a person can opt in. i appreciate that. and again to the members that are watching this, i am just asking questions with the utmost abundance of caution and care to make sure we aren't exposing san franciscans to undue harassment from the federal government. madam chair, thank you. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor cohen. supervisor fewer? > supervisor fewer: yes, i want to thank supervisor cohen for questions. the sad reality is that we may not be able to protect that information from the federal government. i think that everyone who is in this country undocumented who decides to sign up for daca knows the risk and takes the risk knowing that the benefits in their personal situation may out weigh the risk and with voting, of course we want to

give all of our parents an opportunity to vote for their elected officials and especially many of those immigrants who have come to this country because of our public education system. because they seek education for their children as a stepping stone into prosperity in this country. it's important they know the risks involved and they make that choice wisely, that's why this ordinance is so important so everybody is aware, i think everybody heard they have the right to vote but they aren't aware of the risk and to be truthful there are certain risks involved. this ordinance is a measure to actually let those people know there are some risks involved but you do also have a right to vote. >> president breed: thank you,

supervisor fewer. supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: thank you. i just wanted to first thank supervisor fewer for taking this on. this is a disappointing moment, there should be a historic move to allow parents of children in school to have a say over who are on the governance body for our education system. it should be something we are proud of and celebrating and instead we are forced to pass an ordinance to educate and alert people of the risks of doing so because we have such a dangerous administration in washington when it comes to immigrants. we toyed with this a lot. we went back and forth about what was the best way to both uphold those rights that san franciscans believe immigrant

parents should have, while at the same time protecting those communities. it wasn't an easy process. this is a sad day for us and hopefully we will have a change in the white house pretty soon where it won't be dangerous for immigrant parents to have a say over their children's education. >> president breed: thank you supervisor ronen. seeing no other names on the roster, colleagues can we take this item same house, same call? without objection the ordinance passes unanimously on the first reading. madam clerk, supervisor cohen? >> yes, just a reminder, i made a motion to rescind item 11. >> president breed: supervisor cohen made a motion to rescind item 11, seconded by supervisor yee. colleagues can we take that without objection? without objection the vote has been rescinded. on the vote, can we take it same house, same call. without objection the ordinance passes unanimously on the first reading. did you guys amend that?

as amended, thanks. all right. madam clerk, item 14. >> clerk: ordinance to amend the campaign and governmental conduct code. madam president, this has an 8-vote threshold. >> president breed: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, madam president and colleagues. i want to thank you for supporting as our clerk and her staff, deputy city attorney andrew chen and supervisor tang, friends of ethics, non-profit advocates and those involved the last two years to assemble this comprehensive package of ethics reforms. i want to acknowledge my staff, lee heffner for his work on this. because we voted on this once, i will keep it brief. i think that this is a large

step forward in the ever evolving world of campaign reform, of ethics reform. as i said before while there are still some things i would like to get right including some of the proposals prohibit campaign contributions by individuals and entities pending land use matters before the city, as well as the additional disclosures of the financial interests of major donors, which i intend to bring back at a future point, as i said before, we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good in passing the significant reforms which require disclosure of political payments over $5,000 made at the behest of city officers, entities that donate more than $10,000 in a single election cycle, contracts over $100,000 with the city and county of san

francisco, requires real-time disclosure of audio and video advertising and electronic medium including facebook, instagram, twitter and others, recusal with financial conflicts of interest, requires reporting of payments of individuals matters pending before the city which they have a financial interest. i think it's a large step forward and hope we pass it unanimously. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor peskin. supervisor safai? >> >> supervisor safai: thank you, supervisor peskin. we have discussed one item, we will introduce as a trailing piece of legislation. it's around the idea of candidate control committees or ballot measure committees and creating a bright line between what line or threshold needs to be crossed to change that definition.

