Which is very different from the Big Government point of view. That San Francisco enjoys. Thank you very much. Now, this conversation has been great but we do have to have our final remarks now. Marcy, i like to start with you. Okay, thank you. Let me wrap up with just what we were thinking about in our meetings. We were saying, okay, the idea, for example, the legislation says that the employees may not have the Financial Resources to stay home on unpaid leave. Yes, thats right. None of them out there do. Its not just the City Employees. Another thing would be for example, it helps [inaudible]. We have a huge amount of people already in government. We dont need to attract any more. Again, speaking from the libertarian point of view. It helps with prosperity. Well, you know, you kind of have to look at the big picture. The big picture will tell you, the more benefits you give, the higher the ability for one group to spend more money while the other group spends less. So, we have not achieved anything. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your remarks. Grace. Deanna . The voters voted in 2002 to provide these benefits for City Employees and rear are just asking to look at that paid parental leave and see what we can do to enhance. If you believe that your parents should be given the opportunity to spend the same amount of time with her child, if you believe that when they come back they should have that opportunity to draw on what they currently approved for themselves for their sick time, to go back and take care of their child after that 1216 week period, that there will be situations where they want to come back and take care of themselves with their child, those are the two measures that we are voting on and that is what we are building on on what the voters have done in 2002. Again, this is not up on rotation at some point and this november. Its going to go on and see how we can support all of our families in San Francisco because we have led the way for more than a decade and we will continue to be that way for all of our jurisdictions. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comments also. We hope this discussion has been informative. For more information on this and other ballot measures, in this years election, please visit the San Francisco elections website at we hope this discussion has been informative. For more information on this and other ballot measures, in this years election, please visit the San Francisco elections website sfelections. Org. Remember, early voting is available at city hall monday through friday from 8 am to 5 pm. You can also vote at city hall on the two weekends before election day. And if you dont vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday to 5 pm. You can also vote at city hall on the two weekends before election day. And if you dont vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday, november 3. Thank you for watching. [music] hello. I am Maxine Anderson with the league of women voters of San Francisco. Along with the league and sf goth dd, im here to discuss proposition c a ballot measure that would be before the voters hello. I am Maxine Anderson with the league of women voters of San Francisco. Along with the league and sf goth dd, im here to discuss proposition c a ballot measure that would be before the voters on tuesday, november 3. Individuals who are paid to directly contact city officers to it influence their legislative or administrative action are called lobbyists. Their activities are regulated by the citys lobbyist ordinance. The ordinance does not address any direct lobbying , also known as expenditure lobbying. We are persons solicit or urge others to directly contact city officers. Proposition c was defined expenditure lobbies as any person or Business Days 2500 or more in a calendar month to solicit, request, or urge others to directly lobby city officers. A yes vote means you want the city to regulate its expenditure lobbyists by requiring them to register with the Ethics Commission pay a 500 registration fee, and filed monthly disclosures regarding their lobbying activities. A no vote means you do not want to make these changes. I am here with a lena schmidt a proponent of proposition c. We are also joined by debby lerman from the San FranciscoHuman Services med network. And opponents of the measure. Thank you both for being here. I would like to start with some opening remarks. Well start with you, first debbie. Thank you, maxine. Our organization has officially opposed this measure. Last year we worked very closely with the board of supervisors, which was amending the current legislation on direct lobbyists and the board shows unanimously to exempt nonprofits from the legislation because of the potential showing Chilling Effect on nonprofit advocacy. The city relies on a diverse strong Nonprofit Sector on the front lines of healthcare, safety net Environmental Issues and other social issues. This legislation this ballot measure, will cause nonprofits to be afraid to engage in advocacy. I have worked for many many years with nonprofits that have misconceptions around the concepts role was. Many things are not even allowed to lobby the irs increases its scrutiny of nonprofits that do expensive lobbying. The foundations hesitate to fund him and we need to be sure that they can engage in the public debate thank you very much, dedicate a lena . Thank you. I appreciate the league putting this together. Let me say that this opposition, proposition c, the key is transparency. Before i go into that let me also note the Ethics Commission is the organization that put it on the ballot. The Ethics Commission is an independent organization independent commission. It has the authority to put something on the ballot. It had a series of hearings on it and open meetings on it, so that everything could be discussed and they voted unanimously to put it on the ballot the first time in 10 years that they did. When proposition c restores what San Francisco had until 2009 get it affirms the voters and the citizens tribunal to follow the money and that the dollars that are being used for lobbying should be open and expose it to the electorate. There has been in on this changed sinceill stop. