Skip to main content

tv   San Francisco Government Television  SFGTV  June 13, 2016 10:00am-12:01pm PDT

10:00 am
attorney. mr. deputy is sen. john another people gibner a number people have been raising concerns about the committee's indecency at. can you explain how we have addressed that issue and how you feel about the legality of what were putting before this body today? >> city attorney: deputy city attorney john gibner. first of all, as we do any time members of the public right litigation to challenge any ordinance proposal for the board, we've advise you confidentially regarding legal issues, but generally, following your direction, we drafted this ordinance in order to avoid the medication decency act issue that is been raised publicly that you mentioned. essentially, the ordinance does not regulate the content that
10:01 am
hosts post on the website, the listing platforms should rather, the ordinance merely regulates business activity of those platforms that engage in hosting services. >> supervisor avalos: thank you mr. gibner and thank you to the city attorney for the amazing work it with that i respectfully ask for your support. we believe this a pretty modest piece of legislation and this is one of those things where we should not be fighting about this and my hope is we have as much support on this board as possible. thank you >> president breed: thank you supervisor campos. supervisor weiner >> supervisor wiener: all be supporting this legislation today. as i've said many times, we need improved enforcement and i think this, although i know there are potentially some legal issues here, it is a step in the direction of more enforcement did i do want to just note a couple things and
10:02 am
one thing in particular. i do not agree with the i think sometimes that characterize agent we hear that no one is registering. the fact is, and we heard this as you know colleagues, i hold quarterly oversight hearing on short-term rental enforcement at the land use and transportation committee. what we saw in the last presentation from the opposite of short-term rental is that we are seeing an acceleration of registrations. last year, unfortunately, was a partially lost year because given that basically immediately after we adopted the legislation at issue, it was announced that was a failure within like 3-4 weeks. and proposition fc thereafter was proposed. not surprisingly, a lot of posts decided they were not going to run ahead and register when they would not even know what the rules were going to be. once proposition f
10:03 am
was defeated by the voters and since then we've seen an acceleration and the number of hose registering. there has been a steady increase and it has been a significant increase compared to what was before. when you have this many hosts it's not going to happen overnight but were moving in a positive direction with that said, improved enforcement is a good thing to enforce the law. i do have a amendment which i've shared with supervisor peskin and supervisor campos which is distributed. when is a technical amendment on page 4, line 8, adding the words, providing reservation and payment services for a listing of. this is recommended by the city attorney a technical amendment. a amendment i'm also offering directs the office of short-term rentals to both promulgate wools and regulations be simplified and
10:04 am
streamlined the host registration process, and also within 45 days of the effective date of the legislation to report back to the board of supervisors with recommendations about how the registration process can be improved, expanded, streamlined, made simpler, made more user-friendly. the process right now is quite cumbersome for many hosts could especially, when you talk about those that are only engaging short-term rentals for say a few days of the year or a week or two a year. it's a process to go through for not doing very much short-term renting. so, in order to get those numbers off and to keep that momentum we need to make the process more streamlined, less cumbersome, and so, the legislation, the amendment on proposing would direct the opposite short-term rentals to come back to us and to say or tell us what regulations they've issued to try to improve the process and if we
10:05 am
need to do eight legislation, to make it a more streamlined process to recommend to us how to proceed and so that is the minutes i make and that is my motion. >> president breed: thank you supervisor weiner has made a motion to amend and the medics have been circulated. they then seconded by supervisor campos. colleagues, can we take the amendment can we take that without objection? without objection the motion passes. >>[gavel] >> president breed: seeing no other names on the roster, i'm clerk please call the roll on the item >> clerk: on item 42 as amended >> supervisor yee: aye >> supervisor avalos: aye >> president breed: aye >> supervisor campos: aye >> supervisor cohen: aye >> supervisor kim: aye >> supervisor mar: aye >> supervisor peskin: aye >> supervisor tang: aye
10:06 am
>> supervisor wiener: aye >> clerk: there's 10 aye >> president breed: the one that says amended passes unanimously on the first reading >>[gavel] >> president breed: item number 43, please >> clerk: item 43 considered by the land-use and transportation committee director meeting on monday, june 5 at 1:30 pm and was recommended as amended with the same title and it's a ordinance to dedicate city jurisdictional property located on a portion of state trust parcel to commonly known as mission bay park p-six as open space public right-of-way and naming the new part mission bay kids part accepting an irrevocable offer the acquisition facilities that comprise the park improvements the main site facilities for public open space and park purposes except in the park for maintenance and liability purposes subject to specified limitations adopting the sql findings and making other appropriate finance. >> president breed: rollcall vote the clerk on item 33 >> president breed: excuse me. supervisor kim speak
10:07 am
>> supervisor kim: i want to emphasize the point of this expedited legislative we have a children's playground built by our master developer in mission bay and due to several different hurdles and agency bureaucracy, we've not been able to open this part. i do want to knowledge many residents who've seen this playground and been incredibly frustrated by seeing a resource they can use, given the growing population here in this mission bay and the which we expect that 15,000 new residents by 2017. many of whom are young couples and families. you can see this when you go to the mission bay library branch. the afternoon storytime is packed with young children with their families and this part is an additional resource that holds us ensure we are building complete neighborhoods on behalf of our communities. i do want to recognize and thank ocii. i see mark-who's been
10:08 am
working closely with our office to expedite this process did we can open this playground in the summertime and ensure that this resources available to the public. we will be working very closely with our multiple agency to see what we can do to expedite this process for future conveyances of parks and streets as we continue to build out this new neighborhood. colleagues, ask for your support >> president breed: thank you. i'm clerk please call the roll >> clerk: item 43 speedy aye >> supervisor avalos: aye >> president breed: aye >> supervisor campos: aye >> supervisor cohen: aye opposed? aye >> supervisor kim: aye >> supervisor mar: aye >> supervisor peskin: aye >> supervisor tang: aye >> supervisor wiener: aye >> president breed: the item passes unanimously on the first reading >>[gavel] >> president breed: was go to local introductions. >> clerk: supervisor >> supervisor yee: your first to introduce new business >> supervisor yee: submit >> clerk: supervisor avalos >> supervisor avalos: thank
10:09 am
you. today i'm submitting a carbon tax could pay tax on nonrenewable energy that will be used to support the expansion of seeing san francisco urban forest. this tax would also help to incentivize or make an incentive for people to move to our clean power sf program. so it's a very timely that in that way. over the years, the city has relinquished its responsibility over maintaining street trees. i believe that is an act that has disproportionately affected working-class communities where single family homes are predominant and many people in my district struggle for pain that so this tax is also linked by an effort to take carbon out of the atmosphere by creating disincentives for people to
10:10 am
receive their electricity from nonrenewable sources, as well as to incentivize the trees that will help pull carbon out of the atmosphere. the way that this carbon tax would work, the controller would generate about $80 million a year and there are exemptions. anyone who receives at least $.50 to 2% of their electricity from a new will sources, clean power sf customers would be exempt from this tax. this tax would continue the broad exemption for low income customers better in the current utility users tax and that would include all tier 1 customers would continue their exemption, which would represent 40% of residential customers in san francisco. care customers, as well, would it be exempt, the ones that receive a family electric rate
10:11 am
assistance. they would be exempt. currently, commercial customers pay 7.5% of a tax on both electrical and natural gas them a while residents residential customers pay no tax. so, this would actually increase from that 7.5% among 2.5% more to an overall 10% increase. based on the average residential pg&e bill in san francisco being $108 for electrical and natural gas use, this tax will be an additional $2.70 a month all coming from the natural gas side, which is, of course a nonrenewable. the rest, all colleagues i will sum it >> clerk: thank you supervisor avalos good president breed >> president breed: think. this is an exciting time of the year because there's only great things happening all over the city and especially in my
10:12 am
district and i want to take this opportunity to highlight just a few. tonight, from five-7 pm sf jazz and proxy will be hosting their second annual neighborhood block party at patricia's green. in hayes valley on acadia and hays, which also kicks off the 34th annual sf jazz festival. there'll be live music, movies, shown on a big screen, the beer garden is always really popular and food trucks. so stop i hayes valley tonight. on saturday, june 11, there's a grill in the model, which is hosted by adrian williams of the village project. it's a great event. it happens every single year. it said hamilton playground. it's a fun, exciting event. there's food, activities for kids, and there's music did a lot of
10:13 am
great blues performers will be present. so, stop by between the hours of noon and 5 pm on saturday. finally, on sunday, there will be the 39th annual state be as very street there which will take place on from 11 am-6 pm. it'll be on the street between coal and trader street. the fair will feature arts and crafts three musical stages and a family area. this year's strict stage will also feature performance by paul kander, when the original members of the psychedelics rock band and the jefferson starship and a native san franciscan. he'll be honoring him at that dickerson is good thank you supervisor peskin. with that, colleagues, i have one last item and in memoriam for mrs. emma jean burress. she is the mother of civil rights
10:14 am
attorney john burris, and she passed away this friday, may 27, and supervisor cohen and i would like to adjourn the board meeting today in her honor. mrs. burress was an exceptional dresser without, the colorful hats. sure my me a lot of my grandmother when i was c john burris pictures of his mom she'd always have a beautiful hats on. she had a cat for every occasion matching gloves, purse and shoes. persaud was beautiful just as beautiful as her outfits in her motto was, if i can be helpful i will. she was very helpful to so many. for many years, she operated the summer side home and marengo residential facility for those who are physically handicapped or develop mentally disabled. she treated the clients as her children and instructed all employees to do the same. she also participated in a number of nonprofit organizations, including the
10:15 am
national council for negro women whose mission is to advance the opportunities and quality of life for african-american women and families. she was a member of the delta sigma beta sorority in african-american public service oriented sorority that educates the community on issues affecting their lives. and, the continentals of omega boys and girls club of vallejo which promotes the health, social education and character development of children in vallejo. mrs. burress was married for 67 years to the late -and they have six children. she is survived by her daughter faye anderson, her son, rev. dr. ronald burris, mr. clinton burress, and mr. john burris. a host of grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and great-great-grandchildren. mrs. burress was the matriarch of her family who treated everyone with kindness and sincerity good she will be dearly missed.