supervisor peskin and tang lead on the contribution piece. i think we will come on something more robust that talks about time, management and raising money and we will be introducing that immediately following this and working with the ethics commission to make that. i do appreciate the hard work that went into this, thank you. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor safai, santa -- seeing no other names on the roster, can we take it same house, same call? without objection it passes unanimously on the first reading. clerk, please read the next item. >> clerk: [reading item 15]

>> president breed: supervisor sheehy? >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. colleagues, what this ordinance does, and first before i start, i want to thank jeff ca kazitsky. this gives a priority to homeless people, we bring in, treat for substance abuse or mental health issues and we make progress with them and make sure they get a priority for getting housing when they get out. right now i don't know if you have seen what i have seen often in my district but i will see people on a corner mid block. obviously in acute mental health or substance use distress, they will go into a program and then a month later i see the same person. when we had a committee hearing, an individual talked about his experience, he had been homeless.

he spent a month in a residential treatment program. yet when he got through, the only place that was available for him to be released to was the street. well predictably before too long he is addicted again. yet, he again sought help, or we got him into help, he spent a month in a residential treatment program. again succeeded with that. again, time for him to leave. he is released on the street. predictably after a period of time, he relapses. he again, at this time is in a residential substance use treatment facility and is succeeding but looming in front of him is not a bed with supportive housing or continuity of care. what he is looking at most likely is the street.

one data point that's come from the director is we have 500 individuals on the street who are on methadone, we have 500 individuals who recognize their addiction, took appropriate and responsible action to deal with their addiction, yet we allow them to remain in the environment where they are most likely to fail. director garcia at a budget committee hearing recounted the experience of one individual who did 5250, involuntary 72-hour mental health hold at san francisco general over 100 times. notwithstanding the policies we have or way we do things is not compassionate and frankly not humane, it is so wasteful of our resources. when we get someone into mental health or substance use treatment, we should make it a

priority to keep those people in treatment. so what this measure does, it prioritizes people coming from residential behavioral health programs and we have 5,000 people going through those programs every year who are being released. it prioritizes them for supportive housing. it creates a linkage with the department of public health so the supportive housing that people are released into has the appropriately trained staff directed by d.p.h. to make sure there's continuity of care so we end up building success and not creating these endless cycles of failure. that's why i call this breaking the cycle ordinance and i hope you will be able to support this. thank you. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor sheehy, and i would like to be added as a co-sponsor. seeing no other names on the

roster, colleagues can we pass this item same house, same call? without objection the ordinance passes unanimously on the first reading. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: item 16 is motion to approve the mayor's nomination for reappointment of sonia melara. >> president breed: call item 17 too. >> clerk: [reading item 17] >> president breed: supervisor fewer? > supervisor fewer: yes, thank you very much, president breed. colleagues, i will not be able to support sonia melara or joseph marshall to be reappointed to the police commission, with all due respect i strongly feel approval of mayoral appointments only three weeks before voters cast their vote for the next mayor of san

francisco is premature. i believe it's imperative we pause and allow the new mayor who will be sworn in july to weigh in on these critical decisions. the police commission is one of the most powerful commissions in the city of san francisco and we need to make sure decisions for appointment are made with careful thought and intention. in light of the unanimous decision to approve major police reforms and in light of the possible departure of our chief of police, this is simply not the time to approve these appointments. thank you. > supervisor fewer: thank you, supervisor fewer. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor fewer. seeing no other names on the roster, madam clerk, call the roll. >> clerk: safai aye. sheehy aye. stefani aye. tang aye. yee no. supervisor breed aye. supervisor cohen. no.

supervisor fewer aye > supervisor fewer: no. >> clerk: supervisor fewer no. supervisor kim no. supervisor peskin no. supervisor ronen no. there are five ayes and six nos, supervisors yee, cohen, fewer, kim, peskin and ronen in the dissent. >> president breed: the motion fails. madam clerk, let's go to our 3:00 p.m. special order. >> clerk: madam president do you mind if we ask for a recess for one moment while i confer with the deputy city attorney on one particular point. >> president breed: 3-minute recess.

