the bargaining units. can you call item 27? >> ordinancending the code for the health care ordinance. >> an item i introduced. iwant to thank avalos, mirkarimi, chu, chiu, and kim for the co-sponsorship. i would like to continue this t to the call of the chair. let me open it to public comment. is there any member of the public who would like to speak on the health and security ordnance. up. i hope you had a good day. >> i put most of it back. and i just wan ttt to say. ♪ smile a healthy smile for me. won't you do that, please i hope that you smile so glad and i know you'll have healthy smiles won't be sad. smile a healthy smile for me won't you please today ♪ >> thank you. mr. paulsen. and one thing we forgot during the america's cup. there may be a need for a singer for that project. is there another member who wants to speak? public, disclosed in we have a motion to continue to the call of the chair. do we have any other business before the committee. >> there are no other items. >> thank you for the attention. the meeting is adjourned.

include the sunshine ordinance. at present, they take the position that the brown act applies. it is cumbersome and difficult to enforce on getting open government, sunshine. my suggestion to you is that you pass this enabling legislation. you mandate that they comply with the sunshine ordinance as well as the brown act. thank you. chairperson campos: next speaker. >> there are two things been passed out. when is my statement. the other is a report done by compass point on the organization. i am here to express my disappointment with the north of market community but the district. it started with overwhelming support from all parts of the neighborhood, including residents with an interim board. it slowly became dominated by special interests, identity- seeking funding, and their agencies. i should point out that speakers today our funding agencies. the work community no longer is appropriate. time and time again, resident leaders were being left out of the decision making process. there was no accountability. there n

>> they are in violation of the ordinance -- >> ok, i understand. it is just that they are required to register. >> in the legislation, there is a whole other list of criteria that talk about the requirements for normal building code. keeping the building watertight, numerous other things. even though they are not directly referred to, the fact that they are not registering the building, it is opening up those possibilities. so you could have a situation where you have an address, but we do not stop there. we would go on an issue additional violations for broken windows, unsafe conditions. commissioner lee: so those will follow after? >> after were possibly during. there are so many addresses involved, there are always more issues to be dealt with then time permits. --aft after or possibly during. once we go through the list, we can do further scrutiny on particular addresses. commissioner lee: is there any collaboration with other departments, maybe dpw, the department of health, where there might be excessive dumping of garbage in some of the aband

sorry. 26 3.27, on the revised ordinance before you is on page 12. as this is heightening the block requirements for blocks 5 and 6. and then there is language throughout the ordinance that memorializes that change. staff are supportive and recommending you incorporate the changes into the ordinance before you. supervisor cohen: in terms of the proposed density, how does it compare to the other projects going on in the executive parking area >> specifically the density would be higher than before. clough but i think that is just hard to measure density in land distribution. essentially would be urban design status. attempting to have most southern portions of the candlestick development commensurate with the approval for candlestick point, immediately to your east. i cannot say that it is precisely the same. there are slight nuances and differences. but that is what is approved. >> how tall are these towers? >> west to east, they are 170 feet to 100 feet, to 80 feet. >> they do not get taller? >> they go up and they come back down. >> 170 feet. and as

the ordinance adopting amendment no. 1 to the 2010 -- 2012 and -- operating engineers no. 3. the ordinance adopting amendment no. 1 to the 2010-2012 journeymen and apprentices of the pipe fitting industry no. 38. and amendment no. 3 for the 2011-2013 said francisco police officers association. item number 16 to adopt and implement amendment no. 322013 for the police officers association, in no. 17, the ordinance adopting amendment no. 1 the 2010-2012 for the service employees international union. the ordinance adopted an amendment no. 1 to the operating engineers local union -- the international union of operating officer. and then the number one to

