any members of the public? secretary boomer: david pilpell. >> there is a lot of information here, so let me be quick, and maybe i will ask a question at the end. these require a little more detailed explanation, at least to the public. the $2 million in management reductions, not clear what that is, the determination of the leases was not clear what and where the operating impacts would be. i want to be clear, on page 11 of the operating hand out, that charging for transfers i think it's a bad idea. similarly, charging for the clipper, that is bad. there could be a discount for multiple rides on the clipper, similar to tokens, so if somebody wants to load $40 worth of cash, i would give them more than 20 rides so there is an incentive to use multiple rides using clipper, tokens, but i would not charge more overtly for a cash there unless we are increasing cash fares generally, and we have had some discussions about ratios between the cash fares and the ratios. on slide 12, the automatic indexing, one of the box

i'm with the public controller's office of public finance. e certificate of presentation. -- of participation. a related ordinance was adopted by this board in october of 2010 that approved the issuance of the cop along with the finance of the various transmission documents, not to exceed $40 million, of which $38 million would finance its three acts as an improvement. since october of 2010, the projects that have relied on the city's commercial paper to provide interim financing, and as of march of this year, approximately $10 million has been drawn upon and expanded by the project. with the cop, the current plan is to refund the commercial paper and then balance -- and then the balance through the project completion, around may. the city's disclosures, but that we call attendance -- that we call appendix a, the results of the november election, several bond measures that have been approved and issued, along with updates to the current fiscal year budget and finances, and the related agencies. those details are provided in appendix 8. -- appe

there is a meeting in the richmond that the public library at 6:00. it is about entertainment and what not out in the richmond area. >> your turn. >> c-mac's security guard training went well. they had 27 students from a lot of clubs around the city. i think it is a good start. i think c-mac will do another training in maybe six months. that looks like there is interest. >> commissioner lee, a quick question. they did the power to arrest. does c-mac intend to do the additional 40 hours? >> they have been informed that they have to do the continuing education. there is continuing education on the other 32 hours. >> some people ask me that question and i didn't have an answer. >> they can do that on their own time. the information was sent to us. all the forms and everything, those are the next steps. >> anybody else? seeing none, that concludes the tuesday, march 27 meeting of the entertainment commission for the city and county of san francisco. thank you for coming. >> hello. the welcome to the creditor meeting of the budget and finance committee. my

any members of the public who wish to speak on this item? >> out of respect, we're going -- we have some video presentations and we're looking forward to the conversation. thousands of young people have been working with supervisor campos and the board of the mta to address the needs of low- income youth and access. we are excited about what we can do to really increase resources for public transit around the clock and it needs and it needs for equity for low income families. that is what we are excited to be partnering with you about and we look forward to when this next conversation happens and to catching you before the upcoming budget discussions on march 6. supervisor chu: are there other members of the public who wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. i know you are doing a lot to talk about the ongoing issues and actions coming before the board in addition to items at the board of supervisors. in terms of a time line, could you and let us know about that? >>

is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam clerk, please call item five. >> item 5. increase the amount of the professional services contract with wmh corporation by $4,300,000, to a total amount not to exceed $5,900,000, to complete preliminary engineering, environmental analysis, and design services of the yerba buena island bridge structures and authorize the executive director to modify contract terms and conditions. this is an action item. commissioner campos: thank you. items five through 11 are items that were heard and considered by the finance committee. i do not know if commissioner wiener has anything to add, as chair of the finance committee, to any of the items. commisioner wiener: no, mr. chair. commissioner campos: is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. roll-call on item five. >> [roll call] the item passes. commissioner campos: please call item six. >> item 6. award a two-year consultant contract