[recess]

>> president breed: thank you for your patience. we are back as the full board of supervisors. and we are now at items 18-21, madam clerk, please call those items for our 3:00 p.m. special order. >> clerk: thank you, madam president. items 18-21 comprise the hearing of persons interested in the certification of a conditional use authorization for a proposed project located at 701 valencia street, to legalize temporary conversion of an accessory parking lot, to a commercial parking lot with an added condition prohibiting restaurant and limited restaurant use within a valencia street neighborhood commercial trance et zoning district and a 55x height and bulk district. item 18 is motion to approve conditional use for the

valencia street project, item 20 is the motion to conditionally disapprove the department's decision and item 21 motion to direct the findings in a degs to the board's disapposal. >> president breed: we have the appeal of the conditional use at 701 valencia street in district 9. for this hearing we will be considering whether or not to approve the planning condition conditional use authorization for accessory parking lot to a commercial parking lot. without objection we will proceed as follows. up to 10 minutes for our presentation by the appellant or appellant representative. up to 2 minutes per speaker in support of the appeal. up to 10 minutes for presentation from the planning commission.

up to 10 minutes per speaker in opposition of the appeal and finally up to 3 minutes for rebuttal of the appeal by the appellant or project sponsor or their representative. and with that, supervisor ronen, before we open this hearing, would you like to make any remarks? okay, we will open this hearing and at this time i will ask that the appellant or appellant representative please come forward. you will have up to ten minutes. it appears, colleagues, i wanted you to know all the appellants in the case is also the project sponsor. so we will be having only one presentation from this party, so please move forward. >> president breed and distinguished supervisors, my name is tom mullane, i'm a local attorney and i'm here in support of the appellant's project sponsor.

basically we are here to -- >> president breed: are you the appellant and project sponsor? >> this is the project sponsor, i'm just introducing him. >> president breed: okay, because that's part of your -- >> yes, i will be very brief. in fact, my guess is that you want to hear from the project sponsor rather from me and i will be happy to turn the podium over to him immediately but what is under appeal here is the condition preventing restaurant use in the property and we believe it is a principle and permitted use and it was necessary and a use that should be allowed. thank you. >> and i just want to make it very clear it's only on the condition of 701 valencia. president breed and supervisors it's an honor to speak before you today.

my name is ryan maltic. we have witnessed decline in small business and general lack of affordability in the area due to big business and large corporations swiftly dominating. ridesharing applications have a stronger presence than ever and greatly reduced the demand for lots being solely used for parking. a few years ago i began searching for a new way we could adapt to this change to better serve the community. after talking with our neighbors local businesses and non-profits a vision started to take route. we began in a cohesive family friendly environment. we envision the community space that would allow for a niek

businesses and non-profits to have a platform in a popular area. in late 2016 we decided to implement a test pilot featuring 11 filipino food truck. it was a resounding success receiving praise and appreciation and not one single complaint. the empty parking lot hosted a one of a kind corridor that quickly became part of the fabric. with great consideration evan approached me with a concept how the food in this space could benefit working class entrepreneurs could get their foot in the door. the support was so strong the san francisco planning department and office of economic and workforce development encouraged to file for an authorization from

temporary use to permanent use, same process a brick and mortar is subject to. determination from planning department deemed this proposed use will provide use necessarily or desirable for and compatible with the neighborhood. with confidence and joy all signs pointed to our vision becoming reality. for weeks we did community outreach by engaging with nearby residents and businesses and the support was overwhelming. as support kept rolling in i kept track and had zero worry about anything but a positive future about our project and the staff supported that. the report says they are in favor of the changes proposed. the food options it provides and local businesses it will support and provide space for. up to this point before the planning commission hearing i

