taking it seriously and putting it into your recommendations. i have spoken to the new owner right after i filed and he seemed like a nice guy but clueless that tenants have rights in san francisco. there was no plan for where they were supposed to go during construction and i asked what about when it's done and can they move back in and he's, like, they're not coming back. that's not illegal. that's an eviction and since then been he has tragically filed evictions on the tenants. so they are here. one of the tenants has been in the mission for 50 years and i would just want to let them speak for themselves and get out of the way. thanks. >> come on up.

>> i'm here for cal fox of the tertenderloin housing clinic. i'm here for the tenants upstairs. spoon *they have been tenants f9 years and unlike the characterizizatiocharacterizatit seems like a nice guy, we had the opposite impression. they hathe showers were water w. this work being proposed would reconfigure the units, not just expand, so there is no effort to keep the tenants in. whether or not there's been an implication of a notice of termination is not the point

here. we're in the present. this is their long-term home. the work that's being done is purely elective and cosmetic and intended probably to quadruple the value of the property, not only by creating more size but by getting rid of the long-term tenants. this would eliminate the backyard which is part of the very, very limited open space. they have a dog that uses the backyard. there is very limited space in san francisco and throughout the mission district. it's so concrete and steel. this is one of the few places where they can go out and enjoy the sun and light and let me just ask. (speaking foreign language).

>> i'm the daughter of a deceased person who meant so much to me. that is my father. who is supposed to be the head of the household, right? and we hit rock bottom because we're just getting hit left and right with these new oppositions about new improvements to the house. yes, they are needed, but they're asking us to be displaced permanently and where will we go? we haven't discussed where to move. how we're going to continue on while i'm still in school and employed. i'm looking for someone to work. it's very hard.

but it was just a matter of time when they say it's time to go. >> so in a nutshell, they work will result in the displacement of people that are already in a crisis because of the premature deaths of the father, husband, and then it's like that carlos santana letter, where it says come home and what's their letter saying, get out of here. so we ask you to please deny this permit application and not issue a permit that's going to unnecessarily get rid of long-term tenants. >> thank you. >> so we will take a public comment in support of the dr requester.

>> my name is steven booth with the tenderloin housing clinic. this is maria and she's lived in this property for 38 years and raised a family there and she continues to be a part of the very fabric of this neighborhood. her doctor is three blocks away that she can walk to wherever she needs to. she shops on 24th street and knows the neighbors there and is virtually a part of the fabric of this community. this project makes no provision for her.

her story is quintessentially an american story. she umgreated from el salvador and in the mission district for 50 years, got married in san francisco, worked at the st. francis hotel for about 40 areas. she's supported this community and part of it for a long time. what you're asked to do is to authorize a permit which essentially allow for a dream of profit in the future by a real estate speculator and do we support that dream or do we support the american dream which this is an example of the american dream. she came here, worked hard, is has been here all her life and will be excluded from the mission.

also with her today is pedro rote, her son, who his formative years were spent in that home. the home is still the center of the -- she has three sons, an extended family, grandchildren and they come to visit her on holidays and this is really her pricplace and her community. i also want to say that the landlord's attitude to her has not been friendly or kind. in the very beginning, they tried to trick her by saying, we'll pay you a paltry amount if you leave and then told her she had to leave in six months. three times they shut off the water and she wasn't able to

bathe, clean dishes and they will build a taj mahal. >> any other public support in request oresponse to the dr req? >> i'm greg smith, the architect for this project. the owner would like to add

vertically up and down to each unit, creating from what is a two-room, plus a culture, a two-bedroom and the same footprint and not expanding up and down. so what the owner is trying to do is make family use fit units

preferable over one-perform units and that's what we're trying to do. you'll turn it over to the own owner. >> i'm neil aton, i'm the owner and so my wife and i live a few blocks from the property with our young family. we're not looking to profit from this development but live in this development. ed takewe've ended up with this confrontation with the tenant tenantsand the communication i've had has been clear that there's no real room for negotiation. what i heard back was the only way that they would not file a dr request is if the tenant were

never disturbed. bringing this up to standards is not possible. to respond to the character characterizations is evil landlords, turning off water, trying to trick elderly ladies into leaving their home is completely false and inaccurate. water was turned off during repairs and there were issues getting it on. this happened over the weekend and we had to call the first available plumber to come on sunday morning. the other issues that miss miranda ref dens referenced aboe

