i give it to you. all right. good morning and welcome to our june 3rd, 2024 rules committee meeting. i'm supervisor shaman walton. i am your acting chair of the rules committee. this morning, joined by committee member, supervisor safaí and supervisor chan, who will be substituting for supervisor ronen this morning. our clerk is victor young, and i would like to thank jamie ashburn for with sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting for us this morning. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements, yes. public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda. when you

have item of interest comes up in public. comment is called. please line up to speak on your right. alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing and either the following ways. email them to myself. the rules committee clerk at victor young at sfgovtv. org if you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and include as part of the file. you may also send written comments via us mail to our office in city hall. one doctor carlton goodlett place, room 244, san francisco, california 94102. please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda on june 11th, 2024, unless otherwise stated. that completes my initial announcements. thank you so much, mr. clerk, the chair will entertain a motion to excuse supervisor ronan from this meeting. yes, on the motion to, excuse supervisor ronan,

supervisor chan chan i supervisor safaí safaí i vice chair walton i walton i that motion passes without objection. thank you so much. would you please call item number one? yes item number one is ordinance amending the administrative code to streamline contracting to vision zero. transportation projects to authorize the municipal transportation agency and the department of public works to enter into and amend contracts without a hearing to environmental codes or provisions related to competitive bidding. equal benefits. local business enterprise unit ization, and other requirements for construction work and professional and other services related to vision zero projects. there is a request that this matter be referred out as a committee report. thank you so much and supervisor chan, i believe this is your item. thank you. chair walton. and thank you so much for, willingness to have this item to be heard today, as

a committee report, potentially to be able to vote on at full board tomorrow, you know, colleagues, i as you know, the city has not met its vision zero goal. and we have a long ways to go to eliminate traffic fatalities, far too often we have important vision zero projects and proposed improvements that are in pre-construction, while our communities continue to wait and contend with the dangers of high injury networks and collision hotspots, and so it's a reason why i really wanted to have a piece of legislation that declared this as, as an emergency on our streets and with a sense of that urgency that i hope to have your support, and, and approval of this legislation while that only the executive branch, including a city department, can declare the emergency declaration so that we can move forward with, repairs and other types of

construction projects, that is necessary to ensure the safety of the public on our streets, legislative branch, like ourselves as a board of supervisors, cannot declare the emergency declaration, and so this is the best comparable way as through the policy to, to really mirroring, what we can actually do, with that legislation, with this legislation is to really declare this to actually cannot while not in short of declaring an emergency, we're able to streamline these contracting for vision zero project, i know that there's some language that seems to be a little bit confusing to the public and to others, but we really have voted similarly, a administrative code waiver with a similar goal is the most as most recent, in fact, colleagues, i think some of us

on the board, have been co-sponsor to the mayor's proposal. it's administrative code waivers for the sfmta to contract for automated speed enforcement system, and that we recently approved it. it waives certain contracting requirements under chapter six and 21, i know that there's some concerns about this, so about the language that currently before us today. so i have asked our city attorney to review and see how we can perhaps amend this legislation mirroring similar language that the board has already approved for the automated speed enforcement system. clearly also, again, with the goal that we meet our vision zero goals to make our streets safer for everyone. and the goal of this ordinance, though, is really allow the sfmta and public works to clear up approved vision zero projects that is, after the conversation with communities and outreach, it's not to shortcut the outreach and

communications with our communities, but to really push forward once those are approved. that we can push forward these vision zero project, through without any delay, and this also has put a timeline specifically for only three years after the passage of this legislation. so it means that sfmta and public works have about three years time to clear any, that is, any vision zero projects are backlogged, but really also to continue to make sure that we, streamline and move forward with any other vision zero projects that are already been approved and can actually move forward without further delay. and so with that, i hope to have your support today. i do have sfmta and public works that are here, howell ramos here from sfmta and alex burns from public works is here to answer any questions you may have. thank you. thank you so much. chair chan. supervisor safaí. thank you. you know,

actually, i have a lot of questions about this. i understand that we've done something similar as it pertains to the emergency crisis of dealing with the homelessness and condition of our streets, but i have a, you know, first of all, i'd like to know what the list of projects are. i don't feel comfortable giving a blank check to the sfmta to without knowing what the projects are. and then with that, i'd also like to know how long these projects have been delayed and how this rises to the occasion of using this as an issue. i know that when we were talking about the list of concern within our sros, when we had that conversation, we knew that there was a backlog of emergency repairs in terms of elevators, in terms of the condition of the units, but i feel like trying to get information from the sfmta is somewhat of a black hole. and then when we do ask for that information in, you're talking about a lot of times this delay

of the department, it's not the delay of the contracting process . i mean, we've gone through a very extensive history in this city about working with our local business enterprises, working with local hire, all that's being asked to be waived in this instance. and so i really want to understand if is the director of mta here today is the senior project managers that work on these projects here today. i think the first of all, i want, by the way, this is not a criticism of you. supervisor chan. i just the department is asking for some serious waivers and they have a bad track record of managing projects. so i understand that part of what we're doing here today is handing this over to public works, which i have a lot more confidence in. they do a tremendous job in most cases, but what i want to understand the genesis of this, and i also would like to know what the list

of projects are. supervisor chan , did you want to chair. thank you. chair walton, through the chair, first, i wanted to have our deputy city attorney and pearson here to actually explain a little bit about the legislation itself. and this is clearly actually, first of all, i am the legislation, sponsor and i initiated this as a, as a way to really talk about, discuss the sense of urgency. we, as you know, as also commission on the county transportation authority have time and time questioned, sfmta why these vision zero projects have been long delayed and i have really requested and thanks to our deputy city attorney and pearson and her support to kind of walk us through, and we have back and forth about whether or not to include a really specific list of projects to be part of the legislation. and, i believe that she does have the answer to that question. deputy city attorney anne pearson, to supervisor safaí is request for

a list. there is no such list because this legislation doesn't expedite approvals for specific projects. it otherwise authorizes the department to choose to expedite certain projects that meet the definition of a vision zero project. so it's not a specific list. it is for projects that meet that definition. this is very similar to the approach that the board took when approving certain waivers of the administrative code for projects that address homelessness. those projects were not listed in the legislation, but any project that met the definition that was included in the legislation could be expedited. pursuant to its provisions. i appreciate that explanation, but i would still like to hear from the mta, i have to believe, given the high injury corridors and i have to believe based on presentations that we've heard in the transportation authority, there has to be a list of priority projects that would be

utilized for this legislation. so why don't we call up the representative from mta and supervisor sapphire if you have questions, you can ask those questions. that's what i'm trying to do. thank you. chair. oh, i'm sorry, supervisor chan, why don't we let him ask his questions? then we'll come back to you if you have something to add to that through the chair. i'm okay with that, supervisor chan. thank you. chair walton. i do want to actually have the both sfmta and public works here to share a samples of projects that actually could deem qualified under this legislation. i think that there's such thing as, like, you know, what could deemed qualifik that what we don't want to do is to say, these are the only projects that are going to be qualified under this, under this legislation. but i do believe that there's a whole list of project that we can identify that, in the events that this legislation is approved, that these project could qualify as a, as a examples of what vision

zero project, looks like. thank you, thank you. okay, so now can i ask my questions to. yes. okay so, mr. ramos, are you representing the mta today? yes, supervisor. so he actually represents them every day. okay, but i'm the only person is what? i mean, mr. chair, so. so you heard me ask the question about a list of potential projects for high injury, for vision zero. but i also like to know more. how long have these projects been delayed? and how are you all going to utilize this differently than what you currently have at your fingertips? now to be able to help with vision zero throughout the city, because essentially what you're asking is you don't want to use local contractors, you don't want to use local hire, you want to serve event the entire process to have a no bid process. so i want to understand and i get it. it's supervisor chan, but we're

giving you this authority to hand over to dpw. i don't think you all have a great track record of meeting project deadlines. as it is. and we also have a problem in the city in the last few years of handing out no bid contracts that have not proven to be really good for our city. so i really want to understand the list, potential list, and what kind of delays you all have experienced. thank you. supervisor safaí, ramos, the local government affairs manager for the sfmta here representing the sfmta, when we were notified of this legislation, we were excited about it because we share the supervisor's goals and expediting the kinds of projects that would result in safety, improve, proved, results. as you know, we have, as a city, meetin zero goals. and sometimes these projects take, much longer than any of us would like. i'm thinking of, for example, how long it took to get that traffic signal installed at, at alemany

and teresa that we were just at over the summer or over the, the, the last few months, we are excited to use this legislation to effectively unclog the backlog of projects, to expedite them and to the supervisor's point. we don't have an express list, but you just said there's a backlog of projects. well, the supervisor has put her finger on the fact that projects could be expedited a little bit more quickly. i can't get into the details that i am not the project manager of these projects, but what i can say is, is that is the project manager available today? no, unfortunately they were all out on vacation and that's why i'm here, but i am pleased to say that before they left, they did present to you a list at the to your point back in april, which i have here on the on the projector which is an example of the kinds of projects that we would like to expedite as per the supervisor's, intent. go

ahead and move forward. mr. ramos. can we see them? yeah, it's on the. it's on the projector now. oh, just one moment. can we have the overhead display, please? thank you. there we go. and i have hard copies for you as well. if you would like. so, supervisor safaí, did you want him to report on these? you want to take time to look at these? how do you want to. i kind of see half the what of i mean, i, i see the project. it gets a little bit to a list, but it also doesn't necessarily tell us how long these projects have been in the queue, how quickly they'll move forward, and what this legislation will do to help achieve this goal, mr. ramos, do you have an idea like the average duration of time these projects may have been held up? no, i'm afraid i don't have those. that level of details,

chair walton but, but what i do know is that the spirit of the legislation is intended to overcome any hurdles that might have gotten in the way and slow things down. i think that probably my colleagues from public works and or the conversations that the supervisor has had might be able to put her finger a little bit more on those specific delays. i'm not a project manager, so i don't have those concrete examples. what i do know is that the spirit of the legislation is one with which we are trying to race towards meeting our vision zero goals, and this legislation is trying to elevate that priority versus some of the priorities that have held up these types of contract implementations in the past. so we would have liked to have seen it be even more broadly. we were trying to work with the supervisor to get expediting of, like all traffic signals, all, advanced stop center lines, all these things. but to the supervisor's credit, what she's trying to do is just fix a current, what she and i think public works are perceiving as a

little bit of slowing down after it leaves our, our shop or our our offices and gets ready to get put into the ground. so there's no environmental hangups. i don't think that there is any kind of other additional, i guess. i'm sorry. i'm sorry to cut you off. it's hard to get a straight answer from you because you're not a project manager. yes. so i don't even have a sense from what you're describing, how much time this is actually going to save. because because what we're doing is we're setting a precedent of throwing the contracting process out, the competitive process out all the other things that that are written into our chapters and codes to expedite something. but i'm not clear exactly how much it's going to expedite. the other thing that's not clear from this is what is the dollar amount on these projects? oh, i can't speak to that either. supervisor i'm like, i we would be happy to bring back the project managers to speak to those levels of details. but again, i don't think that this

legislation is trying to point out a specific project. it's more along the lines of the spirit of the legislation and as it would apply to projects as necessary to expedite these, these any any work. i understand the spirit of what supervisor chan is attempting to do, and i appreciate it coming forward, in terms of not having enough information to make a decision today in terms of the dollar amount in terms of the time that it's going to save, in terms of prioritizing action. listen, we all want to achieve vision zero goals in our city, and we're concerned about the number of number of deaths that have happened, saying exactly the same as it was six years ago. a lot of these things that are being talked about were talked about 5 or 6 years ago. so there's not really anything new that's being proposed in terms of your department, in terms of. so i don't get a clear picture of how much time is going to be saved, how much money is going to be saved, how much is this

going to be achieved without having that level of detail, so i personally, supervisor, i know you're the sponsor of this. i don't feel comfortable going forward with this today. it would be better if we would have an idea of what the actual list of projects were. and i see some idea here. maybe the dollar amount. and then. and then maybe if there was a cap on the dollar, like, it just, it just feels like it's too much. we're handing over to this department. without some real clear parameters around it. thank you. supervisor, how long are the project managers on vacation? they were back today. i passed them on the elevator on the way down, but the issue is, is that, you know, they've been out. unfortunately but in the time that we would take to prepare for something like this. okay. supervisor chan, can we call up public works and just have public works? because. because that's like, more specific to really like, what the public

works project is. but, colleagues, i just wanted to also point back again, now that you have the hard copies of it, is that like, you know, it's quick build project summary table that are have really specific. as you can see, there are two way protected bike lanes and transit boarding islands and or things like pedestrian safety improvements that are protected bike lanes, signal timing changes and curb management and lane reduction. and these are again, these are the project that are already being approved and in design. so they're not anything that's brand new completely. and that you can actually also see the estimated construction phase, which is anywhere ranging between mid 2024 to late 2024. so i think that i, i feel for mr. ramos, for having to stand up here to answer the questions that his colleagues project. but the project itself also has been through a lengthy discussion or at least presentation during our county transportation commission

