the real test will be the upcoming public workshops where the community will be able to voice their opinions on the proposed improvement. we are confident through the m.t.a.'s thorough outreach process the team will be able to insure that the project serves all the people who bike. i have received a lot of emails from members who are excited to see safety and traffic improvements coming to a major north-south bike corridor. i can say that our members are excited to see the m.t.a. imagining and creating a better valencia street. we look forward to further work done on the project. thank you for your time. >> thank you. are there any other members of the public who would like to testify on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. this is information item. so we will go on to the next item. >> item 13, progress report for the van ness avenue bus rapid transit project. this is an information item. >> how are we doing there? >> ms. mccarthy. we made up for lost time yet?

>> good morning, commissioner. to touch off of that, i am peter gabancho, the project manager on the van ness improvement project, the core of which is the van ness bus rapid transit project which will feature san francisco's first bus rapid transit system. globally proven solution to i a dress traffic congestion and improve public transit. wrapped around the core is an extensive amount of utility work and other civic improvements along the corridor. when last presented an update on this project, directorruskin was here in september and we started the utility trenching and potholing to identify utility conflicts moving forward. now the work is well and truly underway and the water line work

has begun in earnest. identifying and managing abandoned utilities requires a great deal of care and the extense of the utility complex with the planning is unfortunately increasing the days necessary to complete this phase of the construction. in addition, night noise and vibration have been tentative and the team is taking measures wherever possible to reduce the impact of night noise to the community. as much of the project work as possible is being moved to being completed during daytime hours and we are working and we are looking at some re-engineering some of the work we were doing to minimize the amount of night work that is required. unfortunately, because van ness avenue is part of highway 101 and a very busy corridor, there is some work that we will have to do during the night.

thank you. while some of the work is proceeding on or ahead of schedule such as the installation of the muni joint duct bank along the west side of the street, the extent of the utility complex is increasing the days of work necessary to complete the overall utility phase. the original plan to open 2019 has unfortunately been pushed back to late 2020 because of the ongoing challenges. the project will continue to implement tactics to reduce the project's delay. the product team is urging the contractor to pothole and well in advance of the utility work as it progresses so that we can resolve utility conflicts before the impact the schedule. we are also encouraging the

contractor to put on more crews and run more shifts and use the crews that they have more efficiently to accelerate the work as much as possible. in addition, we are working with our sustainable streets division to try to ep o up the total number of streets -- to try to open up the total number of streets to increase the number of intersections under construction at one time to try to get ahead of this and get back on schedule. moving forward, we are in phase one of the project and that is primarily utility work and the major milestones will be the completion of the sewer work and the water work as we move forward as well as various upgrades to the auks illy watt -- to the auxiliary water supply system. they have been particularly involved in helping move this work forward as efficiently as possible.

one of the -- like all large projects, we had our challenges. the contractor has filed eight notices of potential claim with the project. the project team has rejected the eight notices that have been filed. three of those notices of potential claim have materialized into actual claims totalling just over $21 million, and 358 days of delay claimed. we anticipate that some portion to have remaining notices of potential claim will also move forward into actual claims. we are continuing our robust public outreach effort with weekly construction forecasts being sent to the community. and holding regular community office hours at the construction office located at 180 redwood along the corridor. and i would like to thank you

for your time. and we'll be happy to take questions. >> thank you. are there any questions from members? commissioner stephanie. >> thank you, chair. i had a quick question with regard to the article that was in the "examiner" today about the unexpected old city infrastructure under the street causing part of the delay. the you explain a little bit more about that. and also, when planning for projects in the future, is there a way to detect that before we start digging? >> we start with extreme part of it. we discovered all sorts of infrastructure, some of which we knew about, some of which was not located exactly where we expected to find it. and some of which was completely unexpected. as an example of infrastructure that we found that was completely unexpected, we were delayed on one block and found

