little bit in a couple of minutes to draft another bullet point on to this that is maybe more specific and more targeted around creating internship programs specifically for our students of san francisco? that'd be great. >> can i ask a question? the superintendent has suggested to me that if the concern is that it's not implicit that we would have an internship program as part of any future pla, the superintendent just suggested that perhaps whereas could be restored but reworded in a more positive way so that we don't insert language about an internship that could be problematic. >> it could just state that any agreement that the district would enter into would include an element for around an internship program for our students, but i think that commissioner mendoza -- if you want to tweak the wording and i will look at it to and then after the presentation we can present it. >> mr. davis, you can help craft that as well. and just in terms of the -- i just wanted to be clear. so this resolution is simply to instruct the staff to move forward on a policy. and i wanted to just ask in terms of additional language or putting anything else in, is it gonna be restricted to what's in here or as they're developing if other things come up 'cause we'll still have to approve a policy down the road. so i just wanted to put that on record that there may be some other things that come down the road through april 23 and i just wanna have the flexibility to have that conversation because the policy is not in place yet, but this is instructing our staff to go forward to create the policy. >> i agree. i think we should write a line in there that allows us some flexibility to make additions and amendments to other things you might wanna see, of course with board approval. >> mr. wynn. >> thank you. i have a number of questions and comments. in case of that i'm fine with putting in something that makes reference to that, although we can amend anything at any time. it's kind of like passing something saying we can do what we do. i don't object to that, people are redoesn't doesn't -- redundant. i'm very much? support of local hire. i think this is a very specific and long resolution that again, is our tendency to try to put everything and think of everything and describe it in such a way so while i appreciate -- and i think we should reiterate all the time, but this is something that says we're asking the staff to try to craft a policy that allows us to do things in this area that we're interested in, it is very specific. and for that reason i have some concern because we had a report from -- as was requested when this first was introduced from our staff which had a process which was referred to earlier. it was my memory between 200 and 300 thousand dollars a year for monitoring a local hire program. so all the other things that are listed here that we say we want, aggressive outreach programs, all kinds of other things, the internship program, all of those things are not necessarily covered in the cost estimates that we have and therefore we don't have an idea about what it might cost. further, we all have had issues raised by the bond advisory committee and i appreciate that our attorney has looked at that but i'm not sure it's totally within this area -- that we are -- i'm not totally satisfied that it's an appropriate use of prop 39 because prop 39 is so specific in what you can use, what you have to say in the bond language itself in order to spend money in a way that's not specified clearly in the language so i think that's a concern. and i would like to have, before we get the policy, a further anal -- analysis of what kind of staff time this will cost, which is the financial analysis that we currently have some reference to. so i think that's important for us to know. i remain a bit concerned about some language that has been left in there and we've heard testimony this evening that makes me think we still have lots of confusion about whether or not /w*e can do what the city does, which in many cases we can't. in fact, our legal advice has been we can do a mandatory local hire policy or program only as part of a negotiated project labor agreement. and so some of these -- and as i said before, that means that whatever we want, our program has to be agreed to by the building trades council and we do a pla. and just to remind everybody, while the previous pla conditions were agreed to by the negotiators of the building trades council, each member of the union had to sign the pla. so i -- none of us will be in those negotiations thankfully, but those doing the negotiations, need to be clear that every union member must sign. i'm not gonna go into the detail because i just have some concerns /-fpbl . i don't actually know enough about the detail, but seems to me there may [inaudible] things that require contractors to work with state regulator apprenticeship programs, which are actually the people who have apprentices and work with them -- they're hired by contractors, but it's the local unions that actually work with the apprentice programs so i think we have some impossible things that unintentionally that we'll need to work out as we go along. so i -- those are really the things i wanted to say. one concern i have also about something that we were told just is not legal, is that i have concern -- i appreciate the word explore, but i still have concern with the words direct contracting because while we just did authorization for -- and a contract for design build contract on willy brown and we've talked about lease issues, but -- and all those things are fine. we can talk about those. but what i understood from our lawyers was that it was the direct contracting policy that we had a problem with. so if that could be modified in such a way just to not be inaccurate in the message that it's sending i would appreciate that. thank you. i'm gonna go to miss lee first and then exhibitioner. >> how long will it take for the staff to establish the minimum participation levels for the san francisco certified lo kale businesses and to establish a required minimum for project work hours. >> i believe delegate lee has proposed a question on how long it would take to come up with the requirements, and as stated in policy, it would be april 3. >> first i wanna thank everyone who came tonight and spoke. all of our staff, our community partners, our labor partners had so much to do to get it to where we are now, but