and city law you should ignore state law and follow city law that's not correct. i think i must have understood what the city attorney said for reasons i've explained. you are required to look at state law and precede in that manner to the extent city law it in conflict with state law it's preempted. fm in my final mini want to briefly for the record make a couple of points on the merits. so my understanding of indicting can because it's been substantially longer 60 days since at&t submitted it's applications the board has no longer jurisdiction to rule and in this instance would be unfortunate for my client but 60 days means 60 days. to the extent the department wants to ignore indicting can to the point that 60 days under state law has no meaning in this inspection i'll simply point out the new ordinance as applied to at&t is void because it violates i section 1407 b that requires the legislation be applied equally >> thank you. >> ms. short. >> carol short department of public works. i would focus my presentation on the fact that the new ordinance has now taken

as to seeing i come back and support any co- commissioners on the issue of the fact there's a state law a law in place the yee question is how are we spending the money to get compliance. so we not instead of imposing fees and double fees educate and punish those who are the hold outs who follow the law or punish everybody and spend thousands of dollars not getting the results that the revenue after that, you related to us respectfully submitted is an expertise through public businesses that's quite a bit of public money added on the licenses that are due? city and county but i thank you for your prospective >> commissioner white. >> i've already said my preferences. >> any other commissioner comments. >> let's take public comment any public comment on that item on item 5? seeing none, public comment is closed >> any other commissioner comments. >> commissioner president adams just for the sake of the record for the meeting i would appreciate if we could get a specific definition of the po s and the types of systems you regulate. >> okay. it all falls into the definition of the state la

so, i want to start with state law. ab 2732 was introduced in 2002 and that was requiring businesses to conspicuously display price and have that price be easily viewable by customers when using automatic check-out system. and the bill won't go into effect until 2017 because [speaker not understood] and the justification behind this bill was that the department of consumer affairs found that one-third of retail businesses he overcharged for sale priced items when using those automatic check-out systems. and then in 2005 there was another bill that had passed to establish authority for counties to inspect accuracy of these point of sale systems in the retail businesses. ~ 2007 and then moving to the local ordinance that was adopted in 2010, and i just want to go through a couple of definitions. just bear with me here. point of sale station means individual and separate equipment a capable of recovering electronically stored price information that is used to charge consumers for the purpose of commodities and point of sal

states have been passing laws regarding abortion for almost 200 years. the supreme court took over in roe v. wade decision and since 1973 the united states has had the most per mmissive abortion laws in the world today. most americans have always opposed most abortions and the vast majority of americans support reasonable and common sense abortion regulations, at least that's been my experience. i don't think it's a false experience. this bill attempts to wipe it all out to eliminate even minimal regulations that most americans support, and that the supreme court has already said are constitutional. i oppose this kind of legislation more than 20 years ago when i was ranking member of what is considered a day in the hup committee. this bill would not regulate abortions. it would regulate the states telling them what laws they may or may not pass. how did congress have the authority to do that? >> i think it would be -- currently the laws other than what the supreme court will or will not allow has thestateture people. it's a very good way to handle this. t

plastic that's important it's been 20 years we're at the point san francisco is out of guidance with state law that the state is threatening to come in and enforce against the state so i'm taking this on to xheej the parties and ask the questions to find a long-term solution we'll need changes in state law as well as the partners to come with the good faith effort to forge a scloougs solution so there are maybe some interesting roll we may want to carve out on helping xheej the parties and find a solution. so my first 60 days besides working with those i've divided into two categories xoirlg focus and internally ones i've met with the mayor to work with it's priorities and have regular meetings with his advisors to make sure i'm very much in sync with the mayor's office i've met with the 11 supervisors and now going on to department heads working to get on the calendar of all the department heads that intersect with us and participating in some department head meetings even though the san francisco environment commission may not be on the agenda i want to be an gambled partner so i'm getting t

are state laws laws are state laws the way it works is the federal government recommends vaccines the c.d.c. and the state governments and the different states have different exemptions states have medical exemptions every state that too has the list exception and there are eighteen states that have an exemption for philosophical conscientious police. so where is this route in trenton in front of city hall i think. new jersey just passed a little over a year ago a law stating that there were four more vaccines that are now going to be mandated for children to get into school that's why we're having a rally to raise the awareness that new jersey is going overboard so. we are standing publicly for the legal rights to follow our conscience when making educated that's in this issue for our families and the state can force you to put your life from the line or your child's life line for any medical intervention then the state has too much power more than two thousand prince george's county students have not gotten their state mandated shots tonight and also made it to some of those par

