announcements? >> please silnchs cell phones and complete speaker card submit today the clerk will appear on the july 19 agenda unless otherwise stated. >> todays meeting will not be as excited as yesterday. >> item 1 is first daft of charter amendment to authorize san francisco resident who are non citizens to vote for board of education. >> thank you. supervisor mar as i mentioned isn't here today. if we can get a motion to excuse him as well. okay. without objection supervisor mar is excused. since he won't be here and like to continue the item i'll call public comment unless mr. lynn would you like to speak? we'll go to public comment for item 1. any members who wish to speak come forward. seeing none. public comment is closed. would supervisor mar like 14th or 11th? we'll continue item 1 to the july 14th meeting and we'll take that without objection. item 2, please. >> item 2 is hearing to consider ord nns submitted by 4 or more supervisors to the voters november 8, 2016 election ordinance amending the tax by one cent per ounce on the disbution on sugar sweetened. >> we will not take action on this today and the sponsor is supervisor cohen. >> thank you. this is a hearing item today, we will have a discussion. the item before us is a initiative ordinance to initiate a penny per ounce distribute tax on sugary sweetened beverages. the city is facing a epidemic of helt concerns and critical we do something about it. we krideed to bring back a tax measure that is expect today generate $24 million annually. it is our goal these funds are dedicated to very important things like nutrition, nutritional education, physical activity programs, chronic disease prevention qu food access programs. the ordinance requires we establish a 16 member advisory board that includes medical and health care professionals to advise the board of supervires and mayors office where the revenue should go. i think there is no doubt that the science speaks for itself. we know there is a direct link between sugar consumption and diabetes. 1 in 33 born today will develop diabetes in their lifetime and this will continue to exacerbate if consumption of the beverages are not reduced. type 2 diabetes the 5th leading cause of death in san francisco which is underestimate since heart disease is the leading killer it is a often a result of type 2 diabetes. the rates are higher in community of colorment 50 percent of african americans and 1/3 of latinos born after 2,000 will develop diabetes. death rates from type 2 in san francisco are 5 times higher in the african american community and in san francisco alone the estimated dwreckt and indirect cost of diabetes and obesity is attributable to sugary sweetened beverage. it is up to $61 million a year. that is sth direct cost, 61 million dollars a year. these stats are staggering and quite frankly unacceptable and the thing that is most redeeming about the stats are they are entirely preventable. so, we know that soda taxes work. mexico passed a 10 percent soda tax, 1 peso per leader in 2014 and seen astronomical results. after one year of implementing the tax, sales of sugary beverages in the country failed by 12 percent and bottleed water rose by 4 percent. this declean is also across all demo graphics, but it was the greatest among lowest income communities whos cunl sumption has fallen 17 percent. many people this is regressive tax and will continue to do so. by regressive i mean it impacts poor communities and it does. the tax effects those folks at the bottom but also here to say regressive diseases like type 2 diabetes also disproportioninately effect people at the bottom so do we sit around and do nothing or go to work? that is what we are here to do is roll up our sleeves and talk about it. 58 percent of african american youth versus 25 percent caication youth will contract type 2 diabetes entheir life. in the bayview the highest rates of emergency visits and hospitalization rates are a result from diabetes. heart failure and hypertension. more so than any other community in san francisco. so, i as a representative can't sit and allow this to continue to happen. i ask the community to join me. we built a wonderful coalition and will do something. we are putting a measure on the ballot that is a start to bring a healthy san francisco. i want to acknowledge the many coalitions that have joined this battle and wanted to also acknowledge public health advocates who work with us on this measure. i specifically want to recognize supervisor wiener, supervisor mar, supervisor farrell who signed on as supporters of this measure. supervisor tang, i don't know if you have any questions but think we can open for public comment. >> no questions or comments. thank you for your work on this and we'll open up item 2 to public comment an had one speaker card which is dr. john moss. anyone else who wishes to speak on this please come forward. >> good afternoon. thank you chair tang for convening the special meeting of rules committee, it is a honor and privilege to share my perspective. i speak at the secretary of the san francisco medical society on behalf of the american heart association and california medical association who have all endorsed this measure. the san francisco medical society strongly supported this new ordinance building the efforts with prop e in 2014 and applaud supervisor cohen, mar, wiener and farrell. i revide in district 5 and pleased prop e was approved by 30 point margin in 2014 and pleased in the two years we have seen a number of victories. we have seen the new legislation by supervisor mar t the sales of sugar sweetened beverages in city vending machines and limit the use of city funds and supervisor wiener to place a warning label. the major success is a soda tax in philadelphia. we are excited to build on this effort in san francisco and berkeley and excited by the efforts coordinateed with oakland and [inaudible] applaud supervisor cohen had for this measure. happy to answer any questions. >> i thank you for your support. i have a stack of speaker cards. dr. ritman are you still here? why don't you come up. we have lorie capatelli, who is a member of oakland city council. dr. ritman. we have linda mell from berkeley city counseler r. deborah lam from dental society. please come up when you hear your name called. sumanthy simon from coalition of 100 black women. ann randolph. robert gould. vunensa bong. dr. we'll start with you. thank you. thank you. just as a reminder you have two minutes to speak for public comment and will hear a shoft chime indicating you have 30 seconds remaining and that is your warningment welcome. >> good afternoon. i like to thank you fl opportunity to speak in support of the legislation before you. my name is maxine hickman i resident and business woman in san francisco for more than 40 years. i'm president of the san francisco chapter of the national coalition of black women. the mission is advocate on behalf of women and girls of color in the areas of health, education and economic empowerment. 46 percent of the population has diabetes or on the path to getting it. for latinos the rate is higher at 55 percent. one of every 3 children born in 2 thousand will development diabetes. latinos and african americans the rate is one out of two. this proposal will help turn the trends around. [inaudible] tooth aches and cavities is the number one preventable. passing this measure will [inaudible] it is our strong hope that this board will vote in favor of the san francisco for the tax bill. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. dr. ritman. >> hi. it is honor to be here. thank you. i'm dr. jeff ritman and was on the richmond city counsm rr and proposed the richmond soda tax and vice president of local physicians for such a responsibility chapter and can speak on their behalf. the science is no longer in doubt. when we did the richmond measure it was a little more shaky, but now it is clear liquid sugar is what is behind the type 2 diabetes epidemic. science is now ahead of the public perception and if we can line up with the public perception with the science, we can save a lot of lives. let's face it, san francisco is a leadership city. people look to you not only nationally, but around the world for leadership and when san francisco will do it, it will make a huge impact because others understand san francisco as a place that really puts things like health, things like the environment, that's the reputation san francisco has, so when you embrace this it will make a huge difference. i'm proud to be be a part of this effort and hpy to help in any way i can so thank you for your leadership and look forward to work wg you. >> thank you for joining us today. dr. ritman is lorie capitelli here? not yet. no problem. is linda mow here? let's work with the people we have. next speaker. >> good afternoon, my name is dr. jonathan butler and representing the [inaudible] i want to let you bow 29.1 million americans have diabetes. 35 to 90 million are believed to have prediabetes. 