partnership is the friends of the public library. on the front page of this it says, did you receive any and funding from any governmental resource? no. if you turn to page 15, the question is, "did you receive anything of value from a governmental entity without charge?" again, zero, zero, zero, for the past five years, they contend they've received nothing of value in services or facilities from the san francisco public library, which, of course, is nonsense. they use the facilities for all kinds of things. they sell naming opportunities, they gather books, they gather donations. what they get from the library side is this lack of disclosure. this is a scandal that a department like this is basically privately run, all of their policy determinations are this private entity and in fact this is the essential idea of every con artist. it's called hubris. as far as they're concerned, responsibility is for fools. i hope you understand that these two things go together. if corruption were not synonymous with responsibility, abuse would no

thank you. >> are there other members of the public who wish to speak on item #3? -- item number four, please. >> a resolution authorizing the department of public health to retroactively accept an extended grant in the amount of $137,933 from the public health foundation enterprises inc. to participate in a program entitled "viral hepatitis surveillance in the city and county of san francisco" for january 1, 2012 through october 31, 2012, and waving in direct costs. >> on the project director for the chronic hepatitis viral surveillance project and i am here to formally request -- i am formally here to see if we can have this excepted. >>supervisor chu: if you could explain the grant and what would be done with it? >> we have been maintaining a chronic hepatitis registry of all the positive lab tests that come and annually for chronic hepatitis b and c. that funding has been through the sec the of that public health foundation and we're a subcontractor for the grant. they are putting out a new funding opportunity announcement later this year, but this is a one time

copies available to the public. finally, you can't delegate work to more than one member of the task force. as you were thinking of different pieces that you might delegate, delegate to one person and the person can request help from other individuals so long as it is not a quorum. and finally i just want to remind you, the agendas have to be posted 72 hours in advance. is the best practice to include all information that will be discussed. it is probably not going to be possible given some of the tight deadlines. anything you have that you know will be discussed in the meeting has to be included in the agenda packet. materials that are not -- the first time you have something, give it to the clerk. >> can i ask you to repeat the items you set for each district? >> population and a variation, a relevant and demographic information, a list of recognized neighborhoods, i think that is really key. communities of interest as applicable. any specific findings regarding continuity. the san diego redistricting taskforce has

other public employees throughout the state have this. san francisco employees do not have this as a result of proposition c, which you all voted for. commissioner campos: thank you. this is public comment on the 2011 annual report. thank you. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. please call item 16. >> my apologies. this is an action item. i know that the house has changed. >> [roll call] the item passes. commissioner campos: thank you. again, we want to think the executive director and his staff for the work that went into the annual report. please call item 16. >> introduction of new items. this is an information item. commissioner campos: is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, any new items that you want to reduce? madam clerk, please call item 17. >> public comment. commissioner campos: this is an opportunity for the public to revive public comment on any item within the jurisd

next speaker. >> stop the public rape of the public finance -- public library. as i said last week, the careers of politicians based on vanity and abuse of power disappear as fast as they arise. where is the progress of democracy comes from the sacrifice of many nameless individuals, it is built up slowly over decades. national sunshine week was last week, but it needs to be emphasized because it is no secret that open government is under attack in san francisco. you give someone a title and already he thinks he is an aristocrat who should be able to make his self-serving deals at the expense of the public without interference or annoyance from democracy. you will notice that in san francisco, no one recognized note -- national sunshine week. there was a time when open government and open records laws and the public library were involved in serving the right to know and empowering the people. that was before the library and government decided that serving the interests of the so-called aristocrats could be turned into a private income stream. you have become so e

the next item on the agenda is presentation of the public finance report. as noted here, after each election cycle involving publicly financed races, the staff assists us in reporting on execution of the program and answers many of the questions that we have about patterns and trends that may be taking place and provides some very helpful information. i want to thank ms. shaikh and the staff at all levels for bringing us another helpful and comprehensive report on the limited public financing program. is there anything you want to add initially, i will then ask the commissioner fist they have any questions or comments. >> it was a very interesting election. we had many complicated questions. we didn't have an idle moment. it was the first time we administered the public financing program in a mayoral race and it was a lot more work than we expected. >> i think those words are apparent to all of us and we watched during the season and i for one simply want to note that you all -- and i mean the entire staff -- handled an extremely complicated and unprecedente

