they're cookie cutter homes, and you can't do that. you have to look at zoning and market rate housing. i do agree that you should build responsibly in merchant and traffic corridors with the input of residents, but i also opposed sb 827, which scott wiener proposed, and that is to build more than five stories, and i don't think that is the answer in the sunset district. >> thank you very much. mr. tom? >> i think that of course everyone wants more housing. there are some workable solutions to that, besides just increasing density because when we increase density, we have to say what kind of density. i'd like to see more two and three bedroom homes rather than the studios and the one bedrooms that the developers have been talking about, because this is a family neighborhood. i'd also like to consider

parking. right now, the planning code calls for.2 parking spaces for each unit. i need to drive more than a quarter of a car when i take my kids around town, so that needs to be considered for the neighborhood. also, the water infrastructure here is not adequate in case there's a disaster, so we have to consider that. and we also -- people don't realize there's sandy soil, and we know the millennium tower is sinking. we have to consider how high we can build out here. it's not like the rest of the city. the other solution is to make it easier for people to rent out their inlaws so that they could take it back down the road if they want their kids to move in. >> thank you. miss basan? >> density has two parts, people density and actual building density. i don't favor increasing building density in the sunset for a number of reasons.

first of all, the issue is about supply and demand. there is far more demand than there is supply, but that's really a lie because there are estimated to be at least 40,000 units being held off unit by landlords who are afraid to rent to tenants all across san francisco. and in the sunset district, it's estimated to be about 10 to 15,000 units. so i say look at existing supply before we build, and i don't think that building on transit corridors is a great idea for the simple reason that while noriega street is a transit corridor today and could be built up under these grand plans, next year, it could be moraga street. thank you. >> thank you very much. the next question, i'll begin with mr. mar, and again i'm going to compound the question.

one of the questions was district four is primarily residential, in which many families try to raise arththei children. what's your vision for improving life for district four's youth from arthur forming years to youth? and could you think of this in terms of public safety and reducing crime and also cleaning the streets -- cleaning up sunset? >> yes, sure. well, actually, we -- we moved to the sunset district, which wife and i, mainly to raise our daughter here, and she's in eighth grade at hoover middle school. so again, like many of our neighbors, we value the family friendly environment of the sunset district and the good schools that we have, you know, the playgrounds and the parks. but, you know, having said that and getting to the question, there is a lot more that we could do to make the sunset

district family friendly and a better environment for our young people to grow up in. one thing that i'm committed to is expanding services directly in the neighborhood, both for children and youth but also seniors and families, there's really a lack of neighborhood based services here in the sunset compared to other districts, and we see that, you know, a lot of sunset residents actually go outside of the neighborhood to access services. as a nonprofit executive director in san francisco for over 25 years, i'm very committed to developing more neighborhood based services for children, youth, and everyone in the sunset. >> thank you very much. mr. mcneil? >> so i care deeply about families not just because i have one, but i'm a public schoolteacher by day. my background, i look at public policies through the lens of the family. that's not to the exclusion of folks who don't have a family, or retirees. if you want to have safe

streets, those streets have to be safe for kids to be able to walk. if you want great parks, you want -- great parks aren't just for kids. they're for everyone. it's not community building. so i think looking at the public policy through the lens of is this going to help families thrive and stay in san francisco, it's actually something that affects us all. one thing i'm committed to doing for the office of district four supervisor is making my office a one stop shop for people about daycare, public school system. you can call the public school board, but it's too big. you're not going to have that person connection. i would like to make the district supervisor's office for sort of a one-stop shop for child care and child thriving needs. >> thank you. mr. murphy? >> i teach preschool at sfusd.

i'm an eco instructor for the district. i've seen our enrollments dropping. san francisco, we have the smallest population of youth of any major city in the country. the reason for this, again, is the destablization of our neighborhoods. i would like to see a vacancy tax on the books. i would like to see a tax on out of town ownership of our properties. we need to take away the housing stock that could be used by families, take it away from the real estate investment trusts and the corporate landlords, take ownership of that, stablize our neighborhoods. and we need to have safe environments for our children to play in. i was a principal of the action to protect golden gate park from toxic turf. that's a hazard. our drinking water is now being polluted by toxins in our groundwater. we need a strong legislator who will standup to that. >> thank you very much.

