>> morning and welcome to a special rules committee meeting for today wednesday june 29. i'm the chair of the committee joined remotely by committee member supervisor connie chan and soon to be joined by vice chair supervisor rafael mandelman. harcourt is victoryoung . >> clerk: committees are now convened for enforcing attendance. and the public comment while we will provide remoteaccess via telephone . the board recognizes public access is essential and we will be taking public comment as

follows. first public comments will be taken on each item.those in person will be allowed to speak first and we will take those who are waiting on telephone lines. for those watching 26, 78 or 90 on ask sfgov.org public comment call in number is streaming across your screen. that number is 415-655-0001. and to the meeting id 2491 588 6137 then press pound and pound again. next you will hear a indicating you are unmuted and in listening mode only those on the telephone shoulddialá3 to be added to the speaker line . if you're on the telephone turn down your television and all listening devices. as indicated we will take public comment period for those attending in person we will go to ourpublic comment line . you may select public comments

in writing on either of the following ways email myself , at sfgov.org. public comments will be forwarded as part of the file. you may also send your own comments by us mail to your office in city hall, carl b goodlatte place. san francisco california 94102. that complete our additional announcements. >> thank you mister young. i'll make a few announcements as we share namely that we have quite a packed agenda of charter minutes today that go for quite some time. as an accommodation to supervisor safai i'm going to start by getting item 6 out of

order not to exceed 30 minutes and here that item1st . as an accommodation to the city attorney's office to consolidate two measures for which a particular city attorney needs to be present i will then take item one and then item 3. and then we will go in the remaining order. because of the amount of anticipated public interest in all of these items and some of them in particular, my colleagues have suggested and i agree that we will limit what will probably be hours of public comments to one minute per speaker. everybody is also welcome to send emails and letters that will be incorporated in the court file and with that mister young you please i read item number six item 6 is the

charter amendment for the city and county of san francisco to eliminate the full funding for cost-of-living benefit payments to members of the san francisco police retirement system who retired before november 2, 1996. subject to a monthly monetary and beneficiaries and years that theretirement system was not fully funded . >> thank you mister young. this charter amendment is authored by chief author supervisor safai and cosponsored by myself with supervisor melgar and i want to thank and acknowledge supervisor safai for doing long and difficult work to address this inequity and do so in a way that does not adversely impact our retirement system and with that the floor is yours. >> thank you chair, thank you

supervisor mandelman, thank you for hearing this item today for the charter amendment. for many years retirees have been vital to a basic cost-of-living adjustment. after november 6, 1996 election voters adopted an amendment benefiting allretirees . after november 8, 2000 election the voters added a full funding requirement to the benefit meeting at the paper supplemental cost of benefits retirement system had to be fully funded based on themarket value of previous years . that requirement was challenged as an unconstitutional impairment or vested contractual right and protected our benefits for the city of san francisco in 2015. the court of appeals held the

full funding requirement could not be applied to current employees or to those who had retired on or after november 6, 1996. it could be applied to thosewho had retired before 1996 . thus removing the benefits for pre-1996 retirees who had these benefits for 18 years. i just want to note that it was the first time in our city's history of benefits for retirees was ever away. this amendment in essence today overrides the protect our benefits decision regarding members who retired before 1996 allowing them to receive supplemental cost-of-living benefits even if the full funding requirement was not their side. we do say in the charter amendment we have to meet all of our economic benchmarks and so when everyone else in the city that's currently receiving a benefit received that

supplemental cost-of-living adjustment so with all the pre-1996retirees . let me tell you who these retirees are. most of them, the vast majority of them 70 percent make less than $50,000 a year. most of them are in their late 70s and 80s. all of them gave blood, sweat and tears to the city and dedicated themselves to the city. to have a benefit taken away from them and all the. in the room today know what that means. to have a benefit taken awayis unjust . and not only is it unjust to treat our seniors and elderly that way. many of them are living in poverty and so today my belief is that this is not just our charter amendment. it is the right thing todo. and and rc has the resources . it has the will.

it has the labor account in our history and we need to address this unjust move that we made. in the years when this requirement is not satisfied supplemental cost-of-living if it is capped . $200 a month for those retirees and their qualified beneficiaries that make any more than $50,000 a year in retiree benefits. this metric will provide a. a mental cost-of-living benefit to the lowest income retirees. described here. this amendment does not include retroactive payments. they're not going to get paid back for any of the years that they lost this benefit which is over a decade. and if this passes today, our retirement system will only adjust based allowance for this group to account for the supplemental cost-of-living

adjustment payments they would receive in 2013, 2014, 2017, 2018 and 2019. as a result of the full fundin requirement and subject to the cap for those making over $50,000 a year pension . to sum it up this charter amendment is to restore a benefit taken away and targets providing a cost-of-living adjustment to those retirees left out. many of them, some of them are disabled. some ofthem were veterans . all of them are family. so thank you supervisor peskin. thank you and early sponsor. thank you to supervisor melgar. there's a couple other supervisors that have committed but have not signedon it. supervisor walton, we have not gotten the official . supervisor chan, supervisor

ronen. all of whom have committed to this charter amendment. thank you mister chair. if you have any questions i'm happy to answer them but i want to keep my promise of staying to 30 minutes or less. thank you for adjusting us in the schedule today . >> why don't we go to the office of the comptroller. supervisor chan. >> i can't see you on the roster. the floor is yours. >> thank you chair peskin and my apologies for beingremote . i just have a clarifying statement from what supervisor safai said. i appreciate his leadership on thisissue . i am a supporter of the charter amendment even though i willnot be a cosponsor but i will be in support of the . i do have a question

specifically about the total dollar amount that will be coming with this adjustment and i understand that he has worked really hard on the costs of living adjustment dollar amoun . >> that supervisor chan is a good segue into the statement by the controller that is required by this charter amendment so why don't we have the office ofcomptroller answe that question . who is here on behalf of comptroller rosenfeld ? >> good morning chair peskin, janice levy with the controller's office and in response to supervisor chan's question as noted in our letter based on the retirement actuarial assumption and

policies the measure would result in expected costs to the cityof approximately 15 million annually for five years of which 9 million would be paid from the general fund . >> and 6 million would be by theretirement system .>> i believe so, yes. >> when they make that, they talk about general fund. the remaining comes from the enterprise deployment . >> thank you for that.>> that's okay. that's just because i've been so involved in all ofthis conversation. supervisor chan . does that answer your question satisfactorily? >> absolutely. i appreciate thefinal dollar amount . i think it was that supervisor safai has worked hard to make sure that we balance out and be

fiscally responsible but truly it's an obligation we have to people that have been serving for a long time so thank you so much chair andthank you so muc supervisor safai . >> with that why don't we go ahead .>> thank you again i just one clarification we circulated a email from our new cd i/o this morning. it was brought to my attention at the last minute that the actuary assumption was a five-year absorption. what we negotiated actually was a 10 yearabsorption . this email today says that our july 14 board meeting for the retirement system we will have an item that will allow the board to adjust our policy to considerable five and 10 years. so i spoke with the controller thismorning . that will allow them to successfully repair numbers to

account for what we negotiated with his 5.8, 5.9 million and general funds for 10 years. that's what i would impress to you and all the other folks that have been involved in these conversations. so that will be adjusted and every step of the legislative process the controller submits what wasjust submitted today. it will be adjusted and it will be updated . just wanted that to be on the recordand i've circulated the email for the record . so thank you. >> and then before we go to public comment this has been the subject of a mandated meet and confer. supervisor safai can tell us the status of thatmeeting . >> i spoke with the one outstanding group or association. they said they are fine they have been intending to convey that to human resources

department. i just spoke with them. they said they are, they have that information. if we don't have 100 percent clarity whydon't we go through the content of this hearing . and then maybe we can take action later in the agenda so that should give us some time to get clarity for the city attorney so wecan move forward today . >> will have ample opportunity we are around all day and evening. why don't weopen item number six of the public comment ? supervisor mandelman, good morning and we took item 6 out of order and we are now looking for in person public comment not to exceed. >> members who wish to speak on this item or join us in person should line up to speed along the side of the room . those who are listening remotely please call 415-655-0001. and for the meeting id of 6137

press pound and pound again. once connected pressá3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that will be your queue. you may begin your public comment. >> supervisors, i didn't think i could do this in a minute but after supervisor safai made every argument i can think of i think itwill be easier . yes, it's true that it's the only time the pension benefit has been taken away. i represent protect our benefits and i'm also the chair of restore retired city workers or benefits 2021. that's when we got our sacred thing

we've been fighting this for 11 years .one of the things, and a public court in may 2019 they and their ruling on page 18 which i prepared a little packet for you. they said well, even though we applaud the advocacy of the retirement system, the true remedy to take legislative action is reserved by the citizens so that's all we're asking as we took close to the city voters and let them decide onrestoring this . it's a tough time to govern. i know all you guys rights are being attacked and all the stuff. >> the speakerstime has elapsed . >> nancy jen and all these women whowere the proud voices to get disconnected . thank you very much. >> next speaker please. >> i'd like to let you know

that our timer is not giving us audible signals so i will be announcing when speakers times have elapsed . next speaker please. >> good morning supervisors. i am kim o'brien secretary-treasurer of the retired firefighters and spouses association. i'm here to ask you to pass on to the full board of supervisors thissupplemental charter amendment .for placement on this november ballot. when citizens provided retirees with a supplemental poll of 1996 i am one of them. approximately 2000 retired firefighters, their spouses and surviving spouses. time has eroded our numbers to about 500+ inflation has eroded the ability to maintain an independent life but instead we rely on family for financial assistance . this mostly affects and spouses

who receive a reduced retirement allotment. facets of this charter amendment do not guarantee retirees will ever receive the benefits of the charter amendment. please pass this charter amendment on to the full board ofsupervisors for this november about . >>. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> speaker: supervisors, president of my mobile 2021. the first thing i want to do is bank supervisor safai for drafting this compromise agreement. i'm not here in my capacity as president, i'm here as a lifelong voter of san francisco. i recall the 1996, measure that was passed and the very folks i thought were going to get the benefits of this are the folks

who've lost this benefit so i'm here to encourage the board to do theright thing and move this forward .i want to keep this real short. iread the arguments back in 1996 . i'm one of those people who reads these things. the argument ended with these lines. it says it's time for fairness, it's time for equity. it's time to keep the promise so i heard body tofollow what waswritten in 96 . do the right thing and move this forward .>> thank you mister vallejo, next speaker please. >> speaker: my name is herbert weiner. i'm a resident of district 1. on the executive board of retired police of the city and county of san francisco and a seiu retired member and member of protect our benefits. i've known three deceased people who have been denied the cost of living benefit

including nancy jen who is the founder of plb. and like equity i am advocating for the restoration of benefits and this is underlined by our economy which has high inflation and very high cost. it's only fair that living members of pre-1996 retirees receive this benefit and i am strongly advocating for that. you verymuch . >> next speaker please. >> my name is denise mayfield. i'm a little nervous. mymother is nancy jen . >> i saw the resemblance. >> anyway, my mom was born and activist. even when she retired as a city employee she became an activist

for the retirees. she was one of the group that formed plb. sorry. my mom always fought for the rights of all retired city employees to be able to have the money to have a quality retirement.whenever i was in a new job my mom always said how are the benefits. i had been a union activist because of my mom's influence . she and i believe. please do the right thing and get this on the ballot measure. iq so much. also we are having a celebration of life on july 16 at the pacifica community centerfrom 1 to 4 , you are all invited. >> clerk: as an honor to know and work with tiffany.

are there any other members of the public in these chambers who would like to testify on item 6? seeing none are there any remote members of the public who would like to testify remotely? >> any members of the public who arewaiting for remote public comment, first speaker please . can we have our first remote caller? caller, are you online? >> unattended.

>> clerk: i believe it is an unattended line, can we remove it move on to our next caller . >> speaker: thank you supervisors but i didn't plan on commenting on this item. >> clerk: when we do get your item you can press star3 to raise yourhand at any time . can i have our next caller please ? >> thank you board of supervisors, thank you for everyone inattendance . this is dennis williams of the fillmore , founder of heat san francisco a grassroots organization and also a sub chair of the fillmore merchants collaborative committee. i want to say please supervisors i urge you to access on the ballot for our retirees in thecity who have

been instrumental in shaping the city , worked hard and are suffering right now. so please we stand in the fillmore with this bad and it is on theballot in november so thank you . >> clerk: anymore remaining speakers on this item? >> we have one more caller. >> speaker: hello. >> clerk: we can hear you, pleaseproceed . >> speaker: i too am in support of putting this on the ballot in november. i am a retiree seiu 1021. i served on cope and we are backing these people who really need the money right nowbecause things are really hard . for anybody living in the city and i know i am a new member,

retiree member. although that's just because i didn't start until the end of 78 . sothat made me a new member . and i understand that retirees are diminishing in the amount ofbenefits that they are receiving . and although they are in crucial need of enough funds to survive living insan francisco , we particularly have to focus on the ones most inneed . thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is dorothy silver, i didn't give my name. >> clerk: we have one more speaker, next speaker please . >> speaker: i assume you can

hear me. on this issue i have no pacific point of view on the supplemental cost of living benefit aspect i did want to speak to the other aspect that the executive director under this proposal would beemployed by individual contract . this would create yet another employee outside of civil service or the provisions of not an exemptnon-civil service appointment . the puc and mta directors lost the infrastructure at puc are already subject toindividual contract . i don't think that's a good direction . i think it's better to have department heads the department heads under the city as exempt from civil service and i would want to know a little bit more about why this is considered a good direction. i don't particularlyconsider it

so. that's my concern with regard to this measure at this time . >> any additional speakers for this item western mark that completes the speakers for thi matter. public comment on item number six is closed . and supervisor safai, the last speaker did bring up something with regard to thisamendment . it deserves to be addressed. >> absolutely. i willcomment on that real quick . we as the president of the retirement system we are committed to recruiting and attracting the most talent and leadership. what came to our attention at the very end of the process is we just moved to hire a new cio was part of that process negotiating often times your attracting people from other parts of the country which

requires relocationbenefits, which requires transition benefits . all of that we were not able to offer a negotiable side to come up with a creativesolution . thankfully we were able to do that but it came to the attention of the entire board of retirement that it puts us at a competitive disadvantage to not have the ability to directly negotiate with someone that's overseeing 30+million dollars system . and that is how it's been all over the country. so we consulted the representative union. we got there by involved in the negotiations. we worked with carol and hr their team. we worked with our city attorney and we added this small piece of this overall charter which we intend to do

as part of this overall structural support.we thought it was the right time and again all of you have been made aware of this . it was referenced there are only twoother systems heads in our city , mtaand puc how the structure . wethink it was the right time to do this . we haveconsented on this . last thing i want to say i want to thank all of the protect our benefits leadership for all their hard work and their willingness to negotiate with us on 1021. local 21, the poa, local 798 and everyone involved in representingmembership . in helping us shake this charter amendment. i also want to thank our city attorneys for her hard work and working with the team and also my fellow commissioner along with joe, our longest-serving

commissioner. very helpful in this process. and thank the dhr team who are artists with carol eisenand our team for helping us get tothis to the finish line . iq mister chair . >> thank you supervisor. >> thank you chair and thank you for doing the hard work. and all the fine folks who worked onthis . >> good job. >> i was just a guy who said keep it under $10 million. >> that's okay i've already thanked you as a cosponsor . >> i understand that issues with meat have been resolved to the satisfaction of the department of human resources

and city attorney's office and we can vote on this now and to that end i will make a motion to send item number six to the board of supervisors with positive recommendation where once it arrives it will as required sit for a week before it can be voted on by the board of supervisors to be placed on november 8 about you on that motion esther clerkor rollcall please. >> clerk: on that motion supervisor chan . [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair: why don'twe move on to item number one and as i said we will go toitem number three .>> item number one . item number one is a charter amendment. the drive to amend the charter

of the city and county of san francisco to provide for accelerated review of 100 percent affordable housing projects, educator housing project andmarket rate projects that provide significant increase , affordability and private department municipal review in lieu of approval or certain appeals to city boards and commissions and an election to be held on november 8, 2022. >> thank you mister young. supervisor chan the floor is yours. >> thank you chair peskin. colleagues, iintroduced this legislation , measure last month. but i'm going to start off mentioning about something that i am not an expert on. which i think chair peskin and vice chair mandelman know better than i do is that this actually really touches on some

of the conversation around the environmental quality act that protectsenvironmental health and safety .the critical review process and protects us of course also part of it is the san francisco discretionary review. that's in my opinion it's really think about land use in the context of the history and neighborhood impact and i think that i have great respect for and i think about it in a way that is to safeguard our environment and our community from gentrification and displacement. but we know that we are facing a housing crisis. that we have not produced enough affordable housing. while we have produced enough market rate, we're far far behind on affordable housing

introduction. we're not in a space where we're meeting the housing production mandate according to the original housing needs assessment. the reason why this ballot measure was introduced is to accelerate the process and build real affordable housing that san francisco families can afford. to safeguard against any deceitful attempt to mislead ourvoters, our san francisco voters and residents about market rate housing and affordable housing . we do have to like i said earlier accelerate the production of affordable housing to meet our cities housing demand but i think there are ways to do it that we can be thoughtful and it's the reason why this ballot measure, the affordable housing production at will truly affordable housing for families and residents to really think about that area of median income that would be inclusive

of very low income and middle income families and households. this legislation also looks at workforce development by requiring specific language like skilled and trained but it also really brings workers so that they can be paid the minimum wage because let's be real. right now as we build market rate and as we don't all this housing that the people who built them cannot afford to live in the housing that so we've got to solve that problem for them as well. this, measure will also bring greater transparency and accountability into how the city bands are affordable housing dollars that we make sure we are on track and that the money actually goes towards buildingthe housing that people need . i want to thank president

walton and supervisor peskin for your early cosponsorship. i told the president will also be a cosponsor now so i am also proud of how the building trade and labor council and united educators stand in solidarity with us on this ballot measure. last but not least i definitely want to thank the council of community housing organization that people would call them. they really helped us the partner in this to make sure that we move forward with proper feedback, not only ideal for working families but that we can actually producereal affordable housing . i do have some amendments that i will be proposing today but i'm also happy to open to conversation with colleagues,

with you now and also to public comments before i come back to officially make the motion to amend. thank you chair peskin. >> if you want to briefly describe before we engage the panel in public in this discussion because some of the substance of thoseamendments are policed . >> understood, thank you. in the amendment we're going to make reference to planning cod section 401 . to prevent pulled in port in the affordable housing application and this is specifically making sure that we're clarifying the qualification for affordable housing. i believe that some of our language was put in for the four-part legislation that was recently passed at land use

yesterday. and then another amendment is to relate to clarifying edits to the directors which is the mayor's office housing and community development director's annual report and then also for the defined scope to make sure it's not going to be vacant as a set aside but truly is the source of the mayor's budget position so we're defining the scope to include forces and proposed allocation for each type of housing . we're also going to in the amendment that allows the board of supervisors to create an advisory body to have options tocreate an advisory body . and so that's what we have so far. i know that there are conversations that's happening i think similarly to what, i don't want to take the words vice chairman dylan's mouth but

i have seen some of the communications related to our click yesterday. many mentioning very similar goals which i think that one is open to that and we be prepared to assess the amendment and including prevailing wages, this is addressing the problems that are anywhere to 3to 9 units . and then as well as 25 units for skills and training. i'm sorry, i'm a little bit sick so i want to make sure that's clear. and i'm rambling. >> you have 10 million other californians sorry for what you experienced. before i go to supervisor mandelman why don't we hear from the office of the comptroller miss leavy as to the controllers on thismeasure

? >> thank you chair. this charter amendment would impact the cost ofgovernment . to the extent this legislation shortens the approvals process the city of affordable housing projects could see cost savings due to shorter development timelines and construction timelines andproject costs . to the extent this legislation was old and increase in affordable housing rates are due to lower assessed values or tax-exempt properties it could result in a future loss of property revenue for the city however i would consider it likely most of these impacts willbe modest in the range of projects eligible for the measures accelerated reveal . thank you see one supervisor mandelman. >> thank you chair peskin and supervisor chan.

i've circulated some thoughts about amendments. i'm not anticipatingintroducing amendments today . i really just want to say a few things and maybe help share some of where my head is at. this ballot measure and this other ballot measure that we have the ability to amend. i've been thinking about missing middle. missing middle is aphrase that gets used about a particular type of housing . it describes something about the state of housing in san francisco. i think that most and franciscans recognize that we have a housing crisis and that the housing crisis is related to the shortage of housing for almost everyone. the solution to that involves a mix as far as we can get there.

