right? >> no. no, there has to be a step between the printing out and the department receiving it. there is a couple of options. if someone -- so ideally, people have printers at home. and then they can print the accessible ballot at home. then use the envelope that was part of the regular vote-by-mail that we mailed to the voter. that's the ideal situation. however, if someone doesn't have a printer at home, one option that is available is to save it on a usb stick and then take the usb stick to the library and print out the ballot. and this week, i just learned there is another service that the library provides, which is more useful than usb stick. the library has a service called printer on. and people can upload a file using this printer on service to

secure servers that the library maintains. then the user has to designate what branch and what printer at the branch is eligible to actually print out that file. and the user has 24 hours from the time of sending the file from the home system to the library system to go to the branch, or to the main library, to print out that ballot. when the user -- i used it actually this week. so it's rather straight forward. i tried it out. i tried it out for a ballot. so a user will choose a user name which could be a first name. then the user picks a password. then there is a reference number attached to the record, which it isn't necessary to download the ballot, but the system recommends that people record the reference number. so basically, the user has to create a user name, which can be

their first name. i picked jane over at the library, because she was the one that was going to print it out. i did a simple password, 2018. and then designated the file to be printed out at a printer, a black and white printer on the third floor of the copyroom. jane went to the third floor, printed out the ballot. so if someone doesn't have a printer, the printer on system is probably the best way if they can get to a library, and the easiest way. it doesn't require usb stick. to get the ballot back to us, it has to be in an envelope. so if someone were to show up with a ballot and they signed it and they put the residential address -- technically, we would accept it, but that's not the

way we're supposed to do it. ideally, the law requires the ballots to be in envelopes when they come back to the elections. so on the envelope is the address and the signature. we're to compare the signature to the signatures we have when they registered to vote. we look at the signatures on the envelopes and signatures in our database and make the comparison. if someone prints out a ballot and they don't use department

-- the usb sticks may not be formatted. that is what i think. but the printer on is seamless. >> co-chair blacksten: great. all right. if we don't have any other questions from council members, let's go to staff. are there any staff members? >> i have a comment. this is nicole. thank you very much for coming. i want to say a couple of things, maybe, john, if you could explain for now why it's not possible to electronically transmit your ballot.

we heard about it needs to be in an envelope, but is there anything else you can say about that, because i know it's a point of concern, especially from individuals who would find that piece difficult. the printing piece. >> the printing or the transmission? >> no, the printing. so as far as i understand, if you could just explain why we can't electronically transmit ballots, that would be helpful. >> there are instances where ballots can be transmitted. so overseas voters can fax their ballots back. >> but we can't take the ballot from the voting system and directly send it somewhere, right? i'm just trying to clarify why there is this intermediate step? >> well, one the system is not set up for that.

also, there is no -- the system, we don't -- the department is not issuing ballots to specific voters using the system. so the whole internet voting, online voting, that's a whole different conversation. so when the ballot is issued from this accessible vote-by-mail system, it's not being issued to a specific person within our registration database. we don't know who is getting the ballots. so the system is set up to maintain confidentiality of voters. so if someone were to send us a ballot back electronically, we would have any record that -- we wouldn't know what to do with it, because there is nothing set up to validate the votes on there. we can't, for domestic voters who are not in the military, we cannot accept images.

like the military overseas voters can fax their ballots back to us and we can accept that fax of their signature, but anybody who is domestic, not in the military, must be original signature on the envelope. so the process doesn't allow for it. that's the factors on the ground. now as far as theoretical, the reasons why people don't like electronic voting or the sending of ballot content online, there is a chance someone could hack into it and change the votes. that is potential something that could happen with printer on, but it's outside the voting system, so it's not something that i control. it's not something that is certified. so if someone used the printer on service, they would want to verify the information they printed out was the information selected. >> co-chair blacksten: very good.