the remains of a retaining wall used to build the building on that block when the original construction was going on. when the construction was finished, the retaining wall and tiebacks were left in the street where they had been installed during the building construction. they were what's called abandoned in place. they didn't show up on any of the drawings or any of the surveys, and we were digging and suddenly we hit them and it was a matter of trying to identify whether they were still in use, who owned them, what process we could use to get around or through them. there have been a large number of particularry gas lines that -- of particularly gas lines that we have found, some of which could be in excess of 100 years old that run down the length of the street and have laterals that go out to the blocks. most of them, of course, are

abandoned, but for safety reasons, we can't -- the contractor simply can't start demolishing. we have to make an effort to identify the original owner and if no owner can be found, we do what's called hot tapping and windowing where we drill into the pipe and make sure there is nothing dangerous inside of it, cut a hole into the pipe to see if there is wiring running through it, and if it's found to be safe, it's ripped out. but that process takes time. and it's unfortunately means we can't just stick a backhoe in the ground and start marching down the corridor. i'm sorry, what was the second part of your question? >> is there a way to see whether or not -- >> oh, one of the technologies that we are experimenting with on the project and in an effort to address this issue is ground penetrating radar. that can tell us if there is an

the exact depther to material and can be used to highlight as we move forward. and there's what you have to be careful about. in some cases it is provided information that was useful to us. and in other cases there was another block where we had so many basically two, four, and six inch laterals from the street onto the block that the ground penetrating area couldn't distinguish individual items there. just showed as a uniformed block which it reads as regular soil. when they opened up the ground, we found all the pipes that we didn't know were there. in the end, there are record searches that we did at the beginning. there was -- like i said, we are experimenting with this g.p.r. technology which has its advantages, but it has its

limits as well. the only real way and from the ground of suspicious areas. and going back to the office and figuring out identifying that area. >> once you discover this, what is the process for notifying the district supervisors and the public so that we can inform our constituents about how much longer it's going to take? i get these questions asked all the time at community meetings. >> ms. mccarthy, maybe you want to answer that or maybe peter wants to answer that. >> kate mccarthy is the public information officer. >> and that answer -- >> and actually, like outreach and engagement manager. thank you. so with the delays that have been happening, we have been

sending official briefings each month that give an update. since about november we have been regularly updating and public officials if we have about 300 on our list to notify them and say, hey, these are the latest conditions that we are undergoing and we also include an update on the schedule delay. that is one way we have been doing it. we have a weekly forecast that we publish that is online. and we also take subscriptions via email and text message so we can on a weekly way notify people. we have a quarterly news letter that we mail out to about 30,000 project neighbors. >> thank you. >> and you have been very responsive to all my constituent requests, so thank you. >> thank you. we have a great team. >> do you want to give the url or the email address for anybody who is watching? >> thank you. that is a great idea. sfmta.com/vanness. go to the project website and

there is a place on the right column where you can sign up for project updates. you can get text messages or emails if you prefer. and you can also if you don't want to get updates but just want to see what construction schedule is, you can see the project updates on that upper right hand corner on the website. sfmta.com/vanness. >> thank you, kate. >> thank you. >> are there any other questions from members? seeing none, are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item? good to see you. welcome. >> i am very familiar with this site, and also concerned about the senior disabled community along the corridor. for example, at pacific you have two large senior disabled buildings, pena and this sort of thing, and you have -- there's

the senior disabled build iing d octavia and i was just wondering if they have this from the project managers who have approached the seniors disabled community. there is what they have -- they have what they call city wide council made of of all the senior disabled buildings in the city. and i suggest they contact them and tell them that there are some people that for some reason do not speak english or cannot afford a computer and suggest they contact these people because they would definitely be

affected by it. >> thank you. i am sure you can talk to peter or kate. public comment is closed. thank you for that information update. mr. clerk, next item, please. >> item 14, late night transportation working group phase ii final report. this is an information item. >> all right. we have ben from our staff. do you want to start? >> sure. good morning, members of the board. we have some slides here somewhere. i will start and keep it brief while they get the slides set up. thank you for hearing this item this morning. the san francisco late night working group is an effort started four years ago, april 2014, and it emerged out of a hearing at the board's land use

