San Francisco Youth Commission
Minutes
Monday, April 16, 2012
5:15-8:00pm
City Hall, Room 416
1. Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl.
San Francisco, CA 94102

There will be public comment on each item.

1. Call to Order and Roll Call

Chairwoman Leah LaCroix called the meeting to order at 5:17pm.

Commissioners present: Sarah Armstrong, Robin Bonner, Rachel Brodwin, Angel Carrion, Betty Huey, Leah LaCroix, Hillary Liang, Lily Marshall-Fricker, Mia Tu Mutch, Nicholas Persky, Mia Shackelford (arrived at 5:40 p.m.), Joyce Sun, Happy (Huimin) Yang.
Commissioners absent: Jonathan Baer, Antonia Huneeus, Javonte Holloway, Rene Ontiveros. There was quorum. Staff present: Mario Yedidia, Phimy Truong.

2. Approval of Agenda (Action Item)

There was no public comment or discussion on this item.

Commissioner Bonner, seconded by Commissioner Sun, moved to approve the agenda. This motion was approved unanimously by acclamation.

3. Approval of Minutes (Action Item)

A. Monday, April 2, 2012
(Document A)

There was no public comment or discussion on this item.

Commissioner Bonner, seconded by Commissioner Sun, moved to approve the minutes to the meeting of Monday, April 2, 2012. This motion was approved unanimously by acclamation.

B. Monday, April 2, 2012—Special Community Budget Town Hall
(Document B)

There was no public comment or discussion on this item.

Commissioner Bonner, seconded by Commissioner Tu Mutch, moved to approve the minutes to the Special Community Budget Town Hall on Monday, April 2, 2012. This motion was approved unanimously by acclamation.

4. Public Comment on Items not on Agenda (Discussion Only)

Angelina Yu, a Youth Organizer at Adopt-an-Alleyway (AAA) program of the Chinatown Community Development Corporation (CCDC), informed commissioners of a new youth program that AAA will be rolling out this summer called the Chinatown Urban Institute. The Chinatown Urban Institute will be an 8 week urban planning program, open to high school seniors and youth ages 18-24. If accepted, youth will be immersed in issues such as land use, affordable housing, healthy open spaces, and the needs of communities in Chinatown. Ms. Yu strongly encouraged commissioners to apply to the program, as well as inform their peers of the opportunity.

5. Legislation Referred from the Board of Supervisors (All Items to Follow Discussion and Possible Action)

A. [BOS file no. 120193] Ordinance: 1) amending Public Works Code Section 184.85 to modify the permissible distance between mobile food facilities and school; and 2) adopting environmental findings. (Supervisor Wiener, Olague)
Presenter: Office of Supervisor Scott Wiener
(Document C)

Chairwoman LaCroix made introductory remarks and then laid out the format for how the Commission would hear and then respond to the legislation referred. Chairwoman LaCroix then welcomed Supervisor Scott Wiener, sponsor of the legislation referred, BOS file no. 120193.

Supervisor Wiener then explained that he had requested that this legislation be referred to the Youth Commission, because he felt the Commissioners’ feedback was critical. Supervisor Wiener then provided an overview of the ordinance, which would amend the Public Works Code Section 184.85 to modify the permissible distance between mobile food facilities and schools. Currently, the distance between a food truck vendor and a public school campus is 1500 feet (approximately three blocks). In an effort to support community of small business owners who make up the city’s vibrant food scene—and to help decrease the congestion of food truck vendors in downtown San Francisco—Supervisor Wiener’s legislation would, in general, decrease the required distance between food trucks and schools from 1,500 feet to 500 feet, with certain exceptions.

Supervisor Wiener shared that he fully supports the San Francisco Unified School District’s (SFUSD) federally-funded school lunch program and felt that his legislation would both continue to protect the program and balance out the needs of schools, neighborhoods, and local businesses. The Supervisor stated that his goal is to arrive at legislation that everyone can get behind. Research done by the Supervisor’s office shows that there are 6 SFUSD high schools with open lunch campuses: George Washington, School of the Arts, Lowell, Abraham Lincoln, Hilltop, and Galileo. All middle schools and 2/3rds of SFUSD’s high schools have closed lunch campuses. The Supervisor’s proposal to reduce the distance from 1500 to 1000 feet from schools would only be for the 4 high schools with open lunch campuses (George Washington, SOTA, Lowell, and Abraham Lincoln). The proposal to reduce the distance from 1500 to 500 feet would be for all middle schools, Hilltop HS, Galileo HS, and remaining 2/3drs of SFUSD high schools with closed campuses. The Supervisor stated that there is still an ongoing dialogue between his office, food advocates, and the SFUSD, and he would be honored to have the Youth Commission’s support on this legislation. Chairwoman LaCroix then thanked Supervisor Wiener for his presentation.