10:16 am
the rest i submit >> clerk: thank you. supervisor campos >> supervisor campos: submit >> clerk: supervisor >>[adjournment] >> supervisor cohen: submit >> clerk: supervisor farrell speed >> supervisor farrell: submit >> clerk: supervisor mar >> supervisor mar: today on election day him and recent charter ballot measure for the november out to expand democracy in san francisco for tens of thousands of immigrant parents by allowing noncitizens the right to vote in school board elections. i want to thank especially some momentum and david chiu of michael's father supervisor campos and avalos cohen weiner and others. i also want to say it's been a 20 year struggle for voting rights for immigrant communities. our coalition of parents and immigrant organizations spans all of our neighborhoods of our city and now is the time the weekend in
10:17 am
san francisco pass a measure like this. i also want to say that san francisco would not be alone. chicago, new york city, and a number of jurisdictions throughout this country have allowed noncitizens the right to vote but for most of the united states of america, history, noncitizens have been allowed to vote. it's only in the nt immigrant movements of the 1920s the repression of that era that was wiped away and now is the time for san francisco grassroots networks of immigrant communities, parents, and others that want expanded democracy to step forward to put san francisco on the map to making it free again. i also want to say too, are immigrant parents and immigrant committee organizations are ready from their own networks from past elections to the specter of donald trump in the immigrant rhetoric at the national level san francisco could stick step four to expand rights for immigrants while others are attacking immigrants. also, i want to thank leaders from our immigrant rights commission by
10:18 am
cathy cole and others for dancing this over the years. matt gonzalez and-to others over the years but especially our grassroots coalition, giving a voice to parents and expanding democracy is the right thing to do in san francisco. it also will help improve our school system by engaging more immigrant parents into the process of their children's education. lastly, i will say expanding democracy is right for san francisco and immigrants deserve the right to vote in school board elections. also, i like to be referred after supervisor peskin talk about the done right the rest i'll submit >> clerk: thank you. supervisor peskin >> supervisor peskin: taking mdm. clerk. colleagues, i actually spoke to the legislation that supervisor mar just referenced last week so i will not speak about it again, but today i will speak to
10:19 am
legislation that we are introducing, which will ban candidate control general-purpose committees in the city and county of san francisco. the general-purpose committees have been used to raise unlimited funds for unspecified measures, usually over a number of election cycles, and in essence, stylish uncontrolled funds for candidates were elected officers who control them. unlike candidate controlled ballot measure committees, which are stylish to support or oppose a specific proposition or initiative ordinance, general-purpose committees do not need to specify with the money being raised is going to be spent on. as a result, as far as i can tell, the primary incentive to donate to these committees is to create a special relationship between the donor and the elected official which is a recipe for undue influence if not legal corruption. not only that, these committees allow candidates and elected officers to circumvent the campaign contribution limits that exist
10:20 am
in their own candidate races. on this election day, we have a duty as elected officers and has occasional candidates to periodically turn the lens inward and scrutinize our own practices, and in doing so to work to reduce the influence of money in our political system. it doesn't take much introspection to realize the obvious. the amount of money flowing in and out of our political ecosystem here in san francisco is seemingly without limit. to the extent that the sources of these funds are increasingly consolidated among a small handful of the ordinarily wealthy special interest, the voices of everyday state's san franciscans and residents are being drowned out by an ocean of money. i want to thank the friends of ethics for the research and investigation of candidate control general purpose committees and also bob
10:21 am
stern, otherwise known as the godfather of campaign finance reform in the state of california is eloquent presentations on this issue, and i want to thank at the city attorney andrew chen, for drafting this measure in adding candidate control is a proactive step in the right direction and i look forward to continuing this conversation and garnering your support over the coming weeks and months. the rest i will submit. i do want to adjourn today's meeting in the memory of the gene rattner [sp?] and mike and condolences to her husband, lee rattner and to her two children. >> clerk: thank you. before we get to you supervisor cannot understand supervisor 10 m you'll be cementing. thank you. supervisor mar >> supervisor mar: i want to thank supervisor peskin for his comments last week on density done right. as an effort to move forward san francisco's protection assault businesses and residents will also producing more portable housing
10:22 am
and housing for our city. i want to acknowledge that was approved by the mayor's office last year to support his version of a density bonus for the westside and other neighborhoods but it became apparent to me by my review of the legislation that had not been thoroughly vetted, special decimal si communities by no supervisor tang has engaged or neighborhood and it seemed to me it did not do enough to fully promote truly affordable housing and protect the afford housing stock in the city. i want to note, huge advocate building more affordable housing and housing in general but i don't think any development should come at the cost of the rampant convictions of our residents and loss of our small business sectors as well. so, in the past few months i am my office and others in the richmond district work to ensure that a richmond district residents and all of our residents had a chance to at least engage on the mayor's proposal but supervisor tang's proposal, and i think to further the fruit of our labors to that effort from supervisor
10:23 am
peskin affordable housing groups and tenant rights organizations in my office. as a progressive i'm not against building more housing kit in fact, it is critical for our whole region, but am actively leading to create more and to preserve more housing for the majority of san franciscans. this legislation and with the proposed increase to our inclusionary housing requirements of today's ballot, will once again respond to our city's most critical need in the regions need as well. i think the density done right ordinance much is about ensuring that we are prioritizing housing developers are low income and middle income residents, is it also about ensuring the community has some real meaningful input and access into the planning process as well. so, this is been a long process for our city force san francisco. i think density done right is the right thing to do and it helps us work together with committee leaders in every district and hopefully consolidate the planning commissions awful
10:24 am
recommendations or so i really thank supervisor peskin and the housing justice and affordable housing groups are putting their work in many of the small business organizations working on this as well. i urge support as it moves forward to the sport. the rest i will submit. >> clerk: thank you. supervisor kim us to be referred >> supervisor kim: thank you. i don't have notes on this, but i did want to submit an in memoriam on behalf of our office to marry jessop is one of our district 6 tenderloin residents. mary is someone who has been incredibly active in our neighborhood in our community and we just learned of her passing away. i want to semi-condolences to her neighbors, friends, her family. she is someone who always had a smile on her face. attended many of our meetings for-part healthy corner stores, pedestrian safety, good she was one of those women who was active and care to the very
10:25 am
last day. she was one of the volunteers of sunday streets, and i know sunday streets have also sent their condolences to her as well. she was an active member and advocate for her-. she came out of their breast cancer program and she had fought cancer and beat cancer. she spent her life actually teaching in the public schools before she retired and volunteered her time during a tremendous amount of work in our neighborhoods. she will be missed tremendously. most of all, she was just one of the sweetest and kindest people that i knew and her heart was incredibly genuine. so, mary, we will miss you immensely good rest in peace. thank you for all your work and advocacy for your care for your neighbors and constituents. here in the tenderloin neighborhood and the rest i submit >> clerk: data. better president that includes the introduction of new business >> clerk: speak, present. >> president breed: thank you that can you please read public comments. supervisor weiner
10:26 am
>> supervisor wiener: there's a 3 pm special order that was continued >> president breed: i apologize good we can go back to-is that for your item? >> supervisor wiener: it's a conditional use appeal will be continued >> president breed: okay. i'm clerk, excuse me members of the public i apologize. we need to get to 3 pm special order. mdm. clerk, can you get to the 3 pm special order >> clerk: items 38-41 buys a special read through pm for public hearing persons interested in the planning commission to the vocation of a conditional use authorization dated september 24 2015 for certification of a conditional use authorize issue. dated march 31, 2016 for a proposed project at 313-323 cumberland streets. item 39 is a motion to approve the missions to approve conditional use authorization to item 40 is a motion to disapprove the commissions decision to approve the
10:27 am
conditional use an item 40 41 is direct operation of finance >> president breed: supervisor weiner >> supervisor wiener: and colleagues, the parties have agreed to and requested a one-week continuance so i move to continue this appeal to next tuesday's summit june 14. >> president breed: supervisor weiner has moved and seconded by supervisor campos. any other members of the public would like to provide public comment specifically on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed >>[gavel] >> president breed: mdm. clerk on the motion to continue can you please call the roll >> clerk: supervisor >> supervisor yee: aye >> supervisor avalos: aye >> president breed: aye >> supervisor campos: aye >> supervisor cohen: aye >> supervisor farrell: aye >> supervisor kim: aye
10:28 am
