nonprofits that they're working with, and now would the mechanics of transition work because it says must issue an rfp, and then they'll go through the process of designating a district manager. >> supervisor ronen: sure. again, there's never been a process before delineated, so they would all look a little different. so we want -- we want there to be a point person, whether it's an executive director or administrator for every different cultural district because often without a staffer whose full-time job in the community is concentrating, then things aren't able to thrive in the same way? and so that is prescribed in the legislation. but the way in which the decision making bodies work around funding and around, you know, prioritization of projects is going to differ.

in an original version of the legislation, there was a time where we thought, and i still think this somewhat, that there should be a c.a.c. for every single cultural district because we want that oversight and that responsibility and that place for public input for every single one, but not all my colleagues felt the same about that, so i'm trying to be collaborative in spirit and give that ability for gompan - governance -- >> supervisor safai: that makes sense. sometimes when we have c.a.c.'s, we have difficulty reaching quorums and filling the seats, but i have a feeling that these particular c.a.c.'s would be full al the time and people be fully engaged. did you say i have another question, supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: no, i only

have one question. >> supervisor safai: okay. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: i know that we -- it's been mentioned that this is an assumption, whatever cultural district that's being developed is going to be in one supervisor's district, so if there's an overlap, are there any prichgovisions for that. i didn't see that. >> supervisor ronen: i would assume that the supes would work together to create it, but it doesn't prescribe it one way or another. it doesn't say the supervisor -- the author has to be the supervisor of the district, but the assumption is that's what would happen, and that if a cultural district crossed district boundaries, then, the supervisors would work together with the community. >> supervisor yee: i just raise the question because i wasn't sure. >> supervisor ronen: yeah, yeah, yeah. >> supervisor safai: okay. so we have -- i think we're good right now. thank you, brian.

deputy city attorney givner, i know we have a whole round of amendments that were made. do you want to read, kind of summarize those, so -- and all of the amendments that have been put forward today, are they -- are they substantive to require additional time that we would -- that we would have to continue this item for one week and then vote on it at the next meeting, or are these amendments that are just -- that were handed to us, are they okay to move forward? and then first of all, why don't you talk about all of the amendments because there's quite a few. >> mr. givner: sure. deputy city attorney jon givner. you don't have to read the amendments into the record. i think supervisor ronen described essentially what those amendments are at the outset. one big piece of it is there are some changes to the structure throughout, but one big piece is no longer requiring specific departments to submit reports to mohcd in

order to prepare the master chess report and no longer prepare that ordinances creating cultural districts will go through specific commissions. now it may be and probably will be that when an ordinance is introduced to create a new cultural district, it will be required to go through certain commissions, depending on its content like the historic preservation commission, but the ordinance doesn't specify that in that kind of fine board detail. in terms of your second question about the process going forward, there is not an amendment that would trigger a continuance, so the committee could pass it out today. >> supervisor safai: supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: i'd like to make a motion to pass these amendments as announced by supervisor ronen? >> supervisor safai: i think we can do that. >> supervisor yee: i'd like to pass these amendments out of committee with a positive

recommendation to the full p d board. >> supervisor safai: we can do that without objection. >> supervisor ronen: yea. thank you. thank you, everyone, so much. >> supervisor safai: thank you everyone for coming out today. please call the next item. >> clerk: next on the agenda is item number five. [agenda item read] >> supervisor safai: i'm going to hand this over to supervisor yee. >> supervisor yee: thank you

very much, chair safai. colleagues before you today is an ordinance to -- that was already passed by the voters in november 2016. prop m allowed noncitizens to register to vote in school board elections. the law expands voting and civil rights for working parents whose children are enrolled in the san francisco unified school district schools and allows parents to have a direct way to influence how decisions are made regarding their children's education. to provide content, noncitizen parents make a third of the san francisco unified school district's community whose children are enrolled. however, given the current political climate, the need for immigrants to know their rights as well as their risks is paramount to protect and make sure families can stay together, have stability, and not live in fear.

