>> good morning. the meeting will come to order. well come to march 20, 2024 meeting of budget finance committee. i'm supervisor chair of the committee and joined by supervisor sor melgar and soon supervisor mandelman. >> to those in attendance to

silence cell phones and electronic devices. should you have documents to be included as part of the file they should submit to myself the clerk. public comment will be taken on each item. when your item comes up please line up . fill out a comment card and leave on the tray by the television tray if you wish to be recorded for the minutes. you may submit public comment in writing. e-mail myself at brentjulipa@sfgov.org. if you submit via e-mail it will be forwarded to the supervisor. you may submit comments by u.s. postal service in city hall at 1 dr. carlton b goodlett place,

room 244, san francisco california 94102. items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of march 26 unless otherwise stated: >> thank you. we have budget legislative item report for item 24 and for that one item we will have department presentation and followed by the budget legislative analyst and take questions and comment. mr. clerk, please call item 1. >> resolution approving and authorizing the director of property, on behalf of the city's department of emergency management and the department of technology, to execute a sharing agreement for the continued use of emergency radio telecommunications and associated equipment, with the

department of veterans affairs - medical center san francisco at a base rent of $117,648 per year with 3% annual rent increases commencing june 1, 2024, through march 31, 2029 for an initial term of five years with three five-year options to extend; and authorizing the director of property to execute any amendments, options to extend to the agreement term, make certain modifications and take certain actions that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city, do not materially decrease the benefits to the city and are necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes of the sharing agreement or this resolution.r advisable to effectuate the purposes of the sharing agreement or this resolution. madam chair. >> thank you. we have our real estate division here. >> good morning chair chan and supervisor melgar. claudia for real estate division. since 1997 the city owned and maintained a 800 megahurt city wide public safety divisions including police, fire public health, sheriff safety divisions. there are 8 tower that provide the grid. the tower at issue is one of them. in 2003 the city approved enter

into sharing agreement with department of veteran affairs medical center for radio telecommunication equipment. to renewals carried the lease to 2023. we started negotiations with the va in 2021. we received a first draft at the end of 2023 and we have been negotiation since. basically we accept their template because they do not negotiate on the template or price. having received the sharing agreement, it took a little longer but we did come to an agreement. the new sharing agreement provides a initial base rent of 117.648 $117.648 year. we do not have an appraisal for that amount , the appraisal from summer 2023 and guidelines support that amount. it is little less then the recommended $10 thousand a month. the term is for 5 years and

commences june 1, with 3, 5 year options to renew. i believe we did send an amendment because 5 years from june 1 is not march, but may and we need to make those changes. thauj. thank you. >> thank you. yes we see you are requesting two amendments to correct the dates in the resolution to match thudprument which is page 1 line 8 as well as page 2 line 20, both changing from march to may. thank you. i don't have any questions. i accomplish it. i know that given the understanding that it is not easy to negotiate with a federal and state partners for many reasons, regulations on all size so i appreciate all your efforts. thank you so much for your work and i don't see any name on the roster and we'll go to public comment on this item. thank you. >> we invite members who joined

us today who wish to speak item 1 to line up to speak right now. madam chair, no speakers. >> thank you. with that, public comment is closed. i like to first amend as requested by the department tochange the date from march to may on the legislation and with that, a roll call, please on the amendment. >> on that motion to amend the resolution as offered by the department of real estate or real estate division, vice chair mandelman, absent. member melgar, aye. chair chan, aye. we have two ayes with vice chair mandelman absent. >> thank you, the motion passes. before we move forward i like to excuse vice chair mandelman till he arrives. i don't think we need a roll call for that.

