out or considering meter expansion is that we also think about a revised residential parking permit eligibility requirement and in a lot of the neighborhoods that i represent that have traditionally been very mixed use but certain along the southeast sector in supervisor campos' sdrekt, we are creating new neighborhoods that don't look like twin peaks and we are always going to have office, residential and retail all on the same blocks and it makes a lot of our residents ineligible to apply for rpp even if there's a higher density of rez densest on those blocks because of the number of units we reer placing in those buildings, so i talked to director ris k*en about it, i know they're working on it, i think i need to see further commitment especially from what i hear from our residents, more headway we make on revising the rpp process before we support

parking meter expansion, a number of other issues that i brought up is that meters do start at 7 a.m., they start at 7 a.m. at the tenderloin, i want to look at -- i mean, how much revenue do we generate from that and do we penalize people that can't get rpp in the tenderloin and have to get up earlier to move their cars if fe have a car to get to work which is a lot of our working class family ins the tenderloin, how can we move meters back to 9 a.m. and how can we rethink that evening meters, that is something in the district that i represent, i guess we have the giant stadium, something that our meters are smart enough to be able to acknowledge and not -- that was something that, you know, was ignored during the outreach process, and by the way, i think sfmta does amazing outreach, i think they do a great job of having meetings in

our neighborhoods, i think it's a question of how that feedback is incorporated and i understand parking is going the continue to be a very controversial issue, i think it is a very tough one for many of us. i want to continue to have it but i would support a contract with the 25 thousand meters, i'm not sure i can support one that includes an additional 5 thousand. >> supervisor campos? >> thank you. mr. president, i want to thank again the mta and my colleagues for the work that's been done on this item. i agree with what supervisor kim was saying in terms of the limitations of what this resolution has in terms of the board of supervisors' ability to impact how parking meters are placed by the mta and i think that supervisor kim raises some very important points. that said, where i have a different take is that i do

believe that within the confines of the current legal governance structure of the mta vis-a-vis the board of supervisors that this resolution goes as far as we can go and i think that to the extent that there are additional things that are needed including ways in which we can have more of a community process, i think that that actually requires changes to the existing law and how the mta's actually governed and i don't know if we can do that by way of a resolution, in fact, we know we can't, and so i will be supporting this contract because i do think that given the legal structure of the mta, that this is probably as far as the board of supervisors can push, this resolution is not binding but i also know that -- well, first of all, i respect

and trust that director ris k*en will follow the commitment that he has made, but if for some reason there's a failure to do that, there are many thing that is the mta has to come to this board and ask for, so there will be plenty of opportunity for us to inject ourselves where needed. that said, i do think we need to figure out a way of creating more transparency and community involvement around the decisions around parking meters. i think that that requires a larger conversation and i do hope that we engage in that larger conversation, but i think the language that has been introduced by supervisor avalos provides some at least, you know, i guess control in terms if you will by this board, so thank you. >> supervisor cohen? >> thank you very much. a little bit off topic in terms of the contract at hand, but

director ris k*en, i have a question for you, what is the rational that parking meters in japan town started at 9:00 and parking meters in tenderloin start at 7 p.m. >> so, my understanding is that when time limits and zones were established, they were done pretty roughly in terms of the kind of downtown areas, the parking meters zones that are currently in the transportation code and it was drawn from a very broad rush, subsequent to this discussion that i've had with supervisor kim, direct my staff to re-evaluate where that line is drawn. we earlier in response to an earlier inquiry about a different part of the downtown, we did evaluate and identified, you know, we looked at the occupancy, we looked at the

justification. i do think that there's a case for a later start in the tenderloin area given some of the residential nature, given the fact that commercial activity is not starting there for the most part at 7:00 in the morning, a lot of the parking regulation that is we have in the city have been in place for a long time and had not been i think systematically evaluated when i was at dpw, i felt the same with the street sweeping frequency, as supervisor kim's request, that's something we're looking at with respect to the tenderloin and with respect to the parking controls as i mentioned, we systematically or routinely respond to requests to re-evaluate yellow zone hours or whether something should be a yellow zone, it's a continuous process that we're doing but we're particularly looking at the tenderloin start times right. >> so, that process you're

talking about, you'll evaluate your policy, your staff will go through some kind of internal analysis but make recommendations to the mta commission and then the commission will adopt it? >> that's correct, for things that require mta board approval. i believe change in meter hours would -- so, that would be something that we would review, we'll discuss that with the supervisor in the community and should we have an agreeable situation, that's something we would recommend to the mta board and that would go through a public hearing first. er >> can you tell us where else in the city do our meters engage at 7 a.m.? >> i believe it's largely around van ness, soit's the northeast quadrant of the city. >> okay, thank you board of

