tv [untitled] September 20, 2013 7:00pm-7:31pm PDT
of items, [speaker not understood] documents that you use to present when you're looking for work including looking for work with the u.s. military. listed here, the latitude and longitude. there is a reason i put latitude and longitude there. of course, all of earth is divided up into sections, part of which we call latitude and the other part be called the longitude. and with that, i just want to conclude with the lord's prayer. our father who art in heaven, hal owed be your name. your kingdom come. your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil for yours is the kingdom, the power
and the glory, forever and ever, amen. >> next speaker. jesus said that i have greater witness than that of john, and that's quite a statement to make because john the baptist was written about by three different authors by three different books that wrote about him. micah said in chapter 2 verse 13 the baker, john right there, he broke the ice. the breaker has come up before them. they have broken up ~ and have passed through the gates and are gone out by it and they're killing -- that's jesus right there -- [speaker not understood] before them. and the lord the head of them. in isaiah he's called the voice of the lord. that was 700 years before. and in micah he is spoken of as being the prophet like elijah. when christ said he had greater witness than that of john, what
he was saying was he had greater witness in the scripture itself and in miracles. i have greater witness than that of john for the works which the father has given me to finish, the same works that i do, their bear witness of me that the father has sent me. and then he said, search the scriptures for in them you think you have eternal life and they are they which testify of me. how can you believe [speaker not understood] receive honor of other and seek not the honor that comes from god only? don think i will accuse you to the father. there is one that accuses you, even moses in whom you trust. had you believed moses, you would have believed me because he wrote of me. but if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words? jesus said, i am the way, the truth and the life. and perhaps the most misunderstood verse in the entire bible is about judgmentalism. according to the lord jesus christ, if you're not a hypocrite, if you're walking in
the light as he is in the light, judgmentalism is good and he explains his own words in matthew 7 when he said, judge not be not judged for with what judgment you judged and with what measure you meet it will be measured back to you again. >> are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in general public comment? seeing none, general public comment is closed. [gavel] >> with that, why don't we go back to item 17 on due process. madam clerk. >> mr. president, that item has been called. it's before the board of supervisors. >> all right. let's first hear from supervisor avalos. >> thank you, president chiu, colleagues. first off, i just want to say to the many [speaker not understood] sponsors for this ordinance. thank you very much for your
co-sponsorship. the strength of this ordinance and they negotiate on this ordinance has been based on your co-sponsorship. so, i want to thank you for that. [speaker not understood] i'm very emotional now. i'm going to try and get my words in order. first off, i want to ask some of the advocates, the members of the immigrant rights community, domestic violence advocates, the lawyers, all the community members and allies, if you can stand, please, and we can [speaker not understood] in the room for your great support for this ordinance just for a moment. thank you. i just want to say -- [chanting]
[chanting] [gavel] >> we just broke our board rules. >> if i could ask, folks, if you could please sit down. and, yes, supervisor avalos is correct, did you break the board rules. that being said, ask folks for the rest of the proceeding -- >> you just broke our board rules. i really appreciate it. i'm not sure if it's going to make it any easier for me to say what i want to say. i want to say what an honor it has been to work on this legislation with the community. i actually wanted to really work on this legislation for years. i've been working on immigrant rights movement as a laboringer, as a community
organizer. i fought against prop 184, 187 back in 1994. it was my first time of actually getting involved in politics and california, we're a state that has enormous immigrant community. my district, district 11 is over 50% foreign borne. we're a district of immigrants and we have to make sure that we are doing everything we can to recognize the great contributions that immigrants make to this great state, to this great city and this great country. and we don't do enough to assure that there are protections and pathways to citizenship overall across the country. we're in the middle of a debate for comprehensive inclusive immigration reform. and i know people in this room have fought, have been to -- i've been to washington, d.c. to fight for more comprehensive inclusive reform. and as also all of you in the
room here who are fighting at the local level, that we have real protection for our communities against the devastation that the [speaker not understood] has caused across the country. here in san francisco there have been -- in 2011, 2012 -- 7 84 people, not just people who have been -- people who have been deported and many more people who have been turned over to the i-system through criminal justice system ~. this legislation is about public safety. this legislation recognizes that if there is ever a shred of doubt or fear of a vic telemundo or witness of a crime [speaker not understood] to call 911 [speaker not understood] themselves or a family member or community member being turned over to [speaker not understood] and deported, we are having a tremendous effect on everyone's public safety in san francisco. so, we actually crafted this legislation to make sure that we can improve public safety, but we craft this legislation