>> supervisor mar: aye >> supervisor peskin: aye >> supervisor tang: aye >> supervisor wiener: aye >> clerk: there are 11 aye >> president breed: this item will be continued one week to the meeting of june 14, 2016. >>[gavel] >> president breed: mdm. clerk, now please read public, >> clerk: at this time the public may address the entire board of supervisors for to 2 min. on items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board to include the minutes and items on the adoption without reference to committee calendar item 46-52. public comment is not about what item has been previously subject to public comment and the board committee. pursuant to the portable structure your remarks to the board as a whole not to individual supervisors not to the audience, please good speakers using translation assistance be allowed twice the amount of time to testify it if
10:29 am
you would like to display your document on the overhead projector please clearly state such two sfgtv and remove the document when you like the screen to mov thro return to live coverage of the meeting. >> president breed: per speaker please. >> testifier:[foreign language]
10:30 am
ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. as you know, my name --i'm here today to tell you that yesterday, monday, used to be the day for ramadan. and last friday, [inaudible] the best man who is named mohammed ali. i am the same age as him. god gives me time to see him two times. in-i met him in egypt cairo. in 90 i had a chance to see them in oakland. what i did, because i am far from him, i told him that can you lay with me? i did it two
10:31 am
times. and he loved it. he told his wife that i'm crazy. and his wife liked what i did and she asked me to say with him and i have to be within one hour in my life. and i supported him until he [inaudible]. i have a little bit of message. i can tell you, goodbye our best friends, are most mohammed ali and go with rest and peace. i have another --i would like to give our supervisor. please, can you take that to give him were to give all of them. god bless all of you and i give him health for what he did [inaudible].
10:32 am
god bless all of you. thank you >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> testifier: cesar chavez spoke out very strongly against the racist organization-for good reason. he knew what he was talking to tom is getting in hot water because of his comments that he made that this judge is a member of the raza, they talk about murdering people. they're terrible wicked organization. eddie garcia is the chief of police in san jose. there's a reason why we have chaos san ricardo, i called up same. they all know me down there and i didn't get through to them but i was then asked him to say a few kind words about donald trump. you know, we have our-he is our differences, but no, he strongly siding with hillary. i
10:33 am
find it interesting that you know the bible says that behold i show you a mystery. we should not all sleep but we shall be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump. it just strange. i'm not saying it's in the bible but unseen cyrus was and it's interesting story agency this and the antiquities of the jews, he says daniel showed cyrus's prophecies about himself and isaiah, and were written about 200 years before cyrus was born. he so related he did what god said he would do. we are wrapping up the end of the age. we are coming so close to the end demand are not sure when the sabbath year began. possibly it began april 13. i got on the house jones show that day and was able to make the announcement that the times of the gentiles has ended. as a matter-of-fact, may
10:34 am
20 was exactly 7003 and 65 days from the end of the times of the gentiles. when the jubilee began. the 70th jubilee. jesus christ is coming soon. we are in the sabbath you right now. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good afternoon supervisors. political leaders on expanding feature high aspirations. our career in destiny for service of the people. they should [inaudible] into principles for their profitable struggle for true success. that adequate contemplation for better [inaudible] one surely can open up 100 years of [inaudible] for establishing internal foundations for the city, state and nation. transportation, housing, education, business development, government law, and public facilities of concern. in terms of well organized planning, well
10:35 am
structured order for the majority of the people. elections always come to be extremely competitive for the candidates. the outcomes of surely will be determine the future course of an exciting continuation of career for all winners could the life of destiny for all mission date leaders are actually heading for [inaudible] adventure of humanity and just. political leaders should work harder to fight for the rights of the people who matter what platform or public service. the people are with you all the [inaudible] of your mighty deeds you outperform. you should have no trouble in successfully moving forward to resolve problems and enjoyed your great living conditions upon official kingdom [inaudible]. thank you >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please.
10:36 am
>> testifier: thank you president breed and all the members of the cobol. my name is christopher doll and i still live at six and howard 10 bucks less than 40 m from sea level. i rise to renew a comment of mine of gender 1220 to get quote them i like to drop the board's attention of article 3 of our beloved charter specifically to the second sentence of section 3.1001 where it says, and i quote, the mayor shall devote his or her entire time and attention to the duties of the office and shall not give any time or attention to any other occupation or business activity. i would definitely categorize the campaign for governor or any office other than the secretary as mayor of our beloved city and county as other occupation or business activity. why is the board merely applying the mayor to
10:37 am
his security detail cause when the board could and should be demanding that he return all salary and benefits and expenses paid to in between his official announcement candidacy for governor and a withdrawal. he suddenly felt each and every one of those days to apply his entire time and attention to the duties of the office and anything less than his entire time and attention is his entire failure to serve. he should also be great salary and benefits and expenses for each day he failed when asked to categorically denied that he would be a candidate for governor. he should rebate salary and benefits and expenses reached a of his expected service when he was so disengaged from contact with our beloved city and county that there was no officially designated acting mayor. i would also ask the board to rebate salary and benefits and expenses for themselves and for
10:38 am
their staff for each day of debate on this matter either in committee or full board when no member raise the issue of a possible conflict with the charter. i'd like to thank every member for customizing the theme of manager class negligence. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: hello. kristi long committee plan policy director four-. thank you for the opportunity to come today. i want to speak to item 49 which is the proposed resolution before you urge our state legislators to oppose the proposed by right housing bill budget traveler. we urge you to support the governor's proposal. this is a statewide bill and it will have statewide benefits. the san francisco residents would also benefit from it. while san francisco does a very good job finding and proving subset is affordable housing as many other problems with this planning process which together
10:39 am
contributes to a situation of chronic delay, high costs and under supply of housing. this reform is important for number recent. important for the environment incurred high-density compact development, transit and urban areas rather than in greenfield location get it will encourage mixed income in places that will local inclusionary housing. some encouraging concentrated development and locations that are conducive to walking biking and taking transit. this form is important for retaining diverse. italy to reduce this placement and greater affordability and our city both directly on our planning process and indirectly through its impact on housing supply and other bay area cities. under the governor's proposal san francisco. great control over land use. wsdl be with to develop our own zoning but the zoning matter will be predictable transparent rules that govern the development is that of an unpredictable system will be ritually reject projects. to be clear, it was to be significant process
10:40 am
public input and decision-making by elected officials. the process will simply take place at the level of the general plan. plan and zoning rather that the individual project level. we urge you to support rather than oppose the trail bill on streamlining for the housing approvals and want to expand housing opportunities for san francisco bay area and california residents. intended with finding a permanent affordable housing the overall supplies by the solution. thank you >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good afternoon board of supervisors. i am talking about item 49 as well. san francisco has contributed to over 7000 permanent legal for the low and moderate income housing units and over 13,000 above moderate income units 11,000 units in the pipeline. fully entitled an additional 20,000 years waiting for approval. san francisco is being lumped in with a bunch of december cities were not creating such numbers of housing which the state bill is supposed to address. yet it dismisses the work by city leaders in our state
10:41 am
representatives [inaudible]. by the governors will preempt the will this board for decisions regarding the local inclusionary housing requirement including having performance standards applicable to san francisco. by right housing approval budget trailer bill should be amended or opposed to allow the state to respect and preserve local authority. san francisco is such a special place, we value your decision. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good afternoon. i am actually here to the board of supervisors for not supporting the trailer bill and i'm also here to thank you for supporting the charter amendment to put some restrictions on the mta board. for some time now, they have been having a war on the citizens of the city, and our
10:42 am
visitors, by making it difficult for people to get around, to live their lives without rate stress. now, i think it really gone too far by removing bus seats off of buses with it was bad enough there to take away bus stops to make people with heavy packages and children and other kinds of situations have to walk distances to get on the bus but now they also want you to be able to stand on the bus. i'm speaking from experience. i actually felt on moving bus on time and about the injured myself, so i can tell you i will not be on standing on any buses were parked cars or trains of any kind. i think it really a dangerous situation. i hope that this board of supervisors will reconsider having any more buses removed off of-seats removed off of buses. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please.