mr. win? >> i support having neighborhood schools. [inaudible] >> sure. i support having neighborhood schools for our neighborhood kids. in particular, i'm not supportive of having a lottery system, making it more difficult for our middle class families to thrive and our kids traveling all across the city to just get a good public education. i am proud of the parks in the sunset district. i've done my park as a youth coordinator to serve the youth at holy name for years -- actually, 14 years. i hosted a friday night basketball session over at holy name, where high school students and college students are able to play basketball and stay off the streets. i was also a high school coordinator for the department of election. i'm proud to say that i was the cochair for the ortega branch library campaign. back in 2010, we rebuilt this

library over here, and it supports the children, and it makes the sunset better. >> thank you. thank you very much. mr. tom? >> i also have a family here. they were born in the house that they live in in the sunset today, and we're vested in trying to make it better for everyone. we know that the schools are not really under the -- it's out of our hands for the supervisors. it's controlled a lot by the state of california, but the after school and before school programs is what i would like to see. right now, the preschool program considers age four and age five. i would like to see it expanded to age two and three. for the after school programs, especially with two working parents like myself and my wife, we need after school programs that take care of kids that are educational and enriching and can watch kids

till 6:00 when parents comes home from work. i started the friends of the sunset playground which took an unsafe park, and we ended up selling cookies for $1. we raised over $1.5 million and dedicated the park back to the city of san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. miss basan? >> thank you. first, i would like to echo mr. win's comments about having neighborhood schools for neighborhood children. i think it's incredibly important for them. [inaudible] >> thank you. second, i would suggest that have libraries that have open hours seven days a week and all day long would be a tremendous improvement for the children in our neighborhood. and in terms of public safety for our children, i strongly suggest that the sunset district not have any cannabis

dispensaries in the borders of district, not have any illegal injection sites in the border of its district and not have any navigation centers in the borders of its district. this is what's going to keep the character and the safety of the sunset intact, and we want that for our current residents and for our children. >> thank you very much. and mr. kim? >> so the sunset is definitely very residential, and it has historically been very family friendly, although the up tick in crime has put that in question. like mr. murphy has said, we have a lot of investors holding onto property, trying to make a quick buck off of them, renting them out for a week or a month

at a time. we have this constantly shifting tourist base, and how are we going to be able to keep an eye -- like, make sure we have a consistent neighborhood if we have new neighbors all the time? so we need to make these vacant units actually apartments so that people can live in them. i'm lucky to live right by ortega library, but we need more facilities like that in our district. we need more libraries, and we don't even have a ccsf campus in our neighborhood, and that's something that i would love to push for. >> thank you very much. now we're going to move onto the next question that deals with transportation, and we're going to go to mr. mcneil. what is your opinion on the el taraval rapid project and other transportation initiatives in the city? >> so like i said, i was

representing district four. katey tang appointed me to the pedestrian advisory safety committee, so i went to all of those mta meetings with the l. it was a colossal failure on a public outreach front. nobody is happy about the improvements along the el, and i think that one of the things that's really important is to have more oversight at m.t.a., but it's important to have somebody in the board of supervisors that knows the neighborhood, that can help guide public transportation improvements and projects in a way that shows that they know the neighborhood, right? i'm thinking about when the l turns onto noriega out by the water, there's no stop light there, so the l can sort of actually get hung up on just normal traffic. there's simple, easy ways that

we can improve transportation in the sunset if you're from the sunset and you know how to work it with city hall. >> thank you very much. mr. murphy? >> yeah. the sfmta's process -- public process has been heavy handed and phony. as supervisor, what i would like to do is setup a community advisory boards throughout the sunset and take control of that process. a lot of people are checked out of politics in the sunset completely because we've been abandoned to city hall politics for decades. as an independent supervisor, i would invite participantory democracy. i would like to hear neighbors, not just listen to them and give lip service. the l taraval project hurt businesses. local businesses were also hurt by another crazy heavy handed project on irving street which disrupted holiday store traffic

