>> the meeting will come to order. good morning everybody and welcome to monday february 13, 2023 meeting rules committee of the san francisco board of surprisers. i'm supervisor dorsey joined by vice chair shamann walton and we are waiting on committee member safai. thanks so much to- >> i'm here online. >> okay. >> joining remotely is our committee member ahsha safai. thanks so much to the committee clerk victor young and

thanks to sfgovtv. >> the board convening hybrid meeting to allow in person attendance and public comment. theboard recognize equitable public access is essential and will take public comment, first public comment will be taken on each item. those in person will be allowed to speak first and then we'll talk to those waiting on the-take those waiting on the telg phone line. those watching 26-public comment call in line is streaming across the stream. the number is 415-655-0001 then enter meeting id 24824714832 and pound and pound again. when connected you will hear the meeting discussion and muted listening mode. when the item comes up those in

person line up to speak and those on the telephone line dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. if you are on telephone please remember to turn down the television and other listening devices. we will take public comment from those in person and then pgo to public comment telephone line. alternatively you may submit public comment in writing, e-mail to myself the rules committee clerk at victor.young.sfgov.org. you may also send written comment u.s. mail to the office at city hall, 1 dr. carlton b goodlett place. that concludes my initial comments. >> thank you mr. clerk. please call items 1-3? >> item 1 is appoint

one person for term ending september 2, 2024 to assessment appeals board 1. item 2 is hearing to consider appointing one member september 4, 2023, to september 204 to assessment appeals board 2. item 3 is hearing to consider appointing one person ending september 4, 2023, three members terms ending september 2, 2024 one member ending 2025 to assessment appeals board 3 and like to note regarding assessment appeals board one there was a error on the vacancy notice so believe we may need to continue the matter. >> thank you mr. clerk. as the clerk menshzed mentioned there was a clerical error

but doesn't mean we can't hear from mitchell joining in person. is ms. mitchell here? okay. the floor is yours. >> my name is quirina mitchell a real estate appraiser. a licensed aprayers in the state of california and member of the appraisal institute and been appraising in the bay area total of 8 year. i began my career in los angeles with mckenna evaluation. in 2015 i move today the bay area (inaudible) i'm a director at bbg. i provide evaluation and consulting to the bay area. (inaudible) retail industrial office mixed use development land and specialized

property types. i attended two assessment appeals board meeting in the last month. looking to obtain experience in the hearing process and contribute and grow my knowledge of valuation in the local market. thank you for the opportunity to share my experience and qualifications with you today. >> thank you. also item 2 is assessment appeals board appointment of stephen wassermann. where wassermann. floor is yours. >> hi. thank you for having me. i have been in real estate in the mid-90 in san francisco as commercial real estate brobelger and run my own investment and management firmism on the assessment appeals board twice in the past and really enjoy the work.

have to always mention how great profession the assessors are. this can be a very contentious situation with the appeals board. assessors are been professional to the taxpayer. my experience goes like the previous person here. goes into valuation of property across all asset types. been doing it all most 30 years. thank you. >> thank you mr. wassermann. item 3 is appointment of betsy miller. i dont know if betsy miller is here remotely. >> she is remote. >> okay. >> good morning. my name is betsy miller and i want to say thanks for considering my application. my qualifications are different then the other two candidates. i

have been a attorney and graduating from usf in 2008 and been a practicing attorney since that time. i started working in ip and more corporate law and large litigation and in 2014 i started my own firm and have been working for myself since then. my practice area is i do transactional and litigation work. mostly focusing on housing issues and tenant issues and i handled a number of real estate transactions and lawsuits related to real estate so have been on the ort side of the process where you file the paperwork. i have not participated in appeals board hearing, but through this job i hope to gain more experience in that area and learn more about that part of the law. and also it is a nice opportunity to serve your community by serving on a board like this.

just personally my mom is a local politician on the east coast and it is important the local government has qualified people working in the process, so that you can maintain the sense of fairness and balance because as mr. wassermann said it does get contentious and it is personal so hope i can maintain integrity in the system by acting as a board member and that is all i have to say. thank you for your time. >> thank you mr. miller. seeing no one on the roster for-to discuss this, let's open up to public comment. >> yes, members of the public who wish to comment on these matters may line up to speak at this time. if you are joining remotely, please call the public comment line at

415-655-0001. the meeting id 24822714832 then pound and pound again. once connected you need to press 3 to enter the speaker line. system profit will indicate you raised your hand. please wait till we take public comment and when the system indicates you are unmuted that is your queue to begin your comment. there is no one in the room for public comment at this time. just checking our telephone line to see if there is anybody. there is nobody on the telephone line for public comment on these matters. >> thank you mr. clerk. i just want to express my gratitude everybody. i reviewed whether of the applications and everybody looks very well qualified and i would say to mrs. miller as somebody i worked for many years with lawyers, the way that this is written, it does

provide for-it is relevant to being a attorney and think attorneys bring a sense of understanding of the quasi-judicial and judicial process so i think we will be well served by your service and want to express my gratitude for folks who are doing this. colleagues--anything to add? i like to make a motion on item 1 that because of the-so we can have the noticing error to call this back to-to continue this for the february 27 meeting to allow for proper noticing. >> yes, on that motion , supervisor safai safai aye. vice chair walton. walton aye. chair dorsey. >> aye. >> dorsey aye. the motion to

continue is approved without objection. >> thank you mr. clerk. and on item 2 and 3 i like to mike make a motion to send to full board with positive recommendation. >> usually we do pick a seat for each person. i believe mr. wassermann is seat 5 and betsy miller i dont believe it make as difference for which seat as they have the same termination date. would you like to choose seat 2? >> yes. >> on the motion to recommend, supervisor safai. safai aye; vice chair walton. >> walton aye. chair dorsey. dorsey aye. motion passes without objection. >> thank you mr. clerk. the applicants will be sent to the full board with positive recommendation. mr. clerk please call item number 4?

>> yes, item 4 is ordinance amending the administrative code to extend time for reinvestment working group for required reports to board of supervisors and local agency formation commission from deadline of september 30, 2023 and extend the sunset date for the working group to december 31, 2023. >> thank you mr. clerk. supervisor preston is the sponsor joining us today so like to invite him to say a few words. supervisor preston the floor is yours. >> thank you so much chair dorsey and committee members and very much appreciate you getting this on calendar and making space for this. we are very excited with some of the new-the presenters bring you up to speed on the progress on public bank. the ordinance here is simply to extend the timeline for the working group to continue and finish its work, but i think it

is also great opportunity for the committee to hear what some of the recent developments are. i do want to start by recognizing folks doing a lot of heavy lifting around moving our city toward having a municipal public bank, and specifically kristen evans the chair of the reinvestment working group here today and will be presenting. vice chair fernando (inaudible) and all the members of the reinvestment working group doing incredible work and want to recognize and thank jeremy pollack the executive officer of lafco and (inaudible) to the reinvestment working group. the entire san francisco public bank coalition for ongoing sport and advocacy and all the individuals who have pushed all of us on the board and different parts of city government to move forward

toward a public bank. also, want to acknowledge the really exemplary work done by hr&a advisors who prepared the draft plan and are the consultants working closely with lafco and investment working group. i want to thank my legislative aid preston killgore who worked tirelessly and lead our work in district 5 office. the ordinance before you extends the reinvestment working group sunset date and deadline to produce the business and governance reports for the board of supervisors and lafco and extend the current one year deadline to september 30 and extend the sunset date for the working group to the end of this calendar year. colleagues there were some delays in getting the reinvestment working group feeded