10:43 am
>> testifier: i'm going to have if you page powerpoint. greetings supervise. my name is- i'm a software engineer at cisco systems and [inaudible] april 19 president of japan town merchants association [inaudible] and gave no convincing reason. based on our practice [inaudible] and we were deeply hurt. two days ago last sunday, the same band on san bruno [inaudible] which is 12 miles away from here it was not only warmly received but also on the special word of the prey. so you a few pictures of last sunday's san bruno parade. this is our baton members. next.
10:44 am
this is our band performing. next. this is our exciting mom and daughter taking photos with us. next. this is this tour-the san bruno lines and chairman. he gave us the cup for the special award last sunday. so within two months and a few muzzling the same band was treated completely different. you wonder why good what's happening to san francisco? is san francisco a city that's will by the commonest party? apparently, no. is event known for bias and discrimination? apparently, no. why is san francisco so different from san bruno? a city just 12 miles away. the reason that chinese government through san francisco chinese general counselors and [inaudible] influenced their behavior. to the point of abandoning the bow use that this nation was built upon bringing shame and disgrace to this great city. i
10:45 am
wish you would look into this issue and help us resolve the undeserved rejection. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good afternoon supervisor. my name is--in a citizen in san francisco. i'm here to express my [inaudible] marching band was rejected on the cherry bloom festival. we already got permission from the organizer, but read dressed up and showed up, but at the last moment, we were told we were rejected. that doesn't make sense. i serve the country in 2014. our nation is to fight for the freedom of the world. that is my freedom to parade was [inaudible] to my freedom
10:46 am
to parade was deprived of that moment in the country which i serve. i believe the discrimination is not fit. pursuing freedom of belief is the great country of the united states. pursuing freedom is the reason why this great country, the united states of america is [inaudible] that's also the reason why i came to america from china. i want freedom without discrimination. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i will speak for her. dear honorable board of supervisors. my name is--a san francisco resin. i'm a pianist and plate saxophone in the-marching band. you might
10:47 am
think our group was excluded from the gym found cherry blossom festival grand parade, but why do you keep coming back to the board of supervisors meeting. why don't you go to the parade organizer, hashimoto? first, the japan town parade is excluded us the much again due to the [inaudible] the southwest chinese new year parade. the chinese [inaudible] is usually influenced san francisco and the root of the problem goes beyond mr. hashimoto. second, does the gym and found parade and southwest
10:48 am
airlines chinese new year parade [inaudible] this public money came from tech including us the marching band who live in san francisco so we have a right to raise our issue here. certainly, the most important the issue is much bigger than the parade. the essence of this exclusion of fundamental value of america. it's about what this country is and is not. it's about the name and image of the san francisco. think
10:49 am
about it after a few years what we came to know the brutal prosecution by the chinese communist party. to find out several meeting people were thrown into jail in labor camps and many died a persecution. to know that over 60,000 and possibly a lot more people were killed for their-the [inaudible] against their will. at that time, they would also come to know that san francisco was once a [inaudible] of the chinese communist party intentionally or unintentionally. how will you face this part of history? they zero children? face their own children. the issue of excluding us from the parade goes far beyond the parade itself. it relates to how we think about our morals of this country and of the city. we are looking forward to your attention and help. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you very much. next speaker, please.
10:50 am
>> testifier: good afternoon. tim: gather 300 member organization and individuals of the san francisco housing action coalition would want access our strong support for gov. brown's proposal for by right housing into the density bonus streamlining we would hope the board of supervisors would support the governor's efforts on our behalf. i want to draw your attention to a remarkable letter that came out last week from a consortium of statewide affordable housing and social justice groups. it took a remarkable position of saying, we support the governor's efforts, but as with certain amendments. the amendment a pretty common subject is nothing currently difficult about them. i would imagine that's a very constructive approach to city the taken this. the plain truth, the housing affordability and displacement crises keep getting worse year after year because we lack the
10:51 am
tools at the local level to make a difference. we badly need the states help if we want to different future for san francisco. as governor, and the legislative analyst office recently noted, we do not have the resources to subsidize our way out of our housing predicament and until we figure out new approaches to dramatically increase housing production it does not seem likely that the displacement of logan come an increasingly middle income folks can be slowed much less stopped. and, opposing were trying to get san francisco exempted from this raises some difficult questions because if san francisco succeeds in exempted itself from the governor's proposal, many other committees across the state make similar requests. i think there's a fallback position we all agree on is, we do want more funding from the state for affordable housing and we don't have enough. the federal government is getting out of it. the state has
10:52 am
inadequate resource. that's a good as to make to the governor, but nothing we are doing at the local level scales to the enormity of the challenge we are facing. i would hope that you would support the governor's position. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good evening, supervisors. particularly by sisters in the back there. my name is ace i am on the case. i'm speaking from the heart and hope you hear me through your years. so many of years i'm putting the city on notice. specifically, our african-american black sisters that know about the outmigration. knowing that it's institutionalized through the then mayor newsom now lieut. gov. newsom. it was transferred then out mayor ed lee they did not do a damn thing to people who look like me. how? it wasn't in the budget. it wasn't in the budget. that was the problem that ed lee that's what
10:53 am
they told human rights. the only problem that newsom administrative because he was 59 dollars in the red. but now we are $5 billion in the green and you ain't got nothing for the people that look like me? [inaudible] there's a reason for sisters, legislators, who resent shakers, policymakers, listen to what i've got to say because once i go put something in writing, it's going to stop everything. sisters, in the back, come on up. how can you how could you dare be sitting up here, i been in politics that when you all were little girls. but now you women, your policymakers, you should be proud-i'm proud of you but there's something missing. legislation that prepare
10:54 am
something for youngsters. these other legislators are putting things together. that's what you all do. make history. let me talk to you. because the mayor doesn't care. ed lee he knows maybe we work together >> clerk: thank you mr. washington. next speaker, please. mr. washington, just for next time you appear please direct your remarks to the board as a whole, not to individual supervisors, please. >> president breed: i heard every word. thank you. >>[background speaking] >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> testifier: tom gilbert. before november's election in 2015 talk about how i was disappointed in the leadership of the democratic party and as
10:55 am