and put one business i know of out of business. so we need to really take control of the public process, and we need a hard-nosed legislator to do that. >> thank you very much. mr. win? >> i think it's important that we continue to challenge our government to be leaders in public and alternative transportation. the city always seems plagued with constant traffic congestion and poor urban planning. if we look at sfmta, there should be more than enough of a budget to actually be functioning. that's not happening, especially out in the sunset district where families and workers commute an hour a day, you might as well work in palo alto if that's the case, to try to make it down there and make it home for dinner. sfmta's bungled its rail

systems. we're a world class city with a lack of scope and vision. this agency doesn't possess that. if i were supervisor, i would actually ask that ed reiskin would step down. he's been given ample opportunity to serve us, and he hasn't done that the right way. >> thank you. thank you very much. mr. tom? >> i used to work on the caps commission, which is now part of m.t.a., and when everything folded into the m.t.a., we lost control of a lot of our transportation issues. what i would do is i would call for an independent audit of the m.t.a., and we can specifically say of the l tearaval or the n judah. this holds people accountable. it quantifies the performance

and brings up the level of efficiency. so we need to have accountability for m.t.a. to the public, and i would make sure that that happens. >> thank you very much. miss basan. >> thank you. i agree with mr. tom that when m.t.a. was created as a merger between the department of parking and traffic and muni, it was a colossal failure, and i think it should be split up again, and it should go back to the way it was with the department of parking and traffic as one entity dealing with traffic, and muni as a separate entity dealing with what it needs to deal with, which is the movement of people. the emphasis that m.t.a. has put on shaving nine seconds off a trip is ridiculous. everybody knows that the streets of san francisco are so congested with all kinds of vehicles that nine seconds

isn't going to make a difference. they should be focusing on service to the constituents. instead of taking away stops, they should be adding stops. it used to be their goal that every household could reach a muni stop in two blocks. we don't have that anymore, we need to bring that back. >> thank you very much. mr. kim? >> so the sfmta has made a habit of make i a decision before -- making a decision before gathering community input. the l taraval is no different. they're making decisions based on outdated studies, moving stops to increase the speed of the l. meanwhile, we have the elderly and disabled who are unable to

find a stop close to them because they've been remove will them. we've been removing parking spots, that's hurting small businesses. all these decisions being made, and it's all under the guise of some kind of solution, but that solution's hurting a lot of people. we had a proposition a few years ago to actually make sfmta board of directors not all appointed by the mayor but have some appointed by the board of supervisors. i would like to see some of that come back and maybe even have some of those positions elected positions? >> thank you. mr. mar. >> i agree with all of my colleagues critiques, the changes to the l taraval. i would just add that i ride the l tear avalue every day. i'm a commuter. i work downtown in civic

center. often, i'll have to take a car from civic center down to embarcadero to be able to get on a car to be able to get back home. and we're the technology capital of the world now, and it still takes an hour to get by train from the sunset to downtown if it doesn't breakdown along the way, so we're one of the wealthiest, most creative cities in the world, and yet thousands of service hours are missed every month by m.t.a. we deserve a world class transit system for our world class city, and we deserve more frequent services for commuters and trains with two car minimum during peak hours, and we deserve to end switchbacks on the l tear avalue aaraval and >> okay. thank you very much. okay. our next question, we're going to start with mr. murphy, and it should be mcneil, shouldn't it? >> i just went. >> okay. sorry. with mr. murphy, but we're

going to switch to the issue of drugs and their use in the city because that's one of the things that's been on the news a lot and on tv. the question is what can we do to address the drug use in san francisco, and give us your opinion on safe injection sites and to bring it locally to district four, how do you feel about retail and medicinal cannabis being available in the sunset? >> the place to start -- i've had a carefully articulated position on corporate weed since marijuana dispensaries in the sunset since i filed my paperwork in march. adam kim and i were actually on the ballot, would have been on the ballot prior to katey tang's departure, and the rest of the candidates that you see here luckily stepped up later on in order to give us a nice

round of choices for supervisor. my position on marijuana is we don't need any dispensaries in the sunset. we don't need it. the reason we don't need any is because you can get it delivered to your door. the city has totally bungled the marijuana legislation. we're now just figuring out how we can tax it, profit it like an a.t.m. machine. >> thank you very much. mr. win? >> yeah. recreational cannabis is legal as of this year. i accept that. do i agree we should have a dispensary out on noriega?

you're not supposed to have a dispensary 600 feet away from a church or school or community in that aspect, so the public has spoken in that regard. i look at -- at -- also, the issue of alcohol really affecting our children. we're talking about that war on drugs, i think alcohol is a little more important in terms of addressing and educating in that capacity. regards to navigation centers, i don't support a navigation center in the sunset district. i don't believe that the residents feel that it's appropriate to have that. the navigations centers outside of the sunset and downtown aren't working in particular as well. i've also opposed spark down in the lower haight when i was the community engagement director at spark -- against spark.

