oh, and tell the zombies they're blocked, too. business commission meeting. it is monday, feb 22. the start time is 2: 05. this is regular meeting of the small business commission and this afternoons meeting is televised live and the small business commission want tooz thank media service sf gov tv staff for televising [inaudible] sf gov tv.org and click on watch sf gov tv 2. member oz thf public take the opportunity to silence phone squz electronic

devicesism public comment is limited to 3 minutes per speaker unless otherwise established by the presiding officer of the meeting speaking. speakers are required to state name kwr yellow speaker cards on the table appreciated a and deliver the speaker cards up here on the edge of the rail. so, with that, sf gov tv can we have the slide, please? i got--i guess-there we go. >> my turn. as is our new custom we begin and end each small business commission meeting with a reminder that the office of small business is

sth thonly place to start your new business in san francisco and the best place to get answers about doing business in san francisco. the office of small business should be your first stop when you have a question what to do next. we provide free and won on one assistance to help achieve goal squz needs. the suchbss include a check list of required registration, permits licegence zoning requirements. we connect you to city funded business resources through various partnerships for the development of your business plan to access financing legal and technical support or any other assistance thmpt office of small business is here to support through the many stages of business not just the beginic. we are here in city hall room 110, monday through friday. you can calloon the phone, 415-554-6134 or visit on line, business

portal.sf gov. we provide service in english chinese and spanish. if you need assistance in small business matter start here. >> item 1 is call to order and roll call. commissioner adams, here. commissioner dooley. commissioner dwight, here. commissioner ortiz-cartagena, here. commissioner tour-sarkissian, here. commissioner zouzounis, here. >> general public comment. this allows members to comments within the pursue oof the small business commission and suggest new ajepda items. this is the time to talk about things not on the agenda today so this is your chance. any members that would like to comment or make suggestions for things

not on the agenda today? seeing none this public comment is closed. >> item number 3 is discussion and possible action to make recommendations to the board of supervisors on file number 160024. police and administrative code all jnder toilet facilities. this is a ordinance amend thg police code to mandate business squz places of public accommodation desinginate single user toilet facilities available to public or employee as all gender and accessible personoffs any gender identity and require enforcement of the signage requirements by department of building inspection and require buildings on land that the city owns or leases to provide all gender toilet facilities. this is a action item for you commissioners and today we have

carolyn goossen aid to supervisor campos office >> thank you for having me here today. i'm here representing supervisor compose. we have introduced and worked on so many monthwise advocates in the transjnder and disabilities and senior rights muni. this is a piece of legislation that is very common sense to increase zeens can safety in san francisco. we have a number of supervisors who cosponsored the legislation including supervisor farrell, kim, mar and yee. what this law will do is require businesses and places of accommodation to identify any single room bathroom as a all gender bathroom. it dozen require a change in the fixtures of the bathroom, it is insureing through signage

change anyone can access the bathroom. the reason is this a important issue particularly then transgender community relates to safety and violence the community experienced and then in term thofz seniors and disability community surround the often complicated negotiation if you have a tenant that is a different gender having to decide which bathroom to go in. this is relevant for parents of opposite gender children a well as mere broadly it is a instance women face and womens have long restroom lines. essentially we feel this is very common sense. we are not the first to do it. a number of cities have already put forth such laws locally including in washington dc, philadelphia, austin, west holly wood,

berkeley and new york. this is introduced at the state level recently and we have very strong support from a number of agencies. we worked with dbi [inaudible] here today as well carl rujohnson [inaudible] who work closely on this to make it is a comprehensive clear law that really works with dbi and human rights commission so there accountability measures that are clear but it is also very reasonable in terms of the process. we have support from gtba, gtra,boma, hotel counsel, building inspection commission and youth commission and everyone said it is about time and have done this and why didn't we do it sooner. dba at early at 2005 had a department memo of bathrooms that are jnder

neutral. we would love your support today and if it is okay i would love to have witch rich [inaudible] and carl rajohnson come up. unless you is questions. >> commissioner adams >> i just want to say-thank supervisor campos for this legislation t. is well overdue and i want to compliment on you on this, it the outreach. you went to dbi and golden restaurant association, you went to all the player jz everybody supports this. including myself, so i just want to thank you and you guys did the right thing and how you got it out there with the public support and thank you. like i said, this is way long overdue >> thank rugina as well. one

thing we will be doing is providing a fax sheet to insure it is very clear what small businesses have to do and it is a ujicational opportunity. we also made it so that it doesn't become implemented until 90 days until the legislation passes so we can insure everyone understand this is a simple change that is meaningful >> will you make a approved sign available on line so people can doneload and post it. >> this week i'll speak with local sign companies in san francisco to talk about making the sign-there are variations of the sign you can post so we are talking about the signs that are really the most modern [inaudible] all gender for example and so we'll work with them to make sure it is easily available >> i think is t is best if it were

available for free on your website so we know it suproouved and you can decide i want the fancy metal one or laminated one or print it out myself but i want to know what i'm buying is the approved format. todays printing it is easy to for free print out the sign and post it on the single door in the place of work and think that is fair as this is a wind fall for the sign making industry they get to make millions of signs >> i saw in berkeley where they have the blue sign and they have the one with the sign at the bottom and [inaudible] it was half-and half. >> again, if you want to do one that is more graphically appealing that is fine but the bare minimum requirement should be available on line for free and for comparison. >> we can talk about--i think

we should also hear from department of building inspection and/or carla around-sometimes the signage there are certain ada requirements of what is there and because of visual impairments so i think maybe we should hear-i don't know if carla or richard is the appropriate person to talk about. >> we get a pitch as a business owner every single year from companies that want us to post all the rule jz regulations, all this and that and guess what? it comes with, by the way it is ix 5 dollars for this and 55 dollar for that and those thingerize just words and printed in the proper font and type and language that should be readily available to people. that is my suggestion. we have other commissioner comment so maybe we can get through those first.

>> thank you, i echo my cocommissioners opinion about the wonderful initiative but i would like to go fl to the nitty-gritty how to help on the record so we have a understanding of how it applies to small business if you bare with me. so, we talking about public accommodations, what is in your opinion could you tell what a public accommodation is? does it apply to businesses, to buildings, to retail, why dont you define that clearly so we understand. >> the think we did include a definition, but places where the public goes. we include businesses and schools and included any libraries, any place where the public would be entering and be going into. i

think that aligns with state law around public accommodation definition >> i would like to help you but 121 a 1 and i printed that. when i go over there-it covers all retail, theater, concert hall, stadium, auditorium, bakeries, grocery stores, laundsry mats and covers build ings and professional offices, is that your understand? >> uh-huh >> is there any public place is a exception to your list so it is clear so everybody understands it is a requirement? >> no. >> your understanding there is no exception correct? >> correct. >> we talking about the multi-user toilet facilities are an exception, correct? it says in paragraph

that you have in the end it says multiuser tolet system may be identified as all jnder facilities but not required to be all gender. is that a exception to the ordinance? in other words, if you have a multi-using toilet facilities you don't have a requirement to have a signage- >> this is only for the requirement is only for single room restrooms, hoferb, there are cases now of restaurants that are beginning to do this more and more and choosing to have multi-gender restrooms that are all gender so we are saying we don't prohibit you from doing that. you can allow to continue. >> if you are retail with

multi-user toilet futilities are you required to have a third bathroom which is gender neutral in your opinion? because here it says multi-user toilet facilities may be all gender facilities and not required to be all gender. are we going to have to explain to retail that maybe they may end up having a third bathroom gender neutral? >> i appreciate it. >> it is important for retail to know what they center to do in 90 days. >> what you have to do within 90 days if you have a single room restroom with male or female sign you change the signage to reflect it is all gender. that is all. if and have two bathrooms one male and one female both are all gender. it isn't only you have

one restroom that is all gender and use a bthroom for something else. we are not decreasing amount of bathrooms we say maintain the level of bathrooms you have and switch the signage to all gender. there is nothing anyone has to coo with regards to multi-stalled room. >> what is the requirement to have a male and female, when do you have the requirement to have a separate male and female restroom? i'm trying to find out if there is any case or situation where you would have to have a third bathroom? under the law, when would you have to have a clear separation male and female toilet or bathroom? is there any-could you assure us in fact in a situation like this a

third bathroom isn't required in your opinion? >> are you referring to the multi-stall restroom >> i think building code is what you are referring to and maybe richard can address that >> the other question would be could you desinginate a multi-stall- >> you can. the law says you is it choice but not obligated. >> you can use either one. >> rick halren, the supervisor of technical service division at department of building inspection. we assisted the supervisor in developing this ordinance. to answer your question, the requirement for restrooms are dictated by it building code title 24 part 2 as well as california

plumbing code. there is no-whatever fixture is there they are required to have that is what they are required to have. the ordinance does n't alter that. the only time where i would say they add a single user restroom is under chapter 11 b, 202.4 palth of travel upgrades which is a volunteer act to add a bathroom in lou of altering the existing sex restrooms but there is no requirement and this ordinance would not require additional restroom or fixture be added. >> okay, so to sum up, it is no obligation to add a third bathroom any time? >> none what so ever unless the building code required it for other reasons. if the building code require

frz other reasons we would do that but on this ordinance no, for not any reason >> could you give a example where a building code would require a third bathroom? >> if you doing a major alteration and mens and women rooms and have a feasibility altering the two restrooms the july 1 alteration to chapter 11 b allows for separate seperal unisex single user restroom to be installed. if that is the case the restroom would fall into the ordinance and gender neutral >> for ada. if and are not compliant with ada law you can opt to install a third bathroom that meets the requirements >> that is only if you alter the existing tenant space. >> these 2 bathrooms are not

ada compliant and have to add a third one? >> you could add a third one. >> if you can't make it compliant you have to add a third one. >> we do roir you provide some accessible restroom. >> you have to add a third one under this ordinance how would you make it all gender neutral or one of them gender neutral? >> the ordinance is a single neutral restroom and only required to add one and falls under this and the signage has to indicate it isope toon all genders. >> another question i have if i may, how are you going plain all of this to the retail? to all the-those who have to comply, are you planning on sending mailers or is it published and posted on your website? how are you going to get the message out in 90 days?

