we are paying for employees, we were all imposed -- opposed to it. it works. i think this worlulsd work for parking lots. >> next speaker. >> my name is steven lee. i am the 12-year owner of the glass capt. there is a starbucks, a wells fargo bank parking lot but is open. i have been dealing with this for 12 years. i am going to give you a couple of things. we have 30 employees. 15 our security. our patrons park close to an a block away. going back to finding out if there are incidents, you can

check with the sfpd. we have been sued for having confrontations' because our security is trying to keep the neighborhood quiet because we have a condo on all four sides. they are coming across the bay. they cruised into the lot. they wait until our patrons finely go to the parking lot, and and they end up parking themselves there and start making noise. we have to send security to try to mitigate the problem and keep the noise and down a period of police and everyone puts pressure on us in that situation. sometimes if there are no altercations and we find out our customers' cars got broken into and they are crying and screaming that they lost their credit cards and purses and all about. there is an attendant in the beginning, and at 12:00 they

take up and split. i think it is irresponsible. i understand the small business people, but what about us among we incur a lot of costs to protect the neighborhood. on fourth street i practically secure the whole street. i have a guard who monitors the parking lot to make sure there is no breaking into for our customers say. here is the problem. now you have shootings. it only takes one year ago and -- it only takes one. the big parking lot shooting they had behind temple, and luckily caltrans is building a new terminal concep, so they cl.

there are some with no attendance. they should close it. people the break into a parking lot will get arrested, but if they are not usable because there is no attendant, they should do that, but right now there is not one. they say, we are not responsible for lost items, but why do we have to do the burden of protecting our lots when the insurance do not cover itsel? >> can i ask a question? you are saying people come from outside, and with no attendant there is nothing to stop them from parking in the car? >> yes. >> how would an attendant decide whether to let them in or not? >> if they had of sense.

-- a fence. i have no way of channeling and who pays and who does not. you can at least keep these people out, even if they have to shut the gate. at least they are attending their own property. that solves a big problem right there. trucks it would keep him from staying in their cars and drinking. they would make sure they park their cars and left the parking lot. >> there is no one officially able to call 911. we do not own that parking lot, so how can we call the police for help, and they end up getting blamed for it. it is a catch-22. i understand how much it costs to have the ticket taker.

>> do we have any other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner o'connor: i was definitely thinking hard about both of your comments, and a couple of ideas pass through my head. those lawsuitots were very heav. i do not know if they are going to close a lot because you are dark, but there're other things that are going to attract business. those are significant loss that should be able to be staffed.

this reiterate my point about a police permit officer which is how we all used to have to get our permits. the permit officer would be the one to decide which conditions and which securities. that goes to the entertainment commission, but i think the police department could weigh in on these matters and what lots should require. there are definitely lots that need supervision, and a lot is going to have a way more impact. you have to go and hire the right person who is going to get a job done. you are going to have to try out a few people because it is not an easy job. those examples are right on.

they are not being staffed. it does end up giving the entertainment community of black 5. i know there have been problems. i just want to weigh in and agree there are definitely problematic lots. part of it is the one i oversee i wish it was busier. clubs, the amount of security it who you have hinges on how busy you are going to be that night.

if you have 100 people you cannot afford tight security. it does not work. we have all learned how to try to protect our immediate neighbors and be good neighbors. commissioner clyde: i just want to say i think this is the beauty of the process. we can get detailed clarification around legislation, and i want to say it is a valuable process, because i have to say i will support this legislation. i understand it gives the police chief the ability to promulgate rules for securities. it authorizes this work from

the chief of police, and the security plans are individualized, and i believe the problem is graves, and i believe it is coming and worse. -- is becoming worse. i walked 3:00 thursday in the afternoon to yesterday, and the things i saw on the street astounded me. there were fights. there were almost 5/8, and it was 3:30 in the afternoon in the day, so i believe i am ready sooto recommend this. i believe this will protect our

night life and clubs. anything will make the general area safe for a very good people are walking in the financial district, in north beach, in the mission district, so these larger venues, a police district people can establish what is going on, so i am ready to support this. >> i want to support both of our public speakers. i think our nightlife is under attack for other reasons, and it is a billion dollar industry we need to enhance.

you really opened up my eyes. i actually parked there. >> you you drink? as i do not drink in my car. i have actually seen people partying in their cars before going to slim's, and i have a tremendous amount of respect for and director kane. i like commissioner o'connor's idea of some kind of a food truck we can add. i know there is controversy, but i liked that idea. i like the there could been a win-win situation. >> it would come down to what

is defined as a staffer. >> if you left it how it used to be with the permiting officers at each station, and there are issues, and sgt shock does deal with it. gooi like hearing from the industry, because i want to do everything i can to help your industry. you employ a lot of people, and there are a lot of small businesses. iraq's commissioners, to questions. -- >> commissioners, two

questions. i am disappointed i am not able to see the mapping and taking a look at the venue. from what i hear taking a look at the parking lot waith starbucks and wells fargo, those are entities that can be established that they have the ability to afford attendance, and we see there are situations where it can be afforded, because it is not required, they do not have to do so. i do not want to been in the position that we pass without having the ability to look at mapping and understanding the parking lots in relation to

1,000 foot in dealing with the difficulty of compliance. >> do we know when we can get that information? can we request its? >> i know the planning department is working on this. we are redoing it, so it could be within a week or two. >> it is something we can refer to, because we can review it. >> what is the timing in relationship to the legislation moving through the committee process in relation to being able to review that information? but we have not scheduled it yet. it would go to public safety, but it is not yet scheduled.