only received two emails from people that had great concern. unfortunately come time for the planning commission hearing and due to lack of understanding of process, i made the mistake of not informing my support and arrived by myself. the main voice heard was opposition and end result was no food condition being applied to conditional use approval. such a condition resulted in immediate removal of food truck and was set to be a great community space to be enjoyed by all, it reverted back to a stale unused space on one of the most undesirable corners in san francisco. it stinks to have an entire project be completely voted down that should have been the exact opposite but part of the decision i can't live with is it displaced the current

business effective immediately. our only ask is that the board remove the no food condition with the condition of just one food truck, one food truck, senior sig to operate, no alcohol whatsoever, no generators, we have electrical plug-ins. to show community support that this simple is favorable and desirable we have done outreach to nearby residents, business organizations. in all our outreach no one stated opposition and i have a list of nearby businesses to support that. one moment. on the other hand the organizer of the opposition wasn't interested in having a conversation and therefore didn't allow for understanding

or compromise at any level. that same community organizer said she had no problem with the current food truck arrangement. during our outreach efforts he learned opposition got signatures based on a different scenario than what we are proposing today. they didn't offer to leave info behind for signees to better understand what they are signing. such a tactic is deeply concerning. i respect the concern by all of any new development large or small but the fact i can't live with is displacing working place employment. it's a desired asset to the community and i ask for you to allow them to stay thank you. >> my name is evan kadera.

gill grew up in daley city, i'm a san francisco native, born and raised, born at saint luke's, now cesar chavez. we were an existing business that operated on the private property of 701 valencia street since december 2016. [please stand by for captioner switch...] .

>> -- but we are not given the same protection, and that needs to change. to give the planning commission the benefit of the doubt, i do believe that it was a simple

oversight that we were already existing, and that's why we're here today, asking you to make it right. we are asking for you to either remove the no food condition or reinstate or tua permit which would allow us to continue our operation at 701 valencia. ultimately we existed at this location for over a year and proven we are not a detriment to any of the neighboring businesses, we are not a nuisance to the neighborhood, and we are loved by the community at large. >> supervisors, i want to reiterate one thing that wasn't mentioned. hours of operation, 9:00 p.m. daily. in closing, i would like to say one single solitary beloved food truck, 9:00 p.m. closure, no alcohol. i don't know if there's any other vacant lot in san francisco has a condition

there's no food, and i don't think bringing tents in there for merchants was a good idea in today's day and age. please support this small business, possibly two small businesses. the parking alone may be limited to the space. >> thank you very much for your presentation. now, we will open it up to public comment for anyone who is here to speak in support of the appeal. you will have up to two minutes. >> hi. my name is dino, and i live at 85 sycamore street, which is around the corner from this particular lot. i've found this -- i'm in support of keeping them there. i think it would be a really great continued use in that area. in terms of nuisance, i don't

understand the concern, specifically since this is the center of the mission and entertainment district. i was very bored to hear on the planning commission, miss milicent johnson said senior studio was kind of burrito-y. in addition, i don't think the planning commission should be overreaching in its decision making, they should not be fitting which types of businesses should be belonging where. i don't think that is the type of government that any of us advocate. in general, i just have concerns based on my own experience with the planning commission about the scope and process. these are unelected officials that actually write laws overriding code, which is stuff that board of supervisors and folks have voted on.

i find it rife with cronyism and corruption. it just depends on who shows up and what the mood of the day is, which is just, you know, again, as i said, is ripe for corruption. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is al perez. i am the president of a local nonprofit called filipino arts exposition. i am also a commissioner in the entertainment commission, but i'm here today as a community advocate. i live in san francisco over 37 years. my familiar plea do ha my family do have roots in the mission as my family lives at 37th and mission. they have brn a strong member of the -- been a strong member

of the filipino community. it's so important that you recognize outstanding small business owners earlier today, because i believe that this is also a model minority small business owners. i believe they are exactly the type of business that this neighborhood would want. evan and his partners came from very humble beginnings, and have won best of san francisco food truck for seven years. they have been operating in the same location for three years. they serve delicious food at very affordable prices. this was the only business oflg filipino -- offering filipino cuisine in the entire mission. even the planning commission staff supported this project

