dramatically activate public spaces that we have seen here. it is truly a happening were you have food trucks with a variety of different cuisines, all sorts of things coming together at the same time. the police department has not been the best avenue how to achieve -- avenue to achieve the clarity going forward. some of the results of the legislation will be permanent fees, reducing it by almost half. there will be a thorough review of the health apart -- from the health department and other departments to ensure

[unintelligible] an issue that has come up in the last few days relates to previous legislation with respect to mobile food trucks in middle and high schools. it prohibited food trucks from being within 1,500 feet of a middle or high school. there was an effort to apprehend the sugared sodas. use of food trucks going up and basically sneaking customers from the student population to buy sodas and other items that were no longer available on campus. the legislation that i have before you expands not just to food trucks but push carts that were not previously regulated under supervisor elsbernd's

legislation. the issue that has come up to us, the legislation currently does not cover the recreation and parks department. in looking at this, we discovered that the 2007 legislation did not affect what recreation and parks department can do. i want to acknowledge daneiiel walkdo who has been an activist for better food being available to students. i support the goals that she has to provide better food choices on campuses. the recreation and parks department has come forward and talk about -- we have copies of a letter that was provided to

us. i am getting copies of that for colleagues that do not have it outlining their concerns about their need to grapple with their budget situation and provide food amenities. and their commitment to adopting rules and practices that would require them to coordinate with them to ensure that decisions are made. -- good decisions are made. ultimately, there was static in the neighborhood and blue bottle made the decision not to pursue it. it was approved to have a food cart there in that instance, they are saying that they would look at delores park and make

sure there would be no more mobile food vending above nineteenth street. not more than two blocks away from the campus itself. i would ask that the assistant clerk and distribute its. we are looking at what the implications would be if we implement the measure before us. we don't want a mobile food park within 1500 square feet of the middle or high school. it is not covered, the only major park. most of the park facilities

would be affected by that. colleagues, i believe there is a representative of the recreation and parks department here. if i could invite nick to reflect on the general manager's letter and welcome him back. president chiu: without objection, could we allow this individual to speak? >> thank you supervisors. -- thank you, supervisors. incorporating all of those parts that are adjacent.

we have been committed to a healthy lifestyles very seriously. and healthy menu consisting of organic, locally grown products. in addition to the practice that we are already undertaking, our general manager has proposed to increase the partnership with the school district such that any proposed food vendor operating the park adjacent to a school, we would include the principle in the evaluation of whether or not such a park use would be appropriate. and we would coordinate with the principle of the school as well as the nutritional director for the school to help determine the appropriate location and then

appropriate menu -- and inappropriate many -- an appropriate menu. >> i would like to acknowledge my staff member that worked very hard in the stakeholder process around this legislation. and indicate that this will hopefully open up an economic opportunity to individuals to have carts, have mobile food operations, and i think it will add to the vibrancy and vitality of the food culture and the food environment of san francisco. that is what the objective really is. it is difficult for many people to step in and open up a restaurant. i want to acknowledge kevin

wesley from the golden gate restaurant association has been extremely supportive and i really very much appreciate the approach that he and his association has taken, seen as part of the greater good. and there is the discussion are around the issue of schools in the global food vending. i am sensitive and open to ideas that colleagues might have, and it is difficult for me to want to preclude the recreation and parks department from working with aggregates and seeing if it would protect the nutritional interests of students without precluding their vending. president chiu: supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you,

mr. president. to supervisor dufty. first of all, thank you for the legislation and your leadership on this. a quick question, and i am not sure how this has been covered. how would the thought process on be food courts be extended to formula retail? supervisor dufty: ken rich is here from the economic and workforce development. >> it is handled a little bit differently from the public right-of-way legislation. there is a prohibition for a single permit holder or individual or entity that can only have permits for seven carts or trucks. it is not handled the same way,

but we sort of get at the desire to not have large companies getting into this business by restricting it to seven different cars or trucks. supervisor mirkarimi: through the chair, a deerfield had the consistency of us being able to greet the ability of formula retail to follow current land use law will be applied? >> there are two different pieces of legislation, one of them as with the public works code. and the reasoning behind this was not so much an issue of formula retail going through businesses that look like a chain. here, it looks a little

different. so rather than going through the similar criteria of formula retail, it will only issue seven permits up to a single individual. we kind of keep the playing field open. i would defer on how it is handled on private property. >> there is a 300 ft notice requirement. individuals are notified within the neighborhood commercial district that there has been an application. anyone could object based on who the provider is. >> the legislation that the planning commission reviewed and unanimously recommended your approval on did not address specifically the issue of formula retail.