a mix of subsidized housing for people who cannot afford the market and also an increase that we are producing through the market to bring down press. i also think there is a middle out there in san francisco. certainly in my district. we're not prepared right now to give up any ability you might have two sheep developments in san francisco's neighborhoods. what i hope that we could do is come up with paths forward on the ballot that would address what i think that missing middle is directing us to do and all too often we get polarized between neighborhood advocates who have sometimes justifiable fears of losing whatever happens in their

neighborhood and housing advocates . i've who i think sometimes fear that there is a value or validity in what neighborhood advocates are saying. the mayors legislation is sort of underlying all thisi think . it states largely on a piece of legislation that in rules i had a lot of concernsabout that legislation . in my mind in an ideal world we would have continued to workon that but there was not time . but the fundamental notion that we should be making it easier to build all kinds of housing including market rate housing, it's baked into the proposal that is out there. i think it is called an affordable housing metric but the pieces of the mayors legislation that are most

concerning are not of the affordable housing.there are about money market rate housing and i think streamlining market rate housing is what we do but i think we need to behonest about what we're talking about and i do , i would hope that the board of supervisors goes with this other piece of legislation might be able to meet the moment and think about the way we actually advance not just streamlining but some set of projects that would make it easier to get to. that's kind of what we set up to do and that's reflected in the amendment that i am circulating for input from all the various stakeholders who d . this involves a lot of folks but i'm hoping we could maybe agree on some additional part of this legislation that would perhaps make it all board of supervisors plan to move forward, not just streamlining

of fully affordable projects but also the streamlining of some kind of other projects that i think would address our housing crisis.what i'm proposing is an inclusion of an eligible streamlining category of neighborhoods and projects that would have a project of 3 to 9 units that would add at least one additional unit to the property so we're not going to streamline the monster bill that happens to have an additional bonus that will never getused . and pay prevailing wages for construction workers and not making zoning modifications. there's anotherprogram , there is a density program that members of theboard are familiar with . they thought about trade-offs and come up with additional density levels or additional affordability levels to trade for increased, to trade for

increases in height or density bonuses. i think the challenge with those homeless sf projects is that we haven't funded as many of them as we'd like to at this point. i think that home sf offers us another alternative to think about streamlining in exchange for the affordability that's required by the existing program. so i think we should include home sf. i think that as we do these things i am sensitive to concerns that my colleagues have and i share around this movement. it's not realistic to think san francisco will fill the housing we needto without small-scale housing but we need , i think that we need to be careful to make sure that we're meeting that displacement and that we have homes for san francisco and i think that it's important to allow for streamlining

projects where there is existing housing that would be demolished only so long as we replace the units of comparable affordability and a right of first offer for the replacement units that occupancy are providing for any rent control unit. where the most recent occupancy was a low income household making 80 percent of ami , so this is largely from state legislation that was a mouthfu . it is available to look at. i also have some concerns about opening the door to large-scale demolition so i think it is important that if we allow for streamlining in our neighborhoods infill processes

and the streamlining of home sf projects that we expand the scope of historic properties that would be excluded from the ministerial streamlining to include small category a historic resources for any building constructed prior to 1945. it would be subjectto the existing rules around review of demolition . such properties would not be eligible for streamlining at the same level of environmental review and other discretionary products but this would make significant relaxation to where you can do these kinds of residential projects without having to go through that or ceqa or another discretionary process. that's kind of what i'm thinking . for me, that would be a major move forward.we would not only be baking and sb 35 as

something thevoters had said . which has been great for affordable housing but we would also be making in my opinion a real move in the direction of streamlining of largely market rate projects and we haven't produced a ton of them. i would love for the sport to come together on something like that. thank you supervisor and for i give supervisor chan an opportunity to respond i want to make sure these amendments that you are circulating that i received last night are part of the file and that any member of the public canaccess them after this meeting . we provided them to city attorneys and the clerk wouldbe where you would provide them . i have seen them and even

discuss them with your staff this morning.okay. that wouldbe good . thank you mister young. those will be part of the file in so far as this will not be acted on by this committeetoday . given amendments, some of which will be incorporated tomorrow and some of which will be incorporated at our next meeting this will be continued to another special meeting on july 26, a week from today. with thatsupervisor chan . >> thank you chair and thank you so much to chair mandelman's amendment and i am definitely committed to the amendments or one of the set of

amendments that he's suggesting which is what i'm interested to make the amendment today with my motion is that on the new version that we're submitting today is to insert the eligibility for a 100 percent eligibility for the 100 percent affordable housing development or an increase of affordable housing projects of 10 units or more for a prevailing wage. and for any of the ones that i just mentioned where 25 units or more i should see increased affordable of 25 units or more. i believe that is what supervisor mandelman has suggested in his amendmentand

i'm happy to move those forward today . so to some of the other ones that supervisor mandelman has suggested wethought about home sf . i want to say that home sf was an effort for former supervisor katie tang was part of that effort but that was well thought out program. and i know that it's in the works and it's working in the richmond so when we put forward this ballotmeasure , we did not include home sf because we didn't want to try to fix something that's not broken. it's working so i just want to put out there that's the reason why home sf has been part of the ballot measurewhich is a charter amendment . and so that was my reasoning. but hearing what supervisor

mandelman had talked about, one is to make sure the expanded scope of what we consider historical properties or potentially historical properties , the ones that may have historical resources and such to actually protect them and not be subject to this whole exemption. renewed exemption. i think that is reasonable. i think that's something that's definitelyinteresting and we can have that conversation . as far as existing housing demolition i would like to learn more about your thoughts there and then see what we can do and i think ultimately we do have to share a goal. the shared goal is we want to protect existing tenants and existing affordable housing

stock and so i look forward to talk more about that with you. and i'm grateful that chair peskin will have a special hearing so it allows us to make more amendments in time. hopefully we do get the tools of this body and thiscommittee and we can go to a full board for a vote and have an opportunity to make it to the balance in november. but ireally appreciated . >> why don't we open item number one up for public comment not toexceed one minute .please in chambers . >> members of the public who wishto speak and are joining us in person should line up to speak now . for those joining us remotely pleasecall 415-655-0001 . enter the meeting id of transport.

press pound and pound again. once selected you will pressá3 to enter the speaker line. for those in theinterview please wait till the system indicates you have been unmuted and that will be your cue to begin comments . >> welcome members of the board of supervisors . this situation is complicated. the operation has increased. there are many locations in san francisco that are one-story buildings that areold . and some of those buildings go six-story, a story. you can just rebuild their. now, this is not for housing.

[inaudible] would be immoral and in that regard it is unrealistic extremes. and requirements that make it nearly impossible to create affordable housing.you slow the process down. >> the speakers time has elapsed. >> speaker: thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> speaker: good morning supervisors, i'm ceo of habitat for humanity greater san francisco. i'm here to respectfully disagree and say we would like you to not move forward with this ballot because it has a lot of confusing and misleading language. we work every day to build affordable homeownership in san

francisco. for 30 years and we believe the measure we put forward this morning foraffordable homes now is a great solution to the problem . it takes care of many of the issues you raised so we respectfully ask you to please work with our group and move back ballot initiative forward and help us that are producing 100 percentaffordable homeownership and join with us in that great effort .>> next speaker please. >> is afternoon. good afternoon. i live in the lower eighth and i'm a real estate agent and also a board member of the healthcare action coalition and every day i talked to families cannot afford to buy their homes because we've made it very difficult to build anything new. i also respectfully ask that i disagree with this because we have a ballot measure here and it will streamline our housing production. it will create more housing and make it easier for us to build in san francisco soeverybody

can stay here . i'd especially ask youto support affordable homesnow because that is what we need . we can streamline and go forward and be healthy . >> next speaker please. >> good afternoon chair the rules committee. i'm up field rep and also a d1 resident. i'm here to speak in opposition to the affordable housing production and my district d1 fewer than 100 members of housing has been built. it's time to stop playing ball and start building.ask you to please join me in helping 52,000 other sanfranciscans in support of affordable homes now . thank you. >> next speaker. >> on a representative from local 22. the carpenters support affordable homes now. it would provide some of the

strongest labor standards ever proposed in construction and the competing charter amendment does not have high standards. no healthcare guarantees for workers and in fact the competing amendment is an attempt by handful of supervisors to suppress affordable homes now which is backed by over 50,000 members of this electorate here in san francisco. it is our responsibility to represent the workers of the supervisor back to and would continue to ignore. the supervisors amendment will not beget either the inclusion nor the construction that's dessert so let's unify behind the practical solution which is affordable homes now. let's start stop playing politics in a crisis and make sure our unions and healthcare are available to pollworkers. let's build this city and get behind affordable homes now . >> next speaker. >> speaker: supervisors, chair peskin on the senior field representative .

i'm also a longtime d1 resident. i'm here alsorespectfully oppose this amendment . because basically we have san francisco affordable homes now which provides prevailing wage for all those workingin the project. healthcare for not just them but their spouses and their children, no exclusions . apprenticeship training to allow skills which will in turn provide for security of a career and retirement benefits for them and their families. local hires along with our partners will allow for continued equity and upward mobility of all sanfranciscans coming into all our traits . and compliance which binds them all together. we have a real fear here that having to competing measures will ensure the failure and destruction of both and this particular bill is being amended so much that it no longer is what it purports to

be. >> next speaker.>> good morning chair members. my name is april atkins and i am a field representative for local 22 and i'm here in support of affordable homes now. thank you for allowing me to speak. affordable housing would create opportunities for residents of san francisco who work on projects that have a living wage giving them an opportunity to gothrough apprenticeship programs which is a four-year apprenticeship program which is equivalent to an aa degree . at the completion of the program they willbecome journey level carpenters going through their apprenticeship program they will be able to work in the city they livein . and provide a good housing and wage for themselves as well as their families . being born and raised in san

francisco i was able to live comfortably when it came to purchasing a home it was that wasn't affordable and i had to move out ofthe city to purchase the home. local hiring isessential . >> the speakers time has elapsed . >> next speaker. >> thanks for allowing me to speak. i live in no we valley and i'm a university professor author and biography ofjane jacobs . i ask you all respectfully to withdraw this charter amendmen . it doesn't go with the one supported by mandelman and read for a bunch of reasons but primarily the one in my mind is our trust in institutions is being destroyed and have to ballot measures, that look deceptively similar is going to make people even lose more faith in our constitution and that's something that we shouldn't be in the fire like that. we should be forming a

consensus around mayor breed affordable act . thank you so much. >> my name is weiner. i'm a resident of district 1 and i want to question this charter proposal. one, are the same developers that destroyed housing and meet people homeless going to build this new affordable housing? they can't have it 2 ways and it's totally unfair. also will this new housing at the same living space that every member of this audience enjoys? i don't want to have five spaces concentrated in a given area that was formerly occupied. you have to have adequate housing and it has to have adequate living space.

also the fact that spurr is promoting this. makes me question it. i referred to spurr as the society for ascension of urban revolt. as long as their hands on it everyone should question it. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> good afternoon supervisors. myname is don oakley . i have worked the majority of my 27 year career, 20 years of it in the mission rock area, mission bayarea . and i strongly oppose the housing production act by connie chan and support the affordable elements now act which will get homes out there and get people in them and get the language that's needed for healthcare, the prevailing wage

is what we need to get out there for the workers. please think about that today. >> next speaker. >> alex landsberg with the electrical industry on behalf of building trades. i want to thank you all for keeping construction in mind and incorporating standards for 25 units and looking for ways to create real affordability for people rather than a streamlined getaway. sort of streamlining gentrification if you will . >> next speaker. >> thank you for the opportunity toaddress the board. my name is john, i'm a member of 9068 . we strongly oppose connie chan's proposed charter amendment. >> good afternoon, tim have a

lot of industrial partner local 2236 and i've worked my entire career in san francisco and i'd like to respectfully oppose supervisor chance proposed charteramendment, thank you . >> speaker: i am from 715 carpenter. i've been in the city for about fiveyears . i support connie chan's proposal, thank you. >> next speaker.>> good afternoon committee. i've been with carmen since 1999 and right now i am a field rep at local 22 in sanfrancisco . i'm here to oppose the affordable housing reduction act and ask that it just be th

affordable homes now act . >> good afternoon supervisors. kenneth stillslocal 9144 . i'm in opposition of connie chan's proposed amended charte . >> speaker: local 34 pound driver in opposition ofconnie chan's proposed charter amendment, thank you . >>. >> speaker: kevin fisher, i live in the castro and i'm trying to decide whether san francisco is going to be a place in the long run for my family and place where i can live comfortably and i think it's not surprising that given the types of piecemeal

solutions that are being considered that san francisco saw the largest loss of residents of any major city in the united states last year. these need to bevery serious measures considered to make it an affordable place for young people to stay long-term and for our seniors to live here comfortably, thank you . >> good afternoon chair and members of the rules committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today . i'ma member of norcal carpenters local 2236 and i work as a cabinetmaker for 17 years . another senior organizer and carpenterslocal 22 representing 4000 members . we oppose supervisor chance charter proposed charter amendment. we believe the proposal is political and an effort to confuse voters and will not increase housing production in san francisco. there already exists

legislation the state level thathas the sameelements of this proposal and havenot worked . we asked the committee do not support this horrible housing production act , thank you . >> next speaker. >> director of organizing for norcal carpenters union representing 38,000 men and women, 4000 of which are here in san francisco out of carpenters local 22. i spent my morning turning in 52,000 voters balance with signatures insupport affordabl homes now and what that says is san francisco is getting it all wrong . san francisco needs to do better . voters are tired of the bureaucratic process that does more to createhousing and it says the responsibility of all districts to provide housing not just a few districts . we are far from reaching our goal by 2031. we need to support real change like affordable homes now. real change that generates an

amount of san francisco need affordable mixed-use educator worker housing and it will connect local residents to working-class jobs where there's a pathway to an apprenticeship , prevailing wages the standard and healthcare is required for workers housing. supervisor chan is misleading and deceptive initiative is not regressive . >> next speaker. >> good afternoon supervisors housing action coalition . also here to respectfully oppose the charter amendment you have before you today. there are a number of issues we have with the charter that have been proposed. one of the main pieces i believe is the original press release stated there's a skilled provision of of 100 percent affordable housing and it's just not true. the legislation itself does not contain any requirement for 100 percent bills or 100 percent affordable housing projects. at the end of the day we think

this places unrealistic constraints to make it impossible and the primary purpose is to confuse voters into undermining a pro-housing proposal submittedto the department this morning . thank you very much. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon, john obelisk, community housing. the affordable housing production act is based on the principle ofproviding a public benefit in this case by right of approval for public good increased affordable housing . that measure that's been talked about before you seems to get voter approval to change the definition of affordable housing but affordable housing when applied to people with higher incomes making it to 140 percent affordable ami. there measure would apply that new public good to get a public benefit streamlined. that act you measure would give by right approval for projects that provide a slight increase

of housing that they are now calling affordable under the definition . the affordable housing production act would provide by right approval for a project that with greater public benefit that significantly increases a portion of affordable housing utilizing the existing affordable housing standards which continue to build housing for people with incomes that can only afford ... >> clerk: we are going with one minute today. >> next speaker please. and comments can be submitted to the board of supervisors an this committee . >> speaker: i'm andrew sutherland,longtime resident and also my first time coming up and speaking . the ... i often get questions from friends asking what should

i vote on stuff and they're very confused about all the ballot measures and it's now very clear to me why. we have one measure that's been submitted and will clearly build housing in the city and now we have a poison pill alternative measure that is being proposed by supervisor chan and it's clearly just an effort to confuse voters and this is why my friends get confused. this is why no housing gets built in the city so i asked that we not pass this amendment. thank you. >> speaker: good afternoon members of the committee. i'm here representing found as. we urge the rules committee to pass along this charter a

minute to the full board with unanimousrecommendation and then to us the voters in november . this charter amendment will help the city accelerate the production of affordable housing . that's how we can in short the current and future generations can afford to live in the city . san francisco has far exceeded its goals for market rate housing having built 151 percent of its market rate production goal but less than 50 percent of its affordable housing goal. this charter amendment offers an opportunity todeepen collaboration and build unity between executive and legislative branches . it provides a space for the community to inform the development of affordability plants . the affordability housing production act is the only act that meaningfully provides affordable housing and holds the city budget process accountable to many affordability goals. thank you supervisor for your leadership to create a charter amendment that will shift attention back to affordable housing. >> good afternoon supervisors.

i am representing the council of community housing organizations here in support of the affordable housing production act . that was developed by broad coalition of including organized labor, san francisco laborcouncil and united educators of san francisco . affordable housing developers, repcoalition and others . you've heard a lot about the mb have tomeasure which is based on deception . many of you have probably met the folks with the green shirts askingfor signatures . once i sat down with one of these folks, i paid signature gatherers who wanted to know more, walked her through the legislation and her eyes lit up when she realized what she was gathering signatures for as far as a measure that would give preferential treatment to development that would provide just three units out of 100 four folksearning $130,000 , individuals withstudios for rent at $3300 .

that is not what we are creating. we arecreating more affordability . thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> speaker: chinatown community development center, our board has not yet taken a position on this matter but from the staff level we are very concerned that the voters need an actual choice on the ballot between approaches to affordable housing. the proposal that i guess is being submitted today by signatures would be redefined affordability crisis by redefiningaffordability . so that for an average two-bedroom apartment, the rents would be $3700 up from currently our average for 100

percent affordable at 80 percent ami. that is $2500 a month. specifically there raising the rent and calling it affordable housing and we think that's fundamentally problematic so we think voters need a choice. i thinkvoters need to understand that there is a different path for affordable housing . >> the other individuals who would like to testify on item number one in the chamber ? seeing none why don't we go to public comment on this item. >> we currently have 35 colors on the line. can we have our firstcaller please ? >> i'm calling on behalf of you a local 38. congressman's third union in san francisco. we currently have proximally 400 trained members. we stand with thesan francisco building trades council and thank you for standing with

local construction workers, thank you . >> next caller please. >> my name is jonathan dressler local 713. i'm in support of the affordable homes now initiative andin opposition of supervisor chan's measure. thank you . >> next caller please. >> i'm in the borough of drywall 96 eight. we currently have around 460 members on the ready to work list. i stand in support of the affordable homes now initiative and in opposition to supervisor tends better. thank you. >> can we have our next caller? >> speaker: hello supervisors. i am a resident of the city of

district 10. i'min support of san francisco building trades council offered for standing . trained construction workers which i am one and very proud of it. i've been given the opportunity to provide for my family. thank you. >> we have oneperson in chambers who is here for public testimony so i'll go back in chambers for a minute . >> kim money san francisco labor council. i wanted to say the current charter amendment before you is completely in line with thesan francisco housing our workers . in terms of affordability. as you all are aware we put up a report on the desperate need for housing and workers in the city. and workers crossed the line. and the ami breakdown of affordable housing in this measure coincides with that report. i want to thank this will

create more housing for workers. then that affordable housing now initiative that is gathering signatures so i want to say that this is completely in line with the labor council affordability criteria that we put out in our housing and workers report. >> thankyou and we will go back to public comment . >> i'm with carpenters local 22 and i stand in support of the affordable homes now initiative. it isthe position of supervisor chan's measure. thank you . >> next caller please. >> my name is eugene morris with carpenters local152 . i want to thank you chair and the committee.

i'm inopposition of supervisor chan's measure and i stand in strong support of affordable homes now . >> next caller. >> good afternoon. i'm anastasia your monopolist, member of san francisco tenants union. i think supervisor chan for her leadership in creating the amended that willshift attention back to building truly affordable housing . it's the kind our communities desperately need. the housing production act will build truly affordable housing for families and residents by increasing the percentage of on-site affordable units in new projects , support our workforce development by requiring skilled and trained union employment and requiring workers to be paid at a prevailing wage so that those who build housing can afford to

live in it . build greater transparency and accountability into how the city spends affordable housing funds by requiring an annual report for the budget process. the measures championed by san franciscoeducators , the labor council, building trades and leading affordable and housing advocates. we urge you to send it to the fullboard with a positive recommendation . >> next caller. >>. [please stand by]

affordable homes now initiative and in opposition to supervisor chan's measure of the affordable housing production act. i thank you for your time and allowing me to speak. have a great day. >> thank you. next caller. do we have a caller on the line? >> good afternoon, local 152.

i stand in support of the affordable homes now initiative and in opposition to supervisor chan's measure. thank you. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> hello, i live in district 5. i support new housing of all kinds. we must work on the afford and housing. i oppose supervisor chan's measure, we cannot keep kicking the can down the road. the intent to obstruct project and allow the same old nimby hacks to oppose housing. empty parking lots, i hope the board of supervisors will get in line with 60 plus san franciscans that want more

housing built now. thank you. >> thank you. next caller. >> good afternoon. my name is matthew ward, 15 year member of local 102. in support of the affordable homes now initiative and oppose supervisor chan's measure. i hope you all have a wonderful day, thanks for hearing me out. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> hi, this is jack burton, calling in today. thanks for holding this meeting and allowing public comment. a resident of district 5. i'm also an architect for afford and housing in san francisco and this measure, while trying to do its best is deceptive and a bit naive and i oppose this measure. house vital to building

affordable housing in the city. currently it exceeds $100,000 a unit. this measure will raise the percentage from 21.5% to 35% of units to be affordable and mixed income housing, which sounds very attractive but it's naive at best and deceptive to voters at its worst. this measure just will knock people out, it will actually create less housing with less development. >> your time has elapsed. >> i am for development. please do not support this measure. thank you. >> thank you, next caller. >> hi, r.j. ferry, local plumbers. i have over 400 members out of

work in san francisco, i stand with the san francisco building trades council and thank the author for standing with local construction workers. thank you very much, have a nice day. >> thank you, next caller. >> good afternoon, john doherty, representing electrical workers since 1895. i stand the author for standing with local construction workers drafting the affordable housing act this. measure will lift all in the trades and provide for sustaining incomes and healthcare in exchange for stream lining the approval process. all the trades used to work on providing a lateral wage to the middle class but the carpenters looking to garner political favor by pulling the ladder behind them and leaving the rest of the trades to fend for themselves. i strongly support the affordable housing production act. thank you.