also on the principle that everyone should have due process against the arbitrary denial of liberty. and that is the standard that is in our constitution. we have two amendments of our constitution. the fifth amendment and the 14th amendment that protect due process, and i am really hoping that we can have the strongest piece of legislation that can come out of this board of supervisors that can uphold those rights as much as possible. but i know that we wouldn't be as far as we are today without my co-sponsors, but also members of the community who have fought so hard for this. many people who are undocumented themselves, who actually come [speaker not understood] -- [cheering and applauding] [gavel] >> again, if i could ask folks to please respect the rules of the chamber. >> thank you. people came without papers, but without fear, knowing that speaking out is something that is really hard to do, that creates greater scrutiny on one
self-, but also to sacrifice that because they're not working for they have selves, but for the greater good. and i am just again very honored to be working with you in that process. i don't believe we're going to get everything we wanted, but we would never have gotten as much as we're going to get without your great work. and everyone in this room is here supporting this legislation should feel very proud about what we've been able to achieve and what we have come out of this board of supervisors will be an example for the rest of this country. and, so, thank you for your great work and i look forward to celebrating you when we actually get this passed in the coming week. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor campos. >> thank you. thank you it, mr. president. [speaking in spanish] ~
i wanted to say a few words in spanish. i know that it's been a long time -- struggle to not only work on this specific item, but on many items involving immigrant rights. and i want to thank all the members of the community, the very broad coalition within the latino community, the asian american community, the african-american community, the jewish community, the lgbt community, the women's rights community, the domestic violence community, you name it, every community has been a part of this process. but, you know, it takes someone coming forward and presenting legislation. so, i am very grateful to supervisor avalos and his staff for all the work that they have done. it takes a lot of courage to take on an issue as difficult
as this one. and in many respects it is deja vu all over again because it wasn't too long ago when i started as a supervisor we were debating a very similar issue of whether or not to provide due process to undocumented youth. and it's interesting that, you know, time has passed, but in many respects a lot of things haven't changed. and let me say that i respect everyone that's been involved in this process. there are many good people who have different perspectives on this. i think that the intentions that everyone has irrespective of their views, are good intentions. but i do believe that sometimes bad policy is made with good intentions and that sometimes there are unintended consequences that come out of the wrong policy choices being made. and the thing that i want to address today is this issue of the carve outs. i know that is the central question in terms of what
legislation we move forward. and i know the intention of the carve outs is to protect and ensure, and to protect the public to ensure public safety. but i have to say that i will respectfully disagree with folks who are talking about the need for a carve out because, first of all, we have to understand what it is we're talking about. the issue before us is the issue of whether or not to give individuals who are charged with a crime due process. on the other hand is the separate issue of whether or not, separate and apart from that, we are going to follow immigration holds. whether or not we as a city are going to use our resources and become an extension and an arm of immigration. and on that particular question i wholeheartedly agree with the
district attorney who i think needs to be given a great deal of credit for taking the very courageous stand that, to the extent that we truly care about public safety, absolutely. to the extent we truly care about public safety, the best thing that we can do in terms of public safety is to completely disassociate ourselves from immigration enforcement. (applause) >> that is the best thing. [cheering and applauding] >> the chief -- the chief law enforcement officer for the city and county of san francisco not only someone who serves as district attorney, but who previously served as the chief of police for this city and county of san francisco noted the dangers of going down the path of creating carve outs.
as he rightly pointed out, if your fear is that somehow you're going to let dangerous criminals off the hook, there are tools that are already in place that the immigration agency has to ensure that those individuals are not just let free and let go into the public and endanger any resident. and that to the extent that there are things that can be done to strengthen the protections that are needed for the public, that the right place to do it is through the criminal justice system instead of dirtying our hands by becoming a partner with immigration. i think that george gastone is absolutely right. and there are votes that we take that i do think have a historical significance.
this is one of those votes. there will be a time when people, people who are kids right now, maybe generations that have not been born, will talk about the trend that we have seen in the last few years where local governments have been forced to inject themselves in immigration enforcement. and those future generations will say what were people thinking in the year 2013 that we -- that they actually thought that this was the way to protect the public? this is one of those votes. there will be people who will look back at this and say, you know, how could that happen in this country? you know, we started the meeting with folks talking about how today is constitution day in the state capital and constitution day in the city and county of san francisco, i
guess. well, constitution day is an important one. but the thing about the constitution and specifically about the first 10 amendments to that constitution, that bill of rights, is that it applies to everyone. it applies to every individual irrespective of what crime you have been charged with. it recognizes that you cannot ensure the safety of a public if you also do not provide individuals basic rights that allow them to have their fair day in court. and to the extent we deprive them of those rights, not only are we depriving them, but in a way we are taking something away from ourselves because those rights not only say something about how to treat people, but in so doing it says something about who we are as a people. and, so, i know that there will not be a vote today.
