considerate to everyone who can benefit from it. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors, president cohen. i'm liz jackson simpson, c.e.o. of success centers. and we were established 35 years ago by superior court judges to support re-entry clients find employment, education, and to get back on their feet. and we launch -- we're the only career center in the city that has a cannabis equity program and that works with a number of the licensed cannabis retailers to hire local community members and support training for equity applicants. we are here to speak in favor of the language that will allow for dynamic delivery. these are jobs that pay a living wage, as well as supports benefits for the drivers and

also allows us to grow this budding work force and support the people that we care most about. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. i'm angela white. i'm a job developer with the success center san francisco. i will just cut to the short by saying, i am here to support the language that allows the smaller businesses to use the dynamic system. the driver positions are -- i would say the number, hundreds of jobs that come through for equity applicants and it does pay a living wage and so i just hope that you can vote and have -- >> supervisor safai: thank you for being here. thank you. next speaker. >> morning, supervisors. i'm william dylan, equity

applicant, resident of the sunset. i have three applications that i'm intending to proceed on. i want to make a couple of points. any retrospective application of this will have an inordinant amount of damage on the applicants and their partners. it will create legal liability, there will be breach of agreements that are in place. it's more than just applications. they're projects that people are investing their lives in, life savings. you can't turn back the clock now and change the rules. we relied on the laws and that reliance would be extremely damaging and undermine the mission. any cap we proposed, it has to be fair, equitable and applied to everyone, including the existing m.c.d. operators. we're proposing a fair cap that's applied across the board. existing operators should be able to have --

>> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker. >> thanks for your leadership on this important manner. cannabis is many things but simple is not one of them. i would like to talk about dynamic manifest delivery. we're requesting you remove the language to 16, 22b. consolidation of the industry and public safety. if passed, it will allow for consolidation of the cannabis market by ease. ease is big tech. they raised $50 million since the launch in 2014. and poised to put 50 to 100 mobile dispensaries on the street and capturing up to 30% of all retail sales. 50 to 100 mobile dispensaries are not safe. storefronts are safe.

we have security guards and cameras and safe rooms. mobile dispensaries with no security and no cameras. a driver in a car, load up on product and go location to location all day. they put their orders together out of a case in the back of a trunk. no one is watching their back. cannabis delivery drivers have been robbed at gunpoint many times. dynamic delivery is not safe. please return section 16, 22b10 to its original form. thank you. >> hi. i'm jim freeburn. i moved here in 1989 and have been involved in the cannabis industry since the following year. i'm currently operating a micro business in the bayview and delivery is part of our business model and i would like to advocate that the dynamic delivery model creates an unlevel paying field for us. i would like it advocate that it's removed and that small time

operators are allowed to access the market in a more fairway. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor safai, thank you for your comments on supporting homegrown businesses and that we're created by san francisco residents that are locals, natives, that have lived here. president cohen and everyone involved in creating the equity program, it's an amazing thing, but it's a living, breathing thing that will be changing. it will take all of our commitment to make sure that it works. most of the cannabis industry is committed to and behind it200it. i will read a little bit of the san francisco charter. in the middle, "government will provide accountability and ethics in public sector to foster social harmony and

cohesion to assure equality of opportunity for every resident." if that doesn't meet or spell out the equity program, i don't know what does. i hope and trust that -- >> supervisor safai: thank you. do you have any pending applications? >> yes. i have two cannabis retail pending that i'm a minority -- >> supervisor safai: in the equity? >> yes, two in equity and one under medical cannabis. i have a provisional permit from the department of public health, but it's been very difficult to get the project built based on the changes. >> supervisor safai: one provisional, one permit and two equity? >> correct. >> supervisor safai: thank you. ma'am, you cannot speak again. you can only speak once.

