the beacon, college connect and college and career center and parent partner. that concludes my presentation. i believe both the applicants have representatives here if you'd like to ask them questions. >> thank you. i guess at this time we'll take pub public comment if the applicants want to make public comment, this is the time. you have three minutes. you're welcome to comment. >> i'm linda from marine charter. i'm the chief financial officer. i'd like to add a few items to the presentation which was all correct. we've been in the same location for 40 years. and we are a 63-year-old company. we are probably the oldest shipping company left in san francisco. as far as i know, there are only two left. us and hamburg.

we've been in the aquatic park enabled for 40 years, we're in a historic landmark building. at one time, in our 40-year history in that location, we probably had 100 employees at one time. the company is a little bit smaller now, but we still support the local law enforcement. we make donations to them. we attend -- we are active in the maritime events in the area. and all over san francisco. and i think that's it. all right. any questions? >> thank you very much for your comments. >> thank you. >> i'm edward kaufman. i'm the executive director for

mission graduates. i think it has been aptly reported on, we've been in the mission community for 50 years. i can think of no other vision for programming that is more important than ensuring that young people in our community are able to get the degrees they need to get the careers that will keep them in san francisco. so i think in our application, you see a lot of our content so i'll leave it for any questions you have. >> does any other member of the public wish to comment? steeg none we'll close public comment. commissioner johns. >> once again, we have a couple of interesting businesses that have made totally different contributions to san francisco. and contributions that are totally different than what

we've seen before. it's so heartening to be able to recognize these organizations. and so i move that they be approved. >> second. >> thank you. we have a motion and second. any other comments? commissioner hyland. >> thank you and congratulations tots applications. i have comments on each application that are very different. i think on the mission graduates, i applaud you for your work. i'm involved with the architectural foundation and the build access program which has a high school focus program. but this is the heart of the social resilience i can't think? getting stability in our own generation so they can actually stay here in san francisco. i thank you for that. on the marine chartering company, i may steal commissioner johnck's thunder

here. we're both on the waterfront long range update working group. the cultural legacy of our waterfront so so important. it's a thread that two of us have tried to shepherd through the process to make sure that's an overarching theme in the waterfront plan, not currently just one redges. one -- run recommends. however, we'd love o see more businesses reflect the waterfront. >> thank you, commissioner black. >> briefly, i really applaud the fact that the marine charter business has been there and stayed there given much lower rents elsewhere. it's nice that it's right there on the waterfront. that's great.

i hope you'll stay for a number of years. i also wanted to note an 88% success rate for commission graduates compared to -- that's four times the state average. i think that's phenomenal. obviously, it reflects a lot of good work and congratulations. >> thank you. commissioner johnck. >> well, yes, commissioner hyland said it all. i'm so excited to have a maritime business. we've had red and white and i can't come up with too many more. we have to get some more. maybe you can help us. there isn't any more. [laughter] >> there will be. >> i'm going to work on it. then the mission graduates. i was not too familiar with your organization. so i think that's terrific. yeah, wonderful. >> we have a motion and a second. >> very good commissioners. on that motion, then to adopt

recommendations for approval commissioner black 37 yes. >> commissioner jompg. >> yes. >> commissioner johns. >> yes. >> commissioner matsuda. >> yes, commissioner pearlman. yes. >> commissioner hiemed. >> commissioner wolf rasm. >> yes. >> that passes. now for 827 presentation material. >> i want to make a comment here. this is an informational presentation. this bill is still in flux. we don't know what the final legislation is going to be. we're listening and gathering information. we're not here to take a motion- position on it. >> but the board of supervisors did yesterday -- take a position on it even though we're not going to do that. >> we don't know what the bill is. so we're not going to take -- i recommend we don't take a position on it. thank you.

