We had a item from the july 20 agenda we recessed to today. Im supervisor cohen and to the right is supervisor wiener and jane kim. Clerk is androa ash burry and want to recognize sfgtv. These gentlemen will be broadcasting this committee. Please silent Electronic Devices and complete speaker cards and documents to be included to the file should be [inaudible] unless otherwise stated thank you very much. Could you call item 1 a motion ordering submitting to the voters a ordinance [inaudible] surplus City Property supervisor kim is the primary author of this item and im sure she has opening remarks for us today thank you chair cohen. As members of the committee know i introduced this item as a ballot measure to expand orcities surplus ordinance passed in 2002 and amended irn 2005 chblt it directs the city to prioritize Affordable Housing on public lands that dont serve a city function. We continue to do more and the production of affordable and middle Income Housing and achieving the goal of 33 percent Affordable Housing and 50 percent for middle clatss housing. This battle measures adds a tool to address the cities housing crisis. I want to thank and recognize the work of supervisors cohens office and inMayors Office as we work on the intent of the language within the bal lt measure moving before the voters. There is a variety of Different Things around reporting and how departments will communicate and insure a variety of needs are met on the surplus praerpt while prioritizing Affordable Housing which we believe is a number one priority of thcity. Ill be introducing a series of amendments that reconcile a number of areas that may have been gray or a number of differences between all of our offices andim glad to see well have a measure with consensus only because this is a important process. Thank you i want to offer a couple remarks and ptd to take a moment and thank all the parties involved from the beginning who have come together to develop a consensus measure that we can all support in november. I want to give a voice to danny in supervisor kims office also who pick said up actually, april started off the process with us and also want to give recognition to my legislative aid to an dria brus and also great leadership in supervisor wieners office as well. The Mayors Office ken rich is instrumental and nicky wheaten and one thing we can agree on is housing is in on inforfront of our agendas and as we make policy and make legislation i think we can agree the city owned Surplus Property present a unique opportunity to work with partner tooz develop more Affordable Housing. With that said i see Housing Partners here, gale billman is patient and [inaudible] in having a voice in this piece of legislation. The process changes proposed in the measure will significantly improve the cities ability to track, report and dispose of Surplus Properties for Affordable Housing develops. Additionally the amendments here today also recognize there are instances and should use Surplus Property for a non Affordable Housing cause your use. We also used Surplus Property for assets such as expansion of the Produce Market in district 10 and in the future well use Surplus Property to rebuild the nob[inaudible] it isnt clear if the surplus land can be permitted without going to the voters. I want to take a moment to the advocates woo came together to bring this measure forward and we can now go into the discussion of the amendments. Supervisor wiener has a few remarks. Thank you very much madam chair and thank you for your leadership in helping to take what was a fairly flawed proposal and helping to really get it into shape and i want to thank the Mayors Office for doing that as well. Surplus property ordinance is a very important ordinance and it is important to strike a good balance and make sure we generate resource squz land for Affordable Housing. I know we all support that. Also making sure we take all the cities needs into account. The Surplus Property ordinance was authored by then chris dally and passed as a ordinance at the board of supervisors and so when i originally say there was a 4 supervisor measure going on to the ballot to supersede that and expand it, i had some concerns particularly the way the things were drafted. Not necessarily have agfully competitive bid process the property and concerns about neighborhood open space being swept up for development and lack of flexibility in termoffs the uses supervisor cohen described whether it is a Waste Water Treatment Plant or park our Transit Needs and want [inaudible] goes to the ballot and gets passed by the voters even though it is a subject that can be passed at the board of supervisors it then becomes all most impossible to make changes to it. I think it is very important that we be extremely careful when we make a decision to take a item we can easily pass at the board of supervisors and send it to the ballot to make sure it is well drafted and we have flexibility in the future. The original measure did not allow for that, it was i think problem atom in a number of respects and think these changes make it a much much better piece of legislation and i want to thank everyone who helped move us in that direction also including [inaudible] in my office. And so im glad we are moving in that direction. I do have 2 questions and i dont know madam chair if you want me to save those questions until weare we going to Public Comment now or yes the public has waited longnumber ill wait after Public Comment why dont we go ahead and take i was going to state that anyone who spoke on the item on july 20 can not speak again on the item today fantastic, i think we have new speakers though so lets open up pub lic comment. Good afternoon chair cohen, my name is gale [inaudible] we want to exspess how thrilled we are to have a consensus measure. Consensss measures unit all sides of our political spectrum in San Francisco. When we those measures on the ballot it is more likely that they pass. As we know competing measures aunch both fail as confusion for the voters. For a measure that prioritize the use for public sites is housing for Homeless Individuals making less than 20 percent of ami if it is feasible on the site. Community Housing Partnership is thrilled this is moving