have anything for wheelchair accessible 25 thousand a week it cames to 100 thousand a month, 1.2 million dollars a year. if i was sth chief of ceo of any of those companies i would fine that in a flash so i would have to-i could be waved of providing wheelchair accessible vans and drivers for the sate of san francisco. what a voice change. anyway, with that you understand what i'm talking about? we don't want to go backwards thmpt rumor has it these new buses that are being remodeled, the express fwuzing they take out wheelchair accessibility >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public who would like to provide public? seeing none public comment is cloized >> modm clerk can you to

thudoption without ref rens to committee >>phony-19 are consider frd immediate adoption. single roll call vote [inaudible] >> any member want to [inaudible] any items >> can you call the roll >> iteal 17-19, supervisor cohen, aye. farrell, aye. kim, aye. mar, aye. tang, aye. wiener, aye. yee aye. avalos, aye. breed, aye. companyose, aye. christensen, aye. thrrks are 11 aye's >> those items area dopted unanimously. can we police return to item number 13 >> item 13 is the consideration of the resolution oof to aprove the report of

assessment costs >> have we completed discussion with the property owners? thank you. >> president breed and members of the board, per your instructions we have met and confer would the property owners >> could you identify your san francisco again >> grechen rude, dpw, phil gallow, dpw. per your sfruckzs we met and conferred with the property ofen rb squz other interested partdies appearing before us to resolve the over due invoice. 4 locations were removed from the list. 70 locations remain on the list for assessment on the property tax role. we submitted the final praurnts to the clerk of the board rkss and okay&the gentlemen who came late, were you able to have a discussion with him?

>> yes >> were there change tooz the list or the result of that conver saigz? >> no >> okay. supervisor christensen >> i wupdered madam chair if i can have a opportunity to address a couple other issues >> yes. how do you prefer i do that >> iocan ask question of department of public works >> in looking at the roles i see 2 addresses on grand avenue and traungly suspect those may be similar to the situations of some of the people we heard from this evening. would you guys have any particular knowledge about any of these singular location snz do you have any information or particulars about them? what i suspect it is probably language barrier and lack of understanding and these people didn't understand enough to come down here today and

complain. i'm thinks that we can assess this amount of money, but suspect this is more administrative dead end going forward. i wondered-my office would be appy to try to help facilitate a better out come and make them aware of the obligation to remove graffiti and address these issues if thatd would be helpful >> we appreciate it. >> supervisor christensen just for clarity you are concerned by passing this revised list today there won't be recourse for these individual members to either have these fees adjusted or waved? >> exactly. can you please explain the process so we understand what is at stack as a result of passing this as amendmented today >> my name is joseph [inaudible] represent the department of public work squz

want to say moving forward with the list goes before-before the list go tooz the property tax role we have some time to remove properties and clear the list if needs to be >> from my understanding mr. gibner can you clarify that because it is my understanding once we aproov this list it needs to wrurn to the board to be removed so i want to make sure we are all only the same page >> deputy city tern i should probably confer with the department. the board has to authorize and any properties where we are imposing the lean or collecting. i should confer qu the department about the discretion they have to remove praurnts once the board adopted the motion >> just for clarity, the board adopts this motion and it will be left you have the discretion to actually remove

one of these properties if anything changes? >> yes if the property owner pays or if we can work with the board to make changes if the board agree >> for example the 98 year old man he had a hardship waver and if there are other sich waiz like that where there is a hardship waver or language barrier and someone who duds rnt understand we want to make sure that by approving this we don't prevent dpw from removing them entirely. >> thereat is correct >> attorney gibner >> one option you have today is to continue the matter not for additional public hearing where all the individuals come back and speakgon, but on the ultimate decision of whether to adopt the legislation and we

can provide further advice over the next week >> is it possible to adopt the ones we move from the list entirely and address those not removed from the list in the future? >> yes, you can do that. >> okay would another option is remove the 2 or 3 items i have questions about and address them separately >> that is a option as well >> through the chair to the members of public works, if i eliminate the last 2 items on the first page which are grantarve new items, would you be able to address those separately at a later date >> absolutely supervisor >> okay, you would like to continue those 2 items? >> yes >> to the next meeting of the board? >> may 19 >> supervisor christensen made a motion to attend those 2 particular items to the meeting

of may 19. is there a second? second by supervisor tang. can we take that without objection? without objection we continue those to the meeting of may 19 >> thank you >> thank you. on the remaining doument not including those items we continued, colleagues is there a motion to move this forward-motion by supervisor cohen and second by supervisor christensen. can we take this without objections? without objection this passes as amended. madam clerk can you read the in memoriam >> on behalf of supervisor wav lose for the late retired deputy chief stanley frances court. >> madam clerk is there any other business before us td >> that conclude the business

for today >> thank you for buying here ladies and gentlemen we are adjourned.