committee. and then supervisor weiner offered a resolution to create a group looking at late night and early morning transportation to, from, and within san francisco with a lens primarily on workers as well as residents and visitors. and over the last four years, the group has met a dozen times and the first phase resulted in the other 9:00 to 5:00 and identified 15 recommendations that were ultimately distilled to a series of next steps on this slide. and the first report and extent the appreciation to the late night working transportation doup. to date we have had representatives from the transit agencies and night life advocates and other stakeholder

who have participated in this process over the years. and i think have done some really great work. with that, i will turn it over to colin. >> thank you, ben. good morning. the first of these that i will talk about is an effort to look at service in the all-night period. and we look a look at the existing service and how it is performing as well as where there are gaps in the existing network. we identified a set of recommendations that include things like improving route 91 as well as extending service to fisherman's wharf and some service improvements to the east bay and the peninsula. in terms of what is going on now, they have implemented a pilot of some of the service to the peninsula. meanwhi meanwhile, sfmta has applied for lifeline fund for the extensions to fishermen's wharf. meanwhile, a.c. transit, that service is in question at the moment because some of it was --

some of service is funded by bart pilot that is expiring. so we'll need some new funding to implement the service recommendation there is. turning to location specific improvements, we worked with a couple of interested business districts here to conduct surveys of employers and employees. and identify what some needs were specifically in those neighborhoods, but could be generalized to other areas in the city. those include safety improvements, and lighting improvements as well as better access to transit information and so in addition to the city wide efforts and recommending as the agencies on the late night network and the vision zero network, we make sure we are incorporating the late night needs going forward. we launched a couple of rounds

of the services that exist on the street with the portal and a number of portals to point folks to that portal. it resulted in significantly increased traffic, so people are learning more about that. we recommend as we move forward that both transit agencies and m.t.c. could use the materials and information to continue to help spread the word. >> we worked with monitoring performance of the all nighter network on an ongoing basis and develop specific matrix including ridership and reliability. moving forward, we are formalizing that process of a biennial monitoring effort that will plan to lead. a couple of other things we worked with sfmta on share d soe proposed contracts and regulations proposed to the taxi task force.

and also the transit agencies that operate rail service all agreed to produce white papers looking at the opportunities and operating more service hours during the night. bart and cal-tran have released those taking a closer look at the barriers and maintenance and capital issues to running more service hours and sfmta is wrapping up their own white paper. moving forward, an as well as working with agencies on funding for implementing additional service recommendations. and our umbrella recommendation here is that moving forward this is really a regional efforts a a lot of late night travel is regional. we have been working with m.t.c. to hopefully hand over the leadership of the late night effort to that regional effort and had some great conversations in term of setting up the working group to cover both late

night as well as other transit coordinating issues. so we can continue those conversations and they are interested in taking that on. so with that, happy to answer questions, ben and i, and thank you. >> commissioner? >> yes, thank you very much. so this is an issue actually that i have been interested in because younger women than me, but even women my age have been telling me that do not safe riding on muni at night. when they do ride, they notice they are the only women on the bus many times and it is mainly males. when you are doing data collection, i didn't see anything addressing that and even those who are wholly dependent on public tapgs and transportation and this is a crucial data point to make women

feel safer on public transportation after hours. >> thank you. that is a good yes. and we actually talked a lot with transit operators about whether there are ways to look at safety data and it's challenging because it's a regional system and there are a lot of different agencies that are collecting that data. it is not always -- some could have incidents on the transit vehicle and some incidents on the street and not necessarily waiting for the bus, but not associated with the transit week vooek and limited numbers of incidents in quantity because there are relatively few rider,

but it is an issue certainly that we can keep as part of the discussion. >> a lot of it is about perception and how you feel personally as a woman going into a dark parking lot, but when asking other women now, they never take muni at night, so maybe not some regional transportation but about muni and what to do around muni so that people are not taking them and actually using the public transportation system. i will say that it is as a woman, you can have a sense of the environment and get the sixth sense of what is safe and not safe. i think that my email counterparts can agree that if

