from staff and i think they were trying to be positive in making this successful. has there been follow-up from that meeting and has it been communicated to the employees? >> yes. there has been, that was before we really started doing the in-depth scheduling of the training and over the last few weeks, in fact there have been sessions with all of the management to make sure people are signed up and people are signed up for the training, that's a big thing. there's really two big components to make it smoothment one is to get everybody up to speed as much as possible and to wrap up the testing and to resolve as many defects as possible. that is the emphasis and there's been follow-up with the training with their management.

>> commissioner walker? >> thank you. i went to one of the trainings, and it was really succinct. it simplified everything very much. so i really want to encourage the rest of my commission to do that. to go and figure and look and see what we are dealing with and what people are going to be working on because it's informative, because it helps you understand how everything is structured. as people talk to us about the system, we will be able to understand it a little better if we are able to use it. it's a really great session, maybe a couple hours, maybe a little more. thank you very much for that. >> thank you. >> it's helpful to understand it. i want to continually congratulate you and your team for pulling this forward. and it really has been pulling it. it's been a process. we have all been through for a long time.

and i'm really -- i really appreciate that the challenges that we knew we were going to run into, are being resolved in such a creative way. to be able to keep us on schedule and targeted for our september 4th. i keep mentioning that go-live. which is something all of us are looking forward to. so thank you for righting our boat and keeping us sailing. the director and the i.t. team. so thank everyone. as i said at the department meeting, it's now in all of our hands. the success of this program is really going to rely on everyone at the department. and everyone using the system to, you know, give input and constructive criticism. we are at that point now where we could hear things and to a degree adjust to try to make it work better. so thank you very much. >> it is a very big change for everybody.

it will need all of your support. the staff will need all of your support over the next few months. and for the next few months after that after post go-live, i'm sure we will encounter some issues. i think we need to approach it all with a little bit of openness. and reason to help them through it. it's a big change. >> it is. it's a completely different system. we are asking each and every person using the system to gather more information so we have more information all together in one place. it will help all of us do our jobs better, and it will also provide better access and transparency to the public as to what we are doing. so it's really, really an intentional and important change. so thank you. >> and to that point, whatever resources you need from additional consulting fees from

a change management group or training or whatever, as you know, you have our full support on this, and we want this to have all the resources to make it successful. >> i'll bear that in mind, thank you. on projects of this size, i normally see a couple weeks of support, or four weeks of support. we have continued, we've got the vendor on board for three months, for us to go live for exactly that, to help us roll with the punches. it's much more than most projects i've been on of this size and scope but it's because of the importance and complexity of the office and complexity of the function. >> thank you, sean. >> thank you. >> is there public comment on item 8? >> i would also like to commend

the i.t. group. this is well beyond the normal system installation. they have had to deal with business process issues. a lack of documentation, so the scope is just way beyond the normal system installing. they have done a good job persevering and moving forward. >> any additional public comment? okay, seeing none. item 9, director's report. 9a, update on d.b.i.'s finances. >> good afternoon, commissioners, kara, before you is the may '18 financial report, includes revenues and

expenditures from july 2017 to may 2018. on the revenue side, revenues continue to be strong, as you could see in the memo, we have projected to exceed our budget again this year. however, that strength is there but it is going to be lower than the prior years. so basically we have been on record highs the last few years. we are starting to see our revenues decrease but they are still better than budget so we are still having really good revenue strength. on the expenditure side, where we see, i will go back to revenues, where we see reduction, plan review revenue. plan review last year this time we were almost at 29 and this year we were almost $3 million lower. so that's where we see the reduction. on the expenditure side, we are basically the same as last year. we are about maybe $400,000 more. compared to the prior year. $56 million.

we are okay there. if you look at the first page you will see we are projecting some expenditure savings too. but i want to caution the b.i.c. that number will probably change. i brought this up last month, we do anticipate we will exceed some work orders, $17.4 million expenditures we have it projected at the actual budget amount but we know we will exceed that so we will use savings in places like salaries to cover it, so we probably won't have that $2.3 in expenditure savings but right now this is where we are with the revenue and expenditures and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> seeing none, thank you. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> item 9b. update on proposed or recently enacted state or local legislation. >> good afternoon.

