could have acted on in pieces along the way. but didn't. i mean 1.127 land use matters, originally introduced in 2008. and subsequently introduced a year ago. last night, i actually got an e-mail from a member of the public with the staff recommendations. i was taken a back that the members and the supervisors and the members of the finance committee that we will grapple with it today did not get the e-mail. i am not -- i will to say those things. i want to thank the supervisor for duplicating the file. i think that shows that there is -- it is a message that we are willing to go both ways. the language is something that i have been interested in now literally for a decade. i introduced that in 2008 toward

the end of my first go around on the board of supervisors. i am looking for that harmony and maybe the way to do it is to have that joint meeting. i would like to introduce an amendment to delete the operative date. it means it would be effective 30 days after the mayor's signature. and i want to signal the commission that the board can approve the changes and vote them effective long before the january 1st, 2019, date that is in the legislation before the board. i think this is necessary, prudent and i will work with staff to ensure that they have what they need to implement the changes in advance of the november election. and to the extent in advance of the final lap in the final june

election. on page of line 1. i have in section 4, and i have given that to my colleagues. the city attorney has a copy of that and the clerk. section 3.209 subsection b. this is the repeated recusals. section -- page 31. line 23 through 32. i would delete this section. in my reading of this, i still think the section poses a problem. you have spoken to the fact -- the board supervisor should be taken out. as part of the community, i don't mind being regulated. but the 2 weeks ago, under state law, any of us are presumed as a matter of law to have a conflict if there is an appeal within a thousand feet of real property that we own. in my case last year in 2017,

this never happened to me in the years i served on the board until last year, lo and behold by chance, there were two land appeals in 1,000 feet of my property. i didn't know what to do. i talked to the city attorney and recused myself of the board. had there been a third, my neighbours are upset i was not able to actually vote. i would recuse myself. i hear you about the broad nature of the jack of all trades and expert at none. i hear you. and it does make sense in the commission context. in my office, discussion with the ethics commission staff, i think the responses have been in adequate as to how the commission intends to calculate the one percent threshold in subsection 2. and more critically, i don't know understand why there is a penalty for taking the proper

step to recuse itself. that is a disincentive to recusal. a couple of weeks ago, isn't a recusal a good thing. we want people to do the right thing and recuse themselves. the bottom line is that absent clear objective rules when the board should recuse himself for a conflict of interest, we cannot allow the member to decide for themselves whether they should make the call. i am not satisfied with the explanation i received from staff that, you know, what is good for los angeles is good for san francisco. i am certainly open to that. lastly, the staff has new recommendations for the commission deliberation tomorrow. i would like to introduce formally my major donor

disclosure amendments. as my colleagues on the committee know, i introduced stand alone ordinance this tuesday that would require major donors to disclose additional information regarding business interests in san francisco. we cannot ban the behaviour, unfortunately because political mediators -- before the supreme court. the people of san francisco deserve to know why the individuals and the entities who are dumping millions of dollars into the local political economy are doing so. i think that is good public policy. that should be implemented as quickly as possible. and i am so far impressed by the willingness of my colleagues to move this forward expeditiously. i want to thank the board president for the willingness to waive the 30 day rule. i want the ethics commission to

waive is properly and send it to the board of supervisors. i distribute a new section, 1.158. major donors financial disclosure that begins at line -- page 20, line 4 and extends to page 22, line 2. and at page 22, line 2 -- page 23, line 11. a number of members that require real-time disclosure and audio and video requirements as to who the contributors are no the advisors. this is commonplace in other jurisdictions. lastly at page 24 lines 1 through 8. clarifying that the advertizers, the top three contributors must be disclosed. as i am thinking about it, and maybe i can hear from colleagues with regard to the recusal, maybe what staff is saying works for the panel, i might hold on

to my notion of deleting the recusal. one possibility is we can delete the recusal in one of the copies and not in the others. we are showing the commissioner willingness to hear from them and try to come up with something to pass quickly. delete it in one maybe, and not the others, the amendments are on the table. >> any comments? refer to public comment. are there members of the public that wish to speak to the item? >> super san francisco human services network.