>> thank you. next caller, please. >> my name is, good afternoon, supervisors. my name is guiermo, i represent 68l, and well over 500 unemployed members that work here in san francisco and we stand in support of affordable homes now. and oppose supervisor chan's measure. thank you. >> next caller. >> yes, my name is ed reyes, president of iron workers local 377, san francisco. i have 200 members that are currently on the out of work list. i stand in strong support of supervisor chan's measure to streamline affordable housing and i appreciate the measure

being put forward. please move it forward to the full board. thank you. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> any name is jim chapel, a member of the hack, a long time housing advocate and 45-year resident of d.8. at 9:00 this morning, true housing advocate submitted 52,000 petitions to put the measure on the november 8th ballot. that will speed up the entitlement of affordable housing. in contrast, the proposed chapter amendment on your agenda today will assure that even less affordable housing is constructed than today. it is completely unrealistic and uninformed. this proposed measure is cynical, designed to confuse the voters, and profoundly anti-housing. please oppose this measure.

and please inform yourselves on ways to actually increase housing affordability, stop grandstanding and support the affordable homes measure. this attempt to confuse the voters is simply unconscionable. thank you. >> thank you. can we have the next caller. >> supervisors, good afternoon, my name is pedro mendez, a field representative for carpenter's union local 22. we have 208 carpenters on the ready to work list, i stand in support of the affordable homes now initiative give agencies of all working class women and men, i stand in opposition of supervisor chan's measure. thank you. >> thank you. next caller.

>> hello, speaking on behalf of action. we are in opposition to the proposed amendment because it will ultimately be a hindrance to building now homes. the proposed development standards would also be significant constraints on housing development and prevent san francisco from a housing element. >> thank you, can we have our next caller. >> this is mr. dennis williams of d5. business owner of a real estate development company. i have to humbly oppose supervisor chan's ballot proposal, approval process to go through so many committees, leave it open to be unjustly halted. i stand with affordable homes

now. 30 plus years, no black real estate developers have led affordable housing projects in the city. we demand to build, i want to commend jay bradshaw, executive officer carpenters union and ron wilmet who i met from the carpenters union and said they would welcome working for a black developer as many other unions would and they are not racist as my sign said and protest at the panhandle park months ago and they would love to be hired. so, we are ready. i challenge supervisor chan, pesky and president walton to implement -- >> your time has -- >> for minority real estate developers. thank you. >> thank you, can we have the next caller. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is martin, i represent

over 200 members that live and work in san francisco. today i stand in support of the affordable homes now and in opposition of supervisor chan's measure. thank you very much. >> thank you. next caller. can we have our next caller, please. this may be an unintended line. so move on to the next caller. maybe we can come back and check this line. please proceed. >> supervisors, can you hear me? supervisors, this is lorraine petty, senior renter and long time affordable housing advocate for seniors and people with disabilities. i'm here to support supervisor chan's charter amendment. it's going to bring genuine

levels of affordability and accountability to new developments. mayor breed measure heading to the ballot is deceitfully named and holds out only false hope for affordability, it's really intended to build housing most people cannot afford. 30% of san francisco's population by the year 2030. supervisor chan's charter apartment is what we need, thank you. >> can we have our next caller. >> good afternoon, my name is paulina, i'm commenting in support of affordable homes now and against the poison pill discussed today. i signed on to affordable homes early because i felt strongly. now potential to have two competing measures. confused the voters and possibly

kill housing. exemplary of what's wrong, unfortunately. please support affordable homes now. thank you. >> thank you, next caller. >> hello, my name is weston cooper, i live in d3 in north beach. it's a neighborhood that's important to me and the same neighborhood my grandparents moved to in the 1920s with my 3-year-olds mother. my grandmother cut hair and worked as a bank teller and today they would not have been able to move to san francisco because the policies have made it one of the least affordable cities on earth. for generations we have seen discretionary review and ceqa abused to kill new housing. sad and desperate decision to need a charter amendment to bypass some reviews, i'm excited

about the affordable homes now amendment and i hope that the counter bill that supervisor chan peskin are co-sponsoring does not make it to the ballot, i think it will confuse voters and unlikely to have an impact on the badly needed housing supply that we need. >> your time -- >> thank you for taking the time to listen. >> thank you. next caller. >> this is sue hester. i urge you to support supervisor chan's affordable housing production act. please vote it out of committee. the maneuver to counter it by redefining of affordable and to basically be migratory housing is unacceptable. people have struggled to build affordable housing in san

francisco for decades, and we are doing it. affordable housing developers, real affordable developers exist in san francisco. they have a struggle against mayor who is not supportive of those efforts, but supervisors don't vote, keep this on the ballot, put it on the ballot, thank you supervisor chan. >> thank you. next caller. >> good afternoon, members of the committee, rudy gonzales, san francisco building construction trades counsel and deescalate the tone a little bit. there are legitimate policy disagreements and what we are hearing is kind of competing rallies right now, even virtually. i want to thank supervisor mandelman for putting together some thoughtful proposals and

ideas, those deserve some consideration. you know, at the end of the day, skilled and trained standards means we will support a workforce that have graduated from apprenticeship and we see that pipeline as our responsibility, our burden, our obligation t our communities, particularly a san francisco native like myself to bring people into the middle class, and legitimate disagreement. i imagine supervisor safai is journalling like i told you so. there are consensus ways to do this and unfortunately this has been forced upon us. i think this is a smart and thoughtful approach, i appreciate supervisor chan standing with the building trades council and the labor council -- >> your time. >> and gas lighting and undemocratic to say one is a poison pill to the other. >> your time has elapsed. >> will weigh in on this. thank you for your time. >> hear from the next caller,

please. >> yes, good afternoon supervisors. my name is mark goodell, i represent close to 700 members of local 16, in good times over 100 of those members work in san francisco but right now it is not good times for those members. it is a shame that the one union and some other groups that are supporting affordable homes now claim the charter amendment is politically motivated. motivation is to create jobs for all construction workers and to build housing with the best labor standards. i stand with the san francisco building trades and thank supervisor chan for standing with local construction workers. thank you. >> thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello, my name is scott. i live in voting district 8. i would like a choice in

november and vote. i oppose affordable homes now because the percentage of affordable homes is too low. over 78% of the units would be market rate and get accelerated approval process through the mayor's proposal. that is simply too low, it would provide good union jobs but not provide those union workers with a place to live. those places are only affordable to the investor class, to add to their real estate investment portfolios in the state and new york, in london, in lake tahoe. please send supervisor chan's charter amendment to the board for a full vote. >> thank you. can we have the next caller. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is greg hardiman, i would like to thank the

committee for opportunity to talk, elevators union and district 7 resident. we stand in support of the building trades council, with the skills and trade language and like to thank author, supervisor chan for standing with the local construction workers. thank you. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> hi, can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> great. hello, chelsea weeks, i am a resident of district 2. i strongly oppose this amendment and want to echo what others have said around the proposition, when it comes to confusing constituents. proposal looks and sounds pro housing but it purports affordable mixed income and

educator housing. however, does nothing to remove the roadblocks that make building affordable housing in the city, instead unrealistic constraints and requirements on that make it nearly impossible to build anything, the situation we are in now. and does nothing to hold the city accountable for establishing reasonable time frames for mixed income projects. i ask you please do better by your people. listen to the callers today and support affordable homes now. thank you. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. danny campbell, member and a representative of sheet metal workers local 104 here in san francisco. we support supervisor chan's affordable housing production act. we stand with the san francisco building and construction trades

council and want to thank the author, supervisor chan, for standing with local skilled and trained construction workers. we kindly ask you move it out of committee today to the full board. thanks, and have a great afternoon. >> thank you. next caller. >> hi, good afternoon. my name is cheryl dornton, a school district 10 supervisor and i want to say i am supporting supervisor chan's initiative for affordable housing and i think it should be on the ballot as a competing, as an option for people to vote on the affordable housing act that the mayor is proposing, the a.m.i.s are so high, i believe they are up to $109,000, and most people who are trying to get affordable housing don't make that type of income so they are going to be displaced.

so i am in agreement with supervisor chan's proposal. thank you. >> thank you. next caller. >> yeah, larry missola, here to support chan's ordinance and appreciate her putting that forward today. i want to ask you why you think you saw so many carpenters speak out against this item today, the answer is easy. their leaders are a bunch of sell-offs that don't care about any other trades but themselves. connie chan's ordinance protects all workers, we all know we need housing built in san francisco but cannot do it on the backs of the workers. the, woulders need to be included in this. affordable homes now is a complete hack job, pun intended. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller.

do we have additional callers? an hi, my name is frank, i'm a long time resident of district 7. president of the sunset club, father of two daughters who could not afford to buy homes on their own in san francisco and two granddaughters who will be on the job market in the next 5 or 10 years and unable to buy a home in san francisco, maybe not even able to rent because san francisco does not build homes. i'm also a long time affordable housing advocate. served on the non-profit board that built in holiday tariffs and supported affordable housing

in school district 5 and i oppose this amendment. thank you. >> thank you, next caller. >> good afternoon. my name is deborah schneider, 22 year resident of san francisco and district 7 voter. i'm calling to strongly oppose supervisor chan's measure because it's yet another example of an anti-housing supervisor pretending to be something about housing that will do next to nothing. supervisor chan consistently measured bringing homes to san francisco and this measure will result in little to no new housing getting built. in contrast, the affordable homes now measure on the november 8th ballot, faster and easier to create affordable housing and well paying jobs at the same time. it's also very important to look, to understand that affordable homes now is backed by tens of thousands of san francisco voters together with a

broad coalition of housing groups like habitat for humanity, green belt alliance, housing advocates, housing experts and affordable housing champions like senator scott wiener, mayor london breed and supervisor dorsey. i would urge everyone. >> your time has -- >> look at the records of the supervisors who are trying to thwart it. >> your type has elapsed. next caller, please. >> hi, joe demento, a district 8 resident and strongly oppose this amendment and i don't think it should come out of rules. we are in a dire housing crisis, you all know we have until 2031 to build 82,000 or so units. planning commission reported that we are actually slowing down housing production in san francisco. we are lower this year's rate is

lower than in 2019, and that's really a bad thing and so there's a lot of callers talking about the need for more affordable, 0 -- 50% of 0 is 0. if we have more housing of all income levels rents will go down and more people able to afford to live here. i have a family, i really want to be able to live here the rest of my life and maybe even the rest of their lives. i would encourage supervisors who talk about market rate housing being a problem to read a study that came out of nyu in 2019 that said it does lower housing costs, and does not lead to gentrification. so please do not vote this out of rules committee and please support affordable homes now. let's not confuse the voters. thank you very much. >> thank you. that was our last caller on the line. >> ok. public comment for today on item number 1 is closed.

but there will be more of it next week and probably the week after and who knows after that. supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: thank you, chair peskin and i want to first thank all of the public commenters for coming forward and having the comments and if i may just generally respond to all the public comments that provided today. you know, i think that having a choice for voters is not confusing. it's not "a poison pill." i take offense of that because you know, i think that you may -- in a democracy, having choices before voters is always a good thing, and i think that that is what we are doing here. so that's first. and i think also allows one to

have choices, allows us to really have a conversation about affordability, and affordability, how is it being defined, and in this legislation. we are actually defining it as what has been defined in the san francisco standard which is at 120% of area median income, 160,000 for a household of four and that's considered as middle income housing standards. so i think let's really have an honest conversation about what is really affordable for the people, working families in san francisco. what can they really afford. and frankly, shame, shame on housing profiteers, pitting our workers against each other. i firmly believe in the movement

of unions and workers and allowing them and supporting them to have workers protections prevailing wage and so much more that they deserve, so that they, too, can afford the housing they build is a responsibility of a policy maker and i assume that responsibility and i will fight for that, and i believe in that movement, and so for housing profiteers to pit workers against each other is shameful and i want to respond to that and i want to finds a space to bring our workers together so they don't feel like they have to pit themselves against their laborer siblings to have jobs and have prevailing wage and to have workers protection. so that -- that is my initial reaction to the public comments today, but like you, chair peskin said, that we will have

more of that. i would like to then now if i may to make the motion to move the amendment that i have mentioned earlier during this meeting forward, would you like me, chair peskin, to reiterate my amendment? >> i don't think that is necessary. those are before us, they are part of the file, you have previously described them, and i'm happy to do that and encourage you and supervisor mandelman and interested parties to discuss the other amendments that supervisor mandelman is socializing and by the way, are now a part of the file and mr. young, i know because i saw the email from supervisor mandelman's staff to the clerk, are available for public review. so go ahead and make a motion on your amendments and then we will continue the item with your

permission to july 6th. >> thank you so much. please. >> motion made by supervisor chan to amend this file as she stated and as is before us. on that motion, mr. young, a roll call, please. [roll call vote taken] the motion passes without objection. >> then we will vote to continue this item on the special meeting to july 6th. [roll call vote taken] the motion passes without objection. >> ok. colleagues, we have only four

remaining items, some of them will receive oodles of public comment. i know we have a deputy city attorney whose time is precious who wants to work on item 3 and ardis graham is here presumably for item 2, why don't we recess for, how long will it take us to eat? 30 minutes, and we will reconvene at 1:30. >> good afternoon, reconvene the special meeting of the rules committee. mr. young, could you please read item 3 out of order. >> yes. charter amendment to amend the city and county of san francisco, a city policy when the city amends the planning code to allow for density or

height that developers agree to the new units to amend administrative code to establish the height limits in effect. and election to be held on november 8, 2022. >> thank you, mr. young. supervisor chan, i assume you are with us. >> i am. >> thank you for your sponsorship and colleagues, the measure before us codfies a practice that i think we have all become familiar with, both in recent time and during my tenure on this board of supervisors dating back to the early 2000s. in plain terms, make rent control for upzonings in the

city. just as we did with accessory dwelling units, which i initially proposed and i think 2003 new a.d.u.s be subject to rent control, albeit i was a bit ahead of my time and that measure did not ultimately succeed, not along progressive lines but east side supervisors for it and west side supervisors outnumbered us by one vote. at any rate, that has long passed and consistent with what the board passed yesterday with supervisor mandelman's multi-plex legislation and what the measure says is we don't fear density in san francisco, we believe in the imperative to increase residential density across the city, particularly in neighborhoods that have passed laws to exclude new housing density and fortify property values while locking scores of new san franciscans out of

housing opportunities as we just discussed in the last measure. it says let's build residential areas in san francisco and the ground work. in the cost of hawkins rental housing act, which state legislature refuses, unfortunately, to reform, the 1995 law that largely prohibits expansion of rent control to new housing proebts in the state of california. but there is a critical exception that says any time the city provides direct financial assistance or any other form of assistance to a private developer, that we can apply rent control to that housing by contract. increasing development capacity is one such form of public assistance, increases land values, increases the potential for developers to earn additional income. it is -- fundamentally an

exercise of our local police powers and every time we say that more homes are allowed on a parcel of land we are conferring a real quantifiable benefit on the owners of that property. in return, under this measure, we get rent control. i want to be clear about how this measure impacts the development of new housing and i'll start here. this measure would not in and of itself apply rent control to any existing housing. but i want to be even more explicit, there is no statistical relevant data or evidence that this has any negative impact on the development of new housing. this is not a measure to create barriers to new development. to the contrary, it lays the ground work for that new development at significant scale. it provides a clear objective standard for that new development. we can look at other parts of the united states of america to make this clearer, we can look

at new jersey which passed a rent control measure and housing construction actually plummeted in surrounding areas where rent control did not apply. we can look at boston, which phased out rent control in the mid 90s and rents skyrocketed and homeless population doubled until 2002 when the mayor called to reinstate. a study found rent control had little effect on the construction of new housing. we are not setting initial market rents, which is what building proforma's are based upon. they are not predicated on what rents will be in 5 or 10 or 20 years. to the extent real estate investment trusts are speculating on that level, eviction and displacement have harms for that consideration as well and i don't think anyone will agree that eviction is a viable or right business model. rent control is many things.

antidote to the inflation crisis right now, causing harm to san franciscans confronting high gas prices and food and basic consumer goods, security for long-term tenants suddenly competing for rents with a new industry of high wage earners, predictability for seniors on fixed incomes forced back into the workplace across the country right now. the market rents of today are the affordable rent controlled rents of tomorrow. and a recent study by the u.c. berkeley urban displacement project, who benefits from tenant protections, the most effective tools stabilizing neighborhoods and communities. the study also found combining rent control with protections, particularly those of lower

socioeconomic strata. rent control also ensures the market raise housing of today as i said provides the affordable rents of tomorrow. and because it's tied to the consumer price index, it provides all of that, still ensuring that investors earn a reasonable rate of return on their investment. at its core, rent control is the bedrock of stable communities and i think we have experienced that with san francisco rent control law dating back to 1979. i want to really emphasize this because san francisco is an archipelago of intact neighborhoods and communities and resell yens of the communities over time is one of the reasons why the democratic system i think is so robust. stable communities means neighborhoods and neighbors who have relationships with each other and organize together around common concerns. they are better equipped to advocate to lawmakers and hold ee lebted officials accountable, whether it's trash in the

streets, use of public space, or providing our small business community with customers. at its core, rent control is a fool for fortifying the fundamental tenants of our local economy and i cannot emphasize, the benefits of rent quality are unquantifiable as they are obvious. san franciscans understand this and rent control has polled well in san francisco and repeatedly voted in favor of appealing the costa hawkins act to allow for the expansion of rent control, that was true as relates to propositions 10 and 21. this is a rent control city and the measure gives voters the opportunity to make that clear. with that, colleagues, i have some amendments that i have been working on that in conjunction with some pension trusts that i have been conferring with would

incorporate a stablization period, a grace period, if you will, and would allow a phase-in on new construction as to what rent control would apply. i'm not ready to make those amendments today, but intends to do so at our next special meeting on july 6th, and with that, if there are any comments or questions from colleagues, this is an opportunity to do that. and then we will go to public comment. supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor chan and then supervisor mandelman. sorry, i can't see your name on the roster, supervisor. >> all good, thank you, chair peskin. i just wanted to express my support just in general about rent control. i am a firm believer in rent control and it's personal for me

because i think for those of you who know my personal story that i came here when i was, came to san francisco chinatown when i was 13 years old, my mom was able to, as a single mom with two teenage kids was able to have an apartment, one bedroom apartment, but still it was home for us, you know, in chinatown, and with protection of rent control she was able to stay in the neighborhood that our family grew up in until the day she passed away, and without the protection of rent control i just don't think that she was able to do that. so i just want to express my support and thank you, chair peskin, for your leadership on rent control and happy to hopefully see this move forward and however way it can. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mandelman. >> may be a dumb question,

but -- >> no such thing as a dumb question. >> why is the rent control to which is subject? >> chapter 37 of the administrative code of the city and county of san francisco, rent stablization. >> and i have counsel here to help me. >> the other question i sort of am wondering about, we could not figure it out in the office, but it may be addressed, how does this overlay with inclusionary requirements. >> if there's a building that has to be, that is going to be 20% affordable or whatever the requirement is, are those inclusionary units, also applies to affordable units. so, upzoning. is there any -- is this to be worked out in the development agreement, are those

inclusionary units potentially also subject to rent control? >> so, and then what about a fully affordable project. how does inclusionary -- >> this contemplates a costa hawkins waiver, not an agreement, but i will defer to the deputy city attorney. >> one moment, let me -- please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. deputy city attorney. under section 206. for example, the home assess projects are accepted under the definition of density increase triggering the measure. those projects would not be included. the measure is silent as to projects that get inclusionary units under section 415, city's

affordable housing ordinance. so it will behoove us perhaps if the board is amenable to have an amendment to specify whether section 415 units would or would not be subject to the ordinance. as written, it's silent on that. >> and would be subject to future figuring it out. >> exactly. >> seems like probably inclusionary units, which are generally regulated by, you know, the people not paying more than a certain percentage of their income ought to be exempted, and seems like, and what about 100% affordable project? >> if it's within those contained in section 206, it would be included but if it's not, it would -- >> 206. >> home sf and other similar projects like the state density project. >> but just the plain old -- >> density exception.

