Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  June 29, 2018 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT

12:00 pm
knowledgeable and very vocal so she has recommendations. i think that as a committee for us to all bring forward because we're hearing they're having the biggest rollout and we think this is going to be that we need to actually have a firm footing as a lafco and helping to set direction and also some guidance along the way. and to be able to critique. and then you're our voice and communicator between the two. so it would mean that you would have to, you know, thoroughly understand, of course, what's going on and have more of an oversight so you're able to tell us that we're as a body able to critically look at how the rollout is going and to give these sort of suggestions as a body. and then, let's see... i think -- yeah, i think that is it. so any questions about that or is that clear? >> i think that is clear. and, you know, i so far have had one meeting with the p.u.c. but
12:01 pm
i think that i need to meet with them more and i need to sort of establish what the -- what the level of transparency is with the p.u.c. because right now i have to say that after two months on the job i'm still getting a handle on that. and i have gone back and reviewed the language in the original m.o.u. and i reviewed the ordinance that mandates lafco oversees and for feedback on cleanpowersf and i feel that language is outdated, frankly. and it's something that we'll need to revisit, to clearer define what lafco's role is in the oversight of cleanpowersf. >> supervisor fewer: that's great. are you referring to the 2008 m.o.u., yes, and it does state that the m.o.u. calls on san francisco lafco to advise the searcsfpuc and the board of supervisors on all aspects of cleanpowersf's development and
12:02 pm
operation and management. i believe that commissioner pollock has a comment. >> vice chair pollock: thank you so much. this is helpful i think. perhaps in the future that we would like to revisit the language on the m.o.u. though it looks like we probably in doing a special study might exhaust the funds in that m.o.u. in the next one or two fiscal years. but i just want to clarify lafco's unique role in this is because of the way that the city and the county have set up the board of supervisors, and it does not have oversight on the sfpuc. and it's the sfpuc's commission that provides it. the only way that the board of supervisors is going to be able to do -- to weigh in would be by resolution or by a budgetary line item. and then approving the budget. so i think that it's important when you prepare information for
12:03 pm
lafco that those commissioners that also serve on the board of supervisors could take a memo from lafco to their other supervisors. that might be a helpful way to bridge the gap and, you know, and maintaining the independence and the differing roles that lafco has from the board of supervisors. but also providing a document and some clarity that, you know, chair fewer and commissioner ronen can take to the board of supervisors and then say, you know, because of the work that we have done here on lafco we'd like to bring this forward as an item of discussion on the board. that would be helpful. just sort of to have a second step that you could help to prepare a document. >> supervisor fewer: right. and to complement also the work of what cleanpowersf is doing too to work in conjunction with the city partners. thank you. and any other comments or questions for mr. goebel?
12:04 pm
thank you for this. and this is open up for public comment now. okay. our friends from the public, hi, bruce, come on up. >> speaking under a different organization, public net san francisco coalition and the ash bury neighborhood council. and we welcome mr. goebel to lafco. and we very welcome him and we had the opportunity to speak on a few items. i want to speak about the fiber, municipal fiber. as you know this is kind of been now almost dead right now. and so i would urge you to continue this. this is something that our group has been working on for 12 years since the earth link wifi debacle. and so one of the main things that's important to make this move forward is the dig once
12:05 pm
ordinance. that ordinance was introduced to be a mandate and at the 11th hour it was turned into something voluntary. in order to be able to get more correspond wit and more empty pipe in the ground, dedicated for fiber or dedicated for anything else, it could be for electric if we wanted to. that was suggested by the then supervisor zambiano and daly at the time, that "dig once" is really important. anytime that the city digs up or any contractor digs up the ground as we have seen with the sewer renovation projects, we could have had fiber in so many neighborhoods. this isn't just about the underserved neighborhoods because if for some reason something happens at the board of supervisors and that doesn't happen, then we don't have anything. so we have to start at the top. we have to start with the big huge project. this is a utility, like any other utility that we have to deal with. and it is going to be expensive.