the law also defines for those who are not sure what state means, the law hopefully includes a definition of state. it includes state to main the 50 states, plus the district of columbia. we have an example of congress deeming a nonstate to be a state, and thereby authorizing the subsidies within that policy. similarly, the statute says if a territory create such an exchange, shall be treated as a state. again, you have congress drawing an equivalence between something that is not a state and the state, so residents of that policy will be eligible for substitute. simply put, the entire statute is fully consistent with the requirement that taxpayers be enrolled in state established exchanges in order to receive the tax credits or subsidies that are available through the exchanges. the statute is clear and consistent and unambiguous on this point. as of legislative history, the most important thing to understand about this provision is how little legislative history there is. there are three interrelated reasons for this. first, as the new republic's jonathan cohen told npr in january, 2010

and other entities, state entities that may change their laws. do you plan or will there be a plan to check some of these states? now florida will change the law possibly and others have already changed the law. some have changed the law for some time. i am getting back reports on california that are -- a news reporter told me he went out and he said, it's a whole different world. again, much more dramatic than you would expect. it's not just medical marijuana use but it's spread. and he was telling me just the societal change in behavior change. so it's having impact. but i think we need to look at doing testing. those are the medical marijuana states. and each one of the languages may be a little bit different allowing more latitude. but then you have colorado, which we have had some experience to date. but i think we ought to go in and look at colorado. washington is more recent. but where you have a change in law, if it's medical marijuana and again, change is brought about by that law. and then you have a much more lax use or legalization, as

it's state law not federal law.rick perry wants to run for president the second time around. i think he's doing a better job this time than last time. i don't presuppose or prejudge what is happening here. what i can tell you is a lot of republicans have a lot of questions in texas about what he's done. this is also the guy that has blasted barack obama for executive judicial overreach and that's exactly what he probably did when he vetoed that provision that got him in such hot water. >> so, while speaking at the heritage foundation yesterday perry addressed the border crisis while invoking isis militants in iraq and syria. listen to this. >> i think there's the obvious great concern because of the condition of the border from the standpoint of it not being secure and us not knowing who is penetrating across, that individuals from isis or other terrorist states could be and i think is a very real possibility they may have already used that. >> help me through this. the border is unsafe and because the border is uns

the state law issued. and as simple. you pass a state law that says only individuals who voted in the primary can vote in the primary runoff. and that would have prevented this huge influx of individuals coming into do it. normally it is not really a problem because you have contested primaries on both sides. get the chance to make the decision in the party is a lot. >> did you have a question? >> kevin from pennsylvania. the clashes between eric holder and congress are pretty public. can you comment a little bit of the effectiveness? possibly more effective oversight with the plight? >> you know, we have a great constitutional system. but part of the problem with that system is that it assumes that people will abide by it. and we have an entire chapter about eric holder in the way he has misled congress to lie to congress and shoals and other content for congress. doesn't care about upsetting congress are replying put their requests are for major oversight one of the only things that congress can do is try to use the po

so the form seven hundred a the form we reference here and the state law as recently passed regulation that allows us to do the electronic filings. part of the regulations didn't address the actual formulate of the regulations. i think there's a benefit to having our data being in the same format as other cities jurisdictions so we go ahead and build a dabt then we have to go through and change how we're collecting the information. the state we know is working on the specifications so it's in our best interests to wait for the process to be finished >> so what's the format. >> there's two formats there's one controlled by net file we use to collect the information and a format that collects the information in other jurisdictions. >> so what i was awe eluding to it would be in the best interest to wait for the site to invent the database so all the information will be recorded in the same manner. >> cost what do we think it's going to cost to make the data researchable. >> it won't be very expensive because the - every city that is using the file system is going to be interested in havi

deadline we proposed it not be implement if so outside of the ethics commission jurisdiction under the state law only the f p pc can conduct enforcement matters regarding form seven hundred this is not an enforcement matter to recommend something we don't have the power to enforce anything unless a person fails to file in 90 days we recommend they be dismissed our recommendation maybe go forward in many instances so the reason we can't do this we will be conducting enforcement that's not enforcement recommendation is not enforcement so the reason didn't make sense. i think it's a good idea and i would move that we adapt the recommendation of the grand jury that we recommend dismissals for any employee that fails to file after the deadline someone has been informed by us with thirty days with a couple of follows up if they have not done that by 90 days they've shown contempt and they should be dismissed so my motion would be that we adapt the recommendation 14 b as property by the grand jury. >> commissioner keane who do i think we should recommend it to? >> i think in regard to the particular of