>> i have been asked by the deputy director ed sweeny to develop a brosure on how the ordinance work squz what signage is allowed and demonstrations of them and we will post on that our website as soon as this develops and forward a copy to the oufs of small business and distribute best we can from there and provide a copy to the supervisors as well. >> before you leave a lot of businesses we talk about also offices, public places, that may apply to building owners so how are you going reach these people, businesses versus property owners, how will that pan out is a concern of mine? how do we prevent the people be in violation within 90 days? >> that is where we are going

to be engaging all the stakeholders we have engaged throughout the process and get their help. we will reach out to you in the small business commission and make the information available at the city agency websites. we want to make sure this is a educational opportunity and not difficult for people so they have the information available. so, we intend to do outreach and welcome other suggestions. we can share all of the organizations we are plan toog work with and there are other ones we know of we would welcome that information so we can insure that the outreach is sufficient. >> commissioner yee riley >> i think we discussed some of the question i have. this ordinance only apply to single user bathroom? >> yes, >> building or retail establishment they have ladies room and mens room they are not required to change the signage?

>> exactly. these are wheniogo in there is one toilet and sink and you close the door and that is the only bathroom where this is applied >> i have seen a lot of those in the restaurants. why is this under the police code rather than the building? >> this was to insure and i don't know if you want to come to speak to that. this sadis cushion with sity agency. let me have carla talk to that a little bit. >> good afternoon commissioners, carla johnson, director at the mayors office on disability and we had quite a lot of discussion about the best place to put the new provision and the police code was chosen because there is some prez dns. we have other provision in the police code enforced by department of building inspection. a good example is the noise ordinance. the

reason it isn't in the building code really is that the state writers of the building code set forth only 3 exceptions for how you can modify the building code and you have to justify a lot of [inaudible] to the state building code based upon climatic, geo logic or top graphic issues. if you are subject to hurricanes you may modify the building code to put in greater resistance to hurricane and earthquakes you can be more seismically robust. top graphic in san francisco with all the hills you may make exceptions on that. since this is a simple and elegant solution to address a equity issue about human rights the police code looked like the cleanest place to put the change. >> we can use social climate change. >> i think that is a excellent point to make. this is somewhat of a

tsumami. >> commissioners any other questions? okay , public comment. >> i just wanted to add my hole hearted support and the appreciation the supervisor reached out to a variety of stakeholders including small business with regina and senior i disability action and the mayor office on disabout. this is a issue that touches all of our core mandate squz a buft blend of #1i6b8 rights human rights and dignity for all people to use a facility with relatively little

hastal. i heard a question about signage and wanted to answer that there are accessibility provision about signage and that is because under the ada if you have a sign intended for people that are sighted that sign needs to meet the people who are blind or low vision so the saneage would include things like race, character and braille characters so people that are blind know what facility. >> that is good to know. thank you. i also want to thank you. we got a heads up on this early on and talked about it among our sevl squz constituents whether this would have effect on small business and it was determination it does not. any negative effect and it is all good so thank you very much. so, if you guys are done we'll ask for public comment. anyone from the public has anything to

say about this item now is the time to do it. seeing none public comment is closed. commissioner adams >> i would make a motion to support board of supervisors file number 160024 as is. >> i'll second. >> roll call vote. >> role call. commissioner adams, yes. commissioner dwight, yes. commissioner ortiz-cartagena, yes. commissioner tour-sarkissian, yes. commissioner yee, riley, yes. commissioner zouzounis, yes. that passes 6-0. >> thank you for your time today. appreciate it and i know more about bathrooms than i thought i would. on to the next item. >> item number 4 is discussion and possible action to make recommendation to the board of supervisors on

file 150969, planning code the affordsability housing bonus program and again today we have cure steen disenjure from the planning department and sheila-i forgot how to say your last name. nick lop gose who is also here and then diana pauns day leown from office of economic and work force development. she won't make a presentation because it will be the same as what she did last time but is here to answer any questions you may have about the supportive programs we have. >> great. welcome. >> good afternoon commissioners. regina were you able to make a copy of case reports from the commission? commissioners in the binder is the staff report. it is labled staff report and the first item after-ateitem

4. starting on page 14 hopefully it got flagged is the amendment. will be the amendment the amendments we'll discuss with the case report. >> okay. >> good afternoon. planning department staff. happy to be here to talk about affordable housing bonus program. last time we spent a lot of time making sure you understood the broader context and policy goals and the program itself and dove into small business concerns and issues. since we met we have done more thinking and work. we really took the comments you made at thalast hear toog heart, worked with resigna and diana so we have proposed amendments represented in the case report to the commission and also will be talking about today. #2450es are recommendations our department are making to our commission that we think will enhance protection of small businesses. if it

pleases the commission i'll do a quick overview of the program for the benefit 06 the public and dive into the small business commission question. if i can have the overhead. to start of course this is the heart of the program is about encouraging more affordable housing without public subsidy. we know we need more affordable housing. this program is one of the many tools the city has at its disposal to create affordable housing. it encourages up to 30 percent affordable housing onsite privately subsidized by development potential. we target 3 different income levels, low, moderate and middle income with this program. each development would have at least two income levels served so the full 30 percent. as i said, this is

one of the many programs. these are some of the ofert programs the more traditional affordable housing programs that serve households that are very low income households. the majority about 88 percent the existing housing supply, service these households. this program proposes to continue building low and moderate income as our current inclusionary program and add a middle income band. again thrks program is a little-has many different options for project sponsors, one is implement the state density bonus law. that is what we call the state [inaudible] program and that encourages projict sponsors to provide 13-20 percent

affordable unit. while we were evaluating that there were more need for affordable housing so we developed the local program that encourages project sponsors to provide up to 30 percent affordable housing for a additional development incentive of two stories. of course this program benefits the one or two hundred percent affordable projects entitled each year. at our last commission hearing together there is a lot of conversation about you know, how do you understand the scale of the program, what sites will be impacted, how are you so sure what scale the program will be or how many units will be generated so i wanted to walk you through where we started figuring out where the program will apply and how we focused

on the soft site. the map in front of you is the entire city, so the entire city is in the state of california so the state density bonus law applies in this area. that is where we started but we wanted to understand where the program would apply. the first thing we did is remove parcels managed by redevelopment agency or already had a development agreement. these are parcels not under the planning code jurisdiction. then we removed the zoning districts like light industrial, pdr and commercial that don't allow residential units at all. and then we removed our recent area plans where density limits converted to height and bulk

limit so much of [inaudible] again, industrial districts. some industrial districts like you can have housing as a ce rks but those sites are unique and considered separately so they are not eligible. rh 1 and rh 2 by far and away the biggest portion of our city which only allows one or two units of housing. generally the state law saws 5 unit or more so these are ineligible from the state law. we are focusing on on the state law where does the city need to enable the state law and have a ordinance that enacts it. and so, you probably have seen this map in turquoise and this is what you have seen

in the tor quoiz version. all the areas we talked about are out due to state law or some other consideration. the next thing we did is remove parcels that have a category a historic resource and so there are 3 designations in the city, there is a, no resource, c, known not to be a resource, bay far and away the largest pool is category b and it means we don't know. we haven't done the historic survey on the propertiesism before any development project through this program or any other program can be pursued on one of those sites we do an evaluation and determine if it was a, known historic resource, not eligible or c not a

resource eligible. this gives a sense this reduces the number of parcels that are eligible for the program. supervisor breed proposed a amendment that our department and the mayor and supervisor tang all supported which was to remove eligibility for rent controlled units. that dramatically reduced the number of parcels eligible for the program. and in response to a lot of community conversations and conversations at the commission and with our commission, we have taken this idea that supervisor breed introduced and moved it further which is to say we'll not demolish any belding with a residential unit if they are using this program. any site in the city of san francisco that has currently a residential unit is ineligible to participate in the affordable housing bonus program. there are two

things going on, one is trying to protect the existing housing stock which may have affordable by the age or nature and two, protecting neighborhood character. i think the historic preservation piece is strong but some are wordied about things that are not category a but important contributes to the neighborhood. we can achieve 5 thousand affordable housing unit through program while putting the restriction ibplace. in fact, when the team did the soft set analysis to understand the scale of the program, we always assumed a site with a residential unit on it isn't developed under the program so this doesn't change the outcomes but provides security and assurety for the existing residents so we'll present that our commission and they will formulate their recommendation to the board of

supervisors. realizing the overhead is very-the slides are challenging to see so i have paper copies if we can switch to the overhead. i don't know if that shows any better. sf gov tv-great. just to recap where we were, this is the map without the historic resources that are eligible. the colored parcels are eligible for the program. when you remove rent control you can see that diminishes it. then when you remove all residential unit it further

diminishes eligibility parcels. there was a request from the commission to understand exactly where this will happen. like precise lay which spot in the city and that is actually very challenging for us to articulate or know. what we are really good at knowing is about the scale, about the general impact that might happen. what we have done in the past and i described at the last hearing is a soft site analysis so after we reduce all the parcels dependent if they are eligible we look at what is on the site and say, what is the potential height versus what is there now and is the difference between those two is 5 percent, if only 5 percent the total site is utilized, then it is considered soft or potentially developable. there

are about 240 sites in the program area that are having this ratio or under developed. we think that is a good proxy for the sites and amount of development that will happen but don't think those exact sites will be the 240 sites and let me explain why. every gas station in the program area will show up as soft fwut know we will need gash stations in the future along the corridors so know the gas stations will remain gas station. there will be other buildings that are 7 or 9 percent soft but not well maintained or healthy buildings for whatever reason and those are the one we might flip. we use the 240 sites to understand the approximate scale. at this commission requested that we release the list of those sites and so we have a memo available to share with you on that account. it

