paid for by developers. to say that if you are not in favor of increasing it from $45 million to $47 a year, you are somehow not supporting working people and you are siding with the 1% is absolutely specious and political game and that is what this is really about. we took a gigantic step forward putting legislation together in the way that you should put it together and we passed it and it's done. at some point the legislative process ends and you move forward with implementation. anyone can always take the position it's not enough and that developers should pay more, but what we did was a

gigantic step forward. what is being proposed today, frankly, is very, very small. it's not going to accomplish anything, but i do understand it makes for good political theater. i will be supporting the veto today. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor mar. >> thank you. i wanted to respond to a few of the points that supervisor wiener made ands will thank supervisor avalos and vision zero and pro-transportation coalition for standing up to override the mayor's veto. it's $2.4 million a year that would go into a better transit system and $30 million in one-time revenue. i don't think that is a little amount. though we need much more. but i think this is about equity and it's about requiring the largest developers to pay their fair share as supervisor avalos mentioned. so i urge my colleagues to join supervisor avalos and myself and others to override mayor lee's unfortunate vetov this task

force measure. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mar. supervisor campos. >> thank you, madam president and with all due respect to my colleagues, who will be voting to sustain this veto, the argument that is being made by these developers is sort of what happened with airbnb. it took airbnb so many years to pay its back taxes, and it was so used to not playing by the rules for so long that when it finally followed the rules, it was actually boosting about that. in this case, these developers are not used to paying nothing for so long that when they are paying an amount, even if it's a small amount relative to what they should be paying they somehow think they are giving their -- they doing us a favor. let's be clear here, it is a giveaway to big developers and it so happens in this case

, people say, at one point legislative process those end. why is it that the legislative process has to end when it actually benefits developers? how about stopping the legislative process when it gets to the point of actually helping real people, regular people? that is what we are saying. you know, they may argue all they want, but at the end of the day, they are giving a big giveaway to development community. >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor kim. >> just want to speak in support of supervisor avalos' amendments to the transportation sustainability fee. this has been a long-term discussion and, in fact all of these amendments were before the planning commission and, in fact they supported more tiered fee structure for how we do transportation fees for particularly our commercial buildings and our residential, depending on size.

we know that those who build larger projects not only have a larger impact on our transit system, they can also usually afford to pay more. this is modest change, but more fair change not just for the every day residents of san francisco, but developers as well. each project is not equal and it makes sense that we tier our fee as the projects get larger he you pay a little bit more. as you create more jobs and put more workers in the downtown area, you pay a little bit more to help support our transit system. over the last couple of weeks we have been having conversations about what is the most appropriate revenue source for funding public transit? and this board agreed that one of the ways to do that was not a flat fee on tow away charges that can change anywhere from $600-$800 that really impoverished low-income and working-class households and residents in the city. we worked with sfmta to

reduce the fees and acknowledging there would be a hole in the budget when we took that revenue source away. now the more appropriate revenue source for funding our public transit system is a progressive tiered fee. this is one of those options and alternates. we can ask for developers who can give more to our public transit system and certainly a lot more than our working-class residents that get slapped with a $600-800 tow away charge for one singular mistake and yet this board is now going to stay they can't support a slight increase in the transportation sustainability fee. i think that this is an important policy question for this board to continue to tackle? there there are ways that are not as regressive to continue to invest in our transit system and members have said they would introduce a set aside or supplemental appropriation if of which i think we all agree is right thing to do.

i think this is one of those appropriate revenue sources to help continue to support our rich and well-developed public transit system. so i will be voting to support supervisor avalos' amendments today. >> thank you, supervisor kim. supervisor avalos. >> thank you. just to continue my political theater, i actually agree with supervisor wiener. there has been a great deal of work on creating a new tsf and i would say that supervisor wiener has done a lot of work only that. and i do appreciate his movement to build a new framework for the tsf. we needed that new framework because we left a lot of money on the table compared -- compared to what we have in place now. by not approving the tsf and that was something that was really important to me. we developed a framework for

the tsf, but how we settled on a fee that is anemic compared to what it could be with this measure is something beyond me? i don't know how we got to settle on the fee that we have today? we had discussion in committee to raise the fee. there were votes in committee to do that and the votes kept it in committee to be the lower fee until we actually made this new improved version before us today. we had six members of the board of supervisors who supported -- that is the majority -- who supported this higher fee, which will raise $2 million a year and $30 million in one-time funds. that to me says there are many ways that we could have crafted the fee beyond the framework that we put together over the years. so this framework, this fee that we have before us today, means that we approve it, and override this veto, we're saying to the taxpayers you will not have to subsidize

the transportation impacts of big development. that is the final vote we have today. by sustaining the veto, you are saying to the taxpayers, it's you who have to pay for the impacts of big development and not the developers themselves. that is the clear choice that is before us today. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor wiener. >> thank you. you know, i just -- and supervisor avalos, we actually work well together on a lot of transportation issues and i know we will, we just have a real disagreement on this one. to suggest that the tsf is telling developers that they don't have to pay is just not consistent with the facts. developers are going to pay $45 million a year under the tsf, $19 million a more year than they would have paid. we almost doubled what developers have to pay. we extended it the first time to residential and increased

it repeatedly on commercial. so if someone wants to argue that we need to -- that there is some sort of meaningful difference between $45 million a year and $47 million a year, let's be real clear. that is what the argument is here, should they pay $45 a year or should they pay $47 million a year? that is what this big argument is about and to suggest that is the difference between developer s paying their fair share and not paying their fair share, that -- there is no basis for doing that and that is why i referred to this as a " political theater." because it's not about the actual money. i have fought very hard for funding for transit. authored proposition b, that is generating almost $30 million a year for transportation in the city. now every member of this board of supervisors supported proposition b. it made it barely out of this body to the voters. so i get it; that we need more funding for our transportation system. but to have a fight between

$45 million and $47 million it is not about the money. that is about scoring political points vis-a-vis the mayor or whoever else. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor avalos. >> thank you. i have just wanted to have the last word. [laughter ] thank you supervisor. and with that, colleagues, madam clerk, can you please call the roll? >> on item 1, supervisor breed? >> no. >> breed no. supervisor campos? >> aye. >> campos aye. >> supervisor cohen? >> no. >> cohen no. >> supervisor kim? >> aye. >> kim, aye. >> supervisor mar? >> aye. >> supervisor peskin. >> a. >> supervisor tang? >> no. >> supervisor wiener? >> no. >> supervisor yee. >> yee aye. >> supervisors avalos. >> avalos aye. >> six ayes and four twos

supervisors breed, cohen, tang and wiener in the dissent. >> the veto is sustained and the ordinance fails. [ gavel ] >> madam clerk, please call the next item. >> item 2 is an ordinance to suspend administrative code section 21.1. the competitive solicitation process for electronic health record system for the department of public health san francisco health network to approve the selection of the regents of university of california as the preferred contractor. >> roll-call vote on item 2. >> supervisor breed? >> aye. >> breed aye. >> supervisor campos? >> aye. >> campos aye. >> supervisor cohen. >> no, cohen no. >> supervisor kim? >> no. >> kim, no. >> supervisor mar? >> aye. >> mar aye? >> supervisor peskin? >> peskin aye. >> supervisor tang? >> tang aye. >> supervisor wiener? >> wiener aye. >> supervisor yee? >> yee aye. >> supervisor avalos?

