has on incentivizing or disincentivizing. i think it's going to be a positive report based on the passionate feelings of the planning commission. >> supervisor tang: why don't we turn it over to ms. jones? >> yes, sfmta planning director, sarah jones. there is a review of all city-wide fees every five years, but the board of supervisors also included analysis on a three-year cycle of economic feasibility. >> supervisor safai: is that currently in this ordinance or is that company wide policy? >> yes, we've incorporated into our budget supporting the planning department in conducting that feasibility study. >> supervisor safai: if we pass

this today, how much time will pass before we have understanding of the fiscal impact and feasibility of this, three years? >> no. for this upcoming year, the study is going to be undertaken in the next few months. >> supervisor safai: so a year from now, this will be studied? >> within the upcoming year. >> supervisor safai: got it. ok. that sounds good. thank you, madame chair. >> supervisor tang: ok, so hearing that, i could have gone both ways, right? i would have again preferred that regardless if it was a controller analysis of the city-wide impact fees or the tsf feasibility analysis coming up in the upcoming year, i would have loved the increase to be associated with those studies, but you know, i will defer to our district supervisor where much of the impact is, as well as the planning commission that supported it. so it is what it is today. supervisor safai, still

comments? >> supervisor safai: one more through the chair to supervisor peskin, when i heard the comments, i think we talked about this for a second, the idea that there is $500 million in fees that are being generated by central soma. there is a lot of conversation about transportation and overall fees. we're going to be taking that up in the next two months. so the idea of taking this and putting it into the consideration of that and potentially having that -- >> supervisor peskin: why don't we have ms. jones attempt to address that who will be more articulate than i ever will be. >> this is just scratching the surface of the issue, but there is a distinction between what the fees that come off of development projects pay related specifically to an area plan, or to a community benefit district, and what we are able to spend our transportation

sustainability fees on. the money that is levied onto development projects in the context of an area plan, some of it goes to that invisible stuff that nobody really wants to think about or pay for. but most of it does go to something that is clearly tied to and supporting a development project like a complete streets project right there. or you know, transit. or transportation infrastructure that is within the area and enhancing the area and the development projects overall. in contrast, transportation sustainability fee is a funding source that helps us put money into the transportation system in ways that improves it in sort of a more invisible basic kind of way, so for example, you can use transportation

sustainability fee to pay for a new engine for a bus that extends the life of that bus, deals with state of good repair, that kind of thing. so it's not a directly comparable funding source that you can just swap out indiscriminately. so there is a certain value to mta of tsf that doesn't come from the projects. which are also very important improvements as well. >> supervisor safai: i get that. that makes sense. thank you for the explains. through the chair, i would say that in the context of all the fees considered in this larger package coming up at central soma, there is a point by which we cannot go past, otherwise some of the projects become unsustainable. so i it's important to consider that in the larger context since we're to the end of the road on that debate. we want to consider this fee as

part of the larger package that is coming in front of us, but thank you for the distinction, one seems to be more local to the area and one can have impact on the area, but impact in other areas of the city as well. i appreciate that distinction. thank you, madame dam char x. >> supervisor kim: we are currently working with our key site developers and other soma developers and the community on developing a cohesive plan with all of the fees. it's not to discourage what is happening today, but i feel very confident that when we make a final vote, it will be a comprehensive look at everything together. i feel comfortable supporting the $2 fee and it will be known to everyone that transportation

is important. we're not try to prevent development in central soma. we want ta thank to happen. -- we want that to happen. i do feel comfortable moving forward with this today. it's not that we get another bite at the apple, but again, the whole plan is coming before the land use committee on june 25th. >> supervisor tang: thank you. appreciate your comments. with that, colleagues, do we want to have a motion? any further debate? >> supervisor kim: i'll move for recommendation to the full board. >> supervisor tang: we'll do that without objection. any other items today? >> clerk: there is no further business. >> supervisor tang: thank you, we are adjourned. it.

