>> hello, hello. good afternoon, and welcome to the january 29th, 2019 regular meeting of the san francisco board of supervisors. madame clerk, please call the roll. >> thank you, mr president. [roll call]

>> mr president, you have a quorum. >> thank you. thank you, ladies and gentlemen, will you please join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> on behalf of the board, i would like to acknowledge the staff at s.f. gov t.v. who record each of our meetings and make the transcripts available to the public online. madame clerk, are there any communications class. >> i have none to report, mr president. >> colleagues, today we are

approving the minutes from the december 4th, 2018, december 18th, 2018 board meetings. are there any changes to these minutes -- meeting minutes? seeing none, can i entertain a motion to approve the minutes as presented? motion made supervisor peskin. is there a second? and seconded by supervisor stefani. motion to approve -- okay. without any objection back the motion passes. madame clerk, can you please read the consent agenda. >> items one through eight are on consent, in these items are considered to be routine. if a member rejects, an idea maybe severed and considered separately.

>> seeing none -- are you going to... colleagues would any of you like to sever any of the items from the consent? seeing none, can we have roll call of items one through eight. >> on items one through eight... [roll call]

>> thank you. these items have passed unanimously. madame clerk, let's go to the regular agenda. >> item nine is a ordinance to levy special taxes within the central soma special tax district. >> colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? okay, without objection, this ordinance is finally passed. madame clerk cap next item, please. >> item ten is an ordinance to amend the planning code to require additional findings for home s.f. project authorizations to enter into administrative deadlines and fee modification, and to affirm the determination and to make the appropriate findings. >> okay, colleagues, and we take this item same house, same call? without objection, this ordinance is passed. >> item 11 is an ordinance to amend the planning code to allow medical cannabis dispensaries with approvals from the planning department for a medical cannabis dispensary use as of

generally fifth, 2018. >> can we take this item same house, same call? this ordinance is passed. madame clerk, please call items 12 through 14. >> item 12 through 14 are three ordinances -- item 12 amend the general plan to advise -- revised map one of the downtown area plan, item 13 is to amend the general plan to advise both ordinances to change a designation of 1650, 1660, in 1670 and 1680 mission street and to make the appropriate findings , item 14 a mensa planning code by revising the zoning map to rezone 1615, 1660, in 1670 mission street, and affirm the determination to make the appropriate findings. >> okay. colleagues, can retake these items, same house, same call,

without objection, these ordinance are finally passed. please call the next item. >> item 15 is an ordinance amending the administrative code to require city employees to complete harassment prevention training annually, and recommending the civil service commission adopt a rule requiring d.h.r. to accept complaints of harassment, discrimination, or retaliation up to one year after the date of the alleged incident. >> okay, colleagues, and we take this item same house, same call? without objection, the ordinances passed. madame clerk, call the next item >> item 16 is an ordinance to delegate authority under charter section 9.118 to the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission to enter into 20 year term grant agreements for the city's green infrastructure grant program, subject to certain conditions, including a july 1st, 2020 sunset date. >> great.

colleagues, can we take this item same house, sin call. >> no. >> i see someone on the roster. supervisor peskin? >> thank you. colleagues, i would like to hand out 11 copies of an amendment that i am proposing, and i will hand those to the clerk right now for all of you to review, which simply -- these are set forth, hold on one second, set forth on page number -- just so that we are clear, this is delegating authority pursuant to a charter section 9.1182 the s.f. p.u.c. general manager, which i have some reservations about, but in working with the p.u.c. and their staff, and i want to thank john, i am offering the following

amendments. on page 4, line 20, to insert a sub to. and on page 5, line three, inserting a subsection b. with a reporting requirement starting with the quarter beginning july 1st, 2019, the s.f. p.u.c. shall submit quarterly written reports to the clerk of the board summarizing all agreements the p.u.c. has entered into during the prior quarter. each grant shall be submitted no later than 30 days following the completion of the quarter that is the subject of the report, and see, a sunset date and delegation of authority provided under subsection 280 of these ordinances shall apply only to grant agreements and amendments or modifications executed before july 1st, 2020, and expire by

