good afternoon. welcome to the tuesday may 21, 2013 board of supervisors meeting in the county of san francisco which is proud to be part of the san francisco bay area which is hosting the super bowl for 2014. >> clerk, call the roll? >> campos, avalos, chiu, cohen, present, supervisor ferrel, present, kim absent.mar absent, supervisor tang present, wiener present, supervisor yee. mr. president you have a quorum.

>> ladies and gentlemen please join us in the pledge of allegiance. >> colleagues we have our meeting minutes. approved. madam clerk, any communications? >> i have no communication, mr. president. >> first item is the policy discussion between the honorable mayor edwin lee this week representing the even may 8. item 1:30443: [formal policy discussions - may 21, 2013] pursuant to charter sections 2.103 and 3.100077, and administrative code, section 2.11, the mayor shall answer the following eligible question submitted by supervisor representing district 8. the mayor may address the board

initially for up to five minutes. discussion shall not exceed five mayor edwin lee this week representing the even may 8. sf 11234 >> thank you. welcome back. ask if you have any preliminary comments would you like to make? >> thank you, are good afternoon. thank you president chiu and mexican -- members to the board of supervisors. i would like to thank every member for joining me in all of the budget town hall meetings that we've had and i know it's important for us to join us and hear about the priorities. i'm also using all of the input and information that we gather and i look forward to presenting you with a proposed budget in a few short days hopefully a budget that reflects our values and representing a hundred percent of san franciscans. balancing our priorities isn't simple and easy and i will look

forward to meeting you in the next coming weeks to make sure it's balanced. thanks for joining me on the stage with our warriors ground and the announcing of the super bowl hosting. >> thank you, mr. mayor. our one and only question today by colleague supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. mayor i'm happy to give you a reason to come down here for question time. i know how much you look forward to it. so, mr. mayor, in many neighborhoods across the city our sidewalks don't have the capacity to ensure safe and comfortable pedestrian flow which squeezes the pedestrians onto the street when there is a crowd on the sidewalk. while infrastructure improvement while widening our sidewalks can alleviate

pedestrian congestion and these resources are limited. a less expensive solution is to improve placement of street furniture such as surface mounted utility boxes, news racks, advertising kiosks and public toiments -- toilets and other fixtures on the sidewalk individually can impede pedestrian flow and restrict visibility of pedestrians at corners, with so many pieces of sidewalk furniture competing for scares sidewalk furniture placement what can we do to create safe and comfortable sidewalks along the street and how will you ensure that we

increase safety and hazardous visibility situations and how do you plan to relive this strategy and in miles of pedestrian up grades. >> thank you for that question, supervisor. as you and i agree our sidewalk space is a limit resources. it's where our utilities run, we have strollers and cafes and where trees grow and where fire fighters find their nearest fire hydrant. we have many competing demands with so many square feet. many have asked questions about how we are working to these things. i know

these items are important to you but some are tradeoffs. for example, the pedestrian safety strategy has so far resulted in hundreds of signs around schools and new count down pedestrian signals. implementation of the bicycle plan has increased the space for bicycle racks. we have strategies to reduce sidewalk clutter. the bicycle plan, pedestrian safety strategy, the again plan, storm water management plan, the better streets plan and our traverse policy are all excellent road maps. but these plans cannot be considered and isolation and that's what i believe you mean, supervisor and they can not succeed in isolation as well and they can't succeed in purely volunteer basis. guidelines must be considered

across departments and value utd for fees ability or else what's the point of having all of these great plans. i know that you have review legislation that would design a committee which would create a committee to coordinate and evaluate proposed right of way improvements. i'm very interested in the discussion about this legislation. i'm especially interested in hearing about how we might best coordinate not just major street scape but -- smaller situations. do utilities boxes need to be as big as they are, can we manage signage that is less intrusive. i agree with more stringent coordination we

will work together to ensure sidewalk safety. >> thank you, mr. mayor. that concludes the questions for today. >> and with that, why don't we proceed to our next agenda item. please call item 2 through 6. item 130261:[health code - retroactive increase in patient rates for certain mental health services] sponsor: mayor ordinance amending the health code, section 128, to retroactively increase patient rates charged for certain mental health services. 05/14/2013; passed, item 130261:[health code - retroactive increase in patient rates for certain mental health services] sponsor: mayor ordinance amending the health code, section 128, to retroactively increase patient rates charged for certain mental health services. 05/14/2013; passed, on first item 130261:[health code - retroactive increase in patient rates for certain mental health services] sponsor: mayor ordinance amending the health code, section 128, to retroactively increase patient rates charged for certain mental health services. 05/14/2013; passed, on first reading. >> 121234 >> supervisor cohen, aye, ferrel aye, kim aye, mar aye, tang aye, wiener aye, supervisor yee aye, avalos aye, supervisor breed, aye, campos aye, president chiu, there are