water being shut off, that's new to me. in terms of the issues mentioned by the downstairs tenants, any -- nobody communicates with me any issues. after we filed eviction notice, there was retaliation in terms of complaints of the building department which had been depth with or had been dealt with and as soon as we heard from them and so, unfortunately, we've ended up in this scenario and this is the only property that i own in anyplace. we've lived in the mixe missionr five years and hopefully we'll live here for a long time to come and i'll leave it at that. thank you for your time. >> do we have any public comment in support of the project

sponsor? with that, you have a two minute rebuttal? you get two more minutes. >> commissioner johnson. >> where do i begin? this is not the first time we've heard a case like this, in which there are tenants who are in danger of being rent evicted out of a property. to all of the folks who cal camt and who had to go through the struggle of coming here and sharing your story, i say thank you. and you shouldn't have go

through this. i think we as a commission have again and again and again stated that if a project comes to us, we are not comfortable with rent rent evictions and certainly a plan in place of how people will be moved and put back into the units is the bare minimum and then we have serious concerns and want to go through it with a fine tooth comb. so i'm a little disappointed that this is here. there is no way i could support this project at all. so i would take dr and not approve and would love to hear what other commissioners have to say. >> i second that motion.

>> commissioner moore? >> mr. winslow read into the description of this case and suddenly suggested indeed the applicant had not provided any kind of mediating suggestions of what to do with the tenants. the owner stands in front of us without acknowledging the problem is difficult and makes me feel very uncomfortable to hear this project. so the rules surrounding these particular cases in the city are very well published and well-known and i am actually quite speechless. speechless to hear an applicant coming forward with as many tenants in the building and kind of, really, at least i'm sorry to say that seeming oblivious to the problem he's

creating. i have to say that because we are very fair and patient, week in, week out, year in and year out, to see these cases piling up and to sit here with no acknowledgement of the problem is, frankly, shocking to me. and just as commissioner johnson very skillfully summarized her feelings, i would second your thoughts. >> commissioner richards. >> miss fever, please, what estrucevictions have been filed? >> i'm not sure. you should ask the attorney. >> miss fox, do you know. >> will you please speak into the microphone.

>> they have filed notices of templtermination and we intend o challenge that when the notices expire. >> ok, thank you. >> i mean, i echo my fellow commissioners. you already live in the mission and that's great. you're a part of the community. you bought a building that had people living in it who are also a part of the community. for you to continue to live in the mission, these other members of the community are going to be thrown out into the street. that's heartless. if i could put a notice of special restriction that you could never expand your building on your building because of what you're doing, i would, but i can't. but i'll remember this address and i hope that it gets dred again. i can't support a project like this. there's a motion seconded to

take dr and disapprove and i would recommend that you articulate findings for mr. winslow to add to the dr action memo. and i hope that it gets dred >> for discretionary reviews, you don't. >> we sat through a presentation that took two years of staff work to come up with strategies on community stabilization, on preservation of housing, on all of the resources that the city is spending to make this happen and that surely can be a

finding. so i am -- i think that prevention of homelessness, community stabilization, some stuff about map 2020, the preservation of housing, the tenants are folks who are older. they're also protected tenants under the rent-control law and there are things we could state as findings. commissioner richards? >> hardship due to loss of family members, extra stress of young persons still going to school and in the middle of loss of a father, you think that there are millions of arguments, particularly after we spend listeningy time, as you mentioned on the community stablization act today. >> if i could property you to also include one of the issues brought forth was the expansion doubling the size, automatically

increases the affordability, inaffordability of this. >> commissioners richards? >> so at my first confirmation hearing before the rule's committee, i mentioned hershey chocolate company because they bought joseph schmidt with the intent of not wanting him to compete with them, so they bought the business and shut it down. you bought a business, which is is housing provider business, using the ellis fact and you're shutting it down for your own gain. when we started this hearing, i mentioned to some people, we have to go to the state and senator weiner and assemblyman chu and get them to do ellis act

reform, there has to be a spectator tax on profit. this is what we're looking at right now and that's my last two cents. i'm flummoxed. >> thank you for those findings to disapprove, (role call). >> so moved, commissioners and that motion passed 5-0. >> we're now adjourned.

