excuse. >> i would like to make a motion to excuse supervisor peskin. can you call item one? take. >> clerk: approving 7095.42 to natasha khoruzenko for property tax in an unreported change in ownership. >> the deputy is here. thank you for being here. >> good morning, thank you for having me. this is the final reward under a

now expired property tax dog ordinance that expired about a year ago. in this case we got information from ms. natasha khoruzenko about a change of ownership that had happened in 1988 and we spent quite a bit of time researching the issue and getting assistance with the city attorney. the claim was that originally it was reported that there had been the parent child transfer. we learned that was, in fact, not the case. we were able to or were required to go back and reassess the

property. the result was that we assessed and the tax collector collected about $70,000 in unpaid property taxes and under the watchdog ordinance, if the person reporting to us provided information that was unknown to the assessor, they were eligible for a 10% reward. this item here is to approve the assessor's recommendation that a reward of over $7,000 be granted to ms. natasha khoruzenko. >> thank you for the presentation. i don't see any questions from members. i will open for public comment on item one. public comment is now closed. we will take a motion to move forward with recommendations. we can do that without objection. >> thank you very much. >> mr. clerk please call item

number two. >> clerk: a motion approving the budget legislative analyst work plan for 2018. it authorizes the budget analyst to reallocate 20 percent of the hours based on the board of supervisors service needs and requires approval for reallocation greater than 20%. it sets dates for the 2018 annual performance evaluation of the joint venture partnership. >> thank you, mr. clerk. we have the budget legislative analyst office offering remarks on this item. >> i want to clarify. this is our audit plan, not work plan. there is a difference there. this is a motion to approve the audit plan for 2018-2019. this would be within the hours

approve within our contract. the board approved 6800 hours in 2018-2019 for audit work and projects. this is women within that -- well with in that. there are three audits recommended. one is an evaluation of the trencheds and municipal they ridership and revenues and managing traffic congestion and the impact on m un i. it shows a decline in ridership from year to year and increase in traffic congestion. we thought these worry lated items. next audit would be the work force development for low income and homeless adults. the third is an audit of the office of economic and work force development planning for large scale development to address the economic impact on the surrounding businesses.

we have currently completed two audits for 2017-2018. these would be audits we would begin in july 2018. we are available for questions. >> seeing no questions. we open public comment on item two. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you, ms. campbell, for developing the work and audit plan. we do have -- can we have a motion to move forward with recommendation without objection? thank you so much, mr. campbell. mr. clerk please call the astitem not the last but item number three. >> clerk: a hear on existing building standards and seismic safety zonesig concluding infill and waterfront neighborhoods.

>> thank you, mr. clerk. the sponsor is unable to be here today. we are continuing to the call of the chair. i would like to open up for public comment on item number three. thank you. >> good morning. brian silver. i would just like to after eight hearings point out there is an existing pg&e vault underneath the entire tower on the south side of the foundation. when this building started settling. the tower got hung up on this utility pole.

that is it. >> thank you. okay. seeing no further public comment on item number 3. public comment is closed. thank you for attending. we will take a motion to continue at the call of the chair without objection. >> mr. clerk please call item four through 15. >> clerk: 4 through 15 are ordinances and resolution authorizing settlements of lawsuit against the city and county of san francisco. >> we will open up for public comment on all items. no public comment it is closed. may we take a motion to convene to closed session without objection. we will ask members of the public to exit the room.

>> we show public quorum. to voice your opinions and concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of small businesses here in san francisco. if you need assistance with small business matters, start here at the office of small business.

thank you. first item, please. >> clerk: item one, call to order and roll call. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: mr. president, you have a quorum. >> great. thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: item 2, general public comment. allows members of the public to comment generally on matters within the business commission's jurisdiction, but not on the agenda, and suggests future discussion items. >> do we have members of the public that would like to talk to us on items that are not on today's agenda. hello, sir. >> my name is stephen cornell and i am representing the council of district merchants,