as further background, there was a proposed ordinance earlier this year that would have paused the implementation of prop m and delayed the outreach process. the intent was meant to protect community members given the risks -- high risks of deportation. however, given the strong desire from community members and the broad and diverse prop n collaborative to continue moving forward with the victory they won on november 2016, they 3r50approached my office sponsor this implementation ordinance. this creates an actionable framework for the department of elections to do as much as possible within their power to ensure community members know their rights and their risk so that each member can make their -- an informed decision. to reach a third of the san francisco unified school district parent community across multiple languages and

cultures, especially during the summer will require a thoughtful and intentional outreach plan. this means ensuring language and cultural accessibility, maintaining sa maintaining sanctuary protections while ensuring an election that complies with federal law. by doing this, san francisco will continue its leadership in civil and immigrant rights. i'd like to thank all the community based organizations who spear headed and persisted in this effort from the beginning, starting in 2004, 2010 and especially 2016. i'd like to specifically recognize african advocacy network, mission graduates, coleman advocates, casa -- just cause, commission economic development agency, la raza

community, chinese for affirmative action and parent groups -- other parent groups. so right now, i want to bring up the director of the advocacy -- the director of advocacy from the chinese for affirmative action. >> thank you, vice chair yee, and good evening, supervisors. thank you so much to the rules committee for hearing this today. again, i'm the director of of advocacy. i just wanted to take this opportunity to thank both chair safai and supervisor stefani, your office staff, for meeting with us and engaging us in the last month, for trying to get this on the agenda. special thanks to chair yee for championing the ordinance, and special thampgsz for supervisor ronen -- thanks for supervisor

ronen and sandra fewer for advocating for this. we are a member and as a member of local coalitions like the san francisco immigrant legal and education network and also anchoring the language access network, caa serves primarily chinese language limited proficient, and we also contribute to local safety nets through staffing the san francisco rapid response hotline to protect immigrant families. for almost over ten years, caa has cultivated community leadership through parent involvement in the san francisco unified school district, and we have immigrant parented who have advocates for language access in the state of california. in tandem with other immigrant communities of color, c.a.a. has pushed for noncitizen

voting to become a reality in 2016 since 2004. you know, in 2016, something amazing happened for immigrant families at the polls where san franciscan voters came together and decided to make prop n

the ordinance recommends recommendations that we have, and we hope that you can really invite testimonies from community leaders who are directly impacted and also highlight so that we are able to highlight some of the efforts to weave some of the -- [inaudible] >> this ordinance signals to immigrant families the vitality of our democracy. thank you.

>> supervisor yee: thank you very much for talking so fast. director of the department of elections, thanks for being there and being patient. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i don't have any presentation, but the department appreciates the supervisors bringing this are forward, actually, so we have some clarification about the process in getting this charter amendment implemented. right now, after we had our last language accessibility advisory committee meeting, i think that the roll out of the affidavit will be on july 16. it will get us through the june alex process, also give people some time to rally as far as the outreach and other political matters are concerned, so i can take any questions. >> supervisor yee: i don't see any questions. >> thank you. >> supervisor yee: thank you very much again for being here and being supportive of this. why don't we take public comments at this point.

if you have any, appreciate it if it's really short. >> this is another example of the preferential treatment and differential treatment that you give to blacks and u.s. citizens here, okay? i'll be better off being an illegal alien instead of a black. now you want people who are fraud in this process, talking about it will protect voter fraud and you're illegal in the city illegally and you want to vote. that's against federal law off the top. that's another example of you treating noncitizens of the united states like you dgot diplomatic immunity. you cutting through people that is going through the red tape procedures to become a citizen and then you've got the audacity to talk about elections. for you to talk about affirmative action, you should

be affirming back paying and putting that 60 square footage of city blocks back to affirm to reestablishment of the african americans and give them their nationality back to be free from this slavery that started this differential treatment that's continuing here today. black people aren't immigrants. we was brought here at slaves. you got that? black people built the white house. then after the black people finished building it, you had the audacity to call it the white house. talk about affirmative, and you're saying that's going to protect voter fraud? that's against federal law. you've got these light weight u.s. attorneys that ain't taken care of business yet saying they're going up against illegal immigration. i'm going to give you an example. there's criminal law that says that every illegal alien that

administration supports is automatically one year in the federal pent. and i'm going to tell you something else if you've got an illegal alien and you release them, and they commit -- >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm with the african advocacy network, and i would like first of all to start saying thank you to equal the gratitude of our friend here to supervisor yee and the ronen and fewer and as well as -- as well to supervisor safai and stefani. first of all, if we look back and we put the right to vote into context, we may find out that some of these immigrants we're talking about here are here just because they didn't

