register for produce. that can be carats or a pound of something or whatever. we see that type of thing in all the stores. some stores carry produce and that increased. tobacco and alcohol will take longer, that is longer process. a number of stores-the hypothesis as stores shift the business model i stock healthy foods especially like packaged salad and things, that is profitable and in some cases more profitable than alcohol and tobacco then they demand less on those type of products which is what many store owners would like to do anyway. that is what we are finding. >> that is good to know. that's it, but great program. congratulations, good job and keep it up because we need this in these neighborhoods. >> commissioner zouzounis. >> thank you so much for your presentation. um, i have a question arounds your

partnerships with department of environment and um, what you might forsee in the future with that. it is my mdsing there are some existing limitations with addressing the need of energy up grades and know the limitations are out of your hands and come from the state mostly, but it has been limited to lighting upgrades and small refrigeration and anything that bigger in terms of refrigeration that will make a impact in regards to energy savings usually has to include a owners expense to that. i know you offer loan recommendations and the such but my question is, do you forsee any change in incentives or subsidies for larger energy upgrades in regards to refrigeration and equipment in particular with upcoming department of environment

programming? >> so, i think as i mentioned earlier we try to package resources from the city from different agency squz i think one thing we do is partner with department of environment because they have small business program around energy savings. as of now the only partnership is around the audit jz will be conducted around energy savings. the one thing is how to build in the recommendation for that equipment into our idp. let's say department of environment recommends certain equipment, if we incorporate into the individual development plan for each of the businesses can we cover those costs as part of the program. i think we are exploring that andope toon it. we are asking all the businesses to go through the audit and based on the findings we will explore that further and help the small business owner purchase the right equipment that meets the doe requirements if you will and also our objectives a a healthy retail sf program.

>> the butteee of dph being married to oewd in this program, is that they are connected to so many other departments that provides different incentives for small business we wouldn't be familiar with. as incentives come along and you connected us with department of environment about this issue and hopefully over time as they begin these programs we already certified certain stores are motivated and making these changes they will be able to avail themselves of these new types of refrigeration units and energy efficient programs and things like that so really good work on that one. >> one more thing i wanted to say is please look at healthy retail sf.org website. everything we talked about, description of there program, preand post of the stores involved, news coverage, all of that and as jorge mentioned the

services available and bundled is on the website. >> just one quick question just to get a idea of demand. how many stores do you have currently that applied? i know you said you are going to do two. curious how many may be waiting for their turn? >> that is a good question because we have a ongoing list. the last time in the tenderloin i think we had 25 interested. just in the tenderloin alone who showed interest and show up to the informationals about 10, 15 which means they are committed to moving forward. i know there is a interest in addition to those in the program. >> is that interest due i mean sort of law unintended consequences. clearly there are opportunities to upgrade your store, so to what extent is-is there interest there that is more slanted towards i will get a upgrade to st. store,

increase and already carry produce but will carry more but i will get new fridge and signage? >> i think there is but i think that is why the informationals are important because you explain the other commitments that come up with as involving your community and being aware and providing the appropriate products and if they feel like it works for their model, that's-and it is always not necessarily that they need a fridge unit. that is one thing that potentially they need based on the [inaudible] city associates or expercents, they make recommendations of what is needed to increase the footprint and healthy products. >> of the 9 stores in the program there was a continuum of capital investment some already had the equipment they

need and others did not? what is the range of intrestment? >> the range of investment is 15 to $20 thousand plus 15-about $35 thousand of investment including staffing of leaders and equipment and consultant. in term thofz equipment around the capital is around 15 to $20 thousand made depending on the store. also one thing we didn't capture is some of the businesses are putting some of their own capital into the program. for example, one och the tendser loin markets we made a recommendation for a product and they went and bought a larger product. we like to see that happen. they secure their financing for the product. >> the piece jorge talked about at the begin ogthf process where we do the assessment of

the store after they complete the interest form, we do a business operation assessment and physical layout assess like is the store a good fit for the program and the community engagement assessment where we trooto figure how committed the store is to making the changes and there are criteria we do to assess that. we spend a lot of time trying to find the stores that are the best fit in the program. >> commissioner yee, riley. >> you mentioned the tenderloin district, are you also looking at all the communities such as chinatown and missionary? >> that is a great question. we got inquiries from the mission and chinatown and some of district 2 and sun set and showing interest in the program and think now it is about resources. not only financial resources but also the leadership on the ground, meaning do we have organizations like the

tenderloin healthy cornerstore coalition interested in this work and providing the support. as you mentioned the model of the program is requires strong leadership on the ground so someone that works closely with the business owners and resident to let them know the store exists but yes, there is interest from other communities in the program. >> i have just a follow up question coming back to the 25 businesses. these businesses have been qualified and in the tenderloin in the list of potential recipients and participants to the program, is that it? they have been selected- >> they have not been selected, no. >> coming back and i'll close my-you said at the been ginning you have a maximum you would consider converting in a community before-no? >> i don't have a maximum, i think it is a ongoing

conversation of the threshold. >> we don't know yet. >> we don't know and need a expert to inform us. >> we are pretty sure we are no where near that yet. >> you can absorb 25, correct? >> uh-huh >> for that you need money, correct? okay. [laughter]. >> any other questions, commissioners? we will open to public comment. any members the public that could like to comment on the item? thank you very much, seeing none public comment is closed. thank you very much for your presentation. appreciate it. good luck for the future. next item, please. >> item number 4, update on legacy business program. discussion and possible action to review the legacy business program staff report for november and december 2016, presentation of the proposed grant awards for the business assistance grant. discussion and possible action item.

presenter richard kurylo, legacy business program manager, office of small business. >> good afternoon president dwight, commissioners mptd richard kurylo, legacy business program manager. i have a update for november and december 2016. i have a poweropinion presentation today. i included statistics, major accomplishments, press and major upcoming activities. i distributed a november and december staff report and there are copies on the table for memberoffs the audience. in november we received 4 legacy nominations. two applications

and $250 in application fees which are $50 per applicant. hisphoric preservation commission reviewed 28 application squz the small business commission reviewed 22 applications. 22 businesses on the legacy business registry. in december we received 10 legacy nominations, 4 applications and $350 in application fees. the historic preservation commission reviewed 3 applications and small business commission reviewed 15 application squz listed all 15 businesses on the legacy business registry. from the programs beginning through the end of december there were 129 nominations, 87 applications and $4100 in application fees. 67 reviewed by inhistoric preservation commission and 64 businesses

listed on the registry. major plxments in november included adding 22 businesses to the registry, submitting 3 application tooz historic preservation for review, issuing the business assist ance grant application and instructions, continued drafted the rent stabilization document squz continued contract negotiation with working solutions for legacy business program check printing services. major plxments in december included: adding 15 businesses to the legacy business registry, submitting 3 applications to the historic preservation commission, receiving 51 business assistance grant applications, reviewing the grants applications received, setting occupy legacy businesses with city and county of san francisco, continuing drafting the rent stabilization grant and continuing contract negotiations with working

