be civilian. we will see what the budget cost is. so we actually, i think, there are people on the committee that thought that we should take the recommendations that the budget analyst and not fund the new academy coming through, but the majority voted to actually fund the new police classes. so that is the extra funds that came in. and it was -- i think that was the purpose of this civilianization, instead of investing in new academy classes. i want to say we'll be having a hearing about incarceration and the cost of incarceration and i want you to come to that actually. and actually, you can meet with chelsea about that and what that agenda looks like. also, i wanted to say, yes, i know about our non-investment in public education in the state of california, which is the fifth

largest economy in the world. and we see continually that public education is not funded. this is why i think we need to reform prop 13 and i hope that is coming in 2020. and that will pass. because that is a little loophole also that allows corporations to get a tax break on their property tax that is meant for homeowners. we see large corporations benefitting from this, where more money should be coming for public education. i also wanted to say i agree with you about community colleges. that i think this is a solid investment. it is not only aligned, i think, with life long learning, but it is also a port of a solution to homelessness. that we are now facing the third

industrial revolution here. and we don't have a safety net for these people. and people need to learn new trades or need to learn to up their skill level to compete. we're talking about people who are maybe 40 years old. and this is the gift of free city college that they can go back and up the skill level, perhaps learn a new skill, to be actively involved in the job market. and as we know, that this is a very horrible time for people to be losing their jobs in san francisco because it is hard to re-enter the job market without extra training. i went to a city college myself. so did my husband. we went when it was free. so we both know the value of a free college education. and also, i want to say the city college, i was on the school board for eight years. it's a safety net for those we

don't serve well in our k-12 system. it is -- so even more resources should be put to it, because it is the last safety net sometimes for folks to actually get a college education. because our public school system has failed them. so, i know that we have been in touch. we will have a day of public comment. and we would suggest that you come back actually during that time. and i want to also say, i know this is a really long hearing and thank you so much for waiting and listening to everything. i believe we've probably lost a lot of the public comment. i apologize. we knew this was going to be a long one. and we're all here to blame a little bit, because we asked so many questions.

but i want to invite you to come back and remind us that you were at the last of the list and had to wait and that should not happen again. so thank you very much. and i appreciate it. and any comments or -- i think you agree also on city college here. thank you very much again. now let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public that would like this comment on item number 5? michael, thank you for being so patient. i appreciate it. >> all of you, you just witnessed what it is like and got a sample of what it feels like to be a black man. and be racially profiled. i come in here today to speak up about the most vulnerable people who are not getting equal opportunity housing, and what it takes in order to take care of their problems and disabilities.

i'm sitting there by myself, taking care of my business, waiting to speak. a black skin colored female comes in and starts yelling, asking for freedom back. gascon is here, okay, and i don't like the way he disrespected stefani when she explains how their organization is pointing the finger back and forth and forth and back. so the sheriff come over and ask me to come out. so while i'm by the door, i'm surrounded by three people. i said what you should do is ask him how come he ain't prosecuting that hate crime that has been directed towards me and blacks skinned color females. i don't appreciate him talking to you like this stefani. i'm quick to react when females are disrespected. steve lloyd is making death threats toward me, i'll kill you

n igg er. i went to the restraining order, courted several times and got restraining orders against him and put him in jail. been going through this five and a half years. they tell him to prosecute him on a hate crime because that demonstrated that while he's making these slurs and making death threats, it's a terrorist threat and a hate prime -- [bell ringing] >> supervisor fewer: mr. wright, would you please put the microphone back on. i have a question for you. when you were escorted out of the room, i believe you wanted to address something with the district attorney. and i said you should address

that during public comment time. so would you -- i understand the situation that happened to you. but right now, can you tell me what is it that you wanted to address the district attorney and to say. >> well, he was up here, i used my legal expense, stefani, you're not the only one that is prosecuted up in here. i wanted to grill him and have you ask him, how come you not following that criminal courtroom judge's instruction to bring steve lloyd to trial for a hate crime because i documented everything that he did and the signatures who he arrest, females and harassing females in the elevator. he'll get in the elevator with a female and when the elevator door is closed, he'll say you fucking fingenigger.