Commissioners Bonner and Armstrong asked clarifying questions. Chairwoman LaCroix asked Commissioners to hold off on questions until further information is provided by an SFUSD representative. Chairwoman LaCroix then welcomed Chris Armentrout, Director of Development and Government Relations to the SFUSD, to the Youth Commission meeting.

Mr. Armentrout thanked the Youth Commission for their time, and thanked Supervisor Wiener and his office for reaching out to and including the SFUSD in the process of drafting this legislation. Mr. Armentrout then provided some background as to where the SFUSD stands on this legislation, stating that the SFUSD is not opposed to food trucks and that the district recognizes the vibrancy that the food truck scene provides to San Francisco’s local economy. Mr. Armentrout stated that the SFUSD has a healthy school lunch program, and that this legislation poses to fundamental problems with respect to the school lunch programs—that is, an economic problem and one of social justice. Economically, the district needs as many eligible youth as possible to use the federally subsidized school lunch program so that the district can draw down its federal reimbursement. This legislation would increase competition and thus hurt the district’s school lunch program. With respect to social justice, Mr. Armentrout laid out the issue of students who would not be able to afford food trucks and the stigma that would cause. The SFUSD’s position is aligned with the Supervisor with the 500 feet limit at the middle schools, as these campuses are more tightly controlled. He expressed that there should be a rule across the board for all high schools, and the district is open to changing the language to change the hours to accommodate vendors over the school breaks, summers, and holidays. Mr. Armentrout then thanked the Youth Commission and Supervisor Wiener for their time and work.

Commissioners Tu Mutch, Carrion, Brodwin, and Shackelford then asked clarifying questions on the district’s position on the legislation.

Public Comment:

Matthew Cohen, coordinator of Off the Grid, a food truck roaming food market in San Francisco, expressed that most of the food trucks have healthy options and priced their food in a way that is not necessarily affordable to students. Mr. Cohen shared that food trucks options are also healthier today. He expressed to the commission that the lives of the people in the room and their businesses will be affected by this legislation, and would appreciate the commission’s consideration to support the Supervisor’s legislation.

Tim Volkema, owner of the Kasa Indian Eatery food truck, shared that he owns a restaurant in the Castro neighborhood, and has two food trucks. He expressed that there are too many food trucks parked down town and there needed to be more diversity of food trucks throughout the city. He felt Supervisor Wiener’s legislation would address both these issues.

Gail Lillian, owner of the Liba Falafel food truck, expressed that she has been in the business for 2.5 years, and shared that her target market were employed people who consistently purchase food during their lunch hour.

Monica Wong, owner of the Little Green Cyclo food truck, shared her experiences of growing up in the restaurant business and seeing a new breed of gourmet food trucks staffed by diverse owners. She expressed that there was a void in demand of food trucks.

Todd Middleton, owner of Fins on a Hoof food truck, shared that his food is more upscale and that his targeted clients are mainly adults. He would love access to park his food truck in other neighborhoods, as it would alleviate the application process to park downtown. He invited commissioners to try out his food sometime.

Brett Niebergall, owner of Southern Sandwich Company, expressed that his clients are mainly 21 year old college students and older. He shared that even if his food truck was parked near schools, he would be surprised to see youth come out to try his food. He hoped that commission would have the city’s best interest in mind when considering this legislation.

Joe Jacobsmeyer, owner of 3sum Eats, expressed that his food truck targets anyone who wants to try his food. He does not look at specific genres of people, but would love to be able to serve all.

William Pill, owner of Hapa San Francisco, shared that his food truck was one of the first trucks in the city. He currently does not target high school students because of the price level of his food options. He expressed that the 1500 feet radius would allow his business to grow and would allow more people to enjoy his cuisine. Though he currently does not target youth, he would be in support of targeting more youth, as he has personal disagreements with school lunch options.

Curtis Kimball, owner of the Crème Brulee Cart, expressed that he started his business three years ago. Mr. Kimball would like to active public spaces and feels that food trucks are a great way to get a community together. He expressed that the downtown public spaces are aggravated and feels that other spaces in the city could be used more actively.