12:06 pm
but the longer we wait the more expensive it gets. this is something that we feel, everybody feels that we absolutely need. this is the way of our world now. so i would urge you to expand the subjective. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, bruce. >> all right, i'm with public net and with san francisco clean energy advocates and californians for energy choice. first to reiterate what bruce said. and i would even go farther in saying that now the public broadband is not happening from the mayor's office. and the fact that this -- that lafco took the lead on this 12 years ago and it has been leading on it ever since. this is now in your court. lafco can take this on and make it happen and make it a real public broadband system that's good. so the work plan is really exciting. it's good to see a good
12:07 pm
proactive executive officer in here that's planning to help you to make lafco to put lafco back on the map and make it a driver of city policy again. that's excellent. and i want to give a thumbs up to the request about inclusion and intersectionallity. i think that even if that costs us some money that is the focus of everything that we're working on right now, sectionallity. so we need bryan to get that training. on cleanpowersf there's two things that we need you as a commission to do on cleanpowersf. remember that the bill that created the choice put the board of supervisors in charge as the body in charge of cleanpowersf. so though it's an enterprise agency the board is in charge and can pass ordinances and has done so. we need you to get the board of supervisors, not sfpuc, to do a
12:08 pm
sydney, australia, style buildout plan for clean energy. and the other thing that we need you to do is that on these bills that we have been fighting in sacrament, cal c.c.a. has not been good, they've been neutral in support of ab813. and we need lafco and the board of supervisors to put pressure on and to direct the sfpuc as its membership of cal c.c.a. to oppose these. >> supervisor fewer: seeing none, public comment is now closed. so, commissioners, can we have a motion to adopt the work plan of our executive officer? >> so moved. >> supervisor fewer: okay. >> seconded. >> supervisor fewer: great. without objection we can take that action. thank you. and madam clerk, call item number 7. >> item number 7 is the authorization for executive officer to conduct a study on emerging mobility services and the effect on labor partnering with the san francisco county transportation authority.
12:09 pm
>> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. so, mr. goebel, i thank you. >> thank you, madam chair and i presented in my work plan, this item would authorize me to begin the study as i mentioned and mr. warren logan, the senior planner at the transportation authority is here as well in case you have questions. i know that you wanted to add taxi services to this. >> through the chair, just to clarify, there's a specific goal i have in mind so it's not just taxi services in general. i want to figure out how to address the -- the workers, the tax taxi drivers, that purchased medallions right before they declined dramatically in value and are now in a crisis in their lives and with their families.
12:10 pm
>> supervisor fewer: i think that how it might relate to this is how this emerging mobility labor force -- just the whole company sort of what they're doing -- is really affecting the labor force here in san francisco in particular those people that are also providing these kind of transportation services. how is it affecting these taxi drivers? i mean, we know sort of anecdotally that they come to our board meeting every tuesday and they lament how they are just barely making it and they can't make it. on top of that they have bought these medallionses for $250,000 for the m.t.a. and so not only -- they said at the time that they thought that it might have been good to buy it because there was a taxi business that was very viable here in san francisco. so i think that how this relates is how these emerging technologies have actually affected our own workforce here.
