available to survivors each step of the way and hold the city systems accountable. the trial for my rape finally took place two months ago and i was on the stand for three hours and during questions from the defense attorney, like, why didn't you scream... >> supervisor cohen: i'm sorry, your public comment is over but maybe you can finish up with your last sentence. >> okay. i come here today to just say that it's urgent that you pass the sharp ordinance today as a critical step and to keep on going. >> supervisor cohen: thank you, thank you for sharing your testimony. we're grateful for it. any other member of the public to comment on item 14? seeing none, public comment is closed. and colleagues, i would like to make a motion to accept the amendments. if we could take that without objection? without objection. and i would like to approve and send to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended.

oh, i'm sorry, supervisor stefani, please. >> supervisor stefani: i wanted to thank supervisor ronen again for her leadership on this and the amazing staff and for all of the survivors who have come out to share their stories and i have been so moved by that. i have met with many and i thank them for taking time to meet with me as well and i'm very happy to support this legislation and to see it go forward. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: supervisor fewer any remarks? all right, thank you. so, again, i make a motion to approve this legislation and send it to the full board with a positive recommendation (please stand by)

-- to point out that the amendments that you aadopted last week actually were in some part aimed at accommodating the concerns from the p.v.t.s and that is why the new category for receipts above $50 million was included. >> supervisor cohen: all right, thank you. and public comment. i have two cards, first nima rahira and then kristen shoe

macker and any other members would like to come, please step up. >> i'm here to ask you to please and respectfully to exclude private transit vehicles from this tax initiative. there's only one private transit vehicle operator and chariot inc and it's in stark contrast to what this initiative is intended to target. unlike it they are w2 and not 1099 workers. they have rejected the independent contractor model. why is this important? chariot pays a payroll tax for its drivers. the companies with independent contracted drivers do not pay a payroll tax for their drivers. and chariot drivers are also representatives of teamsters local 665 while independent contractors don't have the benefit of organizing. and chariot invests in high skills training for san francisco residents and nearly half of chariot's drivers live in bayview and hunter's point and they pay for a point for each driver and pays an hourly

wage. and unlike it they are permitted under the city. and they pay a fee for a number of vehicles permitted and that amount is $90,000 and this number will soon be $140,000. and chariot shares its data with san francisco in real-time and among other things this allows for administrative enforcement of permit requirements through citations and fines. chariot is governed by criteria to complement public transit and not to compete with public transit and chariot reduces wear and tear on greenhouse emissions. for every chariot on the road we remove 10 occupancy vehicles and this amounts to thousands of cars off the san francisco roads every week. so i want to thank you all for what you do for this city and i appreciate supervisor peskin's effort here and i appreciate your consideration. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you, next speaker.

>> i am kristin schumacher, and i wanted to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this measure but to share some of our union's concerns about what happened in the last session regarding amendments. initially this measure included an early sunset of the payroll tax exemption which was taken out. and our concern is this is a time when the city needs revenue for infrastructure and improving public services and that we shouldn't be chipping away from potential revenues in this measure and our concern is that this will continue in the future and i want to caution the board against that. and the twitter tax break had allowed the companies to avoid over $60 million in taxes and that early sunset of the provision would have meant around $7 million in additional and potential revenue. and considering the size of the tax break thus far, and the impact that the companies like twitter have had on our city i think that would have been fair

to include that early sunset. so i want to thank you for bringing this measure but caution against further amendments that would reduce its potential revenue. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. any other speakers? >> good morning, peter strauss on the board of the san francisco transit riders and the member of the transportation justice coalition and we want to thank supervisor peskin for all of the work in the past few years that led up to this. and i want to thank supervisor fewer and your colleagues on the full board for joining as co-sponsors of this measure which we strongly support. as you know the voters passed it by two-thirds in 2016. and also many people were part of the task force late last year and early this year which supported an investment program in transportation but failed to develop a revenue source to