>> thank you very much. mr. tom? >> we know that marijuana has been made legal in california, but that doesn't mean that we can't have some oversight in our community. i would like to make sure that anyplace that's going to open here does not have any crime committed either inside or outside the place and that there's no possibility of selling it to children. more than that, the injection sites and navigation centers seems to be much more of a serious problem than the cannabis, and we don't need those in the sunset district. i would rather see the resources spent on after school programs and education. so as far as that goes i want to make sure we don't have navigation and need exchange centers in the sunset district. that will help us not have anymore drug use out here. >> thank you.

miss basan. >> the question -- [inaudible] >>. >> the question is regarding the use of illegal drug use and cannabis in the sunset and in san francisco. regardless of what you may think about california law, both illegal drug use and cannabis use sale, possession and growing remain illegal under federal law. so because of that, because i am an attorney, and my oath is to the constitution of the united states of america, those two activities remain technically illegal in california, despite the voters voting for medical marijuana and recreational marijuana. i cannot support a cannabis dispensary in the district, or anywhere in san francisco, and i certainly don't support illegal drug injection sites.

this is not what san francisco should be about. why are we rolling out the red carpet for drug abusers and painting all of the merchant zones with red zones? this is not what we should be doing. >> thank you very much. mr. kim? >> so like many people who spoke before me said, cannabis is now legal in the state of california and in san francisco, and we have plenty of older individuals or people who have mobility issues or other kinds of mental issue that actually require marijuana, and i would rather not stand between them and the accessibility of medical marijuana. that said, i do know the gentrification effects that cannabis dispensaries can have. that's why they imposed a

blanket ban in chinatown, and that's the thing that we don't need, is we don't need cannabis dispensaries attracting all kinds of tourists and increasing property values for people who just want to be able to live and not be displaced from their apartments. >> thank you very much. mr. mar? >> some of you may have seen the examiner article that came out this week that sort of highlighted my position on cannabis dispensaries in the sunset. my position is the three that have been proposed so far in our neighborhood have been strongly opposed by neighbors, so that indicates to me that they were not good fits for those locations, and for any proposal in the neighborhood, i'm committed to listening to the community, ensuring that they have a voice in the decision. it's really the responsibility

of the project sponsor to convince us, the neighbors, that they're going to be a responsible business and a good fit. if not, i would oppose them. taking that a step further, one of my first priorities would be to convene a working group, a working sunset district cannabis working group, that would bring together the cannabis issues in the district to foster more understanding, to find common ground and to sort of collectively develop cannabis dispensaries in our neighborhood. >> thank you very much. mr. mcneil? >> so i mean as a parent and a teacher, this -- i really want to do everything i can to prevent drugs from getting into the hands of our young people. one of the things to think about drug addiction, and it really is awful, to think of it as a symptom of other problems, and those are -- that's a very complicated public health debate, but at least you could

do -- from a supervisor's perspective, the least you could do it make it very clear that we are against drugs. it's worth saying that if you want to open up a new business, that's great. you need to be a good neighbor, and the dramatic failure of some of these cannabis dispensaries to get any failure from the sunset, it's clear they're not good neighbors. they're here to make a buck. same thing goes for the outreach efforts that we do have as a city. one of the problems is that all of our services, especially our counter drug efforts are concentrated in the tenderloin, in the south of market areas, and that makes sense, but we need support, too, we need a supervisor who understands our district, who knows where the needles are, where the people are publicly using drugs, and where the city needs to intervene. >> thank you very much. the next question, we're going to go to mr. win, and it's a citywide question. so what is your view on san francisco sanctuary city