initially, hiring the process of hiring a consultants working with the city attorney office. they had to contract out for some external legal advice to support the reinvestment working group, and so we are a little behind schedule and that's why this ordinance was necessary. the board of spl supervisorsue unanimously passed the authorization for the working group in 2021. the members seated in early 2022 and tasked studying public banking and submitting to the bord of surprisers and lafco business governance plan to establish non depositorylanding corporation and public bank wholely owned by the city so very very pleased to announce that as of friday the reinvestment working

group received their first draft business government plan work wg the consultants for a mfc and public bank and they can fill you in a bit more in the details that incorporates feedback received from the fdic and california department of financial protection and that was incorporated into these drafts. the reinvestment working group will take comments after this period starting now and then come back to the board with final plans in the upcoming months and then we will do the work at the board and with other departments and all arms of government to make this happen so very excited this is moving forward. appreciate the time and would like with mr. chair if okay to invite up (inaudible) and kristen evans

for their presentation, which will bring everyone up to speak. >> please. >> thank you. >> this mic right here? thank you supervisors. good morning. supervisor preston did a excellent job summarizing most of the presentation so i'll go through it quickly once it is up. >> if you could try to speak either into the mic or if the other next to you is easier, but if you can speak directly that would be great. >> can you hear me? perfect. >> thank you. >> so, i'll get started. in california sponsored by then assembly member david chu passed the public banking act which allows counties and municipalities in california to start a publicly owned bank. the reinvestment working group ordinance sponsored by

supervisor preston was passed in 2021 with two goals providing business and governance plans for a non depository, step 1 bank and a full depository bank and lafco agreed to help with studying this process. next slide, jeremy. just to summarize, the extension ordinance as the supervisor said, it is pretty basic. we are going to extend the due date for these plans to be submitted to the board of supervisors until september 31 and extend the sunset to may 31. we already have the draft plans for the non depository public bank. we got them friday and the goal right now for the next three months is to collect as much feedback from the working group members lafco commissioners and other board of supervisors to development the final version of the plans. the goal is to have

the-next slide. the goal is to have the mfc documents ready to be presented by march 31 and public bank by may 31. between june and december the working group might meet a couple more times if you have questions for them or if there are other matters for them to consider, but the plan right now is to have everything completed by may 31 and we just want a little leeway. just in case. so, accomplishments to date, working with hr & a we have conducted four focus groups with total 33 participants to garther feedback from san francisco residents what they need as far as public bank. tooked the findings and the researched further what the lending product needs to be to support affordable housing,

small businesses and green financing and specifically focusing on repairing the harm that the private lending industry caused to communities of color and poor people in the city. also developed governance plan to submit to fdic for initial feedback. this is pre-application review so tell us what we need to change before we submit to them. and we have as of friday a draft mmc gov nns governance and business plan and green bank option so if we wanted to add green banking into the mix we can do that as well. next slide, please jeremy. >> great. as mentioned, or supervisor preston mentioned my name is kristen evans and the current chair of the san francisco reinvestment

working group. i was elected in april last year. i occupy one of four community seats, specifically the seat reserved for small business owner. i'm a owner of the book smith and (inaudible) located in haight ashberry. we began the work coming up to speed on the work previously done by the treasurer office and bla on recommendations for creating a public bank. once the consultant contract was finalized we were as mentioned able to begin the process of community outreach and that included preparation and facilitation of four focus groups with stakeholders which the public bank is envisioned to serve. green energy, small business, affordable housing and advocates. additionally, our consultants conducted one on one interviews with relevant city departments and

community financial institutions who serve the community with existing loan programs. so, through those conversations and additional research our consultant identified and identify market gaps and community needs for lending services to validate the need for public bank and inform development of two business plans and you can switch to the next slide. thank you. and significant time was spent by the working group members and public bank coalition with gary stephenson (inaudible) on the development of draft governance plan. one that would insure anti-corruption measures in place to safeguard the bank financial houldings and shield from political influence. that plan was shared with federal and state

regueilators. this shared the projected timeline for completion of work. friday we received the first draft of both business plans for the msc and public bank. our working group will have the tunlt to review the document jz provide feedback at the meeting later this week so invite everybody to come to the reinvestment working group thursday at 3. over the next 3 months we solicit community feedback and incorporate changes to refine the documents with the plan complete the end of march and public bank plan by the end of may. following the completion of the deliverable's provided, the reinvestment working group will have the opportunity to continue as needed and once satisfied we fulfilled the responsibility we submit the plans to the board of supervisors for your consideration. so, the legislation before you has a

sunseting by december and finally thank you for your consideration and we do have additional slides with additional information. we are happy to field any additional questions. thank you. >> can we go through those-we are good. happy to take questions, supervisors. >> thank you both for your work and the presentation. i think one question i had-i will say i was surprised that the in the report that came out friday and want to urge, for the public and anyone watching to know this is going to be the comment period coming up to get your views incorporated into these drafts so i think it is really-appreciate the opportunity to get the word out. i say in reviewing them, i was struck by a number of things. i was expecting a much

longer timeline to get going. having not been sure exactly where that would land, it looks like if i read it right the mfc, there is no-that could happen as soon as this year that could be set up again, if the will is there and we finalize these recommendations and consider them, but there is no barriers at the state level that can happen (inaudible) it looks like with a plan to have more full public bank in a 3 to 5 year timeframe. so, i was struck by that on the timeline. i love to hear your comments and make sure i get it right. and the other is on the cost. it looks like a sort of low end of about $20 million investment. more like 50 to really get going and then projections thats within three years that the public bank is actually paying for itself and

actually earning-i dont want to call a profit because it isn't a profit but in the blank on a 3 year timeline in these draft plans. am i getting all that right or is there anything you want to add of timeline and cost recognizing this is all draft? >> absolutely. you are correct supervisor. the city of san francisco can start a non depository financial corporation today if it wanted. the city gives millions of dollars in loans every year. as the treasurer task force report showed in 2019, there is millions of dollars of loans given by city of san francisco. whether those are loans or called loans and actually grants and how much and the return, we asked put out request in multiple departments to get that information in clarity and so can get started now. you are right, with (inaudible) who are experts starting denova banks

said with $20 million both-sorry, 20million non depository is step one as the city can turn a profit within 3 years and public bank with $50 million can also turn a profit within three years, so they modeled both options for us and as the board of supervisors requested they one step one non depository first and ramp up 3-5 years for public bank. you can give comment on and give feedback until the working group finishes its work. >> thank you very much. a couple other quick comments. first off, as you say, i always when i hear turn a profit-the difference between these profits and the profits of our mainstream banks is these get plowed back into the objective

of the public bank of affordable housing dollars, green investments and small businesses. >> absolutely. this bank will take a lower return for projects with high social value. that is our mission and goal. >> thanks. couple other things i wanted to note. we have another process supervisor walton lead in having a working group working on reparations and i want to note because that is in a draft form and people are talking about that, that would be before the board. i just want to recognize that there is a real overlap in that one of the recommendations in the draft reparations report is actually the creation of public bank so very exciting to see both of these things moving forward. >> absolutely. if i can add, the department of environment received a report from berkeley law school that also calls for a green bank for san francisco

to pay for its climate action plan. >> wonderful. i know we will talk about the merits and here today more on the down the road when we have a final plan. we are mostly focused on just making sure you have the room to do your work. i think this is very timely and very much connected to our economic recovery as a city. i think that including reinvestment and doing so through a public bank, it is one of the best ways that we actually make sure that our city is using our revenue and tax revenue to reverse inequities not perpetuate them and thank you for having this on the hearing. >> thank you. supervisor walton. >> >> thank you chair dorsey and one, i want to thank

