the civil grand jury for adding the enforcement support for the sea level i'm here to support the project we've no evidence of moved from 5 to 10 years from the sequa documents to a public conversation to prepare our shorelines i know that san francisco is enclosed on many sides so today, you've heard many departments talk about not only the vulnerability assessments they're doing alone in their areas of interests but working collaboratively together on a number of projects that are considered leadership models for the region to highlight two super is working or working with the agencies here today as well as federal and state agencies in the ocean beach master plan on the open space and public access

we're working with bcdc the dutch government and private partners including the san francisco bay area e bay giants to adapt the strategies in the mission creek and the waterfront we have the capital guidelines we're starting to work on the seawall we're part of the resilient collaborative on the rockefeller foundation that's funding to grow the conversation subtitling around recipients and climate change in conclusion i think the grand jury recommendation really get at an issue that's he getting attention in our city some of the ideas are more readilyly implemented by regardless we look forward to the progress and continuing the conversation. >> thank you are there any members of the public that wish

to make p.m. public testimony seeing none, it's closed. okay. so colleagues, can we go through each item and make recommendations for response supervisor tang >> thank you. i want to thank all the different city agrees that have come together to address the be issue and as supervisor representing a district that's borden by ocean beach we're concerned about the issue and have been working closely with all the agencies not only from our city level but state and federal as well as spur to address the sea level rise with that, i concur with the comments made by several members from the adverse departments we have addressed the issue but realizing we're dealing with and a half so it is documents and

sometimes, we really need to even engage in trial and error with that, said i want to go through this or some of the findings finding one that the city didn't have a citywide comprehensive plan to sea level rise i partially disagree the city and counties city was formed in 2013 a sea level committee that has a draft for the sea level access the draft plan was be presented to the city administrator in may of 2014 and is currently undergoing review by city agency the draft plan includes information on the effected and possible sea level rise through 200 one hundred and the storm surge effecting water levels for the comprehensive

plan to follow to be sure the resiliency and the draft plan will be acted open been the capital plan in 2014. so as with recommendation one a this is regarding whether the city should prepare and adapt a risk assessment for the comprehensive plan regarding sea level rise the answer is similar to in finding one but this recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented in september 2014 so as mentioned the city has a draft comprehensive plan adapted by the capital planning committee in september 2014 and the plan provides a fraction that can be used in southeast the development along the shoreline in addressing that reflex for recommendation 1-b

this talks about adapting a citywide comprehensive plan for adaptation to rising sea level and the flood plans and should include a lifespan of each project outlined in the plan. my suggestion is that we say the recommendation has not been pledged bye bye september 2014 currently sequa provides that the planning department's with authority to require the promotions be designed zoo to mitigate sea level rise. for recommendation one c this has to do with the resiliencycy if the reich's sea levels and through our planning and building department require that the construction project

vulnerable to future floodplain flooding be with the 2015 project. i will say that the recommendation will not be impeding the reason being well, i'll say that the board of supervisors agree with the statement the city should build implement this it is adapt terrify but resilient to the 2050 projection doesn't influence the project including explore inform storm surge or wave action or lifespan and location or failure of a project. additionally the draft guidance prepared by itself sea level rise committee will address this issue. and colleagues if you have comments recommendation one d this has to do with the city departments

that are involved in the dames such dpw mta poster and coordinate the efforts to minimize any inconvenience to the public and address the certify few minutes this recommendation has been implemented while this requirement didn't officially apply to the board of supervisors currently, the city departments cooperate with various utility companies stafshd years ago. finding number 2 the city planning code has no provisions addressing the impacts associated with rising sea levels without the appropriate provisions there's no means to insure a sustainable on land rising sea levels we partially disagree with the finding the planning and the reason being that planning department

evaluates whether the proeptd projects exposes people to injure or dedicate as a result of the sea level rise. for recommendation 2a it should be and it should be again amended i'm saying currently this requirement didn't officially pertain to the board of supervisors the puc has maps along the shorlz that are potentially vulnerable for protected sea level rise and the planning department additionally considers those maps in evaluating the flood zones under serial killer recommendation two

b the planning code should be amended for public safety where it can't be protected while this didn't specifically pretender to the board of supervisors our response should be this will not be implemented sequa provides the planning department with sufficient authority to require the mitigation of potential hazards from sea level rise. vblths number 3 this states our city's building code with no impacts associated with sea level rise i disagree partially again, while the board of supervisors doesn't have the jurisdiction over this the city agrees with the statement that the building code and the ports building code dpoo didn't include the impacts of sea level rise how have they evaluate the

impacts required under sequa. recommendation 3 also talking about the building code and the ports building code this had address the impacts with sea level rise especially with strm rise and will insure the protection from sea level rise and also amendments to protect the most vulnerable system and be reviewed and reassessed every 5 years will require further analysis. the statement and the rational being any further implementation of the building codes will require prirmgs changes and further analysis between of the scientific community must be performed to perform effectively policies and to address our sea

level rise. finding 5 just states we engaged in a process to conduct the ocean beach master plan we agree number 5 we look at the master plan this is recommendation has been implement i'll note it is ongoing. the city is currently working with all agencies and finding 11 states the city has not set aside funds we agree with that statement i suggest we agree with that statement but also note open the side while we've not set aside funds this is through the draft comprehensive plan the city will be taking up as we engage on future budget

allocations. recommendation 11 a the city should start a reserve fund that will not be implemented the reason it is unnecessary since the mayor and the board of supervisors set aside funds on an unanimous basis in the something as a whole the planning committee can take up yearly recommendation b the cost and implementation of the adaptation strategies and the loss of the families to do so i you go the implementation ass recommendation has been implemented as part of the harassed implementation plan the city identified the man made hazards and future versions of the hazy mitigation plan will incorporate the more recent work by updating the vulnerability

