"k" and "m" priority and getting through st. francis circle in a more timely manner. >> commissioner: thank you. mr. wiener. >> i noticed my name is spelled the same way scott wiener's and it should be w-e-i-n-e-r. i think the goal of muni should be service delivery should match the density of the city. now, for decade ago this was the case. you had a comprehensive system. now you're stripping services from the neighborhood and focussing on the most heavily-used line. this is a supply and demand principle instead of services

meeting actual need. i appreciate the addition of coaches but i wonder how many have been taken from the neighborhoods. so in essence you have a zero sum solution. what we need to do is beef up the services and have more coaches than ever before and that also consists of restoring eliminated bus stops and runs. for instance, at 26 valencia used to run to st. luke's hospital from downtown and ran to the merced extended neighborhood triangle district. it doesn't do that anymore. you don't have a direct link with downtown. i don't live in that area but i know people who do and they share that concern. so basically, you have to constantly expand services in order to meet density. that means meeting need. right now the way the muni forward is is like amputating

the toes and grafting them to a kneecap to a printer to make him run faster. -- sprinter to make him run faster. that's crazy. the overall delivery system is not good at the present time. i don't see a significant change in improvement. thank you. >> commissioner: thank you very much. any further public comment on item number 12? seeing none, i have a few questions for ms. kirschbaum. are there others that would like to address anything? director eaken. >> i have two questions for today. one, i heard a lot of concerns about the switchbacks on the "t" run and a know we're doing those. i believe as part of trying to fill service gaps but i think there's equity implications of the switchbacks not making it so i wonder if you can talk about that a little bit, one.

and two, you talked about congestion as a key barrier and a loved the slide that shows the different types of busses we have. i think we have five rapid lines of the lines. we've celebrate the success of the rapid lines. i wonder if the long-term solution when you think of getting busses out of traffic is a long-term solution it take the five routes and make more and more especially those of the 72 stuck in traffic to do more dedicated bus only lanes or do you believe the solution is something more system wide to address the bus routes that aren't currently served with a dedicated line to reduce congestion more holistically.

>> we have made a commitment to eliminate switchbacks other than a line blocked or mechanical failure. starting april 6. we chose that date because we'll be done with the construction we currently have busses on the "t" line and we'll be implement new schedule win -- with additional running time we believe say primary driver of our need to switchback throughout the system. we suspect the overall system will become healthier as we add in additional running time. it's not what i ideally like to do but if our schedules don't reflect the reality, we create

reliability problems. so we're always working on two paths. what can we to to improve the train speeds and then making sure we have accurate schedules. so we'll be looking this year in addition to downtown mission, we'll also be looking at the j line and some opportunities to do some of these leaning forward investments in that corridor. in order to have transit priority treatments, i don't think you necessarily need to be a rapid line. i think a lot of the treatments that we do to prioritize busses and trains work for a lot of different types of service. a rapid route really only works on a corridor that has really frequent service like four or five-minute combined service. the reason is if you're going to

split out into two type of service, a local and rapid you need them both to come frequently or nobody's going to wait for the other. we constantly get requests like why can't we have a rapid on the 29 and sunset or a rapid on the 7/haight. part of it is there's not an overall density in service types. i think one area we in general haven't cracked is how do we protect the infrequent routes from traffic. routes where we can't justify take whole lane of traffic for a 15-minute route. there's just not enough frequency of use so what other things can we do in the system

to help replicate the free flow speed is what we'd ultimately be looking at. >> commissioner: anything further? director hsu. >> thank you, this is helpful. i think it's great you have the training program because it's important in getting people to switch when jobs change because of technology or mode shifts. i'm curious of the 57 in the new class, how many came from chariot and do we have a sense how many of that bump may keep us with a positive momentum for a while? if we know that. >> i'll invite our acting h.r. director. >> i'm derek kim the current acting h.r. director for sfmta. approximately 18 came from chariot. we feel that so far the city

drive program with the b permit has been extremely helpful. it's been one of the biggest road blocks for people to become transit operators. >> and do we know of the people who come in through the "b" permit program how many do we end up getting? i'm sure some end up choosing different paths after they have the license. >> we just start the program. we did a first small pilot in january and a ramp up when chariot went down starting in february. i don't think we know yet but the idea generally is that to the extend we are supporting the program it would be supporting for folks who would apply from muni operator jobs. >> commissioner: so we'd expect a high return from the people who participate? >> that's our expectation but the first class just got through in february.

