yeah. okay. good afternoon. this meeting will come to order. welcome to the april 2024 regular meeting of the land use and transportation committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i'm supervisor mariana melgar, chair of the committee. joined by vice chair dean preston, the committee clerk today is john carroll, and i would also like to acknowledge jeanette engel from safeguard tv, mr. clark, do you have any announcements? yes. thank you. please ensure that you've silenced your cell phones and other electronic devices you brought with you to the chamber today. if you have public comment on any of today's sorry if you have public comment on today's singular agenda item, when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called, please line up to speak along the western wall of this room.

you may submit your written public comment by emailing me at joanne period. crowell at sf gov. org or you may send your written public comment to our office in city hall. that is the clerk's office, room 244. city hall's address is one. doctor carlton b goodlett place, san francisco, california 94102. items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of april 16th, 2024, unless otherwise stated. thank you very much, mr. clerk. before we call item number one, i would like to make a motion to excuse president peskin from today's meeting on the motion offered by the chair to excuse member peskin, vice chair preston preston, i chair melgar i. melgar i madam chair, there are two eyes. thank you, mr. clerk. please call item number one. agenda. item number one is a resolution authorizing the city and county of san francisco acting by and through the mayor's office of housing and community development, to submit an application to and participate in the pro housing designation program administered by the california department of housing and community development. thank you, miss

sheila nikolopoulos from the mayor's office of housing and community development is here. and i also see the director of macd, dan adams, who is here to answer any questions, go ahead, mr. michalopoulos. good afternoon. sheila michalopoulos, director of policy and legislative affairs for macd, before you today is a resolution to support the city's application to the state department of housing and community development to their pro housing designation program. the board approved a similar resolution, filed 220826, in october of 2022. the state's approval of that application was delayed to give san francisco time to align certain policies, such as adu regulations, with the pro housing requirements. earlier this month, under their newly updated pro housing designation program guidelines, hcd resubmitted our application to the state for the pro housing designation. we have worked with hcd to revise the resolution in line with their updated guidelines, as having a pro

housing designation will give san francisco additional points in applications for competitive housing and infrastructure funding, including important funding sources like the affordable housing and sustainable communities grant program, the infill infrastructure grant program, and certain state transportation funding programs. san francisco needs state funding to build affordable housing. two thirds of funding for the construction of affordable housing in san francisco comes from state or federal government. only one third of the funding comes from the city. the competition for statewide affordable housing funds is intense, and every point towards a higher score matters. when the applicant pool is crowded, the affordable housing and sustainable communities program and the infill infrastructure grant programs have awarded. 18 san francisco projects. more than 309,000,000 in 4 funding rounds since 2018. this funding helps build thousands of new affordable units. these funding opportunities are becoming more competitive though, so having preference points via the pro housing designation is an important part of securing state funding and realizing our affordable housing production goals, specifically, there are

three housing projects totaling 352 units that have pending applications to the affordable housing and sustainable communities grant program for up to 50 million each. that includes 35 million for the housing developments and 15 million for supporting transportation improvements. so 150 million total. if awarded, these projects would start construction next year. there is also a transportation grant application for 26 million that mta for mta that will be pending later this spring. to qualify for a pro housing city, san francisco must meet threshold requirements, including a compliant housing element and submission submission of the annual progress report for housing element. comply with a variety of state housing laws, adoption of best practices in its treatment of homeless encampments, and an executed apply for resolution, which is before you today. in addition, san francisco's application includes documentation of existing pro housing policies and categories such as favorable zoning and land use, acceleration of housing production time frames, reduction of construction and

development costs, and providing financial subsidies. our application to the state highlights 14 existing policies that fit into these categories, including our local density program, home sf, which exceeds statutory requirements by 35. local adu programs that increase density in single family residential areas and expedite permitting for adus. our policy of no parking requirements for residential development. zoning that allows for mixed uses, and commercial districts. establishment of a one stop permit center to expedite permit processing. priority permit processing for 100% affordable projects and projects with increased affordability impact fee waivers for 100% affordable projects with city subsidy and local capital funding sources such as the housing trust fund and the affordable housing production and preservation fund, and local operating subsidies such as losp and sos. the application identifies existing policies and programs only. it does not commit the city to any policy changes. a successful application for the pro housing program is expected

