basically, i don't know -- could be that these are actual rental units going up within the developments on market. i revert to the old term condominiums so that's basically what i meant. >> a number of the projects that are either planned or about to go into construction in the plan area are rentals. >> okay. >> there's a mix. >> okay, thank you. >> can you talk a little bit about this car sharing, one of the issues that we're really taking a look at is accessibility of car sharing in the upper market area. could you maybe talk about that a little bit? >> well, obviously car sharing with the location of the facilities, car sharing facilities, so i'm assuming this is going moving right

along here and moving one step further. first i would have to wonder where exactly the facility for car sharing, whether this would be one on one done iconically through electronic means, customer to customer or sharer to sharer. i have to study that issue a little bit more. >> more specifically about care sharing spots in developments, for example, in the market-octavia plan area in terms of requirements for making them optional for making them possible. >> well, i would say that that would be a very favorable to have those required in new developments as a percentage of off street parking that is required for lease developments, yes, of course. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much for your consideration and time. >> thank you, mr. steen next, we have nick wolff, nick you have spoken before to this committee but you are welcome

it speak again if you would like. i know many of the questions had come up around not really your qualifications to sit on the seat, you are very well qualified to sit on the cac as someone who works in the market-octavia plan but to really flesh out some of how you would represent the low income community in this seat. >> sure. thank you, madam chair and supervisors. thank you for your time today. i did believe that i am the right person for this seat and i welcome this opportunity to discuss my candidacy further. i work in the economic development department in the lgbt center in market and octavia. i also commute to work on muni every day and i am invested in this area's development. i have the background and leadership experience in community development and i am committed to bringing the needs of low

income residents to the forefront in this seat. along with an understanding of gentrification and displacement about how that will adversely affect long time residents of this area, in particular the low income and lgbt community when you talk about breaking support networks and eroding political power, i also understand a lot of the core land use issues as well. in particular housing and again while i understand that this cac doesn't formally get involved until permits are filed, one of my real priorities in this seat is affordable housing and rental options, in particular given how much of a safety net that they are in the city and as a homelessness prevention measure right now. i think it's important to address the fact that many of the developers in the upper

market area have been able to fee out of the inclusionary zoning requirements, which is an important tool as we work to create economically diverse communities within this project area. access to clean safe public open space is something that every resident in this area deserves and every effort needs to be made to prioritize open space preservation and creation. low income populations in particular are more likely to be victims of pedestrian-vehicle accidents so making intersections safer, particularly along upper market, is a priority of mine as well. so, too, are creating pathways in the form of service and support for better life outcomes for existing residents. so i'd like to see an emphasis put on economic and employment support that prioritizes local residents.

something so much like the soma stablization fund that we heard earlier. specifically i like, i want to create pathways and support around eviction prevention, down payment assistance, tenant repair and maintenance and healthy outcomes as well through support services from local nonprofit providers, lion martin, alliance aids health project and others. i'm committed in the seat of staying connected and accountable to the evolving concerns of residents, low income residents, through periodic check-ins with leaders who i have relationships with, with community housing partnership, mercy housing and others. and this of course is on top of my day-to-day work at the lgbt center where a majority of individuals who come through the door on a daily basis are low income,

many extremely low income. so i want to reiterate my desire to serve in this seat on this committee and thank you for your time this afternoon. >> thank you, mr. wolff, thank you so much for coming back again to the rules committee. i just have a quick question about something you said, how the fee out inclusionary program helped contribute to the diversity of communities? i may have misheard you. >> this inclusionary zoning fee is a tool to create economically diverse communities and i think the ability to fee out of that works against that as a goal of the cac >> the community recently

wrote a letter against the fee out. are there any questions from committee members? seeing none, we will move on to public comment. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. my name is thomas harper, i work with the chp subdivision solutions sf working with low income housing as a temporary desk clerk. i also am an entrepreneur working on my small business street studios which is expanding to become a program that will support other low income youth in poverty who are creative to rocket into that area where they can sell and produce their own creative works. i feel that i speak on behalf of other maligned young very low income people of my age

