removing ten single occupancy vehicles per chariot on the road. we're committed to safety as he ca -- accessibility with a fleet of wheelchair accessible vehicles we have and we have an in-app function that you can request a wheelchair accessible vehicle through the app. we're also providing service to areas of -- >> thank you. >> thank you so much. >> thank you, again, directors. i did spend much of the morning looking over this report. i think it's a good first step. i hope that some effective regulation comes out of it. but i wanted to specifically talk about the tncs and has

been noted by a couple of directors, this -- the biggest part of the congestion problem in the city is undoubtedly the tncs. the city has thus far taken the position they don't have regulatory authority over tncs, but certainly you have regulatory authority in so far as it goes -- the general rules, the rules of application that apply citywide to all vehicles or even, i would say, to certain classes of vehicles such as the ones that are contained in this report. so i would love to see some effective regulation having to do with that. i would particularly call attention to the idea of congestion pricing because it's more than just stopping in bike

lanes and double parking. it's sheer numbers. it's the sheer numbers of them that are on the street. if a handle can be gotten on that, i think it will have a tremendous benefit across the board and across the city. so i hope you take a good, close look at that. i hope you also take a look at regulations that find ways that you can regulate tnc as long with other forms of transportation. thank you. >> thank you. yes, mr. gilberte. >> tom gilberte. numbers matter. i heard just recently that it's 6,000 uber lifts on the road at one time versus 35,000 uber on the road at some point. numbers matter. again, quality of life. do we want 6,000 more cars

downtown? even if they're giving another government will take a nice profit or tax or, you know -- but do we want them? is that where we want to go? insurance, if a scooter with a helmet hits a person in a wheelchair or a little kid or an old folk, we get broken a whole lot easier. the uber lit insurance pattern, if there's no one in the car, they have a different set of insurance, what they'll pay. this is a billion dollar -- billions of dollars corporation. i'm sitting here thinking that if you had children and they were going to spend the rest of their life paralyzed, duh. and 6,000 or 40,000 or 30,000 cars are going to add more tension to drivers that are on the street.

that includes the tourist drivers that don't know what they're doing. if you're driving in the city and you're making money in the city, you should sign into a $5 million damage policy per person. the city can arrange that funding through a public bank. we need to go that route. we don't need more sprawl of mechanical machines in this city. thank you. >> thank you. herbert winer is the last speaker. >> there's one thing -- two things that have been left out. one is accessibility to transportation. now, people are expected to walk a quarter of a mile to the bus stop. if you're a senior or a disabled person, it's a hardship. now, that plan should address this. the second thing about

congestion, you remove parking spaces, you remove driving lanes. you have an increased volume of cars coming. yeah. you are going to have congestion. that's one contributory factor. in addition to uber and lyft. i think this should be examined as part of the plan. this is a long-standing problem. it's not been addressed. when you increase the walking distance, less people are going to take public transportation. also, when you constrict the driving lanes, there's more of a pileup of cars. there are areas -- neighborhoods where congestion did not exist before. now it does. try california streets in the richmond district. it didn't used to be this way. now it is. now there's several streets that are could not justed.

i recommend that the mta and cta examine their could no congesteg and be more realistic. >> thank you. anymore public comment? no? seeing none, public comment is closed. directors, this is a discussion item only. there's no action, but the public speakers, we did, you know, hear, again, about the hardships that tncs are causing and it will be good to have a strategy to come out of this report. personally, i think congestion charging is an idea with a discussion coming back is very good. i applaud that. that's going to be an interesting one to hear. maybe this time people will see there is a need and we can do something with it. director rubke, did you have thoughts? >> i'm sorry. thank you. so thanks for this report.

it was comprehensive and got into details on a lot of things that i thought were really forward thing and helpful. i just wanted to question the metric used in the accessibility piece. i think they were good in general, but i thought the first one caused me a little concern, by i think, if i'm recalling, the phrasing is something like the percentage of that services users who have disabilities or who identify as disabilities as having disabilities. and i guess i'm concerned about using that as a metric because i think that in a lot of the cases where this service clearly doesn't have accessibility or disabled access, you're not going to get a very good or useful metric from that in my mind because the user -- people with disabilities won't sign up as a user of a service where there's no obvious access. so, for example, bike share, i love the idea. it's so awesome, but i'm not going to sign up for bike share.