11 ayes. >> item is adopted. >> the clerk: item 130185: [appropriation - $656,958 of general fund reserve to the public defender for salary expenditures - fy2012-2013] sponsors: campos; avalos and mar ordinance appropriating $656,958 from the general fund reserve to the public defender for salary expenditures in fy2012-2013, pursuant to charter section 9.113, this appropriation is subject to a two-thirds affirmative vote of all members of the board of supervisors. fiscal impactt 04/02/2013; re-referred to the budget and finance committee. 05/14/2013; passed >> the clerk: sf 71234 same call? >> this item is passes. >> next item? >> the clerk: item 130364: commission for overtime - fy2012-2013] sponsor: mayor ordinance de-appropriating $71,016 in salaries in the public utilities commission, hetch hetchy department, operating budget and re-appropriating $71,016 to overtime in the public utilities commission, hetch hetchy department operating budget in order to support the department's projected increases in overtime as required per ordinance no. 194-11, and requiring a two-thirds vote of all members of the board of supervisors for approval. 05/14/2013; passed on first reading. question: shall this ordinance be finally passed. >> same house same call. this ordinance is finally passed. next item. the clerk: sfitem

130364: commission for overtime - fy2012-2013] sponsor: mayor ordinance de-appropriating $71,016 in salaries in the public utilities commission, hetch hetchy department, operating budget and re-appropriating $71,016 to overtime in the public utilities commission, hetch hetchy department operating budget in order to support the department's projected increases in overtime as required per ordinance no. 194-11, and requiring a two-thirds vote of all members of the board of supervisors for approval. 05/14/2013; passed on first reading. question: shall this ordinance be finally passed. >> same house, same call. this ordinance is finally passed. >> item 10. item 130366: [de-appropriation and re-appropriation - $250,000 to public utilities commission for overtime - fy2012-2013] sponsor: mayor ordinance de-appropriating $250,000 in debt service in the public utilities commission, water enterprise department, operating budget, and re-appropriating $250,000 to overtime in the public utilities commission, water enterprise department, operating budget, in order to support the department's projected increases in overtime, as required by board of supervisors ordinance no. 194-11; and requiring a two-thirds vote of all members of the board of supervisors for approval. fiscal impactt 05/14/2013; passed on first reading. question: shall this ordinance item 130366: [de-appropriation and re-appropriation - $250,000 to public utilities commission for overtime - fy2012-2013] sponsor: mayor ordinance de-appropriating $250,000 in debt service in the public utilities commission, water enterprise department, operating budget, and re-appropriating $250,000 to overtime in the public utilities commission, water enterprise department, operating budget, in order to support the department's projected increases in overtime, as required by board of supervisors ordinance no. 194-11; and requiring a two-thirds vote of all members of the board of supervisors for approval. fiscal impactt 05/14/2013; passed on first reading. question: shall this ordinance item 130366: [de-appropriation and re-appropriation - $250,000 to public utilities commission for overtime - fy2012-2013] sponsor: mayor ordinance de-appropriating $250,000 in debt service in the public utilities commission, water enterprise department, operating budget, and