set. when i say that last year i was homeless in the shelters and now i have supportive income housing, i am transgendered and i speak for that subset as well and i'd like to be able to say that more than has ever been appropriate before, the children are the future. people say that but at this point the people of my age set who are going through these difficult things are also the people who are really linked into the technology, into google, into self-education, these sort of just free spread of information things, and they are the ones who are solving the problems. they are the ones who are coming up with solutions to the stuff that they are in every day, head deep, and i'm one of them. and if it wasn't for him helping me

at lgbt center, pointing me in the correct direction, i wouldn't be creating a program to help other youth of my own age. you can have all the great ideas that you want when you are in the homeless system but without that supportive housing then you won't get anywhere. thank you for your time. >> thank you so much for being here. we appreciate hearing from you. is there any other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues, we have item 7 before you which was continued from two weeks ago. supervisor avalos. >> thank you, i do appreciate both candidates being here. i appreciate mr. wolff coming here a second time as well and want to thank you for deepening your commitment and your response to our questioning here at the committee. i'm actually very impressed with mr. steen's, his work in the past and his current work as

well, he has not stopped his commitment i believe to working with and on behalf of low income people and i feel that he better represents the interests of what this seat is about and he's talking about a lot of things that i think are a big concern of mine as we're seeing san francisco move in a direction that is working more for the wealthy when he clearly hits the notes i want to hear when he talks about making sure we have the perspective of folks that are not getting the advantage that many others are getting in the city. that's something we have to look for as a city and i want to appoint people to bodies that look at our land use from that perspective, so i would like to support mr. steen in this position and would like to motion that. >> okay, so there is a motion to move forward on mr. steen to the board for this seat on the

market-octavia citizen's advicery committee. i just want to say a couple of things. i was one of the members had brought up concerns about insuring that we had a low income perspective in the market-octavia citizens advisory committee. i want to really appreciate mr. wolff for really spending the additional time to do some work and some research around some of the issues that impact our lower income communities and appreciate the time you spent with me to sit down and talk about some of these issues and i think they are much more fleshed out and i understand your perspective a lot better. do you really think that your work is focused around small business development and i think that perspective is incredibly important for this plan, but i think in terms of what the seat is being called for, i think that mr. steen more strongly represents that perspective that i would like to see as a low income sro tenant that lives in the octavia-market plan.

the market-octavia plan also includes district 6 as well as district 5 and we don't have any member in district 6 in the cac i know that mr. steen lives in a historic sro hotel on market street and also does a lot of work on continuum care and just was appreciative of your ability to be able to articulate i think what you think are some of the perspectives and needs of very low income residents in the area. i know we can kind of debate what is low income, what is not. i generally don't view ami above 60 percent to be low income. i used to be in that income range, actually right around 60, 70 percent ami i do not consider myself low income. that being said, nick, i know the lgbt center does really support low income residents and i would like to see you in

some capacity engaged in this cac in the future, or another cac where i think your small business expertise will really come in use and really appreciate the work you have done in viz valley as well. i was very impressed by mr. steen and will be happy to support this motion. mr. farrell. >> do you want --. >> i'm sorry, supervisor wiener and then supervisor farrell. >> thank you, madam chair. again, thank you to both candidates. i as i did two weeks ago or three weeks ago, whenever the last meeting was, support mr. wolff and am proud to join supervisor cohen in that support. i also know that rebecca rolf, executive director of the lgbt center which provides services to low

income people, was here but due to the length of the last item had to leave and i know she feels strongly about this and i agree with her. i think mr. wolff would provide an excellent perspective on the market-octavia cac as i mentioned, i work with the cac frequently and i think he would bring a terrific perspective. i also think the lgbt center, having the center directly connected into the cac makes a lot of sense as we have more development in that part of market street the lgbt center is going it play a more and more significant role in the community so i think it makes sense to have someone from the center on there, which is why i was excited when mr. wolff applied. i think he does work with low income people, the center certainly works with an enormous number of low income