to enhance san francisco's ability to access critical state funds for housing and infrastructure. these funds are especially important in these times of increased statewide competition for limited resources. we expect the state to complete the review of our application by may 17th. with the governor's budget announcement gutting the non ahsc housing capital programs for the next two fiscal years, it's all the more important that we put our most competitive feet forward this year and next year for the affordable housing, sustainable communities, because this is cap and trade funded and it's not a risk of pullback like some of the other programs we are available to answer. any questions. thank you. thank you so much, miss nikolopoulos, supervisor preston, thank you, chair melgar. and thank you, miss nikolopoulos, for the presentation. and also just, will say that, fully concur around the need and whatever we can do to make ourselves more competitive, for these funds. so

in that respect, the resolution before us is welcome. and i also want to say, i want to thank you for what i understand, and director adams was some work behind the scenes with the department, city state attorney and others to strike that balance that you referred to of, of, making sure we meet the criteria that's been set up, but also without pre deciding or undermining, further efforts that are, you know, will be before the board and the administration. so i appreciate the care that went into creating the resolution. i do want to comment, a bit on this. some of this is just the nature of this resolution. sort of no one's no one hears fault on this front. but but, but some things i do just want to put on the record while we're talking about this, because i think it's important. and i've spoken to this before. when it came through committee the first time we had this

so-called pro housing designation, i just want to note and not normalize what i view as the absurdity of the state, calling this an aid having baked into now the state, codes the idea of pro housing versus non pro housing. nobody can actually explain what pro housing is. it appears to be a firm that one set of lobbyists uses for certain policies. and then we're supposed to accept that anyone who doesn't see things their way is somehow anti housing. so i think it's an unfortunate terme. it is apparently really the state's i think euphemism for state housing policies that, at least as applied in san francisco, operate primarily to increase land values and incentivize the building of luxury housing that working class people cannot afford in our city. and then i think, to make the irony even greater, the state has developed a program

where failure to immediately pass laws or to increase property values and incentivize luxury housing locally result in the state blocking funding for affordable housing. so couldn't make this up. if i were trying to state actually conditions affordable housing money for the poor and working class folks of our city, not on the city ramping up our investments in affordable housing for poor and working class people, but instead on whether we are sufficiently incentivizing housing that in our market is unaffordable by design. so it is no wonder that in the last rina cycle, we over produced market rate housing and underproduced affordable housing. so i understand this resolution statutorily required for us to have a competitive edge, for state affordable housing money. so i understand why it's before us, and i look forward to

passing it today and hopefully at the full board as well. despite this really absurdity of how the state law requirements are structured, i think we all want to be competitive for these funds, i do note and i have resisted the urge to, to start proposing amendments, to this resolution because i don't want to complicate this, but i, i do feel the need to note this on the record, a dynamic that i think is missing from this resolution. it's probably not needed in the resolution, but i think it's important and that and that is the many efforts to increase our affordable housing stock that have been approved by this board of supervisors and have been obstructed, defunded or delayed by the mayor, and these are ongoing disputes. there are policy differences. there are budget differences, and i think they should be noted on the record, even if not

formerly included in the resolution. so consistent with san francisco's duty to affirmatively further fair housing, this board of supervisors has authorized and urged additional affordable housing investments and developments above and beyond those undertaken by the mayor's office, including, but not limited to, urging the use of proposition i revenue from 2020, and each year for affordable housing, which the mayor has refused to budget each year, appropriating funds. the board has appropriated funds into san francisco's housing stability fund for preservation, acquisition, which last year the mayor defunded by $20 million and, leaving what is currently, basically a zeroed out budget precluding many worthy projects from being acquired for housing permanent, affordable housing

preservation, the board has urged development of affordable housing on city owned land at parcel k in hayes valley. it's. the mayor has now delayed indefinitely. and in addition, for what can only be described as purely political reasons, the mayor intervened to block affordable housing development at 400 divisadero, which could provide over 160 affordable homes for working class san franciscans and formerly homeless san franciscans. so i raise all this, and that's just a partial list, to urge the administration to do better on affordable housing. i welcome the new leadership at mcrd and look forward to continuing to work with director adams and his team, but i will continue to use every opportunity to urge the mayor to stop blocking this board and the voters of san francisco when it comes to the development of affordable housing in our city, and i also