status? >> yeah. i do believe that -- that we do need to protect our immigrant community. i was angela alioto's west side field director for the last month of her campaign for mayor, but i also abstained from being there at the press conferences where she organized and introduced new legislation for convicts, convicted felons. so for myself, i do believe that we need to protect our sanctuary city law, and i do believe that -- that our elected officials need to stand by the communities and also not work with i.c.e. in terms of any type of communication. and again, it changes from specific issue for each of these individuals, but i do believe that it's important to protect the integrity of our immigrant a refugee or as an

seeking asylum for whatever grounds, you are welcome to do so. you can enter at any port of entry such as a airport or a sea port, and you can ask for asylum once your foot touches the ground. illegal immigration is a completely different issue. i do not support it, i do not support sanctuary cities, i do

not support sanctuary states. i challenge one person to come to me with an actual case of somebody who went to the police because they were victimized and they were protected by sanctuary city. >> thank you. thank you very much. mr. kim? >> we have a thriving immigrant population in san francisco. a lot of what san francisco's known for is its diversity, and a lot of that has been brought by immigrants, so i stand in strong support of our sanctuary city status. and if we have convicts or felons who are not legal immigrants, you know, we don't need i.c.e. to tell us that. we have our own due process system in san francisco, and we don't need people to strip away rights from people just because they didn't have the means to come here on a $1,000 visa.

sanctuary laws are protecting people from regressive actions, and i can't oppose them, and i also oppose angela alioto's proposed measure against the sanctuary laws. >> thank you very much. mr. mar. >> as a son of immigrants and a long-time community leader in our immigrant communities in the bay area, this issue is deeply personal to me. i fully support our sanctuary s city law, and i think it's very important in the current political climate that on a national level, the trump administration is really using immigrants as a foil and targets, and whipping up a lot of antiimmigrant sentiment that's creating a divisive

community. i was the executive director of the chinese progression association for 15 years, supporting chinese families to improve their living and working conditions. i served as the northern california director of the citizenship project which encouraged voter participation and registration in our region. so i would support and protect our immigrants. >> thank you very much. mr. mcneil. >> i love the sunset because of its diversity and immigration is a part of that. i would just echo everything mr. mar said. i think it's important to remember sanctuary city, what people are talking about is if

you're just picked up, suspected of something, and then you're carted off to i.c.e. that's not the job of our police. if you're a victim of domestic violence, if you want to help inform the police and solve the crime, you should feel comfortable going to the police and not fear being locked up. just because we're fighting donald trump and standing for social justice, there are some places where there are shades of gray. one is for example our participation in the joint terrorism task force. there are ways -- and we are not part of that. that's why the sfpd had no idea what was happening when we were almost attacked on pier 39. i think we need to find ways to cooperate when it makes sense, to hold our values, and to find a due process way to protect immigrants. >> thank you. mr. murphy? >> unfortunately. a lot of the talk of sanctuary

cities misses the context that it comes from. angela alioto wasn't quite getting the attention she thought she deserved, and she was the author of the sanctuary city policy, so she staged a press conference and said i want to close this loophole. and actually, sent a ballot measure to elections, which was terrible. it would have allowed any -- any law enforcement officer to pick anybody off the street and hand them over to i.c.e., which sounds a lot like profiling which sounds counter to san francisco values. later she fixed it, once we called her out on it and said you're a civil rights lawyer. you shouldn't have done it. we have a civil rights policy in effect. we are a sanctuary city, and we should protect those, including some of those are among the youngest border crossers, some

of whom are my students at sfusd. >> thank you very much. now we're going to talk about something that affects not only the sunset but affects us citywide. over the years for many reasons, we've seen an increase in wildfires around the state, and the probability of us suffering a significant earthquake here in san francisco, if you listen to the news, it's imminent. what are your needs on new earthquake or require resistant systems or infrastructure to address that fact of life here in the city? >> thank you for that question. right now, our awss water system was built in 1913. only the northeast corner of san francisco has enough fire protection to take care of

itself. the entire west side is not protected. the last big main runs through 19th avenue, and it serves the areas east of there. if there was an earthquake, there would be 100 fires that break out on the west side, and we don't have the infrastructure. we have 32 cisterns. there's one on my block. you need two pumps, one to pump the water out, and another one to pump it into the fire. we only have six hook and ladder trucks. that's not nearly enough. six fires can be put out, or three fires can be put out, and we can have 100 break out here. we have to improve the systems so we can include water coming from the ocean and lake merced, so i encourage getting the infrastructure rapidly fixed up. >> thank you very much. miss basan. >> thank you.

