i'd like to comment on the 120,000 dogs that was first proposed, i believe, around 2004 by carl friedman, who was the head of animal care and control at the time. that's 15 years ago. the city has grown, dog population has grown, so the 120,000 is grossly an underestimate, and i have to say, i did all these figures, did all this research on the american pet -- avma who has estimates on dog owners, american veterinary, the pet products population, and i kind of went in between and my estimates are very conservative. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> thank you. my name is laura. san francisco resident for 14 years. i have three to four points i would like to make. point number one, this item should not be on the agenda today for reasons everyone has

already stated. modified hours will not alleviate the adjacent home owners' concerns about all-day ambient noise, yet they will restrict public access to the park during required off-peak hours as determined by rec and park's own survey. this compromise, while understanding a way to resolve the issue, it's a lose-lose proposition, benefits neither side, and has no evidentiary basis. point number three, if the commissioners push forward, despite the concerns, i would suggest nothing less than 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. operating hours is reasonable. when i commute to work in menlo wash, i have to catch my bus at 7:00 a.m. i return home no earlier than 7:00 p.m. i have to feed my family dinner, especially during summer when

it's light, we deserve access to this beautiful space. in any future meetings, i hope, regarding this topic, i would request the home owners provide their disclosure packages to prove they did not knowingly move to this situation. and i would like an objective neutral party to conduct a sound assessment to determine if noise from this park is any more significant than noise from any park of the city. [ applause ] also, as my addendum, please fix the restrooms. they've been broken over a decade. and we need to pee also. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please, and as they are coming up, i have david, andrea, and james. and then after that, anyone who hasn't filled out a blue card,

come on up and you can speak. go ahead. >> in doing so, they deem their own interest in a speedy resolution to be more important than the interest of the many people who actually use this park. if the department can do this at upper douglass, they can do it at any other park in the city. our shared spaces are what make it possible to maintain a high quality of life, despite the challenges of living in a city whose cost of living far exceeds that of any other in the nation. when the city is allowed to bypass the rules governing these spaces, it's unacceptable.

regardless of the outcome of the proposal, please do not repeat these tactics of secrecy and shortcuts, where the results affect so many san francisco residents. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> hi, commissioners. i'm andrea buffa. i helped start the organization save our recreation a few years ago when they were trying to restrict dog walking there, and i live in glenn park. i'm quite close to this park, and i use it sometimes. my neighborhood park, sunnyside park, previously was an off-leash area and now is an on-leash area. i guess i want to change what i was planning on saying, because i'm one of the threatening dog people, and i understand it's super hard to come to a public meeting and be in the minority, maybe even have people boo you, maybe have people act

inappropriately in the audience, but that's part of the public process. we need to teach people on our side how to act right and be okay with people and express anger somewhere else, and the other people need to know that, yeah, it's hard. i've been in that position, too, and it's hard and it's part of making changes you want. you probably know the trend around the world is to keep parks open later and more hours, because of the increasing documentation of the physical health benefits, the mental health benefits, and the safety benefits of having parks in our neighborhoods. so i agree with what others have said about the community process. i don't know how it got this far, and there's no reason to keep it going any further. so i hope that you take this off the table or vote no on the proposal. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello, commissioners.

my name is david emanuel. i live right at the border of glenn park and noe valley, and my dog park is the upper noe rec center. we are a dog run, decompressed granite. i do go to upper douglass occasionally. it is closed i think about four months, maybe longer, and when it is closed, our dog run and the surrounding ones do feel pressure. people are always welcome, and we don't mind it, but it does impact the smaller parks. i think there's been a little bit of a disservice the way the department has represented the resolution to you. it actually, this resolution, has three different or four different now time recommendations. one is from the department staff, one is from a friends group, one with is from a neighbors group, and the other is from your own operations committee, and what's missing here is more of a debate and a real community-driven process.