sorry. you can tell someone else what you want to say that hasn't spoken. >> i'm martin olive, president of vape room, and board of the cannabis retailers association. i ask you to remove section 16, 22b10 that allows for dynamic manifest delivery. this amendment will benefit a large corporation that has not played by the rules set form by san francisco and california. the rules that the rest of the community has been following to operate in this structure. i don't know why we would reward a large congomeration that skirts regulations. this amendment will undermine the equity program and allow consolidation to those with the highest budget, negatively impacting small delivery

services and rules set forth this year. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. any other members of the comment wish to comment? seeing none, public comment's closed. okay. so we can get back to the conversation. after 23 people speaking -- i want to wait for president cohen to come back. from this audience response and public comment, we had four out of 24 that had more than one application pending. and i understand and i think one of the commenters made a strong comment -- and this is something -- we try to be as objective as we can in this process. we are constantly in this body and one of the roles we play is reviewing -- people talked about this in terms of the process of applications and projects. there are development projects that always come in front of this body on appeal, oftentimes

ceqa appeal or conditional use appeals. in the same breath, it's millions and millions of dollars of money that's put forward and oftentimes either the projects are approved and oftentimes not or maybe changed. i understand the frustration dealing with an industry that is changing in realtime. one thing i know for the record that no permit has been issued under the equity plan. i just want to say for the record -- supervisor cohen, tremendous leadership on all aspects of cannabis. she and my office work together -- she and i work together on certain aspects of the equity. i led on the amendment as it pertained to setting up the next pool of 50%, meaning that the next batch of applications would be equity. i am doing everything i can to

approach this in a fair manner, to ensure as many people, as many applicants, as many opportunities are provided for as many different people. and i also understood that once we set that up, once we set up a program that created a pool of people that would be able to apply for this program, we understand also that there will be some short falls, yes, there's a lack of social network and lack of accessing capital. but we're not in a free market. the money is coming to individual investors. they're coming and saying, i qualify under equity. you are an investor, venture capitalist, want to invest in this market, let's partner together and build a business. that is the reality of this market. and so the way i'm approaching

it is, and i think the way many of us are approaching it, try to create as many opportunities as possible. in no way, shape or form, is anything i'm doing trying to discriminate against anybody but expand opportunities for as many people as possible. i am sensitive to the fact that people put hard-earned money, resources, time, equity, and blood, sweat and tears and tried to open up opportunities for their family, build wealth, generational wealth. i'm sensitive to all of that. so i'm interested to hear president cohen what you have to say after hearing from a pool of people, as well as anyone else on this committee. because i think that overall, it sounds like this body is going to have a cap. and i know we have language here for a cap on retail regardless of industry, equity/nonequity on the retail side and we need to have a conversation about the

next pool of 60 plus. at least in this pool -- can you speak to how many individual applicants besides the four we heard from today that have multiple applications under the equity program. do you have that information? >> nicole elliott. i'm happy to do that math based on numbers we pulled about 1 1/2 weeks ago, if you give me a few minutes. >> supervisor safai: okay. president cohen? >> president cohen: my comments are simple. the cap is unnecessary. >> supervisor safai: no cap at all? >> president cohen: particularly if supervisor peskin's cap goes through, i think that cap is more equitable. >> supervisor safai: not any of

the category, two or three, just none on equity, four overall? >> president cohen: correct. >> supervisor mandelman: i don't think i have super strong feelings on this. one seems low. i could live with four across the board. i could support something between one and four. >> supervisor safai: that was a very diplomatic answer because it sounded like you said everything but nothing. [laughter] you will agree with everything and not take a position. >> supervisor mandelman: i think one is low. >> supervisor safai: i heard you. i'm teasing. it sounds like the will of the body would be to -- supervisor stefani, do you have a comment? >> supervisor stefani: yes. i agree that one is low and as i asked my questions earlier, i was worried about the retro activity of this amendment. i want to, of course, respect

what supervisor cohen said. i have issues with that as well, but i think one is too low. >> supervisor safai: okay. sounds like one is way too low. then maybe we'll do -- are you okay with potentially doing supervisor peskin and -- do you want to add any comments on behalf of your boss? >> no. only that it would be great if we could move this amendment today for purposes of tweaking it tomorrow. substantively not much has changed since last time except we raised it two to four. that's about all. thank you. >> supervisor safai: mr. givner, are we able to send it out as committee report to the full board? >> yes. >> supervisor mandelman: i think if we are -- i'm supportive of supervisor peskin's amendment, so i think we should increase