we will not be talking about the substance of the ordinance, but picking a date to consider the ordinance and potential adoption. departments that is recommending july 21 for the adoption hearing. that is the ordinance before you. president olague: i would like to open it up for public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. i did receive a call, for what it is worth, and an e-mail from a member of the public who is interested, and who was wondering if there is a possibility that we will be looking at other aspects of the eastern neighborhoods plan for cleanup. he was wondering if there would be other opportunities where we might be able to look at some of the issues they're raised in western south of market. >> we can follow up on that. "we have done with the ordinance before you is we have a comprehensive list of things we would like to examine for the eastern neighborhoods. we have a timeframe where some of them needed to come before you. the ordinance before you are items that are simple fact -- simple fixes or things we get a handle on inexpedient -- in an expedient manner. p

there was reference on the sunshine ordinance, does the sunshine ordinance apply to c.b.d.'s? >> according to the city attorney, it does not, because c.b.d.'s bids are formed under state law so they have to comply with the california brown act and then the california public records act and if they follow those two rules, they should be able to, you know, follow the sunshine ordinance rules, as well. >> not necessarily, because the brown act and the public records act don't go as far as the sunshine ordinance. my understanding is and i think it happened with something involving a c.b.d. and supervisor mirkarimi's district, they have the ability to go beyond what the brown act and public records act requires and i would suggest that they do that here, that they simply adopt the sunshine ordinance. i think legally there's nothing that precludes them from doing that. that would be one suggestion, whoever is listening from the c.b.d., i think that's a good idea. we can have that requirement instituted by the board of supervisors but i think that the more uniformity there is, the bet

the effective date was september 2009. code section 103.4. this ordinance requires annual registration, a registration fee to be paid [inaudible] before you you have a packet listing 427 active addresses. of those, 291 have paid and registered their buildings. the balance are in different stages of the code enforcement process. keep in mind, over the past two years or so, there were 300 other buildings that were evaluated. the owners responded and provided us with industry documents and information. they were declared as not needed to be on the active list. commissioner murphy: what is the annual fee for that? >> $765. that involves the registration form, ownership, other information, other requirements for the building. commissioner murphy: so it is the same fee as a single-family house, as in multiple units? >> yes. now, if you look at any active address on the list, it does not give an indication of the amount of staff time involved in any of those entries. when a particular address comes to our attention, we do a quick evaluation and then send out a let

penalties from $500 to $1,000 for retaliation against workers who exercise their rights under the ordinance, and finally, it allows osb to issue a citation. without going through the notice requirements. it will allow them when they feel is appropriate to cite those on the spot for violating the law. it also calls on them to make every effort to resolve complaints in a timely manner and take more -- no more than one year to settle. the old saying justice delayed is justice denied. it is so true when it comes to low-wage workers who are not paid their minimum wages. they cannot make their ranch. they cannot make their ends meet in san francisco, so these are long-delayed processes, and a harm us in a way that is devastating to their lives. finally, to create outreach materials that are designed for workers in particular industries so they are aware of their rights under the laws and allow them to claim any unclaimed back wages for any enforcement if the wages go on claim for three years. so that is my presentation. i am here to answer any questions you may have. president o'brien: commission

with the last six months of ordinances that have been passed. and removing all the controls related to mission bay. this week, the board approved it as amended. 800 presidio was scheduled for ceqa appeal, and next tuesday the board plans of holding the hearing for the ceqa appeal and the conditional use appealed and related authorizations. new introductions. there are three new ordinance is related to our work that i would like to share with you. supervisor mar introduced an ordinance that would make four changes to the planning code. it would allow eating and drinking allowed it in the neighborhood commercial districts, but only were the total street frontage is less than 30% in the event the concentration of these restaurants is greater than 30%, conditional use authorization would be required. that was the first change. the second change was recommending to remove the prohibition on large fast-food restaurants in this area. and to add a prohibition on formula retail. the third change is the ordinance would make the principal use on the ground

