two previous comments of president hirsch. first, sitting here as you're going through it, i thank you for thoughtful and competent presentation, but you know, you're asking us to sign off on a $600 million budget with a very nice power point and -- is there a way we can do this where perhaps a group of commissioners can be part of the process before the meeting so they can have real input and feedback? and we can, as you -- the same exact thought came to my mind. i thought we're put in the position, we don't have a choice because of deadlines, but to rubber stamp something and i don't believe we're doing our duty as commissioners if we're acting simply as rubber stamps. is there a way do that next year? >> absolutely, yeah.

we start back in december in the departmental phase, collecting information and starting the process, so certainly -- >> perhaps president hirsch can speak with you and set up a group so we won't have this issue next year. the commission budget does come out of this? >> yeah, all of the -- anything that the commission wishes to request does come out of our budget and i think, you know, generally any request that has come to me, we've -- i don't getmy requests from the commission. >> is there discretionary funds available for the issues? other police commissions will send their commissioners for training. >> yeah, there are funds available, discretionary funds

available to the department as a whole and we would certainly, as we those requests come in, work a way to make sure those funds -- >> but if we were interested next year, perhaps we could have segregated funds for the commission. >> that is a request we could talk about in december, yeah. >> i want to let the other commissioners know, this is the first folly in many. when we submit this, it's the largest possible number and what happens with this, we will go -- i've gone to the budget committee before and the full board of supervisors and a lot of different things happen with the numbers we request. so these numbers are aspirational, i would imagine. we'd like to get as much as we can, but the reality is, once this runs through the budget committee, through the full board of supervisors and the negotiations with the mayor's office, last year i remember having multiple conversations with the chief over many of the

issues. with one supervisor suddenly saying no cars whatsoever. and our cars are falling apart. then bring it back to half the cars we asked for. so this is just like step one. and just so you know, whatever we approve tonight is not what it will look like at the end of the day. >> the only issue, though, even with step one we owe a duty to the city to understand it.

one position specifically. then i think what we did was we

went back to look at the actuals for what you requested. it is about $10,000. i would have to go look at that again. yeah, again, you know, come talk to me, please. >> it sounds like we will. i appreciate it. thank you very much. we need a vote. is that what we are asked for? >> a motion and second. >> the timeframe is 21st? >> that's correct. entries have to be complete by the 19th, no later than. >> we don't have the ability to put it off. i would entertain a motion. i would like any commissioner who between now and the 19 or 20th has thought of additional issues or comments they be free to contact you and the comments will be incorporated in whatever you do with the mayor's office.

>> my e-mail is on the slide. >> is there a motion to approve this initial budget. >> so moved. >> second. all in favor. aye. >> any opposed. no opposed. it carries. >> we need public comment. >> before the vote? >> now you tell me. any public comment on the budget? no public comment do we revote? >> yes. >> we have the motion. all in favor of the motion. any opposed. now it passes. >> thank you, commissioners. >> next item. >> this is item 4. discussion and possible action to approve issuance of department bulletin modifies

order 11.01. personnel compensation reissue of 17. action. >> who is taking the lead on this? >> i am. this department bulletin does demand a general order. the commissioner has given us guidance that any bulletin that amended go should be reviewed by the commission. this is a very, very minor amendment. the initial department bulletin adjusted the overtime reportings from half an hour to 15 minutes. we also added language under be restructure of department that commanders and executive director can also approve over time highlighted in blue at the very end of the department bulletin.