solutions. press in late october and november consisted two articles about effort in seattle to create a legacy business program similar to san francisco as well as coverage of new legacy businesses. press in december consisted of a article about the stud bar, article about seattle legacy business experts and 3 articles about zeitgeist which is a legacy business and the efforts to protect the outdoor beer garden from a shadow from it proposed building across the street. the three are included because they make mention of zeitgeist as a legacy business. major upcoming activities for january and beyond including presented three legacy businesses to the small business commission which we did january 9, paying grants to approved applicants. proneting

rent stabilization grant to you today. submitting the rent stabilization grant to the board of supervisors for their review. issuing the ronet stabilization grant and receiving applications. finalizing the contract with working solution jz issue request for proposal for logy and brandsing. please note there are no applications for the legacy business registry before you today because the meeting of historic preservation commission about 2 and a half weeks ago was canceled because of new year and there a slow down because of thanksgiving and holidays so will pick up again in about a month or so. for the business assistance grant, i'll review the applications stats and intendsed use of funds. >> actually before we go there, are there any questions about the legacy business registry?

i have a couple. so, i notice just the year highlights, 129 nominations. are those nominations by supervisor? >> supervisors and the mayor. >> and the mayor. okay. interesting. so there are not only nominations hrf i guess everyone has to be nominated one way or another? >> that's correct. >> 42 of these didn't move on to the application process, about 30 percent, particular reason for that? >> some are nominated and not aware of the program so have to inform them about the program. not all of them that provided applications have nominations. sometimes we receive applications without a nomination so some the numbers are off there as well. and there are some nominations that

we received and applications and prnlly in the process reviewing those, so they haven't come to you or historic preservation yet either. >> between 20 and 25 percent don't pass to the historic preservation commission so of 87, 67 passed to historic preservation. are those stim in process? >> there are only three nominees that dropped out. i think two business that wnt out of business and one that decided to remove from the process. >> in the backlog now, do we have how many roughly? >> going through the process that is submit today the historic preservation commission? >> yes, >> 4 or 5 of those in the process. my next submission date is monday, i'm trying to

get 5 for that one and they'll pick up again because the holidays. >> just quick question. out of those who are not in the program and nominated, are they all qualified or are they some that were nominated but could not qualify? >> there is a possibility some nominated are not qualified because we do our best to receive nominations that are qualified. the nominators are aware of the qualifications, but once we start reviewing them sometimes we discover they are not qualified. >> come somecan be in the gray zone which is the not 30 years but- >> some of these 45 may not be qualified? >> yes, that is correct. >> i want to put that in a category. >> that is correct. >> i know that like [inaudible] they were on market street but they moved to oakland so don't think they would qualify.

>> flax has a store in the up arounds the water. they moved the headquarters but have a store- >> fort mason. >> really? >> they opened the store in fort mason because sfai is mubing to fort mason so the hope is there will be- >> they are opening a campus there. >> i think the original if i'm not mistaken, the original legislation included them being headquartered in the city. >> so headquarters isn't a requirement? >> they have >> to have a presence. i got a application and they don't have a presence in the city. there is allowed to be a two year gap so i'm working with them. >> i won't look frg specifics just general. sorry to interrupt. we can move to the next part.

>> the business assistant grant. we received 64 legacies were eligible to apply. we received 51 applications by the december 15th deadlines and all 5 wn were on time. 446 applications are finalized and 5 are in progress. the 5 in progress are generally because we requested verify caishz of their full time equivalent employees andvent yet received appropriate verification. there were a total of 803 full time equivalent employees or fte ranging from 1 to 100 with 100 the maximum allowedthism average is 15.75 fte and median was 8. the grants totaled 4100

$414500. -note these numbers may change depending on the final outcome of the 5 applications in progress. proposed use of the grants funds included ada improvements, archiveing, associated memberships, equipment and technology, facade improvement, human resources, inventory, marketing promotion, rent and tenant improvements. i have here on the slide different percentages of each of those. the office of small business would like to begin processing grants tothe 46 applicant who's applications are complete followed by the 5 applicants when their applications are completed. grants will be awarded to businesses as they get set up as vepders with the city and

county of san francisco. this item is listed on the agenda as discussion and possible action item and action by the commission is optional. that concludes my presentation and happy to answer any questions. >> commissioners, any questions before i ask mine. ? >> this business is on the business portal? >> you have copyies and we have copies here and i can add it to the agenda for the meeting. we can add it to had website if you like. >> the legacy business program, is it on the business portal? >> the information is all on our website. >> our website, not the business portal? >> not the business portal, just our website, the small business commission website. office of small business website. >> the line item rent, does

that-those are rent stabilization grants? >> no, those proposing to use the grant for rent would use it for rent increased they received for the continuation of their business. >> alright, so this is separate from a negotiation with a landlord for rent stabilization so this is my rent has gone up and apply on the fte base frs the amount of money i can and use it for rent? >> that's correct. >> alright. alright. and so if we were to simply grant these fund, that would be $400 thousand out of the available budget, is that correct? the available budget is what?

>> $1 million. >> $1 million. >> the business assist ance grants are $400 thousand so right on the money. >> $1 million per year? >> 1 $1 million per year for- >> it is annual basis so renews. >> we have a million for fiscal year 17/18 and that includes both grants in there. >> a number of these are --probably half is one time sorts of things, equipment, technology, facade improvements, i don't know what human resources refers to. rent was be a reoccurring annual request whether granted or not would be determined. actually, soerant is just

basically 25 percent of the total, so three quarters of it is potentially one time expenditures so we can have a new crop of requests and we could accommodate a new crop of requests for the $300 thousand the next time around. this is the first time, right? and the opportunity is great, but we have to be careful we don't like, the first time we give the money we shut down for future grants because it becomes a reoccurring request. >> it was very open so did want say they are to use it for rent increases they can just use for rent. some did they rent was increased and some just saiderant. represent. >> let's make it clear this is a yearly application, so in order to benefit from the next fiscal years budget, they have

in a timely fashion make a application, the application has to be approved by- >> the applications are due by september 30, 2017 and we can accept them from july 1 through september 30. it is based on the fte as of june 30, 2017. >> it can be the same amount or lower amount t is dependent on your assessment in 20-next application. >> it depends on the number of fte's that were employed as of june 30. >> june 30 >> 2017. >> it goes from june 2016 to >> july 1, 2016 to june 30-basically you take all the employees june 302017 and look at the average tweakly hours between july 1, 20s 16 and june