the group for all of your work on the public bank and thank supervisor preston for continuing to work. i can remember when i was on the board of education work ing with supervisor fewer and we had conversations years ago putting in the work to get a public bank in san francisco and the fact the work is happening and going to be realty, i'm excited about that. i have been on several different forums and had conversations with some of the leadership in philadelphia working on a public bank as well and beat us in the championship game and can't let them beat us in this. we know how that turned out yesterday too. in all seriousness, thank you for the work and this is something that is important for all of us. like supervisor preston did state, it is no-not by chance that all this work is happening together, public bank, reparations and everything that we are

trying to do to make sure that fonegs who need the most can get ahead so appreciate the work. >> thank you supervisor waltzen and express my appreciation to supervisor preston for his leadership. i know the promise of the civic bank has been-public bank is civic aspiration a long time and i appreciate the work you are doing on this and think-this is one of those things that is important to get right rather then fast and that is why-i don't there should be a reason that we are exteneding the timeline on this and really do appreciate mr. samurai and ms. evans the work you are doing and be remiss not to express gratitude to jeremy pollack on this as well. with that- >> ditto. >> mr. clerk, public comment. >> members of the

public who wish to comment my line up to speak at this time. if you are joining remotely call 415-655-0001. the meeting id 24 822714832. pound and pound again. please wait until we take public scaument comment and when the system indicates you are unmuted that is your queue to begin comment. anybody in the chamber who would like to comment at this time? there being nobody in the chamber we'll move to the callers on the telephone line. can we have our first caller? >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is rick (inaudible) i live in burnal heights and been working with public bank with san

francisco public bank coalition and public banking alliance the last all most 5 years now. i'm in strong support of supersurpriser prestons request for the extension. believe me, we worked hard and it imprisive to see the working group produced two drafts we can look over and they are dealing with important issues such as governance and funding the bank. however, it was unrealistic to complete this work in less then one year once it got started and an extension is absolutely necessary to share that the (inaudible) thorough and accurate. i would like to really aagree with what has been said about the need for affordable housing, climate justice, small business support and reparations. we need to recover. it is true that the city needs a lot of work and it

needs money to do the work and the public bank is one means to get that money so thank you very much for your work and strongly support the request for extension. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller, please? >> my name is misha styer a district 7 resident with public bank coalition and calling in support of the extension. want to uplift how (inaudible) the impressive and diligent work that has gone into this plan and excited with how actionable and concrete it will end up being, and as supervisor preston uplifted it is timely that we have this--this in our toolkit as a city for recovery. i think it is

serendipitous and (inaudible) thanks everyone for your work and let's please get the extension to continue this important work. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller, please? >> hello everyone. this is jacky fielder. been on lafco since november 2021 and organizing for public bank since 2017. thanks everyone for your comments and questions too. there are still a lot of questions and room for improvement on the draft plans and public bank coalition has been pouring over this the past weekday and few days and we are still sorting through a lot of the points in there but appreciate more time

as always, and very much encourage folks to take a look at the draft plan and certainly submit your comments and questions for feedback. i'm always available, but would appreciate more time with this group and thanks for your support. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> good morning committee membersism my name is jasmine (inaudible) senior attorney at the lawyer committee for civil rights of san francisco, a member of the san francisco public bank coalition calling to support the extension for working group as the work has been and continues to be critical to the establishment of the sf public bank. i want express my thanks and appreciation for the working group and (inaudible) for all 24 work including community outreach and education, connecting the lending

gaps and priority analysis and producing the draft governance and business plan. i'm particularly impressed and excited about the draft plans, which include pushing affordable housing, small business lending and green investment. there are still a lot of questions however and more time would be great to have a true iterative process with community as well as push for more community input and education. this is all a very complex task that can change the financing landscape not just in san francisco but all of california. san francisco is looked to as a model so for these reasons i support the extension. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> good morn ing, this is anataseia (inaudible) district 8 resident. i attended the most recent meeting that was held by the public

bank working group. this is a very serious sober-minded group and i support the extension and i also am really enthused that we will be using our tax revenue to right the inequities in our city. thank you. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? that was the last caller on the telephone line. >> thank you mr. young. public comment on item 4 is now closed. supervisor preston. >> thank you chair dorsey and appreciate all the statements of support and all the folks calling in. i did want to recognize supervisor walton referenced former supervisor fewers leadership. there is quite a bit history on the board so i want to acknowledge folks who have worked from originally i believe former

supervisor john avalos to my knowledge the first to actively push and explore this during his time as supervisor fewer, certainly took some big steps forward as well, and just reminding everyone that this was-the creation of the working group passed unanimously and think it is good sign this is a area where there has been such universal support for moving forward. also want to recognize our city attorney, david chu who in the assembly authored the bill that creates the structure here for us to move forward with a formal application and approval with the state so very much appreciate his work and leadership in sacramento on this. and last but not least, the lafco team i

talked about executive officer pollack and we heard from mr. samurai but also all the members of lafco and in particular our chair connie chan, supervisor chan has really this was a big addition to the body of work that lafco holds and handles and everyone stepped up to facilitate the working group and carry a lot of that work, so with that, urge support for the ordinance and thank you again. >> thank you supervisor preston. seeing no one else on the roster to discuss this, i like to make a motion to send item to full board with positive recommendation. mr. clerk, roll call on the motion. >> yes, on the motion to recommend, supervisor safai. safai aye. vice chair walton. walton absent. chair

dorsey. dorsey aye. the motion passes without objection with vice chair walton being absent. >> are thank you mr. clerk. without opposition item 4 goes to full board with positive recommendation. mr. clerk, please call item 5. >> item 5 is ordinance amending the administrative code and business tax regulation code as required by proposition c adopted at the november 8, 202 election to provide the homelessinize oversight commission appoint all member tuesday the local homeless coordinating board that the coordinating board sole duties are to serve as govening body required to participate in the federal continuum of care program and advice the commission on issues related to continuum of care that the shelter monitoring committee advice the commission in lieu of the board and our city our homes oversight committee advice and make recommendations and inform the department of homelessness and

supportive housing strategic planning process. >> thank you mr. clerk. i appreciate the work that our colleague and rules committee member supervisor safai has done on this. supervisor safai, the floor is yours. >> thank you. colleagues, as you recall, members of the public last week we approved the ordinance prop c required to stand up the homeless oversight commission and then duplicated the file and continued it for a week today. today we are introducing amendments that are not required by prop c but also good government and we worked on that with our department of homeless supportive housing. these amendment said will help the city better secure federal funds and streamline the bodies that report to the homeless oversight commission. the amendments further clarify which department staffed the commission and the various committees and cleanup reporting requirements. since

these amendments were substunative they will sit two weeks and heard again in the february 27 meeting. all of you should have received the amendments. we have emily cohen from department of supportive housing and do a short presentation and she and i can answer questions when she is done. >> thank you chair and supervisor safai. happy to walk through detail on these amendments and just want to express my appreciation to supervisor safai and his staff working so closely with hsh and our team to streamline the existing oversight body. as the supervisor said last week the board passed first reading the initial ordinance to set up the homeless oversight commission and so i will just focus today on the amendments being introduced. my colleague is going to share some slides. these amendments being introduced today are

really about streamlining the preexisting oversight bodies that the department of homelessinize and supportive housing is already working with so i'll walk through each 3. for the local homeless coordinating board the amendments will prohibit members from serving on multiple bodies as it will for members of the commission shelter monitoring committee and shelter advisory committee. for the lhcd, the amendments increase the number of seats from 9 to 11 which will help better align with huds continuum of care recommendations making us more competitive for federal funding. additionally, the continuum-local bord will really focus its work on oversight of the federal funding that comes from the continuum of care program. hud set out guidelines of what makes up a best practice for a oversight bord and

