we're committed to safety as he ca -- accessibility with a fleet of wheelchair accessible vehicles we have and we have an in-app function that you can request a wheelchair accessible vehicle through the app. we're also providing service to areas of -- >> thank you. >> thank you so much. >> thank you, again, directors. i did spend much of the morning looking over this report. i think it's a good first step. i hope that some effective regulation comes out of it. but i wanted to specifically talk about the tncs and has been noted by a couple of

directors, this -- the biggest part of the congestion problem in the city is undoubtedly the tncs. the city has thus far taken the position they don't have regulatory authority over tncs, but certainly you have regulatory authority in so far as it goes -- the general rules, the rules of application that apply citywide to all vehicles or even, i would say, to certain classes of vehicles such as the ones that are contained in this report. so i would love to see some effective regulation having to do with that. i would particularly call attention to the idea of congestion pricing because it's more than just stopping in bike lanes and double parking. it's sheer numbers. it's the sheer numbers of them

that are on the street. if a handle can be gotten on that, i think it will have a tremendous benefit across the board and across the city. so i hope you take a good, close look at that. i hope you also take a look at regulations that find ways that you can regulate tnc as long with other forms of transportation. thank you. >> thank you. yes, mr. gilberte. >> tom gilberte. numbers matter. i heard just recently that it's 6,000 uber lifts on the road at one time versus 35,000 uber on the road at some point. numbers matter. again, quality of life. do we want 6,000 more cars downtown? even if they're giving another

government will take a nice profit or tax or, you know -- but do we want them? is that where we want to go? insurance, if a scooter with a helmet hits a person in a wheelchair or a little kid or an old folk, we get broken a whole lot easier. the uber lit insurance pattern, if there's no one in the car, they have a different set of insurance, what they'll pay. this is a billion dollar -- billions of dollars corporation. i'm sitting here thinking that if you had children and they were going to spend the rest of their life paralyzed, duh. and 6,000 or 40,000 or 30,000 cars are going to add more tension to drivers that are on the street. that includes the tourist drivers that don't know what they're doing. if you're driving in the city

and you're making money in the city, you should sign into a $5 million damage policy per person. the city can arrange that funding through a public bank. we need to go that route. we don't need more sprawl of mechanical machines in this city. thank you. >> thank you. herbert winer is the last speaker. >> there's one thing -- two things that have been left out. one is accessibility to transportation. now, people are expected to walk a quarter of a mile to the bus stop. if you're a senior or a disabled person, it's a hardship. now, that plan should address this. the second thing about congestion, you remove parking spaces, you remove driving

lanes. you have an increased volume of cars coming. yeah. you are going to have congestion. that's one contributory factor. in addition to uber and lyft. i think this should be examined as part of the plan. this is a long-standing problem. it's not been addressed. when you increase the walking distance, less people are going to take public transportation. also, when you constrict the driving lanes, there's more of a pileup of cars. there are areas -- neighborhoods where congestion did not exist before. now it does. try california streets in the richmond district. it didn't used to be this way. now it is. now there's several streets that are could not justed. i recommend that the mta and cta examine their could no congesteg

and be more realistic. >> thank you. anymore public comment? no? seeing none, public comment is closed. directors, this is a discussion item only. there's no action, but the public speakers, we did, you know, hear, again, about the hardships that tncs are causing and it will be good to have a strategy to come out of this report. personally, i think congestion charging is an idea with a discussion coming back is very good. i applaud that. that's going to be an interesting one to hear. maybe this time people will see there is a need and we can do something with it. director rubke, did you have thoughts? >> i'm sorry. thank you. so thanks for this report. it was comprehensive and got into details on a lot of things that i thought were really

