saw two weeks ago. it is a testament to your hard work, i don't want to thank you. i'm happy we were able to look at how to scale the park decreases in a way that would not competitively hurt our long-term folks at the port. i also really, would like i like the acknowledgement about the wage issue. this is a comment. i would recommend the national park service, if it is not already in your contracting practices with a new concessionaire, put in the cpi increases are up, or any other unit increases that would normally take places -- take place in other contract, apply to this contract, whether or not the operator chooses a union shop. do you think that is something that could be in your discretion create that we don't have wage issues in the future. that is just a comment. and that i wanted to echo a statement about the city of sausalito. i think our resolution noticed and saw this moving forward.

we are not a reasonable transportation authority. that is not our role. while we can work with you collaboratively, which i feel this amendment does, i think it's a larger issue. it needs to be taken up with the appropriate bodies and authorities that look at reasonable transportation for the whole region in the bay area. it is outside of our scope. i think our staff is doing the best they can to note it and move forward. i'm happy with the progress and with the community supports. i see myself too in a place where i can move forward and be supportive of this project. >> thank you. >> i will support the item and put together -- but i want to be vocally clear that i support competitive bidding in the widest sense that we could. the board of supervisors gave an exemption to competitive bidding

for this project, particularly the park cruises. in a perfect world, i think it should be put out to bid. i went back, and i looked at the board resolution on november 16th, 2,008. very oddly, in the entire document, it is six pages long. nowhere in that document didn't really talk about opening up park cruises and to that portion being exempted. at somewhere, but it's buried in the back of the document in the term sheet. but even the public notice that went out after the board of supervisors filed that, i believe it is an error in the big picture. if we want to competitively bid and give an exemption, the first line of the board resolution should stay competitive bidding exemption for the park services,

and for the cruise line, or extra business that we are giving in this contract. i will look at these very carefully. i'm also going to talk to members of the board and candidly ask them how aware they were a bit. competitive bidding situations are huge in my book. if the fair wage component was not in this contract, i would not be supporting it. i would expect future things that come our way to have the prevailing wage. i would expect park services to be first in line, voluntarily putting in their contract. they will float with the contracts. for me, i have a slightly different take on the sausalito component of this. the minute we leave our shores, and we are out there, i believe we want to be good neighbours with everyone.

just as we brought all the stakeholders together, we have moved from something that had lots of concern to everyone at being on board and i believe that our neighbours whether it be san francisco county or sausalito, whatever it is, we have to look at these decisions in a global way. i am more open to their concerns, the same way i would up they are open to ours if we had issues in san francisco that we wanted them to help with. we spoke about the great group and their decisions are more than san francisco post as a borderline. the group worked on more than just san francisco. we should do the same thing at all times. so if there was a way for us to deal with how the boats move and to keep them away from sausalito and keep them 101, we should look at that openly.

i will not not go forward because of that but i believe it is a very valid discussion to have added to something that if we contract and make agreements, then we have more stakeholders on board, and we have a regional approach to it and everybody can sign on. so, with that, i would be prepared to support the item. >> thank you. >> yeah. this project is kind of like a pot on a stove that is boiling over, and you have to take the lid off sometime. i think that's what's happening. i'm glad i was here at the inception of this. this project before -- it let a lot of bad taste is in people's mouths. it did not turn out very well.

hornblower did not live up to and none of the promises. at left a lot of people in a lot of bad places. this used to be a waterfront that was working class. it took me a lot -- a long time to get there. and it was a lot of frustration dealing with the park service in the beginning. they had threatened to go to fort mason, even though it we know it was just a threat. it just seemed like they never could get their head around it. a lot of this -- we may not be here today if they had came out with the right ways to determination in the beginning. don't you learn from something you have done 11 years ago and you go out and do the same mistake again? i don't kind of get that. what left a bad taste in my mouth was the port had to go to d.c. we met with the department of labor. the park service did not do that. a lot of the work i think the park service did, the port and

