but how would the board do this? san francisco's charter guided -- offered little guidance. >> although it was obvious we would appoint an interim mayor, there was no time line for the two to occur. we looked to outside counsel for answers. they researched those questions. while they researched the legal angle, we began the research on the parliamentary level. at the beginning of the calendar year 2010, we started to craft a generic process for a successor for mayor. being a parliamentarian of the board, i have been working on the process itself. i have been working with two one and parliamentarians in the city. we did some role-playing and tried to contemplate all of the different variables that the board would encounter in appointing a successor mayor. >> the first time i became aware of the process as when my editor and myself asked us how the process would work. we quickly became tongue tied and did not have an answer. you went to the clerk of the board of supervisors to ask, the difference supervisors, the city

the board rules require the board to include language in each piece of legislation that requires a suborn the body to meet at least every four months. the rule contains a mechanism for monitoring the support of bodies in that it requires the office of the clerk and the board to contact each body annually and determine if that body is actually meeting every four months. this review we will provide to you annually. if the suborn the body is not identified as meeting the standard, the clerk of request of the city attorney's office to prepare legislation repealing the resolution or ordinance that rated the support net body and place before the rules committee and ultimately before the board of supervisors for consideration. our office has identified items that are before you today which have not met the board's standards. item four, the telecommunications commission. the actual commission was established in 1996 and dissolved in july of 2010 by ordinance. the item before you is a companion piece that lives in the administrative code. this is an outdated reference to the telecommunications com

the health service system board, their main duty is to the board. it is their duty to watchdog the budget. i don't believe changing the makeup of the health services system board and changing the voting majority is the way to do that. this thing has no debt meant -- direct financial benefit to the city. so why is it here? it is only to change the political perception while allowing the city to take full charge. it is buried in a slam dunk pension reform proposition that affects active employees. it is extremely important to retirees. if we are going to propose this change, it should stand alone so that it could receive the full attention of the public. nobody is going bill looked at the health system part of this. health service system isn't going to get the full debate that we believe it should. we are also extremely worried about the unintended consequences. the health service system trust fund was depleted in prior acts of the city. if you give the control back to the city and the mayor's office , or it will not be influenced by the mayor's offic

if it is a body that is created by the board or the board tracks appointments to, that also includes appointments they approve from the mayor. we are monitoring those. there are 96 of them. linda spends a lot of time doing that. i cannot speak to the executive branch of government. i am not sure what the process is. we have a dedicated staff member to do that, in addition to her duties as the royals' staff. >> thank you. -- chairperson kim: thank you. any questions or comments? do we have a motion to move items four through nine? >> i just wanted to stay -- supervisor elsbernd, you were an aide to supervisor hall

the board secretary, our new board members. [applause] this year marks the 45th anniversary of san francisco pride. we continue to create diversity and march in the street parades. this year we will be focusing on our youth. pride is at the forefront of protecting the lgbt youth and fighting against bullying. our committee has continued to fight since last year. we had a big treat with don't ask, don't tell. a federal judge overturned proposition 8. we continue to fight hiv and aids for our committee. the theme this year "in pride we trust," many ask how we could have that thing this year. it is in san francisco that we fight for equality, a diverse culture, we fight for liberty and freedom for everybody. it is fitting that the community, our leaders, that we can trust our city leaders to stand up with us and stand brown. i hope you will join us for the march and celebration. -- we can trust our city leaders to stand up with us and stand proud. i hope you will join us for the march and celebration. [applause] >> i have a partic

we would ask that the board memorialize this. secondly, we ask the board to order the removal, and there is a number of reasons for this. it is without question that this new window was installed without a permit and replaced in 2005 with a new window and moved above the edge of the appellant's roof. it made contact flush with our roof a significant noise from this window and directly into the corner of the appellant's house. access is obtained by the neighboring tenant and left on the appellate's roof. we voiced concern in january of 2007, but nothing has been done to alleviate this issue. it is our relief that it is a and violation of the building code and code of regulations. that specifies that openings in exterior walls have to comply which indicates that an alteration of an exting window on another property line which is clearly what we have here what violate the california code of regulations that require the alterations chow comply with the requirements of the code of new construction. you could not have a window there. i

