that contract, you can count it as fully expended because it's not available to be trued up and redistributed. so, we are going to have a difference between the cash balances and prior period adjustment [speaker not understood] 100% expended but then still continue to show the activity really with their term, they think of it as we're just requesting authority to access our reserves [speaker not understood]. >> no, i think -- and i apologize. because i think my question -- the answer to it doesn't really matter to us, right? i think my question is how are they going to be able to tell that, right? i'm looking at two periods, i don't know how they're going to be able to true up anything with the way that they're defining reserves because it has a couple different definitions now. but i think -- no disrespect, i think that maybe thinking about it, that question i asked is not -- i don't know that the answer is for us to be concerned about.

so, i okay. >> i would further say that each rops period, they'll learn a little more ~ and probably give us somewhat new instructions next time. so, it is definitely iterative and evolving. >> you guy are maintaining the detailed spreadsheets. i can guarantee you it's going to change in 6 or 12 months. but it seems like [speaker not understood]. >> and i made sure to get the dos analyst directions in writing as well that we can remind them as well, this is how you directed us to [speaker not understood] the rops. >> excellent, thank you very much. this is not an action item so we can move on to the next item, madam secretary. >> thank you. next item is item 6, public comment. madam chair. >> thank you very much. do we have any speaker cards? >> oscar james.

oscar james again. i want to bring up two things that -- well, three things that's been bothering me. one, certificate of preference holders in south -- well, i would say down by moscone center, that area, there were people that were relocated out in those houses, too, that had certificates that has not been brought up. and i think they should be added onto the list of certificate holders. the other thing i want to bring up is turnkey housing. back in '73, '74, i served on a

committee, honorable [speaker not understood] and burton and i brought up the suggestion of about homeless housing and also turnkey housing, people who are coming out of foster care, [speaker not understood] housing. out of the 540 acre that's in the shipyard, they're going to be developing all of that. i haven't heard since that time, me and mrs. vincent brought it up in the p-a-c meetings, what have you. we need to have housing for people in our community who have been in foster care and who are turned out of foster care housing for them. we also need to have housing for those people in our community who either became homeless, fill in some of those projects or buildings for them in the hunters point shipyard. i mean, it was 540 acres. and when i served on that committee, our concern was the people who were affected in our

community, and those people are people who have been affected in our community and nobody has spoke up for them. i wish for this commission to look into that and possibly make some kind of adjustment to make those things possible for the people in our community. not only our community, also for the rest of the people in the san francisco bay area. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. is there any further public comment? >> no other. >> thank you very much. please call the next item. >> report -- the next order of business is item 7, report of the chair. >> i do not have a report with me. thank you very much. next item. make it sound very important, serious. >> the next item of business is item 8, report of the executive director. madam director. >> i have two announcements, commissioners. one, this is all good news based on the actions you've taken and the financing actions you've taken. so, on march 1st, it may have been in your packets, but we

can make sure you have it. dr. davis senior center otherwise known as 5800 third street or carol avenue senior, there is a groundbreaking ceremony on march 1st that coincides with the date of black cusine. district supervisor, the mayor, other folk will be in attendance and prominently featured in the invitation as a primary funder. so, march 1st, i encourage you all to attend and let us know if you'll be coming. and then also another good news event, april 17th, the hunters view phase 2 groundbreaking for which you authorized $21 million, that, too, is another groundbreaking that's gotten pushed, the new date is april 17th and that, too, leader pelosi will in fact be attending that event along with the mayor and other important invited electeds. and, again, your significant contributions to make that happen. so, i encourage you all to attend. that concludes my report.

>> thank you very much. i was driving around last week at hunters view because i didn't get the e-mail. definitely driving around in circles at hunters view. okay, next item. >> the next item of business is item 9, commissioners' questions and matters. madam chair. >> thank you very much. are there questions and matters? i'll tell you one thing, i know i want to recalendar the certificate of preference item to talk how the mayor's office of housing is handling that. we had questions before, but definitely talk about the dda today, yes, talk about that. but >> but the m-o-u is coming back at some point, right? >> yes, the m-o-u was calendared for your second meeting in march, march 18th, i believe. so, we would expect to tackle a lot of those issues. there were a number of follow-up items and questions you and members of the public had. so, we're in the due diligence period, making sure we're responding to your questions and concerns with the mayor's office of housing community development.