initially because it's consistent with the general plan of the planning code for mission 2020. they are desirable for the surrounding neighborhood and meets all applicable requirements of the planning code. thank you for supporting this appeal. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> this is just another example of the most vulnerable people who are working hard and paying taxes and doing the best they can to survive in the city and county of san francisco. we already know that you've got high sky high rents. they're working together as a team to support the sales and their families, and now here you come, want to disturb them. they're paying taxes, just like you. we've got multimillion dollar corporations, and i demonstrated several times, twitter, it used to be five, but now it's nine, companies have gotten a minimum of $217

billion worth of free, tax free money. not paying payroll taxes, and each and every one of you board of supervisors, all you city employees, the district attorney's office, the district attorney itself are paying payroll taxes, and they're paying payroll taxes too, in order to live in san francisco. now you want to disturb their living, and what you going to do? make them homeless and increase the population? you always doing tail end backwards production and treating people that's born and raised in san francisco. it's disgusting. how come you don't charge twitter payroll taxes? they're paying taxes here, and they're not doing nothing that's against the law. they're supporting themselves and their family, and you want to mess with them. you ought to be ashamed of yourself. you're unconscionable. you oversupervise. you're supposed to be taking

care of the most vulnerable people in the city. that's what the board of supervisors used to be about before all you guys got here before, but not now. so price fixing, price gouging, and picking up on the people that can't defend themselves. >> thank you, mr. wright, for your comments. next speaker, please. [inaudible] >> hello. my name is mary, and i'm a resident and homeowner in the neighborhood and i support the appeal. as the mother of a two-year-old toddler, i often find that family friendly food venues are scarce in the neighborhood. therefore i would welcome food venues with outdoor seating that i and my family and other families could enjoy. i pass by that location every day and it would be a great location in the neighborhood to

put this spot to use as a space where the local community can gather, exchange and enjoying an outdoors see meal in our sunny mission neighborhood. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is adrian burns, and i'm a homeowner in the neighborhood. i just want to support this project, and support the youth and adding more family friendly space in the neighborhood as well as a more environmental use of this parking lot. i support this appeal. thank you so much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi there. my name's carlos buena. not only do i live a few blocks from this site, i also own soma street food park and spark social sf, two thriving food trucks in san francisco. and not only that, my family has owned and operated

restaurants along the valencia corridor for 35 years. it's sad to be here on a day where we're supporting and highlighting small businesses in san francisco and now we're here, not allowing this respectable small business to setup shop here on valencia. i've shown improvement firsthand that a project like this could really positively effect, have a positive impact on neighborhoods, not only in mission bay where spark social is located, but also south way where south of soma is located. just like to say i fully support this project. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is tyler mcniven. i own and operate west of pecos, which is on valencia, just a couple of blocks from 701 valencia. i'm also on the member of the

valencia merchants association. we initially supported it. during the day, we don't have as many lunch food options, so if we can create a better harmony with lunch food options and retail, valencia will thrive more during the day. i fully support what's going on here, and this is a beloved food truck. many of my merchant associates and friends really depend on it for a good meal during the week. thank you so much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> ladies and gentlemen of the board, my name is robert pildau. bay area native and san francisco resident. i'm not here to try to pull at the heart strings. i'm here to present this case how i see it through what i feel is a pretty logical lenses. we have this food truck here that brings a massive amount of

food traffic through the neighborhood that i have to imagine not only positively affects this business, but also has a trickle down effect to the surrounding businesses of the area, and it's a positive change, right, in a city which some of us touched on before where we have drastic change that a lot of us seem to view as negative, right? big businesses coming in, rents are sky high, native san franciscans are getting pushed out of their homes. my question is why are we making an example out of two small business owners that are bay area natives? it makes no sense to me at all. i support this appeal. thank you for your time. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is rad reyes, a san francisco resident and a member of the filipino community.