there need to be changes including more residents on the board of directors, training not only four board members of future board members, and contributions of residents on their website. all their correspondence indicates a statement that the entity represents the property owners and in no voice speaks for the tenderloin. the new executive director needs to do out reach to the entire residents of the neighborhood we need to stop addressing land use issues, and doing what other community groups have been doing without any collaborative efforts. thank you. chairperson campos: thank you. that speaker. -- next speaker. >> another founding member of the cbd -- i got off the board immediately after one year because of the infighting, the out of control -- because they got out of control. we are getting them trained. i asked it back then. the office of workforce development is out of sync. state law, for every year, they are supposed to come in front of you annually to give their annual reports. that is for each cbd. fisherman's wharf, annual report, 2010. castro street and upper market, decemb

the issue of restructuring the composition of the board is very important because this board has operatedefficiently in the interest of people who are served by the health service system and also the people of san francisco. the health service system has successfully passed every internal audit. its financial performance and fiscal responsibility is impeccable. its present composition is necessary because deliberation is necessary when you determine benefits and when you determine the cost. because of the above, i am recommending the proposed charter revisions be removed from the pension reform legislation proposed by the mayor. my concern is i do not want to see the clock turned back. this is too darned important to be buried in a sea of legislation regarding pension reform. thank you. >> my name is james elliott. i worked for 37 and half years for the city and i'm retired auto mechanic. i recommended the board take this health service system out of this measure because as the supervisor said, it is not a money saver. the way it is now, we have four members elected and three appointed. w

ed says the first 45 minutes of the stock would be praising the board of supervisors -- the board of directors. [laughter] i am very proud of the selection made. please join me in welcoming the new director of transportation and. [applause] >> thank you. obviously, my mom was up late last night what -- writing talking points for everybody. thank you to her for doing so. [laughter] i am honored and humbled to be here before you today. i want to thank the mta board for their vote of confidence in appointing me to this position. i came to local governments, to public service and local governments 10 or 11 years ago because i love cities. i think cities are incredibly important. they will be potential to enable people to access education and jobs and culture and diversity, interaction and innovation. they also hold the potential to about us grow so that we can grow in ways that we are not spreading out to the west out -- to the rest of the planet that we need to sustain itself. for those reasons, i decided about a dozen years ago to devote my professional life to trying to make this work

in my years on the board, it has never happened this way. if we are trying to maintain our respective constituents needs, whatever the range those needs may be, and still allowing something to move forward -- i am trying to understand that, us as gatekeepers of this decision, how legally we are able to do this. that is not entirely clear. this gives us the veto or umpire right. i would like to figure that out a little more specifically. supervisor weiner: i want to be very clear. there are 2 b was separate issues, the ceqa issue and the permiting issue. they are completely separate and independent issues. regardless of what happens with ceqa, which can eventually get to it permitting process. the law is that dpw will issue a permit. i think it will be sent to a hearing officer and then appealed to the board of appeals for the ultimate say. but at&t has indicated, since at&t is the one that needs to apply for a particular site, that at&t as a matter of respect would defer to supervisors in terms of selecting are not selecting a site. i believ

therefore, it would be a policy for the board of supervisors. supervisor chu: just a couple of questions, perhaps to nadia. with respect to the cop's being exposed, you break out the necessity for commercial paper, being able to take out what we anticipate from the commercial paper program. there is another line item for interest. could you explain the difference between the commercial paper program and interest related to that? what is that intended to carry us through? >> the numbers show that we used commercial paper, once the board approves this through 2012. as a result, we would use up to $15 million or more to fund the project. in that case, because we are drawing down on commercial paper, it is the accrued interest on that commercial paper that is included in the $1.1 million, which represents accrued interest. supervisor chu: so commercial paper will be used during the planning phase? you can use that fund for planning, construction work? >> all of that. we are showing up to $23.9 million. the accrued interest associated with that would

members of the board of supervisors, thank you very much. it is my pleasure to be here again to answer the questions you have presented and to know again my thanks for working with me on the budget and balancing that. i look forward to working with each and every one of you on a number of different aspects as we meet both individually as well as as a group. there's so much to accomplish, and i appreciate the invitations to be in your district every time we are able to signal to the public and to your constituents the things we are getting done to make the city safe and solvent and successful. supervisor chiu: 90. we have five questions that will be provided by our colleagues that represent our even-numbered districts. the first question will be provided by supervisor farrell from district two. supervisor farrell: thank you. beyond what we have accomplished in city hall in 2011, i wanted to understand whether you have any other specific plans you plan to implement before leaving office? >> thank you. that, for me, is a very important question