>> your statement. >> thank you. so good afternoon commissioners. i'm with our city-wide division. i'm going to give you a brief presentation on senate bill 827. as you just heard, it ask still in flux. there isn't even a timeline for adoption yet. we expect the bill to continue to exchange. the presentation i'll -- continue to change, but the

presentation i'll give you today mirrors the memo of last week. it's a summary of the bill as it currently exists which includes a series of amendments made on march first. so i'll go through that. i will -- let's see -- i'll summarize our preliminary analysis of the bill. as well as some outstanding questions we have where the bill is a little bit unclear. please note this analysis is kind of our best guess as what could happen if this bill is to pass. it's highly likely there will be further amendments to the bill. our analysis would evolve as those happen. senate bill 827 was amended in the senate on march first. the memo we prepared today reflects the bill as it currently exists including the amendments. generally, the bill's intent is to increase the amount of

housing bill statewide near transit stations an stations an. it proposes to do that by allowing the trance incompetent across the state to receive a transit-rich bonus allows projects to build up to a minimum height and f.a.r. limit and removing density and parking controls. it does not appear to alter local approval progressesser or take away local control over demolition or historic preservation. amendments introduced in march made it clear that parcels containing rent control units would not be eligible for the bonus nms a local municipality passes a resolution authorizing such deck lition. the amendments include a right to return requirements for any sb27 projects that displace any rental tenants. here is what is proposes.

within a quarter final of a stop or a stop on a bus that runs at least everyon every 15 minutes. the bill would set 85 feet height limits if it faces 70 feet or more. and 5055 feet if it faces a right-of-way narrower than 70 feet. for parcels within a wider radius, within a half mile of a transit stop, the minimum height limits are 55 feet on a parcel racing a right-of-way facing 55 feet. these would be the baseline heights. a developer in theory could use to utilize the bonus to go even higher. this a map of what it might look like in san francisco. the majority of our meeting lines meet the threshold for high quality transit. almost all the city is covered

under the higher height tier proposed. this mean any qualifying project within the orange area on the map woul could be allowed up to5 feet in height if they're located on a wider right-of-way than 70 feet. this is a draft map. we unfortunately don't have complete, accurate g.i.s. data on width of streets and right-of-ways. so we can't see which neighborhood would receive higher height limits and what would receive the lower height limits but we'll coordinate with public works to get the data and update this analysis. however, preliminary look suggests that many of the for example east/west streets in sunset and richmond do tend to have right-of-ways wider than 70 feet and would have the effective highlight limits of 85

feet under the bill. so on any parcel in orange or yellow area on map, a developer would be entitled to request trance eu9-rich bonus exempting them from parking limits. the city would be prohibited from enforcing the height limit of 55, or 58 feet but could still enforce objective zones and design standards as long as they don't we deuce the development potential bloat f.i.r.s list -- below the f.i.r.s listed here. there are areas downtown and area plans where the existing wroaning iser in permissive than what sbal 827 proposes. so there be no change from today. as a mentioned earlier, the bill does not mandate changes to the local approval process.

they would be subject to local inclusionary requirements. including conditional use authorizations and historic preservation review. our section 317 controls on deck lition of units would replain in place. as mentioned earlier, projects requesting a bonus would be a able to compound the bonus and remain eligible for other streamlining laws like sb 325. there are a set of protections for rentals. the bill bans the demolition for rental units for transit-rich projects. they'd enable and replacement of rent control units but they must proactively pass a resolution authorizing a process for doing so. sb 827 requires project sponsors

to provide the following whether the existing units are subject to rent control or not. they must pay moving related expenses. provide relocation benefits, including finding relocation. and they must offer displaced tenants first right of refusal for prabl at the same rate of rent they were paying before. some questions, while it doesn't change local approval process, it is unclear what discretion the city retain for the minimal specifications of sb 827. in san francisco, we have a practice of pairing zonings with measuring the groth. so it took years of study to study the mitigation measures.

including increased on-site affordability requirements. this bill wouldn't preclude us from doing a similar study should it pass, but has no provision allowing cities time to adopt the mitigation measures currently with zoning. this bill would likely reduce interest in the local affordability incentive programs where we typically give project sponsors the option of additional capacity in exchange for increased affordability. sb 827 would offer the extra development capacity without any corresponding increase in affordability. it's possible that sb 827 could result in more affordable housing as it might spur more production of what the current zoning allows. as our inexclusionary requirements would a blie to all the projects.