as was reflected in the [inaudible] tonight we have a long way left to go. this is really the first step where we put forward what our vision is, what our values are, then a policy is created by our staff, and then as has been said, this has to be negotiated, this has to be done in partnership with our labor partners, with the building trades council and there's no other way for this to be done so -- and in terms of the way we view this, putting all of this down and putting in in a pla is a way we hold ourselves accountable for having a bond program that reflects or values, that provides opportunities to the residents of this city who voted, who are paying for it and are making sure they have the opportunities that come as a result, but making sure we hold ourselves accountable so our students have the pathways to have these jobs. the reason why we're doing this is out of the respect and reverence for the work that our building trades workers do and to hold ourselves accountable that we provide the training that that actually happens. i wanna thank for everyone the work that's been done, our general council, some questions and comments have come up around the /hre -- legality of this. i'm an attorney as well, i've spent a lot of time with don, not that that's anything special. that means -- that could be a negative thing. but we've looked a lot, not just at what the city's done, but many other school districts are doing this. lausd is doing this, oakland unified is doing this. so there's a lot of models we can look to, but we need to make sure that we model ours on theirs because you don't wanna have two very large, but completely unaligned local hire programs. so i'm glad we put that amendment in there, but again, we're looking at this very closely in terms of not just whether it's legal, which obviously it's a starting point, but anything that needs to be done needs to be done in partnership with our labor partners and our community partners so we're looking forward to again the rest of process which, as i said, is just beginning. >> i believe council has a suggestion on commissioner mendoza's request. >> i would just create another bullet and it would include the following language. include a robust an comprehensive internship program slash pathway for district students within the project labor agreement. i'll read it one more time. include a robust and comprehensive internship program slash pathway for district students within the project labor agreement. >> thank you council. >> were you moving that? can i hear a second? is there any objections? seeing none, we're gonna go ahead and incorporate that amendment as well. commissioner [inaudible], did you wanna make a comment. i'm sorry. >> thank you president norton. so again, and i think everyone has reiterated this multiple times and in different ways, but i'll say it again so everybody understands that this is just not a yes or a no for our policy, but this is directing the staff to help us get there, right? so as we help the staff to help us get to the place where we say yes, we have a comprehensive local hire language within our project labor agreement, there are going to be many more conversations. and commissioner mendoza isn't in the room at the moment, but i would like to advocate for -- and i hope the authors would think that this is appropriate -- very similarly to how the [inaudible] course requirement conversation [inaudible] crime /hrupl committee meeting -- that this informational agenda [inaudible] conversation isn't going anywhere and we need regular updates and people need to know that there is a space here where you can have conversation and hear what the board is discussing so it's not a mystery and all of a sudden you have to come to a regular board meeting and you hear a presentation. really those happen at the committee level and knowing that the -- it would be a regular agenda item really does help make it clear that we're not trying to divert the public away from the conferring, but actually trying to encourage that conversation in a place for you to know that it's going to happen so i would like to make that suggestion first and fire most that it is a regular agenda item until we get to a place where we get to a vote and it's sent to the regular board for a vote. and the other thing i really want to put forward, which is again, what i've always been talking about is to make certain that we really figure out a structure that is very inclusive and inclusive for community and labor and all of the folks that have worked for sfusd on contracts to bring the history and what they know around internships and hiring and practices in san francisco which are relevant to this discussion with folks who are out of work because folks who have been working may not remember what it's like to be out of work for quite some time and it is not a mystery all over san francisco because there are many folks still out of work and i think that inclusive conversation, not threat, not accusation, but conversation will lend itself to a really clear project labor agreement that serves all of san francisco and all of the contractors who wanna do work with the san francisco unified school district. i can't /waeutd for that to happen. and somehow whatever fraction of the bodies that are supposed to be [inaudible] conversation are either putting on blinders or must have /-lg their ears and it's not an inclusive conversation so that means we have to leave our egos at the door and that's everybody. mine included. and we have to leave those at the door to be able to come to the table for a comprehensive conversation so we can move forward. there's still shenanigans, there's still all kind of things going not right with this process and that doesn't make any sense. we want a pla that is amazing and that serves ultimately /al -- all our kids. they wanna be in those schools, and families wanna come and make those the community hubs and those are built by people who know how to do it. but again, i can't help but advocate over and over again for a more inclusive conversation. leave the egos at the door, 'cause we will not get there with the fighting, the accusations, the threats. that's not the way to go. and i hope that the leaders in the policy here and in the resolution can continue to reiterate that with the conversations you have with all sides because you're leading this discussion. i participate as a commissioner and i participate as a san