applying and looking forward to hearing from you for sure. so good morning, supervisors. thank you for your time and presence today. my name is aaron yen and i'm here in hopes of being reappointed. to seat ten for dcyf oversight advisory committee, it's been an honor to have served this in this seat for the past two years as a very proud, born and raised san francisco native and passionate youth worker for close to 20 years, i have a greater understanding of reverence for the mission that this seat holds , i've dedicated the core of my professional experience, towards providing pivotal and foundational opportunities that address social and racial inequities while uplifting the voices of san francisco's most marginalized youth and families. i devoted my collegiate studies to earning a ba in child adolescent development with a focus on youth and family services from sf state, and my

work towards building community investment that emphasizes education and human connection. if given this opportunity to remain in this seat, i will continue to exemplify the character, accountability and leadership that the community expects from a dedicated civil servant. thank you again for your time and consideration. i'm. i'll be happy to answer any questions around my experience and desire to remain in the seat. thank you guys so much. well, thank you, so much for your service thus far and for your willingness to continue to serve. it's greatly, greatly appreciated. and i don't see any questions from my colleagues. i think we're all aware of your excellent work and just excited you're willing to continue. so i'm going to open this up, item. oh wait, we can do it after public comment. okay, i'm going to open this item up to public comment for sure. thank you guys so much. 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. there will be a soft chime when you have 30s left and a louder chime when your time has expired. are there any speakers who would like to make comment on this matter? i do not see any public commenters on this matter. public comment is now closed. supervisor safaí i just want to thank aaron for his hard work as somebody that obviously our job is to be everywhere in the city at many different events that are related to children and family, and i can't think of one that i have not seen aaron present, visible and actively engaged with the community and families. so very excited for his reappointment today and just appreciate his service and work to our city. thank you, supervisor walton. thank you, chair ronen. and now just keep it simple and say ditto to supervisor safaí comments. thank you. will one of you like to do the honors? if we can make a recommendation to send this item to the full board with positive recommendation. if a roll call, vote yes on the motion to appoint aaron yen to see ten on

that motion. vice chair walton, a walton i supervisor safaí i safaí i chair. ronen i ronen i the motion passes without objection. motion passes unanimously. congratulations, commissioner. yen thank you, mr. clerk, can you please read item number two? item number two is a hearing to consider appointing two members. term's ending january 15th, 2025. one member term ending january 15th, 2026, and nine members terms ending january 15th, 2020 to the san francisco health authority. thank you so much. and we have many applicants today who are here, so i will call you up one by one. and you can stay there. and if you could keep your comments to around two minutes, that would be greatly appreciated. and we're going to start with sean cheng. good

morning supervisors, my name is jen zhang. i'm a ceo of chinese hospital, and it was an honor to serve the san francisco health plan. the board of trust, board of directors for six years. and i'm hoping to be reappointed for a third term. it's very important to have some cisco health plan there for our low income, community. and then i as a provider, i actually served, icu in san francisco health plan patients for more than 20 years. it's very important to me to make sure san francisco health plan is, sustained and continue to provide quality, safe, timely , effective and equitable, health care services to our san francisco health plan members. thank you very much. thank you so much. thank you for your service and for your willingness

to continue to serve and for everything you do for chinese hospital. we appreciate you a lot. thank you. next, we'll hear from roland pickens. good morning, chair roland supervisors walton safaí i'm roland pickens. i am here to request your consideration of reappointment to the board seat for the san francisco health plan, representing san francisco general hospital in the department of public health. i am a i am a 35 year resident of san francisco, have spent most of my professional career here and really been a part of the changing health care landscape in san francisco. so the ability to serve on the board of san francisco health plan is both a privilege and an honor to represent some of our most vulnerable, underserved residents. we in san francisco are fortunate to be part of what they call the two plan model,

where where there's a for profit commercial plan model, which is anthem blue cross, but then there's a local initiative where government came together, along with community organizations, to form an oversight board to make sure our most vulnerable residents get the care that they need. and with the oncoming rollout of the governor's claim program, it's even more important that we continue to have that close collaboration between both our government and community based organizations. so i'm happy to ask you for your support in this reappointment. wonderful. and, you know, i just want to say, just appreciate you and your long, distinguished career at dph and also all the work that you did to get laguna honda back on track. we just, really, really glad that you are serving in this capacity and willing to continue to serve. so thank you so much. appreciate you. next we have, doctor joseph

wu. is he here? oh, there he is. good morning, supervisors, i'm doctor joseph wu. i'm an emergency physician representing the san francisco marin medical society. in my other life, i represent and a and work for astana health. astana, owns three medical groups in the city. access care, jade healthcare, and also amg. and we represent the independent doctors and clinic doctors there, primarily we serve a, a an asian population. we kind of view ourselves as a safety net, for those folks, particularly the seniors. and, i'm proud to be able to do that, i'm. this will be my second term. i'm asking for reappointment. thank you. thank you so much. and thank you for your service and willingness to continue to serve . next, we're hearing from steven fuccaro. doctor steven

fuccaro. hello. hello, chairperson walton and thank you very much to supervisor safaí and, we and we are very much appreciate your time. i've had the honor to ask to be reappointed. i've had the honor of serving on the san francisco health plan board for 15 years, been chairman of the board for the last nine years. and as you've heard from these other extraordinary individuals, it's an amazing entity where we all work together here to try and really provide the optimal care to the medically underserved of san francisco. i am a physician. i've been practicing in san francisco for the last 40 years. i also was a trainee here at the university of california in san francisco. i feel very committed to the underserved, very committed to the mission of medi-cal, and we are lucky to have a fabulous ceo, yolanda richardson, the former, covid vaccine czar of this state of

california. and she's an amazing ceo and she's leading us in great directions. you heard from roland about cal aim california advance and innovating in medi-cal. we're going to be developing a d snip, which is the dual eligible special needs program, which will come on board on 2025, where we'll be having wraparound services for those individuals who have both medi-cal and medicare. the organization is extraordinarily well run. it's an honor to be ahead of the board. and i just would ask for your consideration for reappointment. thank you so very much. thank you so much. and thank you for your willingness to continue to serve. i have to say, this is the first time that i've been on the rules committee, where we're hearing these seats, and it it gives me so much pride and excitement that our lowest income residents are so well served by by this board. so thank you. thank you so much, next we'll hear from nora lisa cooper. good morning. good

morning. so my name is doctor nora lisa cooper. i am a registered nurse at san francisco general hospital. i have been there now for 16 years. super excited to have the opportunity to serve on the board. i have a phd in nursing with a concentration in health policy, and so my research looks at the nexus between policy, practice and patient outcomes, be it at the state, local or institutional level. i am joining a cast of phenomenal folks already on the board, and i'm hoping to be able to contribute both my expertise as a researcher, but also as a nurse. i have been at san francisco general my entire career, and i am committed to serving this community and making sure that they have optimal care. and so anything that i can do to help my patients, whether it's direct patient care or advocacy, i am

here to support that. phenomenal. thank you so much, doctor cooper. we're so lucky to have you in this role. thank you . and now we have two, i believe new applicants, starting with abigail lawrence anderson in. good morning. i'm nina maruyama. i'm the chief officer, compliance and regulatory affairs with san francisco health plan. and i'm abigail alderson and dew point cellucci, who are not here this morning, but they are, as you said, brand new members of our board. they were elected by our member advisory committee. so we're so fortunate to have actual members of our health plan, medi-cal beneficiaries serving on our board, so they were just appointed, to the member advisory committee in january of this year. so they are brand new to the process, and i regret that they could not be here this morning, but we are looking forward to having them join our board. as you can see, we have