lily mathis, filling in for bill as he is on vacation. i want to go over a couple items. one is the codifying ordinance for b.i.c. review of legislated items by the board. it was supposed to be reviewed last week, june 14th, but i'm told there's been substantive changes so it's going to come back to you guys again for consideration possibly for next month consideration and have to go back to the board again, so just that. the other item that was discussed or mentioned is a.b.e. accessible business entrance program. we have about 700 properties that have complied. mainly filing exemptions. about over 400. and other ones that are filing category 1. basically they have already complied with the requirement.

director hui actually has a press conference monday in chinatown as we are planning a workshop in the neighborhood for sometime july 16th. we are still figuring out the details and also coordinating with chinatown community members and building owners there. merchant walk is scheduled right now with supervisor ronen in the mission to do about a.b.e. and there are other ones coming on board as well. that concludes my update. thank you. >> thank you, lily. >> item 9c, update on major projects. >> good afternoon, tom hui, department of building inspection. as you see compared to last month, the major project increase by 1.3%. any question you have? >> seeing none, director, thank

you. >> item 9d, update on code enforcement. >> good afternoon, commissioners, ed sweeney, department services. the code enforcement and d.b.i. monthly update 2018 may building inspections performed 5,710. complaints received 435. complaint response has been 24-72 hours, 391. complaints with first notice of violation sent 83. complaints received and abated without n.o.v.197. abated complaints with notice of violations, 41. second notice of violation refer to code enforcement, 33. house unit inspection services, performed 1,049. complaints received 440. response 24-72 hours, 431. complaints with notice of violation issued, 153.

abated complaints with n.o.v., 360. number of cases sent to director's hearing, 64. routine inspections, 180. code enforcement number of cases sent to director's hearing, 104. number of order of abatements issued, 26. number of cases under advisement 5. number of cases abated, 67. code enforcement inspections performed 362. number of cases referred to b.i.c. litigation committee, 2. and the number of cases referred to city attorney, 0. any questions? >> nope. seeing none. thank you, deputy director. >> thank you. is there any public comment on the director's report items 9a-d? seeing none, item 10. review and approval of the minutes of the joint building inspection and planning commission special meeting of

april 12th, 2018. is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> so moved. >> seconded. >> is there public comment on this item? seeing none, are all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> any opposed? the minutes are approved. next item is item 11, review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of may 16th, 2018. is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> approved. >> is there a second? >> aye. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> [off mic] >> yes. >> good afternoon, president mccarthy and commissioners. my name is mary, my brother and

i grew up at 651 alvarado street, home adjacent to 655. i'm concerned about the repair of my damaged foundation and missing property line. sunshine has agreed to repair but only after i sign a release of liability for all involved in the project. this is no way of knowing what could happen in the future with the extensive excavation and removal of so much earth. i'm asking for the building department to assist in resolving this problem to move forward in a positive direction. how could the building department protect the property owners of san francisco. do you have any kind of suggestions you could offer for me? >> unfortunately, mary, we can't comment because it's not calendared but if you make your comments it will be duly noted. >> okay, thank you very much. >> thank you.

>> is there any additional public comment? okay, seeing none. are all commissioners in favor of the minutes? >> aye. >> any opposed? the minutes are approved. the next item is item 12, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn. >> move to adjourn. >> second? >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> we are now adjourned. it is 12:35 p.m. thank you. [ adjourned ]

>> good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors meeting for tuesday, june 26, 2018. madame clerk, please call the roll.

