increase is decided by our colleague here, i guess the thought that sort of flashed to me is that the different specialties that are certified by san francisco general, we have, iklike urology, which haa number of specialties in it that participate in numerous, i assume, surgeries here, and they have the residency program where they have a major cohort, and their subspecialties, where they have outstanding training programs, and the list to rotate through the general has grown substantially. but my -- not concern but sort

of something that we may face is that once we are certified in these new disciplines where their discipline, they're board certified in urology, but all these sub areas that are involved in all this, a number of them are going to other places, especially southern california, chicago, etcetera. there's a big recruitment going on quietly. i've heard this from a number of those who have completed programs, and patients who were upset because maybe there's no longer a spanish speaking urologist who was a key person there or someone else, and i wondered if, in fact -- if, in fact, you are projecting that there will be even more demand for us to maintain the highest quality of physicians which we

have at the general, as we see -- it's going to be a question of how do we retain them afterwards, even though who are in the bay area and could rotate through there when the competition in other parts of the nation is on the radar? i wonder if you had any thoughts about that, and the challenges? >> so something i think is true, is san francisco is san francisco, and we are doing things here that are not happening other places. we're light years ahead in many things. one of the goals for this program that wasn't on that slide, and i'm not sure why i didn't have it there -- was, you know, over time, over the next five years, we really want to develop more of a training program, official training program with ucsf and with zuckerberg, and that's all really exciting, and i think people do really want to be a part of it. and so yeah, we have to figure out how to keep that momentum

going, and i think that's true across all of the specialties that are doing this work. it is -- there's only a handful of people that are specialists, and they are wanted every where else, and we have to keep them. >> a data point of comment that amongst the eight to ten in service training that gender has for staff throughout public health, average provider was ten, so over the course of 2016, they've trained over 100 providers over competence, sensitivity trains, and in their feedback in their evaluations, they agreed or strongly agreed that they felt better that they were able to take care of their transgender patients, especially with regards to their up coming surgeries, that they wanted more of these training and

education sessions; that they hoped following the training to use the information gained from the training to create safer spaces and to use what they've learned to be more sensitive, to be more competent, and really, the bottom line was they just wanted more, so there is the demand out there. >> very good. thank you. >> thank you. i remember when the commission first approved the development of this program and whether it would also be at general, and it's nice to see after five years, the fruition of this, and you and your staff are to be complimented. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you so much. thank you for caring about this and being interested in it and supporting it because it matters. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, commissioners. i'll note that there were no public comment requests for that item. we can move onto item 8, which is the sfjph technological

report, and i believe the same issues are going to be with us for theph technological report, and i believe the same issues are going to be with us for tgph technological report, and i believe the same issues are going to be with us for the presentation. >> good evening, commissioners, director garcia. office of policy and planning, and i'm here presenting rdp's annual report for our fisking year '16-'17. overall our annual report provides a general summary of the accomplishments and highlights across dph in the past fiscal year and is required by our san francisco administrative code. the design in look and feel is pretty similar to previous years reports, and we have incorporated some of the new branding for the san francisco health net work, as well. if you recall, draft report was presented to the finance and planning committee back in november of 2017, and the

version that you've received now, your feedback has been incorporated into that. so our report begins with two messages. one from director garcia and one from our health commission president, dr. chow. the two letters provides our leaderships introductions to the report and provide an introduction to our three feature stories that are introduced later on, which is the progress on the electronic health record, dph becoming accredited public health department, and the whole person care pilot. there's also language in these messages around how our programs help address the social determinants of health and dph's commitment for all san franciscans in the face of uncertainty with the aca. the next section, which is about dph, we introduced the

two division: the san francisco health net work and the population health division, and their roles in our commission to protect and promote the health of san franciscans. we've also included our 2017 organizational chart in this section, and overall, the information provides an overview of the functions and services across dph. our last intro ductory section in the report is the overview of the health section. we also include bios for the commissioners that were serving in that fiscal year. following the health and finance committee feedback, we've incorporated the changes into this section. the bulk of our annual report focuses on the programatic highlights, and these start with three highlights across dph in fiscal year '17-'17, the