operation of law on july 1st, 2020, and the reporting requirements provided for under subsection two b. of this ordinance shall expire by operation of law upon submission of the quarter report covering quarter ending june 30th, 2020 i would like to make that motion , which i think is a good government motion so that all of these grant agreements are public, they go before the p.u.c. commission and are reported to the board of supervisors, because we are being asked to delegate section 9.118 authority. >> okay, there has been a motion made and seconded by supervisor ronen. any objections to the amendment? the motion passes. i don't think this is what would be considered substantive, okay, the motion is amended, colleagues, can we take this item as amended, same house,

same call? without objection, this item is passed as amended on first reading. madame clerk, please call the next item -- before we go to the next item, there is a request to rescind number 11. is there a motion to request every sentiment of item 11? is there a second? is there a second to rescind this item? supervisor mandelman. without any objection, this motion is passed. >> i would like to duplicate the file and send the item -- the duplicated file back to committee. we missed some drafting in the legislation, parallel to the public health code, so we just need to balance that out. >> okay. there is a motion to duplicate the file, and send it into committee. for the original item, let's

have a vote. can we take this item and pass it on on the first reading? without any objection -- >> finally passed. >> is a finally passed? okay. let's take this item. there is a motion to have item 11 finally passed. is there any objection? item 11 finally passes. madame clerk, let's continue to item number 17. >> i thought we did, i need to have a motion. i need to have a motion to send the duplicated file to committee

>> i made the motion. >> is there a second? okay. motion passes without any objection. item number 17. >> item 17 is an ordinance to appropriate 75 million of proceeds from the seismic safety retrofit and affordable housing loan program general obligation bond to the mayor's office of housing and community development, to implement loan programs for up -- at risk in multiunit residential buildings in need of seismic, fire, health , or safety upgrades or major rehabilitation and to convert those buildings to permit affordable housing in fiscal year 2018 through 19, into place the funds on controller's reserve pending the sale of the bond. >> okay. colleagues, can we take this same house, same call without objection? it is passed on first reading. madame clerk, please call items 18 and 19 together.

>> item 18 is a resolution to approve the fifth modification to an air train operation and maintenance airport contract, extending the contract by four months, to commence march 1st, 2019, through june 30th, 2019, and to increase the contract amount for a new total contract amount not to exceed approximately $135.4 million. item 19 is a resolution to approve the fourth modification to the capital program support services contract for the airport capital improvement program with hill international inc. to extend the term bite four years from june 30th, 2019 through november 15th, 2023, and to increase the contract by not to exceed amount of $40 million. >> okay. colleagues, can we take these items same house, same call? without objection, these resolutions are adopted. madame clerk, please call the next item. >> item 20 is a resolution to

provide for the issuance of approximately $261 million in obligation bonds authorizing the issuance and sale of said bonds to provide for the levy of a tax to pay the principal and interest thereof to provide for the establishment of accounts related thereto and to adopt the appropriate findings, as to adopt the determination. >> supervisor peskin? >> mr president, could we also read on 21? >> yes, madame clerk, can you also read item -- item number 21 >> i item 21 is a resolution to authorize the issuance and sale of $75 million in taxable general obligation bonds to prescribe the form in terms and to establish accounts, to approve the form and publication of the official notice of sale, the notice of intention to sell bonds, and to approve a form of the bond purchase contract, and

preliminary official statement, and the form and execution of the official statement relating to the sale of the said bonds, approving the form of the continuing disclosure certificate, authorizing and approving modifications to the documents and ratifying other actions previously taken as defined herein. >> supervisor peskin? >> thank you. colleagues, i just want to rise to thank the voters of san francisco for approving these bonds, not once, but twice. first in 1992 after the earthquake, it was actually legislation offered by then supervisor tom shea, and his aide, and that was money that was meant for seismic retrofits after the 1989 earthquake for a number of reasons. the vast majority of those bonds were never spent, it was a subject of discussion in my first eight years on the board from 2001 to 2009.

i came back in 2015, and the vast majority of those funds had not been expended. i want to thank my staff who actually came up with a creative theory. we went back to the voters, this monies can be used for seismic safety loan improvements, but they can now also be used for the acquisition rehabilitation of at-risk affordable housing. i want to thank the mayor's office of housing and kate hartley. i'm delighted these monies are finally going to be put to good use, and i for most want to thank the voters of san francisco. >> okay. seeing nobody else on the roster , can we take items 20 and 21 same house, same call? with no objection, these resolutions are adopted. madame clerk, please call items 22 through 24 together.