amendments -- would a fly to all the projects. sb 827 wouldn't apply to zones districts that don't allow mousing and prohibit areas in the city that allow housing to zones that don't allow housing. this could mean that we would possibly no longer be able to rezone properties to pdr as we currently are doing on a number of industrial parcels scattered throughout the city. just in summary, sb 827 proposes a broad statewide up-zoning. it's ambitious in the scope and breath because it addresses a major housing shortage. rathere is broad agreement at te state level that california has underbuilt for years. all of our candidates for

governor propose an ambition statewide targets for new units statewide. i think last year was one of the biggest years of housing production in san francisco. think we were around 5,000 units. they're talking about 300 to 500,000 units in california per year for a goal. we'll continue to amend the bills and others and provide analysis and updates as fleas. -- updates as necessary. i'm here for any questions or comments. >> great. we'll do public comments before we take any questions. would any member of the public wish to dment? if so, please -- wish to comment? if so, please come forward. >> good afternoon, i'm paul webber. i'm a delegate to the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods

from telegraph dwellers. i'm here to augment what the staff has said and written in their well-done report. the simple answer -- you probably have the question of what do we do about this. the board of supervisors yesterday approved by a large margin 8-3 to oppose the bill. -- in sacramento. as staff mentioned, this is a state bill. san francisco obviously doesn't control that. the best of all -- in the best of all worlds, the bill would be defeated. but there is pressure to generate some mandate to impose on cities including charter cities of which san francisco is one.

a clean and simple approach would be to seek an exemption from application of the bill limited to san francisco's equivalent of historic district or historic resources. to even get to that point, it will be important for san francisco to engage with other similar departments in other cities or nonprofit affiliates to see if there is agreement among a fairly broad-based group to seek such an exemption, soo if you can agree on what it ought to cover. there is no assurance we'll get it, but the opportunity for an exemption for something like this is probably greater than realistically getting an exemption for the whole city from the bill.

so, i would urge you to work with staff including the city attorney's office. seeing what you can come up with, seeing whom you should engage p with because this will abe proactive effort if you're going to do something and proactive with other organizations throughout the state. thanks very much. >> thank you, mr. webber. does any member of the public wish to comment? seeing and hearing none, we'll close public comment. commissioner pearlman. >> thanks for the presentation. i've been following it carefully. you know, i'm pleased to see the amendments that happened along the way. and i was disappointed in our own board of supervisors that chose to make a statement about their stand on it well before the bill actually is finalized. which seems -- there maybe ways to get exemptions or ways -- i suggested ways to exempt rh 1

and rh-2 districts because there is fear around the increased height limits. i think the board of supervisors jumped the gun because we're not readyity. i can'-- ready.i'm sorry, i canr name. paolo, there you are. is there a map done that indicates what the percentage of san francisco has rent control, historic districts, all the things that would be exempt from this? as a commissioner, we got the barrage of letters of people in the community who are up in arms. every one of them sai said 96% f the city would be rezoned by this. but if you take away rent control and historic districts -- >> hisser to iks districts are not exempted -- historic

districts are not exempted. >> historic districts are not exempted. any building with a rent control unit is not allowed to demolish unless the city chooses to figure out a way to allow that. >> okay. >> we have about half of our housing stock is rent controlled. unrent control. any building built before 1979 generally, if it's rental units, that is half of our housing stock. >> to clarify that, as proposed, could somebody add on top of it or add an addition to it? >> it doesn't get that specific. but my read of it was that any building with a rent control unit is not. but i don't think it gets to that level. >> but it does say does not

otherwise change local approval process for historic preservation. >> i think the issue is, let's say there is a owner in liberty hill has a structure. the question is here on page 4 about what discretion -- on page 10. unclear what the discretion city commission retains. we don't feel this buildin buils compatible but we may not have discretion to say that because it wouldn't meet the minimum height requirement. >> but where does it say does not change the local approval process. >> but we have to get the certificate of appropriateness. >> but the discretion in terms of height. >> could we not grant a certificate of approval to a

project that isn't appropriate in a historic district if the next door neighbors are 40 feet high and someone proposes an 80-foot high building? i'm saying that it doesn't feel as draconian as that because that would be the process as it went through the department. you could -- the staff could say we're not sure we could grant a certificate of appropriateness because it doesn't meet the requirements of the district. >> i think that's the question. is it a state law? it might supersede local laws. there would be april minimum height g height. there is possible we wouldn't have the discretion to make the finding. >> you may have to approve it. we're not sure. >> but then we could be sued. those are some of the questions that are unclear at the moment.