i know the department likes to call it a community-driven process, but there hasn't been an opportunity for a majority of the park users and neighbors to really come and give you some feedback or meet as a group. i think there is a solution. i think you've heard today that many people are willing to do a compromise, and i think we can reach that. we should take a step back and try to look at a compromise. i think in the community there could have been one worked out, but now that you've heard all this feedback, i would hope that you reject the hours in this resolution and determine something different that is more accessible for people. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> i'm bringing the kids with me. yes, these are my kids. in my life -- >> i need you to speak into the mic. >> my name is james wright. larry mazzola knows me from seiussww in san francisco. yes, i know how to organize a

community, because i've been a rank and file member of sciu for 30 years. the people at the park knows me as the guy that picks up poop buckets and fills holes that are there even after wednesday after the park has been closed for a day. somehow the buckets are still full of poop, holes are still in the park. one thing that can kill a dog, send a dog to a vet, one place we shouldn't have foxtails in all of san francisco, we've been weeding foxtails every year that park has been open to try to get them out of there. yes, they are native, but there's many other places that one particular native grass that kills a dog could be. functioning restroom would be nice for the humans. the dogs have a three-acre restroom, a place for the humans to pee would be nice.

they are all trimmed up, that's probably not best to do, but the restroom that's there, that's a historic restroom could be open for people to use it. if san francisco, we're not going to be specific, but come on. why not? even if we take out the water fountain and put a handicap restroom. we finally got a parking spot next to the park, so one place if you're handicap, you can let your dogs off leash, exercise, socialize. humans can socialize, dogs can socialize. we can actually start trying to get along with each other. i know, shocking. but come on. this is san francisco. >> thank you. >> and i'm opposed. >> is there anyone else that would like to make comment? come on up.

it's okay, as soon as she's done, you can come up. >> hi, my name is mary williams. i live at the apartments right at the top -- i live at the apartments right at the top of 27th street. i can see the park from my window. i can hear it, and i can tell you that it's never bothered me at all. it's very minor, ambient noise, and certainly in the evenings, i never hear any barking. never heard barking in the early mornings. also, i was not even aware of this survey that supposedly went out to the neighbors. i don't know how i missed it, but i wasn't given any survey. my partner works in menlo park. he's gone from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. five days a week, so if these changes are made, he would not be able to spend this time

with our dog at all during the week. and so, yeah, i just wanted to offer my experience as a very close neighbor, as a counterpart to anything else you may have heard. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon, my name is brian edwards. long-time resident of san francisco. pretty spirited debate and conversation about the dog park. >> can you speak into the microphone? >> sure. thank you for your time. the reality of the situation is, it's a good dog park. it's kind of a gem in san francisco. three acres, fenced in, you've heard it all. you've heard the conversation about airplanes and airports and moving into the area. fact of the matter is, there needs to be a community area, and this upper douglass provides that. people can talk, dogs can play. you've heard all this. from 7:00 to 9:00 is not

>> on this particular issue, we formally here have a dog committee, and we would meet out at the state, at the county fairgrounds. a long while ago, before it was even a dog park there or officially so. so right now i'm just trying to say that i like dog runs. i like dog parks. i like the social activities for dogs and of humans, but there's a problem here that seems that needs to be addressed that's structural. it's more or less dealing with

what can be done to this given area. there are a lot of flaws of the area. people going up along the side, there's a slope down, the dog can slip down and break their limbs. that's what dr. michael had talked about before. and he was a chair of the dog committee at the time, so there's been a lot of hashing back and forth. so i would recommend seriously have a look at that hole that some people talk about, the grass is not mowed down, and we heard from dan mower about the artificial turf. i'm usually against artificial turf, but in this case, the possibility, as other facilities, i think we can do it. so the hours themselves, i would say until 8:00. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker.

>> good afternoon, thank you. i'm a home owner, taxpayer, muni-bart rider, and i work for the state. by the time i get home and get my dog to the park, and i live two ballot blocks away, it's 6: 6:30. i have a wig cog, she needs to run. this is one of the only places she can get out and have the freedom to run. it's a good group of folks. i want to reiterate we should have had the full meeting and time for public comment, et cetera. it's a great place. i'm not, you know, unsympathetic to the neighbors there. however, you know, it's not that bad. it's not that loud. it's, you know, most of us love our dogs dearly and we respect

the park, you know, that's why we're pulling foxtails, that's why i pick up extra poop, you know, it's a good bunch of people, and we need this park, and by the time i get up there and i let my big dog run, it's going to be past 7:30, and so i would just urge the committee or you to please have the open meeting so that everyone can talk, or at least listen to us. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else who would like to make public comment? okay, seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners? commissioner mazzola. >> thank you. i'd first like to thank everybody for coming out and your testimony today. as far as the process that people are complaining about, i