the cap in 1606 to four. >> supervisor safai: was his amendment introduced last time? >> supervisor mandelman: no. >> a portion -- the nonbolded text in front of you was adopted last time and this is an amendment to the amendment that supervisor peskin made last time. last time the cap was two and this time it's four. >> supervisor safai: i think it's clear that the will of the body to at least make this amendment right now. can we have a motion to accept the amendment as discussed open behalf of supervisor peskin's office? without objection. and then would we make a motion then to remove the -- and, again, i just want it say for the record. i want to reiterate my intent in the approach on this was to create as many opportunities for as many people as possible.

i looked to president cohen for her leadership on this issue. we've had a lot of conversations on this. and i think she understands my intent was not to discriminate against anybody, but to open up as many opportunities as possible, but i think it's pretty obvious it's the will of the body to expand it in a -- to limit it in a different way. would you agree with that, president cohen, in terms of my approach? >> president cohen: yes. >> supervisor safai: thank you. then we can make a motion to remove the amendment as it pertains to one equity applicant per application. can we do that without objection? without objection. i would like to make a motion to duplicate the file. mr. givner? >> no need for a motion on that.

>> supervisor safai: okay. i would like to duplicate the file. the version i would like to send to the full board, i would like to remove the language proposed last week regarding dynamic delivery that president cohen put forward. can we do that without objection? without objection, moved. i just want to state for the record, one, there is true concern regarding the fact that this document had not had any environmental review. i would like to ask that the environmental review officer give an opinion on the duplicated file. we can leave the language in the duplicated file so we have a conversation about the impact of additional automobiles being on the road as it pertains to this industry, not dynamic in general, but delivery overall. if we can have the environmental review officer give us an

opinion on the -- is that okay, mr. givner? >> yes. basically what you would do in the duplicate, i believe, is remove everything except dynamic delivery amendment and add a ceqa finding section, which would trigger referral to the planning commission's environmental review officer, which would determine if this is subject to ceqa at all and if it is what level of environmental analysis -- >> supervisor safai: do i need a motion to add ceqa section? >> yes. >> supervisor safai: okay. can we make a motion to find a ceqa finding section to the document? president cohen? >> president cohen: i want to acknowledge that you duplicated the file, but we did not change the a.m.i. levels.

>> supervisor safai: we will come back to the one that will good to the board. we haven't finished with the document yet. you want to remove that as well? >> president cohen: yes. it should be in both files. i suggest that you rescind the vote to unamend the request to duplicate the file and then amend the a.m.i. levels in the file and then you will have to go back and -- >> supervisor safai: what is your suggestion on the a.m.i.? where would you like to land on that? there was a conversation about 80% a.m.i. being either a requirement or just one of the items to be selected. so let's make a motion -- >> president cohen: that 80% is an option. >> supervisor safai: no income requirement at all? just a sole option? >> president cohen: correct. >> supervisor safai: as it was

originally? got it. >> my understanding of what your plan a moment ago was to leave a version of the ordinance that only included dynamic delivery in committee. are you intending to put the equity criteria as well? >> supervisor safai: no. we can amend the version we send to the full board, right? >> yes. in that version, the proposal to add 80% as one of the options -- >> supervisor safai: and no longer a requirement. >> and then you have to meet three criteria or keep it as two? >> supervisor safai: we'll do it as originally drafted. i don't think i need to rescind the motion to duplicate the file. we can amend the final version. the duplicated file that remains will have the language regarding the -- what was originally as proposed by supervisor cohen.