it hasn't been there long enough to answer. >> commissioner: mr. torres. >> mr. kim, of the follow-up on the chariot, how many of the drivers that signed up are former taxi cab drivers that lost their medallions or wanted to change to becoming drivers? >> i apologize but that i do not know. i don't know who were former cab drivers. >> commissioner: i think it's important to find out because a lot of the complaint i've been hearing have come from cab drivers that we've done so much bad things to them, which i don't think so, but here's an opportunity to recruit them that may need a job and i can't think of anybody better than a cab driver who knows the city. just a thought. >> we'll follow-up. >> thank you. secondly, when you say you're going to minneapolis --

>> our busses our manufactured in st. cloud, minnesota. >> commissioner: why is that? >> to meet with new flyer our bus manufacturer and going specifically to celebrate the last hybrid being leaving the plant as well as to work through some ongoing warrant issues. >> commissioner: so when you're there, how many staff people are going? >> i believe we're bringing four staff people. >> commissioner: and their responsibility will be to inspect the busses? >> yes. >> commissioner: so they'll look at issues like seating and things we've had problems with? >> on the busses? >> commissioner: yes. >> they'll be looking to make sure the vehicles are leaving at the high standard we expect. >> commissioner: so if they do not, do you reject the busses at that point? >> we hold them at the plant until the issues are addressed. >> commissioner: thank you. >> commissioner: thank you, ms.

kirschbaum. i have a few questions but i appreciate the detail and appreciate the overall metric of the time in subway because i think it's a tangible thing and happy to see the average has gone down on one side. so we've seen a drop in the a.m. peak but not p.m. an he'd ya -- any idea of the difference? >> i think the p.m. was affected by the west portal bottleneck we've been able to address. i think the a.m. peak problems tend to be related to other issues like non-communicating trains or trains in manual slowing down the trains behind them as well as the turnaround at embarcadero. so we have not had as much as success in the a.m. peak issues we're having in the p.m. peak

issues. >> commissioner: that suggest to me that maybe the issue is west portal both sides is different things. in the a.m. it's acquisition of the train control system and related things where you come in and p.m. it's coming out and you solved the outflow issue but we still have an in-flow issue. is that fair? >> yes. but specifically where we're seeing that materialize is not at the west portal end of the line in the morning. it's at the downtown stations where we're seeing trains backed up one on top of the other. >> commissioner: right. that's how it manifests out but still the acquisition issue has occurred at west portal. so one of the things that's interesting to me and i'm channelling my inner m mr. peterson is how it plays a

role. at an earlier meeting i raised the question of just closing that intersection to traffic during peak period or altogether. it's not a thoroughfare you could force right and left turns there and still have good flow to the business corridor and folks trying to get across have alternatives up the street at dewy and 14th. has there been further consideration to close traffic that cross the train tracks. >> my apology for not addressing it in the presentation. we have pulled together a rapid team of engineers and planners to look at the type of solutions you're recommending and start testing some things to see how they help at that intersection. we should within the next few

weeks have some progress on that item. >> commissioner: that's my neighborhood. i know the folks affected but i think if we can create the ripple effect in the system it could be a compelling case why we would close an intersection. it might potentially lead to greater pedestrian safety near the library, playground and elementary school. next question, the new radio systems come into play. within the new radio systems, will the command center have the ability to communicate to all passengers in the trains? >> yes. >> commissioner: that's a more efficient way of communicating with our customers then to the driver and having the driver say what's going on. if there's a system wide problem affecting everyone on the system, let's please have system-wide announcement. if you have a question you can

ask your driver or station agent but leaving it to each independent driver is not an effecti effective in my view to deal with those sorts of situations. the congestion issue, i was thinking back to my bus rides it's an issue. we're moving to three dedicated bus lines or streets. we have two b.r.t.s coming on through some dirt around with you to start one and hopefully market street will be soon no private vehicles. are there other streets, major corridors. i'm thinking east west, north, south in my head where we should be seeking to achieve this even

