legislation in residential hotels where we have postings. in apartment buildings, people are now empowered to understand whether they're protected or not as far as fire is concerned. we have many things that we didn't have before. now we're truly measuring success as far as the quality of life, so with that, i want to read one thing for you, and that is one of the major goals of the department of building inspection, as far as its strategic plan. it says, provide inspections to enforce codes and standards to protect occupants' rights ensuring safety and quality life. i mentioned to bill strum that wow, that's provocative language. he said you wrote it. it's something we would have never thought of 30 years ago. ladies and gentlemen, it's been a privilege.

thank you. [applause] stalwa

. >> congratulations again, miss for your service to the city and county of san francisco. [applause] >> president breed: okay. we actually have one more special commendation, and we wanted everyone to know that today, we are celebrating a very special day. in fact, it is the birthday of the clerk of the board of supervisors, angela calvillo.

[applause] breed breed we not only want to wito -- >> president breed: we not only want to wish her a happy birthday, but acknowledge her hard her that she and her team does to keep our meetings runs of the board of supervisors, and a testament to miss lo'il hard work, instead of taking the day off, she is here at the board of supervisors working, so thank you, and we just want to wish you a happy birthday. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: so madam secretary, on behalf of the board of supervisors, here's some sunflowers. you continue to not only know the details of protocol but conduct yourself with grace and aplomb. i have to say in my position as board president, the best hire i ever made.

[applause] >> president breed: thank you. and with that, colleagues, we will go back to our agenda, and i do want to come back to the item that we left off from, item number 26, and wondering what we'd like to do. supervisor tang? >> supervisor tang: can i just ask to delay this to later in the meeting so i can speak with supervisor peskin? >> president breed: okay. so we will delay it until later in the meeting. let's go to item number 27. >> clerk: item 27 is a resolution that pertains to community and neighborhood outreach advertising and to designate the following community neighbor -- newspapers as the papers we will advertise in to provide outreach advertising for fiscal 2018 through 2019 to the small business exchange for the african american community, to

el reportero for the hispanic community, to the bay area reporter for the lesbian guy bisexual community, for the potrero view for the potrero hill, bayview, mission bay, and soma neighborhoods. >> president breed: thank you. and colleagues, i'm very concerned about this particular item. i know that this is about small business outreach, and we've come up against this situation in the past. we know that for neighborhood newspapers to survive, sometimes it is a challenge, and we also know that sometimes our bureaucratic process can be problematic for submittals from these small institutions. and i will say that in reviewing this item, i was very disappointed that the bayview was not listed. i know the sun reporter has made it clear that the reason

why they don't continue to bid is because it's very complicated and time-consuming to facilitate this process as an awardee, and i am also surprised that world journal is not include index th-- include in this list. and i think that's a problem. the whole thing is to make sure we are providing opportunities for newspapers, community newspapers to notice to the communities that they repair that they serve, an opportunity to know what is happening in the city and county of san francisco. we are in the process of talking about notification in item 26 and the need to make sure that neighbors are notified properly for the purposes of providing community feedback on these particular projects. and so i am not satisfied that the work was done to ensure that those smaller newspapers

who should be included in this process are included. and even though i do know that there might have been a late submittal here and there, the whole point is to make it easier for these particular newspapers to have a seat at the table so that the outreach is done properly. and so i'm very concerned, and i would like to ask that we continue this item for the next two weeks, to the meeting of july 10 so that we can get clarity on that particular matter and there can be sufficient outreach in these particular newspapers to include them in this particular contract. and seeing no other -- i will m that motion supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: i just had a question for either staff or the relevant committee just as to -- i guess that would have been budget and finance committee just as to what the

presentation was and why sing tao, world journal, sun reporter are not there. >> president breed: and the bayview. >> supervisor peskin: and the bayview. >> president breed: and the bayview, the reporter i reached out to, she is a small business owner with basically 1.5 employees, and the time that it takes to not only go through the process to provide a submission but also what the city requires to do business makes it very difficult for her to compete in this particular contract, and so she says that it's -- it's more of a burden than it's worth. and so that was the feedback that i got specifically from the sun reporter as to why they did not make a submission. but i do know that sing tao submitted, and i think the -- and i think that world journal submitted, as well. so again, i think that there's

