have additional cannabis shops opened or not. it is really not up to us. >> right. ok. next item. >> item seven. board of supervisors file. the police code. agreements between cannabis businesses and labour organizations. hiring graduates of apprenticeship and pre apprenticeship programs. ordinance amending the police code to require cannabis businesses when entering into a city mandated labor peace agreement or collective bargaining agreement to agree that 35% of new hires should be graduates of state approved apprenticeship programs or of city certified preapprenticeship programs. if a relevant program of either type exists. discussion, action item. presenters are here.

>> welcome. thank you. >> good afternoon. i am legislative aide to district 11 supervisor. the author of the legislation before you. i would also like to point out i am joined and i am thankful for the office of cannabis director who is here and also director of workforce,. they will be speaking as i give some broad strokes on what led to the inception of this legislation. this ordinance is meant to expand the existing city builder job training programs into the burgeoning cannabis industry. by starting a preapprenticeship and apprenticeship program that we have the city grow. we envision city groping a hands on cannabis cultivation program that would provide job training and placement for economic district manager job seekers. this program would create a pipeline of employees to exit the program with industry level training and withdraw guarantees or placements just like it is the case for city build.

for example, city build, for the last ten years has graduated more than 400 -- 1400 workers to the state approved apprenticeship program. these straps provide living wages, the benefits, healthcare, job security, among other things how does it work? here again, this is broad strokes. the director of workforce is here. it is a preapprenticeship program in which the city partners with community-based organizations or c.b.o. to recruit workers from economically disadvantaged communities. participants receive an approved curriculum that is developed by employers and labor organizations jointly. this is a model we envision for city grow. plus, city grow, because it overlaps the targeted community specified in other ordinances, local higher, first source and equity, will also help capture and further our goals of writing some of the many wrongs that have been incurred and are shouldered disproportionally by our black and latin communities. on september 18th, the

statewide cannabis industry employers a joint apprenticeship committee filed an application to establish state apprenticeship programs in the near future for pharmacy technicians, cannabis nursery specialists, manufacturing technicians, and cannabis distribution drivers. the groundwork is being set as we speak. these are all expected to be approved at the end of this calendar year. i'll pass it over now to the director of workforce. thank you. >> great. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for the opportunity to be here. i'm the director of workforce development in the office of economic and workforce development. we are excited about this proposal. we are excited, not only to share with you, but to get your feedback and your thoughts and your input. feedback from the public. what we learned tonight will continue to shape this process. i think this conversation is critical to be here at the small

business commission because you not only looked out for the interest of the small businesses who are seeking to get involved and advance equity but you've also acknowledged the importance of workers. is a hatch that a lot of you wear in your day jobs as well, apart from being commissioners. it is very important to make that clear that we are looking for your feedback as this goes forward in the legislative process and some experts from our staff here at the office of workforce development will be speaking after me. i want to say some broad strokes about the proposal and our work with supervisor safai in his office and community, labor and employee stakeholders to get us here to where we are today. we look forward to your feedback and that from the public. in a moment to, our city build compliance team will talk about the policy and some of the changes that we have proposed to the ordinance. we understand he has taken it under consideration and may very well soon become part of the evolution of the policy.

and then also, the city build employment liaison will talk about programmatically, how this program will work to advance interest to equity and deliver for the employer needs as well but certainly for workers. that is one of the things that we start with when it comes to workforce development. what we like about this proposal when you learn some of the details from it, it is great. this policy takes a lot of feedback about the program to date and builds upon some of the successes that have happened in the workforce program. one of the things that is interesting to employers is that program requires 50% local higher requirements. this program is a little bit different. it is a 35% apprenticeship requirement where there is a state approved apprenticeship policy or program that has been connected to a city certified preapprenticeship. that will be discussed a little bit. when i introduced ms. miss gray in a moment, she will walk through some of the three main changes that we have proposed and she will present along the

lines of what we have proposed to take the program. and may differ a little bit from the page in front of you but being part of the legislative process of which we are very thankful to have the guidance of supervisor his fid and his team, he has been very forthcoming and open with community input and input from our agency and other stakeholders. we know it will be a process that continues. what you will find, and i will make myself available for questions when we conclude and turn over to the commission on the public, i think what you will see is the program streamlines the process of workforce development compliance for employers and as a whole lot better for workers. it advances the equity goals and expands the notion that equity should -- time and time again, it should include compassion and candidates for workforce development and policies as well [applause] >> without further ado, i would like to introduce ms. miss gray from city build.