>> building going from 6 to 8, 12 to 14 stories instead of eight stories because our housing element increased and 14 story affordable housing building. we are silent on that. >> and also a provision that says the mandates, application of rent control as supervisor peskin was saying, except for as necessary to comply with state law, including the housing element law. to the extent the housing element law, or rather state laws would rather an increase that it would be precluded. >> and we can get some clarification on this, but i think that as it relates to inclusionary, inclusionary is price fixed. rent control is a price control, right. so -- but i can see that we might need to have some language that makes that abundantly clear.

>> what would be worse -- for private developers getting stuck with both rent control and an inclusionary requirement on the same unit would be i think a little weird. what would be i think quite bad is for an affordable developer to be unable to raise rent on where income is going up. >> i believe deed restricted inclusionary units include a c.p.i. provision as it is. >> under section 415, the mayor's office housing regulates units. >> that's not rent control. that's 7% a year. >> it's a separate system all together, it's not -- >> anyway, that's just some thoughts. >> got it. >> and i want to thank the chair for thinking about, engaging with, you know, the pension fund and the investors and i do -- i have a long record of having supported rent control and

vacancy control for everything, so hard to backtrack on all those 25 years worth of questionnaires, but i do think that trying to accommodate the realities of the market and investors and figuring out if, you know, as assembly member chu did, maybe that would make sense, so good to here going down the path and thank you. >> and we did look at, as a matter of fact, he did a 15-year deal, what i was proposing to bring before us was more along the lines what we did with inclusionary, which was to give the board the ability to adjust that within a grace period window of the current working number is 5 to 15, but that's what we are talking about as an amendment. >> all right. why don't we open item number 3

up to public excellent before ardis graham gets mad at me about skipping item number 2 twice. would you like the controller to -- >> oh, my bad, i was so good about that on the previous two measures. ms. levy. >> good afternoon, chair peskin. this would have a negative impact on city revenues as rent controlled apartments ten to have a lower assessed value than comparable apartments not subject to rent control. so to the extent that new housing is rent controlled, the city would likely experience a reduction in property tax revenue, compared to what it would receive without the amendment. additionally, the rent control requirement would reduce the financial feasibility of some development projects potentially limiting the level of new housing development in the city. thank you. >> thank you, miss levy. now why don't we open item 3 up to public comment and stick with

our one minute and we will hear this again next week and probably the week after that, first speaker, please. >> yes, members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this matter, joining us in person should line up alongside the room by the windows, remotely, call 1-415-655-0001, enter the meeting i.d. of 24915886137, then press pound and pound again. once connected you need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you can begin your comments. >> good afternoon, supervisors, cory smith, a renter in san francisco, i live underneath our landlord in our duplex. and builders and people who finance construction of new housing, we are here in respectful opposition to the

proposal. intended and somebody that benefits and able to live here because of rent control we view the measure as problematic in reality because we do believe it will make it harder, if not impossible to build new housing which means we will get 0 adigal rent controlled units at the end. the controllers analysis shared the opinion that it would reduce the financial feasibility of projects. and our members question legality and believe it will face immediate challenges. costa hawkins contains an exception where an owner agrees by contract to subject units to rent control but if we are forcing somebody to go into a contract they are not actually opting into it, we are requiring them to do it. so for those reasons and others we oppose the measure and urge of the board to put forward evidence-based solutions for the affordable, housing displacement and affordability crisis. thank you very much.

>> carpenters local 22. we have not taken a firm position on this, i just wanted to say i think we should be thoughtful about the measures we introduce and whether they really move in the right overall direction we are trying to push together as a city, which is to build more housing for the people of san francisco and create jobs through the process. after all, it is through creating well-paying jobs people can afford to live in san francisco in the first place and rent control is well intentioned from a social perspective, we are not against the principle of rent control but you need the right housing availability and tenants in housing units in the first place in order to justify extending legal protections. i mean, look at the stats, we need this to produce 10,000 homes a year over the next eight years to keep up with our goals, and so far in 2022 we are on course to produce less houses than in the past three years and let's not pretend that previous

rate of construction was nearly enough. there's -- >> your time has lapsed. >> think whether it's housing creation or housing stagnation. >> no further parties in the room, we can move on to our call-in speakers. we have three people on the line for public comment. have our first call-in speaker. >> my name is jim chapel, housing advocate and 45-year residents of d8. forbidding rent control for anything built after 1979 is the not way to go, but a good number of years between construction and rent control and a new project. please talk to additional union trust funds, insurance companies, banks, and housing

builders as well as the people who fund housing construction. you cited a number of examples where you believe it was not a problem. there are other examples and studies that show it can be a problem, and before such a measure is taken we really want to be sure that we are not even further shutting down the housing production rate, the very low rate that we have today. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> good afternoon, supervisors. marie harvey calling. i want to comment on this. i'm opposed to this partially because of what we all just witnessed in the conversation

among yourself. it's confusing, there's a lot of ambiguity and i don't think we should be doing anything that makes building housing in san francisco be more difficult, and when the people who write this aren't even sure of all of the ins and outs, that tells me that we are setting ourselves up for a ton more confusion down the road, a lot more red tape, a lot more roadblocks and why would we do that. we need more housing in san francisco. we are desperate for it. why would we do anything at this point in time that blocks housing or makes it less likely to have -- >> your time has elapsed. >> and people throw their hands up. >> thank you. can we have our next caller.

>> supervisors, maureen petty, affordable housing advocate for seniors and people with disabilities. i'm here to support supervisor peskin's charter amendment. there is no greater protection for us renters than rent control. we can't be hit one expected extreme rent year after year. it's prevented the displacement of hundreds of thousands of san francisco residents who would otherwise have long ago been exiled from our city. it is just, it is legal, it is even handedly fair. if the city gives away density height or other financial tips to developers, that they give back stability, protection, to our city's residents. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller?

>> good afternoon, this is anastasia, from the anti-displacement coalition. we need this bill. people don't understand if you move into a new place, the rent is going to be high, but it's even going to be higher if your landlord is allowed to raise it to any amount they want. i am so grateful that i have rent control, although my rent has doubled since i've lived in my apartment, every year it goes up according to the consumer price index, and that's predictable and since now i'm a retired teacher, i can, you know, budget accordingly, and if people don't understand that you have to budget, that's -- that's their problem. i don't understand this argument

that we are not going to create enough housing when that's part of the plan. >> your time has elapsed. >> it makes no difference. [please stand by]

>> next caller. >> caller: hi, i'm against this. i think that the property tax revenue law is something to consider as impact on housing. i also see this as a big legal battle. not everything sounds good in theory works in practice. as i said before, something like this is really exemplary what's wrong. we should not pursue anything like this. thank you for your time.

>> caller: david pilpel again. on this measure, i would not include an ordinance within a charter amendment. i can't stand that. the h.s.h. commission is a good example of directing the board to adopt a conforming ordinance following the approval of a charter amendment. there's a similar language in supervisor chan's item 1 today. i don't see a current 16.131 section in the charter. i would consider replacing the new text in section 3 in this measure rather than 16.132. as to the overall idea, i'm open to the concept of applying rent control for new developments that receive public benefits even if that has to be by way of

contract. so be it. i'm open to the idea. very creative. thank you very much. >> that was our last caller. >> supervisor peskin: public comment is closed. i will reopen public comment. my apology, we have something here in the chamber. mr. rudy gonzalez. >> thank you, i'm rudy gonzalez. i want to thank you for engaging in a thoughtful dialogue. i want to encourage your staff to continue talking with stakeholders. there's a careful approach that can be taken. i'm intrigued with the supervisor mandelman brought forward in terms how we think through a surgical approach.

i do need to be careful, though, i don't want to do something that's detrimental to an construction workforce. i can't deny nor do i think any voter in san francisco can deny the affordability crises and the need to do something that may not stabilize renters tomorrow but may have a profound impact long beyond any of our tenure. i appreciate your approach. >> supervisor peskin: that will conclude public comment. on those constructive words, i will continue my discussions with folks representing equity and pension funds and we'll come forward with some amendments and further discussion deliberation. i want to thank my former staff for his work on this as well as a number of individuals from the

city attorneys office. with that, i will make a motion to continue this item unamended to our special meeting of july 6th. on that motion a roll call please. >> clerk: on a motion to extend this matter to july 6th. [roll call vote] motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: item 2. mr. graham it's your lucky moment. >> clerk: charter amendment to amend the chart kerr city -- charter to city and county san francisco.

>> chair peskin: thank you, mr. young. thank you supervisor chan for your co-sponsorship. as we are all unfortunately aware over the last couple of years, there has been a number of high-level city officials who have been chargedded with criminality. there have been others who we have read plenty about in the newspaper who have been accused of correctly so of behavior that is unbecoming and illegal. they have not been charged. they resign and left and that was the end of it. i want this behavior to stop.

i think one way of doing that is to create a bright line disincentive wherein people will think twice, particularly, high level city officials who we hold to higher standard when they get involved in fraud and bribery and corruption. to that end, i have brought before this committee and hopefully before the full board and in november the voters, a charter amendment that would allow short of a criminal conviction with due process. a process by which the city's contribution to a pension could through the good offices of the administrative law judge, be

taken in part. hopefully, that will send a message that people should think twice and not engage in this kind of behavior that has been a shame and embarrassment and stain on this city. having said that, this charter amendment is concerning to a broad swath of municipal labor organizations, unions, bargaining units are service employees international union to the san francisco police officer association, just to name two of many. to that end, i have been engaged in a meet and confer process where we have had three meet and confers under the auspiciouses under the department of human resources and schedule another one for tomorrow. we have not reached impasse.

i have proposed in those discussions some amendments. one of which -- one round of which has been circulated to all of the unions, which would actually limit in a case whereby clear and convincing evidentiary standard, administrative law judge made a civil conviction, a civil finding, would limit the amount of the employers not employees contribution that could be rescinded, forfeited to the portion of time from which those actors were committed. if you worked for the city for 20 years but only engaged in that behavior in your last five years, it would limit it to that five-year period of time.

now, mind you tomorrow, the former director of public works will be sentenced by the court and that individual lose his pension in hope. that's one amendment that has been circulated i think was meaningful. there are other amendments that were just circulated by the city attorney to the human resources department that will be circulated to all of the interested parties that further define this by actually defining what acts could be found morally to fraud and bribery not to somebody who did something once and got in trouble for it but something that really rised to that level. with that, mr. graham on behalf

of h.r.d. >> good afternoon. thank you chair peskin. we have engaged in a fruitful process. we had four sessions in total involving a wide range of unions, seven unions, 798. the deputy sheriff association. police officers association, 10 to 1, and stationary engineers local 39. then we have one tomorrow as the supervisor said. for that one, local 261 was not able to attend. we may see they want to participate at a later time. >> chair peskin: i received a call this morning from a representative of ifpte local

21. i told him to contact mr. wright at the human resources department employee relations so that he can participate tomorrow on behalf of local 21. >> great. perfect. thank you. >> i want to make myself available for any questions to open questions. >> chair peskin: supervisor chan, any questions? >> supervisor chan: not at that time the moment. thank you. san mateo -- >> chair peskin: i do not want this to be applied arbitrarily. i don't want it to be used by

vindictive department heads to punish rank and file employees for mistakes or one-time events. when there's pervasive ongoing generally high level set of behaviors like we have seen and all realized in 2020 and beyond, that have resulted in two sets of federal criminal charges and additional two individuals who we all read about and then department heads who resigned -- i think that having something like this on the books will deter future behavior of that kind. are there any members of the public who like to testify on item number two?

>> chair peskin: oh, city controller. go ahead. >> good afternoon, chair peskin. i'm with the controller office. this charter amendment do likely in minimal to moderate saving to city government to the extent that the proposed measures will result in future amendments. >> chair peskin: if i had to write it, i would strike to moderate.

>> i will take that into consideration. we can all update the letter to reflect comments. i can also provide a little bit of context to your office with what our thresholds are for determining that and some of our thinking. >> chair peskin: happy to take offline. when you have a payroll and pension the size of this city, i can't imagine.

why don't we open up item 2 up to public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who like to provide public comment you can line up to speak. for those listening remotely please dial (415)655-0001. enter the meeting i.d., 2491 588 6137 # #. i do not see anything in -- see anybody in the room. we have one caller on the line. >> chair peskin: first speaker. >> caller: this is david pilpel. it will be great on 18 separate provisions in the charter appendix a could reference a new general provision on administrative hearing and

forfeiture and point everyone there than having to rep split - replicate the appropriate language. it will be have a closer connection to the ethics commission. i can think tv two specific individuals who are allowed to retire or separate from the p.u.c., should lose any retirement or post-employment benefits. that does not include -- [ indiscernible ] i believe the sentencing of the former director that was referenced that was previously scheduled for tomorrow has been postponed to some time in

august. >> chair peskin: are there any other member of the public for this item? public comment is closed. ms. pearson, given that it is the same paragraph that is repeated again and again. it look likes a 47-page charter amendment. if there is something there, i'm all ears. with that, i will make a motion to continue this item unamended but to be amended after tomorrow's meet and confer to our special meeting of wednesday july 6th. >> clerk: on that motion [roll call vote].

motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: all right. item number 4. thank you mr. graham. >> clerk: item 4 is a charter amendment. amend charter and city county of san francisco to change election cycle for the mayor, sheriff, district attorney and treasurer to they will be elected in even number years to provide that the current term for the officers will end on january 8, 2025 rather than january 8, 2024 so such election will occur in even number years.

>> supervisor preston: that amendment is to move elections to even years. thank you for your co-sponsorship of this item. the data from the past decade shows that even year elections have achieved significantly higher voter turnout than their odd year counterparts. sometimes as much as doubling the number of voters.

this is a voting right groups have for years urged even year elections, given that they correspond with higher turnout. green line institute noted a published case study and i quote holding local elections in odd years, greatly reduces voter turnout and almost certainly skews make-up of the electorate. analysis found that turnout led low turnout elections tend to be

older, whiter and more affluent. this is something that's part of what we see in these low turnout off year elections. not just in san francisco but across the nation. instead of 41% the year before, it was 86% a year later in the even year election. more than double the participation. under this measure, the specific seats and positions that would

be moved election of the mayor, sheriff, district attorney, city attorney and treasurer. those are currently held in odd year. they will be elected during the even years. make it so that all local elected officials will be elected during even year elections. the measure wouldn't change the timing. election for any other elected offices. it would extend the terms of those that would otherwise be expiring next year, extends them by one year rather than a '23 election it will be a 2024 election. this proposed charter amendment would have us fall in the footstep of number other jurisdictions that done this. los angeles and san jose have aligned their elections of important local offices with with the presidential or statewide elections. l.a. adopted its measure in 2015 and has seen exactly what they

expect. they saw a 400% increase in voters between march of 2015 and when they shifted to the even years. san jose, some of you may have been following what happened in san jose, they passed a measure on june 7th of this year with broad support from coalition of labor organizations, bipoc community groups. i hope to have your support. i'm happy to answer any questions. we were alerted to some drafting issues by city attorney we sent around some technical amendments that we are asking the committee to adopt. they don't impact any what i set forth in terms of the purposes and impact. my understanding from the city attorney is they are dissizing -

-- >> seem like voters making in on things less frequently is good way to go, asking less of the voters. allowing focus their time and energy on fewer elections probably the right thing. i know san jose and los angeles moved in this direction. they both did it like a process that involved some level of like

coordination and discussion and study. i'm wondering if the feeling is that we don't really need to do that because others have already. >> supervisor mandelman: i have heard concern limiting the opportunity to go out for geo bonds. the last thing is, just kind of curious for the ordinances how you pick 2%. >> chair peskin: there's an answer to that last one.

>> supervisor mandelman: we can take them in reverse order or out of order. >> the two percent, there was a method to that. the goal was to not make it any easier or more difficult than it currently is to qualify an ordinance. currently, we have two different standards if it's a charter amendment, you gathering signatures, if it's 5% all registered voters. if it's citizens initiative, it is 5% of the turnout from the last mayoral election. what we've proposed here is to -- if we were to leave that in place, we will be dramatically changing or doubling the turnout for the mayor's race, if we just left the provision on the

percentages alone, we'll be doubling the signatures to qualify citizen [ indiscernible ] the two percent of all registered voters is -- it makes it virtually identical number of signatures. for example, in the last -- the 5% from 2019 came out to 8859 signatures. if you look at the previous mayoral election for the year before, it was 9519 signatures. if you applied 2% of all registered voters, it's 9934. it was basically trying to as

closely proximate what is already currently the standard. that's why we proposed the 2%. the purpose is not to change that. not to make it easiertor difficult. hopefully, also provide some consistency going forward, tieing number of things to the registered voters. the other -- in terms of process question, i think it's your observation, more your observation that there is really momentum we're seeing and this is prioritized by lot of voting rights and organizations all around the nation. there wasn't a working group or task force anything of that nature locally that occurred. we've been having that conversation since introducing this.

on the question around bonds. there is -- this doesn't preclude same rules around special election. it doesn't mean there will not be other elections and opportunities to run bonds. it will take -- there won't be a standing election in the odd year for those. that is certainly an impact. there's to way to achieve the objective of the higher turnout in the even year without losing

that opportunity. again, that doesn't mean -- there are special elections that have nothing to do with the regularly scheduled odd year mayoral, d.a., city attorney, treasurer, sheriff election. this won't impact those. the planning around is going to be harder to do. i think the planning will be around the even year election. we'll continue to have not just the presidential year elections that this moves those races torques we'll continue to have as we do this year, the even year elections.

>> supervisor chan: i'm in support of this today. i think that -- let me say that either way, there's a possibility that we could end up having special election. i think this is a good faith effort to minimize and provide both cost savings as well as -- this is a good faith effort to provide cost savings as well as to increase voter turnout. i'm in support of it today. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. why don't we hear from the

controller and this is a pretty quite definable number, possible $9 million for cost of printing and mailing ballots for the knelt -- net saving $6.9 million. >> thank you. you stated the number accurately. i will note that the savings will be reduced or eliminated if special election is required in an odd number of year. those the costs that we've estimated. >> chair peskin: thank you. anything you want to add or subtract? let's go to public comment on this item. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item are joining us in person, should line up to speak now along the side of the room by the window. for those listening remotely

please call (415)655-0001. enter the meeting i.d. 2491 588 6137 # #. once connected, you will need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, please continue to wait until the system indicate you have been unmuted. that will be your cue to begin your comments. there's nobody in the room for public comment. we have one caller on the line. >> caller: this is david pilpel. on this item, i am opposed to this idea. i will go in the other direction and restore the other odd year or off year election. i think having the local election each year in november is an important check on our local government. i would rather have more democracy rather than less. the cost savings here are not worth it. we tend to have a higher voter

turnout in elections when office and measures are heavily contested. it's not easy for the department of elections to keep its seasonal staff with fewer elections and in my view, this measure would make it harder if it passes. this would result in a june and november election in even numbered years with five and 19-month gaps between elections. i'm not so concerned about the five-month gap, but the 19-month gap is a considerable period of time from november of one even number to june of the following even numbered year. you could also send this item as an fyi referral to the city administrator or the capital planning committee for their review and comment as to how it would impact planning for bond measures. thanks for listening.