directors adopted 216 approving the notification requirements for new meter installation proposals which establishes new notification standards for operation, local neighborhood and area wide local management programs for installing new parking meter requirements, in the existing resolution with the changes that i made as well and those are the amendments that i have. i do want to thank mr. kis k*en

and his staff for their flexibility and this contract. when this was first given to me, i saw it only for believing that we had a contract that was replacing existing meters, the old meters with the holder meters and not realizing, not being told at the time there was going to be an expansion as well, and i'm on the fence about how much we can expand or should expand, certainly if we do expand, we need to have real clear identification with haunts and have a real clear criteria where we do it and there are certainly many neighborhoods in san francisco that are being made from scratch and i think those are places where meters might have let's say around the mission bay, we're going to be seeing the new hospital, that could be a place where we could be doing -- could be easily implemented where there has not been much development happening over the years, so i do believe though

we have a compromise that is supportable by the board and i just want to encourage colleagues to support what we have before us with the amendments. >> colleagues, unless there's any -- supervisor kim? >> not on the amendment, my apologies. >> so, on the amendments which i believe were already seconded, is that correct? >> yes, by supervisor mar. >> can we take the amendments without objection, do we need a roll call. the amendments are adopted. supervisor kim, did you have a final comment? >> i wanted to respond to supervisor cohen's responses, so the parking meters that start at 7 a.m. or 8 a.m., they span all throughout fish man's wharf, they go to the mission as well, these are the early morning meters. >> so, it sounds like you described most of the city.

>> it's not -- >> it's not most of the city, it's on specific corridors in those neighborhoods, but when you look at the northeast quadrant, it is pretty much the entire northeast quadrant. and i did ask sfmta to look at this in 2011 and i am still waiting for a resolution to this issue. >> supervisor breed? >> thank you, i just wanted to make two points, i know we're not here to micro manage mta, but i just have a problem with the fact that there isn't any consistency, especially since it is very difficult in the evening time when it gets dark earlier to even see whether or not you need to pay the meters, and so traditionally, the city has always been 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., we add a *fed sunday meters, i'm not certain why, it's one fee, one area, one fee in another area, i understand

we're talking about downtown, but i think for the sake of clear and consistent communication, there should be a discussion around changing and making the meters more consistent. the other issue i wanted to bring up is i don't understand why the port has the authority to oversee meters directly. i know this isn't a part of this discussion, but i just wanted to say that for the record, again, you know, mta doesn't have control over lighting and what happens in the ported and making decisions around port meters and so on and so forth, but i just don't understand that, so i just wanted to put that out there as a discussion. i'm sure we'll have in the future, but i think for the sake of consistency, for the sake of making sure the city is a lot more organized, i'm not a transit expert, nor do i think the board of supervisors should be managing parking meet erps,

but we are allocated fund and supporting these meters for the efficiency of the city to allow for changing these meters, i think the port's role should in the be as managers of meters, thank you. >> colleagues, any additional discussion, do we need a roll call vote on this item? >> on item 12 as amended, supervisor breed? breed, aye. supervisor campos, campos, aye. supervisor chiu, chiu, aye. supervisor cohen? cohen, aye, supervisor farrell? farrell, aye. k*im, no, supervisor mar, mar, aye. supervisor tang, tang, aye. supervisor wiener, wiener, aye. supervisor yee, aye, supervisor avalos, there are 10 ayes, one no. >> the resolution is adopted as amended. item 13. >> item 13 is an ordinance to

retroactively authorize the office of economic and workforce development to accept and expand a grant in the amount of 500 thousand dollars for the mission bay south plan first source hiring program and amending ordinance fiscal years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 to reflect addition of two class 9704 employment and training specialists iii positions and one class 2992 contract compliance. >> roll call vo*et. >> on item 13, breed, aye, supervisor campos, aye, supervisor chiu, chiu, aye, supervise core cohen, cohen, aye. supervise core farrell, aye, supervisor k*im, k im, aye. supervisor mar, mar, aye. supervisor tang, aye. wiener, aye, supervisor yee, yee, aye. supervisor avalos, there are 11