practicing law 20 years and state court and federal court. my legal expense is way far beyond most people who has a degree. representing myself as my own attorney. i've been before numerous judges. i even been before judge dortman. that's why i say when i say it, when i was on my way out the door. >> thank you very much. >> when he sit up there and try to tell stefani that the world has changed since she was a prosecutor, he's a goddamned liar. she hit that on the head. i got a report where transgender is on the receiving end of hate crimes and they're not doing a goddamned thing about that either. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, mr. wright.

stephen lloyd. got it, thank you, mr. wright. thank you very much. okay, let's allow the other public speakers to come forward, because they've been waiting, too. >> supervisor fewer: i can't give him another two minutes. michael -- or drop on by my office, michael, also. thank you, mr. wright. next speaker, please. hi, caroline, staff at the youth commission. my fellow youth commissioners of the transformative justice committee wanted to communicate that we completely support the no jail coalition and based on last year's performance audit of the sfpd, the police department is one of the highly paid city

employees, whereas the youth employment and youth services are not equitable to the current standards. so right now, we're investing on youth rights as well as youth police training. and hoping that actually leads to more rehabilitation with families and youth. so we would highly like to endorse their budget asks and policy asks. thank you. >> good afternoon. the department on the status of women. i wanted to address a specific request around violence against women. our department staff family violence council, the mayor task force on human trafficking and we regularly com pile and develop recommendations to improve san francisco's response to these issues. i provided the highlights and recommendations from our most recent reports. they're over there.

and i just wanted to really call out attention to one. which is the primary recommendation of the family violence council is to fund the sheriff department to implement a program to remove guns from people who have restraining orders against them. domestic violence when there is a gun present, are five times more likely to be killed by a partner. the san matteo county sheriff department has a model where every restraining order is checked to make sure there are guns removed if present. currently the sheriff department is only using overtime hours to serve those 25% restraining orders and they could do more with more staffing. that is an important request. i want to draw the attention for the need for adequate staffing at the victims unit. they identified there should be

65 investigators at the special victims unit. our understanding is there is 51 straddled 11 different disciplines from elder violence, internet crimes, juvenile, missing persons, human traffickers and financial crimes. they have a lot of work to do and we need them to take the work sears seriously. there have been 529 cases of human trafficking since the last report. there is a state law that mandates training for municipal transportation drivers. that will be coming forward. >> supervisor fewer: i just wanted to say quickly for the request about the firearms restraining program. i wanted to follow up with you and make sure you're tied into the restraining order implementation talks. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> hi. i'm lynn and i've been interviewing instructor at city college for over three decades and i'm currently the vice president of aft2121. you may or may not realize there is going to be an $8 million short fall for the fiscal year of 2019-2020, between what city college of san francisco puts out. probably w brought in tens of millions of dollars to the city coffers and it passed with the voters because they thought they were voting to fund free city. the money is there. why isn't it being used for what the voters voted for? >> thank you very much. any other public speakers? seeing none, public comment is closed. madame clerk, any other items before us today? >> madame chair, we need to take

action on this item. would you like this file? >> we would like to file this, please. >> and there is no other business. >> supervisor fewer: we're adjourned. >> look at that beautiful

jellyfish. the way to speak to students and motivate them to take action, to save the planet, they do, they care and my job is to speak to them in a way that they can understand that touches their heart and makes them feel powerful with simple actions to take every day. ♪ ♪ >> i was born and raised in the desert of palm springs, california. my dad was the rabbi in the community there. what i got from watching my father on stage talking to the community was learning how to be in the public. and learning how to do public speaking and i remember the first time i got up to give my first school assembly, i felt my

dad over my shoulder saying pause for drama, deliver your words. when i was a kid, i wanted to be a teacher. and then when i got into high school, i decided i wanted to get into advertising and do graphic art and taglines and stuff like that. by the time i was in college, i decided i wanted to be a decorator. but as i did more work, i realized working my way up meant a lot of physical labor. i only had so much energy to work with for the rest of my life and i could use that energy towards making a lot of money, helping someone else make a lot of money or doing something meaningful. i found the nonprofit working to save the rainforest was looking for volunteers. i went, volunteered and my life changed. suddenly everything i was doing had meaning. stuffing envelopes had meaning,