such an amazing group of people and we're so impressed and so lucky and fortunate to have all of these board members under on our authority. wonderful. well, thank you for coming to speak on their behalf. and i just, you know, just to say a couple, the fact that abigail is an ihss worker and just a pawn is, a relief counselor at progress foundation says a lot. and i think that those perspectives and experience will will certainly be an addition to the board. so thank you so much. thank you. great. so if my colleagues have no comments, i want to open this item up for public comment. 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 speakers who would like to comment on this matter? there does not be a pair. there does not appear to be any speakers on this matter, then public comment is now closed. colleague i would like to make a

motion to send the following applicants to the full board with positive recommendation. j&j or jen psaki for seat two. roland pickens for seat three. joseph wu for seat seven. steven figaro for seat eight, nor lisa, nor lisa cooper for seat nine, abigail lawrence alderson for seat ten. and joseph warren, geology for seat 11, yes. on that motion to recommend, those persons to the listed seats. vice chair walton a walton. i supervisor safaí safaí i chair. ronen i ronen i the motion passes without objection. motion passes unanimously. congratulations everyone. thank you so much, mr. clerk, can you please read item number three? item number three is an ordinance amending the administrative code to streamline contracting for vision zero transportation projects by authorizing the

municipal transportation agency and the department of public works to expedite contracts by waiving applications of the environmental code and provisions related to competitive bidding and equal benefits. local business enterprise utilization and other requirements for construction work and professional and other services related to vision zero projects for a period of three years. okay, great. and this i believe you heard this last week when i wasn't here and supervisor chan had, an amendment that she wanted me to introduce on her behalf, which i'm happy to do, that amendment, simply states that by no later than august 15th, 2025, and every year thereafter, the department shall submit to the board of supervisors, the clerk of the board of supervisors, and the comptroller, a report listing all projects procured under the section 6.78, including a description of the project's scope of work and the total project contract amount for the prior prior fiscal year.

so i will make a motion to vote on after public comment to add this amendment. and but before opening public comment, supervisor safaí. thank you. chair, we had a lot of conversation on friday, heard from the department themselves about actually how much time this would save and, you know, there's some really important aspects of the law that we're asking to be set aside, and so what we talked about and i talked about this with, supervisor chan along with the head of the, the lbe, i don't know the exact i want to say the wrong name, but it's the it's the working group that works with the city administrator office on contracting and work in the city. and so one of the

things that we've asked for and, and supervisor chan is open to this amendment is for the department to put together a go through an rfq process, essentially put a list of qualified vendors together in advance, give everyone the opportunity. lbb's everyone have the opportunity to follow the guidelines that are there. then we have a set list of people that can be drawn from. they've gone through a competitive process. we're still respecting the laws, the rules, all the hard work that we've done to put in place for microbes. lbb's all of the labor code, all of the prevailing wage, all of the different work that we did with citywide pla, all that will be respected and adhered to. and i think that's a better path forward, than just completely throwing out the baby with the bathwater. and i don't think in any way that was the intent. i think we're trying to move as quickly as we can, given the amount of injuries and hazards

that exist in the city, but we don't want to undermine a lot of the hard work we've put into for years in this city. so we put forward a there's been a request put forward to draft an amendment that would say that they would put together a qualified list of vendors, honoring the process. once that's done, then we can streamline the selection process , because then there's a list of qualified vendors that the department of public works would pull from on these projects, i don't think that amendment will be ready today. in fact, i know it won't be, but i think it can be done very quickly. and we should have it ready for next week. it seems. so i would okay. i just wanted to put that into the record. i know you weren't here, and i know you've been communicating with supervisor chan's office. supervisor chan was was open to that. okay. understood she had some good conversations. i understand with miguel galarza, from the community, so i feel comfortable

with that. the only thing. yeah so i'll leave it at that. and i know that supervisor walton also had, a comment or question or two. i think. i don't have any comments. you're good. okay okay. so then let me just i mean, that works out well because this amendment that supervisor chan has to sit for a week requires that we sit. oh. it doesn't, but we're fine with having it sit for a week, i haven't talked to supervisor chan about these amendments. we were trying to get clarity, about about who would lead on it. well, we were trying to get clarity what your amendment was going to be and weren't able to do so. but now that i understand it, that is good to know. so, the only okay, then the only other thing i would add, if supervisor walton doesn't have any thing to add, then i would say i think it would be also good to understand the scope of. and i think we had that conversation last week, the scope of the potential projects and how we're defining vision zero, because we don't want it

to be broadly applied and outside of the scope of vision zero, my understanding is that, mta, issued a list of projects that would be impacted, so there was there is a list in the record that maybe you can go over before next week. well, no, we talked about that. but i don't know if that was the finite list. i think it was potential. i'm not sure. mr. ramos in the crowd. let's let's call him up and find out. good morning. chair ronen. supervisor safaí. supervisor walton hoy ramos, local government affairs manager for the sfmta. and supervisor safaí is correct. that was it wasn't a finite list. it was just an example of some of the projects that we would roll through. so, that is a correct characterization of what the list was. and department of public works also

submitted their list as well, which i think might actually be more applicable in this regard, our list that we submitted was just, communicating the spirit with which we were hoping to act with this legislation. i think that's a great clarification. thank you for that. okay if there's. yes, if i can add one more word of clarification, what the legislation does as introduced is it would authorize the departments to expedite these contracts that meet certain criteria, wouldn't require them to it would authorize them to and to the extent that there's a list in the file, i think those are examples of the types of projects that would likely be eligible for expediting. doesn't mean they are necessarily. it doesn't mean they'll be approved. it doesn't mean there won't be other contracts, but they are just examples of the types of things that the agencies would have the authority to expedite. very helpful. thank you, now, completely understood, supervisor walton, thank you,

chair ronen. and again, and i want to thank, the city attorney's office and mta for clarifying, but it does not specify the projects. and that's always been my concern because mta sometimes pops up in community, and approves projects or presents projects without community input. but after hearing about the, the possibility of including an rfp process on the work, i feel a little bit more comfortable about doing that because i would rather have a specific list that says only these projects, but most certainly, appreciate everyone working together to come up with a compromise. wonderful. and i, as a co-sponsor of this legislation, i, you know, i, i am continuously, saddened by the fact that we see more deaths every year, through traffic, incidents and really all these

vision zero projects couldn't come fast enough for me, it does concern me that we are we have quite a backup in, in getting these projects done. and i do think this legislation will be helpful in moving forward. and i appreciate it, it looks like the amendments that are being developed in the works. so with that, i'd like to open this item up for public comment. yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. are there any speakers on this matter? please approach the podium and if you are going to speak on this item, it would be appreciated. if you line up at this time, you may proceed, good morning supervisors. my name is tricia gregory. i am co-owner of heavyweight trucking , a micro company in the bayview for the last 22 years. i'm also a member of the san francisco latino black and builders association, and a member of the

lba advisory committee. i'm here today to ask you to put a pause on the amendments of vision zero projects, not because we are against making our streets safe, but because where is the data that this approach expedites the contract contracting process? because where was the outreach to the lba advisory committee, or the leaders in the community who could give input to get these projects done and still incorporate us? lbb's because vision zero meets with at least 70 stakeholders, and not one is an engineering or construction group to get input, and the most important thing is that slbs are the other san francisco small businesses that most politicians and city agencies seem to forget. in the city of san francisco that we are the we are the ones who employ our community, not to give them just a job, but a career in the trades. we are the ones who give the formerly incarcerated a

second chance. we are the ones who support other small businesses and put money back into our community. so again, i ask you to please put a pause on this amendment to reach out to the leaders in the community so that all of us in san francisco can win. thank you. thank you. hi, my name is lasagna mansfield . i'm a native, born and raised in san francisco, third generation asian, i'm the proud owner of mansfield. mansfield construction cleanup company, site support for which i also put the community to work. i want to thank you in advance for hearing me and hearing my comments in regards to streamlining. we discussed this prior before this even came out, and we were promised that this would not affect the micro community or companies. as as a native, many of the city officials have access to hold on

