people do not want hra's. no one says, give me an hra. they want health care. the one access to emergency rooms and all kinds of preventive health care. 30 seconds, some people have said that is $50 million sitting around, and in these hard economic times we cannot have that money sitting in accounts unused. i think that is not true. i think what's this loophole is closed, this will go into our health care system. that is going to big -- to be good for workers, consumers, and our city. [applause] supervisor campos: thank you. next speaker. >> i am also with the chinese progress of the association of speaking on behalf of a worker was afraid to be here today because she is afraid of retaliation. she is a full-time worker and a mother. she said, when working people like me have medical emergencies -- [no audio] my employer has hra's, of course, but they never told us about it. i have been held the come up recently at a serious medical condition, appendicitis, that requires surgery and a week of hospital stay. likely as qualify for charity care. otherwise i do not

many workers who have hra's are low- to moderate-income. what happens to individuals when they run out of money because there were only accumulating up to $4,000 and are still sick? medical debt, as you are aware, is a growing problem in the united states. it accounts for 60% of all bankruptcies in the united states according to a harvard medical study. the only way these hra's will provide meaningful access to health coverage is if workers are allowed to accumulate funds in their accounts year to year. i heard this earlier. this is not an entitlement program. we have to keep in mind these workers have worked and earned these benefits. they deserve to have access to them when they need them. we urge the board move forward with this and move it to the full board. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am an organizer with the alliance of california community empowerment and we work on issues of racial and economic justice. i appreciated your comments this morning that we have to think about the

everyone else, janitors, restaurant workers, room cleaners, they knew hra's existed, but had no idea how to access them and they were afraid to ask. many are afraid of retaliation. the reason they're afraid of retaliation is because they see intimidation every day, not when they're asking to have health care coverage paid for. to have people have to go, whether english or -- is or is not their first language, having to argue that is unfair to put on an employee. second, and i have had this experience myself, there are issues of medical privacy that can be violated when an employee has to go to a chart and has to try and argue about what they need and how often they need it. for anyone who has ever worked as an at-will employee, giving any impression to your employer that you may not be healthy for some reason is uncomfortable. it can be scary. i think it is important, and our union stands behind it, and our community stands behind closing this loophole and closing and now. thank you for your leadership. supervisor campos: thank you. speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm director of the off

of all, the alternative that i introduced would eliminate the use it or lose it nature of current hra's. and it would take care of the so-called january problem where an employer tries to get reimbursed for health care needs in its january only to find that money has expired at the end of december. we can achieve this goal by requiring that at least a year's worth of more of health care dollars must always be available to an employee. the alternate that i have proposed also strengthens a notification requirements by mandating strict requirements of quarterly notifications and strict requirements around the prominent posting of information for employees. my all time it -- might alternate also addresses what supervisor campos raised, that the "wall street journal" reference to this issue of false consumer advertising. my alternate states that when an employer says that they're charging a healthy san francisco surcharge, they need to let the city know that they're spending that money on health care. if they are not, they could be facing significant consumer actions. the ordinance makes a n

my ordinance will eliminate the "use it or lose it" nature of hra's, and take care of the supposedly january problem, where employees try to take advantage only to find it expired at the end of the year. the ordinance also strengthens notification requirements, demanding they occur on a quarterly basis. they must be properly posted. this also addresses what happens when an employer says they charge a surcharge but do not spend it on health care. the ordinance also has a provision that says that if the amendment is challenged in court and a court in joins changes, it will be referred back to his supervisor -- back to supervisor campos's language. i want to make sure the health- care needs of our workers are taken care of, and do this during these difficult economic times. supervisor campos: thank you very much, madam clerk. i want to join supervisor mirkarimi in his in memoriam for arthur evans. arthur would be surprised to hear me say this, but i welcomed his involvement and input, even though often i was on the receiving end of his comments. i always appreciated his commitment to th

svhe a harshsv]ieu@ thesvre]i a1 @he general hospitconvicted of r c hra@in to nobac rrreicc ad1e v in rec 1 sv]ieu earlier svcu]isteuody.@no@noc rec 1 >> they sexrec 1 they said.sv]ieu sv reporter:and a plastic su@rge noe violence that thsv]ieu@ c @iousnenossc .rec 1reolc ic1e@ non they started to beat metv]i1 with their noc rec 1tv]itv]ieu@1 a tvt]iheeusetv]ieu@noc veeuriday @by theno pc roretec y appearuved]i deuisprop@ortiugh 1 is t@noc rec 1se uvart of our arab spring @puv]ieu on the penninsula-- in woruvd ] about popular diss]ieu@noc rec 1 rec henoc looking for way steam out of the politi pressure cooker.uvs for @eatsuv]ieu uv pulitzer prizeeren c @noc rec 1 the "washt theuv]ieucenter for eusch@olars noac ndre hc c whreetc he1r it's to its ownho i mean, it was vvver]iy vv]ieu@1 bahrain.to send troops into a second one wvv]ieu billion financial package ofben eut insu@rance.noc rec 1nowoc ug vv]ieuvv]ieu@nole advisory coun >> warner: so is he responeu@nou eumbers of the rowv]ieuwv]i p with the royal fawv]ieu@noc re rec conot want the royal fam@n overthr1hose saudis al in thwvei]ire