this amendment will help better align with that and maximize our ability to draw down federal resources. the membership qualifications will remain flexible but designated to align with federal best practices and we will reference those type of seats on the website so commissioners know who shay should be appointing to the seats. additionally, we are staggering terms to help insure we have institutional knowledge on the board and alternating which seats expire when. and the final amendment will allow the lacb to create subcommittees related specifically to the implementation of the continuum of care programs and funding. the second set of amendments is really related to the shelter grievance advisory committee and want to thank supervisor walton for all your work to codify the shelter grievance program and ordinance late last

year. nothing about this amendment would change the function of the shelter grievance advisory committee, but would shift appointments to the commission and would have the grievance body report to the commission instead of to the local homeless coordinating board since their focus is on continuum of care which does not fund shelter. it makes more sense to have the report go up to the commission and it will-the body will issue a written report to the commission by every march to be included in the commission's annual report. the shelter monitoring commit is a oversight body long existed to oversee the health and well being of the shelter system. the commission will have authority to appoint all members rather then have the members come from the lhcb and board. hsh seat will be

removed and replaced with a dph seat and begin to provide administrative support for this body rather then department of public helthd. we ask the shelter monitoring committee to attended commission meetings. and report. the final amendment is straight forward. directs the department of homelessness and supportive housing to attend commission meetings and provide administrative support to that commission. that's the bulk of those amendments really. the intent as we finally have single oversight to have all of these bodies reporting up into that entity. thank you. >> thank you deputy director cohen. when we approach the creation of this commission there was a lot of conversation about bodies advising and working with the department. this department was created not

that many years ago and in10ed to take a number of different services money and function to put in a department for services for the unhoused and deal with this crisis. we have subsequentially and created this oversight body not only to create oversight auditing functions but also streamline many bodies and work in collaboration with the department. one of which would be the local homeless coordinating board, create advice on budget as it relates to prop c. that process didn't necessarily line up with the department budget process. that is something now that will be done in unison along with the appointment of some of these oversight bodies as mr. cohen stated so we feel this is a better way to operate in this department so appreciate the work of deputy director cohen

and look forward to your support colleagues. thank you. >> thank you supervisor safai. i want to thank deputy director cohen for your work on this and also your presentation today. seeing no one on the roster to comment on this, i think we can open up to public comment. mr. clerk. >> members of the public who wish to speak and joining in person should line up to speak at this time. for those listening remotely call 415-655-0001. enter id 2 (482) 271-4832 and then pound and pound again. once connected you need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted and then begin your comments. you may approach the podium and make your comment. thank you. >> goodern morning chair dorsey and supervisors. thank you for letting me speak this morning. my name is

rick greech and i for years been working to combat homelessness and related problems in the city of san francisco. i am also a cofounder of the (inaudible) navigation center and former director and currently on seat 3 of the shelter monitoring committee. i just want to be clear i'm here on my own behalf. unfortunately the shelter monitoring committee did not have the opportunity to review these changes in our full committee meeting before today. the language i saw on the board website friday seemed okay, but last week hsa presented slides at the local homeless coordinating board meeting among other things said the shelter monitoring committee staff was to be "switched from dph and hsh would provide

administrative support and staffing". i don't think this is a good idea and hoping that this was a mistake, but today it sounds like it is not. i would like to say having dph staff the shelter monitoring committee has always been understood to avoid potential conflict of interest. being in other departments frees them to objectively assess and offer serious and constructive criticism of shelters. leaving these clause out won't prevent implementation of prop c but it would make shelter monitoring committee less effective. i need to emphasize it is important that our unhoused folks feel that they have a impartial body overseeing them. i hope we won't fix what is

already broken. thank you. >> thank you. seeing no other persons in line in the chamber, we can move to our caller. >> >> good morning supervisors. my name is dale seemore a chair member of the local homeless coordinating board. san francisco is all about language, and to me streamlining and oversight don't fit thin same sentence. we have done this before and i'm not necessarily in line with trying to figure a way to streamline this new oversight function that we-we want to make sure we got everything covered. streamlining is not the way to cover things. i also did not get as a local homeless coordinating board we did not get a chance to chime

in maybe on this responsibility from the shelter monitoring committee staff and going from dph to hsh. we got the report and always get it in pencil-i mean pen not pencil and that should be the way-if you want to give advice you bring your report in pencil not in pen and that is how we got it. i'm just concerned and hope you will have a mechanism to understand that these people from formally work for dph will now work for hsh which is the agency they will have "oversight" over and that is a uncomfortable awkward position sometimes nob nob shelt er should be put in the ordinance, the changes to this ordinance to insure in the future that we will never have to worry about this and that isn't streamline, that is serious oversight. thank you for the

opportunity to speak with all of y'all this morning and director cohen, thank you so much for the great report. bye. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> can you hear me now? >> yes, we can. please proceed. >> great. david pillpel. i have not seen the amendments yet but i intend to review them. they sound entirely reasonable based on the presentation. as the previous speakers suggested i would try to review the amendments and overall package of changes with the lhcb and smc. i would also encourage you and those bodies not to forget sunshine training and to keep hybrid public comment at the lhcd and smc and to be sure that that continues to exist at the-it does exist

at the new homeless oversight commission. i think it's incredibly important to have hybrid public comment and particularly a function like shelter monitoring shelter grievances and the lhcd and the commission. thank you very much to staff at hsh and supervisor safai, city attorney, hsa, elsewhere on this. thanks for listening. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? >> hello. this is melanie (inaudible) i am seat 10 of the shelter monitoring committee, and i want to thank the supervisors for allowing me to comment. i just wanted to also express my concern about hsh assuming reach over the shelter monitoring committee. i believe there would be conflict of interest there and

i just feel that we should really look at these amendments carefully and i can't help about think there is a little (inaudible) it got slipped in under our watch. it seems like this is new news that should have been-maybe it is my fault, maybe i should have been more vigilant regarding the policy changes but i definitely want to voice my opinion regarding (inaudible) hsh would not be the best administrative oversight board for us to answer to and we do have a good relationship with dph and i would think we should look at this a lot closer before we make a decision. that is my opinion and thank you very much. >> thank you. can we have our next caller?

>> hi. can you hear me? hello. >> yes, we can hear you, please proceed. >> thank you. hi. good morning chair and supervisors and hsh [difficulty hearing speaker due to audio quality] i'm now serving as a member on the shelter monitoring committee but (inaudible) again, just want to echo what others have said. concern around taking recommendations (inaudible) and particularly the (inaudible) provide evidence based support and staffing (inaudible) counter-productive and lead us

to (inaudible) just want to chime in there to (inaudible) shelter monitoring committee for input as many folks are (inaudible) or actively working (inaudible) >> thank you. can we get our next caller? >> hello, can you hear me? >> yes, we can. please proceed. >> hi. my name is chris, currently a member of the shelter monitoring committee and sit on the

disability seat, but today and y speak on my own behalf because my committee was not given a single chance, not one for the changes in full committee. i thoroughly wish i had been given the time to full on this text. one thing i found problematic is hsh said in a recent lacv meeting all is a way there was to be a "switch" from dph. also, hsh provide support and staffing to the shelter monitoring committee. i hope this is not happening. it is unnecessary change that reduce the effectiveness of the shelter monitoring committee but hurting the credibility of staff (inaudible) seen as impartial and influential. also having the staff and smc to maintain prudent checks and balances so incredibly necessary. if staff

were under hsh anyone can see this is discourage constructive criticism of shelters and give hsh more control then they should have. leaving the clause out will not hinder the implementation of prop c. thank you so much for all your time. >> thank you. can we have our next caller? that was our last public commenter on the telephone line. >> thank you mr. clerk. with that, public comment on item 5 is now closed. seeing no colleagues on the roster wishing to speak further to the item i like to make a motion to send item 5 to full board with positive recommendation. >> (inaudible) >> i make a motion to accept the amendments as proposed that were read into the record. >> i wanted to be sure i got it correctly. the motion is to sapt the amendments

