i ask that this afternoon to see the hospitals grow in the community be approved because bayview hunters point has the most unemployed workers and the majority of them belong to local 261 which i'm signatory to. this would bring wealth back into a community that has been slighted so long and there is so much work to be done on this project that i think a lot of people could come off the welfare roles, the unemployment roles and could become productive. that's one community that really deserves it. i'm definitely a forerunner for my community and san francisco as a san francisco resident, graduated here and my daughter gets her master's next month. i believe in san francisco and i believe in the commissioners. please vote for the right thing. thank you.

>> good afternoon. my name is joe fang. i would ask you for a little patience and forgiveness if i sound a little incoherent. i barely stepped off the plane coming from hong kong. so it's 3:30 in the morning right now. i have been coming to these meetings for a couple of years now and i have also been traveling to hong kong, china, and other parts of the world for many years. i don't know when this project was first started, it must have been at least four or five years ago, but in these four or five years, you know, i have watched entire cities in china spring up out of nothing. i'm just amazed that a business like this, that a project like this that is going to bring nothing but good to the city of san francisco, we sorely need

this project, a project like this. not too many businesses would have the patience to endure to go through the hardship and the perseverance of getting this approval process. now, the city and this country is going downhill, is going to hell because of processes like this. businesses just don't have the patience for the resources to go through this kind of process. you know the city is going broke. we need the money. we need the tax money and i listen to all of these people oppose this project because of their special interests. well, businesses don't -- can't survive on catering to every single special business. you have to look at the overall good of the entire project, ok. you as city leaders have to overlook -- yeah, the minor details, you have to work out

after the project has started. but for god's sake, let's try to cut out all of this bull, cut out all of the red tape and do what is good for the city. thank you. >> he is a hard act to follow. good evening, commissioners. my name is florence, a native san franciscoan and a long time homeowner, i was married in this building. i feel like it's my church. i'm a library clerk and an arrest he can vist at cpmc and in support of the rebuild plan. last year one of our house guests visiting from arizona had a near fatal heart attack on the street. he was taken to the davies campus and to the cardiac intensive care unit. he was saved and he and his family remain grateful for the care they received at the

hospital and in san francisco. when this story was playing out, i had occasions to visit him. i was disturbed by the notion that the patient, the medical staff, the family, and all of the high-tech medical equipment was crammed into one incredibly small room. it didn't seem to be in anybody's best interest. many a night patrick's wife slept in a hard care or on a gurney appropriated on her behalf by the kindly nurses, there were many, nurses, not gurney's. she wanted to be available to her frightened an confused husband as he woke in the night. family members are a vital part of the care time. modern hospital provide comfortable spaces for them. we can't do that in our outdated buildings. we certainly could in new facilities. patients at the st. luke's and other campuses are hospitalized in vulnerable buildings when they themselves are at their most vulnerable. i would like to advocate for a city and its unemployed workers

as well as for our patients, portions of the van ess corridor are moribund. the buildings would provide jobs and would serve to revitalize this area. for the sake of our patients, our workers and our city, please approve this plan, thank you. president fong: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is barbara savitz. i would like to leave you with this thought. commissioners, you are dealing with a corporation whose c.e.o. alone made $4 million last year, yet he can't agree to a community benefits package which would enable the new hospital to be built with more consideration for renters that would have to move, traffic that would be terribly congested and jobs that would have no guarantee forrest dents or union workers. if it weren't for the california nurse association and community groups who fought and were successful in keeping st. luke's open, there would be

even fewer jobs in the rebuild. sutter, how can these 6200 jobs be guaranteed? sutter cannot or will not offer their nurses the backbone of the hospital the ones recognized as the most ethical professions in the country the right to work in the new hospital. to date, nurses do not have transfer rights. pat fry, have a heart. maybe one that you advertise and care about those who are caring for your patients. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, eric brooks, i'm here representing the san francisco green party and also the local grassroots organization in our city. first, i would like to point out that this process would not have taken 10 years had sutter health sat down with the entire community and negotiated in good faith to reach consensus

on all of the things that we're raising as problems with this thing. i would like to also start out by speaking to all the trade union members that were in here, the building trades. no one is talking about building less than 635 beds and hopefully we're talking about building more. what we're talking about is where and how to build those beds, not whether or not you all are going to get jobs. you're going to get those jobs. we need to build this system right. the broad issue here, the issue that covers this whole thing is that this is not just the rebuilding a hospital and building a new one. this is rebuilding an entire network of hospitals and changing the way they operate across the entire city that is going to affect the health and welfare of hundreds of thousands of people who need to use those hospital services for