1, 2017. it got complicated but i created a spreadsheet sthai can plug the numbers in. some provided the yearly hours the employee worked and number of week squz that was easy. some did mujt to month. >> it is 500 hours of ftes is what it is. there is 4 rents requests here. >> the renewal application when you follow up the application u whatever you call it, the next years application is that pretty much the same as the content or you focus on the-you are not taking the basic information that was provided. >> is t is very similar. basically the changes we are making with all due respect about 95 percent of them made

errors on the emissions, some of that was my fault because the way it is worlded or just because of the way the spreadsheet was so basically what we are doing for the next one is make improvements so the errors won't occur and think it will be a lot smoother for next year, but those are the only changes that will be to correct the errors people made. >> thank you. >> on each of these we look at them individually? we approve these, correct? >> i think you asked to take a look at the list but it is my understanding is that it doesn't need to have you look at all of them. they are all available if you like to see them. we have the applications. the fte spreadsheet, their fte verification and some ofthem optionally provided with verification of what they use the funds for so that is all available if you like to see

that. we didn't want to burden you with reviewing all the applications. >> they have to qualify if they meet the qualification requirements and it would become a computation exercise as to how many employees they have multiplied by 500, is that pretty much-you check the information provided earlier and you add on-multiply 500 by a number of full time employees? >> that is correct. they provide verification and we were very strict in terms of verification they provided and made sure we checked the numbers so they matched evenly. >> i have a question about saying all these are granted in front of us this year, then it seemed i recall that the next year these same folks have a priority to apply again or they are back on a even basis with

everyone else? >> for this particular grant they are on a eechben basis. for the rent stabilization there is a priority. >> we talked about kind of the objective here and that is really helping legacy businesses be sustainable businesses, right? and that we have a fiduciary responsibility as stewards of taxpayer dollars to make sure we dont put good money after bad and not investing our grant toog a business which is on its way-on deaths door and this will not help them. i think that it is impractical to think that we would review in detail all these 5 1 applications. that being said, i would suggest to

the commissioners, my fellow commissioners that this is not the day to approve these in mass. we are allowed to allow the office to make its recommendation to us and to either give a blanket approval or not approve certain selectively for whatever reason. i think it would be worthwhile to have a conversation about there may be specific ones commissioners may know about and more generally maybe look at some of the applications, maybe richard could recommend a few applications that are particularly interesting or are typical so we see what is the typical application look like in each area. i'm keen to know we have pot of money and peep apply for it, how are people looking at this and potentially you know, because we are only

going find out through experience, what are the consequences and unintended consequences of having a birch of money oto to give away so let's get a idea what type of response did we stimulate here. a quarter the requests are rent. that's a expense item. everybodys got that so sure, great i got x number of fte if i get $500 to offset great. that isn't a huge amount of money but not out of my pocket. i'm interested people making intestament-capital investments that may springboard them to a different place. tenant improvements is one, equipment and technology is interesting and interetc.ed to know did you see compelling cases where

someone said if i invest in this, this will take my business to a new place? that's my curiosity. >> i have a question about that. to talk about our role in this process. one is, you said that there is no kind of entitlement to the funds each year you have to reapply. just specific questions is that first come first serve next year? how does it work? >> we have to get them at the same time butt by september 30 and revee them all. ewoo have to know the total fte's before we do the grant amountism in this case we have a 5, but the 5 are not going change the fte count very much. normally we should have all of them in so we know the total fte and know the total allocation. >> you wait to the closing date

to collect all your applications. >> that is correct. >> the second is you know what your budget is and you know what the qualification requirements are. it should be legacy business, correct? when they come to the program they have access to these funds. other than knowing the number of fte's, what i would like to know just a reminder and since we have this our attorney here tonight, what are the discretion that you are exercising that would otherwise be our discretion in denying or otherwise granting diminishing or increasing and so i would like to know if it is mechanical process where you get the qualification and you cut the check, or you gonna have in addition say maybe you qualify but will not give it to

you because you don't use it pr the right reason. >> each is the maximum request, that is my initial observationismarve wn asked for fte times 500 which is the maximum. the only limitation is if you are over scribed which you are not, you are on budget as you anticipated that 40 percent $40 percent the million goes towards this versus 60 percent towardserant stabilization which we'll get to in a few minutes. and it kind of begs a interesting question, you give out the first grants and people go right on, there is $500 per fte. >> it is important because we want to reserve discretion but i would like to know if there is room for discretion and to discuss that. we have a qualification process and we have let's say applicants more than we can afford, correct? so we are going give them on a

perada basis or say you don't get it, you get it and get involved in that. >> to answer your question, it is more mechanical so if they meet all the things in the grant, the regulations and they show the proper fte verification they can get the grant. and number two, it is por ada. >> so there is no-just as a follow up. my understanding is i would like our attorney to confirm that, there isn't a room to say okay, we don't like your allocation. if they qualify and then we have togive it to them if we can afford it, otherwise we give a percentage, is that correct? >> that is my understanding too commissioner. the two places where the commission could exercise significant control over this process are-first at

the threshold stage where a business is applying for legacy business status, my understanding is that the commission has significant discretion to make or not make three findings that are necessary to qualify a business to be a legacy business. once a business is a legacy business, once you made those find squgz the business is on the legacy business registry, once a legacy business applies for one of these business assistance grants then the second thing that you can do to sort of channel this process or exercise control over this process is not on a case by case basis but in general you can make regulations and you have pretty broad authority

under the ordinance here of prop j to impose a wide range of additional requirements on what these grants can be used for or how people-what people or what legacy businesses need to do to qualify for it grants. it is my understanding that the commission could for example pass a regulation requiring that these grants not be used for rent and used for capital improvements. moving past that regulation stage, once a legacy business is passed those two choke points, once it on the registry and once it is complying with whatever sort of general regulations are out there, then my understanding is that the office of small business shall give that business a grant. it is a very mu calicle process.

>> that is a good clarification. what that means is let's take a example, we are on budget here and quee have not passed any regulations to date which precludeically knae of these requests because we rely on richard to have vetted them and have no reason to believe that vetting process is anything but perfect right now and so we grant these let's say. snow all of a sudden we are sitting here next year and $8,000 worth of request squz richard deemed all them to be qualified. we haven't passed any regulations precluding any form-same set of requirements, rent, whatever is on the list is still approved. we are then obligated because they pass the first two hurtles to distribute the funds-

>> one hurtle because we don't have regs. >> that is true but in the absence of regs they have gotten-they met the regs that exist, which are pretty wide open now. regardless, and so now those are $800 thousand in qualified requests, we are obligated to give them and to give them on a pro rata basis if our budget is still $400 thousand so everyone gets half of the requestsment we say selectively you get 100 and you get 25 and you get 30 percent so good. takes the burden off us. actually today there is very little discretion to say that we see something here that suggests we pass a regulation for the next round because we won't get through a reg yelltory and sit on these so long to put us through a reg

ulatory process so in the original contemplation the legislation these are all legitimate requests if ween it over the next year decide that didn't see like a good idea or there was a unintended consequences we didn't anticipate we could pass regulations to tweak this butprintly relying on richard and office of small business to have vetted them they are through the hurtle and gates and so we actually don't. i will retract my previous statement. it is probably in our best interest in facilitating the process to take action today because we are not going to reject any of them so should facilitate them. >> mr. president i submit to you before we consider regs which i think we may have to because you pointed out the