but i think it's important that, as we're looking to these emerging technologies and seeing how they com comply with our principles, it's important we keep pressure on then. i understand the report did address those other things. i want to highlight that as a little bit concerning. i think in connection with the other metrics that you have, i think you'll get what you need. i just had a little concern with that. so that's my piece. thank you. >> that's a good point, director. thank you very much. yes, director ramos. >> thank you, madam chair and thank you to the ta staff for this incredible report. i've been anticipating it for a while, and i was very pleased with what you all produced. it's quite a bunch of information. i hope it's going to be required reading for anybody that's working in transportation today. it really is a nice

comprehensive bunch of information. it's very -- it's so comprehensive, there's very little that i can add. i think that speaks to all the brilliant minds that went into the review and the peer review and everybody else that looked at this. it looks really -- you guys covered your bases, which i applaud. there are two questions i had. i saw that you just -- it seems to me like you're going to be evaluating folks with respect to vmt that's related as service vmt. i see that phrase service vmt a bit. i assume that what you mean by that is that once a car comes into service as opposed to generating to get here from wherever it came, i'm wondering if you can spear to that or if you thought about that much at all and what i would like to do

is make sure that we're trying -- this kind of speaks to my next question, which maybe you can do a twofer. with respect to how you're going to be monitoring and rating the percentage of local hire. i saw you refer to the policy, and i applaud that. i didn't quite catch how you would be evaluating the compliance or how they would be effectively hiring people locally, but i do think that those two things are related, which then ultimately gets to sustainability and congestion and what have you. so i'm just hoping that you thought a little bit about that and i'm sure that you did. i would love to hear more about it. >> sure. to your first question about vmt, it actually is a metric that shows up in several places. i'm going to take your point and sort of project it outward. >> okay. >> when we think about autonomous vehicles as a not too

far distant future, they are out of service like you're not in the car, but it is still driving around. that counts in this evaluation. so even though under congestion, we're talking about service vmt, which is your point of -- i'll use this as an example. in the vehicle versus the person that's driving around, vmt finds its way into the financial impact principle under state of good repair. so we are also counting the total vmt that is just associated with that service. so, for example, the driver who picks you up, susan, if they had to drive five miles to get to you and then you took five miles, it will count as five miles in congestion and ten miles under the finance impact principle. that in fact is covered. then under sustainability, we look at people miles traveled because it's a matter of how many people are in that vehicle. are we moving people or vehicles? does that answer your first question? >> i think so. >> is that more information you

needed? >> it's more information than i needed. maybe we can talk more after, but i certainly -- i'm glad you took it into consideration because i do think that's part of the issue is because there's driving around out of service that it's something i think we -- i would like to make sure that we as a city are addressing. so it sounds like you thought about it and you're addressing it in some capacity. maybe we can talk more. i don't want to be the only one holding us up. this speaks to the point from what i understand, a lot of the reason why a lot of the state appreciates these tn cs so much is because they're job providers in towns that don't have a whole lot of alternatives. then they come here to provide services and that contributes to congestion. i appreciate the nod to the local hire policy, i'm wondering if you'll be doing or thinking through more to acknowledge the companies or the providers that

are doing their best to give opportunities to our local residents. >> your approximately is with the taken and we're happy to add that as a future consideration. other documents like our tnc report has documented as an example how many drivers had business licenses before the state granted, about where they were originally located and then driving in san francisco. we are well aware of that phenomenon. >> thank you. >> thank you, director ramos. that is good. i would remind everyone, though, in terms of the tncs providing jobs, i think the last data point i heard which was quite recently because that the average ten tour of the uber drivers is 6 months. they are not providing sustainable jobs and they're not necessarily providing a living wage, but you're right. it's a low barrier to entry. so it's a quick oh, i have a job driving an uber and then it might take them six months to figure out that it's actually not paying --