meeting. there are not anything brand new, and it should not be anything brand new to any of us here, it's been discussed in april, but i'm also going to have our public works here to actually also have another separate list. i believe that can actually show us about things that are already been, again, approved. and the goal is this is not anything that to just, again, skip anything that's already been approved is really a approved project that is supposed to go out to procurement, again, we have not it's not like we haven't done this before. we have done something very similar. as i have mentioned, the automated speed enforcement system, which at that time we know that it's a state grant that allows us to improve and install, any type of speed cameras all around the city. the initial role of it was 33, but when we actually approved this, without knowing the subsequent locations of these speed cameras as well, we know the initial 33. actually,

when we approved this legislation, we didn't really have the initial 33, locations as well. so this is not something that as if it's unprecedented that we have never done before. in fact, with the automated, automated speed enforcement system, there's no time period that we put a limit on this. on the other hand, we put a limit of three years. so specifically, regrettably, we didn't put it in the long title. but with the help of our deputy city attorney and pearson, now we're going to make some amendments today to specifically shows that is to expedite the contracts, meaning the existing contracts, as well as only for limiting for a period of three years. actually, these were already language written in the body of the legislations, but we're happy to amend the long title itself to show, what it's actually written in the legislation. but i'm going to have mr. alex burns to really walk us through. what are the examples of examples of qualifying projects? yeah. good morning supervisors alex burns,

contract administration at public works. so when we got this legislation, we took a look at projects that are in the pipeline against the scope that the legislation covers, we identified around 15 projects. we will confirm those and we can provide that that list to this committee, some examples of those projects. they're mostly streetscape improvement projects. if i would just read off the list, we have mission safety improvement program, stuart street, streetscape project, fremont safety improvement project. so most of the projects fall under that categorization, i believe there was a question about the time that it could save. so we took a look at what's being waived through this, legislation. so once the projects are ready for advertisement, a process that would take around 9 to 10 months, can probably be reduced

to around 5 to 6. so, we can provide that list of projects as requested. thank you. any more questions? supervisor jane, supervisor safaí. no, that was that was a lot more helpful i appreciate that. so it sounds like you have a list of potential 15 projects that are in the queue. and it sounds like from what you've presented, this could potentially save three months during the procurement phase for four months i think was the number. i certainly would like to see that. and then the other question i had that i wanted to throw out there was the dollar amount, in terms of the cost of the project and how much we're actually giving waiver authority to, because that also concerns me, the overall cost, because again, i if we're just giving a blank

check and we're just waiving it for three years, it's, it could be a potential for problems through the chair to supervisor chan, not to not to you all you all are going to do public works are going to do what we ask. but that's also another concern in terms of the dollar amount that we're giving, waiver authority to supervisor chan. thank you, chair walton, through the chair. i mean, there's been conversation with, again, our director, charlie chang. tilly chang at the county transportation commission and really are trying to figure out what are the project, identify as vision zero. and can we put a dollar amount cap to these projects and what we have identified is that, you vision zero projects can be fairly large, like the one that some of you went to the ribbon cutting to for the folsom streets project. that's roughly about 50 million, and that's a really large project. but what we also have recognized that though, with usually when it's a project

that size, it comes with federal and state funding. and what we today is really waiving the local, city code and city administrative code and it just we still have to very much in compliance to federal and state codes for contract compliance. so this actually does not. and in fact, i have confirmed that with our city attorney who drafted this legislation for us, that whether or not we need to further clarify and define that it does not waive federal and state code. it actually does not do that. it does not waive any of those codes. it only vary. again the by the time like what public works has said, any project that is any that time take of ten months up to ten months time that we can now shrink it to half of its time, so that's all there really is to it. and, you know, i think at the end of the day, like supervisor safaí, you don't have to vote for this. and

absolutely, i am fine with that. i think that we if we can actually face the reality is then then when we actually are through, time and time again when we bring sfmta or any city departments before us to tell them that how they're not efficient with pushing vision zero projects and every time when we have a pedestrian fatality or, cyclist fatality or any type of fatalities that we then when they come before us and we say, how are we not moving some of these project forward, then we need to ought to ask ourselves, what are the solutions that we're offering on the table to actually problem solve this? and today i'm problem solving only specifically the ones that help sfmta to. first of all, i think through this legislation prioritize what can be done and what should be done. and that's including the public works as well. to say these are the things that we actually been approved and designed, and we ought to actually just finish

them. in fact, some of these contracts we already been in contractors, for example, like bobo or bike lanes, we know that these are the things that we have ongoing contractors that have been doing this. but as required, every each single project have to go out to bid. so can we actually expedite these types of contracts to say we already know these things that can be done and we should streamline them. but i'm fine and understand that where you stand. thank you. thank you, supervisor chan. supervisor safaí no thank you. and i, i appreciate that supervisor chan, i want to be clear this. these are all really important issues that we're dealing with. my biggest concern is the overall precedent that's being set, i have a little bit better understanding of how long of this will, shave off. but what i, what i don't have and i guess what i was trying to emphasize is that a lot of the delays supervisor are, are because of the internal processes of the mta themselves. and so some of

the, some of the delays in fault we're having is, is because of the department's mismanagement of the contracts themselves. so we're giving an authority, and i don't want to give false hope that we're going to actually expedite projects when there's been mismanagement anyway. and so that was what that was what i was trying to get at. i understand the goal of what you're trying to do. and and i, i appreciate it because we want to obviously expedite as much as possible. one, one. and you made a good point there, with regard to a lot of times we're using the same vendors for work that we know. so rather than having to go through. so i guess what i would ask, public works is, through the, through the chair, if that's okay, do you have a list of qualified vendors that you work with? do you have an rfq list that you, that you do? because that would make it a lot easier if you're obviously done an rfq. and these are the five vendors you work with to do curbs or, you know, protected

bike lanes. and these are the ones you've worked in the past. but i think some of the concern is when you're doing, sole source contracting, then you might be picking people outside of that universe. and so if there's already a list of qualified vendors that might make it a lot easier for the public and this body to understand. good morning, alex burns, public works, public works doesn't have a specific set of qualified vendors, for this scope of projects, similar to some of the other contracting legislations, we would implement policies and procedures, to the point where i don't think we would allow sole source, we would have some sort of process in place to ensure that it's transparent and competitive and fair. so that's essentially we would create a procedure for this process. can, can i ask, through the chair to the deputy

city attorney, is there anything in the language that prohibits sole source contracting? it says non competitive deputy city attorney and pearson, no. the intent is to waive any requirement for a competitive procurement. is there some is there through through the chair to the sponsors there are some or even to is there something that we could put in that would say that that public works would then put together procedures to ensure similar to what the project manager just said, to ensure that this is not seems like that would be a friendly amendment to control for what we're talking about. this chair thank you. chair walton, through the chair, i wanted to point to the legislation itself, you know, to go to the page, let's see, to the legislation

specifically in, discuss about, page two. and it's so in the line seven, that the department heads has determined in writing that the public work or improvement is for the construction, repair, or improvements of public facilities with a primary purpose of implementing vision zero. so there will be a written record about the list of project and what they are, and that why they're actually being waived, of this process. so i, it's not directly of what saying that it's not going to sole source or whether or not. but for all it this actually is kind of meet what your inquiry is about. how do we know the list of project? what are the list of qualifying projects. and this is actually on the record for the departments to actually make

determination of the list of projects that qualify. and of course, at any moment, like when that's like a public record about what project will actually be receiving this specific waiver. yeah, i see you. i'm sorry. are you finished, supervisor chan, yes. supervisor safaí. oh. thank you. so on line seven, it's talking about the department head in writing. that is for vision zero, i understand that, i guess i was saying something a little bit different. what the, gentleman from public works said was that they would do everything they can to ensure that this was not a sole source bid, that it would be something more, i don't want to put words in your mouth, but what i understood more was working within on a list of vendors that were appropriate to the particular project. and so what i was saying was potentially is maybe we could

add language that would clarify that a little bit so that it was not someone outside of the universe of the work that has been done or with your department in the past. it because you have to create your own procedures. it doesn't necessarily have to be in the legislation, but sometimes you can add a clarifying, sentence or two that could give some guidance through the chair to the deputy city attorney, deputy city attorney pierce, deputy city attorney ann pearson. i'm not sure i understand the proposed amendment with enough specificity to be able to say whether or not we could draft it today. i don't think we can. it sounds like you're looking to add some type of requirement that notwithstanding this waiver of the actual competitive procurement requirement, the department shall undergo some sort of process. but i think we'd need more information about what that is, what that looks like to be able to draft it. i through the chair, i guess what i was saying was there's a list of vendors that they've identified, that they've worked on similar projects within the

past, and so that they would work with that universe of vendors because they know they're qualified, they have a track record of doing their work that they wouldn't be going outside of a larger universe. is that to you? i'd be happy to work with you during the next week on that amendment, but i don't think we can prepare it. let me just say this, supervisor safaí, because it seems like we're not going to solve your concern. no, again, i'm i'm trying to just understand from the project. i'm trying to make a friendly amendment. i'm not trying to do anything that's going to completely undermine it. just want to have a little bit more clarity, i've gotten a bit more clarity. it sounds like there's a scope of about 15 projects that would be helpful to understand. it would be helpful to understand if there's a limit on the dollar amount. i think that's something that we talked a little bit about. and then the only last thing i was saying was if there was a list of qualified vendors that they've worked with in the past. so again, i'm trying to work in collaboration for those that are watching, a lot of times these things have to be done in

committee because you're working with an individual. you can't have conversations outside of committee. so that's why all this is happening in real time and definitely appreciate that. supervisor safaí. but i think it's pretty clear that the changes you want to make are probably not going to be changes that can be made without moving to continue this item. well, i wanted to hear from the sponsor. if she was open to that, if that's okay. supervisor chan, thank you. we do have amendments today. i think we're proposing, to clarifying in the long title, that's for sure. i would love to just quickly read that on the record, it's that we would like to amend the long title to strike out, on to strike out the, to enter into an amend and instead and replace that to expedite contracts and then and strike out without a hearing to the and inserts by waiving application of the environmental

code and then also strike out or or to instead we place it with and then we ending it to also include clarification that it's only for a period of three years. i'm also happy to i'm open to, have to say that this is a including language that allows us to use a pool of vendors, but i like to hear from public works that whether that is feasible, whether to say this is the pool of vendors that will be considered within this procurement contract and like, let me also just say that that's also potentially, interesting. lee, i don't know if we also have a pool of approved, like lbb's, which is the local business enterprise, list of

pool vendors, which i do not think that we do, so what does that mean? and how how would that how would that be for the lbb's? but i look forward to hearing from public works explaining that, good morning, alex burns, san francisco public works. so we do not have a list of pre-qualified vendors set up for these scopes, we would be able to obtain a list of potential, like lbb's who have the correct licensure and certifications to perform this, so i guess my comment originally was toward similar legislations in the past, we've come up with an internal procedure and policy around what the procurement will look like, and, and we would do something similar here, but i would say depending on the timeline of when these projects go out, i can take it back to look into setting up some sort of pre-qualified list as reasonable, but just at this time, we would be able to get a

list of lbb's, but we do not have like a preset pre-qualified list of vendors for this scope. thank you, supervisor and i note , your, motion to accept the amendments would address that after public comment, we can go to public comment. so, and before we go to public comment, just a couple of things that i do do want to state, 100. we want to achieve vision zero. but i'm starting to get concerned just overall. and it has really nothing specific to this legislation, just about all the streamlining we're allowing city departments, it's starting to become more of the norm. and i think that's just something that we need to be cautious of. if i do have one criticism of mta, and i definitely have more than one, but it's most certainly the

lack of outreach, the lack of cultural sensitivity when it comes to projects. the lack of time that they afford community, the way they come into community, and giving them the opportunity to speed up projects is a concern, because cause sometimes my constituents wake up and things are completely different in their neighborhood. and sometimes they didn't even know that the changes were coming. so always worried about giving certain departments that type of, opportunity. of course, i'm concerned about what it does for local hire and what it does to benefit our lbb's. i think the, the one thing that would make me feel a little better about this, and obviously this is up for discussion. if if we could get get some specificity in terms of what exact projects this would be. and i see we have a list of some of the types of projects, but i think versus a time limit, actually saying

these are the projects where this streamlining legislation would apply to. and then if we need to make some changes or provide a different opportunity for mta at a later date or time, i think that's something that we could possibly do. but if they say for this, 20 projects will be under this streamlining, device, i think i like that a little bit better. and, and i would just say that, you know, i do appreciate trying to do everything we can to address vision zero and make sure that projects, and these are all worthy projects are able to move forward in a, in a more efficient and faster timeline. so i do support that, but i do i do think we should limit what the projects are so that mta isn't so that certain projects aren't coming up. and then we're just saying in the name of vision zero, all of these things are going to be expedited and streamlined, when we can be real specific about projects. so supervisor chan, thank you, supervisor walton. absolutely i

mean, after especially as a district one supervisor who had, like, a really a really tense back and forth with sfmta on gary, brt for our merchants and time and time again taking not only that, removing parking all along, gary, but just have to fight to make sure that we do have parking along the avenues so that it just really support our merchants. no doubt. like i too have a lot of criticism for gary brt with sfmta, but also other types of projects that sfmta implemented. that's including random bike rental locations, throughout our district. and so not that not that i don't have any criticism of sfmta. certainly i have been a vocal, criticism critic of it, and yet here i am simply because that i think that there are, we