any other questions from staff? >> not at this time. >> co-chair blacksten: very good. so then, i think that will conclude your presentation. and we appreciate you coming, mr. arntz. >> you're welcome. >> co-chair blacksten: we'll be in touch. >> thank you. >> co-chair blacksten: let's go to the bridge line. is there anyone on the bridge line that would like to make a comment? anybody? all right. let's go to the people in the audience. are there any comments? no speaker card. all right. that's item number 6. and so very information a.m.al. -- we do appreciate getting an

update on that. let's move to item number 7. this is a technology day. emerging technology on working hands accessibility and safety. i know that nicole is one of our speakers. and i think you're joined -- you have a colleague who is joining you. >> krista is here and she's going to do the bulk of the presentation. i'm just going to help facilitate when we get to that point. i will say that we really would like the session after krista provides the introduction to be an open exchange. we want ideas and feedback from you as council members and also anyone who is participating in the audience or on the bridge line. so it looks like krista is getting things set up. we're about ready to start. >> hello, everyone. thank you so much for inviting

me here today. we are really excited to share with you our progress on the emerging technology open working group. i am krista canellakis. i'm the chief innovation officer for the city and county of san francisco. and we wanted to start with showing you where we see ourselves heading. in november 2018, supervisor yee passed a resolution asking city add minister to form a working group to look at and develop recommendations on best practices for government and industry on the responsible use of technology in our city. and as part of that, we will be developing guidelines for the mayor, for the board of supervisors and regulators in our city on how to identify major city and public concerns as emerging technologies arrive and are deployed in our city.

and also as part of the final deliverable, we'll be giving recommendations on how to improve the dialogue between the city and the community, and industry. so we want to share about how we're thinking about defining emerging technology. so how we're looking at is, emerging technologies are new technologies, new applications of technology, and new business models. and within that, those kind of three buckets, we're looking at emerging technologies that are in development and have only been tested at a market level or on a very limited basis. and we're also looking for technologies that will have a measurable impact, whether it's economically, socially, or morally in the next 5-10 years.

and we also are looking for technologies that don't really fit into an existing regulatory category or scheme within san francisco. that's sort of our scope in terms of what we're looking at. and here's our vision. so our vision is to be a city that embraces technology. to enhance quality of life in our public spaces. that's where we're really heading. in terms of the process, and what we've done thus far, we kicked off a public process on july 9. and we really started with listening. we wanted to understand and listen to the challenges from all sides of the table. so that included community groups, labor groups, accessibility stakeholders, the technology sector, our own city

family as well as a variety of community advocates. from moving on from the listening sessions, we were really trying to understand and identify what the needs are with this new permitting and regulation for the emerging technologies. and then the last meeting was to develop some initial recommendations and possible actions of what the city might take. and so our next and final public meeting will be on november 5. we will be presenting our draft recommendation and sort of initial actions. so here we see some of the kind of themes and tracks of what we heard throughout the process. some of the key priorities and things we're considering as we develop these recommendations are collaboration and partnerships. how do we develop a more collaborative process as we work

with companies who want to -- and community in our city? also, how do we develop a more agile permitting scheme? and that is keeping companies in the city accountable. third, is community engagement and city priority. how do we bring the community into the process of both the kind of permitting process and also in the process of kind of engaging with the companies that are working in the city? equity and equitable benefits are a key part of what we're looking for in the recommendations. what we're focusing on today is the accessibility and safety recommendations. and then another kind of track is around data sharing, security and privacy as these companies are deployed. and finally forecasting. so those are the high-level tracks. today, we're going to be

focusing on some of the possible actions and recommendations around accessibility and safety. we're eager to hear your feedback on. one is around developing a regulatory vetting process, accounting for accessibility compliance review and user impact of technology on disability communities. how do we integrate those accessibility needs into sort of the compliance and permitting process? >> may i interject? >> please do. >> so krista is about to go through five different accessibility and safety recommendations, so as she's going through these items, i want to encourage us to think about these and think about as she's going through them, how these recommendations particularly resonate with you. these recommendations came out