support it. so we look to this as addressing the revenue issues as best we can. and we also recognize that we have a lot of work ahead of us and we look forward to working with you on developing the allocation strategy that needs to accompany this measure as we go forward. but today i want to thank you for your support and i urge the committee to pass this to the full board for it to pass recommendation. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you for your testimony. any other members of the public that would like to testify or give public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor peskin, is there any last-minute remarks? >> supervisor peskin: if i may i would like to address some of the comments from the members of the public. oops, i guess that my time is up. >> supervisor cohen: please, continue. >> supervisor peskin: regard to the comments on behalf of chariot. first of all, i want to acknowledge and to appreciate

the fact that chariot does indeed use union labor and is not involved in the 1099 race to the bottom. and that albeit with a few hiccups has had a relatively cooperative relationship with the san francisco m.t.a. and making sure that they don't compete against each other in ways that diminish the public transit. having said that, the fact that corporate players behave well does not mean that they should not be included in the tax. i mean, for instance, because hotels have agreements with unite here and local 2 and give those people w2s instead of 1099s doesn't mean that we shouldn't have a hotel tax to pay for arts and other things in san francisco. so i think if we go down the road that because an

organization is using our streets and chooses to have union labor that they become exempt from taxation or fees is a dangerous road to go down and i am hopeful that the provisions that we put in relative to the additional tier at $50 million, which was really designed to address some of the p.v.t. concerns would take care of those issues. with regard to the comment on behalf of the international federation of professional technical engineers, let me say that while i was not on the board when the so-called twitter tax was passed, the reality is that it sunsets in may of 2019 and it seemed to me that we would -- and, yes, i put it in in the beginning but it was really a distraction from the main event which is the tax that is before us and for five months

it did not seem to be worth putting into this. that is why i removed it. but going forward this is actually a revenue source that will be here for many years to fund transportation and other city needs, but -- and i appreciate the comments of the local 21, but i really don't think that five months of a tax that is sunsetting by its own terms is worth putting in the measure. >> supervisor cohen: all right, thank you, i appreciate that. all right, colleagues, i don't think if there's any other discussions or debate that we need to have on item 16 and i would like to make a motion to move this item to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: roll call vote please. >> supervisor cohen: let's take a roll call vote. >> clerk: supervisor fewer? >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor stefani.

>> no. >> clerk: two ayes and one no. >> supervisor cohen: this passes. madam clerk, the last item is 17. >> clerk: item 17, motion ordering submitted to the voters at an election to be held on november 6, 2018 and ordinance amending the business and tax regulation code to propose an additional growth receipt tax on growth receipt from cannibas business activities and the first $500,000 and exempting retail sales of medicinal cannibas. >> supervisor cohen: thank you for hearing this item today. over the past several weeks my office has spent dozens of hours speaking with advocates presenting at the cannibas tax force -- we have been on calls with the california growers association and, of course, in constant consultation with the kocomptroller's office. and i recognize safia liter.

and they are concerned about the black market thriving under the proposed structure and i understand that they feel that an additional gross receipt tax limits the quote, normalization process, end quote. but i want to let you know that i disagree and i think that we're a long way from normalization. thank you. we no -- we need better enforcement strategy against the black market. we need to fund the equity program. and above all else to make sure that it is successful. we need to give the workforce development programs that this body mandated in the process back in november unlicensed operators are a problem. but they will not go away on their own. the city needs the revenue to normalize this industry. i'm very sympathetic to the concerns but we have a difference of opinion on how to solve this problem.