12:11 pm
a workforce that actually reflects the values of san franciscoians unionizing. and to go to commissioner singh's comment also how it's affecting the labor force of public transportation. so our drivers, those -- that we had actually a stable workforce here before these emerging technologies came in. so i think that it is a partnership about -- also talking about the scooters and about all of these emerging mobilities and how it's really affected the labor force that it has displaced in a way. with maybe to back up with some data. is that making it clear, commissioner ronen, that we can tackle the next issue about? >> supervisor ronen: i think that you articulated that perfectly and the only thing that i would add is that in the
12:12 pm
overall analysis if you could start to take a look at possible solutions to the impact on that workforce, that would be fantastic. >> i have been reading, for example, that uber in new york city was required to pay a hardship fee to taxi drivers in that city. so one of the things that we'll do is examine best practices in other cities. before i continue though i want to invite mr. logan from the transportation authority. >> supervisor fewer: hi, mr. logan. >> to share what their vision was for this particular research. >> supervisor fewer: sure. >> hi, commissioners. my name is warren logan. i'm a senior transportation planner at the san francisco county of transportation authority. soon enough our separate commission which is also the board of supervisors, will be hearing our final report, excuse me -- our final report for emerging mobility evaluation and i'm excited to present that to you soon. our vision is to partner with bryan and we're very excited to hear the enthusiasm for
12:13 pm
understanding the gaps around labor. primarily our focus was on how these different services were impacting congestion. so we recognize, however, that during our initial scope of our guiding principles for emerging mobility, that several of the commissioners encouraged us to include labor. and so, obviously, we're super enthusiastic to partner with you on this and i want to herald this effort. but i hear you loud and clear not only understanding how this is impacting the folks in that gig economy, but also how they're impacting other labor forces in the city. my understanding though is that to your point, commissioner ronen, the sfu is documenting the impact for taxi drivers so i'm happy to encourage them to provide more information about that study. i don't know when it's planning to be reported out but i'll connect about that. >> supervisor ronen: that is great but i don't see solutions
12:14 pm
and action and that's -- >> supervisor fewer: absolutely. >> supervisor ronen: that's the piece that i'm asking mr. goebel to focus on. >> supervisor fewer: and during the budget committee i would say that the airport is saying now that there's 800,000 single rides, i mean, to the airport on a monthly basis. therefore, increasing the workforce that pulls the police department services, and pulls to the airport now because of the added enforcement that is needed. so we're looking at it on a lot of different perspectives on real true costs of these gig economies in san francisco. thank you very much. any other questions for mr. logan, commissioner pollock. >> vice chair pollock: just a quick question. when you look at the labor piece specifically, is it a focus at all that we look at labor practices of companies that
12:15 pm
receive either contractual or public land designations, like i'm thinking of curbs or right-of-way in turns of the use of the roadways. i know that the city and the county has set up when you sign a contract with the city that you have to have certain labor practices. you have to have certain, you know, benefits for employees and that sort of thing. i don't know if partnering for curb space or, you know, bike racks and that sort of thing is also a contractual obligation in terms of labor practices? is that a sort of gap that's also been identified? i don't understand the labor sort of piece in terms of contracting for those things. >> that's a great question. i think that one of the mechimisms that we have in the city to sort of push our goals and agenda for good labor practices is, in fact, through the permitting system that
12:16 pm
operates through the public works department. and so one of the things that i have been doing with our team is to work out how to harmonize the different permits that we operate here in the city, for standing scooters and electric mobeds and bike sharing etc. and you will see this coming up with the standing scooters the way that we're pushing our labor practices and our 10 vetting principles for emerging mobility. they're excited. so our different permitting systems. i'll get ahead of this too is that we have been working with the m.t.a. again to harmonize all of those structures to address the gaps that we're identifying. so we'll see it through the new permits and circling back to the old as well. does that answer your question? >> vice chair pollock: i think that it does. so you're saying that it's a permitting process rather than a contracting process? >> that's my understanding is that would be the contract with this company. so if they have any business with the city that's one way to enforce it. and, on the other hand if we wanted to conduct a pilot with any one of these companies that
12:17 pm
doesn't necessarily have a permit with us and that's another way to, you know, increase that viability there. so an example in our research and in our payment section would say, you know, let's seek out partnerships with companies that are good actors in these other ways. so if we did a pilot in the bayview which is something that we managed a while ago, can we not find a partner that has good labor practices and has union employees, for example. that could be a contingency that we add into those partnership requirements. >> supervisor fewer: i think this is something that actually mr. goebel can actually present on next time. yeah, actually, because i think -- yeah. >> vice chair pollock: thank you so much, that answers my question. >> supervisor fewer: so the questions are open for public comment. any members of the public, please come forward and you have two minutes. >> hello, brenda lynch and i wasn't here for this but i would like to respectfully suggest
12:18 pm
that lafco include not only sorely needed data analysis and recommendations for the board of supervisors, but also suggestions for positions that both the city attorney and the board can take to the city of san francisco's position at the state p.u.c. and other state agencies. as we know the state p.u.c. has circumscribed the city's ability to really deal with this problem, but there will be a new change and transitions at the. u.c. so perhaps with good data analysis and actions by this board and the recommendations, for instance, what the city's attorney should be at the state p.u.c. and other health and other agencies you could get a broader impact within the next year. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, thank you for joining us. yes, mr. brooks. >> yes, hello again, eric brooks. this time speaking on behalf of our city of san francisco and the san francisco green party.