>> 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 all >> i want to welcome you here to the civic center hotel. my name is gale dill man, the c.e.o. of community housing partnership. in 2015, this was the second navigation center to open its doors and welcome over 92 individuals living inen ca encampments in the street. this announcement will ensure that before individuals have the opportunity to enter shelter and

navigation centers, they can receive vital services and treatments that they so much need and deserve. and on an on going basis. on behalf of all of community housing partnerships, and the 91 navigation center individuals here at this site, we are so excited and honored to introduce our mayor mark farrell. [applause] >> thank you, gale. good morning, everyone. i want to thank you all for joining us here today. as we all know, san francisco and the rest of our country, and cities around our country, are dealing with an opioid crisis hitting our streets. it's unfolding in our neighborhoods and in our sidewalks in front of our very eyes. fighting this fight means that we not only have to use existing programs but if we're really going to solve the issue and make a dent, we have to be creative. we have to come forward with new policies and new programs that

will make a difference on our streets. and that is why we're here today. to announce a significant investment in a new, addiction treatment program with our street medicine team. the street medicine team has long been a part of how san francisco seeks to deal with the health of individuals on our sidewalks and in the streets of san francisco. the street medicine team is on the front lines every single day here in san francisco. bringing service and treatment to those who need it here in san francisco. the small but vital team works every single day to care for those were in a traditional clinic or hospital, it's simply not the answer and it's not working. their work is rooted in compassion and acceptance and meeting people where they are. including streets, our shelters and our navigation centers here

in san francisco. with this new investment of over $3 million a year, we are adding 10 new staff and increasing resources to focus on the drug addiction on our streets of san francisco. and to address the opioid epidemic, right here on the streets of san francisco, the team will be expanding the work that they started with the pilot that started last year and expanding this program across the entire city. i am proud that san francisco is going to be the first city in the nation to take this approach. san francisco is a leader in so many areas and once again, we are stepping up with professionals that know how to get job run right. leaders willing to take bold approaches to address the issues confronting san francisco residents and those that need

our help on our streets. by providing this medicine out of a traditional clinic setting, we're expanding our outreach capacity and taking every opportunity to help those individuals that are on our streets suffering from drug addiction. the program, which sometimes i have trouble saying, is an important part of our larger strategy here in san francisco and with our department of public-health, to address those struckelling with addiction. which includes detox to residential treatment services. this investment, let me be very clear about this. this investment will ultimately help save lives. and it will improve the conditions on the streets of san francisco. i want to thank a number of people who have brought this program to light today. first of all, director barbara garcia from our department of

public-health. [applause] >> dr. sven for his leadership and ingenuity. we knew he would get the loudest applause and he deserves it. our department of homelessness and their partnership in leadership as well. and all the other providers and healthcare leaders that are behind me here today that are working so hard every single day in san francisco. to get those that are on our streets with the help that they need. whether it's homelessness or drug addiction or the other issues plaguing those on our streets, our goal in san francisco is to be compassionate and get people off the streets, on to their own two feet and on to better lives. thank you for being here today and with that i love to turn it over to director garcia for remarks. [applause] >> good morning.

thank you mayor for your commitment to the effort of treatment access for those suffering from opioid addiction. i'm barbra garcia. i want to acknowledge all of the d.p.h. staff here that work every day to heal and support san franciscans who are in need of healthcare. i'd like to give them another round of applause. [applause] we know science has proven, for a long time, with many personal stories and the medication assisted treatment works. addiction is a challenge of a lifetime treatment and recovery happen and people do get better. mayor lee, a year and a half ago, asked me is there something else that we can do? we need to reach people on the streets who are clearly suffering and in the grips of addiction. what else can we do? we know that some of our traditional approaches of

addiction treatment, that is, waiting for people to be ready to come to us to seek help. it doesn't always work for those suffering from addiction and especially if they are homeless. all of our services are voluntary and we have to develop care relations to engage people into care and it does take time. but i really want to thank dr. barrie sven who took this challenge for mayor lee and myself and add this service to his existing street medicine team. medication assisted treatment. to the streets where he goes daily providing care to the homeless people in need. that is how this program was born. in the fall of 2016. we have served over 95 people since then bringing medications to fight opioid addictions directly to them on the streets. by expanding the program today, we are first taking a big step towards our ability to combat the opioid addiction in this