people in the lgbt community and otherwise and i also want to respond to a point that supervisor kim just made about what qualifies as low income. this is a debate we have had in the past. but just to be very, very clear, under 80 percent of ami under san francisco law, state law and federal law is considered to be low income. the federal housing act of 1937 defines 80 percent or under 80 percent as low income. california uses the same standard. our housing element defines under 80 percent of ami as low income. our housing code defines under 80 percent as low income. our planning code also at section 401b defines under 80 percent of ami as low income and our administrative code defines under 80 percent of ami as low

income. i have not seen any other legal standards that provide otherwise so whatever one's personal opinion, the standards that we apply in san francisco define under 80 percent of the ami as low income and the enabling legislation creating a low income seat for the market-octavia cac does not provide otherwise. so i think for the sake of consistency we should be applying that standard. i will also note that this seat was held for a number of years by peter cohen, who by his own statement before this committee almost a year ago is not low income. and mr. cohen held the seat for quite some time and when he was not reappointed by the board of supervisors earlier this year 5 members of the board, two of whom are sitting here in this committee today, voted to

reappoint him and i don't recall this issue being brought up. so i'm surprised it hear it being brought up today from someone who under san francisco's own definition of low income undisputiblely qualifies as low income. so i do support mr. wolff and colleagues i ask for your support. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. supervisor farrell. >> to both candidates, thank you very much for coming forward. much appreciated. will looks like we'll have a split here. i associate myself with some of supervisor wiener's comments. you know, to me this is a seat where it's a low income seat but that's a qualification to sit on this, not that you have to be working as your vocation in that community necessarily. and i do believe i am very familiar with the lgbt center,

i'm very supportive of that and rebecca and all the good work you do, that's something i would like to be supportive of, especially here given, as supervisor wiener mentioned, it's the heart of this area. so anyways, i will again thank you to you both for being here, much appreciated. i will be supporting mr. wolff and will continue to do so at the full board. >> thank you, supervisor farrell. i believe we will have to take a roll call on this item. just very quickly, i actually want to concur with supervisor wiener's statements about the definitions. i think clearly it fits under the definition of low income. i think that's definitely the case. i think then peter cohen, we certainly felt that he could represent the perspective of low income communities due to his work in affordable housing so i think he was able to represent that perspective, but i do agree that i would much more prefer to have a resident in the market-octavia plan that is low income that understands

the population, knows the population because they are their neighbors. so i think that is certainly important. i think that actually either of you will be great on the cac no matter what happens at the full board i will support either of you. i do feel more comfortable moving ford with mr. steen as our recommendation to the full board but if it is the case the full board goes with mr. wolff, i will certainly support you to the full board as well. i want to comment quickly on the lgbt center. i agree it's at the heart of the plan but when we created the cac last december and we had 9 seats up, that issue did not come up that we needed to have someone from the lgbt center. i wish i had the opportunity to support the lgbt center last year when we had 9 open seats because that certainly was the case. i will move forward with this motion. can we take roll call on this motion, madam clerk.

>> supervisor farrell. >> no. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> supervisor kim. >> aye. >> kim aye, two ayes, one no. >> i want to thank the applicants before us today, i think we have two great applicants before us and i look forward to seeing both of you in january when this item comes before the full board. out of consideration for our city attorney, who has child care duties, i am going to call item 10 and 11 out of order and i really apologize to howard bloomberg if you are here, i'm sorry this is taking some time. i believe justin true is here on behalf of president david chiu -- madam clerk, can you please call 10 and 11. >> item 10, ordinance amending

the campaign governmental conduct code to require electronic filing of campaign statements. no. 11, updating conflict of interest code. >> my name is judson true, i am here on these two items which president chiu sponsored. would you like to take 11 first or any particular order? >> i think we're just going to have both items --. >> they were directly connected other than being updated to our campaign and governmental conduct code. the first one is the item that's very simple, very clear, state law, a measure sponsored by assembly man ammiano now allows us to forego requiring any paper filing for campaigns. as