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Im sure within my questions you have an opportunity to continue your thought. Because, my first question to debbie is going to be, this measure sometimes colleges increasing transparent. You believe this ballot measure increases transparency and City Government and elections . I think that this legislation would have unintended consequences. It will discourage nonprofits from advocating a nonprofits are often the only way are the havenots of our city to organize themselves to speak out on issues. The Ethics Commission working with the board of supervisors that in many advocates we have developed something that would not have had unintended consequences and that we would be able to change. So, it may increase transparency in reporting, the more likely it will lead nonprofits is that of same were going to register tuesday were going to advocate less and it will decrease transparency on the many issues that we debate every day. Thank you. A lena. How do you feel on that . I think transparency is key to all this and i think that the nonprofits are already have to report on the 501 c 3 501 c four at the report to the irs in previous two 2009, they were reporting to the Ethics Commission also. That there were a number of them that did and it didnt seem to have a lot of hammering or tampering of fact at that point. I think that the reason it went through the Ethics Commission is because the Ethics Commission is independent and not subject to political pressure the way the board of supervisors candy. I think its important that when you have regulations out there that cover a certain class of lets say, 501 c 3 in this case, it is only equitable that it should cover all classes of the 501 c 3 s. So i think thats important. I think the other thing to remember is that since 2009, we have the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United and that Citizens United meant a tremendous influx of dollars that were unregulated and undisclosed, and they often set up nonprofits in orderbecause that ensured that there would be they do not have to list their donors when they were a nonprofit. So, what we are trying to do is to make sure that everybody is covered in that everybody is treated equitably. Thank you very much. Going along with that, so, we get some sense to the people who viewed this, do you think this measure ballot measure goes far enough or do you believe it goes too far in your opinion and will start with you, i lena thank you. Its an interesting question. I think there has to be a number of issues that need to be looked at within the world of lobbying, but what this does is basically restore what we had before, makes it allinclusive, which is what we had before, and that its an enormous burst up and one that could make a difference down the road. Thank you very much. Debbie . It goes way too far. It was not necessary to include nonprofits in order to get at the types of problems that a lena has raised here. The ballot measure will require forprofits to disclose their expenditures. Its the Forprofit Corporation establishes and astroturf nonprofit though Forprofit Corporation will have to disclose all their expenditures that they used to create the nonprofits and give to the nonprofit for the purpose of lobbying. Okay. Thank you very much for your answers to those questions and for the help youre giving to the voters of the city of San Francisco. Now, where can have your Closing Remarks. After Closing Remarks will start with you, i lena. Okay, thank you again for having this and letting us have a chance to talk about it. As i say, i think the important thing on this issue is transparency. I was the foreperson of the civil grand jury in 2013, i think 2014, and we look at the Ethics Commission investigated the Ethics Commission for 8 months and came out of the report, this was one of our recommendations in the report. At this part be restored,. So, certainly after all that scrutiny this was a good step in the right direction. I also want to say that i have also been with nonprofits both in terms of being on the board, being a staff member and all that. I understand the constrictions of time but i think if you accept the shield of the government i being a nonprofit and accept what goes with a 501 c 3 , you should be willing to be treated equally with other nonprofits and be able to put the information out there that the voters need so badly. Thank you very much. Debbie, your remarks. First of all, nonprofits are they in batumi community a better place. By passing a ballot measure that would require nonprofits to pay a 500 fee for the privilege of expressing their First Amendment rights, we will have a situation where nonprofits will simply advocate less. The more burdensome, the more complicated, we make the rules, the more nonprofits say, it is not worth the risk of trying to comply with these ordinance. It is not worth the trouble of having