and not give up on san francisco. we did. we stayed. we continue to pay taxes. we continue to pay rents. but what did the city do or think on behalf of us? not to consider us. not to talk to us. we're holding on. we need your support. please pause on the amendment and think about us in regards to moving forward. thank you. good morning, supervisors. i'm john trasvina, district 11 home owner and native. i'm upcoming here to oppose the legislation. i'm heartened to hear that that we're talking about compromises and doing doing some additional work because obviously waiving civil rights laws, waiving protections is not something we should do every day. and i don't think

it's something we should do at all. i haven't heard as the as the colleagues have have spoken about, what's the connection between having in our law protection, protecting city workers against sex harassment by contractors, lbe a level playing field and prevailing wage? why are those barriers to getting vision zero done on an expedited manner? i haven't heard the data and i don't know whether whether it's out there, this law, this bill as it is now written, would waive in 14 b and administrative code section six, some very, very important protections for women workers. even what you've described as coming up with a list of, of contractors that wouldn't protect women workers or our city workers against sex harassment by contractors that is waived under this legislation. so i urge you to look at that. second is that this should not have been sped up in the first place. president peskin waived the rule 3.22. this is the very reason why you

have 3.22 setting. putting aside a bill for 30 days on major city policy. if waiving civil rights is not major city policy, i don't know what is so i i'm pleased to see the, working behind the scenes, and we look forward to hearing more progress on this. thank you. hello, board. my name is takisha alicia. i'm the founder of shanda consulting llc. we are a local business out of san francisco, and i want to echo what everyone else has said today and also with when it comes to streamlining is that if we could involve cmed, the city's attorney's office, as well as representatives from the small business community. before we take this to the boc or legislature, thank you. thank you. are there any additional speakers on this matter? madam chair, there is no additional speakers. okay. supervisor walton. thank you. chair. ronen

so i'm still not clear, if the lbw community is actually had the opportunity to feel like they've been a part of this conversation, or if they're in supportive of moving forward, i know one of my major concerns expressed last week was the fact that our community was left out. and i want to make sure that we're not putting policies in place that do not allow for our our businesses to be supported and participate and receive the resources and the benefit of any projects in our community. so i'm still confused at where we are on that. supervisor safaí. thank you, supervisor walton. so so we did speak to miguel galarza from the lbw advisory committee, we have had conversations also. he had conversations with the sponsor of the legislation. and we've agreed that we will make an

amendment that will say, we will ask public works to put together a an rfq request for qualifications. it will follow all the procedures that are outlined. once they have that list, then they can proceed to move in an expedited manner. so actually we have a representative here from public works, chair, if we could call it public works, is that okay with you, chair. absolutely. i think that's bruce. good morning, supervisors. bruce robertson deputy director of finance and admin with public works. thank you. so what we're contemplating, bruce, is an amendment that would say that would ask you all to go through an rfq process, request for qualifications. that's what i'm calling it. you might call it something different, but it will allow everyone the opportunity to respond. once you have a list of vendors, however extensive, that is based on the parameters

that we have here, then you can pull from that list as projects present themselves, but can you talk about that for a moment so that the that the public can hear you. correct, through the chair? supervisor safaí, based on our understanding of the amendment, we would create an rfq and then develop a pool where we could then do a mini solicitation, where we could then make sure in our mini solicitation process, we would outline the project. we would outline what licensing requirements were there and then really shorten the time period for people and firms to respond to that solicitation, we have two ways of currently doing an emergency. we have chapter 660 for when public works declares an emergency, and then chapter 6.76, which is the recently reapproved homeless emergency declaration. and under both of those, we've developed pretty stringent policies. and one of the things we do is we do post on the city website, and we do work with cmd to make sure that the broader context in community

is aware of those opportunities. so we do have some procedures in place that we would follow to ensure that the community and all potential bidders are aware of that, and one thing i would mention over the course of the week, we did look at the previous few years and there's been about 27 projects that have had some form of vision, zero scope, and 86% of those. the prime contractor has been an ll.b. so our outreach to lbb's and going through, you know, the processes that we've put in place are certainly working to contract with the community for these types of projects with that, happy to answer any additional questions. thank you. and through the chair. so i saw the 6.76 that you follow. you required to have at least two bids. you're required to notice, the community. this would be different than that. this would be you would be following the procedures going through an rfq. once you have a qualified list, then you can pull from that list as projects become available.

that that's that's how we're envisioning envisioning the amendment that that public works would do an rfq. and in fact, we've had this conversation. it's why i voted against i was one of the people that voted against the emergency authority for hsh because we pushed them on this. we asked them to put an rfq together, and all they gave us was stonewalling, and i think this will help because public works works with a lot of different departments. this will set a good precedent, because if we want to expedite, we can expedite. but we need to still follow all the procedures that have been outlined going through prevailing wage, following, all of the rules that have been laid in place that this body and many bodies before us have laid the foundation for. i think that's an important we don't want to change that. personally. i don't want to change that precedent. i don't think anyone on this body does or the sponsor. i think the idea is we have not done a good job as a city to lower the

number of, of fatalities. and so that is an important goal to achieve and move quicker on. however where we can't do it, we can't pit the two against one another. and i think the right way to do it. and i'm hopeful that with this amendment, we should be able to have very clear language that you all can follow, sounds like you're already starting to do it. maybe formalizing it just a little bit more and then getting your list of qualified vendors. so you don't have to call each time. right? that's what wewe did then union square with adult probation. they had a list of qualified vendors. they were able to put that out very quickly. they pulled from that list, and then we were able to get people housed and on the road to addiction recovery. i think we can do it. if it's been done in the city before, i think we can do it in this instance as well and still achieve the goals of vision zero. do you have anything you want to add, no. outside of what i said. so does

that sound a little bit clearer to you what we're contemplating in terms of the amendment about having, a list of qualified vendors that you can pull from once you've. yeah we'll work, internally with our contract administration team and develop a list that will meet the policy objectives from this body. and we're ready to help successfully deliver these projects in a timely manner. okay. thank you. thank you. sir, through the chair to supervisor walton. does that sound? is that a little bit more clear? i mean, in terms of does that sound better to you? i just want to hear what your response it sounds like we're continuing this for a week so we can still have conversation. right. and i just want to say to the community, once this was made aware, once this was on the agenda, we can't speak to one another as committee members. we can only speak in here. otherwise we're breaking, sunshine rules. so a lot of this is happening in real time. and so once we heard the calls, once we heard from your leadership, we started to dive in more and work with our city attorney's, the departments, as well as

representatives from lbe community, from the lbe advisory, group. so there'll be another week. we will we will circle back with them and the sponsor. and i think hopefully you all feel more comfortable. thank you. and i appreciate, you trying to find a solution that works for everyone. supervisor safaí, thank you for that. and with that, if we could have or. yes, if we could have a vote on the motion to amend on the motion to amend, the proposals made by chair ronen on behalf of supervisor chan, vice chair walton i. walton i supervisor safaí i safaí i chair ronen, i ronen i the motion passes without objection. the motion passes unanimously. and then if we can, continue this item to,

next week's meeting on june 17th on the motion to continue the matter, as amended to june 17th, vice chair walton a walton i supervisor safaí i safaí i chair . ronen i ronen i the motion passes without objection. motion passes without objection, mr. clerk, can you please read item number four? item number four is an ordinance amending the public works code to streamline the enforcement of vending requirements and restrictions, clarifying vending permit applications and compliance requirements. and, supervisor safaí, this is your amendment to my legislation, so i don't know if you'd like to speak to it. this was a hostile amendment. just kidding. yes. no, i just we spoke about it last week. i think it sat on now for a week based on the amendments that we've put forward in terms of the, street vending, essentially, and the idea was

