demolitions require authorization from the planning commission. with that demolition, a sponsor would have to present what they are proposing to rebuild in that case as well. >> in that case, that would involve neighborhood notification at all that. if that -- if there was a proposed demolition. >> that's right. we would need a newspaper notice and we are proposing it would go to an online notice add a posted notice. >> okay. that would be different, additional changes to our current demolition notification process? >> no. that is our current process and it would continue. >> okay. ok, great. that was one issue i heard around demolition. the other thing has to do with the fact that we are here today with legislation amending the planning code. i think i see representatives

year from the department of building inspection but i want to clarify what sort of notification would be involved for our so called pop outs that we are talking about and that it has become quite controversial somehow. there is notification, i believe from d.b.i. can you explain what that actually is? >> supervisor, i am from d.b.i. that is correct. we would normally notify the adjacent neighbours and the one behind and that would include the appeal window, 15 days from the permit issued. >> okay. that appeal goes to which body? >> to the board of appeals. >> okay. even if we were to make the change today to the planning code, d.b.i. would still continue his neighbourhood notification and appeal process for pop outs? >> that is correct. >> thank you. ok. >> thank you. i like the thought behind 100% affordable projects. i like the thought behind downtown historic. i definitely want to spend time

talking about, and then -- putting a uniform notification process for the number of days. something we've been talking about with planning for over a year. i am happy to see this move forward. i like one of the commenters. it is true. the preapplication is the part where the majority of the work is done, and if it is done correctly, that is when it should happen. it is -- if there is a requirement in this the talks about the preapplication process. that is my first question. >> thank you. i am with the planning department staff. right now, anything that requires 311 or 312 notification also requires a preapplication meeting. that is a way that things where it is. >> with that remain under this proposal? >> if the ordinance were to pass as currently written, the popout would not require notification so there would be no meeting. however,, the commission did recommend there should be a preapplication meeting for the

pop outs if there were no notification. they didn't alternately make that recommendation formally, because instead they recommended they keep notice for the pop outs. however, it would be possible to do the preapplication meeting through a commissiicy.ol >> when you say notice for the pop outs, what did they recommend? >> they recommended they should continue to have 311. >> okay. i don't agree with that but i do believe that i mean if we are good to move something forward today, we should say there would be a required preapplication, and then i do believe the immediate neighbour -- neighbors and similar to what happens in d.b.i. for appeal, and then the lot right behind you, should be noticed. so is that in the current form

of this legislation? so it is still 311? >> that's right. the preapplication meeting is a commission policy. what we would do is return to the commission to advise them as to what the boment where and they can establish in their poli tha preapplication meeting should be required for the popout. >> right. i would do a hybrid of the two. i think there definitely should be a preapplication. that should be a requirement if we are going to do over-the-counter for pop outs. i believe that more than just a postcard and something online. if you are an immediate neighbors in the lot behind a property that is getting a popout, you should get a full set of plans and have the opportunity, whether it is certified mail, or something, to know that neighbour -- that neighbors and the lot behind has received the plans as proposed. >> that's right. currently with a preapplication materials, what is sent would not be change for this ordinance. >> the preapplication would include the immediate neighbors in the lot behind. >> that's right. and the plants for the project. >> and the full plans. if we want to have a requirement for p. application, it would covered the things i just talked about. >> it would be up to the planning commission to adopt that policy.

they expressed of notification were to go away that that would be their preference. >> that would be my preference today. >> thank you. i'm a little confused because maybe planning staff or even d.b.i. can clarified that the preapplication meeting, that is a particular set ofationo at d.b.i., similar to what d.b.i. spoke of, right? or is it the same thing. >> it is similar staying in that it is a jason neighbors but it is a different process. it requires preapplication meetings as a first thing before we can take the permit. test to be two weeks before we receive the permit and then there is a 311 notification period. it is only mailed out what's a planner has determined the project is code compliant. after the vote building permit has been signed off on by the planning department, that is when the notification from d.b.i. comes out to the adjacent neighbors. >> great. and so, i appreciate that clarification because i think my preference is that yes, there is still some level of notification tothe neighbors if he had their preapplication process, but not to the full on 311.