president who will take duty.sly his or her and defendto uphold the constitution of the united states. law shreds your constitutional rights. it lowers your standard of care. it puts government in charge of your care. and it takes away something as precious as life itself. your liberty. this law requires almost everyone to enroll in a one-size-fits-all government design health plan. when you go to file your taxes, you have to attach proof for the irs that you are enrolled in such a plan. attaching the proof will shield you from an iris penalty. to at will subject you degree of government control and intrusion unprecedented in american history. for the first time in american theory, this law empowers secretary of health and human how doctorsdictate treat privately insured patients, so even if you have at night or cigna, and you paid for it out of your own pocket, the government can still call the shots. 1311 h1-b of this law -- that is right. read it and you will see. pay only insurers can those dr.'s and hospitals that obey whatever regulations the secretary imposes in the name of quality.

all of the new england states adopted such laws. new york adopted it and about half of the states in the midwest adopted it. did any southern states adopt such a law? no. so we're seeing that the country is dividing over the issue of temperance and particularly over the attempt to use political prohibition to force people to change their behavior. >> i have a question. >> go ahead. >> why does the southern part of the united states not go -- not pass prohibition laws? >> this is a very good question. can anybody think of reasons why the south might be particularly reluctant to jump on board with this northern phenomena. yes. >> with the examples of a factory there's not as many in the south. >> there's not as many factories. we talked about industrial capitalism being one of the three sources. that source is particularly weak in the south. >> people in the south work outside. >> they are working outside. it's a very rural part of the country. yes. >> the town hall meetings -- >> okay. it's harder to organize social groups in the sout

it is that the judgment that federal law or state law reflects. federal law and state law which to preclude funding for abortions do not consider these particular forms of contraception to be abortion. with all due respect to my would say and i think that you have about 2 million women who relied on the methods of birth control. at the nothing that they think they are engaged in abortion in doing that. it is there belief. it is sincere. we respect it. it is not a belief that we think is reflected in federal or state law for our traditions of where that line is drawn. and so i do think that that is what makes this a difficult case. i agree. if you disagree with their position at the threshold that corporations him even though you have a situation, and we analogy can have situations in which tightly knit small groups own and operate corporations where there is an appeal to that, the argument that they ought to recognize the claim of exercising religion. the problem i would submit is the implications of doing this, for entanglement, making the judgmen

. >> when you die it's a matter of state law how that property gets distributed. eally it's necessary to work with the states but this is one area where the law should be uniform from state to state because digital assets cross state lines so easily. >> is it possible since you're talking about google and yahoo and global communities, is it possible to keep everything the same across the board? going conceivabl >> conceivably it could happen. we're going to work with the existing raw -- you la in the states had we have now. i agree with carl, i commend google for providing choice to their consumers. i believe when the law ufada is enacted in the states it will refer to those services that are provided by companies like google account manager. the only reason companies are moving that direction is because of the digital assets act that is going to override some of the terms of service agreements that maybe they would prefer people didn't know about. >> mohamed says privacy should be constituted by the individual whether dead or alive. carl, this is a being brand-new

individual states have signed into law restrictive regulation that single out services, between 2011 and 2013, more than two dozen states passed over 200 restrictions that block access to abortion services. this translates to more restrictions placed on women's health care in three years than in the entire preceding decade. the effect of these laws is that a woman as constitutional rights now depends on her address. the right of women residing in my home state of california now vastly differ from the rights of women living in texas or mississippi. 56% of women, over half of women in our country now live in a state that is hostile to abortion. these laws to biased counseling requirements, to the exact size requirements and corridor width for the offices in which the procedure is to take place. they are laws like the recent one in texas which make no sense medically. they require doctors performing abortion procedures to have formal 5d mitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their dlinic, among other senseless requirements. we already see the effects. after the law passed, c

