in and browse through our products. also, visit us online. we have minimal hours. it is nice to set up viewings of these products here. >> hello, i'm shannon with the league of women voters of san francisco. along with the league and sfgov tv, i'm here to discuss proposition i, a ballot measure which will be before the voters on tuesday, november 8th.

the city closed certain public streets to private motor vehicles reserving the streets as open space for recreational purposes. these closures weren abilitied in response to the covid-19 pandemic. in may, 2022, the board of supervisors at the golden gate and safety program. the closed portion of jfk drive and certain connector streets in golden gate park seven days a week to private motor vehicles and reserving the street as open space for recreational uses. these closures do not apply to emergency vehicles, official government vehicles, inter park transit shuttle buses and similar vehicles authorized to transport people as well as vehicles making deliveries to the museum. the great highway between lincoln way and slope boulevard is closed to motor vehicles with limited exceptions from noon fridays to 6:00 a.m.

mondays and on holidays. the city proposed to remove the great highway between slope boulevard and skyline boulevard to protect city infrastructure from damage caused by sea level rise. the city would redirect vehicles along skyline, sunset and slope boulevard. proposition i would restrict the city's ability to limit private vehicles used on jfk drive and certain connector streets in golden gate park and the great highway. proposition i would repeal the board's may 2022 ordinance and require the city to allow private motor vehicles to use jfk drive and certain connective streets in golden gate park at all times except from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on sundays and legal holidays year-round as well as on saturdays and april through september. proposition i would require the city to allow motor

use at all times on the great highway and not allow the city to remove the great highway between slope and skyline boulevard as proposed. for both the great highway and jfk drive along with the other affected streets in golden gate park, the city could temporarily limit access the roads for emergency for street repairs and community events. if proposition i passes, board may amend this ordinance by a 2/3 vote only if the amendments are consistent with the measure purposes or required by a court. if proposition i pass was more votes than proposition j, then proposition j would have no legal effect. if you vote yes, you want to require the city to allow private motor vehicles on john f kennedy drive and connector streets in golden gate park at all times except from 6:00 a.m.

to 6:00 p.m. on sundays and legal holidays year-round as well as on saturdays in april through september. you also want to require the city to allow motor vehicles in both directions at all times on the great highway and not allow the city to removing the great highway between slope and skyline boulevard as proposed. if you vote know, do -- if you vote no, you do not want to make these changes. i'm here with charge head, the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods and proponent of proposition i. welcome. >> thank you. >> we're joined by justin nguyen from the san francisco bicycle coalition. and an opponent of the measure. >> thank you for having me. >> thank you both for being here. i would like to start with charles. why do you believe this proposition is so important? >> well, the title of the ordinance establishing proposition i says it all. it's

access for all. i live near golden gate park, i can walk there any time. i'm lucky that way but golden gate park is central to the city and to all of our neighborhoods and all of our districts. it's difficult for me to imagine people walking or even biking from treasure island to come to golden gate park. same thing with hunters point and hendy park and candle stick, difficult. not impossible. president of the board shamal walton complained people of dis-- of district ten had no access to the park. we need to have the park accessible to all. it is lotable that the rec. and park department wants to have everybody to have a park

within ten minutes walking tame from their residence. but golden gate park is unique in the city and unique in the nation, i think in terms of what it offers in the way of museums and other attractions. i think all of us deserve access to the park as much as possible whether or not we can bike there, walk there or for our parents have to drive us there or we have elderly people that need to be driven there. >> thank you. justin? >> proposition i is a setback for california. it makes people less safe and steps back on client goals and fiscally irresponsible. the opening of the highway extension as deemed by proposition i would put $80 million price tag to stop coast erosion. that's money that's going to be spent and simply for