re-appropriating $250,000 to overtime in the public utilities commission, water enterprise department, operating budget, in order to support the department's projected increases in overtime, as required by board of supervisors ordinance no. 194-11; and requiring a two-thirds vote of all members of the board of supervisors for approval. fiscal impactt 05/14/2013; passed on first reading. question: shall this ordinance be finally passed?. 1234 >> item 10. item 130226: [park code - south of market west skatepark and dog park] sponsor: kim ordinance amending the park code to designate portions of the property assessor's block no. 3513, lot nos. 071 and 0744 leased by the city and county of san francisco from the state of california, immediately under and adjacent to the portions of the central freeway located between otis and stevenson streets and between valencia and stevenson streets and partially bounded by duboce avenue and referred to as "south of market somaa west skatepark and dog park," as a "park" within the meaning of the park code and to authorize the recreation and park department's park patrol to patrol those portions of the leased property; and making environmental findings, and findings of consistency with the general plan. question: shall this ordinance be passed on first reading?1234 . supervisor ferrel. >> thanks. items 11 through 17. 11 and 12 have to do with roads and in proposition with 2011. of the # $248 million has been issued and these bonds are $133 million. item 13, emergency response bond. proposition b authorizes in 2010 not to exceed $212 million day to day over $103 million has been issued. this is $1.9 million to supply the fire station. and the neighborhoods parks bond we supported last year is the first in $71 million to renovate parks throughout our city. colleagues same item, same call. this resolution is adopted. item 12. >> the clerk: item 11, mr. president. >> was that on item 10? >> now we are on item 11. the clerk: item 130381: [sale - road repaving and street safety general obligation bonds, 2011, series 2013c - not to exceed $133,275,000]

sponsors: mayor; wiener and yee resolution authorizing and directing the sale of not to exceed $133,275,000 aggregate principal amount of road repaving and street safety general obligation bonds, 2011, series 2013c; prescribing the form and terms of said bonds; authorizing the execution, authentication, and registration of said bonds; providing for the appointment of depositories and other agents for said bonds; providing for the establishment of accounts related to said bonds; providing for the manner of sale of said bonds by competitive sale; approving the forms of official notice of sale and notice of intention to sell bonds; directing the publication of the notice of intention to sell bonds; approving the form of the preliminary official statement and the form and execution of the official statement relating to the sale of said bonds; approving the form of the continuing disclosure certificate; authorizing and approving modifications to documents; declaring the city's intent to reimburse certain expenditures; ratifying certain actions previously taken; and granting general authority to city officials to take necessary actions in connection with the authorization, issuance, sale, and delivery of said bonds. fiscal impactt question: shall this >> now we are on item 11. the clerk: sf 121234 >> colleagues. supervisor ferrel were referencing item no. 11. which is why we thought we were on item 11. let me ask for item 11. any discussion? seeing none. can we take this item same house, same call. this resolution is adopted. >> item 12? the clerk: item 130363:[appropriation - road repaving and street safety general obligation bonds, 2011, series 2013c - $133,275,000 - fy2012-2013] sponsors: mayor; wiener, yee and chiu ordinance appropriating $133,275,000 of the road repaving and street safety general obligation bonds, 2011, series 2013b, proceeds including $122,058,097 to the department of public works and $11,216,903 to the municipal transportation agency for resurfacing, sidewalk, curb ramp, and street structure improvements, the redesign of street streetscapes to include pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements, and traffic signal improvements to support transit priority for fy2012-2013 and placing these funds on controller's reserve pending the sale of the bonds. fiscal impactt question: shall this ordinance be passed on first reading1234 >> same house, same call. this ordinance is passed in the first reading. call items 13

and 14 related to earthquake safety. >> sfitem 130382: [sale - earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bonds, 2010, series 2013b - not to exceed $31,905,000] sponsors: mayor; chiu resolution authorizing and directing the sale of not to exceed $31,905,000 aggregate principal amount of earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bonds, 2010, series 2013b; prescribing the form and terms of said bonds; authorizing the execution, authentication, and registration of said bonds; providing for the appointment of depositories and other agents for said bonds; providing for the establishment of accounts related to said bonds; providing for the manner of sale of said bonds by competitive sale; approving the forms of official notice of sale and notice of intention to sell bonds; directing the publication of the notice of intention to sell bonds; approving the form of the preliminary official statement and the form and execution of the official statement relating to the sale of said bonds; approving the form of the continuing disclosure certificate; authorizing and approving modifications to documents; declaring the city's intent to reimburse certain expenditures; ratifying certain actions previously taken; and granting general authority to city officials to take necessary actions in connection with the authorization, issuance, sale, and delivery of said bonds. fiscal impactt question: shall this resolution be adopted?1234 sfitem 130368:[appropriation - earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bonds, 2011, series 2013b - $31,905,000 - fy2012-2013] sponsors: mayor; chiu ordinance appropriating $31,905,000 of the earthquake safety and emergency response general obligation bonds, 2010, series 2013b, proceeds to the department