>> the timeline is march 6. we will have a public hearing on fares, fees, and finds, including all of the items in this presentation. the latter part of the presentation has been number of slides on possible revenue measures. we're not recommending any of them, but we will be holding a public hearing to hear public comment and feedback on all of those ideas. we will be doing a series of town hall meetings in march. we will be taking something similar to this information out to the public and soliciting feedback and we will bring our first proposed budget to the board on april 3. we have a deadline to get the proposed budget to city hall by may 1. so if we do not get a consensus on the budget, we would have a second crack at it on april 17. possibly it would be voted on april 3. at the latest, april 17 before it is transmitted to city hall for the may 1 deadline. in the meantime, i believe we're scheduled for the budget committee on april 13. supervisor chu: march 6 is the first public hearing and there'll be a series of town halls an

i think the perception of the public was they had a right to see the video and understand what happened in that incident, at least as star as you could from the video. but i think in terms of trying to get away from all this, i don't think if what you described again, i think the public has seen information which they think should be released but wouldn't be released under the current regimen. i realize it's an impossible question because of the issues of national security. but could you just tell me how congress responds to that, what i think is a wildly held public perception. >> anyone. >> i think -- i mean, it's difficult to address outside of the particular facts of any one particular incident. i think that there's certainly -- i mean, it's an important balance to ensure that we're protecting generally national security and properly classified information and that that's not compromised and then on the other hand ensuring that information isn't being improperly withheld. i mean, that's no news to anyone, but i think that's just the balances that has to be given. in terms of respond

i am with the comptroller's office of public finance. the item before you is to put -- approve the issuance of a tax- exempt basis, a federal tax dollars that require borrowers to get approval from your local jurisdiction before issuing tax- exempt obligations. our office has held duly noticed public hearings, requesting approval of the financing. i believe that mrs. spitz will answer any questions you have on financing for the project. there is no -- the city is not a party to the transaction. supervisor chu: thank you very much. supervisor avalos? >> i support the rest -- supervisor avalos: i support the resolution in terms of school financing. it has provided a lot of great community benefits in terms of meeting space and in our space for nonprofit organizations that train young people as well. on top of being a great school. i offered to sponsor this resolution. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor. i believe that given that there is no fiscal impact on the city, there is no budget analyst report. let's open the item for public comme

they're many the public file and the intended audience of the public disclosures is the public at large. any member of the public who wants to see that information can get it. they have to go to the station, knock on the door and ask to see the public file. >> i don't agree with you on that. for example, our media buyers gave us all of that information in the last campaign instantaneo instantaneously. we knew within ten or 15 minutes. i sure you my media buyer was not able to go to a tv station when they were in st. louis in 15 minutes. i think a lot of that information is available now. i guess i'm confused as to why you all are doing this when i can still get the information from the federal election commission. let's say it says emerson for congress made this buy. i can go online and find out who all my contributors are. i'm just -- i'm confused by whether is there a problem? >> the information that's in broadcaster public files and broadcasters have been required by statute and commission rules for many years as part of the obligations for public trustees to maintain certain informa

it was not an attempt to hide anything from the public. there were just a lot of concern from members of the board that we are doing the right thing here. as someone who has come here before, an advocate for public financing, i am not 100% happy with everything in this, but, on balance, it is a good effort. the standard that you are charged, to look at changes like this, does this further the goals of the campaign finance reform ordinance? that is what any changes meant to do. looking at it that way, this document does that. it does a number of good things, including dealing with the zombie candidate issue, and will make the program itself more stable because it is making us more conscious of the use of public dollars. it is going to make sure there is enough money in the fund, we hope, to finance all the candidates based on past elections, but it is also going to make it a love it harder to get the public financing, as we know. on balance, we have struck a good package here. i would urge you to support it. we know we need a boat from the b