so today i want to propose a compromise amendment. i am proposing that we remove the, quote, phase-in year currently scheduled for 2020. and to have a full rate effect of 2021 to be the first year of impelementation. this allows us to move forward with the plans with the city but also gives the city and the upcoming board to address the cannibas business in potential cannibas businesses in potential overhaul of the business tax program in 2020. so this allows us to move forward but also allows the industry to have some breathing room as it begins to normalize. since the ordinance does give the board the power to reduce or to delay the rates we will have the power to delay, to reduce, or otherwise change the tax rates in that particular process. these are amendments that we passed last week. and i believe that this compromise gives everyone the

space to continue this conversation in the context of the greater business tax structure without kicking the can down the road. and i'm also including an amendment that i discussed last week in committee which we are calling the wayfair amendment. i have circulated the amendments to each of you. this would impose a gross receipts tax on those businesses based outside of the city but distributing inside san francisco. it will -- it will level the playing field between the made-in-san francisco city and those operators that are operating outside of the city but conducting business inside of the city. given that we still need a bit more time to understand the legal and the fiscal implications of this particular amendment i am proposing that we duplicate the file and add this amendment to the new version. we can take the next week to further study the issue and move forward with one of two versions

next week. and before i move on i have a question for the city attorney's office. thank you, mr. gibner. on the issue that has arisen in many of my conversations, is the question of our medical cannibas exemption. and it's a very straightforward question, why does it apply only to retail? so my understanding is that it's due to state regulation. can you perhaps confirm that on the record and explain the issue a little bit to us. >> sure. deputy city attorney john gibner. the problem is that under the state scheme upstream cannibas isn't designated for medical purposes versus recreational. and so there would not be a way currently for the city to

determine whether -- whether a business is -- is -- or a particular business is working as medicinal or recreational. so there's no way for us to determine administratively whether you fit a medicinal exception because the state scheme doesn't break it down that way. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you. i don't know if that was helpful or -- it wasn't hurtful but i don't know if it was necessarily bringing the clarity that i was looking for. >> okay, maybe let me try again. >> supervisor cohen: yes, try one more time. [laughter]. >> if we tax medicinal and recreational differently there would be no way for us to -- and the manufacturer says that we're making medicinal and they tell us that and there would be no way for us to verify that they are -- they are manufacturing

medicinal product as opposed to recreational because the state doesn't distinguish their business to be manufacturing for both or either. and we would have no way of auditing and verifying that they are creating medicinal product. >> supervisor cohen: that's actually very helpful. colleagues, do we have any questions or need clarification? i'll go to public comment and i have a stack of cards and recognize david goldman and then we have jessica sharp and cynthia kenness, and rob king. if i haven't called your name please come up and speak. hello. mr. goldman. >> good morning, supervisors. and thank you for making some very needed amendments to help improve the tax measure. my name is david goldman and i'm the president of the san francisco chapter of the cannibas policy oriented club.

i think that the amendments that you have made are good but i think that it needs to go further. there needs to be a way to exempt cultivators who have medical licenses, manufacturers, testers and distributors who have medical licenses from taxation. because, clearly, what will happen is that the taxes they pay will will be passed down to patients. patients are being taxed enough. since july 1st, our tax rate has gone up 50% prior to 2018. and all it has done is to led to many of my friends in the medical cannibas community going back to the black market. they got sticker shock when there was a 15% increase on january 1st and there was a 35% increase for cultivation and testing fees on july 1st. that's 50% plus the sales tax is nearly 59%. adding this extra tax, even indirectly, will eventually trickle down and hurt patients. secondly, we think that the tax

rate should be ecequal with other businesses and why should cannibas be higher than other businesses? and, finally, i believe that the money should be earmarked for helping the applicants with no-cost loans and they should also -- we should also earmark the money to help low-income medical cannibas patients in the city get their cannibas at lower or no cost. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi, i am jessica sharp and i'm a cannibas entrepreneur and co-founder of an organization called new era. i wanted to share today that the supervisors' pro poeing posal requires the cannibas businesses to pay a tax rate of 4 to 51 times of what other san francisco businesses pay. i'm a recovering technologists that moved into cannibas because of the arts and because of the community that it fosters. and there are very few of us that are making the transition