a problem here that we need to address. supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: yes. i also mentioned this at the budget committee meeting, is that i noticed, also, that the richmond review wasn't there, and that the marina times was, and that i questioned that, and they said they had not submitted a proposal. so i -- i would thank you for actually asking about the process and whether or not that process is as inclusive as it could be. >> president breed: thank you. and i think we have someone from the city administrator's office who'd like to explain what occurred. >> yes. and good afternoon, supervisors. i'm alex degrassi, and i work in the office of contract administration, and all the firms that are mentioned today, we did do the outreach to those firms. however, for the firms that you did mention, we did not receive

a proposal in. we did receive a proposal from sing tao. it was late, though, so from a technical standpoint, we didn't have the option to recommend an award to sing tao. the one issue or the one problem i'm assuming, though, that's causing some difficulty for some of the papers that were mentioned, and this is all driven and scifically in the code in -- and the newspapers have to be printed here in the city of san francisco. and as you know, as you've been talking earlier about the cost of housing, that's the same thing that impacts the cost of businesses here in san francisco. so the cost of owning a print shop and doing business here in san francisco could be the problem. i have not polled all those companies that were mentioned, but if you'd like, that is something that our confidence

can do. but i can tell you that in the way that the code is written, you are required to have the printing done here in the city and county of san francisco and that's been one of the factors that we have seen that has impacted some of the firms which also includes sing tao. >> president breed: and i thought that we had a discussion about this a few years ago, and i don't recall exactly what the follow up was, but i know that there were members of this board who had expressed a desire to make sure that those papers that actually serve communities in san francisco, especially the small -- smaller businesses, have a real opportunity to compete for the purpose of making sure we're distributing information with all of these outlets. and we didn't want these particular newspapers that are

community serving to be left out. i don't recall the follow through that took place in that conversation, but i'm just wondering if this is delayed two additional weeks, if that would be problematic. >> i don't believe it would be a problemisatic e. i don't know that we'd be able to necessarily solve the problem as far as the way the code is written, but i know in the past the board has exercised some level of discretion as far as allowing some firms through, and as our office, it can certainly work with the board on the particular firms that they do have in mind. >> president breed: so you don't believe that -- what were the things that were done in the past to address this issue? because i do recall the bayview actually being on this list, so i'm not certain what could have happened in that case. >> and the thing -- what i'm referring to, madam president,

is i don't understand in the past -- i believe in the past that the board has exercised some discretion to allow certain firms to be awards contracts. as written, as our office doesn't have the discretion to override that, but ihink that th -- at the board level, they have exercised the discretion to allow certain firms to be awards contracts. >> president breed: okay. thank you. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you. that's just what i was going to say. in the past, the o.c.a. -- let me take aep back. this was a goofy ballot initiative that one newspaper put on several decades ago. that newspaper does not exist anymore. it was meant for that newspaper to get all of the official advertising, but the way it is written, the office of contract administration can't recommend things, but the board can do what it wants. and in the past, i remember this very clearly, we would look at their recommendations, and then, we would add the sing

tao, and the world journal, and the bayview. and i don't actually remember adding the sun reporter because my recollection is they didn't even apply, but we can -- we have the discretion to do that whether it's today or two weeks from now, and we should just do that. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor peskin, and i would say that we should do a two-week continuance and connect with those particular newspaper outlets and then make the amendments at the meeting of july 10. supervisor cohen? >> supervisor cohen: you know, this is an issue, like supervisor peskin said, that comes up annually, and we do handle it. i don't think we need to wait two weeks. i think it can be addressed today. we dealt with it in budget committee. i reached out to the sun reporter. she expressed she has no interest. the bayview has had an opportunity in years past and is going through a little transition right now. the way we can easily solve

this problem is to bring a charter amendment to voters and make a slight change. that's it, a simple charter amendment to voters. so if anyone's not doing anything, maybe some colleagues would be interested to bring a simple charter amendment to the voters to change all this. but in all seriousness, we can address this today and not even worry about it in two weeks. >> president breed: so supervisor cohen, are you suggesting -- are you saying that you've been in contact with the bayview and they're not interested? cone cone no, i cannot say that. i will say they've been involved in the process. if you'd like, we can delay this matter and i can reach ou to them and deal with this matter before the close of business today. i don't believe we need to prolong it two weeks, it's just a simple call. >> president breed: okay. i would like to move this item to later in the agenda.