>> for the first time in nearly two decades fishers have been granted the legal right to sell fish directly to the package right off their boat -- to the public right off their boats in san francisco. it's not only helping local fishers to stay afloat but it's evoking the spirit of the wharf by resurfacing the traditional methods of selling fish. but how is it regulated? and what does it take for a boat to be transported into a floating fish market? find out as we hop on board on this episode of "what's next sf." (♪) we're here with the owner and the captain of the vessel pioneer. it's no coincidence that your boat is called the pioneer because it's doing just that. it's the first boat in san francisco to sell fish directly from the boat. how did you establish your boat into such a floating fish market? >> well, you know, i always thought that it would be nice to

be able to provide fresh fish to the locals because most of the fish markets, you would have to do a large amount of volume in order to bring in enough fish to cover the overhead. when you start selling to the public that volume is much less so it makes it hard to make enough money. so being able to do this is really -- it's a big positive thing i think for the entire community. >> a very positive thing. as a third-generation fisherman joe as his friends call him has been trawling the california waters for sustainably caught seafood since an early age. since obtaining a permit to sell fish directly to the public he is able to serve fish at an affordable price. >> right now we're just selling what a lot of the markets like, flat fish and rock fish and what the public likes. so we have been working for many, many years and putting cameras in them. there's the ability to short fish and we have panels that we open and close so we target the different species of fish by adjusting the net.

and then not only that but then the net sort out the sizes which is really important. >> joe brings in a lot of fish, around 20,000 pounds per fishing trip to be exact. >> we had one day one time that we sold almost 18,000 pounds. >> it's incredible. >> i know, it's hard to imagine. >> but this wasn't always the case for joe. >> the markets that we have left in california, they're few and far between, and they really are restrictive. they'll let you fish for a couple months and shut you down. a lot of times it's rough weather and if you can't make your delivery you will lose your rotation. that's why there's hardly any boats left in california because of the market challenges. my boat was often sitting over here at the dock for years and i couldn't do anything with it because we had no market. the ability to go catch fish is fine, i had the permits, but you couldn't take them off your boat. >> that was until the port commission of san francisco rallied behind them and voted unanimously to approve a pilot program to allow the fish to be

sold directly to consumers right off their boats. >> the purpose of the program is to allow commercial fishers to sell their fish directly from their boats to the end consumer in a safe and orderly manner for the benefit of the overall fishing community at the port of san francisco. we have limited the program to certain types of fish such as salmon, halibut, tuna and rock fish. crab is restricted from this program because we did not want to interfere with the existing crab sales on taylor street and jefferson street. so this is not meant to favor one aspect of the fishing industry more than another. it's to basically to lift up the whole industry together. >> and if joe the program has been doing just that. >> it was almost breathtaking whenever i woke up one morning and i got my federal receiver, my first receivers license in the mail. and that gave me permission to actually take fish off my boat. once we started to be able to

sell, it opened things up a bit. because now that we have that federal permit and i was able to ppetition the city council and getting permission from san francisco to actually use the dock and to sell fish here, it was a big turning point. because we really didn't think or know that we'd get such a positive response from the public. and so we're getting thousands of people coming down here buying fish every week and so that's pretty cool. they like the fish so much that they take pictures of it when they cook it and they send us all of these pictures and then they ask us, you know, constantly for certain types of fish now. and when they come down here the one thing that they say is that they're so amazed that the fish is so fresh they could eat a little bit during the week and it's still fresh all week in the refrigerator. so that's really cool. >> the fish is very fresh and the price is super. i don't think that you can get it anywhere in the bay area.

i can see it, and i can stir fry it, wow, you can do anything you want. i just can say this is a good place to shop and you have a good experience. >> this program supports the strategic plan in terms of engagement, people being connected to the waterfront, and also economic vitality. because it's helping the fishermen to make ends meet. they have no guarantees in their businesses, not like some people, and we want to do everything that we can to help them to have a good and thriving business. >> how does it feel to be able to sell your fish locally kind of in the traditional way, like your grandfather probably did? >> when i was a kid and i used to work in my dad's fish market, a lot of the markets that we sell to now are second and third and fourth generation markets. so i remember as a kid putting their tags on the boxes of fish that we shipped out of monterey

and ship down to l.a. so it's kind of cool that we're still dealing with the same families. and this is probably about the only way that anyone can really survive in california is to sell your own fish. >> one of the advantages of this program is the department people that pull in the fish, they can find out where they caught it and find out more about the fisherman and that adds to their experience. the feedback from the fishers has been very good and the feedback from the customers have very good. and there's a lot of people coming to the wharf now that might not have done so. in fact, there's people that go through the neighboring restaurants that are going to eat fish inside but before they go in they see the action on the dock and they want to kind of look at what's happening on the boat before they go in and they have a meal. so it's generated some conversation down at the wharf and that's a good thing. >> as you can see by the line forming behind me getting ready to buy fish, the pilot program

has been a huge success. for more information visit sfsport.com. (♪) (♪)

i pledge a llegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. . >> before i ask for the roll call, the fans are on for a couple reasons. the building engineer is in route but not here yet. please be prepared to speak louder cheese are all recorded both audio and video. please speak louder today. the next genral item now before roll call is item 13 is pulled.