get granted the right to vote where they're coming from. and for most of them, voting is the first life experience. and in a normal world, having a word to say in the policy, which is taking care of the education of your child should be a no brainer. but we are in a different world. we are under an administration which everything that is out there can be used in the way which we've never thought of. so the thing -- the thing is the right thing to do here, not only to educate, inform, educate and empower our community members about what it is to vote, but at the same time, the risks that exist that are out there. so i'm here to say to you as a community based organization serving, you know -- serving the african immigrants, we're ready to work with you, and we do support this prop n, and we

say thank you because, you know, this is a huge step toward the empowerment of our community members. and again, for us, it is a lesson that you make a commitment as a community based organization which is that all community members should access naturalization because that would be certainly the safety for all of us. thank you again for your work. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is vanessa bowman. i'm the director at the central american resource center. we believe that it's important and proper that despite concerns and risks for immigrants, the immigrant communities we serve have fought very hard for prop n to vote in school elections. while the current admin has

added additional fears, the additional implementation sponsored by yee can help reduce these risks while at the same time empowering immigrant community members to engage in a political process that affects education of their children. the implementation ordinance sponsored by supervisor yee has laid out critical ways in which community members can be protected through language safeguards, warning notices and check lists. in addition, we are a part of larger citywide collaboratives including the san francisco anywhere tich defense collaborative, and the san francisco immigration and legal network which are made up of many organizations that have expertise and capacity to provide legal immigration consultation services through which immigrant community members can receive information and orientation around how voting can affect their immigration status. these services are low cost,

accessible to members of the immigrant community and can play an important role in helping immigrants making informed decisions when exercising their right to vote in school board elections, so we hope that you will support prop n and the implementation. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am the community engagement coordinator at c.a.a. when san francisco passed proposition n in 2016, it was a clear act of support for immigrant families, and an important community led victory that demonstrated or city's value in equal access and inclusivity. we must do so by ensuring safe implementation of noncitizen parent voting in the school board elections. as one of our chinatown community leaders, if this issue of implement indication

is not resolved, the result is that many noncitizen parents will not know how to vote and not get the rights they deserve. the long-term solution is to protect noncitizen parents' right to vote and implement prop n. this implementation ordinance will answer to the broad spectrum of opinions in our communities as it will dictate how the department of elections will protect our voters in the registration process and the right kind of information that would allow san francisco residents to decide for themselves whether or not this is the right time for them to register. the ordinance also strengthens our extensive community and defense infrastructure for language access iblt and implementation which exists in the san francisco immigrant and legal education network. together we are providing and will continue to provide the necessary linguistically and culturally responsive resources to our communities, such as

know your rights workshops to community members and institutions and face to tase outreach and schools and parks. i hope you will continue to support immigrant families and strengthen implementation. thank you. >> good afternoon, my name is lucy, and i work for the mission economic agencies. this is my second time speaking in support of noncitizen voting. first when prop n came before this committee in 2016 and i am here to speak on the importance of what is now a law. i ist -- i was -- [inaudible] >> -- should be included and integrated into the social and political fabric of san francisco. this law is a direct line for immigrant parents to advocate for their children's education. we must be accountable for

these parents and the voters who supported this initiative. in a political environment that is guided by fear, i come here to remind you that an empowered community is not a fearful community. this is not the time to fear but to be bold. our immigrant community needs to know that san francisco continues to believe in the inclusion of immigrants to maintain the vitality of our democracy. it is our duty to ensure fair and transparent implementation process and as a community based organization, we are clo.