forward thing and helpful. i just wanted to question the metric used in the accessibility piece. i think they were good in general, but i thought the first one caused me a little concern, by i think, if i'm recalling, the phrasing is something like the percentage of that services users who have disabilities or who identify as disabilities as having disabilities. and i guess i'm concerned about using that as a metric because i think that in a lot of the cases where this service clearly doesn't have accessibility or disabled access, you're not going to get a very good or useful metric from that in my mind because the user -- people with disabilities won't sign up as a user of a service where there's no obvious access. so, for example, bike share, i love the idea. it's so awesome, but i'm not going to sign up for bike share. but i think it's important that, as we're looking to these

emerging technologies and seeing how they com comply with our principles, it's important we keep pressure on then. i understand the report did address those other things. i want to highlight that as a little bit concerning. i think in connection with the other metrics that you have, i think you'll get what you need. i just had a little concern with that. so that's my piece. thank you. >> that's a good point, director. thank you very much. yes, director ramos. >> thank you, madam chair and thank you to the ta staff for this incredible report. i've been anticipating it for a while, and i was very pleased with what you all produced. it's quite a bunch of information. i hope it's going to be required reading for anybody that's working in transportation today. it really is a nice comprehensive bunch of information.

it's very -- it's so comprehensive, there's very little that i can add. i think that speaks to all the brilliant minds that went into the review and the peer review and everybody else that looked at this. it looks really -- you guys covered your bases, which i applaud. there are two questions i had. i saw that you just -- it seems to me like you're going to be evaluating folks with respect to vmt that's related as service vmt. i see that phrase service vmt a bit. i assume that what you mean by that is that once a car comes into service as opposed to generating to get here from wherever it came, i'm wondering if you can spear to that or if you thought about that much at all and what i would like to do is make sure that we're trying -- this kind of speaks to

my next question, which maybe you can do a twofer. with respect to how you're going to be monitoring and rating the percentage of local hire. i saw you refer to the policy, and i applaud that. i didn't quite catch how you would be evaluating the compliance or how they would be effectively hiring people locally, but i do think that those two things are related, which then ultimately gets to sustainability and congestion and what have you. so i'm just hoping that you thought a little bit about that and i'm sure that you did. i would love to hear more about it. >> sure. to your first question about vmt, it actually is a metric that shows up in several places. i'm going to take your point and sort of project it outward. >> okay. >> when we think about autonomous vehicles as a not too far distant future, they are out of service like you're not in the car, but it is still driving around.

that counts in this evaluation. so even though under congestion, we're talking about service vmt, which is your point of -- i'll use this as an example. in the vehicle versus the person that's driving around, vmt finds its way into the financial impact principle under state of good repair. so we are also counting the total vmt that is just associated with that service. so, for example, the driver who picks you up, susan, if they had to drive five miles to get to you and then you took five miles, it will count as five miles in congestion and ten miles under the finance impact principle. that in fact is covered. then under sustainability, we look at people miles traveled because it's a matter of how many people are in that vehicle. are we moving people or vehicles? does that answer your first question? >> i think so. >> is that more information you needed? >> it's more information than i needed. maybe we can talk more after, but i certainly -- i'm glad you

took it into consideration because i do think that's part of the issue is because there's driving around out of service that it's something i think we -- i would like to make sure that we as a city are addressing. so it sounds like you thought about it and you're addressing it in some capacity. maybe we can talk more. i don't want to be the only one holding us up. this speaks to the point from what i understand, a lot of the reason why a lot of the state appreciates these tn cs so much is because they're job providers in towns that don't have a whole lot of alternatives. then they come here to provide services and that contributes to congestion. i appreciate the nod to the local hire policy, i'm wondering if you'll be doing or thinking through more to acknowledge the companies or the providers that are doing their best to give opportunities to our local

residents. >> your approximately is with the taken and we're happy to add that as a future consideration. other documents like our tnc report has documented as an example how many drivers had business licenses before the state granted, about where they were originally located and then driving in san francisco. we are well aware of that phenomenon. >> thank you. >> thank you, director ramos. that is good. i would remind everyone, though, in terms of the tncs providing jobs, i think the last data point i heard which was quite recently because that the average ten tour of the uber drivers is 6 months. they are not providing sustainable jobs and they're not necessarily providing a living wage, but you're right. it's a low barrier to entry. so it's a quick oh, i have a job driving an uber and then it might take them six months to figure out that it's actually not paying -- >> i think that my perception, i could be wrong, but it's such a