special commissions of up to 25% of the applicable rate, we make environmental findings, out of the ordinance with the section -- to designate weekday and weekend hours. to the gulf sees at lincoln park. this is amending the code, to designate the weekend hours for the nonresidential rates, and making environmental findings to designate weekday and weekend hours to golden gate park, and item number 11, the ordinance amending the health code section 128, to set rates and other services provided by the department of public health and effective on july 2011, with the ordinance administrative code section, to add a fee of $35 for services provided by the public, for this program. >> thank you very much. items one and two -- this is the budget and the corresponding item. this is a piece of legislation, trailing with the budget for the particular rates or other pieces of legislation corresponding to the budget. those items will be continued so that we can have public comment on them tomorrow. we will begin with a budget hearing, if you have any opening comments. >> we have no opening comments. >> w

what this section of the ordinance does is it just asks them to work in collaboration , so the use their existing outreach budget and to perhaps make adjustments to the materials so that they are better targeted towards the industry and the workers that are most suffering from wage stuffed. commissioner kasselman: nothing additional is needed? >> no. commissioner kasselman: thinks. commissioner: i am in a business where if you do not have your signs up, you are fined. in just to reiterate what commissioner clyde had said, there is a lot of human trafficking here in san francisco, and i have seen this firsthand, and there are people being paid low wages below minimum wage, and it is an expensive place to live, so i will be supporting this legislation. >> thank you. president o'brien: commissioner collide? commissioner clyde: in the hearing, it was stated that one or two are paid below the minimum wage. i believe chinatown was cited as -- in one of the studies, that one out of every two restaurant workers are actually paid below the minimum wage, so i am wondering how note you are handling

they only need to hold the ordinances for the 90 day wait. monday's hearing, the department's staff expressed support for insuring balanced development. staff also expressed concerns about a few of the ramifications of this resolution. specifically that the proposed metering may bond future commissions or board members and prevent them from using their discretion to approve potentially beneficial projects. the department explained that the meeting projects in an area this small is difficult and projects just outside the boundaries would not be counted towards the numbers but would have an impact in the area nonetheless. the boundaries of western soma were not drawn to reflect a self-sustaining urban organism but are the result as a result of political negotiations, and a split through blocks and st. pierre lastly, due to the specific lot size needs of affordable housing got to come staff requested more time to study the issue to ensure there are not large parcels of rezoning to support the 70% affordable housing that the community is seeking.

of the creation -- that we cannot issue compliance with the ordinance. this is something else but i would ask that you consult with the city attorney to see if there is a way that we could condition this as part of the approval, compliance with this ordinance. i do not know that there is anything that precludes us from requiring us to comply with the sunshine ordnance going forward. those are a couple of things that maybe, you can look into before the comeback to the board of supervisors. >> great. and are there any other questions or comments? we have a resolution in before the committee. there has been indication as the kinds of changes that we would like to see as the matter comes before the board. a motion by farrell with a recommendation. thank you to everyone wh ocame out -- who came out on the matter. >> can you call item six? >> a hearing on the debt structure and the non-voter approved debt. >> this item has been introduced by supervisor farrell. he and his staff have spent time working on the item. the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair campos.

we could divide the file and create to get be of different ordinances. one would reconvene the districting taskforce and one would designate the members of the task force under the conflict of interest code. convening the task force would not be subject to referendum. then the task force could be up and running and conducting its business without delay. >> our city attorney has proposed that we divide the file. in motion by supervisor mirkarimi. sentiment by avalos. s --econded by avalos. with regards to the separate file, that would amend the city's conflict of interest code. that should be the case as well. why do we not now move to roll call? one special commendation that i will offer. if we could move to roll call. >> you are first on a roll call for introductions. supervisor wiener: thank you. i am calling for a hearing related to the epw order issuing the excavation permits on public rights of way. i think we have all gone through the last number of months with ceqa and the at&t boxes. even though we have a better street plan, even though we have an