>> items 22 through 24 are three resolutions that authorize the mayor's office of housing and community development on behalf of the city to execute several grant applications under the department of housing and community development, affordable housing, and sustainable communities program is a joint applicant. item 22, with balboa park housing partners for the project at 2347 it was a -- 2347 san jose avenue. item 23, the joint applicant with turk 500 associates for the project at 500 turk street authorizing the city to assume joint and federal liability of the completion of the project required by the grant program for the term agreement, and for item 24, as a joint applicant with mercy housing california, a.c. transit or the san francisco county transportation authority for the affordable

housing project at treasure island, parcel 31, if successful , authorizing the authority to assume joint and federal liability for the completion of the project as required by the program terms, and to adopt the findings. >> okay. colleagues, can we take these items, same house same call? without objections, these resolutions are adopted. what number are we on? >> can we take -- can we have the next item because. >> item 25 is a resolution to retroactively approve a 74 million-dollar grant agreement between the department of homelessness and supportive housing, and the tenderloin housing clinic for supportive housing services for formerly homeless adults through june 30 th, 2018, retroactive authorization for the first amendment to increase the agreement amount by $7.7 million for a new amount of $82 million,

and a further retroactive authorization to approve a second amendment to extend the agreement by two years for a total contract term of july first 2014, through june 30th 2020, and to finally increase the agreement amount by $35.1 million for a new total of $117.2 million. >> okay. supervisor peskin? >> can somebody tell us why this is retroactive? this has been going on forever, so i just can't figure out why something like this would be retroactive. >> yes, please, go ahead and respond. >> good afternoon. i'm the deputy director for administration and finance for the department of homelessness and supportive housing. through the president, if you know, our department was created in august of 2016. we inherited a number of contracts with various levels of documentation and completion from the human services agency,

as well as the department of public health. this contract before you was never brought before the board by the human services agency, and was entered into contract in 2014 without your approval. our department did not catch that until we were able to do a more formal audit, and review of all of our grants, and we have taken a number of steps to ensure that this never occurs again. i'm happy to discuss what those steps are, but we are before you today, seeking your approval for the original contract, the amendment that was made within four months of the department's creation, and then the proposed second amendment, which would allow us to consider -- continue the services for the permanent supportive housing. >> supervisor peskin? >> so the 2014 contract, when it was at h.s.a., in violation of charter section 9.118, was entered into without any

approval of the legislative body is that correct? >> through the president, that is my understanding. and that is what took us a while to conclude in the documentation there was some draft resolutions , but it is in the budget and analyst report, but it sounds like it was due to administrative oversight that did not occur. >> how many other contracts are out there, if i may, through the president, to our controller, like this is one of the board of supervisors' fundamental charter responsibilities. the fact that a contract in excess of $10 million could be left without approval of the san francisco board of supervisors, is to put it mildly, deeply disturbing to this supervisor. how could that happen, what

controls are in place, are there other contracts out there -- i've never seen this before. i mean in 20 years in and out of this job, i've never seen this before. i mean this is deeply disturbing i mean, how many -- how can you as the controller certify funds when a contract has not been approved by the san francisco board of supervisors? >> supervisor his, through the president, i'm the city controller. we have some of this conversation at budget and finance committee. a couple of foundational points here, we have different controls in place, some of which are systematized -- systematized an automated in the financial systems, and then we have others that rely on institutional controls, people and procedures to prevent things, in this case, we are talking about a contract approval, fundamentally under the charter, that is not a

controller's office responsibility, but rather designated to other officers in the city. this particular control, and the $10 million or more is not one where there is a practical way to automate it. so this is a control that's always going to access through approvals and requirements that will fall to the city officers, department heads, and a certain central city authority that review and approve these. it involves, in different cases, the office of contract administration, in certain cases will involve the approval of the city attorney attorney's office, and another paths with a couple of others. we discussed at committee, and we are working on a review of those people and procedure controls to determine whether we think there are weaknesses in them that should be improved. and we committed to reporting back to the committee. we would be happy to do that to the full board at the conclusion of that, but clearly something was missed at that moment, many

years ago here on this contract. >> are there other contracts -- correct me if i'm wrong, this contract was entered into without the approval of the board of supervisors, and subsequently amended again when it already was in the new shop, which would have required approval of the board of supervisors. is that correct? >> that also should have been approved by the board of supervisors, correct. >> what is the remedy here? i mean, to me this is -- and i got it happened in 2014, and we got a new department, his i'm not pointing fingers at this one or that one, but this is the kind of thing where if a department head does this, whether it is intentional or unintentional, that person should be relieved of his or her duties. this is some serious stuff. you don't have to respond to that through the president.