short tenure because they're tapped into an infinite workforce that they're treating as disposable. you get one star rating now and you're gone or whatever. >> yeah. it's unfortunate. mr. logan, thank you again. do i have any other discussion questions, comments? no. thank you so much both of you for the work on that. i'm glad we'll be seeing you again with a strategy because we look forward to that very much. all right. i see i have a public speaker comment card up there, but we've closed public comment on this item. what is that on? >> this is for discussion as to whether to invoke -- >> excellent. >> madam chair, would you like to discuss 10.5 at this point? >> yes. do we have -- i believe we need to continue that item. is that correct. >> yes. >> all right. so as we continue that item, i would just remind staff to circle back with the cac since they had concerned around this as well. as we're figuring out what to do about that one, we can also loop

back with the cac to explain that as well. all right. so 10.5 we will continue. so we will move on. >> discussion as to whether or not to invoke the important client privilege. we have a comment. >> thank you, again. i note that the closed session concerns the lawsuit that the san francisco federal credit union has brought against the mta on the medallion sales program. i don't have an opinion on the legal issues in this lawsuit, but i do believe that it is part of a larger discussion that needs to take place around the

medallion sales and what to do about it. it's a broken program. it has to be resolved at some point. you can't keep people prisoners in these medallions for the rest of eternity. we've had over 120, i believe, for closures. so we're going to let it go until every last one is foreclosed. and then the problem goes away. no, i don't think so. so again, i think that something needs to be done about this, and in new york, for instance, they're beginning to come to the same conclusion. there is now a new effort, first of all, to reign in tncs. you may be aware that four taxi and delivery drivers have committed suicide in recent months over desperate economic conditions and that's causing the city to look at this again. a recent editorial in the

new york sometimes abou"newyorkt to read you these sentences. over time, the city should consider whether it owes something to drivers who sunk their savings into taxi medallions. many went into debt to buy these permits because the city promised them a monopoly on picking up passengers, a promise it has not been able to keep. so i think the simple answer is that the mta needs to make these people good and needs to find a funding source to do this. thank you. >> thank you. do i have a motion to go into closed -- i have one more public commenter. >> i want to agree with the comments that my friend mark just made. i hope you'll bear that in mind as you convene your closed session. i just also wanted to clarify your action just know on 10.5. is that to continue it later in the meeting, or is that to continue to t. to a future meeting. >> a future meeting. >> i'm good with that, and i hope to talk to staff before then. >> thank you very much. anymore public comment on closed

session? no. seeing number, it's closed. do i have a motion? do i have a second? all in favor. hearing none, we will move to a >> chairman brinkman: all to a right. so we are back into open session. all right. item 14 announcement of closed session, the mta board of directors went in closed section but no action. it would be item 15 would be appropriate for a motion to disclose or not disclose the information. a first. a second? all in favor of not disclosing? we will not disclose. >> chair, that concludes the business before you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you all for spending your tuesday with us.

>> on december 28, 1912. san francisco mayor, sonny jim rolph stared into the crowds of those who have gathered. a moment in history. the birth of a publicly own transit system. san francisco municipal railway. muni as it would become to be known. happy birthday, muni, here is to the next 100 years. the birth of muni had been a long-time coming. over the years the city was disjointed privately owned companies. horses and steam and electric-powered vehicles. creating a hodgepodge of transit

options. none of them particularly satisfying to city residents. the city transit system like the city itself would have changes during the san francisco earthquake. the transition that will pursue from this aftermath would change san francisco's transportation system once again. facilitated by city boss, abe ruth, ushering in the electric city car. the writing was on the wall. the clammer had begun for the experiment including public transit people. owned by the people and for the people. the idea of a consolidated city-owned transit system had