board president david chiu. thank you very much, david. [applause] supervisor jane kim, thank you very much. supervisor ross mirkarimi, thank you. and supervisor scott wiener, thank you very much. [applause] they were all the members of the budget committee. but again, i want to thank each and every one of the members of the board, because we worked really hard. at the beginning, in january of this year, we all faced a $380 million deficit, and we all went to work. particularly, our office had to lead. like i say, we were on first base. and i wanted to thank so many other parties in this great city of ours for coming together. because the board of supervisors and the mayor's office, we knew we could not do this alone. the city budget reflects so many values of our great city. whether it is departments or community-based agencies or whether it is neighborhood groups, we all had to put our focus on and make sure that this budget would be balanced in the right way. so i want to especially thank all of our labor unions in the city for coming t

i would welcome him to go to the board of supervisors to make his pitch to the board. i believe the majority, if not all of the board of supervisors, will end up endorsing our proposal. we will have a public process for him to involve himself. i had offered his input. we took a lot of his ideas at the beginning in january, february, march, when we included everyone at the table, and he was still out that gathering signatures for something different, using outside money and outside help. we were all working with the city family, labor unions, city departments, trying to do our work. so his proposal has not really changed. i think he is just realizing the data is coming and he is a ploy to have to make a decision whether to go with hours or himself. i do not that there is much support for his proposal. he has not that it the right way. we continue offering him eight opportunity to join us. he will attack our proposal with limited few points that are not correct. he is currently saying that we made some deal using the budget balancing proposal. that is so nonsensical. he

chair, members of the board. as mr. ford has mentioned, a management audit of each of the sfmta divisions was requested by the board of supervisors in 2010. mr. ford and his office and also the city services auditor from the controllers selected sustainable streets as the first of the divisions to be audited. to be followed each year by another division within the agency. the audit set out to assess five areas. one, how well the division maintains the city and county of san francisco's traffic markings, signals, and signs. compliance with major contracts with basic city contracts. whether the division prevents scheduling conflicts. and whether the division's off street model is advantageous to the city. finally, the adequacy of the division's performance measures. the auditors' staff has been working very closely with my divisions. i want to thank them for their diligence and also their spirit of collaboration. and i think a lot of the results that come out of this audit would be very useful in helping us to do great me

commissioner torres: as any member of the board did the candidates? but said the board she? no. commissioner torres: so we're still in flux? >> yes. thank you. president vietor: thank you. we will take some public comment now on item number 19. >> good afternoon, commissioners. first, i will say, before you, my time, since he shifted 19 to much earlier in the agenda, i literally had to rush in here as fast as i possibly could to get here. so for public participation, it would be good to try to leave the agenda as written. to my comments. i have a lot to say and only three minutes to say it. the first thing is, item 8c, which you continued earlier, is actually quite vital. and if you can revisit that now that ann is here and vote to approve it, it is very important, because we need those contractors to be about to be tasked by your staff to do extensive preparatory work that well informed things like the term sheet. what i am specifically referring to as the preparatory work towards the bill about that advocates have been pushing so hard for. -- the build out that advocates have

in 2004, the board composition was changed from 3 to 4, 4 to 3.rankly, i have looked at the legislation, all 302 pages of it. i see a change in that. naturally, we do not want to give up our supplemental cola, but given what city employees have given up, it is little in order to help of the city at this time. the other point, as far as health services are concerned, you have retained parity with the active employees, as far as premium rates go. you have kept the 50% pick up for our out-of-pocket cost, which helps a great deal. i see nothing in this that is injuries to retirees, as a group. i urge you to pass this. commissioner kim: thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is douglas yepp. i agree with the first three speakers. in my opinion, i think the city, in a certain sense, has been using a certain form of creative economics in their past agreements with the union for salary and benefits. even my own union, 10 to one could not adequately explained to me how come -- 1021, could not adequately explain to me why i was not receiving my be