right now and we are actively working currently as an incubator for the equity applicants. there are people who have money and resources who are wanting to connect and work with those who do not. and we just need time and we need the ability to make that happen before the larger organizations come in and push out all of the small mom and pop and independent little companies that are starting out right now. so that's my request. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. thank you for your statement. next speaker. >> hi, i am cynthia with new era also. we are applying as an equity incubator and have seen the different equity applicants that are in the pipeline and seeing the struggles that they've been having with regards to not having enough money to procure real estate space or even creating a cultivation farm. and these higher gross receipt

taxes are disincentivizing not only the black market cultivators that have already been out there but new ones that want to come into play. so if we're trying to not perpetuate the unregulated market these extraordinary high taxes have created disincentives to licensure. and so the licenses businesses are at a disadvantage relative to unlicensed businesses. and high local state tax in san francisco will only exacerbate the disadvantage and more and more compliant businesses will be forced to shut down. if you want to normalize with the state and to help us to normalize the cannibas industry we are passionate and compassionate professionals who love what we do for our patients and customers and neighborhoods, employees and families. we simply want to be treated fairly and to be part of the great economy in san francisco and california. so one question that we wanted to ask was, what is the public

policy justification for taxing cannibas more heavily than other industries? >> supervisor cohen: next speaker. >> hi, i am rob king, with a small license cultivation company here in san francisco. last week i spoke about our company and how our team is proud to be in san francisco. and i work with the state university research on worker health and safety and how we broadly seek to be a positive example of doing it right as indoor growers. however, i still can't wrap my head around the taxes as the last speaker said. we're still being taxed at a rate far beyond that of any other business in the city. and i haven't heard a compelling argument for that. i don't like to compare cannibas with alcohol but, indeed, the health implications for alcohol are greater and in 2010 a much smaller proposed gross receipt tax on alcohol failed and this was earmarked to help some of those issues. this tax is not earmarked to

address any of those issues and that might come up with cannibas, and the gross receipts taxes, smaller amounts for much larger industries are also receiving pushback. i think that we just heard about a 1% proposed for those making over $50 million. and the cutoff is an issue at $500,000 versus a million for other businesses. further, i'd like to put cultivation into context. an article in "forbes" called "cultivation, a raise to the bottom." this makes sense when viewed in the view of agriculture which is what we're part of. the get big or get out model still haunts our food system and making it hard for small farmers across country. small cultivators, the only kind that can exist within san francisco face a similar outlook. if there's any hope of a model beyond the traditional legacy of get big or get out this segment of the industry especially must

be supported. far from arguing for exemptions or further resources here today, i'm simply asking that we are taxed as any other small business brave enough to call san francisco home. and i thank you for your consideration. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker. >> hi, my name is sarah rodriguez and i'm a small business owner of a manufacturing company here in san francisco, a cannibas manufacturing company. does this work? sfgov-tv, the overhead, please. the overhead, please. is your item on there? all right, one more time, sfgov. oh, turn it this way? oh, okay. so it needs -- i can just raise

it up. i'm -- i'm responding specifically to the memorandum that was sent out last week regarding the predicted effect of the city tax on cannibas businesses. oh, that's fine. i can just move it. on cannibas businesses. the memo did not contain references or specifically link to the data which it cites. so mainly this claimed that a percent of this tax could be absorbed by the consumer and this was asserted by the claim that the gross revenues have increased by 25% in the last year. and ignoring the fact that we just transitioned to recreation and so that 25% increase actually could be due to the number of purchases. the study goes on to say that some amount of this could be due to increase in price. however, we have had not seen

any data to substantiate this. we'd like to advocate a data-driven strategy to best serve both the city of san francisco and the emerging cannibas industry. if we represent the san francisco tax revenue by the multiplication of the tax with the price at which the good is sold and the number of purchases, -- >> supervisor cohen: thank you, i'm sorry but your time is up and maybe finish your last sentence. >> sure. my point is that demand is very high in dispensaries and lines are very long. so please go to the dispensaries. but the availability of legal goods is very, very low. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. >> thank you. >> presiden.>> supervisor cohent speaker. >> good morning, supervisors and my name is kenneth michael cohen

