park evaluation scores which are the proposition c mandate we are recreation parks staff and staff from the comptroller's office evaluate every park every quarter and its amenities, the quality of the cleanliness, the quality of the landscaping, and what this shows us that in an equity zone 85% of the amenities were features past the evaluation. a little bit higher in the outside the equity zones part of the city and then an average their citywide. maintenance and repair, that reflects the closure rate which is to say the closure rate of our work orders which is the sink is broken where there's graffiti or the irrigation needs to be

replaced. these are the internal work orders that come from 311, staff, and other sources. so this reflects how many tma work order requests came in in fy 16 and of this comedy were close. inside spirit i should say performed completed. inside the equity zone 84%, outside 82 the citywide average of 83. capital investment. capital investment is includes we decided to do a three-year average because capital is so lumpy it so-it is hard to say anyone year is because we get voter approval for a bond and then we issue it six months later than the

renovated for three years and opens to the public so what you would you count it. we decided to a three-year average their. this includes the last three budgets as well as all the appropriations to date on the 2012 bond. in the annual appropriation ordinance that has this capital investment in it includes funds gathered from developers that it--i'm not sure what it stands for interagency planning something >> is all capital dollars per created weatherby from our bond program or developer fees or grants that we've obtained anything that's run through the annual procreation ordinance. again is-noted we take a three-year average because capital projects take more than one year to do and when the funds are available again as taylor noted, is lumpy. which means that they are not the dollars don't become available on a consistent way. we look at three years rather than one

>> there's an asterix on this one and this was actually the numbers are quite different the last time you saw this and it's in response to a finding from the comptroller's office. that we had not counted it correctly or fully. so that is part of the estimation for why that is so much bigger than the last time you saw it. volunteers good there's two kinds of investments actually but also again in response to public comment we separate out the volunteer hours. so another element of responsiveness on our part was that members of the community wanted to see park volunteers which are people that are working on litter abatement or weeds segregated from recreation volunteers which are volunteers soccer coaches or zoom but teachers are all volunteers. now we can really see that recreation volunteer hours to given to people really, that's the standardizing denominator there for 1000 people, in

equity zones, versus outside in the city as a whole. that's looking good. park volunteer hours. this is the landscape part of it. comparable there. for a could you we did no one for a good seem to make more sense than because park volunteer hours are inducted into the land. then just the last one there just is another way of seeing these numbers, a percent of the total volunteer hours given in the each of the areas. so 22% in total volunteer hours both [inaudible] are provided inside the equity zone. recreation get hours of recreation of resources. deviously this included the recreation volunteers i just referenced above but we pulled those out so again the summers look quite different than the last time. we showed discharge, hours of

recreation and resources now reflect the structured recreation provided by our staff or our partners. for example, the y which does self hope programming at rec centers. so just us and our partners now. then just sometimes these numbers are hard to understands we try to present them in different ways. this is a percentage. so 20% of the people getting about 46% of those recreation resources. scholarships, scholarships are not subject we don't have an outpatient but we want to show this because it could have actually gone in access as well because this is really reflects our commitment to make sure that everyone can get out and play. we want-by looking at

these numbers it shows that in fact a marketing our education efforts to oh people understand the scholarships are available for all ages is-we are being successful. this more work to do but 20% of the population has 36% of the scholarships. this is just a plotting of the incident data that was that we used. these metrics supervisor avalos said and we have said so many times, are just a tool. they are a way to now look at everything we do and use this tool to help us more deeply understand and here is one way we could look at it. the average-this is actually should have an asterix for commissioner lucas your joke last time got

us thinking about the statistician that died in a lake average death of 3 inches because averages sometimes don't they hide the store. they tend to pollute the story. so if we hear is the average our scores but another way to look at it is the top of the score. instead of averaging would so get the top and the bottom. so the top 20 park scores in fy 16, 40% of them were in the equity zone. remember that 37% of the parks. that seems to be on par. in fy 15, though, it was just fun out to have the lens go back and look at things that before we even conceived of inequity zone. in fy 15, 25% of the top parks best scoring parks were naturally zones get what that shows is that we redid gillman and dimaggio and