we've heard the phrase support small business community a lot, and what has happened here is extremely unjust. he serves filipino food, and there's nothing similar to that in this neighborhood. he wasn't operating illegally, he paid taxes, he had all his required permits. he's the epitome of a small business. if we don't protect people like him, we're sending a really bad message. i have four children, and i've always encouraged them to find something that they love to do and work for themselves, start -- start their own business, but after seeing what's happened here, i'm a little bit hesitant. so i'm hoping you'll reconsider. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi, everyone.

my name's chafey zhou. i'm an immigrant from china. i live in the neighborhood for almost 20 years. i do multiple jobs. one of my jobs is working -- [inaudible] >> -- while the food truck is there. what i want to say is the fact that the two -- those two mexican restaurants claiming that -- that their business was threatened by the food truck business is not true. when i was there, i've seen their -- their business lines very long all the time, and they didn't even provide enough sitting for their customers. so i -- i feel like many customers -- their customers sitting in our lot in the food truck place. so -- and now, the food trucks got terminate, and i lost my job, so yeah, that's all i want to say, thanks so much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> hello. i am an employee of 701 valencia. i'm going to be reading on behalf of sharon's appliances due to they couldn't be here. i'm writing on behalf of sharon's appliances, a mission district business that has been family owned since the 1800's. i'm writing for this full support of project sponsor. the relationship between the project sponsor and sharon's goes back for over a decade, and all of our dealings, i can say without a doubt that he's a model tenant, and not only has ryan paid rent on 250i78, he has always dealt with any and all issues that have arisen on our property with swift and careful attention. as one can imagine, having a property on the corner of 18 and valencia has its pluses and

minuses, and we believe both should be acknowledged. its fantastic location allows a great opportunity to do something positive such as allowing a great business to operate as only filipino food and the entire valencia street corridor. there are also a handful of vibrant possibilities which can happen on a great corner. the downside is that without a man's presence, the space is open to vandenberg willism, loitering, public indecency, drug use, and other activity. firearm ammunition was recently cleaned up at the site. it should be noted that in the past couple of years, $20,000 in damages of vandenberg willism has occurred in the space when it's unmanned. we under that gentrification is a sensitive topic on valencia

street, but we understand that not everyone is as open to change, but we do hope that this business is allowed to operate at 701 valencia street under the condition that's no food condition be -- >> thank you. thank you for your comments.

sis . >> but, of course, he told me about the rejected proposal, which i was pretty deciismayed hear about with all the plans that he had. further beyond that, ryan, you know, from just -- from even outside of his proposal, he always has -- whichever -- or any community he's involved in, he always has their best interests in mind.

i have no doubt that any issue that would arise would be addressed by ryan, and also, you know, hate to see that senor sisig was rejected on the proposal. thank you for your time. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is stephen satterfield. i am a feed reviewer and multimedia manager. i had an opportunity to work directly with ryan as a collaborator at some of our food media work. as many people have presented before me, ryan has proven represented represented -- repeatedly over the course of a decade to be a model citizen and a community first advocate at each opportunity. i find myself personally dismayed that we have three bay area natives, two small

businesses, who have tried to do nothing but create a sense of community around an otherwise under utilized space, only to be turned away from what i can only hope was something that was mistaken. san francisco takes a huge amount of pride and also capital from its hospitality and tourism sector, most of which is predicated on our reputation as one of the canninary capitals of the world. i'm sure you know this is a reputation that's under siege when we have restaurants that are having a hard timekeeping their doors open and operating. contrary to popular belief, it is time-consuming and energy and capital consuming to run a food truck. that being said, it is still a much lower barrier to entry than a brick and mortar restaurant, and the idea of san francisco natives, especially people of color who i advocate