>> aye. >> avalos aye. >> there are eight ayes and two nots with supervisors cohen and kim in the dissent. >> the ordinance finally passes. [ gavel ] . >> next item, please. >> item 3-5 were referred without recommendation from the budget and finance committee. item 3, is an ordinance to appropriate $2.5 million from the general fund reserve to the recreation and park department for facilities improvements in the geneva car barn in 2015-16. >> supervisor avalos? >> thank you, president breed. colleagues, i first want to thank the budget committee for forwarding -- for hearing this item and moving it forward. this supplemental, was something that i had introduced in early december before the mayor's budget instructions had come out. this is a project, geneva office building powerhouse has been a project decades in the making. it sit on the corner of san josé and geneva avenue.

and it's an industry area that is passed through by thousands and thousands of people going to muni and bart every morning and evening. this is an industrial area right in the middle of district 11, between mission terrace neighborhood, cuyahoga neighborhood and it would be a vital place to put together a place to go through, that is just not a place to pass through on your way to bart or muni. we are already making a neighborhood here in this neighborhood by building affordable housing across the street from geneva office building. the powerhouse that is before us today, that this supplemental would fund would fund phase 1 of the building that would create an arts space, performance space, and practice space, that would be used by arts organizations in the southern part of san

francisco. heretofore in the city's history we have never had such a facility in the southern part of san francisco and it's vitally needed especially when we see in district 11, there are hundreds of artists who make their art in the city, but practice it elsewhere. we also have a really great organization called the youth art exchange, that does some incredible work and does a lot of community development work through art, and this would provide a great venue for them to showcase their work in the district. right now they do it soma, rather than district 11 where they are based. there are a lot of things i could say about this neighborhood and how its been passed over by decades' of neglect from the city, and during our economic boom, we have seen much of san francisco transform itself

before you are as and not just new buildings maze made for the private sector, but development fees and neighborhood impact fees around those developments as well. but we see no development in district is he and general fund dollars that go from our city budget to support the developments around big developments in other part of the san francisco, south of market, along our waterfront and along market street, but we don't have that kind of development in the district 11. it makes so much sense that we help to build the equity that we don't have in our development and general fund dollars that go to neighborhoods based on that development. that is what this supplemental really does. while we see this great economic boom, and we're not saying that revenue come and trickle down to our neighborhoods. most of all, we don't have the plumbing for that to trickle down. this supplemental is a form of plumbing to be able to get some of our wealth that is

generated to a neighborhood that greatly needs it; that will help to jump-start the development in an area that has seen such neglect and really bring it up to the 21st century. so i have beth reuben stein from my office, who will show you the images of geneva office building and powerhouse. if we can get that lined up? this is the neighborhood. could you point to where the -- i guess you have to do it there, no? that is the building in question, 280 and muni yards and we're building a neighborhood in the middle. one of the key public facilities will be the

geneva office development and across the street from there will be the upper yard, 100% affordable housing 85 units will be built and it's just one way to complement the effort. our next view and we probably don't have to go so to the screen. this is how the building looked in the '70s when it was in use and how it currently looks right now. it is a really great facade and great beauty and great potential, but still, more or less an eyesore in the neighborhood. the next slide is the current powerhouse, which is actually the site of phase 1 that the supplemental will help close the gap in funding to make happen. and this is the final version of the entire building when it's fully developed, still looking for the entire amount of money for that. the next slide will be what is actual phase 1 of the powerhouse site will be the

performance space and practice space that this supplemental will help fund. there is currently money from the last park bond $3 million, that is there. we have actually contribute edsome funds from our budget over the years for design documents and this $2.5 million that is before us today will finally close the gap so we can move forward on this project. colleagues, there is no better time to support district 11. we have had multiple opportunities to show that and each time the board of supervisors has risen to the occasion to support this neighborhood. our district, district 11 is completely united behind this, from every walk of life from every economic sector, from all of our neighborhood associations and social justice organizations are all behind this measure, and really hoping that you can help move this forward and support it. thank you, colleagues. >> thank you. supervisor tang. >> thank you. first i will start by saying that i think this is an incredible project that i really look forward to seeing happen. i think that there has been

a lot of uniformity around it with constituents and supervisor avalos has certainly been a really good champion for this partnership for many, many years. as i said in budget committee, i think that for me, i'm just not comfortable with supporting a supplemental for this at this moment. i think this really belongs in the budget process and deliberations and year and year after i have seen even before i became a supervisor there has been a commitment to fund this project. we have all supported it in our various forms and various budget processes. i think that is something, again, a conversation that belongs in the budget process. so i do not have anything against this project. i think that it's going to serve the community very well it's complete and i think there have been funds set aside as well in previous parks bonds that have passed by voters. i think $2 million, for example, for construction.

so i know there is a funding gap. i think if it came before the board of supervisors and budget committee, it's something that againly continue to support. but just not in this form. >> president breed. >> thank you. i would like to associate myself with the comments of supervisor tang. i, too, think this is a great project and i do think it belongs in the budget process. we have a process for this particular matter for a reason. i remember over the past three years, before we were able to fund keizer track to get that done it was turned down year over year by the capital budget committee and finally funded after being rejected aat least three times by recreation and park and keizer drive is basically the responsibility of rec and parks, but a major thoroughfare for people who drive through the park and has been in a state of

disrepair and recreation and park didn't fund repairing that particular keizer drive. it was funded by dpw. i just think that although there is a lot of great intentions i have an amazing project in my district, the muni substation, which is a bright on the filmore. i would like $2.5 million to rehabilitate the station and make what has been promised to the community for so many years, but i realize there are so many projects in in the city and so much to do and challenges to getting everything that we want done in a timely manner. it's not to say that i wouldn't support this project through the process in the process. i have supported funding for this project in the past, but with our budget process coming up i do think it's more appropriate to include a project of this nature in the budget process and not as a supplemental at

this time. so unfortunately, i can't support the supplemental. thank you. >> supervisor yee. >> thank you. when we had this discussion at the budget committee, we actually continued this item for a week, in the hope that supervisor avalos would be able to have a discussion with the mayor's office to see a clear pathway in funding this project. yes, this project is in district 11 and borders about two blocks from my district. so in many ways this project really impacts both our districts, both 11 and 7 directly. i have been supportive of this project, really exciting project that has been sitting there for a while. i'm going to be supporting this supplemental, and hope

-- my hope is that even if we get the supplemental today, that this discussion at the budget -- during the budget process will happen any way. we'll be still be far short of the funding required to complete the whole project. so colleagues, i really hope that i'm hearing the right thing, which is that people will continue to support this project in one form or another. i'm hoping today that many of you can actually vote-yes on this item. >> thank you, supervisor yee. supervisor campos. >> thank you, madam president. my understanding from what has been said about this project is that this project is ready to go. and while i understand and respect the fact that people as a general rule don't want to do supplementals, i think that in terms of moving this project forward it might actually be more expensive to wait to actually begin the

work. and i certainly was very impressed with the feedback from this community and to me, if we're going to end up approving this funding a few months down the road, i think that we should not let form dictate over substance. i think we should just move this forward. i know from being on this board that supervisor avalos has been very responsible in how he brings any supplemental before this board. it's not something that he does, and so i'm going to defer to his judgment, and he believes this is something that is needed for his district. >> >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor peskin. >> thank you. some 15 years ago when the mta owned this property, it

was actually going to be demolished. the city rallied and then my then college supervisor sandoval rallied and district 11 rallied and we were able to make, i think, a courageous decision under the leadership of then rec and parks general manager elizabeth gold stein to transfer that facility to rec and parks. it's been a decade-and-a-half. supervisor sandoval endeavored for eight years. supervisor avalos has endeavored now for an additional eight years. i think the time has come. this is not about district 11. this is part of the city's patrimony. this is a great historic resource. we can breathe new life into this resource. it will create jobs. it will create housing >> it will create a much-needed facility and save one of the greatest early-century buildings of this city. i urge all of you to consider this and to vote for it. it is time to get it done.