begun traction. and in 1909, voters went to the polls and created a bond measure to create the people's railway. would become a reality three years later. on december 28, 1912, mayor sonny rolph introduced the new geary electric streetcar line and the new san francisco railway. that he said would be the nucleus that would host the city. and san francisco gave further incentive to expand the city's network. a project by way of tunnel leading into chinatown by way of

north beach. in december the first streetcar was driven into the tunnel. just two years after its berth, muni had added two lines. and k, l and m lines that span out from westportal. in 1928, the j line opened heading west to the beach. in 1944 san francisco voters finally approved muni take-over of the market street railway. by then motor bus and trolley bus improvement had given them the ability to conquer san francisco's hills. after the war most of the street-car lines would be replaced with motor or trolley bus service. in 1947, the mayor recommended replacing two lines with motor

coaches. and it appeared that san francisco's iconic cable cars had seen their final days. entered mrs. cluskin, the leader to save the cable cars. arguing that the cable cars were a symbol of the city, and she entered a charter placed on the november ballot. it passed overwhelmly. the california street cable railway was purchased by the city in 1952. there were cut backs on the cable car system and in 1957 only three lines would remain. the three lines that exist today. in 1964 the cable car's future as part of california's transit system was sealed when it was proclaimed a national historic

landmark. in february, 1980, muni metro were officially inaugurated. in that same year, muni received its first fleet of buses equipped with wheelchair lifts. in 1982 when the cable car had a shut-down, they added an alternative attraction to the cars. the festival was a huge hit and would continue for the next four summers in a permanent f-line that would extend all the way to fisherman's wharf, by 2000 the f-line was in place.

and in 2007 muni extended the third line to the southeast corner and returning to third street. for the first time in 60 years. in the course of last 100 years, muni's diverse workforce forged by men and women of innovation have reflected the many cultures that flock to the city. muni's ground-breaking antidiscrimination has guaranteed equal opportunity for all. the city's policy mandates the course for the future, as they work diligently to increase options and increase multialternatives, and deduce -- reduce the carbon footprint. it continues to improve the systems.

during this sen -- centennial year we reflect on the transit system. driven nit. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their shop & dine in the 49 within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services in the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so we're will you shop & dine in the 49 chinatown has to be one the best unique shopping areas in san francisco that is color fulfill and safe each vegetation and seafood and find everything in chinatown the walk shop in chinatown

welcome to jason dessert i'm the fifth generation of candy in san francisco still that serves 2000 district in the chinatown in the past it was the tradition and my family was the royal chef in the pot pals that's why we learned this stuff and moved from here to have dragon candy i want people to know that is art we will explain a walk and they can't walk in and out it is different techniques from stir frying to smoking to steaming and they do show of. >> beer a royalty for the age berry up to now not people know that especially the toughest they think this is - i really

appreciate they love this art. >> from the cantonese to the hypomania and we have hot pots we have all of the cuisines of china in our chinatown you don't have to go far. >> small business is important to our neighborhood because if we really make a lot of people lives better more people get a job here not just a big firm. >> you don't have to go anywhere else we have pocketed of great neighborhoods haul have all have their own uniqueness. >> san francisco has to a

good afternoon everyone and welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors meeting for tuesday, may 15th, 2018. madam clerk, please call the

role. thank you, madam president. president breed? breed, present. supervisor cohen? cohen, president. super visor fewer? fewer, present. supervisor safai? safai, not present. supervisor sheehy? sheehy, present. supervisor ronen? ronen, president.

supervisor tang? tang, present. supervisor yee? yee, present. will you join me for the pledge of allegiance. without objection, those meeting minutes will be approved after public comment. madam clerk, please read the consent agenda. items one and two are on consent. these items are considered routi routine. madam clerk, please call the role. on items one and two. supervise supervisor yee? yee, aye.

