come out with different size cart, tents, sometimes i don't come out at all. >> when was that photo? >> this was the weekend of christmas, like, a saturday night at christmas. you bet. yes? >> i have a question, as well. so since you've been there 44 years, there used to be forests that were on the corners, and i know that they -- they didn't voluntarily leave. do you remember why -- i ask can ask the department that after. >> there were two florists. >> there was one in front of i.magnin, and one in front of neiman marcus. >> the one in front of neiman marcus, they died and they went out of business. but the other one, i don't know if they just picked them up and

put them on geary. >> the last thing was for reference, do you remember the old vietnam vet that used to sell nickels for a nickel and he used to be on that cart? >> oh, yeah. >> thank you. you don't look old enough to remember that. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thanks for your time. we'll now hear from the permit holder. you have six minutes. >> so the appellants brought up congestion. there is a large amount of foot traffic in union square. it's important to point out when the ordinance was amended in 2014, it did not prohibit m.f.f.'s from operating in areas with large amounts of foot traffic. it provides guidance on where they believe m.f.f.'s should expand. the typical -- but it allows reviews on a case by case b.

the typical traffic flows and existing food frask demonstrates -- traffic demonstrates that our presence would not have a negative impact on congestion. on the east side of the block, you have a flower stand whose operation takes up an 8 foot by 20 foot space and is open every day 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. outside of macy's, you have appellant's hot dog cart who has 10 foot of sidewalk clearance and is open daily. our location is on the west side of the block, and our

operation exists within the confines of a legal parking space, occupying no portion of the sidewalk where the sidewalk in front is 15 feet, not 10 feet. we are a grab and go operation where our offerings are made in advance and ready to be served upon ordering. all the pictures of the appellant's exhibits feature full fledged food trucks that require people to order, wait five to 15 minutes for their order to be prepared, and then receive their order. even in the event that a substantial number of people wanted ice cream, the pace of the people being served would move expeditiously. they've brought up blocking retail storefronts. it is unreasonable to claim our presence would cause harm to retail storefronts. our parking space is designated for six wheel commercial vehicles five days a week. due to a scale of the local comparison to illustrate the

difference of vehicle size. here on the bottom, you've got our vehicle. above that, it's drawn to scale. above that, you've got a standard food truck, and then, beyond that, you have a six-wheel commercial vehicle. the 70 foot distance restriction that the appellant raised, that restriction raised by the appellants only applies to brick and mortar restaurants. it does not apply to other m.f.f.'s. they raised possibly changing the use of the permit. we were very specific in our permit application what the intended use of this permit was. the m.f.f. ordinance gives the d.p.w. director the right to revoke or suspend a permit in cases of fraud, misrepresentation or false claim in a permit application, and that's located in section

4(c) 2(a) 1. furthermore, the director has the authority to revoke a permit where the permit's operation negatively impacted public health, safety, convenience, or welfare. in section 4(c) 2(a) 4. they also touched on a permit being transferrable. the transfer of a permit requires the explicit consent of the director of public works. in conclusion it is clear that the appellants are frustrated with the m.f.f. legislation. however we should be be penalized for their frustration or the acts committed by others. we complied with what was put before us by the city, and we reasonably relied on following the legislation that has been on the books now for five years. there's been no abuse, error or fraud in the issuance of this permit. therefore, we respectfully ask that you do not overturn it.

it would be an honor and a privilege to participate in the union square business community. we ask that we be evaluated on who we are and the specific proposal we have put forward, not on wild speculation, inaccurate information, and nonsensical hypotheticals. thank you. and i believe my brother would like to say a few words, so i'll let him speak. >> you know, my brother and i put everything we have into building a business that's not only dedicated to the city and community, but one that's dedicated to doing things the right way. dotting all i's, crossing all 2 t, so it's very important to demonstrate out comes when things are done properly and rules are followed. as you've heard from the public, which i'd like to thank for their dedication, and passion. there are so many reasons why this is important. this is an opportunity for the

city to demonstrate that it actually cares about its local citizens and constituents, that it values supporting a disappearing class of business, and that it's vital to not only the identity of the city br the community as well. we ask that the committee respect the decision already made and not bend at the interest of a select few. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> yeah, we all have questions, i think. >> we'll start with you. >> can i see that photo you put up the first time of the bus. >> which -- >> the pink -- hot pink. >> which -- the original bus? >> no, the one that you're planning on. >> using this one? that bus? >> right. so i guess i'm a little confused. so how many people do you expect to serve?