i want to comment today. on content of the legislation. i want to express our deep appreciation to the board of supervisors for taking a thorough look at at this legislation that is deeply flawed and many of your proposed amendments to address some of the serious concerns. we have not seen a written version of all the amendments that are on the table. and there is also a new version for the ethics commission. there was a new version on tuesday and then another version on wednesday. that is what they are discussing for putting on the ballot for friday. we have not really had time to read what they are proposing.

we do appreciate and support and urge everybody to accept this collaborative process where everybody can work together to look at what is on the table. there is no reason whatsoever to rush to the ballot in june. the supervisor noted, there is no reason to wait for a january date. it can take effect earlier. also once it goes on the ballot, there is no opportunity to tinker with little thinks when we find out in the real world that does not work. there are unintended consequences. we live in a city with a spirit of collaboration and stakeholder engagement and public participation in the process. there is a reason why we have a high threshold before the members of the ethics

commission. >> thank you very much. the next speaker. >> good morning. we have 180 members who are part of our association. i just want to appreciate the thoughtfulness brought to the process. we are encouraged by the spirit by the board of supervisors and the members and staff of the ethics commission and are encouraged on the legislation. as noted by the folks, this is important legislation and to get it right. to ensure that not only public trust is felt by institutions and unintended consequences that will harm the san francisco residence or hinder the ability

for philanthropy to address the complex issues affecting the city. we hope that the commission and the board will continue to work together. we are in support of the supervisor suggesting to hold joint hearings so the legislation can move forward actively and effectively. working together to get it right. thank you. >> good morning. i am on the california council for alliance for justice. a national association of non-profits and we focus in large part on helping other non-profits and provide better voices to advocacy. from that perspective, i would like to thank the board for its very thoughtful and meticulous work on the legislation. i would like to thank ethics

staff for clearly having taken into account some of the things that we along with the non-profit partners have been stressing throughout the conversation. on that note, i will say that i do agree with the supervisor thoughts about the repeated recusals provision that i share. some of the concerns that not only in state law rather forceful requiring recusal, including the political reform act and the section 1090 of the government code. this is the area of expertise. and serving on the commission allows them to further serve their communities by bringing that expertise to the board.

i would like to emphasize that we really support a lot of the changes that we have seen made to the legislation. particularly being in a financial -- rather than vague terms such as favours. and also tieing the influence to voter official action. on the matter of recusal... >> thank you very much. >> i am with the council of community housing organizations. i want to say thank you for the process. i think it is moving the legislation forward in a good way. i have not read the new amendments. i think it sounds like they are moving in the right direction. we encourage you to continue to work collaboratively with ethics on creating legislation that

works well. i think this is the way to do it. working down a legislative pathway. rather than a ballot measure. again, thank you for all the work that you are doing on this. >> thank you. >> thank you. issues to members of the committee for consideration. we are appreciative of the fact that you are taking time to add additional things. to tell you what they are, we do think that the land use issue needs to move forward now. this is the time when land use decisions are being made. we think that is important to happen now. we think that the bundling provisions should include contractors, somehow -- making contributions, they left out

bundling. and the thought of the ethics commissioner, [no audio] fundraiser for people who are going to make decisions. the answer is yes, you can. unless you change that. we think that influencing the provision about influencing decisions should not be limited to financial. if you take a look at the lobby page that is downloaded in excel and look at the government decisions, you will find that a very significant of lobbying in city hall. and what kind of policies will take place. with this, that and the other. it is all in financial interest that take place. i think that the language that was there before about attempting to influence legislative or administrative decisions can be modified.

the commissioners making contributions is too narrow. there is places where there is no commission for hundreds of millions of dollars. the language means that you cannot contribute to [indiscernible] >> thank you very much. >> the -- i'm an officer of the ethics commission. i have been onboard of non-profits for 20 years. i will bring my experience forward. i have two process questions outside specific the legislation. first, we don't know whether the

supervisor has considered technical issues, we don't know if there is the two supervisors voting or not. that is something that the public ought to know who can vote or not. because you will have a split vote if it is two people. i want to go back to some of what we have been saying from our end of advocacy. one of the ethics commissioner voted against it because he thought it was not strong enough. there was no private action. if you want to look at comparability and have across the board -- which has been around for decades and not include it in here, that there is no [indiscernible] i bring to mind the scenario of a few years ago, where a real estate professional on a building