proposed by supervisor safai. on the motion, supervisor safai. safai aye. walton aye. chair dorsey. dorsey aye. the motion passes without objection. on the motion to continue the matter as amended- >> it has to be continued because it is substantive. sorry. make a motion to continue the item as amended. >> that would be to the- >> 27th. >> february 27 meeting of the rules committee on the motion to continue. supervisor safai. aye. vice chair walton. walton aye. chair dorsey. dorsey aye. the motion passes without objection. >> thank you mr. clerk. can you please call item 6? >> yes. item 6

ordinance amending the administrative code to remove agreements let under chapter 6 for public works or improvement from the prohibitions in chapter 12x on the city's entering into a contract with a contractor that has its united states headquarters in a state that allows discrimination against lgbt individuals, has restrictive abortion laws, or has voter suppression laws, or where any or all of the contract would be performed in such a state. >> thank you mr. clerk. supervisor safai, once again the floor is yours. >> thank you. colleagues, today i'm here to ask for you to support a ordinance that help insure the city construction project s are delivered at the highest level 06 quality and improve the odds that they come in on time and on budget. the chapter 12x of the administrative code which i voted to enact limits the city ability to contract with

companies headquartered in certain states. that number now has risen to about 30 states out of the 5 oin the united states. we all meaning members of this body and board and many of the city leadership and all the city leadership agree with the core principles of protecting voting rights, reproductive freedom and lgbtq plus right said. friday the city adminivator put out a report showing 12x has not achieved these goals. only one state changes any law as a result. instead we have seen unintended consequence, fewer bidders means lower quality and higher construction costs, and it also means fewer bidders with which our local lbe to work with and develop relationships with. there is opposition today and we anticipate that from people who benefit from the status quo and i wanted to take a moment at the outset to respond to a couple point that have

submitted in writing. first, this legislation does not change any aspect of local subcontracting requirements or local hire rules. any prime correct deliver local jobs regardless of where they are based and must follow all of our 14b requirements. second, this proposal does not change the city commitment to lgbtq equity, any contractor still has to meet 12b equal benefits requirements. and agree to non discrimination laws. national organization called the human rightscome pain issued a corporate equality index that how many companies advance lgbtq rights and companies like black and (inaudible) jacob engineering, sherman williams, ikea, lowes all

received hundred percent on the score card but can't do business with san francisco. a california based company with much lower marks can and that doesn't make sense to me. we ask correction departments to share impacts of 12x on operations and tell us what contracting opportunities are coming up. and just to put a extra point, 12x was never created to limit competition. that was never the intent of 12x. today we are joined by ivy (inaudible) from puc, bruce robberson from public work and judy (inaudible) i believe is remote from the airport. i like to begin with ivy fine to talk about the impact of 12x on the puc.

>> good morning ing supervisors, ivy fine with public utility commission contract group. we have a couple slides today that show upcoming contracts in 2023 and 2024 that potentially will be impacted by the repeal of 12x on chapter 6 construction and professional service contracts. the san francisco public utilities commission has between 10 $10 million and 20million about 8 contracts that will be advertised for engineer estimate of about $113 million and for design bid build so construction contractors greater then $20 million. we have 7 contracts

for total of $630 million and we have alternative delivery contracts that have a engineer $7 contracts for total of $630 million and we have alternative delivery contracts that have a engineer estimate over 20million. two contracts that total $240 million. where 12x impacts construction is on high dollar value contracts as well as if they are smaller contracts but incredibly highly specialized, so for example, on the construction side for the o'shaughnessy dam it is $8 million however it is specialized. we want to insure we have a competitive bidding pool that is technically competent to perform the work. on the other side of the spectrum we have the millbrae yard laboratory shop improvement, $200 million which benefit from a competitive bidding pool which

forces bidders to sharpen their pencil on cost. i can also speak on the professional service side but open to any questions you may have. >> one thing i wanted to add and thank you for going through the next slide, could you also-if you didn't mention already how it could help improve the joint venture programs? >> so, these large firming comes in and can speak on professional service side, there are 3 or 4 off the top of my head that would not normally under 12x propose on one of our contracts. for contracts under $10 million there is a local business enterprise program incentive where joint verchers can receive 7 and a half percent or 5 percent depending on the amount of work the non-joint venture partner performs and these are

wonderful opportunities for the local business enterprises to match with and partner with a larger firm. many of these firms already have long-standing mentorship programs as well and be able to provide additional opportunities for a local business enterprise to partner with a larger firm and learn and perform work on our projects. >> what we have seen so far on these two slides, these are upcoming contracts that could potentially be impacted. >> correct. >> what have you seen from past experience in terms of what impact 12x had on the contracting for chapter 6 and professional services? >> for many of our contracts, especially the higher dollar value contracts, to propose or prepare a bid can cost

anywhere from 10 of thousands of dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars. i'm not sure what the incentive would be for a firm to spend that kind of money if they already know that there is a ordinance banning their participation. the ordinance doesn't ban any firm from bidding, but 12x waver would be required by a department head in order to award the contract. >> okay. great. thank you. i think the next-unless colleagues any questions? supervisor walton. >> thank you chair dorsey. i don't have a question, but just definitely--i partly understand the initant of the ordinance but the fact of the matter is, businesses and

corporations are (inaudible) to be successful and this- [applause] and this as written is

basically just give away and in direct conflict with san francisco values unless our values have somehow changed. just responding to the jv program, it is already problematic when you consider the definition of lbe is and the fact we have businesses that are really not local that are able to have work around and receive business here in san francisco under some of the jv partnerships so we have to do more to protect our small contractors, the lbe, mbe and minority businesses and this isn't something that is going to protect them, this will provide a bigger opportunity for them to be exploited by bigger businesses and bigger corporations so as written this is not something i think we should support and not be rewarding those businesses that dont share our values, have the headquarters outside the city

at the detriment to some advantages we need from having big business. i want to make sure that was on the record. >> thank you vice chair walton and thank you supervisor safai. i will confess that as a city employee and manager in this building for most of my career, i actually have pretty strong feelings about our city contracting and procurement processes and 12x but in the spirit of having open mind i like to invite public comment. >> yes, members of the public who wish to speak and joining in person should line up to speak at this time. those listening call 415-655-0001 and enter meeting id 24822714832 and pound and pound

again. prez star 3 to enter the speaker line. please wait until the system indicates quou are unmuted and then begin your comments. can we have our first inperson speaker? >> good morning. my name is bruce (inaudible) and thank you for the opportunity to address you on what i consider a very critical business that you have before you today. i'm a small business owner. i have a small 31 person shop in san francisco, been in business all most 12 years and i owe any success i can call success to the policies that san francisco has consistently been a leader in. they thereare not many place yz could have replicated what i have done accept san francisco. i'm also here as the national association of minority contractors an organization around for over 55 years. it is in