'cause i look at this -- this size, and it doesn't look like it can hold very much. >> so -- right, so what we did was we limited our offerings. we'll only be offering six flavors, and there'll be a freezer that stretches across the side of it, within the width of the van, so it should be probably able to handle a day's sales. >> a full day's sales. >> right. >> okay. and then, there was a comment that you guys weren't interested in any negotiations or discussions to think about other locations. can you tell me a little bit about that. >> well, that's not entirely accurate. >> okay. >> we are -- you know, we set our sights on this. we had our mind on this, and we want to see it through. so this is our main focus, so that's all i can say in regards to that. there was no particular discussion about particular locations in other relocations. there was potential offerings, but what we said is, you know,

our mind has been set on this, our heart has been set on this. this is more than just about selling ice cream, and we think that this particular landmark location has special value. >> and why is that? tell me why that particular location. why is that important to you? >> well, it is a landmark. people walk by, and that is the spot, and we want to be a part of that. we want to be able to show people that san francisco is more than just chain stores. there's nothing wrong with chain stores, but there's more to san francisco than what's currently being represented there and what's being served there, so we wanted to make a difference within that particular space, within that particular area. >> okay. my question. so the concern here is that the permit is transferrable, and yes, we understand that it's up to the director. just out of curiosity, would you be willing to have a special deed of restriction saying that there is no other

substitution other than the size of that 1978 vanagon there. >> yeah. >> and so there would be no exceptions to that. you couldn't go left, right, up down, that would be the size. >> yeah. we have no plan on deviating from what we're putting forward. i would think that -- >> i think you're saying permit restriction. >> okay. permit restriction because the concern, one of is the blockage, the footprint and the real estate that that takes is relatively small in comparison to 35 feet and 16 feet up in the air, right? and so if -- but if that is -- you're willing to do that, that's a -- you know, a plus on my side. >> commissioners, that does affect transfer? >> you can condition anything. >> thank you. >> and yeah, i would like to reiterate and be clear that we have no intention of deviating

from this and are completely fine in putting things in writing, an extra provision. >> okay. we will now hear from the department. thank you. >> thank you. >> you have six minutes, mr. cohen. >> i'm not sure i have much to add. a lot of the arguments were discussed at length, so if you have any questions. >> i guess i might have one. how often have you had requested to transfer a permit? >> they come -- they come periodically. we've had -- i couldn't say how often, how frequently. >> but you do see them. >> they have -- they do come. >> and are you aware when those have happened as to whether the equipment, if you want to call it that, has changed dramatically? >> we don't necessarily -- i mean, we started to review or

look at the equipment. we'd definitely look at the footprint in terms of push carts, in terms of food trucks, as long as they meet the criteria from the health and fire department -- departments, we don't comment on the look of the truck. >> answer that question, though. do you allow the neighbors or the neighborhood to weigh in on your decision to allow a transfer or do they have no say in the matter? >> the transfers do not require notification, as far as i'm aware. >> and the neighborhood's not alerted. >> not alerted, no. if they wish to, and they wish to appeal, i think they could, but i'm not sure on that. >> so your question that i asked to the appellant that had been there 40 years, can you elaborate, does the florist

require a d.p.w. permit, as well. >> so the florist, i think they're under an ordinance or a special provision. >> so they're not through you or your department. >> i think they're defined in the public works code, but i don't think we allow any new florists. >> so is the permitting -- that's the question i have is, is there used to be florists on all sides, and i've got some definition from the hot dog vendor guy, but i would like clarification from the department as how that went. >> sorry. >> i mean, why did they leave? 'cause just from hearsay, i heard they were no longer allowed to be on those corners. and so the only one that would not allow them to be on the corner would be the department, which would be your department. that's the question i'm asking you. >> i think if -- i'm not too familiar with the flower arts or flower stands, and if it was in this -- the construction area, the central subway, i believe they'd work with m.t.a.