think sarah laid it out that, you know, 67 other parks have the same process, you know, that the commission did not initiate this, the community did, so this happens to be the process. but with that being said, from everything i've heard today, i don't see a really good enough reason to change the hours of the park. you know, it's not like there's unsafe issues, not like kids are throwing keggers out there and noisy all night. it's dog barking. that's what a dog park is. to me, if there's going to be a change, shouldn't close it any earlier than 9:00. i think parks are there to be open, and if it's not a reason for being unsafe, i don't think there's a good enough reason that i've heard to change it. so i would vote to keep it the same. i'd go against the staff's

recommendation and operating committee to keep it open till 10:00, but if there was a middle ground to be reached, i would vote yes on 9:00, but nothing earlier than that. those are my comments. >> thank you. commissioner anderson? >> commissioner anderson: hello, everyone. i want to thank everybody for coming out, and i also want to acknowledge those who can't make it. i understand how difficult it is, and i want you to know that i have read the materials. we've gotten myriad of emails and reports, comments, and videos, and i hear you, so i went out to the park last week and i walked around, and first i

want to thank and commend the community that helps rec and park take care of that space. i noticed the dog poop buckets and extra baggies, the signs about foxtails. clearly, the individual users are not a problem. the dog walkers are very professional. i just want to preface that i read the noise ordinances, too. that's one of the reasons why i as chair of the operations committee requested a start time of 7:00 a.m., because that's sort of when the noise ordinance says, okay, it's not quiet time anymore, we can start getting busy. that's how i came up with 7:00

a.m. we came up with 7:00 a.m. it wasn't arbitrary. in the beginning of the noise ordinance, it's prefaced that noise is very subjective and different people experience it differently, and sort of those sudden noises are really the things that get people excited, usually, and in the preface it suggested that people who are dealing with the issue deal directly with one another. and that was something i suggested when i went out in the hallway on june 6th. i asked if people could come together and talk about this. my friend on the prozac, i want you to know that i take our responsibilities to find a pathway where everyone is happy. this is not something everyone is happy. doesn't matter how many

community processes we have beyond today. not everyone is going to be happy. so we're trying to find something that seems sort of fair. and we have to make tough decisions, and we don't take anything lightly. so i do think that people still need to continue to talk with one another about this. and the thing i want to say that i observed about dog walkers, which i would hope that the community would keep talking about was they are allowed to take up to eight dogs on a

leash. nothing we can do. almost an insoluble problem. having said that, i'm also someone that does not run away from tough decisions or from making mistakes, so i am willing to say that maybe it would be better if we did change the hours that it be 7:00 a.m., because again, that dove tails

with the noise ordinance, until 9:00 p.m., which i heard a lot of people suggest. again, though, i don't really think it solves the problem so much, because i think it's the sudden awful noises that are bothering people. that's where the community comes in. we also don't have -- there used to be sort of a, you know, barking dog neighborhood committee. those were dissolved a few years ago. so maybe you guys should work on getting it re-upped or maybe ask the people on prozac to fill that role. that's what they are there for. and then finally, after walking around the park that day, and by the way, you all did a pretty good job, but i still stepped in poo, but that wasn't okay, wasn't too major, but then i needed to go to the bathroom. there was no place to go to the bathroom, so i would really like to suggest a porta potty or something in the interim and fix

the bathrooms and they will be all gendered and then everyone can go to the bathroom. finally, i would just like to comment on something i think we all feel about public discourse. it's really easy to sit at your computer and say things, and some people get really mean spirited and think because, you know, they are sitting at their desk that somehow people don't understand the emotion that's getting darted at them through email and social media. i've seen it, you know, i've been misrepresented. that's fine. it's all part of the sort of, you know, deal here. but i really think that we should think about our public discourse. i like to think of san franciscans as being the most progressive, compassionate people in the world. we should show that to one another. so to accuse property owners by being evil just because of being property owners is wrong, and accusing dog owners as evil

because they love furry children is wrong. we're all right here. we just have to figure out how to get along. so my recommendation is work harder to work together, talk to the dog walkers about not parking in front of these homes, and i would recommend that we amend the hours to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. >> thank you, commissioner. commissioner mcdonnell. >> commissioner mc donnell: thank you. so i have a couple of concerns. one, in reading the staff memo and report, at least as it lands on me, it seems to presume someone was concerned about the hours, the hours should be changed, and so it goes from someone expresses concern to let's figure out what the new hours need to be, versus what it should have triggered rightfully, in my opinion, would have been a community process. i would disagree slightly with my colleague, commissioner