if it's not dedicated. what i see is we have a red carpet lane on geary and cars are coming into it. there's congestion, there's other issues. are there other streets we should be considering where we just make them red carpet only and really make the entire street no private vehicles other than perhaps taxi and deliveries. i realize that's a grand thing but we were challenging earlier to be policy makers and if congestion is the problem slowing the busses down, not a lack of bus or coaches just too many cars in the way, we are disincentivizing people to take the bus. in dissatisfaction to the robust plans we have about b.r.t. and market street we could look at what corridors that aren't that great for car flow in the first place and make them entirely red

c carpet. could be during peak hours or all-time service. there's many streets that flow that are narrow but nevertheless flow really well, east and west and north and south. turk street comes to mind for me. i would suggest the highest priority let's consider how we'll address this congestion issue more boldly and reward people for riding the bus and give them the above ground subway on more than the three routes and final in switching to h.r. i'm thrilled about the acquisition of the new drivers. this is a new group of drivers recruited at a large segment at once. it's not just about hiring them

but retake -- retaining them. let's please make sure to follow the hiring program and retention program to make sure and see if these people are encountering specific issues or whatever and make sure we're retaining them as well. okay. we'll have another report next month. >> yes. >> commissioner: we haven't scared you away? invigorated you and challenged you. >> that's what i'm about. >> before we let her go, can i say i love the idea of creating some streets that are red carpet lanes for bus where's maybe we don't have a lot of cars and can make a lot of impact. keep in mind we can keep those streets that function for bicycles, busses an pedestrians and just deprioritize private car traffic. i'm sure we have a lot of streets like that in the city that can make a huge impact and

let's be transit first and bicycle first and pedestrian first and deprioritize some cars on streets in the city. you'll get around just fine, director torres. >> commissioner: a little insight to our board of directors. all items 13 and 14 together, please, ms. boomer. >> clerk: 13 proven contract modification 14 to radio system replacement project designed with harris corporation do add design work and repair fiber optic cable in the twin peaks tunnel and start a warrant amount to increase the contract amount for a total amount of not

to seed $92,641,000. number 14 is approving contract 2018-49 as needed professional services with conduent transport solutions to provide as-needed services to support the computer aid dispatch system and an automated vehicle location system functions of the muni radio system for a contract amount not to exceed $7,000 for a term of five years. >> i'm the technology officer for the sfmta for the project and i'm excited to be able to present this to you today because we just did our final cut over for the radio system within the rail and it was done

a year and a half ago and we're now moving into the more clean up and operationalizing the overall system within the vehicles and the back end. so within that along with conduent the acquisition of new tools to better enable the team to manage the fleet are from co conduent part of the overall radio implementation but a subcontractor to the harris organization. we wanted to make sure we had a stand-alone contact with the conduent team to allow us to increase functionality as needed to allow us to make certain tweaks to the system as needed because harris not the software vendor of the system. we'll also move from the harris 1240 contract and defining our substantial completion with the turn over and cut over of the

rail system substantial completion will move us directly into warranty of that system and you'll see a stand alone contract coming your way to move the warranty to a stand-alone to close off the contract. this is enabling us since we have substantial use of the system to clean up the project contact and moving to closure once other things are done. twin peaks repair was in the west portal tunnel when the contractors cut one of our fiber cables that was serving our backup because we have redundancy in the backup and needed that repaired expeditiously and wanted to facilitate that payment they'll work that contract item through the other. >> commissioner: directors any questions ob this exciting contract? >> i have a couple questions. we originally thought this could

be done by 2015 when we awarded it at 2012 and we're at 90% and there was a two-year lapse. i'm confused on what happened i guess. >> i can try since this predated lisa's time with the agency in assuming the management of the contract. this was a complex project with harris doing some of the work and i've been meeting with the team every woo two-weeks for the -- two weeks for the life of the contract which suggests hasn't the level of management of oversight it's needed as we hit many problems along the way. with the design build prath

project we didn't hand it over. we created a spec and worked with them with harris and conduent to try to get to the final design requirements and ultimately the system that met our performance specs. we've had a lot of challenges along the way. some software. some hardware. we spent time on the cables that attached to the unit in the cab of the l.r.v. the cable they provided we found was not functioning adequately. we moved around and then it wouldn't function. so this is one small example of months and month to go twulg -- between the hardware provider and we've had numerous issues and there's lessons learned in

how we'd do a large systems proj like this. every one of the systems projects we've done and we've down quite a few recently have had various challenges and largely in terms of the schedules not being realistic up front and the iterative nature of the design taking too long. it's been in some ways frustrating but the but cut-over happened a year and a half ago. we were able to cut the busses over and that's been up and running and functioning very well. the trains though there's fewer of them than busses has dragged out in the last year and a half. and initially the trains were going to follow immediately after the busses and it's been hard to get all the configuration done for the trains and new trains and so this is taken longer than we had hoped. the cut-over that happened march