some other parks that are located in these areas and other scores are higher. so they are moving in the right direction. on the lowest on the bottom end of the scale, the lowest park scores in fy 16 50% of the lowest parks scores were in the equity zone. now they have 37% of the parks. that is definitely a sku. a sku if you look at fy 15 with 70%. two were going in the right direction both the bottom and the top but more work needs to be done. this was really this is so rewarding gratifying to provide this lends to the existing data and think about other ways we can use it in the future. this is a super long list of phenomena going to read it-we took these equity zone

parks and then apply them to our current year budget which was >> taylor's dr. rita but i'm going to jump in. this with a rubber meets the road. this is now gives us an ability to say what are we doing with this data. how are we making sure where our commitment to parks in these neighborhoods. this year is unique because our budget friendly was done before the measure passed before we had engage in this tool. to just show you where our priorities are and where your parties are and where kozak's priorities are in the community aborts, this is the work these are current projects that are in our budgets and current programs that we are launching on the next two slides at our in parks in equity zones. without beating everyone that there's a significant amount of capital investment is significant amount of park developments. a significant amount of programming expansion deferred maintenance projects

core resurfacing's and a couple public safety initiatives in those parts. over time, our goal is to develop a little bit more of a system for how we prioritize our investments and take our project. it should be a combination of site condition and need and some of this equity focused data. we are just beginning to the journey of exploring how to put that matrix together so that we can be more data-driven and frankly, perfectly transparent in why we are making some of the investments we are making were letting all of you make certain decisions based on how different projects ranked on this data. this is the beginning of a journey but what's worthy here is that these are this commission in this department existing values. these are the projects we are working on. >> this is just a list of some of the informal conversations that we've had about this work. there have been accountable

informal conversation just in the hour and civic center pocket i talked with old-time about this. lots of people. so this is-today is highlighted good we are hoping that you will prove these metrics but our work is not done. we are going to continue-the next up as your call is to integrate them into our strategic plan. we will go back to prozac in november with back. we are going to continue to reach out and get feedback and to make this better and better. over the years. there is a yearly cycle will be toward our budget and looking for the next 29 years. i want to note that the underlying data the-the state is issuing version 3.0 coming

out of the soon. cities are giving comment on it now and if you can just think two point the2010censusjusthowmuchsanfranc i scohaschangedsincethenandthevers ion3. 0willbebasedonthemid-censustheam ericancommunitysurvey,so2015data andalsoasanu mberofnewpopulationcharacteristi c sfactorsincludingoneforrentburde nwhichwill >> so this is a dynamic analysis and the data is changing as our world changes. all of us are moving into the world of big data for sure. i can assure you the crime stats some of the work on tma is going to be defined and more of

a lesson of next time. this is our very first cut. we've never done anything like this or has anyone to our knowledge ever come up with metrics although lots of other departments are working on it and think about it . this is a quantitative expression of equity and it's only going to get more and more informed as the data continues to be refined. >> commissioner would you like to go to public comment >> yes, please >> thank you so much. >> >>[calling public comment cards] >> good afternoon

commissioners. my name is dennis-i've served the last five years in district 5 representable on prozac i was on the working group that committed our advice to you as we are advisory. in our resolution in powerpoint and presumably that's in your packet. we were truly pleased and i know this i don't need to say a lot more than that but we were truly pleased by the efforts fanning more equitable distribution of services. but we are deeply concerned that some of the metrics showed little significant difference at least in the initial draft between the disadvantage zones and the advantage zones. we were supportive of the incorporation of the equity strategic and operational planning and window were going to look at that in the next few months. however we want to make sure that we like the hubble telescope is that we metrics lens, which gm ginsburg has told was over and over again

through which we look at everything were you look at everything we will make sure it's adjusted before its launch. your supportive but we want sometime for some corrections to the metrics could for example, the metrics show to make this is a key point, the staff still presume for example that 100% of park resources and services consumed in a neck we zone part by equity zone residence. a study of 24 senses trucks around mclaren for example established that 12 of the 24 tracks actually were occupied by nonequity zone folks and that they used the parks by 50 birds 56% of the population using the quarter-mile buffer zone around everything we does established as a presumption as the assumption of how people use parks. that buffer zone is the basis for the analysis that the