20major areas of the united states. we stand shoulder and shoulder with many organizations you will hear today opposing the changes to this legislation. san francisco occupies a coveted position not only in this state but also the nation. you have been a leader on a lot of things. you are looked to as a example that other municipalities want to be if they had resources and that includes the leadership. if they had that. i urge you all in the basis of just morality to not retract from that awesome responsibility that you have. i urge you also on the basis of just competitiveness, america is built on

the capitalism. we understand everything about capitalism is good. the issue of greed that gets in the way and tarnishes it. (inaudible) never let a good crisis go to waste. so in this head long rush for efficiency in government- >> that is your time. >> ask this not become a casualty of that. i guess i'm off here. thank you. [applause] >> good morning supervisors dorsey, shamann walter and supervisor safai. i am a business owner and this year 30 years in business and as architect in the city employing local residents and also 40 years a small business policy where i had mentors of

eileen (inaudible) all of those were my mentors in small business policy. what i want to talk to you about is that i'm representing an organization the san francisco latino and black builder association which was out-growth of my being involved in the recovery for the city of san francisco. what you will hear today is there will be opposition only because you haven't consulted the small business community to see if there is thesh holds we can work with you or the successes of this policy. we need to have that. the problem is that in your streamlining of your process and government processing contracting, you are not looking to the experience the small business community and that's your source of information to build better policy to streamline, so i ask you not to approve this, or

opposing this and set down with us and ask us what will work for you guys and streamlining the process. when gavin newsom was here and wanted to streamline the process he asked the business community to come in and look at the conditions and components of the process, but please do not move any policies with economic empowerment, social justice and equity that are the criteria in these policies. i thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is nick colina, been in the bayview 15 years. also member of the (inaudible) gay man and

construction industry and not sure you guys know what it is like to be a openly gay man in the construction industry but it isn't easy so here today representing our community for those that can't. those too afraid to be here today to say i want a seat at the table. i am here today in opposition to item 6. request the data provide to justify the change. we are opposed to the elimination of 12x until the data is presented to justify the elimination. we are opposed to any changes in economic inequity and social criteria including the ordinance or construction contract before consulting small business advisory groups like the (inaudible) national association of minority contractors. we are hurting today. our local businesses are hurting today. if you look at the utilization reports from cmd our lbe work is going like this and flatline at it bottom

and businesses outside san francisco are getting all the opportunity. this is not going to help lb and not going to help lgbtq contractors and work force. what would harvey milk say? what would harvey milk say? [applause] >> i want before just a moment. i wanted to-if you wanted to express your support the custom is do this with your hands but frown on applause. >> goodern morning. (inaudible) owner of mansefield construction company. african american raised and born in san francisco. signature to local 261 and member of the san francisco latino and black builder association. i oppose item number 6. we request the data be provided to justify the change. we are opposed to elimination of 12x until the data is presented to justify the elimination. we are opposed to any changes

in any economic equity and social criteria included any ordinance or construction contract before consulting the small business community and construction and professional services. what is the city gaining with these changes and elimination? has the city asked the local construction and ae services how they have benefited from 12x? with elimination it is the large multi-national corporations with their headquarters based in san francisco going to benefit? why should these corporations benefit with doing business in the state that do not share california values? i am not -out of district 10 and prnlly sponsored community memberinize to the union to get a living wage over $30 an hour. may not seem like had a lot to much, but to them it is. i

am pushing to continue to get the work to put my community to work. thank you. >> good morning board supervisors. stirling framers is my business. born and raised in the city, san francisco. i have been in the trade for 15 years throughout local 22, and here to oppose item 16, and my question is, if this was to streamline the construction contracts why hasn't the small business community contacted mayor newsom did? the city needs to review how multiple agencies provide plan approval in the field and reduce time

costs. also, i like the board of supervisors to consider inclusion of black real estate company like dc williams such as black contractors as myself and black truckers . we are not getting multimillion contracts. support us in being a part of that change. thank you. [clapping] >> joshia (inaudible) bay area pipe and equipment. thank you. we are a small lbe prefabrication sop shop in san francisco here every day payingerant in the city, doing everything we can to support businesses. is there anything in the ordinances stopping those businesses from

coming here and taking part in that every day to keep the lights on here in the city? i think that all of us here just want to have our voice heard and to be part of those decisions and say hey, we are here, we might not be able to take that entire contract or do that entire job, but we want to be included in that job and be able to be part of it. thank you. >> good morning. my name is paul peneder gast. i serve as the president of build-out california which on a weekly basis communicate with 6039 professionals in the architecture engineering construction and real estate development industry. supervisor dorsey thank you very much for coming to our event last june 1 with david perry. appreciate your support. in my day time i'm the owner of pendergast supporting group a public affairs business been in business thirty years now and we spend all our time working in the construction

industry to empower local minority lgbtq businesses and share the supervisor desire to improve the project delivery of all projbects in san francisco whether it is the van ness brt and dtx, we share your support on that. in the process of assessing this very issue, we believe there is a severe lack of economic data. i like it enter into record today on behalf of build out california 10 specific economic data points we very much like to see the city of san francisco put forward. we understand that carmen chu put out a report friday and have not had a chance to look at that. (inaudible) possible impacted by this. i like to challenge the city to go back to those firms some great friends of build out and ask how

many lgbtq have you currently or in the past brought on your teams whether professional service or construction contractors. let us start with that economic data point and move forward with when we talk about equity justice. love they are a part of hrc and part of equality california but let's see how many dollars are going to lgbtq businesses and aiding in construction. thank you so much. >> you can leave it on the banister and i'll pick it up. you can leave it right there, i'll get it. >> good morning. my name is lamar (inaudible) president of asian inc. thank you for your service. i want to fully express that i subscribe fully to all the comments that have been previously raised especially by mr. stirling, mrs. (inaudible) mr. kitsching and others as well as comments you will hear from mr. (inaudible) (inaudible) coalition for economic equity. the coalition found out about the legislation on

thursday. it was urgent enough to meet together thursday evening to talk about this. it is so important that no one here not anyone who has spoken previously has a vested interest in the status quo because the status quo has not worked for small local businesses and we are here to change the status quo to make the system work for small local businesses. the lbe program, the 14b program was born out of the minority women business enterprise program it . there are local businesses diverse businesses who are here who just ask to take their rightful place at the table. the city administrator carmen che commissioned the economic activity task force. you have mrs. (inaudible) a part of the task force and that task force called for economic recovery through the lifting up of small local business enterprises. there is nothing in that report that says we make it easier for small local business

enterprises to achieve recovery by giving more of the work to out of state firms in places that we have not done business with. there are folks here who are not because they put in bids for city work. the primes competing head to head with those firms. we are now making it much more difficult for those firms to compete for those dollars and these dollars are what represent values. we vote in our economy with our dollars and cents. i ask we vote on this based on our values and not sell out to the lowest bidder. thank you. [clapping] >> supervisors, i clearly believe that this amendment is not ready for prime time. as a member of the san francisco builders association, and the coalition for economic equality, i stand united in the

principles established for 12x. that has come to light that the author of 12x clearly said there are unintended consequences that develop developed because of 12x. i would point out that as a member of the community, i am not a lgbtq member. i don't adhere to abortion i refect the fact you have right to abortion and thankful we live in a state where we have voting laws that are non restrictive, however we should not be selling out our convictions and our principles so that it doesn't cost our pocket book additional money. we should stand for our convictions. as public servants to us, we the people need to have you

empower us so we can have that fairness when it comes to reviewing legislation so that all the people who contribute in making sure that if amendments are to be offered they are offered through a collective and continued space. it reminds me of a parable from book of luke that says a honorable man who said let me get that twig out of your eye but stands with a rafter in his eye and cannot see what is going on around him because he isn't associated with those who have the business knowledge to help him along. let us we the people help you make substantive changes with participation. thank you so much. >> thank you. there being no additional in the chamber, if you can move to the telephone callers.