and i had a request. i think last meeting or meeting before, you had a discussion about displays in storefronts and the general health of business and retail in san francisco. from that. we would like to request that you go to the planning department, the zoning administrator, and ask for determination, a determination of what internet companies are. are they formula businesses? do they form -- fall under our definition of them? right now, internet companies have their own trucks going in and out of the city all the time, making deliveries. some of the companies have lockers or small kiosks where they can leave stuff off. they even have places where you can buy some stuff. we're starting to see things like -- an example, amazon, which now owns whole foods markets, they'll be in the same

building, down the road maybe. the whole foods market might not do well. amazon might take over. does that mean it becomes another formula retail? what we would like is some kind of a determination of how this all works. any questions? thank y thank you. >> great. got it. thank you. any other members of the public that would like to make a comment on items not on today's agenda? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item, please. [agenda item read]. >> clerk: the business is the jazz room, the presenter is richard kurylo, legacy interim

manager. >> good afternoon, president adams, commissioners, office of small business staff. richard kurylo. legacy business program manager. sfgov tv, i have a powerpoint presentation. before you today is one application for your consideration for the business to be included on the legacy business registry. the application was reviewed by me for completion then submitted to planning department staff on february 21st for their review. the historic preservation commission heard the application on march 21st and made a positive recommendation to the small business commission. for the applicant, the commission has been provided a staff report, draft resolution, the application, a case report from planning department staff, and a resolution from the historic preservation commission. there are copies on the table

for the public. the applicant is the jazz room. the jazz room is located at 5267 third street and opened in 1962, a time of similarering unrest in the bayview-hunters point community. african americans made it their home after world war ii. this unrest channelled a sense of community. in this environment, the jazz room opened as a venue that would offer live music and drinks, designed to cater to the social and entertainment needs of the evolving community. although the jazz room has always served alcohol, it was envisioned to be more than just another neighborhood bar, hence, the name. jazz room was and is an important part of the legacy of the african american experience in san francisco and bayview-hunters point. jazz room received a positive

recommendation from the historic preservation commission. staff finds the business has met the three criteria to qualify for listing on the legacy business registry. there is a draft resolution for consideration by the small business commission. note that a motion in support of the business should be a motion in favor of the resolution. in the resolution, please pay close attention to the core physical features or traditions that define the business. once approved by the small business commission, the business must maintain these physical features or traditions in order to remain on the legacy basis registry. for the jazz room, it's our featuring jazz music. this concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. i know there are representatives who would like to speak. >> great. thank you. any questions before we go to public comment? okay. would anybody like to speak on behalf of the jazz room?

and we are opening it up to public comment. come on up. welcome. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is theo ellington, and i'm alongside the owner of the jazz room. state your name for the record? bernedette smith. >> now, normally, bernedette is working at the jazz room, but there is a monumentous occasion not only for bernedette, but for the community, so she wanted to make an appearance. this is a no brainer for me and a no brainer for a lot of the folks in the bayview. this is a long-standing community institution because like the presentation mentioned, we've got civil rights movement, we've got the era of this investment. this was really providing

consistency for a lot of the residents who lived down in bayview, so you guys are cementing bayview's history and really preserving the african american culture. you know across the city and county of san francisco, the african american population has decreased significantly. there are a number of efforts that are happening in bayview in particular to preserve that culture. i'm a part of a group called economic development on third, started by four women owned businesses along the third street corridor that decided the success of their business was dependent upon their collective success, so there's a lot of activity happening, and this really, like i mentioned before, cements the legacy for african americans, cements the legacy for miss bernedette, cements the legacy of the jazz room, and we urge you to support the resolution and grant us this status. thank you so much.

>> great. thank you. any other speakers? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners? commissioner dooley? >> commissioner dooley: clearly, this business is well deserving being included on the legacy business, and i'm sure we all want to congratulate you on your long-time success, and congratulations. >> miss smith, you're an angel, and you've put up with it for a long, long time down there. and you've seen the changes good and bad, and hopefully we're in a good position down there now, you know, with the council district merchants and other organizations, good

things are happening, and you endured, so thank you for everything you've done for the city and for the neighborhood. so do we have a motion to approve? >> move to approve. >> second. >> i have a motion by commissioner dwight, seconded by commissioner yee riley. role call. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: motion passes, 5-0. >> congratulations. [applause]. >> next item, please. [agenda item read].