9 has gotten all that functionality in place. we can move the folks out of our old 1950s control system to our new modern control center and have the service management benefits julie talked about. >> i guess how do we get to a place where the contract technically expired and the first contract is a retroactive contract? >> until we had schedule certainty, we didn't think it made sense. i was personal meeting with them every two weeks to know where we were in the process. we weren't able to resolve such as the cable issues. we weren't able to project a final date or even a reasonable expectation for when system completion would be. rather than come and continue to

update the contract, we also had outstanding commercial issues in terms of what was in this outside of the spec it seems to make the most sense to get two substantial completions to resolve the commercial issues and bring a full close-out mod in the end. we were working with eyes wide open and chose to modify the contract. >> and in the contact with the next five years are we confident in the scope of this we'll able to do the project within $7 million and five years?

>> the next is a support contract. now that we have the system in the software part there's maintenance we will need we would have needed anyway and during the process we found there's functionality we could have but don't have. we'll able to do discreet software enhancements. it's a not to exceed amount. we may not use the $7 million. if we find greater use than we anticipated for it, we may want to come back for an extension. it's a different animal. this is just maintaining the software and providing a contract vehicle for enhancements we may want to make. >> what's the obligation for harris working with the new contractor. they're work is ending and then we hand it over to the new

contractor. >> we'll be bringing a contract for the radio portion. they interact but there's two systems. and we'll bring contact for the service of the radio. we'll need ongoing service support from both the organizations and vendors. >> and the final question is you mentioned we had a fiber optic wire cut. how can away void or what can we do to ensure this doesn't happen again? i'm sure the contractor paid for that but i'm sure it set us back in time. >> we're work the construction side to make sure we have the right containment around. there's extensive work in the

twin peaks project and we had instruction from the contractor and we've taken that on since and will make sure it happens. >> do we identify our various wires? i know with the work happening and they asked about the p.u.c. and the water project there's been wires and utility things are we labelling it and making it clear so we know what's there and in the future we can find it? >> we have that now and today as well as the drawings and everything that lay everything out and know exactly what. that's how we knew what the cable was and what it was for and back up and not primary. >> this is an action item.

>> clerk: motion to approve. >> commissioner: is there public comment? >> clerk: no. >> commissioner: public comment is closed. i'll entertain a motion on both contracts at the same time. director torres moved that. >> a second to approve. >> commissioner: all in favor please say aye. anyone opposed? that's as radio clear as it gets. >> clerk: thank you, directors. >> clerk: concludes the business before you today. >> commissioner: let's remember we are adjourning in memory of ms. rothstein and double down or our mission to make fellow citizens safe on the streets of san francisco. thank you, everybody.

>> good morning, the meeting will come to order. welcome to the march 18, 2019, rules committee. seated to my right is shamann walton, and seated to my left is rules

committee supervisor gordon mar. and we're joined by president norman yee. and i would like to thank those from s.f. gov. tv for staffing this meeting. >> please silence you cell phones and all electronic equipment. documents should be included as part of the record and submitted to the clerk. >> chairwoman: thank you so much. can you please read item number one. >> would you like me to call one and two together? >> chairwoman: sure. >> item one is a motion amending the rules of order for striking rule 3.29 to remove the budget and finance committee on federal policy changes. and item two is the board of supervisors clarifying amendments to rule 3.26 rules committee and rule