>> hello, this is jasmine (inaudible) community for civil rights in san francisco again. i work in economic justice practice where we try to close the racial gap helping entrepreneurs of color and local businesses build wealth for their themselves and their communities. based on the mission and in support of economic equity i call to oppose the amendment to remove constructions agreements contracting with states with certain types of discriminatory laws. i disagree section 12xs haant worked as (inaudible) still see taxes thin states that opposed lgbtq rights reproductive justice and voting rights. also telling there is no proposal to remove chapter 21 that takes contracts for goods and service from

12x and chapter 6 on contracting meaning the city does know (inaudible) not contract with these states for anything in the 12x purposes. in terms of lbe, no data is provided to show local and california businesses are not competitive enough for these contracts. even if so, the city has declared small businesses are significant sector of the local economy and form the backbone of our neighborhoods so the local business enterprise and non discrimination contracting ordinance needed the goal to support local businesses and insure they compete and create a level playing field in the field of contracting. this proposed amendment directly contra dicts the goal prioritizing lower cost. (inaudible) sf is a leader in

lgbtq women voting right s issues and voting right issues. don't allow the city values to be bought by low r cost. >> thank you for your time. thank you. next caller, please. >> can you hear me now? >> yes, we can. please proceed. >> great. david pillpel again. so, i lean towards supporting this legislation, but it suggests to me a periodic review of all the city contracting restrictions would be in order whether those-the various contracting restrictions are accomplishing the goals they were setting out, whether they are unnecessarily necessary or unnecessarily restricting city contracts, reducing the contractor pool, increasing the city cost, broadening or narrowing the

restrictions in law, adding or reducing factors like social equity, and ease of implementation in city departments. we spend a huge amount of time and money on city contracting. the various departments, particularly the chapter 6 and chapter 21 departments but all city departments, plus the city attorney, cmd, controller's office, civil service commission, dhr, hrc, oca, we got a small army of people that deal with city contracting and i'm-and sometimes that achieves more of our goals and sometimes it doesn't and so that's why am suggest a broader review and periodic assessment of those restrictions. to some earlier speakers i wonder if this item proposal has been to small business commission and maybe a report from the office

of economic analysis would be useful. thanks for listening. >> thank you. that was our last public commenter for this matter. >> thank you mr. young and with that public comment on item 6 is now closed. i want to-before i hand off to supervisor safai because there are a few more people wept to hear from, i did want to say, i have worked most of my career in city government and have had a lot of frustrations over the years with how cumbersome and expensive the contractor and procurement processes can be and i have been convinced that if san franciscans had any idea how much money we are-of their dollars we are wasting on processes and some of the performative things we do with our contracting, i think they would be furious about it. and

rightfully so. i also think it is important that we remember what chapter 12x endeavored to do and why it was first enacted and then why there were amendments to it and that was solely to incentivize states who's laws on lgbtq plus equality, voting rights and on choice were objectionable and the purpose of this administrative code provision was to incentivize those states to change their laws and after all the years looking back here is the relevant data point, zero states changed the policies. we are down to 20 states with which we can contract with businesses-i also understand that people feel that these are companies are necessarily not sharing our values because they happen to be from a state that is different from ours or laws we find objectionable but i remind everybody that as roontly as 10 years ago california would have been a 12x state. a

banned state because of proposition 8. in that case, your businesses would be punished for acts of california voter jz this is personal as a gay man and worked on marriage equality going back before gavin newsom was issuing marriage license to same sex colors and worked in city attorney office. i worked against the night initiative in 2000. these issues are important to me and share the values that motivated 12x but the law needs togo. it hasn't work and makes competitive bidding less compesative and as the city faces a (72) (inaudible) hiv funding we are able to have. the nurses we are not laying off. we are in for a couple of difficult years and when we make competitive bidding less

competitive when we adopt anti-competitive policy because we pat oen the back and say we are doing something about laws we object to or red states we don't like, the bottom line we are costing tax pays more money. i will support this amendment this administrative code change but it is step in the direction that should repeal 12x all together. then i just also say that i think this is something--beyond even what the recent things we have done on contracting, this isn't the first generation of san francisco board of supervisors to do this. i dont know themic bride principles. that is relic from the 1990 about how catholics in northern ireland are employed. we have bans on

hardwood in indonesia, even though stopped exporting hardwood. we had a provision in every contract you couldn't do business with birma when they didn't exist. we have a equal benefit ordinance that is the one contractual element we had that required things that moved the conversation forward on marriage equality but we should understand there was a time back before marriage equality was the law of the land nation wide, 60 percent of the large employers in this nation had domestic partnership benefits. now since 2015 when the (inaudible) decision made marriage equality the law of the united states, domestic partnership are a relic and if you start a company today this isn't something people are adopting. it means competitive bidding is less and

less competitive and more and more expensive for taxpayers so that is my rant and where i'm coming from but i share the values that motivate 12x but i this reflected in the values that make sure we have hiv funding and supporting voting rights here in san francisco because of how expensive this is making our contracting. with that, i want to hand off to supervisor safai. sorry, supervisor walton. >> thank you so much chair dorsey. one thing i just want to share, i was originally supportive of making some changes to 12x. i do want our employees to be able to recruit from black colleges. i do want our lgbtq businesses to be able to survive and support each other across the counts ry. i do want minority businesses to benefit but no okay

providing opportunities for businesses and people who continue to discriminate and people who continuously harm our indigenous businesses. the provisions in 12x that protect businesses and quite frankly protect our communities were developed with input from community, with community and so most certainly shouldn't be talking about changes without the lgbtq community and small business community and minority community because these 12x policy was developed with input from community and so changes as rapid as this and changes that will most certainly have some detrimental effects and negative consequences should not happen with legislation in this manner and that part to me is important. again, there are things in 12x that are quite frankly hampering some of our

businesses and some of our communities from being able to thrive in certain ways and certain manners but opening up the flood gates for corporations and not how we deal with that. we need to come up with some serious thought, have serious conversations, include community about how to address these changes. i definitely am not in support of this ordinance and the manner it is written and wont be in support of any changes or anything that is going to negatively effect what we fought for in the original intent of 12x. >> thank you vice chair walton. i want to hand off to supervisor safai. >> thank you. and thank you for all the comment today. i want to continue with the departments we wanted to allow people the opportunity to public comment. thank you for waiting. i will call up bruce robertson from public works.

>> chair dorsey we have one person jump on public comment as we were closing it. do you want to allow that one person only? >> reopen for the one person only. mr. lam, can we have this one person? >> hi. my name is (inaudible) really glad to hear about the fact that we want the small businesses to be part of the conversation. right now you have a ordinance you are trying to move forward and we haven't had a chance to look at the changes. in the interest of justice and equity i think is appropriate to send it back and let the small business community weigh in and see where it comes out, but right now you have a strong stakeholder group that

isn't part of the process and that's not part of the justice equity san francisco is known for. i would recommend that we at least allow the small business community to weigh in on changes that you are wanting to make. (inaudible) at least know that you have the participation of all stakeholders. thank you. >> thank you. i believe we can close public comment. >> thank you. >> public comment is closed and supervisor safai. >> yes, mr. robertson. >> my apologies. please proceed. >> good morning. i will go through some of the larger contract opportunities we have coming up in public works. we issue 40 to 45 construction contracts annually. most of them are in the 1 to

$5 million range so these 6 are the largests we have coming up and illustrative of the portfolio public works provides the city. we have mta work, rec and park facilities, internal public works and some projects for theeseer bond. the largest is the fire training facility over $200 million. then we got parkwork, transbay 3 park which is working in collaboration with ocii. the hertz recreation center for rec and park and two paving projectss and 1399 marin street. again, just to reiterate these are the 6 larngest contracts thin near future we will issue but majority are 1 to $5 million range. that is the only slide. we only did construction

contracts and happy to answer questions. >> have you seen-what impact have you seen 12x have? >> through the chair, supervisor safai i think the budget legislative analyst report that came out october last year summed up well. it is hard to quantify in terms of what the cost were but i think what we have seen is we do certainly see bidders on some of the larger projects out of state not responding to opportunities within the department and i think that is what we say. why they are not bidding is it 12x or other reasons other opportunities and ort jurisdictions? and the think the budget legislative analyst summarized thatd quite well in the report. >> thank you. we could talk about professional services but that's fine. did you have any questions? okay. thank you sir. >> thank you so much. >> i think the next person we'll go to is judy (inaudible) from the airport. i think she is remote, mr. clerk.

