entertainment industry. so private parking facilities are generally not staffed late at night when the clubs let out. they can be poorly lit, and often they are sort of magnets for bad behavior. right now the police department permits all -- not city-owned -- but private parking facilities and requires renewal of the permits on an annual basis. currently, applicants are not required to submit any information about their security plans or procedures. basically this legislation requires operators of parking lots and garages to provide security plans as part of their permit applications to the police department. we didn't say -- ty could be sort of minimal. this is for all parking lots across the city and for all kinds of parking lot related violence, theft, muggings or whatever. but for those parking lots that are within 1,000 feet of a place of entertainment permit, the legislation says that

certain minimum security requirements would apply. the two are providing detailed lighting plans to the police department that meet the existing fire code and the second is staffing the facility until 3:00 a.m. the police chief would have the discretion to add additional security measures if a parking lot had had multiple public safety issues. you guys had a bunch of questions. the first and most important one being you wanted a map sort of looking at where all the place of entertainment permits are relative to where the permitted parking facilities are. despite herculean efforts, i was not able to get that from city staff. i'm sorry that i don't have the data for you, because i would love to have it.

that being said, i will go down the list of the rest of the questions. there were four of the questions that sort of have to do with whether -- supervisor chiu, supervisor wiener and others should change the legislation for more discretion from the police department. say the parking lot hadn't had any public safety issues. maybe the requirements for staffing could be lifted. there were always comments about whether it could be narrowed to certain toews of the week like thursday through sunday instead of the whole work. supervisor commue is very opening -- supervisor chiu is

open to allowing that type of discussion with the police department. say a lot hadn't had any public safety issue for the past two years or some sort of standard like that. that was the answer to most of the questions. i could go through specific once if you have specific questions, but maybe i will leave it at that for now. >> commissioner? >> the one thing -- i wasn't here for all this. was there any can -- any consideration that there could be remote visual monitoring. >> we talked about that, but i think like cameras would be good after the fact, after a crime has been committed. this is sort of to prevent the crimes from happening. >> and how about like panic buttons or something like that?

some other divides -- device? we have fire alarms everywhere. >> that is something a parking lot could install. >> providing flexibility to use some technology. the biggest issue is whether you have to provide staff because we all know that is the more expensive thing to do, not to mention putting some people in jeopardy as well. >> when i first looked at this, i don't know how much i like this. in the last month i have heard from the entertainment community, people who have venues up in norton beach, and nort beet they are in favor of it. if something happens in the private lots, they are the ones getting blamed for it. >> i get that. it is basically legislating a

partnership between the venues and the place where people mark in order to -- park to get to those venues. some lots are very good about it, and there are some that aren't so very good about it. >> i think as long as we can give a certain level of discretion to the authorities that are best able to make the determinations, which is law enforcement. >> i like that the areas where there are problems, that law enforcement can work with that. i'm ok with that. >> yes. >> if it is of interest to the commission, we worked with the police department and the entertainment commission on getting some police reports. there are some pretty shocking statements. there are three parking lots on broadway that we tried to pull the police reports for, and there is like attempted

homicide. it is not exactly in the parking lot, but it is around there. it is a list of assaults, grand theft, attempted homicides and other things. >> director? >> katherine -- you reached out to city car and those entities, and did you have feedback? >> we reached out, but we do not have feedback yet. we did have conversations with people. for the most part we think this would be beneficial for the companies because their property and customers are in these parking lots, and if it is a problematic parking lot, it is going to be much better off if there is staffing there. if a few lots decide to close instead of staying open until 3:00 a.m., it may be good for

business anyway. that may be one way of looking at the city carshare issue. >> any other commissioner comments? let's open it up to general public comment. is there any public comment on this? >> members of the public, public comment will be limited to three minutes. if you could please state your name clearly, and you can line up on the side wall. >> hi. good evening. my name is caroline. i am here on behalf of priority parking. the reason i'm here is that obviously priority parking and members of the parking association are very concerned about this proposed legislation. i understand the rationale behind it, but obviously they are concerned about the cost of operating the parking lots going up. and the possibility of some of these lots being shut down.