mazzola, because what, as madeleine said, what is consistent across all of our parks and consideration of changing hours is a community process. what's missing in this moment is a community process. the memo says guidelines a community must follow when following, support from a district supervisor, rpd staff, operations managers, and community meetings must be held to gather feedback on the proposed change. when you race to the conclusion, the summary of who is in favor and who is opposed, doesn't represent the supervisor, and it certainly doesn't represent the

engagement of community meetings. certainly, can understand anyone having concerns about whether or not a community meeting would be civil or not. that's a reasonable concern, but it shouldn't prevent, in my opinion, the holding of said meeting, need to put in ways to mitigate police presence or other means to ensure it is a safe and civil place to have discourse. this is the city of saint francis, this is the people's republic of san francisco. that's just how we do it, and we have to figure out how to do it in ways that we all feel comfortable, no matter what our views are, even when they are opposing. so all of that said, i'm not in favor of in this moment changing the proposal. sorry, changing the hours from what is recommended, because we didn't do what we said as a department we should do, which is a community process. so my point of view is, we need to go back to the beginning, have a community process, land

on what we should do. >> thank you, commissioner low? >> commissioner low: i'm happy with the process how we got here and i believe my colleague commissioner anderson intended to make a motion and i would second, having the park hours from 7:00 a.m. and close at 9:00 p.m. i would second that. >> seeing no other commission comments, we have a recommendation, a motion, to change the hours from the current ones to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., and we have a second. all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> opposed? >> no. >> commissioner buell: the motion carries. i'm sorry, commissioner -- i'm looking at commissioner mcdonnell looking at me like are you a no. >> commissioner mc donnell: i'm a no.

>> commissioner buell: we have two noes and four yeas. [ roll call ] >> commissioner anderson. >> commissioner harrison. >> can i call for a substitute motion? >> you can make a friendly amendment. >> go ahead. you can make a -- >> you can offer a friendly amendment. >> why can't i do a substitute motion? >> commissioner buell: we need a parliamentarian here. we have a motion on the floor. >> because you have to get me to agree to a substitute motion. i don't agree. i'll consider a friendly amendment. >> friendly amendment is keep the hours the same. >> just vote it down. >> commissioner buell: let's continue the roll call.

>> clerk: commissioner mazzola. >> commissioner mazzola: no. >> clerk: commissioner buell. >> commissioner buell: aye. >> clerk: the motion does pass. hours are 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. >> commissioner buell: thank you. >> commissioner mazzola: can i ask a question? >> clerk: yes. >> commissioner mazzola: this park has a fence around it. other parks don't have fences around it. are there hours on those parks, and if so, what happens if someone goes into that park anyways? >> commissioner buell: go ahead. >> there are hours on all of our parks, and many of the parks do not have fences. those are enforced primarily by complaint, either a call to our park rangers or sfpd, and there are also patrols through the park by park rangers and sfpd. does that answer your question?

>> commissioner mazzola: yeah, okay. >> commissioner buell: okay. let's move on then on the calendar. >> clerk: we are now on item 10. which is general public comment, continued from item 4. and i'm going to hold up just a minute.

>> okay. >> clerk: okay, if we can clear the room, please? thank you. thank you. okay, we are now on item 10, which is general public comment continued from item 4. is there anyone who would -- if we could take any secondary conversations outside, please. thank you. item number ten, general public comment, continued from item no. 4. is there anyone who did not comment on item 4 that would like to make general public comment? seeing none, this item is closed. we're on item 11, commissioners' matters. commissioners, are there any matters you would like to bring forward that you would like to request be brought up at a later time with no discussion at this

point? >> commissioner buell: commissioner low. >> commissioner low: yes, i would like to bring up before the commission in september, if possible, to designate funds from the commission contingency fund for chinatown to build a perimeter fence and replacement of a ship which apparently is an attraction for illegal activities. >> commissioner buell: so noted. >> clerk: is there anyone else? >> commissioner buell: commissioner mcdonnell. >> commissioner mc donnell: it's a question. what's the timing on an update on bond? >> we can probably do something in -- and this relates to commissioner anderson, i can give you a shorter update and gm report next month, or a longer presentation august or september. we're getting ready to start our public process, and we're