neighbors would still have the ability to appeal the d.b.i. permit to the board of permit appeals, but you are allowing that window of time for a project sponsor to be able to, you know, do the process a little quicker and easier. again, still keeping in mind that our existing demolition control is applied an so forth and so there is still a process for that. >> right. >> just to finish that thought, i mean, for me, it is really important -- the people that are the most impacted by a popout are the two immediate neighbors and in the lot behind, if there is a lot. i think that requiring preapplication which would cover all of those things is the appropriate way to step forward. it also accomplishes, similar to what we introduced with 312 reform where we are reducing staff time. we are really allowing folks to focus on some of these larger missions in the city which is affordable housing and getting

more units online to deal with the overall demand in the city and reduce staff time overall. at the same time, respecting the interests and the desires of the neighbors. if we were to make that recommendation today, it would go back to the planning commission. >> yes. the ordinance would not have to return to the planning commission, because everything that is before -- >> it was ready considered. >> we could make the amendment to say that neighborhood notification would be required for pop out. >> the planning staff would recommend you include that in your resolution urging the planning commission to adopt that policy rather than instituting this in the codes because a preapplication meetings are not something that are set forth in the code. >> we would have to do a separate resolution? >> as part of your resolution on this ordinance. i just mean, as opposed to an actual amendment within the ordinance. >> maybe the way to do that would be to add in on codified

section at the end of the ordinance urging the planning commission. >> got it. we could make an amendment today that would say, for pop outs, that we would require preapplication process, and then add the end of the ordinance, that there would be, urging this beme part of the planning commission's -- >> the full amendment would be and on codified section urging the planning commission, when it considers as policy, to require preapplication process for the pop outs. not to amend section 311 to say that specifically. >> right. i think that's right. okay. but we don't have any language, right now as proposed from what i am saying? >> it is not currently in the ordinance because we would direct the commission through your resolution language, that's right. >> we can amend this today?

>> that's right. >> to require preapplication and remove 311 notification. >> that removal of 311 is already in the audience -- ordinance. >> what we can add it? >> yeah. >> thank you. supervisor kim? mendments that i want to introduce. they are substantive and must go back to the anning commission. i must implicate the file to put these amendments into the adjudicated file. i have distributed amendments to committee members and also to city attorney john gibbon or. this is around amendments to the permit to alter a certificate of appropriateness process. is to add, with ending -- within planning code section 10052 add each to the code at ages 65 through 67. notwithstanding the foregoing signs, camaros and exterior paint to install an event or

anniversary of an event of national or international significance, relevant to the historic context of the landmark or district regardless of the size, should not be subject to the provision of the subject. this is aligned in section 1006.6. i want to add to planning code section one 11.12 add subsection d. and page 67, 68 that notwithstanding the foregoing, science, mirrors and exterior paint same contacts should not be subject to the provisions as long as they follow the rules. this is in regard to something previous to my time in office, but in my district which was a mural that was put up at the theatre, at the plaza. and this is to ensure that that signage gets to continue to stay in place. we also want to him and into

planning code section, and this is a question for the city attorney in terms of where it is appropriately placed, the science of any size and celebrat of event et cetera et cetera, where it is located. i will make a motion to keep the file and amend the duplicated file so that it can return planning to be heard by the planning commission. >> thank you. john get better? >> thank you. there are a few issues that my office has looked into with this set of amendments, including where to put it and some other issues that i'm discussing with your office. i would recommend, today, you duplicate the file you suggested so we can work out some language and discuss further with your office. after the committee makes an

amendment next week, it would then be referred back to planning. >> okay. that makes sense. we will work with your office over the next week to do that. i just had a follow-up question for p theout an this was a question or a statement made by members of the public which was that often thieves popout spoke r with a larger housing buildout. my understanding is that, in that case, you know, other notifications and processes would be triggered along with the popout. i just want to get verification of that. >> that is correct. if you are proposing a project that is larger than the popout, it triggers a section 311 notice. the architects brought up that if their clients know they have to do notice, they will propose a larger project because they have to. our hope is that by making pop outs over-the-counter, it will guide people to do it in a more reasonable way instead of going to be a jerk -- bigger projects