city. the new funding will allow us to directly serve 250 new individuals but we also know that we can serve more once we get those engagements and those relationships because in all of our clinics, we can access the service and medication. so this program is a big step forward to saving lives, lost to heroine, fentanyl and methamphetamine addictions and overdoses. homeless people who use drugs are especially vulnerable and our health system is adapting going directly to them with compassionate outreach and expertise. we're able to help a group that gets missed in the traditional structure of visits and appointments. our low barrier medication program is just one piece of a city-wide effort to increase treatment. we are also providing emergency rooms at sucker burg general hospital and implementing a new addiction consultant service within our hospital to ensure

all physicians at the hospital have access to treatment experts for their patients. the doctors from this service are also here today. so again, i want to thank mayor farrell for supporting all of our efforts to address those with substance abuse disorders and continuing our efforts to save lives. with that i'd like to introduce dr. barrie sven. [applause] >> well, thank you very much, mayor farrell and director garcia and the city of san francisco for the opportunity to do this. i have been working with people experiencing homelessness in san francisco since 1991. my philosophy in this work is do what works, do what is needed. i didn't come into this work with a preconceived notion of what it is that is going to

work. when we see what the problems are, then we develop what are the possible solutions? it doesn't feel like it's a great innovation to say if people are not able to come into a clinic let's go out and see them where they are. i think what feels like an ininnovation about that is many people have the pre conception or the stereo type that a person experiencing homelessness doesn't care about their health. a person with a substance use disorder isn't very concerned about their health. what we see, day after day, one person after another, is that people are deeply concerned about their health. they may have more compelling concerns. where are they going to eat? where are they going to lay their head down and if they pend on drugs, where will they get drugs to prevent themselves from having severe and awful withdrawals. if we're out there with our team

and this is absolutely about a team, not about me as a single physician, doing something, if we're out there as a team we're able to meet people where they are. we see and talk to people about the harms related to their substance use. we also see what the damage to the community related to that substance use is. and we're talking to people about treatment. you've heard the term bupinorfine. that is our medication that we are primarily using. we're also often recommending and referring and assisting people when it's appropriate, to get to methadone treatments and we're using another medication to treat opioid use disorder.

having these medications have changed my attitude towards seeing heroine users. earlier in my career, not that i didn't like heroine users, but i never felt like i had something to offer. now they're my favorite patient. i have something that can immediately change your recollection with the drugs you use and change what your circumstances are. many people who we see have heard about it and they haven't had the opportunity to talk to medical providers who have expertise and get prescriptions. the basic idea is bring it to people where they are, get people stabilized, and then they're able to move into those next steps because when you are strung out on heroine, when you need to use or else have awful withdrawals, every four to six

hours, it's really hard to do anything. what we need to do is provide something that is at least as compelling to people as what is happening to them on the streets. medication is absolutely necessary. human contact, treatment and caring for people is the other thing necessary. with those things in place, and this program expansion, is allowing us to do that, we have the opportunity not only to reach the 250 additional new patients but that really has an amplifying effect. when one person is on the street felfeeling hopeless and sees thr buddy getting help, that is a tremendous boost to that person being able to take maybe that one more step to say, maybe things aren't absolutely

hopeless, maybe there's something i can do. maybe that other person doesn't even have an opioid use disorder. maybe they don't use heroine. maybe they have a problem with alcohol? maybe they have a problem with mental health disorder. seeing that hope where someone is hopeful. the most positive, most effective thing i've seen in this program is one person telling another, hey, i got this medicine from the street medicine team. i saw dr. evan, i saw one of their nurses. that person saying well, i can't believe it. you were the least likely to succeed guy. you were the worst-off person. you are the person with the worst addiction i know and now you are telling me you are not using? that's tremendous in building hope and that's what we need to do as we address the problems that we see. so i'm going to introduce chris, one of our initial low barrier

buprenorp hine patients. someone who will tell you about his experience. so thank you. [applause] >> good morning. my name is christopher rafino and to piggy back on what dr. svens said, one rainy morning, as i got out of jail, and i contacted dr. sven, via the mail and telephone and to other people, i did not want to use anymore. i had tried many, many attempts unsuccessfully of shaking my addiction to heroine of 28 years. nothing worked. i tried everything. residential programs, everything. well, dr. sven met me out in the rain with my bicycle in hand and the clothes on my back and spoke to me for 25, maybe 30 minutes.