the staff wind it up doing that work. that left a bad taste in my mouth. but i do see, finally, it seems like the park service has come around somewhat. there was some behind-the-scenes thing that went on in d.c. they were very slow and responded to a letter. she expressed they did not give her the respect responding to her. i don't know about bureaucrats. i'm just a working guy, but sometimes where if you get caught up in that, you get stuck up in a file and they can't seem to figure it out. i believe in simplicity. i am a working guy. but sometimes bureaucracy just blows my mind if we can't get through that. that being said, it seems like the union has made some strives towards -- forwards. you heard them all. they are willing to go forward. i want to thank support staff. you guys were beyond. he did a lot of the park service

and you carried their water. i think they can do better in the future. they didn't show me that they could have done as much as they could do. that being said, i feel this needs to go to the next phase. and needs to be in the hands. at the end of the day, this is a political decision. that is what the board of supervisors makes the decisions for. i'm hoping in the future, badge the park service will step up, not to make the same mistakes. in san francisco, we seem to work together to try to get things done. there needs to be a cohesiveness, and i guess when decisions are made in washington where the bureaucrats are at, they are not down here on ground zero. you need to be on the ground. i don't know if a lot of people know, we've been through three park service directors. when this thing started. one person comes in and another person comes in there hasn't been any continuity. the meeting that i was in a november, mark was there.

he said i know about the unions. you know what? everyone is part of this dynamic. it is san francisco. we are not like la. we have a way of coming together and putting our differences aside to get things done. i would ask the park service in the future that you be more inclusive, and think about what you are doing, and include everybody. we want things done, and a hornblower did not live up to any of those things. we want the best surveillance for our people here. so many people come up here and it benefits our people to come here on cruise ships and everything and a tourism of 30 million. and so, i'm moving forward. and i also understand that the union keeps moving the goalpost. is a little bit for everybody there. i'm going to vote for this today and put it in the hands of the board of supervisors where it needs to be, and once again, i want to thank you guys.

you were great. rebecca, jade, mike, so many of you guys stepped up and did a lot of work for them. president brandon, this thing got off track and you got it back on track. and i want to thank my fellow commissioners. >> thank you. >> i have one clarifying question in terms of the national park service has increased in terms of the value of the size of the boat. and we heard from tom in terms of being concerned about the environment, and we also heard comment about is there any inherent bias through the existing concessionaire? i we have heard -- as we have heard in history in the past, that my understanding is cactus because the existing concessionaire has sized the boats, does not necessarily bias the transaction. because we had this concession

and when hornblower took over -- actually they bought the boats. that does not represent inherent bias from the beginning of an existing contrast -- concessionaire. and i would like the national park service to comment on what would be the key criteria to evaluate the concessionaire we. >> in response to your question i have this understanding of how things work. i did understand that it had to be a transaction that happened. that would be one way for another se want to take over if that turns out to be the case. that would be an elective sale. that would not be a forced sale and hornblower would have to sell. in terms of availability of vessels, that is one what mechanism by which a new operator could operate. but in terms of the other specifics, i defer to the national park service.

>> okay. i do want to reiterate, as i mentioned at our last meeting, the park service is required by regulation and policy to adhere to a very tough standard for the concession contract and golden gate follows that closely. is a very rigourous process. this is a large contract for the national park service. it -- all components of it go through the competitive process. it is overseen by the washington office because of its size. and with that, i will turn it over to you. >> i would jus will just speak a moment to the criteria in which the perspective offers will be evaluated. we actually do have -- sorry i do not have the full prospectus with meat right now, but we do have two criteria that they will be evaluated on regarding their

vessels. does certainly cover things like the vessel size, minimum requirements which we have discussed at length here. as well as amenities for comfo comfort, excess ability, other components. there's a really rigourous element related to environmental performance as well. the minimum requirements will be a tier three. so there are really explicit details as for how the proposal should be developed to meet both operational needs, and the performance specification. >> what can you give us, in plain english, what tier three environment all standards main? >> yeah, it is a most progressive at this point that the environmental protection agency has out. it is related to a missions -- emissions and yet the general operations of the vessel. >> is this something, i guess from the past, that going forward, we would expect that the vessel was looking for environmentally friendly and