>> there is time. >> i think we should hold off on this. >> i would like to weigh in on a couple of things. i recognize the speaker as well, and i appreciate the input. i am concerned the lighting is just to get the job done. most of the time when we see examples of activity when we see exactly what we are trying to avoid, obviously they did not care about the camera, and they are going to introduce themselves. i am convinced about the. i am sensitive to the fact that entertainment venues are getting a bad rap, su. -- too.

there are some people operating parking lots, and they have not a clue this is going on. they are not represented here. the bigger lots have more resources and are sloughed into what is happening. as part of our job is to be wary and aware of the small persons who do not know what is going on. i agree with the general intent. we have a problem coming from an area vulnerable to being abused. we need to take a look at that, and i am going to let some other people talk. maybe we need to find more information about this. if we are going to to make any motion, i want to take into account the potential impact on smaller operators.

i would like to see of phasing in and make sure there is some out and reach. i might be able to support science is the motion forward and -- support that is the motion does. >> this item is discussion item. will we have an opportunity to see more information? blacks yes. >> do we have time to hear it again? >> it sounds like you would be willing. >> of thought as to the request of the commission, i can bring it back to the supervisors, i would think they would oblige. >> you could provide a list of

questions you would like follow up on from a legislative sponsor to review again. it would be good to know, i think for the commission to make any a evaluative decision, if a parking lot chooses to make clothesed, what kind of costs ty are going to have to incur to allow their customers to have access. now people do not necessarily used city car share. if they are having an emergency and need to get through, there has to be access if they close the gates and locked the gate.

>> i want to throw out one other idea i had, which is if this those moves forward, and it is decided new offices across the board, -- if it is decided this is across the board, one way the decision can make it fair is by looking at reducing the 25% tax to 20% or 22% in lieu of demanding operators provide staffing, which is helping to assist the police department in reducing the overall taxation on neighborhoods, so in that sense the operator should be given some kind of our break on this sales tax parking lots have to abide by.

>> i like that idea. i do not want to use economic impact. we used the word, and it can bog things gondown. it is almost what we are talking about, but i like the idea of getting an opportunity to have a tax break on a program, and it could be reported as a cost of this business, and you get a tax credit, which is not the same thing. i do not have any other comments from commissioners, so do we have any comments from commissioners? >> i think we need to ask is she can come back and answer any

questions that would be more clarifying and can narrow down who would be in the initial rollout, but we support the intent of this legislation. >> perhaps we could have staff, up with a list of questions that we could forward to the supervisor's office. >> if the report is available the next week, we can identify the parking lots. >> i would recommend that we draw up from this discussion the points individual commissioners have made and to come back,

especially to bring the information as soon as possible so we can hear it and review what we have to save. i am sensitive to the public safety side. i am also sensitive to the job creation side. people do not pump their gas in portland oregon. in the state of oregon you cannot pump your own gas. you know why they did that? to preserve the jobs of gas attendance, to make sure people going from high school into college had some gainful employment, so honestly, i have to jump start from the cost of the employee, and i dared leave. i would like to add my voice that if you are creating a johj,

that you get some kind of tax credit as well. it could be small, but it would be important. but would be my recommendation. >> what i heard was a motion to continue and to also scheduled this at the next legislation and policy committee and to request a legislative spots also have representatives. that is the connection i think they made. >> i do have a motion. is there a second as? that is seconded by commissioner dooley. [calling votes]

commissioners, on that motion passes, 6-0. >> thank you very much. next item, please. >> commissioners, you are on item number seven. discussion of efforts on environment code, check our bags and checkout buying charges, a presentation by the department of the environment. >> thank you for the opportunity to come back and present an update on where we are with the

checkout environment. first i would like to thank you for the continued support of this legislation, and i think it has been a helpful tool, so are what -- so what i want to do is give you an update on 3 items. eageone is the amendments that happened in december. second is a brief discussion around the availability of some of the check our bags and what the market looks like for small businesses in san francisco, and the last thing is outreach and what additional steps to the market is entering an -- is

doing. the sponsor really look into a lot of concerns that this commission as well as individuals stakeholders had, and ultimately they have fallen into four general categories. first was the automatic increase that would have been over one year. if the legislation was originally written as 10 cents and then it would drive up to 25 cents, so the automatic 25 cents was removed. the second amendment was discussed by the board of supervisors, expanding by an

additional three months of legislation to give an opportunity to dig even deeper prior to the legislation being enacted. the third item that was discussed and amended is a broader exemption with respect to bags could have direct contact with food. i think there was a lot of concern among stakeholders of supervisors said they wanted a clearer definition of those checkout lines were the single item is a food item there would not be a charge associated with that. if you go to a cookie store and you purchase three cookies, and there is a bag out of a point of

sale, there is no 10 cent charge for that consumer, because it is items of food if you go to our hardware store and buy 25 nails for a particular project, it goes into a small band. that would not have a check out charge associated with it. the final amendment is they directed the comptroller's office that after january 13 to conduct another economic analysis on how the legislation is meeting the intended goals of reducing single use plastic bags in san francisco, so those were the general items the board of supervisors adopted that is very different from what you considered in early december.

the second item i wanted to discuss, the staff had asked about the availability of reusable, compostable bags, and what i can say it from our departments perspectives from looking at all of the five manufacturers -- bag manufacturers because of this legislation there is not one particular company that is going to benefit from this new requirement, given the fact that many municipalities are moving towards demanding progress -- products that are reusable but can withstand the legislation in terms of being able to be washed, being used