>> supervisor cohen: okay. >> president breed: connect with the newspapers that were mentioned, and if there's interest, i'd like my colleagues to support an amendment to include them in this contract. supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim: i was just confirming that the sing tao and the world journal did actually apply. >> yes. >> supervisor kim: but they don't have printing that actually take place in san francisco. okay. i'm just going to say that being that those two newspapers do have an interest in participating but were not selected because of this requirement that o.c. -- >> o.c.a. >> supervisor kim: o.c.a. -- sorry. we have o.c.i.i. coming before us later. o.c.a. could not make a recommendation for those two, i will be making a motion to include those two publications. >> president breed: okay supervisor kim has made a motion to include those two publications, and seconded by

supervisor tang. can we take that without objectio? without objection. supervisor cohen? >> supervisor cohen: i just wanted to ask, did bayview apply? >> no ma'am. >> president breed: but even they did not apply, that does not prohibit us from including them in this. >> supervisor cohen: correct. >> i don't believe so, no. >> president breed: and also they've applied in the past but they're dealing with capacity issues from my understanding. >> i'm not aware if they did or not in the past. >> president breed: okay. supervisor cohen? >> supervisor cohen: yes, i'll make a motion to include the bayview. >> president breed: all right. supervisor cohen has made a motion, seconded by supervisor yee, can we take that without objection? on that amendment, can we take that, same house, same call. the amendment passes without objection. [ gavel ]. >>redeed: please read item 28.

[agenda item read] >> president breed: supervisor tang? >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. i wanted to see if there might be willingness to try to amend this item so that we could at least include advertisement in the chronicle for half the year like we did in the past. i know when we talked about streamlining, neighborhood notification, people wanting to understand information fully. i do know that the chronicle has a yearly readership that is about double than the examiner, and wanted to see if we could include the chronicle as part of this. >> president breed: and thank you, supervisor. supervisors, i completely support that. we have a number of newspapers that exist in san francisco, and regardless of how we may or may not like a particular newspaper outlet, i do think that we do this city a

disservice by not including notifications in all newspapers when the opportunity presents itself, so with that motion that you're proposing, supervisor tang, i'm happy to second it. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: can you, madam president, respectfully, through the chair, to supervisor tang. let me just set forth my arguments as to why i don't think that's a good idea, and they really don't have to do with the media content of either publication. one thing i think is important is that one paper's free. the other one costs $2. the other thing is in the old days, when we did split it, six months and six months, it's for people who don't use the internet who go out and read the official publications. you don't know which paper you're supposed to be reading which half of the year, so i think consistency is very important. and then, finally, san

francisco is what i call a 1.5 wspapetown, and if we want to maintain -- if we want to have another newspaper of record, keeping the examiner, which, you know, lives on a shoestring budget, i think is good for content and diversity, and i will respectful leo pos thatmotion. >> president breed: supervisor peskin, just for clarity, the examiner's not printing every day. how often are they printing? they don't have actual physical papers except for reduced amount of time. >> three days a week. >> president breed: three days a week? thank you. supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: yeah, i wanted to agree with supervisor peskin and underscore his last point, which is that over the years, we have lost so many print newspapers in this city, and every time we lose another paper, i think that's a detriment to all of us, that having different sources,

different points of view, a robustmedia, especially at this time when there is such an attack from the federal government on media, is incredible important. and we have an ability -- is incredibly important. and we have an ability here as a city to help keep a paper afloat that provides that diverse voice. and so i do not agree with the amendment as put forth by supervisor tang. >> president breed: so in the process of helping to keep a paper afloat that is not printed every day, we're denying the opportunity to provide another source for people to be exposed to the information. that's what i'm most concerned about, so if there is, for example, a recommendation that could help support that without taking away the ability to use a paper like the chronicle as a

way to communicate to the public. i want to see us do something else for the purposes of keeping this paper afloat, which i think is necessary, but maybe there's an opportunity to look at a different percentage or maybe looking at making amendments to the contract. however, i still think it's important to use the chronicle as a vehicle to communicate what we need to to the public. supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: yes. through the chair, i was wondering if i could ask, o.c.a., given that the examiner is printed three days a week, when do these advertisements go out? >> the advertisements go out -- typically, you have to give notice the evening before. as our office is working with the clerk of the bod's office, an approach that o.c.a. was going to recommend to the board was to have as a primary