you feel the situation waiting for a bus, too dark or too long and the only one at the bus stop and also on the bus and notice you are the only female on the bus. i feel like that is that you could be a target. i would love to see some data on what women are really feeling overnight and met with ed ruskin and a preliminary, not by gender, but just overall, and the numbers with age groups and the data point on that to make women feel safer. >> commissioner safai? >> thank you, chairman. thank you for this report. one of the things that i wanted to recommend that i wasn't sure was reflected is there are a lot

of folks in the service sector. i wanted to know if you had reached out and a lot of people in the industries that were asked the normal hours of service. that something is that what we talked about with the janitors union and folks that live in my and supervisor ronen's district. bart cuts off time and late night service is an important thing. and we are talking about 4,000 workers in the downtown core and the vast majority is women, so it could be great to have someone represented an continuing from the service sector industry that would be helpful in informing the

direction of the group itself. >> i greetly agree. so as we continue to push forward on this that redefinitely need to do. >> i want to echo about not feeling safe on a bus. i just received a message yesterday from someone that they felt they just -- we feel helpless out there and a crazy man on a bus, drunk, and threatening a woman and the bus driver didn't or couldn't do anything. they couldn't stop the bus, couldn't call police. it is something i heard all the time so that will need to be considered. thank you, commissioner, if for bringing that up. >> thank you, commissioners. if there is no other questions or comments, are there members of the public who would like to

testify? >> yes, i was in the working group and i told the gentlemen to look into the schedules of 2002 and back to where the service got cut and look at how often and how regular the buses ran and that, therefore, the hotel and workers could get to

and from work. at fisherman's wharf and fishermen's wharf was hurting because they were losing money and didn't have that many people. they didn't have many worker there is. i suggest someone from the community talk to the union and talk to the veteran driver who has been on the street for many years and the service was cut because of what was going on in the city and talk to the bus

drivers and the union because the people do want the jobs back. the new drivers don't want the mickey mouse runs at muni. they want muni and sfmta and something that can bring them pleasure like taking people to and from work. >> thank you, ms. sacks. public comment is closed. thank you for that information item. mr. clerk. next item please. >> item 15, discussion of the san francisco county transportation authority board's meeting structure. this is information item. >> as i mentioned in the chair's remarks if there is no objection, colleagues, and you are welcome to weigh in, we will call this yearlong experiments concluded shortly and return to a finance committee and plans and programs committee as well did in the past and i was

initially hopeful that having 11 of us bring about moments of robust discussion and there have been moments of that, but it is tough to get us here twice a month, but once a month committee of the whole and have two committee meetings in the intervening weeks, and staff will bring that forward. is there anything you want to add? is there any public comment on this item? commissioner tang? >> it is me. hi. yes, chair. actually, i like the format and hear colleagues from my -- and i hear comments from the colleagues especially because many of the items don't concern my district. it is nice to hear about the opinions of supervisors of where the projects and money is being

spent to weigh in on it. i personally like this and feel colleagues have a hard time getting here on time, getting quorum. you would love my colleagues to feel a sort of greater responsibility around the timeliness of this. , and so we're not waiting and we have had an incident where we didn't have quorum, people left and lack of quorum. and if my colleagues are amenable to this format, i actually like it, but just want to say that i am new to this and probably the only format i am familiar with. but i think it's okay. thanks. >> commissioner tang. >> i also like this format and might be some days to shorten the agenda a bit. i know that when we had a committee structure, we had attendance issues there, too. so either way we will struggle with attendance in quorum and so

forth. so i think maybe we could just continue monitoring if we go back to committee structure and whether we keep it here and structuring the agenda a little differently. >> i appreciate the comments. commissioner safai, are you nodding your head? >> i agree. i prefer to have a group discussion about a lot of the issues. and it's true before when we had the committees it was harder and when issues came here to kind of grasp on to them. i agree with what commissioner tang says. sometimes the agenda is a little bit too long, but other than that, i would prefer to keep it the way it is. >> commissioner yee? >> i concur. i really don't. but i prefer this fort mat because we might discuss something in length at the committee, and then we have the