Kyle Pierce, owner of Senor Sisig, expressed that he is in favor of Supervisor Wiener’s legislation. His market is around the 20-35 year old age range and would love to provide more food options to the working community all over the city.

Xiaofan Wu, sophomore at Lowell High School, expressed her personal experiences as a student. She feels that students with the option are already purchasing food outside of school. She feels that having food trucks near campuses would help students who are already leaving to purchase their lunch, and feels it would be better for the food business.

After public comment was over, Chairwoman LaCroix explained that the Commission typically responds to legislation referred in three basic ways: with a motion of support, a motion to not support, or to take no position on it.

Commissioner Sun stated that most schools are in residential neighborhoods, and asked Supervisor Wiener how neighborhood residents are responding to this legislation. Supervisor Wiener shared that the popularity of food trucks shows how supportive people are of the food truck business. He expressed that the City would have to do a good job at regulating food trucks around trash facilities, and he would work on improving the Department of Public Works’ (DPW) enforcement on these issues. The process of applying for a food truck permit requires a notice to go out to all residents, giving them a chance to voice their concerns around a food vendor conducting business in their neighborhood. It is the City’s job to allow neighbors to have a choice where food trucks go and to make sure the food trucks follows the rules.

Chairwoman LaCroix then shared with members of the public and her peers that she is a fan of food trucks and frequents Off the Grid. She was disappointed that a lot of food truck owners said in public comment that they don’t necessarily target youth as they do not see youth as potential clients. She expressed that youth are also part of San Francisco’s economy.

Commissioners Bonner, Brodwin, Armstrong and Shackelford engaged in a short discussion around the legislation and asked clarifying questions.

Commissioner Brodwin moved to support this proposed ordinance (BOS file no. 120193) that would amend Public Works Code Section 184.85 to modify the permissible distance between mobile food facilities and schools and to adopt environmental findings. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Bonner. This motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes (11) – Armstrong, Bonner, Brodwin, LaCroix, Liang, Marshall-Fricker, Tu Mutch, Persky, Shackelford, Sun, Yang. No’s (1) – Huey. Absent (1)—Carrion.

Chairwoman LaCroix thanked Supervisor Wiener and Mr. Armentrout for their presentations, and thanked the food truck business owners who spoke in public comment.

6. Legislative Report on Youth Commission Items Sent to the Mayor and Board of Supervisors (Discussion Only)

Director of the Youth Commission, Mario Yedidia, then provided the Commission with a detailed legislative report on Youth Commission business items sent to the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors.

Mr. Yedidia started with an update on Youth Commission resolution 1112 AL-10, calling on the city to implement a local Summer Jobs+. This resolution went to the Board of Supervisors Budget and Finance committee on Wednesday, April 11, 2012 where Commissioner Persky gave a presentation to members of the Board. There was public comment by multiple youth employment service providers, a majority who were members of the San Francisco Youth Employment Coalition. The resolution was ultimately passed forward to the full Board of Supervisors with positive recommendation and Supervisor Carmen Chu added on a co sponsor. Commissioner Persky chimed in to share that he felt there was a positive response from supervisors and community members.

Mr. Yedidia then moved on to update the Commission on the Mayor’s public launch of a San Francisco Summer Jobs+ on Thursday, April 12, 2012. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi attended the event, as well as other public officials. Commissioner Persky had attended the event and shared with his peers that the Mayor announced a goal of 5,000 jobs for the city’s youth, with 2,500 coming from the public sector and 2,500 coming from the private sector. Summer Jobs+ would be coordinated by the United Way of the Bay Area’s Matchbridge program. Youth can log onto www.hiresfyouth.com to learn more. Commissioner Persky felt that it was an overall positive event, but ultimately the Youth Commission should remain involve to ensure that that disconnected and transitionally aged youth (TAY) would be served, and that youth employment opportunities exists annually.

Mr. Yedidia then shared with the Commission that the President of the Board of Supervisors Supervisor David Chiu had introduced a hearing on youth recreation access at Juvenile Hall. This hearing was a direct result of the Youth Commission’s research and resolution on this issue, and Mr. Yedidia urged Commissioners to help out on the outreach for this hearing, as well as to attend the hearing if possible.

Mr. Yedidia then concluded the legislative report by informing them that TAY SF will now be housed at the Department of Children, Youth, and their Families (DCYF), with Glenn Eagleson as one of the lead staff on TAY issues. Commissioner Bonner added that the TAY young adult advisory body would still continue, and that Jose-Luis Mejia will move onto TAY to facilitate the advisory body.