and as a secondary provider, so in this case, the primary provider would be the examiner, and they were the highest ranking firm, they were the highest ranking firm and responsive firm. to be clear, however, on the off days, where we didn't have a service day on a monday or tuesday, and we needed to get something out that day, we would put it in the chronicle. so we would not be taking away anything from the examiner, and they would be the primary contract holder over the course of this contract, if they did start to change and print every day again, all that work would go to them. so the work that would be going to the chronicle would only be on the days that the examiner is not in print. >> supervisor ronen: and we are publishing every day advertisements? >> as of now, no, because we only have the work with the examiner.

but with these contracts, we would be able to advertise every day. >> supervisor ronen: and sorry. maybe this question, then, through the chair to the clerk of the board, perhaps, it -- would the best case scenario be that we have access to a print newspaper every single day to print notices because it's all committee hearings. >> clerk: yes, through the president, absolutely. we are in agreement with the -- with what they're recommending. >> supervisor ronen: okay. and also, through the president, supervisor tang, was that your amendment? >> supervisor tang: through the chair to supervisor ronen, my original amendment was what i had seen us doing previously at this board, so splitting, a half year. >> supervisor ronen: would you be open to a friendly amendment adopting o.c.a.'s recommendation? >> supervisor tang: i guess so. if that's the recommendation, i think that's the way --

>> president breed: supervisor >> supn: soo to restate it, unless -- do you want me to make the motion? >> president breed: well, first of all, supervisor tang, do you want to withdraw your motion? >> supervisor tang: i'll withdraw my motion. >> president breed: and i'll withdraw my second. supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: yes. i would make a motion to make the sanrancisco examiner the primary newspaper announcements of meetings for official announcements with the chronicle as the secondary, and the impact of that, just to explain a little bit more, would be given that the examiner is only printing three days a week at this time, that on those three days, that will be the primary newspaper. if the examiner in the future goes back to a five-day print cycle, then they would take over five days a week, but in the meantime, the chronicle would be the back up paper. >> president breed: okay. mr. givner, is that okay or do we need the language or is that

sufficient? >> mr. givner: that's sufficient. we can amend the resolution. >> president breed: so supervisor ronen has made a motion, seconded by supervisor yee. supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim: can i just understand exactly what that's going to mean? >> that's going to mean working with the clerk of the board's office on days when they of notice -- say, for example, they know that they need to get a notice at the newspaper on a monday. on those days, we work as a clearinghouse, and in that clearinghouse, we will directly advertise it in the chronicle. however if we know the advertisement is going to be falling on a wednesday or thursday or a sunday, then, they will direct that work to the examiner. >> supervisor kim: so the examiner only prints on wednesday, thursday, and sunday? >> yes. >> clerk: that's correct. wednesday, thursday, and sunday through the press. >> president breed: and if that increases, then, basically, that the -- the use

of the examiner will be what we would consider, so if it goes from three days to four days, then, we would use them for the four days instead of the three days, based on what you heard from the amendment and what was cleared through our attorney general. supervisor kim -- i mean, attorney general? i'm sorry. it's been a long day. >> supervisor tang: i am'm ha to promote mr. givner. so what is it that we do with the reduced printing of the examiner? >> and it's my understanding that we only have the option of in printing notices in the examiner, so if there were something to come up, is it not as a city print in the chronicle, so we have to have a notice printing around those days in the examiner. >> supervisor tang: so

currently, the clerk's office works to consolidate our notices on the days that the examiner prints? >> yes. >> supervisor tang: i would prefer to stay with one paper. that's just my opinion. i won't be supporting this amendment. if we think it's confusing to bifurcate six months and six months, it's going to be more confusing to bifurcate by days, so i think we should work to consolidate our notices on the days they publish, so i will not be supporting this amendment. >> president breed: and miss calvil calvillo wants to provide some clarity. >> clerk: through the president, it has expanded their noticing by two weeks, so they are concerned, they need to publish five consecutive days at least. currently with the examiner just reducing down to three days, it has, like i said, expanding their noticing period for items to be before the commission. >> supervisor tang: i just -- i don't see an issue with us