a road that has been designed to be closed next year. keeping the road open provides a mill stone over san francisco taxpayers and additionally, jfk drive continually be on a high corridor and it's in the top 13 percent of streets in the san francisco and it's 75% of traffic deaths. by reopening jfk drive to road users to driver specificallies, it puts our most volunteerable at risk and after the park is preserved, it's compromised. there's five hundred spots with the reproval of jfk, in addition to the 800 car (indiscernible). there's plenty of options for those to drive to san francisco and prop i is a solution looking for a problem and creating, let's say san francisco won, we have a higher tax liability that's not great for our community. >> thank you. we're going to move into some questions and the

first question will go to justin. so, how are proposition i addressed or not address the safety concerns that folks have for pedestrians and cyclists using golden gate park. >> it doesn't. simply put. we have had jfk open to cars since its existence. it proves cars and pedestrians and (indiscernible) and park was made for people not thoroughfare for cars and pieces of steel. we need to provide access for road users and even with the closure of jfk for cars, there's addition of ada handicap spots and conversations with making the affordable rates within the concourse. this is about maintaining equitable transportation options for all road users. >> thank you. same question to you charles, what do you have to say about the safety around pedestrians and cyclists within

golden gate park? >> i think that there's adequate protection for pedestrians and for bicyclists throughout the park. i think that it's difficult to, for me to say that bicycles posed no threat and i have a friend whose wheelchair bound and the one thing he fears the most is bicycles because they don't, usually they don't obey stop signs and that sort of thing so i think it's up to everyone who uses the park, boukists, pedestrians -- bicycles and pedestrians and drivers to maintain the rules of the road, to have constant vigilance and just to let people enjoy the park as they want to. >> thank you. second question will go back to you charles, the southern portion of great highway from float boulevard to skyline boulevard is a planning and study to address the beach

erosion and protection of wastewater infrastructure. how would proposition i address these plans to protect city infrastructure in shoreline? >> i think that prop i is not geared that much to that question but on the other hand through trailing legislation which would follow the adoption prop i. the board of supervisors and planning commission and the department of public works. became up with a plan to equitably address those issues. >> thank you. justin, same question to you. >> this proposition actually ties the hands of the city in creating a roadway and preserving a highway extension. there have been plans to, four to five seawall and protect the sewage treatment plant but the roadway would change those plans and put an $80 million price tag

that the city would have to fund to protect this roadway. by keeping this roadway open for cars, it really -- it forces the city to keep the street open that it has designed to close in light of climate change impacts. >> thank you. closing statements. any further thoughts about proposition i, we'll start with you charles? >> okay, thank you. again, (indiscernible) proposition i's main point, main aim is to open up the great highway and jfk drive in the areas that have been adhered to for shutdown or had closed reduce. it's to make the park more enjoyable to all visitors and all residents, open to all and again, the title of the ordinance is access for all.

that sum it's all up. >> thank you. justin? >> yeah. prop i name is a misnomer about access for all. it's access for cars. even with the closure of jfk two cars, just two entrances and five thousand parking spaces and it's surrounded for road users and it's important we preserve the green space for road users and for example, (indiscernible) to the park having 30% since jfk has been closed and showing the car closure increased the foot traffic in the park and to the exhibits. it concludes to the gardens and allows our exhibitions that's world class to prosper, so this proposition is a step back and put the $80 million price tag that our

taxpayers are paying for. >> thank you for your time. >> thank you for having us. >> thank you for educating the public about this closure. >> we hope this discussion has been informative. for more information about this and other ballot measures in the november election, please visit the department of elections website at sf elections dot orgful remember, early voting is available at city hall starting on october 11th from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and if you don't vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday, november 8th.