and public works to relocate. i'm sure that's how -- i wasn't part of that, so i can't really speak to that. >> was that a question related to this case? >> yeah, it is related to this case. >> or other interests? >> it is related to this case. and then, i have a question for the ice cream truck. >> no, i have a question for mr. cohen. >> okay. >> how do you determine congestion? >> how do we determine congestion? we -- i think it's hard to make a determination without -- >> it's traffic analysis, right? >> no, we don't do traffic analysis, no. if we were presented one, we would probably present it to m.t.a. as the traffic arm and make a determination. we're not traffic specialists. we don't review transportation in that respect. >> so the permit is not subject to congestion at all? >> well, there's words. >> well, that's what i'm trying

to get at. >> yeah. >> they're qualitative, you know? >> i believe the permit's requirements or the path of travel requirements and the serving requirements, that's captured in the requirement that the sidewalk be 10 feet for food trucks and 15 feet for push trucks. because the push cart is on the sidewalk, so you need that area. the distance from the curb for the push cart, and then, you need the path of travel space. i believe that's how they came up with those widths when they came up with the code. >> okay. >> and the shy distance that they referred to in the brief. >> that's not in the code. >> or in your quantitative analysis, right? >> no. >> okay, and again, i have a question for the permit holder. so on the vehicle that you're going to use, is that vehicle going to be stripped and be

towed into the property or is it going to be driving in in its own power. >> it's going to be driving in on its own. >> i'm going to be amazed how much ice cream you're going to be able to get there. i've been to your shop, as well. >> okay. that was my question. >> okay. commissioners, this matter is submitted. >> comments, commissioners? >> you want to go first, i've been blazing all night long, literally. >> i'm prepared to support the permit. i don't know how i feel about the restriction. >> i'm not supportive of the permit. i think there's too much

congestion there and not just at those special times that they've brought forth, but the entire area's packed. i'm talking about regular days. and the usage of this is different than some of the other streets. when you have streets that are fronted by mainly office buildings, it's come and go, it's a little more permanent for the issue of congestion. here, where you have people that are there with no time frame, and i think therefore, based upon my experience, the congestion is already quite a bit, and i personally wouldn't have wanted to see anything on that sidewalk. >> i'll start, then, you know,

continue. so as a small minority businessperson for a very, very long time, over 30 years, i'm, one, a proponent of small business. i think that san francisco in general was based on that prin principal. you look at all the companies that starts here, levi strauss, esprit, gap, and the list goes on and on. i know that neighborhood really well. i'm down there on a regular basis. that block is -- of all the blocks, that block, it's just extremely, extremely congested. so my concern would be, one, for pedestrian safety. i mean, i'd love to see a small

business succeed and bring some special spark back to -- to the district. but at the same time, it's not that i'm supportive of large business, but big business, if you folks go down to union square, which i was at today, and you see the amount of empty space and storefronts, it's scary. retail is leaving our city at an alarming, alarming rate. and yes, i'm bad. i had three orders of amazon dropped off at my house today, and i'm, you know -- it's tough. i think that retail in the city needs all the help they can get. i'm not super supportive, and the only way that i would be is if a -- a deed of restrictions or some -- some restrictions regarding keeping the footprint of the 1978 volkswagen vanagon