he said look, i'm going to do this for you. dodo not let me down. i don't believe i have. three and a half years ago, that occurred right over here. three blocks away from here. my life has changed dramatically. i am a substance abuse councilor myself. i work in a facility across the bay. my life has changed. i have everything back i lost. i owe my love to dr. sven and buprenorphine. out that i was loosing hope you but i got it. i'd like to introduce someone from the homeless outreach program or the homeless program, jeff >> thank you, chris. [applause] >> my name is jeff with the department of homelessness and supportive housing. i want to thank you all for being here today. i want to thank the department

of public-health. homelessness is a complex problem and it requires the partnership amongst many city departments and individuals and people experiencing homelessness to resolve this issue and this is just one of many steps that we need to take. we're very excited about expanding this pilot that we started with d.p.h. many, many months ago. i believe it was in late 2016. i want to thank mayor farrell for his leadership in expanding this important program. so thank you again for being here today and we'll take questions over at the side. thank you. [applause]

>> welcome to the may 16, 2018, special meeting of the public safety and neighborhood services committee. supervisor jeff sheehy, chair of the committee. next to me is supervisor ronen. can we please have quiet? quiet, quiet. and to my left is supervisor fewer, subbing in for supervisor peskin. the clerk is erica major, and also like to thank samuel williams and jim smith at sfgov-tv for staffing this meeting. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. completed speaker cards and any

documents should be submitted to the clerk. items acted on will appear on the may 22 agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor sheehy: we need a motion to excuse supervisor peskin. >> clerk: item one, type 20 off sale beer and wine license to the argentum business, llc, 47 6th street. >> you have before you a p.c.m. report for the argentum project. they have applied for a type-20 license, would allow them to sell off sale wine and beer only. 0 letters of protest, 0 letters of support.

they are located in plot 210, considered a high crime area. they are in census track 176.01, considered a high saturation area. tenderloin has no oppositions. a.l.u. approves with the following recommended conditions. number one, sales of alcohol beverage should be permitted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily. number two, the following alcohol beverages should not be sold in quantities of fewer than three individual containers per sale. number one, beer, including malt beverages and malt liquors products and containers of 40 ounces or less. two, premixed wine commonly known as wine coolers. three, premixed distilled spirits, cocktails, number three, beer and malt beverage

products regardless of size shall only be sold in pre-packaged unit quantities. number four, no wine should be sold in bottles or containers of less than 750 ml. number five, petitioner shall actively monitor the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons on any property adjacent to the licensed permits as depicted on the most recently certified abc253. and number six, any graffiti painted or marked upon the premise or any adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted over within 72 hours of being applied. noted the applicant has agreed with the above recommended conditions. >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. are there any questions? thank you.

call up moses karet from supervisor kim's office. >> good evening, supervisors. we would just like to encourage the applicant to install lighting and cameras as part of their application and to help out with this, the street cleaning that will inevitably occur in front of the store front. so, those are the very simple things that we are asking. thank you. >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. could we hear from the owners now, if they are here? >> good morning. we are the owners. and we have committed with city to clean up our sidewalk. we already installed cameras and we will provide lighting for

space and we will not operate out of the hours the permit allows us to sell alcohol, anyway. >> thank you. any questions? >> just for sergeant george. are those additional requirements requested by supervisor kim's office already part of the conditions or do we need to add those as additional conditions? >> what happened with this one, the conditions were signed prior to hearing from supervisor kim's office, so we could not add to it but we did speak with abc and justin jep also spoke with noel from supervisor kim's office and they don't have conditions to enforce like that. so that's why we added the monitoring of trying to add these conditions to mitigate the concerns. but abc doesn't even have

conditions as far as street cleaning. so that's why we put the latter. >> deputy city attorney is not here, wondering how we can include those as conditions. >> right. >> if you give me a moment i could contact him. maybe go back to the item. >> come back to the item later? >> maybe we could open it up and close public comment and then -- >> good idea. we'll hold off until we hear from the city attorney. now is there anyone, any members of the public who would wish to testify, speakers will have two minutes. please speak your first and last name clearly and those persons who have prepared written statements are encouraged to leave a copy with the clerk for inclusion in the official file. no applause or booing is permitted. are there any individuals interested in testifying now? about this matter?