having to notify earlier than the five or ten-day requirement. and i honestly, i find it aggravating when we miss notifications because they're so close to the commission date. it just means that there wasn't good preparation, that we're bringing in items last minute. i just think that's not the best way to do business, and we should know in advance what we're notifying for. >> well, we do sometimes know in advance, but what happens when the board calls a special meeting or any other commissions call a special meeting or there's a special committee meeting that any of the chairs decideo hold? i mean, so i just -- from my perspective, i just think it's more responsible for us to have at least a back up, an alternative, if necessary, to use for that purpose, so i think that's what this is about more so. and i understand that it might seem confusing, but the fact it, i think it's important that we have as many notification outlets with all of our

newspapers as possible for full transparency to the public. supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim: yeah, no, i understand that. i just think that the intent of this law is for some type of consistency so that people know where to get notifications. if it's in two different newspapers, i don't think we're truly following the intent or the spirit of the law. what we're basically saying is we're writing off our obligations, saying it's printed somewhere, just go and find it. that, to me is not the spirit of the law. it means we're following the law and doing some type of notification. i would prefer -- i haven't heard complaints about it thus far. this is how we've been doing it since the examiner has reduced its publication date. this is the first i've heard it was an issue. if it was such an issue, i think i would have been hearing about it prior to today's meeting. i won't be supporting today's amendment. >> president breed: just in the past, we've supported both

newspapers, which is why it hasn't been a problem. >> supervisor tang: in the past two years -- [please stand by]

i think we need to resolve it. i think there's going to be emergency hearings and that we need to notify the public and there's no way to anticipate sometimes. my suggestion is that we can -- the clerk and other people that's going to be sending out

notifications continue to send out ahead of time as much as possible so most of the notifications can be done. but for those special instances where we need to notify and there's only a friday left or whatever, then we use the -- rather than going back to the days where i -- you know, i would wait last minute to do everything. i suggest that we commit to it thoroughly and that in six months time i would like to know whether or not the pattern that has been used for the last six months continues or not. in other words, i don't want us to fall back and get lazy and say -- so i don't have to worry about it. is that a fair ask of our clerk? >> through the president, we certainly maintain that information and make a presentation to you after that

six-month period. >> and then if that's the case if i could get commitments from others then i would be supporting this amendment. >> thank you. supervis supervisor safari. >> thank you. i think what you're proposing is a good solution. what i've found working with the clerk and the board we have in the amount of time we have it would be good to have a back up option because we have confronted that. it has nothing to do with the preparation of the clerk's office or any of the other commissions that we work with. it has more to do with the timing and sometimes the lack of noticing on our part to the clerk's office so i appreciate the comments that you gave. it sounds like this will help facilitate the work you did as well as noticing the public as we move along with our process with the board in a timely manner. i think this is a good solution and i would be supporting the

proposal. >> seeing no other names on the roster, on the amendment p proposed -- oh, mr. gibner. >> just wanted to be -- trying hink through how exactly this would work. in some circumstances, for instance, the clerk mentioned the mta board is sometimes required to publish on five consecutive days. under supervisor -- i think that could go in two different directions, the mta board -- what the mta would public on monday and tuesday in the chronicle, wednesday and thursday in the examiner, friday in the chronicle or the board could give discretion to the clerk and ota on how those type of situations would be handled in order to maximize notice. >> i think that the ability to, again, use the examiner as the

primary paper and publish to the max the maximum amount of time that we are able to do it in advance in those particular days, why would that be any different i think than what we are doing right now? because i guess it happened -- like the examiner -- and i think the point was made that the change in the publication of the examiner happened midway through the contract and so maybe we could receive an explanation as to how we had handled it before this was brought to our attention today. >> madame president, angela clevio, clerk of the board. the good news is there has not been any 4 hour -- any 24 hour request for meetings so we

haven't had to notice anything in the newspaper on a 24 hour notice. we always try to get with the chairs to determine when their regular meetings are scheduled and try to work with them in advance when they are scheduling special meetings so that we can publish in the newspaper in advance. a member of the public only needs to see the notice one time for the continuous notices as mentioned by mr. gibner. so we would love to be able to publish all of our notices in every newspaper and would certainly look for the direction of the board on how you would want us to handle that. >> so it has not been impacted since the change? >> for the board of supervisors and our committees not so much but i have heard from other commissions who are concerned that their consecutive noticing will be impacted.