first being our public health accreditation. we were awarded accreditation on march 9, 2017. at that time we were one of nine health departments in california to hold that crediting, and that demonstrates our -- to the community. the next story is around the whole person care pilot. so the city was awarded additional funds for a total of 161 million for whole person care, which is a medi-cal waiver for california. the pilot for dph is a collaborative interagency effort, with an aim to establish a human centered and seamless system of care for our homeless san franciscans. and the last feature story that we've included this focuses on our enterprise for an

electronic health record. our ehrrfp was issued, and it will not an essential tool to continuously improving our patient experience and ensuring the highest quality of care for all san franciscans. then, moving forward past those three major accomplishments, we also have included 27 shorter highlights this year, showcasing dph's commitment to our mission. there are nine highlights around promoting health, which include our bayview health zone, sf quits. there are 12 on protecting health, including reenvisioning jail replacement, vision zero, and we've included six on our infant structure and ourlene,lene being the key priority for the department. highlights were collected across our services, our programs, and they showcase our key programmatic work across

our division. so following the highlights, we do include a major part of the report on data and numbers. first we have our dph budget. we include the revenue, expenditures, and we highlight investments that were made for fiscal year '16-'17, including the 2.8 million that we invested in specialty mental health services for youth, and the 1.5 in ongoing human resources efforts for the department. the next is our san francisco health net work data. it incorporates encounters across different visits and patient demographics across our hospitals, primary care of mental health, substance abuse and jail health. there's been a lot of effort this year across the network to create a standard data methodology to ensure more accurate, clean data moving forward and the aalignment with sfgph's annual report as well. the next report is the public

health data. it focuses on the six areas of the strategic plan with key programmatic activities and impact metrics within each. we've also included an additional metric on black african american health based on the feedbacks from the commissioners in planning. that was based on hypertension control. and lastly, we include the 13 health resolutions to showcase the major policy actions of the commission, as well. the last section of the report, you'll notice, includes our service sites and our contractors. the maps that we've included for service sites have been updated, and they follow our new branding for the san francisco health net work. we've included one on primary care, and one for our city's behavioral health site, and we've included a note now that all of our contracted sites for behavioral health couldn't be included due to the number.

we then end with our community contractors to acknowledge their contributions to the work that we do here at dph. so moving forward, we'll finalize the report after your -- if you have any additional feedback, and then, the final report will be posted on our website, and you will all get copies -- printed copies, funding provided by the public health foundation, and with that, i'll conclude. i thank you all, and if you have any questions or feedback, i'd be happy to take it. >> commissioners, questions. the staff has taken the comments very well and has i think produced a marvelous report which balances the enormous work that this department has done via -- i didn't count the number of highlights, but you said 27. >> there are 27 and then three

major additional ones, for 30 total. >> for those who want to read about the programs and those who are more data driven, can see the numbers, so it's a very fine balance of both, and i think within the highlights, there are also numbers, those of us who like to know how many people are really touched by these programs. and i think the staff has done a marvelous job in presenting a report that demonstrates that our $2 billion organization's done. although it suddenly dawned on me, we probably didn't actually discuss any of our research this time, did we, in this? >> i don't think there's too much on that. >> and a portion that this department does -- and maybe that is for the future in terms of adding that as a component because that certainly is a very important part of what we do.

and i think you've captures,d, think, both the programmat particulprogrammatic problems and individuals in our entire city, and i think maybe research is what we're missing. >> sure. >> but i -- and the reason i gave this comment was that i needed to have found a copy of this to read within the past hour and are i was overwhelmed within that period of time that you could just feel the energy that you put into and that the department does. just know it's out there, almost every second of every day, doing something in some part of the city, and for

somebody. that was the impression i got just reading the document this morning. >> thank you. >> so commissioner cavekarshme? >> yeah. i just wanted to thank you for the work. it's pretty impressive? >> yes. >> im want to thank you for yor work on this report. i agree with my colleagues. this is very easy to read. sometimes these things are hard to read, and it's laborius, you put it beside your bed, on your night stand, but not this. >> you look at this, whole section by the numbers. how many things -- [ inaudible ] -- there it is. where are the sights? what's our mission? and you've done it. our staff -- it's really a