faxing out requests had meaning. i eventually moved up to san francisco to work out of the office here, given a lot of assembly through los angeles county and then came up here and doing assemblies to kids about rainforest. one of my jobs was to teach about recycle, teaching students to reduce, reuse, recycle and compost, i'm teaching them they have the power, and that motivates them. it was satisfying for me to work with for the department of environment to create a message that gets to the heart of the issue. the san francisco department of environment is the only agency that has a full time educational team, we go into the schools to help teach children how to protect nature and the environment. we realized we needed animal mascot to spark excitement with

the students. the city during the gold rush days, the phoenix became part of the city feel and i love the symbolism of the phoenix, about transformation and the message that the theme of the phoenix provides, we all have the power to transform our world for the better. we have to provide teachers with curriculum online, our curriculum is in two different languages and whether it's lesson plans or student fact sheets, teachers can use them and we've had great feedback. we have helped public and private schools in san francisco increase their waste use and students are working hard to sort waste at the end of the lunch and understand the power of reusing, reducing, recycling

and composting. >> great job. >> i've been with the department for 15 years and an environmental educator for more than 23 years and i'm grateful for the work that i get to do, especially on behalf of the city and county of san francisco. i try to use my voice as intentionally as possible to suppo support, i think of my grandmother who had a positive attitude and looked at things positively. try to do that as well in my work and with my words to be an uplifting force for myself and others. think of entering the job force as a treasure hunt. you can only go to your next clue and more will be revealed. follow your instincts, listen to your gut, follow your heart, do what makes you happy and pragmatic and see where it takes

you and get to the next place. trust if you want to do good in this world, that much. >> thank you for coming. >> we are ready. >> the meeting will come to order. this is the april 19th 2019 meeting of the san francisco local agency formation commission. i am centrally fewer, chair of the commission. i am joined by our chief commissioners. the clerk of the commission is victor young. i would like to thank the staff at san francisco government t.v.

for arranging today's meeting. unfortunately commissioner hilary ronen is having to step down from our commission. we have appreciated her role in this body and want to thank her for her service. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> please make sure to silence also phones and electronic devices. speaker cards and copies of any documents included as part of the testimony should be submitted. >> mr. clerk, please assist commissioner singh on her apparatus? thank you. one moment, please. thank you very much. mr. clerk, can you please call item number 2? >> item number 2, approval of the minutes from the march 15th

2019 a regular meeting, i would like to note there is one correction needed in that the title of the documents should read minute and not agenda. >> thank you very much. do any commissioners have any changes to the minutes of the march 15th meeting? seeing no changes, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on item number 2, the minutes of the meeting? mr. wright. >> i don't know anything about the minutes of the meeting, but the two minutes that i do have, i want to make an announcement, and when i get to public comment i'm going to demonstrate how to sink and save $66,000,000.1 building apartment building complexes. i have been stressing for years, but not getting nowhere to explain that when you get a developer, you need a nonprofit developer, and quit getting developers are in it to make

money and putting profit over safety. i will demonstrate that you can save $66 million per building, and this technique is pertaining to the inclusionary rule, where you are supposed to include the most honorable people to give housing. that is why everybody voted for them. then after being put into effect , you come up with this loophole that the developer, the construction company can pay the mayor's office on housing $2 million in order to not include the inclusionary people who the rule was targeted for, and then build another building and performed the same procedure all over again, that's why you have so many people out on the street, and about you setting the affordable housing, you claim it is affordable housing, yet you make the lowest income at $80,000, $70,000 a year, and out of nerve say that is low

income housing. i'm real upset with kate hartley she came up here last week, this week and put up a scale and said that this is low income, and very low income, and the truth of the matter is, the people in the very low and low income brackets is not being included in the housing opportunities, it is disgusting, it is not fair, and the new supervisors, i will show you how they are not following the rules of regulations pertaining to mission rock. it has 1,000 apartment buildings i think 33% is supposed to be for low income bracket and very low income bracket people. i think that comes out to 250 of those apartments is supposed to be for very low and low -- >> thank you, thank you, mr. wright. are there any other members of the public that would like to comment on item number 2? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> yes. >> motion made by commissioner mar and seconded by commissioner singh.