of these public meetings that krista had mentioned and we got a lot of feedback from different folks that were in the room. including groups that work with people with disabilities. and some feedback from people with disabilities directly. but part of why we're presenting here today, is because we really would like additional feedback specifically from people with disabilities on how these recommendations look to you. so just to keep a lens on that, because we would like your feedback when we've gone through these five recommendations. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> so, yeah, for the first one, it's around developing a regulatory vetting process to ensure accessibility is incorporated and we understand the impacts of some of the technologies on our disability communities. the second is developing an ongoing collaborative engagement

process with disability stakeholders and bringing them together with the product development companies as all stages of the product development cycle. so we're seeing it from the ideation phase to testing and deployment. and then third, we would like to recommend universal design standards that account for accessibility, safety and also identifying opportunities for innovation. the final two accessibility and safety recommendations are is proactively engaging with the product development companies. so that emerging technologies can be part of an accessibility solution to an existing problem. so understanding what are the problems that we're trying to

solve in our city and how do we engage with companies in helping us solve the problems? and the fifth recommendation is to establish a fund so that emerging and adaptive technologies can be available and accessible to our lower income residents with disabilities. we wanted to also share some of the recommendations around equitable benefits. so there are four in this bucket. the first is conducting an equity and impact assessment as a standard tool to evaluate new technologies. the second is to develop city-wide strategy to close the digital divide. the third is to create an equity technology fund to support access for low-income communities. and then the fourth is to

incentivize and present apprenticeship programs. finally, we want to share what is coming up and particularly want to encourage folks from the accessibility community to participate in some of these upcoming activities. as you can see, september through october, we will be really engaging with community members. we encourage you to reach out to us. if you have specific feedback or want to understand more about the process or give your input. and november, as i mentioned, on the previous slide, november 5, we have a public meeting. and in november and december, we'll be refining the recommendations to city minister will be refining the recommendations to submit to the board in december. and then finally, we encourage

you to stay in touch. here's some of the ways you can stay in touch. go to emerging tech. you can e-mail us at emerging tech or call us, (415) 554-4577. and thank you again for this opportunity. i'm happy to answer questions. >> maybe, you can flip back to the accessibility and safety recommendations as council members formulate their questions? >> co-chair blacksten: ok, alex, you're first up. >> council member madrid: thank you for coming. i have a lot of questions have you done any research on what is

available right now and what can be used in the future as you are in the process of this type of new best practices. and second is that what are the things that you personally think should be included besides these recommended right now? >> i can take those. so, to your first question, alex. so i just want to clarify what you mean in the first part. so in terms of research about what has been done about which

piece? >> council member madrid: on what other cities -- >> i see. >> council member madrid: -- and departments are doing with it. there is a lot of going on about accessibility and best practices, what have you guys done any or just -- >> i can answer that. yeah, so as part of our first phase and the listening phase, part of our listening was also to look at what other cities are doing. so we actually did a very intense research and interview

process with cities mostly in the united states so look at what they're doing and what the best practices are and what we can learn from. both mistakes and best practices. and then also, in addition to other cities, we also looked at -- we also talked with different subject matter experts in academia, to sort of help inform what our -- to really shape our recommendations. we wanted to learn from what is already out there and there will be, as part of our final report, we'll be sharing some of those lessons and advice. >> your second question of what is missing, that's why we need your feedback. it's kind of aggregate of all of

the feedback from the listening sessions pared down to these five essential points that i feel incorporate and encapsulate what we've heard from the community so far. but this is why there are draft recommendations because we're not sure if something is missing. so if there is something that you would like to suggest that we add or think about in a different way, that's what we want to hear about. >> council member madrid: yes. >> any thoughts right now? >> council member madrid: i'm sure you know about iphone and things like that. and some of them are not very accessible to all people.

any thoughts on how to make it more inclusive to all? >> so one piece of feedback is to think about how, as we're using and developing apps promoted through the city, to make sure we have a process for making them more accessible, is that what you mean? >> council member madrid: yes. and i really like what you guys suggested on inclusive on using people with disability and using them for testing like that.