supervisor breed? breed, aye. supervisor peskin? peskin, aye. madam clerk, let's go to the next item. an ordnance to amend the movement code.

item six appropriates $146 million of proceeds from the general obligation housing bond series 2018 d. for public housing, low income housing and investment in the mission neighborhood and middle income housing in 2017-2018.

and item seven appropriates $52.5 million of proceeds for improvements in seismic strengthening for mental health emergency response and safety and homeless shelter and service, placing all funds on controller's reserve pending the outcome of the sale of the bonds. same house, same call. without objection, the items pass unanimously. next item? item eight is a resolution to authorize the tack collector to sell at public auction certain parcels of tax defaulted real property as defined herein. supervisor tang? i know that given previous discussions on this item, i had been communicating with the treasurer and tax collector's office outside of this meeting to go through what the office had been doing in light of our

last conversation. i wasn't sure if anyone was here and i didn't ask anyone. so it's not their fault if they're not here. supervisor tang, we could come back to this item later in the meeting and get someone in the department to come. that would be helpful, i think, for us all. okay, if colleagues are interested. otherwise, i was happy to share that they did inform me that they took extra steps for posting on the site and so forth, regardless of whether it was an actual property or not. but if other colleagues want to hear from then, then we could defer. okay, all right. okay, so we will come back to this item and we will make sure that we reach out to someone from the treasurer tax collector's office to come to our meeting today for this item. madam clerk, let's call supervisor kim on item eight? okay, madam clerk, please call item number nine. item nine is a resolution to retro actively authorize the

recreation and park department

supervisor safai? for item number 11. sorry. this is the first reading of this item. just wanted to say a few words about this. supervisor peskin and i have worked on this legislation for over a year. the genesis of this, colleagues, was the general frustration that many of us have felt on this board with our interactions with sfmta. we put this legislation forward in two pieces, and i'm gonna hand it over to supervisor peskin to speak from his perspective about his approach. but essentially, when we're thinking about it, it was about an agency that was extremely, extremely large and had many different objectives that

sometimes were competing objectives. when i came on this board, there was still a lot of general frustration when it came down to the micro level and the neighborhood level issues. so that's the way i approach th this. we've been engaging for over a year. if you remember, we had a jeopardy conversation about a potential charter amendment that would have broken is sfmta into two pieces. a department of sustainable streets and a department of muni.

we are accessing what supervisor peskin and others put into the charter over a decade a go. and as i said, we have seen a change in behavior. we've seen some progress in dealing with some of these issues. there's still a way's to go. but i would say that this is a good compromised piece of legislation. and i think i've heard from many of my colleagues that you have started to see some positive steps in the right direction and gotten more response from the sfmta. so we're willing to do this on a year. we want to give this some time. but essentially, we believe that this is an opportunity for some authority to come back to this board. now, that does not mean that we will be hearing items on a weekly basis. we believe that like the conditional use authority that we have, when five members of the board sign on to a piece of legislation, that that's

happened twice since i've been on the board for a year and a half. we believe that this will be used very strategically, or if at all. but at the same time, it is something that we have access to and we do have the ability to review some decisions that will come forward. i'm gonna hand it over to my colleague, supervisor peskin, through the chair. but i know that some of this is also about the separation of powers and the division of power ins our city. so i'm gonna hand it over to my colleague from china town north beach. supervisor peskin? thank you, madam president and colleagues. first of all, i want to thank supervisor safai for having the courage and perseverance to move this forward. i also want to thank the staff and director riskin as well as the commission for working with us in a collaborative fashion and underscore what supervisor safai said, which is just the

mere presence of this appeal procedure has already, i think, started to affectuate the kind of communication that many of us felt we're lacking. it's very difficult to explain that as a result of the 2007 proposition a charter amendment, this board of supervisors has little, if any, legislative authority over the works of a $1.2 billion agency known as the sfmta. supervisor safai said a little bit about prop a. i want to actually, just for historic reminiscence, go back to 1999 when two supervisors collaborated on proposition e, which was the first real piece of charter reform since they