>> i didn't hear the question, so i won't. >> supervisor peskin, do you have any more comments? >> i would like a roll call, i'm not going to vote for it. >> i would like to say that i would like to echo your concerns about this, and i will also not vote for this. roll call, please. [roll call] >> through the chair, if i may. >> i'm sorry, you want to speak? go ahead. >> if i may, supervisor peskin, i understand your concern. i do think it is worthwhile though to hear also from gg on the remedies that they have put into place so we can be assured that this will not happen again. would you be willing to hear that? >> absolutely.

>> we heard this extensively in budget, and we heard your concern, we hear your concern, we are also very concerned and gg provided us -- i'm sorry, but i don't know your last name, that she provided us with a very thorough explanation of the protocols that were put into place so it doesn't happen again thank you. >> through the president, thank you for the opportunity. this is a unique situation, and in my 13 years in the city and county, on my last nine years of a c.f.o. with overseeing grants and contracts, i was very concerned when this came to my attention, and immediately started an internal review. putting procedures in place, and better internal controls as a controller mentioned, it is very much upon us as city leaders to ensure we are in compliance with

all charter requirements, as well as all laws and regulations we changed two key things. we have an entirely new staff there at h.s.h., we have all new contracts, analysts, that have been trained, not only internally, but by the office of contract administration, the controller, we have been in many conversations with our partners at the deputy -- of the city attorney's office, weave a new deputy city attorney who we have worked with on better checks and controls so they have to see the approved resolution in the grant or contract pocket before they sign off, and that those signatures need to be in place before the leadership and the department signs off. we have a seasoned contract manager that has put in other systems and reporting devices in place, we have gone through an exhaustive search of ledger his drawer and the historical documentation that came over, and we are documentation -- where documentation is lacking,

we decided to do a new procurement, rather than re-create or understand what happened in the past, because it has been certainly a confusing and complicated process. the contracts and grant agreements are now flagged that over $10 million. many of our supportive contracts are already at that level, or are nearing that level so that we are planning six months and a year whether we need to wreak procure the services, or allow time to go to the board and have that oversight done. so i'm confident going forward that this won't be repeated, but i did want to be transparent as possible and explain to you what had happened and where we are today. thank you. >> supervisor walton? >> thank you president yee, i'm interested to know what happens to the project for the tenderloin housing clinic if we do not approve this agreement retroactively at this time. >> with -- miss whitney?

>> through the president, if you do not approve, we cannot continue the services at 1566 units of permanent supportive housing. i have never been in that situation. we would have to reprocure the services and that would take some time and effort, and in the meantime, i think tenants would be at risk to lose their housing , certainly the provider would be at risk for not getting compensated for the services they've been providing. >> supervisor walton, are you finished? okay. supervisor peskin? >> if i may, i would like to ask a question of the clerk of the board of supervisors, department number 1 of the city and county of san francisco, as to what internal controls are department has in place. >> through the president, several years ago, we begin adding a whereas or therefore

results clause to assist the departments in locating their finely executed documents that they would then provide our office a copy of all executed contracts, i believe 30 days after they have finally signed them and executed them. we have been receiving some contracts based upon that result clause. so it is a stopgap. it will assist. i'm not sure we are receiving all contracts from all the departments, executed contracts. >> mr president, colleagues, i don't -- obviously these are important services, to me, this is tantamount to a constitutional crisis, and i want to send a message back not only to this department, but to every department in the city, i mean, we give grants to nonprofits, and we make sure that those nonprofits have internal controls in place, that

