# Board of Supervisors Minutes: May 10, 2016 - Meeting date: 2016-05-10 - Document type: minutes - Source format: PDF - Extracted pages: 33 - [Canonical HTML transcript](https://sfbos.info/documents/344/2016-05-10-minutes) - [Authoritative City source](https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=M&ID=498871&GUID=F1CC9ABA-BC91-4297-9D63-0E1BA20C54F5) > This text was extracted for search and accessibility. The linked City source is the authoritative public record. ## Structured legislative records ### File 160493: Formal Policy Discussions - May 10, 2016 - Pages: 3-7 - Vote 1: other - Action: iginal question submitted by the District 11 Supervisor, in light of the presence of sudden or unexpected incidents raising formal or time-sensitive policy questions. The request was granted without objection. Privilege of the floor was granted unanimously to Jon Givner (Office of the City Attorney) to provide the four-step criteria test to allow eligible Supervisors to pose questions that could not have been anticipated prior to the deadline for appearance on the agenda, which include: 1) the question was posed after the 12:00 noon deadline on Wednesday, May 4, 2016; 2) there was a sudden or unexpected incident raising formal or time-sensitive policy questions; 3) members could not have anticipated the question prior to the deadline; and 4) the question cannot be adequately addressed at the next scheduled question time. Supervisor Breed, seconded by Supervisor Campos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 5 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to the numerous arrests and thousands of dollars in damage as a result of a large group from protestors who gathered at City Hall. The motion carried by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Farrell, Tang, Wiener - Vote 2: referral - Action: athered at City Hall, resulting in numerous arrests and thousands of dollars of damage. This raises formal, time-sensitive policy questions. It was the latest in a series of unrest following racist and homophobic text scandals among SFPD officers, very controversial officer involved shootings, and multiple investigations into the department. The community is in pain. Protestors are demanding the removal of Chief Suhr, and I know you have said you will not do so. I respect that. But my question is: given that impasse, that disagreement, where does this end? Where do you see this situation heading? And how do we reconcile; how do we bring the City together and ensure everyone feels safe in their community? (Supervisor Breed, District 5) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 5 Supervisor. Supervisor Mar, seconded by Supervisor Campos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 1 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to sudden and unexpected incidents related to the deep-seated bigotry within the Policy Department. The motion carried by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Farrell, Tang, Wiener - Vote 3: referral - Action: on of Internal Affairs devoted exclusively to addressing and rooting out bigotry, as well as institutional racism within the Police Department; and 3) that we make a formal request to the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, calling for an investigation into the Police Department for violations of the civil rights of African-Americans and Latino-Americans. These above demands are based on the history of corruption and scandal within and by the Police Department, which have established a pervasive pattern of civil rights abuse and violation based on race. They appreciate our time and attention, they ask if we would support these demands. I support these demands, will you? (Supervisor Mar, District 1) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 1 Supervisor. Supervisor Campos, seconded by Supervisor Avalos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 9 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to yesterday's release of the findings by the Blue Ribbon Panel on Transparency, Accountability, and Fairness. The motion FAILED by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Cohen, Farrell, Tang, Wiener - Vote 4: rejection - Action: Supervisor Yee, seconded by Supervisor Kim, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 7 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to the Mayor's newly announced $17.5 million reform package to fund comprehensive police reforms and violence prevention. The motion FAILED by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Cohen, Farrell, Tang, Wiener - Vote 5: other - Action: City and County of San Francisco Page 371 Printed at 11:21 am on 6/22/16 Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes 5/10/2016 Supervisor Peskin, seconded by Supervisor Mar, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 3 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to the unexpected circumstances that arose last Friday and also manifested in the suspension of the hunger strike. The motion carried by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Farrell, Tang, Wiener - Vote 6: rescission - Action: Mr. Mayor: I’ve spoken with our Public Defender, Jeff Adachi, as well our former Mayor Willie Brown, and they are very concerned with the current state of the escalating protests in San Francisco, and the rapidly deteriorating trust between communities of color and our SFPD, as well as the public safety issues these have posed. Both have indicated that they are willing and able to act as intermediaries and help broker a greater peace on behalf of the City. Are you willing and open to this prospect and will you reach out to take them up on their offer to assist in brokering reforms that will make our city a safer and more peaceable place?” (Supervisor Peskin, District 3) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 3 Supervisor. Supervisor Campos, seconded by Supervisor Cohen, moved to rescind the