>> i think that my perception, i could be wrong, but it's such a short tenure because they're tapped into an infinite workforce that they're treating as disposable. you get one star rating now and you're gone or whatever. >> yeah. it's unfortunate. mr. logan, thank you again. do i have any other discussion questions, comments? no. thank you so much both of you for the work on that. i'm glad we'll be seeing you again with a strategy because we look forward to that very much. all right. i see i have a public speaker comment card up there, but we've closed public comment on this item. what is that on? >> this is for discussion as to whether to invoke -- >> excellent. >> madam chair, would you like to discuss 10.5 at this point? >> yes. do we have -- i believe we need to continue that item. is that correct. >> yes. >> all right. so as we continue that item, i would just remind staff to circle back with the cac since they had concerned around this

as well. as we're figuring out what to do about that one, we can also loop back with the cac to explain that as well. all right. so 10.5 we will continue. so we will move on. >> discussion as to whether or not to invoke the important client privilege. we have a comment. >> thank you, again. i note that the closed session concerns the lawsuit that the san francisco federal credit union has brought against the mta on the medallion sales program. i don't have an opinion on the legal issues in this lawsuit, but i do believe that it is part

of a larger discussion that needs to take place around the medallion sales and what to do about it. it's a broken program. it has to be resolved at some point. you can't keep people prisoners in these medallions for the rest of eternity. we've had over 120, i believe, for closures. so we're going to let it go until every last one is foreclosed. and then the problem goes away. no, i don't think so. so again, i think that something needs to be done about this, and in new york, for instance, they're beginning to come to the same conclusion. there is now a new effort, first of all, to reign in tncs. you may be aware that four taxi and delivery drivers have committed suicide in recent months over desperate economic conditions and that's causing

the city to look at this again. a recent editorial in the new york sometimes abou"newyorkt to read you these sentences. over time, the city should consider whether it owes something to drivers who sunk their savings into taxi medallions. many went into debt to buy these permits because the city promised them a monopoly on picking up passengers, a promise it has not been able to keep. so i think the simple answer is that the mta needs to make these people good and needs to find a funding source to do this. thank you. >> thank you. do i have a motion to go into closed -- i have one more public commenter. >> i want to agree with the comments that my friend mark just made. i hope you'll bear that in mind as you convene your closed session. i just also wanted to clarify your action just know on 10.5. is that to continue it later in the meeting, or is that to continue to t. to a future meeting. >> a future meeting.

>> i'm good with that, and i hope to talk to staff before then. >> thank you very much. anymore public comment on closed session? no. seeing number, it's closed. do i have a motion? do i have a second? all in favor. hearing none, we will move to a >> chairman brinkman: all to a right. so we are back into open session. all right. item 14 announcement of closed session, the mta board of directors went in closed section but no action. it would be item 15 would be appropriate for a motion to disclose or not disclose the information. a first. a second? all in favor of not disclosing? we will not disclose. >> chair, that concludes the business before you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you all for spending your tuesday with us.

>> when i open up the paper every day, i'm just amazed at how many different environmental issues keep popping up. when i think about what planet i want to leave for my children and other generations, i think about what kind of contribution

i can make on a personal level to the environment. >> it was really easy to sign up for the program. i just went online to cleanpowersf.org, i signed up and then started getting pieces in the mail letting me know i was going switch over and poof it happened. now when i want to pay my bill, i go to pg&e and i don't see any difference in paying now. if you're a family on the budget, if you sign up for the regular green program, it's not going to change your bill at all. you can sign up online or call. you'll have the peace of mind knowing you're doing your part in your household to help the environment.

>> all right, everyone. i know that there's a lot going on today and people have busy schedules so we are going to get starteded. -- started. good afternoon. my name is david compos and i'm here today in my capacity as chair of the san francisco democratic county central committee. we have here from the county committee c. francis shay, who is another member of the committee and our executive director adam mays. what you see here is the -- a united front by the elected city and county of san francisco, beginning with our mayor, mayor mark ferrell and a number of other officials. you are going to hear from some of them to make a very clear

statement and send a very strong message that we as the elected family of san francisco stand against this decisive proposal by angela leoto. we are here because we believe that our sanctuary ordnance is ultimately about protecting not only the rights of immigrants but actually keeping san francisco safe. we believe that that ordnance enhances public safety and it's important that the people of the city and county of san francisco hear directly from our elected leadership. i would end with this before i turn it over to mayor ferrell, that in some respects the damage has already been made and the damage is that this effort increases the fear and anxiety within the immigrant community that are already terrified of

having any interaction with government, local government included. in that sense it is so important for those immigrants to hear directly from our elected family. with that i'd like to introduce the mayor of the city and county of san francisco, mayor mark ferrell. >> thank you, david. i want to thank everyone for being here this afternoon. first of all i want to say that i'm proud to be here, to stand with everyone beside me and everyone who is behind me to stand with the residents of the city of san francisco. what i also say that i'm incredibly disappointed to have to be here. never in my wildest dreams did i think that the rhetoric from donald trump and washington dc would find a way to our become yard here in the city of san francisco. to me it is absolutely insane. you know, when i took office in