>> r. kurylo: good afternoon again. richard kurylo, legacy business program manager. today i'm presenting proposed rules and regulations for the legacy business registry. the document includes items from the administrative code, previous direction from the sbc, recommendations from the city attorney, and newly proposed rules and regulations. this is the initial effort to compile all the rules and regulations for the registry into a comprehensive document. please feel free to ask questions during the presentation. number one, scoped from the administrative code. a, these rules and regulations apply to a registry of legacy businesses peradmin code section 2(a) 242. b, the office of small business shall establish and maintain the legacy business registry. c, legacy business means a

business that has been nominated by a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor and that the business after a hearing determines it meets each of the following criteria. i'm going to read this in its entirety because there are a lot of references to it in the rules and regulations. number one, the business has operated in san francisco for 30 or more years with no break-in san francisco operations exceeding two years. the business may have operated in more than one location. if the liz has operated in san francisco for more than 20 years but less than 30 years, it may still satisfy this subsection if the small business commission finds that the business has significantly contributed to the history or identity of a particular neighborhood or community and if not included on the registry, the business would face a significant risk of displacement. you have to identify pretty much everything in this paragraph, which you'll see. number two, the business has contributed to the

neighborhood's history and/or the identity of a particular neighborhood or community. number three, the business is committed to maintaining the physical features or traditions that define the business, including craft, culinary or art forms, and if the small business commission makes all three findings, it shall include the business in the registry as a legacy business. note i'm proposing that letter's d and e which follow be moved to the section of definitions of keywords and phrases; and also, the word shall will be added to both sections. i placed it incorrectly and discovered it when i was doing the powerpoint presentation. b says the physical features or traditions that define the business shall include the business model. e, says the physical features or tradition that define the business shall include the name of the business. the business must maintain a

consistent core business name to be eligible for and remain on the registry. i provided an example here, which you folks can read on the powerpoint or you can read in your presentation, and any exceptions shall be made on a case-by-case basis by the small business commission. we are leaving an opening if you decided that you want to make an exception. f, nominations for the registry shall be limited to a total of 300 businesses peryear. a nomination is deemed to have been made on the date that small business commission received the nomination in writing by a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor. nominations received after the close of business on june 30th shall be considered received in the following fiscal year, and the nominations for any fichk will year shall be the first 300 received in that fiscal year. these are all from the admin code. g, there is no limit on the number of nominations that may

be made by a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor. h, there shall be a one time refundable admin fee for inclusion in the registry. number two, definitions of keywords and phrases, a, business. 1, business shall be a for profit or nonprofit entity including sole proprietorships, general partnerships, limited liability companies, or llc's, b corporations, c corporations, s corporations, limited liability partnerships and joint ventures. these categories came directly from the business registration with the treasurer tax collector. we left off public entities from the list. number two, if a business includes multiple corporate entities or is otherwise divided into multiple entities, for example, departments, sections, divisions, agencies,

etcetera, they shall all be included in the registry as long as they fall under the same employer identification number, and then, we briefly define what an ein is. number three, if there are multiple locations, all san francisco locations shall be included in the registry as long as they have the same name, same ownership, and same business model for all of the locations. same name means the name core business name, we gave an example. same ownership means having same ownership and identical percentage of ownership, and same business model means having identical core features or traditions. d, nomination. nomination shall be a letter on nominator letterhead. the nominator shall submit a letter that includes the name of the business, a paragraph that notes the business's eligibility criteria, business

address and contact information. two, the nominator shall be a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor at the time of nomination. the nominator need not still be a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor when the small business commission makes the final determination to add the business to the legacy business registry. c, the business has operated in san francisco for 30 or more years with no break-in san francisco operations cedeing two years. number two, the number of years in business in san francisco shall be 30 or more years in the past, and the start date shall be the start date of their articles of incorporation. number three, the founding location of the business shall be used to determine the number of years the business has operated, even if the business has moved from its founding location. number four, the business need not be headquartered in san francisco. number five, no break-in san

francisco operations exceeding two years shall mean no break exceeding two years in the existence of the business as evidenced through the business registration, and no break-in fiscal operations exceeding four years. exceptions may be made for exceptional circumstances as determined by the sbc. number six, a business shall be in existence and in operation in san francisco and not in a period of break-in operations when the business is added to the registry as evidenced through the business registration. d-1, more than 20 years shall mean at least 20 years and one day. the starting day as well as the specific starting month and day if known shall be considered in determining the age of the business being more than 20 years. e, significant risk of displacement. business rents their building