were a property of our public utilities commission back in the day. and if you will recall, willie brown had a challenge to see whether or not he could walk down market street faster than the j line got from the van ness station to the embarcadero station. for the first eight years that i was on the board of superviso supervisors, every red curb, blue curb, green curb, yellow curb, stop sign actually came to the land use and transportation committee for approval. when prop a came around in 2007, we gave all of that authority to the sfmta commission. and prop a actually, which i was the chief author of, included a provision that said

that the board of supervisors, by ordnance, can create an appeal procedure so that legislative actions takingen by the sfmta commission could be appealed to this board of supervisors. and indeed, i introduced some appellate legislation and the clock ran out and i actually never got it done. ten years has passed. this is narrowly tailored and narrowly crafted. as supervisor safai says, it takes five members of this board to bring an appeal. i expect that we'll use that judicially, that this is really creating a pathway for us to have healthy, robust interactions with the mta staff and the commission. and that we will not need to avail ourselves of this appellate procedure very often. and with that, i commend it to you, colleagues. and again, i want to thank supervisor safai and the committee that brought this

forward. thank you for your support and committee. thank you, supervisor peskin. supervisor safai? yes, i just want to bring the attention to the board here, we have one small amendment. page 1, line 19-22. and that's the definition of a development application.

i want to thank supervisor peskin and his staff, my staff, the sfmta, at the present time city attorney gibner. i know that this was something that was on your plate along with deputy city attorney john kennedy and the sfmta staff and susan cleveland knolls. we know this was not an easy piece of legislation. but colleagues, we ask for your

support. thank you. colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? the amendment, madam president. where's the amendment? oh, sorry. this is for another piece of legislation. no, i just read the amendment into the record. i thought they had given you a copy. it's a very small change to the definition of what a development agreement is, application. that's line 19-22. making a motion to accept that amendment. supervisor safai has made a motion to amend seconded by supervisor peskin. can we take the amendment without objection? without objection, the amendment passes. and on the item as amended, can we take that same house, same call? without objection, the ordnance -- madam president, supervisor cohen. supervisor cohen? on item no. 11 as amended, madam clerk please call the

roll.

we did an increased amount of research for this year's auction based on a lot of your feedback. we really do appreciate that. it made for a much better process all around. we did what we call skip tracing in the collections world. we looked for anybody who might have some interest in these parcels.

whether or not there was a recorded deed, we really expanded the search and found the widest net possible of folks that may need to be notified. and we sent certified notification to all of those people. we also sent letters to all of the direct neighbors of each of the vacant parcels. so if there were people living anywhere directly around those vacant parcels, they receive notification. and just this morning, we began physically posting the vacant parcels. we're notifying people about the auction and what to do if they have concerns. we also sent each of you a personalized list of the parcels in your district for consideration with parcel maps and some brief descriptions of the square footage and the taxes owed. and we are having parcels redeemed every day, which means people are getting our notification, paying off their back taxes and we hope to have

a very uneventful auction this year. thank you. thank you. supervisor tang? thank you, i just wanted to thank the treasurer's office for really listening to us during that last issue that we had with the auction list. you did personally reach out to our office, sharing with us the list. we did have some very strange deliver of parcels. but i really appreciate you sharing with us everything the office has done since then. and i can see that it is going above and beyond what you did in the past, so thank you. thank you. seeing no other names on the roaster on the item. madam clerk, please call the roll. [roll call]

there are 11 ayes. the resolution is adopted unanimously. all right, madam clerk. let's go to our next item where we left off. supervisor ronen? i'm very excited to be here today voting on this legislation that i introduced past october. over the past few months, my office and i have worked diligently to incorporate input from city departments, existing cultural districts, community leaders and many of you, my colleagues on the board. and thank you to the many people who have been part of