i don't see- >> no objection. >> vice chair mandelman is excused until he arrives. let's send the amended legislation to full board with recommendation and roll call. >> on the motion to forward to full board with positive recommendation as amended, member melgar, aye. chair chan, aye. we have two ayes with vice chair mandelman excused. >> thank you, motion passes. with that, let's call item 2. >> item 2 is ordinance amending the administrative code to revise the fees for copies of certain documents in and services provided by the office of the assessor-recorder. madam chair. >> thank you, and today we have the office of the assessor-recorder here. >> good morning chair chan,

supervisors. good morning chair chan, supervisor melgar. holly long from assessor-recorder office and joining me are [indiscernible] here to help answer any questions you may have. this legislation seeks approval to amend the fees for copies for recorded documents. it authorize the controller's office to annually update these fees to reflect any changes in the consumer price index. it also updates the fees for notary services to compliance with state law. the mission of our office is to fairly securely identify assess all taxable property. we also record assess and provide access to property

marriage and other records mptd in recent years we have done quite a lot of improvement to expand access to recorded documents. digitized 7 million documents. a few years back we launched record manager, a online tool for the public to search and pay and downloud recorded documents. in addition, to online access recorded documents can be obtained in person and by mail. here is the currency as well as proposed fee. the current fees have not changed in over 25 years despite changes in points of access as well as the cost to obtain these records for the public. we partnered with the controller's office to do a time and motion study and the proposed fees reflect the

direct and indirect costs of providing these records to the public. the proposal is a two tiered fee structure that reflect the level of services. firsts the keys for copies a flat fee of $1.76 regardless of page count. second, the fees of documents obtained by staff from city hall by mail and public kiosk is fee per page. here are the fee differences for the top three most recorded document, which are deeds, deeds of trust and reconconvenience. 67 percent of all transactions are from online users, so for these users the cost fwr average 5 page document is 82 percent cost savings. compared to other counties, san francisco is a leader among

peers and making public records more easily and fully accessible and lower costs. in summary, this ordinance reflects our office values to advance transparency, efficiency and accessibility eliminating barriers to access while recovering the true cost to service the public. thank you and we are available for questions you may have. >> thank you. i don't have any questions about the fee and i as always, the fees increase has public notice and so does this one and posted in advance. supervisor melgar. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation. i am glad you are increasing the fees. 20 years is a long time not to increase a fee. i do is have a question about usage, because i have been in the position of having to go down to the assessor office and

find documents, and the database is not that modern, or you know, user friendly, and we want people to be able to access stuff easily online. that is what the fee structure reflects . we want people to help themselves rather then use staff time or energy, so i wonder if there is effort or thought to maybe increase fees further and help pay for modernization of the system? >> great question. carlos. >> hi, supervisor. i don't know when you were last down in our office. can you--six months ago. did you try the online system and it gave you difficulty or? >> i tried your system there. >> on the kiosk or down at the consal like the computers?

>> the consal. >> okay. i love to learn more about your spoorns. experience. the system updated in 2021, a brand new system. it is sort of as holly mentioned, we sort of see ourselves as leaders in the field in terms of accessibility to the records. we are continuing to make upgrades to the system and enhancements, but if there were particular difficulties you have it is helpful to understand those. >> i can talk off-line about the difficulties. i'm a pretty tech savvy person. i do think there is lots of opportunities for the system to work better, not just for you, but with others for example, the school district using your records to see if somebody is eligible to enroll in our public schools, but somebody has to go over there. it is great if they could just-there was a integration with the system. i know it isn't a city agency,

but it is just a example that like, everybody relies on your system. >> yeah. we have done everything we can, but would continue to enhance the system as possible. i think the goal with the fees is to make records as accessible as possible and you raise a great point which is sometimes a higher fee can-if it supports a easier access point can actually improve access. happy to consider it. >> thank you. >> thanks. >> thank you. you have first hand user experience feedback hire in the chamber. with that, let's go to public comment on this item. >> members of the public who wish to address this committee regarding the item 2, now is your opportunity to approach the lectern. madam chair, no speakers. >> now that public comment is closed, and with that, would

like to move the item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please. >> the motion to forward the ordinance to full board with positive recommendation, melgar, aye. chan, aye. two ayes and vice chair mandelman excused. >> thank you, motion passes. please call item number 3. >> item number 3, resolution approving a second amendment to the disposition and development agreement between the port and fc pier 70, llc for the pier 70 28-acre site project; authorizing the executive director of the port to enter amendments or modifications to the second amendment that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the resolution; and adopting findings under the california environmental quality act. madam chair. >> thank you. today we have sf port. >> good morning supervisors. my name is christine.