useful document. i mean, it isn't just something to look at and say oh, wow, it really shares the heart and soul of what we're doing, and our partners that are involved in this total process of public health in san francisco. well done. thank you. >> thank you. >> and i'm wondering, as you're finishing a draft and just to, you know, go back to that thought of research, you think we should put maybe one page, and the amount of research that we are doing, and then, we could expand that next year a little bit more? 'cause this does go to the mayor and the supervisors, and it would be really nice to be able to have them understand that not only are we also delivering services and keeping the health of the city in check here and improving it, but that we're also creating research and informing the world. >> i -- dr. aragon is probably

the person you could work with for his section. >> i don't want to delay much more when we need to move it forward. >> i think we can do that very easy, yes. >> and then, as we have in the past, we can forward this with a letter to each of our board of supervisors and the mayor's office. does that sound reasonable, that we could perhaps add one more page, and then, we would expand on that in the following year? >> i can work on that. >> okay. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> was there any other public comment? >> no public comment requests for this item. >> okay. thank you. >> item nine, commissioners, is other public business. and you have the calendar before you. there's nothing noted in terms of special meeting notes, as we move forward. >> were there any items from the prior year that we had not completely covered or -- ain

calendar. >> i took the past two years' calendar and forwarded all the items that we had calendared in the previous years, and any items that we haven't done, i put it forth on this calendar, so right now, the answer would be no. there's nothing undone from the previous years. >> so we begin with a clean slate. >> at least trying to. >> okay. thank you. commissioners, any items you would like to place on the calendar at this point? i think we already placed one, which was the food program. >> right. >> i should say food security, right? >> which i think will probably go in the fall after director garcia -- there's more work to be done on that in the department before that comes forth. >> right. >> shall we move onto item ten, the jcc report back? >> okay. item ten, and i've lost my agenda. >> commissioner sanchez?

commissioner sanchez? a report back on the jcc meeting from february 13th? >> yes, commissioner sanchez? >> the joint conference committee for laguna honda met on february 6th. we approved the minutes of the previous meetings. it was primarily closed session, reviewing both the quality reports and the medical credentialing reports, so that ends our meeting for -- on that. any additional comments? >> okay. our next item, then. >> a consideration for adjournment. >> so a motion for adjournment is in order. >> so moved. >> and a second? >> second. >> all in favor, please say aye. this meeting is now adjourned. thank you.

. >> the meting will come to ord order. this is the february 23rd, 2018 special meeting of the san francisco local agency formation commission. i am sandra leigh fewer, chair of the commission. i am joined by commissioner cynthia pollock on my left and hillary rope then on my right. i would also like to thank the staff at sfgovtv, for recording today's meetings. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> madam clerk, can you please read item number two. >> item 2 is the approval of

the lafco meeting minutes of november 30, 2017 workshop, and the november 30, 2017 regular meeting. >> thank you. do any of the commissioners have any changes to the november 30, 2017 minutes? >> yes, i do. >> under opening remarks and proposals presented by the commission, i recall it says rise chair pollock provided the following two proposals, broad band and revisiting an affordable housing study. i believe there was also a third, an expansion of clean power sf. >> supervisor fewer: okay. are there any other changes to the november 30, 2017 minutes? all right. seeing none, i will open this up to public comment. are there any members of the

public who wish to comment on item 2. seeing none, item 2 is now closed. is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> so moved. >> second. >> moved by commissioner pollock and seconded by commissioner rhenown, those minutes are approved. madam clerk, can you call item number three. >> item three is lafco regular meeting schedule. >> i believe we have a message from angela calvillo, interim chair officer. >> thank you. i wanted to introduce item three. for the first few months lafco meetings were on an as-needed basis. now lafco is suggesting that we set the next couple of meetings, particular, march 16, 2018; april 20th, may 18, june 15th, july 20th, september 21, october 19, and november 16,

we have the room space available for the lafco, and this will also assist us in aligning our meetings with the regular board meetings. >> thank you very much. colleagues, any comments? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item number three? seeing no public speakers, public comment is now closed. colleagues, can we have a motion to approve the regular meeting schedule for 2018? >> great. moved by commissioner ropenen, seconded by commissioner pollock, the item is proved. madam clerk, can you please call item four. >> item four is nominating two members to the board, ending.