protective? >> yes. we are endeavouring to ensure that. >> okayed. thank you. >> okayed. >> i want to direct this to director forbes. what is your opinion about sausalito when this came to you? can you tell us -- tell us what it was? you said we'd have to talk about it in open session. >> they have very legitimate concerns about how traffic will be managed for future prospective embarkation at fort baker. national park service has said that they will take part in more study. it is legally required that there be more study. fundamentally i feel, i echo the

commissioner's comments. it is not a good area and it is not in our domain. however, i would like us to acknowledge sausalito's concerns and to include the language to say we have heard it. it needs to be studied and needs to be addressed. we need to give our partners in the national park service our regard, and our respect that they have said they will do this work, and it is also legally required that they do so. it is as much as we can do, and we have endeavoured to understand their concerns to the fullest extent. >> thank you. >> any other questions? >> ok. thank you so much for this presentation. thank you so much for working with everyone to come to where we are today. i especially want to thank my fellow commissioners for asking the hard questions, and really

digging in and making sure that this was the best contract for the port, long-term. you know, it may have ruffled a few feathers, but as everyone said, over the past five years, this project has gotten better and better and better. could it get better? yeah. but we will not be too greedy i especially want to thank director forbes and her team for the patients and due diligence of crossing the tee's and dotting the eyes and making sure everybody's questions were answered and for bringing us all together to get labor, national park service, almost o the cityf sausalito together to make sure that this project could move forward.

this will be a great project for the port of san francisco. and to have anyone come and invest $30 million in our pier is phenomenal. so i am happy that we were all able to work together. that, for the most part, everybody is happy. with that, commissioners, are you ready to vote? >> before you boat -- >> i'm sorry,. >> we are recommending two motions. the first would be to whether to approve the amendment for the resolution that they read into the record, and the second motion would be whether to approve the resolution as amended. [laughter] >> with someonwould someone like the motion? [laughter] >> all in favor? i will make the motion to approve the resolution as amended. >> second. >> all in favor? and he opposed?

the resolution has passed. [applause] >> is there any new business? seeing none. >> motion to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor? meeting adjourned. at 62942 wor

together we can support your or

children. it's been my dream to start is a valley school since i was a little girl. i'm having a lot of fun with it (clapping) the biggest thing we really want the kids to have fun. a lot of times parents say that valley schools have a lot of problems but we want them to follow directions but we want them to have a wonderful time and be an affordable time so the kids will go to school here.

we hold the classes to no longer 12 and there's 23 teachers. i go around and i watch each class and there's certain children i watched from babies and it's exciting to see them after today. the children learn how to follow directions and it ends up helping them in their regular schooling. they get self-confidents and today, we had a residual and a lot of time go on stage and i hope they get the bug and want to dance for the rest of their

>> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their showing up and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 san francisco owes must of the charm to the unique

characterization of each corridor has a distinction permanent our neighbors are the economic engine of the city. >> if we could a afford the lot by these we'll not to have the kind of store in the future the kids will eat from some restaurants chinatown has phobia one of the best the most unique neighborhood shopping areas of san francisco. >> chinatown is one of the oldest chinatown in the state we need to be able allergies the people and that's the reason chinatown is showing more of the people will the traditional thepg. >> north beach is i know one

of the last little italian community. >> one of the last neighborhood that hadn't changed a whole lot and san francisco community so strong and the sense of partnership with businesses as well and i just love north beach community old school italian comfort and love that is what italians are all about we need people to come here and shop here so we can keep this going not only us but, of course, everything else in the community i think local businesses the small ones and coffee shops are unique in their own way that is the characteristic of the neighborhood i peace officer prefer it is local character you have to support them.