their executive director can't sign a, over a certain amount money without a member of the board signing it, the nonprofit that i worked for for many years limited liability as executive director without direct approvals by my board. that is what this function of government is, and to know that there's a contract out there -- i mean, we are not talking about a few bucks. this is $117 million, and it has been going on for half a decade. i feel like i have no choice but to send a message to all the departments. it's not something that i'm doing capriciously, but at any right -- but at any rate, i want to thank you for actually coming and being transparent and having recognized it, even though it was done once by your department , and once by a previous departments. i would love to have trent come here as the head of h.s.a., and

explain how this happened in 2014 under his watch, but it is unconscionable, it is pretty heavy duty, so with that, i will be voting no, i just have to do that. >> okay, any other comments on this item? [roll call] >> so the resolution is adopted.

with a vote of eight-5 -- 8-3. please call the next item. >> item 26 is a resolution to approve the controller's office of public finance data management policy and procedures to manage the debt issuance process, and determine other matters in connection therein as defined. >> okay, supervisor peskin? >> that was from the previous item. >> colleagues, any comments? no comments. madam clerk, roll call on this item, please. [roll call]

>> okay, this ordinance is passed on first reading unanimously. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> twenty-seven is a resolution to retroactively authorize the department of public health to accept and expand an approximate $147,000 grant increase for a new total amount of $554,000 from the california department of public health to participate in a program entitled court ftd program management through june 30th, 2019. >> colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, it is adopted please call the next item. >> item 28 is an ordinance to amend the planning code to change the zoning controls for a nonretail sales and service uses in the seat three are downtown

retail zoning district to amend the planning and administrative codes to create the union square park recreation and open space fund and fee, and to affirm the determination, and to make the appropriate findings. >> okay. colleagues, can we take this item, same house, same call? without objection, this resolution is adopted. >> please call the next item. >> yeah, it is 239 p.m. we will go to our 230 p.m. commendations. madam clerk, i believe -- we have two. supervisor haney and supervisor mar. >> supervisor haney? >> it is my pleasure to present a commendation to the equity centre.

it was formerly known as a veteran's equity centre is a nonprofit organization located in the south of market. they have serve the community for the last 20 years. during the early years, they focused on assisting filipino world war ii veterans and their families. they helped people like ernesto single, a first sergeant of the united states army. he led a group of 72 soldiers and saved many lives during the war. when he emigrated to san francisco from the philippines in 1999, he had no income and no home. with the help of the v. you see, he could get services immediately. they help -- found him a home, got him medical benefits, and assisted him financially to help them get on his feet. most importantly, they welcomed him with open arms. it was a place where he could socialize with other veterans, a place where he could share a meal with other people in the south of market, and a safe place where he belonged.

the equity centre has expanded its services to include low-income seniors, families, people with disabilities, immigrants, lgbtq, formerly incarcerated, and homeless individuals. basis these groups their case management, counselling, free legal clinics, health services, and affordable housing. i have the pleasure of celebrating his truck -- the 20 th anniversary last week, along with supervisor safai who was there. they are a community, they are a family. when one person in the family is not feeling supported or loved, they are there for them. sometimes at their most difficult moments. i want to commend the advocacy of the executive director luis antonio, and her staff, as well as the board of directors, past and present.

their hard work resulted in many wins for the veterans, including advocacy on the national level, but the most recent national win was in december, 2016, when they were voted sponsor 46 out of 53 congressional representatives, which insured the passage of the congressional gold medal legislation for the filipino veterans. this commendation is well-deserved, and i know that they will continue to thrive and excel for another 20 years. it is my pleasure to present this commendation. i would like to call up the executive director luisa antonio to accept this award on behalf of the group. [applause] >> commendation three, the board of supervisors of the city and county of san francisco hereby -- commend the equity centre for 20 years of public service, for veterans, seniors, family and the filipino community. we recognize your exemplary service in pursuing justice and

fighting for the rights of immigrants and marginalized members of our communities. [applause]