12:19 pm
first, i would reiterate everything that miss lynch just said, and getting our input on the state level is crucial. we can't just let the cpuc doing thdoits own thing on this and we have to push the way that sfpuc pushes them on clean energy. this is one of the things that i work on. and i have been meeting with taxi drivers. and there are a lot of things that we might be able to do that should be included in this study. one of the problems that we face is out-of-town drivers. well, i believe that you may be able to put a fee out to-of-town drivers to make it so expensive for them to do that that they stop coming in. because that's one of the main problems. and another problem is the situation of uber being kind of the middle person or the middle entity on this, and collecting profits for now good reason. one thing that's new that should be included in this study is electronic currencies.
12:20 pm
we're moving away from credit cards and cash to electronic currencies on phones and things like that. and some of the new electronic currencies that are emerging could literally be created as local currency in san francisco for transportation. and there's something called a smart contract that can be built in through computer code and into these currencies so that you could do things like require the drivers to be local, require them to get paid a certain amount of money. things like that. and so that it would favor the taxi drivers. and another thing that the city should definitely look at and i don't know why we haven't done this yet is to make all of the drivers, city employees with city benefits, so that they fall under the city. and that's another way to get them out from under these rapacious companies like uber and lyft. and with respect if the m.t.a. was going to...
12:21 pm
>> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, mr. brooks. mr. wolf? >> thank you, bruce wolf speaking for myself just on this particular issue and i think that the problem that started with all of this was that uber and lyft and the others went to the state. i think that it would be good if maybe you think about drafting some legislation to push at the state level to bring it back to local control. so i would urge you to do that. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. and any other people of the public that would like to see some public comment is now closed. i believe that we don't need to take an action on this item. is that correct, mr. clerk? >> i defer to miss stricter on this. >> yes, i understand that the executive officer is looking for direction to proceed with the study and so i think that a motion to allow him to proceed
12:22 pm
would be appropriate. >> supervisor fewer: all right. is there a motion to authorization our executive officer to do this study on emerging services and partnering with the transportation authority. so moved. great. seconded by commissioner ronen and we can take that without objection. thank you, that motion is passed. thank you. madam clerk, please read item number 8. >> item number 8 is an update on the state legislation and the california assembly bill 813. >> supervisor fewer: i know this is very complicated and so as simply as possible, thank you. >> thank you, madam chair. the item that i'd like to call your attention to is assembly bill 813 by chris holden. i wanted to prepare a staff memo for you on this but, frankly, it is a complex issue and a complex piece of legislation. but i'll do my best to describe it to you in a nutshell. the legislation by definition
12:23 pm
would begin the process of creating a western regional transmission system and it's not the first time that it was proposed. they tried to get it passed in the 11th hour in san francisco and it's been on the radar for the past several years. on its face regionalization sounds like a good idea and supporters view it as a great way to expand renewal energy across the west. for example, instead of drawing energy from our fossil fuel plants when california is at its peak use, we could, say, tap into wind energy from other states. california could sell off instead of turning off solar farms when we have more supply than demand. and it would be a great way supporters argue to help california to meet its climate and clean energy goals. however, opponents of the bill, and the list is long, have
12:24 pm
pointed out a number of risks. many see it as a threat to consumers because there's little protection from rate increases. a threat to solar power jobs and disadvantaged communities. a threat to c.c.a. programs because it could increase the transz missiotransmission costst to our climate and energy goals because it could open the door to more coal energy in california increasing greenhouse gas emissions. and another big worry about this legislation is that it would take away direct oversight of our grid from california and instead transfer it to a committee where other western states would have the biggest say and which would be directly controlled by the federal energy regulatory commission under the trump administration. our current governance structure is under the california independent system operator which has a board appointed by the governor with confirmation by the state senate.