the rest of this century. we need to do that right. and anyone, anyone from mars could look at this project plan and see that we're taking one hospital in a poor neighborhood from a couple hundred beds down to 80 and then building a huge one in a more wealthy neighborhood where there are going to be major traffic problems and just recognize from that that it's a bad idea. above and beyond that, sutter is going to make some of its other satellite facilities smaller. it's going to be competing with facilities around it making those smaller. this is clearly a bad way to do a plan for the entire city to make sure that everyone is taken care of and their health care is properly taken care of. so we don't want fewer jobs. we want the jobs to be implemented in a different way to build a project that is

going to equally serve the entire city and is not going to get snarled up in the case of a major earthquake. it's really kind of funny to listen to people talk about earthquake safety when their intention is to create earthquake safety into new ubtse by creating a problem that creates even more earthquake danger by putting a giant hospital in the middle of a bad transit area instead of putting a big one at st. luke's and a smaller one than currently proposed for the van ess area. the health care master plan is going to be coming out within a year or so. there is no reason whatsoever that we shouldn't wait for that plan and make sutter do this right. president fong: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners, my name is aaron cone. i'm here to speak on behalf of the owners of the property at 1000 van ess.

we are neighborhood to the proposed cpmc facility at cathedral hill. i'm here to encourage the commission to certify the e.i.r. my client has followed the hospital process with great interest. they made a strategic decision to invest in the neighborhood because of both its dynamic nature and the positive impact of having a major health care facility nearby. i have watched the loss of local businesses in the van ess corridor and the tenderloin over the last several years. it is our firm belief that the hospital's first significant investment from developers, construction of the facilities planned under the e.i.r. will bring 1,500 new construction jobs. these workers and the visitors and employees of the medical complex will bring significant new services into our neighborhood. diverse businesses will be incentivized to relocate near the new cpmc complex to serve hospital patients, visitors, and staff and the community at large.

the dollars spent in local businesses will help encourage additional entrepreneurial opportunities forrest dents. we are encouraged about the benefits of having a 24-hour facility and it's accompanying around the clock security. this will provide safety without added strain on law enforcement. the final e.i.r. you are considering directly reflects the work of the blue ribbon community when included representatives of the city, community, and religious groups, unions, doctors, nurses, and cpmc. the e.i.r. incorporates every single recommendation of the committee. in closing, cpmc has proven itself to be a good neighbor who considered the concerns of the surrounding community. thank you for your attention. thank you. >> hello, my name is ryan bear, i'm a community organizer with cpmc. i'm working to grow food with residents in the tenderloin. i'm also a sixth generation san franciscan and i also hold a

degree in urban planning from san francisco state university. first of all, we're talking about health care. we're not talking about business. i hear a lot of people talking about business. we're all for health care, but we're not for the business of health care. i know as a fellow planner, all of you all are looking at the questions of for whom and for what this building is for. it's not just simply health care, but for who and for what. also, i'm sure you're aware of the level of importance for participatory planning as there are so many community leaders speaking up against this as opposed to peaceful and fancy suits, i believe that should be raising red flags for y'all. the current master plan for cpmc does not promote the health of our neighborhoods. we're here to ensure that we do not approve this development which has the generation of profits over the health of our community. this is a community of families and individuals that are in desperate need of affordable

housing, food, and health care. this is not a hospital set on serving the local population. we do not want a hospital that will not commit to hire locally and does not provide charitable health care. you must recognize the overall well-being of our city. you must be aware that the displacement in san francisco as a result of urban renewal in the western edition, the geary boulevard expansion, dot come boom and busts and loss in the city. the cpmc hospital will be added to this list if you refuse to listen to us as a community. we are urging you not to the follow the legacy of justin herman and other planners who put the well become of financial interests over the development of healthy community. this development does not hold true to zoning codes. the master plan of san francisco as well as the van ess corridor area plan. as planners, you must see the fact that the hospital will demolish current housing stock and will drive up the costs of

living in one of the most expensive cities on the planet. you must not accept this current proposal as it stands until it reflects the need and demands of the people. i have heard a lot of use of the word community and i ask you to think about what does that mean? who is involved in the community, define community. does this involve everyone or a certain group of individuals. thank you. >> good evening, president fong and commissioners. i actually am from the community. i was born and raised in san francisco. i went to st. phillips and archbishop reardon high school. i currently own a home here and the idea of having a seismically safe modern hospital in my neighborhood is one that i support. i have one truly vivid memory from when i was 3 years old, a day i'll never forget in my entire life and that's the 1989 earthquake.