>> thank you, madame president. [roll call] >> madame president, you have a quorum. >> thank you, ladies and gentlemen. please join us for the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge of allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisable with liberty and justice for all. ok. thank you, madame clerk.

are there any communications? >> yes. there is one to report. this is mostly for the members of the public as the board of supervisors is aware. we are in receipt of a communication dated june 20, 2018. from president linden breed resigning the office of board president. effective at the end of today's regularly scheduled meeting, june 26, 2018. and as required by charter section 2.116 and board rule 6.1.1, items 53 through 55 are on today's agenda so the board may consider nominations to take public comment on the nomination and to conduct an election for the next board president to become effective at adjournment. >> thank you. colleagues, is there a motion to approve the minutes for may 22, 2018? moved by supervisor tang. second by supervisor sheehy. can we take that without objection? without objection, those meeting minutes will be aproved

after public comment. [gavel sounds] all right, madame clerk, let's go to our first item. >> special order at 2:00 p.m. is an appearance by the honorable mark farrell. no questions submitted from supervisors representing districts one through four. the may yar may now address the board for up to five minutes. >> thank you, mr. mayor. welcome to the board chamber. you have the floor. >> thank you, president breed. mayor-elect breed. good afternoon, everyone. happy to be here once again and for the final time speaking with you as mayor during our monthly question time program. i'm going to be short today. but i just wanted to say that for the past seven and a half years, being able to serve the residents of san francisco truly has been an honor as someone like many of us serving in this chamber, who's born and raised in san francisco, it really is impossible to state how significant it has been and what an honor it has been. as a youngster, i never would have been able to imagine that i would come into the building every day for more than seven

years working on issues that matter most to san francisco residents, to our businesses and to our visitors here in san francisco. you know, first of all, to represent the residents of district two, the neighborhoods that i was born and raised in was an incredible honor. and these past six months have been incredibly special as your mayor. i've had the honor of working closely with so many people who care so passionately about the city of san francisco. on the issues and challenges that we collectively face, that we all want to address together. it's been a humbling experience and one that i will never forget. i'm also very proud of all that we've accomplished over the past six months and i leave this office with great hope and optimism for the future of our city. because i know san francisco will be lead by a mayor who shares my compassion and dedication to this city. during these turbulent times when you face a federal administration that specializes in bigotry and cruelty and a president who preaches hateful

and did advicive rhetoric, i want to make sure that i pledge my full support to mayor-elect breed and i vow to stand by the city and show the country what it means to share in san francisco values. mayor-elect breed and i have already met about the transition. i look forward to continuing to meet in the up coming week. and i have offered and commit my full support and pledge the full support of my staff to make this transition as smooth as possible. i've talked before about how everyone in the mayor's office was so incredibly kind when i came in. and i pledge to do exactly the same and show the same hospitality for mayor breed and her administration. as i prepare to step down as mayor, i want to again extend my appreciation to the wonderful people of our city family. to the members here on our board of supervisors, our department heads, all of our wonderful public employees, and everyone else who i was fortunate enough to work with during my time here in office. it has truly been an amazing

ride and i'm incredibly grateful for all who made this possible. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, mr. mayor. we appreciate your kind words. [applause] ok, madame clerk, let's go to the consent agenda. >> items one through nine are on consent. these items are considered routine if a member objects an item may be removed and considered separately. >> roll call vote. >> and items one through nine -- [roll call]

>> there are 11 ayes. >> those items are adopted unanimously. item number 10 please. >> and ordinance to call and provide for a special election on tuesday, november 6, 2018 for the purpose of submitting to san francisco voters a proposition for the city and counter to incur $425 million of bonded debt to finance the construction, reconstruction, acquisition, improvement, demolition, seismic strengthening and repair of the em barcadero wall. >> can we take this item, same house, same call? without objection, the ordinance the >> passed unanimously. madame clerk, please call items 1 and 12 together. >> item 11 is the proposed interim budgets and appropriation order nance for departments of the city and county of san francisco as of june 1, 2018 for the fiscal years ending june 30, 2019 and june 30, 2020. item 12 is the proposed interim

annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget and appropriation ordinance for the fiscal years ending june 30, 2019 and june 30, 2020. >> colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, the ordinances finally pass unanimously. madame clerk, please read items 13 through 25 together. >> items 13 through 25 are 13 ordinances that adopt and implement various memorandum of understanding or m.o.u.s between the city and the following union locals for varying terms. items 13 and 14 are the m.o.u.s between the city and the firefighters union. both local 798 and unit one and unit two to be effective july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2021. item five, ordinance to adopt a decision and award of the arbitration board establishing the m.o.u. between the city and san francisco police officers association effective july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2021.