we can take that without objection. the minutes are approved. mr. clerk, please call item number 3. >> item number 3, community choice aggregation activities report. >> thank you very much. we will have a presentation on the clean power s.f. director of the san francisco public utilities commission with updates about enrolment, as well as state legislative updates. go ahead. >> good morning, commissioners. i'm the director of clean power s.f. for the san francisco public utilities commission. i do have a few slides for you today that will run through in a fairly brief update, it is a pleasure to be with you in this meeting in april. it is a big month, it is earth month. it also happens to be the month that clean power s.f. really and truly goes citywide by completing our enrolment of residential accounts in the city and county. so we are going to cover our

enrolment and service status and we will provide, as the chair mentioned, a state legislative update and then we are happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. >> as i just mentioned, starting the beginning of this month, the clean power s.f. program began enrolling about 280,000 customer accounts citywide, mostly residential, a little under 1,000 of those were commercial customers, so what that means is now -- as of the end of april, about a week and a half from now , the program will have enrolled more than 400,000 customer accounts citywide, which is about 99-point 9% of our potential. the only remaining accounts are some of the largest commercial accounts in the city, which we are going to go back and speak to the second half of this calendar year, and that was an approach we took as a risk

mitigation measure. they command a lot of sales, so we want to make sure we have the time to understand their interest in staying with the program. so what that means on the opt out and upgrade statistics that we try to show every time we come here and speak with you, is that the cumulative out rate for the program is now two-point 7%. you might recall, it was about three-point 4% last month. that has come down because we have enrolled a lot of accounts. we're still in the open enrolment period. there are a couple more months of that, so do expect more opt outs to come through, but we are on the trajectory that we were anticipating, maybe even a little bit better. so the super green upgrade rate is now one point for%. that includes the accounts we have enrolled. that represents three-point 5% of our program annual energy sales, and i wanted to draw that distinction here. because last time i reported to you ever super green enrolment

rate was higher, so it has come down because the sheer number of accounts has gone up, but we haven't -- we have a significant number of sales, and that is ultimately what counts when it comes to addressing climate change. i know this is still a relatively small percentage overall, but we are addressing that by improving the carbon footprint of our entire energy purchases. i also wanted to add another stat here, which is it has come down to one point 4%, but ever super green enrolments have also continued to grow. we added 24% more super green enrolments since we in -- since we started. things are going wrong -- well. this is a voluntary action on the part of our customers. one last thing, how do we compare with our peers? so mce clean energy which has spread is now multicounty,

c.c.a., they have been operating since 2010. there upgrade rate is 1.9% the c.c.a. in sonoma is 1%. our goal is 5%. we think that we are setting our target pretty high, and we think that san francisco will deliver, too. so that is my report on enrolment and i will pause here if you have any questions before he handed over to my colleague. >> i see no one on the roster. >> okay. so i will hand it over to susanne of our external affairs team who will walk you through the update. >> thank you. >> hello, commissioners, thank you so much for having me today. i'm on the policy and governors

affairs team. we submitted our slides before an important develop it came up and stay policy late last week, the report from the governor's strike team on wildfires and climate change came out, so it is not on the slide, but we wanted to give you a quick update on that and give you a chance to ask any questions you might have. you might remember governor newsom newson convened a strike force on wildfires in january, last friday the strikeforce released its report on california policy options to reduce the risk of utility caused wildfires, as well as utility financial problems linked to wildfires. the report focuses on the urgent need for wildfire mitigation and suppression, developing a safer and more reliable electricity system and keeping costs affordable for all californians. and importantly, the report notes a catastrophic wildfires are exacerbated by climate change and says it is critical to state's progress in clean

energy is not derailed. the reports recommended many recommendations focusing on five key areas for action. the first one is wildfire prevention and response, the second is mitigating climate change their clean energy policies. number 3 is fair allocation of catastrophic wildfire damages. number 4 is a more effective cpuc with the tools needed to manage a changing utility market , a number 5 is holding them accountable and building utility that prioritizes safety. the report mentions c.c.a. most prominently in section two, which is mitigating climate change through clean energy section, it touches on the impact of c.c.a.s and direct access providers in the evolution of the energy market. the report highlights that c.c.a. his are playing an important role in advancing clean energy in california and it also recommends and state actions including evaluating a resource adequacy backstop via the legislative process,

increasing transparency for load serving entities such as c.c.a.s and steak ordination of procurement, increased variability in generation and consumption, and the report also recommends considering a change to the state's condemnation law which holds utilities accountable for wildfires even if they are not explicitly just explicitly at fault. we expect many of these concepts will surface in the legislature in the coming months and we will be engaging on her own and through c.c.a. i can pause here for any questions on the report. >> i see no names on the roster. >> great. okay. i will go ahead and then talk about our state legislative update at this point starting with ab 56. it is one of the bills we are closely monitoring so far, the sfpuc is opposed to this bill, as is cal c.c.a. other opposition so far come from socal edison, and stakeholders including p.g. & e, semper energy, the american wind energy association and the solar energy industries association all says they can only support