census tracks actually show more accurate assessment who uses the park. it's incorrect to assume that an equity part is used entirely by 1% equity folks zaidi . >> dennis can i ask you a question. i will hold you to the time. >> i didn't realize was a time >> no, you're not that i don't want this conversation to interrupt a much time you get to make your case. that's all. wouldn't one assume in the case then that would be because we have some sports fields of there and we have visiting teams that are using it from outside the area were people coming in because of programming in the parks? do we know the answer to that when you say there's that percentage that are not from the area? >> exactly commissioner. >> actually the point i was making based on the study of the 24 senses trucks around

mclaren and the leg up is not based on a good i will come to that point of visiting teams. that is a point >> already, juries would talk about the same thing. >> i was talking about a study of 24 senses trucks around the south southern section on the map. it included the border which was the buffer zone. the taylor established in the department has established with a 5 min. walking zone. it turns out that when you examine the 24 senses trucks that touch 12 of them are equity and 12 of them are nonequity. they are further away than what was thought. when you look at it and you do the total calculation of the populations 56% of the users of the park came from the nonequity and 4% came from the equity >> got it. thank you. continue.

>> so the issue is there the assumption that an equity part is used by 1% by equity residence. it's true if all the senses trucks around the park are equity zones equity tracks, that is to but it turns out what's left out in fact is that all throughout san francisco even near equity parks census tracks very and some of them are nonequity and some of them are equity. so that assumption is a fundamental thing that is mistaken in the 100%. it is out sharing the reality is-and mild on >> keep going >> that was because of my interruption. i do not mean to do that >> that's okay. >> i want to give you your fair shake on this.

>> thank you thank you commissioner. the issue is that sharing of the metrics. the reality is and also some areas older san francisco people share but there's another assumption that's fundamentally not recognized in taylor's work and i've no criticism of taylor. i think she's done excellent work, but folks tend generally --and that's the assumption of the quarter-mile buffer, folks tend to generally go to the parks nearest them for most what they do in parks. i pointed out to her earlier i live near golden gate park. i been there to mclaren 15-20 times in my like it am a native san franciscans. i been to dolores park 35 times i've been to lincoln park 40 times i've been to golden gate park 2000+ timesheet sometimes 3-4 times a week at oven across the street from it for 43 years. what you do is you go to the part nearest you. there's another assumption want to get at which

i think is important to know. it's connected to this. most people go to the places nearest to them to recreate and as we know from teachers and other people work with folks in disadvantaged areas oftentimes the kids in their having even ever been to the mountains or to a beach or to a farm. so it would be inappropriate then to assume that just because people have two legs though traveled across town and go to the nicer part. or the other way around. so i think those assumptions and what that is that economics determines often how far people go for recreation and i think that should be incorporated into the >> okay i think i give it as much time as i can. see was okay i was going to urge if the point is made you clear the zip is an ongoing prospect that the commission you guys are probably the only oversight

entities you need to establish the mechanisms be was guided. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is anna d representing of the district 6. when i first listened to the first presentation on equity metrics i was excited because i district is one of the districts that doesn't is in great need of open spaces. i think this is a wonderful project that you have good however i'm going to go over it. over one issue in that is the scores versus observation.

on the presentation we filled out some the scores are really high for some of the equity parks and specifically for -sorry for mcclellan park is about 85% it has a score of 85.3 and the [inaudible] which also was a score of 85.5. the problem that i see with this is that when you go to this part you see there's open garbage cans. you say they are dirty. you see the structures the playground structures are broken. so how do the two parks have such high scores? that doesn't equal what is on the score which is on the actual park. going back to observations come i think it's important that when they score on the park you look at a partisan individual part, not

as a [inaudible] for all the parts especially in the tenderloin because we have like many many many hundreds of families that don't speak english. give asian families that speak more than other languages, not english. we have asian speakers we have spanish speakers. for the most part, they don't understand what don't know it is okay to go and save we don't have garbage cans here. that is okay to call for a repair. so they don't get the chance to call and ask for these repairs. therefore i think the observation is very important when scoring the parks. 80. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. commissioners and president

buell. general manager ginsburg says by supervisor artie said what was going to stay to start with the will go there but i do want to emphasize was prozac that chairman e equity metrics that were passed in recent charter amendment. again as was said earlier by dennis we are thrilled that the equity metrics are here because it's really important to those of us who live in equity zones now. that we realize this is something that's long overdue that needs to be done. as phil mentioned, it's not anecdotal. real data were looking for. with that said, kozak had a number of recommendations that as taylor has said this is even newer than i think a day or two ago because she has incorporated many prozac's recommendations which are in a packet that you should have that we still are looking for those also to be incorporated >> beaux-arts in the packages so you know >> thank you. so i just want

