Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    November 25, 2010 5:00am-5:30am PST

5:00 am
december meeting on the day that we usually have it, but we asked the staff when we should have it. today, i received a message saying that they would like to have one particularly for the purpose of further reporting on the specifics of the development of the transportation proposal for next year. and the three year phase-in we are proposing. we have not settled on the date yet, it will be either december 6, 7, or the 13. it looks like a 13 because we have other meetings. that would be the day before the relar board meeting in december. watch for that on the web.
5:01 am
are we posting be presentations on all the information that we got last night? we have to oppose that because throughout the process, as you all know, we have been supportive and we discussed the importance of these proposals being publicized to everybody. changes in transportation and changes of the student assignment system will affect everybody in the system and we need to know that. the last item, we have gotten the beginnings of a proposal about the special education assignment process. i would urge the commissioners to read the presentation and the report that we have and give feedback. there will be other opportunities to discuss this. the staff is proposing to ask that we set aside places in the
5:02 am
student assignment process for transitional grades for inclusion, students that have inclusion of iep's at every school. this is sort of a conclusion, but it became clear that the board is going to have to be supportive of holding places at schools when we have pressure from people when their students cannot have -- do not have iep's. we want to -- this is the beginning of our tryin gg to meet the commitment of having the special education assignment process be like the regular student assignment process.
5:03 am
and our commitment to changing the nature of our special education program, particularly an inclusion as was noted in the audit from a program based to a service based process. i will finish by saying that we definitely want all the members of the board to pay attention to the materials. as we have all along, there were members of the board and i thank them for their time and attention and attendants who were at the meeting. i know everybody is really interested in this. it is essential for us getting the kind of implementation that we are committed to. i would just make another pitch that as much as possible, it will be good if members of the board are at the attendance on
5:04 am
saturday because there will be a lot of questions about the new process. thank you. president kim: item t is a report of the closed session actions. commissioner fewer: -- commissioner maufas: bill meets starting at 5:00. is it wednesday? pardon me. i would not have been here. wednesday, starting at 5:00, it is just three topics. i know that we will try to get to that meeting relatively quickly because the other commissioners have time constraints. we will start promptly at 5:00 tomorrow in a board meeting room. commissioner fewer: i would like
5:05 am
to report back on a visit today that commissioner norton and the deputy superintendent and miss dodge, we went to visit the school and this is a school we have a collaboration with. to serve students who are ill and must be hospitalized. and they can continue the education while there -- while they are in school. there are also students all over the country that come here. some come with their whole families with their siblings. i have to say personally, this school makes me especially proud of our school system in an effort to serve all students. i just wanted to report on that.
5:06 am
president kim: thank you. item t is the report of the closed session actions. the board of education approved one assistant principal and one supervisor. item u is posted in the agenda under informational notice of classified personnel transactions. tonight, we had turned in the memory of three individuals. -- adjourn in the memory of three individuals. one student was an innocent victim of gun violence and one of our gateway to college students. another student passed awway due to an unfortunate chronic medical situation. it to the mother of our superintendent -- and to the
5:07 am
mother of our superintendent. our deepest sympathy goes out to the families and the superintendent and his family for the loss of his mother. she was born in mexico in 1927 and she was a wise mother and grandmother. she was a loving homemaker and raised her family and loss angeles. she returned to spend her sunset years back in mexico where she passed away on sunday, november 7, 2010. the superintendent said she was a kind and a beautiful person that touched many lives. she raised an amazing family. meeting adjourned.
5:08 am
>> i have 2 job titles. i'm manager of the tour program as well as i am the historyian of city hall. this building is multifaceted to say the very least it's a municipal building that operates the city and county of san francisco. this building was a dream that became a reality of a man by the name of james junior elected mayor of san francisco in 1912.
5:09 am
he didn't have a city hall because it was destroyed in the earth wake of 1906. construction began in april of 1913. in december 1915, the building was complete. it opened it's doors in january 1916. >> it's a wonderful experience to come to a building built like this. the building is built as a palace. not for a king or queen. it's built for all people. this building is beautiful art. those are architecture at the time when city hall was built, san francisco had an enormous french population. therefore building a palace in
5:10 am
the art tradition is not unusual. >> jimmie was an incredible individual he knew that san francisco had to regain it's place in the world. he decided to have the tallest dome built in the united states. it's now stands 307 feet 6 inches from the ground 40 feet taller than the united states capital. >> you could spend days going around the building and finding something new. the embellishment, the carvings, it represents commerce, navigation, all of the things that san francisco is famous for. >> the wood you see in the
5:11 am
board of supervisor's chambers is oak and all hand carved on site. interesting thing about the oak is there isn't anymore in the entire world. the floors in china was cleard and never replanted. if you look up at the seceiling you would believe that's hand kof carved out of wood and it is a cast plaster sealing and the only spanish design in an arts building. there are no records about how many people worked on this building. the workman who worked on this building did not all speak the same language. and what happened was the person
5:12 am
working next to the other person respected a skill a skill that was so wonderful that we have this masterpiece to show the world today. >> around me what you see is an exhibition bien asian american women artist association. one of my favorites is cheers to muses which is a variety of sculpture, paintings and photographs in which the artists
5:13 am
not only show their own work but talk about the muses who inspired them. coming up we have a variety of exhibitions celebrating diversity and performances and every first thursday we have an opening in our main gallery. >> what kinds of organizations utilize your affordable space progr program? >> there's a huge range. last week des president clinton divas had a drag fashion show. the united states of asian american festival has events here every career as does the national career arts festival. in recent years homies organizing the empower youth had one of their first large scale neighborhood events. >> i think of it as multi-generational i see artists who are emerging and young and community members that may be from in college to, you know,
5:14 am
some of the old-timers that have been around a long time. i think that is special about this organization. >> it shows work by more than 1,000 bay area visual artists each year and collaborates through the programs with between 60 and 90 nonprofit cultural organizations each year. we host weekly figure drawing sessions every saturday morning. there is an accurate dojo with classes they nights a week and people can drop in. we have a free drop-in print maki making class. and print making workshops for adults a want to learn the craft. we have an open studio. >> how do you see it as distinguishing itself as a unique place and organization? >> i was just reading an interview with elizabeth streb
5:15 am
and she was talking about her vision for the spaces of the future being rather than being warehouse spaces, being a space where all kinds of participation on all levels is possible. i think this is alreadythat space where artists at all levels of experience can be innovators, risk takers, learn about other cultures, find something unexpected and we are a true alternative space in that we are welcoming to everyone.