is this up for approval? >> yes. >> any questions? commissioner elias. >> can you tell me why it is now changed to the division commander rather than the commanding officer or deputy chief? is that a lower ranking officer to approve the overtime? >> lowe her ranking -- lower ranking officer in command staff. >> wouldn't that leave more room for discrepancies in overtime between different sort of divisions and departments? >> no, it would put the commanders more in tune with the overseeing the over time, approval of the budget communicating with the budget so captains communicate directly and could understand what the thought process was when the captains were requesting and

reviewing the overtime versus the ansis tent chief who don't have the direct communication was the captains at the station levels. >> this would allow the command staff to have greater authority to approve over time without having to declare it with their super-yours? >> no, it just give the commander who oversees the station to have that communication with the captain. currently the way it is, the captains have to go to commander and deputy chiefs. deputy chiefs are out doing policy revisions, meetings where the captains are communicating with commanders. it is eliminating -- how would i say it? a layer of extra communication where at times they can't be communicate directly with the chief because of whatever meetings they are in. they need to streamline it more.

>> it shall be approved by the commander rather than the deputy chiefs. correct. >> it is just with the new structure the way chief scott reorganized the department we center assistant and deputy chief and it is more in line with having the womanders oversee the divisions give the approval process rather than the deputy chief with the new restruck turring. >> i have the return about the overtime and numbers. >> i share that concern. i think what this does is give more oversight in the overtime. now you have the division commanders over each station. the overtime that we have been monitoring with the new reporting and how we have been tracking it actually i think has been paying dividends. we have dropped the overtime usage. >> i guess it doesn't outline in this the oversight of the division commanders approving

the over time. i think that is a little problematic. as we know, commanders and captains at stations rotate out. it is upsetting to the community. i think it would be subjective and we wouldn't have a streamlined process because of the movement. >> i want to be clear. the overtime that needs to be approved is over time four. that is miscellaneous. what we are talking about is when you have a community meeting or administrative action, not larger events or operations. all of those have to go up to the deputy chiefs,sistent chiefs for review prior to approval. we are talking about over time category four. when we have chinese new years or demonstration coming up, we try to anticipate what staffings

needs are going to be required to factor in if there is going to be over time if we are going to use on duty resources, that goes up to the top. the chief is included in the discussions as well. >> proof is in the pudding. this is all monitored. vice president taylor. >> commissioner taylor: can you tell us what problems this is solving? what were the issues that precipitated these changes to the djo and what went into the analysis in determining the division commander was better than the bureau commanding officer? >> the borough deputy chief temperature doesn't directly communicate with the captains. you have the chain of command. each division will follow the chief of command. the captains report to

commanders. commanders look at the request to determine whether over time four should be approved. it is an administrative request for say like captain wants a staff meeting at the station. in order to have the staff meeting you want to bring in as many lieutenants and sergeants as possible rather than trying to meet with all three shifts. when they are not working together you try to bring them in earlier to overlap shifts that is what we are talking about. they are not approving hundreds of hours of overtime. we are talking about one district station maybe 25 hours over time. >> has there been a particular problem with the overtime that necessary teated this change? i am trying to get the background as to why this segment of the djo was changed and it wouldn't affect any other

djo regarding over time. were there issues here that you are addressing with this? >> no it is to streamline the process to follow the chain of command. >> thank you. we need a vote on this, is that correct? >> you need a motion, second and public comment. >> motion to approve? >> i move to approve. >> second. >> public comment on this time item? come on up. it looks like you brought flowers for the commissioner and we appreciate that. come on up to the microphone, please. >> good evening. you don't have a nametag so i

will call you chief if that will work. >> identify yourself. >> hector. i am bad with names. we should have nicknames. i can't think of one. robert hersh. commissioners thank you. i will not trier to learn everybody's name. this is a long time since i have been to a police commission meeting. i am a former -- retiree of the san francisco city and county assessors office. i was only there for a little over five years so i get a small pension about $250. i am a native from san francisco. i went to woodrow wilson high school. i am a wilson warrior. i was two classes short of a

high school diploma. they could have been study halls. in 1968 i was up at a hippie ranch and it was warm and the sun was shining. i didn't want to come and climb the hill every morning. >> this is very interesting. this is not general comment yet. we are asking for comments on this particular proposal. >> what i am interested in specking about is compensation, developing a compensation plan for officers so when there is a manhunt like for the doodler. there is more incentive for officers to be involved in the apprehension. >> i will ask you to wait for the general comment period. we are not on over time, right? >> yes. >> you want to comment on over time? >> yes. >> have at it. >> an officer working over time being involved in a manhunt is like over time.