that require notice. >> is there any reason for members of the public to be concerned about the popout in and of itself going over-the-counter in a blue of a larger project that theproj ct sponsor is actually considering? >> there is concern about that. we discussedother amendment to address the concern that someone could propose the monster house situation and try to add a popout in addition to that to exceed the monster has limitations. so we have prepared an amendment that would say that you cannot add a popout within three years of another expansion. >> i see. >> if you do, it would require notice. >> even after the three years or within the first three years? >> within the first three years. >> what can we do beyond that? i imagine that neighbors and members of the public would have concerns beyond, you know, the envelope of the monster home project beyond three years.

>> the three year proposal would be to deal with that cereal permitting potential to make it difficult or very unlikely for someone to want to hold off on doing their main project for a period of three years so they can try to take advantage of the regulations. in terms of whether or not neighbors would have concerns about the popout, we've heard the concerns at the planning commission. the staff analysis, because the popts themselves are compatible with the residential design guideline, and because they are almost, in every case, approved without getting a discretionary review and they do come to the planning commission, they are infrequently modified. we feel the popout footprint itself is quite appropriate to be with over-the-counter approval for those reasons. the cereal permitting issue would be dealt with through the -- dealt with through the three year proposal. >> in general, what is a scope in terms of the number of simple popout applications of the planning department gets in an average year? >> we believe we are getting 250

applications that have that scope of work in them. most of those have other work as well. as he mentioned the guidance that we have gotten from architects and from our staff that has been with the department for a a while is they have heard from sponsors that if they had known there was the ability to go without the, you know, lengthy process, they would have done something smaller. in addition, windows and larger projects come to us. we tend to whittle them down for the design review process is something close to what the popout is because it does match the residential design guideline. in other words, many of those application start with something larger and they end with something as close to the popout by virtue of what we're doing at the planning department when they come in. having them over-the-counter, they would sit within that small envelope. >> thank you for those clarification pieces. the other thing that was brought up is around the 20 versus 30 day notice. i am looking at this chart that shows all the different current requirements for the mailing

period for all sorts of different notifications, 311, 312, conditional use, you name it. for the map -- for the vast majority, and isee why the legislation proposed 20 days versus 30 is that most of them are 20 days. in fact,, i count only one, to walk, three, rougher on page here that again, represent the typical types of notification that people would receive a 30 . the vast majority are 20 days. that there is a whole bunch that would have required ten day notice that would be going to 20 days. it would be increased. this is something we are agreeing with the original legislation which is to go to the 20 day notice uniformly instead. so i guess that is a recommendation that i don't plan on taking fm the planning commission. >> with that said, are there any further cup questions or comments? i would say that amongst the

different amendments that i see, i want to preserve the pop outs. that is very important. but have the notification, the neighborhood notification required, and specifically, that is the 311 notification there was an existing structure that was expanded in the prior three years, to prevent cereal permitting as the planning department mentioned. and then, i know the supervisor spoke about talking about directing the planning commission to adopt the policy for the section 136 pop outs to require a preapplication meeting between the applicant and adjacent neighbours before a rear yard addition can be submitted. i would like to include that provision as well. i'm willing to take a couple recommendations from the planning commission, which recommendation number 2. amending section 333 to allow the zoning administrator to determine the requirements for posted notice for unique sights.