item 16 and 17, the m.o.u.s between the city and municipal capex tiffs association, fire and police, effective both for july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2021. item 18, compensation for employees of the city, subject to provisions of charter section a8.409 in job codes not represented by an employee organization and establishing working schedules and other terms and conditions of employment and methods of payment effective july 1, 2018. for items 19 and 20, an ordinance to adopt and implement number two to the 2015 through 2018m.o.u. between the city and union of american physicians and dentists. unit 17 and 18 to update certain terms and conditions of employment and to extend the terms for both m.o.o. uz through june 30, 2019. for item 21, adopts and implements amendment number six

through the 2007-2018 for the city and m.o.u. local 2021 for h-1 fire rescue par ed manyics to update the language and extend the term of the m.o.u. through june 30, 2020. for items 22 and 23, adopting and implementing amendment number one to both the 2014 through 2019m.o.u. between the city and the transport workers union local 250-a and multiunit, unit 28, to implement a union access to a new employees' program for both. and for item 24, adopting and implementing amendment number one through the 2014-2019m.o.u. between the city and craft occasion and for item 25, an ordinance to adopt and implement amendment number three to the 2014 through 2019 m.o.u. between the city and international federation of professional and technical engineers, local 21, by aed ago

one-time base wage increase to classification 8240, the public safety communication coordinators effective july 1, 2018 and to appropriate $150,000 in training funds for fiscal year 2018 through 19 for a total training fund for that year of $900,000. >> all right, colleagues. can we take those items same house, same call? without objection, the items are adopted unanimously. madame clerk, item number 26. >> an ordinance to amend the planning code to eliminate discretionary review hearings for projects that contain 100% affordable housing upon delegation by the planning commission, to provide for planning department review of large projects located in c-3 downtown commercial districts and for certain minor alterations to historical landmarks and in conservation districts to consolidate standardized and streamlined notification requirements and procedures to require newspaper notice in residential, commercial and mixed-use districts to affirm the ceqa

determination and make the appropriate findings. >> supervisor p/esskin. >> thank you, madame president, colleagues can. as i discussed last week when we continued this item, the ordinance before us seeks at least in part to substantially curtail community involvement in the planning process and frankly has been shrouded and impervious to community input. as i mentioned last week, i wanted time to craft a handful of amendments that are before you to this item that i believe mend or go a long way to mending some of the sources of consternation in this lengthy 70-page-long piece of legislation. but first i want to reiterate that these amendments i'm about to propose would preserve the streamlining of approval as for 100% affordable housing projects. and in that regard, i don't think there are two sides to this conversation, but one loud voice in agreement that we are

in the midst of a housing crisis and it is incumbent upon the city to do whatever we can to facilitate the construction of 100% of affordable housing projects. i can also live with the process improvements for minor alterations to historic landmarks and large projects in the downtown c-3 zone which is district that i represent. though i'm not in the least persuaded that anyponent of this measure has met their burden of showing that these changes will alleviate enough pressure on the planning department to perform its other functions. that brings me to the broader point here. which is that much of this ordinance seeks to solve a problem that is not about the housing cry theys we all agreed upon. but rather the fabricated problem of neighborhood and community input in the planning process. the implicit message here is that by removing opportunities for communities and neighborhoods to weigh in, we'll be able to build more housing faster. and while there may be room for improvement on some projects,

there is to allow for a modicum of input and the rebuilding of badly-needed trusts in the exercises of discretion by decision-makers in this city and in the institution of government more generally. in a specific issue of land use and planning, we talk about how community and neighborhood groups exercise their discretion whether it be taking of the discretionary review, the environmental review process. but we talk very little and do even less about the myriad of ways that city officials, whether bit the planning department, m.t.a. or building department also exercise discretion and the direct and indirect harm causes the communities when that discretion is exercised, negligently or wrecklessly. when the city is in a position to exercise discretion at odds with the community and immediate surrounding neighbors, avenues for community input and review are necessary if we're going to build and maintain trust in our local democracy and ouren