of public works in fy2012-2013 for necessary repairs and seismic improvements in order to better prepare san francisco for a major earthquake or natural disaster; and placing these funds on controller's reserve pending the sale of the bonds. fiscal impactt question: shall this ordinance be passed on first reading?1234 >> thank you. colleagues. can we do these two items, same house same call. without objection. this resolution is adopted and the ordinance is adopted. madam clerk call items 15. the clerk: for not to exceed an aggregate principle amount for bonds actions previously taken in general authority to city officials taking necessary actions with the authorization issue and sale of delivery of said bonds. item 16 is directing the sale of not to exceed approximately $74 million in neighborhood parks general obligation bonds. item 17. approximately $74 million in parks bonds. includes approximately $55.1 million to the parks and recreation. through 2012-2013. >> these resolutions are adopted and passed in 2013. >> item 18?

>> the clerk: with the minimum annual guarantee of approximately $37,000 of september 29, 2003 through february 29, 2017. >> this resolution is adopted. next item. >> item 19? >> the clerk: for a data center space at 31 ranch oh drive. from the state of california technology agency for an initial term of two years with a base annual rate of $130,000. >> same house, same call. this resolution is adopted. >> items 20 and 21 related to the skate park. >> the clerk: item 20 for property along oatis and steven son street, item 21 leased pace

for california for highway 101 between valencia and steven son street and the total base rent of approximately $2.3 million. >> these items are adopted. >> item 22? >> the clerk: to authorize the service authority for abandoned vehicles on all vehicles registered to city residented from june 2013. >> colleagues, same house, same call? this item passes. >> no. 23. >> supervisor wiener? >> thank you, mr. president, before us today is a proposed new article 10 historic district immediately north of

deboys park. this is the first new historic district before us in almost a decade. this district which is truly beautiful and unique is directly north of did park and the three dead-end streets. carmelita. it's comprised of 87 buildings and has a significant number of intact victorian and it is a truly beautiful neighborhood and if you have not been there, i encourage you to go and visit. this district came out of the historic surveys conducted as part of the market octaveia process. we have gone through a several community process through

several community meetings as well as a survey as i requested the planning department conduct which i showed support in the neighborhood i will acknowledge that this support is not unanimous and there are focus who do not support the historic district and i believe we did go through a process and we very carefully listened to feedback from the community and this is probably the most narrowly drawn the historic city. this is only the defining features of the district and primarily the facade and these are not areas that are not character defining. as part of this interesting process what is leading up to us today we have heard that is not surprising to any of us that there is very significant frustration with the planning

process in san francisco. it takes too long and too cumbersome in many ways and frustrating for home owners who have projects that are non-controversial and still takes them a long time. i'm very sensitive to that generalized concern about our planning process and i frankly i agree with them that there are things that we can do to improve it. but this driblth is -- district is narrowly drawn to a significant improvement including a newly crafted administrative appropriateness that staff will be able to grant administrative certificates of appropriateness over the counter for none major changes to these homes, in addition colleagues and i this you for this and i offered legislation this year to pass

the mill zach for owners to historic owns for benefits of owning a home in this district is to be able to access tax credits as incentives to be able to maintain the homes. i ask for your support. >> thank you, supervisor, any additional comments. colleagues can we take this item, same house same call without objection this item is passed in the first reading. item 24. the clerk: to clarify permanent procedures and to expand suspension citation and enforcement provision regarding entertainment permits. >> supervisor wiener? >> thank you. before us today is legislation that i sponsored to the entertainment regulation in the police code as well as to the noise ordinance. the legislation will allow for more

diverse live music and d j and enforce the powers of the eligibility for musicen at the same en -- it will address noise issue. promoting a thriving and response nightlife is not only important to our city's cultural vibrancy but brings jobs and revenue to the city. in march of last year the city economist did a study that i requested quantifying the economic impact of nightlife in san francisco. as you recall it showed that nightlife generates $4.2 billion for the economics in the city and provides tax revenues and employees 48,000 people. this legislation balances the goal of expanding nightlife and entertainment for our city's cultural and economic benefit with the need to ensure that venues act

responsely and if they violate the law, enforcement occurs. brought aims to increase entertainment and also general clean up. a few of the main aspects of the legislation and i will say that i worked closely with the entertainment commission on the legislation, both the entertainment commission and the small business commission voted unanimously to support it. the legislation expands the limited light performance which we created years ago to include outdoor spaces like patios and court yards where currently they can not obtain an on going permit for live music. the noise standards are the same. the expansion of live performance