have they have enough excuses, for years to say why or not, why we're not accomplishing vision zero goals and, and i think that this is one way that if you start looking at the list and i think that that's what we probably need to do, is to provide you the list of qualifying deemed qualifying project. but like i just want to say that though these are samples of the list, not so much of like where again, because we're giving them a three year time, to say what are other qualifying projects that could be, that's one and two. i think that they're going to be ones that, it's going to come up that once it's approved within the three years timeline, that could probably deem qualified, and again, i think the dollar amount to limit is difficult for the reason being, again, there are ones that also receive federal and state funding also deemed as vision zero, but then they will

not receive leave, so portion of it will be receiving city grant and city funding, but then majority of it will not and therefore will not be able to qualify, and so i think that those are the ones that and that does not mean smaller project are not fair fund funded anyways. so it's, it's been the back and forth with our transportation, agency about what can how do we define vision zero, but through this process, i also want to say it actually highlights the fact that vision zero is simply a vision that, like, we have never really defined how do we respond to it as a city and that is the reason why, when we do ask sfmta for a list of projects that could be deemed qualified that we're having such a hard time with is because as a city, and i think all of us, are responsible to for it, is that we never really

have a chance to be at the cta or even at the board. and of course, with our sfmta board directors to define what vision zero project should look like. and we just put them into a category, i think sfmta to talk about it now, but i think i don't think it's until now that sfmta is going to have a vision zero team. specifically, it seems like every project has some aspect of so-called vision zero, but it has never been a centralized, sort of team to say, this is what we do and how we implement vision zero project. but, with that and i know that we need to go to public comment, so i'll have it to go to public comments. and then we can determine, first i would like to make the amendments that i have proposed, and then i'm also open for discussion with supervisor safíi about potential amendment. thank you so much. mr. clerk, can we go to public comment? yes members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line to speak at this time. each

speaker will be allowed two minutes. there will be a soft chime when you have 30s left, and a louder chime when your time has expired. you may begin a 45 years of watching this board. i've never seen a worse piece of legislation, supervisor safaí, every union member who's watching this should be really pissed off at you if you let this thing go by. we negotiated for years and years. for 100 years. you're going to push. you're going to kill the environment. you're going to throw benefits off, supervisor walton, how many hearings have you heard on minority businesses ? they need contracts, right? this waves. it doesn't have to be. you're waving everything. you should not wave anything. any time anybody tells you they want. government tells you they want to streamline something, cover your butt. and that's what this is. you should kill this entire it's not needed. just because somebody is not doing their job doesn't mean you lower the bar. that's absolutely preposterous. it's like the cops. i mean, dorsey wants to

give the cops retired cops from other jurisdictions. $310,000 a year to come here and work for five years. you think i'm kidding? you know, a retired sergeant after 30 years makes 185,000. this is ten years ago. and 125,000 retirement. they're going to take the retirement fund guarantee, a return on that of 120 that's in the bank, and then pay them 180, 310,000 for the cops and waiving all requirements. no environments. screw the environment, screw with competitive bidding, screw the local business enterprises. and if the mayor wants to throw in something else, she's got a great track record. if the mayor wants to throw in everything else, he's just throwing the word other or other that she wants to do this is hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on this over since 2014, and you're lowering the standards. that is unacceptable. you should all vote against it, particularly safaí. you vote

against it, and walton you vote against it because these are your people that are getting screwed and. so perhaps before we start waiving things for vision zero number one, i'd like to see if there are any measurable results from the tens and tens of millions of dollars already spent. i'd also like to know how we look at balancing vision zero efforts against efforts to revitalize downtown and businesses, because folsom street is not going to help that. it's great to have bike lanes. it's not great to have bike lanes at the expense of commerce, tourism, commuters, etc. or there's other places where they can go. i'd also like to encourage all of you if you haven't ever looked at them, to look at the department of public health's, case, the sort of case summaries of vision zero deaths,

and you will take note that fully 50% of them are not able to be addressed by anything done in vision zero, yet they continue to include those deaths with other ones. they are often accidents 10% of the time it's somebody homeless who's like, wandered into the street. so look at the numbers they're giving you because those numbers aren't adding up. just like the numbers for this legislation aren't adding up. good morning. i actually didn't come in here to make public comment on this. i didn't even know this was on the agenda, but sitting here listening to it and having experienced, the way that sfmta operates in this city unchecked, devoid of any ability to listen to community feedback, i just felt compelled to come up here and to thank supervisor safaí and walton for having the questions that they have and

asking the questions that they're asking the people who came here today. now, granted, i understand it's not your role and there are other people who might have been able to speak to that. better. you don't you can't answer questions. you're talking about taking the guardrails off of an agency that has one of the worst track records, not only for performance, but for transparency. and you want to take the guardrails off that when we're have a looming, you know, budget deficit. forget it. sfmta needs to be more transparent and more reflective of what their communities need and want, and they have no idea how to do it. this is a horrible piece of legislation, and i thank supervisor safaí for raising his concerns about it. this should not pass. sfmta needs to be held accountable, not have the guardrails taken off so they can go even more rogue than they already have been. thanks are there any additional speakers for this

matter? there are no additional public commenters. thank you, mr. clerk. public comment is now closed. i know we have a motion to accept the amendments that were submitted by supervisor chan. can we get a roll call on that? on the motion on the amendments, supervisor chan i chan i supervisor safaí i safaí vice chair walton i walton i. that motion passes without objection. thank you so much. so i as through the chair. i mean, i'm open to supervisor chavez, potential amendments and i'm happy to continue for one week, i am not interested in, i think that colleagues i you vote however way you want to vote, i, have i'm standing by this legislation that i have put forward before you today. i think that it's disheartening to hear, that about that, i am not

in complete i am not without a i am not a not a critic. not not a critic of the vision zero altogether. however, i do think, though, at times that saying things like protected bike lane or, loading bus stops or loading zone and certain elements and including bobo, those are the things that the city has been doing for more than a decade, and some have really proven to be, it works. some of the stuff that actually really do work, and some of the stuff that, don't that i think that we have conversation about is not so much of, whether the method itself, but more as where it's placed. and so i think the question is there were times that there were questions cushions. i'm not always a fan of, or, or even, certain ways of, position. we've been asking

for stop signs and pedestrian flashing beacons, all those things that we have asked for, to that we know, proven to be, as pedestrian and safety improvements and really is what we're looking at today, i am open to amendment. it's that really help narrow down the list of vendor. i think we've been asking, ways to do that, too, but i'm also, happy to move this, for a vote. and however way you decide to vote, i understand. i'm going to respect that. thank you. i just add, i, i too agree. i think we all agree 100% that vision zero is aspirational and we've done everything we can on the transportation authority to try to advance and support. i'm not 100% convinced that there's really been a strong effort, to make improvements over the last five years. a lot of the things

that we're talking about, not supervisor chan, but what we hear from the administration and mta are things that were have been recycled from five years ago, has nothing to do with this legislation. i think a lot of the concern that i have is with the department to which we're providing this authority, because of the track record of terrible, because of the track record of geary, brt, because of the track record of van ness, there just hasn't been a real, confidence from from this supervisor in terms of their ability to manage projects. and so i would feel more comfortable with a potential defined list. and so i appreciate that. i think that maybe have a little more conversation about if there's a way to limit the local dollar amount, not the overall scope, because that's federal and state. but if there's a conversation on on what that means, but if you have a potential list of projects and that's a little bit easier, right? because some of that can go up or down, and then the last thing i would say is if you're

open, if there's a way to add language that talks about a list of previously qualified vendors that the department has worked with, because let's be clear, just so we're clear on some of the public comment, this is how public works works. they work with their internal staff. and very often when we're talking about smaller projects, they work with a list of qualified vendors. not to you, but to what was was put out there. and i think that would make me feel more comfortable in terms of talking about a list of previously qualified vendors rather than just a blank check of being able to just choose or go out to any one in a sole source manner, and so that so if there's a list of previously qualified vendors that the departments work with on similar style projects, that probably would, would, would be a little bit easier. but if you're open to working for one week, we can try, see if we can look for some language supervisor, if you're okay with that. if you're open to one week continuance, i'm

happy to work with you and your team on that. but if you'd rather a vote today, i respect. either way. supervisor chan, i want to clarify the taraval project, as well as gary. brt would not deem qualified under under this. i just really want to be very clear. again i understand right, but i understand so. so i think i think the, the, the challenge here is, is that let's not confuse what vision zero projects really are. and i think that actually essentially is part of the problem is that like it seems like most people do not understand what vision zero projects are and have issues, with it and that they are not gary brt. gary i would not say gary i would not be have an agree to provide a waiver for a project like gary brt. i do think that i am open to a conversation about narrowing, these, figure out a way, language wise, to figure out

narrowing a scope of qualifying projects. and i think that at the end of the day, i want to say that that does not mean a couple of things. again i because i concur with chair walton's assessment, at the end of the day, that people the way that they feel about certain sfmta project, whether vision zero or not, is that the all oftentimes the lack of outreach, lack of communications, and lack of the cultural competency to communicate what the project really included and what the goals are for and so today, again, it's to say, how can we narrow down, similarly to what we have done with speed camera? how do we narrow and define vision zero, and i think perhaps it is through this process that we realize what vision zero project should look like, because right now it seems like neither sfm or specifically sfmta, is not able to provide us

a clearly defined what vision zero project looks like. i think there are going to be attempts to do so. i think that sfmta and a very late sunday afternoon, been trying yet, which is yesterday, to try to attempt to narrow the scope because i think they understand the possibility of what this is, and i'm happy to have those conversations, in a public hearing to what a narrowing that vision zero scope is. and so i make the motion to move this to for one week to next week at the rules committee, and i hope i could make it back. and if, if the chair, ronen will allow it to again to be the first item, i would really appreciate it. i didn't think that we're going to have this kind of elaborated discussion today, but i still appreciate that, i hope that chair ronen, will be receptive to having this, for discussion and on agenda next week. i'm sure her team is listening, mr. clerk, on that motion. my apologies. this matters.

continue. the matter as amended to june 10th. correct yes. on that motion, supervisor chan i chan i supervisor safaí i safaí i vice chair walton i walton i the motion passes. thank you. motion carries continued to next week. thank you, supervisor chan . mr. clerk, please call item number two. item number two is a motion approving rejecting the president of the board of supervisor aaron peskin. nomination of jessica campos for reappointment to the childcare planning and advisory council. term ending march 19th, 2027. thank you so much. and i don't see miss campos here, which she's supposed to be present. or is she? oh, i'm sorry. there she is. my apologies, miss campos. you have the floor. good morning, supervisors, just want to thank you all for the ongoing

support. currently, i serve as the director of outreach and engagement for the human rights commission. and i'm asking for your support to continue as seat 12 for the cpc council, which is, in efforts and advocacy for our young children and our families in san francisco, ensuring that they, get adequate and quality care in our services and child care, as well as continuing to advocate that we are funding and providing their ongoing care from career to from cradle to career. so ensuring that their pathways are present. thank you, miss campos. do you have anything super safaí? mr. clerk, can we go to public comment on this? yes. member of the public who wishes to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. is there anybody who would like to speak on this matter? there does not appear to be any speakers. thank you. seeing no speakers. public comment is now closed. i just want to say thank you, to

miss campos for being willing to serve and appreciate your continued work. and i make a motion that we send this forward to the full board with a positive recommendation, can we amend it to delete the word rejecting throughout the legislation? yes please. and my apologies, supervisor safaí, i just want to concur with your comments. we appreciate miss campos and all her hard work on behalf of, early child care and the group of providers that she's worked with. anytime i'm around the city at any event that has to do with early child care, she's there. she's engaged and working to support. so really appreciate her involvement and engagement. thank you. supervisor safaí. mr. clerk, on the motion, yes, on the motion to delete rejecting throughout the legislation to approve on that motion. supervisor chan, absent supervisor safaí i safaí vice chair walton i walton i that

motion passes. thank you. without objection. thank you. motion moves forward, madam. mr. clerk, please call item number three. item number three is a motion to approve and rejecting the mayor's nomination for the appointment of j. sean anderson to the sanitation and streets commission for the unexpired portion of initial two year term ending july 1st, 2024, and a four year term beginning july 1st, 2024 and ending july 1st, 2028. thank you so much. and, mr. anderson, you have the floor . good morning, chair walton and supervisor safaí. thank you to the rules committee for having me today, my name is jay sean anderson. i am a san francisco native from bayview-hunters point, i worked in finance for two years and impact investment trying to get sustainable energies and have esg. resources allocated to our communities, while i like that role, i switched to nonprofit because i