francisco citizen and i also participate as the kid who grew up labor. that's all my family has ever been about. that's what has brought opportunities and helped us move along. we moved into a two story home. that was labor. that's union strength. so i cannot express it enough and i'll say it in side bar conversations everywhere. please check the ego at the door to come to the conversation to get down to work so all the things we wanna do here and for our students and families that wanna visit the schools here in san francisco. i'll get off my soap box. >> thank you. i think that's a very good suggestion that we have regular updates on this. thank you. so i just wanna address some of the issues. i think the issue of an oversight person has come up and so for the person that was on the bond committee, i just wanna say that you know we are paying out of our 2006 that we are already spending money on prevailing wage because in our pla we say that we will pay prevailing wage and so we had to have someone to monitor that, that person is being paid out of that 2006 bond money. so we're kind of already doing that with our last pla and i just wanna say i hope my commissioners i agree [inaudible] pla, i think pla's a great thing and i think i understand that every trade signs on to the pla and every trade has an opportunity not to sign on. so we're not excluding anybody because laborers 261 is not part of the council so we wanna make sure they're at the table too. so i wanna thank supervisor yee for bringing this forward and for supervisor haney signing on after supervisor [inaudible] left and i'm really glad to hear about [inaudible] and she won a great contract there just re/sepbtdly. i was a past member of local two and was on the picket line for six weeks and i was a cocktail waitress so i know the power of labor. so that leads us today in this vote. we as a public entity leave a much higher calling and responsibility to set the standard of what san francisco should be like. i'm a fourth generation san francisco citizen. it is our responsibility to use whatever resources we have to help the students and families of san francisco so when i hear opposition about local hire or i hear people telling me they don't want local hire, i don't understand it. we are not asking for 100 percent local hire, we are asking for a minimum amount. it is not even majority. it is that minimum amount for local hire for san francisco residents. we need to open the doors for their students, our students, graduates, your san francisco children, this is what our students want. organized labor sets the standard for wage in this country, we want our students to be part of that. today with this vote i believe we set things in motion for a new day at san francisco unified. we set a higher standard on what we expect our city to be doing for our families and our students. i think we can do better. today if we pass this, it is the first step toward this direction and it is about the students, it's about creating a better pathway for them, a real internship to the jobs and i wanna say also i concur with commissioner, i think we should leave all our egos at the door and get down to the business of employing the people of san francisco. i think we should get down to providing a real internship for our students and i'm gonna kick open that door for our students sew they have jobbings here in san francisco because our students are san francisco residents. so we have a higher standard and higher calling because we set the example for all those businesses who want to come and do business here in san francisco. the word needs to be loud and clear, if you do business here in san francisco, you have to remember our san francisco residents and you have to remember our san francisco labor organizations. that is just how it works. so i look forward to hearing the policy, i look forward tonight for this vote passing, that with can finally direct staff, get it out of committee, get it out of the board, get it in the hands of staff to create something that is simply wonderful for the residents of san francisco and for the students of the san francisco unified school district. i ask you to vote for this and join me in this new day. this is a new direction. the direction we set in 2008 for the pla. this is the next step. so commissioners i ask you to vote in favor of this and join me in entering a new era in san francisco hiring. thank you very much. >> thank you. i feel like i shouldn't even follow you. i just wanna say i appreciate the concerns that commissioner wynn's brought up, there are some important questions about what this policy looks like, and as everyone has talked about before, this is a request to create a policy that aligns with the aspirations of the board. so this does a really good job of laying out noble as -- aspirations. so there is a lot of work yet to be done. i fully expect that we'll get a lot more staff analysis about the trade offs of all these things we wanna do, both financial and otherwise so this very much doesn't feel like the policy itself or the road itself. this is simply the blueprint for where we wanna go, the framework for where we wanna go and that, i'm very supportive so i wanna thank my colleagues for their work on this. this has been a long time coming back to -- you know, we've been talking about this be for seven or eight or nine months, maybe longer. so i'm really pleased to be going on to the next step. i see that you have joined us again commissioner mendoza. do you have any fine -- final comments? >> i think we're on the right path and this is something we should be doing. we have a tremendous amount of work in the district and we wanna make sure it's done right and that we're thinking about the city at large and i think that this could get us there and i wanna thank the authors and supervisor yee. >> thank you, roll call please. >> miss lee, miss wong, miss fewer, mr. haney, miss [inaudible], miss mendoza, miss wynn, misnorton. six i's. >> i know there are probably a lot of people anxious to leave the room now. as you exit we will be continuing with our meeting. we are moving on to item g -- i mean, item j, request to speak regarding general matters. as i reminded the audience earlier, the cards that i have now, as i've called this item and the people who signed up to speak before today are the people who will speak. i am going to call your name. as i call your name, please ryan -- line up at