>> has been impacted sgl. >> has been impacted and will continue to be impacted if amendments are not made. >> okay. >> so could we write into this acceptance that we require -- basically what supervisor yee expressed but make it part of the acceptance for this? or write it into the resolution that we expect departments to plan ahead and to the extend possible prenotify about meetings as they have been doing because clearly they have had to do something in order to comply with the law since this change

was enacted and then only in emergency situations or where it was impossible to think ahead do they advertise in the secondary source. so basically what supervisor yee expressed but write it into the resolution as a requirement. >> something like if the department makes a written finding of necessity or something like that. >> there you go. >> okay. so that's a motion? >> yes. >> do we need to make a motion for that as well? okay. so you want to amend your motion and is there a second? seconded by supervisor yee. colleagues can we take that without objection? without objection the motion has been amended to include that. supervisor yee. >> just quickly in regards to the last example of the five consecutive days, if one were to

look at the examiner all the time they will find an examiner. i'm real comfortable if the days will be krchronicled rather tha trying to figure out a complicated system. that's my take on it. >> thank you. sup supervisor kim. >> so the amendment would be to permit our city departments to utilize the chronicle as long they provide a statement of necessity? that would justify why they were not able to submit it on a -- in advance basically. i guess my second question is what has sfmta will be doing during these last couple of months when the examiner reduced its publication? i know it's not been around for very long but i feel like i would have heard about this if this happened three months ago

or two months ago. that's still enough time to inform members of this board that that's an issue. it's not like this started last week. >> i am not at liberty to say what mta has been doing at the interim. the office of contract administration puts out the solicitation and then the departments issue and work from that. as we are not involved in the day-to-day as the use of the contract. >> i mean, my guess is that sfmta just sent a number of notifications at once, maybe more than five or ten days because they know the schedule of their meetings, right; is that correct? >> through the president to supervisor kim, that's correct. a five-day noticing period. we heard from the executive secretary to the mta who indicated a five-day notice

would take a two-week period for the meetings. >> are the only exception special meetings that only have a 24-hour notice? if that's the exception i would rather just say that unless it's a meeting that requires 24 hour notification. barring that we use our main contractor. i feel comfortable with that amendment. >> i think there are some noticing requirements for five consecutive days so i just think that it's not as if they are able to make a decision from my understanding to choose not to use the examiner that that would be the primary newspaper for the three days of the publication but i there's a five day notification then that would be those days specific to the chronicle if that's something that they need to use. >> so what the sfmta, my understanding, is doing to do is they are submitting it be the five day notice. i think that's a better practice for departments anyways.

they are submitting their noticing because the meetings are regularly scheduled. some of them might be five days, ten, seven, eight but the notifications are going out. out -- it just has to be previous of the five days. five day social security -- five days is the minimum. the 24 hour advanced notification, out would be great to have chronicle as a back up for those emergency meetings. i think that we should be very specific and allocated accordingly. >> thank you. >> i will support that as the amendment. >> supervisor. >> this is all business done by the city and county of san francisco. so we are focusing on meetings but we also have other publications and notices that need to happen. i can tell you not to shift the conversation away from the

sfmta. i know the planning department has had some issues in the past where there's been some noticing that were missed based on deadlines, if it was internal or if it had to do with missing the deadlines, the publication based on the examiner. i think that we need to approach this conversation based on how we can expand noticing. i understand the arguments that supervisor peskin made about including this as a city that's a paper as a half. i think that's an important thing as well. i certainly want to see us have more options but i think what we are trying to do and i think supervisor ronen put this forward, we are trying to have more flexibility for the departments that are there. i don't think necessarily that expanding notification into more than one publication is going to limit people's ability to have access to that notification. so i would be for the original proposal amendment. i wouldn't necessarily want to constrict this so much. i like -- excuse me, deputy