only the significant amendments. this to focuses on a concerned that we are seeing quite a victim of -- a bit of an sacramento, that is how to ensure grid reliability with an increasingly decentralized energy system. it did pass the assembly utilities and energy commission, although there was scepticism from legislators. the bill would give the cpuc the ability to tasking existing state agency is a procurement backstop. at the hearing last week for the bill, we focus and how the bill will be amended to address any stakeholder concerns and should be seen as a starting point for discussions. c.c.a. is providing some ideas for different amendments to make it a little bit more tenable for c.c.a.s. we currently believe that a central buyer is unnecessary, however, we will would be willing to support one who is responsibilities are limited to procuring unmet local resource adequacy capacity. so we will definitely be continuing to engage on this bill and report back to as the

session progresses, any questions on ab 56? great. ab 1362 is another bill we wanted to draw your attention to it would not be applicable to clean power s.f. because it applies primarily to c.c.a.s that are in development, but cal c.c.a. is opposing this bill. it would over stern s.p. 790 which was signed into law into 2011 and has the cpuc with adopting a code of conduct to prohibit investor-owned utilities for marketing against c.c.a.s unless funded by shareholders. so this prevents the iou from using their position and market power to undermine c.c.a. developments. this bill is currently in assembly utilities and it will be heard next week. and s.b. 155 is another bill that cal c.c.a. is opposing. we are also still in the process of reviewing and determining our position. it would allow the cpuc to audit load serving entities like c.c.a.s, the compliance with the

renewable portfolio standard requirement, and ensure corrective action when there is no compliance. cal c.c.a. is concerned that the bill would reduce c.c.a.s' flexibility and metonymy and increase procurement costs, and affect programmatic goals. that will be heard as well in the senate next week on the 24 th. any questions about those two bills or anything else. >> any comments? seeing none. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for your time. >> let's open this up for public comment. is anyone who like to comment on item number 3? seeing none, public comment is now closed. there is no action to be taken from the commission on this matter. mr. clerk, please call item number 4. >> item number 4, consideration of approval a proposed budget for 2019, 2020. >> thank you very much. i like to bring up our executive director to present on this item .

>> thank you, madame chair. i'm the executive officer, and i'm here today to present the 2019, 2020 budget. every year, the city and county of san francisco is required to fund for the general fund in the amount of $297,342. in addition, we have an m.o.u. with the san francisco public utilities commission, which funds our work as the oversight authority for clean power s.f. this year, there were no new requests for funding, and there's only a few slight changes, which i will explain. first, though, this is a history , this slide is a history of our work order balance with the sfpuc. in the second column at the bottom, you can see that we spend about $10,000 this year, most of it was for my time

working on clean power s.f., and also to pay our clean power s.f. interns a modest stipend, i've been careful not to draw a lot from this fund so we can preserve as much as possible for our work on the local buildout planning for clean power s.f., and as you know it, our previous meeting approved an r.f.q. to retain removable energy experts and i am looking at completing a draft of that r.f.q. also we expect the p.u.c. to approve an extension of the m.o.u. which expires this fiscal year. sometime in late may, which would be the earliest i am told. this next slide is our general fund balance. our general fund appropriation expenditures and the year in balance for lafco from 2007 onward. we have set aside a reserve of about $45,000, or 15% of the annual budget.

the second column, bottom figure shows ever projected here in balance and expenditures. that is going to leave us with about $23,000 to carry over into next year's budget. these are our expenditures to date, and everything is pretty much on budget with one exception, and in the last few months, we have exceeded our budget for legal services and there's a few reasons for that, one is, we have asked our legal council to do more work, two is the time spent on boarding our new team, and we have worked out a plan to ensure we stay within budget moving forward, and i have to say, i'm enjoying working with her and the rest of the legal team at richards watson. we have proposed slightly higher legal budgets this year only an increase of about $3,000, based on this year's spending. and then our final slide is our proposed budget for fiscal 2019,