to point out a couple things we've given several data points so far have not been incorporated in a leave that with margaret because those are not in your packet but we have some ideas about things that should be in there and maybe plans we don't wait another year . i think that part of what i'm asking for is an ongoing conversation formally and informally because under prozac schools zero a formal structure we would like to be with to have ongoing meetings in some format or some way to incorporate these changes. just one example is the percentage of teammate was on him. when our recommendations is that you should have a number 14 made backlogs inequity zones and how long they've been in there since the day we were called in when they were finally close out particularly instructional cases because you see a lot more those inequities on. that is one example. another one is measurement of staff levels. the national recreation park association has standards. for example mclaren park should

have 10 the of 1.5. so i think those are real valuable measurements inequity zones that we would like to have incorporated that in that document that hope you get a chance to see. with that in mind he passed a motion that also is in your packet urging that you support our recommendations and ask rpd to incorporate them soon rather than later attitude of open ongoing process to work with us to fine-tune results. with that in mind, thank you. >> be thanks. >> next speaker >>good afternoon commissioners. mr. ginsberg. my name is d sullivan. i want to speak about the metrics on maintenance as they exist right now. in my opinion leaders should really be about money spent per capita

. that is the most direct and meaningful measures one of the most. why isn't it in here? the two metrics that are in your which are the park scores for maintenance and repair requests logged into the internal tma system as completed our indirect and much less reliable metrics. rpd says this project is not proposed because they don't know how much they spend for maintenance in any given part. can they actually be serious about this that they don't know how many gardeners, janitors and managers are allocated to each part? their tma system does not track time in the joe's associated with the job even if they don't have this information they need to figure it out now. how can they do a good job of managing our parks without it? i would suggest we use an area of maintenance were meaningful equity metrics such as janitorial hours per month for bathrooms and clubhouses per capita local population.

trashcan capacity per capita of local population. trashcan pickup volume per month per capita local population. the bathroom open hours per month per capita local population. as we with capital spending maintenance spending should not be based on the natural areas program. in fact the national areas program is specifically exempt from the valuation of cleanliness in its area. the activities of do not benefit park users at large. of particular concern is the reliance on toxic herbicides. we enjoy a special exception from department of environment tools that allows them to use the most toxic herbicides freely in the natural areas for such dubious purposes as quote land scape renovation these projection of remote toxic chemicals and e the zone parks. thank you very much

>> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is leah peden and i serve as the chairman of the blue-green way for the san francisco park alliance but most importantly i'm a mother and a third-generation from the bayview. i used parks every day and every week and revisit parks throughout the city. we are very pleased at these equity method could equity is often a discussion but rec and park are seeing how these funds are benefiting is part of the city and parks. parks are the last affordable thing in san francisco. it provides for not only children but families good it's very important to move this forward and it should be a living document constantly evolving and getting feedback and as you said, about is one part because they're having baseball could i live directly across from the park. depending

on what happens there is basketball and football and soccer and directly impacts who's visiting those parks but getting the title feedback and data really understanding what benefits are going into the park can really help the people of san francisco but most fully to children who use it. only go to the parks is so fascinating to see how the children care so much about learning and understanding in their part. when my sons favorite things is a sticky guy from golden gate park. the children were flowing so energetic to really see and understand the city kid to be out in what they call the wildlife of a part is really important to them. it's really important factor to really make sure that we are understanding but also the making sure the equity metrics are in place. thank you. >> thank you. >> i have one more card. that is >>[calling public comment cards] if anyone else would like to come forward?, left. did you want to speak?