and i'd like to thank you for the progress that you have made on this issue, including the amendments that you have offered. i'd just like to say that the taxes are killing me. i am a low-income retired person and using medical cannibas and the taxes are killing me now already and i am just wondering how i'm going to be able to afford it with even additional taxes coming up soon with the gross receipts tax. i would ask you for parity in the cannibas industry with the gross receipts tax with other -- with other types of businesses in san francisco with what they're paying. and not simply to have a higher tax on cannibas simply because it's cannibas. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> sfgov-tv could i have the overhead, please. hello president cohen, supervisor fewer and supervisor

stefani. thank you again for hearing this issue. i'm appreciative from the bottom of my heart for all of the progress that we've made on this issue involving tax. delaying the implementation gives us a chance to have a data-driven conversation and i'm dubious that the board of supervisors would ever choose to lower a tax. i don't know if that's going to happen or not so that's frightening for me. but for the interest of the public and everybody watching at home i'd like it talk about i.r.s. code 280e. this code denies the deduction for any expense in a business trafficking in a controlled substance. what this effectively means is that cannibas businesses can't write off their rent and electricity and they can't write off their employee cost. when you can't deduct those things you go from about 21% to a 49% tax rate. so that's just a broad conversation of what we're already facing at the federal level. and, believe me, if i could go to washington, d.c., and i had

the funds and they wanted to listen to me about this i'd talk to them but i don't think they would. so you guys, thank you for listening to me. and then so that's the federal tax burden that we're under and we face state excise taxs and we'll pay our payroll taxes and then we're now facing a gross receipts tax. and we're facing a gross receipts tax that is four to 50 times the rate of other businesseses and i really feel that the cannibas industry will be -- will have an additional tax but i would like that tax to feel fair to the industry. and i think that a double tax of the current payroll would be very fair. industry-wide that's kind of where we've all landed and we like the idea of a double tax. but the four x to the 50x, when you look at the data it's just frightening. okay. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker.

>> hello, supervisors, thank you for listening to our comments. i appreciate you. and the headway that you've already made, pushing it off really helps the equity applicants. i'm a equity partner and i hope to work on equity program in its early stages from a business standpoint. and just from a patient standpoint and an activist i want to remind you guys that alcohol and cigarettes kill people every day. cannibas doesn't kill people and there is no death toll for cannibas so there should be no death toll on cannibas because there's no death toll from can bass. so a lot of the reasons that we tax or have extra taxes on these industries is because they are, you know, they kill people and they're problematic. whereas this is the opposite, and we heal patients. i know personally of hundreds of

patients that have been healed by cannibas through cancer, autism, child leukemia, a number of different diseases that modern medicine haven't been able to help with. and then also if we want to bring in manufacturers and have distribution in san francisco, i mean, we won't be competitive if the tax is too high with other places which will force the retailer to look outside of san francisco which will squeeze out any taxes from manufacturing and distribution and so on and so forth. because of the real estate in general and how expensive it is to either find real estate, pay for real estate and do business in san francisco. and so if there is a tax i would say that it should go directly to the equity incubator program or something to help the equity applicants continue to flourish because there will be that tax

so if the tax is put into a program to to help it could counter. >> supervisor cohen: thank you, next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. jim lazarus, the san francisco chamber of commerce and i appreciate the amendments made and what is pending before you today. i think that a deferral of any tax collections is the right thing to do. we have to go back to gross receipts generally and the ordinance from 2012 needs to be amended. you have heard me say we have a tale of a payroll tax next year of .5% and we base this on $410 million of business taxes in 2007 -- pardon me, 2011 and it's now $800 million of business taxes collected. based on that payroll growth. so you're getting a combination of gross receipts and payroll tax that t continues. our problem is with any disparaging rates that target