and i said this last week, i'll just be very brief, is that once notice is given to people that are on the streets illegally vending, that can't produce a permit, that can't produce receipts, we have to follow due process. we have to give them notice that's required, but what's not required and what we're trying and we're closing the loophole with this legislation is we don't have to keep coming back and giving notice every single time. once we've given notice under this amendment, that notice will last for 120 days, as long as public works is able to, and they will document that notice has been given the date to the person, so on. and we feel like this is going to be a very, very effective way from listening to the street inspectors themselves, talking to the small businesses, talking to the legal vendors, this will be effective way to close the loophole, to really get at the people that

are on the streets, selling illegally, fencing stolen goods. that's what we're trying to stop the illegal fencing of stolen goods. so thank you, colleagues, i think the amendments have sat for a week. i don't have anything else additional to add. great thank you. and can we please open this item up for public comment? yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item can line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. are there any speakers who would like to comment on this matter? there are no speakers on this matter. public comment is now closed. would you like to do the honors supervisor safaí yes. thank you. would you be like to be added back as a co-sponsor? i'm just kidding. thank you for allowing me to lead on this. i appreciate it. and i just want to say thank you. supervisor ronen, when we originally introduced this a few years ago, we had this conversation in committee. we wanted to give time to allow for the process to be less, to really respect the

legal vendors that were there, but also go after the illegal, vendors of selling of stolen goods, this is tightening that you've been a great partner in it every step of the way. so i appreciate your support and work. and i know that the mission is one of the areas in the city that you see that happens in the excelsior, happens in un plaza, happens in fisherman's wharf. so we really want to do our best to, to see this loophole closed. and i appreciate your work and working with our office. thank you, are you going to make the motion? yes, i make a motion to, send this item to the full board with positive recommendation. roll call. vote yes on that motion. vice chair walton, i walton i supervisor safaí i safaí i chair ronen i ronen i the motion passes without objection passes unanimously. mr. clerk, can you please read item number five? item number five is ordinance amending the municipal election code to update the qualifications and procedures

for the translation of transliteration of the names of candidates for local office in chinese character based name to appear on the ballot. wonderful. and we have director answer. good morning. good morning. providers, so today the department is requesting the rules committee to approve amendments to municipal elections code section 401. messy. section 401 sets the criteria for candidates to meet when requesting chinese character based names to appear on ballots during the nomination period for local offices. the proposed amendments will align the mec with state law regarding candidates needing to demonstrate their use of a requested chinese character based name for the two years prior to filing nomination documents. currently, the mec requires candidates for local offices to demonstrate established use of a requested chinese character based name and the mec does not set a time frame for the use of the name. in comparison, state law

requires candidates for federal and state offices to provide documentation of their use of a requested chinese character based name in the public sphere for two years. relatedly in october 2023, the board of supervisors adopted adopted a resolution urging the department to implement a two year time frame for candidates for local offices to demonstrate their use of a requested name. subsequently, the department established a policy that candidates for local offices provide documentation that they have used the name in the public sphere for the two years prior to their relevant nomination periods. these amendments also established two declarations for candidates who were given chinese character based names at birth, and cannot provide documentation regarding the names. one declaration requires a family member to attest that a candidate was given a chinese character based name at birth. the second declaration allows candidates to attest they received a name at birth and cannot obtain a declaration from a family member. next, these mec

amendments clarify that the department reviews requested names during their relevant nomination periods. the amendments also clarify the department will consider any requested name as being final only upon the completion of the of the prescribed ten day public examination periods that follow the nomination deadlines for local offices, as required. under state law and mec section 590, a this ten day public examination period is a time when anyone can challenge a candidate's requested name, including by seeking a writ from the superior court regarding the printing of the name on the ballot. and at this point, i can take any questions from the members. wonderful. thank you so much. any questions? colleagues? seeing none. i think that was a great explanation. thank you. we'll open this item up for public comment. members of the public wish to speak on an assignment to speak at this time , each speaker will be allowed two minutes. are there any speakers who like to comment on this matter? there are no speakers for this matter. public

comment is now closed. i would like to make a motion to send this item to the full board with positive recommendation on. yes, on the motion to recommend. vice chair walton i, walton i supervisor safaí safaí i chair ronen i ronen i. the motion passes without objection. motion passes unanimously. can you please read item number six? item number six is an ordinance amending the municipal election code to provide that the names of supporters and opponents of a local ballot measure submitted to the voters be listed in the ballot statement or question for each local measure, except when including such names will cause there to be more than six ballot cards for the election. hello, wonderful. hello again, director arts. thank you, so go to the next one. what? oh victor, could you put the. we got a slide, can we have the slide, please? thank

you. great. thank you. all right, go to the second one. all right. so the purpose of this proposed amendment to the meek, section 510 is to allow the city to opt out of printing the names of supporters and opponents with local ballot measures. if not, printing these names avoids the november ballot needing to exceed six cards. go to the next one. underlying this meek amendment is assembly bill 1416, which requires the printing of the names of supporters and opponents on ballot labels for local measures. unless the county's board of supervisors opts out. the san francisco board of supervisors previously opted out of ab 1416 via ordinance for any election conducted in fiscal year 2324, which essentially meant opting out for the march primary election. the department's current request to the board to opt out is related to the expected large number of local measures that will appear on the november 2024 ballot. the department's request is limited to whether opting out of

printing the names of supporters and opponents will prevent the ballot from exceeding six cards. if not printing, the names would still result in a ballot with more than six cards. the department would then print the names of the supporters and opponents, then slide four. the three images on this slide show the increased space on the ballot card needed to print the names of the supporters and opponents. the first image on the left is a space that two measures, one state and one local, needed on a ballot card. before the enactment of ab 1416, the middle image shows the extra space needed for the one state measure to list supporters and opponents. the third image shows the extra space needed when both measures list the supporters and opponents. the issue is not only the space required for stating the supporters and opponents, but also how the text aligns with the timing marks on the sides of the ballot. the timing marks are the vertically arranged squares that appear on both sides of the ballot. the extra text on the ballot label will require the voting target,

which is the yes or no question to shift successively lower for each measure, and in line with these timing marks. all right. number five. this slide provides another view of the space the supporters and opponents would feel on a ballot card. the number of measures that would likely fit on one side decreases from 6 to 4. all right. six. the department estimates that listing supporters and opponents on the ballot would decrease the number of measures that can fit on a card by 33. instead of printing 12 measures on one card, we can likely fit eight measures. this means if the november ballot has a high number of local measures, the printing of the names of supporters and opponents will likely add at least one additional card to the ballot number seven. well, six card ballot will slow the processing of ballots. a ballot greater than six cards will significantly impact many election related operations, as, for instance, the department's ballot printing vendor would need to modify and slow down its processes for assembling vote by mail ballots. the united states postal service would need to modify how it processes how it

processes outgoing and return vote by mail ballots due to the weight and size of the envelopes, and the department would need to manually process the possible 400,000 return vote by mail ballots, including the hand opening each envelope. due to the limitations of the department's ballot processing equipment. number eight with the with the expected high turnout in the november election, even even if the ballot is limited, limited to six cards, the department still expects needing at least one extra week to process and count ballots compared to the time needed to process ballots for the recent march primary election. every incremental one card increase greater than six cards will significantly impact and slow the counting of ballots and the release of election results. however, again, if opting out would still require more than six cards, the department will then print the names of supporters and opponents of local measures on the ballot. then, in conclusion, for these reasons, the department is requesting the board to opt out of listing supporters and opponents with local measures, if doing so would avoid a ballot