with me today from the port, josh keen and paul as well as representatives from the port development partner brookefield properties. i'll start the presentation with a quick overview of the project. the pier 70 special use district approved by the port and city in 2017. in blue, the sud incompass 35 acres and up to 3 thousand residential units. 1.75 million square feet of office and 9 acres of open space. development of a twaket acre portion of the sud is governed by disposition and development agreement or dda with a port development partner, brooke field. the 28 acre site is developed in three phases. phase 1 again outlined in blue include up to 600 residential

units. 460 thousand square feet of office and 3 and a half acres of new parks and open space. since project approval in 2017, the project achieved a number of important milestones. [field completed [indiscernible] with exceptional of parks. brookefield also completed the rehab of historic building 12 in 2022 and actively leasing the space. there are however 6 remaining buildings in phase 1. the timing of those buildings is uncertain at this point given the ongoing economic impact of the pandemic and overall market conditions. now on to the dda amendments. as mentioned, phase 1 infrastructure accept for parks is now complete. the port commission recommended acceptance of the infrastructure in january and the land use committee made a positive recommendation to the

full board just this past monday. generally, improvements built to sit estandard will be owned and maintained by the city. while infrastructure not built to city standard is owned and maintained by the port. these port items include things like the frame of the former building 15 that spans 22 street, custom street and sidewalk paver and custom street furniture. service special taxes are identified as the funding source for maintaining port accepted infrastructure. however, due to the delay in vertical development, no special taxes are currently available to fund these maintenance costs. the proposed dda amendment address the short-fall by allowing maintenance cost incurred by port or developer to be treated as reimbursable project cost until special taxes are available. that concludes the presentation. port staff and developer are

available for any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. i think given the fact that like supervisor melgar is the chair of the land use already approved this, we don't have further question today on this body and will go to public comment on this item. thank you. >> yes, we invite members of the public who wish to address item 3. now is your opportunity to address this committee. madam chair, no speakers. >> seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. and with that, would like to move the item to full board with recommendation and roll call, please. >> on that motion to forward this resolution to full board with positive recommendation, member melgar, aye. chair chan, aye. two ayes with vice chair mandelman excused. >> thank you, motion passes.

please call item number 4. >> item 4, resolution approving and authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development (“mohcd”) to execute documents relating to a loan for the permanent financing of 936 geary lp for property located at 936-940 geary avenue, pursuant to the small sites program and the preservation and seismic safety program, for a total loan amount not to exceed $11,800,000; confirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; finding that the project loan is consistent with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1; and authorizing the director of mohcd or their designee to make certain modifications to such loan documents, and take certain actions in furtherance of this resolution, as defined herein. madam chair. >> thank you mr. clerk. today we have mayor's office of housing and community

development here. >> thank you. i have a slide show. it is plugged in here. there we go. thank you. so, chair chan, supervisors, may name is sophie rubin with mayor office of community development to request approval of permanent financing at 936 geary street. project comes to the city through the small sites program. the project was structured as a joint venture betwo developers, the san francisco housing development corporation and noven development corporation. related party also act as the general contractor on the project. 42 percent of the households were formally homeless. this is unusual and high for a small site, but we think it is fantastic we are able to support those people. many of those households were

also seniors. several of the units were filled through referrals from catholic charities and those units come with vouchers which is fantastic, it supports our ability to support lower income individuals and our ability to meet the program goals of reaching up to 80 percent ami average for income. there are 31 residential studios at the site as well as two ground floor commercial spaces. both spaces are vacant and we have given the sponsor up to a year to fill those due to current conditions commercial conditions in the neighborhood. there is a commercial leasing plan that would be approved as the condition of the loan if the loan is approved, and we are hopeful that we can find non profits that can lease the space below market rate. just a few more details about the project.

