closed session on the agenda. >> there's no obligation that we opposed this. >> this will be at the wisdom of the president. >> right. >> does this need to be formal? >> we would just collectively discuss how we want to proceed. >> ok. >> we would just leave this that should we just leave this. >> this is just a closed

session. it is difficult for us to get in one room. it is easier for us to get to our states in january? >> well, if we are e-mail to the days that work best, then we can respond to those. >> we are not doing it without her. i am flexible. in the last time we did it on a saturday morning and that seems to work really well, for me anyway. >> january 8th. >> that is fine with me. >> i cannot do the 15th. >> that is a saturday. i commend to the 15th.

-- i cannot do the 15th. >> january 8th. >> we can do this now if you all have calendar is available or if you would rather meet, if no one is objecting at this point to go with your saturdays in january. >> i am good with every -- >> every saturday. >> we could to january 8th and then see what to the other two commissioners have to said. >> this is good for me. >> i picked a good day. and yes. >> do we need to arm wrestle over this? >> no. i have to try to find a

location that is free or less than free. again, ideally, the side of city hall. this requires 15 days. >> this is an open public meeting. a to your public notice, we need to post these changes and what might be conditioned for at least 10 days. hot -- i will seek some clarification on what the items will be.

>> i believe that we have some last-minute public comment. >> ok. >> this is a small comment. i just want you to know that my daughter has worked very hard to create an environment where it is not an adversarial thing for people to get permits to work with the police, to work with the entertainment and to keeping you working, friendly, and she cares about it.

it is interesting for me to see this and for her to be so interested in this and making it come to pass. this would not have happened without her. >> i agree. >> i want you to be my mother. >> i think what she has to say about making the city liable and keeping it for those who live there but also making it for those who come from the outside to come to the city and why they come to the city and make sure that this is done in a way that the police and it the i don't know, that they understand that this review should work and everyone has to work together on this and be on the same page.

she does a good job and i'm proud of her. >> thank you. [laughter] >> the final item is new business request for future agenda items. i will just read staff that short of any major unforeseen circumstances, we will add the closed session to the next meeting and established in the executive director. i believe we have our forced endorsement -- first endorsement. okay, no more public comment, we will end the tuesday, november 23rd meeting of the entertainment commission of the city and county of san francisco. the meeting is adjourned. thank you.

captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- supervisor chu: good morning. welcome to the regular meeting of the city operations neighborhood services committee. madam clerk, are there any announcements today? >> yes. all persons attending this meeting are requested to turn off all cell phones and pagers. if you wish to submit speaker cards, please place them in the container by the rail to your left. if you wish to submit copies of material for members of the committee, please submit an extra copy for the file.

i will actually be calling items out of order. madam clerk, please call this item. item #4. >> item #4. ordinance amending the san francisco health code by adding section 114.1 and section 114.2 to require that the health department and department of aging and adult services adopt a pilot project to provide further care for mentally ill community members. supervisor chu: thank you very much. this item was provided by our sponsor, and she has requested that we tabled this item. do we have a motion to table it? let's go to public comment first. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item?

>> thank you. my name is douglas [unintelligible] and i have lived in san francisco for 28 years. i would like to speak in favor of this item. in my daily activities around san francisco, it is unfortunate that there are so many obviously mentally ill community members by their living in san francisco or passing through. something like this is urgently needed and i think that the supervisor is justified in proposing this item. also i would like to take this opportunity to urge the department of public health to use their money efficiently to help the obviously need, rather than going after whistle- blower's like myself, with in my opinion, fake charges of mandatory sick leave and being

mentally ill. as many people have noted in my basement here at city hall for the past year, if douglas is mentally ill, it says a lot about all of the other people here at city hall. thank you. supervisor chu: are there any other members of the public that wish to speak on item number four? seeing no one, public comment disclosed. bill, did you want to say a few words? do we have a motion to table the item? without objection. madam clerk, please call item no. 1. >> item #one. hearing to consider that the transfer of a type 48 on-sale general public premises liquor license from 730-732 broadway street to 163 jessie street (district 6) to jon gasparini for jessie street cafe will serve the convenience of the people of the city and county of san francisco. supervisor chu: thank you very