january 1st of the first things i did was meet with many of the people who represent our immigrant communities here in san francisco. many of our immigrant rights groups, many of the non-profits that work in our community every single day to keep our city safer. i wanted to reassure them that despite what donald trump was doing and all of the rhetoric that he was talking back in january regarding the i.c.e raids and all of the threats to our country and to the residents of our city that we would not let these threats deter us here in san francisco. we would not let the divisive resident -- rhetoric, the insane policies that i think who we are in san francisco. san francisco will never abandon our volu values. san francisco will never cower to the fear of a president who has hateful rhetoric.

we will not do that here in san francisco. we are a sanctuary city. it's in our dna. it is who we are as san francisco. we understand that our immigrant communities make our city stronger. our immigrant communities make our city safer. they make our cities more diversive, more -- more, diverse. i'm screwing that up. they make our city stronger at the end. we are talking about families who have come from other countries, fleei persucution. they are planting their children here, incredible members of our community here in san francisco and we are going to fight for their right to stay here today and forever here in san francisco. >> [applause] >> i will say that no matter

what comes out of donald trump and the federal administration in washington dc, in san francisco we are going to reject that rhetoric. we are going to standby our immigrant communities. we are going to turn our back to donald trump's idea of building walls around our country and ripping families apart with ill conceived policies and divisive, hateful rhetoric that is dividing our country right now. in san francisco we stand for something very, very different. i will say that as mayor of the city of san francisco we are going to stand side by side with our immigrant communities here in san francisco. not only is it the right thing to do, and i am proud to say this as someone born and raised in san francisco, it's the san francisco thing to do.

we are a sanctuary city, let us be clear about that. we are a sanctuary city today, we are a sanctuary city tomorrow. we will always be a sanctuary city here in san francisco. let us never forget that. thank you, everyone for being here. >> [applause] >> thank you. thank you, mr. mayor. you know, hearing from the law enforcement leadership of the city is really critical and we are proud to have with us today our city attorney, dennis herre herrera. our public defender jeff adache and then i want to turn it over to the chief law enforcement elected official for the city and county of san francisco, our district attorney george gascon. >> [applause] >> thank you, david. thank you, mr. mayor. thank you to the entire city family. you know, there are many things that we can today as to why

there is something inherently wrong with what one particular candidate for mayor in this city is trying to propose. i will not mention the name because i don't want my statement to actually be googled and give any additional amplification to that person. is message is wrong for many different reasons. i'm going to touch up on three. one is about public safety. there are studies after studies and we are down to three and a half of three decades of sanctuary policies around this nation and we know that jurisdictions that have sanctuary policies actually are safer than jurisdictions that are not. i personally can speak not only because i know there is science behind this but i can speak for personal experience having been a law enforcement official in three different jurisdictions. two that have very strong

sanctuary policies and one that didn't. i grew up in l.a. many of you know that. l.a. has had very sanctuary policy. l.a. started the first sanctuary policy in in nation. then i spent time in arizona where the contrary was the case. i can tell you case after case of people afraid to report crimes, people afraid to coming forward and participating in the social and political process in our community and how often that led to people that were here lawfully, even born here to be victimized because earlier incidents of crime were not reported by those that feared that if they were to report the crime they would be deported from this nation. now i'm here in this wonderful city that my wife and i call home and i can tell you that just in the last year we have

seen a 17% reduction in the reporting of domestic violence by immigrant communities, both in the chinese and the latino community because of fear of being deported if you come forward, if you come to the hall of justice. here we are having a candidate looking for the highest office in our county pandering to the same things that we hear from washington on a regular basis. that is wrong. secondly, in addition to the public safety message, i want to send another message and that is social responsibility message. you know, it wasn't that long ago in the late 1800s, for some it may seem like very long but when you look at the history of mankind really a short period of time when messages about the criminality about recent immigrants were being directed towards the irs and irs and