and/or space, and one or more of the following must apply: the existence of the building is at risk or there is a month to month lease or there is no lease or the lease expires prior to or shortly after the business would become 30 years old, and the business certifies and/or demonstrates that the lease may not be renewed by the landlord and/or the rent will increase significantly or there has been some other significant risk of displacement demonstrated by the business owner to the satisfaction of the office of small business. f-1, maintaining the physical feature ares or traditions that define the business shall mean the business must maintain the craft, culinary art forms or business model as identified by the office of small business and approved by the small business commission. number three, status categories. we've developed six categories for nominees, applicants, and legacy businesses.

these are important because they pertain to the registry and the website. category one, legacy business active. the business's registration is active, the business is physically open, business is listed on the registry and included on the website. category two, legacy business active in transition. business registration is active, the business has been physically closed for no more than four years, and the business intends to reopen. they may be seeking a new space or closed for construction, etcetera. the nature of the registry listing is that the business is listed on the registry and included in it a separate section on the website. category three, legacy business inactive. the business registration is either active or has been inactive for no more than two years. business has been physically

closed for no more than fours years, and the business intends to remain closed. there is the possibility that they could open, which is why they're not removed from the registry at this point. businesses listed on the registry and included in a separate section on the website. category four, legacy business removed from registry. sbc determines that the business misrepresented its qualifications for the registry or sbc determines that the business has ceased operation in san francisco, meaning their business registration has been inactive for two or more years or the business has been physically closed for four more years or the sbc determines that the business is no longer committed to maintaining features or traditions that led the business to be listed on the registry. the nature of the registry listing is that the business would be removed from the registry and the website.

categories five and six have to do with nominees and applicants being active or inactive, and this really only affects how we list them in our database internally. number four, removal of a legacy business from the registry. rescinding a nomination of a legacy business before placement on the registry. a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor may rescind a nomination on the business before it's been placed on the registry. this would preclude the listing of the business on the registry until the business is nominated by another nominator. e, rescinding a nomination of a legacy business after placement on the registry. if a member of the board of supervisors or the mayor rescinds a nomination after the business has been placed on the registry, this shall have no effect on the listing of the business on the registry, but the nominator shall be

identified as rescinded formally nominator's name until such time the business is nominated by another nominator. number three, requesting a removal of a legacy business from the legacy business registry. the mayor, a member of the board of supervisors, a commissioner of the sbc or hpc or any member of the public may request the removal of a legacy business from the registry. any such request shall be reviewed to the office of small business. if osb determines that the request for removal warrants further action, it will be referred to the sbc for a knotsed hearing. if osb determines that the request for removal does not warrant further action, asb will notify the requestor. the requestor may appeal that determination to the sbc. letter d, cause for removal

from the registry. any of the following shall be cause to remove a business from the legacy business registry, and these correspond with that category four that i mentioned earlier. number one, sbc determines that the business misrepresented its qualifications for the registry or number two, sbc determines that the business has ceased operations in san francisco or three the sbc determines that the business is no longer committed to maintaining the features or traditions that led the business to be listed on the registry. e, appeals process. determinations made by the office of small business may be appealed in writing to the sbc. appeals should be transmitted by means that will establish the date osb received the request. the appeal must specify each and every ground on which the appellant seeks to disturb sbc's determination. osb will hold a hearing to consider an appeal.

number five, revisions to these rules and regulations. revision to the rules and regulations are subject to disapproval of the board of supervisors by ordinance. the process is described in administrative code 2(a) 242, and we included that here in the rules and regulations. i'm happy to answer any questions you might have. >> commissioner dooley? >> commissioner dooley: i have one question on category two, the business need not be headquartered in san francisco, can you just give me a little more detail on that. >> the business need not be -- which one? i'm sorry. >> commissioner dooley: headquartered. >> r. kurylo: ah, yes. so to be a legacy business, the business does not need to be headquartered in san francisco, but the business itself needs to be in the city for 30 or more years to become on the