>> chair peskin: are there any other members of the public to comment on this item? >> clerk: we have one additional caller. >> caller: hello, good afternoon thank you for hearing me today. i'm representing the counsel on american hispanic relations. i wanted to say that it's important to encourage voting, not make the process more difficult by having more confusing voting time frame. voting is a fundamental right. we must work harder to make the process more accessible. my organization actively works to promote voter education and do voter registration drives, baltimore recommendations and other services to encourage

participation. i think in amendment would further increase voter turnout. please consider support for the item. thank you. >> clerk: that was our last public comment. >> chair peskin: public comment on this item is closed. supervisor preston, through the city attorney, has brought forward a number of technical amendments. which i'm prepared to motion to adopt and then continue. on the motion to adopt the amendments to supervisor preston's charter amendment, a roll call please. >> clerk: on the motion to amend. [roll call vote]. motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: then supervisor preston, we have a special meeting next wednesday if that works for you.

we will continue the item as amended to the special meeting wednesday july 6th. >> clerk: on that motion. [roll call vote]. >> chair peskin: three down one to go for 2022. thank you for your good work. this item is continued as amended. then, mr. young, if you could read the last remaining item. once you read it, we are going to recess until 3:00 because i told the chief sponsor supervisor ronen that given our agenda, we would not get to it until 3:00. she has indicated she would like to start at 3:00. we will recess for 20 minutes and reconvene at 3:00 p.m. and

stay here as long as it takes. >> clerk: item 5 is a charter amendment. to amend the charter of city and county of san francisco to establish student success fund under which the department of youth and families provide grants to schools to implement programs to improve academic achievement and social wellness of students. allocation is specified fiscal years and election to be letted november 8, 2022. >> chair peskin: we are recessed >> chair peskin: we'll reconvene the meeting. we are joined for item 5. which was already read by the

chief sponsor by that charter amendment supervisor hillary ronen as far as supervisor melgar. this committee meeting has been noticed that a majority of the board of supervisors may attend. we may run out of seats if more supervisors show up. with that, supervisor ronen, the floor is yours for as long as you want. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much chair peskin. i have some opening remarks. we're going to lose maria sue for the next hour if we don't get her right now. maria, if you want to make opening remarks or any remarks that you like to about this charter amendment, then come back at 4:00. we might have more questions or make more comments. if you can go first just in case

we lose you. >> thank you. good afternoon chair peskin, all the other supervisors. i'm the director of the department of youth and families. i'm also -- our department is the main grant administrator of the student success charter. i want to say that this is the kind of innovative collaboration that our citier our children, our families and our school district needs. this is where city departments are putting ourselves out there to say to the school district we want to work with you. not only are we just talking

about working with you -- [ indiscernible ] you have our commitment to work with dr. wayne, congratulations dr. wayne and his entire team, as well as our individual school and committee including teachers, administrators, parents and students, school providers and other key stakeholders. when we work together, we can do magic. the way that this charter is structured is that once again, -- we will work with the school district to identify the school needs and then work with the school community to submit an application to dcyf. as many of the supervisors know, dcyf have many years experience in running an application

process. we can definitely work with the schools to help communities learn how to do that and simplify the process. once the school split submits an application, we will go through a review process to implement grant to our schools. the grant can go up to $1 million. then the grant will be multi-year grant, could provide wide variety of support and services to our school community which includes things like literacy support and math support, mental health, using transportation needs for families, and tutoring and learning support. it is a very wide strategy or avenue to support our school. i will say that i will note that there will be very specific

requirements and inside the charter as well as goals and student outcome measures that we will be working with our school district partner to identify. this is not money to do whatever. it is really for us as a city and community of caring adults to come together to work towards the goal of ensuring that our children and families succeed in school as well as thrive in our city. i'm super grateful that supervisor ronen leadership and supervisor melgar's leadership putting the charter together and bringing the community together to move this initiative forward. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much, maria. we hope to see you in an hour.

i want to thank you chair peskin for holding this hearing and for everyone to be here. we said it will start at 4:00. we imagine we'll have people trickling in mid-way through the hearing. i want to give little background why supervisor melgar and i decided to put this charter amendment forward together with many of the partners that i'll be thanking in the end. i want to note that we do have school board commissioners in the room, commissioner kevin and matt alexander. this started with a dream that commissioner kevin bogess. i want to mention that, we're

making it happen. 2019 is the last year that we have accurate data about how our students are doing in school. we will have new data in the fall to see how our students are fairing post-covid. pre-covid in san francisco, one of the richest cities in the richest country in the world, we are failing students -- we are failing a shocking number of students. 34 of our 70 elementary schools in san francisco have more students testing below grade level in math and literacy. 6 of our 12 middle schools have more students testing below grade levels than testing at gray of grade level. in 12 of our 16 high schools, there are more students that are

behind grade level than there are at grade level. this is in the richest city in the richest country in the world. i want to give you a couple of really clear examples. brett hart elementary school in supervisor walton district, only 8% of the students read at grade level and only 10% of the students are at grade level in math. paul revere middle school in my district, only 18% of students read at grade level and only 8 percent of students proficient in math. in lake shore elementary, only 39 students are reading at grade level and only 31 at grade level in math. tenderloin school in supervisor peskin, only 26% students read at grade level.

at cleveland elementary school in supervisor safai's district only 13% are reading at level and only 12% are proficient in math. at mission high school in supervisor mandelman's district only 30% of the students reading at grade level and only 7% of those high schoolers are grade level in math. the list goes on and on. i could stay here until 4:00 reading you all the statistics from every single school in every single district of san francisco. it is a shame. it is a disgrace. every adult should be doing something about this. when i first saw these statistics during covid, i'm embarrassed to say i never paid attention to them prior to covid, i don't think that test scores are end all be all of a community school. my daughter school is similar to

these statistics. i think it's the greatest place in the world. it doesn't mean that those kids are going to succeed in life and in school, but it is a beautiful community. when i saw the statistics, i said to myself, how can any leader in san francisco with any power at all live with themself if they don't do something to change this reality. these statistics are directly connected to every single major problem we face in san francisco. rampant homelessness, widespread food insecurity, over incarceration of people of color, crime, gun violence, you name it. when we fail our children at their most impressional phase of life, when every one of them have an opportunity that they can overcome poverty and succeed have the life with dignity they want to live.

what's really happening is when they can't read and they can't do basic math, their future looks bleak. we have the consequences that i was talking about. the school prison to pipeline is not just a t-shirt slogan, it is a reality that should be ashame of every single adult. the students success ballot measure is an answer to this crises. let me tell you what it does and let me tell you why we know it will move the needle. the student success fund makes $60 million a year available to the schools, grades pre-k to 12. , to create and fund interventions that do one of two things. increase academic achievement of students or increase their social emotional wellness. each school is design its own intervention as the principal

educator, parents, students and communities involved at the school best understand how to meet the needs of their own students. however, the district and dcyf will be the ultimate decision makers over what programs to fund. there are strong outcome controls in the legislation. the school will have to change the intervention to continue to receive fund. the district and -- the district is working on fixing its structural deficit without relying on this measure.

prior to covid, the principal of the school got some limited grant funding to create a whole math intervention program that transformed the school. prior to the program, muir was one of the lowest performing schools in the district. now it has more students testing at grade level than below. they're all low income students of color. there's no pta raising a cent. they are doing better than the vast majority of schools. these interventions work. we just funded sfusd as a pilot

program. if this ballot measure passes, we can replicate it at the 34 other elementary schools that desperately need it. we know the students success fund can be successful because when schools are the district have funding to address student achievement and emotional wellness in the past, we saw much success. whether it was obama's school improvement grant program or out mission promise neighborhood effort, we moved the needle at the lowest performing schools in the district. then the funding to those programs ended and many schools immediately stepped back in crises. if you read the cover to the current situation in everett

middle school in district eight, those crises stem from the dismantlely and loss of funding from many of the efforts that were working ohelp the students at everett. i'm very sad to say that several unions are not supportive of this measure yet. the board received a letter from the labor counsel recently explaining they would only support this measure if it was funded exclusively by erap dollars. are dollars state receive back from the state because our property taxes are high enough to fund our local obligations to schools as defined by the state, not defined by us. the state gives the extra money back to the city that it city use for our general fund to fund

all the needs of the city. ever since the city began receiving the funds, the state has been trying to claw it back. they had several efforts to try to end s.f. eraf and take that money back from it city. therefore, i drafted this measure so if the state ever eliminates eraf, the city other revenue like hotel tax, business tax and executive tax will continue to fund this program. the truth of the matter is, we have no idea if the state will ever eliminate excess eraf.

the worse thing we can do is to start a program that transforms their school and then pull the rug out from underneath them exactly what was done to the students and faculty and educators at everett elementary. that's the worse thing we can do. they end up worse than when the program existed in the first place. that has happened in the past and made things worse. i hope the labor counsel change its mind and support the measure, i will never amend this legislation in such a way that all the programs it funds could disappear in a short time span or overnight. with that colleague, i want to thank a number of groups and individuals that have drafted this measure with me. many are here today or on their way and ready to campaign hard to see this ballot measure victory. let me start with our core drafting committee, supervisor melgar, thank you so much.

i also thank to following individual who gave invaluable input to several drafts of this legislation and who honestly made a good ballot measure a great one. i want to thank the incoming superintendent dr. matt wayne who you'll hear from in a moment. i want to thank conley payne from sfusd.

i want to thank advocates for family and youth. i want to give a very special thanks to my colleague, supervisor ahsha safai. ahsha has not only given critical input, he has been playing a lead role to helping me navigate the political terrain to get it pass the finish line. thank you so much for fighting hard for our kids. finally, a very special thank you to my righteous co-sponsors, supervisors melgar, safai, walton and preston. our compliment to the -- your commitment to the students of

the city is inspiring. colleagues, i could describe all the amendments that i'm introducing today or we can hear from dr. wayne and then hear the amendments. i know supervisor melgar and preston wants to talk. let me finish so that everyone else talks. here are the amendments that i'm going to be introducing today to the student success fund ballot measure. we're removing the background tracking which has been used by other program. clarifications that sfusd and dcyf will work in partnership to develop the process school sight selection. mandates for outcomes that are measured along with mechanisms for accountability and evaluation tied to student outcome, defining core staffing and clarifying fund will not pay for core expenditures. strengthen language on the purpose of the fund and keeping

with the district's community school framework. expanding to sfusd schools that also host pre-k programs to ensure they will not be excluded from these programs. clarifying position mandated by the fund of sfusd positions will be covered by this fund. change the amount of total to $60 million per year and ramping it up over four years instead of three years. removing the trigger starts to year one rather than at the end of the ramp up top 60. incorporating overhead for administration reporting and fund implementation not to exceed 3.5% of the fund for each dcyf and sfusd. clarifying that the community school coordinator must participate in it school sight counsel. the fund will pay for mandated positions in this charter, establishing language that provides an opportunity for grants for school sight

eligibility. the district may apply for grants on behalf of a school or schools to pilot and implement program and keeping with with the student success fund goal. finally data sharing to the extent permitted by state and local law. those are the amendments i will be brewing. -- introducing today. let's hear from my co-author, supervisor melgar. >> supervisor melgar: thank you very much. thank you chair. i wanted to make a couple of points. thank you for the very thorough overview and talking about why we have a need for this. before i became supervisor, i was the executive director at a community center which is a strong partner in many of the lower performing schools in the school district. i worked at the mission economic

development agency and was one of the authors the proposal that we made to the department of education that got us $6 million a year for five years for the mission promise neighborhood. it was the federal government that supported the expansion of this model in the schools and the mission. what it got -- the premise was that low income kids of color are capable of academic excellence, if they are given the opportunity that kids in wealthy families have. that social campaign of having the opportunity to have access to sports, to arts to all of these things that their counterpart and private schools have, is what makes the difference, having food during the day, having the ability to not worry about where you're going to lay your head at night,

where you have the underpinning to support the security of the family and to have access to opportunities like other kids do. those kids will succeed. they did. the data that was tracked through mission promise neighborhoods, we also tracked before that through the school improvement grant, showed that this approach works. when you give opportunities to kids and you feed them and you give the security to tear families that they will family. it has been proven over and over again. then what we've done when the money runs out, we pull out the rug from the kids and families. i think this is best practice to put our commitment to making sure that we are ensuring that families have the security to have these programs throughout their school career. i am so grateful that you took

this leadership, supervisor ronen, that our colleagues understand this. as a mother of three kids, i want to make sure that all kids in the city are assured high quality education and the school support. i want to say, one of the things that we have looked at in that respect, was that our partnerships with the school district staff actually became much better. after the implementation of the program, because the ability to have other adults that can be collaborated with. to have mental health services, food services, made teacher lives better, more success, less stress. we were supporting their work and the families that they work with. i want to say thank you to my colleagues and that i do believe that this is the right thing at

the right time coming out of a pandemic where our family have had to struggle for food, to struggle to pay rent. we seen plummeting of enrollment in unified school district. we're going to have a vision where kids in our schools are going to have the same opportunities as the wealthier kids and private schools is the right thing to do. thank you. >> supervisor preston: thank you supervisor ronen and supervisor melgar for taking the lead on this. one of the things that struck me about san francisco is how we truly epitome the tale of two cities. we have some of the wealthiest, most funded, most resourced

schools, most resourced programs, most resourced extracurricular, whatever you call it. in any way shape or form in the world. we have some of the most underresourced, under funded, struggling programs and educational opportunities in the world. it's not equal. the school around the street from my house, they have a p.t.a. budget less than $10,000. they can't even pay to finish the mural at their school. yet be there's schools in the city who's p.t.a.s can raise over half million dollars. they can have literacy support. they can have educational support. they can have the coaches come

in and work with the students. we put $3 million for stipends. they are the ones coming in doing this work. when my son was in second grade, we didn't know he had dyslexia yet. we were told beginning of third grade, there was no longer going to be a reading coach for him. all the other kids that needed it. that is devastating. it is devastating to have some type of support and have it taken away. it's almost like you take one step forward and two steps backward. the educators in the room noah i'm talking about. it's not just. we are over resourcing the city in some ways. it's a matter how we distribute those resources. , how we distribute those

resources show the values and priorities of our city. one third of our $14 billion goes to the department of public health. we are a city that prioritizes public health. that is over $3 billion. yet, some people would say we're still not doing a good job. we put nowhere near that kind of money into education in san francisco. it's about priorities. this is an attempt to say we have a source of fund. we have additional resources that have come in since 2018 and we're going to prioritize as this board said we would prioritize, putting resources into educational support. that means using the community school model as an example, as the board of education has asked for. we get criticism all the time, request all the time, what about

are you doing to support our schools. how are you working in collaboration with our school. all we can do is say, we're not elected to the board of education and we have some access to resources. this is a forth right attempt make that statement. we are going to have the ability to equalize. guadalupe can come in and ask for half million dollars. there's over couple hundred schools. we're not likely to get a million. that will be transformative for that school. the vast majority of those kids, english is a second language, free or reduced lunch, need the math and literacy support. their test scores are not there. for me, that's why i am personally vested having two

kids who gone through the school and have seen it personally, knowing exactly what's happening. the principals want it. the educators want it. this is something that is important. however, i understand, i'm respectful to my brothers and sisters in labor. i understand that there's anxiety. i'm acknowledging that. however, i do believe we have enough room to continue the conversation. supervisor ronen committed to that, supervisor melgar committed to sit down and keep talking. there are some things that we need to be resolute about. we need to be resolute about committing ourselves to helping put forward a plan that is sustainable. put forward a plan that will have the long-term impact that

is necessary. using the mission promise neighborhood is an example. than is something that shows dramatic success. it was time limited. because it was time limited, all those things fell apart. i feel like one of the most important things we can do on top of creating this funding stream is to show that it will be consistent. show that it will be there long-term. show these schools that it is okay to make this investment. i'm happy to be a part of this conversation. i'm happy to be supportive of this. i know there's still more work to be done. supervisor peskin, my first year on the board of supervisors, it took 11 months to pass inclusionary housing piece of legislation over many months of conversation, multiple continuances. we finally got something done that has lasted to where we are

today. the legislative process is not clean. it's not something that people will feel good about always every step of the way. at the end of the day, we are committed getting this done to the finish line. ultimately, it will have an impact for our children and families. thank you.

>> clerk: dr. wayne is logged into our system. >> hi, sorry, i think supervisor ronener your mic was not on. i couldn't hear. >> supervisor ronen: sorry about that. >> thank you, good afternoon. i'm dr. matt wayne i'm incoming superintendent for the san francisco unified district. i'm rejoining the district community. i'm excited to be stepping in as a new superintendent at a time when the community and the city is coming together to support the needs of our student and provide more resources for public schools. it's an exciting time to be joining the district. i wanted to come to speak about

my support for this measure and emphasize three reasons why i am thrilled that this charter amendment is coming forward. first, i can't think of a better name for this charter amendment than the student success fund, to come in at the same time that i'm coming in and joining the district. i'm coming in with a clear mandate to focus on student success. know that my passion and my leadership orientation is around improving student outcomes, academic outcomes and social emotional learning outcomes as well. the board of education and i are going to be working together to make sure it's clear that student outcomes are a priority and the steps we're going to be taking to meet them. we need resources in order to improve student outcome and this student success fund makes it clear that the city and the community are coming together to provide those resources.

first, this is an important amendment to bring forward so it gives us resources to allow us to target improving student outcomes. supervisor ronen said, this is about improving student outcome. this is not about balancing our budget or taking care of other needs. we'll take care of our business, we need the additional support in order to serve the whole child. second reason i'm excited about this amendment, because, it fosters partnerships and truly will support the community school's approach that is essential for us to help students and families. we've all heard the expression it takes a village. this student success fund demonstrates how that village will work in practice. really appreciate the partnership with supervisor ronen and supervisor melgar in developing this and they are bringing this forward. the mayor's office and thinking through how this would work, as well as the department of youth

and their families and unit group who brought forward ideas and resources to help with this amendment. that's what we need to do if we are going to really serve those kids who have historically not been successful in sebbing in the past. it's about taking that community school approach to organize the resources to help them learn. i worked supporting community schools and working this that framework throughout my career. i think back on students like anna who was a student elementary school, doing well but then started to slip in her reading and her math. they referred her to the coordination of services team. there, the parent outreach worker had a connection with the family learn that the people ha- family had to move two times because of housing insecurity. this is taking a toll on anna and her ability to focus. it's that sort of approach that

will help us make sure we're supporting families and students so they're in position to learn and meet our goals for them around student success. this notion of partnership is another reason why i'm very supportive this charter amendment. lastly, i think the third reason is the ongoing commitment that this charter amendment will bring to providing resources to improve student outcomes. we've heard the supervisor speak to the challenges we face in education and they are so right. we get funds to start something innovative, do something more than just pay for a classroom teacher and principal. when that work starts to show success, often, is when the grant ends. i remember as a principal, we were in program improvement. we had some additional funding to bring in a math approach that made us the most improved school in the district over three-year period. because we improved so much, we lost access to some of those

resources. then, that impacts our ability to continue that good work in the school. for schools to know that these funds will be there win we bring in a program, if it works, we'll be able to sustain it and it's huge. the focus on student outcome, the focus on partnerships in the community school approach and the idea it's bringing ongoing resources all reasons why i support this charter amendment and look forward to working with the supervisors and the city to make sure the voters understand how critical this is for our student's education in san francisco. >> supervisor ronen: thank you so much dr. wayne. we're so excited for you to begin. when is your first day? >> july 5th. i'll be in the office.