you are putting in extra effort. officers are warriors. they will do what they are doing based on a commitment, and they will do it. i grew up on kobe street. my best friend was bobby evangelist take. misthoughtthemiss -- his mothert speak english. she would say como. anyway, over time. >> do you have anything on over time? >> over time? >> putting your energy into a manhunt is over time. that should be compensated.

>> and it is. >> it isn't not when $100,000 goes to the guy that called it in and the police department puts the call on him and they get 100 grand. in the doodler case if i get the caller i would tell every officer i meet we will do 50/50. i will keep my 50% and give you 50% or i keep my 50% and 50%. >> sir, thank you. your time is up. thank you very much. your time is up. any other public comment on this particular item? okay. now we can have the vote. all in favor of approving this proposal monitoring over time. aye. >> one opposition. it passes. next item. >> this is item 5. discussion and possible action

to adopt revised deputy general order 3.09 or take action if necessary discussion and possible action. >> thi this is the the deputy gl order i have been working on. we brought it back to you. i want you to know there is a lot of work put into this. i talked about earlier we actually sat down with all involved parties in the same room and reached agreement on the general order. we had the dpa and poa and police department in the room. the sergeant was in the room. what we tried to do and accomplished through an agreement is to ensure that there is a level of accountability with reference to the dpa being advised regarding who the award recipients are. the department as you see the

awards are a special part of what the san francisco police department do. we as commission approve the awards. we want to ensure that the officers forgetting the awards are not part of an investigation, are not under investigation, if it is criminal or with the dpa or police department. we are worked out an agreement where the dpa would put on notice. there was concerns if they take too long to do this we use the value if they come three or four years down the road. there is a timeframe that is comfortable where everybody will have the investigations completed by a particular time and the awards go forward. if the officer is not charged or under investigation. we put this together. it was a lot of work. you see what is on here tonight. it is a product of an agreement

between the parties. >> commie comment director henderson -- any comment director henderson. >> i do have concerns. i am looking at this, and we have approved awards then we found out officers are part of a civil case or in federal court and stuff like that. section g shall certify the members shall have no pending felony case. he should have no criminal case. i don't understand why we make a difference between misdemeanor and felony. there should be no pending cases. i am concerned about civil litigation. if it is officer-involved shootings and there are accusations. that happened last time.

they were in the middle of a civil case. we should know about that. the commission should know about that. we may have pause before we grant that. i notice you left out the district attorney investigation. if there is an officer still investigated by the district attorney for officer-involved shootings, you know, we should know about that. we should know about that. we may choose not to put that thing forward. then i was looking at the dpa. i was wondering what their role was. they will consult with the chief of police. it doesn't say they will check. page 6 number three upon certifying the list shall provide names to the dpa and consult with the chief in 30-days. it doesn't say they have the right -- they are going to check and investigate the officers for pending cases the civil district attorney or anything like that. i know it is a lot of work.

i am flat you put the cit in there. i am concerned about an award and finding out they are in the middle of a civil trial or pending cases. maybe someone can talk about that. i mean we should know. before we make a decision before the press gets it the next day that we are all there. >> we shall go through them one by one. you raise some valid points. >> let's do this. do you have a response? >> doctor henderson can address the dpa. >> we went back and forth. it is not a possible investigation. that is why we changed the language to a shall. the onus is on the dpa to disclose and present the information that we have to the chief so he has it. >> was i looking at the wrong

section? >> section 3. >> the dpa shal shall consult. >> turn over any information we have about the officers once it is provided to us. i didn't want it to be discretionary if there was something that got turned over. >> i can see this two years down the road. some of us aren't here and the dpa brings up officer a and b. they say that is not your role you are to consult with the department. that is vague and ambiguous. if you have a role research the names. i don't know. i have a problem with the word consult. you don't have the right to tell them anything. >> i appreciate that. how i interpreted consults there is no other interpretation.

