to tax certain organizations, and then you turn around and don't tax the corporations that's a multitrillion, billion dollar organization and you're applying taxes to companies that's head is nowhere as far in their area of profit as the high-tech companies. it's not fair. you can't have a situation about one company but not enjoyed by another. i spoke about that company called chariot, where they just have an employee that was killed by a negligent driver. they came in here and made pleas to be excused from paying payroll taxes and highlighted by the m.t.a., and yet they cannot be exempt from payroll taxes, because they get along with the m.t.a., but yet you turn around and exempt the high-tech companies from payroll taxes, giving them a break. they don't need a break. since when does a mul multi trillion, billion dollar corporation need a break? the people that need a break is the people that's most vulnerable, who you campaign and say that you want to help get situated in the city. >> bob finebaum from save muni. well, you've done the wrong thing, but i hope you realize that what you've a

to put an end to that free multi -- multitrillion and billions of dollars of tax break that those high-tech companies is getting. that money could be used to help not only the situation here, but the most vulnerable people here in the city. jack dorsey, the executive c.e.o. of twitter is laughing at you. if he is watching this demonstration right here about how you are arguing over multimillions and you are giving him a free billions dollars. it is an insult on your intelligence. i have to speak up for you like i speak up for the most disadvantaged people in the city instead of rubbing it in your face, i have to -- i have a lot of top class respect for you but i have to be hard and heavy sometimes to make you realize my points. it is called respect. is that clear? i want to put a strong emphasis on it. >> supervisor cohen: and are there any other speakers? public comment is closed. what i would like to do is to hold these items, seven and eight in committee for one more week if that is ok with you all. i have some follow-up questions that i wanted to touch base with a few other colleagues w

then, you turnaround and give a multitrillion, billion-dollar company, twitter, and five other high tech companies, tax breaks and have already demonstrated well over several times that you've given them a minimum of $215 billion of tax free money, and it's a great deal more than that now because a great deal of time has passed, and i don't have the quarterly reported money tax free that you've given them. then you turnaround and say you're setting the a.p.i. at 55% of the median. sfgov, please. 55% is approximately $44,400 a year, okay? now, you're claiming that that's going to be the lowest income and below. that's a lot. you're not going below that. when you accept the applications, everybody has to make that much money in order to put in an application through the mayor's office on housing. if you're dealing in good faith and having every intention of reaching an agreement on this matter, you would make that 55% target that you're talking about, you would push that at 20. because when you're doing now, everybody's income that's below 55% is not included in the inclusionary rule. if y