needing more than six cards for the upcoming november election. i can take any questions. thanks for the very clear presentation. any questions? colleagues? no? great. we will open this item up for public comment. 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 speakers who would like to provide comment on this matter? there are no speakers on this matter. okay, public comment is now closed and sorry, just one quick question. so under ab 1416 we must list supporters and opponents of state measures. but not local measures and local and but we can opt out of local but we cannot opt out of state. correct. okay, okay. so it's just so interesting and so, depending you won't know whether or not it'll exceed six cards until we know exactly how many

local measures we'll have. exactly. got it. so interesting. all the ramifications. well, thanks. yeah. no, no. thank you. okay. oh. supervisor safaí so are you advocating for there to be opponents and proponents on the ballot on, on on the ballot? i couldn't really tell from your presentation. so state law like you were arguing for it and then you said it's going to like decrease the ability to process. and can you explain. so six so six cards is a significant number for us as far as our processes are concerned. so and we know that if we print the supporters and opponents for local measures, we know that's going to increase the amount of real estate on the, on the cards. yeah. and so if not printing the supporters and opponents for local measures means we don't go into a seventh, eighth or ninth card, then that's what we're asking to do. but if but if we can't stop

going beyond six cards anyway, then the department will print the supporters and opponents for local measures on the ballot, and this is required by state law, correct? got it. okay and if not, are you done? yeah i what for each additional card. that's printed i'm curious what the cost is to the city. it it depends. it's around, we factor around 800 to $850,000 per card, and it includes also the extra handling and process and the work, but if we go into, like, an 8 or 9 card ballot, that's we don't know the cost yet because we don't quite yet know the amount of manual handling of the ballots that we'll have to do. we're trying to modify our equipment, actually, and as is our print vendor, to accommodate card ballots beyond six cards, but usually it's around $850,000 per ballot card. and have you noticed or do you have any idea

the impact on voting, like if, if there's more cards, does that impact turnout in any way that i'm sure that's extremely hard to analyze, but i'm curious if you if there's been any correlation that you've noticed, i don't from my experience, i don't think the number of ballot cards affects turnout, but i do think the number of ballot cards affects the amount of contested measures that voters actually vote on. yeah, they look they they'll look for a contest. they, they want to vote on, and they'll leave the rest of the cards blank. and that's one of the issues that we'll have is that we'll have these, you know, at least five, up to six or more cards. but the number of votes cast for each contest and measure will be different. and then if you remember, in november 2020, i think we had a four card ballot, 4 or 5 card ballot. and more people voted for a local measure than they voted for the presidential contest. and so our turnout was actually based on on voting for a measure versus the presidential contest. and that will happen more that that

variety of voting will happen more with, with more cards involved in the voting. so fascinating. thank you. thank you. okay. that's it. mr. clerk, i'd like to make a motion to send this item forward with a positive recommendation. yes on the motion to recommend vice chair walton walton i, supervisor safaí i safaí i chair. ronen i ronen i the motion passes without objection. motion passes unanimously. i just want to we did do public comment. yes we did. okay. thank you. thank you so much. director. mr. clerk, please read item number seven. item number seven is ordinance amending the administrative, police and transportation codes to allow the establishment and management of entertainment zones in which the outdoor consumption of alcoholic beverages during designated events is allowed, subject to certain conditions. to establish insurance requirements for entertainment zone events. to establish an

entertainment zone on front street between california and sacramento street to allow the outdoor consumption of alcoholic beverages in areas subject to shared space. permit where the permit holders also holds a permit or license from the california department of alcohol beverage control, and affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act. wonderful. and we have ben van houten here from cd to present, good morning, chair ronen and members walton and safaí ben van houten from the office of economic and workforce development. i believe you have my presentation on. i did not load anything onto the laptop. i'll quickly, quickly get it going, this is. all right. very good. thank you

for taking the time today to hear our our local measure on entertainment zones, to start off with a little bit of background about, why we are bringing this to you today, in 2023, the california legislature adopted sb 76. senator wiener's bill, which empowered san francisco to establish entertainment zones. and i'll go into what entertainment zones are. but, this is a pretty groundbreaking measure. we're the first and only city in the state to be able to do this, and this is, this ordinance, would establish a framework for local implementation of that legislation and also designate a first entertainment zone in san francisco on front street. so what is an entertainment zone under state law? and entertainment zone would be an area designated by the board of supervisors through an ordinance. so any entertainment zone has to go through the board

process, and entertainment zone would allow adjacent restaurants and bars to sell open to go beverages for consumption and outdoor areas such as on a street or in a plaza within the zone. an entertainment zone can only operate during special events that are permitted by the department of alcoholic beverage control, but to take a step back for a second, really, the idea here is to help activate our streets with entertainment and community driven events to accelerate economic recovery. so a couple different models, one model would be that there's an existing outdoor event serving alcoholic beverages and restaurants and bars within an entertainment zone, along that event could also sell beverages for consumption outside and the outside space, and then a second possibility is that restaurants and bars on a block want to create new outdoor events where they can sell beverages out into the street during those, during those events. and this is a this is new to california, but it's a practice that has been implemented in a number of ways across the country, in states

like michigan, ohio, north carolina. so there's a lot of precedent, and we're looking at best practices from those jurisdictions as we think about how to implement locally, a couple of slides of some of the state requirements. so again, only restaurants, bars, breweries and wineries can sell these open beverages for consumption in the zone. not liquor stores, not grocery stores. people can't bring their own bottles into the zone for consumption on the street. beverages must be served in a nonmetal or non glass container, and there also must be a process in any entertainment zone to identify patrons that are over 21. so that could be wristbands. handstamps other sort of designated process, open beverages must not leave the zone and they also can't be brought inside businesses within the zone. so you can't you can't take a beverage out of a restaurant and into another bar. you can't take it out of a restaurant and into another business, you have to keep them outdoors within the zone, any ordinance to designate an entertainment zone would need to

be submitted to the department of alcoholic beverage control and businesses that want to participate in entertainment zone would have to notify abc of their intent to participate. additionally, businesses cannot participate if they are prohibited on their liquor license as a condition if they cannot sell to go beverages right now to go bottled beverages, then they would not be able to participate within an entertainment zone. so on to the local implementation legislation , this legislation would authorize pd to adopt a management plan for each entertainment zone. the idea here is that that plan could include additional operating requirements for the zone, in the case of front street, the zone is only going to operate in conjunction with a street closure. so there is the street closure permit that's already required. there's the abc event permit that's already required. really. the management plan is designed to align with those permits and offer any additional supplemental operating conditions to help guide the successful operation of the

entertainment zone. and then this concept of management plan is something that's been adopted in other jurisdictions, like north carolina, with with some significant success. this ordinance would designate the first entertainment zone on front street between california street and sacramento street. it would enable three bars on the block to sell beverages into abc, permitted events in a street closure on the block during event hours between noon and 11:59 p.m, and the idea of those broad hours is, again, obviously this is subject to any abc permitted event. we just want to keep the hours broad in the ordinance so that you know, they could be narrowed in the management plan if need be. they obviously will be contextual to any approved event, on the block . but, but keeping them broad in the ordinance means that, that we don't need to come back to the board every time to if there is a special occasion that would have a later event, and then just to hammer home that other entertainment zones would require subsequent ordinances. and i think that's, you know, certainly something that we

anticipate other businesses, other corridors, being interested in doing. and, you know, we are in real time trying to build some of the guiding literature and to help people, you know, be thoughtful and thinking about whether an entertainment zone is right for them. it's not going to be right for everybody. but we think this is a real, exciting opportunity. and we want to as the as the first in the state, we want to do it well, and with that, happy to answer any questions. any questions, colleagues. okay. i just wanted to say i think this is very exciting and, really, you know, brings us into the world famous cities and in allowing some fun on our streets. so, if i could please be added as a co sponsor, i would appreciate it. thank you. and i will open up this, measure or this item to public comment.

