but approach it the other way around, that the burden should be on at&t to show that a c.u. is appropriate and that we should approve it once and if that finding is made. but not before. so it's a different take on what supervisor weiner is proposing and so i would speak against the motion to amend, and my hope is that out of this deliberation, that what can happen, if we do reject the conditional use, is that it will prompt a more cohesive and more systemic approach that actually provides the planning department the additional tools and, quite frankly, the additional resources it needs to verify a lot of this technical information. and that's what i hope comes out of this deliberation. president chiu: colleagues. any further discussion on the various motions that we have?

if not, why don't we take roll call votes on the motions in the orders in which they were made, first on supervisor campos' motion to reverse the certification. >> the other way around. caller:.o amend first. president chiu: motion to amend first. madam clerk, please call the roll. clerk: supervisor elsbernd - aye farrell aye, kim, no, mar, no, mirkarimi, no, weiner aye, avalos, no, supervisor campos, no. president chiu, aye, supervisor chu, aye, cohen, aye. there are six aye's and five no's. president chiu: given that that would have required eight votes to impose the additional -- i'm

sorry, my understanding was that we were imposing additional conditions which would require eight votes? so it's a six-vote threshold.

. president chiu: if i could ask for us to recess for just three minutes. there's discussion about exactly the votes. why don't we recess for three minutes.

[recess was taken] president chiu: welcome back to the board of supervisors meeting. welcome back to the board of supervisors meeting of tuesday, december 13. we are still on our second 3:00 special order regarding the

conditional use appeal, at 3901 mission street. supervisor campos? mr. president, i hereby make a motion to rescind the last vote on the motion. president chiu: can we take the motion to rescind without objection? motion to rescind passes. supervisor campos: if we can take a vote on the motion to amend. president chiu: so at this time supervisor campos has made a motion to reverse the certification. supervisor weiner has made a motion to amend the reversal of that certification. we could take a roll call vote on supervisor weiner's motion to amend. clerk: supervisor elsbernd, aye. supervisor farrell, aye. supervisor kim, no. supervisor mar, no. supervisor mirkarimi, no. supervisor weiner, aye. supervisor avalos, no. supervisor campos, no.

president chiu, no. supervisor chu, aye, supervisor cohen, cohen, aye. there are five aye's and six no's chiu the motion to amend would have taken six votes so the motion to amend fails so on the underlying motion that supervisor campos has offered to reverse certification, roll call vote. clerk: supervisor elsbernd, no. supervisor farrell, no. supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor mirkarimi, aye. supervisor weiner, aye. supervisor avalos, aye. supervisor campos, aye. president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, no. supervisor cohen, no. there are seven aye's and four no's. president chiu: the certification would have taken eight votes so that motion

fails. are there any other motions? supervisor elsbernd? supervisor elsbernd: your best chance here now is to make a motion to rescind both votes that have just happened and take a revote on supervisor weiner's original motion to amend. president chiu: supervision elsbernd has made a motion to rescind the prior votes seconded by supervisor mirkarimi, can we rescind without objection? those votes are rescinded so now we are voting on supervisor weiner's motion to amend supervisor campos' -- or the other thing we docked, if i could suggest we could do a clean motion to impose additional conditions to amend item 42. >> given that supervisor campos' motion to overturn planning failed, i will make a new motion to table item 41, to move -- to

amend item 42 with the additional condition i indicated, and then to move item 42, as amended, and to move item 43. in other words, to take the c.u. by the planning commission, reject it, and impose a new c.u. with all the conditions of the planning commission plus the additional condition i indicated before, i.e., the independent outside evaluator. that is my motion. president chiu: supervisor weiner has made the motion as he's described to amend the c.u., second to that -- seconded by supervisor farrell. roll call vote. supervisor campos would like to comment on that motion. supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president. given that our effort, my effort to deny the c.u. failed, i want to thank supervisor weiner for the motion and i will be supporting that motion so i

would ask colleagues for your support. thank you. president chiu: on supervisor wiener's motion, roll call clerk supervisor elsbernd, aye, supervisor farrell, aye, supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor mirkarimi, aye, supervisor weiner, aye, supervisor avalos, aye, supervisor campos, aye, president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, aye. supervisor cohen, aye. there are 11 aye's. president chiu: the motion passes. i want to thank you for finishing the second hearing of our 3:00 special order. madam clerk, if we could please call our third special order item and if you could please call items 44 and 45, if i could ask folks that are leaving, if you could leave quietly, that would be greatly appreciated. clerk: item 44 is a motion