realized i wanted to be closer to communities. i worked in domestic violence prevention and i worked in finance, managing the kipp schools, which i actually went to in the fillmore, as of recently, i graduated from a business school from berkeley and from uc hastings here in san francisco around the corner. now, uc law, i'm really passionate about getting our streets really cleaned, i'm currently active in the dogpatch neighborhood association on their streets and , transportation committee. i'm also in the sierra club, advocating for sustainable future for our city, and so this commission is really important to me. i know that, neighborhoods that are forgotten about, like de10, de11 don't often have community input. and some of the work that happens with dpw and sanitation and making sure that our communities are being consulted when we are making decisions about how to allocate our city's resources to provide clean streets. and so i'm really passionate about

improving our public safety, our street conditions, and making sure we have community input in that, also, this allows our small businesses to thrive, and that's really important. and i know that this also takes into account addressing our homeless encampment problem, but i think that all needs to be happening with accountability and equity. and in terms of our services and spending, reducing our response times, handling our budget, i know that the city has a deficit, and there are some challenges with the current structure of the commission with dpw, but i know that we are going to work to optimize our citywide street cleaning operations. and so i'm excited to potentially serve in this role and continue to serve the city in my community. thank you. mr. anderson. do you have anything? supervisor safaí? no. okay, mr. clerk, can we go to public comment on this item? yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. good

morning. thank you for this opportunity. my name is levi wilson. i am john anderson's mother. don't get emotional, i just want to give you a little history about who john is and our family and our, being a native of san francisco. bear with me here, so john is the eldest of four of my anderson angels. that's what i call them. and he is my first miracle child , i can say that our family, maternal and paternal grandparents are retirees from san francisco city. so for muni operator for, dpw san francisco unified school district and dispatcher for traffic and control. so just a little history on that, we grew up in the bayview district, as john mentioned, the odds of us making

it out for a better was for a better future for our lives was against us. and as you can see, john has demonstrated his ability to do and exceed all the expectations, he used to start off as even as a young baby facing challenges with health issues, couldn't breathe. and he beat every odd that the doctors said he wouldn't be able to speak, play sports, he would have long term health issues. and as you can see today, as a testament to god's grace, he is well capable of speaking and doing those things. so i am confident that john will bring his innovative ideas, critical thinking skills, and his love and passion for the city of san francisco. to the department. thank you. thank you. if there are any additional speakers, if you can go ahead and line up at this time, it would be

appreciated. please proceed. good morning, board of supervisors. it's a blessing and an honor to be here. i am jay, sean's aunt. so, to describe jay sean in three words, i would say resilient, diligent and visionary. jay sean turns resilience, his his hit. jay sean's resilience, turns challenges into opportunities. a quick story and to piggyback off of his mother's testimony, jay sean had a trache in his throat. he was about eight months old. he had the medical condition where he could not speak, whenever he was express himself. it was that of a hissing sound. and so we had to protect jay sean very early. we had to protect him from pulling out his trache. we had to protect him from the environment. we just did what we could. but this little resilient boy, with his innovative ways, he actually he

kept fiddling with his trache and we knew that if he pulled it, he could stop breathing and pass away. but he continued, well, jay, sean discovered at about 15 months old that if he plugged his hole that he could actually exercise his vocal cords. and from that point on, he started to speak and express himself to read, to sing and do all the things that he loved to do. just sean is a compassionate leader. he he works alongside people, with the utmost respect. i am excited for jay sean, and i believe that his skill set will be a huge asset to the city of san francisco. thank you. thank you. hello. my name is, lawrence wilson, i am jay, sean's grandfather. and, i'm also used

to work for dpw, and i'd just like to say, in in jay sean's behalf. he's always been a person to get things done. you know, he's he just graduated from two colleges this year at at the same time. and i thought that was remarkable. and i just didn't know how he did it, you know. but he got it done. so i am here to say jay, sean will be a great asset to the city. and, thank you very much. thank you. thank you. are there any additional speakers on this matter? i do not believe we have any additional public commenters . thank you. seeing no additional speakers, public comment is now closed. supervisor safaí, thank you. appreciate family coming out and speaking on behalf of jay sean today, someone that i've seen

just over the last few months from the time he was in my office and the dedication that he showed, so very proud to support him today and elevate him to this position, and when you work on sanitation and streets and you have a grandfather that comes from public works, you better be all things about keeping the streets clean, because i'm going to be calling you because those are the biggest calls i get all the time, young man. so be ready. we're happy to support you. thank you. supervisor safaí. and just want to echo the sentiments of my colleague, it is good to see first faces that are ready and willing to serve, and so looking forward to working with you and to supervisor safaí point, you will be busy, helping us try to keep the streets clean. so move, to send this forward with a positive recommendation, yes, could we amend the legislation to and amend to remove, rejecting to approve the appointment, on the

motion to amend and recommend to the full board supervisor chan, absent supervisor safaí. safaí. i vice chair walton i walton i that motion passes without objection with supervisor chan being absent. thank you. congratulations. motion carries. mr. clerk, please call item number four. item number four is a hearing to consider appointing four members. term ending april 22nd, 2025 to the our city, our home oversight committee. four seats, five applicants. thank you so much, mr. clerk, today we have four seats and we have five applicants, we will actually go in order of what i have in front of me, i do know that miss williams was unable to attend this morning. she had a work conflict, but she is currently serving in seat two and works as the director of community

engagement and partnerships at the california preterm term birth initiative, seat four, which is vacant. we have two applicants. kezia martinez and nancy giotto. and i apologize if i mispronounce your name, but it looks like, kezia is showing up first. so is kezia here? okay, what about nancy? you have the floor. thank you very much. supervisor shamann walton and supervisor ahsha. thank you to meet you again, my name is nancy . i'm originally from kenya by birth. in american, by citizenship. i have been in san

francisco for ten years. i applied for this position because i'm very passionate about the community. i worked as a property manager for years and the last position was working as a property manager for martin luther king, marcus garvey apartments here at the fillmore district. i lost my job because i refused to evict black people, and that is when we connected with supervisor dean preston, who came and really advocated for injustices that were happening in the black community named after two iconic black people. so because of the help i got from reverend amos brown, i fought the racists properly. manager, due to chalco properties, because of what you are doing, evicting even black, veterans who fought for this country because of the ethics and morals i've always had for this city. i refused and stood and fought for seven months, eventually being persuaded by the superior court to negotiate. i accepted to turn in my keys to

the apartment and spent two nights at third baptist, and reverend brown talked to ella, who had our housing program and they paid for my hotel with me, with my two boys who attend, washington high school and lowell high school. it was a very painful time spending new year's and christmas in a hotel with my children, who actually have been here for two years. out of my experience, i refused to go back to property management and, got a job at ella hill hutch working at collective impact, and i did do a lot of community advocacy, especially on housing and help, even formerly incarcerated people access housing through the reentry program, i was i just came back from the white house because our kenyan president was here, i got the email on thursday, and i did not have time to, contact the references. but i did shoot a quick email, and i copied, your aides, who will share the hotel receipts of me being homeless

and i did not realize can wake up as a property manager the next time you are homeless in san francisco. so i'm a very passionate advocate with livable experiences. i have contacted the nonprofits that have helped, me in this journey, especially eviction defense, who came through for me. i contacted the mayor's housing, so i know a lot of loopholes. what single families with children, especially africans in the diaspora, have gone through through livable experiences. we do have africans here in the city who are sleeping on the streets. the president was here and sent a lot of hbcu, partnership, i sit on the board of, the san francisco nairobi sister city, which the mayor should be approving so we can start the bilateral partnership, especially on affordable housing for the africans who live in san francisco. they are not represented. i am their voice out of my journey. i started a nonprofit serving the african community who have a lot of barriers, especially language barriers. in one of the issues

is asking san francisco to accept teaching swahili in schools, in high schools, in university is. the other thing is, the nonprofit is called kijiji africa. out of my passionate work to advocate for people of color in this city, reverend brown, third baptist, they gave us an office. unfortunately, we don't even have operational cost. but i've been doing this for three, working full time. we have over 700 africans here in san francisco who want to live here. but many of the programs, i think there was an article on the standard today talking about rapid rehousing, where they have been encouraging people of color to go and get free, cheaper housing outside san francisco. and, yeah, this is part of the silent ways that san francisco has been gentrifying the black community. so i think i sit in this position not because, i mean, of course, on my qualifications, where i attend the un in geneva and new york meetings and representing the african diaspora. i think being in that board, i'm bringing diversity. i'm bringing in

experience and passion. thank you. thank you so much. and we also have a reappointment for seat six. julia de antonio, who will not be present, but most certainly is currently serving in seat six, worked as a shelter client, advocate for the eviction defense collaborative and seat eight reappointment. and i do believe that miss friedenbach is here. hi good morning. i'm jennifer friedenbach, director of the coalition on homelessness. and, i think you both are pretty familiar with me, but, i just wanted to talk a little bit about my work. i've been the at the coalition on homelessness for 29 years. and previous to that, i was the director of the

hunger and homeless coalition of san mateo county, the long history, in this work of making changes with regards to poverty and homelessness and a lot of tangible wins, including proposition c, which we just did our annual report this year and it's really, exciting to see all the progress, thousands of people are now in housing that were not would not have been without prop c, the shelter expansion has been almost a thousand shelter beds and the prevention work has, literally thousands of folks being prevented from being displaced, recently, margot kushel, who's a researcher and kind of foremost homeless researcher in the country, from ucsf, mentioned that if it were not for prop c, we would have seen about a 34%

increase in homelessness in our last point in time count. so really important. i just wanted to kind of mention my priorities, on the body, we're kind of getting to this point where the fund, which, continues each year is, going to be fully utilized. you know, we've been, of course, frustrated that the money has not hit the streets as quickly as we would have liked it to, and there's still a lot of that pushing that, will take place, a priority for me is correcting inequities, looking at, populations that are underserved, really elevating and centering the voices of unhoused people, and transparency and really following every dollar and making sure we're getting the biggest bang for the buck, and looking at efficiency. and, you know, there's this big budget shortfall. we were at 340 million. we're down to 248. and so that's going to make it

pretty tough over the next couple of years. and really looking at how best to use every one of those dollars and seeing all of those dollars as precious and not not wanting to see them go to waste, and addressing those, those shortfalls, again, centering on unhoused people's experience and elevating that, i think bringing a unique perspective in terms of, we hear a lot from unhoused folks, on what issues they have with the system, what's working, what's not working, and really trying to keep that front and center. thank you. thank you so much. supervisor safaí any comments or statements? i would i would just say i appreciated the comment from miss friedenbach about prop c and how the what the impact it had with the independent study on decreasing the amount of homelessness with from the last point in time count. so appreciate all the hard work of putting data together. i think when the data is driving a lot

of our decision making, it's really helpful, rather than just ideology and passion. and i think that's what a lot of what has driven this prior to the creation of our city, our home oversight committee, bringing accountability and oversight to the spending of a department, coupled with the ballot measure that we ran, which created mandatory audits for that department. and i know we've worked in partnership that new commission, in that body with with your oversight committee. so thank you. thank you. supervisor safaí. mr. clerk, can we go to public comment, please? hi. yes, before moving to public comment, i just want to give one last call to see if can vélez martinez is present for our for this meeting. okay. i do not hear a response. moving on to public comment, members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak. at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. is there anybody who would like to speak

on this matter, please sign up to speak if you'd like to speak on this matter. this is for item for our city, our home oversight committee. so i'm trying to understand how this body could conceivably consider reappointing the person who has sued the city into a standstill of clearing tent encampments. i'm trying to understand how it can possibly not be a conflict of interest, which apparently has been waived in miss frydenberg's case for someone whose agency receives funding to be on the oversight committee, that helps direct the funding. so i'm not quite clear on exactly why she'd be up for reappointment. certainly not why she'd be up for reappointment early and certainly not why she'd be up for an appointment for another two year term, where she shouldn't be being considered for about another year. can we recess the meeting

for one minute, please? thank you. we are reconvening today's rules committee meeting, and public comment is now closed. thank you so much to. it's closed. you didn't get my apologies. you did not stand up to speak before a recess. the meeting. i will make sure. i will make sure you get the time. my apologies. thank you very much, miss frieden. mark is the best thing that ever happened. on behalf of homeless people in this town. to oppose her is just absolutely ridiculous. the best program they have is street sheet. they take people who have absolutely nothing to give them a stack of newspapers, and whatever they give, they, sell. they get it all friedenbach rocks. thank you. are there any

additional speakers on this matter? i do not see any additional speakers. thank you. seeing no other speakers. public comment is now closed, first of all, i just want to thank, everyone who sent emails to advocate for candidates, folks who came in to provide public testimony. i also want to thank all of the candidates for being willing to step up and serve. and do we just want to state that if you do not have an opportunity to serve at this time, most certainly we appreciate your commitment to the city and would love for you to continue to find ways to use your skills and talents, to support the work that we do here in san francisco. i don't know, supervisor safaí, do you have anything before i make a motion, i would just say that this this committee, when it was first,

when it was first conceptualized, was designed to be one that would advise us on the new funding stream that came in from gross receipts tax, subsequently, we ran a ballot measure that created an oversight body. mandatory audits, and we put an entire, all of the different disparate groups that are involved in overseeing and talking about not dealing with the homelessness crisis in our city and oversight and accountability. so listen, we have to have a whole range of views. we have to have a whole range of experience based on what what prerequisites and requirements are. so i feel comfortable, based on that information. so i appreciate it. thank you. supervisor safaí. and with that i would like to make a motion to move forward the following names with a positive

