shopping carts being prohibited. claims were made that was not a direct attack on the homeless, but many people that i know of who are homeless, the only place they know of to keep their possessions are shopping carts. certainly, i have had no issues sitting in a public plaza with someone who has a shopping cart. although i understand where the supervisor is coming from on this, for me at this time the question that i have, i suppose, has to do more with the plight of homeless clear youth -- queer youth. i know that this does not specifically target those individuals, but at some point i would like to look at the realities of setting up a drop

in space, of where people can gather, because currently there is no such space for folks in that district. i know that at one time there was an old church on market that people had envisioned as being used as a report -- resource, being part of that conversation. at this time again, there might be other ways of mitigating these issues. some laws of our -- are already in place. as we start to move towards these types of regulations, in areas like parklets and plazas, it needs to be a broader conversation where we might be able to put cyanate and other things that might mitigate the issues that people are experiencing.

i think that for me, it raised the question of the plight of homeless queer youth in the castro. at least, that is what resonated with me most when i met with members of the public. that being said, i am not ready to support this at this time, but i am open to reviewing the registration around the parts and a possible center for the homeless queer youth in the castro. a place considered a haven and a mecca in our community. supervisor chiu: thank you, supervisor. supervisor kim: i am generally philosophically challenged to the restrictions replace on public spaces in san francisco. i would like to echo the

comments on being deferential to different neighborhoods and districts. having had similar requests for open space near sixth street, having turned down that request, i want to be consistent. to say that if we are not supportive of it in my district, i cannot support it in other neighborhoods. i did appreciate the supervisors. on youth. we do have a lack of save space for you to hang out in. i did not grow up in this particular city, about me and my friends at night, we would often hang out in parts and in other spaces. i am not saying that this ordinance is in any way trying to counter that kind of activity, but i do appreciate the discussion, because i think we need to have a broader discussion on the space is

available for young people, at nighttime, when the centers closed. i appreciate that being brought up. supervisor wiener: thank you. i appreciate all of the perspectives of my colleagues. i welcome you, colleagues, to actually learn more about the plazas. i am glad that everyone is interested in them. i have a representative of the district, someone who has lived through there and has been walking there for the last 15 years. i have mailed to prospective, which is frankly shared by a significant swath of the neighborhood. it is not just about the condo owners next door who do not like certain been happening there.

this legislation, and the issue is happening in the plaza, are the ones identified and advocated for by the people in the neighborhood. that is why there is broad support throughout the neighborhood. i think that it does do a little bit of injustice, or disservice, to say that some of the neighbors nearby are cranky and unhappy and want to be changed. -- unchanged. the supervisor brought up the issue of the aclu. i had a long conversation with them. i think that concerns were addressed, to the extent that they were able to be. the shopping cart provision is gone now. the sweeping provision is identical to what is in our parks code. i have not seen a lawsuit filed

against the parks code. in terms of the permits, the original language that we used, and i was reminded of this last night, but the original language for merchandise was, verbatim, from the parks code, and has been in the parks code for a long time. now, with the amendments that i made, several amendments, it is much more liberal than what we already have in the parks code. again, the aclu is respectfully taking issue to any permitting scheme that could conceivably be applied to a protected activity, if we are not careful. we are looking at things that have been addressed, or addressed to the extent that they are able to be. with respect to 647e, i

appreciate that the supervisor acknowledged that it was not clear. i think that some of the advocates want to have their cake and eat it as well, saying added is already covered. i said this in the press yesterday, that i'd bet my lunch that they would take the position that it does not apply. finally, i do want to -- it is unfortunate that the issue queer youth keeps coming up. frankly, i think it has been an abuse argument in this context. i have been unconditionally supportive in the time i have been in the neighborhood, when neighbors tried to revoke use permits. i publicly oppose that and stated that i wanted to expand the hours. closing at 7:00 is too early. there needs to be a non-alcohol

space for use in the neighborhood. i have been a champion of lgbt youth in the budget. i am absolutely committed to that. to suggest that this is in any way anti-lgbt youth is inaccurate and misplaced. i will also say that having been using in going through this plaza for 15 years, from my own personal perception, there are not as many queere youth in these plaza's as there used to be. in my experience and my perception, there used to be many more. they are not there anymore because harvey milk plaza in particular is a very uncomfortable place for about a different kinds of people to be because of the horrendous behavior that happens in that