i know exactly where i was and what i was doing. i urge you guys to do what's right to ensure the safety of this city and approve the e.i.r. today. thank you. president fong: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm representing george wu and i'll go into it right now. i'm on the board of physicians organize committee and received, retired last year from st. luke's as chief of plastic surgery and hand surgery after 31 years on staff. st. luke is the only other hospital south of market, which often overruns, thank you, often runs over capacity and diverts patients to st. luke's. the argument that you cannot pull all of your police stations or fire departments north of market remains as valid now as it did when the blue ribbon panel concluded the need to rebuild st. luke's. the bay area is due for major earthquake.

we must have redundancy of health care access points. please strike out the prerogative in determining the operating commitments based upon two consecutive years of less than 1% operating margin revenue. st. luke's provides emergency services for orthopedic injuries without the ability of a cast cart orcas technician to facilitate the care. this would easily -- this would be easy to remedy the administrators if the administrators have the will. if you break your arm and go to st. luke's, they can give you a splint, but no cast. without a nearby skilled nursing community, care by physicians and needed family contact with the patient is sacrificed. this must adequately be addressed. finally, psychiatric illnesses is an enormous problem in our society. witness the recent mass shootings due to lack of early intervention. hospitalization is necessary

for the violently in klein. we cannot afford hospitals to deny need. before this agreement can proceed, it needs three weeks including psychiatric care, skilled nursing beds and the elimination of the 1% clause. thank you and again, as a citizen, i got to urge you all the talk about earthquakes, the worst thing to happen is an earthquake clogging up that congested area. i would move, again, everybody wants jobs, wants to do it right, possibly a block or two away, get an access point underground for emergency vehicles. as a patient, my dad and i live actually on the south end of the city. he has congestive heart failure. a window, i had to nearly, i had to run red lights, put other people in danger to get my dad there on time before he died of congestive heart failure. i would also move at the end of the city when any of you have meetings or plans on that end of the city and fate steps in, you might get hit by another car, car crash, drunk driver. if you're on that end of the

city and it falls on you to come into this hospital, where would you want to be, hospital access at this point or having to fight the whole city to get to cpmc? so, again, please don't ignore a large part of the city and the demographics are changing as well as drug use, san francisco is one of the highest drug use cities in the nation, possibly the world. people from all over the world getting addicted causing mental health illness. if they don't have any access, the prison population will rise and those people will be in prison. thank you. president fong: thank you very much. next speaker. >> thank you. president fong, members of the commission, my name is david meckel. i'm the director of research and planning at california college of the arts where i founded san francisco's first professional architectural program 27 years ago. my expertise is in city planning, urban design, and

architecture. in my professional opinion, cpmc's plan for the architecture urban design and public ground improvements of this public are smart, sustainable, and urbanistcally sophisticated. it puts hospital beds and services where transit and people are located and done so in a way that enhances streetscapes, roofscapes and solar access. cpmc's plan has enhancements that are appropriate to the pacific heights, the triangle and neighborhoods while concentrating the highest density of beds and service at the van ess and gerrie location where the highest density of people and urban infrastructure will best be accommodated by them. the intersection of these two arrest teerls and they're direction to the high-rise buildings is a good location. the van ess location used an

innovative drive threw and drop-off to efficiently absorb traffic on surrounding streets. an emergency drop-off plaza, an internal loading dock and a front door facing van ess avenue are all smartly placed access points in the design of the building. the sustain act initiatives are ambitious and admirable, daylighting, nontoxic building materials, green roofs for both people and missing species habitats, irrigation demand met by stormwater capture and the resulting diversion of that runoff from the city's storm and sewer system signal a design approach that will advance san francisco's climate commitment while also creating significantly improved environments of health and healing for our communities. the fact that this building consolidates a vast array of medical services in a compact

design place in the heart of the city with limited parking for staff encouraging public transit use for daily commuting makes this a standout hospital. i respectfully request that the planning commission certify the e.i.r. and move cpmc's architecture, urban design, and public ground commitments forward so that our city and citizens can be served as soon as possible by the seismically safe and smartly designed facilities. thank you. president fong: thank you. >> good afternoon, pilar, california nurses association. thank you, president fong and commissioners for your attention to this matter. we understand it's been a very long day. we understand this has been a struggle for many years for many of us in this room and so we really appreciate that you're giving the attention that it deserves because this

project really has huge impact in the city and in the shape of health care really for san francisco and san franciscans for decades to come. one of the faulty things about how this project has been looked at in a lot of ways, it's looked at a construction project rather than a hospital. it's creating construction jobs up front which is great, the jobs that are going to be here for the long term are nurses, health care workers, the engineers who spoke earlier. this actually could end up being a net job loss. with the current agreement before you. if you are talking about four san francisco residents, the only commitment that you have, that the city has is 40 jobs a year for five years, less than 5% of all of the jobs, right, so if you lose nurses from one hospital to the next hospital,