>> great. >> welcome. >> thank you. good afternoon. welcome -- thank you for the opportunity to present. i am a compliance officer with the office of economic and workforce development. today i will speak specifically about what the ordinance does. when what the proposed amendments are thus far. we just talked about the state process and where they cart -- they currently are apt. if you have any follow-up questions with regard to that process, i will be here to answer those. in terms of what the ordinance does at this -- if the state of california approves the apprenticeship for cannabis which is currently being considered by the division of apprenticeship standards, if the city and county of san francisco certifies relevant pre apprenticeship programs by developing a criteria to meet the industry, also taking into

account employer standards and the connection that organizations have with these preapprenticeship programs with regard to equity or disadvantaged candidates. if that is the case, under the current proposed legislation, cannabis businesses will be required to ensure that 35% of all new hires be registered apprentices enrolled in any of the relevant state apprenticeship programs that have a memorandum of understanding with any of the relevant city certified pre apprenticeship programs. next i will talk about the three proposed amendments. the first proposed amendment makes the preapprenticeship and apprenticeship relationship and and and not in or with respect

to jobseekers. in terms of the original legislation -- new hires may be graduates from any relevant apprenticeship program. the amended language would state that the requirement of 35% does not kick in until the state establishes apprenticeship programs and the city certifies those preapprenticeship programs this provides flexibility with respect to the terms and conditions of the memorandums of understanding but also safeguards the city's investment in preapprenticeship programs by assuring that graduates that graduate from these programs have high benefits to going to work at state apprenticeships

rather than ending up as trainees. amendment two would simply clarify that workers are technically registered apprentices enrolled in a state approved apprenticeship program and not graduates of a state apprenticeship program. so the language simply clarifies the distinction between registered apprentices enrolled in a state approved program and graduates of city certified pre apprenticeships programs while affirming the connection between the concept -- to the extent that we wish to continue to analogize our cannabis workforce objectives in areas in which apprenticeship programs are currently pending state approval and contemplated for application.

our success in construction with city build, which we will talk more about specifically, we want to model the concept that jobseekers see graduate from city certified preapprenticeship programs and then enrolled in state approved programs in order to go to work with participating cannabis employers. the last amendment is a decoupling of the proposed legislation from the labor peace agreement. this amendment would decouple the proposed legislation and make it a standalone requirement triggered by the existing -- of the existence of a state approved apprenticeship program for the type of work performed and a specific recommendation was discussed and recommended by director elliot and oewd agreed

with it. those are -- that is the gist of the legislation on the proposed amendment. thank you for your time. >> great. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. again, we are very thankful to the collaboration with the office of cannabis. i have to say that because we are all working together to get to the same place. i will now introduce another speaker to show in realtime what it looks to have a pre apprenticeship program that connects with community-based organizations to recruit equity candidates to then refer into apprenticeship. >> great. >> i like this. >> thank you for having us here today and allowing us to present good afternoon. we are passing around some of the training packets. you can see on the conceptual --

thank you. >> this had been previously mentioned. we work with city build which is our construction pre apprenticeship program which has been running in the city for over ten years. we would like to replicate the success of the model that we have for city build into this preapprenticeship training. so we would like to focus on the key six components of the city grow training program which will be focused on outreach and to decode meant which would help our community-based organizations to conduct the recruitment strategy to help disadvantaged people to gain entry into the program and as it is outlined in the cannabis section and the police code. and secondly the community-based organizations will be conducting intake and assessment strategies

which will help us to assess individuals and get them entry into the program. we will be recruiting candidates in the job readiness program which will be an intensive 1-2 week training program which will focus on the major components of the cannabis industry overview. clear explanations and career pathways, life skills caps off scale developed in job readiness and job skills. later on we'll be conducting a process in combination with the community-based organizations. and later our candidates will be able to access the pre apprenticeship program which will be an eight week program which will give them entry into the cannabis industry and some of the curriculum components will include and grow marijuana growing, rules and regulations, as well as cannabis overview and equipment and safety practices. upon graduation from the program , we will be working with labor relations and community