>> thank you,supervisor peskin. with, that seeing no other names on the roster, madam clerk please call the roll. >> on item 3 supervisor breed? >> no. >> breed no. supervisor campos? >> aye. >> campos aye. >> supervisor cohen? >> aye. >> cohen aye. >> supervisor kim? >> aye. >> kim aye. >> supervisor mar? >> aye. >> mar aye. >> supervisor peskin? >> aye. >> peskin aye. >> supervisor tang? >> no. >> tang no. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> wiener aye. >> supervisor yee >> aye. >> yee aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> avalos aye. >> eight ayes and two nos where supervisors breed and tang in the dissent. >> the ordinance passs on the first reading. [ gavel ] also it's now past 2:30 and we'll be going into our 2:30 commendations and we have a few on our schedule today i

will start with supervisor campos and supervisor avalos. >> supervisor avalos, would you like to begin? >> for john rodney? >> aren't you honoring someone together? >> yes. great. >> why don't you start? great, i will start. if i may call on the incredible -- i guess are we going to do -- we'll do that one first. the first one is a proclamation that is actually recognizing and remembering the legacy and the memory of a great man, the archbishop of el salvador oscar and to recognize the consulate

general of el salvador, who is here and those who have followed latin-american and know ocean bishop romero was a courageous priest who spoke up continuously on behalf of those that were less fortunate, on behalf of the poor, the oppressed in that country of el salvador. he always preached a vision of unite. the killing of bishop romero not only shocked that country, but of latin america and the whole world.

on the eve of his death, archbishop romero's teaching guide not only the western hemisphere, but the whole world and we know his presence is a very vibrant one in the bay area, where his memory lives in the hearts of so many people. a commendation for the legacy of monmonsignor romero

on this very special day we would like to also join this, with these couple of words from the government of el salvador condemns the terrorist bombings in brussels, belgium and expresses solidarity to the government of belgium and to sends our condolences to the families of the deceased and expect the speedy recovery of those injured. we hope that tranquility is shortly restored in that country. i'm honored to be here today and the graveful to supervisor david campos, john avalos and the rest of the board members for recognizing monsignor romero and his legacy. we celebritied the remembrance of his message and to recognize the

honorable consulate and members of the salvadorarian community that are here today and to ask the executive director of share foundation to give a couple of words regarding this exceptional human being. >> thank you very much for recognizing romero, as many salvadorarians say, it belongs to the larger community of people that want peace. but in wanting peace, he also wants justice, and he decided to have a preferential option for the suffering ones, for the poor. so we want to invite you today, for next year will be his 100th birthday and we're organizing an international party, both in el salvador and we wish in many citis to honor and

remember romero. you are invited and we'll follow-up with you to make sure there is a strong delegation to el salvador to be part of this party. thank you. >> thank you. i would like to pass this beautification of monsignor romero and we're going to give this to the public as well. thank you very much. >> thank you. [ applause ]

colleagues i have one more commendation that i'm doing with supervisor avalos. and if i may ask this incredible individual to please come on up to the podium? john rodney. [ applause ] >> you know, how do i put this? if you live in gotham city, you have batman and you call on batman whenever the city is in danger, and if

you are an immigrant in the bay area, and you are under attack, you have to put out the signal for john rodney to come to the rescue. i want to ask everyone who is in the audience to honor john rodney to please stand. take that bruce wayne. thank you. [laughter ]john rodney is loved by so many people. my office and myself have been talking about honoring john for so many years, probably the first year we came into office and yet, life gets in the way, because at every turn, there is?

issue, some attack against immigrants. so john is the communications mastermind for the bay area immigrants right movement and information guru in every case that the san francisco bay area has had in years. he has been on the frontlines of this effort to gain comprehensive immigration at the national level and led the first major piece of legislationion we passed for. te was the communications guru behind cy id card and local efforts to pass the dream act and daka and fight against car impoundment and fight for trust act, fight for due process for all, the effort to guarantee legal representation for every child placed in the

fast-track, the so-called rocket dockett in immigration court and the list goes on and on and what else can i say except for being you are in great hands. he is truly an unsung hero. he is smart and has an amazing memory and speaks spanish with an accent that sounds native. anyway, i will turn it over to supervisor avalos but john, thank you for everything, and like i said, you really are our super hero in the bay area. [ applause ]

>> gosh, a long time ago i actually had some training in media and have some kind of fascination with it and media advocacy. and i learned so much from you, after all of that. and it's really great to see that you are among us in the bay area to help us do all of the really challenging work of creating a world that supports immigrants, and i just want to say, i love you, man. and all of these people who actually share their love and respect for you. i just wanted to say it on the mic and just thank you for your work, and what is your dog's name again? >> tony. >> thank you for bringing tony with you as. we would not be as strong a coalition fighting for immigration right without our work and all of us have benefited from your wisdom. thank you. >> [ applause ] >> john, if you and tony

would like to say a few words. >> yes. this is a lot -- thank you. i brought tony with me, because i do have a confession. tony actually writes the press releases. [laughter ] >> i just edit them -- sometimes i don't. i was not expecting this. i'm very humbled. it's wonderful to work with both you, david and you john, all of you and our offices as this board has challenged the cruel and unjust deportation machinery this country has. i think what communications work is really about is standing with people who are standing up against injustice. and challenging this hateful idea of the "other" that has really been plaguing the discourse and embracing folks who come out and support

their stores. supporting people like many in this room who have faced deportation and stood up and supporting people like the families of mario and alex, who are still fighting for justice, and i think it's about supporting people who are fighting displacement, and exploitation in an economy that every day is more unequal. and this is a pretty scary time that we're all living in, but i think that what communications work should really do is really lift up our best ideals rather than retreat from them and i think this board has done this, last october with the votes for due process and rejection of the jails and many other great examples and we're all looking forward to working with you for more exciting stuff like that. so thank you. [ applause ]

thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you for your work, john and congratulations. now i would like to

recognize supervisor eric mar for other commendsation. >> thank you, since we're referring to super heroes i will just say it there is a wonderful woman for economic justice in the room for us today. would donna levitt, the director, and i see labor and community activists from grassroots organizations to labor council here in the house with us as well. we're going to be commending donna levitt on her retirement from olse. she has led the office of labor enforcement for years and her work has helped thousands and thousands of families who have been victims of wage-theft and other abuses. when donnaaz hired to lead the olse in 2002, she brought over 20 years of construction and labor experience. she was a pioneering