and for it not to increase in size in any shape or form away, and that's the -- any shape or form or way, and that's the only way i would support it. >> well, i have to take some offense to my fellow commissioner. you -- retail, like anything else must adapt. if it doesn't adapt, it dis. it's just -- the market speaks, and i don't think we should prevent small businesses from being somewhere because retail is having a difficult time. the more concern i have -- and i don't frequent that area as much as you do, is that it is congested, but i don't know that this small business should be punished for our perception of congestion when there's been no real studies, and the department has passed on it. and your idea about a restriction intrigued me enough that i would go commissioner

lazarus' way on a yes, but your way on the restriction. but president fong does have some sway on my, so i am a little concerned about the congestion. >> if there's three votes to -- or two votes to deny the appeal, then -- then -- you need three votes minimum -- >> to continue. >> -- to continue in support of the appeal. >> or to continue. >> or to continue. >> correct. >> well, i'll make a motion to grant the appeal and condition the permit on a restriction that the size of the vehicle never exceeds the proposed one.

>> 1978 volkswagen vanagon. >> okay. we have a motion from commissioner lazarus to grant the appeals and issue the permit on the condition that the vehicle under the permit be limited in size to a 1978 v.w. bus. >> can i have the basis. >> on the basis that restricting it that the permit was properly issued and the restriction will address some of the concerns about congestion. >> okay. so on the basis of the permit was properly issued and will address some concerns about congestion. so on that motion -- [roll call] >> okay. so we have -- do we need to

continue this matter? >> no. >> okay. so -- >> that being the appeal. >> motion fails. >> yeah, motion fails. >> yeah. so -- but we have the motion to grant the appeals, we have three yeses, right, so since commissioner swig is -- >> so if the -- if they want to maintain the condition, then, we have to continue this case. >> okay. >> so i would make -- you want to make a motion to continue or i'll make a motion to continue. >> okay. >> make a motion to continue that the missing commissioner -- that we can hear his vote on it. >> sorry. i'm a little confused. >> so -- okay. i just had it. [inaudible] >> the motion was to grant the

appeals and issue the permit under the condition that the the permit -- well, you would grant the appeal and issue the permit -- >> we're not debating this, okay? there's no thing we're going to take from the audience at this point. you don't understand the procedures. if you want a condition, you have to grant the appeal, okay? >> right. i think that's how i did it. >> yeah. yeah. >> you need four votes. >> so we need -- we need four votes to grant the appeal. we have three votes in support of that motion, which means we need to continue the matter. >> that's why i made a motion to continue it for the -- >> to see where the fifth commissioner stands. >> correct. so on commissioner honda's motion to continue the matter, and this would be to the next meeti meeting -- >> next meeting?

>> which is july 11. >> that's fine. [roll call] >> this is on the continuance? >> if we continue it, we will get vice president swig to vote. >> i'm still voting no. >> well, thank you for voting on the record. this matter is continued to july 11 where we will get vice president swig's vote on the motion. thank you. this concludes the hearing.

>> president chow: the commission will come to order and the secretary will call the roll. >> [roll being called] >> second item on the agenda. before you for approval. a motion is in order. >> so moved. >> second. >> president chow: there's a motion and second. are there any corrections to the minutes? seeing none we'll vote on them. all in favor? opposed? the minutes have been approved. next item, please. >> item 3 is the director's report.

>> president chow: great. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i have three important items to share with you and then any other items you would like on my director's report. the first is we wanted to make sure that all of you knew that the department of public health are supporting the rescanning of the retesting of hunters point shipyard land to answer community health and safety concerns. the hunters point shipyard development has been the subject of recent media reports and community concern due to two major issues. the first is the rescanning of parcel a to insure residents of the hill top area are safe and free from exposure. the second is retesting a portion of the shipyard development that was effected by the fraudulent testing oh of -- of a navy subcontractor. the department of public health supporting plans to rescan and retest the land.