[laughter] the struggle is that we're both public trust agencies. the mandate is narrower than the public port responsibility. initially i think we look at it more as a clash, and now frankly i think we're looking at more as a reconciliation and compromise. previously if you had proposed a project that was a maritime project, bcdc would not give credit recognition to the public trust of value in the same way by being willing to share that space along the pier 27 apron or in the provisioning area of pier 27 as a shared maritime and public access space. they are willing, and they have embraced the idea that the port needs to use the space for some of its functions. they accept the security requirements to close those areas are real. there is not a penalty or not a direct offset we are having to seek out because of that. our experience has really been very collaborative, and i think that both of these agencies has gained a richer understanding about the in the relationship of our public trust responsibility such that we can work together, and at this po

to the members of the public, it will be vacating the ram. we can enter into closed session.

any further questions from the commission? any public comment? seeing no one, could i have a motion? >> moved. >> moved and seconded. all of those in favor? opposed? the item carries. madam secretary, please call item 11. >> item 11. authorize the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission to execute a collection agreement with the united states forest service (forest service) for the sfpuc to fund work by forest service staff, including environmental analyses, value consultation and land title services, and preparation of a feasibility analysis (collectively preparatory work) for acquisition by the sfpuc of 25.2 acres of land at camp mather, in tuolumne county, for an amount not to exceed $60,000 and a duration of 30 months. the sfpuc seeks to purchase the existing camp mather sewage leach field site, and additional road access areas used to service the camp mather water system. >> mr. ritchie? >> commissioners, this is actually a very simple item for us to put into place. the agreement from the u.s. forest service to pay fo

is there any member of the public who wishes to speak? public comment is closed. can we take this, same house, same call? if we can call item no. 17, out of order. unless there is any objection to that. >> this is the information item. we have this on the request of commissioner winner. what's the metropolitan commission -- and the sustainability project is a very important project in terms of assessing how the transit operators can improve their operations, with more cost- effective and efficient way. and squeezing more service out of the limited resources that we have. the transit operators around the region, they have been involved in this process, with the working group. and obviously, there are some disagreements -- to provide some incentives and accountability measures to make sure that they are addressing the cost structures. i will present an update about -- -- >> good afternoon. >> is the microphone on? if you can get close to the microphone, thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. it is good to be here, with the trans this inability project. this is a

are there other members of the public who wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. icles being purchased. it typically is in terms of this equipment program. i wonder, after your thought process and your evaluation, generally, has it been that you are authorizing the purchase of cars to replace those that are out of service? i know there has also been an effort to reduce the size of our fleet as well. >> that is right, supervisor. we are using this process to purchase replacement vehicles as vehicles go out of service. but we have also been over the last several years making a concerted effort to reduce the size of our fleet. if we were to take a look, we would see that although we are replacing some vehicles, we are not replacing all of them. that process is something we are continuing to look at this year with fleet management. to figure out if there are better ways for the city to share vehicles, to find other kinds of cost savings so we do not need as many. chairperson chu: thank you. we have heard public comment on this item. do we have a motion to send the item

especially in the public schools. i think that the teen center of learning lab should emphasize remedial education and give all of these kids a chance to catch up, since a lot of them enter junior college, csu, even you see -- uc, requiring remedial courses, which many people tell me kind of ruins the college experience like their parents had. i think that this learning laboratory should stress remedial education. another part that it should have is a kind of question and answer for where kids can basically ask questions that they would probably fear asking elsewhere. in a sense of it being educational, i think it would also encourage kids to realize that even though they are promoted from grade to grade and level to level, realistically speaking, they are not getting a good education. we should be man enough to face the fact that -- why send a kid to high school, junior college, and college, when realistically you are just going to subject them to even more disappointed when they finally realized, on their own, that t