you can see it's a short quick clear sirpl item. i know it was a priority of the city. mr. sincori championed us at the local level and worked with mr. ammiano. they plan to implement it by next summer and would obviously not require any more filing of paper copies which makes imminent sense. the second item is a lengthy item that is the biannual requirement for us to update our conflict of interest code. it's a rather lengthy ordinance but an assembly of all the conflict of interest codes. each individual department works with the city department's office and ethics commission to update the categories whether or not certain officers of the city if they are involved in decisions of the city have to file form 700 statements of economic interest and so forth, so this

is merely the requirement of our biannual update. i do have a request of the committee to adopt an amendment of the whole since it is a lengthy ordinance as the city attorney went through it they found a few drafting errors and i can provide a copy to the clerk and provide a copy of the committee members and mr. gibner, deputy city attorney, is available to go over any substantive items of who is in what category. i do have a summary but it involves things like delete duplicate entries for the redevelopment commission and there is no longer a puc i am available for questions if the committee has any. >> i see no questions. supervisor avalos. >> do we have the commission

on community investment infrastructure, is that part of this? >> that is a good question. i don't believe it's required at this point because it doesn't exist yet. the members haven't been seated. >> will it be an oversight if it's not included here. >> what we're planning to do here once the committee is constituted and makes a formal hire of the executive director, we would work to come up with a list of all the positions under the commission and propose trailing legislation that would create a conflict of interest code -- amend the conflict of interest code. >> i note this isn't on as a committee report so is it possible at all that by january we will be able to introduce those amendments or probably not if they have to hire the executive director and do a number of other actions. >> it's possible, we were discussing it just this afternoon. i'm not sure. we can discuss it with the commissioners and the executive

director. >> thank you, city attorney gibner. >> we did want to have this in committee before the end of the year, just to signal it was before the full board. >> thank you, mr. true. i see no further questions from colleagues. at this time we will open up for public comment, if there's any public comment on this item. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> so motion to approve both items, accept the amendment of the whole for no. 11 and we can move forward with the recommendation. >> thank you, so we do have a motion to amend item no. 11 as stated by mr. true as an amendment of the whole, we can do that without objection. we also have a motion to move forward items 10 and 1 wpb to the full board without

objection. >> item 8, appointment to the pedestrian safety advisory committee. one seat, one applicant. >> howard bloomberg is here today. if you can talk about your experiences as relates to this seat, we appreciate your being here today. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is howard bloomberg, i live in south beach area of soma, have been there for, living there for 5 years. i came to the bay area in 2000 from the washington, dc area, i was hired in at lockheed martin in sunnyvale as a systems staff engineer to head a specific, be manager of a specific program, and i retired from lockheed martin 3 years ago. i think my major qualification

is enthusiasm for walking in san francisco. it's a wonderful walking down, it has the potential of being really one of the great walking areas in the world. this enthusiasm has led me to notice there are issues with pedestrian safety and fortunately in this city where there are organizations covering just about everything that happens in the city, there are organizations associated with pedestrian safety, in particular in district 6 supervisor kim has an organization now run by sunny angelo on pedestrian safety and i have been attending those meetings and in fact have found them very interesting. when the mayor had the task force for pedestrian safety there was a subcommittee on data, the data subcommittee. i

attended those meetings, they were very interesting. the question was, well, we have data, what do we do with the data, how do we relate data to the issues at hand. i found that to be very, very interesting. i have attended the psac meetings for a very long time as a member of the public. and i noticed that the one advantage i've seen with the psac, really a great advantage, is its continual organization. it obviously reports to the board of supervisors and it has the capability of really having a strategic function and for that reason as i have attended meetings i've thought, well, we do, the psac has a lot of input from various organizations on traffic calming, on street modification, and one of the suggestions i did make not too

long ago was that the police should really, we should step back, the police should really give us an idea of how well are we doing with regard to pedestrian-vehicle accidents including the number of fatalities. in a periodic sense so that we have some idea of how well the city is doing compared to the -- with respect to the metrics that will come out of the mayor's goals and in fact in comparison with other cities in america and throughout the world. my view is that we're dealing not only with tragedy but we're dealing with health issues, health costs, and that i think should be one of the major issue that could come out eventually from the psac so i believe that there are a lot of issues that can be done. i think taking