it would be conducted by the california department of public health and parcel g by the navy and it's a first step in the retesting of areas. defactions are necessary in the response raised by the community about whether this is a risk to the health and safety of current and future residents and workers. the health department encouraging people who are interested to participate in the comment period for the navy's work land on the parcel g retesting. it's essential to have a critical process that the community can trust. as you know, the hunter's point shipyard is a federal project of a clean up by the navy to prepare the site for an ambitious new development that will add approximately 12,000 housing units in san francisco. the navy is a lead agency for the clean up and the environmental protection agency is providing regulatory oversight. the department has been involved in this project for many years.

i would say over two decades. reviewing documents and working with the navy and the epa. we have also -- i met -- talked to the epa with several of our staff members this week and we are going to be having two meetings with them over the phone on a monthly basis to ensure that we are coordinating as well as the regulatory agency. we've had our staff member, amy, who has been our engineer in this area and i've also asked our environmental health director, stephanie kushing who will be supporting amy in the future around all of these needs and issues that we have to work closely with the epa and the navy on this. that is one of the items i wanted to ensure that the department is -- will be supporting the retesting and rescanning of this whole entire area of the shipyard. we also -- many of you have seen in the news an issue that i know

has been very shocking to all of you, which is the separating of immigrant families and we believe this is inhumane and posing health risks. the department of health joins the mayor, the mayor elect, our california senators harris and feinstein, public health and child welfare and many others in condemning the practice of separating children from families along the united states border with mexico as an anti-immigration enforcement policy. more than 2300 children have been separated from their families since early may. from the public health standpoint this practice is inhumane and they have the possibility to lead to short and long term problems for the parents and the children. it demonstrates the broad and detrimental impacts of child separation, abuse and neglect on the health and well being of children into their adulthood.

san francisco is a sanctuary city and we have reaffirmed a commitment to protecting the rights of our immigrant community and the department of health will continue to care for all san francisco residents including immigrants and to support our patients and clients and caregivers during this traumatic event. i know there would be families in san francisco who have immigrants from this immigration issue. we also encourage our san francisco residents to call the members of congress to voice their opinion. we have given the phone number for that. we have a very large way of impacting and advising our a tigs -- practitioners in our communities whenever we find a health concern. we try to be very careful about these because physicians give a lot of health advisories and we don't want to get them insensitive to these but we do want to list the conversation about when we are finding issues

like fentanyl overdoses and one of the things that the drug cartels are doing is that they are very smart in the way they are providing fentanyl. we have recently had a fentanyl overdose from suspected counterfeit oxycodone tablets in san francisco. an individual experienced a near overdose after getting a pill stamped with m30 on june 11th. no pill was available for testing however such tablets are readily available in san francisco. similar events have been reported in arizona. fentanyl has been an increasingly present in street purchased drugs in san francisco including as a white powder and contaminating methamphetamine, cocaine and counterfeit benzos. fentanyl test strips provided by syringe access programs have identified the presence of

fentanyl in many of our street purchased drugs. what we do when we find this, we first and foremost work closely with drug users and we have an organization that does this out reach for us. we wanted to lift the conversation to make sure that physicians and hospitals are well aware of this. many times some hospitals will not test for this kind of a drug and we want to make sure -- we are trying to make sure if we see a theme coming so we are good i think about getting to the drug using community but we also wanted to give to our practi practitioners. some of the actions is to refer patients with opioid use disorder to treatment. san francisco has treatment available on demand which can be accessed at methadone programs or triage center. we just funded $6 million, 3 million per year to expand our access and we have a street medicine chain that we will be work, out of the syringe access

centers and also on the streets of san francisco. those will also be available for practitioners and ensure any patients who purchase any street purchased streets have noloxon, either or direct them to the pharmacies. the pharmacies also carry it or to send to syringe access sites. patients who are using drugs should be encouraged to keep the medication with them at all times. those are the three important messages and then of course we have other items in our director's report and happy to answer any questions. >> president chow: commissioners, questions to the director either in her written report or the added verbal report that she gave us today? >> i have one other item i wanted to ask our cfo to come up and give an announcement regarding the new restructuring in the department concerning our