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. hello, esteemed rules committee. ben bleiman, here i am, the president of the entertainment commission. but i am a civilian today, and i am somebody who worked really hard on the statewide legislation and i'm also an owner of a bar on front street in san francisco. so so, i wanted to just talk about a couple reasons why i think this is great. and then also why i think front street is great for this, so first of all, downtown san francisco and other parts have been stuck in kind of a negative feedback loop. and this could actually, i believe, create a positive feedback loop. so take downtown, for example, people have been going to downtown because they were required to forever because their offices required them to. and now offices are often not requiring them to go downtown. so that means we have to give them reasons to go downtown.

they have to go downtown because they want to, not because they have to. and this is the kind of thing that can do that if it's programed correctly. and if the vibe is right and it's cool and it, we've even seen with first thursdays, that if you give people a reason to go downtown, they're going to do it, second of all, i think there's also the case that, businesses will move downtown, in in coordination with these entertainment zones. so take front street, for example. we have a number of vacancies. and if we are then designated as an entertainment zone, we expect that other hospitality, other nightlife businesses may be very interested in leasing that space. so that would again create a positive feedback loop, i looked at harrington's on front street because partially i thought it would be a great area for an entertainment zone. there are no residential neighbors anywhere near us, which is remarkable. there are no busses, and it's a one way street that's not utilized that much. so part of my calculus in purchasing harrington's was thinking maybe sometime down the road, this

would be a great place for the entertainment zones. and clearly the powers that be agree with me, and i'm excited about it, the youngest bar of the three of us is over 50 years old in that in that on that strip. so i really hope that you will push this forward with a positive vote. and thank you for hearing from me. thanks good morning everybody. thank you. i'm lori thomas. i'm here to represent the golden gate restaurant association, just want to say that this is a super exciting idea. i just second everything ben said. we know that it's been a struggle. we're still seeing restaurants close and food service close at a rate of 2.4 closures to every one opening, based on new department of environmental health data. so while we still see about 3900, it's churning negatively still and everything i think that we can do to help is critical. i want to just echo what ben said. this is great because it levels the playing field for our brick and mortar businesses who are

paying the permits, who are paying the taxes, who are there. and it lets us be able to go out and sell what we do. our core part of our core business and let consumers do that. it also, if i understand it correctly, allows those businesses to be sponsors of the events so that we're not dependent on, say, an event company or something. so that we could take advantage of it, and that is a really key change, i think, as well. so i know that you're all really busy. and i also think just a second, what ben said. there's going to be right neighborhoods for this. and this is a perfect fit to start it. and then we can see how it goes and look to roll it out in a, in a way where obviously neighbors add a lot of, a lot of other issues that we want to consider. but i think this is a really great first move. and we're here to stand to help in any way we can. so thank you guys. appreciate it. my name is che walton, and i'm actually

the agm bar manager for schroders, one of the two restaurants and bars next to ben's. i didn't come with prepared statements because i just wanted to kind of speak off the cuff. and from the heart, when i got to schroders, it was 2018. the whole area was buzzing. people were coming because by default they worked downtown. so we had just already built in foot traffic. a lot of people wanted to avoid the embarcadero, the bart, so they would come have a beer or two. and then when covid hit, unfortunately, harrington shut down. i saw the royal exchange kind of closed down and we tried to open up for like seven weeks, and it was scary. i mean, it was like zero traffic, zero cars. and so now, even though it is a little scary, there is some hope. and by having this initiative, this proposal, it offers hope not only to the business but to our staff. you know, one of the hardest things right now i'm facing is trying to keep employee retention, to give them hope. by having this entertainment zone, not only do i see it helping the street and the immediate businesses, but also so the businesses that have closed the small mom and pop shops, the embarcadero mall

because in my mind i can see now it's a tour, a tourist destination. we can make the fire die like i said, a destination point. so if you're at the ferry building, hey, let's go check out that entertainment zone in five days. so you're building up all that foot traffic i used to remember seeing all the time from the embarcadero to front street. and i think this will help that help us. and i know just personally, i'm going to invest all my mental resources, all my ability to make this work. you know, i think it can be a beautiful, spectacular thing for not only for the city, not only for us, but also for future growth. so hopefully take that in consideration when you're passing the proposal or hopefully for passing it. so thank you. wonderful. thank you. are there any additional speakers on this matter? there are no additional speakers. public comment is now closed. supervisor walton, thank you so much. chair. ronen, i just want to again, thank the folks at the of course, the entertainment commission, all community small

business owners, everyone for coming together. i think that as supervisor ronen talked about, this is part of being a world class city, this is also something that has been needed for a while. you know, when we talk about stepping up in the 21st century, making sure that business is booming, this is something that is happening in other cities and most certainly san francisco needs to step up and allow for this opportunity as well. i like the way it was done in terms of choosing the area, making sure that we find an area where folks embrace the opportunity that is coming forth and then grow and build off of that. so excited about that. i think this will encourage public transportation in, alternate alternatives to driving. so folks can create the foot traffic that is needed in the area. so i, for one, am happy that this is coming forward. and looking forward to spending time in the area and enjoying, the nightlife myself. thank you. thank you. supervisor safaí, i

wanted to ask ben to come back up. not been been the business owner. been from the department. so i don't really have a clear idea from what you presented. how often this will be available? because it says that you have to do it via special permit. so those would be events going on. so what is the what is the vision and the plan for this ? and how often will we see this take place. yeah that's a great question. supervisor. there are a number of different, permitting pieces to consider as part of this. so i know that the front street stakeholders are in the process of exploring a recurring street closure, which would be a, you know, having street closure approval is a threshold to being able to set up and operate the entertainment zone. so i think, i don't want to speak for them, but i know that they're interested in ideally programing several times a week. again, pursuant to that street closure, with an abc special event permit each time,

the abc special event, there are a couple different permits that will be usable in this capacity, either a single single day daily license for a nonprofit or a catering authorization that can be held by an existing business, those catering authorizations allow for the use at one location up to 36 times per year , so, you know, putting all of these pieces together, i think the goal is to do it, you know, with, with as much frequency as, as makes sense from a, from a resources perspective. and, you know, i do think they are going to be, experimenting a little bit to figure out what works for them. so they're going to have so the, the entities that are putting this together are going to have to pay for a street closure permit every time. well, the permit that they're looking at is the, the shared spaces roadway recurring permit. so it would be one, one fee with a, with a recurring set of programing attached to it, certainly thinking about how to keep those costs, manageable for

the business is absolutely, absolutely top of mind, if the outdoor fee waiver legislation moves forward, you know, there's down the line if that, if that takes effect, then potentially that could be a resource for folks looking to set up entertainment zones. but, but that's the that's the lay of the land as it is right now. yeah so they would ask for a shared spaces permit to close the street. yeah. one of their roadway permits that that allow for recurring. it's a it's a recurring street closure, permit . and then what is the role of food? you said you guys are putting together a management plan. what is it that you're managing if it's driven by the businesses? yeah so the management plan would essentially function as, as, as, operating conditions for the operation of the zone, under state law, there does need to be a process specified of how to determine who's 21 and who's not , it didn't feel appropriate to, to codify that in the ordinance because as you know, that could change. or we could learn

lessons during the operation of this, so that identification process, you know, is it going to be handstamps? it's going to be wristbands that needs to be spelled out and submitted to abc. that would be part of the management plan, the approved non-glass nonmetal containers that could be used would also be spelled out in the management plan, and then, you know, to the extent that we're talking about this entertainment zone where there will be that street closure set of terms and conditions, really the management plan would just reaffirm and reiterate, those conditions in the future. if there is a another entertainment zone that doesn't have a street closure permit, then, you know, potentially there's a, there's maybe a different set of conditions or more a more, you know, independent set of conditions that would need to be built into the management plan. but but for our purposes here, the street closure and the abc event permits that really will be the foundational permits and the management plan will just help guide to fill in the gaps in operation. but who's going to be doing the work to submit the

permits? is it the businesses themselves. so the front street team, there's a good team of stakeholders. it's the businesses. it's the downtown partnership ship. boma has been has been involved as well, so they they are the ones who are going to be pulling the street closure permit and then the individual businesses would need to, or i would expect that, that businesses on that block are going to be pulling the abc event permits. so so yeah, there's a there's a little bit of, work that we are actively supporting them in navigating this and also using this as a test case to think about how can we make this complicated process just as navigable for folks moving forward. that's good. i mean, i like to hear that the businesses are driving this because sometimes when the city drives it, we can't get out of our own way and it ends up not being implemented, we've been in this chamber where we've heard announcements before about powell street in particular, and those never came to fruition.