the recommendation number 3, in the same section, to require the posted notice to be visible and legible from the sidewalk or a nearest public right of way. a recommendation number for all that is also in the same section 333 to require a mailed notice with minimum dimensions of five and a half by eight and a half inches. that is half a sheet. and the last one is to amend the same section to require notification procedures to be consistent with applicable planning commission policy. so, again, to reiterate, i would like to take planning commission recommendations two, three, rougher and seven. to do the preapplication meetings and require 311 notification for pop outs where the existing structure would extend in the prior three years. >> colleagues? questions? thoughts? i would like to make a motion for those effects. >> can you read the last one? you lapped read it pretty

quickly. you want just to keep 311 for pop outs? >> for when the existing structure has been modified in the last three years and that is to prevent cereal permitting and scope creep. >> do you have those amendments? you said you had them. here they are. okay. >> for clarity, the item was duplicated in the amendment draw for the original? >> that is correct. >> okay. thank you. >> okay. >> deputy city attorney. it would be cleaner if you amended both the duplicate and the original so we have consistency. >> yes. i would like to make those amendments to both versions, then.

>> so that captured the requirement for preapplication. >> yes. >> okay. >> i have that in there and i have theequ rt too -- well, to keep the 20 day noticing so we don't have to make an amendment, actually. >> i'm fine with that. i will make that motion. >> okay. we will do that without objection, then. okay? both files were amended to that effect. >> and then do we accept your amendments? >> yes. did we? for the duplicated version? >> she is just touching them. >> on the duplicated version around signage, i think there is a motion from supervisor kim for those amendments, sorry. >> yes. that set of amendments would be

adopted next week. you are just continuing that last item. >> i did want to comments that there was a mention about continuing that portion to the july 18th and next land use committee meeting but it will be cancelled because of the budget hearing. it would be july 25th. is that okay? i mean june 25th. we have a few meetings before recess. up to you. depending on the schedule. but i wanted you to know there is no june 18th meetings. >> it could be june 25th or if you would like another date, that is fine. i know central soma plan is on the docket for june 25th and i imagine it will be a fairly lengthy item. and so, i'm happy to hear both. i would suggest maybe hearing it at the next land use meeting after june 25th. >> okay. >> that would be my suggestion. >> july 2nd?

>> july 9th because july 2nd, it is also cancelled because of the 4th of july holiday. is that okay? >> yes. >> july 9th, then. okay. we will continue item number 2 tonda july 9th. >> okay. >> all right? we can do that without objection, then? >>y. >> without objection? >> yes. >> all right. okay, great. i think then on the amended version before us today, if we can get a motion on that item. >> so, to make a motion to send the amended version with positive recommendation. are we doing the committ report? >> no just regular. >> positive recommendation from the full board. >> we will do th without objection. thank you very much. before we hop into item three, i wanted to let you know that supervisor he will be filling in for me for item three.

supervisor kim will be sharing rest of the meeting on my behalf. madame clerk,uca call item >> yes, it is an ordinance amending the planning code to designate 234 t 231st street, a.k.a. south building as a landmark, and affirming appropriate findings. >> thank you very much. i am the author of this item. the landmark designation. i see our planning department up to present on this item. >> may i have the overhead, please? good afternoon. i am here today to present the preservationmmicosion's redatenn for landmark designation of the phillips building located at 234 to 461st street in selma. the building is listed as an article 11 category one significant building.

in january 2017, the hbc approved a major permit to alt alter, as ll as a condition to designate the phillips building as a landmark. the landmark designation was approved in november 2017. h.p.c. commissioners conducted a site visit in 2017 and they initiated landmark designation the same day. on march 7th, 2018, the h.p.c. unanimously recommended landmark designation. the phillips building was new printing business at thethe phillips company which occupied the building until 1947. the five-story building is significant as a distinctive and highly intact example of art deco style and is a considerably rare style in san francisco. it is also the largest art deco style loft building in the city.