scheduling the board to sit as a committee as a whole on december 13 at 3:00 p.m. to hold a public hearing on the status of negotiations between the mayors office and california pacific medical center regarding cpmc's long range development plan. president chiu: let us take item 44 which would allow us to sit as a committee on whole on this date. any discussion on this motion? colleagues, can we take this motion, same house, same call? without objection, the motion is approved. we will sit as a committee in the whole to hear the status of the negotiations between the mayors office and the california pacific medical center today. moving to item 45 which is this hearing. lets me open the hearing with preliminary comments and colleagues, if anyone has additional comments, you're more than welcome to make them. colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, this item on our agenda is to hear an update on the status of negotiations between the city and cpmc over

that health system's proposed $2 billion campus consolidation,, a 15-story, 550 bed hospital on cathedral hill, build a replacement for saint luke's hospital, maintain limited hospital services in support of a specialized neuroscience facility and close down acute care facilities at california and pacific campuses. first, i want to thank colleagues and members of the public for your patience. this has been a long day. i have a feeling it's going to be longer. i know there are folks in the overflow room. we will be here as long as it takes to hear from everyone that wishes to provide public comment. cpmc's proposal would change san francisco's healthcare delivery system for generations to come as i think we all know and as one of the largest development projects in recent times, it would have extremely

significant impacts on the local economy and job opportunities, our need for affordable housing, traffic conditions and transit issues as well as quality of life issues for residents and neighbors immediately surrounding the hospital sites and citywide. we know that negotiations over cpmc's proposal will determine how the project impacts disos affordable healthcare as well as the standard of living in our neighborhoods as well as the number and quality of healthcare and construction jobs for san francisco residents and cpmc's existing employees. since the mayor, on may 16, issued in his city ask of cpmc and cpmc responded in writing on june 6 stating that the mayor's request would make the project fiscally impossible and given that that position was reiterated at a planning commission hearing on june 9, there has not yet been any meaningful public update on the status of discussions between the various parties so at this time i think many of us feel that it is timely for the board

of supervisors and for the general public to receive one. given that the cpmc proposal is so significant and impacts so many aspects of many areas within san francisco, when supervisor mar requested the matter be heard by committee in the whole, a majority of this committee supported him in that. let me suggest how today's proceeding will go. we'll first hear on an update of the status of negotiations from the city's project manager and various department heads with the latter addressing details around specific issues to their departments and taking questions from members of the board. we will then hear public comment. i know that there are six representatives of the community coalition that will kick off public comment, touching upon different issues, and then, of course, we will hear from every member of the public that wishes to speak on this item. with that, let me first ask ken rich if you'd like to provide a presentation on the status of negotiations between the city and cpmc. thank you.

supervisor mar? supervisor mar: this cpmc development has profound implications for healthcare jobs and employment, housing, transportation and our neighborhood's quality of life and the relationship also of big corporate decision making to the public accountability in san francisco and the magnitude of project is huge so it demands extensive public review process that i'm glad we're having here today. also, from the 60-plus community-based organizations that are part of a coalition that's been asking for transparency for this process, i kind of am hoping that this will be a beginning point so that stakeholder groups involved in the neighborhoods throughout our city but especially around the development have a key role at the table in making sure that we have strong community benefits

that emerge from this big development. cpmc's project will deeply affect important aspects of life and health in all of our neighborhoods, so it's throughout san francisco for the next several decades. and we should carefully analyze this development in that light so i wanted to thank the 60-plus occasions and the coalition for bringing this forward and strongly urge that as we discuss this process, that we have a strong community benefits agreement that emerges with the stakeholder groups involved from today's hearing onward as we develop the project. thank you. president chiu: supervisor campos. excuse me. supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president. i want to first of all thank supervisor mar for requesting this hearing and thank you, mr. president, for letting us meet here as a committee of a whole. i look forward to the presentation from staff. i look forward to hearing about the status of negotiations.

