year about the libraries intention to get privacy threatening radio frequency identification technology, rifd. well, february 1st came, and the library commission approved funding $3.5 million for an implementation. unfortunately, it represents, as far as i can tell, the city librarian final poison pill present to our city. i ask you to do what you did 13 years ago and 12 years ago when the library commission likewise forwarded this in their budget, and that was you rejected the funding for rfid. and i hope that you will do that again this year. some interesting notes at the library commission. when more than one person complained about rfid's toxicity to patron privacy, the staff gave two reasons why they asserted. there is no threat to the public. they said, first of all, the library's databases are unhackable. unhackable. knowing what we know about library databases and other databases, that is a pretty far-fetched claim. in addition, it doesn't take hacking into the database to raise and to make privacy threats. and the other reason was that they said it has only a 30-inch range. well, that may be true for certain commercial applications, but not for all. and even show, there's no need to get that close. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good evening, ladies and gentlemen. my name is john fitch. sometimes our eyes are too wide open. if the legal link in the chain had been followed that was already set place by the founding fathers as to how the city would be governed in the event of the sudden death of a mayor, would ms. breed be an active mary, why wasn't she giving a choice in maintaining and being the active mayor or remaining being the board president. you didn't let her decide for herself. she was the only one allowed to make that decision, whether she wanted to do one or the other. members of the board did that for her. when you did that, you broke the link in the legal chain that was already established by our founding fathers which could turn into expo facto because the interim mayor was a legal link in the chain. the interim mayor was no part of being qualified. what qualifications did the interim mayor possess to put him in position where he could be considered to be interim mayor? why was he so important? for whatever reason, the reason was they wanted their own people who they could control. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is denny leonard. i wanted to say that i have had a great experience with the italian american community. i'm from an indian tribe in oregon. a gentleman named joe travelo in italy. we did a debate on italian television. we had never met and became lifelong friends. he and his wife and my wife and i had many meals together. in that time, in 1992, the san francisco foundation decided to change the parade from columbus day to italian american. now we have a new program, and i think that all of us together have spent so much time with many italian-american people at the cafe and around the north beach area, that it is important for us to understand that we are now in 1992 to 2018, a much more connected people. we should celebrate that among ourselves. i would like to say that norman yee, when he stated that it's time for us to recognize each other and to ms. cohen to take the courage to bring that to us. let us make that possible, what we have not had for many years, a celebration for our cultures. maybe we need a cultural minister or a cultural cabinet here in san francisco to celebrate all of us together. so i hope we can work toward that end. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> i would like to ask supervisor cohen to come up here and open this up, please, to any particular page. >> sir, your time is ticking. >> okay. i won't read from it. that's a province do. at 6:32 a.m. during the blue moon that we haven't had since president andrew jackson, the president called michael savage. he called him at his home on his cell phone. yesterday i heard that he's actually thinking about putting his hat in the ring against feinstein. i pray this will take place. i'm telling you what. i really want to see that debate. that was a very rare occurrence. another rare occurrence -- but that could have been planned, a psychological warfare against the democrats, you know, which would be a wise move. anyway, but you can't plan a total solar eclipse from coast to coast. when did that happen? 1776. when jesus was asked about the end of the world, many times there's a double application to prophecies, but i'm surprised we're still here. for the last 13 days, i'm surprised, but something bigger than the blue moon, something bigger than the total coast-to-coast eclipse last year, is what did happen 8,013 days ago. 6,013 days from 9/11 and 3,000 days from what i'm convinced is the actual beginning of the last trump. there's not eight trumpets. there's seven. the culmination of the third row is the seven vials. he's coming back soon. it's going to be judgment day. it really is. if you don't know jesus christ, there's no hope. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is george wooding. i'm the president of the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i'm here to talk about sb827 from state senator scott weiner. he introduced several new amendments, so my testimony will not be the testimony i was going to originally present. i just want to mention, first off, you should consider the residential infrastructure which his legislation will cause and how the city is so unprepared for it. secondarily, i want to talk about the destruction of the single family homes in the residential neighborhoods. and now in closing, i would like to read our resolved resolution for 827. resolve the coalition for san franciscoen neighborhoods, cssn, land use committee urges all members of this organization and anybody else agreeing with this resolution to communicate to the state legislature for the district in which he/she resides to oppose sb827. be further resolved, the california state senate assembly to oppose sba27. finally resolved that the board of supervisor's resolution of february 13th, 2018, which may or may not change now. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is paul weber. i'm a north beach resident and a delegate to the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i'm here to urge you to adopt a pendi pending resolution to oppose sb27. we received an avalanche of amendments to the bill, which we have not had an opportunity to look at. on a quick reading, however, it appears that the most critical ones were not changed. i will comment on those. and that is the bill, as amended, will replace height limits based on proximity to something called transit rich corridors. it would set minimum heights for projects in these areas, 85, 55, 45 feet depending on street width and that would go even higher. in addition, it eliminates many of the local controls on density, ratios and parking, as well as certain design standards. we urge you to oppose 827 for a number of reasons. there's no need for the bill, first of all, the state density bonus law can achieve the same results and require on-site construction of affordable housing, which 827 does not have any requirement for any new affordable housing. under 827, applying local inclusi inclusion area or affordable rules. that would mean those who need the transportation the most would be ineligible to be considered for the housing. finally, the definition is such that it could be managed by local agencies, simply by changing the frequency of bus intervals, which is too center diptous and subject to abuse and the winds of change in the political climate. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> good afternoon. lisa framer, president liberty hill neighborhood association. like the previous speaker, i'm here to speak on 827. we have not had a chance to analyze all the new amendments. i remain concerned about them. eliminating seqa is a serious flaw, and there are real environmental impacts. the basic assumption that high density transit oriented development reduces greenhouse gas emissions has become unchallenged dogma, but closer scrutiny shows flawed data. sb827 assumes that since the entire city is close to public transit, high density nearby will reduce car use, but on average, car results in lower per capita per mile greenhouse gas emissions than mass transit. public transit is assumed to operate at full ridership capacity, which it doesn't. and the greenhouse gas emissions it generates are not factored in. let's face it. san francisco's public transit could use some improvement. packing more people into taller, larger buildings is not so environmentally friendly when you look at the metrics of human health. incidents are increased of widespread diseases and those people are exposed to thousands of toxins. there's serious mental health impacts too. high density housing near transit is not a very good environmental solution to our housing problem. people relate to the world on a human scale. we need to see the sky and the sun and the trees and the flowers. kids need to feel and see and relate to their natural world so they can protect it. we're going to look at the amendments but i remain concerned -- >> thank you for your comments. thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is bruce bowen. i'm from delores heights. i'm here to ask you to join the growing number of cities who realize the existing capacity of 143,000 additional units, we need to carefully plan smart growth. that goes hand in hand with transportation and water. if changes to existing zoning either quantity or location, then the city should use its own planning tools to make changes and not be subject to the clumsy constraints of sb27. supervisors, we've had a money bomb go off in san francisco that's rendered the city uninhabitable. we shouldn't let this bomb of a bill to do even more damage. thank you. next speaker, please. >> katherine harra, the sierra club. the sierra club opposes sb827. we believe it's a heavy handed approach to development that will lead to less transit being offered and more pollution among other unintended consequences. sba27 fuels opposition so future transit development. remember, this is a statewide bill. because it marries transit development to a loss of local zoning control, this approach could increase opposition to fully needed transit investments in various parts of california. it can and will promote displacement. some areas near transit stops consist of disadvantaged communities that already face extreme pressure from gentrification. this could result in communities losing protections that prevent economic pressures from driving people out of their homes. this could result in replacing single family homes with luxury units not available to people with moderate or low incomes, increase of cost of land can increase rents and displacement. displacement forces residents into areas further from their jobs and city centers, increasing commute times and greenhouse gas emissions. sb27 combined with sb35 to include public health and environmental protections. this would increase the amount of unmitigated pollution in these communities while stifling public input. developers should prevent and mitigate their pollution. this potential avoid answer of seqa is unacceptable. we support the need for affordable housing in california. we support higher density. we support in-field development, but sba27 has too many unintended consequences. it will increase pollution, discourage transit, and potentially displace disadvantaged residents. and we oppose it. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm here to express our collective and organized opposition so senator weiner's latest bill sba27. this is an extential threat to life in san francisco, if not california. a lot of people have said many things about the density in san francisco and how having uncontrolled growth and up zoning as it's been proposed by the bill is going to be changing the quality and livability of this city. every mayoral forum i've been to, there's talk about the muni infrastructure that's currently affecting our residents. supervisors, right now, we're at the capacity for our infrastructure. we have issues with our public transport system, and here we have a very much flawed bill that is going to be introducing wild, wild west when it comes to building. this is not what san francisco needs. we are all the way for affordable housing. we're all the way for the government spending money for affordable housing, but we're not free for all in taking the government control. after all, what is the point of having a city planning department. also, today we found out that mr. weiner has introduced a number of amendments. one of them, interestingly enough is protection of local demolition laws. that's why we're urging you to pass reform of demolition laws, demolition controls, and better legislation that's going to make sure that illegal demolitions do not take place in this city. right now we are facing an epidemic of illegal demolitions, things that people pass as remodel, but they're, in fact, demolitions. this bill is going to actually make things worse -- >> thank you for your comments. thank you. and next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is mary mcnamara. i live in the outer sunset. i'm here to address my concerns about sb827. the demolition of single family neighborhoods has been a long-stated goal. i think you're all aware of that. i'm very concerned in the outer sun set with the stress on our services, we have a none shortage of police officers, and it took me an hour and 20 minutes to get here today. also, many of you are probably not aware that there are thousands of residents in the sunset, longtime renters living in family homes, many that are rented at below market rates. the 20% on my block alone. i believe the bill does not address demolition of single family homes and the displacement. once the rezone take place, the door appears to be wide open. it's been stated to me personally outright that once the rezone take place, they're waiting in the wings to file lawsuits under the housing accountability act and force the city of san francisco to approve demolition of single family homes and build according to the maximum allowed under the new zoning. more fundamentally, i am questioning the rationale and the necessity of this bill in the first place. our pipeline has 60,000 units, 5,875 currently under construction. 17,000 approved entitled but not built. 30,000 approved in master plans. 16,000 adus. 31,000 soft side. 7,200 applications currently pending. 15,575 units awaiting rezoning. adds up to 143,000 units. why do we need sb827? thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is james park. i'm a member of the sunset community. my neighbors and i are very concerned about sb827 and 28. it is hugely impacktive and corrosive to the sunset's livability to those of us who enjoy our community and its character. these bills allow the destruction of the single family homes we live in. it enables real estate interest to profit and the canonization of our neighborhood. it allows and forces replacement of our homes through litigious effor efforts. their rationalale is simple. it's increased cost and pricing. exchanging high rises for homes is not the solution. i support housing but not the destruction of our neighborhood. i support affordable housing, but not what sb27 proposes. i elected katie tang to preserve this for thousands of us in sunset. sb27 will destroy it. it will become a feeding frenzy of destruction and construction, plundering our communities because prices will only increase. ree believe the science, not the politics. we know the results. we'll lose your views, backyard enjoyment, parking, it will strain our infrastructure at its limits already. manhattan is not the housing solution for california. we embrace change. we embrace housing. we embrace affordable housing and local control to ensure positive change in a livable sunset and a livable california. sb27 and 28 is not the answer. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is paula banatole. i'm the director of the italian museum in ft. mesa. first of all, i want to compliment supervisor stephanie who made a perfect presentation on what the italian-americans mean to san francisco. i also am here to protest the idea of eliminating italian heritage day. i want to remind you that when this frenzy about columbus came about, we accepted the compromise to columbus day but accepted italian heritage day. and now you want to take that away from us too? i don't think it's fair. it's not fair. and it's not right. that's all i want to say. >> thank you very much for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is father john kirkly. i i'm in the action bay area. i'm here today to urge you to exercise diligence and engage a transparent process in the mou currently being negotiated between the city and the police officers association. this is the first time in a decade that this board has had an opportunity to exercise its oversight authority and ensure that the community's voice and values are reflected in this agreement. in our pastoral work, my colleagues and i have learned firsthand of the excessive use of force, including police-related killings, overpolicing, and bias in policing in our neighborhoods, and especially in our communities of color. we are deeply troubled by the poa's continued resistance to commence police reforms embraced by you, the late mayor ed lee, chief scott, and many, if not most of our sworn officers. we ask that you ensure that the next mou explicitly commits the poa to embrace the reform process, not impede it. and that you refuse to approve any mou that fails to reflect our community's values of the sacredness of all human life, every human being, our commitment to sanctuary and security for all san franciscoens. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is ann marie sayers. the only recognized country for 350 miles along coastal california. it wasn't until 1980 that i realized that the american indian did not get the right to practice religion freely until 1978 with the american indian religious freedom act. so i opened up my great-grandfather's trust to all indigenous people for ceremony. and a lot of people from san francisco, from san francisco state university, they're taking native american study classes, they come to the canyon. san francisco, i absolutely love, particularly the counselor here, we had a sunrise ceremony for them. it was absolutely spectacular. i really want you to know whose land you're on. in indian canyon, we can document 4400 years. so far i've heard 250 years of your population, and we're still here. so i want to thank you so very, very much for supporting indigenous day. it's greatly appreciated. and i have two books here of which elias castillo is year. they have gracely provided each and every one of you these books. learn the history of the property you're on, on the real property. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> i'm elias castillo. i'm the author of the book that's being taught at ucla, stanford, oklahoma state university, and among also other community colleges. it is the first book in the state that exposes the brutality and changes the full image of the missions and the chairman of the amamutson tribe said after my book came out, this is a very, very, very important book for indian communities because now we have the evidence of everything that we have said and that very few have believed in our oral tradition of history. took me seven years of research to find the letters that show that sarah certainly ordered the whippings of indians, did not care about their life on earth, and also did not care about how they lived in the missions, and it contains a letter by mariano, the last president of the missions who said, all we've done for the indians is babtize them, administer the sack rig -- sack rement. it's a critical letter that all of you should know and read in this book. i think it's not a happy book. it's a very serious. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, friends, supervisors. supervisor breed and every member of the board of supervisors. as you know, my name is thomasita. i come here in deep gratitude and appreciate for the vote you took. when you made that vote, it took a lot of pain away, which is main the native community feels every dime columbus day comes around. it reminds us of what was taken and how our people continues to be treated and how the native people were attacked physically and the cowboy took land, and the government didn't do anything to them. it continues, the difference in the treatment. we felt that for gratitude for your sensitivity and integrity, we thank supervisor cohen for bringing this to you. we thank you for your nearly unanimous vote. primarily, we're here to say thank you from the bottom of our heart. thank you. thank you. the and to reinforce what you did was a good thing. we brought these two books for you because one of them tells why it was such a good thing that you took away columbus day and celebrate indigenous people's day. the other one tells why it's a good thing that you did because it tells what happened here in california. so more than anything, i'm here to say thank you profoundly, thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. today is my baby's birthday. we came here on her birthday, when she's turning two years old, because we wanted to thank you for the nearly unanimous vote of indigenous people's day. we want to thank you from the bottom of our heart. they've given you books paid for out of their own pocket so you can learn about this land that we're on and the land this people have settled on. another reason i want to be here, a lot of times in the media, i've been reading about people saying taking away columbus day and things like that. i want to say one thing. native americans know what it's like to have things taken away. we had our land taken away. right? a lot of our culture stripped away. language. trust me, we definitely know about what's taken away. that's why i think it was awesome that ms. cohen made columbus day indigenous people's day. i want to remind you, let's keep to that vote that we voted on, right? that we wanted one day where we thought about indigenous people in san francisco and we only thought about them. i want to say also that i support italian-american heritage day. i just don't think it should be on the same day as indigenous people's day. of all the things that we've done through, been colonized, had our land stolen, some don't get to be seen to the federal government; i think the one thing we can do in san francisco is keep indigenous people's day indigenous people's day. i want to thank you, ms. cohen, for standing up for our community because people rarely do that here in san francisco. again, this is who we're changing the day for. my baby right here. on her birthday we came here to celebrate with you. again, all we want is to keep our day. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> i'm a senior director at policy link where i work on policy toward a safe society. i'm here on the campaign to increase public safety through police accountability. the new police contract must guarantee that the police union will not block reforms and make the city less safe. almost two years ago, i directed the blue ribbon panel to investigate bias in the san francisco police department. one of our major findings was at the police union, the poa, had far too much influence over public safety policy. we found that the poa was overrepresented on the police commission policy working groups and once the commission passed the policy, the poa used its labor law privileges to delay and weaken it. as you know, three months after the report was published, the police department published their own report to make the city more safe. these reforms have been unanimously supported by leaders. even at the city was abandoned, the late mayor lee continued to guarantee the recommendations would be implemented. chief scott was hired on the basis of his experience, incorporating similar reforms in l.a. these expensive reforms will have a substantial impact on safety and accountability in san francisco. so far, poa leadership has expressed the support for these reforms. unless they commit to this in the new contract, they could still block, weaken, or delay through labor processes. therefore, we're asking you today to use your influence to work with the mayor and dhr to include a provision in the new police contract, ensuring that the poa will not meet, revoke, infer on any policy. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> names sand dray dratler. i have lived in the district for 33 years and reside in district two. i love my city and want only the best for it and those of us who live and work here. within this desire, i place police accountability and community safety as high priorities. i became aware of the no justice no deal campaign through faith and action. i knew of the cops report when it was first requested and issued. i was impressed with the recommendations. they were common sense to me, areas where police could better serve the community while can'ting to provide a safe workplace for themselves. needless to say, i was displayed to find that despite best efforts by community leaders and claims of support by the poa, little progress on implementation has been made. what can be done to move these discussions forward and gain commitments to reforms being called for by the community. a logical vehicle would be to incorporate implementation to these recommendations into the mou with sfpoa currently up for review. as we stand here today, you, the board, are in a position to insert language into the contract that would bind sf poa to participate in good faith in the implementation of the forms included in the cops' report. i have spent my career in leadership in local hospitals and understand full well the strength of unions and the relationships that can exist between union leadership and management. i also understand that the union does not always represent the individual interest of its members. most labor contracts contain much more than agreements on wages and hours. could not the sf poa mou spell out agreements to engage in a collaborative process that prevents them -- [bell ringing] >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, i'm father richard smith from faith and action. i'm here as part of the no justice, no deal campaign. i want to thank you for the attention i know you will give, the careful attention to the crafting of the contract with the police officer's association. i have one request, that you not check your values at the door when you go into those conversations. i understand at least a little bit about labor negotiations, the need to stay within the scope of representation, and much of this i know involves the predictable horse trading, but it's not as though we're haggling over the price of a used car here. there is much more at stake, and you know the stories. alex nieto was killed in a hail of 59 police bullets. emil carr, six bullets to his back. jessica williams, mario wood, some of the most vulnerable people in our city, all killed by the police. and there are many other names as well. there are simply too many moms and dads still in tears. please remember them, these families, these victims, as you enter these contract discussions. please remember the values that we share in this city of st. francis. keep these foremost in mind as you take part in creating this contract. in short, no justice, no deal. so thank you again for your careful attention to this important contract. >> thank you for your comments. [bell ringing] >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is john crew. i've been a member of the no justice no deal coallatiition. i'm here as a resident for 40 years and a pissed off taxpayer. we spend an awful lot of money for police services in this town, and we're not getting anywhere close to what we're asking for. i'm going to quickly go through some history. the last time this negotiation or this mou was up for renegotiation was 2007. at the time, the city gave a package to the poa, which the president of the poa said at the time, this is the most lucrative package in the country. what did we get in return? father smith just went through some of the scenarios we went through. i don't have to go through it again. we ha this police department in the life of the last contract took several steps backwards, not forwards. we're now in a position, thankfully, where we do have the cops reform on the table. two years ago last thursday, the mayor put out a press release, even before the cops report, announcing some of the changes. these sweeping changes will need all of us, advocates, city officials, police officers alike. we've all been working together, except the poa. when the cops report came out in october 2016, the mayor, mayor lee, put out an announcement, saying the