want to warn that if the mayor continues on this path, path of blocking these critical affordable housing investments, that i fear that the mayor's ongoing obstruction and defunding of affordable housing could well compromise our so-called pro housing designation and make it even harder for our city to secure scarce state affordable housing funds. so thank you, madam chair, for the time. just wanted to put that on the record, fully prepared to support the resolution and interest in the public comment. thank you. thank you so much, supervisor preston. so, i am also prepared to support this resolution, i want to add a couple of things. since we're putting things on the record, i wholeheartedly agree with you in your comments about the city's lack of investment in affordable housing, our systems, our capacity, our coordination with other departments, and more

importantly than anything else, our funding towards affordable housing, needs to be more robust and keep up with our talk for sure, i have spent most of my career in affordable housing and, you know, it is where i think our pain point is, as a city, where i will disagree with you is because i, represent district seven, it's the west side of the city, my district is the largest district geographically because it is so low density, i have west portal avenue, one of our very successful commercial corridors, which is zoned for 27ft height, and could support a lot of housing, as well, and i think that, you know, we have in the past made decisions that have concentrated both development pressures and, you know, just incentivize development in some areas of our city and not in

others, i was around working for the mayor's office of housing when we, negotiated the eastern neighborhoods plan, which, of course, incentivized and concentrated development in mission soma bayview. the eastern side of the city. while no building happened in district seven. and while some folks, you know, in my district do like it that way, i fear that for the next generation, it makes living on the west side undoable, and i, you know, doing this job because i want my kids to stay here. i want the next generation to have a sustainable, environmentally, responsible city that is connected, that is affordable, that includes both market rate and affordable housing on the west side, neither of which we have built, thus far for the past, you know, 40 years. so i, i look forward

to making sure that our housing element is operational in a way that makes sense for all districts. and for future generations, and that we continue working together, working with advocates and pressuring, you know, folks, so that we can have as much affordable housing investment as possible all over the city. yes. supervisor preston, thank thank you, chair, and i appreciate the comments. i think the one thing, though, that i want to push back on, because i think you framed it as a disagreement and i'm not sure there is one, i'm not arguing or taking issue with efforts to deal and incentivize development on the west side. and i just want to be clear like that or or elsewhere in san francisco. my point in my remarks was, what makes no sense is to tell, like the residents of the fillmore district, there's not going to be state

affordable housing money for you because some change to incentivize market rate housing out on 40th avenue didn't happen fast enough for the state. that's the dynamic that i'm getting at and really object to so strongly. there is a conversation to be had, and we've had this conversation in committee and at the board around the right levels of incentivizing development, the right height, the density. and i think we all welcome i mean, i'll speak for myself. i welcome that conversation. i just don't want to pretend ever, that that's a conversation around creation of affordable housing and what the state has done by this dumbing down of housing policy into this pro housing or not, pro housing is they've they've really conflated the issue of creating affordable housing in our city, with creating market rate housing in our city. and i understand

there's a more of a trickle down analysis that says if you just create enough market rate housing, somehow, it's all going to become affordable. i've been in dealing with affordable housing for over two decades. that hasn't worked and doesn't work, but but but they've taken it one step further here with not just conflating it in theory, but now actually setting up a system whereby by the measures of our success on the market rate housing, which again, it is fine for us to revisit and look at, but using that to decide whether or not to award grants to our city for affordable housing is completely upside down. it only benefits developers, and it only hurts low income and working class san franciscans. okay, let's take public comment on this item, please, mr. clerk, thank you, madam chair. if you have public comment on agenda item number one, please come forward to the

lectern now. good afternoon, supervisors. john avalos from the council of community housing organizations, we are here to urge you to support this resolution on, i do believe that there are certain contradictions that, have been elucidated by the by the committee here today, the fact that we have a housing element, the city is in compliance with it. we have done a lot of work as a city to actually approve that, to look at how we, upzone the west side of the city and build a framework for that. it also be able to protect a lot of communities on the eastern side that are dealing with anti-displacement issues. this is something that this committee has been grappling with all this time, i do look at, kind of an absurdity about that. san francisco does such a great job in affordable housing, production and planning. we do that actually really well,