3.30, select committees, and by adding rule 3.31 to establish a joint city school district and city college select committee. >> chairwoman: thank you. president yee, did you want to discuss or present these items? >> sure. thank you. i will just make it real brief. as the title implies, it is really to clean up some of the language that we have in regards to what goes to what committee. and then mainly what i wanted to do is talk about the joint city school district and city college select committee. we've had select committees before with the school district. and probably had it for many years. and eventually for the last few years we discontinued it because there was not an interest at the time. and there has been a lot

more interest since i've become the president, expressed by not only my own colleagues, but also by the school district and city college. so what's a little bit new is this joint committee actually includes three governance. the city and the school district and the city college. so i've already spoken to the school district and city college. college, their commissioning trustees, and they all agreed they wanted to do this. the idea is we'll have regular meetings scheduled, and that there be to representatives from each of the entities to make up six members. and in addition to that, we have built in an alternative -- alternate -- for each of the entities because in the past there has been

issues of getting a quorum if one person doesn't show up. and the purpose of this is to make sure that we have a way to communicate with the entities because, as you know, there is a lot of, i guess, interaction anyways that happens informally. and more recently, there has been exchange of funding for the city's funding certain things. so we want to make sure that there is some vehicle where we could formalize this. and the other piece is just to eliminate basically the federal -- the budget and finance select committee on federal policy changes that was created last year, i believe. and with the threat of the federal governments

towards local government sort of disappearing. we felt like there was no need for this. okay. >> chairwoman: supervisor walton? >> yes, thank you, chair ronen. i just want to say i was disheartened by the dissolution of the joint committee when i was on the board of education, so i'm excited about reestablishing the joint committee there. there are so many things between the city, the school district, and city college that overlap, particularly in a time when affordability is major, and we're trying to figure out ways, of course, to create more affordable housing, as well as our fights with homelessness and transportation. so so many overlaps, so i want to thank president yee for bringing this back because we need to be working closely with city college and with the school district. so thank you so much. >> chairwoman: thank yo you. viewpoinsupervisor mar? >> yes. i want to also thank

president yee for the proposal to create the joint board of supervisors school district and city college collec select committee. it is something members of the board are enthusiastic about. now is a great time to do that this year. i wanted to highlight one of the priorities i've been working on in my district very much connects to this. i've been working with city college administration and also the school district to expand city college dual enrollment classes in the sunset district for high school students. so we're working on a plan to really expand that this summer, and continue to expand this fall into next spring. that is just an example of the kind of exciting, important work that can happen through this -- within the framework of this joint select committee. so thank you so much. >> i just wanted to add my thanks, president yee, for

being so responsive to us on the board. you know, all three of us, supervisor mar and walton and i are all parents of students in the school district. so shi this is extra relevant and present for us every day. but there just seems to be so many issues -- and also free city college -- where there real is the need for this joint cross-dialogue on the board. thank you so much. we're all very excited about this and really appreciate you. now i will open up this item for public comment. if there is any member of the public who would like to speak on this item, now is your chance. oh, are you going -- okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel]

>> chairwoman: can i have a motion? >> i move that we move this forward to the full board with recommendation. >> chairwoman: without reobjection, items one and two move forward with recommendation to the full board. can you please read item number three. >> item number three is an ordinance, many of the administrative codes required department heads and members of city boards commission to complete complicit training, and to apply newly appointed department heads to have training within 60 days of assuming office, and to require the department of human resources to provide the training. >> chairwoman: thank you. we have a representative from supervisor stefani's office. >> thank you for welcoming me back. i'm here to present just a minutes to the initial legislation on our conversation to make it more robust, particularly for department heads.

on page two, starting on line 15, this is the main amendment that our offices worked with the city attorney and d.h. r. on. it requires department heads to have an in-person training, which will be fulfilled with an all-day training within the first 60 days of them entering their office. and commissioners remain taking an online training. and just to match this so that h.r. can implement it, there are some state adjustments. throughout you'll see that the requirement of june 30th has been changed to december 31st, 2019. i've also got susan guard her with d.h.r., if there are any questions. >> chairwoman: great. any questions? no. thank you so much for being responsive to us. this looks great. i would love to be added as a co-sponsor, please. >> thank you very much, supervisor stefani. i appreciate your support and co-sponsorship.