it was acquired in 2021. the rehabilitation completed last year. including seismic up grades, electrical up grades, window replacements and interior up grades. before you have a couple pictures of the inside of one of the renovated units and a layout. and finally, the request is up to $11.8 million in permanent financing that include $4.4 million in past funds, which is a senior mortgage product through the city and up to $7.4 million in small site program funds. it is notable this is probably one of the cheapest programs in terms of small sites program funds we have seen. it is requesting only about half of the maximum subsidy per unit. and through a deed of restrictions we will be preserving the affordability of all the units in the project

for up to 99 years. thank you and i'm available for any questions. >> good morning. nick monard. item 4 resolution approves the loan from mayor office of housing to 936 geary lp. we summarized the loan terms on page 4 of our report and we also note that the city's funding basically paying off a interim financing providing by the housing accelerator fund to fund the acquisition and rehab of the project and doing it in this way and makes the city incur interest cost for the interim financing and there are few city policies that apply because the city isn't directly funding the rehabilitation so we note that as a policy consideration. we have two technical amendments to the resolution. lower not to exceed by $200

thousand to be consistent with the project budget and correct the address in the resolution and recommend approval as amended. >> thank you. supervisor melgar. >> thank you. out of curiosity, why is the per unit cost lower then other projects we have seen? >> yeah, i think you know, all of the small sites are rehabilitations and just the quality of the building being purchased, there is always some amount of unknown and i think to some extent the project was lucky in that, it just didn't require extraordinary down the bones rehabilitation like many of our projects do. the other thing it is on the larger side for the small sites and you do get a per unit cost benefit the more units there

are in the project. we set our guidelines just across small sites. it isn't dependent how many units there and a 6 or 10 unit project is going to incur more per unit cost to rehabilitate the building then a larger building like this. >> thank you. >> thank you. with that, let's go to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to address the committee on item 4. we have no speakers. >> thank you. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. i love to circle back about really the small sites program and the implementation of it and to just kind of have a evaluation of the overall implementation of the small sites program, since we have somewhat a update of the rules

and since last year i think along with supervisor melgar's work, just we'll probably circle back, not today, but eventually we need to kind of look at the results impact and definitely the cost per unit, both not just on the renovation side, but also really including rental subsidies and maintenance and all that. thank you and with that, i would like to make the motion to amend according to the budget and legislative analyst recommendation, amended proposed resolution to reduce not to exceed loan amount, which my assumption is that the mayor office of housing and community development is in agreement on the not to exceed amount reduction? >> yes. >> then, so i like to make the motion to amend the not to

exceed loan amount from $11.8 million to $11.6 million to reflect the project budget and to state the correct address of the project to 936-940 geary street. motion on the amendment. >> on the motion to amend the resolution as stated by the chair, vice chair mandelman, aye. member melgar, aye. chair chan, aye. we have three ayes. >> thank you. the motion passes. with that, colleagues, i like to send the amended resolution-sorry-amended resolution to the full board with recommendation and with that, a roll call, please. >> on the motion to forward the resolution to the full board with positive recommendation as amended, mandelman aye. melgar, aye. chan, aye. we have three ayes. >> thank you.

the motion passes. let's call item number 5. >> item 5, resolution retroactively authorizing the san francisco public defender's office to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $524,765, pursuant to senate bill no. 101 (sb 101), allocating $20,400,000 (community assistance, recovery, and empowerment (care) court fund), as amended in 2023 by senate bill no. 104 (sb 104), to be distributed by the judicial council of california through the state bar via grant awards to qualified legal services providers and public defender offices to provide representation in care act proceedings, matters related to care agreements, and care plans for the period of august 1, 2023, through june 30, 2024. madam chair. >> thank you mr. clerk. vice chair mandelman i think has remarks particularly on

this item. >> just briefly and thank you madam chair. this is a item brought to us by the public defender's office. this board and the mayor have been supportive of care court implementation through the legislative process and now in the implementation process. we had hearings at the board of supervisors on implementation. this is a collaboration of many different departments and agencies and it is not without cost and so, we are grateful to public defender's office for going out and getting the funds. anyone in care court is entitled to representation through the public defender's office and key players to people who need it. with that, we have a presentation from the public defender's office i believe. >> thank you vice chair mandelman. thank you for sponsoring and for the support of your

legislative aid zara specifically. i'm chief of staff for public defender office and also here with colleagues toa and we'll give a briefs presentation. so, the community assistance recovery empowerment act known as care, became effective as of january 1 of 2023. it authorizes family members, housemates, first responders and behavioral health workers to petition a civil court to create a voluntary care agreement or court ordered care plan that can include treatment, housing, support and other services people with untreated schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders. san francisco is one of 7 counties tasked to implement care court effective as of the legislation effective as of january 1, 2023. the funding became and care court started as of october 1,