we'll leave that in committee. before we go to the final version that we'll send to the full board, i want to say for the record, it's a debate about dynamic delivery and delivery in general that needs to be more fully flushed out. there is value for having a work force that's stable and identifiable that are employees and i think that's an important part of the conversation. i do also believe if you are adding a significant number of cars to the road and using technology that has the ability to identify where the automobiles are, you should have access to that data. we should have an analysis of what the impact of the cars would be on the road. maybe there is an appropriate number at any given time. also the conversation around -- what's the language, supervisor cohen, about having it being an

identifiable business and ensuring there is not any abuse in that, as well as not in any abuse in terms of the process in which the medicine in terms of c.b.d. or marijuana is distribut distributed. i think there's a lot of conversations that need to be have about delivery in general. i think there's a fuller conversation that needs to happen and i think that will happen with rules committee in the coming year. that's the purpose of duplicating the file and giving the environmental to weigh in. that will remain in committee. if we can make a motion to amend the language back to the original portion of the criteria for the equity program as having 80% a.m.i. as one of the criteria, one of the five, and three must be select the.

can we do that without objection? without objection. any other last -- thank you, president. any other amendments that need to be made or considered before we move on to the next item? >> supervisor stefani: i would like to ask a question around ownership changes in terms of whether or not upon transfer it would require an equity applicant and why we settled on 10 years. >> supervisor safai: the 10-year program was to -- the 10-year number i proposed was so that -- to ensure, one, that individuals were not turning over their investments to outside of san francisco. we want to keep the retail portion equity and nonequity as san francisco as possible, as local as possible. 10 years is a fair amount of time to establish your business, build your business, and then at some point, cash out of your

business. we have other protections built into the system in terms of how much ownership can be transferred to outside investors that are not, you know, large capital-owe owners. so that is the amendment to increase to 49%. there is a lot of outside capital, whether it's canadian, australian, east coast venture capital dollars that are trying to come in and change it to a homegrown, local market. we're sensitive to that. it's important to allow people to cash in and 10 years seems to be a fair amount of time. if it's less than that, you are undermining the protections designed for investors to change the ownership structure. that was a number that came up when i had multiple conversations with those in the

industry. any other amendments? okay. so we make a motion to send the amended file to the full board with positive recommendation? so moved without objection. since we have president cohen he here, can we do item 4? would you like to do item 4 on african-american arts and cultural district? >> president cohen: yes, thank you. >> before we proceed, can we continue the duplicated file to -- >> supervisor safai: continue the duplicated file with the language regarding dynamic delivery to the call of the chair. thank you. >> clerk: item 4, amending administrative code to establish african-american arts around cultural to bayview neighborhood. >> president cohen: thank you

for taking item 4 out of order. i will let the chamber settle. folks, we still have business we're trying to conduct here. >> supervisor safai: if you can please be quiet on the way you exit and take your conversations in the hallway, we have a very tight schedule. thank you. president cohen? >> president cohen: the legislation before you establishes african-american arts and culture district in bayview/hunters point. it's clean. it's straightforward. it's a community that nurtures the cultural history that frames the story of the african-american experience here in san francisco. i would like to just highlight a few things. it's, quite frankly to, honor and recognize the contributions of african-american residents in the past, present and in the future of san francisco.

i believe wholeheartedly that this honor is long overdue. the legacy of the community is in a fragile state and we continue to combat out-migration. this serves as an important response for the city to establish something tangible that will preserve the legacy of black populations in san francisco. with that, i'd like to propose the following amendment for this item. i would like to pass these out to you. one for you, mr. clerk. one for the committeepersons. so, they are, in sections pertaining to the citizens advisory membership, deadlines for the report coming from the identified departments and duties of the c.a.c. i tabbed the amendments in the packet i've given you. colleagues, your copies have

amendments highlighted. that's pretty much it. the legislation received overwhelming community support. it's also received support from the historic preservation commission. mr. chair, i would like to turn the meeting back over to you. i think that's it. >> supervisor safai: i think this is pretty straightforward. i want to commend you for getting this in front of us. i know it's important to you as part of your legacy with the hard work you've done. >> president cohen: it's bigger than me. i'm just doing the work. >> supervisor safai: i understand, but it's important to recognize that it's part of a larger conversation, but at the same time, part of the eight years in office that you've been on this body. i appreciate your humility, but i wanted to recognize that. >> president cohen: thank you. one thing i would like to highlight before we take public comment. i want to highlight the -- there's a core group of