>> this is what i don't understand. if we have certain things that can be allowed like you can't demo rent control units. you know, and if we still have some level f, again i understand these things have to be worked out. as the gentleman said, are there certain exceptions? is that something you can work with the department or a group of departments from across the state could work with center wiener and other cosponsors on looking at things like historic districts. aif it's inappropriate for the historic district based on ceqa requirements on how we evaluate historic districts, sthoo an exemption -- are there a series of exemptions that could be proposed? >> i forgot to mention that we're going back to the planning

commission on april 26th, i believe. and they've asked us to kind of come with our recommended amendments. so i think i'd be happy to take down recommendations now. >> so that would be a recommendation that within a defined article xi -- i mean article x historic districts and/or article xi conservation district that there could be some exemption to this. if it doesn't meet the character-defining features or meet the requirements for additions to the district. >> thank you. commissioner black. >> yes, i tried to find this in the report and i didn't find it anywhere. what are the thresholds that trigger this? i'm assuming someone who wants to build a deck on their house

or add a small kitchen addition to their house in a rh-1 or two districts wouldn't have to -- >> so -- is it just new construction? >> basically it could change the zoning. if you're in rh-1 and within a quarter mile of transit as specified in the bill, your zoning is essentially no longer rh-1. it's still rh-1 on our map and paper but this bill would say because you're within a quarter mile of the transit, your zoning is four or five or eight storeys. that's your new height limit. there is no density control or parking required. >> i think to clarify that maybe it's confusing. this idea of minimum height. they're not saying that if you're a developer, you have to build to the minimum height,

they're saying the city cannot impose a high limit lower than this height. so you want to build a housing project, you could do a one-storey housing project, no one is going to stop you but the city can't prevent you. it's confusing, this idea of minimum height. it's not requiring people to build to this height, but cities can't impose a lower height limit. >> understood. thank you for the clarification. i was fairly sure that was the case. i guess i wonder, are there still thresholds or triggers or -- other than just this overlying zoning that projects wouldn't have to comply with this? is there anything? >> i'm not -- >> i couldn't find it -- >> i don't understand. >> i'm trying to understand as a especially as it relates o

historic structures -- relates to historic structures. will is lack of clarity on how the codes interact. are there any other exemptions that would affect a historic district? >> yes. it doesn't appear to say anything about historic districts, but it does not -- anything in the bill doesn't necessarily change the local processes that are in place. so we are -- our historic -- the way we treat historic districts and preservation and resources is our local -- something that we've developed locally. those wouldn't change. what is unclear is discretion -- how much discretion we have if someone is requesting a bonus and our discretion limits them from getting sort of the full bonus that this law would entitle. it's unclear how those two

interact. >> thank you. >> there is the irony of the bus running every 15 minutes. i guess this is a bus being schedule, not the bus actually running. >> that would leave most of the city out. [laughter] >> we've also, i think -- we also think there are some issues that we have questions about. for example, i think in order for the way it's written do you, any bus that runs 15 minutes within the peak hour. we think for transit to be useful, it has to be frequent all day, not just at the peak hour. then there is the issue is zoning is tied to transit like a bus line, then the zoning could shift when the bus line shifts. >> commissioner johnck. >> well, knowing a former

super -- knowing ever supervisor wiener's keen interest in support of the mission of the historic preservation commission and the work we do discussed with him many issues. he presented proposals from time to time before he was elected to the senate. i would think he would be interested and i am interested in either clarifying with him our discretion. i don't think his intent is -- i think his intent is to make a very important statement about the concept of the bill. i think it would be important to have our mission stay intact. if we need to say we would appreciate an exemption for historic districts or conservation districts under article x -- it may not be an