2023. the public defender's office were given $478.429 and additional $46.336 totaling $524.765. the current spending period is starts in october 1 of last year to the end of this fiscal year, however, we were given the option to ret row actively bill towards the preparation for care court starting as of august of 2023. our current spending plan towards the funding consist of one fte, a attorney and one fte a paralegal in addition to staffing cost the grant will be utilized for vouchers as such

as emergency temporary shelters, meals, transportation, and any personal hygiene costs that participants may have. with that, i'll let toa speak to what is currently going on with our care court. >> before you go on- >> not a question. big fan of care court and wanted to be added as cosponsor. that's all. >> you had a question? >> there was no question. just wanted to be added a a cosponsor. >> thank you so much. >> my apology. please go ahead. >> morning chair chan, vice chair mandelman and supervisor melgar. public defender office is active participant in care court. to date there are 21 petitions filed for care based on the estimated total population breakdown in cohort 1 with the first 7 counties consistent with the referral rate in other counties.

requires legal service providers to be appointed in san francisco. the office has been collaborating with them. we have referred three misdemeanor clients eligible because they were incompetent to stand trial and found eligible for a different program, mental health diversion. been appointed on one petition for a client stepping down from a community based conservatorship. we also consulted with legal service providers and three other petitions for former clients. in addition, the additional staff resources have been helpful for addressing implementation of sb43, which has expanded the criteria for conservator shf and result in increase of number of petitions for temporary conservatorships. >> with that, that concludes the presentation and happy to answer questions you may have.

>> just want to acknowledge and welcome [indiscernible] welcome saint brandon students to the chamber. you are joining us at the budget and finance committee. we talk about money. [laughter] and budget and how we spend that money, including care court. i do not have any additional questions. i'm eager to hear just the implementation of it. i know we are still in the initial phase of this, and we won't really know until at least a year. it isn't even a year into implementation, but i think it is something for us to really think about and i am eager to see proposition 1 passage or not, and how this will impact all of us in the long-term, not just san francisco, but up and down the state of california.

i'm really pleased that the care court in san francisco at least is moving forward. >> yes. >> and that i think with that, it will actually help the rest of the state in the curve of figuring out whether how to make it better, whether something we need to continue to invest in and how we can invest in it, so i appreciate all your work as always and thank you so much for being here with us, and with that, i'm going to go to public comment on this item. >> we now inslight invite members of the public who address item 5, now is your opportunity to approach the lectern. madam chair, we have no speakers. >> public comment is now closed. colleagues, i would like to move this item and just want to clarify both sponsor of supervisor mandelman and supervisor melgar on the legislation and move the item

forward with recommendation and roll call, please. >> on that motion to forward the resolution to full board with positive recommendation, mandelman, aye. melgar, aye. chan, aye. we have three ayes. >> the motion passes. mr. clerk, do we have any other business before us today? >> that concludes the business. >> we have budget and appropriation committee today at 1:30 p.m. with that, the meeting is adjourned. [meeting adjourned]

you're watching san francisco rising with chris manners. special guest is david chu. hi i'm chris manners and you're watching san francisco rising the show that's about restarting rebuilding and re imagining our city. i guess today is david chiu, the city attorney for the city and county of san francisco , and he's here today to talk to us about the opioid crisis, reproductive rights and the non citizen voting program. mr chu, welcome to the show. thanks for having me on happy to talk about whatever you want me to talk about, so can we start by explaining the difference between the city attorney's office and the district attorney's office? i think it could be slightly confused. that is a very common fusion with members of the public so um, if you get arrested in san francisco by the san francisco police department, all criminal matters are dealt with by the san francisco district attorney . we handle all civil matters on