constituents in the bayview neighbor that have been following this legislation ever since it was an idea that we floated over a year ago. they've come to every meeting in the neighborhood. they've come to meetings here in the planning commission, in city hall and now they're here in the chamber and i'm grateful. i wanted to uplift the folks that have been supportive. >> supervisor safai: just so folks know, we're on a tight schedule. i said this to the other folks in the chamber previously. we're going to limit public comment to 1 minute. we have to have this meeting done by 12:30. in no way is it intended -- we're being even across the board today. commissioner richardson, please proceed. >> thank you. i'm speaking on behalf of dr. veronica hineka, who cannot

be here. it's an thhistoric day. i want to thank you supervisor cohen. there is historic precedent in san francisco. a very multicultural community. we have latino, japantown, chinatown, great communities and people and now we have the italian, with supervisor stefani. we know we are in good hands. we want to to put this forward. it's long overdue. the history of african-americans, it's a significant couldnntributiocont. we want to continue that. >> president cohen: next speaker, please. hello. >> director of community development mayor's office.

we're the office tasked with overseeing the funding that came out of the prop e funds. so we'll look forward to having approximately $3 million moving forward. we're also responsible for overseeing the report to set up the roadmap for the districts and provide administrative support to the c.a.c., which was established with the legislation. we're eagerly awaiting the opportunity to work with the community members. we think this is an exciting, unique opportunity to do so. and i wanted to put on the record our strong support for this piece of legislation. thanks. >> i'm tara fennell. i want to thank supervisor cohen for moving this forward and say that what the african-american cultural district will do is uplift the work going on in the bayview that many of us have

been boot-strapping for years creating infrastructure and support of local businesses in bayview and the arts and culture community in bayview. thank you for hearing us. it's an important piece of legislation. and to give monetary support to what's been happening. thank you. >> president cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i'm the founder and director of african arts academy. i'm a member of the bayview african-american art cultural district. and i want to say, first of all, president cohen, thank you so much for pushing this forward. we're a nonprofit that specializes in arts and crafts. and there wouldn't be a better place for us to be in the

bayview. so please help us move this forward to help our kids stay off the street and to enjoy what they love and are good at, which is the art. thank you very much. >> president cohen: thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. i'm devin richardson. and i'm one of the co-chairs of the african-american art and cultural district working group. we've been meeting for over a year, countless hours crafting the program and ultimately this legislation that's before you today. i will just say for all the reasons that supervisor cohen has stated, thank you for bringing this forward, we urge you to support this and the amendments that were given to you today and we look forward to working with you and other departments in the city to make this happen. thank you.

>> good morning, supervisors. i'm the owner of two businesses along the third street corridor and also the chair of economic development on third street team. supervisor cohen, thank you for your help over the last eight years and today. we want to stand in great support of this. thank you so much. >> president cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for this opportunity to speak. president cohen, thank you so much for carrying us across the finish line. i'm very grateful this is happening and i just wanted to say thank you, supervisors, for your support creating the african-american cultural district. i'm the executive director of economic development on third. i see it every day, that we have an opportunity to preserve

african-american residences and businesses. i hope you will support this. >> thank you, president cohen, and other supervisors. i'm april spears. i'm not only a business owner in bayview hunters point, but i'm a bayview native, born and raised. and this movement is really important to me because i would love to be a part of preserving african-american culture not only in bayview, but in san francisco. so we really would love your support on this movement. and thank you so much for listening to our thoughts and concerns today. >> supervisor safai: any other members of the public wish to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> president cohen: i have no further remarks. >> supervisor safai: we make a motion to accept the amendments. we can do that without

objection. without objection, amendments are accepted. can we make a motion to send this as amended to the full board with positive recommendation as a committee report? without objection? without objection. great. >> president cohen: thank you. >> supervisor safai: let's see what we have left. did supervisor -- supervisor peskin's office, okay. so we did 2. we continued item 1 to the end of the hearing. oh, 3. let's do 3 real quick. that's mine. >> clerk: item 3, ordinance amending the police code to require cannabis businesses to ensure that 35% of new hires shall be enrolled in