mr. tom and i were at a forum just a few nights ago where we went overall of this about the a awss, which is the auxiliary water supply system. so i echo everything that mr. tom said, but i would piggyback on what he said, and i would add this, this issue of an earthquake happening imminently, and the resulting fires is an extremely good reason not to increase building density, not to have four and five and six story buildings in the sunset, on any corridor, transit or otherwise. it's also a good argument not to encourage accessory dwelling units. when the big one comes, we are not going to have enough food or water, and i hope that you are not going to rely on your government to take care of you, and i hope you are all aware of

72hour.com. this is reasons to improve the awss and take the administration of the p.u.c. and give it back to the fire department who is the expert on this issue. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. mr. kim? >> so it's clear that it's not just our emergency infrastructure that's outdated. we have a lot of public service infrastructure that needs replacing. we have storm drains that go straight out to the bay or to the ocean, and we have our drinking water hooked up to irrelevaigation systems. it's clear that the entire infrastructure needs an overhaul, and that becomes more dire at the risk of a major geological event threatens us. that might happen at any moment, so i agree with mr. tom

that we need an overhaul of that system. [please stand by]

. >> thank you very much. and mr. mcneil? >> i definitely would favor the community approach. i'm a nert, you can look that up, and i think the system does need repairing. the west side of town is not prepared for a major emergency, and we need to do something about that. generally, i think this has to do with how we treat infrastructure in the city. we do a terrible job. there are some thing that's we need to do -- some things that we need to do, and i think i mentioned about fixing policy in the long-term. politicians want to get their name on something or pass a resolution, but what happens is they're not thinking 20 years

down the lines. we've got $2.4 billion in maintenance fees that are identified that are current. one of the solutions, we could be moving towards a real estate developed model. the g.s.a. at the federal level does this, and i think it's something that san francisco could easily implement for practical policy solutions on infrastructure. >> thank you very much. mr. murphy? >> yeah. we need to take a close look at all of our infrastructure systems in the sunset. not just our emergency systems, but our delivery systems, which is mixing toxic groundwater into our potable supply. also our sewer systems, which every time it rains dumps raw sewage into the pacific ocean. these are not hall marks of a green city, not the hall marks of a future focused government. in terms of readiness for an

emergency, i believe our firds responders -- first responders do need our support. luckily, i live down the street from a fire station. i'm thankful for that. instead of show pony projects, we need to come together and support our first responders. that's the most significant way, and take the -- take away from the p.u.c., which is enterprise agency, the ability to dictate which infrastructures prioritized. >> thank you so much. and mr. win? >> i think we can all agree that climate change is real. i could have to echo the sentiments of all my colleagues over here next to me in regards to their concerns for the west side and the city. i am supportive of the improvements of the seawall and the master plan that's happening down at ocean beach to protect our seawall, as well. water wars, i mean, they're

coming. quite frankly, we really have to improve our nert training, as well, and the infrastructure, and that includes working with pg&e, with their lines out here, which i think are super arre archaic. the big one is coming, and i think we need to review our processes and ensure that everything is correct and in order. >> thank you very much. okay. and our next question, what is the major industry if not the major industry in san francisco is tourism. and one issue that we're having now, and if you walk the streets of san francisco, you probably see broken glass as you're walking along the street. so the question is, do you believe there should be harsher criminal penalties for crimes such as break-ins or do you

feel there's another way we can address this issue to reduce this type of crime? and we're going to start with miss basan. >> proposition 47, which was a california state initiative ballot, has been a disaster because it reduced the category of car break-ins from a felony to a misdemeanor, which whas simply encouraged the criminal element. that's why car break-ins have sky rocketed to 30,000 last year. the criminals are coming -- a lot of them are coming from outside the jurisdiction of san francisco. they take b.a.r.t. over, and they know where to target tourists. this sends a sorry message to the rest of the world that san francisco cannot protect tourists when they come here. i do favor harsher penalties for criminals. i think proposition 47 should