really describes in detail the process was we want to make abendantly clear while we make this information available we don't anyone to see their address on there and perceive their site as definitely will be developed because there are a number of steps that need to take place, there is private transaction and will to have this happen and this program is a little challenging to make happen. i want to remind you of the outcomes. can we switch back to the powerpoint? this is one of the sites at david baker architects that build wg the red line is what could be developed on the soft site right now. right now it already has the potential to house 47 units, but ont 6 are affordable. this is under today s control and clearly

more than a single story or vacant parking lot so it is soft by todays standards. when you add the two additional stories you have 65 units, of which 20 are affordable. definitely more units, definitely higher cost to subsidize the 20 affordable units versus 6. the point i'm trying to make here is that, there are some sites in the city that are soft now that will redevelop whether we have this program in place or not. this program affords the city the opportunity to say, should you choose to develop that soft site, we would like to see a higher percent of affordability when that happens. and then there are implication for small businesses. i think we talked about that a little bit but we really want to as a city maintain our

neighborhood character and really protect our existing small businesses. so, i want to review what our current proposal as drafted and introduced includes and then additional recommendations that we are asking the commission to consider and include. so, in working with our friends at oewd and regina we learned a lot about what happens to a small business when they find out they need to relocate and i think we learned the most from the soft story experience that you were all learning on now which is, early notice and lots of time to plan really makes a difference so we put in a requirement that the project sponsors notify current tenants as soon as they apply to the planning department for their first environmental review document. under the theory that letter which says by the way, here are 3 main

organizations that can help you find support and do technical assistance will help the business develop the transition plan. we are pointing out the businesses qualify for cb 3 p and they go down to relocate and move through planning and building process as quickly as possible as they are a existing business if they qualify. this is a reminder of the process so the red box is when the first notification to the commercial tenet would hap squn you can see they have to go through planning review, ceqa, neighborhood notification and public hearing. before i go into the suggested remation tooz the commission, there were a few specific questions from the group last hearing, one around

the 240 soft sites, the other is exactly how much commercial space will you generate under this program. it is again a bit of a crystal ball exercise for the team. we took a look at the 240 soft sites and assume some have commercial ground floor because they are not neighborhood commercial district but those that are we said well, let's assume they will dedicate 20 to 30 percent of space to commercial space. we didn't make that number up, we looked at all the-roundering dairfbuds baker did and you have to put a drauj grauj and driveway in circulation to the top of the ploor and the percent he designed the build squgz they range from 20 to 50 so we tested that and if they went to the average amount we generate 8400 square

feet. that is total so there would be some reduction for change from existing uses. again, we talked about this last time but i want to remind you there are a number of controls in the affordable housing bonus program that address the streetscape design for neighborhood commercial corridors. any praunlect entitled to the program will benefit from that. alright, go back to the amendments. your case report has them in detail. these are the high level summary. the first is pretty straight forward. first rate of refusal for existing commercial tenant, so if they really value being in the location and they are interested in either

relocating temporarily or some other thing for the construction period they have the first right to come back. the second thing, we worked hard with the city attorneys and believe we can require a relocation fee that is commensurate with the federal relocation act. that is tosay, if a mall business is notified they need to rolocate for new construction they are eligible for a fee to help with the rolocation from the project sponsor not the government. work wg rejena and deanna we heard early notification is important but when you think about all the steps we need 18 months and so that is what we proposed. say not just early notification but give the full 18 month warning. finally, i this can we had a lot of conversations to

make sure how the replacement store squz new commercial space is of scale and character and support the small businesses we like and so we kind of came up with this proposal to say the commission, it is up to their discretion to reduce the xhrjs space or requirement it if the public feels like it is a good contribution to the neighborhood. so, again those four recommendations and the exact language of the case report and that should be before you. so, at this point our presentation is over. we welcome discussion and public comment. thank you. >> thank you. i have one question or maybe a couple. so, first off, i'm-the biggest challenge for small owners is

uncertainty so the question is the list of 240 sites as it has been described, is that-does that list-i understand there are potentially sites on that list that will not be developed for a variety of reasons either the owner doesn't want to do it or doesn't pencil out for the own squr the developer how they want to develop the site. they may just not want to do it. it is happening in my neighborhood where owners are saying i want this to be a art gallery and that is what we'll develop and flot consider any other uses. the question is, is this at least a peek at the sites that are candidates? is this the definitive list of potential candidates not to say that they will be developed but if i look on the list and see my business on that list do i know that my building is a possible candidate?

>> yeah, i think that is why it is really challenging to figure how to share the list because we don't want to create that perception that if you are on the list you are a potential candidate and you are off like not. no, this is like a high level analysis of the entire sit ato understand where development might happen. as you we just talked bethat art gallery, there are a number of sites specific transactional issues and they could be neighborhood specific, they could be community specific that really makes this tool more of a proxy than a predictor if that makes sense. i have been work wg the chief economist ted eagan and he shared preliminary research in the past month or so has found that all most- i think he said 60 percent-don't quote me -of our pipeline or future housing development will happen on sites that are 5

percent soft and he said zero percent will happen on sites that are 30 percent soft where the ratio of existing to future is 30 or more. there is the sort of-then it comes down to site specific like exactly what is happening, and what is the u.s. and use and how is it utilized. there is no definitive in or out whether you are on the list just like there isn't today. without the program there is no definitive will my landlord or property owner decide to develop. >> i guess the-i just the issue i have is we have gone through great pains to identify a liof 30 thousand plus sites and to net that down to 240 candidate sites and yet those may or may not be candidate sites so it is a

level of uncertainty i have to tell you in the meetings i have been in the public realm and some of which you and your colleagues presented at, the especially the merchant associations are very concerned about the potential impact. it comes to uncertainty. matter of fact that is a reoccurring theme with all legislation that may effect small business that is the uncertainty that is the gut wrenching part. once you kneyou know and you start planning because if you are out you start planning and if not i stop worrying about it. that is where a lot of the ongoing debate is going on outside of the this room so i just bring that to your attention and sure you probably already know it. the other question i had is there is discussion about combining contig ws

lots and the question came up could someone combine rh 1 and 2 properties to get to 5 lu plus unit however what i heard you say is all residential propertyerize excluded and therefore it doesn't matter if you combine residential properties because they are not candidates anyway >> rh 1 and 2 are not elg frl the state or local program >> this precludes someone from buying adjacent properties and somehow getting in under the 5 plus unit >> they woulden be eligible. >> that good to knee know. i guess this applies to free staning commercial buildings and/or empty lots? >> per the recommendation we are making to the commission, anything without a

residential use is eligible. >> again, if i'm a business owner and i got people living up stairs above me i'm safe? >> right, with that recommended amendment that would protect that small business. >> that is a recommended amendment that is not part the legislation? >> you know, i think it is for this commission to endorse or support that if you feel it is helpful >> i'm strictly trying to get to the algorithm for determining whether i'm at risk or not and i will consider myself at risk until i know otherwise if i'm a business owner and so i'm going to go to that list regardless if i'm told it isn't the definitive list but i will go there because i want to know at least if i'm on that list for lack of any other information. so, i guess we are sort of left again sort of with this uncertainty that with

or without the list we are not certain we are on the list as acon candidate or whether we are a candidate as a business owner? >> right now the city currently has zoning controls where people can seek development of a site so i think what you might be asking is, does this program sort of change the economics for a set of property owners that might make them more likely to develop a site sthai they are not likely to develop today and that is where i really-what i'm trying to underscore is the affordable housing you need to subsidize is pretty evening matched with the additional development potential so the economics on a site remain pretty consistent. so, there is isn't a definitive list. the

list we provided in the memo for you is the parcels that are only 5 percent developed, so they from birds eye view are more likely to have financial incentives to development. >> commission tour-sarkissian. >> thank you for your presentation. helped me a lot from the previous presentation. i have however just to clarify questions about your recommended additionals. so, the first one the required existing businesses afforded first right of refuse for commercial space. is that the same space or smaller space or how is that going to work out and let me finish that question about the site and then we'll go to the next. can it be

different rate? we discussed that last time so one is, is there a minimum space we would guarantee for this business and what would be the rental rate applicable if in fact the business will have a first right of refusal >> lots of big questions. i think what we are really trying to do when we officially put that in the planning code and regulate there is a requirement that a business has for refusal is open up sth conversation between the project sponsor and the commercial tenant to really figure out what types of needs might that small business have and how can having that small business as a tenant help form the design of the ground floor and really to be honest how the project

sponsor work with the community to the show they are interested contributing to the community. there isn't a existing requirement or rent control for commercial spaces so that rental rate would be fair market rent and that would again be the private contract between the existing business and the project sponsor. >> so, the recommendation that you proposing would it at least guarantee the space that the business-displaced business would get back because if the business is occupying 3 thousand square feet and that business will have only 1200 how is that option going to be first right of refusal, be practically workable for that business if that business was using a space that is not going to be able-

>> [inaudible] >> equivalent. i just want to know what your recommendations are, first the minimum and second, the ordinance is not going to make it as a condition for the rate that would be applicable for the business to come back. in other words, the rate is not a condition, however how about the space? >> i think that is a interesting question. while you were talking about that i was going through that in my mind. i think there are a lot of interesting dimensions about that we could add. i have concerns about being too prescriptive. i imagine if there is a building single story and covers a entire lot, if there a multistory building we need to dedicate some of the ground floor to get to the top. what percentage is the right

amount? i don't know. i think maybe there is language you can help craft and out of the recommendation which is first right refusal or a language that acnaumgs the practicality but meets the intent you are describing. >> since we are advocates for small business i would be interested in finding out what the city attorney would propose in going to the maximum protection of that retail business. so, i don't know- >> [inaudible] >> second recommendation is the recommended the board of pr supervisor direct the relocation fee. just a point of clarification and the recommendation is relocation fee for a business that won't come back or equally applicable to the business relocated until the project is completed?