i am assuming you guys are interested because obviously this may affect some of the small businesses that rely on these parking lots. for example, restaurants. i don't want to take up too much of your times, and i only have two minutes. i just want to go through the highlights of the concerns so you are aware of those. starting with the first one, the chief would have the discretion to disapprove the plan. the chief of police would be able to promulgate rules that reach beyond the property. the chief of police would not be able to issue the commercial parking permit unless the chief first approves the security plan. even so, there is not an enumerated appeal mechanism in the legislation if the chief denies a security plan. i think this one is an item of

big concern for the parking lot operators, and actually there is a representative here from the parking association, so i will let him elaborate on this. but the requirement to have staffing if the parking lot or garage is located within 1,000 feet of any entrance or exit to the entertainment establishment, requiring staffing under all hours of operation or until 3:00 a.m. that is obviously a huge concern. for than would reason, entertainment establishment, i recommend you review the definition of that. it is extraordinarily broad. as the parking representative will articulate, this could effectively require the closing of most of the self-rohnert parking lots. i am glad to hear that supervisor chiu's office is willing to entertain the concept of a staff member

on-site if warranted. i want to point out that the chief of police will be looking at the history of incidences over the past two years when he or she reviews the plan. so there will be an ongoing review of incidents over the past two years. thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening, my name is ron. i am haven't of california parking. i am also secretary-treasurer of the parking association of san francisco. we have self objection toss this proposed ordinance. the chief being the staffing requirement. as was mentioned, entertainment establishment, and the reason they can't come up with a map, in san francisco, any place that has any kind of music -- i tried to figure it out and

understand it, but from what i can gather, almost every parking lot in san francisco would have to fall under this requirement to have staffing until 3:00 a.m. staffing is extremely expensive for companies that are union like myself. our attendants cost upwards of $22 an hour plus benefits, which brings them up to almost $35 an hour. i did a quick calculation, and to put on staffing on a lot where we don't require it now would cost over $100,000. we are faced with having to close them down. however, that presents another problem, because many of our parking lots, one of the reasons -- one of the great benefits of a parking lot versus a garage is people can come and go any time of the day or night. in a lot of locations we have

mixed use, including residents, monthly parkers who can come and go any time of the day or night. if we are forced to close them down, people won't have the flexibility to be able to come and go. i see one of the nightclub operators in the room here. steve lee from the glass cat. we operate the lot across the street from him, and we have worked to try to minimize the impact of the patrons of his establishment in our parking lot. we have gone to the extent of actually hiring 10 >> b police officers to parole and share the cost. but we couldn't afford to keep that program going. it is just not cost effective for us to have staffing even in the parking lots where it is busy, much less the locations

that don't do any business from a nightclub or entertainment establishment. thank you very much. >> thank you. next. >> hello commissioners again. steven lee. immelman a board member of cmac , i am a nightclub owner, the glass cat, the grand. all we are really asking here is not 10.b per se. we did trying that. when everybody is in the club, there are no problems. it is just at the end of the night at 2:00. i like the idea about the panic button thing, but you need somebody to push the button. we are only asking for one, because we are going out there to help get these people on their way. but then we don't have a representative of the parking lot to push this little button

if we do have a major brawl out there or any kind of problems. again, just coming and going like he says, it is great. but people that have no interest in the clubs are coming and going in the lot as well. there is no fencing. they are driving in and out, and there is nobody representing the parking lot until our security guards come there at 2:00. by that time there are already people camping out in the parking lot. in fact, now they are starting to set up hot dog stands in there. the cameras and all that because the police want that. we are just asking that there is some kind of controlled entry. one tenant even. our guards are there. i don't know about our venues, how much they are going to self staff, but our mandate is to get everybody home and not have issues. our problem is there is nobody representing the lot. they are already there to