ayes. >> the ordinance is passed in the first reading, item 14. >> item 14 ordinance appropriating 209 million 955 thousand of general obligation bond proceeds approved by voters under proposition a in the november 200 8th l*ex authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds for the building or rebuilding and earthquake sift improvement of the general hospital. >> can we do this in-house, this ordinance is passed on the first reading. item 15. >> item 15 is a resolution approving a waiver of the payment in lieu of taxes for fiscal years 1991-1992 to 212-2013. >> this resolutions adopted, next item. >> item 16 is if resolution to authorize and direct the competitive sale of general obligation bonds not the exceed

approximately 210 million for the san francisco general hospital improvement. >> same house in call, this resolution's adopted, next item. >> item 17 is a resolution approving the issuance of tax exempt obligations by the association of bay area governments finance authority for a non-profit corporations in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed 4 million 500 thousand to finance and refinance. >> same house, incall, this resolution is adopted. item 18. >> this is to resolution declaring the intent of city and county of san francisco to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of future bonded indebtedness authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community dwomment. >> in-house incall, this resolution is adopted. >> colleagues we don't have any 2:30 special orders today, i would like to get through all of the committee reports and then go through our 3:00 p.m.

special items, >> item 30 was considered by the rules committee at a regular committee on september 21 and sent to the committee, it's to appoint mr. harlan kelly junior as a four year term. >> colleagues, in-house, incall, this resolution is adopted. item 31. >> item 31, item 31-33 were considered by the land use and economic development committee at a regular meeting on monday november 25, item 31 was recommended as a amended by the same title, sent to the board as a committee boardbacker report, it's to amend the administrative planning code to receive assistance under all affordable housing programs ministered or funded by the city including the san francisco redevelopment agency by certain tenants being evicted under the ellison act.

>> president chiu? >> colleagues, i know many of us have been working on a number of ideas and proposals to address our current affordability crisis with skyrocket evictions and many working families that are at risk of being driven out of san francisco, i want to thank my co-sponsors for the legislation that we are considering today to help tenants due to the ellis act. the ellis act has been interpreted broadly to allow landlords to evict tenants to go out of the rental business, but we have seen a sharp increase in ellis act findings, a number of months back, the eviction of the leaf family in the heart of my district, two seniors and their adult daughter who had been evicted out of their home of 30 year, when i started speaking to the leaf family, i think we all realized that while we could not necessarily stop ellis act

evictions at least at the local level, we all started thinking about things we could do to assist our most vulnerable residents from getting pushed out of their homes. this would allow tenants who have occupied their apartments for more than 10 years and have received an ellis act eviction notice or tenants would are disabled or have life threatening illness and have occupied their apartments for more than 5 years to receive priority in affordable housing projects funded and ministered by the county of san francisco. i want to thank housing and community development who would be charged by ministering this program. the priorities would be potentially used for up to 20% of units in new developments, the priority could only be used once and not repeated and it would expire after 3 years if it's not used for existing projects or expire after 6 years for unused development.

tenants must still meet project eligibility requirements such as income or age. i believe and i think colleagues, many of us will agree that we need this measure to keep rez densest who have no other means from minding permanent housing from becoming homeless and it is our goal the city is doing everything we can to noted allow residents to fall through the cracks. i want to take a moment and thank the tenant advocates who worked with my aid, the chinatown community development center. >> supervisor cohen? >> thank you very much, through the chair to supervisor chiu. i just want to make sure i'm understanding this correctly. this ordinance would create a preference -- >> a priority for the affordable housing waiting list. >> so, how are you determining

who gets priority? >> so, it would be first come, first serve, you would have to meet the qualifications that i had just described, so in other words, if you need to have received an ellis act eviction notice and have lived in your apartment for either 10 years or lived in your apartment for 5 years or e ver have a life threatening illness or disability and if you qualify for that and also meet the project eligibility requirements for various affordable housing projects that would require certain income or age requirements, you would be eligible for this priority. >> so, question. what if you're a section 8 voucher and you're in a home and the owner wants to ellis evict you out, how does this ordinance k*fr if at all section 8 vouchers.