mr. ace said, he did nothing, the mayor did nothing for his people. he did very little for anybody when he was living in the city. corporate giveaways, real estate, profiteering, airbnb,. the right shares. you got your money, you got to have a super bowl. oddly, that's our last super bowl party. let's bury that one. then, he was running unopposed supposedly, we had a combined moment and maybe that's paying dividends because i saw in the all the printed political mail, there's an alternative slate, choice is better. the first game of the basketball finals, i was watching at my mother's house. franklin and chestnut. [after the game and the embarcadero
10:56 am
station, riding the underground, i met a guy that came from the basketball game and he was writing on busted with got there sooner they kind of took a richmond train instead of suing her to wait a little bit longer. i don't understand why we are changing three lines of part in every way for two lanes, four lanes of service street. it's still ridiculous. transportation and density, at this part does not make sense. voting today, independence. one third, at least, left and the right, and they're carrying the crowds are carrying bernie and the establishment is carrying hillary. >> clerk: mr. gilbert c [inaudible] >> testifier: my time is gone to what happened there? >> clerk: thank you. next
10:57 am
speaker, please. any other speakers who are interested in making public comment? seeing none, mdm. pres. >> president breed: think. seeing no other speakers would like to make public, public comment is now closed >>[gavel] >> president breed: >> clerk: mdm. clerk with the vacuum agenda >> clerk: item 46-52 are being considered for immediate adoption. a member may object seven item and have it considered separately. >> president breed: either any supervisor weiner >> supervisor wiener: 46 and 49 >> president breed: pc no other names on the roster, on the remaining items, mdm. clerk please call the roll >> clerk: item 46-52, without 46 and 49, >> supervisor yee: aye >> supervisor avalos: aye >> president breed: aye >> supervisor campos: aye >> supervisor cohen: aye >> supervisor farrell: aye
10:58 am
>> supervisor kim: aye >> supervisor mar: aye >> supervisor peskin: aye >> supervisor tang: aye >> supervisor wiener: aye >> clerk: the 11 aye >> president breed: those items are approved unanimously >>[gavel] speak >> president breed: please go item 46 >> clerk: item 46 a resolution to urge the recreation parks department to dispute primary program whereby individuals can reserve open space at mission dolores park into words the recreation and park department to discontinue any such rental bargains for any grass plot about san francisco public parks. >> president breed: supervisor kim >> supervisor kim: i like to refer this item to committee. he agreed supervisor >> president breed: >> supervisor kim: has made a motion to refer to committee. >> clerk: mdm. pres. supervisor kim [inaudible] >> president breed: it will go to committee. thank you for
10:59 am
reminding me. with that, let's get to item number 49 >> clerk: item 49, resolution to urge the san francisco legislative delegation to mentor posed by right housing approval proposed trailer bill in recognition of san francisco's local planning tools and significant contributions to regional housing development. >> president breed: supervisor weiner >> us for this item to be pulled? >> supervisor wiener: i'm happy to defer to the author. okay. thank you mdm. pres. so, i'm distributing a amendment of the whole here. i wish i previously did provide earlier today to supervisor peskin. so, colleagues, what your view on the trailer bill that gov. brown has proposed, i think it's a good thing that our governor has begun to call the question in terms of housing in
11:00 am
california. we are truly in a crisis, not just here in san francisco, but throughout much of the bay area and two more and more parts of california. we are housing is exorbitantly expensive and where particularly camargo income and middle class residents are being priced out and often, squeeze out of their communities. it's unsustainable and inequitable. it's a threat to our economy and it's a threat to our environment as people are forced to move further and further away from their community and from where they work. so, this is a statewide issue. it is an issue that the state legislature and governor should be taking up and again, whatever one's view on this bill, it is good we are finally seeing a push in this case by the governor, we know there's also bills from various numbers of the legislature to
11:01 am
address other aspects of the statewide housing prices and that is a good thing. i have-the trailer legislation, the trailer bill, as of right by right housing, it's not perfect and there are parts of that particular bill that i don't agree with. from i read, it makes it too easy to pin it loses of demolition controls and the last thing we need is to make it easier to demolish housing particularly rent-controlled housing in san francisco. it does not allow nearly enough latitude in terms of reviewing design, architecture, urban design in general good in making sure we are getting high-quality well-designed development with good street skating. it also i think potentially could short-circuit some environmental and labor standards that are very important. however, the heart of this legislation, i think, is really about the number of
11:02 am
units allowed under the zoning. we see far too often, i'm talking throughout the state, situations where the zoning allows for a particular number of units and through the approval process and through community opposition, that number of units are pushed down. so i project his own 450 units, but they're only allowed to build 20 units. when that happens over and over again, as it does, we have less housing. we, at the heart of our housing crisis, is that we have grown tremendously good san francisco has grown by 200,000 people since 1980. the bay area, i believe, has grown by 2.5 million people since 1980. we have not created enough housing to keep up and the result is an explosion of housing prices. that is at the heart of the problem. this problem is not
11:03 am
going to go away. the bay area is projected to grow by 2 million people an additional 2 million people, between now and 24. san francisco is projected to break 1 million people by 2040. this problem is not going away, and we have to get it together in terms of housing production. affordable subsidized low market rate housing forces a crucial part of the solution. we need a legislature to help us in other communities to fund affordable housing. but that is not the total solution. in addition, we have to have more housing of all types overall. we are never ever going to solve this problem or come close to solving this problem, without a robust mix of housing creation, including subsidized low market housing but including also other forms of housing as well. the problem i have with blanket opposition to the bill is that it does not
11:04 am
take into account the need for more housing overall. the problem i have with the provision in the current resolution before us that asked for an exemption of any jurisdiction by if i read it correctly, where at least 25% of our overall housing production is below market rate, affordable to low income or moderate income, the problem with that is that it doesn't set any standards for what the overall housing production is. so, 25% of a small number of units might be a high percentage , but that's still a small number of units and are housing prices then continues to get worse and worse and worse. so, i don't agree also with the whereas clauses. in the resolution before us, which really frankly, i think paints and in accurate picture of where we are in san francisco. san francisco is not doing well
11:05 am
when it comes to house. san francisco, frankly is doing poorly when it comes to housing and the proof is in the pudding with the average rent being $3500 a month. in the last couple of years, we have accelerated housing production, and that is after many many many years of largely very very low housing production. so, it's great that for a couple of years now we've been doing better. that needs to continue, let's not pretend like were doing awesome in san francisco. so we need to be exempted from any state effort to try to improve housing policy in california. so, the amendment recognize and the whereas clauses of the gravity of the situation in terms of our housing crisis that is threatening the very fabric of our community, not just in san francisco, but elsewhere.