>> commissioners, i just want to say that what has been said before is very impactful. there's a few things that have been left up you we not really take in consideration transportation, getting to and from arrow our parks. also the impact as commissioner buell has said about site people coming and using are parses specially professional dog walkers. that needs to also be taken into consideration. thank you for all the hard work and hope that it will work for everybody. >> thank you >> anyone else the weather to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner bonilla >> i want to ask a question. the equity zone on a map that you provided for us,, now will those zones serve as the

framework from which all the city departments work with or is it just particular l. are those owns particular rec and park programs and services? >> i will take out one commissioner bonilla because this gets to the work we are doing in the human rights commission and the mayors recent retreats with his department heads which equity was becoming clear about it right now many different up arms as you and i have discussed different ways of looking at this. a lot of cities all talk about equity in agencies within cities, equity. barry fuchs are defining equity. coming up with data to collect so this is a start. we actually think this lens using the population characteristics from the epa is somewhat innovative approach and it is my understanding that other departments may consider

adopting the strategy. this is our work in this is for rec and park services that's what proposition b requires us to do. >> so there's a possibility goes way very >> different departments have >> [inaudible] >> so far different departments have look at this in different ways good we think looking at the jarvie of where equity zones are regardless of what it is the we've rec and park are measuring comparing service delivery within these numbers versus the city as a whole is kind of a interesting approach to make sure that the city is delivering services but far be it from us to tell other garments how to do their business. but i think that is what the human rights commission is starting to think about but how we have a citywide conversation in this regard. >> commissioner mcdonnell >> oh begin first with a few brief thank you to your leadership but also all the

voices that have gone into baking what we have before us now. the fact frankly were even having a metrics conversation at all >> is exciting >> it's a huge quantum leap. that said, i would just acknowledge at least from my perspective that the data and the metrics that make up the current iteration are part of a wide deep set of data sets that are both informed by the actual data points themselves but also points of view. there are very points of view. around not only the data sets themselves but the importance of them. they rise and fall based upon one's perspective and axis point etc. good all of which is a valuable and important. therefore, almost my perspective impossible to win on the perfect set of data and metrics. that will be wholly satisfying to everyone involved

and everyone who cares. so therefore, for me, this particular set is very very useful. i feel like by and large the right metrics to be measured and paid attention to our right. roughly right, frank. hence, the iterative nature of going forward will be important. i think that the opportunity for us to learn frankly from this first baseline and what it tells us what it lifts up for us some things that we presume now to be important you may presume not be as important later in the prosecute other things we did and we might lift up in later iterations. then so the other thing that i think is important if we were trying to develop a set of metrics that will become the static sole

determining factor for all the things we think are important capital investment, etc., i would be afraid because it's imperfect again data set but whether b is on the other factors outside of the data that ought to inform our whole were more conference of decision-making. so i don't look to this as the sole static decision-making piece for everything we hold near and dear to us in terms of how we will again make our investments going forward. the last thing i would say, i really want to underscore it. certainly i know everyone in this room agrees with this. but that interdepartmental collaboration whether lands on these or other sets that is a citywide conversation we absolutely need to have and so if there's ways for me individually or this commission to play a role in promoting and supporting and waving the flag around the importance of that i really would want to take advantage of that. >> thank you good commissioner anderson

>> i really want to commend the staff and all the volunteer hours from the members of prozac. i want to thank. i just want to affirm is it may,, is that your name along to ride on your coattails a little bit and ask in the future if transportation issues could be considered as appropriate good i can just give you a little anecdote as a mom here in the city with children that were 18 months apart was no way i was going to wrestle two strollers and all the coach one onto two different buses to get to their chosen area part. i would often see moms. i didn't try to wrestle kids in strollers and things that are minivans and all that. there's just not adequate loading and unloading around a bunch of parks in the way our people can take three city buses to a park. so i really urge you to keep counting on that drum and i'll

be right there in the bandwidth you get total thank you >> thank you good mr. ginsberg >> a couple of reflections and a concluding remark. one in with respect to transportation, equities a big issue in transportation it i just sat and the directors working group which is a meeting of big-city department larger departments and we talk about policy issues related to growth and equity and muni is doing its work there. for us, when you are talking out commissioner, and i think what may may have been alluding to is ask. let's take a second to celebrate the fact that we have more within a 10 min. walk a higher percentage of san franciscans than any percentage in the country 99% of us live within a 10 min. walk. for us transportation is more of a policy initiative than something we would necessarily kind of measure. what were measuring is how many people can get live with and attend a walk of a part. we are

