tv [untitled] October 17, 2011 12:00am-12:30am PDT
symbolically, indicated that we were fighting back. that we were going to reclaim the atmosphere, the land, the sea. what you are looking at here is how we would present our daily situation reports to describe how they are making progress. next slide another example of the incredible partnership that we have. we think that joint support forces of the right concept here that brings together the unity of effort. with u.s. aid, it was our clear understanding of how to work closely with the government of japan for the lead federal agency in this case. it was critically important, in
this case. they can work the funding issues in ways that the military is not able to. in terms of where we were located, it was not meant to be read, but listed on the right- hand side were all of the ngo's that participated, attempting to galvanize this. it was the role that u.s. aid and the self-defense force played. an example of how to take command and control on the road is a command-and-control unit. we brought this from honolulu so that it would be available in
the event that the crisis continued to provide more challenges for leaders. we will close here with the importance of messaging. another critically important element of this. who has the lead for the message? it should be part of the discussion that takes place at your next table top level exercise. messages can be very confusing and you have many different groups involved. u.s. embassy had the lead. to be very clear about that point, as you roll this up and look at it in aggregate, those are impressive numbers for the people of japan. these were the foreign deployed forces are in japan. everyone rallied and was under way, everyone was a part of this
operation. when self-defense force called out 100,000 people, they had this right behind them. it allowed them to focus on what was critically important to them, finding the remains and lost, allowing us to provide support in the way they needed. someone went to a lot of trouble to put that in the sand and it was an indication of what was possible in times of crisis. particularly when relationships between countries are critical. violations have interests, people have friends. we were able to, for the people that participated, and we will always remember. thank you. i look forward to your questions.
bit, which went down of the revolt of 0 in the morning in the afternoon. in terms of water, we found that when we were measuring it, they were all used in japan. everyone was tied up with the crisis. to get real-time information on water, we had to use our portable kids, which were not calibrated sufficiently to be reliable. and we have the results immediately fed back to us. in order to react responsibly, we had to be able to have reliable instrumentation and
data as the basis of decisions. that is what we learned out of this. >> microphone working here. the information in california was slow. seven days. how do we address warnings without causing panic? >> i think the to start with an understanding that, in the case of radiation, the first questions that we need to ask, number one, is the plant up and operating? or did it shut down? is there a potential release of a lethal doses that requires immediate status on the part of engineers in leaders? if the problem now, and we are
talking temporal issues, is long-term exposure, then that puts this into a different category, i think. i would identify time critical issues in terms of how you manaso, if i have a problem whei am concerned about long-term exposure, now what i need to do is talk about how i gradually start move people away from this so that i can prepare for a long term, sarcophagus type problem. or i will have to find a way to deal with the long-term exposure. i think that as far as how you
manage this, separating the immediate sorts of actions and long term actions would be helpful. if people think that there is an immediate step that needs to be taken for themselves and their children, they will be very much on edge and waiting to hear what leaders are asking. i am reluctant to tell you that you can act on instinct in this case. there is a series of questions that have to be answered. preparing for a table top that involves radiological contamination, it would be to develop crisis action and standard operating procedures where, integrated, we know who is going to do what to get to a clear, empirical understanding of the problem that we have,
along with it the actions and messages that go with it. we did not feel comfortable leaving japan until we had all of that system instrumentation in place. that was our measure of success. as you think about crises in the future, i would incorporate the radiological dimension. the nature of what we are in has us in a position where we are dealing with what a climactic situations and crises we have not anticipated or seen before. having fought through what the radiological dimension is and what the implications of our for these very important approaches. >> i know that you have to get out of here. we have about two minutes. i appreciate your coming.
i have this feeling that you're giving this presentation of pride over what you end your task force did for japan. i want to thank you for what you did today and what your doing out there. i know you must have this warm feeling overhead. >> i used to look up at many of you, what i was down there. >> thank you so much for coming to talk. i know that you have to get out of town there. ladies and gentlemen? [applause] >> thank you. >> for the rest of you, we are going to have our next program and it is going to be some elected officials and mayors. we are going to take 10 minutes. i want you to be back in your
authorize the san francisco unified school district to issue bonds to repair and upgrade more than 50 school facilities. property taxes could be increased if needed to pay the principal and interest on these bonds. the bond funds would be used to repair and replace major building systems including electrical, heating wat, water, security, and fire sprinklers. remove hazardous materials. improve accessibility for people with disabilities. make necessary seismic upgrades. replace permanent structures and perform other work necessary to apply closure -- codes and regulation . they can't pay for teachers and administrative salaries or operative expenditures.