11:06 am
instead of opposing the legislation or asking for an exemption from the legislation, the revised language that i'll distribute, instead, commends the governor for stepping up to call into question but also recognizes there are flaws in this legislation and asks our state delegation to work to amend the legislation to focus it on making sure that communities are not arbitrarily reducing the number of units allowed under the zoning while keeping fully intact other areas where we want to make sure that local control is robust, including relating to urban design standards and architectural standards, regarding affordability and the affordability percentage, relating to the preservation of historic buildings, relating to the preservation of rent-controlled housing stock, to make sure this legislation does not in any way make it easier to demolish our housing stock in terms of labor controls, labor standards
11:07 am
including prevailing wage, and our mental standards including conformity with senate bill 375. so, i think this legislation were this resolution the medics i am proposing, will focus our efforts and instead of opposing brascan san francisco to be exempted, it will focus us on what really needs to happen at the state level which is to stop the reduction in the housing that's produced as opposed to these other issues, which should be amended out of the bill. so colleagues, have distributed this amendment i move that we adopt this amendment of the whole. >> president breed: supervisor weiner has been a motion to amend. second by supervisor farrell. supervisor peskin >> supervisor peskin:
11:08 am
>> has not grown by 200,000 people since 1980. the population of
11:09 am
san francisco wasn't 600 thousand people in 1980. there is a huge amount of turnover and replacement but disagree with that number as a matter of fact. i do understand what you are saying-what supervisor wiener is say with regards >> student the percentage number but look at the numbers in the state of california. not just as a function of percentage, but as a function of total development of units that are very low, low and all affordable units. 7 year period in loss angeles, total all affordable 7957 units between 2006 and 2013 compared to san francisco-by the way they built 46, 7640 total units. compare that with san francisco, we built 7064 all affordable units
11:10 am
on a total of 20, 455 during that time. those are just raw numbers mpt we have led the state. i absolutely agree with my colleague supervisor wiener there is so much more we can and should do but somebody actually has to stand up and say that the governors solution is not the right solution for san francisco county. it disadvantages san francisco county and that is precisely why senator leno is pushing perfornlance based exceptions in the trailing bill in sacramento. colleagues, i think this resolution is fine exactly the way it sits. we have used our existing tools and those tools by the way will be augmented tonight after-the polls close when a certain proposition passes, but we have been using the
11:11 am
tools that we have to get increased amounts of affordable housing chblt that is actually what the conditional use process affords us. by right disadvantages the city and county of san francisco. the good newicize there isn't much policy difference in the body thmpt case supervisor wiener spoke to where a property can have 30 units but the city inicists should only have 12 rsh that doesn't happen. we are all of the same policy mind. while it is true we had a global recession between 2008 and 2012, the work that the board that i served on previously did authorized the increase more dense development of 22 percent the city, everything that you is say, octaivia boulevard, rincon hill, supervisor kim's district, hunter point is
11:12 am
rolling out. is there a lot more we have to do? absolutely, but i don't believe the trailing bill is the right way to go and respectfully hope we can pass this resolution as is. >> thank you supervisor peskin. supervisor tang >> thank you for had comments made and i would say that first of all, there are portions of the governors trailing bill that i agree with and there are things i do not agree with so understand the reaction that is sparked and why supervisor peskins resolution is brought forth. i would like to associate myself with supervisor wieners comments and think what he is proposing is something that is fair. instead of asking for a whole sale exemption for san francisco which every other jurisdiction will ask for as well, we like to say governors office we would like amendments to adapt so we
11:13 am
are not feeding complete local control over planning decisions in san francisco. i just don't understand what would set apart san francisco from other jurisdictions that the governors office would allow only san francisco to have exemption from his proposal and so again, i think that what is probably better for us to do as a united front from san francisco is to say there are certain things we locally like to preserve. for example, allowing the local jurisdiction tooz have the ability to make decisions about good design, making sure that we are having policies in place that prevent us from demolishing rent controlled units, historic preservation issue squz making sure we keep a eye on that and limit demolitions and making sure we are pay attention ocertain virmtal studies and standards that we want to promote in san francisco. i think those are fair thing tooz ask for what we want for local control while not saying
11:14 am
let's just exempt san francisco completely. one thing supervisor peskin mentioned is there are jurisdictions throughout california where the proposal from the governor where it st. good to have this in place. i wouldteric it further and say that maybe we feel that san francisco a a whole is doing better than other jurisdictions, there are neighborhoods within and districts within san francisco that could be doing better. i think the west side for example is one of them. we talk a lot about density equity and that is something i would like to promote as much as possible while preserving our neighborhood characteristics. again, i think i agree with supervisor peskin that the governors proposal is a one size that does not fit all, i do think that what for visor wiener's amendments have brought forth are very fair and allow to continue work wg the governors office on future amendment tooz
11:15 am
allow to retain some sort of local control over certain issues so support the amendment today mpt . >> thank you supervisor tang. supervisor peskin i had a question for you regarding your resolution. realistically do you think especially when san francisco under state center mark leno when he tried to propose specific reforms around the ellis act for san francisco they unfortunately failed. realistically do you think there is a real chance that san francisco through this urging could receive a exemption? >> i do. >> can you explain why you think that is the case? >> because our legislative delegation is uniquely positions in sacramento by vuchue of the fact that state
11:16 am
center leno is the chair of the appropriation committee and this traity legislation is part the entire appropriation negotiation in sack ramento is subject of discussion in conference last thursday night where senator leno make clear his position is phil ting is the chair of budget on the asumbly side san francisco is uniquely positioned. >> thank you. supervisor peskin you had your name on the roster den? >> i just wanted to rise to remind everybody and i think this is worth noting that we are all in receipt of a letter dated yesterday from the san francisco labor counsel which is something i think we should take very seriously. yes, we received letters from the labor counsel
11:17 am
periodically, this letter is written to express their strong opposition to development by right proposal of governor brown's administration and think it is important because when the labor counsel does that, that is all of labor speaking. that is the building trade speaking, that is municipal employees speaking, that is the health care workers speaking and the hotels workers speaking. i think that is very very important. i also want to remind people there is not a single local housing organization that supports the trailing legislation. these are housing organizations that are dovoted to making sure that we build the maximum feasible amount of affordable housing san francisco can build whether it st. bmr or subsidized housing or public housing. not a single organization is supporting the trailing legislation and then i want to
11:18 am
ring a note for democracy and transparency with which is unlike any other bill that is heard by this body or heard by the legislature. this has not been the subject of public haerbings in sacramento. this isn't the subject of deliberations, this is at the very end the session and scheduled to be voted on in the next few days. i have just spoken with supervisor wiener and i think we have come up with a judicious compromise for all of you which is that, this item be continued one week. that will give supervisor wiener the opportunity to move his companion resolution forward and perhaps in the intervening week with a sufficient time we can marry those together and come up with something a consensus piece where we have boleth in front of us next tuesday. >> so, supervisor peskin, is
11:19 am
that a motion? >> not yet. >> okay. supervisor wiener. >> thank you very much madam president and i appreciate the comments supervisor peskin. i want to note that we have-we did see a letter from a coalition of state wide affordable housing organizations and antipoverty organizations indicating that are willing to support the trailer bill with certain amendments. so, i think that our state wide affordable housing organizations rather than having a automatic oppose, or exempt have indicated they want to work to come up with a solution so want to say that for the record. and yes, supervisor peskin is correct. he and i had a discussion and what we agreed to rather
11:20 am
asking this go to committee, instead supervisor peskin will continue one week. i will then introduce my amendments as a stand alone alternative resolution for next weeks agenda and supervisor peskin what i requested as part of my agreement not to send his resolution to committee was an agreement not to both resolutions will receive a up or down vote. is that correct? >> yes. >> okay, so is there a motion on the table? >> motion to continue item 49 one week. >> supervirez peskin made a motion to continue one week to june 14, 2016. seconded by supervisor cohen. colleagues can we take this
11:21 am
without objection? the item is continued to the meeting of tuesday june 14, 2016. madam clerk. >> will you read the in memoriams. j todays meeting is adjourned in memory of the following beloved individuals. on behalf of supervisor kim for the late mrs. marry jesp on behalf of supervisor peskin sfr the late mrs. rogene ragner and on behalf of president breed for the late mrs. ammo gene [inaudible] >> thank you. madam clerk this bring tooz the end of-supervisor cohen is also a part of that in memoriam. for ema gene. that bring tooz theened of our agenda. any other items before us today? >> that concludes the business for today >> okay, good luck everybody today. looking forward to the election results after 8 o'clock. don't forget
11:22 am
to vote. we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned] >> this meaning will come to order. please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
11:23 am
now i will ask our secretary to call the roll. >>clerk: roll call. president scott, breslin excused; supervisor farrell excused, commissioner ferrigno, follansbee, commissioner sass excused. we have a quorum. >> we'll now proceed to item 1. >>clerk: item 1. approval with possible modifications of the minutes of meeting setforth below regular meeting of may 12, 2016. >> are there any questions or comments to the board on those minutes? i think it was a remarkable translation process to get it all down particularly with all the public comment. so i'm ready to entertain a
11:24 am
motion. >> i move approval. >> second. >> is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? that motion carries unanimously. discussion item 2. >>clerk: item 2, discussion item, general public comment on matters within the board's jurisdiction not appearing on today's agenda. >> is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. we will now move to the rates and benefits committee. we are now the committee as a whole on rates and benefits. we will take up action item 3. item 3, action item. approve kaiser permanente
11:25 am
senior advantage fully insured retiree rates and premium contributions for 2017 plan year. >> we have before you a presentation or powerpoint document that outlines the requested rate increase for the medicare advantage kaiser senior care product. we have it correctly stated as the 2017 kaiser permanente managed prescriptions retiree. this is the material. what we'll go through in our summary on page 3. that as a matter of practice for this product which covers seniors only 55 plus which is a cms program that creates a capitation amount determined by calculations
11:26 am
by kaiser to cover the specific medicare members that this addresses. this is how it's done. instead of permitting claims, they get the medical management skill set to cover underneath that cost. this has been a very well received program over many many years and kaiser is of course a leading advantage program in the state of california. with that being said, as a matter of practice and necessity in order to have the rates correctly reviewed by the board of supervisors, we did an early release of the number. so kaiser allows us and there are kaiser representatives here if there are questions about that exercise. they allow us to have an early number. what does that mean? they don't know the early number. what they are going to get from cms from kaiser, so they give their best estimate to us. we agree to this
11:27 am
practice, so at the end of the day when they finally know what they are going to get, we get a number. if we bill for 2016 or 2015, if we find out the number should have been more, then we add the difference to next year's rates. that's what this is all about. for 2017 the estimate they can give us at this point in time is $331. for 2016, it was determined after they received the final remission from cms, that the number should have been $9.76 higher. so we have to add those numbers together. so the billing rate is $340.76. i would like you to also see page 4 of this document.