behalf of the city and county of san francisco. what that means is a number of things. we provide advice and counsel to all actors within city government from our mayor. every member of the board of supervisors to the 100 plus departments, commissions boards that represent the city and county of san francisco. we also defend the city against thousands of lawsuits. so if you slip and fall in front of city hall if there's a bus accident if there is an incident involving the san francisco police department, we defend those matters. we also bring lawsuits on behalf of the city and county of san francisco, where most famous for litigating and obtaining the constitutional right to marry for lgbtq couples have sued gun manufacturers, payday lenders, oil companies, you name it, who are undercutting the rights of san franciscans and the city and county of san francisco. so now moving on to the opioid crisis. i understand you've had some success in court, um, dealing

with manufacturers, distributors and pharmacies. could you elaborate a little bit on that for us, so the opioid industry and by that i refer to the legal industry that prescribes pain pills. um over years. uh, deceived americans and resulted in literally thousands upon thousands of deaths and tragedies that we see on our streets every day when it comes to the addictions that folks are experiencing. many of the addictions really stemmed from what happened over a decade plus period where the prescription pain industry marketed prescription pills in ways that were false. we were one of thousands of jurisdictions around america that brought a lawsuit against the opioid industry. but we've had a particular set of successes that others have not. ah we initially brought a lawsuit a few years ago against every part of the opioid supply chain, and that

included manufacturers, distributors and retailers, including pharmacies over the course of four plus years. a number of these corporate defendants settled with us. we've as of this moment brought in over $120 million of cash and services. to the city to help address the root causes of what we're talking about. but a few months ago, we had a really historic verdict against the pharmacy, walgreens and their role walgreens was responsible for literally over 100 million pills, flooding the streets of san francisco over a period of years where they flouted federal law that require them to track where they're pills were going to. they had a what? what we refer to as a phil phil phil. pharmacy culture where folks would bring in their prescriptions, and the pharmacist would just fill them without checking why someone was coming in multiple times without

checking why certain doctors were seen a 100 fold increase in the number of opioid prescriptions that they were prescribing. so we had a historic judgment against walgreens recently, but it's been a very intense lawsuit. and we know that will never bring back the lives that we have lost to opioid addictions. but it's critical for us that we get the resources that we need. maybe one other thing i'll mention because it's often confusion. a large percentage of folks who are addicted to street level drugs say heroin or fentanyl started their addictions. with painkillers, opioid medications that were prescribed through doctors provided through pharmacies and so literally the suffering that we're seeing on our streets was caused by the opioid industry over many, many years and has created the significant crisis that we are dealing with right now. right right now moving on. i understand after the recent supreme court ruling, striking

down robust as wade that you've put together an organization that's designed to help mm. provide free services to people who are both. seeking abortions and providing them can you tell us about the organization? sure so, um, before the dobbs decision came down, but after we learned about the leak from the supreme court about the draft that suggested the decision would be as bad as it has turned out to be, um, i reached out to leadership from the bar association of san francisco because we knew that if that decision came down there would be tens of thousands of patients around the country as well as providers whose legal situation would be in jeopardy. women doctors, nurses who could be subjected to lawsuits who could be arrested who could be prosecuted, particularly in red states? 26 states where rights are being rolled back or in the process or have already been rolled back because of the dobbs decision. so we put out a call to lawyers all over the bay and

frankly, all over the country, and as of this moment there have been over 70 law firms that have answered our call to be part of the legal alliance for reproductive rights who have committed to reviewing cases and providing pro bono assistance to patients and providers who are at legal risk. we also are looking at potential cases that these lawyers can bring against various states. in these areas that are looking to deprive women and patients and providers of their of their rights. um it is a very dark time in america, and i'm really proud that that barrier attorneys, the legal community care have stepped up to answer the call. it's very important that's great. so now the non citizen voting program that was passed by voters just for school boards has faced them court challenges recently, but it was in place for the most recent election that we've had. how do you see that situation panning out? in fact, it's been in place for now. five school