getting ready to update you on that. >> i would recommend a longer discussion when you're ready. >> thank you. >> but before the ink is dry. >> yeah. commissioners, 100%. we haven't begun -- >> just saying, when you're ready. >> no press conferences. >> yeah. >> so noted. >> commissioner buell: commissioner anderson. >> yes, when you do that, if you could be so kind as to sort of maybe highlight a little about this jackson park thing, and if it's not going to be in the 2020 bond, give us a clue how it gets some attention. that would be wonderful. >> commissioner, there will be a community process, the jackson community, who you heard from a few public speakers today is one of communities all over the city -- >> commissioner anderson: i know. >> so we have a very databased process, so we have a community

working group. it's all still premature. this is just early advocacy. >> okay. and then i would like to figure out how you would like to respond to the upper douglass dog park, and my request for some bathroom opportunities. >> noted. >> no modular. >> commissioner anderson: so when would be a good time when we could hear back about that? which meeting? >> well -- >> bathrooms -- million dollar bathrooms don't evolve out of thin air, so let us do a little bit of homework and report back. >> commissioner buell: report back to commissioner anderson. >> commissioner anderson: i'll hold it until then. >> clerk: is there any public comment on this item? that's commissioners' matters. is that a yes or a no?

>> he's not getting up. >> clerk: public comment is closed. item 12, new business/agenda setting. is there any public comment? >> commissioner buell: i don't see any notes here. any public comment? >> clerk: being none, item is closed. item 13, communications. any public comment? seeing none, this is closed. item 14 is adjournment. >> commissioner buell: i would like to adjourn in the name of two individuals. as some of you may know, commissioner bonilla's father passed away and i would request adjourning in honor of him and as noted by the general manager, sulu palega. is there a motion? >> so moved. >> commissioner buell: second? >> second. >> commissioner buell: all in favor? thank you.

i'm nicole and lindsey, i like the fresh air. when we sign up, it's always so gratifying. we want to be here. so i'm very excite ied to be here today. >> your volunteerism is appreciated most definitely. >> last year we were able to do 6,000 hours volunteering.

without that we can't survive. volunteering is really important because we can't do this. it's important to understand and a concept of learning how to take care of this park. we have almost a 160 acres in the district 10 area. >> it's fun to come out here. >> we have a park. it's better to take some of the stuff off the fences so people can look at the park. >> the street, every time, our friends.

>> i think everybody should give back. we are very fortunate. we are successful with the company and it's time to give back. it's a great place for us. the weather is nice. no rain. beautiful san francisco. >> it's a great way to be able to have fun and give back and walk away with a great feeling. for more opportunities we have volunteering every single day of the week. get in touch with the parks and recreation center

>> this facility is the largest

project in our sewer system improvement program. it has a price tag of 1.3 borghese. it is rebuilding one -- $1.3 billion. the policy and government affairs team helps the finance team talk to legislative officials and policymakers creating financial programs for us to get low interest loans. >> getting the funding for the project was important to save money for the ratepayers of san francisco and enable us to build the project on budget. >> we were able to secure for the sf p.u.c. the loans from the epa and state mostly for the facilities project. >> we are providing low cost funding for projects that really provide tremendous social and environmental impact. for example the $699 million loan is going to pay for half of

the biosolid project. >> what is challenging of the new sources of financing. they require the group to look at creative option ways to take the funds and build them to the existing process. >> the southeast plant is in hunter's bay. it is across the street from residential homes. one of the objectives was to make it an asset. >> it will be at another plant further away from houses. it is going to help in terms of odor, air emissions, noise. >> this project that receives the federal loan funding is going to create 3,000 jobs in the community. >> in addition the streetscape improvements and architecture there is a lot of thought so that it is an asset to the community. >> it feels great to win the financial assisting ability

award. i believe the group works hard to an chief financial stability in everything they do. >> we are getting world wide recognition for the work we are doing because of the green infracture projects in the communities with a lot of social impact. to me i am very proud of that effort to be a part of that. >> i nominated the team for the financial sustain ability award. they got some of the largest state and federal loans in the country. it saved the agency 10s of millions of dollars. i am proud of temperature team for put -- proud of the team for putting this together. putting this together.

>> good morning, everyone. this meeting will come to order. this is the june 26th, 2019 special meeting of the budget and finance committee. i am chair of the budget and finance committee. i would like to thank carmen and lawrence from san francisco government t.v. for broadcasting this meeting, madame clerk, are there any announcements? >> silence all cell phones and electronic devices. completed speaker cards and copy of any documents should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear in the july 9th, board of supervisorst