the phillips building is also significant for it's association with master architect henry h. myers. prominent local architect to design buildings throughout the bay area including memorial buildings. the phillips building is a rare example of their work, commercial work. character defining interior features include the tora lobby and former display show room. these places are eligible for designation because they were historically publicly accessible. there is no known public art or neighborhood opposition to designation as a landmark and the owners are pportive of landrk designation. the department believes the building me see established eligibility requirements and landmark status. the h.p.c. recommends landmark designation to the board of supervisors. this concludes my presentation and i am happy to answer any questions. the property owners representatives are here today

to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. i think we... yes, thank you so much. at this time, we will open up for public comment on item number 3. public comment is no -- now closed. so colleagues, no questions or comments from community members, i would like to make a motion to move item number 3 forward with a recommendation. >> would you like to excuse the supervisor or supervisor from the rest of the meeting? >> yes. let's excuse her. do we second? yes, we can do that without objection. thank you. can we take a motion to move item number 3 forward to the full board with recommendation. we have a motion. no objections. we can move forward at number 3

with no objections. can you please call item number 4. >> yes, it is the resolution between flood avenue and ocean >> thank you. the sponsor of this item is here today. oductory remarks.r to him forin thank you. >> sure. thank you. colleagues, back in april, i introduced a resolution in anticipation of the asia pacific american heritage month in may. given the anti-immigrant and racist rhetoric and policies eminent -- emanating from washington, dc, which has led to increase -- increased acts of intolerance towards immigrant communities. there has been an increased effort from communities, locally and nationally, to reve names from public statues in places which honour figures who expose racism.

there has also been an increased movement nationally and globally to recognize women's historical contributions and their role in our current professional, and public settings. we have successful local examples of this, such as supervisors legislation to rename columbus day to indigenous peoples day. supervisor peskin'islaegion to remove justin herman's name from the plaza. students from the university of san francisco rename to the campus building. not only has our country's consciousness been raised to acknowledge the importance of contributions from historically marginalized communities. people of colour, particularly women of colour, and the

disabled communities. we know our history in order not to repeat mistakes in our past. that is why today, we are hearing my resolution to rename it to freda klo way and remove mena post as a racist legacy. he served as a san francisco mayor from 1897-2,002 and was the senator from 2015 -- 1915-1921. he supported the chinese exclusion act of 1882 and to th immigration act of 1924. banning chinese and japanese immigrants. he ran his senatorial campaign on the motto to keep california weight and save our state from oriental aggression. i want to read from you the

interview frida kahlo -- when he talks about the silent invasion of japanese workers into california. quote, at the california is a white man's country. and the two races cannot live side-by-side in peace. as much as we discover the country first and occupied -- and occupied it, we propose to hold it against either a peaceful orike rlvasion. as soon as japanese people are kicked out of the country, there will be danger of irritating these sensitive and aggressive people. they must be excluded, because they are nonassimilable. they are a permanently foreign elements. they do not spring families and they do not perched -- support churches, schools or theatres.

in time, they will not fight for uncle sam but betray him as the enemy. these are a few of the types of remarks that you made during that time. so, he also supported legislation to make interracial marriage between asian and caucasians illegal. the street was named phelan avenue as early as 19 '06 and though the street name was supposedly named after his father, james phelan he was a wealthy real estate broker, the younger man's anti- immigration policy besmirched his father's name. the street may not have been named after his father if his son had not been just finishing his may oral term. the younger james phelan and his racist views are the most widely

associated with the lane. the renaming processes have not undergone as extensive a community process as my office has conducted. i outraged to archbishop riordan high school to the principal, and two city college last year, reaching out to them and expressing my intentions. at the time, the principal at archbishop, when i told him he went back to check and he came back to me and said, this should not be a major problem though they would have to change their letterhead. at the time, i was also told you don't have to worry about that for at least five years. my office then proceeded to door and knock and scent letters last fall to all the residence up and down the street. and eventually inviting community members to rejoin my

renaming committee. residents participated and restart listed five names which went out to vote. at a time when i wanted to rename phelan, i had no particular name in mind except i wanted to raise an issue, a historical mistake of saying this is not what we want today, and we will find a better name. so, after the devoting -- by the way, it is a process that is not etched in stone where you have to have a vote at all. i mean, i just chose it to get input from the community, as much as i could. but frida kahlo, another women of color was a name that received the greatest support. the street renaming process would happen over a five-year period. there is ample time for neighbors to update to the documents. we had a similar stnamit