1 in 11 teens have prediabetes. a number we thought was alarmingly high back then but fast forward to today and that increase today 1 in 4 teens, that is quarter of our kids. projections suggest 40 percent of u.s. children will develop the disease win their life time. to suggest having diabetes as a young age is devastating is a understatement. these kids will face injections and kidney and dialysis. it is maimer contributor to type 2 diabetes. having one sode aa day over time raising the risk of getting diabetes by 26 percent. beverage companies continue to target black and latino youth. black children and teens saw 80 percent to 90 percent more adess compare today white youth including more than twice as many for sprite, 5 hour energy and vitamin water. from 2008 to 10, hispanic children saw 40 percent more ads for sugary drinks mptd this morning we can address a range of issues that effect the black community but one issue is health disparity. what changed is inage people get diabetes. it used it be called adult onset because it effected parent and grandparents but it is effecting our kids and significantly effecting our black community. as [inaudible] i stands in support for the sugary drink tax. >> thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. dr. bennett and i a pediatrician and practicing in san francisco mainly with youth in the bayview for the last 12 years. i am very familiar with the idea of bobeasty and diabetes in our young people because i diagnose it. i get youth who come in on a regular basis who have more serveings of soda in a day than vegetables. that is not uncommon and the beginning of a terrible journey for them that will lead for their parent and grandparent. i see hartd disease, diabetes and helt problems that start a a younger age. sugar sweetened beverages are well established to be a central cause of this. it a complex issue but that 26 percent just quoted to you is from one drink a day and that wasn't found with diet drinks or fruit juice so it isn't just a substitution and any anything is the same. it is sugar sweetened beverages. we in the health department do education campaigns and shape up and [inaudible] and soda free summer and everything we can to convince people drinking the beverages is a bad idea and some progress was made but this issues not just created by peoples bad choices. it is created by industry and public policy and a lot of different things and have to have responses from all those areas in order to tackle the problem. we will alone will not be able to do it so we need a multi-factorial response. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. [applause]: >> vanessa bomen, the director the central american resource center. i ask the board support a soda tax this coming november. as many may know and pointed out latinos nation wide suffer type 2 diabetes and obesity and see latino children diagnoses with diabetes and obesity. this includes a lack of exercise and over consumption of unhealthy food and drinks. unfortunately sugary drinks are part of daily life for many latino families. latino squz youth are unfairly targeted by soda companies in the media that promotion pepsi and coke. we also see in san francisco latino's have the second highest rate of sugary drinks of 9th graders. something has to be done to reverse the health crisis. our community believes a sode atax is wrun of many stral strategies that will help change unhealthy habits and dissuedeing member tooz purchase soda. can also be used to support health prevention programs which we [inaudible] to provide critical health education on the importance of eating healthy and leading active leavesism we are inspired berkeley pass adsoda tax so look forward the board of supervisors put it on the next ballot. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. debry eelen from the san francisco dental society. thank you for the opportunity to comment today. the san francisco dental society rementing over a thousand member denest in the sate and county of san francisco supports a sugary beverage distributor tax because we believe the effort will lead to improving the helt and lives of all san franciscans. the intent is reduce the amount of sugar consumed by san francisco children and adles olescents and reduce diabetes and will result in the reduction of [inaudible] oral health is essential to overall health and dental [inaudible] remains one the most common disease in in childhood experienced by 2/3 of children in california. research shows increased consumption is associated with more dental disease including cavities and poor overall health. the frequency and consumption along with the combination of high lechbls of sugar and asedmake these beverages damaging to teeth. in san francisco, nearly 40 percent of children experienced dental [inaudible] by the time they reach kindergarten impacting school attendance and ability to concentrate and to learn. dental [inaudible] is preventable and includes reduction and consumption of sugary beverages. by taxing sugary beverages this will help reduce the amount of sugar. the measure will generate millions a year to fund programs to prevent tooth decay, gum disease and other health problems. san francisco believes the soda tax will improve oral health and overall health of san francisco residents and we support this effort. thank you. >> thank you for being here. [applause]. we have a full house and lot of people that want to speak, so one the rules we have in committee instead of applause you can show spirit fingers. it is powerful and fun way to show support. when you hear something you don't like just do a thumbs down. no need to boo or hiss. i want to invite victor lynn to come up and speak on behalf of supervisor mar who is sponsor on this piece of legislation. >> good afternoon. supervisor tang and supervisor cohen. supervisor mar coulden be here today and apologize. he wanted to express his support for this legislation here. and also to thank you the ongoing support of community involvement for community helths equity and build our coalition. it is great to see the doctors and grassroots support sw representatives from the east bay. we just want to thank you and supervisor wiener and everyone else for ongoing support and hope this passes in november. >> thank you very much. we will get back to public comment. please come up next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is fernando [inaudible] deputy director and administration officer at mission neighborhood health center. our board of directors which compes 51 percent of our patient population has indoorsed this initiative and i think that we are a good micro cosm of how sugary drinks impacts children and adults alike. i would like to mention last year we served all most 12 thousand patients, of those diagnosed with overweight and obesity, all most 4100 which is 31 percent. i would like to mention about a thousand of our patients have diabetes. around 5 years ago we had about 50 percent ofpede atric patients around 5,000 patients, 50 percent were overweight or obese. thanks to health and wellness [inaudible] have been able to reduce it somewhat to around 40 percent. we think that we need all the tools in the tool box so we can address the issue of obesity. if we do not that what we will do is fueling the diabetes epidemic. i think this is a good way with health and wellness promotional messages. i think we will be able to curve this epidemic of diabetes that is effecting many of our patient pop ygz. thank you very much. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> good afternoon. my name is cristina [inaudible] i am here today as a resident and a public school parent. i work for the public health department and work on this issue since 2008 when we started soda free summer. at that time i thought sugary drinks contribute today diabetes and obesity. the sugary drinks consumed are get toog a point where it is toxic. we are having fatty liver transplaintsplants similar to alcohol. the body processes liquid sugar differently than it does food. i'm here to express my strong support for something like this. i have been doing the work dr. bennett talked about around education. we won't get to significant change until we have something that discourages sugary drinks whether it is a form of the tax or warning label. there are a lot of different strategies. it will provide needed revenue to provide education. the beverage industry will say people need to educate. we can't compete the ads, so this is a way to have some level of equal footing to take on the industry and speak the truth about sugary drinks and the fact they are making us sick. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> my name is dr. robert guld and thank you for the opportunity to speak here. i worked for 35 years as a pathologist in kaiser before coming to my current position as adjunkt professor at ucsf school of medication. all of this is sent for identification purposes as our university can't indoors specific initiatives. a great deal of my work and working with others and protecting children and those who will be born from the effects of a wide variety of stuff such as chemicals and sugar sweetened beverages is at the heart-of the healthy food component. i'm speaking for san francisco [inaudible] past national organization are more than 2500 local health professional and other members strongly support the initiatives for all the reasons given by other helths professionals and recognizing effort like dr. bennett are hampered by the ability of large corporations to sell these type of stuff willy-nilly to our children particularly those in already strussed out areas of the city who have multiple other things impacting their health as well as poor healthcare in general. i want to underscore or strong support for this mere ered by the support of california medical association, american academy of pediatrics. this will aid efforts to provide healthy food to patients and have a strong message from san francisco will make a strong word. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you for giving me the opportunity to show my support. my name is wilson [inaudible] from the [inaudible] chinese health coalition and our mission is enhance the health and [inaudible] in the chinese community. it is time to take action and thank you for the legislation by tracking the sugary beverage companies because they are effecting our community communities now. these companies are distributing unhealthy drinks to harm our diverse community in san francisco. consuming unhealthy drinks can increase the chance developing many types of chronic disease. for example, there are obesity, heart and liver disease and early stages of common disease for youth now like tooth decay and early stages of obesity. the total population of the current children in san francisco cover 40 percent of having obesity especially in the san francisco chinatown. children have 53 percent developing early stages of tooth decay which is significantly worse comparing to san francisco overall. right now getting this legislation we'll be able to support and show like the changes to support our future generations. so, in addition to the fund ing that we are receiving, we can promote the current health education and develop early stage prevention that can benefit and create better and healthier communities. on behalf of [inaudible] we are strongly supporting the san francisco sugary distribution tax ordinance. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon supervisor tang and supervisor cohen and citizens. i'm [inaudible] project coordinator for [inaudible] appropriate services project and [inaudible] chinese health can ligz. thank you for offering the opportunity to share our viewpoints on the sugary drink distributor tax ordinance. nicko choice chinese helths coalition is [inaudible] address public health crisis of sugary drink consumption. it has been found to be a leading contributor of tooth decay, obesity, heart disease and diabetes. the proposed ordinance will raise awareness between sugary drinks and [inaudible] support community programs to [inaudible] epidemic. in particular, sugary drink consumption is a significant health issue in asian american community. 63 percent of asian youth report drinking at least one sugary beverage a day. the consumption as sugary drinks is found to increase risk of diabetes, which is a silent killer. according to nih and cdc researchers, all most 50 percent of asian americans are suffering from end diagnosed type 2 diabetes often as a result of sedentary lifestyle and poor eating habits. 2 out of 3 persons with diabetes die from heart attack or stroke. in addition to diabetes, 38 percent of aelgz americans in san francisco unified school district have experienced dental decay by kindergarten age. prevention and early intervention can go a long way to intervening a epidemic in the general and asian american communities. i'm in strong support the sugary drink distributor tax orbd nns to enhance the well being of california. >> before we go to the next speaker i like to welcome our frnd and colleagues supervisor wiener. >> thank you very much supervisor cohen. thank you. i just want to-i am in the middle of something but i wanted to make sure to stop by to reiterate my strong support for this soda tax. this is-this issue in termoffs the catastrophic health impacts of sugary drinks on our residents here and around the world particularly in low income communities and communities of color and particularly on kids who are now actually getting type 2 diabetes which used to be a disease of aging. not that sugary beverageerize the only culprit but a significant culprit and we know that and the science is crystal clear t. . it is not disputable. the only ones who dispute it are the so called experts on the [inaudible] the only question for us as a city and society is are we doing what we did with tobacco which is regulate tax, provide nrfgz helths warn ings and do what we know works to reduce consumption and make people healthier? it worked with cigarettes. we have a lot fewer people smoking today and people are healthier. the question is are we doing that with sugary beverages? 56 percent of san franciscans voted in favor of the soda tax. 56 percent spent $10 million in corporate responding against it. we know where the people of san francisco stand on this and i know that it will happen this time and just want to thank all of the grassroots activists, volunteers and community stakeholders. we didn't get it last time but we will keep going and thank you for visor cohen for your leadership on this as well. >> thank you supervisor wiener on yours. ready for public comment? next speaker. >> thank you madam chair and supervisors. my name is [inaudible] pediatrician in san francisco for 18 years and as my colleagues before we stated i stand here representing many physicians who can't be here because they are seeing patients in the office today. the california medical association and american academy of pediatrics and san francisco medical society stands in support of this. sugar consumption trip #89d tripled in the past 50 years. sugar sweetened beverages which are what will be addressed in the initiative are the largest source of sugar. it is the largest source of calories in the american diet and liquid sugar is different. the way the body processes it go directly to the liver and absorbed differently leading to the fatly liver you heard and i have diagnosed children as young as 5 and it is just devastating. the other piece to this is it doesn't help feel full when you have liquid sugar and that is another piece of the puzzle that is so important and why sugar sweetened beverages are different. i also like dr.bent diagnose adult onset dibateies in my practice. one out of 3 born in 2 thousand will [inaudible] this is a preventable disease. the data is clear, taxing soda will drive down consumption. we know this is true especially for children and teens. this is common sense to address a real public health crisis driven by increased sun sumption and need to reverse the trend. i and my colleagues support the initiative. please put the health of our people above public profit. thank you. >> thank you. next speakers. >> my name is emily [inaudible] and work at close concerns a diabetes and information organization. the incidence of type 2 diabetes increased in the u.s. becoming a leading cause of morbidity and mortality and effecting people of younger ages at a greater frequency. as a daughter, granddaughter and niece of people with type 2 diabetes i know how pervasive this disease is. unfonchinately ratef diagnosis and complications are exacerbated in minority and low income populations. the toxic food environment intensifys this problem. near half african american and luteenlo children will develop diabetes. significantly increase the risk of developing diabetes. i urge you to prioritize the health of our community, particularly that of children, the most vulnerable members of our society. the greatest tool we have to combat the dpi beaties epidemic and revention. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to speak. my name is ava [inaudible] and senior program manager at the [inaudible] diabetes non profit dedicated to improving the lives of people with diabetes and prediabetes. new diabetes cases are exploding. the impact of diabetes [inaudible] the greatest burden is on the personal level. through my work i hear all the time about the challenges many people with diabetes are up against. here are quotes. i had 4 surgeries in 4 months including having two toes amputated. i hate finger sticks. i feel i'm losing control of my life and it st. frightening. i am falling all the time, broke my shoulder and kidneys are failing and cant feel my arm or leg. these are happening in san francisco in children and adults. we know sugar sweetened beverages are linked to diabetes so if we don't act it is on us. thank you for taking this initiative and supporting the sugary drinks beverage tax. >> thank you >> helen gow and work at close concerns, a diabetes nrfgz company based in san francisco. the biggest public helt challenge failed to capture the attention of americans. stigma and misunderstanding created a culture where patients are blamed for diabetes. this is close concern. we too often make people are diabetes feel it is their fault about the toxic food environment makes it hard to be healthy. drinks like soda are the number 1 source of added sugar in the diet and account for half consumed. a sugary beverage taxes shows decrease in soda but raises awareness [inaudible] too many people are not informed of the risk. we [inaudible] the city of san francisco has a opportunity to set a example for cities across america as we build a culture of health. thank you for your support and make thg healthy choice the easy choice. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello. thank you for having me here. honored to be here. not a san francisco native but work here. my name is jamie bruno and health nutrition [inaudible] we serve over 400 families in the city and i wanted to share that i am in support of this tax because one the toughest part of my jobs is speak to the parents addicted to soda. to speak to the children and try to get them off the soda and try to reverse their consciousness and awareness of what is healing to their bodies. it atrocious our water systems are not in place in the mission. there is more soda consumed and more liquor stores around the corner and food deserts but can't have a functional water fountain to teach the children to take them to the park and give them water to nourish their bodies. that's why i'm here. i want to insure the wellbeing of our future generation because they are the ones that will be there watching over us when we are oldser and now they are sick. 40 percent of the children in the mission are obese or dealing with stages of diabetes. already having high blood pressure. this is a injustice to the future generation. this is injustice to the communities that come here for opportunity in the nation. they center to start out being sick. this is not how i invention america or how i envision san francisco. everyone in favor of this, please stands up. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity. my name is ben dudeic and concerned citizen. so concerned i sought out a job on the campaign to pass the soda tax. san franciscans united to reduce diabetes. i want to second all the stats but not going to repeat them. i just want to thank everybody who is supported. elected officials-there are 115 endorsing elected officials, local businesses, and organizations both local and national all in support and want to thank everybody for standsing up against the propaganda of big soda. i want to remind the san francisco unified school district feared removing sugar sweetens beverages would negatively impact the school male program budget. the idea removing the products from shelves would hurt businesses is a myth the big soda corporations spread. in fact, when the school district removed the products they sold more water, milk and juice and revenues went up counter to what the big soda corporations would like you to believe. i would like to reminds everybody in 2014 the american beverage association announced their balance calories initiative with the goal to reduce beverage calories consumed per person nationally by 20 percent by 2025. i think voting for this measure and supporting at every level will help the american beverage association to achieve the goal. if they speak out against this they are hip crts. >> thank you. next speaker. >> [inaudible] [speaking spanish] [waiting for translation] >> he works for had latino coalition for healthy california and works with diabetes community. in outreach to families, parents have a hard time getting their kids to stay off the sugary drinks and beverages even though they try to educate them. they are find tg is hard to compete at home when the kids are expose today a lot of ads and sugary drinks accessible throughout the day. he also states that he is a huge supporter the soda tax because of the marketing being done to these communities of color and the students. >> thank you for your testimony. next speaker. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is john [inaudible] i teach english here in the city at francisco middle school and here to voice my enthuse astic support of this measure. every day i teach low income students and see the disproportioninate damage soda does to low income communities and communities of color. today the soda industry knows of their products many harms just as the tobacco industry did 50 years ago. their business model is the manufacture and sale of metabolic and dental illness to the most vulnerable strata of society. sugar is addictive. therefore, in the face of a industry happy to take our money and ruin our health, the only ethical response is a tax on their dangerous product. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> [waiting for translation] >> she is a resident of san francisco and she supports this tax on soda companies. [waiting for translation] >> we know sugary sweetened beverages are tied to diabetes and diabetes has a huge impact on our residents wellbeing and health. >> [waiting for translation] >> and this is quhie i support the distributor tax you put on the ballot. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. >> hold the microphone to her mouth. >> [waiting for translation] >> in the last several years i center seen the impact of diabetes on young people particularly ones that i interact with. and i represent cyc. >> [waiting for translation] >> the young people are the next generation so it is important we keep their health and mind when we are here today. >> [waiting for translation] >> i urge all you to support the tax in support of the future of our next generation and health of our next generation and future of our young children. >> thank you very much. we still have a stack of speaker cards but know many stood up in solidarity, if there is anyone that would love to speak that hasn't a chance, i see a representative from the heart association so welcome. welcome you to the microphone. if there is anyone dying to speak, please come on up. if not, we'll close public comment and continue moving forward. >> hi, good afternoon. britny nob nagovernment relations drecktder for american heart association. we wanted to give our strong support for this initiative. as we know, sugary drinks are harmful, addictive products and beyond the health impacts of the products, they are marketed to communities of color. we know that despite the industries claims this is a regressive tax they target people of color and show latino people twice as many ads as white children and show black and asian children twice as many ads as white children. they were not claiming this internally when they made decisions to target our communities and hurt them with anone harm ful product. i am here to give strong support and excite today see the community come out this november. >> thank you. i have one more person, dr. shaning are you here? you spoke already. any other members that would like to speak come up. >> thank you supervisor cohen. i was fortunate that i could eat whatever i wanted my whole life. my two older sisters were not. they were both severely obose. one passed away 4 years ago. she was a year older than i and she had diabetes among other health problems. when i worked at laguna honda for a decade in the rehabilitation services department i was very aware the deproportioninate number of african american patients, they represented 25 percent of the population. many were there learning how to ambulate again following lower leg amputations. it broke my heart. worse, when i confronted former supervisor sofy maxwell here in city hall about the plan to cut 33 percent of the bed of laguna honda because 25 percent of the patients were african american, her callus response to me was who cares. i cared. i cared because i have multi-racial nieces and nephews who are also severely overweight and dont want to see them face amputations and not have skilled nursing facilities that will care for them. >> thank you. >> i strongly support this propolesh and you have my vote. >> thank you. i appreciate that. thank you everyone. i appreciate your time and willingness to come down and testify. supervisor tang, thank you for allowing us to schedule this hearing. needly to say this is a measure that is of urgent nature. it is matter of life and death and think you heard the statistics and we know personally many people probably in our own families, i know the case in my own family of members that have suffered and died from diabetes. so, it is my effort to bring this measure to voters in november so we can not only raise awareness but raise money to educate the next generation so they can take care of themselves. with that, i turn the committee back over to you. >> alright. thank you so much supervisor cohen and everyone who came out. i would just say that coupling this effort with other efforts to try to encourage people to drink water and so forth is so important. i think we are moving slowly on that. i have worked with student at lincoln high school who said we would love to have more water bottle filling stations in the school. the only one is in the cafeteria which is locked after 2 p.m. so we have been trying to ret row fit a water fountain so they can go and use more of the water bottle filling stations and just wish the school district would also try to help speed that process up for all schools in the unified school district so kids can start early on knowing water is a better alternative. also, you were alarmed to hear at lincoln high school we discurved the school district is charging to buy water bottles. they are selling them in theveneding machines and there was concern if they took away the sales from water bottles that it would hurt the revenue source frz the school district as well. i just bring up one experience i had with our local high school to say i think there are a lot of other things we need to do as well to encourage young people to drink things other than soda. so, with that said, thank you for coming up. thank you supervisor cohen. >> i just want to say thank you. i want to acknowledge and thank my staff who organized this from a legislative perspective and want to recognize moncuchinchia organizing the volunteers and getting people out and educated. she is on the grounds day to day person. i want to recognize the volunteers that are rolling up the sleeve jz joining this fight. the seniors and young people will ban together and will be victorious. >> with that said public comment is closed and this hearing-before we close the hearing why done we go to the controllers office who will share the costing letter. >> nutosha [inaudible] controllers office. we estimate the tax will bring in 14.4 million dollars a year as it is a enacted if passed jan 