for as entrepreneurs in this space as others is really disheartening, and i hope will be reconsidered. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. that's me, again. i'm a taxi driver, san francisco. i've been driving 22 years in the city of san francisco. we bought -- i bought a medallion for 200 -- >> sir, i'm going to pause your time. this item is about an appeal of 701 valencia street. there will be an opportunity for public comment later in the meet. >> no problem. >> and we welcome your comment at that time. thank you. >> hello. i want to also speak about the taxi, but we'll talk later. >> we welcome your comments. >> just want to comment a little bit on the 701. >> okay. i'll set the timer for you. >> it's -- i see it like those people who have spent so much

many on the restaurant to build a restaurant and to get through so many different inspections and to cleaning everything, and these food trucks, it seems like the way that uber and lyft is sneaking into the taxi industry, same way they are trying to destroy the industry. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is tomi. i'm an artist that helped run with the design of the community lot area. i work with ryan on many projects, and i can say that he is a very hard working man, and he's a very trustworthy person. he's working very hard to create a space that the entire community can enjoy together. i also worked many years ago as a valet at this specific lot,

so i spent a lot of time there in the community, eating at the mexican restaurant next door, and i really enjoy the space, but i always knew that it was -- there was a lot of potential there. kind of just -- it's just a lot, but if you really put your head together, you can turn it into something really special. and when i saw the plans ryan had for it, it reminded me of home. i'm originally from nigeria. there, it's very common to have open community spaces, and the community comes together and you eat really delicious ethnic foods. you enjoy the sunset, you see your neighbors, and i feel like that's something we could really use in san francisco. i just wanted to say, i think it would be a big shame if san francisco lost this opportunity. it's kind of -- it just feels really fresh. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello to you all. my name is natalie cash.

i'm a resident in bernal heights. born and raised in the bay area. i just want to say i've grownup eating lots of different cultural foods in the mission district, and i can't really think of another filipino food option that i'd want to eat. i know this parking lot well. i've lived down the block from it for a while, and i just have to say when that parking lot is empty, it's just a bit of a sad site, and it does collect trash, and human feces and things like that. it's just a really dirty part of the city, and it's -- if people and community can come together and change that, i think that's amazing. all these people here in this room today are here to better the area, and i support this. sorry. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> hello. i'm here to support senor sisig because it's an amazing food truck. i don't know if you remember in september of 2014, the turf war they had with the mission playground where the up and coming tech was kind of bullying the neighborhood kids and pushing them out. it was pity, it was petty, it was sad, it wasn't right. it kind of reminds me of the situation we have today. we're tired of seeing our neighborhood gyms scuffed out and having to give way to boutiques and high end restaurants that don't really cater to moi. you know, it's -- it's different. so senor sisig seemed to cater to all. they've always been a very personable experience, and i've always enjoyed it. there was no negative element, they don't sell alcohol. you don't have, say, like, a

rowdy crowd in there or anything. it was nice. yeah, i think it's a great addition to the neighborhood, and i'd just be really sad to see them bullied off the field, and yeah, they work hard, so if we could keep them around, it would mean a lot to us. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is damian cash. i'm an sf resident for over ten years, and i just wanted to reinforce an observation today in this meeting. i noticed earlier there was congratulations and you know great welcomage for small local businesses that have been a -- remain a staple here for a while. i found it was rather ironic that we're doing quite the opposite now. and i'd like to have that sink in for a second, and think about it.

>> appreciate your comments. next speaker, please. >> i'm a first generation filipino immigrant. just thought i'd offer a couple of thoughts based on what i've heard so far. i've also heard the opposition of those opposed to the project. first of all, this is not competition for the local merchants. the food that senor sisig offers might sound the same but it's completely different. you heard the folks say it is unique, and that, i agree with. second, i am he aa frequent visitor to the area, and i can assure you if one of us stops to do something on that corner, we're off doing something else with many other vendors on that street, and they're not all food vendors. third, i heard the original concerns that people raised, and i see now that in terms of