11:28 am
when we have rate cards for any of our products for retirees and medical retirees, we have numbers in addition to the pure premium. those numbers of vsp premium, our healthcare sustainability and then we have added best doctors. and very proactive second opinion that hopefully will allow us to manage medical care in the future. all of these have been reviewed by the board and accepted by the board. additionally, we are adding the $9.76. with that, i would like to turn your attention to page 5. page 5. >> may i raise a question? >> absolutely. what would kaiser assume the drivers to be in that negative variance? >> what would happen is we
11:29 am
get a best estimate. >> i understand that. what caused the number to drive it? >> cms determines for the entire basket of people at the end of the year. once they get all the remissions in and figure out the judgement to the final request are, they say we can give you this amount of money. so, what turns out is they got less money than they expected to get. which means the rates should have been higher. we've been told through the last say 18 months that cms is rachting back money. to have this finally reconciled going forward, we are going to possibly be more short more often than not. this is not expected during this time. that helpful? >> that's fine.
11:30 am
>> let me ask a question too. so the medicare advantage, what medicare returns the same for kaiser as it would be for blue shield? >> it's the amount of money that's area adjusted. >> it's the same for the blue shield people? >> when they look at it, it's an area based number with statistics relative to that population. if they are a higher risk or different set of people, you have a fact that is calculated. if blue shield needs to be a certain number, they determine you get that amount of money. if your other medicare advantage filer is in the exact same situation with a better set of risks, chances are they get less money that is well
11:31 am
documented in architecture that they pay you. you don't get the exactly same amount of money. yes, sir? >> my understanding if kaiser docs forget to code their diabetes for the whole year, cms wouldn't have the diabetes. would the numbers be what they think the diabetics get for cms. a lot of this is diagnosis driven and the providers attempt to capture the diagnosis to make sure the reimbursements are maximize. >> the more money they get, the less they have to charge the purchaser. is that clear? it doesn't necessarily, well said, sir. you can look at it from different directions. it's an activity that requires very good documentation of
11:32 am
diagnosis as was clearly spoken by the fine doctor and the risk. i know kaiser is best at collecting the data and make myselfing the reimbursement there is. period. i'm not selling you kaiser. they will be able to sustain a better set of numbers in terms of the what the city will have to pay for that population. >> is that a reasonable statement? >> yes. >> thank you. if kaiser can get an early estimate, why doesn't blue shield get an early estimate. >> we have it. >> why didn't we get that number. >> their's is the harder number. we haven't combined this number. >> we didn't know that last
11:33 am
month what blue shield's medicare rate would be. >> yes, ma'am. but i have not provided it in this form at this point in time. >> okay. >> is that correct. >> i didn't know we had the blue shield medicare reimbursement rate. >> not yet. did we know this exact same amount of information from blue shield, please restate the question. >> yeah. i saw it said kaiser provided an early estimate but i don't remember you saying blue shield provided an early estimate of what the rates would be. that was my question. i don't remember seeing that last month. >> no. blue shield did not provide and early estimate of the retiree
11:34 am
medicare rate. >> why not? >> that's not the way they present the numbers. from kaiser they presented an early estimate and the way they recoupe the money, they do say in november, the way the program is structured under blue shield, the calculation they provide is april or may. depending on the level of the calculation, we go into negotiations is their best and final. where kaiser has reserved the right to say we won't know a hard number until later in the year. and historically when they have been able to release a number in july, they release their best and final and then ask us to change it to the difference from the july
11:35 am
number to the november number. but they have said in essence, we can technically do that. but when we ask for a much earlier number, they say we want to put this process in place. that's the way that works. >> so they put it on this process 3 years ago? >> yes. >> we had the question asked and answered, are there any other questions? >> we are on page 5. this is how we bill the rates in all cases. we take the premium from the vendor and add the 3 pieces and the final number. by the rules of the 10 counties, the lesser of the premium or the ten county. since the ten county was 604
11:36 am
$604. i can't remember what it was. the retiree person pays exactly nothing for the rate for their coverage under this program. and we go through the other calculations. the only other thing that applies to the retirees is the subsidy. it was developed to adjust the rate to early retirees. that being said, here are the set of numbers. if we go to the next page, we look at how this applies to the member 2-16 versus 2-17. the number that i will highlight is with the addition of the reconciliation, the retiree plus one will go up $12.88. three
11:37 am
retirees will go $38.66 and non-medicare dependent. these are all the numbers. i have shared. we have gone through the exercise of the reconciliation. we have all on page 9 we have our foot notes for the items on the rate cards. if there are any more questions, i will make my recommendation. >> your recommendation is? >> please approve as presented. >> you heard the recommendation from the medical advantage plan for kaiser. the retiree renewal premiums and contributions. are you ready to vote. i would like to entertain a motion unless you have a question. >> i move to approve. >> second. >> it's been properly moved
11:38 am
and seconded that we approve the rates as submitted by the actuary accepting the actuary's recommendation. is there a question from the board? public comment? public speaker: good afternoon, commissioners, clarence vonsky, retired city employees. the only thing that i really have a question about because i do appreciate neal's explanation of where the $9 came from and how it's being calculated. i think we are missing the rates that have the medicare member plus the non-medicare member. as i recall we would usually have the more of the rates that included that balance with other non-medicare members because otherwise these rates, they are very good and we can see them, but we really don't know the impact on those members that have dependents that are non-medicare. it would have
11:39 am
been nice to see that also since i think it would go with this presentation and not the one we have seen before. and later i will express to you my other concerns about the blue shield rate and how they deal with it. that's the only thing i'm looking for here. thank you very much. >> i will ask the actuary to please come forward and answer that question. >> yes, i would like to answer that question and address that to claire. this is a family rate to assume two non-dependents. this is a same chart that we have presented as i have been so privileged to be your actuary. it's no less than or no more than. does that help? okay.
11:40 am
>> we have a comment from a kaiser representative. >> hi. i want to add something. we are adding the rider. $50 co-pay per visit up to the combined 30 visits, with the chiral combined. it comes with that second benefit as well. the second benefit being added is what we call our silver and fit program. that provides a program for the participant to either join a participating gym that's part of the silver and fit network at no cost to them or receive a home fitness program package. if they don't want to go into the gym, they can
11:41 am
get a fitness package for walking or pilates at their home. >> thank you. any other comment? questions. we have a motion and second. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? the motion carries unanimously. i would like to welcome our counsel at this time. would you please identify yourself. >> good morning, this is cecillia mangoba from the city attorney's office. welcome, glad to have you. our other attorney is engaged today. thank you for standing in for him. all right, we are now ready to move to the regular board agenda. and as she gets ready to leave, i would like to congratulate
11:42 am
on her son's graduation this evening. congratulations. [ applause ]. >> the first board item is no. 4. >>clerk: item 4, discussion item. president's report. >> the action item i have about the city's charter sent to the members of the board by through our counsel. at another meeting we will have a kind of chronology of changes in the charter over the years that have currently brought the current documents to their current state. so this is the first in a couple of steps. this has been requested by the governance committee at its regular meeting and i thought by
11:43 am
starting out what is covered in our work which is covered in these and looking back over time changes in the charter provisions that go through the board. that has impacted this board's work. that was slightly delayed not only with -- eric's absence today but there were no red line versions in the charter. he's going through an analysis to figure out what actually changed in the before document and the resulting after document. it's a little diceey. i haven't seen it, but that's what he's doing. but that will be presented at another meeting. i just wanted the board to be aware of that. secondly, i wanted to congratulate. i had the privilege of attending a
11:44 am
luncheon yesterday with commissioner breslin, the san francisco county employees. i would like to thank the employees of the county of san francisco and congratulate the officers. we had a good time. i did commend them on their work and thanked them for their continued service on behalf of the retiree system. lastly, i would like to call attention to the board and i will ask the board to send it electronically. the california healthcare foundation. this is an annual study they
11:45 am
do on employers across the state of california. it highlights a series of i think some people would say they are not very intuitive, they are kind of obvious trends in healthcare coverage in the state of california. i would encourage the commissioners to take time to read the link. there are several charts that accompany this information. but it does give a very good overview of the level of healthcare coverage across the state, what employers are doing, what co-pays, deductibles, increases we have seen over time and one of the whopping statistics for me was that since 2002, there has been a cumulative increase of 216%, 216% increase in the overall cost
11:46 am
of healthcare to individuals. it's an astounding kind of thing to think it's been a little bit more of a decade but that's been the impact to the marketplace over time. there are a number of other statistics and highlights contained in the report and it's from the california healthcare foundation. it will be given to the board members by our secretary after this meeting. i commend it to you as a reading for the month of july if we act on the proposal today, you are not going to have a july meeting. so you can substitute that hours of work on that item. all right. we'll move on to the directors report. >>clerk: item 5, directors report. director?