it shall not be discussed today. we will notify people in advance before that comes back on the calendar. now we will start -- before public session we will have the roll call. (roll call). we have a quorum. >> the rules for general public participation will be in effect. if you want to speak, please submit your name but limit to two minutes when we get to times to speak on items in general or a particular item when called. we will go to closed session. do we have a motion from the board? motion. >> second.

all in favor say aye. motion passes. let's figure out how to operate the fans with the doo [closed session]. >> we need a motion regarding closed session to report out to disclose or not disclose. is there a motion to that effect. >> i would move. >> motion that is seconded. all those in favor say aye. we will start with general public comment. we will give -- is kim still here? thank you. >> san francisco labor council. i am honored to be here today, and the san francisco labor

council this past year and a half two years has under gone leadership changes. i am here to introduce myself and on behalf of the executive director introduce him. we plan to work with each and every one of you over the next few months through the public employee committee and talking to you about how the retirement system can reflect the current values of labor here in the city. thank you. >> john, go ahead. >> i am john. i am a 44 year member of the pension fund. i have got some good news for you board members today, believe it or not. last friday the elk care trust fund decided to invest in hedge

funds. $400 million with the big boys investment club. i guess he was talking about you members. she said have said the big persons investment club. i gave that board five reasons why they should not invest in hedge funds. i got the impression they decided to invest in hedge funds before the public comment. the five reasons i gave them not to invest in hedge funds are the same five reasons i will give you to divest. hedge funds are poor-performing, high risk, high cost investments. second reason. 30 large pension funds like the cal-pers and new york city are

divesting. third reason they do not give down market protection. 2008 was one of the largest down markets in history. hedge funds lost 18 to 20%. those less risky had a loss of 21%. fourth reason. what is supposed to be the best invested in the world advised our pension fund two years ago index funds would be a better investment than hedge funds. so far that is right. fifth reason and most important. the vast majority of our members don't want their money in high risk hedge funds. i guess that is all i have to say. please use common sense and divest from hedge funds starting today. thank you.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. representing retired employee of the city and county. what i noticed in the packet was this letter inviting commissioner bridges to this government of chili in the second investment forum in chili in november. it is a great honor to have a member of our board to be invited to this event. it is an apex summit. there is a lot of stuff in here. i was blown away. it is a great, great honor, and we should congratulate commissioner bridges to be so honored to attend and represent

us at this great event. congratulations. >> i want to make a public service announcement. to my fellow commissioners. they can't answer back because of public comment. i am the new chairman. as the new chairman of the investment committee, i would like to encourage my fellow commissioners to attend the investment committee next week. we have a series of interviews for investment managers. i do not -- and the president knows me as the commissioner running a show, but i don't like to tell people that have come in to present with doing business and tell them we don't have a quorum. i would encourage everybody to

attend or if not give notice as soon as possible. thank you. >> let me emphasize that. please understand, if it is not obvious. interviewing two terms to be our general consultant which is one of the board's key roles for driving all our investments, if we do not have a quorum that decision is frozen for who knows how many months. please, your attendance is required if we want to do one of our very important decisions. >> this is good cop and bad cop there. >> do you want to speak on item 12? item 13 is pulled for today and for the foreseeable future. you have the floor, mr. coker. >> are we on item 7?

>> item 5. approval of the minutes of the september 11, 2019 meeting. >> move to approve. >> second. any amendments. public comment on item 5. seeing none, all in favor say aye. opposed. item 6. >> item 6. consent calendar. >> does anybody want any items on the consent calendar set aside for separate consideration. that does not require a second. a motion is in order. >> i move to approve. >> second. >> motion made and seconded. any public comment? all in favor say aye. okay.