but it's a state law issue and it's simple.you pass a state law that says only individuals who voted in the primary can vote in the primary runoff. and that would've prevented this huge influx of individuals coming in to do. normally it's not really a problem because you contested primaries on both sides. the republicans don't want to go vote in the democratic primary and the democrats don't want to go vote in the republican primary and give up her decision. >> kevin, did you have a question? >> the clashes between eric holder and congress are pretty well public, but he still seems to be proceeding on the same course he always has. could you comment on the effectiveness of congressional oversight on the justice department and what possibly more effective oversight would look like? >> we have a great constitutional system, but part of the problem with that system is that it assumes that people will abide by it. and we have an entire chapter about eric holder and the way he is misled congress, has lied to congress and showed utte

and then how much discretion does a local municipality in the application of the state law, what discussion if any at the national level is taking place regarding brick and mortar and online. and does the small business commission have additional questions that need to be answered for the final analysis. and that's all i have regarding the presentation. so, if you guys have any more questions to direct me, i'll do my best to be able to answer those. >> commissioners, do we have any questions? commissioner dwight. >> thanks for your presentation. very informative. my father's company made the first supermarket scanners. i'm very familiar with the -- why this legislation all came to be. in the early days the pricing database was largely manual, so, its was disconnected from the database at the register. so, there was great concern you would see a price on the shelf. check out is different price higher, lower. the concern was you would be checked out at a higher price. in the flurry of activity at a check-out thing like supermarket, things are flying by so fast you don't realize it until you g

so this is the federal law, and that's where we are at this point. but what's taken place is, again, the states have taken action and localities -- excuse me. this washington crud is -- let me have a little drink here. there are is something that comes with the cold weather. but, again, we've heard what the law is, we've seen what states are doing. and unfortunately, there's chaos as it relates to where we're going and what our policy is as far as what's allowed, what's legalized. and now enforcement's going to react. to compound this, in our society we all look to the president for leadership regardless of what party he is, and the current president has made some statements of late. in fact, just a few days ago president obama said, i'll quote: i don't think it's more dangerous than alcohol, referring to marijuana, and then he said it's important, it's important for it to go forward because it's important for society not to have a situation which a large portion of people have all at one time or another broken the law and only a few select people get puppished. punished. that was the statement

because of this decision, omar had to become the driving forces behind a change in state law. >> minnesota is one of those states where you could not sell someone a glass of beer at a production brew. >> in other words he could serve in bars, restaurants and liquor stores but that was about it. >> when someone comes in for tour, we give them beer. that's all free. it's not legal for us to charge them for that glass of beer. in some states you can do that, some states you can't. >> the second brewery he would want to beer would have its own restaurant and bar. he wants to sell his own product. that put him on a collision course with the law. >> if we could change the law, breweries sell a glass of beer. then we're not just building a brewery but a destination. >> with a political battle brewing he took it to the capital, hired lobbyists, enlisted expertise of the company one simple plan. >> i realized what exactly he wanted to do and realized it was a 78-year-old prohibition era law and said, well, this is going to take some -- this isn't going to happen in two weeks. >> despite support oma

and, again, i can't overemphasize the fact that it would be consistent with state law. >> okay, thank you very much. no questions, there's no budget analyst report here. so, we'll move on to public comment. anybody wish to comment on item 18? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> i move approval. >> okay. we can take it without objection. [gavel] >> madam clerk, can you call item 20 to 24 together, please? >> item number 20, ordinance appropriating $106,095,000 of the 2014 series earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bond proceeds to the department of public works in fiscal year 2014-2015 for necessary repairs and sigh mike improvements in order to better prepare san francisco for a major earthquake or natural disaster. item number 21, ordinance appropriating $57,840,000 of the 2014 series earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bond proceeds to the department of public works in fiscal year 2014-2015 for me repair and seismic improvements in order to better prepare san francisco for a major earthquake or natural disaster. item numb

that have any such device we use in law enforcement in the united states? ofyes, there is some use vice is very similar to that by law enforcement. currently doing a pilot test in california to test the feasibility of more widespread use of devices very similar to that. >> we have an alcohol standard that blood-alcohol above a certain standard, you are in legal jeopardy. would you remind us what that standard is? >> .08. correction that is a national standard, and excepted by virtually all states? >> that's right. >> do we have a comparable standard for thc? >> no, we don't, sir. the available evidence does not support the development of an impairment threshold for thc, which would be a knowledge is to that for alcohol. >> why is that, dr. michael? indicatesle evidence that the response of individuals to increasing amounts of thc is much more variable than it is for alcohol. so with alcohol we have a considerable body of evidence that can place risk odds at increasing levels of blood-alcohol content. for example, .08 blood alcohol is associated with about fo