12:00. they collect their money and pack up and leave. we are only talking about three more hours to have one extra guy. at least that the -- is the lot i deal with. the ones around city nights and the other lots around freeway and things, a lot of them are totally unattended, not collecting any money and wide open. with that said, i just think it is a public safety issue. we are tired of policing it even though it is our job in a sense. we don't want any injuries with our patrons, and it is really a drag when somebody gets their car broken into. a lot of team we are kicking out people who are pretending to be attendants. they are collecting money from our customers. that is all i have to say. >> any other public comment?

commissioners? commissioner o'brien? >> i wish you guys had shown up last month when we had this discussion. we definitely heard loud and clear language from the side that wanted to do something about a problem that seems we all agree exists today, which is the parking lots. i do remember making the suggestion that cameras could be installed. one of the responses back was cameras just don't have an effect. they really don't work. i realized when i heard that that people that are breaking into convenience stores and what not don't pay any attention to the camera. they wave at the camera to say hello. we heard a lot of stuff. all the commissioners at the

start were responding with another fee, and they are going to pay money. but by the time the end of night came, they began to feel that there is something in this, and there is some merit to what is going on. i can reintroduce you back up with a question. i would like to ask you to come back up for a question. can you introduce something that is not going to be so cost prohibitive financially. this is an issue we need to address. >> yes, certain locations, certain nightclub and venues. it depends on the nightclub itself, what kind of people it draws, and the performance that is happening that particular evening. certain types of venues draw different types of crowds that tend to party after, and some venues don't have any problems whatsoever. i bring up the example of

yoshi's, a jazz bar. people that go in there don't cause any issues or problems. it depends on the type of venue, who the performer is, who the d.j. is, and the type of people that come into these nightclub. that is one concern. also if it is a busy night, the friday and saturday evenings, yes it is possible that we could make enough money to staff them until 3:00 a.m. again, though, i have concerns about my attendant being out there at 3:00 in the morning. he is not a policeman. they are not trained to handle violence or crime. i don't know what he is supposed to do, maybe push a button, and i don't know what good that is going to do. there is that issue as well. this requirement is seven days a week until 3:00 a.m. for places that don't have any nightclub business. it has to be moderate fight and restricted. it is too overreaching. >> thank you.

commissioner dooley? >> it seems to me the betts solution to this question is to -- the best solution to this question is continue on the path to have the police chief waive this requirement if there is no history of problems. it seems like that would be a fairway to go about this. because clearly there are many parking lots -- living near broadway know that every parking lot on broadway has a history of problems. so if we could possibly narrow it in some way, if that is possible, to have it have the non-problem causing people waved. if they started having problems, then they would need to be reviewed. >> commissioner? >> i have to say that at our last meeting, the public

comment, the testimony that we heard about public safety was compelling. i mean it was compelling. we are looking at legislation that would require that lots be either staffed or that they close, that they be fenced off and access not be given. because when cars park, things happen in the cars, people drinking and partying in their cars through the night, that is just not acceptable. there is expensive public safety costs and fall-out. but beyond that there is just the personal safety of people in the neighborhoods, and even in the downtown neighborhoods. i will actually go back to the original legislation and say that i don't see that it is onerous for the parking lot owners to work with the police

department on developing security plans, and to work with the chief of police. who will you be working with? you will be working with the district station venue people and the operators to come up with a credible, workable security plan, what it really looks like. i would just recommend that the industry take that proactive step. our commissioner that is missing, michael owe connor. it is interesting you brought up a hot dog staff. he asked what is staffing. does it have to be an employee of the parking lot directly? can it be a vendor or food trucks? maybe there are creative solutions. again, i'm sympathetic with using data to drive these plans