supervisor mirkarimi: i support this legislation, i just want to put into consideration a trailing piece of law that would have lined up consistency so that at least that loophole is potentially covered. thank you, supervisor dufty. if i may, on suggestion of amendment, on page 2 line 19, i believe we are on the department of public works law. where it says "mobile caterer," any trailer home is transported by a motorized vehicle. i would motion an amendment on line 19, insert "or trailer that

is transported by a motorized vehicle." president chiu: without objection, the amendment will be made. supervisor mirkarimi: on page 3, line 6, under j "pushcart." any wagon cart or food serving device. i would insert "that is transported by human power." >> i would support that as well. i would add horse and buggy. supervisor mirkarimi: interesting modalities. good for san franciscans. page 11, line 12, insertion

for number 4. in several weeks, we are having a major hearing so that people who are looking for information from many of our departments get it very clearly. could we please -- the department should maintain a mobile food facility page on its website dealing with all issues and pending permits. did i actually make a motion? president chiu: we will do one on the best motion. supervisor mirkarimi: on line 25, same page, just add "and on the mobile food facility" on the department's website.

president chiu: supervisor mirkarimi has made the amendment seconded by supervisor dufty. without objection. supervisor mar: thank you to supervisor dufty for his leadership on this. i want to reiterate on eo f - - on-- one of the points of the property near schools. the main one is mission high school, and i appreciate the letter that clarifies that. the november be located close to mission high. and the commitment that he parks department works closely and discusses with the school principal and the various stakeholder groups to make sure that food vendors and carts

don't jeopardize the work within the school district and the student nutrition programs to create healthier options. crew supervisor of the -- who supervisor dufty mentioned, because of the activism of parents, there are about 1500 more meals served per day this year than last year. full meals are much more balanced and healthier given the efforts to create solid bars and better choices. i worry that food carts will be like a magnet that pulls students away from the much healthier options. it might address the issue of the produced lunch for lower

income families, so that everybody eating together -- i worry that it might lead to an effort where somebody might go outside and leave the cafeteria area for kids and students in the school. i appreciate the very clear language that addresses the issue. hopefully the task force plays a leading role so that we do not minimize the great work of the parent activists. supervisor campos: just echoing the comments that were made about the great work that supervisor dufty has done on this legislation. i am very supportive of it. on the issue of food trucks being near schools, i have a somewhat different perspective.

i do think that we should be on board and making sure that we provide healthy food choices for our students. and i think that the work that has been done are around that is something that should be commended. that said, i don't think that it necessarily means that a ban on some of the trucks that have been identified is necessarily the right answer. i will tell you that i have worked with many people, many small merchants that on those trucks that will take issue with the fact that such a vendor automatically means that food choices. there are some restaurants that have probably worse food choices than these vendors. i think that we have to be very careful not to paint people with a wide brush because i know many

of these trucks and many of these vendors have got out of their way to work with school communities to provide healthy choices. i think we have to be very careful in how we address this issue. to make sure that of the alternatives are provided and we need to hold every establishment, in respect of of what their means to actually buy or rent a location are, that we hold all establishments to the same standard. and that many of these vendors are doing the right thing and are likely to do the right thing that some of these restaurants have not been doing. i want to say that this is not as simple as perhaps it has been portrayed at times. >> i want to conclude and

knowledge the representative of activism a round school nutrition and acknowledge that she has also met with others earlier in the process. and the ways that i could have done a better job, i apologize for that and indicate that with the approval of this legislation, as it relates to supervisor mirkarimi's concern and that there be a clear process from the parks department and school nutrition leadership, i will be mindful to ensure that nothing bad results from this. we want to see good things happen. president chiu: if we can vote on these two items. supervisor maxwell: aye. supervisor mirkarimi: aye.