tradeswoman who began her apprentice as a carpenter in 1980 where she progressed to superintendent, estimator and union representative. donna was the first woman to head a major construction local at the united brotherhood of carpenters and joiners of america and her distinguished career -- her amazing career, i think has included service on the california building standards commission, the san francisco landmarks preservation advisory board and executive board of the san francisco labor council and thank you to tim and connie for being here with us too. donna's experience in prevailing wage enabled her to develop effective enforcement strategies. during her tenure, san francisco has led the nation in passing landmark labor laws, which the olse was assigned to enforce. because of young workers united and progressive workers alliance we have the first in the nation raising the minimum wage paid sick-leave and a number of

other laws, wage-theft laws as well and donna's leader, the osle enforces fair chance ordinance, family-friendly workplace and the most recent addition, which i'm very proud of, the retail workers bill of rights, which i helped to author, along with jobs for justice and assemblyman david chiu, the challenges of rule-making show donna's experience and her understanding of the regulatory frameworks of local, state and federal laws. because of olse's successful model, donnas a commitment to work welcome the grassroots communication organizers has helped the most disenfranchised workers to fighttor their works and build empowerment efforts and combat wage-theft. san francisco has been so

fortunate to have donna's dedication to workers' rights. donnella, you have left a remarkable legacy behind and hopefully one that will remain with us for years to come. we have big shoes to fill that you are leaving. donna, as we move forward, i and my colleagues hope that the mayor and the city will fill this position with a strong champion like you, for workers' rights. as you have been and that we find the same steady and skilled leadership that you have provided, especially someone with the understanding of the legislative framework. >> supervisor campos is on the roster. >> thank you very much. madam president. i will be very brief. what a day today. monsignor romero and john rodney and now donna levitt and it's hard to imagine our

city government without donna and her presence at olse. when you look at the prosperity that we have had as a city, there are things still not right and we have the office of labor standards enforcement and that office has become the great equalizer, when it comes to so many low-paid workers; for whatever reason, you know, are the victims of the system. whether it's wage-theft or employers not following the rules, i have seen donna and her office do justice for so many of these workers time and time again. i can only imagine the thousands and thousands of people whose lives are better because of the work that you

have done, done donna and that is quite a legacy you take with you. i want to say as the supervisor for district 9 and as a resident of san francisco, i'm eternally grateful to you, for being there, for workers, for making sure that we do right by every worker. and for the integrity and commitment that you bring to the job. it will always be remembered, and it's a legacy that you should be very proud of; and i hope that you get to take some time and enjoy with family, but i just want to say a job well-done. thank you very much. >> thank you, supervisor campos >> supervisor avalos. you have a lot of fans, donna. >> donna, just wanted to say thank you for running this office for so many years. it seem like every year we added a new mandate for your

office to take up and you never said no. you were always understanding just how you were going to do that, but i just wanted to say thank you. you ran a really great ship and you have tremendous stapp staff working under you that have done a very fine job. your office does a lot of work with immigrants, the ones who seem to bear the brunt of wage-theft and employers not following the rules. my district is 50-foreign-born and i just want to say thank you for taking on that responsibility for training really great staff do that work and we want to make sure that the person who comes after you understands the regulatoriv framework and knows how to work with different systems that you have to work with

the plumbing and regulatory system. i wanted to add that a lot of groups -- a lot of cities in the country doing work increasing worker's rights and minimum wage and health care type of ordinances, but a lot of them don't think about having a labors standards enforcement office to do that work and your office has been a great example for the entire country how do this work. i know a lot of people have come and visited and talked to you and your staff of how you get this work done? so thank you for leading the way across the country as well. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam president. it has been pleasure over the last decade-and-a-half to watch the olse go from weekend being a one-ordinance shop to 15-ordinance shop. when i first became a supervisor, this was the ask from the house of labor. i don't think any of us realized it would become a

national model, and to donna, i want to say, that you have been tough, and fair, and most importantly, impervious to political interference. supervisor avaloss is that you ran a good ship. i want to say that you navigated the political waters very, very well. you didn't let any of us or the chief executive tell you what do or when to do it. you applied it fairly and it's a tough job. because when you are enforcing against folks, it's never easy and it's never fun, but you always did it calmly and i look forward to having someone who fill yours shoes that is going to navigate those waters without being politically enphered interfered and to envision what olse was. thank you for your service. >> thank you, supervisor

peskin [ applause ] . >> supervisor kim. >> i wanted to acknowledge donna on your leadership at osle and it requires using a scalpel and not a knife and i want to acknowledge your work. we had an opportunity to work with your department where [speaker not understood] and we would not have been able to do our work as effectively in achieving our goals if not for your input during the legislative process and certainly afterwards you and your staff ensuring that our laws actually get implemented. it's one thing to write great laws, but without enforcement, and i know this takes an incredible amount of

work and leadership. thank you. i'm very sad to see you go. i hope we can find someone that can certainly physical your big shoes. thank you for your service tour city. our city. >> thank you. supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much. donna, here we are -- sharing wonderful thoughts and experiences that we have over the years and i have come to know you only in last six years, but we're recognizing you and your wonderful attributes and talents that you have brought to the city and makes me wonder who you have coached to fill the big shoes that you now leave vacant? i'm particularly reminded on ban the box work and helping particularly communities of color and those reentering from the justice system back into the community to get jobs and to get housing. and much of what supervisor

kim was saying, these laws mean nothing if there is no one watching, if there is no one enforcing and this role you have filled for many years is absolutely incredible. i'm happy and excited for you, but i do lament as to what we are left with? not to say that next person beyond you won't be as great, but there is something special that you brought, a product of your personality, a very delicate, but firm touch. you are very thoughtful and very insightful and personable and easy to work with and you led a tremendous team, tremendous team and you have helped to make san francisco that much better and more aggressive in protecting the working environment for communities of color, as well as just working-class people. i just wanted to lend my voice to say thank you to you and let you know how grateful am. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor cohen. supervisor wiener. >> thank you, madam president. i want to also join the

chorous saying what a pleasure it has been to work with you. i think sometimes much to the chagrin of my staff, we have done a lot of prevailing wage legislation, even though it's incredibly important legislation, it's unbelievable hard and complicated and you are always on the verge of jurisdictional dispute between unions it's just really hard pieces of legislation to navigate, even if they seem simple i going in. you have helped to make it a lot easier. we have always been able to rely on to you give us information and guidance and the history to make sure that we have that context. this legislative work around prevailing wage is so incredibly important to support our middle-class and that people have living wage jobs and are able to succeed. so i just want to thank you for helping us and our office through difficult pieces of

legislation, but also for your support for working people and we're going to miss you. >> thank you. with that, donna, you have the microphone. >> thank you so much, supervisors. i feel humbled and honored. i would like to ask, if i may, if the staff people former and past, who are here there olse please stand with me. [ applause ] i want to express my heartfelt thanks to three mayors, mayor willie brown, mr. gavin newsom and mayor ed lee for having the confidence in me and giving me this opportunity to serve. i want to thank city administrator naomi kelly

and her team for their support and guidance. city attorney dennis herrera and deputis for their sound advice and our community collaborators and friends and the dedicated and talented staff at olse. amany of you know and has been mentioned today olse was create by ordinance in 2001. with the vision of stan smith, who is here with us today. >> hey stan ! [ applause ] we were created to enforce one law, which was prevailing wage on the city's public works construction contracts. and i have kind of seen it since then, coming from construction, like building a high-rise. in 2003, the voters approved one of the first in the