now they're being recycled and talked about again. and, but again, that was driven by the city. this is driven by businesses. so if it's three businesses in particular that are going to be driving this, i have a lot more confidence that it will actually come to fruition, so i'm, i too am super excited about this. i think it will be very a beneficial. i think choosing the right street for the test case is, is a good opportunity because there's less disruption to other parts of the city. there's also hotels there that get tourists. i think letting the hotels also be a part of this, and not just looking for a downtown office workers, but all of the different areas, the location next to the bart, major, major, major, stop on the bart line. i think it's very, very accessible. and it will be something i guess i was just trying to understand the implementation. if it's a special event, they're just going to be applying for these permits on an ongoing basis.

it's not something that there's this particular artist or is there entertainment associated with it, or is it just outdoor? consumption of alcohol? yeah. despite the name, entertainment zone entertainment is not required. but i do think that in terms of developing one of these zones successfully, both in terms of attracting people and also building that environment, that having entertainment is a critical is a critical component that that and that's something that i know the front street folks are thinking about is entertainment, recreational activities, amenities, like really building a positive environment that, yes, outdoor alcohol consumption is absolutely a piece of it. and for that, from the finances numbers perspective, it it's really important. but it's the rest of that experience making it an experience that is really critical to its to its success in the short and long term. i again, i think that's great. i mean, because you can have just a beer garden, which is one thing, or wine or whatever, but this, this, this allowed for all

levels of alcoholic consumption, this entertainment zone does, certainly, you know, in the future on a case by case basis, that could be that or on an entertainment zone by entertainment zone basis, that that decision could be made independently each time. but, but given that all three of these operators are able to serve cocktails as well as beer and wine, this would allow for the sale of cocktails as well. yeah. that's great. chair, is it all right with you? can i just call back up one of the comments i just wanted to hear, since he's a business owner and they're the ones that are going to be doing the work, i'd love to just hear really quickly from them. absolutely if ben could come back up, that would be great. ben. this. ben. commissioner. ben. other. ben i know we have a manager as well, so appreciate you being here, but just wanted to hear you know, so what's what's the vision? and i know you're working with three businesses collectively. what's the what's the vision of. i understand the

broad strokes, but what do you what do you all plan? we talked a little about music. we talked a little bit about entertainment. what's the vision and what's the timeline for when you think this actually might take off? yeah. so pending the forces beyond our control, we would imagine it would take the first phase of this would take effect right after labor day. so, everything else working out, we hope around august this would be the law and then we would give us some time to get things ready after labor day, we envision a phased approach. so one thing about street closures and we've learned this in san francisco, is there are white papers on this. most of them don't, don't work, because most of the time people close streets, they close the street and they're like, job done, but that is not what you need. you need to close the street, and then you need to make the street cool. you need to program it. well you need to make it make it look cool. you need to make it feel cool. everything about it has to work out. and that's why we've seen street closures work sometimes. and they don't. so we

want to we are highly cognizant of the fact that there's a lot of effort that has to go into this. so phase one for us will be music, we're also looking at a number of kind of larger scale events. yes, so we already have oktoberfest that's been going there for decades. and we have the saint patrick's day events, which go on for decades. we have an event with, with downtown partnership, the let's go. so we're thinking of doing the let's go party there. so we have kind of six every other month. an event, and then there will be some sort of regular closure, that we're hoping for on thursdays and fridays or just thursdays, where people can come down and enjoy themselves. i envision it kind of like a european city center, not the word. bourbon street's been tossed around, but i don't see this as bourbon street in any sort of way, shape or form. i see it well. i love bourbon street, don't get me wrong. i mean on front street, right? why not? you know, bourbon street is amazing. just one block of front street is never going to going to equal bourbon street where you can wander, aspire to the. no. so what we're aspiring to

again, it's not a pejorative. it's just this is not what i'm envisioning for what we are. i'm envisioning a place like i've been to in europe and in south america and other other countries where you walk outside with a beverage and you sit in the sun or surrounded by people on, on, on available seating everywhere with some music playing and things going on which we just don't simply have in america and not in san francisco. so phase one, music. probably some games, some better seating, phase two, we're looking at a big investment from landlords. will there be an entry fee? we will. we're not allowed to charge entry fee. so it has to be a public right of way at all times. the public is allowed in there at all times. it's the city's property. reason i ask is you brought up saint patrick's day and there were a few closures on areas where there were festivities and so saint patrick's day had a you had to pay to get in. there was no, not not in front street. so front street, you had to be 21

to get into a certain area. but there was no there was no money paid, paid for. so these this is a public land. we can't charge people to come into the public space. that's what i was thinking. and now that you say that, i think someone was illegally charging on a closed street. maybe right away. yeah, maybe you paid some random person. no, no. nothing to do. no, no, they were checking ids. okay. the street was closed. yeah. and you had to pay. yeah. my understanding is that's not allowed unless there's an ordinance. i think there's some street fairs and stuff that are trying to figure that out right now. but my understanding is that's not that's not allowed. so i'm just again, the plan is not because people are going to come in and buy alcohol. and we have no plan to charge entry fee. yeah our goal is it's open to the public at all times. and again, i'm not saying i'm against i'm just trying to understand. no, i don't think you are. i mean, listen, the businesses are have been these are conversations that we've had to internally. and so one thing you could do, like let's say we did like a food festival like a, oyster fest down there, for example. right anybody can come in there. but if you want to partake in the vendors and the

businesses selling oysters, then you pay and you get the fee, but you're not. but you're allowed in there. anybody's allowed in there. yeah. got it. okay great. i mean it sounds sounds pretty phenomenal. i think that, something that will add to the spirit of getting people back downtown. i just since this was the first opportunity we've had to talk about it on the record, i think it's good for the public to hear, what the vision is. and what are the three businesses? harrington's, schroders and royal exchange. got it. yeah. got it. and all three of you are coordinating with one another highly coordinated. yes. wonderful. okay thank you so much. thank you, chair, for giving me that opportunity to ask a few more questions. sure sounds great. and i would like to make a motion to send this item to the full board with positive recommendation. and please add me as a co-sponsor as well, please, yes, i will add, supervisor safaí as a co-sponsor. and on the motion to recommend vice chair walton, i am pleased me as a co-sponsor.