despite the lack of resources more than other, jurisdictions around the state of california. and yet we do have to apply for a pro housing designation on top so we can still be competitive, even though we're probably more competitive already. it's this, housing designations that gives us, the same advantage we probably had before. so it's necessary that we apply for it. there are a number of community housing organizations that are subject to the this pro housing designation that would benefit from it. so it's vital that we do approve of it. however, there's a clause in one of the resolve clauses here that that basically says that, you know, you're not supposed to do any more additional legislation that could help us to, you know, could make sure that san francisco lose its housing designation. you're not supposed to do that. and that's what your, your you're approving here today that does tie the hands of the city and county of san francisco to look at how we might, you know, be innovative. right now. we're not beating our our progress goals that we have

for, housing construction. and there might need to be some adjustments that are being made, we also need to look at how we protect certain neighborhoods against displacement. and that could be our hands could be tied. so please support this resolution. but i understand there are definite contradictions here. thank you. thank you for sharing your comments. do we have anyone else who has public comment on agenda item number one? madam chair, thank you so much. public comment on this item is now closed, we are, on break next week, so this cannot go as a committee report. it will have to wait until after we get back. so i would like to make a motion that we, send this out to the full board with positive recommendation on the motion that this resolution be sent to the board of supervisors with the recommendation of land use and transportation vice chair preston preston. i member peskin is excused. chair. melgar i melgar i, madam chair, there are two eyes. okay. that, motion passes. thank you. are there any

more items before us today? there is no further business. we are adjourned. thank you. >> [applause]. [music] [music]

>> about 20 years ago the port was look to develop a network of open space and parks and to bring the art network and access to the bay to the entire 7 and a half miles of waterfront property. this location, 7 acres, identified a very important place to make a park for the community. the park was used very much for ship building. it was a very important location in the city's history. iot best part of the water front was heavy industrial and did in the have opportunity for the public to get in and enjoy will bay and connected to the bay. >> they incorporated the historical value of the area people can learn what was here before, what is here now and then really be able to

understand the community that they live in. this was a vibrant ship building area here for years and years. and you know here we got a slip away and for us to have an opportunity to teach our children the old way specials incorporate them in the new ways, it is endless. >> this will be an upon upon wonder uponful addition to the southeast sector of san francisco it is green and clean and beautiful and access to the bay from a park is just going to be incredible. jot things planned is going to make this a destination for the folkless in the upon community. ability to come out and have a picnic on the grass. and to come out and use the picnic area with the tables and bbq pit and movie night and food trucks has an open space is

exciting. we don't are much of it in dog patch. i think this will be a family and community based type park. >> the port is good about talking with the local people about things they might like. >> the whole place is a play ground they will not see anything like this before. >> i feel blessed have been part of the commission and the process of bringing this park to the community. this has been a long community lead process. >> open space is something we have been doing in san francisco for a long time. connectivity we have to the waterfront and san francisco is important. i can't wait to experience it as a residents and district supervisor. >> sic]

>> shared spaces have transformed san francisco's streets and sidewalks. local business communities are more resilient and our neighborhood centers are more vibrant and lively. fire blocks and parking lanes can be for seating and merchandising and other community activities. we're counting on operators of shared spaces to ensure their sites are safe and accessible for all. when pair mets, firefighters and other first responders arrive at a scene, they need clear visual access to see the building entrances, exits and storefront windows from the street. that means parklets should be transfer in the areas above inches above the sidewalk level. it's best if these areas are totally unobstructed by transparent materials may be okay. you can check with fire