the issue that i added and negotiated for was the shall so it would not be ambiguous and would not be a possibility. >> director henderson. as much faith as we have in you, you are not going to be here forever. the next director if it falls into hands we don't be have the same confidence. consult doesn't mean anything. they could say we need more, great, good-bye. >> i don't care about the interpretation. in my mind that is what consult meant. there is no other thing to consult about other than problems i or the agency would have. what else would we consult about. >> if there is an open or pending investigation that would be more precise. >> or consulting regarding

section g. >> it says regarding the nominating members. >> regarding what? >> nominated members. >> in particular with reference to section g which is open cases. the area the chief is going to review, whether they have a felony case, anything pending with the internal affairs, dpa, so when you say you shall consult, you shall consult with, you know, regarding g, and b. >> that is what i interpreted consult to mean. we didn't specify it there. like i said. i hadn't anticipated consult to be anything other than a full report from my agency. >> a lot of this is covered in g. the assistant chief participated in this, too. >> to address one of the

questions. no pending felony criminal cases we are talking about the officer-involved shooting investigation, that would cover that section. >> the officer involved shooting is a felony investigation. >> it doesn't say. it has no felony pending criminal cases. >> the question was different. >> hang on. it is okay to jump to felony. you got the answer if it is satisfactory or not on the word consulting. i it may not make sense to us. we are moving to the felony case pending. isn't a felony case a case in court or does it mean something else? >> it means a case. >> i just don't what did you folks mean? what were you thinking?

>> felony criminal case the way we were discussing meant anything felony criminal investigation. >> not necessarily charges, a pending investigation. we are definitely not going to the significant case, a felony that the officer is undergoing. >> would it make more sense to have terms pending felony investigation as opposed to a felony case? >> felonies? >> criminal. why is the felony? >> we will get to that in a second. that is part two of the question. >> what if it is a misdemeanor, bias, someone being charged with bias or something? i don't know. or misdemeanor battery? can we say civil or criminal cases instead of felony? >> one issue at a time. let's deal with felony first

cases, then deal with civil versus criminal. i agree with the commissioner if an officer had a pending misdemeanor, a violent criminal case and be there are circumstances, you know under which you may not want to give that officer a medal until it is resolved. felony versus misdemeanor, i get that point. i think that there is value to actually delineating the investigation. investigation means different than a charged case. those would be my notes. people get involved in all kinds of civil suits that have nothing to do with the commission's business. i don't feel strongly about an open civil case. people s sue each other for all sorts of reasons.

>> people have sued in federal court. >> officers who are active. >> this is related to. >> a lot of civil cases. a landlord tenant dispute. >> doesn't sound like this is ripe for approval right now. >> no. >> i have a few issues, too. >> i want to ask how do you think it would be best to proceed? >> this is a lot of disagreement here. somewhat we have had are the parties involved. the commission has to approve it. we have been going back and forth on the language about pending criminal case, investigation, misdemeanor or felony. we spent a lot of time and effort in this. commissioners have concerned.

the last thing to do is pass something people are concerned about. i also know that there is, you know, part of this is that these awards technically belong to the police department. we want to make sure. a lot of what was said to prevent what happened during the meetings talk about the commissioner's concerns what we have seen on the commission. we thought it was a good product. people think there is an issue so i think we should take it off calendar tonight. i do want input from people. i wasted a lot of time and effort. there are people reaching out to folk on the commission saying they are not happy with the deputy general order. i need transparent. we will get this done right. that would be my suggestion we put this over. i would like to get input. >> let's agree on a timeframe.