police department will accept and implement every single recommendation. his words. and part of that statement says he's directing the leadership of the police commission to implement those forms as soon as possible. it is two years later. we don't have those reforms. and the reason you cannot go into this contract acting like all of this didn't happen, and you can negotiate it the same exact way. we need to make sure in exchange for what we're paying, that we're getting modern, professional, top dollar, unbiassed policing, and that the poa obstruction to these reforms stops. they say to support it. they can put it in writing. i've shared with your staff some questions to ask. [bell ringing] >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is pastor dimitri edwards. i want a few different organizations. i'm part of the no justice, no deal coalition. i want pico, california and the church of god interstate association representing hundreds of churns around the state and also of the clergy from different parts of the region. i simply want to say this. as we're sitting here, we have the privilege of sitting in meetings, having the opportunity to discuss public safety, but there are the most impacts individuals that don't have a voice and don't have a vote. i want you to think about what type of public safety system are we going to give to the next generation. you can sit here and continue to avoid the issues that the police union is basically clocking any types of reforms that people are in need of. the question is how can you sit here? how can you sleep at night when the blood of your own citizens is running in the street because the police officer's association is preventing the needed reforms that must be implemented for the san francisco police department. i want to go on record and say we are not anti-police. we believe that police have one of the most difficult jobs in america, and we believe that in order for their jobs to be better, there needs to be an increase in public trust, but there can be no public trust if negotiations are done in the dark and the voices of the community are not at the table. i'm praying, and i'm hoping, as we enter into and part of this lent season, remember that jesus was crucified and killed by corrupt cops. don't allow this to continue to happen in your city on your watch because, check this out, when voting comes up and you don't move on behalf of the community, you will be voted out, and people will be put in place to negotiate something that's fair for its citizens of san francisco. thank you for this opportunity. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm john talbot. a resident of the city for over 30 years and also a member of the no justice, no deal coalition. my part in this coalition has been to attend chief scott's reform meetings, community reform meetings. so i understand from the inside how much dysfunction there is in the culture of the san francisco police. that's why i ask you today, along with my colleagues, to support the reforms and to demand that the poa support those as well. if you're unaware of how slowly the process is going, let me say that what chief scott did, which is a good thing, was to take all of these recommendations, put them on a spreadsheet to get them taken care of. when an organization doesn't take care of its members and has leadership, our elected officials, then they don't push them to where they need to be. in business school we learned about culture change. in silicon valley, we always talked about disrupt, disrupt. well, in this case, what we need is for the supervisors and the mayor to step up and demand that the reforms be put in place. the reforms are not difficult. most of them are boiled down to we need a new website for this or that. that doesn't change culture. [bell ringing] >> if you're not aware, i notice that finally after six months, the department of police accountability has finally put up the site for filing complaints with the dpa. it was down for six months. that's how slowly things move, and that's not appropriate because people are harmed when reforms are not taken as required. [bell ringing] >> thank you for your comments, next speaker, please. [please stand by] gathering thousands of signatures in the city of san francisco. and, again, very much in support of italian-american heritage day, celebrating the contributions to the city and at no expense picking one over the other. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> thank you. good afternoon, president breed, members of the board of supervisors. my name is barbara atard, second of four generations of san francisco natives. i'm a city retiree. i worked at the office of citizen complaints and now the department of police accountability for 15 years. i'm a police accountability consultant. i'm here today to speak about the upcoming negotiations for the p.o.a. labor contract. having worked with police unions across the country, i'm astounded at the aggressive political hard line stance of the p.o.a. the p.o.a. has used its ample coffers to undermine reforms that have been part of a public and negotiated process with the community and the p.o.a. and the commission the p.o.a. has brought lawsuits to challenge and undermine the use of force policy that's standard in departments across the country. they do massive public campaigns to undermine policy, police chief, commission and board of supervisors. an example of this is the misleading taser initiative that they put on the ballot. the safer policing initiative, but it's the opposite. it establishing a very loose policy for tasers that will surely result in deaths and lawsuits. it puts into the hands of the voters the complicated decision about a new, controversial weapon. again undermining the commission, police chief and board of supervisors. i urge you and insist that the current contract be extended or you include provinces that the p.o.a. will not block contract reforms during the next period. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> president breed, members of the board, i'm larry griffin. i'm a native san franciscan, but that's not why i'm here. i'm here to speak about a piece of legislation introduced by supervisor ronen, the decision that labor is facing as a whole across this country. supervisor ronen has introduced legislation to make it easier for unions to approach their members during this very serious time. it's something that labor is facing. i would urge the members of the board to back her piece of legislation and i'm here as a political vice president for local 21. and we support this piece of legislation. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please? >> it's a giveaway. we don't want to give away our responsibility to our healthy environments or communities. the police -- we want them to be on our side and we want them to be on our side. there shouldn't be any division in this part of the healthy, trusting community. 17th avenue, there's a safeway. muni wanted to make that stop, if you're leaving that stop to go further west, you had to cross 19th avenue. seniors, disabled, even normal people. that is a wrong direction for muni. i want to praise supervisor yee for making that change go the opposite way. supervisor hillary ronen cleaning up 16th and mission. when you are finished with that, all the supervisors may go downtown to montgomery, powell, civic center and walk the muni passageway to the elevator there and start cleaning up that, though you cannot touch the elevator door because it belongs to bart, which doesn't do what it's doing and muni doesn't do what it's doing. so we have a problem here. i would like to clean that mess up. and everybody -- citizens from every supervisors' district use those elevators. children in baby carriages use those. the people of the government of san francisco will deal with the people that work in san francisco and the people that watch this show and live in the city should be able to handle an open session. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please? >> good afternoon. i'm sam denison. i live in the tenderloin. and i just wanted to say, it's very hard to believe that i will be at the next tenderloin's people's congress and sharon hewitt will not be there to say, sam, come here. i have something it tell you. i wanted to take 10 or 15 seconds for a moment of silence for her because i think it's right that someone from the tender loin should speak to her memory today and let us all remember what it is that she would have whispered to you had she said, come here, come here. i have something to tell you. take a moment of silence with me to remember sharon's voice. it's really worth it. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please? >> i believe it's -- well. sorry. getting a little organized. there presently exists -- >> clerk: sir, please speak directly into the microphone. >> there presently exists in the san francisco unified school district an extensive bilingual program and i will not criticize that decision. it's pragmatic, beneficial, and, however, i would like to see greater emphasis on remedial english to improve competence and bridge san francisco's diverse speech community, expand vocabulary and young minds through the process of collaboration upon meaning. the exchange of knowledge can clearly have impacts on future career advancement and occupational opportunity. i'm sure that you will agree that a general head start at reading carries distinct, life-long benefits. there is good reason for me to believe, for example, that a 4-year-old will benefit from receiving reading tutorial on the basis of imperical observation. a preschool reading program would provide the appropriate challenge and opportunities for children to develop their own initiative, self-motivation and educational skills and contribute in an effort to prepare for academic advancement, improve upon student advantagement and adequate levels of self-confidence. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. any other members of the public that would like to address the board during public comment? madam president? >> supervisor breed: thank you. seeing no other members of the public that would like to comment. public comment is now closed. madam clerk, before we go to closed session, please read the items for reference. >> clerk: items 42 and 43 are being considered for adoption without reference to committee. an item may be removed and considered separately. >> supervisor breed: we're going to call them both separately. please call item 42. >> clerk: resolution to oppose the repeal of the clean power plan and urging the united states environmental protection agency to continue to implement the money's critical policies that requires states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and generate cleaner energy. >> supervisor breed: colleagues, you have a resolution before you that urges the e.p.a. to upheld the obama administration clean power plan. the clean power plan was created under the leadership of president obama in 2015 and established the first-ever national standards to limit carbon pollution from stationary sources like power plants. march 28, 2017, president donald trump signed an executive order to direct the e.p.a. to dismantle this program of the e.p.a. is holding a listening session to take public comment tomorrow at the library here in civic center. and this resolution will put the city and county of san francisco on the record opposing the appeal of the clean power plan. saying that we as community will not sit by and allow this administration to continue to use fake news, fake science and fake promises t