plaza. this is not about query youth -- queer youth and accessibility to neighbors, it is about making it accessibility to everyone, whatever your age or income. this legislation achieve that. colleagues, i respectfully ask for your support. supervisor elsbernd: i appreciate the supervisors' efforts. i am swayed by arguments and i wanted to raise the issue that there are eight members of the army milk club that have written to us, urging us not to support the legislation. it was a big issue in land use as well. i really do feel like, in many

ways, supervisor, you are trying to address the concerns of merchants around the plaza. if i have to weigh in, i would have to do so on the side of the most vulnerable in the community. there are suggestions from a number of leaders, including those who have signed on in opposition. not because i do not respect the work that you have tried to do to keep your neighborhood as strong as you can. i will be voting no on this ordinance. supervisor chiu: colleagues, i appreciate the debate and discussion today. this has been a difficult issue. when i first learned about this, i followed what happened at land use. i told the supervisor that we

have all discussed what he needs to do, but also to address the concerns raised by various community voices. i have had numerous meetings with folks to bring numerous concerns. this is why i had asked the supervisor to consider the changes to the four major sections of this legislation, to address the sweeping provisions, camping provisions, the ability for folks to spend time in the park, as well as dealing with the issue around four wheeled conveyances, or shopping carts. i very much appreciate the feedback in terms of articulating those concerns. right now i think that this legislation addresses those concerns. which is why i am going to support this. in our roles, i think we have to figure out how to move beyond the intense emotions in these

issues, getting down to what this legislation does. i think it is modest. i think that we are all committed to the issues that the supervisor i enlarge reiterating what is in our parks code, and i think that is why i will support this, and i appreciate all of the discussion and will continue to have this. supervisor avalos: i go back to what i think was the original intent with the legislation, which is one that i was not

comfortable with, and that lingered with me about how this legislation works and what the thoughts are, and i think it is difficult, and supervisors concerns about his untested. it is difficult to hear of what we say that often comes to the board of supervisors, people are concerned about issues of homelessness or differences in class, vulnerable people that seem to be put upon more than others in the regulation of our public spaces, but that is an argument that i tend to want to support people who i think are more vulnerable, and i am going to be siding with them with my vote on this legislation because they did think we have to figure at how to make our city a sanctuary it really is, and when

i see intent that is behind legislation that constrains our ability to use public space and enjoy it, i question that legislation, and this is one piece that i will be questioning, as well. i do understand a lot of work that was put behind it, but i do not think there is complete in agreement in the neighborhood about how our public space should be regulated in the castro area. commissioner: seen no other comments, an roll call vote. secretary: reading roll] supervisor campos, president chiu, supervisor chu.

there are six eyes and four nose. commissioner: the item is approved on the first read. president chiu: it is now 3:00. why do we not go to our special order? madam clerk, could you please read items number 27 and 28? secretary: item 27, a hearing on the real property les -- lease with bauer intelligent transportation for pier 50 for a term of 10 years. >> -- president chiu: this is

something that was going to be moved because of the america's cup. there were some substantive amendment. last week, we had to continue the item, and because we need to get this done quickly, that is why we are sitting as a whole. is there someone from the port to give a separate discussion on some of the amendments that we are hearing? and then we will obviously hear any public comments on this. >> thank you, president chiu. i am with the port of san francisco. good afternoon, supervisors. as was described, this is a new 10-year lease for bauer transportation services, and they are currently at pier 27, which is the new cruise terminal.

they are prepared to move to pier 50 to facilitate not only their expansion within the san francisco community but also the project. the lease that was first submitted had one minor amendment, an indemnification provision, and it has been resubmitted back to the board here, and also, the resolution was resubmitted to include the ceqa appeal process and other findings. and i am happy to answer any questions. president chiu: colleagues, any questions of staff? seeing none, i would like to have public comment on this lease pertaining to pier 50. police stepped up to the

microphone. each member of the public has two minutes. >> can we move back to the harvey milk thing? president chiu: i am sorry, we cannot, but if you want to comment on this item, you can. next speaker. >> ♪ we are just transportation ships that pass in the night, and we will smile when we say it is all right we are still year we will make it all turned out right like those transportation ships that pass in the night ♪ president chiu: any other members of the public want to address us under public comment? cnn.com if i can entertain a

motion to file this? the motion by supervisor mar, seconded by supervisor kim. this has been fiat. and on item 28, unless there is any discussion, if we could take an roll call vote. secretary: [roll call vote] supervisor wiener, supervisor avalos, supervisor csmpos, -- campos. there are 11 ayes. president chiu: that is adopted. if we can go to roll call. secretary: supervisor farrell,

you are first. supervisor chu. supervisor kim you are first. i am sorry. supervisor wiener. supervisor wiener: madam clerk, today i am submitting a revised version of legislation that consolidates and simplifies the existing eating and drinking definition in the planning code that reduces the existing definitions of restaurants, cafes from 13 to 3. the distinguishing characteristic would be historically most volatile, namely the sale of alcohol, and we would have three categories. one with out limited sales would be limited. with wine and beer would be simply a restaurant, and then a full liquor license would be classified as a bar.