>> okay. i would say let's see how march 18 is shaping up. i don't want to -- there's lots of other things in the m-o-u and i don't necessarily want to high jack the whole discussion with certificate of preference because i think there are some questions that won't be answered by the m-o-u that we need answered how they're going to manage it, how they're going to develop that, how are they going to extend it. i don't want to get caught in that. maybe we can make it the same day hopefully. >> but you're not going to be here. >> oh, i'm not going to be here. i will talk to you about that. yes, i am actually missing the march 18 meeting. i think we can manage through the regular agenda process with the chair and vice-chair to make sure there is a balance of item and that commissioners are -- we have the full complement of the commission for matters of important concern. ~ >> yes. thank you, tiffany. [laughter] >> thank you for your testimony.

okay. any other questions, matters? next item, plea. >> the next order of business is item 10, closed session. >> thank you very much. i'd like to take a recess for just a couple minutes. anyone here is not directly involved in the closed session item, i would ask that you please leave the hearing room and madam secretary, please change over the tape and we will reconvene in a few minutes. >> thank you very much. we have reconvened regular session at 3:20. madam secretary please call the next item. >> the next matter of business is item 11, madam chair, adjournment. >> thank you very much. we are adjourned at 3:21. [gavel] [adjourned]

>> good evening and welcome to the small business commission, regular meeting of monday, february 10, 2014, the meeting is called to order at 5:33. >> we will conduct a roll kaug, commissioner adams? >> here. >> commissioner dooley? >> here. >> commissioner dwight. >> here. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> here. >> xhie, white. >> here. >> all are present and we have a quorum, takes us to two, general public comment, and all periods during the meeting is limited to three minutes per speaker unless otherwise established by the presiding officer of the meeting speakers

are requested but not required to state their name, completing of the card is optional to besinger help with the written record of the meeting deliver the speaker cars to the secretary prior to approaching. >> do we have any members of the public that would like to make the comments on the items not on tonight's agenda? >> good afternoon. my name is jordan angle and most of you know me i think at this point, i am here this week as a representative of a group of property owners and business owners on the broad way corridor, a few of which appeared at the last small business commission legislative hearing, we were under the impression that after that meeting that the agenda item will be presented to discuss it on broad way, when we received it on friday afternoon and did not see anything on the agenda, we were confused. this has frightened many property owners who feel that it will be a disaster for the neighborhood, we are well aware of the ongoing problems on

broad way, however the solution lies in the responsible growth and business friendly legislation. on a personal note in regard to my family's building that my grandmother owns, we have been trying to remodel the building and get the liquor license approved for two years, to be caught up in this moratorium would be a traf vesty, we have requested a hearing so that we can have the liquor license approved, so far the board has ignored our requests, our constitutional rights to due process are being infringed on at this point and we are very frustrated. and we would like help from a few people in the city. >> what is your name? >> jordan angle. >> jordan, may i? >> we can't comment. >> okay. >> we can't comment on public comment. >> okay. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> any other members of the public? >> don't leave just yet.

>> seeing none, public comment is closed next item. >> takes us to item three, approval of the january, 27th, 2014, regular meeting minutes this is an action item. >> motion? >> motion to approve item number 3? >> i move. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> next item? >> takes us to item four, presentation of a small business commission certificate of honor recognizing commission luke o'brien for more than four years on the service. >> commissioner cannot be here and asked if we would postpone to february 24th? >> i would like a motion that we move this item to the next meeting? >> second. >> so moved. >> all in favor?

>> aye. >> next item. >> brings us to item five, discussion and possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors, on board of supervisors file number 1 31205 planning code pro-ducks, distribution and repair zoning. this is a discussion and possible action item. we have with us tiffany garcia from the office of economic and workforce development and andrea brus from the office of comen. >> i am the business development manager within the office of economic and workforce development. i have the pleasure of serving businesses that fall into the business sectors of manufacturing and retail. i put together a quick powerpoint presentation, to help you all better understand the planning code legislation that is being proposed in regards to production, distribution and repair to

zoning. >> as we can see, the growth of san francisco manufacturing is current data allows us, there is a little over 530 manufacturers in san francisco. this is a 25 percent increase from last year, and a 47 percent increase since the mayor pointed me business director at the office of economic and workforce development. so this is a 3 year slide. there is over 4,000 blue collar jobs and the pdr space is in high demand and low and which they utilize the pdr zoning and we are running out of affordable space and transit served neighborhoods and growing pdr space users including light industrials and some examples could be companies that handle assembly, and disassembly and finishing. >> the proposed legislation, there are minor changes to the function of the pdr districts which were enacted in 2008, the first one is in regards to storage and this is an