same discussion from the full m.t.a. board, and this prefrnts duplication of -- this prevents duplication of discussion, so i prefer to keep this format. >> mr. ronen? commissioner ronen? >> when i complained a few weeks ago and put this item on the agenda, it wasn't necessarily the full board meetings but the fact that we were arriving so late as a board, but 30 minutes into what should have been the meeting we didn't have quorum to start the meeting. and that it was just getting ridiculous. and i felt particularly bad for the public that was waiting to testify on items which we never got to because partially because we got to so late. and i am fine with either committee structure or the full board structure. i just feel like we have to make a commitment as commissioners to get here on time like we do

every week for the board meeting. >> got my commitment. commissioner cohen? >> thank you. >> wondering if there is a way we can change the date. does it have to be on a tuesday? the structure i can live with. but tuesday. >> there is nothing magical about tuesday. that is the way it's been, but we can easily with a vote of this body change that to another time. >> just wondering if there is an appetite. supervisor kim doesn't look like she has much of an appetite for it. >> supervisor kim likes to eat. >> it is not the appetite, but we have committee meetings on monday, wednesday, and thursday. so it's not -- i understand the challenge of having it on tuesday morning. i don't know what day we would switch it to. that is why i made a face. i think there is no perfect day. >> i agree. >> maybe we can start with suggestion that i will work with staff on making sure we don't have the lengthy meetings that run up against our board meeting. and then we will always take a

solemn pledge that we will do everything in our power to arrive at 9:59 to if there is no objection, i will reverse what an i heard from you t a various meetings and let's continue the experiment, but let's let members of the public weigh in. are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item? seeing none -- i don't want to discourage public testimony. going once, going twice, public comment is closed. thank you for that discussion, colleagues. i really preeshlt appreciate it. is there any introduction of new items? any general public comment? please come forward. >> good morning.

i appeared here several months ago to sheet about one of the procurements that you were funding of diesel buses. last week myself and several colleagues were at the sfmta making the same point. since then joe fitz reported that m.t.a. is moving forward on a modest pilot. i think we should applaud them for that. it's been a long time coming, especially in light of supervisors ongoing policy statements by the city. but the undersigned groups on this letter that i am going to submit to you believe that much more needs to be done. our procurement system remains oriented towards diesel for the non-trolley buses and no -- state deadlines are looming and are actually pushing us and driving and ought to be driving procurement decisions and operations planning decisions.

and our system or there remains no real systemic effort to get m.t.a. ready to incorporate this as the new technology. and prepare our fleet and operations for electric buses. so as in your role as a funding agency and the overturned agency in the other role as the city's legislative body, hope that you can provide leadership and help and expedite the process on the pilot and do what you can to move the m.t.a. and to be the leader on this. and san francisco has been a leader on clean energy and clean transportation technology for a long time, but the problem with that is the that people close on you and people surpass you. and we need to constantly keep at it. we hope that you can do that. the other folks here will talk more to that point. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker please.

>> somebody will come get that. >> i am jack fleck, a retired transportation engineer from sfmta. i do know some of you. i am now active in a group called 350 bay area and climate activists trying to push as hard as we can to reduce greenhouse gases. and so i am just here to support muni's effort to electrify the system. office little chagrinned to see in 2007 there was a ballot measure passed that said we should move expeditiously to electrify and eliminate the greenhouse gases and here we are over 10 years later we haven't done it. i am thinking, hey, come on, let's get this thing moving. the technology is really here and many cities have the electric buses out there and let's support the pilot program. that would be great if the electric buses could replace the trolleys. that would be a big savings for the city, but in general we are here to support you and your