building -- i forget the supervisor -- i think it was mirkarimi. when that ordinance was written, dpw was the lead agency for graffiti blight. we are more in a supporting role. we would be more like the broken windows. commissioner murphy: how about overgrown vacant lots? >> it is in our housing code. we can certainly address it. but the lead agency is usually dpw. we could get health involved in it, if it was deemed to be a health hazard. commissioner murphy: so the complaint would come into you, to dbi first? >> generally, yes, it would start at the third floor as a routine complaint. then it would be routed to the sixth floor, to the building inspector we have assigned to that particular task. >> because we have had a wet spring, through june, i am sure the growth of that, especially on lots that are vulnerable, especially this summer, to brush fires. we normally think about that as outside of san francisco, but is that a possibility, where there might be a higher category of keeping an eye out for these large lots, open lots with weed growth that will ultimately b

. >> i would like to point out the ordinance is not being amended by any of the changes in the documents. it is an ordinance approving a development agreement substantially in the form that was filed. we spelled out divisions in the text of the ordinance we thought would be of particular concern for the board. for example, one for replacement units, one based on costa- hawkins, all the things we thought the board would be concerned bond. if one of those things were to change or work to change in the text of the ordinance before you, that could require noticing. but what you have in front of you is an ordinance that approves a development agreement substantially in the form of the board file. it is contemplated that the board might want to make changes or talk about changing. if the board and the developer agree upon those changes, it is appropriate for those changes to be made to the development agreement, as has been done in other major development deals. most importantly, the shipyard redevelopment project -- a number of changes were made before the board at the hearing. the important

items 34 and 35. >> 34 is the interim annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget for fiscal years ending june 30, 2012 and 2013 for enterprise departments. 35, interim consolidated budget an annual appropriation ordinance for all estimated receipts appropriations for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 for the enterprise departments. supervisor chiu: can we take these items same house, same call? these ordinances are finally passed. 36. >> item 36 is an ordinance adopted and implemented of men and four to the 2007-2013 memorandum of understanding between the city and firefighters local 798 unit 1. supervisor chiu: i understand we have to excuse supervisor chu. without objection, she is excuse. roll call vote. >> on item 36, mar aye. . mirkarimi aye. wiener aye. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye. cohen aye. elsbernd aye. farrell aye. kim aye. there are 10 ayes. supervisor chiu: the ordinance is finally passed. >> item 37, ordinance adopted and implemented amendment 5 to the one -- 2006-2012 memorandum of understanding between the city and county of san for disco and the muni

the planning commission initiated the ordinance in july of 2010. on august 5 of leicester, the recommended approval to the board of supervisors. originally the legislation contained amendments related to historic preservation issues. since the planning commission action in august of last year, hpc has continued to have dialogue with the planning commission. as they continue in their dialogue about historic preservation issues, all of the modifications related to preservation have been pulled out to allow that conversation to continue. instead, we have all of the non historic preservation items before you. we hope to bring the rest forward in the coming months. with the ordinance before you, there has been another change since august of 2010. both the commission and the board have continued to approve planning code amendments since they acted in august. the ordinance before you as an updated to reflect all of those amendments that have occurred at the board in the intervening months. the legislation amends things such as moving the net to 2500 becaus

. >> it would require the application, and my question is do we do about elsewhere by ordinance. >> but is a general standard the city typically will follow in terms of its analysis as well as when we analyze projects that might alter it resources. goo>> there is a debate because standards are high, and there are people who believe there should be on modification. my question is are there other aspects that mandate application of standards? >> i have been informed by the historic resources experts but the planning code does not contain a requirement following standards, but of the commission has adopted it as a rule in terms of their view of projects in jurisdiction. >> i would request that the amendment be separated. >> why don't we do that thelma -- why don't we do that? colleagues, can we take those amendments without objection? those are for the underlying documents, items 14 through 59. with respect to the motion, is there a second? can we have our role call on that motion. >> [calling vote ss] supervisor chu: no. supervisor cohen: no. supervisor farrell: no. supervisor wiener: no.