mraiing process. -- our planning process. for those reasons, it is incumbent on this body at this time to focus on ways to rebuild the trust in our community. while there is ample room in the agreement of this extensive ordinance, particularly as it relates to affordable housing, many provisions move us in exactly the opposite direction of building that needed trust. so, it is with that preface that i want to propose a number of amendments which we've received lots of e-mails about as well and i referenced them last week for your consideration and i've distributed copies of the proposed amendments. f*ushs let me start by saying they leave all of the ordinances streamlining revisions for the 100% affordable housing projects in place. 100% would be subject to add mifn tiff approval and not subject to discretionary review. 100% of affordable housing projects would be subject to planning review director for consistent si with bonus design

guidelines and other applicable guidelines. 100% affordable housing projects may be granted waivers by the planning director from open space, rear yard and unit exposure requirements. the amendments would maintain the or did nanls's streamlined review of large projects located in the c-3 and certain minor alterations to historical landmarks subject to article 10 and 11 of the planning code. amendments would preserve the 30-day notice for all permit applications that are subject to 30-day neighborhood notice in the current planning code in sections 311 and 312. this includes permit applications for changes of use, establishment of formula retail, establishment of m.c.d. use and significant residential construction promises, for example demolitions, entirely new construction and removal of residential units. pop-outs, which i think is a term of art and not of science, but extensions into the rear yard, up to 12 horizontal feet and two stories tall in the rear yard, planning code

section 136-c would remain subject to 30-day neighborhood notice. these amendments are subject to all other permit applications to standard 20-day neighborhood notice and the other notice procedures set forth in planning code section 333. finally, it maintains the existing resin by 17 plan notice which communities fought for for many, many years so they could actually see plans that were meaningful wrather than the shrunken ones that used to appear on eight by 10 pieces of paper and establish online notice for all permit applications. with, that i believe supervisor ronen has an additional amendment that she spoke to last week and she would like to propose. otherwise, colleagues, i thank you for your support. >> supervisor peskin has made a motion to amend. is there a second? seconded by supervisor ronen.

supervisor ronen. >> thank you. yes. i want to thank supervisor peskin and the additional moment that i spoke about last week has to do with language access. many of my district's constituents are mon low english, chinese or spanish speakers and need to engage in discussion about construction and land use in our neighborhoods. the land use that i'm presented will ensure that people with limited english will received a quat information for these notifications to be meaningful. the amended language will contain the same basic information translated as is required in english. with these amendments, i am supportive of this legislation. i appreciate that the mayor is encoding elements from the late mayor ed lee's executive director. i have submitted complimentary

legislation to ensure that projects receive -- that are 100% affordable receive absolute top priority from city departments as they go through the post entitlement permitting and this legislation will be at land use next months and i hope to have your support. but i do believe that we must balance a speedy process with the ability of neighbors to weigh in. and as we're undergoing tremendous change, we need construction and density done right. and we do this best by including the voice of the community. so with these amendments, i'm happy to support this legislation. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor ronen. supervisor tang? >> thank you very much. i do appreciate colleagues and especially through ronen and peskin to incorporate the feedback that we've heard and all received many, many e-mails

on. however, i received the incorporated version of all the amendments right before this meeting. i am a little concerned. one of the things that i think we have agreed upon is regarding the neighborhood notification and i expressed that i was actually -- i am ok with neighborhood notification that are subject to 311, 312 to remain at 30 days and the rest to be at 20 days. that would actually augment the amount of public notice for many of the projects subject to 10-day notice and increase it up to 20 days. again, it is a fine compromise if people want neighborhood notify indication. -- notification. that is something that i will agree to. in looking over the legislation, for example, this piece in here around alterations. it seems like that is a significant change. and so i was wondering if supervisor peskin could actually explain that first. >> and also supervisor tang, these amendments were just passed around.