7. Presentations (Discussion Only)

There were none.

8. Youth Commission Business (All Items to Follow Discussion and Possible Action)

A. Motion—04—Shall the San Francisco Youth Commission support the effort to stop the closure of the Oakland Youth Commission?
Presenter and sponsor: Commissioner Persky
(Document D)

For this item, Commissioner Persky provided some context on the closure of the Oakland Youth Commission, and then read the motion into the public record. Commissioner Persky noted that there was an Oakland Youth Commission in the audience who would be able to speak more on this issue.

Eric Gant, an Oakland Youth Commissioner, expressed to the SF Youth Commissioners, how important it is to have youth voice. He explained that in his personal experiences, it has been difficult for youth voice to be heard in the City of Oakland. He shared the difficulties it has been to get support from the city of Oakland to continue the Youth Commission. Currently, there is no budget for a city staff to help manage and facilitate meetings for the Oakland Youth Commissioners. The commissioners are still allowed to meet, but per their bylaws, they need to have a staff present to help streamline and maintain their work around Oakland’s youth issues. He encouraged the commissioners to sign the online petition to save the Oakland Youth Commission. Youth voice is an integral part of a community and a city, and he urged the San Francisco Youth Commission to pass this motion, to support the Oakland Youth Commission’s existence.

San Francisco Youth Commissioners then asked clarifying questions and voiced their concerns and support for the Oakland Youth Commission. Commissioners expressed disappointment that the Oakland Youth Commission isn’t receiving enough support. Commissioners LaCroix, Armstrong, Tu Mutch, and Bonner shared their concerns and support.

Commissioner Bonner, with a second by Commissioner Brodwin, moved to support the motion to support the effort to stop the closure of the Oakland Youth Commission. This motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes (13) – Armstrong, Bonner, Brodwin, Carrion, Huey, LaCroix, Liang, Marshall-Fricker, Tu Mutch, Persky, Shackelford, Sun, Yang.

Commissioner Persky then volunteered to pen a letter to the City of Oakland to express the San Francisco’s Youth Commission’s support of the Oakland Youth Commission. Commissioners Shackelford, Bonner, LaCroix, Brodwin, and Tu Mutch volunteered to help Commissioner Persky.

B. Motion—05—Motion to Support and Co-sponsor MO’ MAGIC’s Summer Learning Series regarding Mo Magic Collaboration
Presenter and sponsor: Commissioner LaCroix
(Document E)

Chairwoman LaCroix provided some context to this motion. Commissioner LaCroix recently met with Sheryl Davis, Director of Mo’Magic, on potential Youth Commission and Mo’Magic summer event collaborations.

Chairwoman LaCroix then read the motion into the public record.

Commissioner Bonner, seconded by Commissioner LaCroix moved to approve the motion to support and co-sponsor Mo’Magic’s Summer Learning Series. This motion was approved unanimously on the following roll call vote: Ayes (13) – Armstrong, Bonner, Brodwin, Carrion, Huey, LaCroix, Liang, Marshall-Fricker, Tu Mutch, Persky, Shackelford, Sun, Yang.

C. [Second Reading] Approval of Youth Commission Policy & Budget Priorities FY 12-13/13-14
(Document F)

Chairwoman LaCroix introduced this item by sharing with her commissioners the goals of the Youth Commission, which is to represent the voices of youth in San Francisco. She explained the importance of this document, and the importance of representing the Youth Commission and their respective roles well, and to understand the document well.
Chairwoman LaCroix and staff then laid out the format for how the commission should proceed with going over and then approving the Youth Commission Policy & Budget Priorities FY12-13/13/-14. The priorities would be read into the public record first. As per staff suggestion, after all priorities are read, the Commission will discuss each priority one by one and make amendments as needed. Action should be taken on each amendment after a motion and second has been made. After all amendments have been made, then the commission would vote to approve the document as a whole.

Chairwoman LaCroix started by reading Priority #1 Free MUNI for Youth in to the public record; Commissioner Armstrong then read Priority #2; Commissioner Carrion read Priority #3, Recreation Access at Juvenile Hall.

Due to technical difficulties with the sound and microphones at the meeting, Chairwoman LaCroix called the meeting to a recess at 7:21pm. The meeting was called back to order at 7:26 pm.