nation's minimum wage ordinances. the living wage ordinances were moved into our shop. the sweat-free ordinance was passed by the board in 2006. the voters passed the first in the country paid sick-leave ordinance. you passed the health care security ordinance. followed by the family-friendly workplace ordinance, fair chance ordinance and retailer workers bill of rights and not to mention those that are in committee just this week. i think we have got a couple more. with each new law, we have done our best to turn your progressive vision of workplace justice into reality. and to make these laws meaningful in the everyday lives of workers in san francisco. we have uncovered $10 million plus another $5 million where we collaborated with the

labor commission's and these cases involved san francisco's most vulnerable workers, oven non-english [spa-erbz/] and work in the nurd ground economy paid in cash at less than the minimum wage often work long hours without overtime pay, often under the threat of deportation if they complain. i think back on our hard-fought victories when we got proof it was the employer who called i.c.e. only the husband of a claimant and do stop them from selling off or hiding their assets. the great organizings done by the filipino community center that led to recovery of over $1 million for workers in residential care home cases and uplifting work of the chinese progressive association, with restaurant

workers, including the case where workers were awared back wages. as you know, san francisco was the first city in the country to require employers to provide paid sick-leave and you know what? the sky didn't fall. and now over 22 cities and five states have their own paid sick-leave ordinances modeled on ours. it's been an honor for me to testify before other jurisdictions about our experiences implementing san francisco's law and our conclusion that paid sick-leave can be easily enforced, is good for workers, good for employer and good public policy. one of the boldest pieces of legislation, which with stood [speaker not understood]

it coefficient part time employees and businesss than the aca. to-date; concluding over 250 compliance reviews initiated by worker complaints that have resulted in health care benefits for over 8 300 workers. i'm also happy to report that nearly 20% of covered employers who submitted and forms to the olse -- said that they changed their hiring practices to complain -- i'm sorry, to comply with the fair chance ordinance. and to provide a fair shot at job opportunities for people with arrest and conviction records. i would be remiss if i didn't also highlight our successes enforcing prevailing wages on the city's public works contracts. we have recovered over $6 million in back wages for construction workers, and over $2 million in penalties to the city's general fund.

four contractors have been debared from bidding city contractors and two referred for criminal prosecution n. two of our most memorable cases olse subpoenaed copies of checks from the contractor's bank to prove that they had two sets of books. actual checks used to pay workers and checks shown to the city. and these were contractors who have been done doing public works contracts in san francisco for many years. the record is near and dear to my hart and we have not only recovered some serious monies, but leveled the playing field for law-abiding contractors to successfully bid on city contracts. i'm proud that olse has billion a state and national model for enforcement. we work with the community collaborative to ensure that we're reaching those workers most acted by wage theft.

we protect the identity of workers who filed compliants and conduct company-wide audits going back three years. we work hard to educate employers about their obligations, to provide clear guidance and make ourselves available to field questions about san francisco's laws and hold violators auto a cannotable. supervisors, i'm truly honored by your kind words, but please know this commendation is real will the not for me, but for the entire staff of the olse. they are the ones on the front oflines, they show up at restaurants to interview workers at 10 -p.m. when the time sheets show that nobody works after 9:00 p.m. they do home visits it find workers who may have been underpaid in order to hear their stories. they speak to workers in their native languages to make them feel comfortable and earn their trust. they perform audits on their computers until their necks and shoulders ache and spend week on thes phones answering employer's questions each year when the annual

reporting forms become due. they hound employers when their payments are late. they are respectful with employees and maintain a positive attitude when they hear excuses about what happened to the missing pay records, et cetera. i am indebted to all of them for any successes i have achieve in my time here. thank you. [ applause ] >> secretary-treasurer -- -- they

[speaker not understood] i want to thank her publicly for all the work she has done at the building trades. [ applause ]

again congratulations donna and thank you for all your hard work for the city and county of san francisco. [ applause ] all right, colleagues, we have one more commendation. just one more. later today, we will vote on my legislation to establish the san francisco homicide reward fund for unsolved murders in our city. this reward fund encourages witnesss to come forward. it puts those responsible behind bars, and it gives solace for those who lost loved ones. right now i want to recognize the importance of preventing these unfortunate and untimely deaths in the first

place. and as a result of a lot of hard work, i want to basically bring forward a woman who i have known as long as i have remember, ms. maddie scott. please come forward. a fierce leader to prevent gun violence here in our city. ms. scott. [ applause ] maddie scott is the president of the brady campaign to prevent gun violence, the san francisco chapter. she is also executive director of healing for her families and our nation, and she is chapter leader of the san francisco mothers in charge. and she is the founder of the healing circle, which has done so much to uplift so many members of our community, who have lost loved ones. but more importantly, maddie is a mother, a mother who

lost her son to gun violence, a mother who turned her grief and her pain into meaningful action, a mother who is giving a voice to the victims of this sad epidemic in our community. she has organized gun buybacks in city hall with united players, to take hundreds of guns off the streets. she has also worked with the board of education to passes a resolution calleding for the school district to support gun control policies and communicate information about gun buyback events and gun safety practices with families. and expand upon lessons in the classroom, around violence-prevention. every year on the anniversary of the sandy hook elementary school oshooting in connecticut, she works with other organizations in the city to raise awareness by gun violence and to remember the lives that we have lost over the years to gun violence.

she also organizes during mother's day, when she bring those mothers together for healing, for prayer, for support, for love, for comfort. this is hard work. this is emotional work. and maddie is doing this work with grace and zeal. she is a tireless self-less leader, and i am proud to honor her today for always being on the frontlines, every time there is, sadly, a loss of life in our community. maddie is the first person who i call and often times the first person there with the mother and the family, praying, supporting, and encouraging, lifting them up. as i had said before, unfortunately in this chamber about the fact that in our community, we have experienced far too much loss

to gun violence. and sometimes we get so caught up in our grief, that we forget as sean richard would say, brothers against guns, we forget to honor the living. we forget to honor those who continue to support us, those who continue to lift us up. and today, for your love, for your courage, for your inspiration, for all that you continue to do, and have done for over 20 years in our community, ms. maddie scott on behalf of the city and county of san francisco, we commend you. [ applause ] with that, i would like to recognize my colleagues, who would like to say a few words as well. supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much. good afternoon, maddie scott. >> good afternoon. >> i think this commendation is long overdue. you have been a tremendous leader of helping mothers who have lost their children and who are grieving, helping them heal.