be overturned and that these crimes should be reclassified as the felonies that they were originally. and i think that the city could do a much better job in terms of having some sort of ambassador program, fully staffed at all tourist sites 24-7 to protect the tourists. >> thank you very much. mr. kim? >> i'm not a fan of increasing penalties being a deterrent to crime. part of that is because if we're not even catching the criminals, how are we -- why would the penalty matter to them? and the problem is a lot of our police officers are wasting their time downtown busting the homeless when they should be patrolling the streets in every neighborhood. and that's what we need, we need more police presence, we need police engagement with the community. if the officer knows neighborhood, then people in the neighborhood are less likely to commit a crime

because they know their authority figure. the more engaged the police are with the community, the less likely they are also to be perceived as a threat of violence and more as a community leader, and that's what we need, just better community leadership overall to watch over our streets in a joint effort. >> thank you. mr. mar. >> i work down in civic center and kind of at ground zero of those crime problems, and i've had my car broken into a number of times, so i certainly would agree that we need to do a much better job of addressing auto burglaries in our city. and one idea that i have that i would like to push for is the creation of a citywide auto burglary unit that's just focused citywide because right now there's staff from the

different district stations that are focused on the issue, that we have a district wide auto burglary unit that can develop a more comprehensive strategic approach to the problem. it would also free up our district station staff to focus on the neighborhood and district issues. beyond that, i just wanted to say on public safety overall, we all deserve to feel safe in our homes without fare of crime disrupting our communities. for then suite district, i would -- the sunset district, i would really prioritize strategies that build relationships between the law enforcement and communities they serve, and focus on more multilingual staff. >> thank you. mr. mcneil? >> the first place i lived in was across from golden gate park, and my car was broken into four times in there. i am glad that the sfpd has

started having district focus on this, and we actually have seen a decrease in property crime like that with police staffing, so one obvious place to start that would differentiate me from other members of the current board of supervisors is i'm in favor of police staffing. we are technically actually are at full police staffing, except that was at levels designed in 1994. i'm proud to have the police officers association union endorsement, and there are other things that we can do. like miss basan said, there's organized crime of this. most car break-ins are by people who do this again and again and again. wherever you are on prop 47 aside, if you have -- someone's part of a crime ring like this, you are missing the point. we need to punish people who are serial car breakers. >> thank you very much. mr. murphy? >> i believe in community based policing, not broken windows

policing. stable communities are safe communities. my street used to have 40 families on it, 40 families. now there's, like, six. airbnb complaints on both ends of the street. so we need to stablize our communities, and i earlier mentioned a number of ways we can do that. in terms of tourism, i think what we're headed toward is another sort of generia, with little pockets of san francisco that's recognizable, like the painted ladies and the golden gate bridge. i'd like to preserve the entire city, the unique, rich fabric of our neighborhoods. and community policing, there used to be beat cops in north beach who looked like beat cops. i'd like to see more of those characters on our streets. in terms of auto break-ins, i don't believe -- they dropped 40% in the last count.

it's dog whistle politics. >> thank you very much. mr. win? >> yeah. the tourist industry is a big industry in the industry, and what i notice is tourists, they look at the fact that we have dirty streets, the homeless issue is not a purported 10,000 homeless issue, it's more of a 15,000 person issue. we're losing conventions, as well. but i'm more concerned about our residents and the protection of our residents and the safety of our residents. we have 30,000 break-ins of property crimes a year, and i think in the last couple of years, we only had 13 convictions. that's unacceptable. and while sfpd talks about a task force and decreasing those numbers, i think we could do a lot better.