state-approved apprentice programs. >> supervisor safai: this is my item. it's a proposal that we put in place. i think we made some amendments last week. the amendments now are solidified. we had put a place holder in as local hire percentage. we changed that local hire in this category, if they're state-certified apprenticeship programs, but created to train a flourishing work force pool. we call it city grow. we're excited about this program. we think it's a pathway of opportunity for a well-trained work force. if we can -- i don't have any additional comments. i don't any there's any

additional amendments. if there are no comments, i will open it up for public comment. any members of the public wish to comment, come forward. seeing none, public comment's closed. all right. so can we -- can i entertain a motion to send it to the full board with positive recommendation? so moved. >> as committee report? >> supervisor safai: as committee report, yes. thank you. approved. okay. so i am -- hold on one second.

>> supervisor safai: thank you, director elliott and your team and city attorney, for your hard work on the cannabis. call item 5. >> clerk: item 5 is charter amendment to establish the free city college fund to defray certain costs of city college students and require annual appropriation to the fund. >> supervisor safai: thank you, president cohen, for your help and all the work with us today. it sounded like you were a permanent committee member today. thank you. there's a little confusion about this item. i just want to say for the record -- had some good

conversation with the folks. i'm a supporter of free city college. i worked as part of the campaign with the janitors and many other members from the labor community. oftentimes we're talking about budget set-asides or baseline funding without new revenue sources. the conversation around free city college was absolutely associated with the conversation around prop w, whiches with a property transfer tax. that property transfer tax generates $40 million a year and two main sources of funding in that are the -- two main targeted policy areas are free

city college, and we're going into our second year on that, as well as street fee program. i'm prepared today to take a motion to send this out of committee with positive recommendation to the full board as a committee report. i've spoken with supervisor kim's office, met with free city college folks. there are a couple of amendments that will be made at the full board, which of which -- we have some accountability language. after year four, controller can adjust the baseline and all we'll talk about is after five years to have the board -- 2/3 majority of the board and the mayor to adjust the baseline as necessary as well, as a second layer. and that provides for us to have a larger conversation as it relates to the general fund, as

well as without having to go back to the voters or ask in the future any supplemental budget requests. and then i think supervisor kim said they would make a motion to move back from 20 years to 10 years. again, that's just two amendments there. so we'll ask for those amendments to be ready for tomorrow. supervisor kim could not join us today. she's in interviews all day long with the m.t.c. we'll present those tomorrow. so for the general public's understanding, the way the process works with charter amendments, they'll be prepared for tomorrow and made at the full board tomorrow and because it's a charter amendment, they will go an additional week to the second board meeting of the month, which is the 11th. at that time, they will then be

read into the record as the committee of the whole. we'll have a hearing on that. because of the -- because you don't have to have two readings for a charter amendment, they just have to be prepared and sit for one week. they will sit from the 11th and then we'll do everything we can to have a special hearing -- which i committed to making myself available for. i know supervisor mandelman has said he would make himself available, and we would do that the following week. in case there is anything else that needed to be changed, if we missed a comma or a period or anything, we have five or six months to make adjustments and the board can do that in partnership with the coalition of free city klecollege. you would remove existing charter language and we have a good cushion of time to get all

that done. to update folks on the conversation i had with supervisor kim, but that's the plan for today. we won't make any amendments in committee. we're going to make them tomorrow at the full board. >> supervisor stefani: yes, thank you, thank you for explaining that. are we going to have a chance to ask questions of anyone tomorrow at the full board? i am definitely supportive of free city college. [please stand by]

>> we have the ability to make a motion to remove that language and to plant -- replace it with additional language. there is still significant time opportunity to have hearings, concerns or questions answered. >> thank you for that explanation. i just want -- you said it was your intention to send this to the full board as a committee report with positive recommendation. >> would you like to do it

without kuala. >> i understand. >> my feeling is i have unanswered questions. it would be on responsible for me to say it is something i can do right now. >> i got it. >> not to say i will not support it. >> i got it. that is just for the record. that is a normal part of the process if there are questions still resolving and multiple opportunities, we can send it as a committee report and we can do it without recommendation. we can have further conversations at the full board. i do not have any objection to that. did you want to say anything? >> only to thank you for your willingness to talk to supervisor kim about this and work through this process. as you have described, it is also my understanding of supervisor kim's desire. thank you. >> okay. any members of the public wish to comment on this item, please come forward. we will limit the comments today to one minutes because we have to end this committee in the next 20 minutes because there is a land use committee. we are moving as quickly as we can in this process.