[ gavel ]. >> supervisor yee: good team work. >> supervisor safai: okay. so i think with -- i think this item is -- i just want to say thank you, supervisor yee, for taking this on. thank you for director art z and all those working with immigrant communities, this is a very important piece of legislation, so i thank you for your leadership. i think there's no opposition on this body. any other comment? >> supervisor yee: yeah. i actually forgot to thank my cosponsors, supervisors fewer and ronen. i know why we really wanted to make this happen in regards to having parents, all parents, be able to have a voice in their child's education. and i was on the school

boardtboard for artery -- eight years. basically, these families had no voice, and when you elect people, and those elected -- not everybody, but maybe some of it is unconscious. but when you have -- when you're elected, and you know certain people have to vote for you, and you know certain people don't have a chance to vote for you, you tend to ignore those that are not going to get you into office, and i think this is a way to say, you know, pay attention to, you know, all the students and don't ignore the ones that are english speakers -- non-english speakers or english learners. so -- and just this hopefully will give the security that we need for these people that want to provide that voice for their children. so i'd like to make this motion to pass this out of committee

with a positive recommendation to the full board. >> supervisor safai: and i think we can do that without objection. congratulations, everyone. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor safai: please call the next item. [agenda item read] >> supervisor safai: thank you. and i just, for the record, want to note that we're joined by supervisor sheehy, and this is his item, so we'll hand it over to supervisor sheehy for some opening remarks. oh, wait, before you do that, supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: can i ask a question of the -- >> supervisor safai: regarding, this item? >> supervisor yee: the last item. >> supervisor safai: do you want to rescind it and ask the question on the record?

so make a motion to rescind item -- the vote -- >> supervisor yee: do i need to make that motion to rescind. >> supervisor safai: item number five without objection. >> supervisor yee: there were two amendments that were real minor, but i guess i should read it into the record that -- we need to amendment it, right? >> mr. givner: yes. i understand supervisor yee is proposing to remove some references to lawyers and law firms. there was a requirement that the department of elections provide lawyer and law firm referrals in the voter materials, and instead, it will now say with the amendment proposed by supervisor yee that the city will provide referrals to appropriate organizations without singling out law firms. >> supervisor yee: okay. it's not of any -- it's not going to hold it back. >> supervisor safai: okay. so we'll make that motion without objection. >> supervisor yee: make the motion to amend. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor yee: and i'd like to make this motion to

pass this out of committee without objection to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor safai: great. call the next item -- oh, that's right. you called it. [please stand by for captioner switch]

barbara garcia described an individual who had been placed on a 72-hour involuntary psychiatric hold at san francisco general, a.k.a. 5150'd over 100 times before they were permanently placed. we do the math on that and it's an incredible waste on our resources and traumatizing for those individuals to be cycled in and out of treatment and on the street. a data point from jeff, we have 500 methadone users currently on the street. so we have individuals who have made a choice to deal with their addiction and yet we put

them in the environment that makes them most likely to fail. i just want to read a bit from an email from someone, from a provider who is supportive. this agency supports clients who are searching for, who provide substance use treatment. she describes many clients spent months successfully participating in group treatment and individual counseling and many of them currently exit their programs into homelessness. as she says, i have worked here for five years and see firsthand the extreme effort so many of our clients make and still struggle to have secure and stable housing after they finish the program. so the measure is in front of you. we did have a couple of

amendments that we put in. so before we hear from the department of homelessness and a couple of other folks, let me just note the amendments. one is making clear we are moving people into permanent supportive housing and not transitional housing so we struck that, so no temporary shelters but actually to get them into supportive housing and also to clarify this is part of a larger coordinated entry system the department of homelessness is operating, all on page 3, roughly line 8-19. the third part we want to clarify is when individuals are placed in supportive housing that they have the appropriate counseling and support and those services be provided uninterrupted by the department of public health which has the

skill set to do so. so i have today emily cohen from the department of homelessness and supportive housing and thank you for being here this late. i appreciate it. >> good afternoon, supervisors, i'm emily cohen with department of homelessness and supportive housing. our director jeff kazisky sends his regrets not being here today. we thank you for your leadership on this issue. we share your concern that people who are homeless and going through residential treatment not be discharged to the streets. people in residential treatment are doing the transformational work of recovering and returning to homelessness challenges this ongoing recovery. h.s.h. and d.p.h. are continuously building our efforts to collaborate and better serve the highest need folks in our community,

including people leaving residential treatment. we have work world the supervisors office on the amendments and as amended we are excited to support this legislation and just really grateful for the opportunity to work together with your office and also answer any questions you may have about how h.s.h. and d.p.h. will implement. >> thank you. >> supervisor safai: supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: it says upon discharge many individuals don't have a home to go to and are discharged to the streets. can you describe how long might they be in a residential treatment program, 30 days, 60 days, longer, six months? under what circumstances does this happen? >> sure, and kell -- kelly from department of health may know this better but i believe it's up to 90 days that people