registry. i think that's in the -- it was originally -- >> it was under the original, right. >> r. kurylo: yeah. i think originally there were three versions of the prop j, in the admin code, and one of them said that the business had to be headquartered, and that was removed from the final legislation. >> was there a particular business or businesses that we wanted to include that was the reason for that? >> i don't think in particular, but it was -- >> or was it in principle. >> r. kurylo: but there are a number coming forward that are seeking approval, that are not headquartered in san francisco, but they're family owned and have been here for 30 plus years. there is an example coming forward. >> commissioner dooley: i think we might want to think

about that one again at some time, just to get a little more clarification on it. >> no. let's say you have a company that's, like, a retail store that's giving back to the neighborhood, but their corporate headquarters isn't in san francisco, but they definitely -- >> i think jeffrey torres is headquartered in berkeley, but you can see they started? the ci -- started in the city, but then, they had to move because of the rent, and then, they opened a store in the city. >> that -- that was a very good example. >> r. kurylo: came back to the city specifically for the legacy business program, actually. >> i guess the -- i guess, you know, the sort of wrinkle here is that it's taxpayer money that is paying for the legacy

registry and all of the attendant benefits. if a company that is not based in san francisco were to apply for those benefits and receive them, is that company really paying its fair share in terms of taxes and -- and they're going to be subject to kind of the start regulations that anyone -- any business is, including certain fees and taxes, but they're not going to be paying certain taxes into the system based on their location outside of the city, so i -- that's the only area where i would see it. >> and then -- and then only their business in san francisco would be listed on the registry. we wouldn't list -- >> yeah. >> r. kurylo: and then, the grant's only for -- >> yeah. it's eligible for things that happened within the city, but you could argue that that -- that that business wasn't fully

paying into the system, if you will, because of its location outside of our county. observation. we don't need to belabor something that's probably a very rare hedge condition. >> r. kurylo: it does point happen very often, that's true. >> i will say you did -- this is a big cleanup, and again, richard, you did a great job in cleaning this up. and everything seems more straightforward now. you did a good job on this. >> r. kurylo: yet. fantastic. thank you. >> thank you. >> any other questions before we go to public comment? are there any members of the public who would like to make a comment on item number four? seeing none, public comment is closed. this is an action item. does anybody want to make a motion?

>> i move. >> second. >> the motion by commissioner yee riley, second by commissioner dwight. ro roll call. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: motion passes, 5-0. >> great. >> clerk: and may i ask, does that include the question that i wanted to make where i wanted to move -- >> yes. >> okay. does that need to be added to the motion or -- >> technically, it should be read into the record, so -- so. >> i think the motion was to approve with the corrections noted in your presentation. >> right. >> okay. >> that's perfect. >> r. kurylo: and that was moving letters 1 d and e to the sections of definitions of both phrases and adding shall to both. >> yes. >> thank you. >> thank you. you did a very good job, richard.

>> r. kurylo: thank you. oka okay. >> next item, please. >> item five. [agenda item read]

. >> so commissioners, i am going to be presenting on this since our office worked with supervisor tang along with director tom huey from the department of building inspection and nicole bonn from the mayor's office on disability. so this request did grow out of the round table of small business leaders that met with the mayor, and from that prompted the meeting with director huey and bon and i with supervisor tang, so this is the second time that she has extended out the deadline.

some of this is around sort of greater complexity than maybe what was initially thought and sort of getting the program together, but this will be the last time that we do any extension. to the primary -- the primary -- the key extensions around category one and two, so extending that deadline which was initially may 23rd, 2018, to submit the check list, and if you're a category two, and there's any barriers, what are the barrier rules and proposed -- the proposed removal of the barriers for any barriers that are there for category two. so a property owner needed to submit that check list by may 23rd, so this has now been extended out to january 1, 2019. and then, for categories two and three because we had this may 23rd date -- or a 23rd date

was sort of the reporting timeline, we just -- supervisor tang just moved it to the following month, so it begins at the beginning of the following month of what was originally in the first ledge lation for categories three and four. and then, i want to extend my appreciation to director huey again tone incentivize propert owners. he said that the fee is pretty nominal. he proposed waiving the fee so this hopefully will be another encouragement that the property owners have to take so that they won't have to submit an application fee. and then, as was read into the record, the first report to the board of supervisors will be on december 1st, 2018. so those are the key things. these are requests that came from the small business community to help deal with