>> good morning, supervisors, peter warfield, you usually see me in another context but i'm here for one of your items today. in my other context i know a lot about open government and i'm disappointed to see that the speaker cards do not say that they are optional and i think it would be useful, particularly for the item that i'm here for, item four, to make announcements -- >> supervisor sheehy: we are not hearing on item four. >> i'm saying on every item it should be clear that speaker cards are optional and that people not only do not have to provide speaker cards, but that they don't even have to give a name if they don't wish to do so. it's part of the sunshine awards. and i think for people who may not want to give their names, their impression may be the

speaker card is required. >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. noted. any other individuals who wish to testify public comment, and i note you do not have to have a speaker card nor identify yourself by name. public comment is closed. so i think we have a question for the city attorney. >> deputy city attorney, so i understand the committee's question is whether you can impose new conditions in addition to those requested by the police department. the board can't impose binding conditions on liquor licenses. only the state agency can do that. but the board in its resolution can state what conditions the board wants the state to impose. and you regularly do that. pt usually your conditions overlap almost completely with the police department, but you

can add additional conditions in your discretion and they will all be considered by the state. >> so, i would like to propose that we include the additional conditions requested by supervisor kim that the owner of the building or the applicant for this liquor license keep the street in front of the building clean, maintain visible lighting, and cameras. in front of their building. so i make that motion to amend. >> without objection. motion passes. and with that, i make a motion to send this item forward with positive recommendation. >> no objection, motion passes. madam clerk, item two. >> clerk: ordinance amending the

police code to require applicants for cannabis to be a collective labor agreement or bo bona fide labor organization. >> supervisor sheehy: this is an important piece of legislation that fulfills the promise of our cannabis legislation allowing adult use that i carried, along with mayor lee, at the end of last year. we had spoken about making sure that every person who -- that everyone in the labor industry would have the opportunity to organize and this makes real that promise. so, miss garcia. > good morning, supervisors.

jennifer garcia. local 647. supports the supervisors amendment to place code section 1602 and 1609, requiring cannabis businesses with ten or more employees to enter into and abide by the terms of a labor peace agreement. estimated 230,000 people employed in the legal cannabis industry in the u.s. number is expected to double by 2021. the jobs are tightly clustered in certain areas. san francisco is the number two cannabis job market. thankfully, san francisco is number one in setting labor standards. we create policies that support our working families. san francisco does not need more scooter jobs. we should expect the industry to ensure that existing jobs and the jobs being created are beneficial to our community. san francisco workers should be moving forward as this industry

moves forward. professional work force with core union worker protections is crucial for a safe, competitive, marketplace for consumers and good jobs for san francisco. labor is committed to working with cannabis businesses, big and small, to help build a successful industry with a thriving, diverse and trained work force. there are many requirements that cannabis businesses must fulfill in order to be issued a permit. section 1609-8 states written verification the owner of the real property where the cannabis business will be located consents to its use as a cannabis business. i strongly believe workers deserve the same or more consideration than that of a building. a labor peace agreement for workers is not an unreasonable act. labor asks for your support of these amendments. >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. i do know that we were submitted

a memo from the city attorney that, you'll be around if we have questions about that? great. now, i'm opening it up to public comment. anyone who would wish to testify, please come forward or line up on the side. and we usually do it from the left, but that's ok. please. >> i'm michael cobruno, here to speak on behalf of the cannabis industry. we had a meeting with supervisor sheehy and had requested continuance of this matter. we said it's preempted by federal law the way it's written. and asked for additional time, we believe there is also information from the state legislature regarding the matter about preemption, so that letter has been submitted and we hope the city attorney takes a look at it. >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. next speaker.