>> hello, i'm shanna with the league of women voters of san francisco. along with the league and sfgov tv, i'm here to discuss proposition d, a billion on the measure which will be for the voters on tuesday, november 8th. currently, under city law, various city boards, commissions and officials generally must review and make decisions to approve or deny the development of new housing. development of new housing must comply with the city's planning and building codes. state law

generally requires the project to be evaluated for impacts on the environment. the city has affordable housing programs that offer housing for sale or rent at the below market rate. affordable housing has restrictions on eligibility for households such as maximum household income. proposition d which streamlined the approval process by exempting certain affordable housing developments from a number of approvals by the city, if those developments comply with the planning and building code. when the city leases its property or provides financing for these housing projects, the board of supervisors approval would not be required. the proposition would streamline approval of three types of multifamily affordable housing. under the measure, the city would have five to eight months to approve these developments depending on the number of units and the measure may also allow these

developments to proceed without environmental review under state law. if proposition d passes with more votes than proposition e, proposition e would have no legal effect. if you vote yes, you want to streamline approval of affordable housing project that's provide multifamily housing where all units are for households with income up to one hundred 40% of area median income and all residential unit can be more than $120 percent of air median income. additional affordable housing units equals to 15% of the number of affordable onsite units required. or that all residential units are for households that include at least one san francisco unified school district or city college employee with certain household income restrictions. projects

that use city property or city financing would no longer require a board of supervisors approval. the board of supervisors could amend city law to apply these streamline approvals to additional type of housing projects: in certain projects contractors must provide healthcare benefits and offer apprenticeship opportunity. if you vote no, you do not want to make these changes. i'm here with corey smith with the housing action coalition and a proponent of prop d, welcome. >> thank you. >> we're also joined by joseph smook from the race and equity planning coalition and opponent of the coalition. >> thanks for having me. >> thank you both for being here. i would like to start with corey. why do you believe this proposition is so important? >> well, thank you shanna and thank you to the league for hosting this event and for sfgov

tv for record and distributing. prop d isn't going to build housing and it's the affordable house measure and it will make it faster and easier to build affordable housing across all of san francisco. it does things in a few different ways. first of all, it takes the approval process which currently takes four to seven years and narrows it down to months. this increase in efficiency and approvals for code compliant project so projects that follow all of the local planning code and rules will ensure more certainty throughout the process and make sure that housing and affordable housing gets built faster. the other key point that we had is there's strong labor previsions that match the recently legislature bill 2011 and it's prevailing wages for construction workers and healthcare opportunities and apprenticeship programs and it gives san francisco a choice and how we want to approach the next

decade in the feature and quite frankly the time of saying no is behind us. we have to start saying yes, we have to start saying yes to housing and yes to affordable house and the way we do that is by passing proposition d, the affordable homes now measure this november. >> thank you. jeff, your thoughts. >> we have a number of problems with proposition d which is why i'm here and thank you for having us. the planning coalition is a coalition of nearly 40 organizations, grassroots organizations and nonprofit hausauers and cultural districts throughout san francisco. we have a vision of building a san francisco that is equitable and that is affordable for all. a number of the problems we have with proposition d is it says it provides more affordable housing but the problem is that the affordable housing prevision is not something that affordable housing needs which is why the council housing -- they are opposed to proposition d. it provides educator housing,

however, the teachers union is opposed to proposition d because it doesn't provide teachers with what they need and on the market rate side, what it does is confers a ton of value, millions of dollars of value to developers without actually promising to build anything. a couple of problems we have that are more specific, it's called affordable homes now but the problem is it actually redefines as part of the key component of the measure is to creating new definition for affordable at 140% of the area median income and that 140% area median income when you compare it to what market rate is, it's actually higher than market rate. it also doesn't require any family sized units, so the trend in the market currently of developers to build only studios will continue. >> thank you. >> yeah. >> thank you. we have a couple of questions for both of you.