>> supervisor ronen: i can't wait. looking forward working with you and getting this across the finish line. thank you so much for presenting today. any questions for dr. wayne? thank you so much. the next speaker that we're going to hear from is the absolutely rock star, incredible woman, leslie hue, who is representing -- [ applause ] , representing the united educators of san francisco. leslie, to you and to cassandra creel who is the president of the united educators. thank you so much for all the work you put into this measure and your partnership in this endeavor. we see you. we appreciate you. it's been so inspiring to work with you. >> thank you for having me. i really appreciate the time. i have a powerpoint. i really like powerpoints.

just couple of things. i'm a school coordinator at a school. i'm a secretary at united educators of san francisco. this is something that's near and dear to my heart. i finished my 15th year of san francisco unified. we saw a 90% reduction in suspensions in one year. that was sustained over multiple years. we saw 10% to 11% of increases in math and english language art scores. the outpaced rest of the school district by 7% to 8%. we have lot of the data that actually really prove that this can work for lot of school communities. when we center young people we sit in the space of listening,

which as adults, that's really hard. when we listen to our young people and listening to families and tailoring the work of education to that community, that's where we see progress. that's where we often fail, to be able to have unique things that different school communities. kid are different. families are different. these are the kind of things that we can actually do to actually move this work forward and really intentional way. i really wanted to -- why is this important? this is important because there's couple of different things. the first thing is that we know systemic racism is happening. we see if our racialized scores for most vulnerable and most oppressed people, including black families and black community, pacific islanders and latinx. we see those racialized outcomes happening all the time. replicated over and over again. these are systems these are

young people all belong in. young people are struggling. as we're entering a different phase of the pandemic, we are seeing a lot of horrific things. i spent last year in person it was the most exhausting jaw-breaking, hardest year of my 16-year career. i was very glad when june 2nd happened. it was so heart breaking, multiple times. not because it was really hard. actually because we saw what was happening with our young people. one of the biggest things that was happening for our young people was grief and loss. lot of our young people were struggling with parents, families, friends -- they were really scared what was happening. when the surge happened, we had classrooms where there were only five to seven students in the classroom. those students were really scared. it was really hard for them to

learn. we had to do lot of work to support the kids that were actually in classroom this year. lot of our young people are struggling with social emotional issues. i often do not sit in support kids one-on-one. this year i had to do lot of that. lot of our schools are stressed for multiple reasons. also, they are -- also because their learning was impacted, not because of the pandemic, because we have such really -- we really struggle as adults. we had really unstable staffing. at my school we have about 45-person staff. our principal had to take four or five classroom into the

cafeteria multiple days. that's what we could do. these are sort of the tip of the iceberg of why and where refer right now. what this fund does, is couple of different things. when we're talking about the opportunity gap that's not only existing and widening, what we're doing by centering young people in our school communities and be intentional about their needs in a way that we don't do very well right now. we don't actually sit and ask young people what do you need. that has to be the foundation of everything that we do. how do we have that and have a systemized process to be able to have those conversations with our young people, so we can tailor educational experiences to them. to the unique need of this student here in abc elementary school rather than large swaths. when we say young people are

struggling, this grant will help entire community, to become a vegetable like dr. wayne said. this allows all stakeholders to come together to listen to students, to look at data and to come up and adjust practices to ensure student progress. it really brings together that village and bring more adults into the building to support our young people and our families. the other potential structural

impacts i think some people are missing this structural impacts that are really positive for us. when we do these listening campaigns, when we talk about listening to our young people, that is our layman term. when we do these needs assessment and get its data, we have up to date current information about what's going on with our students and families right then and there. these are all of our families that live in our districts, in our school communities, that we can tie back. for example like, i have 15 schools in my district, i want to know what's going on with my families. i want to have annual data on that. what that means is we can actually align all of our resources across the city to be able meet the needs of a families in our entire city. this doesn't impact just our school, it actually has an impact to rethink and redo how

we allocate resources to all our families it san francisco. by having this network, by having this structure set in place, we can be like, oh, abc elementary is in my district in my region, we know exactly what's going on right then and there. we're going to have that realtime data to do that. what happens when we have coordinated resources when we really listen to young people and we though what their needs are. we can actually have the right resources, the right interventions, the right strategy to be able to serve them. right now, we guess. we use data from the year before. we do all of these things. we use all these data points from several years ago. here we have up to date data systems to do that. that's the nerdy part of why. i'm really excited to be here to actually be intentional about what young people need. that's always been what this charter amendment has been about. now we have a way to actually

see through and do it in ways never have been before. this is really amazing to be able to use the educational -- this money is really amazing. thaek for your time and energy. appreciate it. >> supervisor ronen: any questions? [ indiscernible ] >> i do have one question. my staff put together a little letter for me which has a number of labor organizations on the top that are aligned, presumably around a set of asks from that letter.

are you freelancing? >> i'm not freelancing, no. really good question. let's be honest, we are having communicating with our labor siblings. we are very, very in favor of their proposal. we are also saying we want this to move forward while we're doing that work. >> supervisor ronen: supervisor chan is online and has a question. >> supervisor chan: i do have one question. i want to say thank you supervisor ronen for your leadership on this and for bringing this idea forward. this is something that san francisco voters would support.

we have all seen it when we brought forward to them our city our home that we can increase -- [ indiscernible ] they come out in supported it so we can try to tackle our homelessness in san francisco. we saw the prop c that the supervisor brought forward and it's a measure that allows us to provide child care quality child care in san francisco. again, san francisco voters generously supported it. supervisor preston brought forward a transfer tax to provide affordable housing even during the pandemic, san francisco voters voted in support of that. i think my question is, in which

i'm seeing this as some of the tricky issue around this proposal is, was there ever a consideration to think about a new tax funding source or a way to generate tax measure so we could have a dedicated funding for what we're doing here? >> supervisor ronen: i will answer this. yes, sure, there was. as a matter of fact, when supervisor haney and i put on overpaid executive tax on the ballot and won, we have not started collecting that cans. this will be the first year that will will come online. it's not dedicated tax that will go straight to our general fund. it could be used to supplement some of the money that we are transferring to the schools from

the general fund. we are not close to putting another revenue generating measure on the ballot. we're happy to do that in the future. the problem is that the crises is now. the voters did not support a transportation bond in the last cycle. we're going to have several -- we're going to have sale tax on this ballot and other revenue generating measures on this ballot. right now, the scores that i read to you, there's plenty in your district that's supervisor, that was before the covid crises. you're about to hear from parents and families that are going to tell you what it's like today in the classroom. it has only gotten worse. when i say worse, i mean bad. we cannot wait another year to

make a move in these classrooms. the bottom line is the state has underfunded education ever since the '90s when proposition 13 passed. these schools have been starve for funds. they've been cut to the bone. there are no longer guaranteed reading specialist, p.e. teacher, school nurse, school psychologist. all those things that used to be bake and core to school, are now a luxury. that's what this fund would provide. it would provide a consistent set of resources so that schools can get those -- which should be basic? it should be funded by the state. sadly isn't. it will provide those positions to start dealing with the students that are in crises today. [ please stand by ]

>> supervisor mandelman: many supervisors have good ideas or what we think are good ideas. generally, they are not cooked until they are vetted, and you mentioned every single person that i thought was important to consult in an education measure, and all of them apparently in strong support, which is -- you know, which

reflects a whole lot of work on your part. there is a hard part about this, which is, at least at this moment, you know, there are two good arguments about -- about this piece of legislation. there's an argument that we should be making this commitment to poor kids in our schools, and it's also that this would violate a long-standing principle to use revenue to pay for set-asides. and i want to thank all the good folks in labor for

reminding us for the potential in that commitment. i am glad that we don't have to vote on this today. you have shown us your willingness to compromise and your willingness for feedback, so i appreciate that. as i look at these asks from labor, it looks as if there should be room for amendments by the board, as if we should finesse the agreement. i am hopeful that this can be worked out and we'll be a happy family or one big unhappy

family going forward to november, so thanks. >> chair ronen: thank you. i'm so sorry to delay public comment. i didn't know we were going to have this conversation, but let's have it. so we started this measure, and it's -- there's two different parts of the program. there's to see measured improvement in the academic achievement and academic readiness of kids in our school. that part, we worked extensively with education experts, with all the persons -- dr. wayne, every school board commissioner has been working on this. parents -- the parent coalition. you know, really, we've worked with every group in the city, and that part is so much better

than when we started this, and for that, i'm grateful. then, there's the money part. two labor unions that we'll hear from shortly, seiu and local 1021 feel that their funding will go away -- that eraf will go away, and their workers could get laid off. of course, that's extremely concerning, and i would never want to see that happen. i've talked with shawn nelson in the office of the mayor

who's worked for the city for a couple of decades. i said, in the worst budget crisis of our lifetime, were there any workers laid off? she said no. in the past 20 years in the city, there's never been layoffs. >> supervisor peskin: i don't want to make representations on the -- okay. there was a lot of bumping that happened, and bumping happened across agencies, so there were people who bumped out of the city into the school district and into the schools, but not out. >> supervisor ronen: okay. that's not what i heard. before i introduce to you the

version without the amendments, i propose that if there is a $200 million deficit or more in any fiscal year, then the board of supervisors in that year can -- can reduce the allocation to the student success fund all the way from $60 million and anywhere in between to lower it to $25 million. that's never been done better. that's the first time it's happened. therefore, if we're in real crisis, and there is a threat of layoffs, then, you know, we're more than halving the amount of the set-aside. we have a $14 million budget. i don't know that $25 million in one year will make a difference one way or the other. i understand that that

addresses the concern of the union but also addressing the crisis with our school and with our children. that wasn't good enough for labor, so supervisor safai and i offered a whole list of other compromises that we were willing to make. we were willing to take the fund down from $70 to $55 million. we were willing to change the fund from a 25-year fund down to a 15-year fund. we were willing to say even if we don't have a $200 million deficit, if eraf goes away, our federal fund could be in good shape, but if eraf goes away, the board could still reduce the funds three years for $25 million while we're still looking for new funding sources. i don't know -- ahsha, what

else did we do? we offered -- i have a whole list. [indiscernible]. >> supervisor ronen: we offered more compromises, as well, and i can get the list to you. unfortunately, we came to a place that neither side can budge. you'll hear from the unions today. i see them all here, and that is that they want these funds to go away completely if eraf goes away. i explained to them why that can't happen. if you take that fund away, you end up worse than when you started. there are annual six counties, 68 counties in the state that get excess eraf, do not have

the political power in sacramento to continue to hold onto the funding if the state wants to take it. what i've been trying to do is responsively meet both interests at the same time, take care of the kids that are failing and in trouble in our schools, and have a fiscally responsible ballot measure that takes into account our city workers and making sure that they aren't put in harm's way in the case -- you know, there will be a recession at some point. we all know that. and what i would argue is that this ballot measure is the most responsible set-aside to ever pass. the last thing, the charter

amendment contains a reserve for the fund, so in any given year, if the full amount isn't expended, it will go into a reserve fund, up to $30 million, and it will go into the general fund if it's over $30 million, and that can be used to supplement programs in any year if the board of supervisors decides to cut funds less than 60 million. diametrically-opposed interests. unfortunately, we're at that standstill, and i'd be happy to sit down with labor and try to think creatively, but i'd rather lose this than have the kids be in a worse position than they are today. i hope that explains everything.

and now, the dirty laundry is aired for all to see. and with that, can we open it up to public comment? >> clerk: just one or two things. i'll note that we are convened as a special meeting of the board of supervisors as we have six members present. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> [indiscernible] but would otherwise be available to the general fund. the charter amendment would require the city to appropriate significant amounts of money to the student success fund each year. as written in fiscal year 24, the city would appropriate 24.5 million, in 25, $50

million, and in 26, $75 million. the measure would also allow the [indiscernible] budget deficit in excess of 200 million. of course, we will update this letter should any amendment that would impact the financial analysis be introduced. >> supervisor peskin: let's do public comment. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who are in line, you will have one minute to speak. our bell is not working, so i will announce when your one minute is up. for those listening remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d.

2491-588-6137, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue. >> supervisor peskin: all right. the floor is yours. get started. >> all right. kim [indiscernible] san francisco labor council. i can't respond to everything that was said in one minute, so i'm not going to try. there were complete -- i don't want to say lies, but it's the only one that came out. isn't true. negotiations kind of never really happened. once i walked out -- it wasn't us -- we were left there. that's the way she wants to put it. i don't really care. but i do want to say one thing. when she talks about no layoffs, at the expense of,

let's be clear on what city workers did to reduce layoffs. they gave up health care, pensions, staffing, they gave up pay, they gave up everything to make sure that there were as few layoffs as possible, but there were always layoffs, so if you're starting on the scene that there were never any layoffs, let's be clear. city workers paid a hefty price, and people went out the door, i want to be clear. i've been doing this since 2002. >> clerk: your time has lapsed. >> we put together a proposal to negotiate in good faith. >> clerk: speaker's time has lapsed. >> i just want to say, we have our proposals -- >> supervisor peskin: next speaker, please. >> i'm gina, a teacher on special assignment. i'm in favor of the student

success fund charter impact. we have all seen the impact of the pandemic on students' social and emotional well-being. i had a lot of success. many of my struggling readers accelerated with 1.5 to two years of literacy growth. however, there was not enough hours in my day for me to provide these intensive supports some of my students needs, and their learning stalled. providing extra support to students works. we must provide funds so we have enough people to do this important life changing work. i urge all of you to support

the student success fund charter amendment. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is alita fisher. i'm a parent in the district and a special education advocate, and i like to think of our education system as a rubber band. we stretch, we flex, we double over to support things as necessary, and the pandemic stretched our rubber band so thin that it's in danger of snapping. i as a parent would not want to takeaway union jobs. i would never ever want to do that. i would hope our schools would become recruiting grounds for recruiting members.

our wraparound services, our on us service providers that we normally go to, they've stopped taking referrals from sfusd this spring, so our students have nowhere to go. if we had community schools coordinators who had the connections with c.b.o.s, we would all be so much healthier. thank you. [indiscernible]. >> thank you. i'm meredith dotson. i'm here today to express our full support for the student success fund charter amendment. san francisco is a city that should have thriving and equitable schools. it does not. it's hard to admit it, but our district is mediocre at best.

we are the bottom 7% of reading outcomes across the state. there are other metrics beyond there, but it's worrisome, and coming out of the pandemic, our kids need our support now more than ever. we appreciate the extent to which supervisor ronen and others have worked with our communities to improve the outcomes for our students and truly equitable outcomes for our student. we appreciate how much they have reached out to the superintendent and feel this is something to build on between the school, students, and district. >> good afternoon, supervisors, and hillary.

my name is raphael picazo, a district 9 member. as a member of the community, education is the best thing we can offer our children, but not on the backs of our parents who work for the city and county of san francisco as labor members. over the years, our labor have been laid off. i've been here 38 years in the school district, and the city and county, and seen people getting laid off, whether it's furlough days, not getting raises, other sacrifices made to our members, and i wouldn't want that to happen because there's no money out of the general budget.

but if we could find other resources and funding, other ways of -- >> clerk: time has elapsed. >> supervisor peskin: next speaker. >> hi. good afternoon. i'm [indiscernible] school social worker with sfusd and a resident of san francisco. i'm here today to support the student success fund charter amendment. as a social worker in vis valley, i know this school year was unlike any other. i had students advocating for their mental health needs and their physical health needs, as well. our families were in need of food, housing, clothing, and safe space. we needed to heal from

covid-19, but we only had a part-time nurse, and we needed case management on top of that. having stable funding for physical and mental health and academic support would support our overall health of this school community. our students deserve full time services, more social workers and more mental health providers. eraf should go to our student programs. >> hi. i'm sabino wildman. seen a fourth grade girl crying one more than because of difficult things happening at home. i've seen a middle schooler who was telling me that he was thinking about committing suicide and it couldn't be more clear for the need for more

support for students' success. our schools have been chronically underfunded and there's a gap between our low-income students of color and the ever increasing trauma that's increasing in their communities. the student success fund earmarks $70 million a year that would grant sfusd to fund programs that would improve student achievement in their social and emotional wellness for low-income working students and their families, and i really urge you to put this money from our education to help our public schools and communities. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is [indiscernible] and i'm an education manager for the latino task force. i have been partnering with several schools, especially

cesar chavez, over several years. [indiscernible] between school sites, community partners, and the city. designed to most effectively serve the students at each school site based on specific needs and in alignment with the affected pillars of community schools. thank you. >> hello. my name is stacey martinez. i'm the education coordinator with the summer hub with the latino task force. it is my duty to bring a safe and educational space at my high school program, but with that being said, i've taken on

the roles of being an informal social worker, case manager, teacher, peer advocate, case worker, and more. not only am i working full time, but i am a full time student. i'm also an sfusd alumni, and just knowing what services my students need and their families need, this amendment can definitely get that proper care to them and the attention that the students are begging for. so please listen to two of my students today that i have invited to speak on their experiences. thank you. >> hi. my name is [indiscernible] and i am a student at mission high school, and i'm calling in support of the student success fund.

[indiscernible] and helps and also [indiscernible] after covid, there has been less resources for our schools, less teachers, and it has askd me in in -- affected me in the education system by causing teachers to leave schools and not getting the best education possible. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker. >> hi. my name is michelle soto, and i am a student at [indiscernible] college prep high school. i am commenting on the student success fund. we need more programs and resources so we can expand our skill sets. one thing we need is a student center because there's been a lack of wellness focused on students. it has affected me and my education by not being able to have a comfortable relationship

with teachers. i believe that having a comfortable bond with teachers can lead to better grades in classes. i didn't have a chemistry teacher for almost nine months. covid has had a big impact on my school and education. although i don't attend a school within sfucd, i can vouch on behalf of the students because of the students in my experience. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker. >> thank you. my name is anna mejia, and i am an education coordinator for the latino community center. [indiscernible] i've been partnered with many schools in the bayview vis valley in the last several years, and i am here in support of the

successful fund. thank you. >> hello, supervisors. my name's a.j. thomas, and i'm the political action chair for afct local 21. i'd like to correct the record. labor is not opposed to this policy. we applause supervisors ronen and safai for tackling funding that needs to be solved. let's use eraf money for what it's intend today be. let's not put the general fund on a hook for something that puts city employee general fund jobs at risk in the future because we didn't stick the landing on this one. we ask you to please pay attention to seiu local 21 and the entire labor council and

the amendments that we provided for you. thank you. >> good afternoon, committee. my name is kayla degiorgio, and i'm here to voice my support for this student success task. you will hear from opposition that this may encourage layoffs, and while i agree this is a valid concern, speaking even as a child of a teacher, yes, staffing is important, but students have to come first right now. we all know that the performance gap for bipoc students is only growing, the proficiency level supervisor ronen is only growing, and that should spur you into action immediately. our bipoc students are hurting, and these issues cannot be solved with a cookie cutter response. the schools owe students to

invest funding in their communities, and you owe it to the students and the schools. thank you. >> hi. my name is siobhan, and i'm a former student liaison to the school board and speaking in support of the s.f. student success fund. i hope that the success fund supports schools that work with sfusd focal population. [please stand by]

>> my name is furnace case, i heard the two children within the san francisco unified school district andi'm here to support the amendments . i want to applaud the work that

supervisor ronen has done, not just here but in the past. my children attended one of the best schools in san francisco and the reviser ronen worked with the school district to put pressure on the district to make sure that they utilize bond funds. i think all of you are a powerful position to work with the district and the voters in the labor union children at other schools don't have to wait 2 years to get ied evaluation my child who has an ied didn't get reading intervention because of all these phenomenalstaff talked about they were doing five, six other things . with dcyf you'll have the opportunity to see things happen and be responsible for the funds, >> clerk: next year.

ca hello supervisors, i am an issue, and a commissioner of the san francisco school board. my professional background is in business, i'm new to the education field and san francisco citygovernment . i've heard our school district had not worked well before and i personally encountered this pandemic to school when i wanted my son to attend a study by. i contacted the school and they said that's not ours well, organizes that ? i didn't understand why the city and our school district didn't work together. now that i'm on the school board i know how things work and i'm so happy to see that with regards to this charter amendment the city government and school district are working together and the school district is turning a new page with new board members like myself and our new

superintendent. hopefully we are working together. this charter amendment is just the beginning of more good works to come and i fully support this amendment and thankyou to supervisor ronen and others . >> good afternoon chair, i'm alexander also on the board of education and i spent 20 years as a teacher in the san francisco publicschools and i want to talk about the larger context . this approach that's codified in this ballot measure is research-based .it's one that has been supported by the chair of the state board of ed and governor newsom thelegislature invested $2 billion in a similar approach statewide.if we pass this we will become a leader in the state of california around this work .

san francisco: schools will be going from a place people ask questions about to a model for how to educate every child so i want to say thank you so much supervisor ronen, safai, melgar and all of you. we need toget our public schools back on track and make us a statewide leader . >> speaker: good afternoon supervisors. i see we still do not have a stepstool here so i'm going to use the microphone like this . i am the vice president of number ship organizing for local 21. i worked upstairs in the office of laborstandards enforcement and am a resident of district 8 . i'm not only a local 21 member, i am married to tends one library and my parents-in-law are a retired teacher and a retired udf teacher that's really why we are here today. we are here making our best effort to move forward not just

within our own personal families but with our broader labor family and forwardtowards a solution here that will help us do both things .protect and preserve what we desperately need in our schools and also maintain the high level of city services are citizens frankly deserve. that's why we'rehere as the united labor coalition . we recognize and commend all the work board has done to dat . we want to see this succeed. we also want to see him and do everything we need to thank you for your attention. >> my name is john seagrave and i'm a member of local 21 employed by san francisco public works as a technical engineer. i'm delighted that supervisor ronen proposal will add much-needed support to our public schools for the neediest families and students. i have serious concerns about the ongoingfunding requirements and this proposal as it's

written . well while educational revenue augmentation fund is available there is no guarantee that will continue to be so into the future so requiring the general fund money make up any future shortfalls would be a dangerous move as it would require cuts to othermuch-needed public services . i'm here today to urge you the board of supervisors to accept the united labor coalitions amendments to this proposal that would adjust the funding for this verywell-intentioned and much-needed effort while protecting other vital city services . thank you . >>. >> speaker: good afternoon, i am with jamestown community center and i'm here in full support of the june success fund. i want to thank you for setting the standard of how we should be supporting children and their families and this is not an exception. i want to share about our

programs in community school programs whether we are in a community school or not because that is what kids families staff and the community need. i want to share an example of how we are in a community through our summer programming. we have social workers, teachers in training. we have counselors, occupational therapist and staff working with kids to provide mental support, academics, arts, field trips experiences that will carry them on through the rest of their life and weare able to do this because of our partnerships in the community schools .our partnerships with other ceos and i urge you to support this fund and make us the standard not only in san francisco. >> ...