i know that we're going to take some time. again, people want to do the right thing. everyone here is trying to do the right thing. but i am afraid that in the process of trying to do the right thing, we are going to have unattended consequences, and those consequences are going to be lived on a daily basis in neighborhoods like the one that i represent as george gascone noted, four out of 10 latinos are afraid to report crime to the police for fear that by reporting somehow they're going to be connected to the immigration system. by keeping those people from moving forward and contacting, having the trust to contact that police department, you are not only making them less safe, you are making the entire community less safe. so, it is my hope that we collectively decide that we in san francisco are going to be on the right side of history
because the right side of history in this case is clear. let's pass this amendment to ensure due process for all, not due process only for some. (applause) [gavel] >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor mar. >> thank you, president chiu. i did appreciate that you brought up all the community-based organizations that are celebrating constitution day and citizenship day. and i think it was fitting that many of the organizations that are in the audience today before us haven't just been here for this annual day, but have been building on movement of immigrants and refugee communities with different efforts to fight for not only the dignity and human rights of
undocumented people, but for broader european market update of all of our communities. i'm very proud that the asian and pacific islander community based organizations from the asian law caucus which is now a part of a broader network of the asian american justice center and many others that [speaker not understood] from formerly [speaker not understood] pilo and many others here, japanese americans citizen league and the [speaker not understood], asian pacific labor alliance, and the south asian american meeting together, the salvation community, many others are speaking up in a strong voice also for due process for all. on constitution day, i think it's important as others said, that we recognize that due process and the 14th and fifth amendments to the constitution protect everyone's universal rights against government abuse and arbitrary denial of liberty. and as we stand up hopefully to support the due process for all ordinance, put forward by
supervisor avalos and 7 others of us and 8-person super majority, i hope that we all recognize that it's not due process for some, but due process for all as supervisor campos mentioned. i also wanted to say that this coalition that's before us today to i think three years ago we were working on the opt out to the so-called secure communities as others said, secure communities, the so-called secure communities really is not making our communities more safe, but it leads to in some ways the police and law enforcement becoming immigration agents which they are not trained for. and i think the heart of, in many ways, our sanctuary ordinance and our sanctuary city is based on that principle of not letting our police and law enforcement become entangled in immigration issues. many have said earlier in our hearing when we had the neighborhood services committee that supervisor yee was involved in as well as supervisor avalos and campos that the bush administration
started a process of deportations and militarizing the border and separating and tearing apart families as a process that has continued through the obama administration. and in many ways that effort is what's before us today as well and as we as a city start to stand up again for our sanctuary ordinance and our sanctuary city, my hope is that our colleagues all 11 of us look at this issue on constitution day that it should be due process for all and not for some. so, i stand with the broad immigrant rights coalitions that are united from the asian and pacific islander communities to all of us that have been fighting for this for many decades at this historic moment to say no carve outs, due process for all. thank you. [cheering and applauding] [gavel] >> supervisor kim. >> thank you, chair chiu. i think that my previous three colleagues really eloquently talked about the deeply flawed nature of the f comp program
and its impacting our communities. we all know that while the u.s. immigrations and custom employment stated [speaker not understood] is to target serious offenses, we all agree the program's cast is far too wide. as its own data shows, in california about 7 out of 10 of the over 93,500 californianses deported as of february 2014 had no convictionses whatsoever, ~ only minor offenses. to put a real face on the story, because i think we all talk about how programs like scom makes our communities feel less safe, i had an intern in my office whose family experienced a fairly violent burglary. their door was broken. their windows were completely shattered and all of their valuable belongings were gone. his immediate and he is a student at one of our esteemed u.c. collegeses, was of course to call the police ~.