12:25 pm
after the energy crisis in the 90s, california had to actually fight in court to retain the power that it has now over california's electricity grid. firc has jurisdiction, most definitely, but if this bill passes there is a threat that caiso, the independent system operator, could lose what control it has. a number of cities are opposed to this, including west hollywood. they've expressed concern that the legislation would eliminate the ability of cities to maintain governance and procurement decisions related to c.c.a. programs and the city of west hollywood is on record against it. commissioners, the opponents of this legislation i think make very compelling arguments and nothing that i have seen from the supporters have convinced me otherwise. based on my review i'm recommending that sf lafco direct me as the executive
12:26 pm
officer to write a letter to the legislature opposing a.b.813. >> supervisor fewer: any questions for mr. goebel. yes, commissioner pollock. >> vice chair pollock: i just thank you so much for the concise description of the legislation because i know that it is quite complicated. i will be in support of this letter opposing a.b.813. i would be interested in having -- having you also prepare a memo from lafco to the board of supervisors to see if that is a position that the city and county would like to take as well. and then to report back to lafco any feedback that you received from the representatives of san francisco's state legislature. so people representing the city residents to report back to us
12:27 pm
what, if any, action they took on this legislation. >> i'd be happy to, commissioner. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. yes, commissioner singh. >> supervisor singh: i think that cynthia stole my idea, now we're even. no, i'm wondering if there's any action on this? >> i don't think that there's been an official position on it. i have been in touch with their offices and i'm not aware they have taken a position on it yet. and i have also been in touch with the officer of the state senator scott wiener but so far i'm not aware they have taken an official position. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. any other comments or questions? seeing none, open it up for public comment. any members of the public wish to speak on this? mr. brooks, come on up. >> eric brooks, san francisco clean energy advocates and californians for energy choice. so i just want to thank the executive officer for that
12:28 pm
excellent report. it really hits the nail on the head. i don't think that you need many more reasons to oppose this legislation but i will bring up one other one. and this is much like pg&e that makes its money off of building a lot of unnecessary infrastructure and transmission lines and then charging customers for that stuff. brookshire hathaway that would be controlling this grid makes its money exactly the same way. so this is not just about coal or electricity that they sell, this is about giving a cash cow to warren buffet so that he can make money building powerlines that are unnecessary and cause forest fires. and so that's another reason to oppose this. and we might want to include that kind of thing in the letter. the main thing that we need you to expand on is to not just communicate to the board of supervisors, but communicate to the sfpuc. on a very narrow seven, yes,
12:29 pm
five abstention vote, this legislation that would devastate community choice clearly. i can't go into all of the shenanigans why i think that happened but it's not an appropriate result. one of the commissioners from one of the community choice programs has said that they're not sure that they made the right vote when they voted "yes" and they want this reconsidered. so the members of cal c.c.a. are crucial to this and the sfpuc has been neutral and not pushing. we need you to ask them to push for a "no" vote on this bill and on sfb27. and one note with regard to wiener, he has the same concerns that have been announced by some of the opponents but he did vote "yes yet just to move it forward and not necessarily because he supports it. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much, miss lynch.
12:30 pm
>> thank you for considering this. this is a key and critical change in california's energy policy. basically it's going to repeal two important energy crisis protections that we got in in 2001. one was that california appoints the board of directors that runs the grid and our electricity markets. and two was that it's a california public benefits corporation. both of those key protections will be repealed almost immediately. now the proponents say that it doesn't matter, we're under federal law and we'll be under federal law tomorrow. the difference is who enforces and interprets that federal law. and if we didn't think that it mattered who did that we wouldn't care that ryan zenke with the interior and scott pruitt is at e.p.a. because all they're doing is enforcing and interpreting federal law. and this would cede our power to the western states. think about who they are. they're coal states. they are economying dependent on not only using coal but
12:31 pm
producing coal. the only state that is not a coal state is washington. now we know that the trump administration is taking extraordinary measures to subsidize coal both at the ferc and at the courts and now with their emergency powers. california is almost coal free and we use 4% year and we'll be coal-free in 2025. right now is a critical transition point for energy in california and really in the country. because of improved technologies it's actually possible to be 100% renewable soon. so what we would do instead is to hitch our wagon to huge regional fossil-based infrastructure projects. the ratepayers can't pay for a local energy democracy with clean power and also huge fossil-based energy projects. there's not enough pennies on the dollar. it's a choice. and the choice is ours. and you hopefully will add your voice to the sierra club and the environmental california environmental association, all of labor, because 110,000 green
12:32 pm
jobs will drain from california because if they can they'll build it in the right-to-work states that have cheaper land, and renewable power. but right now they have to build it in california because we're a single state i.s.o. and i'm happy to answer questions and i'm sadly intimately familiar with the details of this bill. >> supervisor fewer: commissioner pollock. >> vice chair pollock: thank you very much. i would just -- i think that i don't have any questions for you but i would just say that in directing staff on this letter that you work with miss lynch and other advocates to make a complete list of who should be c.c.ed on the letter so that is out there. and just work then perhaps in making this more public letter that we perhaps could, you could work with the chair to perhaps publish our letter as an op-ed.