and we'll start with you, joseph. so, proposition d aims to streamline the construction of affordable housing but has some caveat that may impede construction such as not requiring developers to build the housing within a certain timeframe. how do you envision or not envision that proposition d will result in the expedited construction of affordable housing. >> that's a great question and i ran out of time in my opening remarks and the problem with proposition d, and as corey mentioned earlier, it expedites the entitlements and it's deferred and they have value that's -- it doesn't require them to build until 36 months after the entitlements are conferred. it's part of the problem we have with the way that affordable homes now, proposition d has been built and it will bring more units online

faster but in fact, what it does is it further xhod guys and doesn't bring the units online. >> thank you. same question, corey. >> jeff is correct. all building permits do expire after 36 months and the reality is people who build housing for a living want to build housing. that's always the goal for people who finance housing, who construct housing. who design housing, the architects. so it has been a goal to try get the entitlement process and this is focusing on as well as the permitting process to go faster. we were proud to sponsor assembly 2234 which aimed to improve the post entitlement building permit acquisition process to ensure that cities to respond in a timely fashion. and if that happens, if the entitlement process is efficient and the

building permit acquisition process is more efficient, that's how we get affordable homes now and how we get shovels into the ground ask create homes for people that the city so desperately need. >> thank you. the second question and we'll start with you, corey. proposition d yours a prevailing wage for construction worker s affordable housing project and some level of professional training or qualifications for some workers, can you clarify how workers will be protected under proposition d and how the requirements will be enforced? >> yeah. absolutely. this is actually like i said, it's wonderful this matches the bill passed in the state legislature assembly bill 2011. prevailing wage is basically a dollar amount that people need to make to actually construct the housing that we are going to be building. health care opportunities and majority of construction workers in the state of california do not have health care so by requiring

health care opportunities, not only to the workers you their families and we know we're going to provide a stronger safety net for all residents. and then the apprenticeship programs. the big issues we have in california right now, there's a labor shortage and there's a skilled labor shortage so because the northern california carpenters union who is our proud partner, they said hey we need to move things far. we need to put solutions on the table and this is one of those measures that will not only benefit the construction workers but all unions across board. >> same question. your feelings about the requirement that's are in proposition d for workers? >> yeah, from opposition side, proposition d doesn't go far enough. it's one of the reasons why the building trades council and the labor council are opposed to proposition d. what they require generally is that there be a requirement for skilled and trained workers and helps to close the gap between

wages and housing costs. and it's extremely important to building trades that would be building these buildings. one of the things that's curious to us is that one of the things that proposition d is pushing is for form based density for larger buildings to be built residential and that generally means towards concrete and steel and it's curious to us, the carpenters union would be supporting proposition d even though -- which is not what the carpenters would be invested in >> we'll move with closing statements and any other thoughts you would like to give on proposition d, corey. >> like i said, san francisco has a great opportunity and choice in front of us if we want to move forward and value our residents like we claim we do. proposition d is supported by supervisor dorsey, senator scott

wiener and mayor london breed t. was put on a by coalition of pro housing advocates, labor units and nonaffordable housing developers and the northern california carpenters union is our strongest coalition partners as well as policy think tank like spur and affordable housing developers like mission housing development corporation as well as habitat for humanity and habitat for humanity is an interesting one because they see a problem from a wide perspective and look across the state and how we need to be building more homes for people faster and it was put on the ballot by 52,000 san francisco voters so read the facts and look at what these do and vote yes on proposition d. >> thank you. final thoughts. >> so part of the problem we have with this, again, what proposition d is streamlines primarily market rate housing by redefining affordable to 140% median. we're looking at

housing that san franciscans can't afford. bringing new lines, bringing new housing online doesn't necessarily solve the problem. san francisco during its current 8-year housing element cycle over built market rate housing by ten thousand units. and housing prices continue to out strip wage so we're concerned that what proposition d does is it doubles down on failed housing policies and what we need to do is focus our housing policies on real true affordable housing for san francisco workers, families, seniors, and those who are being priced out of the city. >> thank you. and thank you both for being here and for your time and your willingness to inform the public about this measure. >> thank you. >> thanks for having us. >> we hope this discussion has been informative. for more information about this and other ballot measures in the november election, please visit the department of elections website at sf elections dot org. remember, early voting is

available at city hall starting on october 11th from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and if you don't vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday, november 8th.