. i think that is absolutely appropriate. one size fits all does not work. it is not necessary. but at the same time i am in favor of actual people being out there. i am. i mean we are automating, we are taking people out of the equation as much as we can. people are too expensive. people are different to -- difficult to manage. at some point we are going to have to say you know i have a person out there because it is good to have a person out there, and that is a job for that person, and there is somebody willing to do that job, and that is a job worth having. i am sympathetic to that argument, having people. again, there are a lot of ways to work on this legislation with fencing, with closing, with staffing, and also with working with the police department.

so i am in support of it. >> commissioner dwight? >> i might suggest that we look to universities who have addressed this problem. this was a big problem at stanford yifert, and then i stalled all over campus this motion of a panic button. i'm talking about the same thing we have on street corners, which is fire alarms and police alerts. this would be a publicized infrastructure which says if i am in a lot, and i feel threatened, and i hit this button, i can expect that the police are going to respond, and especially that the police will be on a heightened alert knowing it is friday night. if we see one of these things go off, we know there is a potential problem. i am also surprised that surveillance cameras are poo-pooed. i will say when i see surveillance cameras at 10:00

on the news, i feel good that about 10 to 100,000 people are going to go i know that guy. he is my neighbor or something. today you really can't get away with much if you are on a surveillance camera. the internet allows the prop gation of that foot -- the prop gation of that footage in an instant. it gets on television, youtube and all over thes place. i think a combination of technology to address places where staffing is expensive and onerous, or on nights where it is more onerous than other nights. there is probably a combination of efforts that can be taken to provide security in the places and venues that are known to be

more post. >> can you address that, supervisor, about having the technology instead of having life human beings there? >> sure. first of all. i want to thank you all for how hard you are working. you should be on the board of supervisors. we are all working into the night. i know my aid had gone into this a bit, but i have over the past almost four years legislated several pieces of legislation to deal with different aspects of nightclub violence. for example, we have passed several pieces of legislation to require nightclub owners to have security plans. in fact, they are required to have security guards as a ratio of one security guard to every 50 patrons in a place because it requires that level of human interaction to sort of keep folks from doing things they

would otherwise regret the next day. then we move to a piece of legislation to address party rooms. the crowds they create have often led to issues. now we have continued to see a pattern of violence happen in and around parking loss. i know my aid had gone into some of the crime statistics. we were able to obtain some stats, and i want to show you. these are the crime statistics in three parks lots. at the 470 broadway lot, there were 21 total incidents, including assault, theft, robberies. if we move on to the next site at 425 broadway. we have a similar number, aggravated assault, attempted

homicide, burglaries, larceny and theft. then there is a third parking lot, just down the street again. four incidents again involving assault, burglaries and larceny. this is a really problem. anyone who suggested it is not, i would certainly dispute that. i am open to an amendment that would give the police chief the discretion to decide exactly which parking lots are 1,000 feet of a place of entertainment have been creating trouble. if there is a parking lot that has a record of safety, i will not insist that that parking locality have a security guard. but i do think that while i have thought about technological approaches to this, as we all know, technology is often reactive. it doesn't prevent a crime from happening, particularly after a long night that may involve drinking. oftentimes the fights that

happen in these parking lots are crimes of passion, as well as other crimes of opportunity. but if it turns out that there are effective ways of dealing with this in other parts of the country, i am very willing to consider technology, but i think there is a difference between the stanford campus and what is actually happening on the streets, on broadway. commissioner, you have one of these businesses, and you see what happens on broadway on a daly or nightly basis. so i am open to considering tecau nodge cal approaches, -- technological approaches.

>> the path of appealing a decision that was made by a permit officer? that was the piece that actually spoke to me. what i would like to do is give the police chief that discretion. i don't know what the appeals process is if the police chief makes a decision that a party doesn't agree with, but i am happy to explore that. >> in fairness to the parking lot operators, sometimes we have more sympathetic people in the police department -- i don't know. you know that the relationship between the police department and places of entertainment has at times been very difficult and not as