attorney gibner said in response, if there's a necessitated need that gives some flexibility. if we are narrowing this down so much, it's three days right if it were to go up or down we have the flexibility to adjust. i know this is not just about the sfmta and not just about meeting s that are happening in committee, it's all notification for the city as i understand it. >> thank you. supervisor tang. >> i just want to say that i appreciated the original movement because we are expanding it. speaking from experience as we are dealing with projects where a lot of parking is being removed, small businesses are being impacted i'm pressing the agency to hurry up and install passenger loading zones, white, green, yellow, you name it and what is holding them up are these notifications to go to these meetings. those are some real life

examples right now. i'm sure there's more. a committee chair, especially land use or budget, we have these notifications and things come up. a lot of times we can't schedule things for you because of that notification component. so, again, it really is a lot of things that do impact us on a regular basis. i would love for us to see that original y original amendment proposed. >> just for clarity supervise tang does that mean that the amendment to the motion you don't support that particular language? >> i would say yes, i would prehefe t original one where it doesn't constrain it so much. >> okay. thank you. supervisor ronen? >> so just in listening to all my colleagues and trying to come up with something that perhaps we could all live with, i want to with draw my original motion and try to rearticulate the different motion. i with draw. can i get a second? thank you. so i would do is make a motion that would make the examiner the

primary official newspaper advertising meetings within the city and county of san francisco and that the city will only use the chronicle if there was some emergency meeting that required 24 hours notification or some other necessity. what was the language, attorney general? just kidding. i like attorney general. >> it depends on which attorney general. >> true. good point. >> good point. >> i know what the president was thinking. >> written finding of necessity. >> okay. with a written -- unless there's a writtening fndf necessity and that the departments report to the board on a quarterly basis about how many times they have invoked this need of

necessity so that we can keep an eye on whether or not they are just using this as an excuse to get out of that advanced planning or if they're using it responsibly for needs. >> okay. supervisor ronen has made a motion, supervisor kim seconded it. i just think that the amendment is too complicated and restrictive. i understand the intent but i do think that your original motion served the appropriate purpose. supervisor ronen. >> so it sounds complicated when i'm articulating it but i don't think it's that complicated. we are asking the departments to do what they have been doing, to think in advance, to publish in a newspaper that we would like to support for all of the reasons that supervisor peskin articulated, it's free and we

want diversity of voice and a competitive newspaper atmosphere out there where we get great journalism through that competition and that we are asking departments but we are ingay we got -- we understand that there are going to be these situations, the 24 hour emergency meeting or something that we can't think of where we want to give you some wiggle room where we can follow the law. we just want to keep an eye on that so we make sure it's not being abused. it sounds complicated because i'm not articulating it well but i think the policy is pretty simple. we want to continue to use the examiner but have the chronicle there for flexibility and emergency when needed. >> emergency and for other specific reasons that need to be documented. >> well, for reasons of necessity. so if there's some reason that the department cannot plan in advance, which we expect them to do, but if they can't for some

reason that they have this other wayf advertising their meetings. we just want to keep an eye on it. >> okay. supervuzer -- supervisor ronen made a motion to amend and it was seconded by supervisor kim. colleagues, can we take the amendment without objection? without objection the amendment passes. on the item as amended, can we take that same call? without objection, the resolution as amended is adopted unanimously. madame clerk, let's go to our committee as a whole, our first committee as a whole. items 50 through 52, please call those items. >> items 50 through 52, the special order at 3:00 p.m., the board of sup-- supervisors will

amend as a whole. the subject matters of u -- of items 51 and 52, amendment for the redevelopment project area and an ordnance approving and adopting an amendment for the project area to affirm the determination and make the proper findings for both ordnances. >> colleagues, we are sitting at a committee as a whole to discuss amendments to the hunters point shipyard and the bay view hunters point redevelopment plans. let's open this hearing. supervi supervisor cohn. >> thank you everyone for agreeing to hear these items. today's meetings is a long time in the making. the original hunters point redevelopment shipyard plan was

approved 21 years ago in 1997. at that time the success of negotiating the stakeholders to secure a commitment from the developer of providing 3 affordable housing was unprecedented. this development set the gold standard for what was possible in affordable housing negotiations and i applaud the forward thinking inclusionary housing numbers along with the advanced community benefits that came with them. the success is coupled with a promise of a boost to the local economy through hundreds of jobs sounded like a dream. it sounded like a dream to most hunter's point, bay view residents and others living in the southeast who looked forward to the addition of many amenities. so today i'm hopeful that my colleagues will join me in moving forward modest suggests to phase two of the hunters