>> okay, thank you very much. i believe supervisor mar has a commendation. you are up. >> thank you. colleagues, i am really excited. today is my first commendation as a district four supervisor, to be recognizing geraldine dorman who recently retired as branch librarian at the parkside library, and has personally touched the life of my family and countless others in the sunset district, and in many other neighborhoods of the city. when my daughter was a child, we would bring her to the parkside library for children's storytime , and always were welcomed with a warm smile, with tunes from a guitar, and of course, with stories. for our family, and again for countless others in the sunset district in the city, having a it nearby enrichment activities that are at the local library

was incredibly invaluable. and joined by the san francisco public library in 2001 as an on-call library and. she served as children's services librarian at western edition and north beach bouncers because of proactive work, revitalizing the children's area at north beach, her former supervisor remarked that i have never worked with a better children's librarian. in 2011, she was promoted to the parkside branch as branch manager where she continue to serve with great leadership, professionalism, and empathy. she continued to successfully encourage patrons to become a lifelong library users, including my daughter, and she provided mentorship to her team and colleagues across the library system, encouraging them to find value and meeting in the little ways that they help

individual members of their communities every single day. the notion -- this notion reflects a remarkable career of an, and what she has built for herself, developing an english conversation group, facilitating a monthly craft program, delivering library materials to seniors and people with disabilities, and supporting activities like movies right next door to the parkside branch , even getting cracks in the ceiling fixed. in the words of her former manager, and has contributed much more to the system that we would need to many more pages to encapsulate all of it. thank you for your enthusiasm, for your dedication, and for touching the lives of the so many people in big ways and small and for teaching my daughter and many others to enjoy reading, and ensuring -- showing her there's a community to support her learning and

growth. our neighborhood and our city owe you a great debt of gratitude. thank you so much. i will just read the text on our certificate of honor. the board of supervisors command geraldine and dortmund in recognition of her 18 years of service to san francisco's many communities. we have followed her dedication. she has developed a unique programs or people of all ages and is best known for providing musical storytime to children. she has been an effective leader as a branch manager, inc. -- and acting district manager pick the board of supervisors is pleased to extend their highest commendation and honor to her. thank you. [applause] >> would you like to say anything?

>> thank you it is an honor to be here today and receive this commendation. like many of you, the library conjures up a positive child lumped -- memories for me. it was a place of refuge. i could nurture my imagination. i could say that the library helps me to sow seeds of curiosity and empathy. when i first became a librarian in 1996, i realized my job was much more than an information specialist. on any given day, i have played

the role of a mother, a teacher, a security guard, a custodian, an engineer, a community it just computer technician, and a social worker. but my most cherished role is being a connector. connecting people to books and other materials, to services, to programs, and to each other. one of the gift gifts of being a public librarian is the opportunity to interact with a very broad spectrum of humanity, and in order to best serve someone, to connect them with what they want or need to, i need to be both curious and empathic. here is what connecting looks like on any given day at parkside library. the seniors who learn how to use e-mail from the teen volunteers so she can stay in touch with her family.

the person experiencing homelessness who gets respite by playing chess on the public computer, the expression of pride and excitement when a child gets his first library card, the new parent who meets other new parents at a weekly storytime, at the socially anxious person who breaks her isolation by attending monthly craft programs. the look of relief on a patron's face when he realizes staff at the library speak his first language. this is just a tiny fraction of the impact i have been fortunate to witness in my career. i want to thank the parkside community for the opportunity to serve you. the parkside staff for whose teamwork embodies service excellence, and to the visionary leaders at the san francisco public library. it has been a privilege of a lifetime to work for an

institution that's simply put, improves people's out lives by making connections in both large and small ways. thank you again for this honor. >> thank you, congratulations. [applause] >> okay. why don't we continue to our next item, item number 29. >> item 29 is a resolution to determine that the transfer of a type 21 off sale general beer, wine, and distilled spirits liquor license to garfield beach , c.v.s. l.l.c., doing businesses c.v.s. pharmacy, located at 500 pine street, will not serve the public convenience or necessity of the city, and requesting the california department of alcoholic beverage control deny the issuance of this license. >> is this a different house. rollcall, please. >> on item 29... [roll call]