partners and utilizing our share agreements with safe approved benefit programs to get them entry into the industry. we will be working closely with the labor part needs and community organizations, and employers and stakeholders as well as employers to ensure that we can successfully implement and develop a training program which will allow disadvantage residents to gain industry -- gain entry into the industry and jobs which will be developed in the future. if you have any questions, please feel free to let us know and we will be happy to answer them as well. >> thank you. if you want to drill a more into the concept, you have what it looks like in the city build model that is a pre apprenticeship going back 12 years and also the proposal on city grow. again, to summarize, the way we see the ordinance and the ideas we have given back to supervisors and conversations,

it really builds upon what is in place with city build in partnering with organizations. one of our core partners is here they have been a partner with city build going back to the beginning of the program. working to recruit equity candidates and the kind of event that would make this a policy with respect to cannabis employers would be, two things. the state approving one or more apprenticeship programs, and the city certifying one or more of those programs as city certified equity programs. because they are recruiting equity candidates for employment , but also because it is working a system that also works with the employers as well i will turn it back to my colleague and i'll be available to answer questions should they come up. thank you for the opportunity to present to the commission today. >> thank you. >> thank you. that concludes our presentation. as you can see, this has been a

labor of love and in transparency and collaboration. we look forward to hearing your feedback. supervisor safai supervises he cannot be here. it is extremely important to him if he could have been here he would be. he is in another commission right now. we will all do our very best answer questions and we will definitely listen to your feedback and recommendations. >> great. i first want to say, thank you to supervisor safai. i really like this legislation. i'm very happy that they are working with josh in oewd. that is great. and the city build's program, i'm really happy. you guys are all working together and the program is very successful. a lot of the building you see her in san francisco -- i was just reading an article in the san francisco business times that a lot of our workforce and a lot of these projects are coming from the city builds academy. you know, with the advent of

recreational marijuana, this is a great thing. i am happy you are working with the office of cannabis because it will put together the workers , the operators, everybody together. this is a labor of love and i am really impressed with everybody coming here today. i'm really excited that they are working with city academy. you guys do really, really good work in your outreach and with people in the community. this is another industry that we can tap in for local employment and help people in the low income and median income communities get jobs and good paying jobs. i really appreciate the effort on everybody coming together and working on this. my congratulations to everybody. commissioner questions? >> thank you.

>> we will do public comment first. do we have any members of the public who would like to opine on item number 7? >> i do have jackie who came up earlier. >> good afternoon, commissioners commissioners. i am the executive director of the philip randolph institute in san francisco. our organization has served low income families and youth of the city. historically we have provided voter registration services and public housing, but in response to going in for years and figuring out why people don't vote, we provided public resources including workforce development, youth programs, and so we are here because we are very happy as well. and commissioner adams, those were really great comments that allowed -- that a lot of people don't talk about when we come to

these commission meetings. equity is the key word here. but historically, cannabis and the war on drugs has negatively affected the black and latino communities. with the population in jail being over 30% people of african-american descent and only being four% in the city, there is a huge disparity that i think this can provide an opportunity to address. and you talked a little bit about how city build is a program that really helps families. it absolutely does. we work with folks that have had criminal histories that think they can come out and never get jobs again. a couple years later, after their internships and after their apprenticeships and as they journey out to, they start making 40 plus dollars an hour with benefits and they start to realize they can own homes. this is a huge opportunity. this a lot of people that are working together and i brought on my community members. if they can stand up for me so

you can see that all these folks are very hopeful for a program like this. as you can see, i brought my youth, my elders, it is a culture change. there is an opportunity for education that comes out of all of this. we are very much looking forward to seeing how this goes and we are very much in support of this >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm speaking as a person who entered the cannabis workforce as a disabled person. i started at a security desk at one of the historic clubs. and eventually became part partner in the club in the tenderloin district that was run by lgbtq people that were disabled. i really appreciate all of the work that has gone into this. i want to remind us that we started, many moons ago, in 2002

with prop s. which was a policy question if the city should grow medical cannabis for low income patients. i think there is a lot of labor of love yet to happen with all of this and a lot of ideas that can merge. i also want to speak to the devastation happening currently in the cannabis community with job loss, with -- we are losing master growers. we are losing adept and journeyman people that have been working at different cultivation sites and farms all over the state. the loss is tremendous. it is at 880-90% rate. we have very affluent and delete companies controlling the means of production. with that acknowledgement, i would like to see a way to bring the people that are experiencing the devastating loss across this state into the workforce in san

francisco. we are a sanctuary city. that should provide disabled employment. i would really like to see disabled workers of san francisco in the state of california that have lost their cannabis jobs due to prop 64 to be able to regain those jobs. to be able to share their skills that they have learned along the way. i really support this effort. i really support supervisor safai's staff and all the people they are all tremendous with a lot of heart. i hope that we can move this forward in a creative manner to take into consideration the devastating loss of the cannabis community since the patches -- passage of prop 64. thank you. [applause] >> any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed.