i do support increased police beats and the walking of beats, and then, i also support police staffing to the mandated level, as well. i do agree with trevor in that capacity. >> thank you very much. mr. tom? >> i know we have a lot of tourists in san francisco, but i don't see them coming to, like, quintara or yorba to look around. what i see is people coming out to the sunset thinking it's an easy pickings place because people don't complain and they're breaking into cars out here, and that is more of a concern to the residents. i started a safe neighborhood watch group that gave people more confidence to report crimes, and now, we have on-line something called nextdoor that gives people an awareness of the crimes that are going on. i would like to see individual cameras and merchant cameras

linked to the police system, and see more community policing. and if the -- as it was mentioned earlier, full police staff goes from 1600 to 2,000, that would help increase our safety here. public safety is paramount for residents and families in the sunset. thank you. >> thank you very much. one of the hot topics this year has been campaign financing, so we're going to ask the question -- or the question was asked, i guess, how will you be funding your campaign and what's your philosophy on campaign financing, and we're going to start with mr. kim. >> we have a lot of dark money in politics, even in san francisco where we have probably some of the stronger campaign finance law. and, you know, even though we're limited to $500 perdonation, somehow, we have candidates who come in with,

you know, .5 million. i'd like to see more public financing available at a lower level, but on top of that, you know, i would like to see more accountability coming from the ethics commission to track where these donations are coming from. personally, i have a very people-based campaign, so i'm not taking any corporate dollars in my campaign at all. >> thank you very much. and mr. mar? >> i -- i'm proud to have qualified for the city's public financing matching program, and through that, i've agreed to a voluntary spending cap of $250,000, and i'm able to get city matching funds for my campaign. by qualifying, we've been able to show that i -- or my campaign or i have broad base support, i'm in the neighborhood in the city from a large range of small, individual donors, so that's a

key part of my campaign. i do want to say, though, that the city's public financing program does need to be looked at in how it's being implemented because i do think the fact that a number of candidates, my colleagues, were not able to qualify for public financing. it was very problematic, and a lot of it was because of the poor way that the program's been implemented. so yeah, i guess i would really support efforts to improve our city's public financing program and make sure all candidates are able to have the necessary information to apply. >> thank you very much, and mr. mcneil? >> there's too much money in san francisco politics. we'll stop, period. i'm the only one up here who's run for office before. i was elected to the democrat central committee when i was in 24, in 2006. i did it by working hard. i believe there is a

diminishing level of returns when it comes to money in politics. i don't know how many mailers you got in the last mayoral election, but hey, here i am, here's why you should consider voting for me. the inundation of special groups that only exist to prop up their person, that kind of thing, i think is bad for san francisco. i'm naive. i like politics. i think it's a great chance to learn from voters and be represented and do wonderful things for your community. it's like community service, but the amount of money that's spent on politics is ridiculous. i'm proud to run a grassroots campaign. i'm just going to be knocking on your door with a door happeninge hanger, and that's it. >> thank you very much. mr. murphy? >> yeah. our last candidate took over

$200,000 associated with the real estate industry. in her second campaign, she ran unopposed and took $100,000 from the same people. that money obviously didn't buy votes, it bought access. i think it behooves voters to be informed and look at where the money's coming from in campaigns. the one that's run here is going to be well funded. my colleague, mr. mar, has a not for profit and can tap that network for donations. my donations come from friends, family, neighbors, people who support me. and i actually have some pluk. i ran for green -- pluck. i ran for green party. i did so successfully without being visited by a developer and visited by the f.b.i. >> thank you. >> so -- thank you. >> thank you.

mr. win? >> we've seen recently how the mayoral race went. it got dirty with certain candidates not signing pledges of not accepting certain expenditures. this is a supervisorial race, smaller race. 70,000 people. i did qualify for public financing, but the ethics commission makes it very difficult to meet certain thresholds, and because of that, you're not playing with house money and city money and be given an opportunity to compete competitively. i've run for profit and nonprof nonprofit campaigns in the city for the last 17 years, so i understand what it means. there's 70,000 people out here -- the candidate with the most amount of money and most amount of support and endorsements doesn't

necessarily win. it's about pounding the pavement and going door to door, so in that capacity, i look forward to the next 58 days. >> thank you very much. mr. tom? >> i'm in the same boat as many of my other colleagues here. i am not going to get public financing, and i'm not depending on it. i think that money could be better spent on city services. i'm going to go the old fashioned way, meeting people in the community. i'm getting my fund raising from other constituents, neighbors, residents, family, and i'm going to work the old fashioned way, meeting people at meet-and-greets, door knocking, calling you, if you don't mind, so i'll look forward to seeing you out there. >> thank you very much. and ms. basan? >> this is my first campaign. i am not a professional