recommendation to the full board for seat two. shane williams for seat for chavez. martinez for seat six julia d'antonio. and for seat eight jennifer friedenbach. excuse me. yes? on that motion for chanel williams, seat two, kenzie martinez, seat four. julio de antonio for seat six and jennifer friedenbach for seat eight. on that motion, supervisor chan absent supervisor safaí i safaí i vice chair walton i walton. i, the motion passes without objection with supervisor chan being absent. thank you. motion carries. mr. clerk, please call item number five. item number five is a motion approving, rejecting the mayor's nomination

for the appointment of c don clay to the police commission for a term ending april 30th, 2028. all right. good morning, supervisors walton and safaí and the chair, supervisor walton, first, i want to thank you for giving me this, brief opportunity to introduce myself and address the mayor's nomination of me for the police commission. now, my resume and with the newspaper articles written, give you sort of a glimpse of who i am, including the fact that i'm a 45 year resident of the city of san francisco. so now, the major question i've been given and ask about is, is most people want to know, well, why do i want to serve on this commission during this time period? and it's pretty simple. my answer is why

not serve? i see my serving as a continuation of my pledge to continue public service. once i left private practice of law. now look over my career as an attorney and a judge. my personal and professional life experiences have allowed me to acquire the unique skills and understanding of the subject matter that the commission faces and face. i do understand the need of treating people in this community decently, fairly and honestly each and every day. the community is our residences, our property owners, businesses, workers, the visitors and the police officers who provide public service to our city. we must have a mutual respect for each other. i ask you for your support of my nomination to this commission. thank you so much, judge clayton. just a couple of

questions. yes, i know that i haven't. do you have any questions? why don't you go ahead? first up. no, you go first, what is the what's the role of the police commission to set the policy and to engage in looking through the disciplinary hearings for police misconduct? that's what that's what the role is by by the nature of the statute that you guys have provided, do you think the police commission has too much power over the department? so let me just say this, chair walton, i don't really know because i have not engaged. i understand the filing as a judge just retiring two months ago, one of the things you have to do, you have to separate yourself from what is happening politically on commissions boards because unlike the, things i'm a former presiding judge of the court of alameda county, but i live here in the city. if something happened in this city that all the judges recused themselves, they might send it over to my county and i'm very cognizant of those things because i live here, that

i try to keep myself distance. but i see there have been issues . i think there's issues as it relates to what is happening here. the power of the police is restricted by what has been dictated to them. by the way, this board and the legislative of you as governors here, the city, the legislative and executive branch, in terms of power, i think you always got to be on the side of restricting power and how you you you take a look at that power there and determine on how you're going to enforce and how it's going to be used. thank you. judge clay. supervisor safaí. so just to add on to that, thank you, judge clay, for putting your, allowing your name to be put forward. i think that's a big deal. i understand that you were previously, a number of years ago on the fire commission. i was is that right? and then also juvenile justice commission and the juvenile probation commission. can you talk a little bit about that time on juvenile probation and the work that you did on juvenile justice? so that was an

interesting time. as you recall what happened. and there was the juvenile justice commission became the juvenile probation commission by way of the city charter and the vote. and that changed to give them the power as we have now. when i was there was a year of the change to fred jordan and the prior chief and the frank jordan issues that apparently they had, problems with each other. when i came on the board, it was questioned as whether or not they were going to close down the juvenile hall. there was under the issues of what the conditions were for the youth, and then during the course of that, the issue became is the funding of groups and where the funding was going and what was happening there. so, so there was a lot of things happening. there were there were numerous numerous meetings. we had, i think at one time we had 600, 700 town hall with people there. so there was a lot of things happening under, when i was there, so that's what i can

tell you. great and have you studied the 272 recommendations from the department of justice that was prescribed for changes in terms of how this department would be run and managed? no, i haven't studied. i've seen them. and that's the 275 and comply an in any city in the country to do that to, to meet those standards. that's, that's pretty amazing. i'm not certain, as it relates to who's reviewing that, who is going to enforce and making sure that's happening. but it's important that it's there and people are doing what they're supposed to do as relates to getting on board of what the new way things should be looking as it relates to police, police policing and city. okay, i don't have any other questions. i'm going to save them for the next commissioner. since she's been on the body. okay. thank you, supervisor safaí. thank you, judge clay. all right. can we go to public comment on this item,

please, mr. clerk? yes? members of the public who wish to speak on this item should speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. good morning. supervisors, dennis herrera, speaking here very proudly and enthusiastically, in support of the nomination of, judge don clay to be a member of the police commission, some of you may know, i had the experience of being on the police commission from 1997 to 2001. and i can tell you, there's no one more qualified to sit on that body than judge clay. i've known judge clay in a personal and professional capacity, for close to 25 years, as well as as his family. his lovely wife, lisa, who served as deputy city attorney before she retired a couple of years ago. and i know judge clay to have the highest level of integrity, judgment and ethics. he is a judge's judge, but he also brings to that, a certain

experience that he got from years of being a criminal defense lawyer as a prosecutor in the us attorney's office, both in terms of prosecuting cases and managerial experience. his broad breadth of experience, his personal integrity, his judgment, his character is exactly, the type of individual that we should be having on a police commission at a time when we have serious public safety issues that we need to address here in the city and county of san francisco. so i'm here to support the nomination of my colleague and my dear, dear friend, judge don clay. you can do no better than to have him as a member of your commission. and i would encourage you to give him your vote of approval. good morning, thank you. my name is stuart hanlon. i'm a criminal defense attorney in san francisco and have done that job

for 46 years. and i know don clay initially as a lawyer in oakland when i was practicing in san francisco, and we became friends as our two sons went to kindergarten through eighth grade together and played sports. and we saw us as socially, and i worked with him when he worked for the us attorney's office in a committee of defense lawyers meeting with him, as the second in command. and i appeared for him as a judge and in front of him as a judge and lost. but, that was not the issue, i also want to make it clear that i have, since i would say since i was in college, been known as a radical , a leftist and progressive, and have done my practice of law in that way, and in that way, i think i'm different than don clay. but given those differences, he has my full support, because what makes him good for the police commission

is that he's fair, he's honest, he's non-biased, and he's direct. and neither the things we need, we don't need to have people say, with my state of mind, i've grown up fighting policemen in the courts, and see them in a different light than i think people, many other people. and i think i would not be a good commissioner because i would be biased. don clay is not biased. he's fair, and he's someone who should sit on a commission. and i think as someone who considered myself a progressive, i was very happy for him to be there and think he would add to our community of safety for both the citizens and the police. thank you. hello once again, i find myself speaking in a situation where i wasn't anticipating it, but as someone who does attend the weekly commission meetings, police commission meetings,

hearing this gentleman speak is exactly. this is exactly the kind of person that i would want on that commission. and i felt like if i was sitting here and i didn't stand up and support him, that would have been a missed this gentleman sounds like he fits the bill. and i really, really hope you put his nomination through. thank you, good morning, supervisors. alan braddell, i also support this, appointment from mayor breed, he was just described, and that's judge clay. he was just described as fair, honest, non-biased and direct. but what a fantastic, statement about

this person who. i don't know, but i go to these meetings regularly at the police commission, and we need somebody like this gentleman. so let's put him in front of the board and get him approved. thank you. are there any additional speakers on this matter? there does not appear to be additional public commenters on this matter. thank you. seeing no more speakers public comment is now closed. any comments? supervisor safaí yeah, i would just say, you know, listen, i as the former chair of this committee, one of the time, i don't think we've ever had a longer committee hearing than we did when we had a few seats that we had to fill for the police commission. i think it was a nine hour meeting started at 10 a.m, went to about 4 or 5 in the afternoon, and, and that's because of the importance of this commission. it's not often

that we get people with level of qualifications as, judge clay. so i think that's an important, step forward for this body, but i think there's been a lot of unfortunately, there's been a lot of attempt to politicize this body consists largely, there's a lot of very difficult decisions that have to be made. that's why i ask the judge about the 272 recommendations. i think we've almost achieved them. or we did. a lot of them had to do with police oversight and reform . and i think this city has done a good job of that over the years relative to other cities around the united states. i can tell you from experience, my first month in office, seven and a half years ago, when an individual was having a mental health crisis because his neighbor had a stay away order and i understand if your walls

being banged on, it three in the morning, you don't know what to do. so the police came. at that time, they were not trained in de-escalation. and unfortunately the individual ended up getting shot on his doorstep behind a gate, a closed gate. and in this body, working with the chief, working with the commission, working with public health, working with experts. the police department has then subsequently gone through a significant training on de-escalation that now, in the last couple of years, you hear little or nothing of police involved shootings in our city, which i think is a significant accomplishment from the work that's been done over the last seven and a half years, that has to do with the commission, has to do with the chief, and it has to do with the oversight and work with that department, and we're going to talk about this with the next commissioner. but i think the most recent ballot

measure that was done, it was designed and to undermine this body and the work that it does and how it can engage and the best way to do police policy and reform is through an open process that's through a commission and through engage and experienced individuals like like judge clay. so i'm happy to support, judge clay today, i want to be clear, and we didn't talk about this, being on the fire commission is very different than being on the police commission. and be ready to give up hours and hours of your life, and i think you go in to that eyes wide open, because that is, that is the task at hand. and as supervisor walton said, the majority of that work is police disciplinary cases and hearing and adjudicating on that. i think you'll have no problem with that. but the second piece is setting policy

for and working collaboratively or and sometimes a little bit more constructively with the police department and forcing them and pushing them to do things that haven't been done, so i'll just i just want to highlight one thing for you, and i think it's one of the biggest shortcomings over the last six years within the police department is not enough. money has been put toward recruiting agent and supervisor walton and i, two years ago had a hearing to talk about diversity and recruitment. i'm talking about women. i'm talking about people of color. i'm talking about how that is actively done. and then just purely the numbers themselves. so despite a lot of the political rhetoric that's out there, there's a very, very small budget allocated to recruitment within the police department for all of the intended, goals. and i would hope that you would make that one of your priorities to look at and talk about, because it's

one of the biggest shortcomings, even in this most recent proposal that's just been laid out. from the mayor's office. so thank you, judge. i'm happy to support you. i'm happy to hear that you're willing to serve and give up a good portion of your time for this work. thank you. supervisor safaí. i move that we remove the word rejecting and replace it with approving and send this item for to the board with a positive recommendation. yes on that motion, supervisor chan, absent supervisor safaí. safaí. vice chair walton i. walton. hi. the motion passes without objection with supervisor chan being absent. thank you. motion carries. mr. clerk, please call item number six. yes. item number six is a motion approving rejecting the mayor's nomination for the reappointment of deborah walker to the police commission for a term ending april 30th, 2028.

good morning, supervisors. good morning and happy pride to everybody, right now they're raising the flag over city hall. so, it's really an honor to be here. thank you for your time here, too, i have been serving on the police commission for the last year, and a half. during which time, as you mentioned, earlier, supervisor, we submitted our follow up to the department of justice, completing our recommended reforms within the department, during the time i've been on the commission, we have had. and every meeting we've had, we've had an update on the status of those reforms, i also met with the auditor who was going to continue working with us to make sure to your point, supervisor

safaí, they are continually auditing that our reforms that we have made part of our system now are, effective. so you're right in saying that our department is actually one of the most reformed in the nation. in when i came on board, i met with president elias, and she assigned me a couple of issues to start discussing with the department as well as the community. and the first of those is the alternatives to policing and how our department interfaces with those options. and in that capacity, i've met with the department, other and the nonprofit community who who provide those other resources and other options for policing. we're moving forward the heart program on a on a citywide level , and really now are discussing ways of increasing the infrastructure to support those efforts, that's that stands

parallel, parallel and apart from the police infrastructure, i also am working on the history of the patrol specials. many of you have been around and have known that that is a is a program the city really supports , communities in the city. a lot of the community is that have had these successful partnerships with the private sector policing have really been pushing to have them reinstated, have the rules and regulations reformed so that it works better to fill the gaps that we're seeing now. i came on board a year and a half ago. the morale in the department was really low, there's been a history of attacking in general rather than specifically focusing on the reforms that need to happen over the last year and a half. some of the efforts that we've all taken in the city have increased morale, have increased recruiting. instead of eight people in a class supervisor

safaí now we have 35 and 40 people in our classes because we are recruiting, we're recruiting women, we're commuting, we're recruiting people of color, we're recruiting people whose families have been in law enforcement for a really long time. we're looking at options about, you know, how to keep people on the force from retiring and using, getting, getting taken advantage of their expertise in training and have them mentoring the next the next wave of law enforcement so we can do reforms at the same time, as that, we're keeping our streets safe, and we must do that. and so those are the issues that i've been working on with president elias and the rest of the commission. i'd be honored to have your support. i really appreciate the time you've taken, and i will stop now and answer any questions you have. thank you so much,