>> i understand we have not received any applications for either of these seats, is that correct? >> that is correct, madam chair. >> commissioner pollock did submit her application right prior to the meeting but it did not make it into the packet. >> so seeing that, with that understanding, i'd like to continue this item, but let's first open this up for public comment, are there any members of the public who wish to comment on item number four? seeing none, public comment is now closed. to allow more time for applications to be submitted, i would like to continue this item for the next regular meeting on march 16th. colleagues, is there a motion to continue? >> so moved. >> thank you move. >> seconded. >> moved by commissioner ronen and seconded by commissioner pollock, without objections, item number four will be continued to the next regular meeting on march 16th. madam clerk, can you please call item number five. >> item five is a community

aggregate report and a community report. >> good afternoon, commissioners. michael himes, director of clean power sf for the sfpc. it's a pleasure to be with you this afternoon. i've got some remarks to update you on the status of program growth, work we've been doing since we last met. first and foremost, though, cleanpowersf continues to serve about 81,000 accounts within the city and county, and to date, our cumulative program opt out rate is 3.2%. it's been at that level for a while. probably the last time we reported it, it was there, as well. i guess another way of looking at this is we have a 98.6%

participation rate. 4 4.1% of our accounts have opted up to our renewable energy, super green, and that is the highest of any cca operating in california. and as -- well, we're also preparing a quarterly enrollment for customers that have signed up for the program since january , and that enrollment is coming up in april. that's a small enrollment of about 250 accounts that have signed up over the past few months. you might recall that in addition to the large enrollment fees is we've been inviting sign ups on an ongoing basis and then conducting these quarterly enrollments to bring those customers into the program on a timely basis. since we last presented to the lafco in late november , a number of things have happened with respect to our program development work. first, on january 23rd, the

puc approved some new rates for cleanpowersf. this is a limited rate action focused on two things. first, at reducing our super green premium for participating customers so effective march 1, next month, our residential super green rates will be 1.5 cents perhour on top of our green kilowith the hour, down from two cents. this reduction will allow the program to remain competitive with comparable offerings by pg&e. the other major actions we took were some modifications to our net energy metering. that's a program that supports customers that have roof top solar. it's a billing credit mechanism that allows customers that own solar to get credits on their bills for any energy they

produce and deliver to the grid. that's tracked every month. net credits that accumulate in a given month are carried forward for application to a following billing period. and then, every year, we look at whether the customer was a net producer of energy or a net consumer, and they were a net producer, we compensate them for that energy. so we made changes based on our experience to date in managing this program. after about a year and a half in operations, the changes were really to improve is simplify the customer experience, so those changes were first to -- we eliminated two net surplus compensation rates that we were using. that's the rates we pay the customer fore additional energy produced over the course of the year. we're now just compensating the customers at the higher of those two rates, which is the

average super green rate. we also adopted a credit carrie forward at the end of the period at our default mechanism. customers can also request a check rather than a carrie forward of the credit on their bills. and finally, we have adopted a policy of carrying forward credits for any customers that have been on the program less than ten months, and the intent of that is to avoid harming any customers that may be expected to get additional credits for the balance of the year. so that's a little bit in the weeds, but those are adjustments that have been made to, again, improve the customer experience, protect our koestner mers were any lost value, and also help improve the efficiency of administering the program. also on january 23rd, the

board of supervisors authorized the puc to enter into power supply contracts to support the next phase of program enrollment. that legislation was signed by the mayor on january 26th. and then lastly, the puc commission affirmed that the conditions necessary to execute the contracts had been met, and authorized the general manager to move forward with all actions in esto complete citywide enrollment for cleanpowersf. so really a major milestone for cleanpowersf. the elements are really coming into place now for a july enrollment. and towards that end, staff is -- we are working to finalize our power supply contracts and bank credit agreement. we're targeting execution in early march of our first set of agreements to come out of the solicitations we issued. we are also working on our enrollment plan, taking into consideration the available