man: ♪ when i need you ♪ ♪ i just close my eyes and i'm with you ♪

♪ and all that i so want to give you ♪ ♪ it's only a... ♪ announcer: you don't have to be a hero to be a hero. when you adopt a child from foster care just being there makes all the difference. >> meeting will come to order. >> now we are ready to go. >> good morning, the meeting will come to order this is a special meeting of the government and oversight committee for may, 7, 2015. and i am supervisor yee and to my right is christensen and to my left is supervisor breed, and the electricker is erica major and we would like to acknowledge the staff at sfgtv. who record each of the meetings

and makes the transcripts available for the public on-line and do you have any announcements? >> make sure that you silence all cell phones and speaker cards should be submitted to the clerk items today will be appear on the may 19th board of supervisor's agenda unless otherwise stated. >> okay. could you please call the first item? >> item one s a hearing to receive updates from various city departments required to provide a response on the implementation of recommendation three and 12 b on cained in the 13, 14, civil grand jury report entitled rising sea levels at our doorstep, is there anyone from the civil grand jury that would like to speak? >> come on up. >> e i would like to wait, and speak after. >> i will have the planning,

department come up to speak right after. >> and okay. >> okay. >> thank you. >> kelley? >> good morning, chair yee and supervisors kelley, director of city wide planning from the san francisco planning department, and i am here actually representing, a whole group of city agencis which have been involved in speaking of the agencis that will rise and specifically responding to the grand jury report, and its recommendations. specifically today, i would like to respond to the two recommendations, and regarding the stake holder and engagement, in this issue, and in the recommendation of the numbers three, and which have to do with amending the city codes, and for the sea level rise, and i serve as the

co-chair, along with the deputy public works director, and of the mayor's coordinating committee on the sea level rise, and i also wanted to interview several people who are here representing the agencies that have been involved, both with that activity and in the work in thinking about and responding to the sea level rise, and those include, patrick, of the city's chief resilientcy officer who is here, and i think that he is actually the first in the nation and the officer, funded in part by the rockefeller foundation, and he has been very engaged inthies you, and we are one of the subcommittees of the mayor's committee. >> and also, with us is david, behar from the public utility's commission who chairs the technical committee, and the sea level rise and who and the

grand jury report is helpful in elevating the sea level rise, for the need for the city to be

aggressive about responding to that the sea level, strategy,

sometimes this fall and the committee is working on a lot of information gathering and a lot of the information and building blocks over this summer and early fall and we are bringing that forward and we will be happy to up date you, and supervisors and as those products and information becomes available. and coordinating, and we actually have the cross membership from all of the departments and including administrative people, as well as, technical people and a lot of work that is getting done there, and the group has divided its efforts into, about 6 components, and the first of which is an economic risk analysis, and sort of the cost and the cost of inaction and the mayor is very interested in knowing that if we don't do

anything or do do very much or deliberately and, what is the cost essentially and, is that work is being led by patrick, which is the officer, and we just came from a meeting just now, about that, and to take it from the sea rise level report and go into the next stage of vonnerbility and each of the capitol agencies and and we will have hard of the strategy and first a high level, assessment of the vonnerbility to the risks to the assessments this fall, and there is a

community engagement group once we have this information together what is our straggy for engaging the citizenry, and of the key stake holders, and from the business, and the community and so forth, and so that will be the product of this work as well, and it will be one thing to amend the recommendations for the building by building approach and probably the necessary approach is to look, sort of in the water front wide at larger solutions, that will protect the whole districts and that are vulnerable, and finally, there is a data analysis, group, a lot of this is really getting our arms around the existing conditions, and risks and vunerbilities and that requires a lot of data provisions and the data crunching and so there is a group that is particularly battled into that particular task. and this will give us the

basis, for saying, how best and most effectively to engage a broader group of stake holders, and and engage on that kind of collaborative effort and there is also a group supporting this which is the technical committee, and that was convened last year and developed, and the sea level guidance for the capitol plan, and that was chaired by david who is here today, and that, document, is now, serving as the guide, for the departments that come forward with the large capitol requests. and of the city. and the engagements that they are requesting. and the committee, and the oversight committee is essentially, making sure, that that is the building assessments are actually,