>> so the fact that you have a section 8 voucher is not relevant to that determination, so if you are ellis acted, you would get a priority placed in line, now if you were already in that line potentially because of having a voucher or some other housing program that you're el vibl for, you could be moved up to the front of that line with this legislation. >> perfect, that's exactly my question, so i want to make sure you're prioritizing seniors, disabled and folks with life threatening illnesses. how are you determining -- how do you determine what's a life threatening illness. >> that is defined in the statute, i had a discussion about this at the committee, the rent board would help to make this determination but it is defined in the statute itself. there is also a reference to an amendment we made to refer to other sections of the administrative code referring to disabilities z. >> okay. thank you very much. >> thank you. colleagues, do we need a roll

call vote on this, can we take this in-house in call? this ordinance passes on first item. >> n*x item. >> item 32 a a resolution to approve the construction o f a cafe in the west garden of the academy of sciences in golden gate park. >> supervisor mar? >> thank you, president chiu, i want to acknowledge that it's been a pleasure working on this, the staff of the california academy of science and is we have with this the general manager and kevin, monalele that have been wonderful to work with. the academy of sciences is beginning tomorrow, it is the season for science exhibit, but this is a project that is a low profiled structure which includes a cafe, it isn't really an expansion of the site but replacement of a temporary structure with a perm nept and attractive building, it allows us to see this sculpture that's hanging like floating like a cloud above it, it's called

where land meets the sea and it will be much more visible with this new structure. the project will enrich the experience hosting the academy which lists countless families, not only from district 1 but throughout the city, i want to thank the land use submit tee for its unanimous support of this. i'll be out there tomorrow for the opening oftys the season for science exhibits, and i wanted to thank kevin and ike for this whole project, i urge your support. >> can we take this item in-house incall. this resolution is adopted. >> item number 33 is an ordinance to amend the transportation code to clarify the definition for parking meter to include electronic pay station and is change the time limit for parking for inoperable or broken parking meters for the time permitted to parking meter and approve

the findings. er >> without objection, this item passes, and with that, madam clerk, why don't we go to our 3:00 special orders related to the various condo conversion fee appeals. >> items 19 through 21 ropes a special order at 3:00 p.m. for appeal for waiver reduction at 273-a, 19th street, item 20 and 21 is the motion approving the appeal and item 21 is for the appropriation of findings, the public comment really required under the government code and the administrative code was met at the november 19th meeting. >> okay. so, colleagues, on today's calendar, we have appeals of the application of the condo conversion fees for two properties, actually for a number of properties, the standards for these appeals are as follows, the board of

supervisors may reduce, adjust or waive the fees if it finds that there is not a relationship or a nexus between the impact of development and the amount of the fees charged, the applicants bear the burden of proof to substantiate the appeal with support of technical information. i propose we conduct the hearing as follows, first, each of the two appellants shall have up to 10 minutes to present their cases for appeals of the condo conversion fees, next we'll maer from members of the public that wish to a support the appeals who can speak for up to two minutes, then the mayor's housing, 20 minutes because we have two different appellants who can present for up to a total of 20 minutes as well, and then the

appellants should have three minutes each for rebuttal. so, unless there's any discussion? okay, madam clerk has reminded me, we have three appeals today, one was continued from last week which is what we have called and then i started talking about the procedure for the remainder of the appeals. why don't we take that first appeal first related to 273a-29th street, i know we had city staff talking to the appellant talking if they were able to resolve this matter. can we maer from city staff on this matter.

one of you please speak. >> john nalan from the city attorney's office. at the conclusion of last week's hearing, the department of public works contacted the appellant and offered to her the deferral process. there is -- and dpw has been in contact with her. there is a check that dpw has to refund the fee at this point and then i'll collect it until the map is ready to be reported. she's not picked up the check yet. >> so, we're waiting for her to make arrangements with dpw to pick up the check. >> okay, so my understanding is that this has been resolved in a way that the appellant has found satisfactory? >> i believe so.

we did contact her to ask if she wanted to continue this appeal before the board of supervisors or whether the fee deferral was satisfactory, and she did not respond one way or the other. >> okay, i understand, is the appellant here? if you want to please step up and let us know your perspective of the appeal. we wanted to provide a little time for you to speak to our city departments. >> thank you so much and thank you for your prompt giving us a refund in order to -- what i would like the request is that in order to -- it would be most helpful if the board would consider amending when the repayment should happen to be ideally the sale of the condo but if that's not agreeable, at

the completion of the condo, the spirit and intention of allowing a deferral for low-income residents is that 16 thousand dollars is an extreme hardship for my mom and i, she's l*f living mostly on social security, i'm only working part time. we have a mortgage on third place on our property we can't refinance, and we have an interest on our morbacker mortgage, we don't have an extra 16 thousand dollars, if you would be willing to extend the payment for low-income residents who have received a deferral to the completion of condo conversion, we'd be elt jibl to refinance at a much better rate, we're stuck at 6%, so if we could do it at the completion of condo conversion, we could refinance and it would not be so much of a financial hardship to pay that 16 thousand fee, that would be