11:47 am
>> thank you. commissioners. i wanted to report on the personnel. month after month we have left a position vacant for attrition savings. attrition occurs when someone leaves a position and takes time to fill it. that's the main reason. because our staff is relatively stable, the average length of tenure is 8 years but it varies from 1 year to 37 years. we don't have a lot of attrition savings. we can't get credit for that so we've had to leave two positions vacant to achieve that for the budget. this year we just late late late yesterday afternoon got our budget from the board of supervisors budget analyst and they want to double our attrition savings which mehave to lay off two people or not
11:48 am
fill two positions that we are currently have made offer letters to. there are also other additional budget cuts in the analyst recommendations. i'm not going to be specific about them because the negotiations aren't final and we don't want staff who are watching television to worry because hopefully we'll be able to save them. the proposals will result if they were implemented as proposed, would result in at least two lay offs. which is unheard of at this time when the mayor presented a balanced budget, we were successful in getting the mayor's approval for our budget that had already a 1.5% decrease over the 2 years. we had our initial call this morning after pamela
11:49 am
spent hours reviewing it and review it with me last night and she worked on it again this morning. we had one discussion with the budget analyst staff and i'm sure we'll have more in order to avoid that. but, i request that the commissioners individually and the members in the audience send their e-mails to the finance committee saying that the health services is doing a good job, we've kept the rates low and met all of our member service goals and we have innovated in terms of wellness and volunteer benefits, and the other things, all database analysis, etc. it's essential we continue on this path. >> we avoided $20 million worth of cost to this party, is that
11:50 am
not correct? >> yes. >> it would have been a cost to the city. >> yes. at any rate. you work all year so hard and you get a blow like this which means an unpleasant month as well as july. i wanted to point that out. >> that is from the finance committee? >> mark farrell is the chair and of course he will support us. will someone with an iphone look? >> we'll research that. we'll say the names publically and tell them how to e-mail city hall and get a hold of everyone. >> i believe it's mark and scott wiener, last year it was jane kim and scott wiener; and london
11:51 am
breed participates as chair of the board. thank you for asking that question. i meant to look it up before i came. i will meet with either them or their staff which i have in years before. >> so how is this information going to be disseminated back to us then? >> we will articulate here at the meeting but we'll ask to distribute the names to the supervisors and the e-mails and phone numbers to be able to either call or write or otherwise camp out with them. >> okay, thank you. >> otherwise the map of providing testimony is to sit through an all day public hearing. i believe it's not this friday, but next friday where every single issue that's going before them is heard. it's quite a laborious -- so, anyway, i appreciate your support especially since we took the mayor's
11:52 am
cuts and approved the budget and now we are being cut more. so, i wanted to point that out and also wanted to point out that we have begun administering this, the employee engagement survey at the committee meeting. we are taking a survey in a matter thatten insures employees responses are confidential and not disclosed and the employees anonymity is protected. some responses might yield information about the respondent or other privacy information including supervisors. we want to make clear that we are doing this confidentially. and that's in an effort to have everyone participate. if they were to be made
11:53 am
public, we shouldn't both undertaking this survey because people don't want to have their responses public. they have assured anonymity. >> may i say something? on behalf of the board, i would request from each and every staff member to please complete the survey. it's an effort by the management team of the system to get a better understanding of what can be done to help engage and respond to your needs. that can only be done if you participate. so, on behalf of myself, principally, but i think i speak for the other commissioners, we are asking each and everyone of you to please participate. >> through the chair? >> yes. >> is it just for active members, the additional services, right, that are in the survey? >> you are talking about the volunteer benefits survey. we are talking about the staff
11:54 am
engagement survey. >> that's no. 7. >> it's been in my personnel report. >> okay, we'll talk about volunteer benefits in a minute. the other thing is we will be presenting the results of the engagement survey at the august board meeting. we'll have a report. in terms of operations. you have in your packet. as usual we've met all of our customer service goals even though our in person assistance continues to grow, but people keep retiring. but that's nice because they just come from downstairs into our office. we did an active survey on voluntary benefits. it's in your packet. as of june 1st, 2500, employees
11:55 am
have responded. we are happy to offer those benefits. more and more employees are asking for voluntary benefits. it varies from paycheck to paycheck. >> can i ask something about the volunteer benefits? >> sure. >> how much is it going to cost us? >> it cost us nothing. >> how does that work? >> we are doing it through the employment benefits district, they are doing our mea benefits. it cost just a little on payroll lines. there are lines for colonial and flack and you name it.
11:56 am
whenever that leaves, they are making adjustments. who is making money on this are the insurance companies. they are vetting rates so there is a place to go and complain. if there are idiosyncracies, the payroll departments will clean them up. hopefully this will reduce the number of payroll lines than there are. it will be easier. >> but no extra staff time? >> no extra staff time. it really is a great benefit. i wanted to draw attention to the data analytics report that's in with the packet. this is the first time we've had a dashboard on the medicare
11:57 am
retirees since the third quarter of 2010. now that our data base is up and running, we can't do it all ourselves, but we can design the report and feed in the request and get it back and present it. i think it's an example of the benefit of the database and you have information on who the retirees are. kaiser has 45% of the medical retirees. >> their average age is 72.6. >> blue shield, 69.3. at least it's what it says on the slide. you are right. 79.1. i apologize. ful >> city plans average ages
11:58 am
75.2. >> this tells us about the admits per 2,000 members, the average length of stay and it does that by vendors so you can see on page 9 the average length of stay for medi-cal retirees for blue shield is 6 days, then 4 days and kaiser 2 days. similar impatient dates per thousand, again blue shield is the highest. interestingly kaiser is the second highest. we also found this in our care organizations. what we need to look at is what are the readmission rates and then city plan is 5 days. an 8-day length of stay is a long time in the hospital.
11:59 am
procedures per 1,000. this is an example script per member per month how many prescriptions and those have all decreased from 2.11, to 2.55. i just wanted to draw your attention to the work of the data analytics department. it's very exciting. other things that are happening is we are building the new enterprise management. you heard us talk about the ecm. we've now got the equipment and building the processes to begin to scan all of those hundreds of thousands of records that we have in our record room and off site storage. we acquired new copiers that will save us money in printing cost. we are doing an actual
12:00 pm
enrollment process, management effort to really keep track of dates and times and hopefully reduce the stress that occurs since we are getting ready for open enrollment. in terms of finance, you will hear from the finance committee. but again we'll emphasize that we have cut 1.5% this year and next year and the budget was approved by the mayor with no additional cuts. then we have to be vigilant about not having further cuts from the board of supervisors. our annual external audit kickoff occurred. in our 2015 post audit by the controllers offices yield no material weaknesses. beyond that, we are in good shape. the other thing i wanted to, in terms of wellness, let me highlight. >> can i just? >> yeah. >> i think we've seen in the