businesses individually rather than as a whole. our problem with these rates is that as we found around the state of california that they're not collecting the revenue because high rates are continuing an underground cannibas economy. and we need to get tax rates correct and we need to do that in conformity with the industry that you're trying to regulate. so we think that it's a step in the right direction. we believe that the rates should be closer to the rates paid of any retail, any wholesale, any manufacturerring, and that this industry shouldn't be unfairly targeted. thank you very much. >> supervisor cohen: thank you, next speaker. >> you know, this is an example of the board being underminded by statements like this. i made several demonstrations pertaining to taxes of twitter and five other high-tech companies. i have demonstrated where twitter has gotten free money pertaining to payroll taxes at a minimum of $217 billion.

and this is a false narrative where you do not collect payroll taxes that you create jobs and that you making revenue for the city. twitter and other high-tech companies is laughing at you. everybody is paying payroll taxes but them. the whole city employees are paying payroll taxes except them. so that's a false narrative. and again as far as taxing the cannibas and everything that is concerned, how come these type of rules and regulations is not being applied to twitter? you need to audit your tax business with twitter and i've already demonstrated a graph there earlier this week on taxes. it's showing that payroll taxes has trickled down on the graph and not creating revenue for the city. and i want to add to you off topic here that i had a demonstration last night before the police commission pertaining

to sexual assault and when you get time i would like you to check out that demonstration. my main issue was to catch the rapist in these cold case files and not just get a bunch of rules and regulations to administrate the treatment of the victims which is good too. but i want to catch the rapists who are floating in the city and county of san francisco and throughout the jurisdiction of the bay area. >> well, cigarettes are taxed heavily and alcohol is taxed heavily and so should marijuana be and, frankly, alcohol is not taxed enough. also, unfortunately, the legalization of marijuana appears to have encouraged market diversification with growers in mexico and turning to poppies and pharmaceuticals and turning towards mass manufacturer of opioids. so i had hope that the

legalization of marijuana might push out prozac and valium but it doesn't look like that happened. so i -- also san francisco has an interest in the lawsuit against pharmaceutical and i hope and assume that you do. >> supervisor cohen: any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item? all right, seeing none, public comment is closed. all right, colleagues, there's a couple actions that we need to take. first i'd like to make a motion to accept the amendment removing the 2020 tax implementation date. may i -- yes, all right, seconded by supervisor fewer. and i can take that without objection. thank you. and i'd like to make a motion to duplicate the file and i'll take that without objection. thank you. and i'd like to amend the new file with the wayfair amendment,

okay, without objection, thank you. and then, colleagues, i don't know if you have any questions or comments before we take our final vote? supervisor stefani or fewer? >> we are required to continue this item to the next meeting. >> supervisor cohen: i will make a motion to continue to july 26th so we can continue the conversation. okay. all right, well, then i'll make a motion to continue one week to july 26th so we can continue the discussion. >> clerk: would you like to consider both files? >> supervisor cohen: yes, continue both files and i'll take that without objection. thank you. madam clerk, any other business before us. >> clerk: no further business. >> supervisor cohen: okay, ladies and gentlemen, we are adjourned. thank you. (♪)

>> providing excellent customer service to each other so that we can succeed together. because we're a small division out here, and we're separated from the rest of the p.u.c., a lot of people wear a lot of different hats. everyone is really adept not just at their own job assigned to them, but really understanding how their job relates to the other functions, and then, how they can work

together with other functions in the organization to solve those problems and meet our core mission. >> we procure, track, and store materials and supplies for the project here. our real goal is to provide the best materials, services and supplies to the 250 people that work here at hetch hetchy, and turn, that supports everyone here in the city. i have a very small, but very efficient and effective team. we really focus hard on doing things right, and then focus on doing the right thing, that benefits everyone. >> the accounting team has several different functions. what happens is because we're so remote out here, we have small groups of people that have to do what the equivalent are of many people in the city. out here, our accounting team handles everything. they love it, they know it inside out, they cherish it, they do their best to make the system work at its most