1, 2018. that is 7.2 million and the fallying year 14.4 million. >> thank you very much. with that said, public comment is clezed and the hearing is held. thank you everyone. alright. and now mr. clerk if you can call item 3. >> iletm 3 is second draft charter amendment to create the housing and development commission to ovsee economic and workforce development in housing and community development at election held nchb 8, 2016. >> i believe we have mrs. [inaudible] from supervisor peskins office. >> thank you chair tang and supervisor cohen for scheduling this hearing today and considering a next round och amendments. i wanted to thank both of you and also the other supervisors and steak holdsers that came out the last rules committee meeting to offer feedback and comments with respect to the charter amendment. i believe i will be asking for your consideration to move the amendments again today. i believe we will clarify and strengthen the measure before you for consideration. just to recap at last weeks committee meeting after discussion with the city administrator and real estate division we removed oversight of the functions that didn't per tain to affordable housing development or implementitation of the sur plus property ordinance. i also appreciated supervisor cohens feedback and kevin carol with respect to ovlap of the workforce functions of oewd oversight. we are proposing to remove the functions from the jurisdiction of the commission. the specific scope of the commission is left broad keeping the placement within the charter and supervisors desire to not be ovly prescriptive but there is a rational wlie the charter amendment can award contracts and grants allocated under the workforce investment act or community block program. this is keeping with the charter amendment central focus which sh creating a commission that provides a vision and strategic plan for housing and neighborhood development in the city. i want to thank lisa [inaudible] from exoewd and stakeholders who have taken time to meet with our office and offer feedback and would like to thank supervisor avalos with respect to establishing a strategic plan for equitable community investment particularlyinose struggling with economic opportunities. we like to offer a amendment to the measure the commission would be tasked adopted a strategic plan for housing and #c3450u7bty development every 5 years which the board of supervisors could modify before adopting via the resolution. if the incoming department of homelessness and supportive housing can commitment to procuring the strategic plan in the first 90 days we should insure the vision for housing and development in the sate which will benefit from long term planning. supervisor avalos offered feedback with respect the way the city family vets development agreements and that is the biggest concern i heard from community members and other supervisors unable to make the rules committee meeting last week. examples brought up included cpmc and america's cup. without being too previptive given chapter 56 of the code sets forth very specific procedures for the processing and approval of development agreements, i think there is a desire others on the board including supervisor peskin to be involved much earlier in the process and make it a transparent process for vetting agreements that you with ilbe asked to vote on at the board. to that end supervisor peskin would like to offer a amendment by providing a opportunity for the director to present a work plan highlighting potential development negotiation opportunities and giving the commission the opportunity to provide guidance. again, this not a mandate or something that the commission will have the authority to approve or reject, it is opportunity to have that discussion a lot earlier. with respect to mohd fundsing approval process, i also received a lot of feedback from housing organizations and staff we should include language that is also more prescriptive setting out a process for the commission which actually included things like a appeals process gibbon other departments with oversight bodies also have appeals processes. for example, it also made sense for us to keep loan committee process in tact and insure the commission meets weekly during nova cycles and recommends those to the loan committee at the end och inweek. i heard from stakeholders this aprauvl process could and should be stream lined. all that said with the wonderful guidance of the city attorney, we feel that is to lay that out in very specific detail is probably much too previptive for the charter so we are offering a amendment today to include a commission task or responsibility to adopt guidelines for how greats are procured and approved. within that process the director and commission have wide latitude to work that out themselves. um, finally, after requests for more flexibility and avoiding the potential for conflicts with respect to the [inaudible] criteria and insureing diversity of voices we added one additional. the supervisor iopponentment process and mayors that would be at large seat and one additional or one change in the criteria for a mayor existing seats that have some experience with homelessness and supportive housing. the intent behind that is to acknowledge not only the mayors commitment around supportive housing but the very necessary role supportive housing plays. without calling the newly forming department of homeless ness the thought is it is someone from that shop. so, i want to thank you the community members and city staff who offered feedback throughout the process and want to stress the charter amendment is designed to be floxeable and also a cooperative relationship between the directors and commission with respect how they run their departments. there has been ongoing discussion for years regarding the x creation of the commission. this is i hope a very thoughtful approach that still allows for wide latitude to the department directors to be able to do the very necessary and critical work they do, but also would help steer the direction and strategic planning for these very important agenda. supervisor peskin feels we pull together a comprehensive measure without being ovlee prescriptive or micro managing these department and look forward continue toog work with staff to work out the existing issues that are not encompassed and addressed within the chapter amendment and i'm available for questions. >> thank you very much. i have quite a few comments but don't know if we want to go to public comment here first. i have one speaker card. eileen boken but think there are more who want to comment on this item. please come up. i see mr. [inaudible] >> good afternoon. george [inaudible] president of coalition for san francisco north neighborhoods. i'm here because i support the charter amendment for housing and development commission. number 1, transparency. i believe the commission will give citizens who don't know what the oewd or mayors office of housing and community development-it gives them a chance to know a little about what is going on. there is no committee or oversight. we don't know what is going on. if we are told we don't know if it is true. planning for neighborhoods. there should be something about strategic planning on the frontened as the commission should be tasked for overseeing the process from start to finish. this is also about taking power away from the mayor and giving this power back to the people who live in sf. citizens need this power to make sure our money is spent correctly so we believe the mayor has way too much power in this process. it is vital the commission or the new commission would have the discretion to establish a process that will streamline the existingfunding approval process. people want to know how their money is being spent. mohcd is one of the only departments that doesn't have an appeals process for rfp's like dph, dcfy or department of homelessness. the new commission must have an appeals process. i support this commission. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, patrick [inaudible] i urge this commitsty to unanimously forward recommendation to full board to put this on novembers ballot. let the voters decide. whether they want more transparency and oversight of a city department that has control over 3 billion with a b. this is about the 850 or so san francisco residents who want to decide this for ourselves at the ballot box. particularly concern is this is not about olson lee's need to be entitled to gravtaus. i was shocked reading that in the newspaper and [inaudible] audioof the meeting last week. his concern he would lack substense or importance a department head has reporting to the mayor instead of to the commission doesn't hold water. you can ask barbara garcia and [inaudible] joan hayes white or greg suhr, bill ginsburg or [inaudible] at the library commission. they are not whining about gravtaus. according to mohd annual report for fiscal year 14/15, mohd issued just one [inaudible] to first responders and that program was first developed they were going to issue 10 thousand dollar loans annually and that didp cut out and cut to to 5, [inaudible] more concern is 5 year period between fiscal yeartony 10 and 11. [inaudible] small program that had -- >> thank you. sorry, your time is up. >> they have 50 million not issued [inaudible] that need to happen and it needs to happen now. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> eileen boken. a resident in support of this item. most of the previous testimony at the other meeting was regarding this item asfocus on the mayors office of housing and community development for affordable housing. instead i would like to focus on mohcd role as a policy body particularly the mayors working group. it is my understanding the mayors working group is instrumental developing the policies for affordable housing density bonus program. in this respect having a independent commission to oversee the mayors housing working group could have significant benefits. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> calvin [inaudible] san francisco information clearing house. i believe if it makes sense to reconfigure city government to deliver homeless services by the creation of homeless department it makes sense to reconfigure city agencies to deliver housing and community services given the fundamental and basic changes that occurred since both of the officers were formed all most 2 decades ago. the realty is most of the financing and the development that is occurring major project development that is occurring that used to be carried by the redevelopment agency or funded by the federal or state government is being done at the local level with our own resources and through a mechanism called the development agreement. i am greatly in support of this measure because the way in which it gives community responsibility and oversight as well assistance to the board of supervisors in the process of the development agreement to development of development agreements which is now the principle form of major development in the city. i process the city hasn't organized itself in my opinion to deal with. this is a necessary staep in that direction. thank you. >> thank you very much. any other members who wish to comment on item 3 just please come up. >> good afternoon. my name is gabriel medina and policy manager for meta. we became affordable housing developer and well as a host of services for over 7,000 clients mainly in latino communities. i am here to support this charter amendment. in particular the mission had over 1500 units of development occur and a lot of the developments happened with development agreements. one in particular the vitta development had a developer agreement, had a lot of benefit tooz the community, but when the community called to ask for the document the city said they didn't have a record of it and the final copy and didn't have capacity to share this. when it came to-we had a recent scenario where i look at developments happening down the line, for sflans instance 300 members of the bublic came together prop a how to spend the dollars for affordable housing and intention of local based developers being able to do that. however, regional developers came in in this case and tried to also apply for those funds when the community, the mission rallyed very hard for not having affordable housing development for 15 years to have the capacity and need policy set so this doesn't occur again. also, we would like to see more representation and transparency especially with regard to latino commissioners. we are 6.6 of the commissioners yet 15 percent the pop wrlgz and this is more opportunity not just for these commissions for transparency and budget allocation but other commissions that center have to do with land use. >> thank you very much. any other members who wish to speak on item 3? okay, seeing none public comment is closed. thank you very much to the speakers and to mrs. anglo from supervisor peskins office to trying to address some of the issues some of the initial amendments. i stand by some of the comments i made at the last meeting which is i am not the creation the commission is really the mechanism for solving which ever problem it is that is identified. i would say i tried to look hard toor see what is the problem we are trying to solve here i think what i'm hearing is we need to have more of a vision and work plan in place especially when it comes to the development of housing and the direction the city is going as well as the earlier valvement and discussion for the development of development agreements. so, those are i would say two of the main components i hear wanting to be addressed, but at the same time i'm not sure having this commission be the place to address that is the appropriate way to go. if there are things that for example, we should do better as a board of supervisors where we see what mohd is bringing forward to us maybe there is something we can change or ask for more brought before us bringing things to light. maybe there is something we can do earlier on in term thofz development of development agreements. that is where i see room for improvement in terms of what is potentially not working here for some people. so, i'm not sure the amendments today really address that. for example, just creating another seat on the commission is not really in my opinion speaking to what we are trying to solve here, so-i know that we do have to continue the item anyway so i just wonder if there is potential to continue the conversation especially when supervisor peskin comes back. i would love to discuss directly how we can shape it in a way to at least address the two main things i have pulled out from what i'm hearing from all you. >> i think that as you all know we are on a tight timeline with respect to the charter amendment. i have talked a little with staff about the potential to-we could have one more shot at making amendments. i would love to hear specifics from staff. i feel i put out there at the last committee meeting i was open to specific language if folks had ideas they wanted to shop ajound heard from some and not others. at this point if there is a opportunity to have a special on monday and then continue that to the 14th so it would be able to circle back around. i know the supervisor will be interested being a part of that conversation. i just want to again say that i do think he has done-has tried to really address without giving up on his initial principles or intent he is trying to do, has given some concessions in terms of jurisdiction or not wanting to micro manage the functions of these departments so i saw yes i think we can continue the conversations but with the understanding that some of the fundamental things he may not be willing to change. >> okay. it would be good to have that conversation with him directly as well and know he has been out so we'll do what we can to make sure we have another special meeting we can continue it to after amendments are made so it doesn't-it can still make it to full board on time. supervisor cohen. >> one day when i grow up and leave the board i will be like supervisor peskin and take long vacations and be able to get things done. i appreciate the amendments and thank you for stopping by the office and walking through them. a couple things when they briefed me on some the amendments i just want clarity on and the first question that comes to mind is, something-is this precedent setting? specifically it is unclear and think my staff may have raised this to you, unclear how one part of a department can be under the jurisdiction of a commission or overseen by the commission. how does that work? >> the way i approached it and the city attorney has some legal guidance around the precedent and impacts, the way that i have approached it is that there is largely no-it is really the commission has the discretion to sort of just set its own procedures and policies and develop that relationship with the directors and so calling out specific provisions and carving those out was really a attempt to try to address folks concerned that even though it wasn't mandated or prescribed in the original draftd it may be something the commission decides it wants to micromanage. by specifically calling it out and saying this will not be under the jurisdiction of the commission was a attempt to try to insure that process waents held up or delayed or-- >> i'll ask the city attorney. deputy city attorney, job gibbener. >> do we have other departments set up in a similar fashion? >> um, there are no commissions that oversee only part of a department or that i know or where we carved out a piece the commission-it isn't within the commissions jurisdition but don't think that is what this does. this says this commission oversees these departments, oewd and mohcd and can set policies overall for those 2 departments including grants and contracts mpt the one thing the commission-can set policies for how the departments process c [inaudible] or workforce investment funds so that is all within the commissions jurisdiction. the only thing the commission cannot do is decide awards of individual grants under these two programs unless the board of supervisors dopts a program providing authority for that program. >> i dont center other questions. >> speaking to earlier points about not trying to micromanage i think a problem i do have is that charter amendment actually writes out what oewd and mohcd is suppose today do. it writes out how in supervisor peskins mind those departments should function and the functions are. that is the problem with that. we have a charter amendment doing that where i'm not sure the departments themselves-i don't want to speak for them but not sure the departments have collaborated to figure out this is what our function should be. so, even though it may not be micromanaging but passing this you are chaichcking essentially some the major functions they have. in any case, i think too continued the discussion and so i'll look forward to supervisor peskin returning and maybe more amendments we can work through on this. >> would we then be looking at continuing to monday special meeting or- >> we could continue to july 14th because i think supervisor peskin doesn't return until monday, is that correct? july 14, i'm willing to hold a special meeting july 18th so it doesn't hold up your timeline. >> thank you chair tang and supervisor cohen. >> i have a question for director-thank you. i have a question i like to brink up drecktder olson lee, one the speakers raised a interested question and thinks it goes to my concern i articulated last week. something you said supervisor tang about the legislation actually will be bringing about change to the department and perhaps it is a change we need. i don't know, that st. why i'm here to figure it out. a public speaker raised a interesting point. 