forward. We want torecognize the hard work of chair cohen and her staff and the hard work of supervisor kim and all of you to make a measure that shows the citizenoffs San Francisco when we look at our public sites which are public property, public trust as a citizen of San Francisco, to really know that the Mayors Office of housing will assess the sites and see first whether they can u. S. 20 percent of ami and castcading up to the middle income. We also want to thank the Mayors Office for all the hard work they put into the site. It is hard giving up assets and how we balance that so the taxpayers get what they deserve. My last comment, this make as nisez pack age on the ballot with inhousing bond. It shows the voters of San Francisco that the board of supervisors and Mayors Office are putting housing first. Any other member oz thf public like to smeek . Seeing no other members pubhook comment is closed. Supervisor wiener i believe you had a few remarks a question for the City Attorney. Since the [inaudible] changed a little bit so i dont go what page it is on now. The question i had from the beginning is making sure property that is neighborhood open space doesnt get swept in and developed . I know we had situations. My district where supervisor [inaudible] at the time transferred property to dpw because it was neighborhood open space and not truly Surplus Property and i did the same thing a few years ago on car corbet so the language is property that is reserved. I dont have the page number it is on page 8 in the definition of property. It excludes land reserved for intend today be reserved for open space. Ask what does that mean . It is up to the board. The board will determine what is placed on the surplus list and what is transferred for development of Affordable Housing so it is pretty clear in the overallthe board will have the ability to designate property for open space and not for housing it is tup to the board, it isnt like a agency can take a property and decide it is up for development, the board will retain full discession about whether to do that . There is clearly city policy here waving in favor of Affordable Housing but it is a board determination and as i read in the definition of property, it does make clear property reserved or intended for open space isnt property that would be transferred. That would be reserved by the board of supervisors or reserved it is in the definition itself and ultimately the board determined what is transferred to mo or put under mos jurisdiction for Affordable Housing. Great, my final question is to supervisor kim in terms of the decision to go to the ballot. There are times where things can be done at the board but make a choice to go to the ballot. Im supportive but curious the thinking there. It was realally important to the member thofz community that worked on drafting the legislation and apologize i didnt acknowledge them at the beginning but did at rules committee. This is something they felt would be well supported but also strengthen the mandate of Surplus Property ordinance which is in theords nns for 13 years but not followed to the note. That was the thinking behind it and they wanted to really go out to the public and insure they understood the issue and strengthen it through the ballot. I appreciate that explanation and will support this and support sending to the ballot. I think there is a lot in the legislation that is a improvement on the existing Surplus Property ordinance and think the Surplus Property ordinance is in effect for a decade or so has been not very clear and i think it isnt surprising it hasnt resulted in a lot of Affordable Housing being built so think this clarifys the process and think it will be a improve. So i support it. Thank you. Happy to hear that. I want to thank a few more people. Andreas powers i forgot to call you out and also mike martin thank you very much. Charles holden you get a shout out. Supervisor kim you want to make a motion or discuss your amendments . Do i need to summarize the amendments . No i will make a motion taamend as the laj wrj is distribute today the committee and clerk and City Attorney and it is clean up language for the intent of the original ordinance introduce today the board. There is a motion made, doesnt require a second so it looks like the motion is adopted and unanimous. Thank you. Madam clerk[inaudible] because this is a ballot measure the amendments require to sit for one more Committee Hearing so i need a motion to continue this motion to amend this item as amended to the july 27 Land Use Committee meeting motion made and passed by the body. Thank you. Any other business before the committee . No other business. Thank you this meeting is adjourned. Okay. Lets get started. This meeting will come to oerd. This is the special meeting of government and audit and oversight of july 9, 2015, im supervisor yee and supervisor christensen and supervisor breed. We would look to acknowledge the staff at sf govtv. Jonathan. We record each of our meetings and make the transcript available online. Madam clerk, dow do you have any announcements . Yes, please make sure you silence all cell phones and Electronic Devices. Items acted upon today will appear on the july 21st, boards board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Can you call item no. 1. City clerk [administrative code language assistance and services at board of supervisors meetings] sponsors yee; avalos, campos, mar and breed ordinance amending the administrative code to require the office of Civic Engagement and immigrant affairs to provide Interpretation Services upon request at every meeting of the board of supervisors between september 1, 2015, and july 31, 2016; and to require the office of Civic Engagement and immigrant affairs to translate agendas of board of supervisors meetings and the Public Document listing all legislation introduced at each board of supervisors meeting during that period. 