much. we have the chief inspector here. you might want to turn on the microphone. in speaking to it. -- and to speak into it. >> beer, wine, distilled spirits for consumption. also offering food service. no letters of protest. no letters of support. the department recommendation is as follows -- approval with conditions recommended by be liaison unit. proposed condition, number one, the sale and service consumption of alcoholic beverages provided between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. each day of the week. the sale of these beverages for off sale consumption is strictly

prohibited. the petitioners shall not make structural changes without prior written approval from the department. four, no eyes. any sound produced in such a manner or degree as to disturb the peace, quiet, and comfort of the persons in the neighborhood. no. 5, loitering. those found to be standing idly by or lingering without business, prohibited on any of the sidewalks under the control of the licensee. thank you. supervisor chu: let's open this item to public comment. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item? seeing no one, public comment is closed. we have a motion to approve this item with the condition provided. without objection. madam clerk, please read item

#2. >> item #2, resolution authorizing the san francisco arts commission to retroactively accept and expend a grant in the amount of $70,000 from the national endowment for the arts for the installation of zhang huan's three heads, six arms at the civic center plaza. >> -- supervisor chu: thank you very much. jill [unintelligible] from the art commission is here. >> good morning, supervisors. if you have any questions, i would be more than happy to answer them supervisor chu:chu please provide -- answer them. supervisor chu: please provide a brief presentation. >> certainly. to celebrate our sister city could with shanghai we sought the work of an artist from shanghai to bring to the civic

center. we knew that it would be costly. one of the first hurdles that we overcame was a local company in san francisco called waterfront containers stepped up to say that they would provide the containers and would arrange for the free shipping. we knew that bulk of the costs would be covered privately through donations. at the same time, we have the application submitted to the national endowment for the arts. everything went seamlessly. we got the sculpture here in time for the dedication. we needed a little bit of intervention from senator feinstein to have customs lived be agricultural inspection hole that they placed when it arrived. at this point, we are planning

to return the sculpture a little bit earlier than the expected duration in the city. we have been informed by customs officials in china that they will not issue another extension for the sculpture. we have attempted to involve, through our various connections, to try to address this issue. it seems like it is a very big hurdle to overcome. the sculpture has been tremendously popular. between the grant and the money provided by the huntington hotel to put up the artist, i would have to say more than 50% was provided from other city sources. >> so, the $70,000 covers about half of the cost? >> no, it probably covers about

one-quarter of the cost or one- third of the cost. about $100,000 worth of private funds was provided by waterfront leasing and shipping. supervisor chu: all right. this is a resolution from the national endowment of arts in the amount of $40,000 to primarily helped to fund the monument sculpture in shanghai. this is retroactive, no new employees have been hired. this is simply a contractual cost? >> that is true. it is simply a formality to formally accept the funds. supervisor chu: are there any members of the public debt would wish to speak on item number two? seeing no one, public comment is closed. >> [inaudible] supervisor chu: we have the motion and it will be moved to

the full board without objection. >> thank you, supervisors. supervisor chu: thank you. item #3. >> item #3. ordinance amending public works code section 184.78 to allow city neighborhood banners, as defined in section 184.78, to be posted on the path of gold lamp posts lining market street, and adopting environmental findings. supervisor chu: thank you. i know [unintelligible] that] is there and has -- i know that nick is here to provide comments. >> my understanding is that this item needs to be referred to the historic preservation commission. this item needs to be referred to the historic preservation commission for a 30 day review. i would like to make that motion. supervisor chu: all right. let's open this item for public comment. and members of the public?

>> good morning, supervisors. my name is douglas. i have lived here for my entire life. i would like to speak out on behalf of this idea. publicizing worthy causes along market street is going to make market street more interesting. if we are lucky, it will attract more tourists. one of the suggestions i would like to put on the banner is to advertise the city's controversial whistleblower program. i know the pros and cons of the program and i know that doctors [unintelligible] are attempting to rectify the laguna honda hospital once and for all. supervisor chu: thank you. any other members of the public that would wish to speak on item number three?