they do seem quite lengthy and i will definitely continue the discussion, by would like a moment to take a look at them before we approve them. supervisor peskin, do you want to respond? >> i had a sidebar conversation with deputy city attorney kate stacey and it was not our intention to broaden. but there is a little bit of new information i think we can fix with a very small tweak. so, deputy city attorney stacey, would you like to speak to that? >> thank you, president breed. kate stacey from the city attorney's office. the language on page 41, lines 20 and 21 would go back to code language that exists now and that code language is -- well, the language on page 41 starts with an increase in the exterior dimensions of a building, including but not limited to, the features set

forth in 136c25. the existing code language is -- excuse me. i have to find it. an increase to the exterior dimensions of a building, except those features listed in 136-c1 through 136-c24. and 136-c26. so it would still include the so-called pop-out in 136-c25, but it would return to the present code revisions. >> that is entirely acceptable to me and i think addresses through the president to supervisor tang what you're getting at and what i intended the amendment to do. >> ok. but i'm not sure that the -- i mean, the reason why i supported this out of land use committee is because i thought that this legislation actually was helping to streamline certain things that, you know, such as windows, dormers or so

forth that we didn't feel should go through notification. i think bigger projects, yes. neighborhoods want to know -- neighbors want to know what's going on. but when you're talking about kind of, again, windows and dormers, is that something that we really want to -- i mean, i think i defer with you on that. >> so i would defer to planning department staff that there are all sorts of exceptions currently in the code to section 311 relative to notice. i believe that those actually include windows and depending on their dimension, dormers. but i will defer to planning department staff. >> thank you, supervisors. planning department staff. that is correct. there is a number of features in section 136 which already are exempt from notification. those are the features in sections 136c-1 through c-24 and the features in section 136-c26 as the deputy city attorney just read off.

c-25 is the provision related to that rear yard modification that currently today does require notification. >> so, what i would suggest is that we further -- i would make a further amendment, which is to take what deputy city attorney stacey just said on page 41, lines 20 and 21, which is to accept out 136-c one through 24 and 26. >> supervisor tang? >> i think it just speaks to the overall nature of the amendments. you know, we got kind of like a draft word document earlier but i didn't get to see this until just now. so, you know, there are other things in here, for example, from what i understand. the planning department are generally guidelines for planned submittals that are now codified. there are so many changes that i'm wondering either we can

delay it to the later in the meeting so i could read through it and understand it or continue the item itself. >> i would prefer the former to the latter and also deputy city attorney stacey, if you want to walk us through -- i mean, i've spoken at a high level about what the amendments i have offered do. but if you want to speak to it, you're welcome to do. so but i prefer to see if we can re-entering the course of the meeting come back to it and if that doesn't work, we can discuss it further. >> i would also add that i prefer that we walk through the amendments to make it clear that there's an intention, there's something that was expected as a result. but these are very -- this is a very lengthy document anja read this whole document as i manage this meeting. and so either we can walk through these particular amendments to get a better

understanding and make proposed changes as it relates to each of those proposed amendments. i think that would be probably most helpful so that we are all on the same page. >> and madame president, i'm happy -- this is a big document, but the amendments from last week are actually only in a handful of places. the first one is on page 29. at line 16 and line 24. referencing different code sections. the next one we discussed is on page 41. there is conforming change of section reference on page 43. >> so first of all, supervisor peskin, there was an amendment to your amendment. but we haven't passed so it i'm going to basically move an amendment to your amendment so is there a second to that?

seconded by supervisor ronen. can we take that without objection? without objection, the amendment to the amendment that has not passed has actually passed. you guys understood that, right? >> yes. >> ok. so, we still have an amendment with an adjustment that we are actually going through now as we speak and so we are at the next one. page 41. so, that's incorporated now as a result of that change. >> correct. and then the bulk of the amendments are in -- depending whether you have a yellow one or a gray one -- are the notification sections starting at page 44, including the language access amendments on -- >> i'm sorry to cut you off. can you go back to page 43 with -- so there was a change in the section. can you explain why? >> yeah. so, this was to make it clear

that removal of residential units would require 30-day notice pursuant to section 311 of the code. i earlier said, and ms. stacey feel free to jump in, by felt that should require additional notice, removal of residential units. should not be a 20-day notice so that now ties it to section 311, rather than section 333. >> got it. >> did i describe that correctly, counselor? >> yes, president breed. kate stacey from the city attorney's office. it might help to step back a minute and provide some overarching guidance. the mayor's ordinance originally took out all the procedures and put them into section 333. supervisor peskin's amendment restores some of the notice requirements in section 311, including starting on page 44, i think supervisor pes kin was just about to start describing this.