thinking through and have thought through a variety of initiatives to make sure this what mobile recreation is about where we actually bring our rockclimbing wall and bikes and skateboards to different neighborhoods that they don't have two kids don't have to come to where the one rockclimbing wall is in the city. we've talked about in the context of a with respect to summer camps with respect to bringing teens from juvenile probation system. we recognize that to give kids and families the experiences they want the transportation is an issue did we budget for transportation and it continues to be kind of a policy work. with respect to collaboration commissioner mcdonnell that's it sparrow [inaudible] i spend with all these at a retreat and was interagency collaboration on this topic and others in one

where you'll hear more about 560 parts working together civic center. the big center commons idea that were trying to work through that. but we work closely whether it's with a puc whether it's his sfpd dc why, dph on healthy san francisco. we have a number of collaborations with departments that kind of fit our vision now with the mayor is trying to do to make sure amounts of collaborating on his citywide vision. that is our work in progress. then last, this is a start. this is we should be proud of the work and by the way, we shall be apologetic about the data. it actually suggests these are our values. yes, we can do better and i'll be the first to admit we need to continue to drill deeper to find different ways to make sure that our parks are responsive to community needs but at this level the data suggests these are your values as a commission. these are our values and our [inaudible]

ballasted finally, to tailor number of other people on our staff we have taken this very seriously get we talked about it at our executive staff retreats. we are engaging in a year-long learning process on internal learning process on the topic of bakley working with the human rights commission is a mother outside facilitators and we are now in a position where we are not reacting to the financial crisis of the moment. or the political controversy of the moment where this is we have now a chance to really kind of drill deeper on this topic and that is our plan. >> vinton seeing no other questions on me make a couple comments. one, taylor i think this is terrific work. you'd be very proud of it. i think it's right at the heart of what we should be doing to give us better judgment about our priorities and how we set them. so much appreciated. i agree

with everything everybody said. this is a first shot at it. it's awkward to be perfect at this places were people individually or collectively can find shortcomings or where they think it can be improved. i am cognizant of the fact that two things i think would be helpful. because it's an ongoing process we need to have a mechanism where both suggestions that improve the process can be incorporated and the mechanics that we haven't set in place only one way to look at these problems and therefore only uses certain metrics. i think we have to keep asking ourselves are those the right metrics. so how we get to that point i would leave the staff to report back to us. i honestly perhaps naïvely could envision a day when the mayor sets aside an afternoon where all the department sit in the chamber and metrics for all the city services could be talked about in the broadest

sense as to how we deliver to the people not the biggest taxpayers but all the taxpayers. how do we satisfy what we can deliver as services to those people? i think is a great place to have this discussion. i think prozac. i think the park alliance. i think both the players that have the most day-to-day knowledge of how you can help this process. so thank you for participating and with that seeing or the questions all entity in a motion moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] so moved >> we are now in item 10 general public comment continued. anyone here let to make general public comment? seeing none, this item is closed. where now in item 11, closed session. anyone would like to make public comment on closed session? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners, you need to make a motion and vote whether to go into closed session >> moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] so moved

>> so we would ask everyone to >> we need a >> we need a 16:45:23>> we need amotion hearing >> e would be whether you want to report any actions in closed session >> moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] he was the second one is whether to vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussions held in closed session >> motion? moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] >> thank you were now on item 12 new business agenda setting. measures you have anything any items >> can we just i don't know where to put up in the placeholder for the very last comment made around the revisiting-i don't know the

right iteration but at some point >> [inaudible] >> yes. >> i think what we can do is just you can have that under new business or under-we can do it under new business agenda setting and we can have a discussion at this point >> yes, that's the point he was fine the right rhythm >> [inaudible] we can't be having no more discussion thank you. item-thank you commissioner item 13 communications there are no communications. we no longer have members of the public. so 14 is adjournment >> moved to adjourn >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. >>[gavel] >>[adjournment] >> >> >>

(clapping) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ celebrating the wow. turnout this is our third annual to celebrate pride we notice we didn't have community event for pride. we actual had 19 we had godzilla and are you ball weird names i think its unique we're able to

have special event we're all women that relax and have fun you know everything is friendly and kind we're all equal i'm happy that

>> good afternoon and welcome to the local agency formation commission my name is jones avalos the chair of commission joined to to my right is by cynthia logical and scomploomz and supervisor mar is usually here but have him excused and today's local agency formation commission is broadcaster by sfgovtv jim smith and defense attorney risk hernandezam