benefits of regs, we should give ourselves time to run the program, to find out the needs of the program and draft the regs accordingly. it looks like to me based on the attorneys response it is pretty mechanical and this commission will not be able to exercise any discretion, therefore, it may end up delegating and should delegate to the office of small business to properly and accurately run the program. >> and we have already effectively done that already. what is interesting is that good on you for getting through the door first. this is the easy year. everyone of these will get approved. >> only the first year. >> the first year and so then it will be sort of a as we come around to the-well, it is

interesting. the first two years because we wont really know the results until the end of the first year and may or may not learn anything the first year. it will be okay, what happened? it is the first 12 months recap and again we'll be leer a year from now and won't have runway to change unless something really weird happens. if something is really out of wake wack we can act quickly where the city attorney for a reg. the likelihood is this will signal for the next round, you better get your application in for legacy business because there is free money here, right? but, the catch 22 is it will be over scribed and so the free money per fte head will go down. interesting. and then also the amount-the allocation,

this 40 percent allocation if for some reason rent stabilization didn't live up to the 60 percent allocation maybe more money would come to this side. i suggest rent stabilization is probably over scribed so then the question we will have are should we allocating $400 thousand to this side or be more like $200 because the real-most impact is on rent stabilization. i don't know, just saying. we might decide to reallocate this budget from its 40/60 to some other allocation or decide rent stabilization doesn't help anybody and buy more toward these. >> i would like a clarification from our attorney. can we freely allocate budgets mubling moving one year from the other? >> [inaudible] >> i don't know if woo can, i want clarification.

>> i'm not sure. my understanding is what is the ordinance does is it creates two separate accounts. >> okay. >> the legacy business rent stabilization account and legacy business assistance account so the fact there are two separate accounts is in the ordinance. i'm not sure who determines and when what kind of appropriation is made to each account. >> richard do you know what the allocation is? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> i know that is a challenge because it is one pool of money in the budget and to separate that out we had to try to estimate how many businesses would be in the business asisance grant and how many landlords would apply for the rent stabilization grant. >> it is by chance that we landed on budget here? >> good estimates. >> it is possible that from a legal perspective the answer to this could vary from year to

year dependent how the board of supervisors. it sounds to me like the board of supervisors this year made a single million allocation to either or both account unless the commission and office of small business-lots of discretion how they allocate it between the accounts, you can imagine the board taking a different approach in different years. >> that makes sense because it is a annual allocation process the board of supervisors as well is it not? there is a baseline there for a certain amount of time and we wrote in i think we could ask for additional funds if we felt it was necessary and we can do that whether we ask for it or not, it is just a ask. >> is this a action item? >> it is. possibly action. >> possible action and the possible action is a motion to approve these as recommended by the office staff with our

without exception. if anybody were to point out a exception here i think that that would be somewhat-that would seem a little bit subjective at this point especially since we are on budget. >> i don't know how we can, if i may-set exceptions if the office of small business vetted approved and qualified these businesses, i don't know how individually as commissioners and ied like to know if there is, we can set exceptions. >> unless any one individual here had knowledge that was not for some reason available to the office staff because of for example, our profession. if we happen to be in the business of vetting other applications by these for financial

consideration then we could conceivebly know something. you could as a attorney be in the midst of-this is violation perhaps of your clieant privilege but i know this company is on the virj of bankruptcy. >> i don't know if that is at this late hour a ground for me to chime in and say this should not qualify. >> maybe not. >> i dont know. i don't want to go into complicated legal scenarios. >> i suggest this is all or nothing proposition. >> can i make a motion then? >> now, we have to have public comment. any other commissioners? >> taking into consideration our parameters of discretion and once these businesses have already passed um, being on the

registry, but it concerns me that the biggest fte number of employees are from non-profits and i don't know if a need basis if that would qualify them for this grant amount should we have knowledge of upcoming grants they might be also receiving and how that might impact you know, like maybe their need. >> we had lengthy discussions on even the appropriateness of including non-profits and it was pointed out non-profits are specifically included. >> i know that is the in the legislation but trying to understand- >> i think that also is ovstepping our bounds to look into the business development opportunity that any of these organizations have. to your point-i just don't think that one, we are not doing the

research and say what grants do you have in the wings because they may or may not get them and so we would be making a determination on information that is not for sure. we have to put probabilities on the possibility they get a loan or grant. any one of these organizations could be in the midst of a loan application or financing that would mitigate need for this so don't think it would be- >> we did ask a question on the grant as to what other business stabilization gants they are receiving so some businesses did respond to that and will continue to ask that question. >> okay, that was one of the- >> so we get a sense who might get grants. >> that's useful. >> bl president when we get to the point where we are drafting regs, we ought to take into account a lot of elements with the help of the city attorney

and come up with guidelines and maybe that would mitigate some of these differences in amounts. >> i think this is where richards expertise will come. nobody knows more about these applications than richard at this point so relying on him to kind of look at some of the common modes here and make recommendations to us going forward here is what i have seen, here are things that you may or my not want to consider as potential impetus for additional regs so i think we will ask you for that. >> we can do that. >> so, before we open up for public comment, this is a potential action item. my recommendation or observation is that this is a all or nothing sort of vote today if we choose to vote and so with

that preamble i open up to public comment now. if there are member thofz public that would like to comment on the itoom please come up and say your piece. >> i hadn't planned on coming up and saying anything but this is a fascinating conversation because in three years i'll be up for this. i say when you think about reduing the regs you make a minimum a business gets. so every business gets at least $500 and the more employees that maybe your scales from that point because concern as a small business is if i am a person with one employee on the list and do all this work to fill out a grant and it is prorated to 10 percent and haven't made minimum wage for filling out the grant and think that is inappropriatefelt >> that is a fantastic observation and appreciate that. richard is here to hear that. any other comments from the public? seeing none public

comment is closed. commissioners any further discussion or motion? >> move to approve. >> move to approve all of these grants as presented by office of small business staff. okay. >> second. >> we have a motion by commissioner yee riley and second by commissioner dooley. alright we will do roll call vote. >> yes. >> richard, is there a problem? >> 5 still in process would this motion take those into account that when we finalize those the amounts may be different than provided today? >> could we say they would get pursuant >> student the amount they qualify for? >> that would be great. >> what is still to be done with these 5? >> fte verification.

>> so, if we can amend the motion that subject to fte verification of the 5 that are in process that these too will be approved if the numbers are verified or they will be modified per the aquil fte which is likely to be plus or minus 1 or 2, right? >> yep, thank you. >> so, if commissioner yee riley would like that amendment. >> yes, so amended. >> i will just read this motion back. so, commissioner yee riley made a motion to approve all the grants as presented by staff with the exception of the 5 pending and those would be approved conditional upon fte verification or revised if such verification suggests a different amounts. >> right. >> okay. perfect.