2020, a few notes, under the line item that says executive officer services, i have lowered my salary estimate for the coming year, as you know i am an independent contractor. last year we had $156,000 budgeted, based on this year's spending and my time, we have lowered it to 150,000 for the coming year. other line items, lafco memberships are slightly higher this year. travel and training, this is mostly to attend lafco events and community choice energy conferences. the rest of the line items are pretty cut and dry. the biggest difference, and -- in this proposed budget, because we do have about $50,000 to play with, i'm proposing 25,000 additional dollars to our labor study, this is to help with media outreach on the final report, printing, photography, i hope to establish a website that would be a resource for

on-demand workers, and i also like to bring on a part-time research associate to assist me with the labor study, this is to ensure that i can manage my time while working on both the study and clean power s.f. i should let you know that we do have about $450,000 in funding requests. there are currently pending for our labor study with the san francisco foundation and the state legislature, i'm not sure how much of that is going to come through, but keeping my fingers crossed. so all told, the budget will have about a $26,000 carryover, plus $45,000 in reserves going forward, i would like to think the clerk of the board's office for her help on the budget, and with that, i would urge your approval. i'm happy to answer any questions and she is here as well. >> thank you very much. any questions or comments about the budget? seeing none, we will open it up for public comment. are there any members of the public would like to comment on

his budget? >> i haven't started talking yet and you started my time. >> reset the? , thank you, mr. clerk. >> you talk about your budget, we would have a lot more money to have in your budget if we wouldn't have to ask for more money, for example, here's 144 -- s.f. viewer, please. this is a hundred and 44 unit apartment building complex that is being built in mountain view. they are charging $56 million to build this unit. when you build apartment building complexes in san francisco, per unit you charged $850,000 per unit, at 144 units of apartment building complexes, that would cost the city

$122 million. hundred 44 unit apartment building complex thing built at $56 million, you save $66 million per building by having a developer build a department built -- apartment building complex at hundred 44 units for $56 million. now, avenue some says 500 million is going to be directed towards helping homeless people, okay, and by the same response, the economic council wants to spend 12.7 million to house all the homeless people that is located in san francisco bay area. is that clear? and here is the mountain view building where it only costs $56 million for this building. and this just flows. san mateo it's building 68 unit

building for $57 million, so if you use this technique, you will be saving millions of dollars, and all the people that is homeless out on the street can have their own apartments instead of going in and out of navigation centers. you keep doing the same thing over and over, year after year, administration after administration, and turn around and wonder why you have so many people on the streets. it is not fair. >> thank you, mr. right. are there any other public speakers? seeing none, public comment is now closed. can we please have a motion to approve the budget, please? so moved by commissioner singh, seconded by commissioner mar. can we take that without objection? thank you very much. please call item number 5. >> item number 5, update on the request for proposals for a survey of on-demand workers workers in san francisco. >> madam chair, thank you.

did i -- can i just make a statement -- >> yes, please. >> i wanted to highlight a conflict of interest that i have with this item, and due to my prior employment with the jobs of justice, and they are listed as the source of income on my latest form 700 filing, so jobs of justice along with a number of other entities submitted a proposal in response to the r.f.p. to the labor mobility survey, and so for those reasons i request to be excused for this item. >> thank you very much. is there a motion to excuse commissioner mar we. >> motion made by commissioner singh, seconded by commissioner fewer, we can take that without objection. commissioner mar is excuse for this item. mr. goebel, please continue. >> thank you, madam chair. commissioners, i'm very excited

to reports that we have chosen it winning bidder for our survey of on-demand workers in san francisco, and i have sent each of you and your staff a copy of the proposal. first little background of how we arrived to today. we originally issued a request for proposals in january, and extended the deadline to the end of march. i did outreach to a number of organizations who have experience in this area, and though i hoped we would ultimately get multiple proposals, in the end we received only one, but it was a strong one that exceeded expectations. because we only received the one proposal, i served as a sole r.f.p. evaluator, and examined it based on its merits on the criteria outlined in the r.f.p. it scored high in the proposal and the interview evaluations, and last week i announced we had -- we tend to wear the contract to a group of economic economic