previous vote moved by Supervisor Campos and rejected by the Board, relating to the District 9 question he requested to ask the Mayor. The motion carried by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Farrell, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Tang, Wiener, Yee - Vote 7: other - Action: Supervisor Campos, seconded by Supervisor Cohen, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 9 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to yesterday's release of the findings by the Blue Ribbon Panel on Transparency, Accountability, and Fairness. The motion carried by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Farrell, Tang, Wiener - Vote 8: continuance - Action: ngs in 2015. We just learned from the District Attorney today that he wants to establish a “special unit to investigate all officer involved shootings." This unit would be walled off from the regular work of the District Attorney's Office and would be housed outside of the Hall of Justice to maintain independence. The unit, comprised of 16 staff, including lawyers, investigators, and paralegals would investigate and decide whether to prosecute all officer involved shootings in San Francisco. The DA has requested a budget of $1.9 million to establish the unit. Will you commit to funding this unit in your budget? (Supervisor Campos, District 9) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 9 Supervisor. Supervisor Avalos, seconded by Supervisor Campos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 11 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to unexpected incidents that resulted in City Hall being occupied last week, the continued Police presence in and around City Hall since last week, and the need to deescalate the situation. The motion carried by the following vote: - Ayes: Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee - Noes: Farrell, Tang, Wiener ### File 160101: Business and Tax Regulations Code - Parking Tax Exemption for Certain Parking Events on School District Property - Pages: 7 - Sponsors: Mar; Farrell ### File 160207: Administrative Code - Local Business Enterprise Bid Discounts - Pages: 7-8 ## Extracted text ### [Page 3](https://sfbos.info/documents/344/2016-05-10-minutes#page-3) Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes 5/10/2016 SPECIAL ORDER 2:00 P.M. - Mayor's Appearance Before The Board President Breed recessed the meeting at 2:20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 2:23 p.m. 160493 [Formal Policy Discussions - May 10, 2016] Pursuant to Charter, Sections 2.103 and 3.100(7), and Administrative Code, Section 2.11, the Mayor shall answer the following eligible questions submitted from the Supervisor representing District 11. The Mayor may address the Board initially for up to five minutes. Discussion shall not exceed five minutes per Supervisor. 1. Mr. Mayor: On May 1st, after many years of struggle and delay, we finally launched CleanPowerSF. But, in order to achieve our long-term goal of creating green jobs by building out renewable energy facilities, we need to quickly expand our customer base. Have you signed up for CleanPowerSF's SuperGreen option? If not, will you pledge to sign up? Will you work with me to expand our publicity campaign for CleanPowerSF? Can you use your extensive connections to San Francisco's business community to help promote CleanPowerSF? (Supervisor Avalos, District 11) Mayor Edwin Lee provided opening remarks to the Board of Supervisors regarding the newly announced $17.5 million police reform package to fund comprehensive police reforms to increase public safety and build greater trust between police officers and the community. President Breed requested that the Board of Supervisors consider prioritizing questions from the eligible odd District Supervisors, prior to hearing the original question submitted by the District 11 Supervisor, in light of the presence of sudden or unexpected incidents raising formal or time-sensitive policy questions. The request was granted without objection. Privilege of the floor was granted unanimously to Jon Givner (Office of the City Attorney) to provide the four-step criteria test to allow eligible Supervisors to pose questions that could not have been anticipated prior to the deadline for appearance on the agenda, which include: 1) the question was posed after the 12:00 noon deadline on Wednesday, May 4, 2016; 2) there was a sudden or unexpected incident raising formal or time-sensitive policy questions; 3) members could not have anticipated the question prior to the deadline; and 4) the question cannot be adequately addressed at the next scheduled question time. Supervisor Breed, seconded by Supervisor Campos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 5 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to the numerous arrests and thousands of dollars in damage as a result of a large group from protestors who gathered at City Hall. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: 8 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 3 - Farrell, Tang, Wiener City and County of San Francisco Page 369 Printed at 11:21 am on 6/22/16 ### [Page 4](https://sfbos.info/documents/344/2016-05-10-minutes#page-4) Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes 5/10/2016 Mr. Mayor: On Friday, following the publication of today’s agenda, a large group of protestors gathered at City Hall, resulting in numerous arrests and thousands of dollars of damage. This raises formal, time-sensitive policy questions. It was the latest in a series of unrest following racist and homophobic text scandals among SFPD officers, very controversial officer involved shootings, and multiple investigations into the department. The community is in pain. Protestors are demanding the removal of Chief Suhr, and I know you have said you will not do so. I respect that. But my question is: given that impasse, that disagreement, where does this end? Where do you see this situation heading? And how do we reconcile; how do we bring the City together and ensure everyone feels safe in their community? (Supervisor Breed, District 5) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 5 Supervisor. Supervisor Mar, seconded by Supervisor Campos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 1 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to sudden and unexpected incidents related to the deep-seated bigotry within the Policy Department. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: 8 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 3 - Farrell, Tang, Wiener City and County of San Francisco Page 370 Printed at 11:21 am on 6/22/16 ### [Page 5](https://sfbos.info/documents/344/2016-05-10-minutes#page-5) Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes 5/10/2016 Mr. Mayor: I’m really appreciative of the progress you’ve cited, the reforms, and the additional funding. We also received a list from the President of the Police Commission, Suzy Loftus, on a number of the items happening, but I’ll just be frank and say respectfully this is not enough. I want to also state you’ve also talked about breakdown in trust between law enforcement and communities and it’s not something that’s happened overnight, its generations and decades. I have a question that’s related to the Racial Justice Committee of the San Francisco Public Defenders Office. I was with our Public Defender, Jeff Adachi, along with Hillary Ronen, from Supervisor Campos’ Office, and Danny Glover yesterday at San Francisco State University, as the Third World Liberation Front 2016, who also has a hunger strike going on, united in solidarity with the Frisco Five and the thousands of people that have been making demands of our City government and the Board of Supervisors and your office. I want to say that their demands to the Board of Supervisors and you are that we take action to address the ongoing and unresolved issues of racial bias and other types of bigotry by sworn officers of the San Francisco Police Department. I won’t talk about the Blue Ribbon Panel because I know other colleagues will, but I will say that Tim Redmond from 48 Hills to Jonah Owen Lamb of the San Francisco Examiner have raised many of these issues as well before us, but the Public Defenders Office highlights the pattern and practice of City government tolerating racial misconduct while making public proclamations to the contrary and they reveal through the text messaging and others, there is a whole list that the Public Defenders Office gives us, including the December 2015 cell phone videos that show 26-year old Mario Woods surrounded by Police Department Officers and shot dead in a volley of gunfire by five separate Police Officers for not responding to their command to drop a knife he held in his hand. They also go on to site the killing of Latino immigrant Luis Gongora, a homeless man, who also in an encampment by Officers. The Public Defenders Office talks about dehumanization, the define it in a letter very, very carefully and academically, talking about Police Officers and the dehumanization of people not only based on race or socioeconomic status, but also immigration status, gender and other factors, as well. Lastly, they go on to say that there is much more that could be done, but Co-Chairs Demariss R. Evans and Rebecca S. Young of the Racial Justice Committee, along with a bunch of members of the Public Defenders Office, including Mark Jacobs, Kwixuan Maloof, Francisco Ugarte, Rebecca Marcus, and many others go on to make demands of the Board of Supervisors and our City government: 1) will we create an independent office of citizens’ complaints with funding that is completely independent of the Police Department and the Police Commission funding and is a separate line item in the City’s budget; 2) they demand that the Police Commission create a separate division of Internal Affairs devoted exclusively to addressing and rooting out bigotry, as well as institutional racism within the Police Department; and 3) that we make a formal request to the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, calling for an investigation into the Police Department for violations of the civil rights of African-Americans and Latino-Americans. These above demands are based on the history of corruption and scandal within and by the Police Department, which have established a pervasive pattern of civil rights abuse and violation based on race. They appreciate our time and attention, they ask if we would support these demands. I support these demands, will you? (Supervisor Mar, District 1) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 1 Supervisor. Supervisor Campos, seconded by Supervisor Avalos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 9 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to yesterday's release of the findings by the Blue Ribbon Panel on Transparency, Accountability, and Fairness. The motion FAILED by the following vote: Ayes: 7 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 4 - Cohen, Farrell, Tang, Wiener Supervisor Yee, seconded by Supervisor Kim, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 7 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to the Mayor's newly announced $17.5 million reform package to fund comprehensive police reforms and violence prevention. The motion FAILED by the following vote: Ayes: 7 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 4 - Cohen, Farrell, Tang, Wiener City and County of San Francisco Page 371 Printed at 11:21 am on 6/22/16 ### [Page 6](https://sfbos.info/documents/344/2016-05-10-minutes#page-6) Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes 5/10/2016 Supervisor Peskin, seconded by Supervisor Mar, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 3 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to the unexpected circumstances that arose last Friday and also manifested in the suspension of the hunger strike. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: 8 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 3 - Farrell, Tang, Wiener Mr. Mayor: I’ve spoken with our Public Defender, Jeff Adachi, as well our former Mayor Willie Brown, and they are very concerned with the current state of the escalating protests in San Francisco, and the rapidly deteriorating trust between communities of color and our SFPD, as well as the public safety issues these have posed. Both have indicated that they are willing and able to act as intermediaries and help broker a greater peace on behalf of the City. Are you willing and open to this prospect and will you reach out to take them up on their offer to assist in brokering reforms that will make our city a safer and more peaceable place?” (Supervisor Peskin, District 3) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 3 Supervisor. Supervisor Campos, seconded by Supervisor Cohen, moved to rescind the previous vote moved by Supervisor Campos and rejected by the Board, relating to the District 9 question he requested to ask the Mayor. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: 11 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Farrell, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Tang, Wiener, Yee Supervisor Campos, seconded by Supervisor Cohen, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 9 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to yesterday's release of the findings by the Blue Ribbon Panel on Transparency, Accountability, and Fairness. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: 8 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 3 - Farrell, Tang, Wiener Mr. Mayor: The Blue Ribbon Panel on Transparency, Accountability, and Fairness in Law Enforcement released its preliminary findings yesterday, and it has brought to light a disturbing lack of oversight and accountability over the San Francisco Police Department, particularly with rogue officers. The findings, written by 3 prestigious judges and seven law firms, was released yesterday in the Examiner after the publication of today’s agenda. At the same time, we have seen a number of officer-involved shootings. Not one of those shootings has led to the termination of an officer. And there was a 100 percent increase in the number of fatal officer involved shootings in 2015. We just learned from the District Attorney today that he wants to establish a “special unit to investigate all officer involved shootings." This unit would be walled off from the regular work of the District Attorney's Office and would be housed outside of the Hall of Justice to maintain independence. The unit, comprised of 16 staff, including lawyers, investigators, and paralegals would investigate and decide whether to prosecute all officer involved shootings in San Francisco. The DA has requested a budget of $1.9 million to establish the unit. Will you commit to funding this unit in your budget? (Supervisor Campos, District 9) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 9 Supervisor. Supervisor Avalos, seconded by Supervisor Campos, moved that a supermajority of the Board allow the eligible Board Member from District 11 to ask a question that was not posed by the deadline, due to unexpected incidents that resulted in City Hall being occupied last week, the continued Police presence in and around City Hall since last week, and the need to deescalate the situation. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: 8 - Avalos, Breed, Campos, Cohen, Kim, Mar, Peskin, Yee Noes: 3 - Farrell, Tang, Wiener City and County of San Francisco Page 372 Printed at 11:21 am on 6/22/16 ### [Page 7](https://sfbos.info/documents/344/2016-05-10-minutes#page-7) Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes 5/10/2016 Mr. Mayor: Given the recent calls for greater accountability of the San Francisco Police Department, I would like to ask the following: Today, you announced that $17.5 million will be invested in “comprehensive police reforms and violence prevention.” This is a significant figure. How will there be a transparent, thoughtful process in how this funding is distributed? How will there be public oversight so that the chickens can guard the foxholes? Furthermore, there has been a lack of trust in how the SF Police Department collects and shares data. With this additional funding, how will you address these concerns? Will there be an independent, neutral auditing process? (Supervisor Avalos, District 11) Mayor Lee addressed the Board of Supervisors and discussed the above referenced question from the District 11 Supervisor. Mayor Lee further addressed the Board and discussed the original question submitted by the District 11 Supervisor. Following public comment this matter was filed. No further action was taken. HEARD AND FILED CONSENT AGENDA Recommendations of the Budget and Finance Sub-Committee 160101 [Business and Tax Regulations Code - Parking Tax Exemption for Certain Parking Events on School District Property] Sponsors: Mar; Farrell Ordinance amending the Business and Tax Regulations Code to exempt, from the parking tax and certain other requirements, a limited number of special parking events operated by volunteer-led non-profit organizations on School District property for the benefit of San Francisco public schools and earning less than $10,000 per event from rent; establishing Special School Parking Event Permits issued by the Tax Collector; and establishing a sunset date. Ordinance No. 078-16 FINALLY PASSED 160207 [Administrative Code - Local Business Enterprise Bid Discounts] Ordinance amending the Administrative Code to allow the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Local Business Enterprises to receive Bid Discounts on eligible SFPUC Regional Project contracts, with certain restrictions. (Public Utilities Commission) Ordinance No. 079-16 FINALLY PASSED City and County of San Francisco Page 373 Printed at 11:21 am on 6/22/16