i.t. >> thank you, commissioners. greg wagner, chief financial officer. we have had a number of changes in our i.t. division and most recent of those is as of last week that departure of our chief information officer, bill kim. so as a result of his departure we will be making some changes in the i.t. division, really important time for i.t. in our department as all of you know as we are continuing to go through the electronic health records project as well as build out our infrastructure department wide. so with bill's departure we named the acting chief information officer for the department. we are at the phase now where on our ehr project wionna has been overseeing the project for a number of years so she's very close to it, very knowledgeable about that so we'll have a lot

of continuity there. she's been with the department for a number of years and so knows the operations. we are moving into a phase with the ehr project where we have gone from planning and building up the team to actually the build phase. so we are now in the build phase in the project management team, the staff is really in place. i was over there a couple of days ago at the offices and it's great for people working on the project. so we've really got the ball rolling. wionna will be reporting to me as we go through the search for a new director. we are going to do a national search for the new cio and we will be reporting to you on that periodically over time as we do our i.t. updates. we've also sat down and developed a plan for other gaps in the organization and some other changes that we need to

make just to respond to the change in leadership. we have appointed a chief operating officer and we are close to hiring a new ethic program director, that's a position that we've had but that has been vacant for a few months. that ethic program director will help a lot with the project development of the epic project to free wionna for more time on operations. we are also recruiting a chief information security officer to back fill a departure recently. i think that we are at a point where we have a lot going on. i think that we are actually in a point of time if we are going to have a change in leadership now is the time that we can take it. we are at a point where the project is really moving along. we are not making any changes to schedule. it will take some adapting but i'm prosecute -- i'm pretty

confident that we are well to do it and we'll get the pieces moving in place. we'll be reporting to you periodically as we do on the ehr proje project and our i.t. operations and let you know how things are going and if there are any issues. just want to let you know that those changes are going on and will start to have some new leadership in the i.t. division. >> also just to let you know, on our calendar july 17th is the next i.t. update. >> president chow: thank you. questions? commissioner guillermo? >> commissioner guillermo: thank you. either for greg or barbara, you mentioned that there were at least three seemingly key positions that are open. do you have a timeline for each of those? i'm just thinking about how difficult in this, you know, area it is to recruit and given that we've got a pretty strict timeline for our implementation

what the -- just knowledge about what the potential disruption might be. first of all i wanted to thank you and barbara for making sure that all of those gaps are filled in the interim. those are three key positions. >> yeah, that's definitely a great question given some of our processes with hiring, which you're eluding to. so for -- aside from the cio position, the other two, the epic program manager and the chief information security officer, those are two that had been vacant previously and so are already in process. i think our cio had reported those hiring plans in place at the last i.t. update. so i wanted to just kind of flag those for you as in process. but the fact that they are already in process means they will be on board relatively soon. i don't know what the exact timeline is.

we are interviewing candidates for the epic program director right now so that should be a pretty quick hire. on the information security position, we are working with the department of technology who has recently gone through recruitment for that position for the city department of technology and they have some resources they are sharing with us to support us in that recruitment. so i believe that that will move on a timeline that is faster than the standard timeline that we would be if we were starting from scratch. so we'll be able to jump a couple of hurdles. so i would hope that we would have those positions within a matter of a couple or a few months. >> commissioner guillermo: and do you have constants given the demand for talent at this high level, particularly the cio, that we are in a position to compete for that talent?

>> i think that we are in a position to compete. i mean, it's absolutely a fair question. it's a tight market. i think one of the things that gives me confidence is number one for people that are healthcare i.t. professionals, we are an exciting place to be because we are doing a lot of things that are not happening elsewhere. but just given the fact that we are in this implementation and the scope and range of things we do within this organization and our focus on community aspects of health, but the second thing is having gone through the last several months of ramping up our organization for the ehr project, that was one of the questions that we kind of flagged as we were going into hiring for the ehr project is given the market out there would we be able to attract and recruit enough in this market to

fill that program. we have been really successful at that. so we found ourselves to be competitive and an attractive place to come work. it will take an active recruitment and we are going to do that. we are not just going to be able to put out the posting on our website but we are going to have to be very proactive and going out and recruiting nationally and then also tapping into networks from the people within the department. we'll work hard at it but i'm optimistic that we are a competitive and attractive place. >> i want to add two things. ehr has a streamlining process to hire i.t. because of the exact things that you just talked about and also epic is a major event for anyone to want to come in and help us with. it is very attractive in that way. the first issue is the fact that ehr has seen the issue of the department of human resources.