amendment of 181 j. and pdr districts new self-storage is not permitted this will allow a rebuild if it provides at least one floor area ratio of new pdr space and it will also allowed shared accessory use in the building inhabited by the-manufacturers and so that space for retail and office can be used a lot more effectively. currently, this holds for one-third of total space, being dedicated to pdr. i have attached a picture for a better understanding of one-third of space. this is an example of a chocolate manufacturer here in san francisco, dolce, cathy is using the front of the business to actually sell the chocolate items and then manufacturing is taking place in the rest of the building. here we are leveraging demand for both offices and pdr use and we are addressing the

vacant parcels to build it both in the same development. and i have attached the map so that you can see the salmon colored parcels that we are referring to, and there are 16 in all. >> so, making the same pdr uses function better is going to be a revision to 204.3 of the planning code to the shared retail space and we know that we need new pdr construction in san francisco and this will allow us to cross subsidize by the high paying uses such as office to support the new construction and also make the small enterprise workplaces known as sew's more attractive to build. >> current controls on them, don't meet the sweet spot for the manufacturers that we are finding currently and we are finding the small enterprise workforce controls or the 100 percent of the spaces as most commonly referred to would allow the units to be 1500 square feet or less.

and again, it will make it easier for new pdr users to get permit and we would revise, 226, changing the status of certain uses from conditional to permitted and generally this is the most common with the food-related uses the current process requires them to get a cu, or a conditional permit, which causes uncertainty and a lot of cost, we would like to clean up the definition of pdr and we need to remove the life sciences and the chemical labs to the definition. >> reforming the requirements as well and which will include, asking the businesses for a business plan to ensure, and create the space and viable and affordable and with the local serving pdr businesses. so our next steps is to continue to move on with a current legislation, and it is currently with the city attorney and we still need to go before the planning commission, and as many of you may have read in sf weekly

there is a rebirth of manufacturing happening in san francisco and we are excited about it and we have the opportunity to marry old world craft with new world technology and form production but we need space for pdr businesses to call home. and more importantly for san francisco to work at. thank you. >> questions? >> one quick thing, sorry. from supervisor cohen's office and i think that tiffany gave you the bulk of what the legislation does about this is something that we have been working on with the mayor's office and the planning department and a number of supervisors who have pdrs zones in their district or just been interested in the manufacturing industry in san francisco for about a year now. and we finally have data that was showing us consistently the types of pdr spaces we need and what size we need, and what some of the common challenges were and we have also have better data around where the

common types of busy,. and we look at pdr, and the industry that we all like to have in san francisco but it is a key component of our workforce here, and the vast majority of the pdr businesses, and we have living wages and the vast majority of them are at varying scales of educational attainment and we generally are benefit and so it is a real growing industry, and it is vital for supporting the workforce and a diverse workforce in the. what we have the businesses open in the pdr district and not having to go through and you will otherwise have to comply with certain zoning,

public health and noise related issues if you are in a pdr district and revising some of the pdr controls to actually require workforce hiring plans that are no longer dependent on the state enterprise zone program which we know will not be the mechanism to hire here in the city. and actually, creating an incentive program to build new construction, of pdr which is something that i think that five years ago when we adopted the eastern neighborhood's plan people thought that we were crazy to think about. and that would actually take some very unutilized parcels in and around particularly the show place square and the north east mission area and create an opportunity for concern potential developers to build the new pdr space and as well as contribute to the over all pdr, need that we have. and then, increasing the cap on the small enterprise work spaces from 500 square feet which they are now, to 1500

square feet which is the most common, sort of space need that we see among the manufacturers, and 500 square feet, often is not going to make the difference for someone who wants to get out of their home or garage and into a new space, but 1,000 to 1500 square feet is that sweet spot between someone that needs to that i can that step in a incan incubator space and we are excited to talk about the ways to continue to support the manufacturing in the city, after five years of implementing eastern neighborhoods and seeing are al

districts so zoned for pdr and the construction opportunities and we are specifically talking about pdr 1 d and 1 g areas, and so, it is an interesting idea, and i have never thought of it. but, i don't think that we are talking about existing neighborhoods probably mc, zoned properties going for pdr use and generally we see the pdr needs a very specific type of commercial use and they need the high ceilings and loading and freight elevator and they need a very certain compliment type of use of use and they are not always the most compatible

with adjacent users, but all of these changes are particularly focused in the existing zone and districts. >> thank you. >> and that is an overlay designation and so every building within that, is and has its own zoning, whether it is a residential or a umu and there are some overlays of pdr and it is kind of an overlay on the pdr, but it is, and it is kind of zoning district and there is and there are some umu parcels that are kind of in the pdr neighboreds, and residential and so i would not technically call it an overlay. >> is dog patch a pdr. portions are, and portions are a rh residential product. >> and any other commissioner comments? or requests questions?