i would like to thank the planning staff and our city attorney for their work on this ordinance. judy had to do a lot of last- minute work. we have met with several key stakeholders in mission bay, which includes the mission bay community advisory committee, the port, and the giants. after meeting with the stakeholders, we understood there was already a planning process under way. we have asked the planning department to remove any proposed modifications in this area until the process has been completed. so we have taken out certain blocks. given this change, i have an amendment to make to the title to remove mission bay district from the title of this legislation, also striking it wherever it is referred to in the legislation. second, we had concerns from small businesses. this came to us from the small business commission about the requirement to participate in a transportation management plan. there was a concern this might unintentionally burden small businesses. this version has already included language that limits the applicability to larger venues and limits applicability

this ordinances passed on the first read. item 26. >> ordinance amending 1061 entitled regulation -- regulating the with the sidewalks between harrison street and fremont and beale street. president chiu: any discussion on this item? same house, same call. any discussion? without objection, this ordinance is passed on first reading. item 27. >> from the land use and economic development committee without recommendation, and ordnance amending the planning code to establish the presidio- setter special use the district at 800 presidio ave. to reflect the boundaries of the presidio-solder special use district. supervisor mirkarimi: i would like emotion to continue this until next tuesday, june 21st. president chiu: supervisor mirkarimi has made a motion to continue this until the 21st. for those of you who are here 44:00 special order, it is our intention to continue those items until next week. -- for those of you are here -- who are here for a the 4:00 special order, is our intention to continue those items until next week. >>

administrative revisions, the appropriation ordinance, and that would delete an existing requirement that the comptroller report to the board of supervisors on the revenue impact on the state budget on the general fund. it up -- it would also delete the provision that the board hold hearings on the mayor's plan and alternative proposals to address any revenue shortfall. we also consider approval of section 15 of the administrative provisions of the interim annual appropriation ordinance and a section 2.6 of the administrative provisions of the interim annual salary ordinance to be a policy matter, because these sections create a new employee monthly stipend without specifying the amount payable to employees to use their personal cell phones for work-related duties. as a general policy, i believe you know the board has not approved capital and equipment during the interim budget period without a detailed review unless the budget and finance committee and full board authorizes receptions requested by the -- exceptions requested by the mayor's office. it is the p

that is one of the parts of our ordinance. president o'brien: ok, well can we get a motion? anybody object? seeing none, the motion is passed. next item. clerk: commissioners, you are on item number nine, a presentation by cost -- by zoe polk. >> on april 14 of this year, our commission voted unanimously for a proposal to at a convention records to the nondiscrimination ordinance, and since that time, they have been working with community groups to put together a forums where we get input. in addition, we have been working with compliance. so we looked at models in other jurisdictions, including seattle, washington, madison, and the states of massachusetts and pennsylvania. all of these have similar legislation in place. we now know that in order to best meet the needs of those of san francisco, i am here tonight to us the small business commission to co-host a forum with the purpose of getting input from small-business owners and employees of up to best craft it compliance guidelines. this is just the beginning of an outreach effort that is being done in order to get proper

from the payroll tax ordinance, i recall a presentation about the displacement issue and that western soma will take care of that. as you know, that plan has not passed yet. this resolution will provide that leverage to ensure the community will not be displaced and there will be balanced growth in our neighborhood. sorry. i was running and i am out of breath. we feel this resolution and the plan itself is well thought out, well balanced, and has community input and different interests. therefore we really ask for your support and to continue supporting our neighborhood and not replace our existing community, and really balance out our community. we have a lot of new development in that area and want to make sure our community are able to live, work, and drive our neighborhood without displacement. thank you. >> good afternoon. it was my distinct pleasure to attend the task force meetings. i fully and freely want to say there is much in the plan that is commendable. it makes great sense for the neighborhood. however, we are comfortable with the stabilization plan. it promises abundant