do we have any more commissioner questions? >> i want to thank everyone who presented today. it was really insightful. i had questions going into it at first. you guys were answering it. that is always awesome. i too agree with my president here on -- i love city build. for me it has been excellent. a lot of people that i know are coming home from prison have been helped through city builds. it touches my heart personally. i did have a couple of questions more technical questions. you mentioned the decoupling regarding the ordinance. so the 35%, once you meet 35%, he will take 50% of the local hire but does that also trigger under ten what does that still apply to ten and up? >> thank you, commissioner. one of the proposed changes would be to have this apprenticeship program separate from the labor peace agreements component of the ordinance which is different than the one you have in front of you. we understand that is a change

we expect will take place. so the triggering -- this situation that means apprentices are part of the program is not the over ten. it would be whether the state first approves an apprenticeship program and then second, if the city and our office certifies a preapprenticeship program that recruits equity candidates to that apprenticeship program. essentially if the city certifies the program, then that would replace every other component of workforce requirements. employers have said, i think there has been a lot of feedback that you have gotten, that there is first a source, local higher, there are all these different components. it has a 50% requirement. what would happen if the state approves an apprenticeship program and the city certifies it as connected to inequity pre apprenticeship, that would be the single requirement making this process a kind of one-stop shop to satisfy the equity workforce objectives that we are

committed to. >> the second question is, it says recruitment through c.b.o. i did not see in the legislation but will it be a -- will it be an amendment that it has to go through c.b.o.? i wanted to go through c.b.o. i agree with that. but the recruitment, i prefer a language saying it is a mandate that you have to go through c.b.o. >> i think that would be something that if if it is a direction that you and the commission would like us to go, that is someplace we can definitely go. i think the reason that city build works is because there are certain things that we, in the city, can and can't do. we count on c.b.o. to do because of their relationship with the community. they are -- [laughter] >> rates they are. a good example. >> a good example where the men and women who are getting out of the system after experiencing the impacts of the failed war on

drugs, the compassion clientele and the patient community who is the heart and soul who brought legalization into the conversation so many decades ago who will be the place that they turn to? as much as we like to think that we work hard on behalf of the community, government can only do so much. community members go to c.b.o. his. thank you for the things you said but city build, as an agency would not be able to have the success stories but for the work that community-based organizations did to recruit men and women and workers of colour, formerly incarcerated workers, limited english speakers, we are working on, as we do, our partnership with the c.b.o. is everything. we would be more than happy to work with supervisors to make up something required in the -- in the ordinance. we would see nothing wrong with putting that in the ordinance. >> thank you.

>> the decoupling from the labor agreement is just something that we concluded after talking to stakeholders about something like city build. something like this also warrants a standalone legislative item. that is primarily the impetus behind that coupling from that. and most definitely, we can have follow-up conversations. as we are speaking, the city attorneys are hard at work. i would like to think people from the city's attorney office. we can most definitely have more follow-up conversations to make sure that the nuts and bolts add up and that is the intention. we will triple. thank you. >> overall, i want to thank everybody. nicole, this is not a fun job. she says is is fun but i wouldn't want it. she is really working hard with limited resources. i want to acknowledge everybody. it is hard work and it is trailblazing work. thank you for your hard work.