>> really notice the port this community we really need to kind of really shop locally and support the communityly live in it is more economic for people to survive here. >> i came down to treasure island to look for a we've got a long ways to go. ring i just got married and didn't want something on line i've met artists and local business owners they need money to go out and shop this is important to short them i think you get better things. >> definitely supporting the local community always good is it interesting to find things i never knew existed or see that

that way. >> i think that is really great that san francisco seize the vails of small business and creates the shop & dine in the 49 to support businesses make people all the residents and visitors realize had cool things are made and produced in san he. >> president adams: this is the regular meeting of the small business commission, monday, july 9, 2018. the meeting is called to order at 5:32 p.m. we thank media services and sfgov tv for televising the meeting, which can be viewed on sfgov2, channel 78 or

sfgovtv.org. members of the public, please take this opportunity to silence your phones. public comment is limited to 3 minutes per speaker. speakers are requested but not required to state their names. completion of a speaker card, while optional, will help to ensure proper spellings of names in the written record. please place speaker cards in the basket to the right of the lectern. speaker cards will be called in the order in which they were placed in the basket. additionally, there's a sign-in sheet at the front table. sfgov tv please show the office of small business slide. >> welcome, everybody. it's our custom to begin and end each small business commission meeting with a reminder that the office of small business is the only place to start your new business in san francisco and 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. you can find us on-line or in person here at city hall. best of all, our services are free of charge. the small business commission is the official public forum to voice your opinions and concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of small businesses in san francisco. if you need assistance with small business matters, it starts here at the office of small business. >> clerk: call to order and roll call. [roll call] >> clerk: mr. president, you have a quorum. >> president adams: thank you.

next item. >> clerk: general public comment allows members of the public to comment on matters of jurisdiction but not on the calendar. discussion item. >> president adams: do we have any members of the public that would like to make comment on items not on today's agenda? seeing none, item is closed. next item, please? >> clerk: presentation on 16th street improvement project. it's part of muni forward and plans to allow zero-emission transit service into mission bay and allow the o.c.s. that powers or trolley buses on kansas street to third street. new bike lanes have been added to 17th street to create a continuous route from mission bay to the mission neighborhood. along with the changes to 16th street, the eastern end of the

22 fillmore route will shift to serve the growth in jobs, housing and hospitals in mission bay. a replacement route is being developed to ensure service maintained in dogpatch areas. once finished, the street will be entirely repaved. discussion item. presenter is project manager, cathal hennessy, capital programs and construction, sfmta. >> good evening. after that nice, long introduction, i feel like he almost covered the presentation already, but i will go through a few more details of it, so if someone can bring up the slide for me. thank you very much. as mentioned, this is a muni forward project.

the limits of the project are on the western edge is 16th at church and eastern edge is down into mission bay. as mentioned, it's part of the transit effectiveness program, where one of the original goals of the project was to realign the 22, which is the element, the section of the map here in black, to realign so it would be on 16th street and in mission bay itself to accommodate the future growth and development of this section of the city. while in the development of the project, 16th street has been identified as a high injury corridor network, meaning there's been a lot of collisions with pedestrians and automobiles and road users along this route. so we're talking this opportunity to improve the state of along the corridor. once the project was started across all city agencies, there

is an opportunity in which can>> john: the project, upgrading the water and sewer system along the corridor. this is a busy map showing a summary of improvements. we're looking to install a transit-only lane starting at 3rd street, going westerly, all the way to 16th street and eastbound, starting ate bryant street between bryant and po potrero. we didn't have enough space to have a transit lane in both directions without completely eliminating parking on 16th. knowing the hardship it could cause to the businesses in that area, that segment of the original project was eliminated

and we only focused on areas that we could fit it in with minimal impact to parking along the corridor. as i said, we joined up with other agencies, so it's a complete street project. this is just one small segment of the overall corridor, but given the interest of time, we spent days talking about all the elements along the corridor, but this is a snapshot replicated where we're installing transit bulbs, upgrading the traffic signals along the corridor and also repaving -- also a repaving of the streets as well. this is a zoomed-in

architectural feature of what this area could be. they will also know that many of the trees in this area are ficus trees, which have a large canopy. one of the comments that we heard from the various members of the public is they said that 16th street was a narrow street and they wanted to see more sunlight come into the corridor. so we will remove some of the ficus trees and put in different species to allow more light. we're also trying to signify the history of the corridor and we are looking to install some additional features just to reflect some history of the corridor, like this is an overlay of the old stadium and there are elements that we can