i admire you, and i have a tremendous amount of respect for you and the work that you have done and will continue to do. we haven't seen eye-to-eye all the time, but i think that is normal. i think there is certainly room in the community to embrace you and to uplift you and to celebrate you. the work that you do, i find that most people don't want to do, because that is the hard work. it's hard to console a grieving mother after the funeral has come and gone. six months, a year after, and to help build not only the community, but families and help them put their lives back together. there is a saying that sometimes, even the healers need to be healed, and we recognize you as a healer in our community and hopefully you will find some solace and some healing aspect into this commendation that we're presenting to you today. it's a beautiful honor. you are of a beautiful person, a beautiful human

being with a heart of gold and i'm so grateful to know you, and to support your work. and i also want to recognize the legions of other women who may not stand in this chamber today, but they stand with you. and you are often the strength and the spine, the backbone when many people don't have the courage to stand up for themselves. so for you and your team of volunteers, i just want to say thank you. it mean as great deal to have you be a part of this work. and i know it's not easy. i know it's not easy. i know you wear the pain on your sleeve every day, but we wanted to recognize you and uplift you and give voice to the work that you are doing and the work that will you will do continue to do and we thank you. [ applause ] . >> supervisor campos >> thank you, i want to thank

you for the recognition of ms. scott and i'm simply going to say that the think the city and county of san francisco has a great deal of gratitude and owes you a great deal of debt, not only to you, but to the mothers of victims of violence, who remind us everyday to do something about this crisis. i'm a better person, a better legislator because of the fact that i have gotten to know you and so many of the other mothers. i just want to thank you for the dignity, the grace and the class with which you approach this very difficult subject. greatly, greatly deserved. god bless. >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor kim. >> ms. scott, it was really great that we as a board can honor you today for over decades' of work for those

families who have experienced violence in their lives. i first met you in 2005, when we worked on proportion a. >> yes. >> a set a-side to invest in violence preventing in our city, after we had experienced a high of 96 homicides in the previous years. this was the community response saying enough is enough. we actually need to put our money where our mouths are, and actually invest in programs that will systematically counter the violence we're experiencing in our communities. even when that violence is isolated in certain neighborhoodss, it impacts everyone in san francisco. but not everyone is able to give it voice, because it's actually one of the most difficult areas to work in the arena of public service. it's emotionally exhausting, and drawing, and for those who continue to do that everyday and to reexperience the trauma and emotional loss with all of the mothers and families, when it's not

necessarily your own family is a tremendous service, and also sacrifice on behalf of our community. so thank you for doing this work as long as you have. it is not easy to do, but it is so needed >> thank you for continuing to be a voice around this issue. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor avalos. >> thank you. ms. scott it's been ten years since i have known you and worked with you. you were part of helping to draft violence prevention set aside that we passed at the board of supervisors 2006, before i was on the board. actually i think it was the only set aside that supervisor peskin supported was that one. so that wasn't easy to get his moment no. >> but i think the exampleful of the bleeding that has been going on in our

communitis and in yours in particular. in '95 we had scores of homicides in the western edition and '96 again and really showed that we needed to do something. the answer wasn't -- we wanted to have effective law enforcement, but the answer wasn't more police officers, but really trying to get at the root causes. part of it, as well as the mental health services and mutual support that helps familis to bear the heavy burden of losing loved ones to violence. and that is what you brought together and i just want to thank you for giving your heart the way you have. because you have given your heart after your heart was torn by loss and that is giving above and beyond what anyone can give. i know it's taken a toll on you, but you are standing here before us with a packed room that has a lot of love for your, and for your service. so i just want to

say thank you and i really appreciate that president breed has brought this commendation before us today to honor you here in this room. >> thank you. ms. scott, again for everything that you continue to do to support others and lift others up we are here to say we lift you up today. we are thankful. we thank god for you for the love and for the inspiration that you continue to provide to so many people. i am just so honored to know you and just grateful for all you have done for the city and county of san francisco. [ applause ] >> thank you, supervisors. i'm just really at a loss for

words right now. but president breed and supervisor cohen and all of you, i want to say, i don't do this work alone. you can't do this work by yourself. you need others to help you. i just want to give honor to god, who gives me the strength to do this work. knowing this is resurrection and easter week, he rose, because they crucified him. he did nothing, but try to help other people, and he just didn't die for black folks, white folks, lgbt, or our children. he died for all of us. he died for all of us and he rose. because he gave me that gift, because i was on the path of destruction, i was angry, i was mad. you know, drugged-out, alcoholed-out and just angry

and god gave me a gift to see my son crossover and because of that gift, i promised him, they can do whatever they want, i don't care, i will do that work for that mother to get off that sofa. i will do the work to keep that young man from picking up that gun and to do that work for those coming out of prison and those in foster care. i will do this work, i don't care, until i take the last breath in my body. my grandson stands here today. he was a year-and-a-half when his dad was killed 19 years ago. it will be 20 years this year. and i'm glad he served on the youth commission and we helped raise him right to do the right thing. i'm proud of that. i'm proud to stand before you, was coletta jackson lange my colleague and her mother kept our doors opening and kept healing open when all hell broke loose and i

wanted to quit. i thank god for mothers in charge and i thank god for the prayers and united players and sean and reverend and keeping the cameras on us and thank each and every of you for hearing our voices and getting this reward money passed to help somebody to come in, so they can give the right information to help get a murderer off the street and then to rehabilitate that person. i think god for elizabeth torres and all the other mothers and fathers and paulette brown, whose son was shot 37 times in front of her house and all the other mothers and vivienne and sharon hewitt, the list goes on, mothers and fathers. i stand before you as a servant of god to do this

work, to make our city and city and county of san francisco a better place. to get guns off our streets, to educate our children. to provide opportunities for our loved ones, and that everybody will have affordable housing and everybody would have a job, and then we could see the violence stop, each one must reach one and teach one. it's about all of us or none of [-ufrs/]. i love all of you. god bless you and thank you for this honor. [ applause ] >> thank you. madam clerk,

if could you call items 4 and 5 together. >> item 4s and 5 will two ordinances that pertain to the san francisco super bowl 50, item 4 is an ordinance to amend the administrative code to be establish a san francisco super bowl 50 impact fund to be used to provide financial support to small businesses specifically impacted by the super bowl-related events. and item 5, ordinance appropriating $100,000 from

the general fund reserve to fund the super bowl 50 impact fund in 2015-16. >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam president and colleagues. last week we held a hearing in budget and finance committee with regard to the two ordinances and first ordinance creates super bowl 50 impact fund and second ordinance puts $100,000 into the fund specifically for those individuals that i believe the city has a direct moral responsibility for namely the 116 street artists and the other dpw valid licensees and permitees, be they food cart vendors, shoeshine vendors displaced for a period of up to 24 days where they make their living day in and day out. this offers them really a

very small modicum of support of $600 per valid claimant, not to exceed $100,000. item no. 4 also allows for other sources of revenue to the fund, be it contributions from the host committee, should it so willing and national football league should it desire or revenues from the super bowl 50-related events exceed expense as determined by the controller, this board could choose to appropriate additional funds to the fund. but at this point, it's really about showing that san francisco is the city that knows how to take care of our own tenants, those 116th street artists who already lost over eight days to rain, some of whom we heard from in committee, who had very compelling and moving testimony. this $600 is the difference

for many of them to be able to pay their rent. some of them in sros and some have come out of homeless and i recommend these ordinances to you and hope you support them. >> thank you supervisor peskin. supervisor cohen. >> thank you, president breed. through the chair, with all due respect, i would like to direct my comments, my questions to supervisor peskin. i wasn't able to listen to the entire testimony last week in the budget committee. but i wanted to ask, how did you come to $100,000? >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you. through the president to supervisor cohen, so we met with tom decainey, who is here from arts commission and met with representatives from the department of public works and we thought it was the lowest amount to give some immediate relief to the universe of people who were directly impacted by the city assists city's action.