12:33 pm
>> supervisor fewer: let's close public comment on this. public comment is now closed. i would like to also suggest to direct our executive officer to prepare a resolution before the board once we take a vote on this. and noting -- right, yeah. noting our motion to either oppose or to support, okay. so is there a motion on the table now to either oppose or support ab813. yes. is there a motion to support or oppose? >> move to oppose. >> supervisor fewer: seconded by commissioner ronen. and we can take that without objection. now i think that we should direct our executive officer to prepare a resolution to be put forth to the san francisco board of supervisors for adoption. thank you very much. and madam clerk, please call
12:34 pm
item number 9. >> item number 9 -- is the executive officer's report. >> supervisor fewer: is there anything that you would like to present? >> just briefly, because this item was continued at our last meeting. i just wanted to thank everyone here with city hall who has been so helpful in my coming onboard as the executive officer, and the staff of the board of the clerk of supervisors has just been amazing. so i'd like to thank angela calvillo and wilson ing, and chelsea boyvard and your office for just rolling out the carpet for me here. it's been an amazing time and i'm super excited to get started on the work plan. and i've had a chance to meet with many of the advocates who have had engagement with lafco now and over the years. but i look forward to sitting down with those advocates who haven't been involved in lafco and reaching out to them so that
12:35 pm
we can have even more members of the public show up here to engage with this body. >> supervisor fewer: this is great. thank you very much. i think that concerning the city hall staff i think that you have met with some of the best and so i think that it's great. i also want to give a shout out to chelsea in my office who has been carrying if work for the last year or so. and i'm delighted that you're onboard. any questions for the executive officer? seeing none, public comment? is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. madam clerk, call item 10. >> item number 10 is public comment. >> supervisor fewer: any members of the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is now closed. madam clerk, please call item number 11. >> item number 11, future agenda items. >> supervisor fewer: any future agenda items, commissioners? seeing none this opens up for public comment? any members of the public -- mr. brooks. >> one last time, eric brooks,
12:36 pm
san francisco clean energy advocates, californians for energy choice, our city and the green party. and so just to get back to the key items. so you heard from former commissioner lynch and myself and many others through email that we are getting ready, if we don't stop ab813, to privatize the electricity grid. so the bill that i mentioned earlier in the hearing needs to be scheduled for the next month to stop that and that is sf217. so the grid could be privatized which would decimate the community choice. and the second bill sf217 will prioritize the energy itself. so no longer it would be community programs. so it's vital that on the, in agenda you have sp217. so get your executive officer to ajendize that and i'll
12:37 pm
communicate to that effect too. and i have sent emails to y'all about that. and one quick note on -- on public broadband is that -- that we do need to agendaize that hopefully at the next meeting because we have an opportunity to get in on this and to take the lead on it. so i would hope that would be on the radar and we would be discussing that too. so thanks. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, mr. brooks. any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is now closed. we take note of the presentation on sb237 for our next agenda item. commissioners any other comments? seeing none. madam clerk, any other business for us today? >> that concludes our business for today. >> supervisor fewer: our meeting is adjourned. thank you very much. .