1234 i believe, let me just say a few words about this. For item no. 1. The language, serves at the board of supervisors meeting. It is something thats been important for myself. This legislation will create a pilot project. To offer languages in spanish, tagalog and all board of supervisors meeting starting september 2015. Currently the languages are available 48 hours in advance and for the other requests the clerk goes above and beyond to comply with request. However it is sometimes difficult to find someone on demand. We have come across a few instances where an constituent requires a Language Interpreter. A Language Interpreter was not present. Our city comprise itself on being diverse. We have a person from every corner of the world. Approximately 60 of the residents are immigrants and 21 of the population identifies itself as English Limited speakers. We have one of the largest pilots in the nation. By creating this Pilot Program at every board of supervisors meeting, the staff of the office of immigrants and Civic Affairs will be available to offer Language Services in spanish tagalog and chinese. The staff will also provide translation of the legislation introduced as much as possible although i think we are going to have an amendment around this particular item. The pilot will last until july 2016. The staff of oc will work with the clerk of the board to create a set of protocols to ensure efficiency and accessibility. I want to make sure that we respect ocs staff time and set up reasonable expectations for the public. I want to acknowledge and thank the office of Civic Engagement and affairs for working with us and my office on this proposed pilot. I would also like to thank the staff and the clerk at the board of supervisors who work tirelessly to serve our residents and accommodate the language needs. I would like to thank the cosponsors of the legislation. Supervisors breed, mar, avalos, campos and crist hristensen. I would like to thank our staff jen who is as passionate about this issue as i am. Now i would like to invite the office to present on this item. Good morning chair yee and supervisors, adrian pon executive director and im joined by me colleague sarah hooker, thank you for your leadership and continuing support of Language Access. San francisco clearing that is strongest Language Access law in the nation. We are in full support of the ordinance proposed ordinance and we look forward to working with the board on developing a pilot. We have a very short overview of the share and will be happy to answer any questions afterwards. Think you have to way. Here we go. This first slide is a snapshot of the city. We have a high density, high diversity. More than one in every three san franciscan is is immigrant and one is female and one of color. We have African American and low wage earners in the city. This next slide gives you a snapshot of language diversity in the city as i mentioned earlier over a third of our city is immigrant. So nearly half of the population speaks a language other than english at home. As you can imagine with this diversity in the city, there are over 112 different languages spoken in the San Francisco bay area. One in every four residents is limited English Proficient in the city. One in every two residents speaks a language other than english. The top five language spoken by limited English Proficient residents in San Francisco are chinese, cantonese followed by mandarin, spanish, filipino, vietnamese and russian. The districts with the highest number of limited English Proficient are in order. 11, 9, 3 and 4. Interesting to knows Chinese LimitedEnglish Proficient residence 54 chinese population in the city and most reside in district 3 and Spanish Speaking in district 9 and higher share that speak other larngs languages and the most diverse in the city are in district 7. The last one im going to cover is some key definitions. These terms are often interchanged and i want to clarify, the interpretation is spoken and translation is written in another language and orally converted in another language while retaining the meaning. Interpretation is spoken and translation is written document of replacement of written text from one language to another language. These are completely different skills but are small staffed and actually perform both of these functions and all of our staff must have a College Degree in order to understand termination and complex and have to be competent in both languages and all of our interpreters have to be certified interpreters and in addition they go through Extensive Research and preparation for every single meeting and document so they understand what they are interpreting. Normally or in the past our office has interpreted an entire proceeding end to end start to finish so that participants understand whats being said and what policies are being made. Ms. Hooker is going to give you more detail of our Language Access and services program. Good morning. This slide provides an overview of our comprehensive Language Initiative which is based on the foundation of the Language Access ordinance. We work very closely with our community organizationsers so they are aware of this law and our partners meet quarterly with us and we have a dialogue with Community Members in an effort to improve the level of services to services. We provide 400,000 a year for programs focused in outreach. This is a snapshot of the Services Today with the small team. We know you may recognize a few people here and we have built up a team of a new staff. We appreciate the support of a new staff to ensure better services. As you know we offer services to the board and city departments prioritizing services and contract with language and solutions. Finally, later to todays item, here is an idea of what Language Services demand has been for the past year. As you can see we had in 20142015. 21 interpretation request 88 document translation request and 116 total translated documents. We had a number of request we had to turn down due to limitation. The translation of one document of three of more languages requires 35 hours of staff time and replacing text. There is a good deal of time also spent on researching complex, policy related content and appropriated terminology for the different types of documents we work on and for accuracy and appropriateness and editing an appropriate version. The project can be anywhere from 35 hours from a simple translation such as a public hearing notice to a complex project where in the past year weve spent as many as 175 hours of staff time on a more detailed