>> i think a lot of companies tend to forget to ask people with disabilities to test their product. >> yeah, i think we have a role as the city to play in sort of connecting some of these companies with our disabilities stakeholders, so they really understand the users and build those users into their product development. >> council member madrid: yes. last question. why -- what is it you're interested in doing accessibility and make it more inclusive to all people? you don't need to answer that. i'm just curious. >> what personally motivates me

around inclusion and accessibility? >> council member madrid: yes. >> in particular with this work, i think technology has the possibility to help our residents improve quality of life and improve the way we live in our city. and so i think there is a really big opportunity for us to play a role in helping to work more closely with the tech sector, to improve the way that technology serves our residents. >> council member madrid: thank you. >> co-chair blacksten: these are great comments. are there any other council members that want to ask any questions? >> council member sassouni: yes, council member orkid. >> co-chair blacksten: orkid? >> council member sassouni: yes. >> go ahead.

>> council member sassouni: so as a member of the deaf community and advocate for other consumers, i notice that the equipment for smart phones and ipads and stuff like that is very outdated. and also, there is a new product coming out every two years. so it's not affordable to have the most up to date technology, which leaves people with disabilities stuck in a way. and you know, the apps for all of the technology that we have have to be regulated by the scc and follow the regulations by fcc for compliance. but the equipment that we buy is self-bought. we have to purchase it ourselves. although the apps are regulated by the fcc, the sad fact is we have to pay for it. like the data plan for phone companies which can get very pricey. and you know, we need the

service to be able to use our video phones as the deaf community and if we have a low internet or quality, we're not able to use that. so the data really impacts our service to access the hearing world and access an interpreter or captioning on videos and stuff like that. it's not free. we're technically paying for it with video relay service. you know, that is we don't pay a phone bill price, but we do pay for data. you know, internet speed and owl all of that has to be taken into consideration and a lot of people in the community can't afford that. in the deaf community, we need to be able to think about all the technology that is available and how to make it more accessible in regards to that issue. because every time a new phone comes out, every time there is a new iphone that comes out, we have suffer because we're not

able to afford the new product. and with the social security income, it's really impossible to afford that. there is a small percentage of people that do have professions and work in the field, and it's still expensive to afford that because of the resources in the community. so i do think there is a divide between people who cannot afford the technology and the fact that we're forced to keep up with it. so it is a fine line between that and our access to having the services. so we need to think about how it can become more affordable for people with disabilities in regards to the internet services. >> thank you, orkid. this is nicole. so it sounds like you would be in support of the recommendation that supports a fund specifically towards looking at affordability of some of the

technology that people with disabilities use and need to use? >> council member sassouni: yes, correct. i'm hopeful of that. and i hope that it works. and you know, just because of like i said, when equipment is released and new devices are released, it's a big problem, because the old ipads and things like that are operating on a different software that impacts our quality of service. and it can be quite frustrating. so -- >> thank you. >> co-chair blacksten: all right. so, any other of my colleagues on the council? a couple quick things. i know time -- wait, i'm sorry. kate? go ahead, kate >> council member williams: some

of the comments that made are shared by the blind community, access. i'm hoping we address that directly. >> co-chair blacksten: i might and i know time is getting away from us a little bit, but i might follow up and say that having input from people within the disabled community is really important. have you reached out at all -- see, i am an entrepreneur. i have my own business. have you reached out to people with disabilities with business that would be using this kind of technology? >> we've been doing our best to broadcast the open meetings and participation in these meetings through using all of our networks and the mod distribution and all of that. what i would say would be helpful, i'm going to push out the survey for feedback one more time that will close then in a

week. and whatever the council members can do to then take that and district it to who you know and get even more feedback. the more feedback we get, the better. we've been getting a fair amount of written feedback through the survey, but i'm going to push it out again. once i do, if you could help by distributing to your networks, that would be appreciated. >> thank you. >> co-chair blacksten: absolutely. that's great. and be glad to work with you on that. >> was there anything you would add to that? >> no. just to also join us on november 5. these are open working groups. and everyone is invited and we encourage everyone to come and if not, please fill out the survey. >> council member madrid: do you know where it is at? >> it's in 1 south van ness on