12:38 pm
12:39 pm
- working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world-class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - our 28,000 city and county employees play an important role in making san francisco what it is today. - we provide residents and visitors with a wide array of services, such as improving city streets and parks, keeping communities safe, and driving buses and cable cars. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco
12:40 pm
gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco. >> shop and dine the 49 promotes local businesses and changes san franciscans to do their shopping and dooipg within the 49 square miles by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant so where will you shop and dine the 49 hi in my mind a ms. medina wom
12:41 pm
12:42 pm
sustainable future . >> san francisco streets and puffs make up 25 percent of cities e city's land area more than all the parks combined they're far two wide and have large flight area the pavement to parks is to test the variants by ininexpensive changing did new open spaces the city made up of streets in you think about the potential of having this space for a purpose it is demands for the best for bikes and families to gather. >> through a collaborative effort with the department we
12:43 pm
the public works and the municipal transportation agency pavement to parks is bringing initiative ideas to our streets. >> so the face of the street is the core of our program we have in the public right-of-way meaning streets that can have areas perpetrated for something else. >> i'm here with john francis pavement to parks manager and this parklet on van ness street first of all, what is a parklet and part of pavement to parks program basically an expense of the walk in a public realm for people to hang anti nor a urban acceptable space for people to use. >> parklets sponsors have to apply to be considered for the program but they come to us you know saying we want to do this and create a new space on our street
12:44 pm
it is a community driven program. >> the program goes beyond just parklets vacant lots and other spaces are converted we're here at playland on 43 this is place is cool with loots things to do and plenty of space to play so we came up with that idea to revitalizations this underutilized yard by going to the community and what they said want to see here we saw that everybody wants to see everything to we want this to be a space for everyone. >> yeah. >> we partnered with the pavement to parks program and so we had the contract for building 236 blot community garden
12:45 pm
it start with a lot of jacuzzi hammers and bulldozer and now the point we're planting trees and flowers we have basketball courts there is so much to do here. >> there's a very full program that they simply joy that and meet the community and friends and about be about the lighter side of city people are more engaged not just the customers. >> with the help of community pavement to parks is reimagining the potential of our student streets if you want more information visit them as the pavement to parks or contact pavement to parks at sfgovtv.or
12:46 pm
did you know that many buildings in san francisco are not bolted to the foundation on today's episode we'll learn how the option to bolt our foundation in an earthquake. >> hi, everybody welcome to another episode of stay safe i'm the director of earthquake safety in the city and county of san francisco i'm joined by a friend matt. >> thank you thanks for being with us we're in a garage but at the el cap center south of market in san francisco what we've done a simulated the garage to show you what it is like to make the improvements and reduce the reflexes of earthquake we're looking at
12:47 pm
foundation bolts what do they do. >> the foundation bolts are one of the strengthening system they hold the lowest piece of wood onto the foundation that prevents the allows from sliding during an earthquake that is a bolt over the original construction and these are typically put in along the foundation to secure the house to the foundation one of the things we'll show you many types of bolts let's go outside and show the vufrdz we're outside the epic center in downtown san francisco we'll show 3 different types of bolts we have a e poxy anchor. >> it is a type of anchor that is adhesive and this is a rod we'll embed both the awe hey
12:48 pm
that embeds it into the foundation that will flip over a big square washer so it secured the mud sell to the foundation we'll need to big drill luckily we have peter from the company that will help us drill the first hole. >> so, now we have the hole drilled i'll stick the bolt in and e post-office box it. >> that wouldn't be a bad idea but the dust will prevent the e post-office box from bonding we need to clean the hole out first. >> so, now we have properly cleaned hole what's the next step. >> the next step to use e post-office box 2 consultants
12:49 pm
that mixes this together and get them into tubes and put a notice he will into the hole and put the e post-office box slowly and have a hole with e post-office box. >> now it is important to worm or remember when you bolt our own foundation you have to go to 9 department of building inspection and get a permit before you start what should we look at next what i did next bolt. >> a couple of anchors that expand and we can try to next that will take a hole that hole is drilled slightly larger marathon the anchor size for the e post-office box to flow around the anchor and at expansion is going into the hole the same
12:50 pm
dinning room we'll switch tamet so, now we have the second hole drilled what next. >> this is the anchor and this one has hard and steel threads that cuts their way into the concrete it is a ti ton anchor with the same large square so similar this didn't require e post-office box. >> that's correct you don't needed for the e post-office box to adhere overnight it will stick more easily.