will be receiving services. >> 90 days is the average. >> 90 days is the average. >> supervisor stefani: and are these services through d.p.h. and our non-profit providers as well? >> yes. >> supervisor stefani: what is the entry point into getting into the 90-day treatment program. how do they enter, how are they screened. how does that start and begin? >> we will defer to kelly as these programs fall in her department. she could better answer them. >> hello, i'm kelly haramoto. people enter into treatment programs from a variety of places, they could be living in the community, could be an inpatient in the hospital or in another community setting. >> supervisor stefani: i'm supportive of this, i'm just trying to understand, when they are done with their treatment program and being released, what is the process in terms of with you we say we are

releasing them to the street. does anybody look regionally to see if they might be able to be housed in another county? i'm just trying to understand why is it they are being released to the streets and is any more work being done to get them into other supportive housing environments in other counties or places? >> discharge planning for people in treatment programs usually starts shortly after their arrival in the program and the conversation begins with that person where they are planning on going when the program finishes. when people are homeless when they enter, the challenge of figuring out what happens as they exit is problematic because they didn't come from a house situation. some folks move onto sober living environments, if they are in a co-occurring program. some are able to go into cooperative housing but the wait lists are quite long and the slots are few. very few people who intend to

reside in san francisco choose to leave san francisco at the end of the treatment episode. >> supervisor stefani: okay. i want to understand better the math of it. you could provide this to me later but i just want to understand what are the opportunities in terms of how many people are in the programs, first of all. and then when they are being released, where might they go? and what does that look like? how many sober living environments do we have to put them into, in terms of long-term sober living. how many spots are there? what type of supportive housing do we have? i want to understand the math. what exactly do we have, can we offer and what are we missing? if you could get me those numbers that would be great. >> sure, absolutely. >> supervisor safai: great, any other questions? why don't we open it up for public comment. >> we did also have lauren

kahn, i believe she brought a couple clients. i was going to go to kelly next. >> supervisor safai: do you you want to do public comment before or after? >> let's do this and then public comment. >> supervisor safai: please come forward. >> lauren koen and your clients, please. >> hi, thanks so much for having us and thanks for your legislation. i'm lauren kahn with health rate 360 we are a provider of substance use disorder mental illness and primary care in 13 counties but headquartered in san francisco, we serve 12,000 san franciscans annually. i want to give a couple numbers quickly for context. last year we served, san francisco paid for of 1,463 people to be in our residential treatment program.

that's residential substance use disorder treatment program. 94% of those people reported they were unsheltered before coming into our treatment programs. and 25% of them left still without a safe and stable place to go. that means that 75% of those folks we had some positive outcomes with but that's still an enormous number. i just wanted to share the context before sharing the platform with my colleagues. >> i just want to say thank you, board members, for allowing me to speak. this is the third time i've ever been in shall -- city hall and i'm a little nervous. i just want to say we support this, i'm also a client from health right 360 and i have a background of several programs i went through. each time i was homeless after

the program and i'm very supportive, we really need it, also because i see the fact that every time we go through the program and ended up in homelessness it's a cycle that i've been seeing. i've been going through this sense 18 years old and i'm now 47. i'm afraid again because i'm coming up to graduation this month, and i have the support of health right 360 helping me and support of h.o.t. trying to help me and there's nothing yet. and i know there's also a secondary program but that stops at a certain amount of time as well. what am i going to do after that is what i'm thinking about. i'm also going to school now. i'm getting my g.e.d., doing computer classes. i'm thinking about getting a

job in outreach and going to college for my counseling degree. it scares me that i might be back where i started from. i don't really have many words except i'm in fear of that and if this passes not just i, but others will benefit from this. they won't be stuck in that cycle any more. so you know, i am just grateful to be able to talk about this and let you know how he feel about this. it's a scary situation, you know. i got health problems, i've got mental issues of this over the years, i have a psychiatrist,