inspection commission handled [indiscernible] i am suggesting for clarification. for non-profit people, there were open communities. they need better training by the ethics of the non-profits this will not cause the sky to fall. this will not cause -- it will not chill the silence. >> thank you. >> any other questions? the comments are now closed. colleagues, discussion. yes, supervisor? >> i just wanted -- and i will need help from the supervisor and maybe from the deputy city attorney, but i was kind of recalling the cannabis

conversation that we had two different files. it is slightly different, because we had the discussion with the ethics commission. i was thinking that perhaps one duplicate file could incorporate all of the recommendations because there has been no action by the ethics commission that have been made by ethic commission staff. 1.1.27 would be stricken, all of the recusal provisions that staff discuss would be all in one file. the other file would have the amendments made by supervisor tang and myself. i forget what -- you have a nice word for what we call the two files. clean file and the amended file or something like this. it is two amended files. one would take the staff recommendation. the other would include all of our amendments.

>> and the cannabis context we call them clean and dirty. (please stand by) and we could

actually then work out the remaining details. let's see, all 16 of us. >> supervisor tang: thank you. so i think it's fine to do the bulky and clean version. i want to qualify that the land use amendment that i would like to propose then, it would be in the bulky version where the land use piece is removed and then the clean version where the land use stays. >> maybe in this context we should use different terms. because there is the ethics version which where you would be removing the land use piece, because the ethics staff is recommending removal of section 1.127. maybe call it the ethics version and the committee vrgs.

the committee version you would keep 1.127 and make all the amendments that you and supervisor peskin are proposing. >> supervisor tang: thank you. and then i also wanted to ask, attorney givener, is this technical, i would think it's not technical. >> yeah, both sets of amendments and nearly every piece of each of those amendments is substantive. as i mentioned earlier, not only does this committee need to act on the amendments again, but the ethics commission would need to act. so the only action you could take after making these amendments is to continue the item. >> so i see supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: just a quick question with regard to the amendments. i want to make sure, acting chair, are all the amendments

that you discussed and supervisor tang, are they in this document? or were there additional amendments made that are not in the document? >> i believe they're all in the document, but the three that i made were to the operative date to repeated recuesals and the addition of 1.158, major donors and then supervisor tang made a series of additional amendments. i believe they're all loaded. i just want to make sure we have everything in writing. >> yes, we've got two different documents. one that supervisor tang has prepared and one that supervisor peskin has prepared. and everything that was mentioned by the two supervisors has been drafted. my office is going to have to

put those two puzzle pieces together, but they will fit. >> ok. then with regard to the amendments put forth by the ethics commission staff, are those before us today? i know they're out there, but if we're talking about adopting them, i don't think they're before the body in terms of -- i mean, they're not in front of us physically at this time? >> you could adopt those amendments. it's within your authority. the document that the ethics commission staff prepared is on the ethics commission's website as attachment to the agenda. i have it up, i could e-mail it to you, but my office doesn't have hard copies of it. >> if i may, madame chair, for the purpose of continuing this conversation inso far as it does exist on the welcome back site

and it's a message to the ethics commission we are playing ball and have a bunch o balls in and the air and we're not taking action today. this is forwarded by the clerk to ethics and both items will be continued to the call of the chair. there is obviously merging that has to be done. eventually, it would appear again in committee and again at the full board. >> supervisor stefani: that's right. >> is there a motion on the item? >> if i could just reiterate. i've duplicated the file which -- any single member of the committee can duplicate the file and you can amend each one. >> i would love if it a member was willing to duplicate the file, have the committee version file and ethics commit file as discussed by members and nonmembers of the committee. >> yeah, so i would like to make a motion to duplicate the file

and adopt the amendments put forward by supervisor peskin and supervisor tang today and also -- that's my first motion. >> supervisor fewer: i would like to make a motion to continue this item to the next committee meeting. right. >> supervisor stefani: ok. >> supervisor fewer: does that motion cover what we discussed. >> you still have to have the duplicated file that contains ethics. >> shall we vote on this motion and we can make another motion to continue the ethics version to the call of the chair as well? >> yeah, i recommend two motions, one on the ethics verse and one on the committee version. >> i understand that we have a motion before us to duplicate the file to accept the amendments that have been presented before us and to