>> good morning commissioners or committee members, sorry. this is judy (inaudible) the chief development officer for san francisco international airport, and as i begin with my list i want to take a minute to say airports are unique facilities and typically require specialized service and rely on companies across the nation to plan design manufacturing and build facilities. hearing the comments of the audience members i have a personal relationship with and value their abilities deeply, we believe strongly in supporting our local businesses at sfo and task partners to exceed requirements for local small business involvement. there are specific service airports require and the companies who provide these services often resign in banned

states. these specialized services include airport planning and terminal design. fuel system designers, passenger boarding bridge designers manufacturing and installs, and specialize in environmental engine ering. we have been able to function clearly under 12x, but we have found that it reduces the competition on our project. we are always looking to seek the most highly qualified firms to help us build our facilities and it potentially lends to have our contractors look to subcontract under other entities so they can still provide those services to sf0. it drives up the overhead and management cost on the project. what you see on the list ahead of you is a combination of professional services and construction services that we

intend to advertise in 2023 just this year. the list includes approximately 20 contracts for just over a billion dollars worth of projects. i would be happy to answer questions you might have. >> thank you judy. you answered my big question which was how it is impacted and how some of the services that you require come from states that you are not able to do business with so that was my main question. looks like mr. chair has a question as well. >> thank you so much. you raised something i hadn't touched on that was a ax to gride about our contracts practices andpologists here in the itisy and that is that the use of sometimes using more expensive subcontractors to get to the contract that someone wants to get, could you elaborate because that is something else that we are creating not just a added burden of public

bureacy but private bureacy. >> sure. so, we have a few entities or companies service providers from across the country who have performed very successfully for us and most recently there was austin commercial headquartered in texas who participated and built our harvey milk terminal 1b project and joint venture with web corp in the building but it was a extremely successful project and would love to contract with austin commercial again, so about mid-project i started talking to them how we can contract with them again in the future and started with discussions. as we continued with those conversations over the past

probably 4ish years, that hasn't happened and instead i looked to pair them up with one of our good local general contractors to see if they could subcontract under a local contractor to deliver facilities. in that case it gives a boost to a local general contractors who does some of our smaller projects for us but may not have the financial ability to build the large project or the expertise on terminal projects to deliver them. but in the process of subcontracting under others it drives up costs because now we pay another entity to oversee their work or contract for their work when the subcontractor has shown their ability to be very successful. did that answer your question? >> it did, thank you

so much. colleagues, any further? >> no. that was a great summary and example. austin was another company that we had known that i forgot to list i know partnered with web corp in the past with the larger contracting so i'm glad-thank you judy for bringing that up. >> sure. >> so, mr. chair, i just want to reiterate and appreciate the public comment. as judy said, i knea lot of it people in the industry. just recall supervisor waltzen and i worked for along with city administrator a significant amount of time to do upgrades and update 14b that was designed companies that have come-that succeeded and expanded in san francisco are able to continue to operate and benefit from 14b. that was the

threshold argument. i'm hundred percent committed to these values that have been stated in so many different ways, but i also as supervisor dorsey said, we have to consider what the original intent of 12x was, and is it achieving its goals and then some of the things and many things i heard here today were more about how we can enhance and support and strengthen the work that local lbe do. it is a different conversation then 12x because tomorrow some of these state legislatures could pass additional laws and instead of 30 states we couldn't do business with, it could be 40. it could go up to 50. and the map provided by the city administrator was pretty stark and i will tell you as a member of the transportation authority, the amount of creativity that we have to get into to

even be able to purchase light rail vehicles to do basic services for this city is pretty phenomenal. there are a lot of exceptions provided in 12x but often time s there is not so it creates a burden for san francisco. in the other vain, we have done very well and can do better and you all pointed it outed to, we can do better but we created a pool of contracting professional services that $10 million threshold or lower that you get a lbe discount. that is a pretty significant discount created in the contracting process and makes the lbe that more competitive. opening up the pool and why i thought this would be a benefit for the local lbe, opening the pool like austin, other companies mentioned today still will be required to and partner with our local businesses. these are these larger

construction professional service contracts that the lbe are not bidding on but they are part of the proposal and design. i can speak from personal experience formally being a lbe, i know from my own limited time in that world for a few years, i was able to work with a larger professional service contracting firm and i know how difficult it can be in terms of when payments are delivered to subcontractors, when notice to stop doing service-notice to contract. there are so many different difficulties working in this environment and i'm committed to continuing to strengthen and work with our lbe, but this to me these reforms today are not about lbe. this is really about 12x was created to send a message and to try to influence and change the policies in the states with which they operate. this is not a

statement of san francisco values by saying we intend to look at this program, has it achieved its goals and if not what is it doing to increase the cost which take away dollars for so many other programs including the lbe program itself. we proposed legislation in november and so it is just now being scheduled and so, we are happy that we have time. there will be a couple weeks. this will not be heard at the board next week. we are committed to continuing to sit down with many coalition of people that have come today and continue to listen and get feedback and input, so again, i appreciate everyone coming out here today and believe this is the right step at this moment in san francisco. >> thank you supervisor safai. i just want to thank the folks who showed up and

think as often plays out in city hall, when we have disagreements sometimes they are value disagreements and sometimes tactical and think is tactical. this is more about whether 12x is the appropriate place to help lbe. i will be a champion of small business and lbe in san francisco, i just feel strongly 12x is not what it was intended for but my door is open to work with you and support our businesses. as i mentioned as somebody who managed units within city departments and has been very frustrated many times with the difficulty, the onerous processes and expense of contracting i feel very strongly. i think in this situation we have-i dont know any two of us agree. i think i will support something

beyond what supervisor safai is proposing and beyond different from what vice chair walton believes, so i think it would be appropriate to make a motion to send to the full board without recommendation. >> i can support that. i also want to say before we take that vote and said this to some people that have come, i think there is legislation that would be introduced that deal with the entire aspect of 12x. my intent today was to try to focus and zero in on a piece i thought we could agree on that was high enough threshold and universe that we could begin that impact these departments in a positive way and have potentially positive impact on the community. i believe sending out without recommendation we have two weeks before get to the full board and committed to sit down and get feedback over

the next 2 weeks and listening more. >> vice chair walton. >> thank you chair dorsey and thank you supervisor safai. i definitely understand what you are trying to do and intent in terms of trying to move forward without recommendation. i truly believe this does not need to be going to the full board at all at this time. i don't think two weeks is enough time to really have the conversations with community that we need on something and changes that will have some definitely unintended negative consequences so i don't think it should go to full board at all at this point. >> mr. clerk. >> yes, on the motion, motion made by chair dorsey to refer the matter to the board of supervisors without recommendation. supervisor safai. >> aye. >> safai aye. vice chair walton. walton no. chair dorsey.

>> aye. >> dorsey aye. the motion passes with vice chair walton descenting in committee. >> thank you mr. clerk. it is on 2-1 vote item 6 goes to the board without recommendation. mr. clerk, is there any further business before this committee? >> there are no additional items on our agenda. >> thank you mr. clerk, we are now adjourned. [meeting adjourned]

and if you need a seat, take whatever empty seat if you need to sit down. first of all, good afternoon! and i want to say welcome to pier 70 in the dog pad's neighborhood. dog pat's is in the house. recently voted one of the hises neighborhood in the city. i want to start by telling you a story about a famous san franciscoian, born in 1835 held from connecticut and named the niantic. yes it's appropriate that we gather at a pier today because the niantic was a ship, a commercial ship destined for trade