>> any other commissioner comments? seeing none, would we like to make a motion? >> i think i would not move to approve everything as stated with a condition to request that they mandate c.b.o. participation. just the language. i know that is the intent, but just to have it right into legislation. >> i second that. >> motion. seconded. we will do roll call. [roll call] >> the motion passes 5-0 with 1 absent and one recused. [applause] >> i want to say thank you for everybody who came out today for this. this is really important that you come to city hall and show and let us know what is going on

i am really excited -- i really like this program. like city build, i have to tell you, i am very impressed with that program. it is employing people. i love it. i am a fan. thank you. >> i also want to thank those of you who were here and two are respectful who do not agree to -- knew not agree with your opinion. that was very kind. thank you. >> next item. >> item eight is board of supervisors file 180646-3. environment code. refuse separation compliance. ordinance amending the environment code to require audits every three years of large refuse generators for compliance with refuse separation requirements. to establish enforcement measures applicable to large refuse generators found not compliant and affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act.

discussion and action item. presenter will be the aide to supervisor safai. >> just a second while we get commissioner dooley. >> welcome. thank you, again. >> good afternoon. and the legislative aide to supervisor safai. the sponsor of this legislative item in front of you. i will start with a backdrop of what led to the inception of this piece of legislation and then i also have jack macy and charles sheehan for the department of environment you are here with me to answer any other questions that you may have. very briefly, in 2003, san francisco embarked on a endeavour get to 20 waste by 2020. earlier this year, unfortunately we learned that not only would the city not be meeting its lofty goal, it was not -- it was

, in fact, behind. specifically, 60% of waste is not be diverted from our waste stream and is being sent to a landfill. this -- i have the slide here by the department of the environment director. >> overhead. >> overhead, please? there you go. >> the 60%, when she announced we are only diverting 40% of our waste stream. so it was this backdrop that govern iced supervisor safai into action and what led to the inception of this legislation. we have lead on other environmental endeavours before. for example, we had the banning of recyclable take-out containers in 2007. the styrofoam band, also 2007

and revisited and expanded in 2016. it went into effect in 2017. we have the mandatory recycling and composting in 2009 and this year, the ban on plastic straws. this is in the spirit -- this has been on the books since 2009 so folks who aren't impacted by this have had almost a decade to get in line and really meet our goals. but i will turn it over now. again, in broad strokes, this modifies existing law and establishes additional refuse separations compliance and enforcement -- enforcement measures that apply to large generators. this will be administered by the department of environment and their specific needs. to the nuts and bolts, before i turn it over. once enacted, this legislation will go into effect july 1st, 2019.

that is something that we conceded and. initially we would start it sooner. the operative day is july 1st, 2019. the trigger or the capture is an account holder that generates 3n compacted refuse per week or has a rolloff compactor service. of course, we have the requirement within 60 days of being served with a notice of noncompliance, the property manager or the building owner can then either, in conversation with the department of environment, adopt a plan and higher serial waste facilitators , or challenge the notice of noncompliance. with that, i will turn it over to jack macy from the department of environment. we have been working with

director raphael. she cannot be here because she was at another committee meeting as well. apologies for that. thank you. >> who would be the large users? who are the people violating? >> so it it would be buildings that generate 30 cubic yards or more of an compacted refuse per week or that have a rolloff compactor service. so the universe right now is a little bit over 500 buildings. we envision that these 500 buildings will be audited in three year cycles. in three years, the 500 and some change would be audited. >> ok. do you have a typical profile of these? i don't have any idea of what the scale is. >> i will turn it over to jack. >> cool, thanks. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i want to show you a summary.

of the properties that are covered by the proposed ordinance. >> i thank you can adjust that so you get more height and it will give you a better view. >> so what we have is either rolloff compactor, and you start at 10 cubic yards, or those who have 30 cubic yards or more weekly. refuse means trash, composting and recycling combined. so we have hundred 43 office buildings. is also another six federal estate office buildings. there are 54 hotels. 128 apartment buildings or residential properties, some of the office buildings are mixed and then there is mixed malls, retails, restaurants, 132 of

those and then we've got a couple school properties. a few universities and colleges. a number of hospitals. a couple churches and food pantries and museums. those total 54. then we have some large convention facilities, stadiums, ferries, that is 14. a couple of industrial sites and 15 city properties. the total is 548. as of our latest data on the level of service. >> so, just so i can -- so i can scale it, a standard refuse band , what percentage of a yard or how many yards as that? >> for a typical small business, if it is a wheeled cart, those come in three sizes. thirty-two, 64 and 96 gallons. there's 202 gallons per cubic yard.