continue this meeting, this item, to the call of the chair. is that correct? yeah. >> it's my understanding that the matter has been duplicated. one of the duplicated files will include the ethics commission amendments and the other will include the committee's amendments. and both items are to be continued to the call of the chair. my understanding. >> supervisor fewer: yeah. >> supervisor stefani: we don't need another motion. >> supervisor fewer: then, i don't think this requires a second. and can we take this without objection? ok. >> i just have one question for the clerk, can we ensure that the entire ethics agenda item 4 packet including the staff recommendations and our amendments is included in the board legislative file going forward? >> clerk: yes, i will include it. do you want me to include it in

both versions? >> yes, both versions. >> clerk: i will retrieve that in place it into the file. >> supervisor fewer: we can take that without objection. >> clerk: the matters were duplicated, amended and continued to the call of the chair. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. mr. clerk, any items before us today? >> clerk: completes the agenda for today. >> supervisor fewer: there is no further business before the committee, the meeting is now adjourned. thank you very much.

>> let me begin by saying good afternoon to everyone. i am mohammed nuru, the director of public works. i want to thank everyone for joining us today to celebrate this construction milestone of station number five. it brings me great joy to honor the progress made on this tremendous project located here in the west end neighborhood. this will deliver a crucial piece of city infrastructure to thousands of nearby businesses, residents and visitors. our agency, public works, is

proud to have designed a modern fire station that is expected to exceed national accreditation standards and serve the essential needs of our first responders. it may not look like it yet, in less than a year's time, a seismically sound fire station will be standing in this very place. it is true public works fashion, the project team has been working hard to ensure this facility will be delivered in timely and fiscally responsible manner. on time and on budget. with that said, it's important that i think the entire public works staff, our project team led by our city architect, project managers and i want to

thank all the staff from public works who worked on this project. but most importantly i want to thank our construction partner in this, alton construction, leading the project and getting it this far. you'll hear from a lot of speakers about the station itself. it will be the most resillent station of all the fire stations here in san francisco because it is a very well designed facility and will meet all the standards as i said earlier. we have quite a number of speakers. i'll start by introducing the president of the board of supervisors and supervisor of the district london breed. please welcome her. (applause) >> good afternoon everybody. thank you all so much for being here today. you know, i have a special love for this fire station because i grew up just a couple of blocks

from here. every year, every time i look at this fire station, all i can think about when i was a kid is toys. this is where i actually came on the door that was located on turk street, that's where we went to pick up our toys during the christmas holiday because of the firefighters toy program. and so i know tom o'connor who is the president of local 798 is here, thank you for continuing that program and your leadership in this city. you know, there's another reason i love this place is because many of the men and women behind me, this is where they work every single day and my aunt, who was mentally disabled, she would come here all the time. sometimes she would be in a good mood and compliment the guys especially and talk about how handsome they were, but sometimes she had difficult times and the people at station five treated her like family, they took care of her, and i

know who is our deputy chief was a captain here during that time, they love michel so very much and i want to thank you for taking care of my aunt and being there for her. this is really a family, and the folks here, they save lives every single day and take care of this community and love this community. so this station is really not just a gift to our city, it's to demonstrate to the men and women of this department, we want to make sure they have a great station, a station that works for them. a station that is state of the art so they can do the job they're doing for our citizens and city and county of san francisco. i want to say thank you to all the folks working on this, to alton for their work on the construction project, moving on time and on budget thus far. and thank you mohammed nuru for

leading construction projects all over the city, i know they're not always on time and budget but that's okay, we'll get to that another day. and our chief will be saying a few words later and our commissioners. this station is going to be a jewel in the city, it's the station we deserve for our residents. i look forward to being here and cutting the ribbon when we open in one year. take care. (applause) >> thank you supervisor breed. and also i have to say from the bottom of my heart, the last few weeks have been very difficult for all of us. london woke up in the middle of the night and took over the city and really did an excellent job. let's give her a hand for that. (applause) now i want to introduce our partner who has worked with us from the beginning all over our