department staff to make sure your site meets visibility requirements. emergency response crews and their equipment need to be move easily between streets, sidewalks and buildings, especially when they are using medical gurneys, ladders and other fire fighting tools. that means that parklet structures need a three foot wide emergency feet every 20 feet and 3 feet from marked parking spaces and emergency access gaps need to be open to the sky, without obstructions, like canopies, roofs, or cables and should always be clear of tables, chairs, planters and other furnishings. emergency responders need to use ladders to reach windows and roofs to buildings and the ladders need unobstructed overhead clearance and room to be placed at a 72-degree angle against the building. clearances needed around the ladders to move equipment and people safely up and down. so not all parklets can have roofs ask canopies depending on the width of the

sidewalk in your area. please make sure that your electric cables are hung so they are out of the way and (indiscernible) to the structure, they can be pulled down by firefighters. cable connections need to be powered from an outdoor reciprocal in the building facade because hard wire connections are much more difficult to disconnect quickly. these updates to the shared spaces program will ensure safety and accessibility for everyone, so we can all enjoy these public spaces. more information is available at sf dot gov slash shared spaces.

meter. >> hello, i'm captain tom the coordinator for the san francisco fire department. this oversight is the three and 4 anniversary of loma linda earthquake i want to go over a

few things to help you preparation building a supply kit and supply kit does is not have to be put together all at once take your time on the website have a list of recommendation and have enough food and water to feed your family through three to 5 days and purchase the fire extinguisher if you have an extinguisher at hand will stop a small fire from being a by fire it is simple to use check the gage make sure it is charged and then repeat the word task task stand for pull to pin aim the novel and screws the trigger and successes to the because of fire the last recommendation to look at the gas meter electrical gas

lines cause fires in the loma linda earthquake and we want to show you how to turn off the gay only turn off if you hear gas or hear hissing and coordinator nathan will demonstrate how to turn that off. >> with a whenever i'm going to turn it over one quarter turn. so in on holler orientation in turn off our gays meter don't turn it back on get a service call fr >> welcome to another episode of

safety on today is episode we'll show you how 0 retroactive you're home let's go inside and take a look. >> hi and patrick chief officer and director of earthquake for the city and county of san francisco welcome to another episode of stay safe in our model home with matt we'll talk about plywood. >> great thanks. >> where are we we if you notice bare studs those are prone to failure in an earthquake we need to stabilize those they don't lean over and plywood is effective as long as you nail along every edge of the

plywood for the framing we'll nail along the sides and top and on the bottom 0 immediately you'll see a problem in a typical san francisco construction because nothing to nail the bottom of the plywood we've got to wind block between the studs and we'll secure this to the mud sill with nails or surface screws something to nail the bottom of the plywood. >> i notice we have not bolted the foundation in the previous episode thorough goes through options with different products so, now we have the blocking we'll a xoich attach the plywood. >> the third thing we'll attach the floor framing of the house above so the top of the braced walls one to have a steel

angle on top of this wall and types of to the top of the wall with nails into the top plate and the nails in this direction driving a nail it difficult unless you have a specialized tool so this makes that easy this is good, good for about 5 hundred pounds of earthquake swinging before and after that mount to the face of wall it secures the top of wall and nailed into the top plate of the with triple wall and this gives us a secure to resist the

forces. >> so you now see the space is totally available to dots blocking that he bottom and bolted the foundation in corneas what the code in the next episode you'll see you apply >> [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.

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, particularly 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 is a different 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. i'm anthony i'm owner of scoop

ice cream in the bayview. >> the environment sit down environment to enjoy a bananasplit. root beer floot. shake, et cetera . just creating that environment for people to come and enjoy. they can experience this is cultural driven. we pretty much replicate what our culture means in the bayview. >> a back story me and my siplings my aunt took us out for ice cream all the time. spend hours eating ice cream and talking and catching up with friends and family of came with an idea. why don't you bring the ice cream shop back has not been one here in a time since the 90's. i thought it would be good to bring something back to a community where i grew up and something with me in business

community. my fate is the apple pie flavor made from french cashew milk it is vegan. homemade cashew milk and cocoa nut milk. apples upon cinnamon and nutmeg and create a great desert. my great grand mother made it from scratch. made ice cream for kids in the neighborhood and made different flavors. sugar free and dairy free. got passion to do it being here in the community and from my family.

>> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> good evening, this is the fire commission march 27, 2024 and the time is 5:01. this meeting is being held in-person, at the physical location or by calling 4115, and using