the 2nd floor. >> in the atrium on 1 south van ness. >> co-chair blacksten: this is south van ness? >> well, this is city hall. 1 south van ness and market right next to the bank of america building. >> co-chair blacksten: ok, excellent. so let's see, are there any other comments from staff? i know nicole is on staff and has been talking. anyone else? >> no other comments. >> co-chair blacksten: this has been very good. i really appreciate that. i will be personally putting november 5 on my calendar and i know we'll do our best to work with you. so we want to thank you for making this presentation. >> thank you for inviting me. >> co-chair blacksten: all right. any other comments from the bridge line? no, i don't hear any. i think we have one speaker

card? >> we have two actually. >> co-chair blacksten: ok, the first. >> tiffany? >> hi this is tiffany i wanted to make a comment that i'm really excited to see this partnership happening, because part of the reason why i live in san francisco is because of these emerging technologies. and i really think we're at the forefront of it. so the other thing i wanted to say, i'm curious about how these draft recommendations will actually play out. holding companies accountable for actually tapping into our communities through their development process. thanks. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you for your comment. and the second card, who do we have? >> that is helen. >> really exciting to hear that there is an interaction going on between emerging technologies

and the communities and individuals with disabilities. just wanted to make a couple of notes. i'm sure people are aware, but in technology areas we do have the w 3 c which we also have conference which is a great way to get resources. we also have the enabling conference. we have the higher ground conference. these conferences all have accessible technologies areas. we've been working for a long time in this area. i, as an individual, have attended these conferences because i have an interest in access and inclusionary design. and used to be in audio video editor and media maker. and that's what my focus was, making things accessible. in that regard, wanting to toss information on how to get resources of interaction. and of course, our own lighthouse center for the blind

is a wonderful place to get your resources for, too, but for more diverse aspect, the worldwide web consortium, they have a wonderful to interact with, you can send information to find out how to make things more accessible. this would include the concern about apps and what not. i would encourage you to further look into the disability resources from local to a state to international level. the enabling conference takes place in d.c. it's a phenomenal conference and gives you a great opportunity to understand hardware, software and accessible design. and we get to see the latest and greatest new emerging technologies. just wanted to make that note to you all. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you

that's great. that's a great conference. thank you for your comment. all of them, by the way. this has been a great section. i'm really excited about where we're going with this project. and it's going to be outstanding. all right, so i think we're at a break. and what is it 2:38. so if you can be back by let's say 10 minutes -- maybe 7 minutes to 3:00 so we can get going on the last presentation. and other items, that would be great. so now we're in a break mode. [ ♪ ]

the interpreter is live. now we need to check on the captioning. ok. we're back.

>> co-chair blacksten: all right. i'm start. number 8. the san francisco tech council strategic planning discussion, employment of people with disabilities and older adults. and our presenter is susan poor. consultant with the san francisco tech council. welcome to the mayor's disability council. >> thank you. >> so thank you for the invitation to be here today. i do represent the san francisco tech council. i'm here today with my colleague andrew broderick, who is also a consultant to the tech council. we're very excited to share with you information and plans we have for looking at the intersection between technology and employment for older adults and adults with disabilities. so i'd like to walk you through some of our process.

before i do that, let me give you background about the tech council so you have framework for thinking about this. the tech council was started in 2015 and its mission, it's hosted by the community living campaign in san francisco. but it's a multi-stakeholder initiative to advance digital conclusion for adults with disabilities and older adults in the city. the vision of the tech council is that those who live here have access to the digital tools they need because we know how critical they are to all of our lives in the city, but to make sure people are able to embrace, technology, change, reduce isolation and thrive. that's the big picture. it was founded in 2015. it came as a result of work that had been done to set up computer training centers across the city

in sf connected. please stand by. please stand by. please stand by.