>> speaker: my name is rena lopez and i work for the department of environment and i'm not proud 21 member to support this program. that's all. >> next. >> my name is ivan, i'm the manager for the latino task force and i wanted to share our position that we support the ballot measure. one of the interventions our clients come to us every week is finding a way to enroll their students from our local schools because they feel they could find a better school that's an intervention that's unacceptable in our community . what we need is the support of our local schools so we can find the in school interventions and keep families andschools in our neighborhoods. those are the kind of interventions that we want to see so please , we support this ballotmeasure only and we would

love to see you support it as well. thank you . >> good afternoon supervisors and i want to thank you for first of all my name is teresa rutherford. i am one of the vps for sei you tends one and i'm a dphworker in the city of san francisco . i also have lived in san francisco for over 50 years and my children attended public schools in san francisco. marina middle school, george washington and i also have experience my child coming home and standing on the toilet because the toilets are so broken. and on the all the other issues that goes with that. so i totally am in support of this having a program that surrounds kids and supports them but i also know it's important to have protections

for the parents of those kids because in 2008 over 400 people were there salaries were cut. >> speakers time has elapsed. >>. >> speaker: they were forced to move. >>. [inaudible] speakers time has elapsed, we need tohold you to one minute . [inaudible] >> good afternoon supervisors, i stand here wearing two hats. i am a principal at mlk middle school and president of united administrators of san francisco so my comments and support for

this program as a backdrop. our brothers and sisters are in the union. community schools. i'm a big supporter of community schools. for two reasons i want to talk aboutthe complexities of leadership and the multiplier that the position of community schoolcoordinator is . when we looked at trying to make changes around the needs , we're talking about student needs. we're talking about educator needs and the needs of the community. the parents and other stakeholders that support the child. that iswhat we call the whole child framework. the coordinator can do a needs assessment and address all those needs and partner with agencies to bring them into th school to meet the needs . what does that do? it allows the agencies in the community to become part of th community of the school and it makes us one . i want to thank you for your

time and i hope we have some success in solving these issues . >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is boggess, vice president ofthe school board and senior policy director at coleman advocates . to speak about like coleman advocates student members are supporting this it's really started in 2018 as we were getting ready to launch a new campaign and families and students really felt abandoned by their leadership and didn't feel there was enough support there to ensure that kids were getting access to the educatio they needed . since then thingshave gotten worse with pandemics and recalls and structural deficits . we're excited about this as a propositionfor us to give voters the chance to say we want to stand up for families . we want to support our schools to be the best they possibly can. in a lot of ways this is probably the path of breaking down the barriers and the silos exist between thedifferent city

andgovernment agencies that prevent people from getting the services they need and deserve . i hope you'll give the voters an opportunity to support this . >> good afternoon supervisors. i work in theplanning department and i'm a proud member of local 21 and number of a delegate to the san francisco labor council . i want to thank you for putting this all about labor has been a long-standing friend of education. if you remember the schools and communities first one ballot measure we watched walked the streets day after day week after week in getting that passed in san francisco. we didn't pass across the state but we believe in education money. but with us today is where is that money coming from? so i want to join my union siblings in urging the compromise that we together. and just to urge that the funding mechanism for this be amended. so thank you for your time.

>> thank you very much for your work and your visit. i'm a proud over 21 member. essential worker, department of public works. i'm here to support this amendment and the only thing we want to quantify is our american amendment is accepted to provide more money to the students and please consider that and thank you again. >> i think i suffered from the short problem and i don't want those second to be counted against me. i'm the executivedirector of ifp local 21 and i do want to clarify and make sure everyone understands that we do support thismeasure with amendments . i'm a mom of an african-american child . single mom who could have

absolutely use these resources when my kid was in school but if i didn't have a job that really would have been more of an impact on my daughter and whether she got greedy enrichment. i think the program is vital andimportant there's a lane to fund thisin and that we canhave a win-win . we don't need to act like the house of representatives and be completely divided here . there's a pathway .the right leadership is taken and where everybody wins. the students, workers, community members of the city and i want to say our members have thousands of kids in the school system in san francisco and they want to have good public schools tobe able to send their kids to and they also need to have jobs . it's not one or the other here . >> thank you, next speaker. >> my name is nick king, elected business representative for glazer's of san francisco unifiedschool district . i rise to support the proposed

labor amendments and ask the co-authors to continue negotiating . weare concerned for the source of the funding . >> thank you, next speaker. >> good afternoon honorable members. rudy gonzalez, chair of th building and construction trade and i'm here as elected leader of the coalition of the school district . i represent carpenters and locksmiths . i represent plumbers and pipefitters, gardeners, sheet metal workers, blazers and others and we've been in dire straits for a long time. we can get behind the spirit and intent and practical application of a measure like this but what's most profound is when i visit the shops i hear more from members like in the contextof them being parents and public school graduates . i can tell you our movement stands in complete solidarity

with each other and on behalf of public schools and when i hear neighborhood schools i think actual public schools . i'm hoping in theamendment process we can have some conversations . maybe review some conversations that haven't gotten traction yet but we are committed to the intent behind this measure and i think it can do a lot ofgood. it's about trying to solve where the funding is and we appreciate this, thank you . >> are there any other individuals in the board chambers who would like to testify. seeing on why do we go to remote public comment. >> clerk: we have 27 callers in line to speak. can we have our first caller? >> speaker: i'm melinda, a 25-year-old native san franciscan, former sf usd student and as an

african-american i want to speak to what this amendment to do to mycommunity . this is a good way to practice preventative care and what i mean by that is preventing the next generation of people incarcerated and next generation of african-americans and project housing. our students are not educated enough to compete for these jobs. we have some of the biggest companies in san francisco but our students are not well educated enough to compete for these jobs. this amendment can help us by giving a better education to our students so they can have careers that can adequately make them productive members of society and not be able to turn to public housing because they can't afford to live here. our parents have legal things to keep them afloat. in san francisco the last african-american committee

every fiscal year we go down one percent. and average income is 30. >> next color. >> i'm in a three teacher at bhm and i want to speak in support of the students success fund because as a middle school teacher i've returned in person teaching the past school year and knowing my students would have high levels of need expected us to be supporting them with additional tutors or additional therapists on campus but unfortunately we did not have any additional students and it was a sub crisis our wellness intervention staff were in more strapped than ever so the messaging there was a lack of extra support from districts was it was our responsibility of teachers like myself to make up for the academic and emotional scars a pandemic is left on our kids and it's not fair and contributes to of myself and coworkers and if we do not approve the student success fund charter amendment messaging is we continue to not

care about the academic and emotional needs of our kids and teachers and during a mass exodus ofeducators we cannot afford to message that at this point it feels like aneed so please meet the needs of our students and staff . >> . >> clerk: can we have our next color? >> speaker: my name is anna, i am a parent of two children in san francisco unified school district and also a product of the district and i am here in full support of the student charter amendment. i've seen prior to this amendment and after the pandemic that our students have been left behind. we please stop this behavior and really connect and fund our students so they can have equal opportunity to be successful and let's show our students that we care for them. they are the future of this country and it's about time we are putting our kids in the back burner, we need to put them in the front.

>> can we have our next color. >> my name is sam, i'm a parent of two kids with iep's at the school with a stellar wellness team and short of that i will support this charter. our school has a 20 percent iep rate that is not usual. there's a huge backlog of evaluations for iep's in the district and we have a dire shortage of psychologists. it's much harder for black and brown children to getdiagnosis of dyslexia or autism and to get those important early services . unfortunately the school is the only place many of our families receivedany services . if you have medi-calit can be impossible if your child needs mental health services . my wife's children get service for our health insurance. i'm talking 15 to 17 hours a week of support. that's besides the privilege i'm talking about.

school social workers help families navigate these convoluted systems as well as give direct support to students. please sort this out with labor. >> clerk: thank you, can we hearfrom the next caller ? >> speaker: my name is leon mclachlan, a parent of two sf usd students. we love our school and we love the teachers and this year was awful. behavior got in the way of learning on a regular basis. and it can't be ignored. so hearing this amendment i stand in full support of it because when yousee what the children are going through right now , you want to give

them or at least i as a parent in the district want to see continuity and stability and we know there's excruciating budget cuts in sfusd so if this money is protected for their needs instead of being tied to academics if it is supported so that students can actually develop relationships with people that will bethere from year-to-year i strongly support making this happen.thank you . >> next caller. >> if the callers not speaking can we move on to the next caller. >> good afternoon everyone. thank you so much for this opportunity.

my name is danae a wilson a resident of district 9 and i'm also a mother of a child attending san francisco school district . i strongly believe the student success charter amendment will be critical in helping our children succeed in school especiallyas we recover from the pandemic . we know that our children have gone through a lot in the last three years and this fund will be incredibly helpful in closing the gaps inmany areas especially around mental health . i think that as a san francisco resident we can become role for other cities in taking care of our children. and we need to domore for them. thank you so much again for the time . >>.

>> speaker: my name is dorothy clark and i'm a parent educator in the sanfrancisco unified school district . here in district learning i've taught students one on one social emotional learning . as i've observed these students i realized that they began practicing strategies to learn and was self-regulating. when parents are able to self regulate their better able to focus and i feel it is important to fund this even in hard economic times. thank you .>> next color please. >> speaker: this is josephine. as a property owner i think we

need to continue to invest in education in our schools. our property tax funded. as a parent who has tremendously benefited from the school system and as a parent educator working in our district 5 years going on six i do a lot of push in and pull out, getting kids support and we don't see a huge need for more social emotional learning supportfor our students after the pandemic . and as a chinese community leader you cannot leave american students behind. i thank you for making the negotiation and hope it will help city workersas well as supporting the charter amendment thank you . >> clerk: next caller.>>

speaker: my name is for a summer i know, director of the schools of san francisco and our focus is to promote the fundamental valueof public education . i want to just make it clear that it's encouraging for all of us to collectively act around structured incentive at the rallies of our city and shift to those that she equity in our culture and language because we are san francisco while students brought the district are facing challenging times it is the staff and families and students at the school site understand their unique needs of their student body . the student success fund encourages creativity and successfully serves students at all school site and is based on the need for students and families and the requirements of set goals and outcomes and reports.

please help fund the program andrestore continuous improvement outcomes and academicachievement and social and emotional wellness . iq . >> can we have our next caller? >> speaker: my name is susan boston and i'm a resident of district 5. i support the plan to create a fund for sfusd but i urge you to modify the funding source. as the charter amendment is written the funding is ever reduced or eliminated in funding for it would require appropriations from the general fund in order to make upthe difference . this final public service in other areas of the city. that would be devastating to all san franciscans. the labor coalition is opposed to the student success fund has in fact come up with a solution that will leverage funds to create a stable funding for the student success fund and attacked vital public services. please listen to that and

incorporate the modifications that they are putting forward . thank you. >> can we have our next caller. >> thank you so much. my name is eddie cochran and i'm the ceo of mission graduates and we run programs and 13 different schools in the san francisco. and i'm calling to be in support of the student success charter amendment and i would just want to say how much we are failing our children. supervisor running dv the test scores. we were failing our students before the pandemic. our students need additional support.they need support that complements the academic learning that they're getting and will support them in terms of developing the socioemotional and wellness

skillsthat they need tothrive. we can do better and we needto do better . this charter amendment is one way to do that . iq . >> clerk: let's hear from our next caller . >> speaker: this is the latino task force. president of the board of homeless children's network and director of the daily chrome collective withcommunity services . calling to support the charter amendment and also urging for strong and good negotiations with the organized labor. i dedicate a lot of my time in working with kids who are living in cars. families who just arrived directing them over to our shelter that lotus street runs and i see firsthand working with the homeless children's network the powerful work of social workers in our nation.

the important work to get people to thrive not just to children but the families so it's very important that we pass this amendment but that it be done with a responsible negotiation with organized labor. thank you so much. >> can we hear from the next caller? >> my name is marlon. san francisco native and a product of the san francisco unified school district. i just wanted to come out in support of this amendment. schools have had their programs cut ever since i was in an sf usd school student. come back in significantly even before the pandemic and now the pandemic has accelerated this process. i think this amendment is crucial to bring back all the

programs but it's also important because it offers students the support they need to be able to come back stronger after the pandemic and the teachers and staff at the schools as well. this has been a problem with many parents to remember at one point at my school they almost cut the pe classes which didn't go through but it almost happened. i really think this charter amendment is important to get back not just whatwe had before the pandemic but even better . >> can we hear from our next caller? >> speaker: i am an employee of

sfusd and resident of the bayview district. as a former student and parent of a kindergartenstudent i am here to advocate for funding to increase access and services for students . students and families are struggling. our educators have been struggling this past year to meet this social emotional need of students . due to the unpredictable year we collectively identified the student school community partnerships. we can do this by lamenting strategies and programs that will work for studentsand families and will offer our student population accessible and sustainable services to meettheir social and emotional needs . community schools can provide opportunities for many students but also offer hope for communities . >> can we have our next caller. >> my name is gloria romero and non-executive director for

healing organization. i'd first like to thank supervisor ronen your leadership on the student success charter amendment and all those involved. in this critical measure that is carefully and intentionally designed to reflect decades of best practices and respect for students needs. i have a long historyof working with students families and schools . provider consultation and capacity building and we see the needs and schools everyday from the mental health needs of students to the interruption of the school prison pipeline . we've engaged in partnered on influencing comprehensive school models and the first chance wraparound programs and services that have proven to improve student achievement and social emotional wellness. the last weeks have been challenging for students families and i'd like to reiterate all the impacts of

covid-19 and the student success fund will bring much-needed. >> clerk: can we had our next caller. >>. >> clerk: please proceed. >> speaker: can you hear me now? it said i was unmuted.my name is nancy. i'm calling from the latino task force and i work with young people. i was a high school teacher before this but today i'm going to read to you guys the note sent to me by one of the students currently here in our afterschool program. she is a recent graduate from soda and would like us to know she's in support of any resources be being added into sf unified school district

especially as far as the wellness centers. she said i'm recently graduated student. the pandemic had a detrimental impact on everyone but really cost over the lack of emotional and educational support in sf unified school district. after going back to in person schooling there were never enough wellness professionals or the wellnesscenters were closed half the time and lots of people i know were skipping classes and it was difficult to learn in that environment . she's asking that if this could be addressed by improving conditions for students of color and low income students and that she's asking that there be mental and emotional support systems implemented for young peoplewho are trying to succeed in school and in life thank you for listening . she's interning with us and is a helpfulyoung person and see that need for future therapists

.>> clerk: can we have our next caller. >> speaker: good evening. my name is lisa i'm a commissioner on san francisco board of education and parent of two sfusd elementary school children. i'm grateful for the collective work done under supervisor ronen's leadership to create the student success fund is on student outcomes . i see this as an opportunity to bring resources to directly benefit and improve student outcomes and specifically focus on the whole childwhich includes not only academic achievement but social emotional wellness . i'm thrilled with the collaboration and partnership between supervisor ronen, community groups. thanks also to supervisors melgar , safai and preston. finally i know our labor union simply are interim as well and

i want to acknowledge and thank them fortheir presence because their participation is critical to ensuring ourstudent success as well . >> clerk: can we have our next caller ? >> speaker: can you hear me? >> clerk: yes we can. >> speaker: thank you. i am district 8, former sfusd student and 40 year teacher. research and i don't talk fast but i'm going to try. the level of systemic instability is real and those who are still keeping it together are doing so at the expense of their own health. please move forward this legislation to get funding directly to sites for our powerful and creative students and programs like the resource which is only one example of evidence-based wraparound programming that improves achievement and emotional wellness that is experiencing

cuts for the coming year. in one month alone this past spring up your resource response actions included drawing 100students into very energetic community building basketball game, fundamentally changing the entire medical staff , weaving over 20 mediations that would otherwise have fallen through the gaps, tutoring and emotional support, facilitating original interactive workshops on topics like boundaries and consent and impacting housing. >> clerk: can we have our next caller ? >> clerk: >> speaker: good afternoon. i was born and raised in san francisco and i am an alumni of unified and am currently the chapter vice president at the college of san francisco. i'm in favor of the charter amendment to increase the metrics well protecting critical government services like the student success fund and to keep working on the modifications .

the energy you make can impact the city workers lives and most underserved communities throughout the city and yet workers were left with no jobs and didn't access their kids were students at the time. >> clerk: thank you, can we haveour next caller ? >> speaker: good evening. this isdoctor carol hill and i'm executive director for the beacon initiative .we have beacons in 27 sfusd schools and i represent about 13 youth serving organizations calling in with covid to say we should support the student success fund. we have an opportunity to do something amazing, something transformation transformational and as other folks have said that will make us a model not just in san francisco but across the world and this is

one of the ways we are able to do it through alignment and cooperation so we support it, thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next caller. >> speaker: hello, my name is david, aci u 1021 member and representative of district 5. i was calling to remind the supervisors thatthey should work with their labor partners . unions represent not just parents of san francisco but also workers of san francisco. please let the unions participate in the process. they want to be part of the solution with seiu supporting education everywhere and for everyone. please don't leave usbehind in this process. thank you . >> clerk: thank you. can we go to your next colors.

>> high supervisors. my mother was a career public school teacher in poor communities in newyork that i strongly support investing in public education . withresources every school could be thecrown jewel of san francisco . my name is melina ahearn . i'm part of ifp local 21 in district 5. we've worked so hard for schools andcommunities first which would have taxed the rich to fund education . we love the proposal. i hope that these balance and pass with specific changes most critically to create stable funding sources. let's use future iterations to create a fulcrum to mitigate unintended consequences for workers and programs that draw on the general fund. labor is with you. let's unify. withthe practical concerns raised here . and thank you supervisor ronen for bringing this issue to the board . >> can we have ournext caller ?

>> i'm a student at mission high school. i'd like to speak today in favor of the funding for the district. one of my favorite aspects of school in the past has been the support and care from all my teachers and especially important that we have a stable environment but i had an experience where a teacher has had to sit down with all of us in the classroom and described to us how scary it was to constantly feel like their job was jeopardized and at the mercy of the funding. and i believe that receiving this money would create more stable environment for everyon . thank you for your time. >>. >> clerk: can we have our next caller? >> hello. my name is michael elias and

i'm the afterschool program director at mission high school and in this role i hope to oversee all student activities ranging from clubs and student events to programs hosted by our nonprofit partners.i want to voice my support for the student success fund charter a minute this will help mission high school tosustainably bolster academic excellence and personal wellness among our cherished mission high students . our students have endured hardships as they pushed through social emotional and academic setbacks. i found out how when students arepresented with taxes to make up for learning loss and interpersonal connection they see these opportunities . they need the additional support of the school district can provide. this will provide these opportunities us to ensure students can receive a wide range of programs and services and allow the school to develop a robust afterschool tutoring program build on the success of our campuses vital cultural

clubs, expand our student imagination through arts and musicprogramming and foster new clubs and activities devoted to mindfulness. in short this amendment will also help holistic healing . >> can we have our next caller. >> good afternoon chair and supervisors. first and foremost i'm a parent with two kids and district schools. i'm also the mission collector at the task for education cochair and former district coordinator. i'm calling in strong support of the student success fund which will provide access to unity driven strategies and make difficult interventions such as the neighborhood network of correlated services that will provide evidence-based wraparound programs and an initiative that stands as a strong testament of the coordinated collaboration between schools and community

partners the city working together while making families secure with academic achievements. the student success fund will make it possible for school sites to identify the set of strategies andinterventions that strategically address the student needs. i look forward to the passing of this legislation and partnering with the district and city to help draft the implementation but there's much needed community fund. thank you for your support . >> can we hear from our next caller. >> hello. >> please proceed. >> my name is carrie and i was born in san francisco and on the local 21 member but i've been a sickly a public think tank and they said that the severity limits like civility and that unless the unless you know where new money is coming from you should let the set-aside expire before you basically drop peter to pay paul.

and in working with budgets i know that's an issue is one of the biggest depletion of funds particularly by board members for certain funds. i would direct you to the work that they've done on this conference. as a budget person i'm calling to support. >> clerk: next caller. >> speaker: can you hear me? thank you so much. thank you supervisor ronen and the rest of the supervisors for this proposal. i volunteered with the latino task force and i'm a proud graduate of mission high school and i'm also the former director for mission beacon community center at everett middle school. this fund is absolutely wonderful initiative. i said early on that with covid-19 we've lost a

generation so with this we can redeem our students and i appreciate this proposal has very specific guidelines but notfunding administrative positions . addressing sufficiency and math and reading. marrying academic and functional emotional wellness, partnering with ceos so i encourage you to please include labor in the conversation. thank you so much, this is so needed. >> can we have our next caller? >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is laredo susan caught up executive director of the center of american research after hearing today's hearing i want to address youas an individual , a san franciscan and a member of the san francisco unified school district. i support thismeasure and i think it should have been done sooner . we're talking about the million dollar per school event it's

not enough and at the end of the day i hear all the testimony from our san franciscans neighbors to view our graduates from san francisco unified school districts as michigan and i was one once a member of 1031. if we don't make this investment now what do we think our workforce and labor movement is going to look like 10, 15, 20 years down the line? this is an investment in the future. i support this initiative and at the end of the day this is going to be taken to the voters and san franciscans will decide. >> can we have our next caller? >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm the principle of buena vista k-8 which is a full-service committee school and now that we do have have identified the areas and our students ability to focus and we removed that. this requires that we pass engagements and that our

community school for nader helps this team connect our families in need to service providers. the wellness team is the backbone of our school success. their work makes it possible for our teachers to reach our children so they can learn. it but it works and it's expensive. we only pull it off by relying on pta and summer arts division. we're relying on language arts teachers to teach tpe. we're going on field trips and still our staff worries every budget season about whether they can keep their jobs. let's keep and expand it. >> thank you, next caller. >> good afternoon. my name is cheryl martin and i'm a resident of district 10 and after listening to this, i think that this fund, this should be supported. thekids on east side, the

schools are inferior to the schools on the west side. they're under resourced, underfunded . and there also segregated by socioeconomics and language. and too many times that we're seeing that the wraparound youth in san francisco are being left behind and the high cost of living here, we are not preparing them to take on jobs to be prepared to enter the workforce in san francisco. instead we are preparing them formass incarceration . we are preparing them to be gentrified out of the city. so i urge you. i support this. but i also support all the employees of san francisco unified school district so i hope you work with labor. >> clerk: thank you, can we haveour next caller ? >> speaker: [inaudible] can you hear me?