>> this resolution is adopted. madam clerk, please call item number 30. >> item 30 is a resolution determining that the issuance of a type 42 on sale beer and wine public premises liquor license to a business doing businesses a museum of ice cream located at one grant avenue will not serve the public convenience or necessity of the city, and

requesting the california department of alcoholic beverage control deny the issuance of this license. >> supervisor peskin? >> thank you. colleagues, we had a very strange meeting last week, i'm sorry, earlier this week. it all blends together. in a rarity, we actually recommended three out of the four liquor licenses that were before the committee for disapproval. it is further complicated by the fact that the board has a limited time within which to act , which instantly -- interestingly enough, with all of these items, it has already passed. they were not scheduled timely, and so as i understand it, the a.b.c., which is a state agency, will take our advice, but at this point, it is technically advice.

had we rendered it within the 90 day period, they would i think be required to deny the license. i'm looking through the chair -- former chairman andelman, maybe i got that wrong. >> i think it's advisory, no matter what. >> maybe through the president, deputy city attorney, it is my understanding that if, in a public convenience and necessity hearing within the 90 day period , the board of supervisors does not find public convenience and necessity, the a.b.c. will not, and cannot issue. is that correct? >> that is correct. there was another item on the psn calendar where the 90 days had already passed, and in that situation, that may have been this c.v.s. liquor license. >> actually, it is all up to them. so the item that we all voted just now to say, it will not

serve the public convenience and necessity. so in item number 30, which is the item before us, we also recommended, and when it is before you -- what is before us today, it will not serve public convenience and necessity. so the applicant -- the museum of ice cream, which did not reach out to the district supervisor prior to the meeting, has met with my office. i unfortunately was not able to meet, but they did meet with my chief of staff. interestingly enough, today we got -- although it is undated, which is kind of weird, a letter asking for us to continue this to a future date. we can't really do that, into a reason we can't do that is because then the a.b.c. can issue. what i would like to suggest to the applicant is that because of

this weird timing that we are in , is that they withdraw, because we cannot -- right now what is actually before the a.b.c., and this is one grant avenue, everyone is midmarket, is a nine a.m. liquor license, which they admitted was pretty goofy, so what i think we should do is vote this item up today, which is it will not serve the public convenience and necessity , encourage the applicant to withdraw, but we've already lost jurisdiction, and if we continue this further, we will totally lose any of the notes we have over the a.b.c. i'm trying to work it out with the applicant, but i think we have no choice, or i would recommend that we have no choice but to vote in favor of item 30 as worded with recommendation by the committee last week. >> so supervisor ronen?

>> i have a question through the chair to chair mandelman. especially now that i'm no longer going to be serving on the board, i am wondering how the scheduling happened. is it that we are not getting the items in time to schedule, then a committee to have enough time and have an influence over the process, or was it just that the committee was backed up, what happened here? >> mr president? >> through the president, in response, after that meeting, we had some conversations with the clerk of that committee to better understand what the process is, and typically he will not schedule items for us to hear until he has received all of the background information from planning staff,

or the alu that we need to have a complete record for us. that is apparently routinely -- not routinely but sometimes taking longer than the 90 days. and what our office will do, which we will not be doing is we will see those timelines earlier , and he is doing an excellent job of calling and prodding departments to get stuff to a sooner, but it may help to have a call from a supervisor from the chair of the committee's office to encourage folks to get that to us earlier. my understanding is that his belief is that this state tends to listen to our advice, even as it -- and i was actually honestly not aware there was this difference, a real difference in how the state would -- the state would deal with our determination before and after that 90 days. given that, i think it is even more important that we try to get those within the 90 day

deadline. >> okay. through the chair, i do think it's important that we get this right, because why have the process at all if we are missing the deadlines and then can't have any input? it is short -- it is sort of a charade and that does not make us look very good. so if we don't have what we need from the department, it does seem like we should have the hearing, and do what we need to do, because that is not on the board of supervisors, and then maybe departments will prioritize this accordingly when they need to. so that is just my two cents there. i have some hesitation on this item, you know, at committee, supervisor peskin said he didn't understand why they needed to serve wine at a family museum, and i explained that as a parent of a 6-year-old, it's very hard to find places where your child

can play and have fun, and you get to relax as a parent and have a glass of wine, so i couldn't agree with him on that point, however, out of deference for the district supervisor who i think has the best read on their district and what's appropriate, and what's not appropriate, especially in the context of a liquor license, i will defer to supervisor peskin on this one. i do hope that the museum of ice cream does withdraw the request, and starts over from the get-go and meets with a supervisor's office so we can get this right next time around. [please stand by]