>> good morning, members of the committee. karen woods, i'm here on behalf of eric pearson and the spark organization. i'm licensing and compliance officer. and we also would like the committee to continue this item for at least a week and short of that, we would request the legislation be amended to make the final l.t.a. required as contingency for the renewal of the permit. and to be clear, it's not because we dislike labor or don't like the peace agreement, but it's already required of the local ordinance and state law. this issue has come to light in the 11th hour during a time at which many of the operators who will be affected by the law are in the process of navigating our 90-day renewal licenses and submitting annual licenses to the state. unfortunately, despite having a seat on the task force, labor organizations have failed to bring the matter before the task force for proper vetting before

industry and the community at large. as a result, the committee has not been able, has not been afforded a proper time period at which to meet with industry to discuss what the impacts will be. in addition to the legal issues raised, we have yet to have fully vetted, which we have yet to fully vet. we have concerns about the union to negotiate, over 200 peace agreements here in san francisco before the issuance of the permit. reminder, only 3 or 4 of these represents and they are responsible for negotiating 200 labor peace agreements. there has not been time and i'm afraid there won't be time. so, for those reasons, and before burdening with any more rules and regulations, it's requested to wait for one more week to discuss and reach appropriate agreement on the timeline.

amendment would still guarantee the agreements, establish a responsible timeline and most importantly, provide both sides with enough sides to -- >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. i want to make a point. labor peace agreement has been in state law, it was in the regulations that the city passed and all we are doing is putting a date to that, which is saying when you get your permit you need to have the labor peace agreement. and i do find it interesting that there's so much resistance to making sure that every person working in the cannabis industry has the right to organize. to participate in a union. we are not requiring people to be in unions but are saying that they have the right to organize, and you know, this is an industry that's largely been underground, and has not been accessible to labor and now that it is above ground i don't see why this becomes the most

burdens, something that's been talked about since the passage, since the legislature took it up is a major issue. per the litigation, i find it interesting when someone already suing the city says they want to litigate with us again. so, i do think the preemption issue, market participant theory, i know well from having created and got, and passed and defended the equal benefits ordinance is not settled completely. i do note that the market participant theory was based on a boston harbor case that did involve prevailing wages and labor and find it interesting that the industry is threatening to bring down the rath of the federal government on the city of san francisco when we are protecting the industry from the federal government. so the irony here is not lost on me, so if any of my colleagues

from any comments that they would like to make. no comments. yeah, i just was going to -- yeah, so, is there any public comment on this? oh, we need to close public comment, i'm sorry. public comment is closed. anyone else wish to testify? >> good morning, public comment. hi, i'm jennifer schwab, a representative in the cannabis for the teamsters union and here on behalf of the joint council 7 of northern california for the teamsters and doug would love to be here but is out on meetings. teamsters represent more than

100,000 individuals in northern california and 12,000 in the city and county of san francisco and we need to protect the workers. working on this regulation, they support the peace agreement. we have witnessed multiple companies attempting to avoid signing l.p.a.s, why this particular regulation is so important to protect workers. that's pretty much all i have to say. thank you for including, it's really important to support our workers in the industry that is brand-new and forming. and it gives them an opportunity to emerge from the black market and have a really solid career in an industry that they love. so, thank you. >> supervisor sheehy: thank you. any additional public comment? public comment is closed. >> i just, i wanted to echo

supervisor sheehy and thank him for taking leadership on this issue. the legalization of adult use marijuana in california is so exciting for many reasons. but one of the most important reasons is that we are finally bringing up from the shadows an industry that's going to provide jobs that are, can provide a living wage that are an alternative to minimum wage, service worker jobs that are open to a set of the workforce that you know, quite frankly, the tech industry, which is the industry that prior to now has been the newest flourishing industry in san francisco and the benefits of jobs in that industry have not been equally felt by all communities in san francisco. so, the fact that this new

industry will be open to all communities is one of the reasons that i've been so enthusiastic about the legalization of adult use marijuana and we need to make sure those are good jobs, that workers have voice in their jobs and the only way to do that is when they are unionized. at will employment does not allow them to have lower power, and less power of their boss and i'm very proud to be co-sponsoring this legislation. thank you. >> yes, i just want to concur with my colleagues, supervisor ronen, and just say this industry we are now embarking on should be on all union jobs. we see the retail market diminishing before our very eyes because of organizations and

companies like amazon, that we have to protect the retail workers and i think every phase, whether it's delivery or it's the retail part of it, it should be union. quite frankly, more than ever now, workers need protections and organized labor sets the standard for a living wage and wage conditions in this country. and the only way that we as legislators actually can be assured that people are being paid a living wage and have worker protections is because we rely heavily on the unions, so i understand the growing pains but i think these are sort of growing pains that i think we can work through as we start to embark on expanding and deepening this industry, thank you. >> supervisor sheehy: no further comments, can i have a motion to