performed and that as part of the project process and i think that we have a have solid and internal structure and it is highly coordinating and the first thing that i will mention is of the new of the effort and the port and the planning department, are, and they are collaborating now on an approach to water front, planning, and that will place the sea level rise really in the center of that public engagement process and develop further policies, and design, and guidance. for the water front community. and the risk and taking advantage of the knowledge of some of the entitled developments that have been forward looking and planned for the sea level rise and plan for adaptation and assess what needs to be done and as part of that effort and i should mention that we are contemplating the process that will involve an informed and science based design competition that will bring in experts much like with don in

the new york new jersey area, following the hurricane sandy, at a process that was known by design and we actually engaged those parties and consultant to help us to create, and scope and build the process for san francisco, but perhaps, for adjoining communities to really, get creative about these solutions, and that was a highly successful process, in the new york, new jersey area, and we hope to duplicate that and now we have a new gauge to help us in scoping out that effort and so that is, our assurance that we are, taking seriously this recommendation three, and excuse me, 12 b and feel that we are implementing the recommendation, and with regard to the recommendation three, which has to do with the amending building codes, to protect against the sea level rise and we are taking the

spirit of that recommendation, and we do want to implement it in a different way than the strike recommendation and so formally, we are saying that that recommendation will not be implemented but we are implementing other measures and let me just quickly, describe those and the department of building inspections and chris from planning has been very involved in that approach, and which we feel is actually a better one, and that is that the city already regulates, the development and in the prone areas, and chris, can describe those regulations, and we have we have worked with fema and they are updating the innovation maps for the coast line and they will be subsequently updating the maps for the bay portions, and those essentially give us guidance for treating individual projects, in those four plans, and they have their own regulations and i think that i have included there, and

secondly, we have the sequa process where the sea level rises becomes the concern in the environmental review process that are subject to any substantial developments or in the flood plain and that is the second way in which we catch the current projects and the difficulty of amending our building codes, that as i said we have think are adequate for this and given the other processes is that they only look at individual buildings, and not access to the buildings, and of the states between the buildings, and in the the larger sort of district solutions that we are after and so we are saying, we may amend in the future but the process for now and the next year or so, we think fleet veered method, rather than doing the measure around the building at the moment.

we will be amending that structure as we go through this planning period over the next year or so. and we really feel that is the best investment of our time is actually the focus on the more integrated process which i have described. >> questions? >> i have a question, though? >> and this is and an important matter and so, and in the current issue, looking at, the future, and the processes is described if, it is in the

discussion for, and a while, i guess, and do you, do you have any, sense of some initial chances that you might be making with the code? not the comprehensive or anything, but, you know, and you, will be looking at code changes as ayou move along for the years and anything that you are anticipating in the near future. >> i guess that i would ask chris and bill to respond to that, and there are certainly some things that we could be looking at but we are just not, we feel that we have the productions in place, let me ask bill. >> and good morning, chris, with the planning department, as mr. kelley mentioned one of

the mayor's committees recently, enacted is the technical committee, which i serve on along with them along with all of the effected departments and the chaired by david of the sfpuc and we have the first meeting of that, and the technical committee recently. and the task committee that i serving on with a few others and tasked with developing recommendations for the coordination committee and for the mayor we have just begun that task and we have had one meeting so far and we have started to develop the ideas, for the changes to address the sea level rise but it is just

the beginning of that process and also as mr. kelley mentioned i think that the feeling is that through the review process, the city has sufficient tools to insure that the flooding risks associated with the sea level rise are adequately evaluated, and addressed and we have been using it for that purpose, and since, in and from what i seen back to 1990, through the mission bay regional, and the plan and more recently, with the treasure island and then of course for the projects that are along the vulnerable areas and our feeling is that while there is a very important issue, we have the tools in

place we will be developing td language and it will be recommended. >> thank you. >> and ma'am, would you like to come up? >> good morning, again, maria here from the civil grand jury, and regarding, thank you, regarding issues 12 b, please note that that, and the entire 12 section, regards, regional planning, where it will be representative of the city, toward regional planning around the area and i was surprised to learn this week that mountain view has committed to google to build a sea wall outside of the shores of mountain view to protect the new development to be paid for by a parcel tax, levied on the citizens and kind of surprised me and i did not

realize that we were that far along around the bay that is shows that we can in the waste any time, as far as talking with other comments around the bay and we need to have a good, strong regional representation there and probably through the aupysings of acds and we are going to end up with a hop scotch of situations all the way around the bay, but we need to be involve and i don't know who they were talking to but it sounds like it was a local decision that they made without the consideration of others, and regarding item three, on the code, and sequa is just fine with the jury, and we are happy with that as long as it is used and i have no idea that they are not, and the regulation is there, and if it is used fine. and the november, the 13th, 2013, the city contracted with the delivery special study on the mission bay which by the way was a bay and it is