so pretty much any account that has a will will be well below 3. if you have -- even if you have 96, let's say you have six 96 ones, that would be 15. you are only halfway to the 30. >> ok. >> it would be unusual account with many large wheeled carts to get close to 30. >> what size restaurant would have that much? >> there are -- >> not many. >> not many. there are some really busy ones. some restaurants have compactors when you compact, the calculation is multiplied by three because you get a 3-1 compaction ratio. so even though small compactors are called a front loader, it was picked up by a rock truck, that may even be 3 cubic yards. but because you are squeezing it , you have 9 cubic yards.

if that is nine times five, if you are getting that picked up every day, now you cross the 30- yard line. >> unless i am wrong, very few small businesses would be affected. >> very few. i have a list from the director and she listed 12 that she was aware of. i don't actually know your definition of small business. when i look at them, i am thinking they look really big to me. but we have -- we have identified 12 so far that would be considered small. may be there is a few more. >> there are small but then there are some that are neighbourhood serving businesses there are, there are neighbourhood grocers. those are some of them that are definitely impacted by the

ordinance. >> some of those stores and of generating a lot. >> and then the restaurant association has identified some as well of their members who are impacted. >> if you go to those grocers, they are separating everything. i see it. there are big buildings downtown that are league certified. i work in the transamerica building. we have to separate everything in our office. we have green and blue and we have the black. they are taking away all of our black stuff and everything has to go into the blue and in the green in our offices. >> this is where san francisco is a world leader and we have these three stream separation programs without other properties in the city. over 99% of every property we have verified has the service that they need. the issue is that a lot of times , the separation is poor.

when we look at what is coming into the trash drains citywide, 60% should not be going in the black containers but in the blue and green. that is what this ordinance addresses. we have the infrastructure and we have the best infrastructure virtually anywhere. and there just needs to be a little bit of a step up in the improvement. we work with properties all the time, all around the city providing a lot of assistance, training, making sure they are system efficient. this is if a property gets to a point with all the assistance that we give them, that they can't quite separate adequately. there is a tolerance for contamination. but if it is so bad that the material can't be marketed, or we are losing a major portion of it, then they would be considered out of compliance. right now, opportunities where they can be assessed extra

colleges -- extra charges through ecology. there are few really large properties where they may be managed by some company outside, waste management, that does their billing. they are paying these extra charges to ecology indefinitely. instead of charging indefinitely , it would be better if they would hire someone to help them improve their performance. and then we get the benefit of having that separation and that recovery and moving towards zero waste with all those environmental benefits. that is why -- there are 80 plus properties that we have identified that we have hired what we called the zero waste facilitators to help with the extra management sorting. in those cases, they have done it so they can improve their diversion right or recovery right where they get a discount, and now the rate structure is such that you can go all the way

towards 100% and get additional discounts. if you are at 15 and you go to 75, for these type of properties , you're talking about thousands of dollars of savings per month. there is a big benefit there. if they were doing poorly and they felt an audit, those to be thousands of dollars a month. those are two ways that having this service can save and that those 80 properties that are hiring facilitators and doing so for economic reasons. >> commissioner dwight? >> have you quantified what percentage of the problem this 60% of unseparated waste is actually going to be addressed? >> the problem is, it is across all the sectors. if you go -- single family residences do well. but if you -- we are certainly seeing it in the apartment sector. you may have noticed we have 128

apartment buildings that are included in this. it is in all sectors. when we think about having somebody take an extra step of hiring somebody, it doesn't make sense for it to be small. the idea was not to include small entities. and by defining this, you are automatically really big if you have rolloff. or 30 cubic yards. that was looking at a universe where we would be below 600 out of over 6,000 commercial accounts. so we were looking at less than ten% going for the largest for the bigger bang for the buck. >> i'm curious if this ten%, if you can clean up their act, does its address ten% of the problem? >> is a good question.

>> it is important to assess the active -- efficacy of this. if you're successful, what did you want to accomplish? >> because these are larger generators and these are much larger than the average generator by several times, it will be a lot more than that ten %. >> the one thing i like about this, at least you included federal and state buildings. >> we do not want them off the hook. nor do we want city agencies off the hook. >> any other questions? do we want to open up to public comment? >> no. >> do you have any more presentation? >> well, we could elaborate more on the refuse rates. i gave you a nutshell about the essence of that savings. if you don't have more questions on that, i think i've covered the key message i wanted to get to you. >> thank you. i want to open it up to public