>> seconded my commissioner dooley. >> alright. commissioner adams. yes. doola, yes. dwight, yes. ortiz-cartagena, absent. commissioner tour-sarkissian, yes. commissioner yee, riley, yes. commissioner zouzounis, yes. that motion is approved 6-0 with one absent. >> congratulation commissioners you just gave away 400, 500. richard thank you for your hard work getting here. this is no small task to vet all these applications so thank you and sure that you'll get 51 letters of appreciation . if you don't, well, they better not come back next year. awesome, thank you. alright. we are on to the next item. >> iletm number 5, review of

legacy business rent stabilization grant program final rules and regulations, and application. discussion and possible action item. our presenter is again, richard kurylo legacy business program manager office of small business. >> thank you. richard kurylo legies business program manager. again, i have a powerpoint presentation because i like them a lot. anything to take the camera off me makes me happy. item 5 is review oof the rent stabilization grant final rules and reg ulations and application. you have opkies copies the document and there are copies on the table for members the audience. matthew lee is here from the city attorneys office to help answer questions. a big thank you to mr. lee and regina dicken dreezy and tour-sarkissian for their exceptional work on rules and regulations for the grant.

>> so, are we going to do highlights, yes? >> yes. i will go over very quickly and then we can talk about details. in 2 d,-number 2 in the rules and regulations is general qualifications for landlords. landlords can not owe to the city, must be registered with the business of tax collector, landlords can not be subject of investigation or enforcement action by it office of labor standards enforcement. 2 d, not related by ownership directly or indirectly to legacy business. this is defined through 6 point developed by the sit aattorneysophilus. happy to go overthem in detail or come back to them after the presentation. >> i think the key here was

defining immediate family relationship. >> that is correct and also ownership by the business of the landord. >> city attorney fees confident and office feels confident we vagood definition of both those things? >> city attorney did a great job dming up with these points. vore confident with it. >> okay. >> number 3, indicated three categories of ineligible landlords. a, the landlord may not be a development agency, commission or entity of the city. b, the landlord may not be any other local state or federal government or related entity and c, the landlord may not have entered into lease agreement with the legacy business that previously owned the property that is subject of the lease agreement. >> no sale lease backs. >> lease back arrangement.

>> very good. >> number 4, covers qualified landlords. when a new landlord assumes the obligation of a lease that qualified the new landlord is eligible to be a qualified landlord if the lease terms and conditions are not negotiated and landlord satisfies all other requirements. you won't see that in the application but you will see that in the next application because there is a initial application and there is one that is a follow up and you will see it in the follow up application. number 5, the conditions per lease. 5 a is regarding options to renew. any number of yearss a leg as business has the option to renew the lease should count towards the lease providing the option to renew is at the businesses discretion. 5 b, lease must be signed before the lapd lord apply frz the grant. 5 c covers disclosure to all legies business that the city

does not guarantee it fumly funds the rent stable zainization grant. 5 d covers special contingency provision in the lease and this we spent a lot of time on. per the legislation there may be a provision in the lease make thg lease or any portion there of contingent upon the landlord receive agerant stabilization grant however thrks contingency is void if doesn't get a grant because owes in money to the city or does something to disqualify. also the landlord may provide a option to pay the landlord amont equal to the grant and finally thrks landlord must provide the business with 120 days noting of intept tent to exercise the contingency provision. 5 e covers additional application certification and numbers 6-8 cover authorize use the funds.

confudenchtality. regarding authorized use the fund the grant is awarded directly to the landlord. the landlord and business may agree to use the grant to offset the rent or for any other purpose and this is consistent with proposition j per the city attorneys office. >> alright. so again this is a fund and it has a budget this year of whatever is left over from what we just granted, so $599 thousand. and if we receive applications next year for a million worth of rent stabilization grants and they all qualify, will we have to give them all-because it is

annual renewal process. funded first. >> yes. >> to their previous funding level? >> um, you take the ones from the prior year and- >> roll them forward. >> they get first priority of the funds and it is pro rata it is for those. if there is enough money for those than i believe you pay those and pro rata- >> i think if i may and i can be corrected. first scenario, you have enough to pay everybody so you pay them all. >> that's correct. >> second scenario you have no new applications but less money, then you prorate. same people who qualified but you don't have the same budget, so if you have same amount of money and so you have to accommodate the first in fully

before you think about the new crop. >> understood. >> and for the new crop, new graduates so to speak, then you have to either prorate. in other words, the first year are going to be in the program fully as long as you have the money for them if the budget is cut then you prorate. if there are new people you have to accommodate them. >> you prorate the incremental funds >> this is in the legislation. >> that is all most exactly right commissioner. so, it is exactly right that if you have enough money to pay all applicants who receive the grant in the prior year then first you fully fund those prir

applicants. if you dont have enough money to fully fund those prior applicants it is exactly right that you prorate based on the square footage of each business. the only thing that is slightly different is, so suppose you fully fund all of your prior year applicants and now you can fund new applicants but you don't have enough money to fully fund everyone who would apply-who make a new application during that coming fiscal year, my understanding is that you take them first come first serve so you fully fund the first applicants to the excitants you can and if you run out of money the second gets no money. >> new applicants on first come first serve. >> it is different approach for the business side of things. it is waiting for the deadline

and then prorating, however, for the rent stabilization it is still a time-there is a time element, if you come first you get served first. >> exactly right. >> this will be on the website and will say applications can come in whereas the business grant come in at the same time. >> great. >> if we have money left over, then can we rom it over to the next year? >> i believe so. >> okay. >> or could we allocate it if we were over scribed in the other fund could we allocate to that in a given year? >> that's a good question. >> the idea being that we should spend all of available money on a annual basis. >> our attorney said if it is not specified by the board-but

if it is we can't. if it is not maybe we can. >> and if we haven't contemplated that we should. >> i think the answer would depend on whatever the conditions are of the boards appropriation for the year so we should look at those. >> that is snng to look into not for any further discussion, but in the event that we don't use all the rents stabilization money in a given year do we bank it or do we reallocate it to the extent that the business assistance grants are over subscribed and allocate it there. what discretion do we have to do those things? >> there is a lot of thoughts but know the first year it will not be a issue but we have given it a lot of thought. >> okay. good. >> i will skip to the

powerpoint presentation. there is a last page, 9-13 cover receipt affgrant payment, verification of information, sanctions for willful and material misrepresentation, appeal and change s to the regulations. movering to the application, the application is included for review. it covers all of the applicable items from the rules and regulation. i do want to point out we decided to request the applicants business account number so that is a proposed change to the application, so something we want to have- >> business account number? >> it is a business account number- >> registration number. >> it is help sfl to look up the businesses. >> you have to be a registered business but that is nice check and balance. >> i got it quickly from the

city website but it is nicer if they just provide it to us. potential motions. regarding potential motion or motions. i want to go over. item 5 is listed on discussion and possible action. intent of item 5 is approve the documents within any applicable modifications noted in the motions. intent of item 6 not to jump ahead but to compare is adopt a resolution regarding the rules and regulations on the application. so, you as i understand it may make one or two motions covering both of the documents together or the two documents separately. and for the motion regarding the application remember to include the modification which is the addition of the business account number. >> okay, item 5 is review the legacy business rent stabilization grant program final rule jz regs and applications. those documents we just reviewed. so we have done that. there was no action