>> [inaudible] expercent on relocation act but believe it applies for your first move so if you choose to the come back you still benefit from that relocation fee. >> in other words, if you have to move across the street or at a distance and you exercise the option to come back you still benefit from the relocation fee? >> we can double check, she gave the head nod but can check. wree modeling after the federal standard but don't have to implement it exactly so think we can implement the spirit of what you are talking about. >> the first move, it doesn't cover the round trip probably? >> yes, so-in other words, if the business does not come back or comes back it shouldn't matter, the

business should benefit from the relocation fee. that is my question and i hope your answer is the business could and would benefit from the relocation regardless of what it does as to exercising the option to occupying a space. >> i believe that is the standard of the federal relocation act but we coo make that the standard for ours and that is a recommendation you may want to add-a clarification you may want to add to any remations you make. >> there is also a cap on the federal relocation, on the budget for the move so if you are a large hardware retailer as we heard from a previous speakers last time that is a more substantial move or if a manufacturer, that is a more substantial move than a service business potentially i guess. >> you gave that example mr.

president last time about having to move across the street and being kind of a burdensome process so i want today make sure that that relocation fee would apply regardless. i think the issue of and this is my closing comment, the issue of giving a option to a business should be workable option, so the fact the business will come back the city attorneys office should consider all the available avenues to protect the small business in that record. >> we have any other commissioner comments before we open up for general public comment? commissioner [inaudible] >> thank you again for the presentation and for looking closer at the recommendations. i think i had a similar question as my fellow commissioner about if someone wasn't going to come back into that

space and collect on that compensation what other options could be available. also if someone doesn't fit into the streamlining program for small business because there are a number of businesses it doesn't apply to given the business model. one thing that came up was maybe looking into tax credit and not just a property tax incentive moving back into a space but small businesses pay a tax to the sate-i'm not a expercent so it is something i'm posing as exploration but one time tax credit or some other compensation if someone does not come full circle into that relocation. >> we can look into that for sure.

thank you. >> commissioners any other comments? now we have public comment. i imagine there are member thofz public that would like to comment. if you have a speaker card we'll collect them up front. looks like we have some in hand >> so, first we have dennis ant nory who will read a statement into the record on behalf of dennis maus copeian >> thank you very much commissioner. dennis was planning being here today but fell ill this morning and he wrote up the comment and second me to present them so that is what i'm doing. i'm here on behalf of san franciscans for community planning. my name is dennis maus cofeian. we approve the proposed amendment to ban demolition of residential units not just rent

controlled but thiz dunt have the support thf mayor, the supervisor tang or board of supervisors. some changeerize responsive to community and merchant crit isism however they fail to remove the remaining and most threatening provisions. we incest there is no mandatory of viable retail buildingsism planning continues to proposal up zoning all 30, 500 properties. planning department estimates should rent controlled housing and anone historic resource building it will remove 19, 300 yet the department insists on upzones all 30, 500 parcels. this has 2 consequencess that will leave 11, 200 buildings subject to demolition and displacement of businesses and establish a lice squns zoning law for future demolition and displacement. finally, the

240 soft sites is made up number and false front for the pr development proposal. half sites occupied by businesses [inaudible] 240 was a guess. we believe that preserving viable neighborhood service businesses should be policy. the amendment to provide small relocation fee eveern if conform toog the uniform act is unlikely [inaudible] doesn't remove the threat of displacing viable neighborhoodss. it puts a price tag on doing that. it does want relieve the very high likelihood of the permanent closure of such local small businesses. planning staff continues to insist on one size fits all inconsistent with preserving neighborhood character in up fp zones and size of construction, even with suggested amendments the

program will impose a one size fits all on neighborhoods and permanently alter the neighborhood of our unique neighborhoods. the requirement of [inaudible] this requirement of demolition is contrary to preserving. a couple statements by dennis were different in the staff recommendations made today >> thank you very much. appreciate you reading that for dennis. next up. >> next is ellen bokeen and dennis antinory and paul weber. >> thank you for coming out. >> my name is arlean boke nl and resident of sun set park site district. i join the neighborhood

[inaudible] opposing the affordal housing density program as stated. at the last meet g ing commissioner dwight asked for solution jz believe there is one. currently the affordable housing program for demolitions only. based on the sunshine request there is a planning department document from one stage of the process which refers to thoest demolitions and additions to existing buildsings. i urge the department to reinstate the addition to existing buildings provision. adding to a existing buildings is disruptive to the neighborhood service business, i believe it would be a even more discorrupt disruptive for the business to relocate. and urge the commission to move forward with a negative

or neutral recommendation. thank you. >> by the way just a reminder public comment is limit today 3 minutes. that is a way to make it equal for all and appreciate when you read your comment. thank you elsqun dennis for reading because it keepatize nice and concise because the objective is get written into public record so the better you are preparing your comments in advns and reading them here, the better they are represented in the public comment. with that- >> dennis antinory and [inaudible] >> i is a copy of denniss comments to submit as well. i really like to acknowledge that the staff has made a lot of changes recommended by our group . they don't in my view go far enough and some of them are rather

ineffective to accomplish the goals they state. the question keeps coming up and don't know why wego back to the 240 so called soft sites because there are many many other soft sites within the effected areas even with the exclusion. in my neighborhoods there are 30 one story businesses with no residences above them. some are in buildings that are commonly owned and 4 businesses within one building owned by the same landlord. that landlord would be under this program very tempted to displace those businesses. so, this idea of a right of first refusal doesn't work if someone has no way to go some place else and can't wait two years.

what do they do in 2 years? once the business is isplaced it will be extremely difficult to relocate or return to that site. the uniform relocation act by the way just for interest was adopted in response to san francisco's redevelopment project in the western addition. it was put in by john burton who was then a very influential member of congress and to responds to the fact that even though there were provisions to protect smalls business within the provisions of the redevelopment agency movement, that those were completely inadequate and we lost numerous small businesses. the question is, if you look at the provisions the uniform act there are better than nothing but if you look at them and take from the pracktdical standpoint of a business they are not enough. even though they provide for provisions for paying for

loss of personal property and for general expenses of relocation, they are not going to save many businesses. they may sieve some but not many. there is no control on rents as commissioner points out, so even with the right of relocation-first refusal we don't know what the rent will be. if the rent are considerable higher than business isn't going to be able to return. the other question i have is not answered by all of this but occupancy by businesses is based on leases, so the notice provision of 18 months doesn't have a lot of application in many instances where a lease provides for the length of the term--thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon, paul weber

and here on behalf of telegraph hill developers. as you know in our neighborhood we have a large number of small businesses and retail have nothing but small business. i have been asked to read a letter from the basically the umbrella organization for business groups which i'll do now and that may take my time. it is letter addressed to supervisor cohen, peskin and wiener who comprise the land use committee. the president write, writing on behalf of san francisco district merchant association to inform you about the-at our meeting last week on february 16 shealy

[inaudible] from the city made a presentation supporting a [inaudible] and dennis [inaudible] san francisco community activist group opposed it. we strongly support the building of affordable housing but not at the expense of possibly losing businesses by virtue och developers demaunshing new buildings. we have many concerns including the impact own utilities, transportation and parking. we voted to not support the legislation as proposed and urge you to do likewise and to recommend further study and input from the small business community. if i have any time left i will echo some of the comments dennis made. as relates to north beach. our businesses in that area for the

most part are small but i'll note the proposal by the staff doesn't identify or articulate watt what type of businesses would get the business of this. would safe way get the business of this or is it just small and what are the definitions of small? secondly, while dennis points out there -the uniform relocation act provides some relief, it doesn't provide the equivalent of what is a resident would be-have his or her property preserved subject to state law which is permitted to be demaunshed anyway. the program for small business doesn't include that. most the suggestions made by staff in the latest proposal which they

are cemded for making the effort are ideas, they are not legislation. here we are on the eve trying to get this passed with page squz pages of ideas that haven't been vetted. [inaudible] brought a idea, how about including each of the displaced businesses in the cities legancy program? do they get a extra50 thousand a year because if not they get market rent competing with legacy businesses that receive 50 thousand a year from the general fund. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> commissioners jim laz rth san francisco chamber of commerce. voted in support the concept behind the legislation. the devil is in the details but clearly if we are going increase housing stock of all types

steps like this have to be taken and 49 square mile city where infill is the primary way we can see significant changes in density to meet the demand. it is demand not only in the general sense but i think you can lose site of the fact that small businesses and all employ oars need to be concerned with the employee of the future will live. will they live in san francisco or close by or is that employee taking transit from central valley get to the work place? affordable housing effects the ability to attract and retain and pay for a employee so i urge you to support the consthofept legislation and work through the details as setforth by the planning department staff.