city, whether it's trying to work on systems, whether it's remodelling fire stations or building new fire stations, leading the effort of going through the whole effort to make sure we have resillant structures and the correct tools that the fire department needs to do its job, welcome chief hayes-white. >> good afternoon everyone. the job is looking great. first and foremost, i want to acknowledge four of our five fire commissioners that are here. the fire commission is under the direction of president cleveland. thank you for your support every step of the way. (applause) as director nuru eluded to, there's been a lot of change and

difficulty in the past several weeks and i would like to also acknowledge the great vision and support always of public safety that mayor ed lee had, if not for mayor lee we would most likely not be standing here. i want to acknowledge mayor lee and certainly president breed, this is near and dear to her heart. this is a vital part of this neighborhood and community. we are all very excited about it. so thank you president breed for being here. and certainly it is a partnership. i have a lot of respect and admiration to my colleague, director of public works, there's a phenomenal team, all those standing here. thank you for what you do. and i want to acknowledge tom

o'connor, vigilant making sure we have healthy safe work places and the men and women standing behind me, members of this very station looking forward -- many drive by each day to look at the progress of the station. hat's off to alton construction. these are the men and women who will be working out of the station, led by the assistant chief here at this division house. we only have two division houses in the city, one at 19th and the other right here. it's a vital part of our operation. assistant chief is with us and the members assigned to engine five, truck five and battalion five, who by the way are still at work, reassigned to local stations. i just wanted to say thank you, great job and we look forward to cutting the ribbon as president breed said. appreciate it. (applause)

>> we all know no project happens without the partnership of the actual contractor. so we're going to ask the contractor from alton construction to come up and say a few words. i will tell you, i have made quite a number of visits to the site during constructions and some of the beams and bolts are the largest and strongest i have seen in construction. being built, i know this is not going anywhere. welcome. come say a few words. (applause) >> they don't usually let us talk at these things. rolling the dice with that one. i'm the vice president of operations for alton construction. we are the general contractor on this project obviously. for the last 20 plus years we

have operated almost exclusively in the public sector, schools, police stations and obviously fire stations. when our group -- when i said i was going to say a few things, i thought about the common stuff, site constraints like working in a big city and it occurred to me that the aspects of this project are not particularly unique at least for me. this is what we do every day. we work in this environment. and the truth is, the materials that go into a building like this are not often the reason a project like this is successful. it's much more often due to the personalities and work ethic of the people on the ground working on this every day. so you know -- sorry -- i'm happy to have the opportunity to say that the group of architects, engineers and project managers i work with

every day out here, sort of lower level are of the highest caliber. you know, the architects who are here, the engineers are here. shawn o'brien, the engineers, i'm not sure if they're here. and captain mcfarland, the fire department representation at our weekly meetings. so to say that i have been impressed with this group's professionalism would be a dramatic understatement. we operate in the nine bay area counties and have hit every corner of every county and i can say without uncertainty this group is exceptional without question.

they're workers, they're not delegators. they get into the problem and get us what we need every day to keep going. we haven't always agreed on everything. this isn't a fairy tail but the group has been fair and direct with us every single time and it's not as common as you might think. i for one am excited to be part of this team and on behalf of our small team, the superintendent, project engineer without whom i would be under water on this job. bob and shannon alton, disappointed they can't be here today and on behalf of our entire alton construction family, congratulations to all stakeholders on the milestone and a special thanks to the people i work with every day. it's been a real pleasure so far and i'm looking forward to a strong finish. (applause) >> thank you andrew.

and all those guys you name are from public works. this project was from a scratch to getting out to contract was done in-house and speaks to the capability of what the public works department can do, it wasn't like that many years ago. now we have healthy projects and we're proud of that. the next part of the event, we're going to sign a beam. we do have markers that all of the guests can sign. but before i do that, on behalf of public works i want to say thank you to all the men and women of the fire department who protect us and make sure our city runs smooth every day. (applause) thank you, thank you all of you. supervisor breed, commissioners, we have pens over there, if you can start the signing process on the beam. we will sign the beam and allow everybody to go back to work. yes, sign.