required on item 5. item 6 is adopting said rules, regulations and application. ; correct? >> it is a resolution. >> but it also says grant application. okay, yes. >> in the application and the regs be voted on in one resolution? >> one resolution yes, but for item 5 which is this item you can do one motion or two separate motions. >> we should have called them together. >> we'll do it separately. >> item 5 is just approving them. >> approving the document. >> item 6 is resolution . two different things. >> that's correct. >> first we have public comment. any other comments among us? any members the public that would like to comment on this

item? you are in learning mode today, you sure you don't have nothing to say? you got three minutes come up. >> you gave great advice on the last one. >> the one thing i'll say here is my major concern with the way this is going down and you may run out of money and i know that as a small business i have been talk toog tie meeu landlord and try to get the 10 year laes for me. if she is going fiend out that she may or may not get that money depending on when she got in line, that makes this whole thing a lot less attractive and much less likely you get those 10 year long leases. i think it is something you need to think about that at least the rent stabilization part of this need to-i don't know the process is but i assume you go to the board of supervisor jz say to them, this is a pool of money that would be increasing

over the year jz it is not something you can-they can do it if they want to cut it, but it won't do the thing we are trying to do here, which is keep long term businesses in san francisco over the long run. that would be my one comment on this is this makes me very nervous in terms of only the first people in, the people who just happened to turn 30 or over this year and if you turn 30 next year you may not get anything. i don't think that is what the people voted for or thought they were voting for. >> good comment. thank you very much. any other member that would like to comment on the item? seeing none public comment is closed. do we have motion to approve the rules, regs and application? >> i motion to approve the rules, regs and application. >> as presented >> as presented. >> second? >> second. >> okay. motion to approve the rules and regulations as presented. the rules and

regulations for the rent stabilization grant program as presented. and the second is by commissioner kathleen dooley. okay. >> question, could we include in the motion-you doing rules regulations and app. could we include the addition of business account number. >> including the business account number. >> the motion is approve them with the amendment of adding the business account number on to the application. yes? >> correct. >> okay. roll call vote. adams, yes. dooley, yes. dwight, yes. ortiz-cartagena is absent. sorry about that. commissioner tour-sarkissian, yes. yee, riley, yes. zouzounis, yes. the motion is approved unanimously 6-o# one absent. >> on to item 6 which is

resolution to accept the rules, regulations and application as presented today. do you have comments? >> i koonot have a powerpoint presentation for this either. hala lieuia. commissioners any discussion before i open for public comment? no. any member thofz public that would like to comment on adoption of this as a resolution? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners do we have discussion or motion to accept rules regulations and application with the amendment to the application as previously noted in item fivel. >> i move. >> yee riley. >> second. >> commissioner dooley, second. alright. commissioner adams, yes. dooley, esi. dwight yes. ortiz-cartagena, absent cht tour-sarkissian, yes. yee riley, yes. zouzounis, yes.

the motion is approved unanimously 6 to 08, 1 absent. >> fantastic. alright. progress. next item, please. >> it is election day at the small business commission. >> must be why we had such a great turn out today. [laughter] >> to start off i am going to read the procedures from the rules of order. i have also brought copies for all of you in case you would like to have them in front of you. okay. here we go. i should probably read this into the record. should i read the procedures first so the agenda order makes more sense? >> whatever the ajendsa order

is. >> okay. i will read the procedures first and the commission shall vote to elect commissioner president and vice president under separate items. for each office the commission secretary calls for nominations. nominations require a second. nominees are provided a opportunity to make a statement. after nominee statements other commissioners will be provided a chance to comment. following nominee and commission statement the commission secretary will open public comment. commissioners shall vote in favor of one nomnay for each office during each round of voting. a commissioner initial vote in faiv of a candidate shall be recorded and may not be revoked or changed. the first nominee to receive 4 votes during a round of voting

shall be deemed elected. if no nominee receives 4 votes the process will be repeated. if no nominee receives 4 votes in favor after not less than 4 rounds may continue the election to the next regular meet frg the office of or offices for which inconclusive election is held. so-- >> okay. >> iletm 7, election of officers. small business commission president. in accordance are rules of order article 2 section 3 election must occur at the regular meeting of commission in january each year. that should say the second regular meeting in january. the president serves a term of one year and elected upon a vote of the commission. this is a action item. okay, so i would like to open it up for nominations, please.

for the president. >> okay. >> i like to nominate president mark dwight for another term. >> okay. >> it has to be seconded? >> yes, a second is required. >> i second. >> okay. any other nomination frz the office of president? >> i like to nominate stephen adams. >> is there a second? alright. without a second that nomination cannot be considered. any other nomination frz the office of president? okay. then

nominations are closed, so we have one nominee that may be considered because of the second. nominees are provided a opportunity to make a statement, so commissioner dwight, would you like to make a statement? >> i would be honored to continue as president. >> alright. commissioners would you like to have discussion on this nomination? >> i just like to say um, that president dwight has taken this commission to a level the next level that what it was intended to be and we are taking it foothe next level and with his leadership, we are there and it is all of us on this dies if you have been on a while, kathleen and irene has, we are lot more respected i think than we were 10 years ago because we are more active and we do more

and a lot has to do with not only all our leaderships but it is the leadership mark pushes us in thinking differently so i appreciate that. >> thank you. >> commissioner comments? okay, i like to open it up for public comment please. any members of the public that would like to comment? public comment is closed. i will now conduct a roll call vote on the nomination. commissioner adams, yes. commissioner dooley, yes. commissioner dwight, yes. commissioner ortiz-cartagena is absent. commissioner tour-sarkissian, yes. commissioner yee riley, yes. commissioner zouzounis, yes. 6-0 with one absent commissioner dwight will serve

in the coming year. >> thank you very much. appreciate your support. next item. >> we will do the whole thing again for vice president. so, but first i should read this into the record. item number 8, election och officers. small business commission vise president. in accordance with rules of order article 2 section 3 election of vice president occur in january each year. the vice president serves a term of one year and elected upon a vote of the commission. action item. okay, i would like to open up for nominations for vice president. >> i nominate steve adams. >> commissioner yee riley nominated steve adams. is there a second? >> i second. >> commissioner tour-sarkissian seconded. any other nominations for office of the vice president? alright.