italian. they were wrong then and they are wrong now. they were not likely to be anymore criminal than the rest of the community and certainly latinos today and the new imgrants from em-- immigrants from asia are not anymore likely to be criminals. we are a nation of laws. we have a constitution that people forget when it comes to immigration and there is such a thing as due process. the reality if someone gets arrested for a felony crime does not necessarily equate to felony crimes. they are doing their job and doing it properly. they are under a preponderance of the evidence or probable cause. later we find additional evidence that as we move forward

in the case that they did not commit the crime at all or perhaps the behavior was more consistent with a misdemeanor and the case would not be prosecuted. even in the case where the case is prosecuted we don't get it right 100% of the time. our friends in the public defenders office went from time to time, not always but that, again, speaks to -- i'm just directing this to jeff. i'm just saying that, you know, the reality is because someone gets arrested for a felony doesn't necessarily mean they have committed a felony. so we have a public safety reason, we have a social responsibility reason and we have a due process reason among the many others that you are going to hear today. so i urge every san francisco resident to reject the message of hate. i urge every san francisco resident to reject political pandering for political

convenience for some. thank you. >> we are in the middle of a mayor's race and it was important to us to invite the may skr-- major candidates for mayor to be here and there is a united front. at this point i would like to ask the candidates. i'm going to do it in alphabetical order and we have right behind me the president of the board of supervisors and i know that we have a number of superv supervisors here. thank you for being here. president london reid. >> [applause] >> thank you. i'm proud to be here to stand united with the citizens of san francisco and our immigrant community to say that we will not demonize the immigrant community here in the city and county of san francisco.

our policies would shortcut the due process rights of our immigrants regardless of their immigration status, to say that our sanctuary city ordnance makes san francisco a magnet to felons across americans is wrong. to say our sanctuary city ordnance makes san francisco a more violent city is counter to the values that we hold deeply in san francisco and is troubling. other one-third of our relatives, friends and neighbors and coworkers are immigrants in the city of san francisco. immigrants are not making san francisco less safe. they never have. our city is safer because all of our residents including our undocumented residents can call the police, can be witnesses without fear of deportation. policies that undermine distrust don't make us safer. they breed fear, silence and

distrust amongst law enforcement. as we stand here today, what is clear is that our work is not done. that collectively our suit for more equitable, compassionate and inclusive city is more urgent now than ever. as dr. king would say, we need to be reminded of the fierce urgency of now. we may have a president who fuels the worse aspects of our humanity, a president who has turned resentment into political strategy and a president who wants to build walls and ban immigrants on the basis of their religion. here in san francisco we stand united for something greater. we stand for what is right. we stand for tolerance, for love, for inclusiveness and sanction way. we stand together in the light.

san francisco is and will always be a sanctuary city as our city has and will continue to welcome immigrant communities from all over the world. we are a safer city because when we come together anything is possible. thank you for all being here today. >> thank you. i know that supervisor kim is in a land use community meeting so i don't know if she will be able to take it. i want to turn it over now to another major candidate for mayor, state senator mark leno. >> [applause] >> chairman compos, thank you so much for assembling this group of elected officials today. i'm happy to stand with everyone here and stand in firm opposition to any proposal going forward to decimate our sanctuary city policies in san

francisco. the suggestion in trump terms that our sanction way city is a magnet and i'm quoting from the mayor candidate who put this forward, murderers, rapest and child moeless -- molesters is no touch thing. san francisco is a welcoming city. there's no facts, no day for such a wreckless claim. we know this country is under a shadow of mean spiritedness and failed leadership. that is no excuse for a candidate for mayor to repeat his words. i have already been accused by her in the press as standing with felons. i'm not standing with felons nor are any of the people standing behind me.

we are standing for public safety, public health and public education. let's be very clear of that. public safety you've heard from the district attorney already. public health, we want everyone in san francisco documented or other wise to make good use of our public health system. viruses and bacteria do not know immigration status. if we want our children, our families, our communities to be healthy we need to keep everyone within those communities healthy and that means everyone should have access to our public health system that will not be the case if people living in fear and living in shadow. the same for public education. if you think your child is at risk of not coming home from school someday because of the federal government sweeps or that you might not be at home to

welcome your child if he or she goes to school because of the same fear, well then you're not going to make use of our public education system. who benefits from having san francisco residents afraid of getting a public education. that creates a chronic underclass of residents. of course the child without a high school diploma has a greater likelihood of finding themselves into our criminal justice system and the loop repeats itself. public safety, public health, public education. i also have to point out that i believe this proposal runs counter to state law and would be preempted. we are a sanctuary state in california. there are 800 felony crimes that are not protected from sanctuary