-- it's almost like a future to the past and looking to the past and also looking to the future. as i mentioned, we'll look at transit lanes, along the corridor. and it will be going from third to church street. and into eastbound direction, potrero to third. from a community engagement, this project has been going on for many, many years. during the outreach process, we, the m.t.a., held four large community meetings. some in the mission area. some in the eastern edge of the project. i've also attended numerous community meetings with potrero boosters, the dogpatch. i've been to encnc. we've briefed supervisors.

we've met with mbna. and working with our office of -- the mayor's office of economic work force development to make sure that we're reaching all the folks that we can within the corridors. we've sent out fliers. we've had posters up along the corridor. we've had postcards in an on-line blog. we also have a project website by simply searching "16th street improvement project." it will bring you straight to the project page. from a schedule standpoint, again, kind of summarizes the steps we've taken. we started our outreach in 2014. we went for almost 1 1/2 years of outreach, gaining input from the public, plus the overall goal of the project. and then from there, we went through the legislative process, followed by the design phase, which kept us to issuing the

documents. when we initially advertised this project, it was above what we could afford. so the city with its sister agencies decided to split the project into two separate phases. the first would be potrero to eutaw street to mission. that project has been advertised and we have received bids and bids are within what's allowable. we're hoping to go to the sfmta shortly and the project would break ground in the fall. potrero to church streets, we are projecting to potentially advertise a project in the fall of last year, which would then lead to construction in the spring. given the density of the neighborhood and all the utility

work, we're expecting this project to be a little longer, closer to 1 1/2 years. if we were to start work in february next year, it would be in august of 2020 by the time it would be complete. continuing to work with all the neighborhoods so we understand that all construction projects have an impact to the community and the businesses along this area. so in addition to the outreach we have maintained, we will be going door to door to get all the businesses and we bring a master list of all the businesses that will be impacted, so we would then do a weekly update so we know -- so everyone has been informed to the very sequencing and stages of the project. the goal is to minimize the construction or to businesses during construction. and i know that the mayor's office of economic work force has issued some guidance in how

agencies can support those goals in order to keep business open and operational in two phases of construction. >> president adams: commissioner dwight? >> vice-president dwight: so you are moving the stop 1 1/2 miles from the location. so i won't have a stop. >> there will be bus service, a replacement bus service for the 22. a person within my agency is leading that effort, working with dogpatch and potrero boosters about where that should be. they've had presentations. there will be a replacement -- >> vice-president dwight: will it be simultaneously with losing

the other? >> yes. once 22 is built out, the replacement service will be -- as soon as we're ready to move the 22 down, the other would come into play. >> vice-president dwight: okay. great. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: how much is budgeted for the loss of businesses and small businesses in the corridor? >> i believe it's 3%, if i'm remembering correctly, is what the guidance is from the mayor's office, but let me confirm that number for you and report back to the commission. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: we've met side-bar from an advocacy standpoint in the neighborhood. there were suggestions and we recommended that for outreach also to be culturally -- use a different cultural lens, especially with the various latino and asian communities. and i'm wondering where we're at

on that. >> that will still be part of our outreach. i know that we are to regroup with that group again one more time and talk through -- coming to today's meetings is a first step and then we'll regroup and attend maybe other community meetings that's ongoing, so we can talk to and have the appropriate personnel there to speak and talk and explain what the project is and get your feedback about the project and explain when and where the work will take place within the project and having it culturally supportive. we are sensitive to that, knowing the history of the mission, especially the segment between church and south van ness. so we'll continue to work with your group on those measures. >> commissioner dooley: with the new plan, will it be mission