>> next week another too soon. >> it will be squeaks. week weeks. >> a timeframe to get back. it is going to take meetings, i think. >> anything additional we should raise to flag it. >> i do. my issue is with respect to section 4 talking about the police commission when this item comes before the police commission for approval page 6. it is important for us to know the outstanding issues before we approve these hours. the last situation we were in we approved these medals. we had no idea certain officers on the list were being accused in court of lying or other instances of sort of you know

misconduct that would be important for us to know. that probably should be addressed in section h as well. >> the last time we did this, the list was vetted with the dpa and through all of the normal sources. there was no officers on that list with anything pending. if there was an issue a few officers were removed from the list given the commission. i want to make that perfectly clear. >> i ask any commissioner who does have comments would like to make modifications or suggestions do so by the end of this month, by the end of february get the comments to commissioner mizzouco. >> i will ask one other commissioner join me for the next and last meeting. >> i would love to. >> commission elias. >> my comments are the felony

and criminal cases. i think if we said had no pending criminal cases or investigations i would have no problem with this. >> i ask you do this in writing by e-mail or somehow so commissioner mizzouco can deal. >> okay. we are going to table this item. do we need public comment on that item? >> yes. >> public comment on this item. >> i agree that just removing the word felony is important. i think you have done a lot of work. it was not a waste of time. it was a lot of effort. this might just take revisions around edited to be good. i appreciate that. i think the civil cases.

there wouldn't be any civil case that would apply to the conduct as police officers unless it was so egregious. thank you for your hard work, commissioner mazzucco. >> any other comments on this item? public comment is closed. next item. >> item six discussion for 11.10 physical fitness evaluation program for purposes of engaging in the meet and confer process with the police officers association discussion and possible action. >> i am here regarding the physical fitness evaluation program. what you are seeing in front of you is cleanup language from the old order last revised in 1997. some of the highlights of note with this.

it does contain some language on the first page regarding ada accommodations and anyone that is wishing to participate that has a temporary modified duty. that is clear to the department position. another highlight of this would be the section c on page 3 which really defines the blood pressure measurement which was not defined in the previous versions of the general order. it not only gives the measurement but talks about the procedure if somebody hits those thresholds. the follow-up procedure for coming back to duty and participating in the test. then finally, it really consolidated everything that was in the previous physical fitness

guide that was written in 1993 and was based upon physical fitness standards used in 1981 and 1986. there has been a lot of changes in physical fitness since then. open to questions. >> thank you. any questions? >> just briefly. this is a new commissioner question. why is this an encouragement as opposed to requirement that they maintain this degree of physical fitness? >> it is a requirement to participate in the actual test, the physical fitness test. on 1b it talks about participation. when this program initially wasn't acted, it basically set grandfathered everybody in prior to july 1, 1994, the test was

optional. everybody after that mandatory test for everybody from the rank of officer to captain. >> okay. thank you. minor clarification. thank you. >> we are looking for a motion to approve. >> so moved. >> on the question we need public comment. any public comment on the physical fitness evaluation program. >> all right then i will call for a vote. all in favor of approving this general order as modified. any opposed? it is passed. next eye stem. >> we have a tem8 general public comment. the public is welcome to address the commission regarding items

that do not appear on tonight's agenda. speaker shall address to the commission as a hole. under the rules of order neither police or dpa personnel or commissioners are required to respond to questions but may provide a brief respond. individual commissioners should refrain from entering any debates or discussion with speakers during public comment. please limit comments to three minutes. >> i am the david good man, son of ben good man a stea a steal r and organizer in the 1930. son of the opera star in the 190s in chicago. neath nephew of sa sam good mane chicago kid.