board elections. um so a little bit of background in our san francisco schools over one out of three kids. has a parent who is a non citizen who doesn't have a say in the election of the policy makers that dictate the future of our san francisco public schools, and so over a number of years, there has been a movement to allow immigrant parents to vote in school board elections. few things i'll mention about that is our country has a very long history when it comes to allowing immigrants to vote. from 17 76 for 100 and 50 years until after world war. one immigrants were allowed to vote in most states in our country on the theory that we want to assimilate immigrants in american democratic values and institutions, and it wasn't until an anti immigrant backlash in world war one that that sort of ended. but in recent years, um cities across america have allowed this to happen. in fact, at this moment, believe there

are over a dozen cities that have voted to allow non citizens to vote in a number of context. now, this is particularly important in our schools just given how challenge our schools are, and given that we know that when we engage more parents in her school system, regardless of their citizenship it helps to lift up our schools for all parents. and so in 2016 the voters of san francisco past about measure that allowed this to happen. unfortunately earlier this year, there were conservative organizations that came to san francisco to bring a lawsuit to try to overturn this , and i should also mention it is obviously the perspective of our office and our city that this is constitutional. nothing in the constitution prohibits non citizens from voting. and in fact, there's an explicit provision in the constitution that allows chartered cities like san francisco when it comes to school board elections to be able to dictate the time and manner of those elections. and so, uh, we are involved in

litigation on this issue. there was an initial ruling that was not good for us that essentially said at the trial court level. we shouldn't allow this. um we appealed it up to the appellate level. the appellate court made an initial decision to allow this past november election to proceed as it has for the last previous four elections. we're going to be in front of that court soon. stay tuned. we'll see what happens. it was good to hear that the city was able to reach a settlement with the center for medicare and medicaid services are meant laguna honda could still operate. how did you manage to reach that agreement? it was not an easy conversation . just a little bit of background. so laguna honda has been an incredibly important institution in san francisco for 150 years, taking care of our most vulnerable patients are frail, very elderly patients, many of whom are at end of life. and a few years ago, there were some issues in that hospital. some violations of rules that we

very much want to make sure don't get violated. there were folks that weren't using proper ppe, who are bringing cigarette lighters into the facility, who might have brought some contraband into the facilities. we have zero tolerance for that and have made that very clear. we self reported some of these violations to the federal authorities. and unfortunately from our perspective, they took the very disproportionate step of ordering the closure. the permanent closure of lugano, honda. problematic on a number of reasons. first and foremost, there are just no skilled nursing facility beds not just in california but around the country. after their order came down. we literally were putting 1000 calls a day to skilled nursing facilities around california and around the country and could find nowhere to move the 700 patients that we had had in the gonna honda but just as disturbingly as we were forced to start moving some of these patients, a number of them died. there's a concept in medicine known as transfer trauma. when you move someone

who is that frail and unfortunately, folks folks died and we were at a point where we were five weeks away from the deadline for the federal government. that they had provided to us to close the facility. so uh and we have been trying for months to get the federal government to reconsider their action, so i was compelled to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the city and county of san francisco and very pleased and appreciate that we were able to come to a settlement whereby transfers will be delayed at least until next year. we're going to have at least a year of funding. to keep the facility open, and hopefully we can get back up on our feet and ensure that no future violations occur because this is an institution that has to stay open for the good of these patients. quite right, quite right. so finally, congratulations on winning an important public power service dispute with pg and e. um why is it important that the city's rights as a local power provider maintained well, so san

francisco has been a local power provider for decades. we are fortunate to have access through our hedge hetchy hydroelectric system to provide electricity to a number of providers, particul public recipients of that. and unfortunately, pg any has used its monopoly when it comes to private electricity to try to stop that, and to block that, and from our perspective, they violated federal law in adding literally tens of millions of dollars of expenses to san francisco and institutions that we're trying to ensure um, public power infrastructure. put years of delays on our ability to do this, and so we had to bring a number of appeals in the federal commission. ah we were successful in those appeals, and there was a decision recently that basically held the pg and e could not use its monopoly to unfairly delay or add tens of millions of dollars of cost. to