street where there will be no longer the ability to turn left anywhere? >> can you repeat that? >> commissioner dooley: will this project incorporate what they did on mission street, which they don't allow any left-hand turns? >> there are subtlies and differences between the mission street corridor and 16th street corridor. on mission, there were some forced right turns. there are no forced right turns on the 16th street project. there will be no left turn restrictio restrictions. many of those are in place and many are for safety reasons. it's a high-injury corridor. so we're rolooking to installed no-left turns and many already

have them. >> vice-president dwight: is there a process in place for assessing business impact of these projects and process for deploying relief funds? >> no. there is not an absolute set process in place. i know that oawd is working on establishing some. the commission does want -- >> vice-president dwight: but this project has settle-aside for this. >> it does, but to my understanding, we don't have a standard process in terms of x percentage of, you know, project funds, based upon number of business -- >> vice-president dwight: and how a business would apply for relief and how we would evaluate that application for relief.

>> i've talked to jorge and we're trying to figure out when the best time month to present. >> vice-president dwight: sooner rather than later. >> they are still finalizing some details. >> commissioner corvi: i came in late and i may have missed some of this. with parking on the street, are you reducing the number of available spaces on the street? and how will it impact deliveries to the businesses? >> so, again, very sensitive to parking on the corridor. we wanted it to be parki parking-neutral. some of the bus zones will be

eliminated or moved from near side of the intersection to the far side. we looked at loading zones, always open to understanding where double parking can occur. it's a fine balance to make sure you have the right number of loading zones and parking spaces so that customers can come and go, but we've been conscious to be parking-neutral. and we mentioned early in the process, there was a statement which we first thought about the project that we would do a transit lane in both directions that would have eliminated all the parking on one side of the street, but we dropped that segment, only the area that we know we have sufficient curb as it stands right now to put a transit lane in both directions. potrero to church, it's essentially what you see today. it's two lanes going westerly and one lane easterly.

one of the westerly lanes is a transit lane. the parking, as i said, it shifts and moves around. when you look at the whole numbers from potrero to church, we're maintaining plus and minus one or two spaces the same number of spaces there right now. >> commissioner yee riley: can you talk about your plan for the bicycles? >> yes. so if we could go back to the overall slide for a minute, the segment of 16th street from potrero, actually san bruno to mississippi, the original configuration was one lane each direction with a bike lane in each direction. in order to accommodate the transit lane in both directions,

we have installed a new bike lane on 17th street, which actually connects to the existing bike lane on 17th street toward mission street. so the bike lanes have moved from 16th street to 17th street. the segment that's different, once you cross caltrans, it remains on 16th. the street was wide enough to maintain the bike lane along the corridor. so bike lanes on 16th and 17th. >> commissioner yee riley: there's no biking on 16th? >> there's no bike lanes. bikes are not prohibited. they're allowed to be there. but most people feel more comfortable with bike lanes and that's the preferred route. it's still legal for them to be there. >> commissioner yee riley: thank you. >> president adams: any other

commissioner questions before we go to public comment? my only thing on this is i will be able to go to a warriors' game and hop on a bus and go straight home with the 22 fillmore. you answered the questions on the parking and that was my big deal. in fact, i appreciate on your layout here that you do put down saying "no loss of parking." i really much appreciate that you did look into the parking, because we're losing too many parking spaces in this town and we need to maintain them. if there's no other questions, i will open it up for public comment. any members of the public that would like to make a comment on this project? come on up. you have a business on this. we definitely want to hear what you have to say. >> hello, commissioners. i'm gwen caplin, ace mailing.