Commissioner Yang continued by reading Priority #4 Jobs for Undocumented Youth and TAY; Commissioner Sun read Priority #5 Three Changes at Police Department; Commissioner Shackelford read Priority #6 Youth Involvement Plans in Future Development Deals; Commissioner Bonner read Priority #7 Implement 2007 TAY Recommendations; and finally, Commissioner Tu Mutch read Priority #8 Expand Implementation of 12N Sensitivity Training.

At this point, Chairwoman LaCroix informed her colleagues that meeting has gone over time, and that she would call a break so that commissioners may call and inform their family members. Chairwoman LaCroix called the meeting to break at 7:53pm. Commissioner Marshall-Fricker had to leave the meeting at 7:53 pm, as she had several tests scheduled for the following day. The meeting was called back to order at 7:59 pm.

Chairwoman LaCroix reminded her colleagues on the Commission of how to discuss each priority, then directed her colleagues to start with Priority #1.

Commissioners Carrion and Brodwin both shared their hesitancy with this priority, in that they do not necessarily agree with prioritizing free MUNI for all youth regardless of income. Commissioner Brodwin stated that she appreciated the last paragraph, which indicated that should free MUNI for all youth not be adopted by the MTA Board, that free MUNI for low-income youth should be administered in a way that is easily accessible and not overly burdensome for the most vulnerable youth populations. Commissioner explained that Brodwin while she did not agree with the idea of providing free MUNI fares for all youth, she recognized and appreciated the hard and voluminous work that many people—and, indeed, many Commissioners—had put in to that campaign. Then, Commissioners LaCroix, Yang, Persky, Bonner, Armstrong, Brodwin, and Carrion all engaged in a passionate and respectful debate on the pros and cons of free MUNI for youth vs. free MUNI for low income youth. Commissioners LaCroix and Yang expressed the importance and value of having a strong priority to free MUNI for youth, and referenced the work that the Commission has been putting into this priority for the last two and a half years. Commissioner Yang expressed that a priority with multiple options might be confusing, and shared that the commission should take a strong stance on this free MUNI for youth priority and noted previous commissions work on this where the option for free MUNI for low income youth was met with too many challenges for it to be implemented successfully.

Commissioner Brodwin, seconded by Commissioner Carrion, moved to amend the recommendation section to Priority #1, in particular, to highlight other options like free MUNI for low income youth and/or limiting free MUNI to school commute hours and/or days, and/or including a reduced price MUNI fare or fast pass. The motion failed based on the following roll call vote: Ayes (4) - Brodwin, Carrion, Shackelford, Sun; No’s (8) – Armstrong, Bonner, Huey, LaCroix, Liang, Tu Mutch, Persky, Yang.

There was no further discussions or amendments made to Priority #1.

Commissioners then moved on to Priority #2. Commissioner Armstrong expressed that she would like to update the final paragraphs of this priority, as the Mayor had recently launched the Summer Jobs+ campaign and she would like to add some more specificity on what the commission is prioritizing around this plan.

Commissioner Armstrong, moved to amend Priority #2 and replace the final paragraph of this priority with a paragraph that reflects the following items: to commend the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors on the launching of Summer Jobs+, to continue to work with the Board and Mayor’s office on the logistics on Summer Jobs+, to continue to prioritize disconnected and TAY in Summer Jobs+, and finally to explore ways for Summer Jobs+ to go beyond this summer and into the future. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Brodwin. This motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes (12) – Armstrong, Bonner, Brodwin, Carrion, Huey, LaCroix, Liang, Persky, Shackelford, Sun, Yang.

There was no further discussion made to Priority #2.

There was no amendment made to Priority #3.

Commissioner Yang expressed that she would like to delete the final two paragraphs of Priority #4 as she had forgotten to take out the notes and testimonial from the priority. Commissioner Bonner responded that personal narratives and testimonials should be encouraged and added to such documents, even if they do not necessarily align with the format of the document.

Commissioner Yang, seconded by Commissioner Shackelford, moved to amend Priority #4 and delete the final two paragraphs, and add a final paragraph that says “United We Dream is an excellent example for the SF city family to consider how to create good jobs for undocumented immigrant young people”. This motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes (10) – Armstrong, Brodwin, Carrion, Huey, Liang, Tu Mutch, Persky, Shackelford, Sun, Yang; No’s (2) – Bonner, LaCroix.

There was no amendment made to Priority 5.

Commissioner Shackelford, seconded by Commissioner Armstrong, moved to amend Priority #6, to add before the bullet points on page 19, “this Board of Supervisor’s resolution includes the following resolve clauses…” This motion carried unanimously.