send it to the board for recommendation without objection, the motion carries. >> i'm sorry, there was a red line here. were you submitting amendments? >> no. >> supervisor sheehy: we now hear item two. >> clerk: three, hearing to evaluate the impact, success and effectiveness of the cigarette butt ashcan pilot program and outreach strategies in district one and district four. >> back in january i called for the hearing to evaluate impact, success and effectiveness of the cigarette butt ashcan pilot launched last summer in district one and district four. it's no secret that cigarette butts were the number one most litterred item in the city, according to the surf rider foundation. because of this, a number of cigarettes litter hot spots were selected as locations for ashcan installations and we have seen with robust outreach in

education, residents are utilizing the ashcan to properly dispose of cigarette litter instead of flicking them on the streets and sidewalks. san francisco public works, department of environment, surf rider foundation and neighborhood associations have all worked to install ashcan and cigarette litter hot spots, particularly where it can directly enter the ocean and bay and along commercial corridors where the cigarette litter is not only unsightly but also a source of pollution. it's been amazing to see a constant that started with just a few cans on balboa merchant corridor in my district has expanded to an entire program. in other neighborhoods like the sunset. and despite the anecdotal successes we have seen and heard, allow us to have the conversation about the

effectiveness of ashcans to curb cigarette litter to expanding the program to benefit the entire city of san francisco. so with that, we have a few department presenters here today. first sunshine swinford, and shelly erickson of surf rider foundation, san francisco chapter and also jeremy spits of san francisco public works, i would like to welcome you all up to present. as mentioned before, sunshine swinford of the san francisco environment, shelly erickson and jere jeremy. >> my name is sunshine, i'm lead staffer with the project,

kicking off titled every butt welcome here and joined by two co-presenters, shelly and jeremy. and joined by two colleagues from the department of the environment, charles sheehan and julie bryant. so, what's the problem with cigarette butts? they are the number one littered item in san francisco. we know this because in 2009 and 2014 the controllers office and department of the environment initiated litter studies conducted to determine the proportion of tobacco-related litter to nontobacco-related litter. cigarette butt litter makes up 53% by item on the streets and sidewalks. cigarette butts or the filter are made of tiny strands of plastic, and they do not biodegrade. the butts are loaded with chemicals such as arsenic and

lead that are poisoning animals that mistake them for food. when the chemicals leach into the ocean and ground water, threaten the safety of the fish we eat and the water we drink. the sad truth is, the filters are tobacco industry gimmick that trick the smoker to thinking they are smoking a healthier cigarette. despite manuel street sweeping, beach clean-up and litter abatement, $0.75 on a pack of cigarettes, cigarette butts are still in the environment. so last june to kick them off the curb, supervisors announced an innovative pilot program to install receptacles across their districts. these aim to provide a resource or a proper place for smokers to place their unwanted butt. although some smokers dispose of their butts, most do not.

flicking a cigarette is a social norm and this is the behavior we want to change. on the morning of the beach clean-up, we also hosted the pilot launch, sorry, hosted a beach clean-up. you can see both supervisors holding the butt full of butts, totally full, this butt holds about 9,000 cigarette butts, and it just, once again, shows, these were collected in about an hour, and how nasty the pieces of trash really are. so, our partners on the project include both the supervisors sandra three fewer, katy tang, san francisco public works and additional collaborators that provided a lot of conversation and some folks already working on the issue. include national park service, california coastal commission, san francisco state university, university of san francisco, department of public health,

save the bay, and shark stewards. so, utilizing both surf rider and department of the environment volunteer teams, prior to the official launch, 40 cigarette butt cans like the one you see here were installed along ocean beach as well as on commercial corridors in the sunset and richmond districts. special thanks to the volunteer teams and our lead, ken, who is pictured here, for contributing over 50 hours of time for the receptacle installations. specifically the cans were first installed in the parking lot atlantic ocean beach, as well as the promenade, and along high foot traffic areas such as geary, balboa, irving, after a couple months into the pilot, a few additional cans were installed as part of a corridor walk by supervisor sandra fewer and public works, additional cans were added and