all of the new underlining is restoring language that's already in the code. but that the original ordinance had deleted because of the reference to section 333. so these amendments effectively have two different kinds of notice. the notice that would be required for section by section 311 which is both a 30-day notice, plus all of these sort of contents of notice and who gets notice, provisions that start on page 44. and then all other permits would look to section 333 for those notification guidelines. and that -- there are many details probably that you might want to discuss within that, but that is sort of the big picture of what these notification amendments do in this version. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> supervisor tang: on page 43, though, we are changing removal of residential units. instead of 20 days, will be 30 days, so that's different than what was originally proposed.

and then, also on page 48, starting line 20, d.r. is discretionary reviews, will be 30 days instead of ten days. so that is a change that is different, again, from what we were discussing. maybe we could go to kate stacey. >> president breed, that is true. i'm sorry. on the bottom of page 48, that is a change from current code requirements from what i think is ten days to 30-days. i need to look at the code to verify those dates, and i'll check the other dates that supervisor tang just mentioned. >> so supervisor tang, was that it? >> supervisor tang: i mean, there's more. i mentioned earlier that there are a lot of planning submittal guidelines that have newly been

codified, and the rear

neighbors, and i think that's from when we've talked, the intent is to force the conversation, to have it with your neighbors, and that is a really important part. you would never want this to happen in such a way that neighbors would not be notified or not have access to a full set of plans. i think a mandatory preapplication hearing forces that conversation, forces a full set of plans, and i think that one of the issues that i have is we're trying to truly just free up some staff time so that we can put some of this important housing development on the agenda and move it forward. that's the only issue that i had, and that's why i think this warrants a little bit more conversation. so -- but i'm happy to hear from the sponsoring supervisor.

>> president breed: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: as i tried to say at the beginning, rear yard pop outs aren't about solving san francisco's housing problems. the reality is this -- our housing department is fee driven, for better or worse. this whole notion that it frees up staff time is rather questionable, if not dubious. they're not being paid with ad valorem tax revenue, they're being paid. so the notion that you stop fees in one place and somehow this is going to miraculously free up staff time, this doesn't make sense. if you've got this other project, this project has fees, whether it's lennar at the shipyard or this whole

conditional use. the reason i think at a high level the desire to stream line 100 % affordable housing makes sense, but the notion that we're wiping out community involvement over the things that drive neighbors and neighborhoods crazy and reduce trust in the planning department has nothing to do with the provision of affordable housing, which is why -- i mean, look, 80% of this ordinance is good, and i support it. and by the way is consistent with a legacy of policy in this chambers. all of the steps that supervisor kim took, that supervisor wiener agreed with to stream line 100% conditional use authorization, that makes sense, but disen fran friesing people from the planning process where the process often gets better where people

resolve neighborhood disputes has nothing to do with addressing the housing crisis, it's about shutting people out of community input. >> president breed: supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you, president breed. i just want to add i think this is a really important piece of legislation and of course as evidenced by my inbox right now, and what supervisor peskin just said, at sunday evening, i was at the home of one of my constituents for two hours talking about this, and telling them i would involve them in this process. as i said it's important for me to have that dialogue with my neighbors. so i feel like if i were to read all of these and understand them, i'm not going to have the opportunity to go back to the people that i've been working with, and i feel like it would be disingenuous for me to vote on it right now. i feel like i'm being asked to vote on something to make sure neighborhoods have notice, yet i'm not noticing them about the