therapist, and a service animal for an emotional partner and an 83-year-old mother waiting for me to complete this and some time down the road i will get housing with her because i need to take care of her and she needs to take care of me, she doesn't need to, she has already, it's my turn. and i'm just, i am just here today to support this all the way. i just want to thank you for giving me this chance to speak on it. >> supervisor safai: thank you very much. is this an additional person? >> my name is haley wright, i'm a health counselor at health right 360 in our resource center. i am privileged to work with people everyday, i see them come in and receiving case management support around applying for affordable housing

opportunities in the city they don't exist often so it's often in the bay area. usually 2-5 years. we do the best we can prepping our clients but unfortunately what we see happen everyday is clients putting in all that effort and exiting the program without anywhere to go. highlighting numbers lauren referenced, it's more severe, we are noting 25% exit in homelessness, more exit into

sober living that are only transitional opportunities so that time ends as well. opportunities like this, i think would be incredible to continue to allow donald and other clients to work toward their goals. we work with an incredible motivated resilient group of individuals and they are needing that support to get their feet back under them and be working toward success. i'm really excited to see this on the agenda for today. i think it's an issue we talk about all the time as we look at how can we continue to provide support around recovery and i think having housing is a critical step. we do see just the cycles through our programs too. i see the clients frequently that i served six months ago coming back through and i think about the cost to the health care system as we are seeing them coming through and the city is paying for treatment again. i also walk home from work, i'm a resident of the mission, i walk home and pass former clients on the street that i see unfortunately after all

that hard work they put in recovery, they relapsed and are back in their addiction and back on the street and it's heartbreaking. i thank you for taking the time to listen to our experience. >> supervisor safai: thank you. we are going to open it up to public comment. anyone who wishes to comment on this item, please come forward. you have two minutes. thank you. >> really, what are you missing? i will tell you what you are missing. all these people that are coming up before you are in low-income and very low income brackets. you are price fixing and price gouging where you steal from programs engineered for the poor, you provide and let it be used by the rich. for example, that mission rock. the instructions for mission rock says 15% of 1,500 apartments within that complex is supposed to be for very low and low income bracket people, the people coming up before you

today. that means 225 of those apartments is supposed to be for low income and very low income family but because of your price fixing you deliberately start the lowest level of income at $36,700 and exclude the very low and low income bracket people who the instructions of that package say you are supposed to be following rules and regulations and you deliberately carve it out of the instructions. about you sir, asking about how can we house these people and stop having them going back into the cycle of homelessness. i think it's been demonstrated several times twitter free tax break of $217 billion in tax-free money. kazinsky says it would take $1 million to house 1,000 homeless people.

you could take that money and house 1,000 homeless people when we only have 8,000 that are homeless on the street and have a balance of 216,999,000. you got poor supervision and management of tax payer money. that accountant over there for the health department [buzzer] >> supervisor safai: thank you, sir. any other members of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. i just want to say thank you to supervisor sheehy. i called for an audit of behavioral health mental services department of public health. it's taken a year to finalize that. we will be presenting that in government audit and oversight in a couple weeks but this is right in line with exactly the kind of thinking in the sense that people with behavioral health services in a residential treatment facility if they don't have follow-up

care they will continue the cycle of homelessness, so i think this is a great piece of legislation. thank you for the support, thank you supervisor sheehy for your leadership on this, and please add me as a co-sponsor. supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: yes, first of all i would like to thank donald for sharing his story today and for your hope. it's great and i know that you can do it, i hope in our residential treatment programs we are encouraging outpatient 12-step programs and that's something that is free. so i hope that is part of our residential treatment programs here in city and i just want to again thank supervisor sheehy for his leadership on this and i would like to be added as a co-sponsor as well. >> supervisor safai: great. supervisor yee, want to make a motion? >> supervisor yee: can i be added too?

[laughter] >> supervisor safai: then you could make a motion. >> supervisor yee: thank you, supervisor sheehy. i would like to make a motion to pass this out with a positive recommendation. >> i believe there are amendments. >> supervisor safai: make a motion to accept the amendments, i think we could do that without objection. >> supervisor yee: i will go ahead and make a motion to pass this out with positive recommendation to the full board as amended. >> supervisor safai: great, without objection. thank you. thank you supervisor sheehy. please read item 7. >> ordinance amending the administrative code to allow members of the successor agency commission to be eligible to participate in the city's health service system. >> supervisor safai: great, anyone wish to comment, seeing none, public comment is closed. i will make a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. could we do that without objection? without objection. please read item number 8. >> ordinance amending the campaign and governmental conduct code regarding campaign