renewable energy supply in 2018 to support our customer enrollment again while meeting our overall program content power objectives. we're providing updated program notices, program collateral and fine-tuning our outreach program for the next enrollment phase, and a lot of that is going to be centered around who we are going to be enrolling in the next phase, and that's something we're working on right now. and then, last but not least here, we're also evaluating a potential rate action for our green product. the reason why we've separated these rate actions is because we are waiting for pg&e to set its rates for this year, and pg&e had been delayed. normally, their rates go into effect on january 1. last year, pg&e issued its rates for 2018, and those will

go into effect next month. and what we're seeing is -- you might recall the pcia of the exit fee that cca customers paid pg&e. we are seeing that go up by about 14%. the -- but we are also seeing pg&e's generation supply rates also go up by about 8%. so the net result is that cleanpowersf rates will continue to belower than pg&e after -- than pg&e's comparable rates by accounting for the pcia. to the extent we do take a rate action in april, it will maintain that beneficial rate differential, and it would go into effect on july 1. and that actually concludes my update. i'm happy to take questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. colleagues, any questions? yes, commissioner pollock?

>> commissioner pollock: i just want to -- excuse me. first of all, congratulations -- >> yeah, thank you for your support through this effort. >> commissioner pollock: i know so many people are so excited to see how it moves forward. i just wonder if we can get a chart, again, of the new dates for the different parts of the roll out and just when we see the big launch and how that's moving along. >> absolutely. >> commissioner pollock: okay. great. thank you. >> yeah. be happy to do that. >> supervisor fewer: commissioner ronen, any questions? okay. seeing none. >> okay. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on item number five? hello. >> good afternoon. commissioners, eric brooks for california energy choice and san francisco clean energy advocates. in the entire 14 kbraerz thyea i've been coming before this

commission, this is the most important thing that i've ever had to say to you. warren buffet and donald trump are trying to get ahold of the california electricity grid to bring coal back to california and undermine renewables. the trump administration has directed regional grid operators like this one would become under a bill in the state legislature and has directed federal agencies to subsidize coal electricity once this happens, so they will be able to make it cheaper than renewables even though it's not. there's a bill that's up last year that's coming up again this year, it's going to be rewritten so that it's easier to pass. the authors made mistakes last year and that's one of the reason they're going to be able to kill it. the result of this bill would be to make our california nonprofit electricity grid turn

into part of a regional private grid of which the largest company acting, and it would be warren buffet's berkshire-hathaway, who has attacked companies in other states. once our grid is part of a private grid than state grid, our california electricity grid will be under the control of the trump administration. this could kill community choice aggregation, and it could kill renewables in general for a decade, possibly more. this is the biggest threat we've ever faced, and it's vital that you oppose it. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. >> hi, commissioners.

jed holtzman from 350 bay area. i just want to say attending the sf meetings, we're ready to go full steam ahead. the one thing i would say for lafco's role, as going forward, as we discussed in the workshop, the role you could play in cleanpowersf, the puc staff has a tremendous amount of work to do to roll out the program, get everyone enrolled, make sure that they're happy, make sure that the city, the board is happy with the budgeting and contracting divisions. i think one role that the lafco can play going forward is as advocates, we get reports on -- and i hope mike doesn't get mad at me. we talk with him about this all the time. we get reports on what silicon valley is doing. now i'm getting reports on what east bay is looking like, and now i'm getting some reports on

the north bay. what i'd like to do is transmit a lot of those best practices where possible from other cca and kind of just instead of growing at our own pace, not enrollment wise, but program development wise, that can he can kind of take the best pieces of the east bay, north bay, and south bay wherever possible, and we'd like to talk to lafco at some point in the future. thanks. >> supervisor fewer: all right. thank you. seeing no further comments, public comment is now closed. there's no action for the commission to take on this matter. madam clerk, can you please call item number six. >> item six is the interim administrative officer's report. >> supervisor fewer: miss calvillo, do you have anything to report? >> thank you, madam chair,

members of the commission, angela calvillo, interim officer. i wanted to provide just a brief introduction to what i've done with the lafco's budget without permission from lafco, but i think it's a good thing. essentially because the budget process for lafco is not on the same timeline as the budget process for the board of supervisors and the city in general, what used to happen is the executive officer would provide me a ballpark figure from lafco that wouldn't be confirmed by lafco until june, so while we are, a city department, submitting our budgets to the mayor and controller as of yesterday, february -- yeah, thank you, 22nd, i asked the budget committee, and the committee has provided me permission to put in the statutory amount that lafco is entitled to, which is $297,342.