efficient. they work for ways to improve it all the time, and that's really an amazing thing. this is really unique because it's everybody across the board. they're invested it, and they do their best for it. >> they're a pretty dynamic team, actually. the warehouse team guys, and the gals over in accounting work very well together. i'm typically in engineering, so i don't work with them all day on an every day basis. so when i do, they've included me in their team and treated me as part of the family. it's pretty amazing. >> this team really understanding the mission of the organization and our responsibilities to deliver water and power, and the team also understands that in order to do that, we have a commitment to each other, so we're all committed to the success of the organization, and that means providing excellent customer service to each other so that we can

succeed you. >> well to the epic center are you ready for the next earthquake did you know if you're a renter you can get earthquake shushes we'll take to the earthquake authorities hi welcome to another episode i'm the chief resilience officer for san francisco i'm joined by my good friends for the earthquake authority we're at the el cap center for the city and county of san francisco started in 2013 to get the community and talk about the

risk we think about earthquake if usual great city you'll see one of the demonstrates we've built the model home and i encourage other episodes we'll be retroactively retrofitting and showing you as property owners to employ you work for the california earthquake authority talk about your role and earthquake shirnls up think the viewers want to know if you're a renter or property owner how the insurance issues. >> i'm the chief mitigation officer or c e a a property line funded pubically managed entity that provides earthquake shiners for one to four units and mobile owners to come down and renters throughout the state of california. >> what make the c e a deft. >> we work with 19 participates the insurer that

sells you, your homeowner policy you're not obligated to buy it but you can buy a policy. >> am i covered with homeowners insurance. >> no california homeowners understand their homeowners insurance doesn't cover earthquake they need a separate policy if you're an shiners you can get the earthquake insurance policy. >> so explain why it is for the c e a is deft if a traditional insurance agency. >> irreverent so in the 80s the state of california passed a law that requires any company that writes the policies to over earthquake insurance the homeowners are not required by commissioner cranshaw can bye there was so much loss they were going to stop writing the insurance policies for

earthquakes they wanted to stop a serious insurance policy. >> we're talking about the homeownership's buying the earthquake shiners but 70 percent are renters what's my opposite. >> the option for renter the earthquake be insurance company is affordable i think people don't realize just exactly what it covers it covers damaged property but loss of use if you have to be under a building they have a quarter main that was broken as well as emergency repair if interests glass breaks in the carpet you need to be in our unit that's whether earthquake is important. >> you're title you're the excessive mitigation officer for the state of california when i think of insurance i don't think about mitigation. >> so as part of public safety mission the c e a started to put

aside mitigation loss fund 5 percent of invested income and when i joined the company 34 years ago we had $45 million to make a difference for moving and incentivizing and mitigation for california homeowners to structure engineering a unique opportunity to cervical homeowners to help them to mitigate the equivalent. >> whether an owner or renter i want to find more information about earthquake insurance where should i go. >> earthquake authority.com not only information about insurance but a calculated figures and as of january lots of deductible and 25 percent if a homeowner mitigate their hope up to 20 percent off their premium as an incentive for the work. >> what does mitigate the home

mean. >> strengthen, renovate, retrofit through a home particularly older to earlier codes and you put in adding streamlining maybe collar bolts to tie to the foundation or to the wall so it is braced to earthquake can be very, very affordable and really makes a difference. >> thank you very much for being with us i encourage the viewers not only to checkout the earthquake authority but we'll talk about i've got time i've b with 25 jobs so for young people one of my favorite days in san francisco thank you, thank you to the companies that are hiring. >> (clapping.) >> the city of san francisco and united way are calling an

employers to have jobs for youth in 2012 president obama issued a challenge and the challenge was get disconnected young people connected to jobs and so mayor ed lee said we should lead this challenge that the city will have 25 hundred jobs that first summer 6200 jobs and been building. >> i'll high are ups we like to pledge 50 jobs so for youth this summer. >> excellent. thank you. >> a large part of the jobs it did manual resource center started off a a youth program and our first year 35 percent of the young people working full-time we know there the pressors looking for committed young people the resource fair attracts over