researchers he will form a unique partnership with community organizers, the survey will be designed by on-demand workers and themselves. so the partners, i will mention them briefly. chris spinner who is the fact you do director at santa cruz, he is going to serve as the principal investigator and the person responsible for coordinating the project with me , steve mckay is an associate professor of sociology at santa cruz. he will play a key role in developing the survey and the methodology. mr. fang, executive director of jobs with justice san francisco will serve as the partner with engaging local community organizations, and especially reaching racially diverse and vulnerable workforce populations , aaron johannsson is the research director of the jobs with justice education fund , she will collect information on prior surveys and serve as an overall advisor and

coordinator. last but not least, hayes with and matt schlesinger are the cofounders of the driver seat cooperative. this is an app that can be used to collect data from on-demand workers, anticipate being able to deploy this -- for hundreds of on-demand workers, which will to collect data and inform the survey. anticipate this data will be very helpful in terms of transportation data to the transportation authority and the sfmta. every one of these partners brings extensive experience on labor issues to the table, they all have impressive resumes, resume is, the academic researchers have long histories doing research on issues related to the restructuring of work, and the economic security, jobs are justice san francisco, as you know is a diverse coalition of more than 30 community faith-based student or labor organizations. they are going to take the lead on recruiting workers for the

survey. that a partners also have experience conducting surveys in multiple languages. they will begin by recruiting workers for a series of focus groups, in which they will develop the questions and the methodology. the researchers plan to use multiple methods, data sources to enhance their findings. there's also this other thing which i'm really excited about is they are in discussions about a potential partnership on the survey with the u.c. berkeley labor sensor. the researchers there are already stuck it -- studying the gig economy, and that partnership could potentially provide aggregate anonymous data from on-demand workers in san francisco by examining tax returns over many years for a partnership with the franchise tax board. i also want to add that the partners experience with ensuring the confidentiality of those who participate in the survey. they have a plan to keep all of

this information storage and an encrypted format. it is an impressive proposal, and i'm thrilled to be able to work with every one of those partners to come up with a series of policy recommendations to address the problems and the issues that we find in the survey, i am now entering into contract negotiations with professor benner and the rest of the team. i hope to bring a contract to you for approval at our may 17 th meeting. there is no action required on this item today, but i am very excited to move forward. >> it sounds very exciting. commissioner singh? >> sorry, there we go. i want to echo commissioner fewer and a incredibly excited about this. i wanted to resurface something that i think could come up or i had brought up many meetings ago at this point, but i would be interested to know if some of the data collection is going to involve, or is going to be able to capture tipping practices, so i brought that up last time, but

since it has come up, there has been a lot more controversy around companies such as door dash, and insta cart to have refused -- insta card says they have changed their policy, but door dash, for example, which is used heavily in san francisco, has refused to change the policy where they are basically deducting tips out of the wages they would pay their delivery drivers otherwise. still very interested if the study is going to try and capture that data, or is it possible to do so? >> thank you. i can tell you, most definitely, that that will be one of the issues the researchers look into i have been in contact with supervisor peskin's office he has been looking into this issue i know the bureau of labor enforcement standards for the city is also conducting an investigation of door dash. i have been in touch with them as well. yes, tipping policies of companies will most definitely be one of the issues we look at.

>> thank you so much, this is really exciting, i think. i thank you are right. this is a very impressive proposal, and i like the fact that it's -- that they will be doing the on the ground work while they are working academically. what a wonderful combination. i look forward to our contract next month and thank you for your work on this. no comments, questions? great, let's open this effort public comment. any members of the public wish to comment on this item? mr. wright. >> yes, you were talking about employees. i will ask you to step back on focus on the employees, that's well over 1,000 that's been working five, ten, 15, 25 years for the city and county of san francisco and you call them exempt employees, this is a discriminatory practice and tricking devices on the grounds that exempt employees that's working and labouring for the

city do not get medical insurance, don't get annuity plans, and don't get no retirement plans, but yet you work them and have them not being able to know what they are going to wake up to you, and whether their job is going to be terminated, it is not fair, then you turn around and you have any executive director that works for the department of public health for well over 20 years and got annuity, retirement plan , and health plan, and she has been embezzling $100,000 a year for seven years straight. do stopper from working, but you let her keep her retirement plan it is not fair. as far as taxes, you talk about dealing with the tax board, i have demonstrated that you have given twitter -- he used to be five, but now it is nine high-tech companies, multi- trillions, and billions of dollars of tax free money, talking about you giving them a break, when i ask you, why is

