Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board amends film rebate program to boost local hiring and raises per‑production cap to $600,000; passes first reading
Summary
Supervisors amended the city’s film rebate program to increase the maximum rebate per production and add stronger First Source hiring language encouraging productions to recruit economically disadvantaged local residents; the ordinance passed its first reading 10–1.
The Board of Supervisors on March 2009 voted in favor of amendments to San Francisco’s film rebate program that raise the individual production cap and add new language aimed at improving local hiring of economically disadvantaged residents.
Supervisor Alioto‑Pier, the item’s author, and supporters said the existing rebate program had been underutilized because of restrictive cost‑eligibility rules. The ordinance removes a provision limiting a production’s rebate to the amount of city tax it paid and sets an individual production cap of $600,000.
Board members also added requirements intended to strengthen local hiring through the city’s First Source program. The amended language requires qualified productions to demonstrate “good faith efforts as certified by the city’s First Source hiring administrator” to hire economically disadvantaged individuals referred by the city workforce system and, in later floor amendments, to enter into a First Source hiring agreement for entry‑level positions and document efforts to consult and interview referred candidates.
Supervisor Avalos described the local impact of film projects, including a case he cited of a young person who “was able to turn his life around” after working on a film; he said that experience informed his vote in favor. Other supervisors voiced constitutional and policy concerns about relying on tax incentives to achieve workforce goals; Supervisor Daly opposed the item on those grounds.
The board approved the ordinance as amended on its first reading by a roll‑call vote of 10 ayes and 1 no. The ordinance will return through the next steps required for final adoption and implementation if pursued to subsequent readings.