compliance, and if there's any questions, i'm happy to answer them. >> any questions, commissioners? no? seeing none, any members of the public wish to make a comment on item number five? welcome. >> stephen cornell again. one thing that might be helpful is the -- something where the property owner will be compelled to tell their tenants when work is going to be done, so when they have to get this going, the building -- all of a sudden, the tenant might find their sidewalks are being torn up or something, that somehow there's some onus on the building owner to notify the tenants with some reasonable amount of time. obviously, you don't get -- you don't have the front of your store torn up overnight. they have a lot of notice on it. it would be nice that the

tenant knows that ahead of time. if you can have something put into it. >> that's a good why the. thank you. >> thank you. >> any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed. i like that last comment that the public made about notification. >> okay. so that's a recommendation to -- you want to add an amendment to -- >> yes. >> and is there a time frame that you want to put before -- >> 24 hours should be significant. >> and if they're going to have to substantially alter the entryway, do you think 24 hours should be enough or should it be a couple months ahead of time? >> i think it should be more than 24 hours. >> i do, too. >> not a couple of months. maybe a month. >> a month is reasonable. >> 30 days? >> we'll call it. >> 30 days. >> 30 days. the public is saying 30 days.

>> i mean, 30 kay's are traditional cycles for all kinds of decisions. >> okay. so 30-day notification. all right. >> commissioner zouzounis: i have a question regarding material on notices that have already been sent out to businesses. they have that may deadline on it. >> so currently, yes, all notification, because this is currently law, is -- has the may 23rd, 2018 deadline on it. as we are in conversation as our office and any last week, there was a brownback. there is another brown bag at dbi. we are letting -- informing folks that the notification is being extended, but we can't officially post- it until this

passes into law. >> okay. >> commissioner zouzounis: so this is a notice that says this may apply to you, so is there clear criteria for people to understand that it actually does or not on the notices that they're getting? i mean, it -- the categories, are they flushed out a little more than just -- like -- >> correct. [ inaudible ] >> so this is sort of a simple check list. i mean, i think it's good for businesses to sort of eye. you know, what their entryway is. the property owner -- there is a very specific check list, and -- that the property owner needs to hire an engineer, an architect or a certified access specialist to fill out that check list, so it isn't just you or the property owner eyeing it and saying orche,h, e to identify one step. the check list is i'd on identifying certain barriers if

they're there, and then what are going to be the proposed remediation of the barriers. >> everyone has to go through that check list even if they're not, you know -- if they don't, you know, stipulate -- or if they don't -- >> if they're a -- [ inaudible ] >> if they're a category one, it needs to be someone expert in identifying what are the code sections for accessibility to say that this entryway is in compliance. and just to note, we do have noted on dbi's site and our site not only -- we've identified from the statewide certified access specialist the dsa website, who does the certification. there's about 116 individuals that say that they work within the city and county of san francisco, so we've listed

that. >> okay. good. okay. any other commissioner questions? do we have a motion to approve -- is this a -- >> it's an action item, and so it would be a motion with the proposed amendment. >> i would motion with the notification for one month to the tenants. >> second. >> clerk: we have a motion by commissioner adams, seconded by commissioner dooley, which adds a 30-day notification to businesses if any disruptive work needs to be done. roll call. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: motion passes, 5-0. one absent. >> great. next item, please. [agenda item read].

>> r. dick-endrizzi: commissioners, there is a draft proposed letter to send to assembly member phil ting, so just a little bit of refresher on some of the background. supervisor wiener last year passed a bill that allowed five municipalities to do a pilot program, and so san francisco has been in discussion with calrecycle to be one of the five municipalities. the department of environment in discussion with calrecycle is developing a plan. we're pretty close to having a clan that calrecycle is agreeing to should meet the criteria of kr -- the crv redemption law. so what we are proposing with the city is the in lieu fees that businesses are paying for

not doing the recycling, but the $100 a day that they're paying in calrecycle, in that those fees are returned back to san francisco for us to develop the pilot program. calrecycle is amenable to this but logistically cannot do it unless they are structurally given permission to do so. so department of environment has worked out with -- that the best way to do this is through the budget process to give authorization to calrecycle to return those in lieu fees back to san francisco to develop the pilot program. so this letter is going to phil ting to encourage him to approve that process through the budget cycle. >> commissioner zouzounis, how do you feel about this? 'cause this'll affect groecers.