commissioner, i do have one question. the same question, one of the same questions i asked, previous candidate, do you think the police commission has too much power over the department? right. i think there's a difference between making law and determining whether the department is, is achieving policy in that towards that law, it's the board of supervisors job to change law or tell us what to enforce or not. it's the supervisors and the mayor. the state of california usually sets forth both the penal and the vehicle codes. and what we're supposed to enforce. so as we look at things like for instance, the pretext stop issue that came forward, it's really important to separate out pretext stops in general from what we're talking about, which is reducing racial bias in in traffic stops. that's a problem. study after study have shown

that it's a problem to have racial bias when you're doing traffic stops and it exists. so how do we get rid of it? is it like some people say, you just stop enforcing certain traffic laws? or is it what we're doing now, which is we've we've statewide in this conversation, the state has adopted a policy that was has been initiated in los angeles for a year and a half, where the officers now on camera have to tell somebody why they're pulling them over. and it's shown to be reducing racial bias in these stops. this pretext stops are a tool that that officers use. it's dictated by law. you can't just pull somebody over for being black or brown or a woman or a lesbian or any of that. you have to have a reason for pulling them over. but sometimes it's also attached to finding guns or drugs or finding another crime that has occurred once they pull them

over. so it's really important that what they're pulling them over for is a valid traffic stop. and that that law in los angeles is reducing racial bias without decreasing traffic stops. i mean, at the very the very next meeting from somebody complaining about racial bias in traffic stops, they were complaining about the fact that police are doing less traffic stops. so what we're doing is confusing our officers as to what they're supposed to be enforcing on the streets. that's the problem of overreach from a commission. i didn't mean to go on and on, but that's that's what happens is you confuse people. what they're doing, how are we going to get stop details and stop data to determine if there's racial bias, if we're encouraging them not to do the traffic stops, it just doesn't make any sense. so, you know, i

feel like this is why we need to really think about it, be very clear about where our reach is. but i don't think it's our job to make law or say what we should be enforcing. but since you brought it up, you don't believe that we should stop pretext pretextual traffic stops. i think that we should stop racial bias in pretext stops. that's the point. a pretext stop is a tool. it's like, let's say that an officer gets a notice that there's been a, like a theft or a violent act , and they're escaping in a blue car. that's, that's going by, let's say the blue car then just runs by the cop and they have a traffic. they have a no license plate on the back under, under what was being proposed to ban pretext stops. the officer could

not pull that person over. that's true, because they could pull them over from running past. so that's. well, they i mean, they are they aren't violating any other law for. so i'm just saying that, that without seeing who's in the driver's seat, if you have again, commissioner, you brought up the topic and you made a statement that you don't see how pretext stops are aligned with racial bias. i think some of them are. you're misstating what i said. so i'm asking you, do you believe that the effort to stop those pretextual stops? do you agree with it? i agree with stopping racially biased pretext stops. yes thank you. supervisor safaí. yes. so just a continuation of some of the things that we were talking about with judge clay, there was ballot measure this past march

that did a number of different things that you could deem, one could deem were the responsibility and job of the police commission. and so that was taken out of the hand of the police commission and handed to the voters of san francisco, one of which was a police pursuit policy. and so can you describe to me, commissioner, the current police pursuit policy, as you understand it, i don't i didn't bring that with me specifically, but that is one of the most important aspects of your job. when well, no, let me finish. i'm sorry. the police pursuit policy. there was a presentation at your commission. the reason i'm asking you this is because there's a lot of misinformation out again, out in the public. there was a presentation given at your commission by the police

staff, brass leadership that talked about how prior to the ballot measure, that san francisco police department had one of the most reputable police pursuit policies in the entire country. and so i'm asking you, as a commissioner, to describe to me your understanding of the police pursuit policy so you can explain. and that's that's part of your job. yeah. well, it goes into i mean, it goes into a lot of detail, obviously. what what the officer needs to look at is the potential for any kind of accidents or, missed gap in chasing people to see if it's safe and, and what prop e did was allowed for things like pilot programs around technology. there's technology now that instead of doing car chases, they can shoot a gps on

a car and follow them by radar instead of putting people at risk because we are in a in one of the most dense cities in the in the country. so, you know, the, the, the what they go through as an officer, i haven't been through the training. i mean, maybe it's something we all should do so we understand it all better, i feel like the, the training that has been, set forth at the academy to train our officers of when to chase and when not to pursue, is really, really effective, again, that was one of the efforts that the jensen and hughes company said was one of the best in the nation. so you know, prop e does give more latitude for pilot programs, especially around technology, because it really these type of things have shown to have less negative effect

than getting in a car chase. so you know, it's it is important. i agree, supervisor. so one of the things that as i understand the policy, the current policy prior to the ballot measure was, first of all, there was a very there was a standard, and that standard usually had to do with a firearm involved. so that was one aspect that i understand. second aspect to, to have somebody chase is that what you're correct. and then and then the second, the second aspect, which i think is one of the most important, is that the responding officers have to call in for guidance. and a green light to a commanding officer. yeah proposition e removed that. now they're putting the decision making solely in the heat of response into the officer's hands. and one of the things i think that people didn't understand about, again, going

back to the data that we talked about in our city, our home oversight, having data drive san francisco police department has the lowest capture rate in the entire state of california on pursuit and has the highest injury rate for innocent bystanders and police officers. that to me was a piece of information that did not get out until very late in the conversation. and i think as that got out, more and more people had a lot of reservations about proposition e. that's why it ended up being a lot closer in a very low voter turnout election. less than 50, so that's why i'm asking you about your understanding of that policy as a commissioner, because i'd like to understand what your position is and what your approach is to that, because that kind of helps to inform me whether or not you know, how you move forward in terms of your decision making for this body, which i think to

supervisor walton's question chair, walton's question. listen, if you're a policy making body for a department that is extremely important in in how our city is governed, i think that that authority should remain as a collaboration between the commission and the police chief. i totally agree, but that's not what proposition e did. well, it's proposition e took the decision making away from the police commission in terms of police pursuit. it took the decision making away from, some of the conversations about technology, which, by the way, just prior to that vote, we literally were waiting for the police department to come and submit to us requests for more technology that had been sitting with the police department for months. it wasn't this body that was slowing it down. it was the police department itself. well, it's good that we're getting those traffic cameras in. those can help too, because i think that, you know, a lot of those

type of things are ongoing and can be referred to if there's a desire to cut off a chase because it's presenting a, you know, to be a dangerous situation. so i agree that the commission needs to work with the department. i think that's our that's our purpose for being there. i think that, the reporting back on the use of technology is going to be vital for both the commission and the board and the mayor. we need to see how these work. but there's a lot, a lot of studies of this kind of technology that indicate the dangers that you're discussing, actually are reduced with these kind. and it's not just cameras, it's this other technology that actually is safer than pursuit. absolutely. and that's why i was a big i was a big proponent of advancing that technology. and the data from those are going to be

coming to both of our bodies to review and input on on it. so what about what about the do you have time in your, schedule? i'm seriously well, only not only are you doing adjudication of officers, but now if you need to do any policy changes, you have to go through. yeah can you talk about that and will you i have i have the time that is needed to carry out. that was a necessary change, in terms of the work that you're doing, i mean, you've been on the. yes, i actually do. i tell you the issues. i'm working on, even though we see, you know, the issues of alternatives to policing and the issues of like working better with private sector security, those are issues that are all over town. each neighborhood is different. so i really think it's vital to get input from each neighborhood on what they see as what's going to work for them. it's imperative. and i, i mean, as a commissioner, i would not be

here if i didn't have the time. i've made a commitment like you all. i mean, maybe we don't get paid. you get paid. but, you know, i have the i have been in a san francisco resident for 45 years. i've been appointed to commissions by tom ammiano, matt gonzalez, aaron peskin, london breed and served so i do know what it takes. no, i get it. i guess my question was, so you supported proposition e, then i did i think that what we were doing wasn't working. i think that i think that the, the morale of the department was down because, you know, there's way too much input from people who don't who aren't police officers. they don't know what it's like to stand out. when you said people that don't, are you talking about commissioners? are you talking about i'm talking about all of us on that. we actually we actually have never held a gun. and been law enforcement. so and there's a

there's a need to have that input and to take it seriously. so that said i support all of the reforms we're doing. and i think the only way we do it is to do it in a way that brings more cooperation from the department. so i just want to understand what you just said. i want to let you finish. so you're saying there's way too much input from people that don't know what it's like to be a cop as a commissioner. so i'm saying i want to be clear. i'm saying very specifically, okay, around the details of this type of pretext. stop. for instance, that's a that's a very interesting conversation because, well, but i'm just saying pretext stops are not the problem. racial bias in pretext stop racial bias in everything we do is the problem that we're seeing that that need reforms. and i don't think not enforcing

the law is the way to do it. that's all i'm saying. i got it, okay. but i'm hearing and again, i'm not trying to put words in your mouth. i'm trying to. okay, then don't i'm trying to understand your presentation and your presentation. you brought up. pretext stops. neither. neither of us did. you did to demonstrate something. and that's fine. and you made your position clear. but then you also just said there's way too much input from people that don't know what it means to be a cop. but it's your job as a commissioner to set policy for that department. that's true. okay so that's a contradiction. well, it's not it's like, how do you weigh both both sides of the input? okay and then it's not it's not it's over heavy on one side which it's not, it's not working i mean that's my point. you've been you've been on this body for how long? seven and a half years. yeah. and under that time we had graduating classes

of eight people, five people, people retiring. correct. and so there's something wrong with the dynamic of the commission and the department that's going on. and so that's what my point is i agree. and so as a commissioner, it's your job to help guide and set policy. and now we have 35 people. right okay. so i think that the i think that the policies and how we're doing it is working well. you just okay. you just said it wasn't working. i'm confused. but with regard glad you brought up recruitment. the recruitment budget of the department has stayed flat for five years. how many years have you been a commissioner, a little over a year and a half. okay, so every year we come in, we get a. we get a proposal from the mayor, we review that proposal, and then the department ends up going out. so yes, you might have seen a slight increase, but that was my point in the previous, commissioner, conversation was

there hasn't been any increase or elevation of the police department's recruitment budget. you have the money. you have the money within your department, because every year you come, we have something on the agenda tomorrow that says, take $5 million and turn it into overtime. so every year we're allocating significant amount of money for hiring of officers. but somehow the officers are not being hired. i have to believe that if you put more money into recruitment, you'd see an increase in the number of people that would be hired in the department in 2007. you're talking about 35. in 2007, the department hired 307 officers in one year. so it can be done if the money is put into recruitment, not just into allocating for academy classes that don't get filled. i agree. are you asking that? i'm asking you what is your opinion on the recruitment budget and why hasn't that been emphasized? i think that recruiting isn't just increasing the budgets, it's

also what we're doing. i'm in discussions with a group of folks who are actually forwarding things like child care for officers, especially around all of the different, stations, when they get called in, especially in these few years when everybody's on overtime, it's really a way. it's what they need. there's a lot of folks who actually retire because they have to take care of family, we need to do things like provide housing opportunities when people sign on, you know, there's a lot we can do in partnering with some of these community groups who are doing the alternatives to policing to actually encourage recruitment from the community in those venues. i mean, there's a lot that we can do in programs that were already engaged in, and i'm not opposed to putting more money into recruitment. i think we need to and i have to say that i'm really proud that we now have larger and more, recruitment classes going on. so

something we're doing is working and some of it is sort of how we're talking to each other. i just want to go back to, to one thing. okay. so thank you for clarifying that, i'm again, i'm still stuck on your comment about way too much input from people that don't know what it's like to be a cop. and yes, you supported prop b, and prop b requires you to go to every single district station and get input from people that aren't police officers. so how do you reconcile that? i don't i don't understand in one breath you're saying, let's have less input from people that don't know what it's like to be a cop. and in the other breath, you're saying you supported a measure that essentially is going to make it almost impossible for you to change any policy within your department? how do you reconcile that? so i, i really support being out in communities, like i

said, and spending the time, i think that when you're talking about, writing dgos, you hear you hear the, the input from everybody involved and, and then we go in to meet and confer and we do that process just like with every other rule around on, employees. so it's sort of in many cases when commissioners do it, it's reviewed differently. so there's we're meeting and conferring, but we're not really meeting and conferring. and we have the final say. and, what what has ended up happening. and this affects the morale of the department is that it's confusing. if you have you looked at all of our dgos? yeah. i'm just it would be helpful because i went to a course where you're of the folks, the new hires who are writing dgos and reviewing them in the department

, and we went over the dgo, specifically about writing dgos, and it was confusing. now it's confusing to me. i'm not an officer, i'm not in law enforcement. but it's what happens is you run the risk of being contradictory, of conflicting with other dgos and that process needs to be really smoothed out and a lot of what is happening now as a result of prop e is they're looking at those dgos that were affected and it will be easy to see what what i'm talking about, what what makes it easier for the officers to follow the rules when they're out there keeping our streets safe? it's different than are we achieving policy that's very different. so i mean, we need to look at the rules. i mean, that's why i supported property. we're going to be evaluating all that stuff on an ongoing basis. i kind of feel that we'll get information that's helpful. i think our relationship with the department and the commission will be

better. i think we're going to be more effective, and i think we're going to increase recruiting. okay, i again, it seems in one breath that you're talking about input from people that don't have experience and the other breath, you're saying that part of the reason why you stood by prop b was because you felt like the commission itself was having too much input from people that didn't know anything about what it was like to be a cop. no, i didn't say input. i said that we were overstepping. i, i you said way too much info for people that don't know what it's like to be a cop. those are your exact words who aren't a cop, right? okay so do you think that we should have a police commission? yes. i think that we do discipline hearings. that's, you know, i think my experience of it and how i am on the commission is that i am neutral.