Commissioner LaCroix asked staff a clarifying question on the uniformity of the document. Staff explained that not all 17 commissioners worked on the document in the office, but those that did worked on their pieces on different days.

Commissioner Brodwin, seconded by Commissioner Bonner moved to add uniformity to the whole document, to replace every “We” with “The Youth Commission”. This motion was approved by acclamation.

Commissioner Bonner, seconded by Commissioner Persky, moved to amend Priority #7, to add to the last sentence of the first paragraph, “and economically disadvantaged backgrounds”. This motion was approved by acclamation.

Commissioner Tu Mutch, seconded by Yang, moved to amend Priority #8 to make the following changes: to change the subtitle to “assure that youth serving City Departments are in compliance with Chapter 12N of the SF Admin Code”, replace the use of “queer” with LGBTQ, except for when it is being defined in the document, and to add in the recommendation section after “to develop a timeline” with “and a mechanism to ensure its compliance”. This motion was approved by acclamation.

Commissioners Brodwin and Tu Mutch suggested to staff to add more words like marvelous and fabulous to the document.

Commissioner Brodwin respectfully expressed to her peers that though she agreed with 99% of this document, she still does not agree with Priority #1 and because of this she does not feel comfortable approving the entire document.

Commissioner LaCroix moved to approve the Youth Commission’s Budget & Policy Priority FY 12-13/13-14, the content of the “background” and “recommendations” sections, as well as the charts and figures, and to authorize staff to continue editing the document until it is complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Bonner. This motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes (11) – Armstrong, Bonner, Carrion, Huey, LaCroix, Liang, Tu Mutch, Persky, Shackelford, Sun, Yang. No’s (1) – Brodwin.

9. Staff Report (Discussion Only)

Chairwoman LaCroix announced that this item, as with the remaining items on the agenda, would be tabled, as the meeting went over time. These items would be continued at the next full Youth Commission meeting.

10. Committee Reports (Discussion Only)

A. Executive Committee; next meeting; Wednesday, May 2, 2012, 4:00-6:00pm, City Hall, room 345A
B. Youth Justice Committee
C. Youth Immigration Committee
D. Youth City Services
E. Youth Employment Committee
F. Student Support, Health, and Facilities Committee
G. Youth Advisory Council

This item was also tabled.

11. Attendance Review (Action Item)

A. Commissioner Bonner, Monday, March 19, 2012
B. Commissioner Bonner, Monday, April 2, 2012
C. Commissioner Ontiveros, Monday, March 19, 2012
D. Commissioner Yang, Monday, March 19, 2012 – Cannot be authorized
E. Commissioner Huneeus, Monday, April 2, 2012
F. Commissioner Liang, Monday, April 2, 2012
G. Commissioner Shackelford, Monday, April 2, 2012

This item was also tabled.

12. Announcements (This Includes Community Events)

This item was also tabled.

13. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 8:48pm.

Any materials distributed to the members of the Youth Commission within 72 hours of the meeting or after the agenda packet has been delivered to the members are available for inspection—along with minutes of previous Youth Commission meetings and all supplementary information—at the Youth Commission office during regular office hours (9am to 6pm, Monday—Friday). The Youth Commission office is located at:
City Hall, Room 345
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 554-6446, Fax: (415) 554-6140
Email: youthcom@sfgov.org
www.sfgov.org/yc

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE SUNSHINE ORDINANCE
(Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code)
Government’s duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people’s business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people’s review.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE SUNSHINE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE SUNSHINE ORDINANCE TASK FORCE, please contact:
Sunshine Ordinance Task Force
City Hall, Room 244
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102‐4689
Phone: (415) 554‐7724, Fax: (415) 554‐5784
E‐mail: sotf@sfgov.org
Copies of the Sunshine Ordinance can be obtained from the Clerk of the Sunshine Ordinance
Task Force, at the San Francisco Public Library, and on the City’s website at
http://www.sfgov.org.

The ringing and use of cell phones, pagers, and similar sound‐producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. The Chair may order the removal from the meeting room of any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound‐producing electronic device.

In order to assist the City’s efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illnesses, multiple chemical sensitivity, or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical‐based products. Please help the City accommodate these individuals.

To obtain a disability‐related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in the meeting, please contact Mario Yedidia, Youth Commission Director [phone: 415-554 6254; email: mario.yedidia@sfgov.org] at least 48 hours before the meeting, except for Monday meetings, for which the deadline is 4:00 p.m. the previous Friday.