>> chairwoman: any member of the public like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> chairwoman: is there a motion? >> i move that we move this forward with a positive recommendation. >> chairwoman: without objection -- >> you need to adopt the amendment. >> i move that we adopt the amendment to the proposed legislation. >> chairwoman: without objection, that item is amended. >> and now move that we move with a positive recommendation, with the amendment, to the full board. >> chairwoman: without objection, that motion passes. [gavel] >> chairwoman: thank you. thank you. can you please read item number four. >> it is a hearing to consider one member term ending 2020 to the advisory committee. one seat, one applicant. >> chairwoman: thank you. is melissa mendoza here? >> i believe we did receive notice that she

was out of town. however, this is a nomination from a member of the board of supervisors. >> chairwoman: great. so we will now open up this item -- i'm sorry, supervisor walton? or was that left over. sorry. we will now open up this item for public comment. >> it is my fault. i just wanted to say that i'm very excited about her participation. everything she does, that she is part of, she is a part of a va very innovative group and active group. i definitely think you should reconfirm her. >> chairwoman: any member of the public like to speak? seeing none, the public comment is closed. would anybody like to make a motion. >> sure. i move that we recommend melissa mendoza to seat five of the advisory committee, on to the full board. >> chairwoman: without objection, that motion passes. thank you, please read

item number five. >> number five is a hearing to appoint one member ending february 1st, 2021, to the park space, open space advisory committee, one seat, one applicant. >> chairwoman: thank you. is rosa chen here? good morning, ms. chen. >> good morning, supervisor. my name is rosa chen. i was born and raised in chinatown in district 3. i've used the parks in district 3, and i'm part of the community for better park and rec in chinatown. while i was serving in the youth commission is few years back, i also worked on park issues in the district as wellmen well. so i think i have a lot of experience working with youth. i used to be an organizer for youth. and i worked on park issues, open space issues, really making sure it is being advocated for the community. >> chairwoman: thank you so much. any questions? no. thank you so much. thank you for being willing to serve in this capacity. it is important.

so thanks so much. is there any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i move the motion forward. >> chairwoman: without objection, that motion passes. item six? >> item six is approving/rejecting the mayor's appointment of scott to the retirement board for a year term ending february 20th, 2023. >> chairwoman: would you like to present the board on your qualifications and interests in this position? >> thank you. thank you for inviting me over for deliberations. i actually tried to see -- i spoke to you last week. i dropped by your office -- both of your offices, supervisors, on friday to see if you had any questions. i'll go with what -- how you want to ask questions.

maybe i'll tell you two minutes on the back of my baseball card, specifically, personally i have six kids, 12 grandkids, citizens of san francisco, all committed to making san francisco a better city. so in my business, i've had a number of activities that give me a unique perspective on the issues at hand that the retirement board is addressing. specifically the esg platform and the like. my personal investing is also in that light. i will tell you on a personal basis, my money managers and like handle e.s.g. regularly, and it goes into the decision-making of my personal life. i do not have any fossel

companies in my investment portfolio, nor do i plan to. we are working on several non-profits, actually, that i am involved with that are eliminating that fossel. on that regard, i think should probably go to the -- as the city -- what i've done in the city. and for about 18, 19 years i've been a commissioner. i was a commissioner on the health service system for about 15 years. and in all of my activities with the city, it is to -- it is with distinct purpose of putting san francisco as a thought waiter, but noanl only a thought waiter, but a

thought enactor. if we're going to talk the talk, we need to walk the walk. when i was first president, we were broke. and in four years, we had that back on to track. and then thereafter, san francisco became a real thought waiter and thought enactor, and affordable care came into place, we were cutting-edge, and we had affordable care, and we had something that was solid in the middle for 125,000 employees, retirees, dependents of the city of san francisco. a fact that i'm really pleased we accomplished. i resigned from the public health service, it is well-known, because i saw an advantage and for the good of the finances that we introduced an actuary that took an r.f.p.

it was associated with one of the companies i'm employed by. i was told by the city attorney it is not a conflict, but when i put my head on the pillow at night and i think it is a conflict -- so i went to the mayor and i resigned. i thought i had a three-month vacation, but i got a call and went on civil service. we have a dedicated group of civil servants. a thought waiter, a thought enactor, and i thought with the identification issues, that's where we're going once again. i was honored to get a call from the mayor, as her appointment on the retirement board. and the same fe fiduciary responsibility. there are 125,000 employee

retirees and dependents. recognizing that responsibility on basis of the issues at hand that have been a little delayed incoming to a resolution or a commitment to do something. defosselization is one example, and e.s.g. going forward, i'm glad to see it is a position where it is, pront and center, and i look forward to pushing those forward on a very thoughtful basis. again, thought leadership and enactor. climate change is a big issue. and i'm also council general to the republic of rwanda, and i have been for many years. i started the san francisco sisters city committee for mayor newso newsom. no more other places than in banghor, with water,