>> clerk: i wonder if you can turn off your computer or television, weappreciate it . >> speaker: sorry. i am from sf. i would really like all these measures to be implemented especially for special education and for those kidswho are english learning . i think it's such a good plan so i just want to make sure the kids have all the reserves you have available and thankyou for all your support for the community . >> clerk: thankyou, can we have our next caller ? >> speaker: supervisors, why don't you pay attention to public comment? you don't want to pay attention topublic comment . you're setting avery good example .a very good example forour students .

so you have therainy day fund and now there's another type of rainy day fund imagination you supervisors have no manners . it's a shockingexample for the children . you very much. >> clerk: that was our last color online. thank you, are there any individuals in these chambers who have nottestified on this item and would like to do so ? we had two more people just jump online. >> i don't know what happened. >> next remote speaker please. >> clerk: >> speaker: i'm one of the board of education commissioners, thank you for taking the time and i wish i could express my appreciation

for your consideration of our students . it warms my heart throughout this public comment to hear from such a wide range of individuals invested in our student success and it illustrates how important partnerships and investments with the community and public education is in supporting our schools and students and i am so excited about the level of partnership ic when crafting this with the mayor's office, the community groups to bring more resources to our schools . and i really really believe that this is the beginning of the key change in how we have been working together . at the district with our city partners so just a big change from what we've seen injust a couple of years ago . i just want to say thank you. i think this is the beginning of a long and i really appreciate the emphasis on equitable measuring and monitoring. that is embedded in the proposal. >> next speaker please.

>> this is amanda alvarado for executive director of the mission. thank you supervisor and all of you whowrote this wonderful piece of legislation . this charter amendment has written will really help offer those much-needed scaffolding support services to our children and our public schools. all are plants that are legal aid and these are newcomer parents, migrant parents from around the globe. low income families and we really need these support services and this is an extremely well-thought-out plan. my other comment is that some have expressedconcern about the funding and what happens what if general funds are used. i can't think of a better use of general operating fund

investing in our children . it's our future. they are worth it and thank you again supervisors for crafting this lovely proposal. and good afternoon . >> can we have our next caller. >> speaker: my nameis nick chandler . i'm also a parent of two public-school students and this is a unique opportunity for us to reorient the entire school of san francisco top to bottom in collaboration with parents and students at the center of this work and i hear the concerns about sustainability and funding sources i would echo to the last color but better use of general funds than this. we know from economic models proven by universities that every dollar you spend on preventative work pays off in full this is a long-term investment in ourstudents that willpay off , that will build labor. build collaboration across groups and will be better for san francisco . please support this measure as written . >> can we have our next caller.

>> my name isalyssa jones gardner. i'm a san francisco native district can resident . and a 10 to 1 member as well as an sfusd alumnus. i support the amendment to increase funding for sf unified while protecting critical public services by restricting thestudent access funds access . this amendment divided by labor was would provide an increasing percentage in funds over the 15 year term going back to 25 percent of the fiscal year 2026 2027 and would establish a reserve with sufficient funds aside each year to ensure the programs stand unless in case the cityfunding is reduced or elevated . san francisco city and county workers including sf unified teachersare united behind this . i would also caution you as a regular voter to not engage in needlessly divisive and

inflammatory language as a meansof eliciting support . that is directed at the supervisors print ones up for election innovember . thank you . >> next caller. >> my name is tonya rivera. i am a page resident and executive director of la raza based out of this nine. i'm calling today in full on 100 percent support of this charter amendment request and i want to start off by thanking the visionary district supervisor ronen for putting children first. taking a long-term landing into the future 25 years from now. business and investment in our community. this is how we have to be proactive addressing the issues for we were just running around trying to get a lack of investment and the pain and

suffering ourchildren are experiencing day in and day out . we get talking about the pandemic as that already happened yet our children are still living the repercussions ofthis pandemic. more and more over we see our children struggling through transitioning , there actually going off to college when they miss two years of significant care so this will support into the future. .>> mister atkinscan you confirm that was our last color ? >> there are no further colors in the queue. public comment is closed. and obviously we have some amendments to make. and i assume we adopt those amendments and continue this

before we do that we will all have an opportunity to speak. let me just start out by wandering around the corn had a little bit and thanking all of the public speakers who are largely on thesame page as to contact . and i say that as i was telling supervisor ronen the other day about the difference between my experience going to berkeley high school and my little brother'sexperience . they were only three years apart as i got the last of the largess of prop 13 and my brother in law at berkeley high after all that came to an end and already berkeley high which was then a great school and still is a great school had changed markedly inits academic offerings . and a plethora of that we did backthen which is kind of a long time ago . social workers and all of the rest of it much of that dried

up to the detriment of the next whatever's been 40 years of students. and so i, the intent here is beyond laudable. i also recognize that the state of california has failed and every time the state feds fail the good people of this city and their elected officials whether it's ryan white care dollars or you name it always figure out a way to backfill at the local level as best we can. while $14 billion is a number i never like to use with the airport and reports and public utilities, the commission that gives water it's really smaller and i don't like to use that number because it's misleading and it's not an apples to apples comparison butputting that in the parking lot for a minute . as a former controller said we

have an endlessamount of need and a limited amount of resources . always struggle with these issues extremely laudable set aside whether it's libraries, whether it's a success fund. i mean, the first set aside in this town which dates from the beginning ofthe last century was the leader werenot for symphony . and it still on the books . i think we now have about 30 of them. and it's a choice. it's a voter choice that when you're in tough times your choices become extremely constrained and i was here in 2007and even though the mayor's chief of staff may recall things differently , and there were layoffs but beyond that fact, the choices that we are making at that time were like the choices that set me home literally crying they weren't just city employees. the wholesale cuts to public

health . through our shadow workforce which are a plethora of nonprofits and it was devastating. it was unimaginable. so i think about all of that every time one of these things, i wasn't really happy to be i think only or one of two members of theboard who voted not to put it on the ballot which of course it got on the ballot . the ballot succeeded but i've also been a stalwart supporter of any number of new sources of revenue and as one speaker said there are folks who have an outsized burden to pay for a better society and i want that walk i want to continue walking the walk and i think there'sa lot there left to walk . having said all that , given that investing in our children

and their education andtheir literacy is one of the most important things that government and society can do , i want this to figure out a way to do it.even though the tensions are running high and we're all wanting to run in the same direction i heard from both the disparate forces of labor and from the supporters and most importantly from the crafters that there is actually room for that creative discussionthat supervisor ronen was talking about . and have any magic answers or i haven't distilled that wisdom on everybody but i'm happy to offer, happy actually i'm not happy to offer my involvement but i think there are folks out there including but not limited to the control room in san francisco who may have creative ideas about what we can do when

things inevitably cycled out. it's kind of amazing that kids in the pandemic were still sitting on a robust budget. i don't know how that's going to go or whatthe future is for the city and i have to say sometimes there's a little confusion about that . eraf is general fund money and we drawn a line through it as general fund money.i understand that when you talk about the e it's educational that there is absolutely an arguable nexus between using eraf money for educational purposes. i'm not disputing that. i'm just saying that for the last number of years through the past decade we have been using it as general fund money.-policy conversations and those chambers. my former colleague and i voted unanimously to pass a

resolution about how much of the money we were going to dedicate to the other issue we were talking about today which is affordablehousing . and then finally as i wind my way of the patch i want to say something i could have said that supervisor mandelman already said related to this yimby affordable housing thing which is we don't in the city we are better than following this nonsense that is being foisted upon us by a bunch of not jobs in our nation's capital. weactually have the ability to sit down and come together and reach reasonable solutions . had that happened in the yimby folks and their well-funded i will say it.

assistance, have that conversation with the rest of the trades you would not see the carpenters fighting with the plumbers in front of the board of supervisors. in san francisco wouldn't be the tvdish for a fight that's happening in our state capital .so let's try to do a little bit better and that as it relates to this measure between now and next wednesday and the monday the on when it's considered two more times by this committee. and i'm wondering through the court . thank you for your indulgence. >>. >> chair: thank you chair peskin, we always love it when you wonder through any issue and educate us your brain with sanfrancisco history .and berkeley. so let me try to explain what's going on herecolleagues . first i want to apologize to labor. i was related to the

conversation i had with chief of staff burns if i was incorrect and i was here but my memory isn't as long as supervisor peskin is memory. i apologize. i've been a lifelong storage labor supporter. i have spent my life fighting for workers especially low-wage workers. and just this budget thing, last budget i talked to the mayor until 3:00 in the morning to get cost-of-living to 10 to 1 numbers. completely on myown . i was just fighting it so there's a lot of information going around and i have to say it has reached some of the disinformation campaign that

we'reseeing at the federal level . i just want to make a couple of points.the first point is that compromise that labor is putting forward.you'd have us use a certain percentage of eraf that would escalate overtime similar to the way that the amendment before you today is in the set-aside from 11 in the first year to 60 in thefourth . and then it at any point eraf goes away the program stops. and arguably. >> keep going. will pass this out. >> arguably you know, if you really want to think about we've been getting about $350 million a year at eraf.

if you look in the past four years that's $1.4 billion so if labor agrees that the eraf money arguably belongs to the kids and the kids can subsidize the 10 percent raise with my complete and utter support and advocacy gave to the city workers. so at no time during the discussion of budget does anyone say our that it's a shame we can't build more housing or get more money to the kids because of the city workers race. we never said that becausewe don't play that way in san francisco . in san francisco we acknowledge that there are a ton of needs and that we have to balance those needs and that they're all just justified. and so i did contrary to

disinformation spoke to supervisor safai. we sat at local 21's office for three hours onsaturday morning . and offered up ton of compromises. and unfortunately the reason we didn't arrive at an agreement is because of thefundamental place that we haven't been able to get past . and that place is if eraf goes away does this program go away? i tried to explain to you all why i think that's doing more harm than good because that's the way all of these programs worked in the past and they created disastrous outcomes for students. they made the schools a worse place than it was before . and so you know, i believe that we're going to have this on the

ballot and eventually it will be the voters that decide if we should be prioritizing 60 million year out of the $14 billion budget that supervisor peskin described with all the correct caveats it's not an accurate comparison it is the $14 billion budget and money can be moved around in very creative ways . so i will do my best over the next week while this sits in this committee to sit down with labor again and try to find some creative third way out of this logjam. i've been willing to do thatall along . and hopefully we will get ther . but colleagues, if we don't i think it's time to take a stand for these kids. these kids that are suffering worse than they ever have before post covid but also it's not a new phenomenon.

the opportunities between children of color and white children in san francisco have been around for decades. and it's time to just say we're going toput our money where our mouth is . we're going to attack it with an unprecedented collaboration with every district in the city which i think is a secondary benefit. this ballot measure, you saw six of the seven. six of the seven school board commissioners testified today. they waited a long time to do this. you saw thesuperintendent testify . you saw maria to testify. they all said this is a really well-designed program that will move the needle. last year the school district and city were suing each other. now we are coming together to work side-by-side program to

impact the kids that need it the most. so i will, i promise you colleagues i will reach out right after this meeting and attempt to sit down with labor tomorrow. it's my understanding that you is out of townso it will have to be tomorrow . and try to find a creative way out ofthis logjam . but if you can't find it i will be asking all of my colleagues to support this charter amendment and with that if one of the committee members could make a motion to accept the minutes and continue this item to i believe it's the six. >> that is correct, we have a national meeting next wednesday a week from today, a special meeting and why don't we try to convene or reconvene for you all can convene your meetings let's keep the conversation and

hope alive about the aforementioned amendments unless anybody has any additional comments. going once, supervisor chan. if you want to say anything yo are welcome to. i don't want to forget you . >> thank you. >> is that you know? >> i wasn't sure if i could say anymore but i can always say that for next week. thank you. >> then on the amendments, mister clark please call the role. >> motion to adopt the amendments,supervisor chan . [roll call vote] motion passes without objection. >> we continue the item is amended to the special meeting of july 6. roll call police.

>> on a supervisor chan. >> is there any more business before this committee ? double checking. that completes the agenda for today. >> we areadjourned .

[crowd noise] [music] as a city we do a lot of parades and celebrations. public work system in the middle of things, doing inspections and cleanings and organizing our crews so we are used to creating something it is something we know how to do. >> this is managed by city workers. they are out here doing the jobs

to make sure our city looks good in our city time. >> we are also routing for the warriors whether we work. it was thrilling when they won and we had to get to work to plan for the parade and to make sure that everybody in the city everybody that come to the city is safe and taken care of. >> a lot went everwent in 100 hours of planning with the warrior and mayors office and city partners it took a team to make today possible. >> important this the department has the presence, seeing the priority and vehicles makes everyone feel safe we value our commute and serve it, it is important. >> the giant crowds we are to bring out our specialized equipment.

we have small response united staffed by a paramedic and mt the small golf cart devices have a gender and he get in and out of crowds. >> i'm here to help people get to where they need to go and figure out the bus routes and navigate things temperature is important we take care of safety and make sure everyone gets to where they need to so everyone can celebrate the warrior and be out on parade day. >> how is or ems book >> when we have been able to do is set up mobile command posts. and we partnered with the private sector with verizon to provide priority communication so we can run our entire emergency response on that network for our first responders. we know they will work even though we are getting thousands of people all competing for the same network to send photos and e maild and texts and video our

first responders are able to do the same amongst the large crowd. >> get out here at 5:30 a.m. and saw employees cleaning the street its takes a team to build a champion. >> i love it and bum when he left i'm glad he is back no matter how much he plays or does not play that man's heart and spirit he carries everyone along and really mentor people and mentoring is so important whether in basketball or the fire service or ems. mentoring is huge and having a presence like that around is huge. >> my favorite player is jordan i like he is a role player and come out as a starter i feel similar to the city i like a structure and plan when there is an opportunity to lead i like that, also. >> the player i like lisa.

he is similar to me all there and game is in the pretty but gets the job done. every time he scores all right. my man is back. >> happy with seth curry's wife strong. she is a leader and she just really puts on a great face for females and being strong and in the face of challenge and negativity. [music] [crowd noise] >> they were tons and tons and tons of blue and yellow confetti. every wrchl the end we picked up 38 tons of trash. mostly confetti. >> in terms of for our crews we were ready. after we had been data break and done carnival in may.

our team was prepped to do the work and they felt tremendous pride in part of the huge celebration and tremendous pride in the coordination we did with the mayor's office, the police department issue public health and the city agencies that got together and put on a party for the bay area. put on the party for the nation. [crowd noise] [music] >> you're watching san francisco rising with chris manners. today's special guest is katy tang. [♪♪♪] >> hi.

i'm chris manners, and you're watching san francisco rising, the show that's focused on rebuilding, reimagining, and revitalizing our city. with us today is katy tang, and she's talk to -- talking to us about assistance and services provided to local businesses. can we talk about the role of the office of small business? many small businesses are struggling to help. how can you help? >> director tang: we are here as the city's central point of information for all things small businesses, so we can help people start, stay, and grow in the city. if you want to start a small business, we can pair you up with small business advisors, who can talk you through your business plan, help you develop it, whether it's regulatory

requirements, business permits, and just help you understand the journey that was up ahead. and if you'd like to stay in san francisco and perhaps your business is facing challenges, we can also pair you with a business advisor who can assess your business needs and figure out whatside that would best help you. so for example, perhaps you need more marketing assistance or you need to be connected to a loan, a low interest loan or a grant program, if that's available. those are services we can provide to you, whether you're starting out or trying to stay in san francisco. and of course, if you want to expand and grow into a new space, we can help assist you with that and help prepare you for the journey ahead. we have a team dedicated to assist you you with all the small business needs, all the requirements needed to help you establish your small business

in san francisco. >> do you have an e.s.l. program for people who want to start small businesses? >> director tang: we have staff that can speak spanish and mandarin and cantonese, and we understand if english is not your first language, it can be difficult, so we want to be as helpful as possible. >> excellent. i know that s.f. shines was created to help with restoring and improvement. can you tell us more about that? >> yes. it's run out of a sister development and it's much needed in the small business community. if you are trying to improve your storefront, whether it's outside, perhaps you want to make some interior improvements, a lot of times,

that involves a lot of cost and resources to be able to do so. for example, you may need to hire an architect to submit drawings so you can get your work done. currently, s.f. shines is offer a pairing of business sign services. you can be paired up with an architect to get your drawings done to help you start to do the actual work. we hope that people will stay tuned, and you can find out more information on our website. that's sfgov.org/osb. >> let's talk about the shared spaces program. it's been a huge success, and outdoor dining spaces are very

popular. >> the shared spaces program, especially during the pandemic, really helped spaces survive. to have an outdoor space where people could safely gather was critical, and the office of small business has been working with these shared spaces during the pandemic. some may or may not have been up to the city's code regulations, so department of public works and other departments have been trying to figure out what violations are and help businesses come into compliance. the planning department and the city have decided that they'll give businesses until 2023 to come into compliance.

also in the meantime, for businesses that want to start new shared spaces, new parklets, that is still an on going program, a new program, so people can always submit their applications for shared spaces regardless whether they started one during the pandemic or not. >> do you anticipate there being other shared spaces programs in the future and how do small businesses go about finding out about them? >> small businesses can find out about it by visiting our website, sfgov/osb or you can call 415-554-6134, and we can connect you with the planning department and other agencies that would be connected with the shared spaces programs. >> over the pandemic, businesses have been victimized

by vandals and other crimes. how can you help them? >> the city offers a program called the vandalism relief fund, and this would allow businesses suffering from graffiti or broken windows to apply with the city through our neighborhood services division, and you could get up to 1,000 or 2,000 if you submit certain documentation, such as a photograph of the damage or a copy of the receipt or document showing the amount you paid for to correct the incident. we are so excited that the city now has a centralized permit center, where people can come and get their business done, hopefully, in the same day where there are several different agencies, ranging

from department of building inspection, planning department, public health, fire department, all here to help people, whether you're building a new business or even new construction, to be able to, again, fit all of your appointments in one day and get things done quickly. so starting in may, our office of small business has actually started working out of 49 south van ness at the permit center, and we have a team of two staff who are dedicated to helping small businesses through their permitting journey. so we do encourage people, you can come to the permit center or you can e-mail us at sfosb@sfgov.org, and you can communicate with our staff dedicated to helping you with your permitting needs. we hope that people will consider consulting with us before you even sign a lease so that we can help you on the path to success and

understanding the journey of setting up a small business in san francisco. >> well, thank you so much. i really appreciate you coming on the show, miss tang. thank you for the time you've given us today. >> director tang: thanks for having me. >> and that's it for this show. we'll be back shortly. you've been watching san francisco rising. for sfgovtv, i'm chris manners. thanks for watching. is r. my name is debra alvarez rodriguez. i'm the deputy director in san francisco. my background is one in which i have spent the entirety of my life committed to finding

solution to poverty and addressing the issues of inequity so people and communities can have accesses to resources and financial freedom. one thing true anode dear to my heart was the power of business ownership in creating pathways to financial freedom. we have still in infancy. we had over 100 entrepreneurs come and start their businesses. some are food trucks. some are restaurants. some are in farmer's markets and so farther. that's an incredible legacy and record to build upon. this was the perfect opportunity for me to come back home, you know, come back to the neighborhood and take my skills and networks and resources and put it backseat in service of the community. given everything with racial reckoning and pandemic it was time for me and everyone else

that had the opportunity to leave and get educated to come back home. we have a opportunity to grow our impact in terms of the number of people we serve and how we serve them. we grow our impact in taking the money we make with our entrepreneurs and circulate those resources back interview the community for community development. the third thing is we have a opportunity to have an impact on public policy in terms of the policies and practices the district has been notorious about interms of inequities. all of those are just the beginning of what is possible in terms of growth and impact. ♪ [ music ] ♪♪

welcome to the bridge to excellence scholarship awards ceremony. please, give it up. what a beautiful day we've been blessed with. it's warm. it's sunny. and we're going to give out some amazing awards to some tremendously talented and perseverance students. the bridge to excellence scholarship is awarded to seniors who are highly dedicated to their academic success. the award is giving to students so they can overcome the financial barriers that come along with attending a