>> i am a lawless said griffin. i cover san francisco city politics and the league of women voters. i am here to discuss a proposition c, a ballot that will be before the voters this november. proposition c will change the way that the city, current and future employees share their pension and health-care benefits. it will adjust employee
contributions to the retirement system based on the city's costs. reducing benefits for future employees. adjust cost of living adjustments. decrease the city contribution to retiree health care costs for certain former employees. require -- changed voting requirement of the health service board and require election officials to make the same contributions. there are two charter amendments regarding pensions. if voters approve both measures, only the one with the most votes will become law. i am here with the executive director at the san francisco labor counsel, and a proponent of proposition c.
thank you for being here. why do you support the proposition c? >> the public-sector unions have been working probably most of this year to sit down and find a way in order to save city services and jobs during these economic times. this involves sitting down with the mayor's office and coming down with a comprehensive chart -- coming up with a comprehensive chart on how to save billions of dollars in san francisco. it stops pension spikes, it adjusts the rates that people will be paying during good times and bad times. it really does save money. it is the consensus way of moving forward, it is supported by the board of supervisors, the mayor's office, and virtually every public official. i am proud of the public-sector unions for putting the measure
on the ballot. it is really going to save the city money. this has been done in ways that i have not seen anywhere else. people are just attacking public workers, and in san francisco, i take my hat off to the unions that are going to be sacrificing and going to be paying more into the city funds in order to save these jobs. there are going to be more moneys coming in. i could not be prouder and i am urging everyone to vote yes. i think this is a san francisco way of doing reform. we have done many things and we are urging everybody to vote yes to save over $1 billion and save cities of vergers -- city services. >> this number is based on a 7.75% investment return that
people feel as unrealistic. how would you address that marke? >> we have sat down with the civil service unions that have endorsed this measure. is about the cycles that we go through during bad economic times. they will be contributing more than they used to. we factored in all of these assumptions. the city is doing better, they won't have to pay quite as much. the san francisco way of sharing and moving forward, i will not get into the weeds. but we looked at the analysis of how the city budget works and what types of numbers will be needed. >> it also changes the makeup of
the health care board that dictate to the cost and availability of various health care options for current and former city employees. can you please address that issue? >> absolutely, this is controversial and no way that it should not be. the mayor's office, during the course of negotiations, wanted to place for appointments on the board that have only three participants. they just kept pounding us all the time and we absolutely said no. we don't need to change any of that. the mayor's office backed down and said, the fourth person gets to be nominated, but the electives, there has to be a majority for that person to come in. they will have their voice
because they do not like who the mayor and the comptroller have nominated. that is the only piece of controversy that i think a small group of retirees are really arguing about. there are some misconceptions. there are not for people that the mayor appoints. >> we will be discussing this measure with a proponent. and now, we are here with jerry, the vice chair of a group calle d pob, it stands for protect our benefits. >> i am actually representing about 3700 retirees. they come from the san francisco unified school district, of the
city, the court system. we have one thing in common, that is the health services system. nobody knows very much about. our health services handle the health services system. we see a change being proposed that would change how the health service and system is run. the comptroller has said that it would not. it would change who is on the board. it will take away one that is elected by the san francisco school system. we don't like that. since reform was passed by the voters, it has been an effective
model. we can go back to the past where we have problems with political influence, attempts to change things, bringing political favoritism in to the department. we like the status quo in this case, and we feel very concerned that the change will not be positive. >> what changes are you fearful of happening? >> that there will be a change in the health service board, the composition will be changed from four elected people and three appointees to be for appointees and if reelected. -- four appointees and three
elected. and elected by the system. then you have five people. at this point, it has worked extremely well. most decisions are unanimous. it will be an artificially induced split that will be a change in the composition. that is the major reaction. >> what we spoke with the executive director of the labor council the claim that the seventh appointee would come from the comptroller's office. how do you not believe that that provides protection for your membership? >> where were the appointee comes from as a little bit different from being able to elect the person.