also, a lot of the questions were answered in optics and opportunity was given the other day. we will limit public comment to one minute. >> for speaker, please proceed. >> i am an instructor in social science. for many years, labour studies as well. i want to thank the committee for expediting this and for encouraging discussion on this really vital issue. i want to tell you that this amendment lifts all boats in san francisco. not only does it raise wages for many san franciscans who can better afford to live here, but it provides jobs for the next generation. so there is a lot at stake here. we have to do a set aside because of the fiscal situation of the state of california and prop 13. otherwise i would not be for a set-aside. but this is an imperative and

emergency kind of situation where only we will be able to provide the money to free city college. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you character next speaker. >> thank you for your time. i am a strong believer in government funding investing in society, and that's what this does. this is investing in society and funding educational opportunities for san franciscans. it is super important for developing economic opportunity for people in this city. not just for people who have money, for buffer people who need to grow their life. this provides that opportunity. we should find it appropriately. thank you. >> good afternoon rules committee. first off, my name is brandon. i am representing the san francisco burning krantz for the local chapter of our resolution.

we are very supportive of free college. we would love to see free state college one day, all public universities free, but we are excited you had the opportunity to extend free city college. we can say it was a very successful enrolment -- enrolment rate his have increased. people are getting an opportunity to achieve higher education and participate in the job market which is out of reach for many native san franciscans. supervisor stefani, we hope you have an opportunity to have your questions answered. we wanted to thank supervisor stuff i.e. -- safai for changing the vote. we will see you all tomorrow. >> hello, supervisors. i am with the california nurses association. i want to point out that one of our presidents graduated years ago from city college with her nursing degree. i graduated from u.c. santa barbara and i paid less than the

students at city college did for a semester years ago. i paid to less. that is due to proposition 13. what i am here to say is that free city college has been successful and i trust that the leadership of this city will continue and this soaked our city will continue to lead in innovative ways like providing free city college to the residents of the city of san francisco. too many students, both in the u.c., cal state, at city college , are homeless because they cannot afford to pay rent and go to school. i encourage the board of supervisors to find a way to have set-asides and make sure that city college remains free for all in the city of san francisco. we can lead. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am a former city college students from 2011-2013. and it gave me the ability to

complete my education in san francisco states. i have had multiple close friends go back to city college after dropping out because they couldn't afford to continue their education and free was the only price tag they could afford when you're trying to pay rent on a student budget in san francisco, with 100 or so dollars that city college has increased intuition can really make all the difference. this experience is not gestured by my friends but by thousands and thousands of san franciscans we have seen this with the increase at city college enrolment around 26%. i am urging you guys to continue funding college at $50 million a year for the next ten years or so because that opportunity that i had should be expanded to all the rest of san francisco students. thank you. >> next speaker. >> hello. i'm here to support free to seek -- city college. i wanted to share two stories of a couple of friends of mine. one friend is going to city

college and went through a breakup this year. she had to move out of her apartment because her rent doubled to $1,200 from $650. around that life change, free city college is the only stable thing that she could count on and that was really important to her. another friend of mine, also working class, has a beat up car she was in a relationship. there was a fight one night to wear their relationship got a little violent and she tried to leave but her car wouldn't start as soon as she got out, she took a mechanic's class at free city college. this isn't just a pointed policy or an ideology. this free city college is a way that we survive in this city. it is one of the many tools that we have. >> next speaker.