i think there is huge progress. clearly it preserves housing of all types. it will preserve the vast majority of single use commercial buildings in most the neighborhoods of historic nature. it will focus on those vacant sites, the parking lots, the former used car lot, the gas station and to some degree in the future subject to all types of planning and appeals pross processes we have in san francisco. nobody will demolish the one story building on cumeant street wut going through years of process to see whether the planning department and board of appeals will ever support the project in the first place. i thing this is a great step to improve the availability of housing throughout the city especially in infill neighborhoods where we

otherwise wouldn't see new housing. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, [inaudible] pat valen teeno and copresident of south beach mission bay merchant association here in support the affordable housing density program. there are a couple things we need to think of from the big picture level. number one, we don't have in place a strong program or any program that produce middle income housing which is critical for small businesses as mr. lazarus pointed out where do the employees and business owners live and middle income folks are probably the type that will stick around and build families and utilize retail. we are also talking about a program that is looking at building neighborhood scale buildings

with affordable housing and ground floor retail. this is a long term view that creates a neighborhood that has everything where people live and work and where they shop. it again will improve a great opportunity for retails over the long term. there are certain details that need to be worked out. it is my understanding that these sites could get-if the program doesn't happen some of the sites could get developed anyway without benefit of the program so think we are much better off if the program gets passed from to build a perfective of affordable housing numbers and how we get more middle income unit out there and make small businesses better off in the long run. i think we made a mistake becoming a car oriented san francisco in certain parts the city and this is a way to bring back into certain areas a

great walkable neighborhoods where people live work and shop so we support and thank you so much. >> thank you. do we have any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner, any other comments. commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> i want to thank staff for the presentation and i know you have done a lot of outreach and thank you for that. i like the spirit the legislation and the thought that went into it and we need things like that, we need proactive approach the mayor and supervisor tang is doing to solve our housing problem. my concern is the uncertainty with this legislation. i sit here on the commission to help small business and the impacts these legislation have on small business. there is a great uncertainty on the impact. 240 isn't a hard number so we

dont know the new commercial the legislation will bring. my concern is it does attract developers that may be able to increase the potential where yes they can develop the properties but the properties become more enticing. from a housing advocate the word is net new. i don't truly see the net new. if a developer wants to go flow a process they can go for a variance. i'm still concerned, i love the spirit of the legislation just concerned of the uncertainty the hard numbers of the legislation. >> it is interesting, as we look at-talked about it potential sites it is said some are empty lots and if you were doing this in your own little domain you may say i will develop the empty lot first because what do i get? a get x number of housing and x amount

of retail. now i go to the next lot and displace people and move them into the building i just built because i more than enough space. if you start with the empty sites and created more density in housing and business space and did a orderly moving around of the deck chairs the challenge i see here is if we start with the occupied spaces we immediately displace people even if there is a site down the street we will develop and it is empty today. if we had a-if we were to rationalize and optimize to minimize displacement we would start with the empty lots first. another approach is make sure in any area we attempt to start with the empties before we start with the occupies. just a potential.

>> i heard your concerns and just wanted to share a dill i'm not sure i presented which is this program and the legislation includes very detailed monitoring so there is a aneral report where we talk about sort of how many unit are developed in the program, proposed and titled and where they are happening and that enables to right course if we see a trend with the right sites are not happening or not getting the level of affordability or other issues we haven't contemplated in this #r5078 or other rooms, we have a annual opportunity to have a discussion. we have a 5 year check in where we dive in and look at the presumptions of the program and make sure we move in the right direction because all of the hard work we

put in is trying to leadtuse a goal and if it dozen we need know right away. >> i appreciate your rfts on that but we are here with a problem that our predecessors didern forsee and it is like the titanic, once the cat is out of the bag it is hard to turn the ship around. once we do something we can't rectify it. the spirit of the legislation is amazing and like the people in the city government are proactive in creative way, if there are no details that is where the concern lies, the actual hard details. >> commissioner adams, >> i want to reiterate what commissioner ortiz-cartagena and [inaudible] i support the spirit the legislation because now it is scary in the town for middle income

housing. you have plenty low income housing and high income housing, there is nothing in the middle and it is getting scary. again, i have friends coworkers everybody is moving out to ant ocand brentwood and hour and a half crazy commutes in the morning. i very appreciative of the mayor and supervisor tang getting this in and i would like to move forward with this, but i just need to have more questions asked because some of the businesses in the last couple weeks called me and am i on the list, will i lose my business? i can't afford to relocate and i really like your idea of tackling president dwights idea of tackling the vacant lots first if we can start with that. start small and then move on and have the legislation written

that way. there are a lot of vacant spaces even on the west side. i drove out next to the safeway store on nor ega and there is a empty lot next door, build there first and some the empty gas station lots, build there first and have their affordability and build high and move from there. that is my two cents. >> commissioner tour-sarkissian. >> again, i would like to congratulate you for your efforts and this wonderful presentation that you made. in fact, i obviously the spirit of this effort and this law is the right one. i echo what my cocommissioners said but i have yet another question to ask if you donts mind. clarification so that i was wondering and forgot to ask the

question is about the new commercial space that is on page i believe on page 23. talked about commercial space under [inaudible] just out of curiosity is that a net increase? >> that's the total new commercial space that we are projecting conservatively would be generated through the 20 year period. >> in addition to what is in existence? in other words it is a net gain? >> it isn't net new, it is total production. i think-i don't remember the numbers but think it was half of the sites do not have structures so half of that is net new and the remainder is addition or-- >> i thought so. and then for

my own education, what is the teacher next door down payment assistance? >> i give a high level. this is a program the mayors office of housing and community development and home ownership is a very difficult thing for people to achieve especially with lower income and the biggest challenge is the down payment so there are programs that help with the down payment and this is one for teachers which we all value having our teachers stabilized in the community. >> the teacher has to make 142,000 or [inaudible] >> that is the maximum. these affordable housing programs generally are available for a band of people up to a certain limit and talk about them in the limits. >> not many teachers will make

142- >> it can be a 2 person household. >> thank you >> commissioner yee riley, >> and a question on the moving fee. is it 10 thousand no more than 20 thousand and that is the relocation act? >> correct >> so 10 thousand, 20 thousand is a lot of money these days so i know if businesses have to move it will probably cost more than that. is there any chance you can reach out to the business owners to see if the number is realistic >> that seems like a good recommendation to come from the commission is take a deeper look at the number. >> i don't know if that was born in the 70's or 80's those are law >> the are location act applies to anything with federal dollars

so the 100 percent affordable housing non profits use that as the standard when they do their own construction. >> those limits were established decades ago then clearly it is more expensive today anywhere and let alone here in san francisco to do relocation. i can imagine 10 thousand dollars would barely pay for the trucks to show up at my place let alone move all the equipment >> that is a great recommendation >> maybe looking at what numbers would make sense just so we understand what the degree of the challenges for a small business to pick up and move. i had a question, a couple terms were used today that are striking fear in the hearts of small business owners one is the whole sale up zoning and don't know what that means frankly. are we going upzone 30,000 properties and open the door to some future unknown

play to enhance development rights outside of this whole affordable housing issue? the second is, this notion of mandatory demolition. there are certainly opportunities where someone can build around an existing structure and may be desirable to to preserve certain historic even if it isn't designated historic but the look and feel the building and maintaining facade. it is hard to live in a construction project but people do remodels all the time and live through them. they may get divorced in the process but live through them. and so this idea that demolition would be mantory, that is a odd requirement to me where i think it would be preferable to say on a case by case basis. maybe that is federal or california law. i'm looking for clarification on the motion of mandstory dim ligz requirement and the notion of whole sale

upzoningism maybe you can explain that. >> those are not terms in the document but i'll try to respond to the spirit of them. mandatory dim ligz we were trying to limit the program to only projects of new construction. we didn't want to enable is a number of existing buildings adding two stories for a lot of reasons. we are not sure the affordability outcomes there are the right ones for us so we may get more unit but won't generate 30 percent new affordable and may generate a small amount and creating a lot of uncertainty in the neighborhood about what places that will happen. and someone hinted at this when they brought up the idea of demolition, we don't want to create a tool that enables somebody to remove all of their existing tenants under the

theory of adding two stories and refilling with a new set of people. we saw this as a way to prevent displacement for rel tivly healthy buildings that wouldn't be demolished otherwise. the intent is to protect the helthsy buildings stock that is using most of the development capacity. the planning code and building code have definitions of demolition and i believe you can demolish a building while maintaining a certain percent of it. demolition is a technical term here but if there were characteristics or elements of the buildings that were neighborhood contributing they can maintain those while still qualifying the program and a recommendation we can get to out of this is for us to parse out the

details to the point you are making without opening up those bigger questions that we were trying to resolve by making it limited to new construction >> as part the process the demolition has to be vetted. it is sort of if i heard right the requirement for demolition is in effect a requirement to require the justification of demolition. >> it is a much higher bar than the baria need to cross just to do a addition to your building, correct. >> alright. >> upzoning, i'm not sure how much i respond to that, i think this goes back to the maps i walked through and the concern people have that this is going to have impact on a great number of parcels and what we are really trying to help break down that message and explain to people there are a

number of eligibility criteria. the one we spent a lot of time talking about is zoning district. you have to meet all those other criteria to participate in the program so we see it as a more strategic infill program >> right, so it seems to me that if i could look at the zoning-again this is getting back to determining whether my particular business is at risk. could i look at the zoning of my building and determine whether i'm at risk or not under this program as you defined the zoning restrictions? >> to put it in terms of risk i say if you are ah 1 degree of risk is no because it isn't a program area. being in the zoning district is just the first criteria then you have to pass all those other things. >> zone pdr i'm also excluded,

correct? >> correct #9d >> there is a algorithm i look at the zoning excluded and permitted and maybe the gray yiria and look at the zoning in my build{say i'm in the clear, the gray or the sites. >> right. you get more-you get a lower or more precise calculation of your risk but to your point and put it in these terms, there is never that clarifying moment until you talk to the property owner or landlord and heard they are interested in a change of use for the site because that is actually the hardest thing for us from our data perspective to really predict or understand. whatever your lease agreement, that is certainly information that is providing

to the small business. >> we discussed if you have a least in place your lease prevails until up for renewal and every business owner because there isn't rent control for commercial property facing being exposed to currents lease rates once their currents lease is up. i'm one of them. renegotiateating my lease this week. also, there is the point we made last time and this time that these things take a long time. all of the approvals-there is probably more than 18 months once you start down this path and i think that we do have-do we have the provision in here that if a owner will go down the path they have to tell their tenet the minute that they know? when the process starts however long it takes the tenant is notified when the process starts is that correct?