seeing none, nominations are closed. so we have one nominee who is seconded and commissioner adams would you like to make a statement? >> i would be honored to serve as your vice president for one more year. >> commissioners would you like to comment? or have discussion? >> i would like to say, commend commissioner adams for his long standing commitment to this commission. it is work and people don't really think about what it takes for all of us to come to these meetings, participate and to be as engaged in the public in particular as commissioner adams is. he goes to lots of events, he is very engaged. i am always amazed by how many people he knows out and about and especially as we had our

legacy businesses not sure there is one he didn't know personally so great to have people on the commission who know the business owners and know the districts the way that commissioner adams does so i think-and it makes him an effective leader here on the commission. >> i personally admire commissioner adams for involvement in the san francisco community. every time i come i learn from him, the information he gives about the neighborhoods and meetings he attend, so i think he plays a essential role on this commission and i would like to see him as the vice president of this commission. >> thank you. >> i like to add that in addition to his commitment and long standing of serving on the

commission, he is out there everywhere. everybody knows him and he knows everybody and i think only absent once all these years. >> only once. >> congraltulations. >> probably in hawaii. >> i was. >> i just want to say after the conclusion of my first year on the commission, i want to say thanks vice president adam frz showing me the ropes in the beginning and i'll extend that to president twite, i learned lot from you guys so thank you. >> any other commissioner comments? alright, i would like to epien open up to public comment. any members of the public who would like to comment for steve adams for vise president? seeing none public comment is closed. i will conduct another role call vote for the nomination. adams, yes. dwight, yes.

sorry, commissioner dooley, yes. dwight, yes. ortiz-cartagena is absent. commissioner tour-sarkissian, yes. yee riley, yes. zouzounis, yes. by vote of 6-0 with one absent stephen adams is aprointed to vice president. >> congratulations. [applause] >> next item. >> moving to item number 9, approval of meeting minutes and this is the january 9, 2017 draft regular meeting minutes and action item, and motion? >> motion to approve. >> commissioner adams motions. >> i second. >> we may need public comment first. first off, any commissioners have comments about the minutes as presented? any members of the public like to comment on item number 9 approval of our meeting minutes

from last session january 9? seeing none public comment is closed. motion? >> i motion. >> approve the minutes as presented. >> i second. >> thank you, mr. president for catching that. we have a motion by commissioner adams and second by commissioner yee riley. all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? that motion passes 6-01 absent. #50i89m 10, commissioner report. allows president rks vice president and commissioner and commissioner tooz >> i don't have any knowledge to report other than beer week in dogpatch. we have 3 brewers doing a collaboration brew so that is exciting t. is a big deal for the city to host beer

week and just as a side note, if you are familiar with a brewery that does a beer called plenty the younger or something like that in sonoma i think it is, that single thing and the event every year to go and try that beer has brought i think well overa million in additional revenue that community. the opportunity for these sort of experienceal events whether it be arounds food which by the way it is rist restaurants week get a deal on a meal at participating restaurant the ggra sponsors, but likewise beer week and other things are the modern day attractions to our neighborhoods and can have very significant impacts on local revenue and therefore success of our small businesses as well

as implication for tax revenue and things like that. anyway- >> i will go. >> you heard it here, beer week is coming up. i think the more of the things we can support and promote, the better because it is kind of the one thing that really adds vitality not only to our neighborhoods but the specific industries >> the small craft breweries are small businesses. >> absolutely. that's all i got. commissioners any other- >> i am now representing the castro merchants on the council of district merchants. i went to my first meeting last week and president dwight was there and i had never been to one of those and what a eye opener. >> i'm representing the new dogpatch business association at council district merchants, so commissioner adams and i are

two new seats at the table for cdma. and i will say that cdma, i have said has the potential to really be the chamber of comperse for small business in san francisco. i have been on the board of the chamber of commerce on and off for the laest 10 year jz i took a break to found sf made be its chairman for two years but after concluding i went back to chamber of commerce. cameber of commerce has done great thing tooz support small business but the chamber of commerce is not the home of small business in san francisco and cdma is a billbit of a misnomer because it says merchants but it represents all small business in san francisco and especially as-we are getting more and more small businesses as we know a uber driver is a small business. a individual consultant is a small business and this gig

economy is actually causing a explosion in small businesses as they must be registered with the city and so i think that the cdma as the sort of place where merchants and now more small businesses come to talk about doing business in san francisco, that the cdma has to the opportunity to take a leadership role for small business in general so i think commissioner adams and i both acknowledge that opportunity for cdma and are there at the table to try to move cdma to the next level and next generation in support of all small businesses in san francisco. any other commissioner updates? >> i attended the district 3 mta summit and then i was followed up with that and now part of the mta working group

which will meet monthly. >> good. >> fantastic. >> outreach and all the things that need to be addressed. >> lack there of. any other commissioner reports? alright. we have public comment on the commissioner reports as presented this evening? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item. >> iletm 11, new business allows commissioners to introduce new agenda items for future consideration. >> i would like to based on our public comment earlier today i would like to recommend the office staff to do a little research for us about this ordinance. the ordinance for point of sale registration and inspection. first off, to determine how much of it is san francisco specific and to what degree is this also a california state and/or federal

regulation, i don't know the answer, i just put it out there. sometimes we are simply acting in response to state and federal regulations, so it would be nice to know to what extent that is the case. if be are on our own on this one, i think it would be worthwhile to consider whether this regulation is a sustainable regulation, whether it is something that we should take as a action to find a sponsor at the board of supervisor s to perhaps change it in a way that is more favorable to smalt business in san francisco. >> i would agree with that one. >> okay, do we-the other new business item i proposed last time and want to keep on the radar screen is a presentation about the small business registration for non-profits of all kinds because i suspect there is knowledge that we

should get out to the public about how to register your non-profit in the city of san francisco including business associations, neighborhood associations and non-profits in general. >> we were going to talk about too and want to stay on top of this, kathleen you brought about planning come in and talking about the changes in the neighborhoods regarding formula retail. >> the first hearing is the third of next month. i try today contact the merchant associations and contacted council district merchants about it, so you know, there are major problems with it, but >> yes, that came up at the council district merchant meeting, your presentation and steve cornell said we need to do something and agree. i think they are way moving way too quick on this.

>> i suggest the merchant association stand up and say slow down on this because there are problems that will have a substantial impact on >> the neighborhood corridors, yes. >> and spent many many many many months going over this with the planning department and at this point i'm-their attitude is he who has gone to them and complained will have a adjustment only for their mcd, so- >> case by case basis. the squeaky wheel gets the grease. >> yeah. the mcd i tend to represent we were able to get a lot of things straightened out. nobody one stepped up to say they had new problems. >> richard was clueless at castro merchants on this. >> it is a big deal.