7 investment calendar. >> annual esg update. >> in june of last year we were presented the strategic plan and then we hired andrew collins of the director of esg investing. he has 12 plus years experience at state street global advisers where he was the esg strategist and at the standards board where he was the technical research director. andrew also holds a bachelor's degree from jail university in environ -- yale university. he is akafst credential holder. in february of this year we also hired luke angus. luke has 10 years investment

experience. he is also a cfa charter holder, with a bachelor's degree in finance and is in the latterpinings in a degree and master degree in renewable energy and sustainability systems. today's update is an update on our three pillars of the strategy. those are active ownership, investment management, and esg collaboration and communication. there is an extensive amount of information in each of those three umbrellas. i want to recognize andrew that the framework that he introduced to the board last year analyzing risk factors has been recognized by peers throughout the country.

andrew and luke have also been very helpful and informative and collaborative in bringing the investment recommendations since their hire to the board. with that i will turn it over to andrew. >> thank you, bill, for that introduction. good afternoon, commissioners. i will pull up some slides here. i am here to do what will become an annual update on the esg platform. there is a fair amount to cover. quickly i will outline all of materials we are going through today. i believe each of the voting items will be called separately. i will outline what those are so we have a full picture what we are talking about. first, i will throw in an overview of the esg platform initially presented last june to

the investment committee. refresh everybody on those three pillars of that platform and provide updates what we have done over the last year or so. next i will provide updates to investment restrictions starting with tobacco, then sudan, then firearms and thermal coal. i will wrap up the discussion talks about how we are addressing climate risk across the plan. this including investment restriction in certain oil and gas companies and a new analysis we have done of climate risk in the utility sector. if that sounds good, i will start with the esg program update. as we have discussed last june, i am putting this back up on the screen. this esg platform provides a structured way to integrate

environmental and social and governing factors that we consider as we invest the plan. we are focusing on esg factors material to long-term investment performance and not focusing on any factors that are a concession or promote a social or political agenda. our issue platform is three pillars. pillar one is active ownership. active shareholders. we are engaging with companies in the portfolio around esg topics material to the operation of those companies. this is primarily public equity issuers and in certain cases those companies that issue public debt. in addition, as active owners we

are voting all shareholder proxies with direct ownership in companies and doing this consistent with the esg beliefs and proxy voting policy. pillar two relates to the way we incorporate esg into the manager due diligence an selection and monitoring. we are not only trying to mitigate the risks in potential investments but using esg as a lens to identify new opportunities. pillar theory lates to collaboration and communication on the important esg issues we are looking at. that is collabberating with other investments and communicating with our full range of stakeholders interested in how the plan is addressing esg considerations. i will provide an update on each

of the three pillars in terms of activities we have done over the last year or so. starting with one. active ownership. we have made progress in building out an active ownership program in 2018 and 2019. on proxy voting we made the switch from isf to glass lewis. new proxy research provider. we are excited to hear about the quality of research they provide, and on all of the shareholder resolutions that we vote and enhanced reporting capabilitities we have as part of that platform. we made updates to the proxy voting guidelines this year to strengthen voting in a few key areas. director diversity, dual class share structures and executive

compensation practices. we voted on 1500 meetings so far in 2019, and i think a few comments on the proxy voting season this year. we have noticed a significant be decrease in shareholder proposals on environmental and social projects. an uptick in those withdrawn by the proponent who filed them. the reason they are withdrawn the management of companies have agreed to address the issues in the shareholder proposal. these are not showing up in the voting statistics. management of company is largely being more responsive to shareholders around environmental and social issues and working to address those without letting those come to vote. on those that did vote, we

supported several key proposals on climate risk management, gender pay disparities, enhanced reporting and the adoption of board diversity policies. we used votes to indicate kernels around the management of climate risk. we voted, for example, against three directors' re-election amount exon including the c.e.o. woods for failing to adequately address climate change and voted on a chartered board committee at exon for environmental and social issues. that is one example. in february of next year we will provide a comprehensive report on the 2019 proxy voting activities once the year ends. >> moving to engagement.

this year marked the start of a program to more directly engage with companies on esg topics. we contacted about 50 through letter writing and e-mails and ended up having in person or over the phone conversations with about a dozen companies on material esg issues for those companies. we focused on thermal comb companies around the plan to ex it the comb industry. we met with oil and gas companies to discuss climate risk and the energy transition, and we took the lead on three companies lacking women on the board of directors and encouraged them to take steps to increase the board's diversity.