>> correct. >> this is exactly the question that i was going to ask about the start of the 18 figuring date for the 18 months. so, let's take the example that our president submitted to you, the owner changes the zoning and comes to you, just give us in this example the time when the landlord is supposed to contact? should they wit for a answer or when there is discussion send the 18 month notice to allow the tenant to be part of that discussion? >> that is a great question. at the planning beapartment we have several stepoffs review. we start with a preliminary review so the project sponsor may write and say,

interested in building housing and want to do it on this site and it is like a refined back of the napkin sketch so we can tell them all the requirements they are subject to. planning code this, design that, all the details. that is a preliminary project assessment and often still in the maybe i'll do this and sometimes we get a letter that is change that i'm thinking about something different. the next step is to file with the planning department their environmental revie document so that is when they decided what project they would like entitlement for and first review with ceqa. before we accept and process that application, we need to see proof they wrote a letter to all the tenets that said i'm thinking about this and on file with the planning department, here are all

the people you can talk to, small business commission, oewd, i'm sure there is more, all the people you can talk to about this to help get technical assistance. the project sponsor still going through environmental review, planning code review, design review then has to go to dbi and then construction would start. there needs to be a minimum of 18 months between here and here. this can be 3 to 5 years for many new construction projects so that 18 months is a minimum. >> one area where the way things work in san francisco [inaudible] >> just mentioned a example of notice. in your recommendation the notifications and [inaudible] are going be included, correct? contract, this and that- >> correct. sheila is working

with renina and diana drafting a template letter we would provide. >> i wanted to speak to how we came up with the 18 months and how it works and the reason we came up with some the recommendations. currentsly if a site is up for redevelopment we on the service end have a really tough time dealing with how much time does this business have to plan to relocate. there is nothing in writing. the lease is mentioned already and that is the one thing that protects them. we have many trying to get business es to be proactive for negotiating their leases. absent of commercial rent control currently the site is redeveloped or up for redevelopment it makes our

job really tough no matter how many services, no matter what we can provide in terms of lease negotiation looking for sites, the market is really tough and so the 18 month would be a minimum. most likely as mentioned, it would take much longer than that but at least we are asking for our businessicize s is it make take longer but what is their guarantee, what if they are on a month to month squlees the property owner can say i will redevelopment. it enhances the protection beyond the lease so in case there is no lease what we hope is that 18 month is a minimum notification for us to be able to work with them to provide our time to -so we can try to make the most use of our program and everything in place. it is no guarantee recollect , there are many challenges when a business relocates but currently we don't have

that. we don't have a minimum notification period or other programs impacting small business or if they are privately redevelopmented a lot of times wedon't know so in this case we get notification and conduct the outreach. it is also tupe the business to create that relationship with us, but that is the thinking for some of these proposals or recommendations that we made in terms of the service provision is also assist us in providing making those services available to give a better chance to help them relocate and find a space. >> thank you. >> commissioners any other questions? commissioner zouzounis. >> i wanted to pose a question for discussion among all of us and something we haven't talked about like the incentives developers may have and it is their benefit to have

mixed income buildsings and if they would rather have luxury housing and not have these incentives to make it a mixed income building. whatever anybody had ideas if this is something that is enticing to developers or may got get a bite. >> the whole ledgesation is about [inaudible] this whole ledgeilation is about enticing developers. build higher and more affordable units and you get some considerations on other things north in order to do that >> there isn't a aumgz to put the housing somewhere else like every building has to have mixed- >> yes. >> did you want to respond to that anyone? well, this is a great

discussion. i feelilateal like i have been 31st in front of a speeding freight train with only a few weeks to think about this. our role here is to advocate on behalf of small business and to try to create a environment where we can vet things like this in a comprehensive way and everyone gets to weigh in on it. i have been to two meetings, the council district merchant association meeting last week and my own potraro hill dogpatch association meeting last week and the responses i have witnessed with unfavorable because i think people are worried about the potential outcome for their own businesses. i think i know i have been benefited from the last two sessions we had discussing the

issue and think we had productive outcomes in terms of potential recommendations for the legislation and potential considerations even in todays meeting i think where you are going away with fresh ideas how we might address the concern on the part of small business owners. we have stated both times we all appreciate the intention here of creating affordable housing because it benefits us as small business owners. effects us as small business owners probably than any other business in the city because we are the employers of people challenged to live here. we are not the high tech companies or venture backed companies, we are the large corporations that dont employ pleny people at this level. we benefit and are also at risk and so i'm-we

made a lot of progress, i personally am not in a position where i feel that i could categorically state in favor of it just because i think i wouldn't be doing my service to my constituent to go back and say here is what we discussed in our commission meeting, you didn't all show up but can watch it on the web or on television, but why don't we have more dialogue because i think the most important thing for getting buy in is people feel they have been heard and given enough time to come to terms with whatever is on the table, both the positive and negative. i think we have to accept change will happen and change will not always be in our favor but i think today we have a obligation to go

back to some oaf the groups we talk to on a reg i recall base squs say here is where we are at and here is what we heard and continue the conversation. for us to say no or yes today will take us out of the conversation because everyone says we checked that box, small business commission weighted in on the matter and said yes or no. this is a item for potential action for us today but i guess i feel that i don't want to say one way or the other today. i would like to continue the conversation. >> i want to agree and feel the same way. hearing from my constituents in castro and noe valley, they appreciate this and know we need it but i can't vote one way or another today and think we need more discussion and dialogue.

-and more talk with small business owners. i think we make progress in the last couple weeks and i was very much sproized how many people watch this on television a couple weeks ago because myself my phone has been ringing off the hook since proand con. we need this and the spirit is out there but how we come to the end we still need to talk about. redevelopment back in the 60's took years and here i also feel like within a couple weeks we have to make quick decision and don't want to do that and don't want to make quick decisions where we made with the soft story ret row fit and agreed and see problems now. i want to keep the dialogue open and very happy you have taken into account and talking with some

of the other groups that are represented here today, but i still need some more questions answered before i can vote yes or no on this and will leave it at that and take no action today >> commissioners excuse me if i interrupt. one thing that is very appreciative is because the planning commission is hearing this on thursday, is to separate out the entire legislation but the proposed mement so if provides direction around the support unless you say no. okay. if there is any direction you want to provide just want to make sure that or if it is just straight up and when this is finalized with the board of supervisors or when it goes back before do you want to hear it again? >> yeah. >> okay. >> i think it is going through

its funnel now and it is going to go through other discussions at planning commission and ultimately end up with the board of supervisors so there will be more discussion. i think i would like us to keep in the discussion. >> the reason i am asking is because as i have been meeting with the planning department and office of economic and workforce development around the small business support it wood good to know if we are heading in the right direction whether you want to take official action and direction being taken around providing some of those and then also there was some-do you want follow up with like some of you have brought up say around the first right of refusal. you want follow up to some of your questions and

clarifying around some of those amendments that are being proposed by the planning staff? >> i think as pointed out there are a lot of nice and potential sides and until they are written into whatever legislation is proposed we conet know what they look like. we could all walk away saying great ideas and approve and find out next week none of those things were adopted in the legislation. >> if i may have your permission that in terms of some the direction or in clarity i can continue to work with the planning staff on understanding some of the direction that you are interested going in or asking to get more information around that dollar value and what is the relevant dollar value? i'm looking for direction in

terms of things to continue to work on. this does set precedent we haven't experienced before in providing supportive services in legislation. >> we still want to keep the conversation going because this is too important and need to engage oewd in this because that is a critical component. anyone that knows how to do it and do it well it is oewd so definitely continue on that. >> there is no question a 20 thousand dollar limit if that is the federal limit and proposing for us to adopt is insufficient for certain businesses. it may be more than enough for

certain kind-in todays environment that is a pretty small move. >> we asked them to look into it. >> i think if collectively if we want to look in-i dont think it falls on the sholders of the planning commission, falls also on oewd to survey or business stakeholders sooewhat is the cost to relocate a business or look-there are probably statistics on this, i have no idea and they probably come from disaster from probably from various disasters that are caused relocations. so, maybe there is bench marks we can find readily. i'm not sure but imagine there might be so that is certainly one specific item where we can get a little more

quantitative about it and determine whether the city is in a position to offer additional assistance, i don't know whether it is or not. how do you go about quadifying that. >> if you allow me to interpret what the president is saying, saying we are not ready today he says, to give a final opinion, however, i think this process was very helpful today. the presentation was excellent. i think the recommendations were set forth. questions were asked about a lot the recommendations. suggestions were made and take squn hope they will be addressed and think what the president is saying we want to be part the discussion so that we can evolve the recommendations, we nail them down- >> yes and i know it is a

tedious process, but we are here for the tedium and excitement and tedium is part of creating good laws. what we are doing here is legislation there are laws and as i said many times need to get them right first than fix them later because we all move on and if we do things in a sweeping fashion we often bare negative consequences from that so we are just i think trying to make sure everyone has their say. those who want to weigh in on it i think we have the small business community has often happened come to this a little late in the process because i think the community outreach has often does though it seems like we are outreaching we are not targeting small business so we have come to a quick

realization that while we may have outreached to communities, neighborhood associations are not merchant association so now that the merchants had a opportunity to weigh in we had a fairry re-sounding opposition as proposed and pending any amendments to the the legislation, so i'm not entirely clear on what the amendments are whether they are ratified and will be included and until we sort of see the next round of vetting of the legislation that we can move forward on that. now, i also understand that there is a great deal of moementm here because there is a lot of political will behind solving the affordability housing issue and clearly this doesn't solve the problem, it is a step in the right direction and don't want to abinstruct the best

intentions of everyone but have a duty and obligation to make sure our constituents don't feel they are been trodden on. >> the proposal is we wait and see or-- >> if i can recap what i heard to make sure i am hearing currently. i heard recommendations around understanding what the space requirements will be and taking a deeper look at the are location dollars to see how it lines up with the needs the business community. but what i heard overall was, a heading on the small business issue is the right direction and this commission would like to see the exact language and exact ordinance of the ideas we proposed. what we are brin toog the planning commission thursday are recommendations. if they

support those that is recommendation to the staff and city attorney to develop them and can bring that back to the this commission and continue to work with regina in case more ideas come up. >> that is a good articulation. >> i believe that it is. >> we are on the same page. thank you so much for your time. >> regina do- >> since it is a action item you need to either take- >> i make a motion to continue this item as is in support of this or just skip this part-take action item to continue and give regina the authority to go ahead and work with oewd and planning on the specifics. >> okay. alright, so commissioner adams made the motion do we have a second? >> i'll second.