exemption. there are different parts. there is density and th the hei. the density limits may have no impact on the historic district. >> i think i would endorse us sending a letter or taking the comments back and, i mean, i could call him up. i'm free to do that. >> please do that if you have the connection. >> that's enough said. go ahead. >> commissiocommissioner johns. >> one thing you might want to think through and that is what seems to me might come up if there is a strong push to exempt landmark districts from this. what happens when some city adopts the historic -- the two-storeys above the garage

height limit historic district? or does something else, which cities will do to somebody verts the intention -- subvert the intention. many, many californians demonstrate their hostility towards housing. so i think you have to think through what you would do to assure, to build into the legislation that what i call legitimate historic districts say liberty hill. it might get an exemption, whereas -- >> or maybe that's a question at our discretion. what -- would the commission have the discretion to approve it. >> there might be districts that would be established for purely

for the reason of qualifying for the exemption. >> which is, i'm sure, why bill has been written in this particular way because of that cynicism. commissioner -- did we have any other comments? i think -- i guess that's it. when are you going to the planning commission? >> april 26th, i believe. let me check on my phone. april 26th. >> we'll have another hearing before then. i wonder, could we add this again to that? if we wanted to make some comments for the planning commission? >> sure. we'd be happy to craft a letter to the commission on your behalf. >> we could rescre re-- review t the hearing.

that's mid-april -- >> next hearing? >> yes. does that sound reasonable? >> yes. >> okay. on your own behalf. thank you for your presentation. i think that concludes our hearing. [gavel]

>> self-planning works to preserve and enhance the city what kind hispanic the environment in a variety of ways overhead plans to fwied other departments to open space and land use an urban design and a variety of other matters related to the physical urban environment planning projects include implementing code change or designing plaza or parks projects can be broad as proipd on overhead neighborhood planning effort typically include public involvement depending on the subject a new

lot or effect or be active in the final process lots of people are troubled by they're moving loss of they're of what we preserve to be they're moving mid block or rear yard open space. >> one way to be involved attend a meeting to go it gives us and the neighbors to learn and participate dribble in future improvements meetings often take the form of open houses or focus groups or other stinks that allows you or your neighbors to provide feedback and ask questions the best way to insure you'll be alerted the community meetings sign up for the notification on the website by signing up using you'll receive the notifications of existing request the specific

neighborhood or project type if you're language is a disability accomodation please call us 72 hours before the event over the events staff will receive the input and publish the results on the website the notifications bans feedback from the public for example, the feedback you provide may change how a street corridors looks at or the web policy the get started in planning for our neighborhood or learner more mr. the upcoming visit the plans and programs package of our we are talking about with our feedback and participation that is important to us not everyone takes this so be proud of taking ann

. >> the san francisco carbon fund was started in 2009. it's basically legislation that was passed by the board of supervisors and the mayor's office for the city of san francisco. they passed legislation that said okay, 13% of the cost of the city air travel is going to go into a fund and we're going to use the money in that fund to do local projects that are going to mitigate and sequester greenhouse gas emission. the grants that we're giving, they're anywhere from 15,000

to, say, $80,000 for a two year grant. i'm shawn rosenmoss. i'm the development of community partnerships and carbon fund for the san francisco department of environment. we have an advisory committee that meets once or twice a year to talk about, okay, what are we going to fund? because we want to look at things like equity and innovative projects. >> i heard about the carbon fund because i used to work for the department of environment. i'm a school education team. my name is marcus major. i'm a founding member of climate action now. we started in 2011. our main goal it to remove carbon in the public right-of-way on sidewalks to build educational gardens that teach people with climate change. >> if it's a greening grant,

75% of the grant has to go for greening. it has to go for planting trees, it has to go for greening up the pavement, because again, this is about permanent carbon savings. >> the dinosaur vegetable gardens was chosen because the garden was covered in is afault since 1932. it was the seed funding for this whole project. the whole garden,ible was about 84,000 square feet, and our project, we removed 3,126 square feet of cement. >> we usually issue a greening rft every other year, and that's for projects that are going to dig up pavement, plant trees, community garden, school garden. >> we were awarded $43,000 for this project. the produce that's grown here is consumed all right at large by the school community.