point shipyard redevelopment plan. these changes will allow shifts in four key areas. first land use changes, reduction in square footage from rnd and office to hotel, retail and commercial. third, james town parcel and then fourth senior housing. i want to thank the members of the land use committee for hearing these items and thank the dozen or so community members who attended yesterday's land use hearing -- land use meeting. it was a very straightforward conversation. i appreciate the thoughtful questions raised by my colleagues. in particular, supervisor kim asked if there was a possibility to convert some of the commercial land use to office -- to housing in the future and most of the development at candle stick point is commercial and that designation does not fit our city's need anymore given that the shift -- given the shift in housing stability

over the last 20 years. while that was not considered in the updates before you today, quite frankly we are not proincluded proincluded froonsideng this in the future and we will make adjustments to the level of retail that's easy -- designated. thank you for raising this issue. second it was asked to consider a higher affordable housing that using state tax credits. i also think this is a good idea. i appreciate his thoughtfulness and i'm grateful for him taking the time to do a deep dive into the numbers. at this time i want to emphasize that we have housing opportunities in the 80 to 100% ami range and the below 60% ami range. so that is including the

expedited senior housing development t i ao mentioned earlier in my remarks. this is important because when we have conversations about middle income residents not being considered or included in our affordable housing considerations it is critical that we understand middle income at the district or on the neighborhood level. sometimes it's not in congruent with a city-wide level. what is middle income in district 4 is not middle income in district 2 and that's not middle income in district 10. in fact, 55% city wide ami captures half of all residents in the bay view neighborhood. when we tell developers that we want to be sure their developments are for everyone, not just a tool to displace

established communities these are the thoughtful conversations that must be made including the level of ami that doesn't reach half the neighborhood it aims to help. what sense does that make? this is the mixture of housing that must be built, housing that accommodating a range of income levels for future tenants. period. lastly i must recognize that this work is happg in the shadows of on going fraudulent soil testing scandals at the hunter's point naval shipyard by a clean up contractor tetra tech. i'm proud to announce that as an out come of the may 14th government audit and oversight committee hearing that i called that the california department of public house has agreed to test parcel a for contamination and test all of parcel g as

well. of course this will be paid for by a united states navy. of course. while the clean up is on going, the work that we are doing today will allow the developer to get entitlements to do predevelopment work. we as a city will remain vigilant about the safety of the workers, about the residents at the shipyard, about the residents around the shipyard. we will not move forward wit any development until we are certain that the soil is safe. now, what i'd like to do now is take a moment and say thank you to brittany, my aid, who has helped me with this entire tter. lto ao invite a who will be presenting. she's the executive director of ocii. she will be speaking now in greater detail about the planned amendments that we are going to be considered today. >> also we have members of the

planning department here to answer any detailed questions that you may have. the floor isurs. thank you. >> thank you. and after your presentation we will open it up then to public comment for members of the public. >> thank you supervisor cohn. good afternoon, board members. i'm nadia, the office of the director of community investment and infrastructure. i'm here to present on amendments to the hunter's point shipyard and redevelopment plans to allow for some changes being made to the candle stick point and the shipyard phase ii project. sf gov tv, please? our agenda today is as follows rg follows, i'll go on the rational and provide some background on the candle stick point and the shipyard phase ii project over all. then i will walk through the amendments themselves, describe the out

reach that was done over the last year and finally summarize the actions before you. to orient you, here's a map of both the hunter's point shipyard and candle stick point, an important distinction is that they are two redevelopment plans that over lapped the two different development agreements. the hunter's point shipyard development area shown in the light red colors indicates two phases of the shipyard, phase i is a smaller project and phase ii is all of the rest of the shipyard and it's part of the larger project with five point. the five point project also includes candle stick point which is on one of the bay view hunter's point redevelopment plan area shown in blue. so what i'll be talking about today is that the -- is the combined candle stick point and hunter's point shipyard phase ii, project with five point and

most specifically changes that effect mostly the shipyard phase ii project of the project. the team from five point are here today and will be available for questions.