50 million dollars for the small sites program is not used, is that accurate? >> that is not accurate. there is a portion of the general inclusionary funds that are being used that are 10 percent is set aside for the small sites program and we in the process getting legislation to conform with the existing program so we have used some of that money as it comes in but we dont have 50 million dollars in the small sites program sitting and waiting to be used. >> when you say getting legislation is it is drafted and introduced by the mayor? >> we are quite busy trying to get things to the board as i mentioned that earlier hearing. many of our things-many of our projects go to the board multiple times. this is on the list of money things we asked the city attorney to take a look at but other things have been of higher priority because of the incredible workload we are subject to in trying to get the affordable housing we are responsible for constructed. this is a area where again, at the last hearing the controller spoke a little about the additional cost of doing the commission and basically says $160,000 a commission secretary. what that statement does want include is all the time that the staff would have to devote to preparing materials and for the commission and attending the commission meetings. that is time and effort that you know, would have to be redirected from the other activities we are doing at this time. the fact that we haven't been able to get that legislation done is not reflectivef of our lack of interest in doing that t is a reflection of our overall workload and inability to address some of the or the policy issues as we try to deliver the 10,000 affordable units at this time. it is just a opportunity to call question and lack of resources. >> another question about the down payment assistance loan program. is it accurate only 1 loan is made when 10 are allocated? >> i think the number is about 5 or maybe 6. we had- >> 6 loans made? >> first responders. as the supervisors -as part the discussions about the housing trust fund, there was a desire to set aside certain funds that were at a hirer income level to target for first respondsers. we have probably maybe 6 loans out of the potential 10 loans that have been made and recently closed on a loan for a first responder. >> how do you you advertise this. >> through the doa and [inaudible] >> the first responder unions are sheriffs department, the police department and fire department. emergency management don't get consideration? >> not exactly sure if the ems are under the definition of dhr first respondsers. part of the problem is the size of the loans. we are not big enough. it is only under this current bond issuance that we were able to increase the size of the loans to a much larger amount. >> what is that amount? >> up to $375,000 and it is with that great hope with the larger down payment assistance more people take advantsage of the program >> part of the challenge is no one knows about it. >> we will work toorthd and hopefully making more people aware of the program. >> fair enough, that's it for me. >> thank you. director lee,-i just had a couple more questions for you. i think since you are up here as i stated what i perceive to be a bulk of the problem people like to see a vision how we go about affordable housing in the city and people being involved in discussion for da. wonder your thoughts about how to better address that? >> i think that we can be before the board on a more regular basis and more specific deliverables to the board to address those concerns. we are at the board a lot for a lot of specific items. every project for our rental assistance program probably went through the commission-through the board at least 3 times going both to committee and back to the board. many of the projects go through the planning department, so there is a lot of oversight related to individual projects. i think the extent there are gaps in that, something at the board would be appropriate to address some of the gaps and whether it is creating some of these annual reports or plans or procedures manual they can be addressed by the board directlys opposed to going throthe commission process. as i stated in the first hearing, part of it is about the duplication of the oversight. we have to go to multiple commissions because we go through the housing commission and planning commission and board and committees and going to multiple commissions before we get to the board and to the extent we can avoid that by addressing some of these issues drethly to the board i think that would be a solution without creating additional work for everybody and allowing and addressing those particular issues directly. >> great. thank you. i like to give oewd a chance to also respond to that. >> ken rich with oewd. standsing in for todd [inaudible] who is out of the office. echoing director lee's words we are happy to work with the board to set up a periodic reporting process in whatever committee and whatever timeframe the board would wish. i do want to point out the next two-development agreements are very long term and move very very slowly. it is interesting we won't have anything in front of the board or planning commission or anybody for the remaindser of the calendar year. the next two development agreements we anticipate being before decision makers and before the board which is a key decision maker on development agreements are the two projects, pier 70 and mission rock project. i want to point out the board approved the beginning of that process physical feasibility finding where the board sought term sheets for the projects and still moving forward with those term sheets as our guiding principle and you will see those. my point is you saw them at the beginning and will see them when they come by for approval and we are more than happy to give a progress report as we have been doing more frequently to the port commission any time you like. >> thank you. i think that what you just said really solidified why at the last hearing i'm not sure the problem this is solving for because i do recall that we do have to approve so many iletms whether it is throw oewd or [inaudible] so maybe we are more explicit if you are interesting participating in the discussion contact me or who ever is involved but i have seen the items come before us and i would just ask that maybe the board members pay more attention and can be involved in the negotiation. that is all i have to say today and hope we can work something out for our july 14th meeting and so at this time we held public comment so if we can get a motion to continue item 3 to the july 14th meet. . >> i make a motion to continue to the july 14th meeting. >> okay, we'll do that without objection. we have to go back to item 2. we didn't take a motion on item 2 because i had to take a motion to file item 2. if we can get a motion. >> i like to make that motion. >> take that without objection. the hearing is held and filed. if we can call item 4. >> item 4 is the second draft of charter amendment to create homeless housing and service funds and appropriation and create a transportation fund. >> i think that we have amendments for item 4. i don't see supervisor -[inaudible] welcome supervisor wiener. perfect timing. we are on item 4. >> good timing if nothing else. >> yes. madam chair recollect , thank you for agendizing this. colleagues you will recall this is a charter amendment companion measure to sales tax currently pending in the budget committee and this chartder amendment will create additional dedicated funding for critical transportation improvements including improvements for muni and increased investment in vision zero and our transit facilities as well as road resurfacing and contributions to a regional partners, most significantly bart where we owe them a greater investment from the city. in addition the charter amendment provides funding for homeless services most particularly permitinant exists from homelessness. this measure will help address two of the most significant challenges we face in the city in terms of the need to address the homeless crisis on the streets and to help people get around our city and region more efficiently. we have been doing a lot of collaborative work with our community stakeholders and city departments and so i have amendments that i will ask the committee to make after public comment and then i'll ask the committee to continue this item i believe until monday is the next special meeting. let me just briefly outline the amendments, which we have i believe distributed. they are right here. you have them already? >> i have a copy, yes. thank you. >> i'll briefly outline them. one amendment is a provision that for the mta capital funds when there is a bad budget year that may result in services cuts that mta can use up to 25 percent of those capital funds to prevent service cuts and the amendment would remove that 25 percent limit to give the agency flexibility to say first and formost we dopet want to cut service and maintain service levels. in addition, for the portion dedicated to street resurfacing, we know in the future there could bow other funding sources whether it is state or federal support and so we want to provide flexibility because if there is a infusion of road resurfacing money from other sources we don't want to require that we over spend on road resurfacing. we will see if that happens, but you never know and life is long. we are inserting 3 triggers that will allow for the reallocation of the street resurfacing money in the fuper under specific circumstances to other transportation needs that are within the charter amendment. if a vlf is passed for streets, then the entire 35 percent allocation in the charter amendment for streets would be reallocated specifically 30 percent to the equity and affordable program. 