i live in the boardman care home for taking care of older adults. it is called golden residential care home owned by antoine who calls herself nina. these are filipino people. my father when he was in the last days was cared for -- forgetting about that. instead of treating the residents who are all kind gentle souls with kindness and love, the care taker, libda, use -- linda uses fear and intimidation. egregious is chasing residents around with butcher knives and knives. one resident. jeffrey she went in a stabbing motion and was able to get within two or three inches of

his stomach. he thought he was being stabbed. i guess she is good enough in her control of weapons to make it appear she is stabbing someone. he developed a an aneurysm. it is in the same spot as the thrust. another resident was struck with a butcher knife on the leg. jeffrey witnessed that, and i called the police and reported it as an assault with a deadly weapon. two officers came from the station and did a very good job. i commend them. they were able to interview. these are hard to -- a lot of people cannot come out very well to express themselves. jeffrey can. they were age option able to

elicit the witness testimony to jeffrey saw linda strike the man. i am hoping the commission will see right now the question is is that an assault with a deadly weapon or brandishing? it goes beyond brandishing. it is assault with a deadly weapon when you talk about a butcher knife. i encourage the commissioners. it is in special investigations i called in to check. i think it is in special investigations. i would like to see that woman arrested and charged. >> thank you, sir. >> former commissioner salinas. >> i am a native san francisco i have passed the half century mark here.

commissioners, you grew up in a gang infested neighborhood. i hung around the gardens and i kid you not. i knew about every gang member in the city. our culture was never ours to establish lines of communication or dialogue, at least respectful lines of communication and dialogue. you slapped somebody up the side of the head the hardest. he had slapped the hardest gained attention and respect. that is how you conducted accident on the streets. we are not on the streets any more. commissioners, you have been given the privilege and honor of serving on one of the most prestigious panels in the city and county of san francisco. you have the ability to affect thousands of brothers and sisters in the black and brown community in the best possible way.

i was a deeply disturbed and disappointed what i read in the periodical last week. there are intelligent, mature professionals on this panel. you have been given the privilege and honor of doing what most people would say i want to give something back to the city. as volunteer citizens. i was deeply disappointed you couldn't set aside the politics and political ragging, the power play to, you know, establish who is going to do what and maintain what title here. you have the title of san francisco police commissioner. that should suffice. it undermines the credibility of this panel, undermines the trust and confidence in all of you when you guys can't conduct business. when you can't get along.

how are we to put our faith and trust in you if you can't get along yourself? i was deeply saddened. i think that, you know, you could do much better. i am heartened by what commissioner said and you are all establishing those lines of communication again and building those relationships. they affect all of us. there is something to be said for decorum. that is a homeboy telling you that. nice seeing all of you. thank you very much. >> any further public comment? >> good evening, i am a resident of district five. it is nice to see you. i don't know your title or

assistant chief. i am here tonight because i shot chief scott would be here. i i want to thank chief scott for two years of service. he is an effective leader. long overdue for testifying for specific incidents. my work site is near valencia. there was a loud man. i made it a point to observe the police interaction. they did not abuse authority. it ended well. a few weeks later i watched the police officers handle a homeless man who was not all the way there. one of the officers recognized me and i did praise them and thank them. i want to give the positive feedback. it is not always positive. a few weeks later at 15th and mission there was a black man on the ground loudly complaining. i stood witness. at first the officers were not happy i was there.

i stood my ground. when i saw they were not hurting him i was relieved. they explained he was running in and out of traffic and they were worried about his safety. >> another officer that was white seemed well trained on working with those in color. i do want to say the homeless sweeps disturb me. i am objecting to homeless people having tents taken from them in the rain. finally i want to say i am pleased with captaineningler at the northern station. i got grabbed into my neighbor's e-mail threats. there is a wrong man. -- young man. i forwarded the threads.

the captain is responsive and gracious. i felt like my neighbors were acting as our problems were his only concern. when i told him i was disappointed. he said that is what he was there for. he is doing a great job at northern station. they were pressing him to question all black men in hoodies in the fillmore. he replied his officers are trained to not raytially profile -- rashtially profile the black men. it is not only wrong but it needs to stop. i want to relay my comments tonight. thank you. >> good evening.