mark is wondering what ehr is. the first issue is there's a streamlining process for us to hire so they have a special recruitment process and i think that's going to help us tremendously on this. >> commissioner guillermo: great. that's good to know. thank you. >> president chow: did that answer your questions? thank you. further questions at this point? i have several comments. one is that mr. wagner in fact will be as we heard and that gives me the confidence of being basically the acting cio at this point in time, managing the project and as we know much of the management is really related to also all the things that still need to do through. while we watch in the future the rebuilding of building five in all those contracts were handled and are handled by over people,

in this case as you know, the finance committee is handling all -- millions of dollars worth of contracts. i think that we can take confidence that mr. wagner being our contract and finance person will actually be able to make sure that those are being done appropriately. without that then we don't have the tools to even have our -- to be new cio to have the ability to carry out the programs. i think that was one where we already saw that pie last time where less than perhaps a quarter of the contracts have been totally led and we've got a long ways to go. so to have that not only remain under his supervision but he will now be directly involved until he gets the new cio will be helpful for us. i think there has been a lot also done up to this point with

the changes of our i.t. system here for the last, what, maybe five or six years in which we've actually moved it into the 21st century. it was probably somewhere in the 19th century for many years here. even though we still have multiple systems, at least we had systems. they were all getting put together and i think it's with the work that has been done and will continue to be carried out. i think the department has a good blueprint to carry it out and we've all seen that and we expect that on our quarterly reports. i'm understanding from mr. wagner that there is no real delay in the roll out of our programs and the continuation of the infrastructure.

so i think that was very good. it is going to be good for us. the other aspect i will point out, especially to our new commissioners is that the hunter's point issue, the shipyard, and the shipyard clean up has been going on for many, many, many, many, many years and just to even see residents down in hunter's point at this point has been quite an accomplishm t accomplishment. it's probably taken as long as even building out the whole mission bay thing if not even longer to actually get to development at hunter's point. i think the department's position that of course we need to build the confidence of our residents and to be sure that they are safe over there by retesting the land to be able to show that it is safe and if there are areas that need remediation then those are the things that need to be brought

forth so that the residents there and future residents will have confidence in the development, probably the last large development in san francisco for quite some time. so i appreciate that and i'm sure the remaining of the commissioners appreciate the position that the department is in to help support that which will be done by the navy and by the california department of public health. so we would expect to hear back the results as the director said once those reports are completed. so our role is to be sure that the public is protected and that the studies are appropriate and that is what we are going to be carrying out. if there are no further questions then we'll move onto our next item, please. >> there was no public comment requests for that item. item 4 is general public comment. i have not received any requests. so we can move onto item 5,

which is a report back from today's community and public health meeting. >> good afternoon, colleagues and members of the audience. i'm going to give a report in the community public health meeting. we had two presentations today. one from the in for learning an innovation. they have specific activities which i'll articulate at this point. they do internal capacity building, needs assessment training and technical assistance, workforce development and they have a summer hiv/aids research program which recruiting college students from around the country, particularly college students of colors and introduces them to a model of research so they can make decisions about whether or not they want to engage in there. they have a future program, which is a program designed to deal with people of color and help them develop skills around

research and activities as it relates to public health. they have an external program which is cdc funded which is capacity building assistance for high impact hiv and they do that nationally as well as locally. they have an innovations program which is california preterm birth initiative, it's a community-based par tis -- participation resource program. they have digital story telling. they shared with us digital story telling with regard to their research for young minority students who are interested in engaging in public health research and the practices that they engage in. that program is called shark. -- called sharp. i had the opportunity to be a sharp adviser many years ago.