efforts to get this done and do it as fast as possible. >> good to see you, mr. fleck. next speaker please. >> good morning. my name is brad mcmillan, and i have a company that designs and manufactures electronics primarily for the electric power industry where it is used to automate the electric power grid. i am an electronics engineer and worked almost my entire career in this industry, and my family has lived in san francisco since 1854. i am here to address support for migrating to an all-electricity transit system. over the last few decades we have seen rapid advances in clean energy technology, solar panels, utility skill wind farms, electric cars, and ever higher capacity batteries are all undergoing advancements to make them more powerful, easier to use and cheaper. these technologies are being created in response to the problems caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

in addition to global warming, the use of fossil fuel causes mountains of coal ash we don't know what to do with, inevitable spills that pollute the land and water, and the awful smog that we have to live with at any of the major cities. in contrast, clean engineer technologies have much less waste and there is nothing to spill, and we can begin to make smog a thing of the past. these clean energy solutions don't need fuel once they are built. if you go to professional conferences or look at the papers being published in professional journals, steady progress is made in developing technology to generate energy more cleanly and efficiently. for san francisco a recent article published in a newsletter stated that the entire city could be completely powered by an offshore wind farm with only 363 turbines. the main point i would like to

make today is that these cleaner technologies are clearly superior and so they are going to be implemented, and each of them operates by generating electricity. as a result, it is in the best interest of the citizens of san francisco both present and future to migrate to the transit system to one that operates with electricity as soon as possible so it can be seamlessly integrated with the cleaner energy sources of the future. >> thank you, sir. next speaker please. thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning. i am emily and i am an outreach coordinator with the union of concerned scientists. thank you for the opportunity to comment today. on behalf of the union of concerned scientists and our nearly 8,000 supporters and members in san francisco, we are encouraged by your recent commitment to move forward with 0 emission bus project and urge you to take seriously the need

to convert muni's fleet to 100% zero emission as soon as possible. we appreciate that the city is beginning to address the potential operational hurdles by deploying the fleet and launching the pilot project, and we are optimistic about the results. as you look at the performance measures of the same model of transit buses across engine types, the performance is better if not better than combustion technologies including acceleration, gradability, and torque. as you likely know, cities across california are finding the solutions they need to transition fleet to to zero emission like los angeles and oakland. we believe it's well worth it for san francisco to start a zero transmission as battery electric buses on today's grid have 80% lower life sooik l greenhouse gas emissions than diesel and nearly 40% lower greenhouse from buses powered by renewable diesel.

and including the ones in san francisco and not mention that they have no emissions because they have no tail pipe. we are excited to hear you moving forward with the project and are hopeful of the commitment that this critical step signals. we look forward to working with you to provide clean buses and air to san francisco residents. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> hi. good morning. my name is paul court, an attorney with earth justice and also a san francisco resident. so we are all here together to ask for this board's oversight and leaderership to move the city forward. and there is activity going on across the state at the state resources board, public utilities commission, the energy commission, and we have been disappointed that muni has not been at these tables. because this committee is focused on overseeing funding, i want to just highlight a few

quick figures with you this morning. first, the state resources board and for battery electric buss is now lower than the cost of ownership for any combustion-type bus. second, california's hfit program now offers $150,000 voucher for each electric, battery electric bus purchased by a transit agency. this alone makes the cost, the purchase cost, the up front capital and lower than the cost for diesel hybrids. third, the city would not only save money on fuel costs by switching to electricity. it could actually make money because the state's low carbon fuel standards pays up to $9,000 per bus per year in incentive

funding. and then finally and this is one of the bigger concerns, infrastructure costs are now at this moment being subsidized by the state and by local utilities, but that funding is not going to be available indefinitely and so delays on the part of muni in making this transition have the risk, face the risk of foregoing available opportunities. thank you. >> thank you. are there any other members of the public who would like to testify on general public comment? ms. sacks. >> i want ed to tell you people that i think that i have been up since my ten your and there was always a plans and programs committee meeting where they discussed things and there was a

an and discussed these things and all those items came to the full board like you have today. i like the old -- i like the old structure because you can do like the board of supervisors and committee reports and committee as a whole. you can sign up and tell what you want -- and find out what went on in the finance committee meeting. you can tell what went on at the plans and programs committee meeting and therefore, the meetings and the meeting would not too long that way either. thank you. >> thank you. so we will close general public comment. and just while we don't and can't engage in discussion, we will definitely -- i have our staff talked to m.t.a. staff about the issues raised.