analysis for the sea level rise. recommendation 11 c our city should explore more positions the various departments have received federal funding and in certain cases while the request is to find a success certain departments continue to look at the funding options. recommendation 11 d our city should request a insurance recommendation from fema for mitigations and adaptation against future funding this requires further analysis the staff is pursuing all available opportunities they have and continue to do so. finding 11 states that reich's sea levels is a regional problem

finding 12 i'm sorry it is a regional problem we agree with that statement. all right. last two recommendation 12 a the city through the board of supervisors we should cooperate our agencies we will say this has been implemented the yours respectfully, yours respectfully, from stakeholders from san francisco and san mateo and bcdc and california coastal and south san francisco and others met in august 2014 to address the impacts open peninsula. recommendation 12b create a local combrup of stakeholders and citizens to feed into the regional group further analysis and we again, this is not in the

directors board of supervisors we agree that the community and stakeholders involvements t is essential and the various city departments will fourth the best the exact nature of the outreach for that. that concludes the sea level recommendation >> okay. thank you supervisor tang. colleagues is that there a motion to table the hearing on this item >> i'll make the motion and again, thank you to the civil grand jury and take a moment to thank the budget analyst and as well as the agencies that are moving forward on this i serve as the board of supervisors representative to bcdc this has been an enormous concern for all commissioners on bcdc it's gifted e gifrl to get a progress report but obviously we've got

more work to do thank you for putting this open the forefront i'm happy to table this hearing and move into onto the recommendations. >> there's been a motion we'll take that without objection. the hearing is now tabled. and also is there a motion to accept the recommendations proposed by supervisor tang to amend the current resolution >> so moved. >> okay. >> i want to make a classification to forward the recommendation responses recommendation 2a where it was recommended that required further analysis we want to clarify a report back in front of the grand jury in six months

the same american people recommendations 3 again, the response request further analysis we want to clarify the report back within 6 months and 11 d where the response requires further analysis and recommendation leveling d. >> okay. thank you. and just for clarity at that time, we will call for hearing before the geocommittee that's why we're tangling the current hearing. with that, it has been properly move forward that we accept the recommendations from supervisor tang without objection we'll accept the recommendations to accept the resolution and then lastly we would i'd like to entertain a monoxide to move forward the resolution as amended to the full board of the committee report >> so moved.

>> thank you we'll take that without objection. the item is is moved and finally any other comments or motorcycle from any of the other members. i'd like to thank the civil grand jury for their hard work and thank everyone for their patience as we went through this process. i'm to thank my aid johnson for working on this and assisting me in reading through the reports a lot of great information in the report a lot of hard work clearly making this a reality and thank you to all the departments for b.c. being responsive as it relates to the report and thanks to everyone a lot of hard work a lot of great things have happened in the city so with that, any more items

before you will say madam clerk. >> there's no further business. >> all right. seeing none, this meeting is adjourned food in sa just about expensive eat but food for everyone and there's organizations in the city that

are doing really good work making sure that healthy food it assessable to everyone. more and more as follows are are becoming interested in upper arlthd they want to joy the open green pace sea know where their food it coming from we'll look at 3 programs talking ushering agricultural and garden to new heights. so what exactly it, your honor agricultural >> it the growing food or flowers within city limits traditionally we've been referring to communities gardener that is a raised bed over and over upper argument has a more a farming way of farming.

>> so tell me 0 what's growing in this garden. >> a really at all plant. in the one of the rare places, you know, people have access to green space 24 is one of the places to grow things like the purple floor. it is sort of recognizing that the more diversity in given space the better not to just have one thing by everything supported each another >> it provides the community with an opportunity to get their hands dirty and reach 0 out and congressmen with the community in ways they might have not

otherwise to engage with one other. >> now the dpw urban planning program so see how the garden community. >> so i grew up on a farm in air force base we picked the foods open the trees and share with other families and as i drive around san francisco i see any trees with apples or mrumdz and lemon trees i can see the food going to waste and brought that idea back to the department many of the trees where the fruit would go to waste we origin or crop and pick other fruits and delivery this to food banks or shelters to people who need them. >> i'm here with nang wong hello nang. >> hello. >> i need to understand house

this gleaning work. >> we come and harvest like for example, we'll come over here this is the lemon and plug it like this. >> (laughter). >> made that good, good and ease. >> the trick is how not to hurt the branches. >> like the thing. >> i'm so excited about this. the people are so passionate about where the food goes to the private property owners give us the food they're happy that no of a t is going to waste >> oh.

thank you. thank you. again job aura natural >> (laughter). >> from backyards to back lots let's take a look at the food and community bonding at the free farm. >> my idea was to start growing food and giving it away. and getting my neighbors to who had space and having a kind of event that brings people together not to run our food program this time around but to share the wealth of the abundance of our welfare. we were all divorce and as part of our philosophy of working together and working together. >> what's the most rewarding aspect of volunteering for the free farm stand.

>> well, we could is a generalic satisfaction but something about giving food away it's giving something i brought that in and sort it and gave it to you it's primitive to be able to give something some basically to someone else. >> now serving number to 49 come on down. >> we have the capability of producing this food and in san francisco you can grow food all year round so the idea we're capable of prougdz food in our own backyards we're here to demonstrate an bans of food and i think that giving it away for free we show individuals it in have to be a comedy.

>> we build time together and it's the strength of any ideas of the connections we'll turn that connection and the more connections you make no mistake about it the more you can have a stronger power and not have to rely on money that's the people power. >> in this episode we've seen the urban farms and gardens provide more in fruits and vegetation people can have the special produce available it can be a place to give back by donating food to others and teach our children the connection to the earth and

environment it's truly