then we contacted gun retailers to press them to don't more and safer responsible practices around the retail of firearms. lastly, in the active ownership pillar. we engage order the regulatory and policy front. we lent our voice for several initiatives like investor and task force on climate related financial disclosures. quick overview of the three pillars, working all of these areas is ongoing and will continue that through the rest of this year to 2020. likewise, we have spent a good deal of time focusing on pillar two integrating esg throughout the management process. as we approach manager due diligence and make recommendations to invest, as we

monitor our manager's performance over time we are trying to understand two important things how they consider e sg factors. one is how they inform and and e in the investment strategy they were considering investing in. two, how does the manager think about the social and governance factors in the way they are running their own firm or company. under both questions is the belief esg consideration can and should be added to the full scope of our manager's process for investing our capital. we tried to be conscious in working with investment teams.

it is not a one size fits all approach. we don't have a bright line requirements about what we are expecting around the esg practices, but really we tried to work with each of our investment teams across the public and private markets to design a set of questions in a process that is getting at the most material esg questions relevant to that asset class for investing and informative of the end decision to make an investment recommendation or not. ultimately a lot of this process is qualitative, it involves asking questions of managers, filling out questionnaires, reviewing their materials with our professional judgment. a lot of it ends up being what managers say about themselves or the investment process.

the other thing we tried to do here is really to see if we can access, utilize data to validate if and how managers are actually doing what they are saying in terms of incorporating esg backers to the investment process. we are doing this at the individual strategy level but also at the asset class level and exploring ways at the full plan level. one of the things we have done recently is licensed a data set from msgi research. they are one of the premier providers in the world. we are be beginning to get comprehensive ratings for the public market funds right now but over time we hope to identify similar data sets for the entire portfolio. one of the things we are trying to do with the data is integrate

it with the existing system to measure risk and monitor performance. these are the style research and we are trying to do this so we can look at esg factors alongside financial factors and not in a separate or siloed kind of way. we have licensed carbon emissions data for a ca carbon footprint. as of june 30 this year the last time we ran the data, the public equity portfolio had a weighted average carbon intensity, which is the most relevant metric, that was 22% lower than the policy benchmark. the chart on the left shows this breakdown by sector and how that

emissions reduction is allocated and attributed to the sector allocations and stock selection. as you can see in the final two rows, a lot of the reduced carbon footprint is due to the portfolio being underway in the material sector as well as energy sector, which are the three most carbon intensive sectors in the economy. over the last 10 years if we look back further, the public equity portfolio, the carbon footprint declined 40% over the last 10 years versus 35% of the benchmark. we are out pacing in terms of the carbon footprint reduction. in the past year we can see the billion dollars in low carbon

strategies in the public equity port folio was effective in lowering the public equity carbon foot print by about 7%. the full details of the analysis are in a separate memo attached to the item. i wanted to highlight theketta aways here -- the keys here. we are continuing to do this third-party data to assess climate risk and other factors. we will talk about the climate risk piece in a little bit, but we are continuing to evaluate new ways to do this, measure the impact of our investments both in esg perspective as well as financial perspective. the other thing we have tried to do in terms of our analysis is look at the way that our investment restrictions and restricting investment in

certain sectors and certain companies has affected the performance of the plan from a return perspective over the last 20 years when we first put in place the investment restriction for tobacco. when we first added our investment restriction in 1998, this was restricted investment in u.s. tobacco firms. we have estimated that over time as we added additional restrictions to our portfolio, we have had a net negative impact of $64 million. the assumption here is that if we invested in a index portfolio of the policy benchmarks versus policy benchmark that excluded the securities in each of these

restricted areas, this is what the cumulative impact would have been over time. i think you can see here from the chart on the left our investments in tobacco has had the largest impact. that impact fluctuated over time to be both positive and negative but an aggregate basis is negative. the investment restrictions then on an aggregate basis since 2006 have been positive by about $25 million and the other exclusions in place for a period of one to three years have been pretty legally gibel. it is in another member mo. we will -- another memo. we will conduct this each year

and report back any new findin findings. to wrap up here with pillar three of the platform, which is really about esg collaboration and communication. much of the work we are doing here is aligned with the work that other investors in the country and around the world are doing, and we conduct a lot of our active ownership work in collaboration with other investors. this is superimportant as a way for spurs to im fiour voice and the impact we are creating with public companies, a collective voice is much stronger than alone voice. the partnerships are listed on the left side. they include the u.n. supported

principals for responsible investment, the investor coalition series, 30% coalition where we engage on director, gender and racial diversity. council of institutional investors and principals for responsible firearms industry which i will talk about later. and then as a reminder all of the work is built on the two key policies, one is our environmental and social government investment policies and procedures and esg values statement. the other is the proxy voting guidelines and principles. those are not attached with these materials but are available for your review. i will maybe pause there before we get into the voting agenda and i am happy