♪ ♪ >> all right. well, first of all, good afternoon everybody, and in case everybody is wondering, today is not only valentine's

day, but ash wednesday, hence the marks on my for head. [ inaudible ] in sro here in san francisco are available for every single resident. i am incredibly pround to be standing can supervisor ronen and supervisor sheehy. it is incredibly important for so many of our constituencies here in san francisco, both in terms of gender, our transgender community, it affects so many people here in san francisco. i think as we continue to see push back from our federal administration in washington d.c., just this week, our department of education announced they're no longer going to be investigating transgender student bathroom complaints, which is a step

absolutely in the wrong direction, but in san francisco, we are different. we are not going to allow hatred todom namt, we will continue to standup for our communities here in san francisco. we will be a beacon of hope. i do want to thanks tha severa individuals for being here today, as i mechanicsed, these issues take a lot of leadership outside of city hall, and this one was led by two incredibly courageous supervisors, and so i want to introduce the first one, supervisor hillary ronen. >> thank you so much for being here. i'm very, very honored and excited to be here.

i also want to extend a special thank you to jordan davis who brought this legislation to our office and said, when you were supervisor campos's chief of staff, you forgot sro hotels to include that specifically in this lemggislation, so it was pleasure to correct that mistake, which we would have put in the original legislation but accidently left it out. so thank you, jordan. i just want to say what we've learned about this legislation about making bathrooms all gender bathroom is when the traps gender stands up and fights for itself, for recognition, for dignity and safety, it ends up benefiting everybody. i don't know about you, but every time i'm out in public, and there's an all gender bathroom, that benefits me as a woman, it helps disabled

individuals who might have an opposite gender caretaker. it just makes our society better, safer, and more welcoming to all of us. so i just think we should look to the transgender community fore guidance on all policies that we work on in san francisco, because it always ends up benefiting not just the community but all of us. so my deep, deep thanks to everyone that's here today, to claire, to the mayor who made an unprecedented move of joining us onto the legislation before he even signed it because that's how much he supports this community. and to the only out member of the queer community on the board of supervisors, jeff sheehy, who always is the first to standup for and advocate for his community. thank you.

[applause] >> so first, i just really want to thank jordan davis. i've been in your chair. that's how i started. i hope i'm still considered an activist, but when someone can come to city hall this change, that's brilliant. thank you for your leadership. i also want to thank mayor farrell for his supporting this and signing this and leadership along the way. i think this is really very important that sro's are brought into the mix. you know, this is where many people live without a lot of resources, who are marginalized, and making sure that the dignity of our trans and gender nonconforming community is recognized, respected dignity of this community is recognized on all level in our society is absolutely critical. i'm very proud to sponsor this,

and i just want to make one other point, since mayor farrell brought up what's going on in washington. we need to, every time we come together, with one of the communities that have been particularly targeted by this administration, they have sought to target the most vulnerable communities in our mix: immigrants, muslims, and the trans community because they think they can get away with it. so even though every time we come together, even though we're making headway and we're leading in san francisco, we have to remember that around the country, people's rights are being taken away, and in this city, immigrants' rights are being threatened every day. we have to align ourselves with other communities in solidarity, that are particularly targeted in these times. so again, thank you to jordan, supervisor ronen, to mayor

farrell. this is great work today. [applause]. >> sorry. claire. i was just supposed to introduce claire who's so great, really doing a tremendous job in filling the shoes and taking on off tereaf teresa sparks, so i'd like to introduce claire farley, who's senior assistant to the mayor. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm so happy to be here with all of you today in this historic moment, and this would not be possible without you, mayor farrell, for your continued support of making sure that our city is committed to lgbt folks. also, thank you to supervisor ronen for your incredible leadership on this, as well as your office, and specifically, also to supervisor sheehy, and all the cosponsors on this

important legislation. i also want to take a moment to thank joerd on and the -- jordan and all the members on the sro task force. this victory really does belong to all of you, so thank you. [applause]. >> as trans and gender nonconforming people, we are all to familiar with the stress, the violence that comes with trying to use the bathroom that match our gender identity and expression. as our rights continue to be attack in the country and under the federal administration, it is important now more than ever that san francisco continues to be a leader in the movement towards fair and quality rights for all. no one should have to worry about facing the stress of going to the bathroom in the place that they call home, so all gender sro ordinaryians

will extend our existing protections and will ensure that our rights are extended to the full community. furthermore, it will increase access for people with disabilities, residents who have caretakers. this resolution is important to make san francisco better. of course we know there's more time to be done, and together we will continue to advance the initiatives, the policies and programs that support a thriving trans and gnc community here in san francisco. we will work to implement policies like this, future policies and programs that help sustain the livelihoods of our communities. let's make sure that san francisco continues to be the beacon of hope and change that the rest of the country desperately needs right now.