seeing none, the public shearing is closed -- the public hearing is close. commissioners? commissioner antonini: thank you. first, i would like to comment on but the -- the final environmental impact report. i think it is clearly complete, accurate, and objective. i will talk to that part of the comments we heard that dealt at least to some degree with the eir. we heard, as both on the advisability of the project itself as well as the eir. there were comments made up on the shadow that might be cast upon the part that is being created in the future, which is spoken to in comments and responses, although i do not believe on the original eir that is necessary to speak to something you are creating in the future. it is not an impact on an existing resourced. but it is analyzed anyway. then there was a lot of talk about do is, that it did not adequately analyze the views. i think i did -- it did a very good job. particular reference is made to use from telegraph hill. there are a few pictures where it is really hard to see the difference between it being there and not being the

so therefore i think the public has seen information illicitly released which they think should have been released but wouldn't be released under the current regimen of foia even as you suggest leahy and others are trying to get it. and i recognize it's an important issue because of the issues of national security. but can you tell me how congress responds to what is a widely held public perception? >> i think it's difficult to address outside of the particular facts of any one particular incident. it's an important balance to make sure we're protecting genuine national security and properly classified information and that that's not compromised. and then on the other hand ensuring that information isn't being improperly withheld. in terms of responding to the public perception, it's just i think listening to the public and making sure there are particular incidents, and i'm not addressing those facts, but there are have been cases in the past where because congress has heard from the public that there were concerns about something being withheld that that was actually addresseby it's

and the admiration came from the press and from the public. they actually became a tourist attractions. people would come to washington, and when they were here they would look to see the suffragists. and there were "what will you do for women's suffrage?" one of the still existing banners. and this is college day on the picket line. there were theme days. you have to do something to keep this different and moving and lively. so there were actually theme days on the picket line. there was college day. they celebrated anniversaries like susan b. anthony's birthday were marked with banners, with quotes from susan b. anthony. lincoln's birthday was marked. and they could put together different combinations of banners. but still they weren't gaining the attention of the president. he treated them with courtesy as he went by them, but he did not speak and he was dismissive of what they were doing. so they escalated again. war of course was declared in april of 1917. and that put a slightly different tone on things. and it's still a question that we

we have information but just for the general public to understand the issue. can i ask you to go through what the grant is about, what it will do for the department of public health? >> i am happy to explain this to you. this is a home visiting program where public health nurses will be visiting first-time mothers did. we will be seeing 100 new mothers in the first one-two years. we are targeting mothers who are low income, may have been exposed to violence. we are including teenage mothers, african american women, and non english-speaking women. the women are enrolled by the 28th week of gestation and their pregnancy and will receive one on one home visits through the first two years of the child's life. the curriculum is assessments, goal setting and behavior change which is integrated into each of the visits. the clients focus on short and long term goals and to achieve the healthy pregnancy outcome, growth and development, and self-sufficiency. this program has been in existence for 30 years and is a research-based, evidence-based program. some of the impr

the department of public works did follow the old process. but the granting of the request is a broader-based request of whether the city did something intentionally or not intentionally to provide notice. when you look at an ordinance that did not provide notice, even if it was unintentional oversight, there still was not as for those permits. >> i am understand that, but i do not feel that is responsive to the request that you feel every time there has been a jurisdiction requested where a 11.09b ruled, we have granted it. >> for next gen, yes. there has been a denial of the appeal a ultimately. >> i remember one that had to do with whether or not it was a good view. to me, that was a very different i

the department of public works did follow the old process. but the granting of the request is a broader-based request of whether the city did something intentionally or not intentionally to provide notice. when you look at an ordinance that did not provide notice, even if it was unintentional oversight, there still was not as for those permits. >> i am understand that, but i do not feel that is responsive to the rue

the gulf. [bell] president fong: thank you. any other public comment? >> my name is catherine hill and i have something to share about the issue that is going on at the gold dust cloud. it is called "47 years." ♪ ♪ not just a bar ♪ closing down ♪ this kind of thing has been happening all over town ♪ ♪ a family business is closing its doors ♪ ♪ so our landlord can make a bit more ♪ ♪ making this neighborhood all look the same ♪ ♪ shirley, i'm going to put up a fight ♪

expanding the policy for state and public employees statewide. expanding the policy for state and public employees statewide.