i think it's a judicious body where we have to take these same rules that you're talking about and see and determine if an officer has violated them. so that's where my concern about the confusion in dgos is we have to discipline on those. and i think that that gets lost in the political debates. do you think the police commission should be involved in setting policy for the department? it sounds like you agree with the oversight of the policy that that our policy is consistent with city law? yes and let's say there's directives around reform, which we just did it is our job to work with the department to make sure that happens. yes. do you think the commission should be involved in setting policy when it comes to

pursuit for interaction with people with mental health issues? do you think there should be policy set from the police commission working with the police department in those i like? i think the i think it's important to work together. yes. okay. all right. i have no further questions. chair. thank you. thank you. supervisor safaí. thank you. commissioner. let's go to public. thank you. yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak. at this time, each speaker will be allowed two minutes. you're missing the whale, guys. she shut the department down. she shut the commission down. ask her why she walked out. anytime you've got. what happened was the mayor lost her plurality because carter overstone, decided to be honest. he said take get rid of that resignation letter in your drawer that says, because i'm going to talk to you honestly, this woman is the most incredible, hard working, member

of the lgbtq community that you're going to find. she spent ten years on the building commission doing yeoman's work standing up to the rba. a lot of nerve here. her mission is to destroy the commission. anytime that commission. i watch all of you guys for all the 30 years you've been on, like, soap operas, you used to be able to watch the police commission every week. they've met twice in the last two months because of deborah walker. she leads the mayor's contingent. if one of the four plurality that are progressive now, has to be miss something, all three of the other mayor's members, suddenly they're sick on the same day they met. twice. she's destroying the commission again. it's not whether the commission can do this or that. if they don't meet, they are our window into the police department. we get to listen to dpa. they give their report. what officers have gone wrong. the police chief gives tells us what crime has

gone on for the last week. well, not for a month. we don't hear any of it because of deborah walker. she has been the mayor's tool to shut down the police commission. she should not be reappointed. and thank deborah for all of her work for all the years on other items. good morning, alan braddell. commissioner walker is not trying to shut down the police commission, and mayor breed's prop e wasn't designed to undermine the police commission. as we just heard from supervisor safaí, the police commission was designed by this body to undermine public safety. okay, that's what happened. now supervisor safaí was stuck on this one phrase. way too much input from people who aren't

cops. i encourage you to listen back to the tape and hear what commissioner walker had to say about that. she simply said there was no balance there. people who aren't cops have valid input and we need to listen to their input. that's not in dispute. so listen. listen carefully to what's being said to you by the by the, by the candidate. and then finally listen carefully to what commissioner walker talked about with during the citywide conversation. we've been having over the past couple of years, los angeles has been able to measurably reduce racial bias and traffic stops without making the traffic stops illegal. okay, that's happened during our citywide conversation about pretext stops. so let's listen to that. let's see that. let's, understand that they've, accomplished that down in la and

in the whole state. that's what we need to think about. thank you. well, it's now good afternoon, chair walton and supervisor safaí. it's a joy to see you after all this time. and on pride month, i and my wife here, irene, are here to support the reappointment of our friend deborah walker to the police commission, i want to stress that it's, you know, as it's the beginning of pride month, that, as lesbians, it's important for us to see and support other lesbians representing us at all levels in local government. and i want to thank the mayor for her commitment to reappoint her commitment to support the reappointment for deborah walker . and hopefully, i'll be able to thank you at the end of the meeting as well. during her time on the police commission, deborah and i have had

conversations on how meaningful and challenging the work is as a police commissioner for. from these conversations, i've come to learn that she is clearly committed to the need, the needed police reforms, and she's also committed to evaluating all considerations and ensuring that there are meaningful and calm deliberations at the commission meetings to ensure that all decisions have a very thorough vetting. it's important that san francisco continues to have representatives that model this type of behavior. san francisco is a city of the world, like london, like paris, in addition to a city to its people. we are a targeted city to who we are and our political leaders that emanate from here. deborah walker understands the importance and the challenges to our police department to balance the security of our city from

these external forces, while ensuring the oppressive means, to ensuring non-oppressive means of policing its residents. thank you. good afternoon. i ask you to consider these three points describing the work of commissioner deborah walker. number one, dedication to mission commissioner walker has remained true to the commission's mission, ensuring ethical conduct and fair consideration of public comments. thanks for that. number two, accountability. she has held the commission accountable, especially when data misrepresentations could have seriously impacted the public's perception of the sfpd. number three integrity. her efforts above have preserved the entire commission's dignity and legitimacy, even and especially

when she stood in contrast to some commissioners, frankly, extremist beliefs and actions for this police commissioner walker deserves our thanks and gratitude, and she has been a consistent voice of reason on a divided commission for the past year and a half, she has worked to bridge ideological divides, collaborating with sfpd and other agencies to reduce crime, improve officer morale and recruitment, and address overdose deaths. her efforts were pivotal in helping the sfpd comply. meet the nearly 300 reforms outlined by the doj. commissioner walker has held the commission accountable when data has been misrepresented. her call for an investigation into the commission itself, while may be uncomfortable and even painful, underscores her commitment to the integrity to integrity. deborah walker's common sense of ethics alone are

, or excuse me, deborah walker's sense of ethics alone are important to the commission's balance, given her proven track record in bridging divides, maintaining accountability, dedication to the commission's mission, and upholding integrity. i challenge you to explain any hesitation in reappointing. thank you so much for your public comment. thank you. so i find it interesting that that both members of this committee appeared to grill, commissioner walker on or at least safaí did on a perceived, slight from the notion of too much input from people who aren't cops. if cops aren't going to weigh in on their policies and what they are able to do and what challenges they face, who else exactly is who

are you looking to for that information or are we simply not interested in it? perhaps that explains things like rubber stamping. cindy elias or other considerably questionable from an ethical standpoint. members of the police commission like commissioner yanez, so i would urge you to take a step back and think about what you're saying. think about what you're saying. you're saying that the input of cops doesn't matter to policies of the police commission. that's outrageous. and the fact is, we all get fools pardons, right? we are not capable of knowing what they face. if we don't ask them, then we're putting things in place that can either endanger them or to her point, make things confusing. i've seen some of these dgos. i can guarantee you that a police officer on the street, depending on the situation, does not have four

minutes to try to run down the four page checklist in their head before acting. so in order for the police commission to be balanced, it has to be balanced with a wide variety of experiences and opinions and or ideologies. and in order for our policing to be balanced, it has to have both the input of people who are not cops and without question, the input of people who are. as a san franciscan who attends the weekly police commission meetings, i've been saddened by the antagonistic and ideologically driven culture that now dominates a once balanced and mutually respectful commission in city hall. the inability and blatant unwillingness to recognize and consider competing viewpoints has become dangerous and has led to dysfunction, bad policy and an intractable obstacle for

public servants to work together for the common good. deborah walker bucks this nasty trend, and i urge you to put her reappointment through to the full board and commission meetings. she listens attentively and respectfully to her peers, as well as to every person who gives public comment, rather than lecturing or insisting on only one point of view, she encourages full and rich discussions on all matters before the commission. she is genuinely interested in starting conversations. actual, real dialog about the issues before the commission, eager to create a space where community and subject matter experts have a place to bring new and creative solutions to the various matters on the agenda. in addition to always being prepared on the subject matter, she has the disciplined, kind, respectful and compassionate disposition required to perform her duties at the highest and most judicious levels for a year and a half now, she's been an impartial voice of reason on a divisive and ideologically driven commission. the public has made it clear that we want our commissions to be bastions of fair and productive work, guided by a culture and collaboration, expertise and honesty, miss walker has brought

all of that to the police commission, and her reappointment would signal a commitment by this committee to continue pursuing those ideals. so for the above stated reasons, i urge you to please move forward with miss walker's reappointment. and i also just want to say if she did support prop e, so did everyone else who voted for it. so did the majority of people. technology will be helpful, and due to the shortages and to reduce risk of injury to people in chases and things of that nature, prop e wouldn't have been needed if there was not this overreach. she supported prop e and so did everybody else. and by the way, who was on the commission in 2007, people like tip mizuko, who were amazing. so much for your comment. are there any additional speakers on this matter? there does not appear to be any additional commenters on this matter. thank you so much for public comment. public

comment is now closed. supervisor safaí yes, thank you. chair. i came in with an open mind today. i really wanted to hear what this commissioner had to say. i heard some some very contrary victory statements. in terms of what the role of the commission is and what it should do. and the reason i brought up proposition e is because proposition e was a clear move, move to take away power from the commission. it was designed to say you commission cannot be involved in setting the policy of pursuit in our department. we're going to put that in front of the voters. you commission can't be involved in the conversation about technology. we're going to put that in front of the voters. i want to be very clear. two years prior to going to the ballot, i had active conversations with the police department on their police

pursuit policy and from a previous chief to the current chief to the entire leadership of the police department. they said clearly to me, and i said this in this chamber. they said clearly to me, do not touch that policy. it is the it is the most forward thinking in the country. we have the most densely settled city in the united states outside of new york city. people, innocent people will die. and guess what? three weeks ago there was a police pursuit in the tenderloin and thank god, a 14 year old girl who was in a crosswalk at galileo high school didn't die. and they called off the pursuit and said they used technology and they used their system. they caught the individual on the. oh, so you haven't heard a lot of police pursuit in the city because it's not a good policy. what was put in front of the voters is you don't want to take away the governing commander to give guidance to the officer and a

pursuit. that is a good policy. that's why i asked the commissioner about that. and i didn't really hear a strong response. what i did hear is that they stood by my proposition e to design, to take away power from that body and listen. to be clear, commissioner elias was in this chamber when i was the chair in a nine hour hearing in multiple hours in my office, and i didn't even attempt to begin to ask some of the same questions that i asked of them, of this reoccurring, of this potential reappointment or the potential appointee that we just sent with positive recommendation to the body. so i have concerns when i hear way too much input from people that don't know what it's like to be a cop, that that again, i didn't say that. that's what was said. and by the way, none of the people that are on the commission were police

officers. they're all coming with their own level of expertise. and yes, the commanding staff with the chief, they're the ones that are giving that input and guiding the policy, making body because they are the officers. we did and have approved in this chamber. and i have before, from the work that i've done with organized retail theft, to go very aggressively with technology. technology is a much better way, and there is a process to do that. but circumventing the process, going to the voters was was unnecessary. it didn't made no sense to me, and again, taking power away from the oversight body that this department needs that it needs that back and forth. and there does need to be a policy setting body, and, and as one of the, one of the people that commented here said a lot of this over politicization happened because the mayor lost control of the commission. the mayor has a majority appointments on this

commission for appointments, for appointments, and because one of her commissioners went in a different direction in terms of policy and actually brought to light, i didn't even ask this question. were you asked to sign a resignation letter when you were appointed? i didn't bring that up today, but i'm bringing it up now because that was where the controversy began. that was deemed by our city attorney to be an unlawful practice, asking people to sign resignation letters on their appointed moment. that's what started the entire contra posse within the police department. and it's all been downhill from there. i think this appointment of commissioner clay, judge clay will be a good, appoint moment. but it is true they haven't had meetings over the last number of months, and that was intentional. it was absolutely intentional. people not showing up because they were asked not to show up, to undermine, again the legitimacy of this body. so i, i have problems. listen i

think no one is guaranteed a commission appointment. you serve at the pleasure of the people of san francisco, and i don't feel confident, reappointing this commissioner today. i apologize. thank you. supervisor safaí. you know, this this job is difficult. and difficult in the sense for me in this case, because i'm having to make a decision about someone who i have respected for so many years. if we were having a conversation about commissioner walker receiving an award for her work and achievements in this city, i'd be at the front of the line to support that. i have a lot of respect for commissioner walker. i agree with the statement of a public comment commenter that said, we should be sending her our thanks and our gratitude, i 100% agree with that. i also agree with the speaker who talked about the

fact that she's done some great work here in san francisco, but unfortunately, the work on the police commission has not been something that i can in good conscience support moving her forward. and a lot of that is attributed to her own statements that she made here at this commission meeting. i mean, you know, i have to make decisions based on what's in front of me. and i truly feel that commissioner walker does not believe that the police commission should be setting policy for the department, which is one of the main functions of the police commission, and it's unfortunate that i am someone who has to make this decision for miss walker, because there is no way i can support this appointment in good conscience, supervisor tapia, i see you.