>> seeing no, we are going to open it up to public comment. >> do you have another question, commissioner dwight? >> there is a particular part of the legislation that i have an issue with because i have retail space in my building and my factory. and i ink think as it is presently written, drills down to more detail about allocating the retail space to the subtenants in the building and so if there are multiple tenants in a space sharing it and there are someone making furniture and jewelry and then to say that, they can only have their prorata share of the one-third carve out for retail and for me that drills down to the level below where the law should be tinkering. and the laws should, you know, create a framework for the law

abiding citizens to make reasonable decisions about how they are going to use the space and for example, furniture requires a lot of space to display. and jewelry, very little. and how do you really allocate a space where there are shared bathrooms, and shared communal spaces for eating and meeting? and that the work spaces themselves do not in and of themselves represent the prorata share that have building? >> yeah. >> i would like to see that monthed moet identified so that we eliminate that detail and it is not enforcable. >> it was something that we talked about kind of internally among the co-sponsors and i think that what you are referring to is being able to share the space in one building and there is a sentence in it that talks about allocating proportionally the size of each

contributing pdr use. and i think that after talking about it, we agree with you, that it is a little bit of level of detail that we are probably not that interested in regulating. i think that what we care about is the over all allowable retail use in a building, and how, the individual tenants choose to a portion that retail among the different uses if someone wants 50 percent of it and someone wants ten percent even though there are types of uses that are arguably different that is something that we are fine with changing and so if the commission wanted to make a recommendation around removing the requirement for the proportionalty between the pdr users and the level of retail they get that is something that we will be happy to do as long as the over all allowable retail in the footprint is not going to exceed what is allowable in the zoning. >> the other rationale is that it could change the dynamic of cohabitating and someone will say that i need more of the retail space and so i am

willing to cover more of the rent and someone who might be on the margin of being able to afford to be there might be allowed to be there because someone is willing to pick up more of the rent. and equally important is that it is not enforcable and no one is going to go out and check it and why would we enact the laws that we can't enforce and are way below kind of the line of reason where we ought to be even. >> i think that it should be something that is left up to the individual tenants and negotiate among themselves and rather than frankly the planning department being in the business of regulating individual aportionment. and if you wanted to put that in the commission's recommendations, i think that we have already talked about a way to remove that requirement as long as we are keeping the over all zoning. >> we have recommended language, >> great. >> let's open any other commissioner questions? >> do you want to open it up to public comment, do we have any members of the public that would like to make a comment on item number five?

>> washington, and i am a long time advocate. and right here, the city hall and i have been over here 25 years and you all are a new agency of the minds, about four or five years. >> okay, do you have a comment on the item. >> yes, i am trying to make my introduction, and i have three minutes and i was making a parallel and i will speak a little more because i came in late, and so i am not familiar and i just thought that i would come up and you know, speak on it. but, specifically, if you asked me about this item, no i don't have any comment on it and i guess that i might as well sit down to public comment. >> we will have public comment at the end. >> thank you. >> do we have anybody that would like to make public comment on this specific item, item number five? >> seeing none, public comment

closed. >> if i could draw your attention, there was written public comment submitted in each of the commissioner's binders for your information >> do we have a recommendation. >> i would like to move that we support this legislation with the one modification with the space and the prorata allocation as it is described and replace it with a language that we have proposed. >> second. >> and okay, do you want to do a roll call? >> commissioner adams? >> yes. >> and commissioner dooley. >> yes. >> dwight. >> yes. ortiz-cartagena. >> yes. >> riley. >> yes. >> and it passes. >> thank you. >> mr. president, that takes us to item number 6, decision and

possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on board of supervisor's file number 1 31207, environment code bottled water this is a discussion and possible action item. and we have with us, cath len from supervisor chiu's office to make a staff presentation. >> good evening, commissioners, from the office of supervisor's david chiu and thanks for having me tonight. and so the ordinance before you this evening, has been in the development for almost a year now. we have worked with the city departments and events and many other stake holders to create a proposal that is fair and also pushes our city to take the steps to begin to address the enormous problem of our addiction to plastic bottled water. i won't take too much of your time explaining the serious environmental damage done by massive over consumption of bottled water because of the facts on this is indisputable and the legislation is enforced by many environmental organizations including the sierra club and the surf