the development of this legislation. what this legislation does is create an official recognition of cultural districts in san francisco. and formalize the process for operating them. this legislation establishes cultural districts as a community stabilization tool and provides a frame work for city departments to invest resources into preserving and strengthening culturally relevant businesses, arts, festivals and affordable housing. a cultural district is an area in san francisco where certain communities have historically established themselves, have brought a rich diversity of culture, business and traditions and continue to have a significant presence today. for example, we have the latino cultural district around 24th street and the mission. and the compton's transgender district in the tenderloin. these are areas in the community that have been

marginalized and oppressed. they've gone to seek refuge and establish themselves in the city. they are also neighborhoods that make san francisco an amazing international travel destination. these enclaves prevent san francisco from becoming a cookie cutter city where every neighborhood looks and feels the same. because of the housing affordability crisis in san francisco, we're not only losing the people that make up these districts, we're losing the businesses that provide the rich cuisines and products that you can only find in those neighborhoods. we're losing the arts and culture organizations that exist for these communities to express themselves and bring vitality and art into our lives. we're even missing that place making that has made us the envy of the world. i've created this formal concept of a cultural district as a way to shift this trend. we currently have five cultural districts in the city and two cultural districts in the making. supervisor cohen is working with the community in the

bayview for an african american cultural district. this legislation, just like cultural districts themselves are a collective effort. i want to thank brian chu for helping us collaborate with many departments to strengthen the legislation. a huge thanks to the cultural district organizers who provided input and are active in protecting their vulnerable communities every day. and lastly, thank you so much to my colleagues who have co-sponsored this legislation, particularly supervisor cohen who was my lead co-sponsor from the beginning and supervisors kim, fewer, sheehy, sa fany and safai. i look forward with protecting the unique identity of san francisco. and colleagues, i just have one small amendment that i passed out to you.

i'd like to make a motion to adopt those changes. supervisor ronen has made a motion to amend. without objection, the amendment passes. supervisor kim? i also want to thank supervisor ronen's office for all of your work on this ordnance. it took almost half a year if not a little bit longer. and i'm also happy to be a co-sponsor of this ordnance. my district includes three of the cultural districts that are mentioned in this ordnance, including the lgbtq cultural districts. these cultural districts are much more than honorary. and in fact, the work that our

community members are trying to take on is far more ambitious. we are trying to preserve these communities so that they can continue to live and thrive here in san francisco. this is also to honor the history of these communities and what they have brought to this great city of san francisco. i'm fortunate to come from a district where we have a rich history of lgbtq leather transgender activism, small businesses and residents. we want to make sure these are more than just street re-namings and plaques, but that we're continuing to invest in the resident small businesses and non-profit cultural organizations. thank you to supervisor ronen and your office on working to create a formation process that

is streamlined, provided a road map, but also sets out clear expectations of our departments and how we expect them to work around the preservation of assets in our city. thank you, supervisor kim. supervisor ronen? i'm sorry, supervisor cohen. thank you very much, this is exciting. we have an african american arts and cultural complex. and now we have on the horizon an african american arts and cultural district. and i think this is something that we should be celebrating. i'm so excited. i'm excited also to continue to further the conversation as we continue our budget conversation because there are projected expenditure costs associated with having a cultural district. with that said, i will recognize supervisor david. supervisor ronen, i'm delighted

to be your number one cheerleader on this legislation. and i think the process of establishing the cultural district will benefit all of san francisco. my only apprehension, one thing that does make me nervous is we'll make san francisco so desirable that more and more people will try to come and live here that will create a different type of problem for us. anyhow, i'm delighted to be your number one co-sponsor on this. i think this is a direction the city should be moving in to celebrate the different cultural contributions that historically have permeated in neighborhoods, even officially and unofficially. the recognition of many members of san francisco and their contributions should be celebrated and acknowledged, thank you. thank you. supervisor ronen? thank you. i forgot to also mention a huge thank you to both katarina morales who's been working her tail off on this