>> i agree, so- >> there is a lot of loop holes and they are unintentional loop holes but when you remove a entire section of the planning code and replace it without looking at how therefore the references and other parts the planning code relate to what you are removing versus what you are adding >> right, >> there are big differences and those kind of things can cause unintended consequences and i clearly see them coming our way. i don't really know what to do at- >> maybe at the next meeting get someone from planning to come and talk to us about this. >> their position is their minor and there is no need to go over it. >> would it be a benefit to publish the changes that you were able to lobby for in your mcd to the other merchant-

>> i did send that out via council district merchants. >> minimally they can lobby for the changes you got. >> they should. in the north beach mcd we asked and received additional food category which i think is one everyone should have now, which is you know, the special food manufacturer that has retail. that should not be considered a limited restaurant. that would have a lower bar in a good way, which would be that type of business is generally very welcome. >> absolutely. >> and so we insisted having that added to the north beach. >> will that include businesses like confection tion makers and >> absolutely. we should make because we have them in my district. >> this would just be to fill a

hole that we have right now and in my opinion it is increasing area of small business folks that bake the gred bread, sell whole sale and have a counter and sell retail. >> case in point, neighbor bake house in my neighborhood, a huge success started out whole sale{abandoned whole sale because they retail business is so strong and anyone, myself included as a manufacturer prefers direct to consumer retail because you don't go through a middle man to sell whole sale so that is proof positive a business we think of as a whole sale business becomes retail is far more sustainable. the number of employees they hire, they have out grown their space and become a institution in the neighborhood in 3 ourfore short years and should encourage

those type of businesses. >> i would argue that it is a lower impact business than lumping everything in the world under limited restaurants. >> i agree. >> absolutely. >> completely agree. >> i would like to request the commission just to send a letter to planning and say, these are the issues, i outlined them and can send them to you. there is also problematic things with formula retail, which is article 7 has a big list of what is considered formula retail and then that's is erased and the new change has half of what was under there. once again, we re quested can you add the previous on to it, they are not like they have become suddenly non formula retail possible

businesses. that's again something that is unintended consequences of not-they added- >> that very list is a-minded numerous times on the basis of hard work to get it amended and this whole sale revised it as part of a general revision seems like rewriting law without go through the proper channels. >> may i suggest commissioner dooleys comments be put in writing and sent to us so we can efficiently communicated. >> let's get those comments and maybe have staff prepare a letter to be approved by us pending our review of those changes, but i think delivering a letter from the commission from the small business commission to the planning commission alerting them of our concerns in these very specific

areas including but not limited to the following list. >> it is a 350 page document. i myself have looked all through 350 pages numerous times but i have to admit there are some things in different mcd's that i am might not catch and that is why i have been trying to urge the mcd to take a look. look at yours and see if there is something there. this is the time to do it. happy to snd that. >> thank you, please do. alright. great. >> the guidance is prepare a or schedule a presentation from the planning department at the next meeting subject to their availability as well as start preparing a letter from staff on the basis of commissioner dooley's notes. >> i say we need to send a letter prior to the first

hearing at the planning commission which will be february 3. >> and so just to get the process down, they will have a hearing, that hearing is that a hearing to approve it in its entirety or the first hear toog hear what people have to say about it? don't know. >> i'm not sure. the thing is these types of things are so-it is very easy and i have seen this before in other issues where the person comes up from the staff and says it is nothing. >> february 3? >> that thursday. >> maybe this is call to cdma to get represented from each district. >> you were at the- >> i just want to chime in here for a second. all you are doing now my understanding is you are putting new business on the agenda for a future meeting of the small business

commission. >> we can't take action on anything. >> right. >> i'm not- >> can we ask the office of small business to give us materials for the next meeting to make decisions, correct? >> that is- >> we are not taking action, we are asking the tools to make a decision at the next meeting. >> that sound right to me. >> great. and maybe just simply making a observation that concerned parties would be advised to show up at the planning commission meeting not knowing whether the outcome of that meeting is to accept these new rules and regs as written or whether there is discussion still to be had. >> as far as i understand it, you are-any member the commission could also attend as

a member of the public and give public comment. >> we have presence of two neighborhood associations here on the panel. >> if you are done with the new business i like to- >> please. >> about the cannabis policies in the city and county of san francisco. january 11 we got from the office of small business and specific a number of documents including but not limited to the state regulation task force report and just to sum up-we had prior to that a presentation from two prominent experts in our state, mr. cur shid and tumar who made presentation and got a summary the notes which was [inaudible] work and i appreciated that.

it looks like 2017 will be the launching year for setting these rules in our county and it seems appropriate-a lot of agencies will be involved and regs will come out and it will effect small business and i find it appropriate mr. president that the office of small business be involved in that process and specifically also the commission in a sense we should have-be involved in the process because these regs will effect small business come 2018, so i strongly recommend to my fellow commissioners that we invite the office of small business to bring us experts. people working on these regs so we can bring our contributions

to the shaping of these regs. >> we also have someone sitting on that task force from the office of small business. i think we do or at least regina- >> i have to report to you that- >> there is no one from the office sitting. there is a representative a small business owner and there is a person representing business interest but we dopet have staff on there. >> so no staff. >> i was surprised and maybe that is another issue beyond my new business discussion that the office of small business nor the commission is represented on the task force. the task force is behind this and need only 3 hours a mupth. what i'm talking about is to be aprized of the shaping and

isn't that a unusual opportunity for our commission to be part of that. >> okay. >> so my proposal for small business is first that the commission be involved in the shaping of these and then that we have regularly experts who would kind of aprize us of what is going on in the city so we can chime in and give our contribution. >> okay. i would propose that those presentations be well thought out in advance and very specific in their analysis and recommendation to us. and not a general overview of the situation. okay. any other-so, we should get ahead

of this cannabis legislation as it effects the city and our small business for sure. alright. any other new business suggestions? alrightfelt any public comment on our new business discussion? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have-on to item 12. >> item number 12. before we do item number 12 s frks fgovtv could you show our slide? >> as is our custom we end the meeting each small business commission meelting weminder the office of small business is the only place to start your new business in san francisco and the best place to get answers to your questions about doing business in san francisco. the office of small business should be your first stop quh you vaquestion about what to do next. you can find us online or in person at city

hall best of all all services are free of charge. the small business commission is the forum to voice opinion squz concerns about policies that efecktd the economic vitality of small businesses in san francisco. if you need assistance with small business matters, start here at the office of small business. thank you. >> okay, item 12 is adjournment. action item. all in favor. >> there is a motion. motion to adjourn. >> i move. >> did we do public comment on- >> we did public comment on- >> sorry, on the new business. okay. the motion is from commissioner yee riley to adjourn the meeting. second. >> i second. >> commissioner adams. all in favor. >> aye. >> opposed? meeting is adjourned at 432 p.m. >> alright. fantastic.

[meeting adjourned].

>> working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrate and dynamic city on sfroert of the art and social change we've been on the edge after all we're at the meeting of land and sea world-class style it is the burn of blew jeans where the rock holds court over the harbor the city's information technology xoflz work on the rulers project for free wifi and developing projects and insuring

patient state of at san francisco general hospital our it professionals make guilty or innocent available and support the house/senate regional wear-out system your our employees joy excessive salaries but working for the city and county of san francisco give us employees the unities to contribute their ideas and energy and commitment to shape the city's future but for considering a career with the considering a career with the city and county of san francisco

announcer: b dreams and good grades aren't enough to get into college. there are actual steps you need to take. finding someone who can help is the first and most important. for the next steps, go to knowhow2go.org. >> all right good morning, ladies and gentlemen, it is good to see you this morning, my name is malia cohen you have joined us on the regular meeting of the budget and finance committee, and i am the chair of which knit i committee and to my right is supervisor norman yee and katy tang and the clerk is linda wong and i would like