6 hundred people if all over the city and the greater bay area. >> we have public and private partnership the employers came from hertz rent a car and many private sector jobs sea have the city staff so the airport is here, starbuck's is here we've been retail we have restaurants, we have offices and so the young people will get an opportunity to partner search warrant with so many of the great champions for jobs. >> for the past 5 years we've hired over 3 willed youth to work as business traces they have been promoted to supervisors. >> if you're doing a job at starbuck's the opportunity for them allows them to understand math if tire working at anothers

architectural firm understanding debris or a media to understand reading and writing differently those are opportunities that the mayor is clear he wanted to provide we're going to be do mock interviews helping young people that the resumes a it pulls them to the career opportunities and building inspection commission make sure they're prepared for those opportunity educational and in terms of their preparation skills by the time many of them leave they'll leave with jobs and new relationships building their network of the opportunity to thrive and i think i could focus and i check around the booths to see had is available i'm hoping to get a job but have employers you know employers give practice. >> i feel this will be a great way to look for jobs we can do

this like you get paid. >> when our young people walk we capture their information so we can do follows up and we have a room that has a our computer lab an opportunity for them to do cover letters and talk about updating their profile and i think how you do things on the internet we help quam and they can update tare resume and can look in interviews and on the spot job officers we hire about one hundred young people today lee alone it is exciting out of that it is if they come through with one hundred walk out with a job. >> we'll rock and roll i guess in the job interviews it went great. >> as a youth we get to go through experiences 3 builds a great foundation gymnasium a

positive outlook and more importantly confidence. >> we really want to do at the end of the day exist a young person with the possibility of what we can be and do we have them go home i want to get there let me connection with those folks and ultimately got on the path. >> good morning good morning caitlin i'm caitlin lopez 23 years old i moved out to california and san francisco, california had i was about 8 years old and actually put in foster care at the age of 9 or 10 had a baby at the 16 years old so i've kind of had this crazy like youth experience. >> despite the challenges she faced caitlin finished high

school and take advantage of program. >> i heard will mayor ed lee's program through my social worker and i interviewed with entrepreneurs after i was matched walking sweet spots office i thought imitated not been in that type of office ones i got into the office with my supervisor we boptd and i got a call from h.r. i got the position and i'm in. >> i have. >> we hired merry for 8 weeks and saw how she did she was only going to work 8 weeks but at the end question offered her a position part time. >> i have those traits it has been great working here my term of 5 weeks was pretty much like

family supporting each other i feel like the mayors job program helped me to get in job without the jobs plus program i - i probably would have not even had a job. >> in her case she's a mother of two now going to school full-time and making it happen so if she can do it differently anyone that has a willingness to try at least try to make it can do it. >> those programs are amazing they're so important for young adults to really go out there and make a better future for themselves and despite not having a traditional - you can go out there based on the programs that's what they're for they want to help you succeed.

>> we'll be committing to 25 jobs in the tech. >> the san francisco rec and park is hiring 3 and 50 youth that summer . >> (clapping.) >> and only child born in the office development allocation to r so for me is a network of the community that made the difference no way i'll be with united way this network was here for me this was personal and professional so important we create the opportunities who know the next ceo or champion of the community is coming today to find their path. >> that's the roll in san francisco we really by helping each other out >> (clapping.) >> the goal for 2017 to create 5 thousand jobs for youth if you want more information invite them at sf youth.org

>> i want to welcome everyone to this very special event. celebrating san francisco's graduation to a 15-dollar an hour at minimum wage. good stuff. [applause] i'm pat mulligan. the director of the office of standards and enforcement. i want to thank everyone for attending this event. i know it is kind of a friday before a long weekend, and some people think it should be a whole week. i appreciate yourdi