the comptroller is himself an appointee of the mayor. so you have an appointee of the appointee, and a 60 day limit before they have to decide on who the person will be. otherwise, the appointee becomes the person automatically. it seems little unfair. the of us who are retirees were ever involved in any of these discussions. >> we hope that that was informative. please visit the web site at the league of women voters. and remember, early voting is available at city hall monday through friday from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m..
♪ >> hello, and welcome to the department of elections right choice voting instructional video. it is part of the department of elections right choice voting outreach campaign and is designed to educate san francisco rig franciscoht choice voting. today we will learn what it is and who is elected using this voting method. we will also talk about with the ranked joyce l. looks like and how to market correctly. finally, we will see how the ranked joyce voting process works and to you an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. so, what is ranked joyce voting? in march 2002 san francisco voters adopted a charter to
implement ranked choice of voting, also known as instant runoff voting. san francisco voters will use it to elect most local officials by selecting a first choice candidate in the first column on the ballot and deborah second and third choice candidates in the second and third columns resect to do -- respectively. this makes it possible to elect local officials with the majority of votes. more than 50% without the need for a second runoff election. in san francisco, ranked choice of voting is for the election of members of the board of supervisors, the mayor, sharon, just -- district attorney, city attorney, treasurer, this is a recorder, and public defender. ranked joyce voting does not apply to elections for local school and community college board members. number the election of state or federal officials. ranked choice of voting does not
affect the adoption ballot measures. when voters received their ballot, either at a polling place or an absentee ballot in the mail, it will consist of multiple cards. voters will receive cards with contests for federal and state offices, as well as for state propositions and local ballot measures. for ranked choice voting contest, voters will receive a separate ranked choice ballot card. it will have instructions to rank three choices, which is new. the ranked choice ballot is designed in the side by side column format that lists the names of all candidates in each of the three columns. when marking the ranked choice ballot, voters elect their first choice in the first column by completing the aero pointing to their choice. for their second choice, voters selected different wind by completing the arab pointing to their choice in the second
column. for their third choice, voters elect a different candidate by completing the arrow pointing to their choice. voters wishing to vote for qualified write-in candidate can write it in on the line provided. and they must complete the arrow pointing to their choice. keep in mind, it voters should select a different candidate for each of the three columns of the ranked choice ballot card. if the voters elect the same candidate in more than one column, his or her vote for that candidate will count only once. also, a voter's second choice will be counted only if his or her first choice candidate has been eliminated. and a voter's third choice will be counted only if both his or her first and second choice candidates have been eliminated. we have talked about how to mark the ranked choice ballot. now let's look at how ranked choice of voting works.
initially, every first choice vote is a candidate. any candidate that receives a majority, more than 50% of the first choice to vote, is determined to be the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the first choice votes, a process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes begins. first, the candidate who received the fewest numbers of first choice votes is eliminated from the race. second, voters who selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice will have their vote to transfer to their second choice. there, all the votes are recounted. fourth, if any candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, he/she is declared the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, the process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes is repeated until one candidate has a winning
majority. now let's look at an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. in this example, we have three candidates. candidate a, b, and c. after all the first choice votes are counted, none of the three candidates has received more than 50%, or a majority of the first choice vote cast. candidate a g-205% ofb the votes% received 40%. and c received 35% of the boats. because no candidate received a majority, the candidate who received the fewest number of first choice votes, a candidate a, is eliminated from the race. voters to pick a candidate a as their first choice candidate will have their but transferred to their second choice. and the voters to pick and a, 15% chose