>> seconded by commissioner yee riley, and commissioner adams, yes. commissioner dwight, yes. commissioner ortiz-cartagena, yes. commissioner tour-sarkissian. yes. commissioner zouzounis, yes. that motion passes 6-0. >> thank you for the members of the public who came out to comment. >> we move to item number 5. this is discussion on post superbowl 50 survey to small businesses. president adams brought this up as a new business item so i will turn it over to you now president dwight. excuse me. i didn't have lunch, i think my blood sugar dropped.

>> the-what did you just--what we asked for or interested in is i think a timely survey of small business community as to how they were effected or perceived they were effected by superbowl 50 and the activities that occurred here in town. i think what i'm reading the press it is quite likely that we will make another bid for a superbowl in the future and it is probably one of the largest and most intensive events the city has seen in a long time so it is sort of a perfect case study how big event effect the city. i think we can learn from our experiences on the last one for all kinds of event boleth localized and intense inside the city and global and intense inside the city. there is nothing-there is everything to

be gained by doing a timely assessment while still fresh in everyones mind. there is a survey done by one merchant association that i'm interested to hear the result jz also the minute you throw a survey out you are like, i should have asked that question but it is out there so i can't. what is great if we can hear what feedback we are hearing from this particular survey so if we create a survey of a broader audience we can add in the questions we urfrgot and rephrase ones that confusing and get at the meat what we want to know and think there is a great deal of interest in the broader small business community of taking the survey. there is a lot of activity out there so maybe if we could coales it based oen-i think there is a second survey also circulating and it had a

technical problem where you were told you already answered the survey even though you hadn't. before we get 20 surveys out from 20 different merchant associations maybe we can use what we are learning already to coales around a single survey we can all then get general information from. that is why i suggested we can ajndize this so the is part the discussion >> mr. president you have kim cope sack and pat valentineo here from south beach mission bay merchant association. >> fantastic, thank you. >> thanks again. pat valen teeno south beach mission bay murchsent association. i'll let tim talk about the survey. we worked together on developing and got it out to the merchants. i think one thing that struck me as i talked to the people on the board and the merchants in

the neighborhood and we are in south beach for the most part, there are folks in the mission bay area, we are kind of too close and too far at the same time from superbowl 50 activities. nobody came to superbowl 50 and the nfl experience to check out the rest of san francisco but we did see some businesses do really well. i think high tops reported in the castro they did well. certain businesses in the bayview did well. i had conversations with folks from oewd and it was a hypothetical question, why don't you do your own event and we were too close. every building in our neighborhood had sign up whether it was a corporate building, office, residential building that said here is the zone, stay away. everybody was hunkered down. people were not coming to work or

doing what they may usually do or come tothe neighborhood. the way i thought of this is what if you went and said superbowl 50 is coming to town and put in 4 and a half million and make 10, 12, 15 million. hotels and tax is great but need to take a 30 percent pay cut for those two weeks you are okay with that? that is what happened. these guys got shit on bad. i felt bad about-did they say that on the screen? >> i ft to emphasize the point-this didn't effect me personally but these guys thought about what to do. how to step up, how to get-they thought they would have all these people coming to the business squz rearranging things and some were hair or nail salons and

some like kim business, restaurants and places that serve the public, all had a pretty bad week, so i'll let kim talk about it. i think the details, it is important-nobody came away saying don't do this but it is the cities obigation to finish the last piece. either they were too differential to the nfl and think the city should have thought of this because this isn't the first time where we had event where we dispaired impacts in the neighborhood. it is one thing when you have a ball game-the merchant will adjust and get used to them and know what happens on game day and different innings. before and after the game. there is work to do on the cities part and have to take it seriously and not come back

with general circumstance but get down and figure how to door to door help the businesses. we are working hard to make this a vibrant commercial corridor in the south beach area and it is hard. it isn't 24 street and noe and castro. i will let kim talk. >> thank you. >> hi, thank you so much for having us and including this in your agenda today. again, my name is kim [inaudible] i'm the copesdant with patrick of the south beach mission bay business association and also the coowner of the brick house caf e in south beach. as patrick said, there is a lot of levels in the preparation and for planning for it and the week of that have to be taken into account.

so, we took a meeting with the representative of the superbowl 50 host committee who-the dramatic impact it will have in the marketing area and how we have a karma geten-that word was thrown around. traffic congestion. we were told that deliveries would be all most impossible and lucky if staff can arrive on time sometimes if at all, so we prepared accordingly. we also prepared with the very high expectations we were given for the swarms of people in the city and especially the direct area that we were expecting. basically we lost out due to over staffing with the people we were expecting that we never

saw and then we also over staffed because we were fearful staff wouldn't be able to make it. businesses, businesses also turned away potential business that we thought might not work such as catering deliveries. my business turned away a couple thousand at least in potential catering deliveries because we were afraid we wouldn't be able to get around town. there is also immediately effected area of course was directly effected around superbowl cities like [inaudible] pet store were not able to deliver at all so their weekly delivers-there is businesses of course more retail salon to depend upon reservations and appointments.

they had massive cancelations. one salon owner said not only did he have so many cancellations he had to continue to over staff just to keep up and manage the phone system for all the cancellation jz changes that were continually coming into the business. that is just a example of some of the over staffing that went on. obviously as patrick said so many local communeers stayed home from work. some of the small offices closed down. some of our business in the south beach area is dependent on the tech community to -they work from home so they did. there is a 3 day weekend we saw my business in particular so 40 percent. our overall survey as all the businesses specifically retail and restaurants saw 32 percent drop in business compared to what you

would usually see during that week, january 30-february 7. let's see, very few businesses in the area saw additional sales from superbowl 50. adam smith from fox city news invested in a 7 foot tall sign welcoming customers, tended hours as many did and saw absolutely-at most we found our survey to show about a 1 percent increase in additional revenue from the sb 50 tourist. [inaudible] we have seen absolutely no additional superbowl increase in sales. they also lost their weekly business in the ferry building which

from what i understand is empty throughout the week. i guess lastly we would strongly recommend whether it is the demographic of the people coming in from a situation like that from what we can see and this sawn official assessment, it didn't seem like the majority of people were into explore san francisco, so if we were to have another superbowl in the city we would strongly suggest some type of marketing outreach or incentive program to get people to see superbowl buy superbowl products and go to places that are easily accessible. a incentive city funded to get them into other neighborhoods let alone other businesses that are not-off the

beaten path. let's see, our findings of the 25 plus businesses that responded, there were many more we talked to unofficially on average they saw 32 percent loss over that week and 1 percent additional business from superbowl tourist. lastly on a personal note as a small business owner, i just want to say it was disheartening, we lost about 40 percent of business throughout the week of what we normally would have seen. that isn't including the extra product and over staffing. so, it is disheartening we not only saw the loss but still have to pay for the party and it seems like a partty we were not invited to so i hope that is kept in mind for the next big event. thank you so much >> thank you for sharing that.

your experience in observations i had similar experiences. i have product in the castro and at the ferry building and i know that our partner in the ferry building their business was down and go to the ferry building every weekend for farmers market and go to restaurants there and the restaurant business was down. their report off the back of the envelope was 30 percent and we went the weekend after it was over and they were thank you god, it is back to normal and get tips again and our seats are full. these are very popular places and they were in the blast zone and people did-locals avoided it and whether it was the dem graphic for attendees of superbowl city they didn't overflow and not

the halo effect hoped for and think that is important for us to acknowledge and really dig into that and quant ify it so going forward we know that we go in eyes wide open next time and brain storm with the people who are putting on the event and endorsing the event both on the superbowl side and city side, how we try to get more benefits for all businesses in san francisco and how we try to mitigate the negative impacts because sometimes you just will be too close and have to know how to prepare. shut your door and take a vacation, what do you do because you incured additional cost by having to over staff and you don't think about the additional cost that are incured. it isn't just the loss it is the additional stuff-we built more product to make sure that our local

retailers wouldn't be short. it was highly unnecessary because they sold less than they normally do and we sell a lot of product at the farey building and it is very consistent and have multiple years of data so can easily quantify the effect over that period of time. >> even [inaudible] the chart er yacht companies were down. they closed the office. they were not having-you think a company like that would have just have their [inaudible] they left considerable revenue >> i think there was a lot of just sort of-it easy to wave your hands and say it is all good for san francisco and in fact it wasn't all good for san francisco. i think we can all talk about the benefits for the city as a whole and think as was said by someone in the press, great cities throw great parties. i'm totally down with

that and we are a great city and should be a host for great events but understand-if you have a great house and want to make it available for parties you want to know what the damage will be because there will be damage. don't treat your house the way they treat their own house. they love going to other peoples houses- >> considering the demographic does it make sense to have it so squarely in the sent center of town where it interrupts commerce? >> that is the biggest thing we need to learn from is-you could argue if we distributed throughout the city we distribute the pain but it was very intensifyed there and in fact they probably-it became known that the voneue got too full and they turned people away and talked about how difficult it was to get through the security gauntlet. i think a

lot didn't show up for that reason. i would love to go but won't go because i may be one standing there after being in line for a couple hours so there was that problem for those people that would attend. for me made the mistake of getting off the-getting off at the embarcadero station instead of going one station up or getting off a station earlier and got in the mix of the security and was late for my appointment thinking i was smart where i got off and got off at the wrong place so there were no advisory how those of us who did need to conduct business maneuver around the venue. >> hands were constantly chaipging and couldn't depend on any set plans. i think the big thing for bed wiser and union square, i don't think that was planned until 3 weeks prior.