i'm glad that's still going on around hiv and aids. i'll stop there with that particular report. if there's any questions i'll make my best effort to answer them. >> president chow: thank you. commissioners, questions? since you indicated and i think that's correct, right, the center is actually one that assists different areas to do training and it's not actually out there creating health programs. >> it is not creating health programs. it provides training both in san francisco and nationally in cdc funded programs. >> president chow: okay. thank you. commissioner, did you have a question here? >> commissioner bernal: no, just underscore what commissioner loyce scahared, i think it's important that it's provided services in more than half of the states in the country and it's really showcasing the excellent work that's being done here in san francisco in terms of hiv

prevention and getting to zero. >> president chow: wonderful. >> vice president loyce: i would also add to that that one of the thing that is this group does is it recognizes that we can learn from other communities and it's willing and receptive to hearing from other communities. i know that san francisco has a reputation of being all that and a bag of chips but in fact we can't learn. >> president chow: do you want to proceed with the second presentation? >> vice president loyce: the second presentation today was from the primary care unit of the san francisco health network. we've presented some very specific work that they are engaged in. they talked about their 3-year relationship with lane and in the lane process they developed and implemented a daily management system that allows for managers to work with the staff around lean objectives and

take their staff and give them the information to allow them to respond and develop lean objecti objectives. one of the goals and the out comes they expect from this is it improves staff moral and ability to manage the services they are providing for the population and it also most importantly gives patients the opportunity to feel connected to and involved in the work of our organization, of primary care particularly. one of the things they are focused on in this report is they wanted to have 70% of the clinics in san francisco do a 7-day post hospitalization follow up with those patients. one of the things they talked about in the tenderloin, urban health hit a 68.2% which is very close to the 70% goal that they had for that center and they gave us a list of all the

centers and where they are in relationship to meeting that 7-day goal and some are closer to it than others but everybody has a plan for addressing it. and with that, that concludes that portion of the report unless commissioner burnel has something to add i'm open to questions. >> president chow: so on the report it seems to indicate that several of the clinics have not or in the schedule will not get to a lean process until 2019. >> vice president loyce: that is correct. they are doing them in cohorts so they have done cohort one and cohort two and cohort three and four will begin in august. cohort three will begin in august and cohort four will begin in october of 2018 with a completion date expected in

january of 2019 and cohort 3 finishing in february of 2019. it is a lengthy process and not something that one can do in short order. training is done primarily by our executive staff in both the networks and in primary care. >> president chow: so in the meantime these other cohorts, are they participating in some sort of a score card or base score card program even though they don't have a lean process? >> vice president loyce: what happens is that dr. hammer hosts on a monthly basis all of the senior managers involved and providing services so they get an opportunity to hear from those cohorts that are actively engaged in the lean process and

they also can begin to apply some of the tools that are being utilized even though they may not have the specific training that cohort one and cohort two has. so once a month 90 people get together to walk through this process. >> president chow: any other questions? yes. >> commissioner guillermo: just a comment. i'm very pleased to see the progress or the process that's been put in place, particularly focused on primary care within the network because i think -- i don't know for sure but it appears very unique to me for this to be in place. i'm althoug also really excited the lean process and i'm looking forward to the reports that will be coming forward for us to review and ultimately the

difference is going to be making in the lives of our patients here in the county, particularly those the most vulnerable and i just hope we are at a point where other counties and other cities are going to be able to look at us and see what we are doing and really sort of maybe model or collaborate on the processes that are being put into place. >> thank you, commissioners. we have also just to note are taking the lean process all the way north for the entire department so it is a leadership issue that we are all very supportive of and we find that we have focus on quality and it also focuses on our patients and consumers and residential individu individuals. it will do well as we are putting our ethics tog