other health care workers to the next hospital, this can actually be a job loser for the city of san francisco. and this agreement is faulty not only in the area of jobs, but in health care and traffic, in transit, in housing and there is a trend in this project that shifts cost and responsibility and in providing health care to the city, san francisco taxpayers and your budget that the city of san francisco is currently struggling with right now. you know, there has been a lot of stories about the health care that people have received, which is great. it's a hospital. they're supposed to provide health care. it's like saying that our nurses took care of them in the hospital. they're supposed to do that. the problem is they still don't do enough, even with everything that they do, the deal says that they can do less charity

care than they are currently doing now. so they actually can lower the bar when it comes to charity care and it's been a fight for years to get them to do their fair share around charity care. in the area of cathedral hill, this is not an area where the environmental impacts can be mitigated in this plan. they cannot. you can't say that you increase traffic and somehow the impacts go down. there are so many faulty pieces in this plan that they have put forward that don't really explore the alternative where you would have a larger st. luke's, where you could actually -- that's really the only alternative that would mitigate the problems at the cathedral hill site and in terms of concerns for our nurses and the communities that we're representing as a coalition, there is a huge concern around emergency access that how on one of the busiest

corners in the city of san francisco, people's lives are at stake in terms of being able to get to that hospital. they are not producing a plan that shows how those emergency vehicles are actually going to get to the hospital. in terms of the housing jobs linkage, they're not doing their fair share around that. on issue after issue after issue, they're actually undermining city policy, undermining the city budget and in cpmc fashion as we know as people who have negotiated with them for decades, they drive a hard bargain and they make sure that their bottom line benefits in the end. this is exactly what is happening in this deal. it's a benefit for cpmc. it is not a benefit for the city on many different levels. it is not going to turn out, unless you have it on paper as the stationary engineer said earlier, unless you have this deal on paper right now, it's

not going to get better. they will not get better. so we hope that you will really send us this project back, do not certify the e.i.r. and please make sure that the alternative is fully explored to ensure that this is something that is really understood as a true alternative to mitigate the impacts that are happening at the cathedral hill site. i'll end even though i don't think i was timed. thank you. >> good evening, thank you, president fong and members of the planning commission. i'm kathleen carroll. i'm the director of workforce development and relations of the prime contractor for the two proposed hospitals. we heard a lot of people coming up here today who i have worked with, who we have committed our time and our effort to find the jobs in san francisco. they're san francisco

residents. i had a whole speech planned. i'm not going to sit here and read it. what i am going to tell you is that i have never seen a level of commitment and the ideal place that we would want to be with all of the people that we work with. we are not looking for one up jobs for people on the construction projects. we are looking to build long-term careers. that's what we're doing. that's why we work with city build academy. it's why we work with the construction admin program. that's why we have been collaborated with the office of economic workforce development for two years, city build, mission hiring hall, the unions and our other sub contractors. we have done a lot. it's what we want to do. it's what we want to continue to do. i really have just touched the surface of our commitment. there is a lot in the workforce agreement that you all have in front of you. this is my full time job. it's become much more than that for me.

it's actually my calling. it's what i love to do. it's what i look forward to do for the next six years. on a more personal note. i have been receiving care at cpmc before it was even cpmc, 1986, my son was born there in 2001. he had four successful surgeries there. in 2009, i was diagnosed with early stage breast cancer and i was treated at cpmc. amazing care, amazing doctors and surgeons and nurses, no doubt about it. i can't imagine what it would be like if we were to continue with the hospitals the way they are, the cpmc hospitals, the california campus, st. luke's. i fully support rebuilding the project and i hope you vote yes tonight, thank you. president fong: thank you. >> good evening, my name is yanika brooks. i'm a registered nurse at cpmc. i just came from work. i feel quite vulnerable in my

uniform. i work mostly with the elderly or, i don't know, those over 65 and medicare patients. it was six, seven years ago, the first e.i.r. where skilled nursing beds would be eliminated from cpmc. and we nurses were quite concerned about that so it's a community and we have fought and testified in this building for years to keep the skilled nursing beds, the medicare beds in cpmc opened. we finally got a commitment from cpmc to keep 100 open, but, you know, it's 100 open in the community and frankly, i would like to see something a little clearer, with a little more commitment on what those 100 beds, where those 100 beds will be in san francisco and what they will look