twitter getting multi- trillions and billions of dollars of tax-free money? and then you tell me, you're giving them a break. they don't need a god damn break the people who need a break or the people who are speaking up for the homeless on the street with people with mental and physical disabilities, amputees, people in wheelchairs, and our veterans, i need a break my god damn self. give me militant -- multimillions of dollars of tax-free money and watch what i do with it. it is not fair. you are running a racket. that is called money-laundering, tax evasion and fraud. where are you keeping that money ? >> thank you. any other public comments? seeing then, public comment is closed. there is no action that needs to be taken at this time. can you please call eight --

last month a launched a new speaker series. what i hope to do by having this speaker series is to bring expert for great conversation on the topics that they are taking on. i hope that these sessions can be a resource not only for myself and for interns, but staff from all supervisors offices and the office of the mayor. our first speaker last month was mary collins of the american jobs project. she gave a pop presentation on the potential for offshore wind energy in california and how california could be a leader in that area. we had staff, five staffers from the sfpuc, we have staff from the port of san francisco, as well as the mayor's office. our speaker next week helped write a new book called designing climate solutions, which is a guidebook for policymakers, and we now host to these these meetings monthly in the conference rooms, and i hope

sometime we will all have time to attend. my one other note is that for the may 17th meeting, i anticipate it will be a longer meeting, and we are looking at changing time from 11:30 a.m. until 1:30 p.m. that day. i believe chair fewer there is a conflict in your schedule that day so we're looking at moving the meeting to a different time. that is all i have. >> thank you very much. let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public would like to comment on item number 6? >> this is a derivative because you are working on the budget, and i want to explain further to you that that tax-free money that is not being collected, i've already mentioned that that is called tax evasion, money-laundering, bank fraud and conspiracy, you are depriving the low income bracket people of their due process and equal opportunity rights. i have talked about the exempt

employees, they are working and can't get full benefits. ronen claims she has experience in employment discrimination law i find it all that nobody stood up for those employees, because, see, what you were doing, having a set of employees during the same type of work, but not getting the same type of benefits and income, medical coverage, and retirement plan, that is a violation of the unequal pay act of title vii of the united states of america code service, the u.s. attorney generals and the lawyer's edition. 2,000 each series. you can't be benefiting one set of people, one set of income and doing the same work, but don't give them the same type of results. that was is a violation of the unequal pay act, and you should compensate those employees and back them up and give them back pay for what you are shortchanging them on. it is not fair. and about this situation -- s.f. viewer, i mentioned kate hartley

she is talking about how she literally put up a scale and said, 80%, which is $63,300, is low income affordable housing. people make it a low $66,300, is not included in the housing opportunity. so you are discriminating against them. you are so deeply involved in you discriminatory packages and you discriminate against people that those same skin color as you and then you said, 50% is low, very low income, so that is $41,450. >> thank you, mr. wright. thank you mr. wright. any other public comments? public comment is now closed. strickler, please read the next item. >> item seven, public comment, members of the public may

address a san francisco local agency formation commission on matters within their jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. >> i wonder -- public comment? mr. wright. >> all picked up all pick up where i left off. i showed you -- >> okay. [indiscernible]. >> i went through this with supervisor walton in his office. he was very impressed, and i want to show you how the homeless situation is at a point where homeless people don't want to go to navigation centers and shelters because of the hardship , it as a result, they are sleeping -- that's what used to do my god damn self when you had me on the streets. [indiscernible] law enforcement came in contact with approximately 1,139

homeless people using the airport as a bathroom to keep themselves clean, while they are living in transit. all because you have to find housing for the low income people that you claim that you want to help, that you can't pay for, and then when you get enough, you turn your back. it's just like mayor breed. she campaigned and claimed her when she was a kid and her two brothers and grandmother were taking care of her and she is taking home $900 a month. that is general income under people who are on the street and living on social security, and getting -- getting general assistance for the same income. how would you like it if you were out on the street and you're at a navigation center for 90 days and they kick you in your grandmother out of the navigation center, that is not housing, it is not fair.

it is another -- [indiscernible]. >> is it on there? >> there it is. >> thank you, mr. wright. thank you very much. public comment is now closed. mr. clerk, will you please read item number 8. >> item number 8, future agenda items. >> colleagues, to be have any future -- yes, supervisor mar? >> thank you, thank you chair fewer. i had a question or an idea on, you know, as we are waiting for the p.u.c.'s report on possible newec