in a much larger streets many, many years ago, and the same process took place when it was harvey streets that was changed to cesar chavez boulevard. again, there was controversy. people are not comfortable with changes, at this point, nobody was saying, let's change it back because that's what it was. it is a part of history that we all know about, and we need to take this opportunity to learn about history, really be a learning moment for all of us to say, what is it that we want to have to reflect our current values? san francisco is a city that prides itself on values of inclusion, tolerance, and respect for multicultural diversity. we will not tolerate exclusion, racism and hatred in our communities. i want to thank my sponsors and colleagues who work with me on

this, and colleagues, i look forward to your support. i wanted to thank the community members today for coming to speak and i knowthat there several ofem out there. why don't i and with that and see -- i think there isalso somebody, before i bring up the public, i would like to ask th them, jeremy from the government affairs from public works department, to lay out, you know, what the process really is so we all understand it. jeremy? >> thank you. thank you supervisors. my name is jeremy. a public works of legislative affairs. supervisors calculate up the process fairly well, essentially when a street name changes proposed, public works goes through a process to contact city departments and also the property owners to let them know

of the intentions. we reached out to relevant city agencies including the department of emergency management and fire department and others and receive no objections. we reached out to the fronting property owners on phelan and 23 fronting properties, we received rejections from seven which is less than 50%. public works recommends moving forward with a proposed name change. as we alluded to, the process going forward is essentially the m.t.a. would be asked to install street name signs that have frida kahlo way in large letters and phelan in small letters up for five years after which it would be replaced with frida kahlo way. i am available for any questions. >> any questions about this? okay. for your information, i have been in communication with city assessors, for the owners of the property, they need to eventually change their date of

trust to reflect the new name. she indicated she is more than willing to help the process as much as possible to make it as convenient as possible. so, maybe right now, if there are no questions, i would like to take public comment. is that a quake? >> we will open it up for public comment on this item. >> i have a bunch of cards here. >> i'm so sorry. why don't we call up the speaker cards first. >> i have other cards soi will call you as soon as we dwindled down the line. >> well, this first speaker please come up? >> deborah fitzpatrick.

>> good afternoon. first, i would like to say that i've been a resident for 30 years on phelan avenue. i was interested -- i was interested when you say that he claims that he only received seven notices. the gentleman before. he said out of 20 residents, that declined, i never received a notice. all i received was, after the fact, the names listed that have already been listed. and names that where, when was frida kahlo. that was a first notice i ever received. so i would just like to say that. i would like to say that i, as a hispanic woma i admire frida

kahlo pastas message through her artwork. but do i want a street that i live on named after her? no i do not. first, i feel that this has been a huge marketing ploy. because of the fact that they have a diego rivera theatre, i feel that frida kahlo's name has come up because to me, it sounds like an advertisement. it has been -- i read that city college has proposed a construction for a multimillion dollar arts centre named after diego rivera as well. which would combine her name and therefore that is why they would like frida kahlo pastas name listed on the streets. it has nothing to do with phelan's name. this is how i feel. however,, my problem is here that you are changing one name

that you are saying is racist to another person who has a very controversial background. freda calo -- frida kahlo is a proponent of communism -- >> thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> i have been at 221 phelan for over 35 years. i am very happy. all the people there are very nice and very helpful. one thing i noticed, this city, whenever you sent a notice, you remember the seniors. most of the seniors don't have internet.

when you said that you shared the name, i would like to have the history of phelan, the history of frida kahlo. so we understand who they are, and why you want to change the name. my question is, is this a business issue? or is it a background issue? so today, the first time i hear that you talk about the history of phelan, and you talk a little bit about frida kahlo. my thinking is i wish that i understand the name. we have been there for a long time and we have been very happy and we wish that we live in peace under the phelan name.