10 percent to regional program. 20 percent to muni fleet facilities. 20 percent to safe streets program and 20 percent to transit opt miization. a second trigger for reallocating the streets money, if new revenue is identified for street repaving above fiscal year 15/16 levels for non general fund money, all or a portion the 35 percent is reallocated based on the percentages i just read. fijely after 10 years subsquechbt to the effective date, if a 2/3 of board of supervisors and mayor agree the 35 percent for street repaving could be reallocated per the formula the percentages i read. there are several minor amendments changing the word may to shall. the intention have for those words to be shall to make it as binding as can be so we are correcting that. we adding language around education, outreach and evaluation in several places. we also make specific references to pedestrians and bicyclists in the safe streets vision zero section and other technical amendments so those are distributed. there is a oral amendment i want to make a minor one but important on page 5, line 16 where currently it says use today fund infrasfruckture improvements that promote user safety and fund safety education outletreach and evaluation. insert and complete streets after promote user safety. promote user safety and complete streets and fund safety education outreach and evaluation. i'll make that oral amendment. those are the amendments which i ask you to move after public comment. >> thank you very much. any questions or comments? we will move to public comment on item 4. i have two speaker card, eileen boken and janis lee, just come on up. >> eileen boken. here in opposition to commingling two very different set asides into one charter amendment. this approach makes absolutely no sense. in a very crowded ballot it makes sense that issues be clear and distinct. this avoid confusion and potential volter fatigue. under these circumstances voters are more likely to oppose the measure, mainly this measure. in the budget finance subcommittee meeting yesterday supervisor wiener introduce adamendment to have this charter amendment and the sales tax measure appear first on the local bal. i agree with supervisor yees response to this amendment. he stated this meant one supervisors issues were more important than anothers. he went on to say how san francisco has a system on how things appear on the ballot. i would go further. i believe it was questionable this amendment was proposed in the first place. i urge the committee to fund homeless housing using the tax on companies rather than a set aside that way there is a cause and effect relation. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hello supervisor,ism janislee and advocacy director of san francisco bike coalition. san francisco bike coalition is in very strong support of the measure continuing to move forward. the need is there. we know the need is there. the mayor transportation 20/30 task force identified 10 billion of need and there is still significant i think something like 3 billion unidentified in that this measure is only helping fill the revenues we are hoping to get as a city for our transportation network. for bike we knee the city is estimating about 660 million just for the bike program alone between now and 2030 and to mention that we were here just last week for the vision zero committee, and allot of people spoke out because of the need for straight safety improvements so we don't have to relive june [inaudible] two women were hit. [inaudible] we appreciate supervisor wiener moving forward with these amendment jz xoe we have to continue working forward and continue the dialogue to make sure this measure and the charter amendment and sales tax measure is something we can be proud of and can fupd the real needs we have whether for complete streets or the affordsability. san francisco is increasingly expensive and [inaudible] transportation justice coalition is think about how san francisco can help fund the affordsability programs like free muni for youth or late night transportation or muni equity strategy so hope the rules committee will move this measure forward. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is an staseia [inaudible] from district 8. okay, in your efforts to create a additional source of revenue to fund homeless housing and services and transportation improvement in san francisco, please consider other revenue streams you can tap. number 1, developers of new construction pay a fee for transportation that is discounted by 75 percent. you may say that developers are paying like 67 percent am to the community benefits, but in the actual, the most recent nexus study shows the relation between the grouth and monetary cost of transportation to support the growth in san francisco is that what is actually getting provided for the transportation sustainability fee collected to fund transportation is only 25 percent of the nexus cost, so there is a discrepancy. i dont think a half cent will take care of that. the second thing, since developers contribute to the community benefits fund that gets dispersed into 12 different areas. the next thing, commune shuttle buses don't contribute to san francisco transportation improvements. i understand they are mucherally exempt or whatever the term is but all use of city housing and transportation and services must pay their share, therefore, please find another revenue source instead of creating a joint charter amendment. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> edward mason. i like to basically oppose budgeting at the ballot box because this amount to 2.6 billion dollars for the next 25 years. i am also opposed to joining these together and i point to you here, homeless cabinet returns from the past and basically hope brings eternal. there was a program for 100 million to 200 million dollars in this article that mayor nusem appointed mrs. aliota tom my question is, are we expecting results from this money? the housing is a national issue and it should be addressed at the national level. we have spent over $500 billion on a war in afghanistan. i think that legislators at the national level we need to encourage them to start rethinking this whole process. for transportation, there should be head count assessment on the emplyees since the company benefits from the employing traveling on streets and highways. the cupertino mayor running for state office, his conclusion after dealing with the apple space ship facility negotiations is there should be a employee head count tax dedicated for transportation. the priorities are miss guided and putting these together i think is a very confusing issue at hand, so are we going to solve homelessness with this? 10 years ago this is the result and it wasn't solved, so budgeting at the ballot box isn't a prudep way of doing business. >> thank you very much. any other members who wish to comment on item 4? seeing none, public comment is closed. alright, so do we have a motion from the commitsty to adopt the amendment supervisor wiener stated into the record? >> i would love to make the motion to accept the amendments made by-the written and oral amendments. >> thank you. i second that so we take that without objection these amendments are adopted. now if we can get a motion to continue the item to the july 11th special committee meeting. >> so moved. >> take without objection. any other items before us today? >> there are no other items. >> we can talk about the letter at the next july 11 meeting. our meeting is adjourned. thank you very much. [meeting adjourned] good aftern the vision zero committee of transportation authority board special meeting. i'm jane kim and serve as vice chair. normal yee is

Related Keywords

Mexico , United States , Berkeley , California , Oakland , Afghanistan , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania , China , Bayview , Spain , San Francisco , Americans , America , Spanish , Chinese , American , Gabriel Medina , Edward Mason , Helen Gow , Linda Mell , Jane Kim , Jamie Bruno , Laguna Honda , Kevin Carol , Katy Tang , Victor Lynn , Malia Cohen , Janis Lee , Jonathan Butler , Francisco Latino , John Moss , Derek Evans , Greg Suhr , Ann Randolph , Robert Gould , Joan Hayes , Olson Lee , Maxine Hickman , Jessie Larsson , Barbara Garcia ,