comment right now. are there any members of the public who would like to make comment on this? come on up. >> thank you for taking the time we own our building in the tender line which is relatively unique for a nonprofit. we have a nonprofit in our building also doing work for the community and for the city contracts. so the only thing i want to speak toward and to remind as part of this legislation, is that sometimes there are nonprofits that are actually stuck in the same bucket as something that is considered large. i was looking at the stats as they were broken out and churches and -- i encourage us to make sure that we are taking a look at the nonprofits as part of the overall picture. we take it seriously and we have

facility staff that we do higher to make sure they get trained. and f.t.e. at at&t stadium and an f.t.e. in the tender line for a nonprofit or not the same thing. i just want to respectfully -- it sounds a good work is going into this. we know that the nonprofit community take screen resources very seriously on it. i want to put it out there that we are remembering that sometimes that small businesses like nonprofits are affected by this kind of legislation. i want to make that as part of the record. >> great. thank you. you have solar panels on your roof. >> yes, we do. >> any other public comment? come on up. >> good afternoon, commissioners commissioners. i am with the restaurant association and i'm here to

speak on behalf of the restaurants that are being affected by this legislation. we were also very surprised to learn that we had restaurants fell into this classification of a large refuse generator. we work with the recology and we have identified 17 of our members that fall into this bucket. and businesses represented today they'll speak to you about their own experiences. but honestly, as you can see from the stats that they were bringing -- given, this legislation covers a lot of different types of businesses and our restaurants are truly small businesses and we are happy to provide a list of them to you as well. we work with recology so often in the restaurant community. we have had a great relationship with recology prior to this legislation even coming forward to work on the audit process, and contamination as a whole other issue that we work regularly with as it comes with a lot of fines and at the end of the day, we don't want to pay those fines. we are very diligent on separation and things like that. regardless of what happens

overnight to their bins. if this legislation comes forward to, we have a few amendments we are requesting. one of them being that the warning. to be established is a 60 day to comply and to do the additional fines or the serial waste facilitator but we feel there is an additional need to have a warning so that the restaurant or small business could figure out a way to comply or fall out of the allergy category. we also have issues with the zero waste facilitator. you are required to hire someone who can will of the business -- they are facing such a labor crisis that we cannot work let alone add someone to work with us for 24 months minimum. it is not feasible. it is not something -- it is something we have issue with and we hope there is language that could be adjusted at that requirement or that sole role exclusive possession. that restaurants should be required to hire. we wanted to get more time -- to

supervise or possess office has been great to extend it for july as it was written for january 1 st. we are asking for more time. we are requesting a january 1st , 2020 date. thank you, so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners i am with the s.f. market. we are a proud legacy business. we thank you for the support of that program. the market in richards had been really engaged in deeply committed to zero waste for a long time. in 1996, we worked with jack and his team. we were the pilot project for composting before it started to roll out to residents and businesses. we are very proud of that. our food recovery program is out on the market every day. we hit over 1 million pounds of fresh produce that we share with community members on a regular basis. we are very committed to this pick what i wanted to do is share with you to the question of what does a large generator look like? in our case, a large generator

is someone who employs 16 people that gives you an idea for us of what a large generator looks like. as has been pointed out earlier, we are totally supportive of zero waste, but not every business is the same. not every industry is the same. and we find that the market and the existing tools that work that are in place and we find -- or the higher rates work perk . perhaps the need to be put into effect more often or earlier. perhaps they need to be more follow-up. we see what our merchants are -- our rates have doubled. we would suggest and encourage that perhaps use more often, more effectively and it is a way to continue to get 20 waste. the other point is getting at -- as you have heard from the others, hiring a full-time person for these sorts of businesses to work exclusively

on one item is not necessarily a way the environment and these businesses work. there are very few businesses at the market where someone puts this job is to do one thing and one thing only. so to put aside the dollar cost to it, the operation cost is another issue. other employees will ask why is that person only doing one thing when i am doing several? we appreciate the opportunity to share some of our perspective on potential impacts at the market. we share the thoughts from the supervisors and the willingness to work with us and work with the industry. we really appreciate the time to be here today to share our perspective. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i am -- i believe that our restaurants do fall into the large category. i will say this.