and let me just from the very beginning say that, you know, my approach from the start of this discussion when i got elected supervisor has been to try to keep an open mind, to try to, as much as possible, work with sutter and cpmc and to the extent possible make sure that this becomes a viable project, that this is something that is completed and happens for the city and county of san francisco. it is, however, though, important to put what's before us in some historical context because as much as we want to work with sutter and cpmc, unfortunately, the history of how sutter and cpmc have interacted with the city and county of san francisco has not been what we want it to be and you may recall that as early as 2004, then supervisor

alyoda-pier, introduced a resolution that addressed the issue of how cpmc and sutter were dealing with uninsured patients who could not pay for their medical bills and, in fact, the board of supervisors was very clear about making sure that tactic from cpmc and sutter changed. likewise, in 2008, here at the board of supervisors, there was a resolution that had the support of many supervisors who are sitting on this board, opposing sutter's attempt to close the saint luke's campus, the saint luke's hospital. we also have seen some recent developments at the state level. we know, for instance, that the california insurance commissioner, dave jones, recently intervened in a lawsuit against sutter alleging a number of things, including fraudulent pricing practices by sutter and

let me just be very clear. we want to work with sutter. we want to make sure, though, that some of the issues that have been identified in the past do not occur again. we want to make sure that the interests of the city and county of san francisco are protected and we want to make sure that all san franciscoans are treated properly. and that will require a two-way street and it will require that cpmc and sutter do not repeat some of the things that have occurred in the past. and so it is in that spirit that i look forward to hearing today how much progress has been made and talk about what the future holds with respect to this project. thank you. president chiu: thank you, colleagues. unless there are other introductory comments, why don't we hear from ken rich with an update on the status of negotiations. >> good afternoon, supervisors. if i could have the powerpoint. i'm ken rich from the office of economic and workforce development and i'm joined by

staff from the mayor's office, department of public health, the m.t.a., the planning department, department of workforce development and the city attorney. we are here to give you an overview of the status of our work on the development agreement with california pacific medical center for their proposed hospital rebuild project. as you know, this project has been under review by the city for several years. starting in early 2011, the city began after discussions with cpmc related to a development agreement in conjunction with the approval of this large and important projectment there have been a number of informational hearings on the project or aspects of the project in front of the board of supervisors, the planning commission and the health commission. in may of this year, mayor lee, at the request of both cpmc and the community coalitions, issued an initial set of requests of cpmc in terms of public benefits connect with -- connected with the project.

this has served as the basis of intensive discussions led by my office but with the very active participation of public health, mayor's office of housing, m.t.a., workforce development and d.p.w. at this point, we're making good progress toward an agreement on the substantive terms of a development agreement but there are a number of items still outstanding and negotiations are ongoing. the bulk of our presentation today will be devoted to laying out, on a fairly specific manner, the set of public benefits and commitments we are negotiating with cpmc. because these negotiations are not concluded and there is not yet a draft development agreement or term sheet, we are not able to get into all of the specifics of all of the items. i do want to reassure you and everyone that once negotiations are concluded, there will be a written document provided to the board and to the public that lays out everything in 100% detail well before the project

approvals and the development agreement are before this board for action. at this point, i will turn it over to elizabeth wadih from the planning department to briefly describe the proposed project itself and the approvals needed and then the rest of us will be back after that to begin going over the development agreement. >> thank you. good evening, supervisors. elizabeth wadih, planning department staff. director ram was here but he was unable to stay for the start of this item. he did, however, want to publicly commend all the city agencies if are working collaboratively together on this project. i'm going to present a brief overview of cpmc's near-term projects and their required land use approvals in order to provide an initial context for the d.a. overview that will follow. in broad strokes, cpmc proposes to construct five new buildings, two at st. luke's, two at van ness and geary also referred to the new cathedral hill campus

and one new building at the davy campus. on the west side of van ness between geary and post at the site of the closed cathedral hill hotel, cpmc proposes construction of a new 555-bed acute care hospital. it will be 15 stories and approximately 265 feet tall. across the street on the east side of van ness between geary and cedar, cpmc proposes construction of a new nine-story approximately 130 foot tall medical office building. the two buildings will be connected underground by a tunnel at the garage level. once the hospital construction is complete, cpmc plans to transfer the acute care services of their california and pacific campuses to this new cathedral hill hospital. at the st. luke's campus, cpmc proposes to construct a new five-story, 80-bed accuse care hospital. the new hospital would be located to the west of the existing hospital tower, over the