as he picked up his phone, his mom put her hand over his and said, we can't call the police. despite how terrified they were for their own safety, and she did not want to contact the police because she was afraid of being deported. he along with the rest of his family are noncitizens here in our city despite the fact that they are all working contributing members. he is in our colleges. they did not feel safe calling the police about a crime that made them feel deeply, deeply unsafe. this story eliminates why the scom program is clearly flawed and the solution to end scom is nationwide. we have made incredible strides towards making that happen. the trust act sponsored by assemblyman ammiano at the state level is a step forward by setting a clear standard for the very limited situations that immigration holds could possibly be upheld. and today's legislative initiative under the leadership of supervisor avalos and the
many, many advocates that are in the room today is another step forward towards the you will matt objective of ending scom. the goal drives the decision of many of us in this room today. san francisco is a national leader in advancing [speaker not understood] policies that uphold the quality and fairness. we do hear matters to the rest of the country. we were the first city to raise our minimum wage above $10. we were one of the first to issue same sex marriage licenses and we were the first city to enact an ordinance reflecting the principles of the u.n. convention to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women in 1998. an action is simply not an option. at the same time there are those who are charged with protecting the public that have been very clear that they need to retain some sort of discretion and order to do their job. after many days and hours of difficult conversations, while i am proposing to bring to the table of this board is an outcome of those deliberations
debating and creative thinking to bring together our jointly stated commitment against unjust racial profiling, deportation, and keeping our community safe. like all compromises, there are aspects that we are introducing, but does not make [speaker not understood], but i believe that our overall objective which is taking a stand against scom, while helping our public safety officials do the work they would like to do will be put in place with this very, very limited carve out. the amendments that i'm introducing i've handed out copies to all members of the board will be to establish the two-part analysis for law enforcement to use to make sure that their public safety objectives are being met. the only time that law enforcement will even consider -- and this is not a requirement -- will consider honoring an immigration hold is this the individual who is the subject of the hold has been convicted of a violent felony, human trafficking with assault of a deadly weapon or use of a gun in the commission of a
violent fellfully, and is currently being charged with one of those violent crimes. even then law enforcement will be required to take evidence of rehabilitation, community ties, status of victim, of domestic violence of a crime, status as a parent of u.s. citizen children, and other factors before making a final decision on whether or not to honor that hold. more over, after three years or upon effective date of comprehensive immigration reform which we hope will happen sooner than in three years on a federal level, this limited set of carve outs will expire. the sheriff will also be mandate today perform an annual review and report of the times when he or she has exercised their discretion so we can maintain oversight of the policy at the board level. i believe that these amendments bring us closer to the place of what our stated objectives is, but i want to really recognize the fact that so many people in this room worked incredibly hard to bring us to the place
that we are today. i know that what we have before us is something that is just a moment in time, but i know that these discussions began in december with supervisor avalos's office and many hours of blood, sweat and tear were put to convincing many elected officials in this room to co-sponsor this legislation that was brought before the city in july. and i don't think that we would be in this place if not for the organizing, the advocacy, but also the courage of many of our noncitizens who have come out to tell why this policy makes them feel unsafe as a resident of the city and county of san francisco. i also want to recognize some of our legislative staff members that have spent quite a bit of time on this. amy chan, andrea [speaker not understood], ivy lee in particular in my office is a former attorney at api legal outreach and asian caucus and community for civil rights. they did a lot of work to being
as creative as possible in terms of narrowing the carve out. so, we are specifically addressing as much as possible the specific concerns of our public safety officials while passing the strongest possible due process ordinance that will be in effect in this city. so, unfortunately we do not have the languages today. they will be ready for our board meeting next week. so,ly will be making a motion to continue, but i did want the public to know exactly what the amendments are that we are introducing today. >> thank you, supervisor kim. supervisor kim has made a motion it continue. is there a second to that motion? seconded by supervisor cohen. supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president. and i, whatever folks' differing views of aspects of the legislation, i want to thank everyone who has worked on getting us to where we are today, including i know the flurry of activity today in terms of having dialogue and coming up with different creative ideas.
i think it did achieve a goal that i'm going to speculate that all of us share, and that is to try to pass legislation that fosters -- allows us to foster trust to immigrant communities and law enforcement and to continue to struggle locally hopefully in a positive direction to do what we can do in light of a completely broken and disfunctional and awful federal immigration system ~ and one that has not yet been fixed and i hope will be fixed in the near future. i came out early and publicly in opposition to secure communities. i came out early publicly in favor as a trust act. i very much would like to be able to support this legislation. i want us to pass it unanimously to send a strong message to our immigrant communities. we also know that
overwhelmingly the people who will be impacted, who are impacted by secure communities or who would be impacted by this legislation have not committed violent crimes. probably never done anything violent in their lives. they find themselves in the criminal justice system for whatever reason and what we don't want to do is have them get caught up in federal immigration systemses providing families causing all sorts of problems for our community. ~ dividing families i was very happy to see something in writing that we received a little while ago in the meeting. i look forward to reviewing it carefully and i'm hoping that we can have something where we can all move forward together and send a very powerful message from san francisco about the need for immigration reform and about our deep desire to support and to keep our immigrant community in san francisco together and united. >> supervisor tang.
IN COLLECTIONSSFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on