we are not in a position as restaurants, with margins as thin as they are, to just throw trash in and accept additional fees. we are really good about working with recology on training and on being able to satisfy the requirements. so we have recology come in and we have them train our new staff we have posters up. we actually do have a couple of different people. one in each restaurant that does oversee our trash separation. but to have a dedicated person, that their sole responsibility is to look over the separation of refuge is a real economic hardship to a restaurant. and i think that it's difficult to justify a punitive action

like that without warning. there are times where we have gotten fines from recology because we have had five pieces of tinfoil in the band that wasn't supposed to have it. so, the ordinance, as it is, is a little unclear to me. and i just want to recognize that in addition to the restaurant association, which i echo all their sentiments, we do , as an industry really try to do our best to comply with the separation. thank you. >> thank you. >> hello, commissioners. the reference to larger refuse generator is conveys a perception that it will only apply to the largest building is

, and businesses in the city. with certain small businesses are also a large e. including some restaurants and neighborhood commercial corridors. and some retailers. allergy defines as having a rolloff compactor and/or generating at least 30 cubic yards of waste per week. some small businesses can produce the latter. the project markets comprises dozens of individual small businesses. while they do a great job of sorting wasted there is no guarantee -- in order to have full-time waste facilitator his as well as pay fines. small business our restaurants and nonprofits may not be able to afford having full-time waste facilitator his. restaurants, especially are hard-pressed to find the stuff i need to stay open. if they will hire someone, especially full-time, it will be a cook or a dishwasher.

we rarely do businesses, especially small businesses. they hire staff exclusively to do one thing. everyone wears many hats. this legislation requires hiring or designating a full-time waste facilitator who is exclusive to that task. there will be a part-time person who wants more hours, and they would not be able to give them additional hours for waste facilitation because they have to be exclusively waste facilitator his. there is only been talk only of allowing part-time waste facilitator his but they would still have to be only that. so let's -- this point applies in this case. this goes against policy passed by the board of supervisors to encourage existing part-time employees more hours or bringing them up to full time before hiring outside applicants. thank you. >> any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is

closed. commissioners? commissioner dwight. >> i agree that this full-time employee requirement is onerous. it is onerous not only for small businesses but medium-size businesses and i agree with the assessment being a small business owner myself that having anyone do one thing in a company is very unusual. as a matter of fact, the sounds to me like a part-time skill and responsibility and part-time skills and responsibilities are often the realm of consultant his. i could see having a company hiring a consultant to assist them. if i understand it properly, this is a penalty for noncompliance. is that correct? it is not a requirement that they have to have this person on staff. they have to get one if they are in noncompliance? so it is really a form -- it is part of the penalty clause. >> it is not necessary to have all these -- again, you are also

-- once you are served with a notice, you have a 50 day window to provide, in writing, to the department of environment, the route you would like to take you can hire a serial waste facilitator, or you can appeal. >> another complication is anyone hiring anyone in 30-60 days is virtually impossible. you put yourself in a situation where you will be immediately noncompliance a penalty. so we need to look at the practical realities when we are crafting this legislation and modifying it if we are going to keep this stuff in there peerk because it is not just -- we have to face the realities of not hiring in san francisco but in the bay area. i think it would be far more efficacious to ski train someone

in the organization who is already there or hire a consultant. we can start a whole new industry of consultants for waste compliance. a sounds to me like the restaurant sector is already heavily engaged with recology. and make sense. they have a refuse stream that readily goes to composting. most of it, probably. and it makes sense that they would already be heavily engaged i would think that very few of them would fall into a compliance situation that couldn't be remedied was temporary. we all have to face the fact that people go into our dumpsters when we are not in attendance. mine, especially. i have to clean up every morning when i have only put out garbage once a week. my first job coming in after the garbage has been out is to clean up all the garbage that has been strewn about spy people dumpster diving for fabric samples. in my waste stream. i can imagine, depending on your

waste stream and what people seem to think it's valuable, you will have the same situation and then you get cross-contamination in your bins. i think we also have to have some leeway for that as well. sometimes we just don't control what happens between the time we put the garbage out on the time it gets collected. >> right. just some backdrop to why this is written as someone who is full-time, this ordinance is revisiting the initial 2009 ordinance. folks have already had ten years to be in compliance and sorts there are different ways to stream. it is not that it is out of the blue or that it is landing on people process lapse. i want to make it clear. this is just amending an existing ordinance that was drafted in 2,009 that said you have to make sure that you are diverging your waste stream. and back then it was what we called the green