amendments. although i think there's things that i agree with, but i'm just not going to have that opportunity to finalize those conversations with everybody that i've been speaking to on these amendments, so i would be supportive of a continuance on this. >> president breed: thank you, supervisor stefani, and seeing no other names on the roster, we have 2:30 commendations to do, and we will come back to this item and make decisions whether or not we will continue the item with or without the amendments. and with that, i'd like to recognize supervisor cohen for our first commendation today. >> supervisor cohen: thank you very much. i'm glad we are able to take a moment and -- take a moment from the deliberations of this important legislation to really

stop and thank an incredible neighborhood leader. i want to introduce to some of you a woman by the name of marie harrison. please give her a round of applause as she comes down. [applause] >> supervisor cohen: please come to the mic. marie harrison has just been a stalwart in the bayview community. she has been an environmental activist for as long as i've known her, and she'll tell you how long she's been doing this. the reason i wanted to take a moment to recognize her leadership because this is my last year on the board of supervisors, and it's an opportunity also to be very honest. she and i haven't seen eye to eye on every single thing. >> this is true. >> supervisor cohen: this is true, but the mark of a good woman, two good women is being able to put our differences aside and being able to recognize when the community's in crisis and roll up our sleeves and work together.

and i just wanted to recognize you publicly for your tremendous dedication to the bayview community. in honor of your leadership, advocacy and lifelong dedication to the environmental and health issues in the bayview-hunters point community, and in recognition of your commitment to improving the health of community members for over two decades -- she's been doing this well before i even stepped on the scene, and i want to recognize that, and i pay my respects to you. and so this is a certificate of honor signed by all of my colleagues here on the board of supervisors just as a small token of our appreciation and our affection as well as mutual respect for your work. thank you very much for your service. [applause] >> thank you.

you can tell that they love me. supervisor cohen, this is your last year, and we've been able to set aside our differences. that's a remarkable thing. it shows that there's growth, and it shows that there's shared honesty in our work. and i'd like to say to you personally, i thank you, and i think i'm about old enough to be your mother, so that's ong. i appreciate that. to all of the other supervisors, let me tell you thank you. i appreciate you, but i would be remiss if i did not ask you to continue to get continue

supporting the community's efforts in getting the shipyard cleaned completely, i.e., a full retesting of the shipyard. i don't want to see another family out there and be worried to death if they're safe or not, and you know it's not safe yet, so let's do that. two -- and i've got about four here. but let me skip to the ones -- because i know you guys have the letter, and i don't want to hold you guys up because at the end, i have one little thing else i need to say. i believe, and i hope that you believe that the retesting has to happen. it's a must, and not just a scanning, but a retesting. you guys are endowed with the ability to make sure our communities are safe. that's all i'm asking. it has nothing to do with you being new and and to the

community or us being displaced. we're going to fight displacement any way, but i'd like to see you guys stay on our side with this. do the right thing. say no to corporate interest, and remembering the communities that you actually work for. and join the community in their efforts to have oversight on this. because trust me, your communities and mine are going to be the ones to make sure that every stone is unturned and to make sure that site is clean, whether it's us or anyone else. i don't have a desire to see another child be made ill from ten years from now. i really don't. and understand that it's taking about that much time for every new member of our community to start showing the effect that

my community has been showing the effects for decades. lastly, to our new mayor, congratulations. [applause] >> i need you to do one thing for me. we asked for an invitation to speak with you. please honor that invitation and let us speak with you. and by the way, show them what you can do. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: ladies and gentlemen, if you're here to support marie harrison, please standup. if you're here to support marie harrison, please standup. show her your love. [applause] >> president breed: don't leave just yet, miss harrison. there will be a photo with you and supervisor cohen.

>> supervisor cohen: yes. >> president breed: thank you clean for your efforts, and we will get that shipyard cleaned up. [applause] >> president breed: all right. next up for our special commendation, will be given by supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: thank you, madam president, and i'd like to take a moment to bring up chief rosemary bosque to the

podium. [applause] bosq jane jap and i also want to thank tom hui and many members of the d.b.i. family who are here to honor rosemary. for those of you that don't know, rosemary is finally retiring, much to the chagrin to many of us in this room who don't want her to. i just want to thank her for hermanny years of service. she is the longest running chief at the department of building inspections housing inspections department and she has help branch the gap between tenants and landlords by ru