to file all these reports. We do not want to peoplelegislative [inaudible] and we want our nonprofits to be out there, expressing their opinions. The First Amendment can be messy. We know that. We dont always agree with people that are expressing their opinion, and thats what its about. We need to empower nonprofits to counter the money thats coming from the haves versus the havenots. Thank you, debbie and helene. Thank you both for your comments and your time. We hope that this discussion has been informative. For more information on this, and other ballot measures in this years election, please visit the San Francisco elections website at, and other ballot measures in this years election, please visit the San Francisco elections website sfelections. Org. Remember, early voting is available at city hall monday through friday from 8 pm to 5 pm. You can also vote at city hall on the two weekends before election day. And, if you dont vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday, november 3. Thank you for watching. [music] hello. Im chris and shoot with the league of women voters of San Francisco. Along with the league and s fwd from your discuss proposition d a ballot measure before the voters on tuesday, november 3. The city to its Port Commission earns a 28 acre waterfront area located south of at t park across mccovey cove. Known as mission rock the site consists of most appears 40 and seawall lot 337. Advantage in a multiyear committee grant process the board adopted a vision statement for mixeduse development of mission rock. Selected a developer to create a project consisted with that statement. Proposition d would increase the height limit of up to 10 of the 20 acres in mission rock. A yes vote means you want to increase the height limit for 10 of the 20 acres of mission rock site from one story to light limits ranging from 40240 v. And naked city policy to encourage the development provided that it includes a acres of parks and open space and housing of which at least 33 is affordable for low and middle income households. A no vote means you dont want to increase the height limit or dr. City policy. Im here with matt ceo of same physical part of lines and its opponent a proposition d. Also join by john environmental attorney what an advocate and opponents of the measure. Thank you both for being here. A pleasure i like to start with opening remark. Matt . Thank you chris and get pleasure to be here. Much of San Franciscos waterfront ballpark ali south to the county line has been for 40 years or more. We got detained here is empty warehouses m. D. Cites some of them are contaminated even superfund site. Thats changing in a very big way. For the past decade, the sentences go Park Alliance has been spearheading an effort called the blue greenway were parting with all Property Owners and Government Agencies committees all along that waterfront to reenvision that waterfront. I put together an unbroken 30 mile long string of parks, open spaces, biking paths, hiking trails, to open up that waterfront for the public use and for spousal developments. The blue greenway starts with Mission Rocket which of the site were looking at here. This parking lot be converted into a acres of open space including the entire waterfront a new promenade around appear. Balanced with housing and jobs. The balance approach to the support thanks, matt. John, opening remark that sounds like thats what proposition d is about. Just like the washington embraces height limits on the waterfront for hours about the Beautiful Day for everybody it that people that live and work a bit watching about waist height limits to 136 feet per [inaudible] proposition d by them are taller than washington and three of them are twice as tall. Taller than the montana towers were in the water and all the buildings in opposition d are taller than pure 70 which were supported last. The reason neither the groups are opposing proposition d is much as we want to parks and talk about, is a right way and a wrong way to develop our waterfront. Thats the history of how weve turned our waterfront like so many others to an open and beautiful voice and yes we need to build. We need to direct it to isnt just about back to the drawing board just Like Washington and the developer will come back with Something Better and way to get that is by state voting no on proposition d. Thanks john. Lets get into the question critic say theres no guarantee for the plants open space thats what it says. Can each of you respond to that expectation start with john sure. Enjoy the height of the project that is the problem. 11 towers three of them are 240 feet and to adam r1 93. Close of the waterfront they lower the buildings 21 2190. Thats those nevadabased for most people. Most of the buildings are not affordable. Yes theres Affordable Housing most of the buildings our offices for private corporations. Yes, that what the penthouse use and dont get them. What luxury condo. Audrey apartments. So our concern yes, we want as much of that associate as possible but if you build 120 feet that still going to provide very little view to anyone other than those inside the buildings which is [inaudible] people matt . A couple points, chris. First off legislation does clearly mandate that the open space will be included in the development. Its really important for us to remember that the port of San Francisco just like all of the ports in the state of california are owned by the people of the state. And we are people of california have delegated the authority to run those ports to the local government in San F