[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 those votes are rescinded so now we are voting on supervisor weiner's motion to amend supervisor campos' -- or the other thing we docked, if i could suggest we could do a clean motion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 surface parking lot and a portion of san jose avenue, the siting of

which was a priority of the blue-ribbon panel. adjacent to the hospital, there will be a new pedestrian pathway that can next that st. jude cesar saba's street -- connected that street to cesar chavez street. they will conduct a new five- story medical building at the corner of cesar chavez and valencia. at the davies campus, cpmc proposes construction of a new four-story office building, also referred to as a neuroscience institute. the negative declaration was overturned by the board. this is now being evaluated through the larger eir, and it will be back again before the planning commission.

there have been no substantive changes to this project since 2007. onto the land use approval. there are many land use approvals required. this is a very, very high-level overview. there is a lot of detail and jon, but in general terms, it will require an agreement and an eir that will cover all campuses. there will be planning code amendments before the project and general plan referrals at all three campuses. there will be conditional use operations at all three campuses and approvals required at st. luke's and cathedral house, and there'll be several other things require that are not heard directly by the planning commission, including a conveyance for a portion of sand is a avenue, the conversion of cedar to a two-way street, and caltrans approval, and with

that, i will turn it back to can rich -- ken rich. >> as you know, staff has spent a very large amount of time working on this project, really in the last couple of years but really intensively for the past year. i want to spend a moment to talk about what we consider this such an important project. first, beyond this act, there is a state mandate to make hospitals say. we obviously want to have up-to- date facilities which will still be operational after an earthquake or other national disaster. second, the facilities constitute about one-third of all of the hospital beds. this rebuild project would include modernization of all of the facilities, and we believe that the project as proposed with a large, regional medical center at cathedral hill, and a smaller community hospital at st. luke's, will help to meet the health-care needs of san

franciscans. third, this would be the largest construction project that the city will see in the immediate future, generating about 4600 jobs, and last, the health-care industry is becoming a more and more important part of the city economy. this was recognized in the city's last economic strategy document. so to get to the development agreement, notwithstanding the importance of this project, the mayor has been clear from the start that the project only makes sense from the city if it comes with certain commitments for a set of public benefits. we will get into these specifically in a moment, but very broadly, they include a commitment to more health care for the poor and underserved, a commitment to save lives, a commitment to support affordable housing, a commitment to local hire and work force development, and a commitment to strip -- to transit street improvements.

as you know, this is a binding legal contract between the city and cpmc to codify these as well as to lay and remedies and damages if either party fails to live up to the commitments. once adopted by the board and signed by the mayor, these agreements can only be modified by further board action. at this point, i would like to turn over to barbara garcia from the department of public health, who will go over some aspects of the agreement. >> thank you, ken. good afternoon, supervisors. i am with the department of health. the health commission and the department of public health have been engaged on these issues with cpmc for more than four years, so in order to advise the city, i thought was important to

build upon the senate began work already done over these years by the health commission and the blue ribbon panel. so today, both myself and my deputy director, colleen, will talk about the issues around health care, but i wanted to provide a review of the history to illustrate the context of the agreement and then describe the key health care provisions on that. it is important to knowledge at the beginning that this is a seismically safe hospital -- these seismically safe hospitals will be very important. this includes our very own san francisco general hospital, on their way to meeting stringent seismic safety standards, and from a health perspective, this hospital building package, together with a proposed provisions which you will hear about today, and it is one that we believe will contribute to the city's most vulnerable population, and we did agree

that the hospital propose over 500 beds and 80 beds at st. luke's that must operate as cohesive and coordinated systems to give patients access to the care that they need on the campus where it is best provided to help beat san francisco's health care needs. in 2008, the blue-ribbon panel on the future of st. luke's was established to advise on planning efforts for the campus at st. luke's. the blue-ribbon panel was charged to create a viable plan for acute care hospitals and outpatient services on the st. luke's campus. the panel comprised of 31 members of the community, which held 10 meetings and two public forums over five months. their work resulted in the blue ribbon panel report on the future of st. luke's hospital and included 11 recommendations. among the recommendations in the

panel report, it included that a new acute hospitals should be rebuilt on 6 campus, that the size of the hospital should be appropriate and that the service mix should include standards of excellence in communities and senior health. on october 7, 2008, the health commission then passed a resolution endorsing the panel's recommendation. the help commission past two additional resolutions related to the rebuild of cpmc. in 2009, they supported the rebuild of the cpmc to have the best possible health plan of the city. this included agreeing to operate st. louis for a minimum of 20 years, increasing the cpmc share of metical --