yes, i will add, vice chair walton as a co sponsor, supervisor safaí a safaí chair. ronan, a ronan i. the motion passes without objection. motion passes unanimously. and thanks to all who came out to speak. appreciate it. mr. clerk. can you please read item number eight? yes. item number eight is the ordinance amending the administrative code to authorize the city department to relay on cooperative purchasing, where wind entering into public works contracts of up to $5 million to authorize the purchaser when procuring commodities or services to relay on all types of cooperative purchasing programs conducted conducted by, or for the benefit of the public entities, including such programs that are not sponsored by nonprofits, and to authorize the purchaser to procure and century installation services when procuring commodities. wonderful. and we have kelly

rudnick, i believe, here to, explain this legislation. thanks for being here. good morning. i'm kelly rudnick. i am with the san francisco recreation and park department and i'm here to speak with you about the proposed ordinance that would amend the administrative code to authorize city departments to rely on cooperative purchasing when entering into public works contracts. up to 5 million. first slide. so what is cooperative purchasing? it's a process that allows city departments nationwide to utilize or piggyback on another city's competitively bid contract to tap into discounted vendor rates for goods and services. this contracting method provides efficiency by combining multiple jurisdictions into a single contract to enhance our purchasing power, negotiate better prices, save

time, and ultimately provide cost savings when constructing or renovating park facilities. this would add just one more project delivery method available to our city. next slide. over 86,000 government agencies participate in public in cooperative purchasing nationwide, and here are just a few california government agencies currently using cooperative purchasing. existing law allows departments to work together with other cities to get group discounts when purchasing goods, such as vehicles or equipment. today, this proposed legislation would extend that capability to include construction. some of the cooperative purchasing contracts available to city departments are omnia sourcewell pavilion and cmas. small, relatively simple projects like rpd playgrounds renovated after 2000 require new surfacing play structures and minor landscape renovations. cooperative purchasing is a delivery method

that would allow city departments to deliver projects like these more quickly, spending less money on administrative costs and more on construction. focusing resources on delivering in the field and providing more construction jobs. next slide vendors save time and money by responding to one rfp and one competitive bidding process for multiple projects. these savings allow vendors to pass on some savings to cities. as an example, here are the percentage discounts on retail play equipment related products and services under the omnia cooperative purchasing agreement. currently, our standard project delivery method for under $5 million projects is design bid build design bid build contract advertisement requires the development of detailed construction bid package, including a fully developed package of construction documents, full specifications to be advertised through public works or rec

park, from advertisement to construction start. the process takes an average of six months. note that city effort to develop a full bid package includes city design project management, contract preparation and contract administration on this equals time and cost. next slide . how can cooperative purchasing help deliver capital projects? more efficiently? it is effective and efficient for small projects with simple scope. if this legislation passes, city departments can utilize cooperative purchasing contracts on projects under 5 million. under the proposed cooperative purchasing process, the city enters into a contract with a vendor under a cooperative purchasing contract. based on discussions with other cities, we estimate the contracting to construction phase would take less than two months. there is no advertisement needed and no bidding phase. it ensures pre-established equipment and materials costs, including retail discounts. it reduces

required contract related administrative and design soft costs and it eliminates the contractors 15% markup on equipment, with the vendor integrated into the planning and design. the cooperative purchasing contract package requires simple construction documentation and standard specifications, including all city contracting standards and requirements. next slide. based on our research, we believe that we can deliver more through cooperative cooperative purchasing. here are three examples. the playground program in the 2020 health and recovery bond included $9 million. the average playground cost 3 million, so we would expect to deliver three playgrounds for the 9 million bond allocation, with 25% less cost per playground. each playground would average 2,250,000, and we could deliver four. that's one additional full playground and a sports field. turf the average

field costs 1.9 million. since 2016, we've replaced seven fields and spent $13.2 million with 25% savings. the average cost per field would be 1.4 million, with the savings, we could have delivered two additional average field projects for the 13.2 million. cooperative purchasing would allow us to put more money into construction. a shift from city money going to soft costs for planning, design and contract administration to money into construction and the actual benefits to the community. we note that these time and cost savings are based upon research and discussions with the city of la, the city of oakland, and cooperative purchasing vendors. next slide rec and park needs to deliver more improvements with our public dollars. a playgrounds general lifespan is 20 years, the play surfacing only ten years, and all projects must account for ada accessibility code changes under

the current project delivery of design bid build rpd playground renewals cost 2 to $5 million and take 3 to 5 years from planning to opening. once funding is identified in 2012, rpd has averaged for playground renovations annually. our current capital program addresses playground needs from the 80s and 90s. these projects require extensive renovations, including ada accessibility improvements and utility upgrades. these projects would not be well suited for cooperative purchasing. the focus of cooperative purchasing, delivery would be on upgrading children's playgrounds that were last renovated after 1995. projects with relatively simple scope requirement. within these projects, we would be prioritizing the oldest and most in need facilities. first outdated play areas. currently 37 children's play areas in the rpd system have exceeded their useful life, making them prime

candidates for cooperative purchasing. delivery method to address this, rpd would need to aggressively renovate seven playgrounds annually over the next 20 years, ensuring all outdated play areas are brought up to modern standards. next slide. this legislation would maintain existing contracting standards, including requirements around local business enterprises, prevailing wage and the city project labor agreement. citywide project labor labor agreement. this streamlined project delivery process will benefit the recreation and park department, sf public works, sf mta, the san francisco airport, port of san francisco, and the puc. this streamlining will enable departments to reduce time spent on contracting and purchasing while still meeting all government requirements. these are the project types that rec park expects to find the biggest benefit by delivering through cooperative purchasing. in conclusion, the legislation before you today would amend the

admin code to enable the city to contract goods and services through cooperative purchasing contracts while maintaining existing public contract code terms and standards, and it would retain current rec and park community engagement standards and processes. this concludes the presentation. san francisco needs to create opportunities to expedite delivery of essential municipal capital projects, including construction of playgrounds, sports fields, and park amenities to neighborhoods across the city. this concludes my presentation and i'm available for questions. thank you for your time today. thank you so much, colleagues. any questions? no i just wanted to thank you for doing this. i think that we should be taking advantage and piggybacking whenever and wherever we can. it's smart governance and will save us money and get us more projects. so i really wanted to appreciate this work. thank you so much, and can i please

co-sponsor this item? and with that, i will open this up for public comment. yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this matter sign up to speak. at this time, each speaker will be allowed two minutes. good morning. sorry. good morning. i've been screaming at kids all morning already, my name is renard monroe. i'm an executive director of youth first, i think this legislation is a commonsense one. it first starts off with something that the san francisco is already struggling with is budgets, and this is cost effective, and it's doable, in the community and experience of new playgrounds and parks and spaces, i'm a direct benefit of that. my program has been located at merced heights playground in district 11 for over 20 years, and speeding up processes to get those things done is very important. my park needed renovations for over 20

years and it was finally completed in 2021, and it's servicing the community really, really well, not just my program that is located in the clubhouse, but all three levels of the playground have been redone and the community loves it, i was there yesterday on a sunday and was just awed by how many dogs were using the dog park, how many families were picnicking and having a great time, and people from the community were playing volleyball. i mean, this thing is pretty much a no brainer. i'm hoping that you guys will pass this. this is a great thing for the city and county of san francisco and also for rec and park. so i stand in solidarity, with parks and rec with this. thank you. are there any other speakers for this matter? there does not appear to be any additional speakers. public comment is now closed. i would

like to make a motion to send this item to the full board with positive recommendation, yes. and the motion to recommend, vice chair walton walton i supervisor safaí safaí. i chair ronen i ronen i the motion passes without objection. motion passes unanimously. mr. clark, are there any other items on the agenda? there are no additional items on today's agenda. this meeting is adjourned.

>> good to see everybody this morning. the sun kale came out. we will get started here. my name is megan mitchell. thank you. [laughter] and i joined the san francisco bicycle coalition board of directors because i believed in the organization's mission to advocate for transforming the city streets, neighborhoods into safe livable spaces by promoting bicycles for every day transportation. [applause] now, honesty, when i was asked to the rally i wasn't sure about it because i felt i didn't belong up here. i'm used to attending these rallies where we talk about the importance of bike lanes