as far as the castro and fisherman's wharf, who were not our permitees, who did speak to negative financial impacts. if there are sufficient funds we can address those other companies and individuals, but we came to that after discussions with the art commission after the universe of street artists who have been our permitees and worked there for decades and that is how we came to that figure. >> thank you. you talked about looking at the universe of permitees. how did you identify this universe? and how do we honor those that were adversely affected and not and weed out those who are not really in the area? >> right. >> there are 116 street artist stalls under the arts commission street artist

program in that location. and we can hear from tom decainey, but in meeting with the arts commission, they know who those individuals are under the program. any application that is submitted would be reviewed by the arts commission and the controller's office. i want to thank ben rosenfield for being willing to administer this program. as to the dpw licensees and permitees, those were numbers that were finished to us by the department of public works. >> supervisor peskin, i think it's a really good idea and i will be supporting items 4 and 56789 thank you for answering my questions. >> thank you supervisor. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you madam president. so we had a long discussion about this in committee and supervisor peskin made some amendments that narrowed the scope in terms of who would be eligible for these funds? and

it is -- i think it's a challenging issue in a lot of ways in terms of -- in terms of how to approve this kind of issue. of course this could have been negotiated as part of the host committee agreement n terms of compensation for specific merchants being displaced. my concern and why i will not be able to support this legislation and appropriation today is that it does really narrow down to one class of merchants. and supervisor peskin was very transparent in terms of his amendments. -- -- merchants in the castro were negatively

impacted during the f market and original legislation would have allowed broader access. amendments in committee really narrow it down and give full priority to the vendors at justice herman plaza and if they all submit for the $600 and presumably that accounts for more than $100,000 and there would be no access for other merchants. while i completely understand and respect the thinking behind that, i'm not in any way critical of the motives or the tactics of the author, i do -- it does leave me feeling uneasy about the legislation. particularly given that i have a particular set of merchants in my district, who weren't theoretically impacted, who literally had a major tourist muni line, f market cutoff and all saw a noticacle drop in business

over the course of the super bowl period. so i will not be supporting this legislation today. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor tang. >> thank you. so as i said in budget committee, i fully understand the difficulties that the street artists faced and highly respect them and since i was younger did my best to support them as well. i had asked the arts commission at budget committee, what was done before the event occurred and what sort of outreach happened? and i'm wondering for the purposes of full boards meeting and i see the director here if you could shed light on the outreach down prior to the event to ensure as many people as possible were not displaced. >> as i reported at last week's budget and finance committee, the arts commission first discussed the potential impacts of super bowl 50 on the street

artists' stalls in justin herman plaza november 20, 2014 and the commissions discussed the potential impact of the super bowl dates in january that would potentially displace the artists' stalls. we were still at that time negotiating alternative spaces with the super bowl host committee. in the end we were able to allocate ten now additional spaces near super bowl city, not directly within the confines of city. but between super bowl city and the nfl experience along market street. on january 4th, the arts commission sent a preliminario it all community street artist licensing-holders that during that period license holders not be able to sell between stuart and drum streets and notified that they could apply for the ten additional faces.

by legislation the programrior requires a daily lottery. so no artist is guaranteed a daily location and they show up to three different lotteris in the city run by volunteers to draw their spaces for the day. that ensures diversity of opportunities for artists, on any given day, to access those prime locations throughout the city, as well as those located in justin herman plaza. it would enable artists to participate in super bowl week in the additional foot traffic and those spaces between 3th and 4th street in marked and addition to the approxiate to the 100 spaces between 1st and 5th street on market. >> in terms of this fund, i don't know if this question would be directed to the author, or to you, but administering the funds,

what if someone for example was given the option of going to the alternative spaces, but on their only decided not to. would they qualify for the funding? >> we currently surveyed our street artists for those who could, approximately 150 respondent and doing other data collection to determine which street artists would occupy a space in justin herman plaza and still working to finalize the most appropriate, fair and transparent way to administer the fund, but imagine we would consider applications from street artist and our advisory panel or street arts committee of the commission would review those claims to award an allocation as deemed appropriate based on the board's designation. >> okay.

thank you. there are a couple of outstanding issues for me. one is that perhaps another underlying issue we could tackle another time, but just the fact there is no kind of grapes of wrathed guaranteed space for the street artists and they have to go through a lottery. so it's difficult to say it was solely because of the super bowl event or the lottery system. secondly, we haven't had the report from the controller's office about the economic generation this event -- i think some of us anticipate there was economic generation from the super bowl festivities and what it means to the city's

bottom-line. lastly, my preference is that we work to address these issues before the event had occurred, and so i know there may be some disagreement about that, but that is just how i feel, that we should make sure to take care of the street artists, make it as part of the negotiations, when the events were coming to san francisco. so at this time, i don't feel comfortable supporting those two items. but i hope that in the future, we can sort out things before hand to prevent the displacement of the street artist s. >> thank you, supervisor tang >> supervisor yee. >> thank you, president breed. i agree with supervisor tang we should have taken care of this beforehand, like a lot of things we're supposed to be doing and the fact is that we didn't take care of it. i don't think we should walk away from it, personally. i just want to say for the audience that is listening that didn't listen to the

budget committee, that we really only talking $600 per person. we're not talking, like, somebody is going to get rich over this. so this $600 something means a lot of these street artists. it could be half their rent. and we need to just support them for all of san francisco. >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you, i would like to address the statements of supervisor tang. that the board should have anticipated and the mayor's office should have anticipated and department should have anticipated the impacts to our own tenant, as well as impacts to businesss in the area. the fact that they were not anticipated, the fact that

this body did not require some payments to individuals who have been displaced and historically when displaced by films have been. the reality is when there is an oversight or if i can be more frank, a mistake, it's not too late for us to fix it now. in an environment where the arts and artists and small businesses are finding it so difficult to survive, much less thrive in san francisco. this $600 is a symbolic payment. many of them lost many, many more. have you seen the emails that we have all gotten in last several days, much more than $600 and one individual sent

us an email $600 was an insult for what she had lost in those days. i think it shows that this city cares, at least symbolically, it shows that we care. and if for no other reason, please vote for items 4 and 5 for those reasons. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. [ applause ] >> roll-call vote. >> on item 4s and 5, supervisor breed? >> aye. >> breed aye. supervisor campos? >> aye. >> campos aye. >> supervisor cohen? >> aye. >> cohen aye. >> supervisor kim? >> aye. >> kim aye. >> supervisor mar? >> aye. >> mar aye. >> supervisor peskin? >> aye. >> peskin aye. >> supervisor tang. >> no tang no. >> supervisor wiener. >> wiener no. >> supervisor yee. >> yee. >> supervisor avalos >> aye. >> avalos aye. >> [a-euts/] ayes and two nos with supervisors tang and wiener in the dissent. >> ordinances passs on the first reading. [ applause ] >> madam clerk, can you call items 6-11. >> item 6 is an ordinance

to appropriate approximately $46.5 million of 2011 general obligation bond proceeds and approximately $2.3 million of accumulate ed bond interest earnings to the department of public workss and municipal transportation agency. for street resurfacing, redesign of street [stkpha-eupz/] 2015-16. item 7, ordinance to appropriate approximately $29.7 million of 2016 earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bond proceeds and accumulated bond interest to public works in 2015-16 for the necessary repairs and seismic improvements. item 8 ordinance to propriety approximately $1 11 million of 2016 series earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bond pros to the department of public works in fys 2015-616 for necessary repairs and seismic improvements. inez tenenbaum 9, resolution to authorize and direct the sale not to exceed approximately $25.2 pl had of [tkpwra-g/] are

gratprincipal amount of general obligation bonds, earthquake safety and emergency response 2010. item 101 is resolution to authorize and direct the sale of not to exceed approximately $1 11 million of city's general obligation bonds series 2016 d, and item 11 is a resolution to authorize and direct the sale of a not to skeet approximately $44.1 million of general obligation bonds for road repaving and street safety in 2011. >> thank you, seeing no names on the roster for items 6-11, please call the roll. >> items 67-11, supervisor breed? >> aye. >> breed aye. >> supervisor campos? >> aye. >> campos aye. >> supervisor cohen? >> cohen aye. >> supervisor kim? kim aye. >> supervisor mar? >> aye. >> mar aye. >> supervisor peskin? >> aye. >> peskin aye. >> supervisor tang. >> tang aye. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> wiener aye. >> supervisor yee?