i know that m.t.a. has been diligently observing your comments and director chang will follow up with sfmta director so that we can achieve the promise of proposition a of 2007 which i think is the primary author of, so very interested in seeing the electrifycation take place. with that, we are adjourned.

>> usf donates 100-120 pounds of food a night. for the four semesters we have been running here, usf has donated about 18,000 pounds of food to the food recovery network. ♪ ♪ >> i'm maggie. >> i'm nick. >> we're coe-chairs of the national led organization. what food recovery does is

recover and redistribute food that would go wasted and redistributing to people in the community. >> the moment that i became really engaged in the cause of fighting food waste was when i had just taken the food from the usf cafeteria and i saw four pans full size full of food perfectly fine to be eaten and made the day before and that would have gone into the trash that night if we didn't recover it the next day. i want to fight food waste because it hurts the economy, it's one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the world. if it was a nation, it would be the third largest nation behind china and the united states.

america wastes about 40% of the food we create every year, $160 billion worth and that's made up in the higher cost of food for consumers. no matter where you view the line, you should be engaged with the issue of food waste. ♪ ♪ >> access edible food that we have throughout our lunch program in our center, i go ahead and collect it and i'll cool it down and every night i prep it up and the next day i'll heat it and ready for delivery. it's really natural for me, i love it, i'm passionate about it and it's just been great. i believe it's such a blessing

to have the opportunity to actually feed people every day. no food should go wasted. there's someone who wants to eat, we have food, it's definitely hand in hand and it shouldn't be looked at as work or a task, we're feeding people and it really means so much to me. i come to work and they're like nora do you want this, do you want that? and it's so great and everyone is truly involved. every day, every night after every period of food, breakfast, lunch, dinner, i mean, people just throw it away. they don't even think twice about it and i think as a whole, as a community, as any community, if people just put a little effort, we could really help each other out. that's how it should be. that's what food is about basically. >> an organization that meets is

the san francisco knight ministry we work with tuesday and thursday's. ♪ ♪ by the power ♪ of your name >> i have faith to move mountains because i believe in jesus. >> i believe it's helpful to offer food to people because as you know, there's so much homelessness in san francisco and california and the united states. i really believe that food is important as well as our faith.

>> the san francisco knight ministry has been around for 54 years. the core of the ministry, a group of ordain ministers, we go out in the middle of the night every single night of the year, so for 54 years we have never missed a night. i know it's difficult to believe maybe in the united states but a lot of our people will say this is the first meal they've had in two days. i really believe it is a time between life or death because i mean, we could be here and have church, but, you know, i don't know how much we could feed or how many we could feed and this way over 100 people get fed every single thursday out here. it's not solely the food, i tell

you, believe me. they're extremely grateful. >> it's super awesome how welcoming they are. after one or two times they're like i recognize you. how are you doing, how is school? i have never been in the city, it's overwhelming. you get to know people and through the music and the food, you get to know people. >> we never know what impact we're going to have on folks. if you just practice love and kindness, it's a labor of love and that's what the food recovery network is and this is a huge -- i believe they salvage our mission. >> to me the most important part is it's about food waste and

feeding people. the food recovery network national slogan is finding ways to feed people. it's property to bring the scientific and human element into the situation.

>> clerk: i would like to remind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or outbursts of any kind. please silence your mobile devices that may sound off during these proceedings, and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to take roll at this time. [roll call] >> clerk: we do expect commissioners melgar, johnson, and richards to be absent today. commissioners, first on your agenda is items proposed for continuance. [agenda items