so by the time lafco does determine its needs and actually comes up with a figure, if it's lower than that amount, then, we'll just adjust the department's budget by that amount. this will make things a little easier for us in our conversations with the mayor's and the controller's office, so with your permission, i appreciate your indulgence to do that today. the last thing i'll say is that i'm the interim officer, and all of the work that we have done over the last couple of months is all done with the great assistance of alisa, your clerk, especially the rfq for executive officer. i'm available for any questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. colleagues, any questions?

no. seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to speak on this item. >> yes. >> supervisor fewer: oh, i'm so sorry. [ inaudible ] >> so eric brooks again, san francisco green party, local grassroots organization, our city, californians for energy support, which is a statewide organization for community choice aggregation and clean choice energy advocates. i would just urge you real quickly to make sure -- in light of what happened last year, let's make sure lafco has full leverage on its own budget and can -- and so make sure you retain the power to not allow any shenanigans to go on in the

future like we saw last year. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. seeing no further public comment, public comment is now closed. there is no commission action to be taken on this matter. can you please call item seven. >> item seven is a discussion on lafco's strategic plan. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. we have discussed a range of things worth exploring, but until we have an executive director, i propose we suspend any further discussion until our march 16th meeting. colleagues, does that sound okay to you? great. now let's open this up to public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item seven. >> surprise, surprise. eric brooks, californians for energy choice and all the other groups that i mentioned before. so the -- we've heard from the interim executive officer that the bids that came in on the

request for qualifications are proprietary, and they're not allowed to be released. the public, of course, really would like to see the applicants and who they are, and so that we can weigh in on who we think would be the best person, but we can't really do it without that information. this is a question for the attorney and for the executive -- interim executive officer, but if we can even get the names of applicants, then, we can look them up themselves and decide what we think and then maybe make comments before your next meeting. i don't know if that's possible, but anything you can give us so that we can, as the public, weigh in on the process, that would be great. thanks. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. any other public speakers? and do we have a response for mr. brooks? >> thank you, madam chair. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. >> in -- in -- in discussing this issue with mr. eng, who is working in conjunction

closely with the office of the city attorneys on this, unfortunately, because we are still in the determination process about whether or not the named individuals that you were speaking about actually meet the minimum qualifications, we are not yet ready to present that information, but we will definitely provide the public that information relatively around the same time we provide that information to the commission. okay. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. seeing no other public speakers, public comment is now closed. i would like to continue this item until our next regular meeting on march 16th. colleagues, is there a motion to continue? thank you very much. great. moved by commissioner pollock and seconded by commissioner ronen, without objections, item number seven will be continued to the next regular meeting on march 16. madam clerk, can you please call item number eight. >> item number eight is an update on obtaining executive

officer services for the commission and possible direction to staff. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i want to invite our interim administrative officer to give an update on the rfq process. miss calvillo. >> thank you, chair. so at the direction of lafco our office issued an rfq for executive officer services. the deadline was extended to february 13th, 2018. the anticipated not to exceed contract raid is $75 an hour. the panel deliberation was scheduled for this morning, and we will issue a notice of intent to prequalify, we're hoping by february 27th. at this time, the details of the respondents are confidential in accordance with the administrative code chapter 67.24 for mr. brooks, but may be subject to disclosure once the panel scoring and the issue of the notice of intent to

prequalify has completed. respondents are not gasuarante a contract if they meet the qualifications because it is on lafco for the qualification and certainly as the chair as she was authorized to conduct this r 23 q process, and the respondent's ability to complete the necessary administrative requirements in order to become an approved city vendor through the general services agency. respondents who are prequalified will remain eligible for consideration and contract negotiation on an as needed basis for five years from the prequalification notification date. we look forward to keeping you apprised on this issue, and i'm available for other questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. >> thank you. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues, any comments or questions? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item number eight? seeing none, public comment is