status in the state nor would they be here locally. so let's ignore wild, reckless rhetoric, focus on the safety, the health and the education of every san francisco resident documented or other wise. thank you. >> [applause] >> thank you issue senator leno. as you can see we have people from different parts of the san francisco elected family. i just want to share that i acknowledge rafael mandleman is here. we have honey mahogany. also from the democratic central committee and a member of the board of supervisor bevin duffy is here. we have former supervisor -- i'm sorry, don avalos who is one of the authors of the amended sanctuary ordnance. then before i turn it over to

our supervisors i also want to acknowledge that our delegation in sacramento is proud to be here as well. i know that assembly member phil tang couldn't be here but someone from senator scott weiner's office as well. i'll turn it over to jeff. >> thank you for allowing many me to read this today. we need to promote policies that protect people living in our city. when we had donald trump and jeff sessions to mas deport people installing fear and terror in our communities we theed to need -- need to stick up for our immigrant communities. the last thing we need is an attack on our immigrants coming from within our own city. san francisco has a lot of real

issues that need to be addressing but demonizing immigrants will not help us solve our problems. it will help us instill more fear in people trying to live their lives and take care of their families. people are afraid to go to work because they don't know if they will be picked up by i.c.e. children are afraid to go to school because they don't want to leave their parents. our neighbors are living in fear and it's policies that tell people you are a part of our city, you are safe here. last year the california legislature passed sanctuary law sb54 that is moving our entire state in the right direction towards creating safe communities for everyone. this happened in part because cities like san francisco have been leaders in this movement and today we cannot -- can continue to lead by rejecting any effort to move us back ward. today all of us stand together to send a clear message that san francisco is a sanctuary city where immigrants can live in peace and harmony without fear and that policies like ours make everyone in our city safer. thank you.

>> [applause] >> thank you, senator weiner. i also want to acknowledge some members of the immigrant rights commission, mario pass, flores cong and michelle wong. with that i would like to give the last word to the two members of the board of supervisors here, supervisor peskin and roman. supervisors. >> let me start by thanking the community who came out very swiftly last friday to affirmatively denounce this absolutely insane initiative and then let me just tell you my thinking when i got a call about today's press conference. my first thought was let us not -- i think our district attorney

said this -- give my name recognition to the individual who would politically pander like this. my second thought was that silence ends up being complicity. even though the community came out it's very important for the elected officials to come out too. let me be clear, none of us are squared of -- scared of getting on the ballot and being voted on by the voters of san francisco what absolutely support our sanctuary city status. that is not what this is about. we have an obligation and responsibility to call this out because when you have that kind of silence we all know what has happened around war crimes, around genocide, around displacement and so that is why we are here today. i also want to say something about being an elected official. yeah, we have heated racers for supervisor and for mayor but

there are moral lines that one does not cross to get one's name in the nooup -- newspaper and that line has been crossed here. if you want to put a ballot initiative on about the summer of love, go with god, god bless. wonderful things. if you want to put on a divisive, hateful ballot measure like this, we've got to call foul and that's why we are all here today. thank you to every elected official and the press and the commissioners for being here. >> thank you for having me here. thank you to david compos for putting this together. what i have to adhere is what a true leader does is not demonize one of the most marginalized groups that is living every day

of their lives in fear in our city and all over this country. what a true leader does is fight the root cause issues that make our city and our country less safe. let's talk about what those real issues are. they are poverty, they are an education system that is starved for resources. there is severe inequality and then let's talk about the easy access to guns all throughout this country. if you want to protect the public safety then let's work on the real issues impacting all of our public safety. let's not demonize a group that contributes so much to the city of san francisco. thank you so much. >> [applause] >> thank you. we are actually going to give the last word to the other mayor candidate who was able to make

it. we want to thank her for being here. you have the last word, supervisor jane kim. >> thank you so much, chair compos. we are in the committee of land use where we are interrogating our neighbor over falsified information. fairly extraordinary. i also want to be here today to stand with our immigrant community and all of our residents regardless of documentation. i am fortunate to be born in this country. not every member of my family came to this country with documentation. we have a broken, broken immigration system that is incredibly difficult for anyone to mire their way through. i'm proud to be in a city that's a sanctuary city and i'm proud to stand here today with so many of our community leaders and our elected leaders in saying that we fully support the full breath