seeing no one, public comment is closed. there is a motion to refer this item to the historic preservation committee and continue to the call of the chair. without objection. all right, item number five. >> item #5, ordinance amending the san francisco public works code by amending sections 184.2, 184.6, 184.8, and 184.12 thereof, relating to newsracks, to provide for: (1) the use of electronic mail for notices of violations; (2) removal of abandoned newsracks or newsracks maintained in violation of the public works code within 7 calendar days of notice of violation sent by electronic mail; (3) imposition of administrative fines for violations resulting in newsrack seizures; (4) consolidation and/or reduction in size of fixed pedestal newsracks at under-used locations; (5) allocation of space in newsrack

boxes on a first-come-first- served basis under certain circumstances; and (6) reduction of the fixed pedestal permit fee from $60 to $50. supervisor chu: thank you. this item is brought to us by supervisor alieoto-pier. >> this is an example of real teamwork, there was a pedestal where smaller publishers wanted to know how they could get space when there were vacancies. the supervisor tried to figure out how to do an informal procedure rather than waiting for the entire year. we learned that the mayor's office and department of public works had other additions that they wanted to make to make the program run much better. with that i wanted to introduce [unintelligible] the director of the program from the department of public works on the various features of this ordinance. supervisor chu: thank you.

use the other microphone? if you are doing a presentation. >> any questions? supervisor chu: let's just go quickly through the changes being proposed for the members of the public that might need the information. >> thank you. primarily, as the supervisor's office has noticed, this came to us under our community as well as some of the publishers. housekeeping issues, for example. the allowing of public works to use electronic mail as a primary source of communications. it brings everything up to the

20th-century -- 21st century, essentially. publishers can receive notification for citation violations against the code must faster -- much faster, enabling dpw to correct the action from seven business days to 10 calendar days. there is no need for that extra four days in the mail. it also imposes penalties that can be increased from $50 to $250 for fees regarding non- compliance to the code. excuse me, i am sorry. the codes are meant to recover

the cost of transport to the yard and storage temporarily. to address the needs of smaller publications and those that do not distribute the news in traditional wax, we have added an informal allocation process whereby anyone that wants to participate in the program can get an empty box space that is available through a very informal process. it is a first-come, first-served basis. fees are reserved from $60 to $50 per year, per box. hopefully that is more affordable, not only for smaller publications, but those who have to pay a fee. supervisor chu: thank you. i know that you have passed out

to was a slide presentation. is that something that you wanted to share? >> i was going to share it, but i do not have a [inaudible] supervisor chu: all right. >> if you have any questions for me? supervisor chu: just a question on the feet. i know that the proposal proposes to reduce the annual fee from $60 to $50. a $10 difference. is this adequate to cover the cost from the view of dpw? >> the cost has never been recovered by the use of the program. it is meant more to address the needs of the publisher in this case. it becomes less and less affordable to participate in the programs. dpw does not recover the cost of running the program. supervisor chu: on a side note,

i know that there were a number of news racks stalled in much of the downtown area and other neighborhoods across the city. there was also a plan to have clear channel continued to provide news racks in other parts of the city over time. every year a certain amount was to be added. how is that program going? >> they have been meeting their goals. basically, 100 units per year that we provide quotations for. hopefully, one of the changes is to downsize and consolidate existing units in the downtown area. union square, for example. there might be an abundance of patteson amounts per intersection. by allowing this proposal, in the residential corridor areas

we have 100 per year. supervisor chu: how many? >> 702. supervisor chu: this is headed into the third year of that program? >> no, supervisor. the clock started during the first five years. the sixth year started when there were 585 units in the downtown area. so that we were able to start in seoul -- installations into the neighborhoods. supervisor chu: we met 5852 years ago? >> december of 2007. supervisor chu: great. any other questions from the committee? are there any members of the public that wish to speak on

item number five? i do not have any speaker cards in front of me. go ahead and line up in the middle. >> good morning, supervisors. i wanted to say over the years that we have watched songs and poetry, these sorts of things, more on that spirit but a serious issue for city operations and neighborhood services. i am very concerned that this city is not prepared for a disaster. we had a fire where the smoke was that some sort of recycling place and the smoke engulfed hunters point. which should have required a shelter in your own home notification from knocking on doors. i called the san francisco health department and was told to call bay area air quality management without receiving a response. i went over there this morning

and spoke to the executive committee. now they are working on it. the inspector at bayview hunters point, there has been no follow- up to find out if anyone had any asthma attacks related to the toxic smoke. i understand that there is a report but no one got back to my e-mail. i was told that first responders are supposed to be responsible, but on that day the police and the fire department told people they did not know. this was a miniature disaster in terms of people possibly having had asthma attacks, as you already know, knocking on doors and in that area, there are too many doors that have oxygen tanks on warnings. even a plume of toxicity vetting goals for 30 minutes or an hour can kill someone in that area. it is just sfu