we were told hour by hour everything was changing. >> obviously it was a new venue for them so they didn't know what they didn't know, now we know a lot so again, fortunately we are all st alive. we have pain to get over but in the process we should definitely be putting together a good objective report about how we were effected and offer up suggestions how to change things or convene a discussion well in advance to the nex event like this how to address some hof the issues. >> thank you for comments. i lot had to do with the media and road closures. i work downtown. i went to work and did drive downtown but it was a cluster you know what downtown. it was, the traffic was horrible and every time you turned on the tv or radio

traffic jam downtown and tell you don't come to work if you work downtown which i thought was crazy. thank you for your report, it is very informational and that needs to get out there. they do want to come back and think they should come back but no superbowl city at market street. keep embarcadero open. if you had that open i think people would have gaunl to the ferry building but everyone was freaked out. stick in the att park or civic center. >> superbowl city was a celebration of superbowl and the nfl, it wasn't a celebration of san francisco and i walked through there and found there was a way to get in very easily, you went up stairs at embarcadero.

as i walked through it i felt this isn't about san francisco. i'm all for championtion games, not a huge fan but okay, someone coming into the the environment are not experiencing san francisco superbowl, they are experiencing superbowl. pure and simple nfl experience. it was the nfl experience and sure it was very carefully coria grched as that. one advice to any city hosting the superbowl it needs to be turned inside out and needs to be a celebration the city in addition to the nfl. >> right and hopefully nfl funded. >> i think that again i think we can in going through this cathartic post game show that we can provide some guidance to the cities to come after us

and our own city as this is forgotten in the past and say it fs so awesome. it wasn't so awesome in every dimension. in no way do i say we dont invite events like this to the city but knowing how to best host them and that we understand it is to the benefit of the event as well as our city that we celebrate san francisco for the uniques quality because that was the stated reason for coming here. we lucked out on the weather but we didn't i don't think get to show case our city the way we like to. thank you so much and getting your survey started and quickly outd there because i talked about it at cdma and the commission and said we whether we sponsor it ourselves we take the survey to the the not

only the merchants association but small business community. >> sure. it was a ref draft so it does need a lot of work. >> we would like to support you in doing the survey and getting it to a big group and convene a working group where we collect ivly put the results together and feed it back into the system >> thank you. >> so- >> commissioners i'm happy-in the binder under number 5 is copy of the survey that the south beach mission bay merchant distributed and happy if you want to start jotting down ideas of things to ask in the survey to collect them and- >> i would like to recommend that we-whether we author a survey ourselves which is totally fine with me

or whether we do a [inaudible] on what is already done. i don't want to take over the effort from anybody else who wants to do t i want to say we are available here as a place to convene that study and that we are here to assist in any way we can whether it is actually being the people to push that survey out or whether it is collaborating with someone who has already doing it or wants to do it. but i do think we should do a city wide survey of small businesses to understand and all small business, not just merchants, to understand what the impacts were and to convene a working group discussion of what we would recommend for future other cities and ourselves to consider changing some of the things that were done. what was good and what wasn't so good >> how would we as a commission

spread the survey? if we can help in the drafting of it, i just out of curiosity for- >> we can all go to every merchants association. regeneina attends the merchant community. it turns out like in our merchant association we have a lot of other business practitioners there that know the small business owners kind of association and so i think first going there. those are the organizations that and some better organized than others where people come together and getting the people who are coming regularly to those meetings to reach out to those they know are not attending. dogpatch isn't well represented at the potraro hill dogpatch meeting when i have something can go into dogpatch and talk

tabusiness owners they can spread the word. getting someone to take a on line survey is a easy thing and there are a bunch of mailing lists out there. >> we use our mailing list and organization. >> right, so we have not only merchant organizations but business organizations. we have a list of the small chambers in addition to the chamber. and then of course our own outreach list. >> i think also we could use the survey done to get leverage in the press. the small business commission is conducting a broader survey and maybe will get-there is a survey coming, great. i want to participate in that so see what we can do. >> maybe-there were some programs-i think one the benefit of the commission convene thg survey or providing some direction to the city as they meet with

these folks to design agreements when we go to bid is i'm interested in hearing the program of the super communities. it roles out a little late, but there is a concept like that work? like super castro . >> [inaudible] brilliant and other than high tops getting a booust with michael sams, the rest the weekend was dead other than the regulars. >> it is good to know because if we talk about neighborhood engagement then what is some of the-what are some of the recommenditions if we have any that we can provide to the city entities or individuals who engage either start putting together the bid packages or whatever have you to start engaging in

the activities much earl ier on the in process opposed to later as we get close toor the activity happening >> a lot of the changes came fast and furious. whether they were road closures or organizational things or whatever, so i think also again -there was a lot of controversy around certain aspects so it caused last minute changes so we all watched it play out like a slow motion train wreck in some regards. so, let's conduct a survey have a report with results of the survey and recommendations and i think if the commission can play a role in convening that i think that is fantastic because i think that is a good role for the commission. >> as i said, i'm welcome to-willing to collect your ideas and

aggregate it and figure out how that we as the commission can send it out or partner with other entities to design the survey. >> if you would like taparticipate that is fantastic, not to distract further from your business but-. thank you >> it would be good to get those probably in the next week or two if you have any ideas so we can keep them going. >> we need to get on this quickly while it is still fresh in our minds because this is wrun one we want to push! >> it sadis cushion item >> like to make sure we keep it on the agenda for continued discussion and action-by action i mean authoring a survey and get tg out and promoting it and putting a timelineoon it so it is done >> the time line is within 2 weeks the commissioners give you their

ideas and you spread it out? >> and we can work with those in the community that we already know of that are already active in the area. >> the process is to get back the feedback and do what with it? >> i think probably to really make it useful is to do maybe a written report to the mayor and board of supervisors office of economic and workforce development >> this is a great agenda item for the quarterly meeting with the mayor. debriefing because it was a big deal. i think that would be a good venue once we have put together a good solid survey and report to start that dialogue. because the next two

years a already decided whether we come back in the short period is 3 years is probably unlikely but we will be a candidate again within the next decade. >> it isn't just for the superbowl too >> this is using the superbowl as the best case and worst case. the biggest case we have seen and how does this apply to other large events whether it be oracle world or dream force or large concert or sporting event that we have the regular ones with the giants and hopefully soon with there warriors but lots of events will happen in these venues and other venues in the city and think there are best practices we could use even in the smaller blast zones, if

you will. >> alright. so , thank you kim for being here and providing that information. we will move to item number 6, which is directors report. commissioners, i will just provide due to the sake of time and us needing to be out of the room for the ethics commission to meet i will provide you a report in writing. item number 7 is presidents report. >> i don't have anything to report this week. thank you >> item number 8 is vice president report >> i have nothing to report this week, thank you. >> item number 9 is commissioners report. >> commissioners any reports? seeing none. great. >> item number 10 is general public comment. >> this is the time when we allow for general public comment on what

you heard today. not what you heard today what you would like to consider in the future. have at it. we have someone. >> my name is irene boke squn resident of sun set park side district. i am urging the commission to request that the sfmta make a informational presentation regarding its muni forward projects. particularly the proposed [inaudible] geary bus rapid transit and van ness bus rapid transit projects. indications is the proposed [inaudible] project would have a significant impact on neighborhood serving businesses. >> thank you very much. any other members of the public like to comment? seeing none public comment is closed. >> new business.

>> any new business anyone want tooz propose? i don't. >> seeing none. sf gov tv if we can have our slide again, please. >> waiting for that slide. live #23r5u78 city hall >> we begin and end each small business meeting with reminor the afs of small business is sth only place to sfart your business in san francisco and get answers about doing business in san francisco. the office of install business should be your first stop when and have a question about what to do next so if you need assistance with small business matters start here at the office of small business. thank you. >> and we shall move to item 12 adjournment >> motion to adjourn >> i second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> adjourn at 4:41.

[meeting adjourned] >> good morning everybody. and welcome to the hamilton family residents and emergency center. thank you jeff for hosting us today. i can't think of a better place to do the signic ceremony for our voter, but i want to say thank you to your and your staff for

working with us to end homelessness for a lot of families and continue to doing that work. today we are here with a number of departments that includes our obviously public health and fire department and emergency services, city administrator that helps me oversee the 10 year capital plan making sure our bonds are affordable, focused and do not raise property taxes as well as public works deapartment who helps oversee that very same goal and to a resident who lives right here who will talk about her experiences and the need for more healthcare and also more facilities in the city. as i said earlier, this today is a opportunity to sign legislation that the board has successfully passed with my support to place before the voters this

june a $350,000,000 public health and safety bond for consideration. it is huge win for our residents because this bond seeks to protect-to make sure we have necessary improvements to our infrastructure and healthcare and emergency medical services, it protects and expand melthal health suvs for those in need and particularly thoest on the streets. i will continue emphasizeing that we do this in a very responsible way. in all our bond and particularly the last decade we have been successful and made sure they do not raise property taxes while we do this and the reason we are able to do this is because we havetony year capital plan staff and assurance that we have sth facilities that we work

together with the 10 year capital planning staff, that makes sure we only present bonds that reflect room in the bond capacity that don't raise property tax squz fit into that. that st. the magic, but it isn't magic for finance people, it is magic we can present new thing for people to embrace in like the voter jz not have to raise property tax to get those new things mptd in this case i want to make sure people understand while we talk about the zuckerbering sf general facility we know we vanew facility that reflects the larger bond in the history of the city but we are also moving all those operations into the hospital as we speak, we are leaving a building that is not seismically safe and we are snot interested ichb demaunshing the y.