12:51 pm
>> and so, now it is good to go is that it. >> that's it. >> the third anchor is a universal foundation plate when you don't have room above our foundation to drill from the
12:52 pm
top. >> so, now we have our foundation plate and the tightened screw a couple of ways to take care of a foundation what's the best. >> the best one depends on what your house is like and our contractors experience they're sometimes considered the cadillac anchor and triplely instead of not witting for the e post-office box this is essentially to use when you don't have the overhead for the foundation it really depends on the contractor and engineering what they prefer. >> talking to a qualified professional and see what >> manufacturing in cities creates this perfect platform
12:53 pm
for people to earn livelihoods and for people to create more economic prosperity. i'm kate sosa. i'm cofounder and ceo of sf made. sf made is a public private partnership in the city of san francisco to help manufacturers start, grow, and stay right here in san francisco. sf made really provides wraparound resources for manufacturers that sets us apart from other small business support organizations who provide more generalized support. everything we do has really been developed over time by listening and thinking about what manufacturer needs grow. for example, it would be
12:54 pm
traditional things like helping them find capital, provide assistance loans, help to provide small business owners with education. we have had some great experience doing what you might call pop ups or temporary selling events, and maybe the most recent example was one that we did as part of sf made week in partnership with the city seas partnership with small business, creating a 100 company selling day right here at city hall, in partnership with mayor lee and the board of supervisors, and it was just a wonderful opportunity for many of our smaller manufacturers who may be one or two-person shop, and who don't have the wherewithal to have their own dedicated retail store to show their products and it comes back to how do we help companies set more money into
12:55 pm
arthur businesses and develop more customers and their relationships, so that they can continue to grow and continue to stay here in san francisco. i'm amy kascel, and i'm the owner of amy kaschel san francisco. we started our line with wedding gowns, and about a year ago, we launched a ready to wear collection. san francisco's a great place to do business in terms of clientele. we have wonderful brides from all walks of life and doing really interesting things: architects, doctors, lawyers, teachers, artists, other like minded entrepreneurs, so really fantastic women to work with. i think it's important for them to know where their clothes are made and how they're made. >> my name is jefferson mccarly, and i'm the general manager of the mission bicycle
12:56 pm
company. we sell bikes made here for people that ride here. essentially, we sell city bikes made for riding in urban environments. our core business really is to build bikes specifically for each individual. we care a lot about craftsmanship, we care a lot about quality, we care about good design, and people like that. when people come in, we spend a lot of time going to the design wall, and we can talk about handle bars, we can see the riding position, and we take notes all over the wall. it's a pretty fun shopping experience. paragraph. >> for me as a designer, i love the control. i can see what's going on, talk to my cutter, my
12:57 pm
pattern maker, looking at the designs. going through the suing room, i'm looking at it, everyone on the team is kind of getting involved, is this what that drape look? is this what she's expecting, maybe if we've made a customization to a dress, which we can do because we're making everything here locally. over the last few years, we've been more technical. it's a great place to be, but you know, you have to concentrate and focus on where things are going and what the right decisions are as a small business owner. >> sometimes it's appropriate to bring in an expert to offer suggestions and guidance in coaching and counseling, and other times, we just need to talk to each other. we need to talk to other manufacturers that are facing similar problems, other people that are in the trenches, just like us,
12:58 pm
so that i can share with them a solution that we came up with to manage our inventory, and they can share with me an idea that they had about how to overcome another problem. >> moving forward, where we see ourselves down the road, maybe five and ten years, is really looking at a business from a little bit more of a ready to wear perspective and making things that are really thoughtful and mindful, mindful of the end user, how they're going to use it, whether it's the end piece or a he hwedding gown, are they going to use it again, and incorporating that into the end collection, and so that's the direction i hear at this point. >> the reason we are so enamored with the work we do is we really do see it as a platform for changing and making the city something that it has always been and making
12:59 pm
sure that we're sharing the opportunities that we've been blessed with economically and socially as possible, broadening that
1:00 pm
please place the card in the basket to the right of the leg turn. lek turn. they will be called in the order placed in the basket. there is a sign in sheet at the front of the table. please show the office of small business slide. >> welcome. it is our custom to begin and end each meeting with a reminder that the office of small business is the only place to start a new business here in san francisco. the best place to get answers to your questions about doing business in san francisco. the office of small business should be your first stop when you have questions about what to do next. find us online or in p