supervisor alioto-pier: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor daly: aye. supervisor dufty: aye. >> supervisor elsbernd: aye. supervisor mar: aye. >> there are 11 aye's. president chiu: next item. >> item 32 is a resolution urging support for the preservation of sacred heart church. item 31 is amending the administrative code for the development and maintenance of the irrigation controls to specify new construction and the landscape rehabilitation projects. supervisor maxwell: this ordinance will establish new standards for landscaping projects, ensuring the -- it is

another way that we will continue to reduce our water footprint in creative and effective ways. the landscape standards, it stems from a robust style that will result in a unique urban environment in san francisco. president chiu: can we take this items in house, same color? -- same house, same call? supervisor maxwell: aye. supervisor mirkarimi: aye. supervisor alioto-pier: aye. supervisor campos: supervisor avalos: -- supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor daly: aye. supervisor dufty: aye. supervisor elsbernd: no.

supervisor mar: aye. >> there are 10 aye's, one no. president chiu: item 32. >> urging the support of the restoration and preservation of sacred heart church. supervisor mirkarimi: i will be as restrained as i possibly can be which i tried to exercise -- and i feel there was a violation of the building code because of the demolition of the important features within what was once known as sacred heart church. that violation speaks for itself. in the spirit of what we press this forward, we think there has been a trail of community. for a number of years, the

people in the film more community, many felt there was a relationship or brokered between the arch diocese, the man who bought the church from the archdiocese. in return, he bequeathed sacred heart church to the academy known as megan firth academy. it is an institution that i welcome for their great work, but the bottom line for us is that this was still able of the historic building and that it was struck home so that it would be lost its eligible status -- it would belie its eligible status for historic preservation. i don't believe that government

or church is above the law, and that is important that we solidify the process and move on from here. i am more than happy to answer any questions. there was a number of misinformation. in one newspaper that comes out , they clearly did not do their homework and investigate a single iota of fact or publish what i had said. if anybody would like me to respond to those, i would be more than happy to provide planning, city department planning data that communicated historic significance eligibility to the archdiocese's that has a relationship to the existing institution. we have all of that right here if anybody would like that. otherwise, in the same vein,

making sure that there be respect of an institution, so is a very similar vibe associated with this. supervisor elsbernd: a big, big difference between the sacred heart and saving bridges. as someone who grew up in the catholic church, i got to know more than i would like to know about the internal politics of the archdiocese and the way things work in the church. big differences between what is going on. one problem, i believe there is very little legal enforcement. it sends a strong message and that might be the motivation here. the problem is, sending a

message alone, you better make sure you get the message right and you talk to the entire community. one clear difference between the sacred heart, the academy has done tremendous work for the community and has been a tremendous asset to not just the community there but the entire city of san francisco. this ignores the entire balance in the entire picture associated with sacred heart church. i think it is very important if we pass resolutions that send messages, we better make very clear that we understand it. this resolution misses a number of important points about what is going on in and around sacred heart church. i am not comfortable sending a message that mrs. of number of important points. -- misses a number of important

points. supervisor mirkarimi: we get this. we are not comopeting on -- competing on a level of value system, except it has concurred that this institution does good work with the community. that is not the focus of the resolution. i recognize that if they do good work with the community, let's include that in the resolution. to the grounds of where this institution is, they did not ask for permission and did not seek a permit in order to eviscerate and demolish this building. they knew very well based on a letter that was sent by the planning department to this institution that it required a certain level of environmental approval before -- anybody is welcome to a copy of it.

to the people that have inherited responsibility of administering this church. why? it wasn't until 20006 in 2007 that the academy -- 2006 and 2007 that the academy -- [unintelligible] please continue to do what you do in the community and you have our support. as it relates to the letter and spirit of the law, this resolution is dead-on accurate. no matter what the denomination is, they are not above the particular standards that we told everybody to. -- hold everybody to. president chiu: any other discussion? surv