finance requirements and conflict of interest disclosures. >> supervisor safai: great. i think lee heppner is going to come but maybe mr. deputy city attorney, can you give us a little summary of what has happened, transpired since our wonderful joint session with the ethics commission? >> yes, deputy city attorney job gintner. the ethics commission, at that meeting there was a version of the ordinance amended and sent back to the rules committee, the ethics commission met on april 18th and adopted a few additional amendments on top of those that are in the board file, the amendments that the ethics commission adopted are largely technical. they change some of the references to electronic media

communications, fixed some cross-references, other clean-up language. they sent a new clean version to the board. it's in your file today. as you know from the april 3rd meeting, the board must pass exactly the same ordinance that the ethics commission passed so if you intend to pass this out today you should first amend your ordinance, amend the document to accept ethics amendments and then pass it out to the full board. >> supervisor safai: great. can we do the amendment or do we have to take public comment first? >> public comment. >> supervisor safai: any members of the public wish to speak, seeing none, public comment is closed. and so do you need to read those amendments into the record? or did you summarize them? >> i don't and they are in the packet for today's agenda already. >> supervisor safai: okay. could i have a motion to accept

the amendments as proposed? great, we can do that. then i know we have lee heppner from supervisor peskin's office with very brief remarks. please put the timer on, [laughter] i'm just kidding. >> thank you, chair safai and members. i will keep it brief and thank you for explaining the procedural posture on this. the board did an extraordinary thing april 3rd passing amendments to this really broad reform to our government conduct code. supervisor peskin is the sponsor but this is really the product of two years of drafting and revision of the ethics commission and longer than that by members of the public invested in these issues. just to reiterate i know the board has to pass exactly what the ethics commission sent forward on april 18th and i hope that you do so today, it sounds like we are getting prepared to do so and to the

extent this are lingering concerns, i know that we have agreed to follow-up on some of that through trailing legislation. just thank you both and look forward to this reform finally passing. thank you. >> supervisor safai: great. i want to thank supervisor peskin and supervisor tang, particularly supervisor peskin has been working on this for a couple years and lee for his hard work on this, i don't think he lost any hair but might have pulled some hair out. it was a memorable night, deputy city attorney gintner we missed you. but -- city attorney did a great job. you might want to help me city attorney givener but there's a section as it requires contributions, disclosure by elected officials as it pertains to ballot measures and independent expenditures right

now as proposed there's a threshold. what section is that? >> section 114.15b on the top of page 7. >> supervisor safai: okay, section 114 b, top of page 7. we are going to have some trailing legislation. working in conjunction with supervisor peskin's office and supervisor tang and essentially we will get at trying to create right now there's a ballot candidate control independent expenditures along with non-candidate control and this refers to non-candidate controlled but the language in the ordinance that pertains to these two is a little bit amorphous or gray. so what we are going to introduce very soon is trying to create a line of what threshold of an official would be involved, whether fundraising, or decision making

or otherwise defined in the ordinance. we feel that's a better threshold than a $5,000 contribution limit or disclosure requirement and i think there's some consensus so we will propose that and work with the ethics commission to amend this. we passed it so it will be coming very quickly. i think kyle is here from the ethics commission. we will follow-up with you on that and that will be coming pretty quickly. otherwise that was for the record and for everyone's own edification, but otherwise we should move forward with this. i think without objection. so moved. and that is ordered. any other matters in front of us today? madam clerk? >> that concludes our business for today. >> supervisor safai: thank you. we are adjourned. [adjourned].

>> working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrate and dynamic city on sfroert of the art and social change we've been on the edge after all we're at the meeting of land and sea world-class style it is the burn of blew jeans where the rock holds court over the harbor the city's information technology xoflz work on the rulers project for free wifi and developing projects and insuring patient state of at san francisco general hospital our it professionals make guilty or innocent available and support

the house/senate regional wear-out system your our employees joy excessive salaries but working for the city and county of san francisco give us employees the unities to contribute their ideas and energy and commitment to shape the city's future but for considering a career with the city and county of san francisc tord to order. can you please rise for the pledge of allegiance. [ pledge of allegiance ] >> president turman, i'd like to call roll. >> president turman: please