now closed. do we have a motion to continue this item to our next regular item on march 16? >> so moved. >> thank you very much. moved by commissioner pollock and seconded by commissioner ronen. without objection, the panel will continue item eight to our next meeting on march 16. item nine. >> consideration to approve the agreement with renne sloan holtzman and safai. >> supervisor fewer: i wanted to allow teresa tristricker to present on this item. >> i am speaking here in my individual capacity and not as your legal advisor as the contracts before you pertains

to the firm that i am currently affiliated with and the firm that i will be affiliated with starting next thursday. our firm that has been providing legal services to you is splitting. the firm will be splitting into two firms. a new firm is being created called renne public law firm, and that is the group that i will be affiliated with, starting on march 1. we will be located in the offices that are currently located in, and have a similar name, but it is a brand-new firm. in order to allow me to continue to provide legal services, we have made the request that the lafco agree to an assignment of the existing contract with the existing firm under the same terms and conditions without any additional extension from the old firm to the new firm for services beginning on march 1. any services that are provided between now and the end of february , including, for

example, my attendance here today, will be provided on behalf of the current firm, and the current firm will eventually submit a bill for those services for anything between now and the end of february . and so with that, i'm going to go ahead and defer to your interim administrative officer for any additional questions, but if you have any questions about the split of the firm or how that is going to work or what this means for you, i'm happy to provide that information. but as far as from my perspective, you will not see any change. the only change will be the name of the firm that i'm affiliated with. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. yes, miss calvillo? >> yes, thank you, miss stricker. the other point that i wanted to make is we had the city attorney's office review the terms of the assignment agreement, and they have signed off on all of the language. we're happy to provide that to you, as well, members of the

commission, and that beginning march 1st, the assignment agreement will take place, and we will have all of the files transferred from the hyde, miller, owen and troste to the new renne law group. >> supervisor fewer: okay. colleagues, any questions, comments? okay. let's open this up to members of the public. are there any members of the public wishing to comment on item nine snoo seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to approve the contract for renne law group, llc. great. moved by commissioner ronen, seconded by commissioner pollock, so approve the contract for the renne law group, llc as our law group. madam clerk, can you please call item ten.

>> item ten is public comment. >> supervisor fewer: this is the time for members of the public to address items on the panel's jurisdiction and not on the agenda. are there any members of the public that would like to speak. >> yes. eric brooks. this time i'll speak on behalf of our city, san francisco and the san francisco green party. as you move forward and start working on affordable housing, there's a desperate issue that's not being addressed in san francisco and that is small businesses, local small businesses. they are going out of business as if there's a wildfire going through the city. the costa hawkins repeal bill and ballot measures that are in planning are not going to solve the problem. in my neighborhood, we've lost

micano's possibly the best greek restaurant in the united states. polk street produce went out of business because of increased rent. the gangway bar, one of the most historic bars in san francisco for the lgbt community is going to have to go out of business or move. in commissioner fewer's district, she knows there's a natural food business that's being driven out of the district because of the decision by the building owner. we are losing key businesses so fast in this city that san francisco's not going to be recognizable in the next decade if we don't do something about this. so as you move forward on supporting affordable housing and the homeless, we also need to think that some of those homeless may be small business owne owners that went out of business because no one can cap their rent.

and that in turn is replacing all of our businesses with formula retail. it's just -- we're not going to have san francisco unless we solve this problem, so i'd urge you to put that on your future agenda. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. seeing no other public speakers, public comment is now closed. madam clerk, can you please call item number 11. >> item number 11 is future agenda items. >> supervisor fewer: are there any future agenda items that my colleagues would like to comment on or discussion. seeing none, let's open this up to members of the public. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item number 11. seeing none, item 11 is now clerk. madam clerk, are there any other items of business before us today? >> that concludes your items of business for today. >> supervisor fewer: there being no further items of business, we are adjourned.

>> okay. good morning, everyone. and i want to welcome you here today, where we will be talking about our new bill that we just introduced, sb-1045, which will give san francisco and other counties additional tools to address the human tragedy that we see unfolding on our streets every day with people who are severely drug addicted, severely mentally ill, and who are deteriorating and dying on our streets. first of all, i want to thank