the city and county of san francisco, as we are trying to move forward with our vision of public power. clearly pgd has not been able to serve not just san francisco but northern california. well we all know that with the wildfires with its bankruptcies, with all the issues that they've had, we think there a dferent model to move forward on and we are grateful to the court. and providing a ruling that allows us to move forward. well thank you so much for coming on the show. i really appreciate the time you've given us here today. i appreciate and thanks for your thanks for your questions. thank you. well that's it. for this episode, we'll be back with another one shortly for sf gov t v. i'm chris manners. thanks for watching. yeah. >> [music] you are watching golden gate inventions with michael. this is episode exploring the

excelsior. >> hi i'm michael you are watching golden gate inventions highlighting urban out doors we are in the excelsior. pickleball. let's play pickleball! pickleball is an incredited low popular sport growing nationwide. pickleball combines tennis, bad mitton and ping pong. playod a bad mitton sized court with paddle and i plasticic ball. starting out is easy. you can pick up paddle and balls for 20 buck and it is suitable for everyone in all skill levels you see here. the gim is played by 2 or 4 players. the ball must be served diagnoty and other rules theory easy to pick up. the game ends when i player or team reaches a set score 11 or

21 point bunkham win bright 2 pickleball courts are available across the city some are and others require booking ahead and a fee. information about the courts found at sf recpark. org if you are interested in playing. now i know why people are playing pickleball. it is so much fun you play all ages. all skill levels and pop on a court and you are red to g. a lot of fun i'm glad i did it. all right. let's go! time for a hike! there is i ton of hike nothing excelsior. 312 acres mc clarin the second largest p in san francisco. there are 7 miles of tris including the there was fer's way this spreads over foresxeft

field and prosecute voids hill side views of the city. and well is a meditative quiet place in mc clarin p you will siendz labyrinth made of rock:now we are at glen eagle golf course special try out disk golf >> now disk golf! so disk golf is like traditional golf but with noticing disks. credit as the sport's pioneer establishing the disk ballsorption and the first standardized target the disk ball hole. the game involves throwing from key areas toward i metal basket. players use different disks for long distances driver,

immediateerate. mid range and precise shot, putters. players begin at the t area. throw disks toward the basket and prosecute seed down the fare way. player with the lowest number of throws the end wins the game. disk golf at glen eagle cost 14 dollars if you pay at the clubhouse. there is an 18 hole course this is free. du see that shot? i won! am i was not very good now i have a huge respect for disk ball player its is difficult but fun. thank you for joining me in the excelsior this is goldenate adventures.

>> driver, bye. >> hi. i'm will b. mixture weltake a walk with me. >> i just love taking strolls in san francisco. they are so many cool and exciting things to see. like -- what is that there? what is that for? hi. buddy. how are you. >> what is that for. >> i'm firefighter with the san francisco fire department havings a great day, thank you for asking. this is a dry sand pipe. dry sand pipes are multilevel building in san francisco and the world. they are a piping system to facilitate the fire engineaire ability to pump water in a buildings that is on fire. >> a fire truck shows up and does what? >> the fire engine will pull up

to the upon front of the building do, spotting the building. you get an engine in the area that is safe. firefighters then take the hose lyoning line it a hydrant and that give us an endsless supply of water. >> wow, cool. i don't see water, where does it come from and where does it go? >> the firefighters take a hose from the fire engine to the dry sand pipe and plug it in this inlet. they are able to adjust the pressure of water going in the inlet. to facilitate the pressure needed for any one of the floors on this building. firefighters take the hose bunked and he will take that homes upon bundle to the floor the fire is on. plug it into similar to this an outlet and they have water to put the fire out.

it is a cool system that we see in a lot of buildings. i personal low use federal on multiple fires in san francisco to safely put a fire out. >> i thought that was a great question that is cool of you to ask. have a great day and nice meeting you. >> thank you for letting us know what that is for. thanks, everybody for watching! bye! [music]