yeah, i just i just wanted to add again, i supported this commissioner for the building commission. i supported this commissioner in the past for the arts commission. i think that at times as, as i said, i came in with an open mind, but, as supervisor walton said, chair walton said i can only go on what comments were presented. here today in front of me, and i don't walk away with the feeling that there's a confidence or a belief from this commissioner in the role of the police commission. and that's my biggest concern. i applaud, miss walker for all her work and service to the city, but i don't believe that she actually believes in the work of this body and that that's that's what gives me pause. and again, i can only go on what comments were provided to me today to and to the questions that i asked. thank you. supervisor safaí. i moved to reject the mayor's nomination for the reappointment of commissioner walker, yes. i

believe we can amend the motion to delete the word approving in in the motion in order to make the motion to reject the nomination for appointment. yes. and on that motion, supervisor chan, absent supervisor safaí safaí, vice chair walton i walton i the motion passes without objection, with supervisor chan being absent. thank you. motion to reject the appointment is approved. mr. clerk, please call item number seven. item number seven is the ordinance amending the public works code to streamline the enforcement of vending requirements and restrictions. clarifying vending permit applications and compliance requirements. thank you. and do we have someone, supervisor safaí, i'm sorry. this your thank. whoa thank you, director short for waiting, sorry for the

long delay. i appreciate you being here today, this legislation in, colleagues and public. i'm introducing some amendments to the street vending requirements and restrictions that will ensure, actually, that we have the right resources and enforce more effectively what actually is happening out on the streets of san francisco. the goal is to protect and encourage those who are vending with, with a lawful permit that are working in conjunction with our department. they've gone through the right channels, but the intent is to discourage the illegal street fencing that's happening. and after discussions with the department, after discussions with actual street vendors and small business owners and those that are actually on the ground doing the work, realize that as part of the process which is currently in in the code, we have to

provide due process. if there's someone on the street, we come up, we notice, notify them, do you have a vending permit? do you have actual receipts for the items that you're selling? and we have to give them some time. but the thing that we're putting forward, put, putting forward today is those warnings don't have to happen in perpetuity. and once you've given someone fair warning and once you can document that internally within the department that you've given an individual a warning, that warning should last for an extended period of time. so the vendors and the department can do the work. and there's no longer this cat and mouse game of they show up one day, they're back again on thursday, they're out doing the same thing over and over again. so the attempt of this is to close the loophole. we want to deal with the bad actors. we want to deal with the people that are fencing stolen items in san francisco. it hurts small businesses. it hurts the local economy. it hurts the overall vibe of san

francisco. so this is really about a sensible approach to, strengthening enforcement and restoring a safe environment to our ecosystem, so i appreciate, director short being here. did you want to add any comments? director short, and then i can talk a little bit about the permits. i mean, the amendments. good afternoon, chair walton, supervisor safaí carla short, director of san francisco public works, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. i do want to recognize i'm here with my colleague, alejandro del calvo, who is one of our lead inspectors out on the street performing this work day in and day out. and i just want to thank you, supervisor sup safaí, for introducing this amendment. we think that this will help make, our work to address the bad actors who are who are not

engaging in appropriate vending, and who are involved in fencing of stolen goods. it will allow us to be a little bit more efficient in the addressing of those individuals. and we will, of course, follow due process. and this will allow us to document our engagement and then not have to continually reengage in the same manner. so, just appreciate your support in this effort. we do want to support our permitted vendors. we have a very low cost, low barrier permit for people to vend who are vending in good faith and not fencing stolen goods, and we think this will help us support them as well as the small businesses. so i'm available for any questions. and alejandro is also here for any questions. thank you, thank you, thank you director. and i would just say really quickly what we're doing here is that once an individual is given a warning and the way we've written it is a verbal

warning, the department and the and the street permit inspectors are able to document that internally. once that documentation is made, the warning now lasts for 120 days, so that inspectors can come back. they can see that it's the same individual. they're able to document that, and they're able to enforce more quickly. and we think this is really going to have a significant impact on the number of bad actors. and i just want to say, as a continuation of some of the previous conversation, let's be clear, a lot of what we see on the streets of san francisco and people selling stolen items is this is organized crime. this is an organized crime network of individuals targeting stores, taking those items out onto the street, and fencing illegal stolen items. why do i know that? because i've spent the last three years working with the police department, the california retailers association, the naacp, united

food and commercial workers union, working with the stores like macy's and safeway and walgreens and cvs, target and what we found is that targeted items end up either out on the streets or on the internet. we had a bust, a police officers raided a home about three blocks from my house, and they had turned a bedroom into a mini walgreens or drugstore and were selling over the counter drugs and over the counter. i mean, excuse me, in cosmetics and they were able to document the individual had over $2 million worth of sales over a three year period. so and that's just one home. so this is another way to crack down on that, you'll see it at farmers markets. you'll see it on the commercial corridors. and we want to do everything we can to empower our street inspectors to do their job and not have to keep chasing

the same individuals over and over again. so that's what the intent of this legislation is here today. thank you. thank you chair. thank you so much. supervisor safaí, can we go to public comment, please? yes members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. are there any members of the public who like to make public comment on this matter? there are no speakers on this matter. thank you. seeing no speakers, public comment is now closed. supervisor safaí, what is your wish, so just to be clear, on page 14 and 15 we introduced the amendments. it talks about a verbal warning. in terms of the items, food, merchandise vending paraphernalia, it talks about how the department shall document in its records the date and time of the verbal warning was provided. and then it goes on to amend and say that within 120 days of the verbal warning,

the enforcement can happen in a much more, direct manner. if they cease to follow the orders of the inspectors. so that's all outlined on page 14, and 15 of the document. so i move to make those amendments as read into the record. just a quick question, supervisor safaí or, director, if you could answer this, i just saw a press release that mayor and senator wiener are working on something. do these amendments or does this legislation, is it arbitrary to what's being proposed, to your knowledge at this point? well, my understanding is and i can let the director add on, but my understanding is that is a very specific piece of legislation and targeting specific items. a commonly some of the items i've mentioned today over the counter drugs and cosmetics, it's things that might be identified from a walgreens, a safeway that legislation is going to go through the process. and it's a very it's a piece of but this is

about enforcement on our streets and whatever items. and as you know, chair, it doesn't cover stolen tools. and that's just one example of what we see out on the streets is, you know, contractors tools that have been stolen and there's a whole there's clothing, there's a whole host of items that are not covered by senator wiener's legislate motion, which still has to make its way through the legislature. and it could be an uphill battle. so that's that's one that's what it's designed it's and again that also what it does here. let's let's be clear for the record, this keeps the lead enforcers public works, street inspectors, that legislation that's being proposed brings police officers back to the forefront. so that's again that's a very different piece of legislation. thank you. supervisor. director shaw, did you want to add anything or. you

don't have to? i would just thank you. carla shaw, director of public works i would i would just add that i think that these are not contradict three, items so that this allows us to take action when we're enforcing around these issues. and if senator wiener's legislation passes, it will cover a subset of what this legislation allows us to do. thank you so much, mr. clerk, on the proposed amendments by supervisor safaí. can we get a roll call? vote please? yes. on the proposed amendments. supervisor chan, absent supervisor safaí. aye safaí. vice chair walton. aye walton i the motion passes without objection. with supervisor chan being absent. thank you. and those items? that's continued for one week. yeah. correct okay, so motion to approve. motion to continue the amended item to the june 10th.

yes. on the motion to continue the matter as amended to the june 10th meeting, supervisor chan, absent supervisor safaí i safaí i vice chair walton i walton i the motion passes without objection. thank you. motion passes to continue. mr. clerk, do we have any more business before us this afternoon? yes. i just wanted to provide a clarification. that item five and six will be, forwarded to the full board as as amended. and i believe we missed stating that, when we made the motion. thank you so much, that completes our agenda for today. thank you. we are adjourned.

>> [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. >> i don't think you need to be an expert to look around and see the increasing frequency of fires throughout california. they are continuing at an ever-increasing rate every summer, and as we all know, the drought continues and huge shortages of water right now. i don't think you have to be an expert to see the impact. when people create greenhouse gases, we are doing so by different activities like burning fossil fuels and letting off carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and we also do this with food waste.

when we waste solid food and leave it in the landfill, it puts methane gas into the atmosphere and that accelerates the rate at which we are warming our planet and makes all the effects of climate change worse. the good news is there are a lot of things that you can be doing, particularly composting and the added benefit is when the compost is actually applied to the soil, it has the ability to reverse climate change by pulling carbon out of the atmosphere and into the soil and the t radios. and there is huge amount of science that is breaking right now around that. >> in the early 90s, san francisco hired some engineers to analyze the material san francisco was sending to landfill. they did a waste characterization study, and that showed that most of the material san francisco was sending to

landfill could be composted. it was things like food scraps, coffee grounds and egg shells and sticks and leaves from gardening. together re-ecology in san francisco started this curbside composting program and we were the first city in the country to collect food scraps separately from other trash and turn them into compost. it turns out it was one of the best things we ever did. it kept 2.5 million tons of material out of the landfill, produced a beautiful nutrient rich compost that has gone on to hundreds of farms, orchards and vineyards. so in that way you can manage your food scraps and produce far less methane. that is part of the solution. that gives people hope that we're doing something to slow down climate change. >> i have been into organic farming my whole life. when we started planting trees, it was natural to have compost

from re-ecology. compost is how i work and the soil biology or the microbes feed the plant and our job as regenerative farmers is to feed the microbes with compost and they will feed the plant. it is very much like in business where you say take care of your employees and your employees will take carolinas of your customers. the same thing. take care of the soil microbes and soil life and that will feed and take care of the plants. >> they love compost because it is a nutrient rich soil amendment. it is food for the soil. that is photosynthesis. pulling carbon from the atmosphere. pushing it back into the soil where it belongs. and the roots exude carbon into the soil. you are helping turn a farm into a carbon sink. it is an international model. delegations from 135 countries have come to study this program. and it actually helped inspire a new law in california, senate bill 1383.

which requires cities in california to reduce the amount of compostable materials they send to landfills by 75% by 2025. and san francisco helped inspire this and this is a nation-leading policy. >> because we have such an immature relationship with nature and the natural cycles and the carbon cycles, government does have to step in and protect the commons, which is soil, ocean, foryes, sir, and so forth. -- forest, and so fors. we know that our largest corporations are a significant percentage of carbon emission, and that the corporate community has significant role to play in reducing carbon emissions. unfortunately, we have no idea and no requirement that they disclose anything about the carbon footprint, the core operation and sp360 stands for the basic notion that large

corporations should be transparent about the carbon footprint. it makes all the sense in the world and very common sense but is controversial. any time you are proposing a policy that is going to make real change and that will change behavior because we know that when corporations have to disclose and be transparent and have that kind of accountability, there is going to be opposition. >> we have to provide technical assistance to comply with the state legislation sb1383 which requires them to have a food donation program. we keep the edible food local. and we are not composting it because we don't want to compost edible food. we want that food to get eaten within san francisco and feed folks in need. it is very unique in san francisco we have such a broad and expansive education program for the city. but also that we have partners

in government and nonprofit that are dedicated to this work. at san francisco unified school district, we have a sustainability office and educators throughout the science department that are building it into the curriculum. making it easy for teachers to teach about this. we work together to build a pipeline for students so that when they are really young in pre-k, they are just learning about the awe and wonder and beauty of nature and they are connecting to animals and things they would naturally find love and affinity towards. as they get older, concepts that keep them engaged like society and people and economics. >> california is experiencing many years of drought. dry periods. that is really hard on farms and is really challenging. compost helps farms get through these difficult times. how is that? compost is a natural sponge that attracts and retains water. and so when we put compost around the roots of plants, it

holds any moisture there from rainfall or irrigation. it helps farms make that corner and that helps them grow for food. you can grow 30% more food in times of drought in you farm naturally with compost. farms and cities in california are very hip now to this fact that creating compost, providing compost to farms helps communities survive and get through those dry periods. >> here is the thing. soil health, climate health, human health, one conversation. if we grow our food differently, we can capture all that excess carbon in the atmosphere and store it in unlimited quantities in the soil, that will create nutrient dense foods that will take care of most of our civilized diseases. so it's one conversation. people have to understand that they are nature. they can't separate. we started prowling the high

plains in the 1870s and by the 1930s, 60 year, we turned it into a dust bowl. that is what ignorance looks like when you don't pay attention to nature. nature bats last. so people have to wake up. wake up. compost. >> it is really easy to get frustrated because we have this belief that you have to be completely sustainable 24/ your. it is not about being perfect. it is about making a change here, a change there in your life. maybe saying, you know what? i don't have to drive to that particular place today. today i am going to take the bus or i'm going to walk. it is about having us is stainable in mind. that is -- it is about having sustainability in mind. that is how we move the dial. you don't have to be perfect all the time. >> san francisco has been and will continue to be one of the greener cities because there are communities who care about protecting a special ecosystem

and habitat. thinking about the history of the ohlone and the native and indigenous people who are stewards of this land from that history to now with the ambitious climate action plan we just passed and the goals we have, i think we have a dedicated group of people who see the importance of this place. and who put effort into building an infrastructure that actually makes it possible. >> we have a long history starting with the gold rush and the anti-war activism and that is also part of the environmental movement in the 60s and 70s. and of course, earth day in 1970 which is huge. and i feel very privileged to work for the city because we are on such a forefront of environmental issues, and we get calls from all over the world really to get information. how do cities create waste programs like they do in san francisco. we are looking into the few which you are and we want innovation. we want solutions.