and with climate change, that you can see the actual results of this. i bring these up because it a filter. it is something i translate through. it is a filter that i feel very comfortable with, that meshes with what the retirement board needs to do. at that, i'd be glad to answer any questions. >> chairwoman: one question: you had mentioned that you stepped off the health services board because, you know, whether or not it was a legal conflict, you saw a perceived conflict between your company and huet and some work that the health services system was doing. is there any conflict that you can imagine between the retirement board and huet, or that you can see up coming. and do hue huet have any business with the city

that could present a similar situation? >> no. i've done my due diligence on this when the mayor asked me. the last thing i need is to be accused of a conflict of interest. especially after doing so much over the years. no, the direct answer. my business -- the business i'm in now and all of the associated businesses i'm involved with have nothing to do with the retirement board, period. we have a retirement division and whatever that does some cultureing and consuln aon, which is my primary business, but i've checked with our compliance people. and i don't see any other -- and i don't see any issue with what i've said going through with all of my money managers and people that handle my finances. >> chairwoman: okay. thank you. as you know, and you

mentioned this a little bit, the board of supervisors voted unanimously to urge the retirement board to divest from fossel fuels in 2013, and then again in 2018. over the last five years the energy sector has been by far the worst performing sector of the market. will you commit to making a motion to divest san francisco retirement system from fossel fuels? >> answer: yes. my thought is -- i happen to believe in this deeply, and i was really heartened to see that the norwegian sovereign fund, the number one product of norway, oil. the norwegian sovereign fund just last week ordered a divestiture of fossel fuels. it is interesting.

>> chairwoman: thank you. we are joined by supervisor safai. did you have some questions? >> yes. i just wanted to make a statement and ask a question or two. thank you, madam chair. i am the representative of the board on the retirement board for our body. i had the pleasure of sitting down with mr. helfun and talking to him -- >> in your district. >> in my district, right. i wanted to say a few things for the record that we talked about, and i think it is important that it be noted that our retirement fund has grown over the last number of years. many city employees are here, including ourselves. our number one responsibility is to grow that fund so we are fully funded for those that retire. we have that feduciary responsibility.

we are 90% funded for all of our retir retirees. so we're doing exceedingly well. one of the things that has frustrated me, and i see some of the advocates here for fossel fuel, we had the conversations, passed the resolutions, and then the response has been, if we don't invest, other funds will. i like the example of the norwegian fund. but what are some of the concrete steps that we can take when staff say, if we don't, others will invest in that fund? >> i guess the thing that allowed me to say yes, that i'd consider this, is the progress that we've made in e.s.g., because out of that platform, basically, you have an investment strategy -- a roadmap, i should say, to

to -- to the deep fosselization issue. it has been delayed. it has been an issue. it has come this full circle to appoint, where now there is a common -- seemingly common direction and push to accomplish this. so there is one good news, and it took time. there is a lot of strategy out there. a lot has developed during the time when we didn't act. so we can borrow from that on an e.s.g. platform, the environmental, the social, and the governance, and find, with the directive, that we have a proprietary responsibility. short answer: i don't think it happens overnight, but it should be a very big step forward to accomplish it.

>> and just as a followup to that, we have passed these resolutions as recently as the last few months, but yet the leadership of the environment fund continue to bring us investments that involve fossel fuel. so recently in the last two months, i was one of the only retirement board individuals to vote against a more recent proposal. so it is frustrating. we pass these resolutions. we believe in this. there are multiple opportunities to invest all over the world. we're not wanting for investment opportunities, and yet they still bring us these investments. >> the e.s.g g. platform has that built into it, that you have the center, the "s," and that the management of the managers -- and if they're not bringing what we're

asking for, what the majority of people are asking for, there are a lot of other managers. >> and there is also another issue that is vexing to us. we had individuals fro from -- former individuals from toytoys "r" us, and a lot of retailers that reorganize under chapter 11, and once they buy the debt it is almost like a never-ending cycle, and they pay dividends. it is hard, so we have the responsibility, we have to make money, but at the same time, we're putting businesses out of business from some of the investment that we make because of this pure -- how do we thanl