>> aye. >> yee aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> avalos aye. >> ten a ayes. >> ordinances passes on first reading and resolutions adopted unanimously. item 12, please. >> item 12 is a resolution to retroactively authorize the children and families commission to to accept and expends a grant in the amount of $2.59 million from the california department of education, et cetera. >> colleagues can we take this item, same house, same call? without objection the resolution is adopted unanimously. next item, please. >> item 13 resolution to authorize the controller to enter into the 10th amendment of a software license and support agreement with oracle america, inc. for perpetual software licenses and software support services for the controller's emerge project, extending the contract term through april 22, 2021 and increasing the maximum expenditure to

approximately $14.3 million. >> same house, same call. without objection, the resolution is adopted unanimously. [ gavel ] >> next item, please. >> item 14, ordinance to amend the administrative code to establish the san francisco homicide reward fund. x president breed. >> thank you, colleagues, i'll be brief, but i know we have a number of members of audience who have been waiting for this item to pass. this legislation creates a permanent city reward fund to compensate those who provide information leading to an arrest and conviction in an unsolved murder case in san francisco. there past six years, san francisco has averaged about 50 homicides per year, each one is tragic, each one is a loss of a son, a sister, a father, or a friend. and each one should have

never happened and each one deserves our ever effort to bring justice. the city has at times offered rewards in specific cases, but it's done so on an ad hoc basis and there is no specific way or process determining how this should be done? my legislation creates a perm permanent rewards up to $250,000 to help solve and prosecute these unsolved murder cases. and this legislation was brought about from the persistence of mothers who continue to ask for support for their children. it is limited to cases that have gone unsolved -- excuse me, in which the police have exhausted all levels of their investigation, and which the chief of police has determined that public

assistance and a reward is necessary. the recipient of the reward cannot have been involved in the crime. and the fund can also accept donations, all in all it requires a small a. taxpayer money, because thankfully we're talking about a small number of cases, but in those cases this reward can make a world of difference and in those cases we should be doing everything we can. i want to thank the police department for their assistance, our deputy city attorney, and i want to thank the mothers who continue to hold us accountable. thank you to paulette and thank you to sala and thank to ms. maddie scott and carolota and sean richards on the frontlines with brothers

against guns and thank my co-sponsors supervisor cohen and supervisor peskin and supervisor yee and with that, colleagues, i ask for your support. >> colleagues any other comments? supervisor cohen? >> thank you.thank you, president breed, for bringing this piece of legislation. i think it's abeen a long time and we have had paulest brown in the chambers for the six years that i have been on the board and the five you have been here, asking for and pleaing for this type of reward to happen. i am glad that we have the courage to do that and colleagues i'm anticipating unanimous support in this vote. i want to commend and recognize prose breed for her leadership in bringing an important measure to our attention, and giving it voice to those folks that, again, don't have a voice and that are not in the chamber advocating on their own behalf. >> thank you, supervisor cohen.

thank you again, colleagues. can we take this item same house, same call? without objection the ordinance passes unanimously on first reading [ applause ] managemented clerk, can you please call the next item. >> item 15 is an ordinance to amend the public works code to clarify that prohibited graffiti extends to all public property including all city assets, and to establish expedited notice and hearing procedures, create administrative penalties for an offending party and renumber code sections and affirming the planning department's ceqa determination. >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam president and colleagues. this is legislation that would help abate the problem of gorilla corporate graffiti marketing apparently folks have not gotten the message out there whether it's nbc, universal, last night it

-- i was out with puc enforcement crew and there is more of this stuff on the sidewalks of district 3. so we really need this kind of legislation. i want to thank the city attorney for his collaboration, the deputy city attorney for drafting it. also i was approached by the public utilities commission last week with respect to a public education campaign that they want to implement that uses sidewalk logos to dissuade the public from dumping oil and chemicals into our sewer. the intent is to identify a range of city-sanctioned exemptions from provide more clarity with respect to defining for the general public what street marking is acceptable and what is not? so in light of this, i offer the following non-substantive amendment on page 4, line 20: which would add a subsection 3 to read "or any painting or marking that a city department makes in the course of its official duties or as part of a public

education campaign, or subsection 4, any painting or marking required for compliance with any local, state, or federal law." so i would like to make that motion to amend the subject ordinance. >> supervisor peskin has made a motion to amend, seconded by supervisor cohen. colleagues can we take that without objection? that passes. can we take the item as amended same house, same call. without objection, the ordinance passes unanimously as amended on the first reading. madam clerk, please call 16 and 17 together. >> item 16 is resolution to receive and approve the annual for the fort noe valley centers chronic , et cetera >>

supervisor wiener. >> community benefit district for the incredible and often thankful work that they do to improve these two neighborhoods in the district i represent. they are really the unsung heroes, who help keep these neighborhoods clean, and safe. and really do spear heads a lot of work to beautify them. both of these organizations are essential collaborators with my office in terms of the work that we need to get done in the neighbors and us supporting their efforts. i want to call out particularly the castro upper markets community benefit district. the castro is a very active neighborhood and a lot going on in keeping that neighborhood clean is a

24/7/365-day a year challenge and the cbd works very, very hard to do that. so i just want to thank both organizations. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. colleagues can we take those items same house, same call? without objection, the resolutions are adopted unanimously. [ gavel ] >> madam clerk, can we call item no. 18 >> item 18 is a resolution to determine that the issuance of a type 42 on-sale beer and wine license to aoa ben >> reporter: marsh for nighthawks dbaa as pinot's palette will serve the public's convenience. >> colleagues, same house, same call -- without objection the ordinance is a[tko-pts/] unanimously. all right 19. >> to determine the issuance of type 64 general theater license to gray area foundation will serv of generate public.

>> same house, same call without objection adopted nutritionally. >> item 20, motion to confirm the re-appointments of nadia sesay and alwaysone lee to the redevelopment successor agency oversight board. >> same house, same call without objection, the motion is approved unanimously. [ gavel ] >> next item. >> item 21, motion to repaint candace wong to the child-care planning and advisory council term ending march 19, 2018. >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam president, colleagues. i want to thank candace wong for not only sitting here patiently throughout this meeting, but for sitting patiently and serving the cpac for the last dozen years. i think i presided over her original appointment. she grew up in district 3 and her work to obtain expansion of child-care facilities has been exemplary. i'm delighted that she is