of what that means. we don't support and i don't support the initiative that is being proposed today. if we truly believe in making our city safer then we really need to proactively act to invest in our public education system, to invest in affordable housing and to really seriously look at gun control reform as supervisor ronhan has stated. this is just a false narrative that we have repeated over and over again. this is an old story. we all know better than this. we can do better than this and i'm proud to stand here today with all of the community and elected leaders. thank you very much. >> thank you. thank you all for being here. thank you to the press and thank you to the elected family for being here, to the community. if there's one message to the individual whose name shall not be mentioned that we want to send is enough.

in any native tongue [foreign language]. adjourned. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shop & dine in the 49 with within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 my name is jim woods i'm the founder of woods beer company and the proprietor of woods copy k open 2 henry adams what makes

us unique is that we're reintegrated brooeg the beer and serving that cross the table people are sitting next to the xurpz drinking alongside we're having a lot of ingredient that get there's a lot to do the district of retail shop having that really close connection with the consumer allows us to do exciting things we decided to come to treasure island because we saw it as an amazing opportunity can't be beat the views and real estate that great county starting to develop on treasure island like minded business owners with last week products and want to get on the ground floor a no-brainer for us when you you, you buying local goods made locally our supporting small business those are not created an, an sprinkle scale with all the machines and

one person procreating them people are making them by hand as a result more interesting and can't get that of minor or anywhere else and san francisco a hot bed for local manufacturing in support that is what keeps your city vibrant we'll make a compelling place to live and visit i think that local business is the lifeblood of san francisco and a vibrant community >> good morning, everyone and thank you for coming my name is rosy form treasurer of the united states and the form of empowerment 2020. >> yeah. >> empowerment 2020 is an initiative to durnl encourage a million women we 2020 to go in

leaders positions it is request quality day and the one hundred year of the 19 amendment that give woman the right to vote joining me on stage a margo the ceo of ma tell. >> (clapping.) >> 74 percent have been girls in middle school express interest in office only girls are expressing an interest in computer science 50 percent less graduating are for girls than thirty years ago i've spent 8 years of the treasurer of the united states to have a portrait on the photo in our public engagement process there were one hundred of women overlooked in the history of our country many tops will be discussed and

empowerment 2020 conference everything there empowering young women and girls to be the future leader to encourage women to get into stem education and getting into nasa and google and making sure that they are part of tech economy. >> the second part of empowerment 2020 is women money and power to put women in so and so positions for the corporate fleet and elected office the third part of empowerment 2020 are the conferences their action oriented women have flatlined at 20 percent on that percentage one and 20 percent women a in congress that is stagnated if we get up to thirty percent fabulous 80 percent would be amazing that conversation is equality will be something we're used to as pair the culture i'd like to that that will be done in 2020 but if -

>> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their showing up and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 san francisco owes must of the charm to the unique characterization of each corridor has a distinction permanent our neighbors are the economic engine of the city. >> if we could a afford the lot by these we'll not to have the kind of store in the future the kids will eat from some restaurants chinatown has phobia one of the best the most unique

neighborhood shopping areas of san francisco. >> chinatown is one of the oldest chinatown in the state we need to be able allergies the people and that's the reason chinatown is showing more of the people will the traditional thepg. >> north beach is i know one of the last little italian community. >> one of the last neighborhood that hadn't changed a whole lot and san francisco community so strong and the sense of partnership with businesses as well and i just love north beach community old school italian

comfort and love that is what italians are all about we need people to come here and shop here so we can keep this going not only us but, of course, everything else in the community i think local businesses the small ones and coffee shops are unique in their own way that is the characteristic of the neighborhood i peace officer prefer it is local character you have to support them. >> really notice the port this community we really need to kind of really shop locally and support the communityly live in it is more economic for people to survive here. >> i came down to treasure

island to look for a we've got a long ways to go. ring i just got married and didn't want something on line i've met artists and local business owners they need money to go out and shop this is important to short them i think you get better things. >> definitely supporting the local community always good is it interesting to find things i never knew existed or see that that way. >> i think that is really great that san francisco seize the vails of small business and creates the shop & dine in the 49 to support businesses make people all the residents and visitors realize had cool things are made and produced in san