what we're most interested -- we've been brought into the plan pretty much -- on a relative live consistent basis. we want to be sure that we're informed almost block by block of where they will be working, because we have big trucks and big deliveries. so although we understand the project, that's our concern is notification of what will happen in front of each and every business in a reasonable period of time to make that adjustment. >> president adams: thank you. >> you're welcome. >> president adams: any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed. based on our public comment just now, will we have like on a lot of projects that muni has, will you have a person on site

working with the businesses, letting them know when things will be done? >> yes. we have a dedicated public information officer for the project, erin miller. she was not able to make it today, but we will have that. and that's part of going door to door to get the names of businesses, so we can inform them once we get into a particular block and we can coordinate during construction what is needed to minimize the impact of businesses. >> president adams: or if there's a problem with construction, 1/3 a point person to go to. >> yes, a dedicated person. >> president adams: we'll make sure you are taken care of, gwen. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i want to applaud this particular project. theres been a lot of outreach. i think sfmta has learned what happened on mission street corridor and even reaching out to organizations like meta and

how it impacts small businesses and being culturally sensitive is amazing. and i think the outreach sfmta is doing is great. however, i have to go on record -- and it's not particular to this project, so nothing to do with 16 -- i strongly disagree with sfmta starting projects and then asking for feedback. what i'm saying, it's like, if i come to your house and be like, i'm going to make something through your living room. give me as much feedback as possible. and then you do an amazing job, along the process, block by block, day by day, but the process is to go and ask if we even want the project altogether. not just say, hey, i'm putting this fast lane through your living room and then, amazing feedback. i think sfmta is learning and growing and nothing to do with this particular project, but i'm going on record for sfmta in

general. they have to ask. the impact on mission street, we lost 25% of small businesses and that was part of the report and part of what they expected to lose and that has a bad taste in the neighborhood. that's in general, nothing to do with this project in particular. they should ask first before they even have a project in mind. >> president adams: any other commissioner questions? this is discussion item only. we thank you for coming. this has been very well, very helpful. we'll be watching this throughout the process, because if there's issues, we'll be the first to know. >> no problem. >> president adams: thank you very much. okay. next item, please. >> clerk: presentation and possible action to support san francisco's local business enterprise, l.b.e., small businesses regarding their

efforts to maintain their businesses as it pertains to bos file 170205. ordinance amending administrative code to require a citywide project labor agreement applicable to certain public work or improvement projects with projected costs over $1 million or where delay in completing the project may interrupt or delay services or use of facilities that are important to the city's central operations or infrastructure. discussion and action item. presenters are julianna sommer, priority graphics. >> this is the power point that julianna will present. in your packet, there's a definition of l.b.e. and

establishing the program, letter from rec and park and public works. and the letter dated may 7 from the lawyers committee on civil rights. we'll provide some updates. and then we have, i believe -- we have staff from contract monitoring division though will not present, but will be here to answer any questions. >> president adams: it says board of supervisors file 170205. who is the sponsor? >> it was then-supervisor farrell, who initially sponsored it. but then it was -- i don't know if dormant is the right word, but it was sort of -- a lot of discussions were happening. and then after mayor lee's death, i think supervisor safai

picked up the mantel for it. >> president adams: okay. >> and this is agendaized a little differently. you can put it on the legislation or -- you can take action on the legislation to make a recommendation or you can take action on a very specific portion, which is the l.b.e. program, which the presentation in supporting them in terms of what their recommendations are to make that recommendation to the board of supervisors. so there are numerous ways you can go. after the presentations and discussion and public comment, you can determine which is the best route for you. >> president adams: great. thank you. welcome. >> thank you, commissioners. i'm julianna sommer, priority graphics, sign manufacturing company in san francisco.

also vice chair of the l.b.e. advisory committee. chair is in the audience, miguel alarza. again, as director regina advised, i will be presenting on this power point for the public. we don't have a digital copy to go through. there are copies over there. you have a lot of information that the director provided you today. a lot of information. a lot of what i call very heady information. we can really dive into the weeds because the devil is truly in the details when it comes to this project labor agreement legislation. and we can dive as deep as you would like to today. i will do an overview of 14b, which is the l.b.e. policy in san francisco. i'm going to go -- i will do an overview of the project labor agreement, maybe a quick definition and then some possible impact