depend, thank y again, thank you so much for being here today and for this amazing step forward. i hope you will join us in the work ahead. thank you. [applause]. >> all right. we're going to get to the signing here.

all right. here we go. [applause]. [gavel] >> welcome, everyone, to our land use committee meeting of february 12, 2018, monday. i am katie tang, chair of this committee, and we're joined by

supervisor safai and supervisor aaron peskin is filling in today. we're joined by supervisor catherine stefani. any announcements? >> yes. please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. items acted upon today will appear on the february 27 board of supervisors agenda, unless otherwise stated. >> is thank you very much. can you please call item one? >> item number one, ordinance amending the planning dozed establish the geary-masonic special use district in the area generally bounded by geary boulevard to the south, masonic avenue to the east and assessor's parcel's block number 1071, lots one and four to the north and west respectively. >> thank you. i will defer to supervisor stefani first since this is in

her district. >> thank you. you heard this project last week. most important, it allows the number of affordable housing units in the project to go from three to 22. that is more affordable units than the total number of units in the original project. again, these amendments raised the inclusionary from 18% to 23% and broken down as 10% at 55% of the a.m.i., 4% at 80% a.m.i., 4% at 110% a.m.i. and 5% at 120% of a.m.i. and the appropriate a.m.i. bans will apply. the second recommendation is around car share spaces and the commission recommended four of the spaces be reserved for car share. on the advice of the city attorney, the amendments increased the findings requiring car share and the 16 spaces to be reserved for car share use. again, i want to thank the

laurel heights improvement association for being forward-thinking and the developers working so well with the neighbours. this project in a neighbourhood that hasn't seen any new housing is very welcomed. and i just want to thank everyone for their hard work on seeing this across the finish line. i was aid to supervisor farrell when this started over two years ago and to see it now is just incredible. so i'm happy to bring this uniquely dense neighbourhood and project forward. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor. any other colleagues? supervisor safai? >> no. i'll reserve. >> all right. and if we don't have any questions for planning staff as well, then i will open this item up to public comment. i have two speaker cards. kathy and richard and anyone else who would like to come up to speak. please line up.

>> good afternoon, supervisors tang, safai, stefani and peskin. i'm from the laurel heights improvement association and i'm very happy to support the project before you today. because this project is on a small 12,000-foot irregular sized lot, the density increase through the special use district would allow the housing units to be increased from 21 to 95 units. which would serve the city's need for more housing. i think this density accommodation is reasonable because the building would conform with the applicable height limb and this would strike a reasonable balance. and the 95 housing units would be better than commercial use in the majority of the building that was the first it ration proposed. although we sorted that out, too.

long time residents there were commission ago shadow study before the project was revised. and we worked with them and we appreciate that the developers worked with the neighbours on the issues of the project design in the height and the nature of the roof screenings and this is not talls case. but we had a free flow of information with these developers because they were willing to work with the neighbourhood so we thanked them for that. we support the building, it's within the height limit and the affordable housing increase because it will provide 5% more for the middle income group, which is so needed because we're losing the middle class in san francisco. the developers responded to our information in a timely fashion and agreed to our request for a condition of approval that, to the extent allowed by [inaudible], that any roof screen be transparent in order to minimize impacts on the

neighbourhood so we had a collaborative process and we thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisor and staff. i'm richard frisbee, laurel heights improvement association. i would just like to thank the four parties involved in this planning department. christopher may, the developers, supervisors past and present now supervisor stefani. and also the neighbourhoods of people who got involved in that. i think that the open, transparent process worked well. we didn't always agree but we always agreed to discuss and have an open dialogue and from that came what we believe is a productive, useful development in our neighbourhood. so thank you very much. >> thank you. any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment on this item is closed. supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madame chair.