>> hi, supervisors. i have been in san francisco, i have lived here, i feel like i am an adoptee since 1969. i have two doctors. i completed -- i have two daughters. city college was practically free in those days. like in the late seventies. on my two daughters graduated there peerk city college is the heart of san francisco. the teachers are fabulous. the class is a fabulous. i was so proud of san francisco when city college became free at last year. bernie sanders came out and was congratulating us on having free city college. this city is so expensive. people are struggling to have a roof over their heads, and then there's other people who are very rich in this city. this is one of -- this is the most expensive city in the country, actually. in california -- california is

the richest state in the world -- >> thank you. thank you so much. thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i work with first-generation and low income students at city college. during the accreditation crisis, the budget and legislative analyst his office identified at city college contributes $300 million of economic activity to the city in the bay area. that is significant. the college makes economic sense for the city supervisor mandelman remembers from his service. a lot of my students work. often 20-40 hours a week. they not qualify for the financial aid. however, the books are to cost

up to $200 per textbook. it is something where stipends can be a tremendous benefit. those hundreds of dollars out at and really benefit our students. thank you very much. >> supervisors, my name is connie and i would like to thank all of you, in particular supervisor stuff i.e. -- safai for the discussion we had this morning. most of the people in this room have met for four or five years, building and expanding city college. we did learn one new fact this morning after our discussion with the chair, and that came from the controller. that is we are -- the stipend, not the stipend, about the amount of our set-aside is the third smallest in this city and the length of our set-aside of ten years is the shortest in

this city. the shortest. we would like to continue those discussions about the length of this charter amendment for the next 24 hours and hopefully come to an agreement to expand it to either agree with supervisor yi 's amendment or -- >> got it. just before the next speaker, i want to say, for the record, there was one other amendment that we had discussed, and it was the oversight committee. i did not say that on the record i will say for the record. that was another thing that we discussed for supervisor mandelman. the oversight committee is coming to an end in terms of its term. i think it would make sense to continue that, and may be we can have a language drafted that will allow for the oversight committee to be a part of this process as we move forward? >> you can. i think we could talk about it off-line about exactly how that will look at how much detail you

want to put into the charger. >> okay. usually it is all done through ordinance versus three charter. >> typically that is how it works. there are a few budget set-asides in the charger that have oversight committees and our experience --dash -- our experience shows that is to work on those details. >> we will talk to mrs. forward to. i think the idea was to allow for the committee to move forward. i think that having it through ordinance, we can reaffirm that through ordinance rather than putting it in the charger and if there was some reason that an individual needed to be adjusted or so on and so forth, it probably doesn't make sense to put it in the charger but continue it through ordinance. i'm sorry. next speaker. >> good afternoon. jordan davis. i definitely support this. i want us to get out as soon as practical. i went to college for free. bad news. it was actually a front for your college and it was a scholarship

people shouldn't have to have a scholarship to get free college. i support free city college back in 2016. i spoke out for it. i supported it and i want to get into a class but i was lazy right there. i just want to see this continue in perpetuity. police, don't be a republican swamp monster. listen to the people and make this happen. i look forward to voting for it when it comes on the ballot. thank you, by. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is,. i just have always loved the swamp monster. anyway, it is not -- it is an opportunity to care and uplifts. i can't think of any better investment in the city at a time , in one of the richest cities in the country, at a time when federal government is

taking a dehumanizing approach every human surface that there is, local government, it is time to step up to show that we care. one of the best ways we can care act not just for our people before our city is to uplift the people who need it the most. one of the best ways you could possibly invest would be in free city college. i am sure you will. thank you. >> great. thank you. any members of the public who wish to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. for the record, i want to say i am a big fan, and a supporter of free city college. i know that my district in particular has a significant number of working families, newly arrived immigrant families and others that benefit from city college overall. and having the opportunity to have access to education, and i think many of the speakers underscored this. it is a way to make a living in san francisco more affordable. so that is a really important aspect of the conversation.

as many noted, students are often working full time, working to balance school and work on top of that with the cost of living in san francisco, having this be one other way in which we can help provide for our residents to make it more affordable and make the city a little bit more accessible for everybody involved, particularly working families and those that need this additional help, to allow to make themselves more economically sufficient. i think it is significantly importance. again, we will make the amendments tomorrow. from listening to the city attorney on this, i think we will do the oversight through ordinance. i was the author about last time there's a significant number of individuals that are membership of that period we will handle that through ordinance. i can work with supervisor mandelman who will be carrying this on as the new board comes in in the new year so we