as i say,i oppose to change the name. let us live in peace. because the change of name would create a big stress for all of us. thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors. danhigh school.nt of archbishop the high school serves a truly diverse population of students. on behalf of the students and over 50 residents who live the there, i wish to let the record show that our community takes issue with the process for how our street name is being changed, and we are opposed to any name changing without a fair process being put in place. the reason for why the street name is being changed is disnest. more importantly, the voting

process was arbitrary, unfair and biased towards the city college. arbitrary in that waiting was unevenly distributed among stakeholder groups. unfair in that our supervisor failed toexplain the process and did next to nothing to inform riordan and inform residents about where the process was taking place. no explanation of the weighting was given. this process was biased towards city college because their representatives were the only ones who knew the details of the process of the march 2nd meeting that i called to gather information from phelan residents and the city college representatives. when i asked if they knew about the process or how to vote, not a single one of the nine of 17 residents present knew how to vote. this is a serious error in process. i asked the board of supervisors to have some oversight over these matters that violate the rights of the city citizens to a

fair voting process. i have 11 of 17 letters signed by residents rejecting the changing of the name of phelan avenue. that is a majority of 40% of the overall voting weighting according to the process. with my vote against, on behalf of the high school which constitutes ten%, that makes 50% opposed to the renaming and i plead with you to route vies the voting process with oversight. [applause] >> afternoon. my name is bonnie wight and i live at 326 phelan avenue. the only meeting that we were invited to was a meeting of the renaming committee. my husband and i went to that meeting to oppose the name change. we were told flatly it was a done deal because phelan was a racist. i agree that racism and hate have no place here, but the

objective at that meeting was to choose a name and frida kahlo way it was already number 1 on the list. our street was named aftethe first irish immigrant that came to san francisco and became a prosperous and wealthy businessman during the gold rush. phelan avenue dead ends into james flat avenue. he was a contemporary of the older phelan so it was no mistake that there streets are together. james phelan had a son named james who was born and raised in san francisco and graduated from law school and became a businessman, and then he was elected mayor of san francisco in 1897. this is the phelan that advocated excluding immigrants from some politically adversarial countries. mayor phelan worked to clean up the corruption that had worked to clean up city hall. he was a strong advocate of public health and he was the president of the red cross and he is responsible for securing the water rights for all time.

history is full of good and bad invents but is the history that makes our city what it is today. members of the mexican communist party and she was a feminist and an internationally recognized artist. she spent some time in san francisco and other american cities but she reportedly disliked american society and found americans boring. our history is full of good and bad and we do not tolerate racism and hatred. abolishing the name phelan from our street is erasing history and perpetuating hate. phelan avenue is named after an irish immigrant, not a racist. we urge you to recommit to naming our street. [applause] >> thank you. i will call somewhere name so you can start lining up.

come on up. >> good afternoon supervisors. we love the name of phelan. i think there is no reason to rename and. frida kahlo is a member of a mexican communist party.

[ indiscernible ] [applause] >> good afternoon supervisors. i teach at city college of san francisco and i am faculty in

the trauma prevention and covery certificate and appreciate frida kahlo's role in bringing a complex examination of trauma in her art to the four. also as a bisexual woman, i am moved by the idea of having a city, a street named for such a visible, early out? or by women. her connection to san francisco was significant in starting in 1930 and in 1940 as the pan american unity mural was painted by her husband, who she remarried in san francisco, diego rivera. and participated in the art community here. i can say that san francisco feels a connection to her. you just have to walk around to see frida kahon a t-shirt, on a bag, painted on a pair of sneakers. san francisco loves her. san francisco it has been an international city who has honoured the struggle against oppression in many parts of the world. we have streets named for a

polish leader of solidarity, and for the filipino dish filipino revolutionary. the san francisco values which we are sometimes mocked for our our values. and very different than those of phelan. he supported the chinese exclusion act and other racist policies. i would be delighted to take the frida kahlo way to the diego rivera mura and to free city college and to the neighbor -- neighborhood of the phelan residents. >> good afternoon. i am speaking in favour of the resolution. i teach, currently at city college. to change the name to frida kahlo way is to take local action with a groan international movement. linking with those working to increase representation of women in public office and public places, and linking to those

standing up for peace and humanity against heightened zeno phobia and racism. [please standby for captioner switch]