in this garden we're growing all kinds of organic vegetables from lettuce, and artichokes. we'll be planting apples and loquats, all kinds of great fruit and veggies. >> the first project was the dipatch biodiesel producing facility. the reason for that is a lot of people in san francisco have diesel cars that they were operating on biodiesel, and they were having to go over to berkeley. we kind of the dog batch preferentials in the difference between diesel and biodiesel. one of the gardens i love is the pomeroy rec center. >> pomeroy has its roots back

to 1952. my name is david, and i'm the chamber and ceo of the pomeroy rehabilitation and recreation center. we were a center for people with intellectual and development cal disabilities in san francisco san francisco. we also have a program for individuals that have acquired brain injury or traumatic brain injury, and we also have one of the larger after school programs for children with special needs that serves the public school system. the sf carbon fund for us has been the launching pad for an entire program here at the pomeroy center. we received about $15,000. the money was really designed to help us improve our garden by buying plants and material and also some infrastructure like a drip system for plants.

we have wine barrels that we repurposed to collect rain water. we actually had removed over 1,000 square feet of concrete so that we could expand the garden. this is where our participants, they come to learn about gardening. they learn about our work in the greenhouse. we have plants that we actually harvest, and eggs from our chickens that we take up and use in cooking classes so that our participants learn as much as anybody else where food comes from. we have two kitchens here at the pomeroy center. one is more of a commercial kitchen and one is more setup like a home kitchen would be, and in the home kitchen, we do a lot of cooking classes, how to make lasagna, how to comsome eggs, so this grant that we received has tremendous value, not only for our center, for our participants, but the

entire community. >> the thing about climate, climate overlaps with everything, and so when we start looking at how we're going to solve climate programs, we solve a lot of other problems, too. this is a radical project, and to be a part of it has been a real honor and a privilege to work with those administrators with the sf carbon fund at the department of environment. >> san francisco carbon grant to -- for us, opened the door to a new -- a new world that we didn't really have before; that the result is this beautiful garden. >> when you look at the community gardens we planted in schools and in neighborhoods, how many thousands of people now have a fabulous place to walk around and feel safe going outside and are growing their own food. that's a huge impact, and we're just going to keep rolling that out and keep rolling that

>> a way of life in san francisco. when the next major quake hits, the city hopes a new law requiring seismic upgrades to five story buildings will help keep more residents safe and sound. tell me a little about the soft story program. what is it? >> it's a program the mayor signed into law about a year and a half ago and the whole idea behind it was to help homeowners strengthen buildings so that they would not collapse. >> did you the soft story program apply to all buildings or building that were built in a certain time frame?

>> it only applies to buildings built in the time frame of 1978 and earlier. it's aimed at wood framed buildings that are three or more stories and five or more units. but the openings at the garage level and the street level aren't supported in many buildings. and without the support during a major earthquake, they are expected to pancake and flatten ~. many of the buildings in this program are under rent control so it's to everybody's advantage to do the work and make sure they protect their investment and their tenant. >> notices have gone out to more than 6,000 owners of potentially at-risk properties but fewer than one-third have responded and thousands might miss an important deadline in september to tell the city what they plan to do. let's talk worst case scenario. what happens in a collapse?

>> buildings have the tendency of rolling over. the first soft story walls lean over and the building collapse. in an earthquake the building is a total loss. >> can you describe what kind of strengthening is involved in the retrofit? >> one of the basic concepts, you want to think of this building kind of like rubber band and the upper three floor are very rigid box and the garage is a very flexible element. in an earthquake the garage will have a tendency to rollover. you have to rubber band analogy that the first floor is a very tough but flexible rubber band such that you never drive force he to the upper floors. where all your damage goes into controlled element like plywood or steel frame. >> so, here we are actually inside of a soft story building. can we talk a little about what kinds of repairs property owners might expect? >> it's a very simple process. we deliberately tried to keep