5:16 am
supervisor mirkarimi: madame, clerk, and good afternoon. if you do not have any announcements, can you read roll call? commissioner campos: present. commissioner dufty: present. commissioner avalos: present. commissioner schmeltzer: absent.
5:17 am
commissioner mirkarimi: present. commissioner pimentel: present. commissioner mirkarimi: item number two. >> presentation of minutes. seeing none, any public comment? public comment is closed. without approval, some moved. -- so moved. >> an update of the process. commissioner mirkarimi: mr. campbell, welcome. >> before i get into the next
5:18 am
steps, i wanted to highlight those that were not aware that last tuesday, there was a hearing on issues related to cca. nancy miller was there as well as commissioner mirkarimi. the committee was interested in what legislation might be helpful to promote cca in california. the issues raised were related to some of the challenges you have all heard here, like putting some real teeth into the
5:19 am
laws that would -- the law says that pg&e should fully cooperate with cca. there should be some legislative changes to really compel them to cooperate, and what that would mean. we talked about some of the existing rules about benefit fees and the application for energy efficiency. participating customers are creating a subsidy where they are paying for benefits that accrue to the investor-owned portfolio and their energy supply portfolio. it was a well attended hearing, and the senators were very
5:20 am
receptive to what they were hearing. a ton of she wants to add to that now or later -- i do not know if she wants to add to that now or later. commissioner mirkarimi: please. maybe we'll pepper this in, but i of appreciated your comments. from the portion that i missed of your first panel discussion, i thought it was very useful to have san francisco and other jurisdictions together were able to illustrate the painful experience that we have gone through, sometimes we think we are alone, but pg&e has really blitzkrieged, attempted to
5:21 am
pursue similar objectives. i have to say that it was very validating. it was not an activist a ton, it was a very academic policy. and they were sort of able to share those. people who probably did not have any -- i think they would have had to have walked away knowing how reprehensible pg&e's actions have been. it enabled municipalities to
5:22 am
use cca. we're not an investor-owned utility or governement. when the private sector decides to rain down, we have no treasury to draw from. we can't return fire if that was what we needed to begin with. san joaquin, what san francisco has been experiencing, it was very helpful to modernize the approach. >> so the exciting part in terms
5:23 am
of what is next hot how we are going to move forward, we made some modifications to the rfp following the september meeting. on nobemb - -november -- on november 3, we received 04 responses. there were various elements of those responses and wanted to make sure that we could have the broadest number of firms to be considered and scored. we are holding meetings with all four respondents on monday.
5:24 am
we will sit down and be able to have a dialogue to have a frank dialogue and to make clear what needs to be included in the responses. and give them a bit more time to let them explain to us whether her or not that is what they want to do. and putting together their packages, it just wasn't included in what we saw. and give them some time to provide the follow up material and go through the scoring process. that is what we are thinking, and we should be able to be on the december timeframe for having selected primary responders.
5:25 am
commissioner mirkarimi: commissioner campos would like to ask you something, but can you tell us who they are? >> they were respondents to the last rfp that was ultimately unsuccessful. we got a response from a firm called noble america's. we got a response from consolation and a response from show energy -- shell energy. commissioner mirkarimi: these are not small companies, to say the least. >> three of them for sure. commissioner mirkarimi:
5:26 am
interesting change from the first effort until mal. >> we are excited to sit down with the firm's on monday. commissioner campos: just a quick question about the larger strategy before we go forward. i think it is great that we have made progress, but i wonder that going through this process, are we not thinking of another option that would be exploring the possibility of the city simply doing this on its own? it might very well be that we get to the right result in terms of the rfp process. but i think it may be other advantages.
5:27 am
>> the city policy is to try to work with other vendors and achieve all the goals. that is what we are pursuing. we have already begun internally to try to figure out what would be another option. we do buy and sell energy. and why don't we provide greenhouse gas free energy? it would not be starting something from scratch. we have started looking into that. it is something i agree has holes some interest. >> i don't know what my colleagues think about this, but at some point, there should be maybe a formal request to get
5:28 am
that kind of analysis done by puc. maybe there is no need for a formal request. i think it is something that should be done and we should explore what the option looks like fully. i think we should do that perspective of what happens with the -- irrespective of what happens with the rfp process. we might find ourselves in a position similar to one that we saw before. i think we have to explore those options on a parallel basis. and that means looking at issues are around liability. there are risks involved, the operational limitations. i think we should be looking at that at the same time and
5:29 am
finalize the analysis as much as possible. that would be my thinking at this point. commissioner pimentel: the first question is, what if they do not make upgrades and choose to send out [unintelligible] >> what happens if we don't get the responses or qualifications? if we don't receive the minimum qualifications as required, we would need to reject those responses. the next question is, what we seek to issue another - -would -- would we seek to issue another rfp? i think it would be ripte