i want to commend you. >> commissioner zouzounis: yeah. i'm in favor of the strongest language barrier to address that structural issue that we're facing to get the ball rolling in san francisco. the department and our office has had parallel conversations of what we need to notify the retailers of what we're doing. because i'm still getting pictures of -- hard copies of people with $13,000 invoices from the state of california, and they have no idea that the state law actually got amended or let alone that the city knows about this and is acting on it. so we need to have a parallel process to inform the retailers of this work, too. >> great. thank you. i know a woman up on potrero hill got one, too. >> yep. good life grocer.

>> i have a question. what is the pilot program? do we know yet? can you share? >> r. dick-endrizzi: the pilot program still to be absolutely finalized, but what department of environment is looking at some stationary places, but mostly, it will be mobile recycling so it will have some -- i don't know exactly how it's -- like, the physical makeup of it, but there will be a recycling thing that moves to different parts of the city and will be there on different days. so whether it might be at a safeway parking lot or somewhere else where it's easy access for individuals to be able to get to and bring their recycleables. >> and those do exist because i've actually seen those in southern, in the eastern san gabriel valley. i've seen those in la hamburbr

arcadia. it's recycleables that they've been using for cans and bottles and stuff. >> this may -- we still may have to do some land use changes to allow this. we still may have to -- there still may be some legislative changes to allow this, but i think it will meet the state laws, and i think it will help alleviate concerns from residents where -- who are close to stationary recycling centers; that you know, put the pressure on -- >> the safeways and all them are just paying the price? >> r. dick-endrizzi: yes. >> it's not been finalized yet, then? >> r. dick-endrizzi: it has not been finalized, and i think once we're able to retain those in lieu fees back, that's

approximately $3 million that can sort of help give us the seed money to sort of solidify the program that needs to be developed. >> okay. thanks. >> okay. let's go to public comment. any members of the public like to make a comment on item number six? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners, do we have any recommendations? commissioner zouzounis? >> commissioner zouzounis: i recommend that we support this letter and then i recommend that we follow up with a parallel process, like i mentioned, of asking the state to relieve these invoices and inform retailers. >> great. >> commissioner zouzounis: yeah. >> second? >> second. >> clerk: all right. we have a motion by commissioner zouzounis, seconded by commissioner

dwight. roll call. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: motion passes, 5-0, with one absent. >> thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: [agenda item read]. >> clerk: in your packet are the draft regular meeting minutes from march 12, 2018 and march 26, 2018. approval of the minutes can be done together or separately? >> do we have any commissioner comments on this? seeing none, do we have any members of the public would like to make comment on item number seven, minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to approve the minutes for both march 12 and march 26? >> move to approve. >> second. >> all in favor? any abstain?

all in favor. >> okay. motion passes, 5-0, one absent. >> okay. next item, please. >> item eight, director's report. update and report on the office of small business and small business center, department programs, policy and legislative matters, announcements from the mayor and announcements regarding small business activities, discussion item. >> r. dick-endrizzi: thank you. so i do have a written report under item number eight in your binder. and just for the public, there are copies in the public binder. so for the legacy business program, just wanted to highlight, we are having our meeting tomorrow with marketing and branding, and we will be getting our sort of first concepts for the logo, so that's exciting. again, we're targeting the end of june to have the logo --

finalize the logo for the small business program. the accessible business entrance program, i will be consistently putting in the director's report presentations that our office will be giving mostly to merchant and business associations. so we are -- we will be presenting tomorrow morning to the potrero hill dogpatch merchants' association, and then, the people of park side aside -- parkside and sunset on may 3rd, and then the outer sunset merchants on may 22nd. dbi is having a brown bag. these brown bags are target at thatted towards the design professional, the engineer, the architects, the cass and property owners, and that will be this friday. and just so that you're aware, we are getting a number of calls, so in the last couple of we