it that way. so, what's involved is plywood, which when you install it and make a wall as we have done here already, then you cover it with this gypsum material. this adds some flexibility so that during the earthquake you'll get movement but not collapse. and that gets strengthened even more when we go over to the steel frame to support the upper floor. >> so, potentially the wood and the steel -- it sounds like a fairly straightforward process takes your odds of collapse from one in 4 to one in 30? >> that's exactly right. that's why we're hoping that people will move quickly and make this happen. >> great. let's take a look. so, let's talk steel frames. tell me what we have going on here. >> well, we have a steel frame here. there are two of these and they

go up to the lower floor and there is a beam that go across, basically a box that is much stiffer and stronger. ~ goes so that during the earthquake the upper floor will not collapse down on this story. it can be done in about two weeks' time. voila, you're done. easy. >> for more information on how to get your building earthquake ready, you. >> well to the epic center are you ready for the next earthquake did you know if you're a renter you can get earthquake shushes we'll take to the earthquake authorities

hi welcome to another episode i'm the chief resilience officer for san francisco i'm joined by my good friends for the earthquake authority we're at the el cap center for the city and county of san francisco started in 2013 to get the community and talk about the risk we think about earthquake if usual great city you'll see one of the demonstrates we've built the model home and i encourage other episodes we'll be retroactively retrofitting and showing you as property owners to employ you work for the california earthquake authority talk about your role and earthquake shirnls up think the viewers want to know if you're a renter or property owner how the insurance issues. >> i'm the chief mitigation officer or c e a a property line

funded pubically managed entity that provides earthquake shiners for one to four units and mobile owners to come down and renters throughout the state of california. >> what make the c e a deft. >> we work with 19 participates the insurer that sells you, your homeowner policy you're not obligated to buy it but you can buy a policy. >> am i covered with homeowners insurance. >> no california homeowners understand their homeowners insurance doesn't cover earthquake they need a separate policy if you're an shiners you can get the earthquake insurance policy. >> so explain why it is for the c e a is deft if a traditional insurance agency.

>> irreverent so in the 80s the state of california passed a law that requires any company that writes the policies to over earthquake insurance the homeowners are not required by commissioner cranshaw can bye there was so much loss they were going to stop writing the insurance policies for earthquakes they wanted to stop a serious insurance policy. >> we're talking about the homeownership's buying the earthquake shiners but 70 percent are renters what's my opposite. >> the option for renter the earthquake be insurance company is affordable i think people don't realize just exactly what it covers it covers damaged property but loss of use if you have to be under a building they have a quarter main that was broken as well as emergency repair if interests glass breaks

in the carpet you need to be in our unit that's whether earthquake is important. >> you're title you're the excessive mitigation officer for the state of california when i think of insurance i don't think about mitigation. >> so as part of public safety mission the c e a started to put aside mitigation loss fund 5 percent of invested income and when i joined the company 34 years ago we had $45 million to make a difference for moving and incentivizing and mitigation for california homeowners to structure engineering a unique opportunity to cervical homeowners to help them to mitigate the equivalent. >> whether an owner or renter i want to find more information about earthquake insurance where should i go. >> earthquake authority.com not only information about

insurance but a calculated figures and as of january lots of deductible and 25 percent if a homeowner mitigate their hope up to 20 percent off their premium as an incentive for the work. >> what does mitigate the home mean. >> strengthen, renovate, retrofit through a home particularly older to earlier codes and you put in adding streamlining maybe collar bolts to tie to the foundation or to the wall so it is braced to earthquake can be very, very affordable and really makes a difference. >> thank you very much for being with us i encourage the viewers not only to checkout the earthquake authority but we'll talk about

good morning. good morning. thank you all so much for coming. this is our 3rd disaster council meeting of the year. and my name is ann cronenberg, i appreciate all of you for attending. i'm director of emergency management. i'm going to turn this over to jason elliott, who is mayor farrell's chief of staff for opening remarks. >> nice to see you all again. i was reminded by these lovely talking points put in front of me, that it's been one quarter since we convened in this forum and i w