i wanted to show a picture of you guys at the event. the spd. it is not on. >> please start the clock. let me see if i can find it. i am going to keep going. that is derek brown that did everything. i want to get to the picture.

those are the kids. wait a minute. okay. you guys are there. i was proud to see you guys up there. what i am trying to say also i was disappointed last week about how everybody walked out in the whole thing. it embarrassed me not only that i was speaking about you know the division that is happening up here, and what do we have coming as the people? what do i have coming as a person that comes here every wednesday? this is the first time in 13 or 12 years i have seen this happening. people walk off the panel so what do we have coming as the public as we see stuff like this? just like he says, where is the

trust at? we are like the community out there. law enforcement against the community. there is no trust. i am worried about that. i am going to go back to why i am here all of the time. my son was murdered august 14, 2006 to this date still no justice. i have been asking for a venue for my son. po, the police association did it before. i am asking for a venue so i don't have to climb up on a poll to put something up for the perpetrators to say where were you when i was murdered? i brought this picture of this young man last time. this is the young man that murdered my son and bragged about it. thomas han hannibal.

these are on the fifth floor in the investigating room. that is how the names came about. i wanted you to see a picture what he looks like now. that is just one of them. i bring you this picture because we don't want to make an uproar. we talk about police killings and back on black crime. we do more about police killings than black-on-black crime. what do we do about that? i want the same justice, same uproar about police killings about community violence. i am asking for your help. i have been asking for your help for the last 12 years. help me. >> thank you. the tip line is (415)575-4444. we say that every week. we have said it for years. we hope for somebody to one day come forward. thank you.

no further public comment. public comment is closed. next item. >> item 9 public comment on all matters to item 11 below including on item 10 vote whether to hold item 11 in closed session. >> any public comment on closed session. >> item 10 vote on whether to hold item 11 in closed session including vote on whether or not to assert the attorney client privilege with regard to item 11:00 a.m. san francisco administrative code 67.10. >> so moved. >> commissioner back on the record in open session and you

still have a quorum. >> is there anything left other than adjournment. >> vote to elect when to discloe closed session. >> i have a motion. >> move. >> is there a second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> the motion carried. >> can i have a motion to adjourn. >> yes. >> so moved. >> all in favor. aye. women's network for a

sustainable future . for a >> san francisco streets and

puffs make up 25 percent of cities e city's land area more than all the parks combined they're far two wide and have large flight area the pavement to parks is to test the variants by ininexpensive changing did new open spaces the city made up of streets in you think about the potential of having this space for a purpose it is demands for the best for bikes and families to gather. >> through a collaborative effort with the department we the public works and the municipal transportation agency pavement to parks is bringing initiative ideas to our streets. >> so the face of the street is the core of our program we have in the public right-of-way

meaning streets that can have areas perpetrated for something else. >> i'm here with john francis pavement to parks manager and this parklet on van ness street first of all, what is a parklet and part of pavement to parks program basically an expense of the walk in a public realm for people to hang anti nor a urban acceptable space for people to use. >> parklets sponsors have to apply to be considered for the program but they come to us you know saying we want to do this and create a new space on our street it is a community driven program. >> the program goes beyond just parklets vacant lots and other spaces are converted we're here at playland on 43 this is place is cool with loots things to do

and plenty of space to play so we came up with that idea to revitalizations this underutilized yard by going to the community and what they said want to see here we saw that everybody wants to see everything to we want this to be a space for everyone. >> yeah. >> we partnered with the pavement to parks program and so we had the contract for building 236 blot community garden it start with a lot of jacuzzi hammers and bulldozer and now the point we're planting trees and flowers we have basketball courts there is so much to do here. >> there's a very full program

that they simply joy that and meet the community and friends and about be about the lighter side of city people are more engaged not just the customers. >> with the help of community pavement to parks is reimagining the potential of our student streets if you want more information visit them as the pavement to parks or contact pavement to parks at sfgovtv.org