our current definitions are so convoluted and complex that it discourages people from actually starting businesses, and so this legislation, which supervisor olague is a co-sponsor on, it will move us in the right direction, so i just want to have a very, very brief video clip that some of you may have seen before, sort of a parody of our current planning code and how ridiculous it is when it comes to opening restaurants. i think we have the video ready to go. secretary: sfgtv please.

[video clip plays] [laughter] >> new and unusual businesses. >> in the neighborhood.

[video clip plays] >> food and disposable wrappers. >> no, i want to use reusable utensils. disposable wrappers. >> because if if it is in disposable wrappers, then you are a fast-food restaurant. since you will be using plates, you are a full-service restaurant. only with conditional use authorization, which takes between four and six months to process and about $4,000 in fees. >> wow, that is a long time and expensive. i do not think i can afford the rent on an empty space for six

months. what if i served the food in rappers? >> u.l. also have to have customers pick up the food from the counter if you are a self- serve restaurant counter. >> ok, i will have the customers pick up the finance serve the food in disposable wrappers. >> and how big is the space? 1000 square feet or less would be a small scar -- small-scale restaurant. above that, you would be not. did you have another location in mind since neither is permitted here? >> have that a space in upper market which is less than 1000 square feet? >> small service require authorization in the upper market neighborhood, but you can open a coffee shop. >> can i sell sandwiches and bagels at a coffee shop and >> yes, as long as they are

prepackaged and not toasted. >> and if i sell sandwiches that are not needed to be in a sandwhich press. >> yes, or we would have to confiscate your toaster. >> can i serve ice-cream at my copy shop. >> only if it is served in a cup and not a cone. otherwise, we would have to send officers to confiscate your ice cream cones. it cannot contain more than 15 speaks -- seats. it must have a limited menu of beverages, paid for prior to consumption and served at a customer service counter. >> thank you. this has been very informative. perhaps i should keep my job as

a waiter. >> you are quite welcome. i am glad i could help. supervisor wiener: thank you, john, and thinking for dealing with the sound difficulties in the beginning. i think this is a fun way to show the unnecessary complexity in the planning code, and i think this legislation will go a long way to addressing that. the rest i submit. secretary: thank you, supervisor wiener. president chiu? president chiu: several months ago, i mentioned during roll call that entrepreneurs have been creating businesses that do well at the same time that they do good, with companies that have a double or triple bottom

lines. in recent years, there have been discussions around the country about formally establishing a new type of corporate structure known as benefit corporations or b corporations, as opposed to the typical c operations. b corporations include stakeholder value and community benefits. the corporations use the power of business to help solve social and environmental problems. late last year, california became the sixth state to charger this kind of corporation, which jerry brown signing it into law in california. today, on introducing legislation that would provide city contract in incentives. to receive this bid preference, a business would have to be legally recognized as a b corporation. at the end of the day, i think it is important to our city,

which has been home to many entrepreneurial ventures, to state that we are open for business to these types of companies. i think it is important that we continue to be a leader of those countries -- companies. i hope that this legislation goes through the process that you will agree with that and that we will move it forward. the rest of items i will submit. secretary: thank you. supervisor campos? supervisor campos: thank you. i have a number of items, but i have won the i am submitting with others. this is for the very important distinction of being a new affiliate of the smithsonian institute. the mexican museum has just announced that it received this distinction, being named an

affiliate of the world renown the smithsonian institution. this distinction establishes a long-term partnership between the smithsonian and the mexican museum and and cleans the future loan of smithsonian our work and artifacts. you can only imagine the possibilities with that. not only does the mexican museum join a very short but esteemed list of museums around the nation to hold the phillippe status, but it is also the first museum in san francisco to be granted this honor. so we are very proud of the mexican museum, and we look forward to the continued work at the city is undertaking, previously with the redevelopment agency, but as we go forward that we continue to make sure that the indian museum becomes a reality. we join house democratic leader nancy pelosi in it nancy pelosi in it congratulating the museum, as