fighting an infection with bull bullets still in his body. brandon is still subject to military and police surveillance in the philippines. even though we know that it was military or police agents who shot him multiple times in the back. this is before us because the attack on brandon has gotten too little attention here in the united states, even when a united states citizen was subjected to an assassination attempt by a foreign powers military that we as taxpayers continue to subsidize. this is before us because the attack on brandon has been met with silence by far too many, because the u.s. embassy in the philippines is failing to protect him, because the federal government is failing to acknowledge or to address the systematic human rights abuses under the philippine president duterte that led to this. and, to fran be frank, because y are failing to have the ability

to adequately defend brandon or to bring him home. i appreciate the partnership and the assistance that we have received from speaker pelosi's office and senators harris and finestein and i want to be clear that it's insufficient and we are running out of time. we need to bring brandon home. we need to ensure that he receives adequate medical care, care that we here can give him. we've added to the record to this file a letter from the san francisco health commission supporting this request. and recognizing brandon's mother, louise lee, has been a dedicated staff member at the department of public health for the last 40 years. alongside supervisor haney we have been advocating on this issue for over a month. in that month, community members have come together to raise funds and to send a delegation to the philippines to visit brandon, including supervisor haney and to organize an incredible breadth of grassr509s advocacy, fueled by hope, anger

and love. in that month we haven't seen enough from our federal government or national media. in addition to security for brandon, and an investigation, with this resolution we are calling on congress to end u.s. military aid to duterte's regime until the extradition killings and -- and to provide immediate support to bring brandon back to san francisco, away from his assailants and that he can receive the medical care that he needs and deserve. we call on the conscience of this country to stop subsidizing abuses and violence that have now hit so close to home. so thank you again, everyone, for turning out and not just this afternoon, but so often and in such a powerful way over the past month. and, colleagues, thank you so much for your support on this. >> president yee: okay, supervisor safai? >> i will be brief and i appreciate the speakers who came out today and thank you to the leadership from haney on this.

and i think that one of the things to underscore is that a threat to democracy anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere. and this young man being a u.s. citizen and being an environmental advocate and being one that wants to fight for justice around the world in his country of, you know, where his mother is from and family is from, i think that it's an important thing. and so i want to thank you to all of the advocates who came out here today and say that we stand firmly shoulde shoulder-to-shoulder with him and we want to see the speedy return of brandon to the united states. so thank you for all of your hard work on this. >> president yee: supervisor stefani? >> thank you, president yee. i want to thank my colleagues for their passion and relentless courage to speak out and to thank all of those who came out. i'm so sorry for what you're going through. and i wanted to be added. >> president yee: supervisor brown?

>> yes, thank you. it's pretty powerful when you come out and you speak about it, friends, family, and advocates. and i would like to also be added to item number 23. thank you. >> president yee: supervisor haney. >> thank you, president yee. i want to thank supervisor mar for your leadership, as well as your staff, edward wright, for being there for brandon and his family from the beginning. and for preparing this resolution. it's been, you know, humbling to partner with you as well as brandon's friends and family who are here. i want to thank them. i want to thank all of the organizations. i know that brandon was very much a part of san francisco and was raised in and politicized in many of the organizations that are here. the malai movement, and c.p.a.

and the league of filipino students. i want to thank you all for fighting for brandon. when i visited him and his family i was able to share with him that you are all fighting for him, that you are sending your love and your solidarity. and he was able to mouth back, thank you. so i wanted to be able to share that with all of you. and i know that he knows that you're fatin fighting for him. his strength is incredible. i can't imagine the level of resilience and strength that it takes to survive being shot four times, three bullets that are still in his body. eight cardiac arrests. and he will not give up. and so i know that this conversation and it's in this spirit that he sai is leading ho continue to fight. and i know that you are all

fighting for him. what we do know is that the work that we're doing to raise attention and to put this on the agenda of our federal representatives and the u.s. embassy is making a difference. they are responding. they weren't before, but they are now. but as supervisor mar said, there's so much more that they can do and we finally got a response related to how they can do a humanitarian evacuateion and they said something about providing a loan to the family and so this is information that wasn't previously provided. it should have been provided immediately to the family. and because of the attention they're now responding. brandon represents the best of san francisco. he -- his cross cultural and cross national solidarity represents a tradition and a history and a legacy in this

city that i think that we should all be very proud of. and the last thing that i want to say is that we -- during our time in the philippines we were able to meet with many of brandon's comrades and his colleagues, indigenous leaders, leaders within manila and in all of them they shared with us that what happened to brandon should not be viewed as an isolated and random incident. but it's part of a campaign of targeting people who are standing up for environmental rights and for human rights across the philippines. and i think that brandon would want us to connect with what happened to him with what is happening with so many people, especially poor people, especially indigenous people in the philippines. and to say that -- that their stories and their experiences are not going to be silenced and that to the extent that our

government is quiet about this, we're going to be louder, we're going to demand that we no longer be complicit by funding such mass murder and political assassination that now has impacted one of our own in brandon lee. so thank you all for your leadership with the passing of this resolution and we have a lot more work to do to make sure that brandon comes home safely and that this campaign of terror and murder that the philippine government has been responsible for -- that we do everything that we can to end it. thank you for being here. >> president yee: supervisor mandelman. >> 5d aadd me as a co-sponsor. >> president yee: supervisor? >> i asked to be a co-sponsor and if i'm not already on there and i would like to be added. and i wanted to thank everyone so much for coming out today.

your love and your fight for brandon and for all of the people of the philippines that are being abused by the government came across so clearly. and we're with you. and just really appreciate all of your work on this issue and your fight for brandon. so, thanks. >> president yee: supervisor walton? >> i would love to be a co-sponsor. >> president yee: supervisor fewer? >> i just wanted to say thank you for coming out today. and i have already added my name as a co-sponsor and to include me in any of your fundraising efforts. thank you. >> president yee: okay. i also want to add my voice to this, which is to thank the friends and relatives and organizations that came out to support brandon lee. and as you can see we stand in solidarity with the community on

this issue. i think -- i believe that everybody has added names as a co-sponsor. and so thank you very much. and right now, madam clerk, i say that we take this item, same house, same call. without objection. then this item passes unanimously. thank you very much. let's see... madam clerk, read the memorial. >> clerk: today's meeting will be adjourned in the memory of the following beloved individuals... on behalf of supervisor peskin for the late jerry crawly, and on behalf of president yee, for the late lawrence joseph fonk and on behalf of supervisor brown for the late marcia marcela harvey. >> president yee: colleagues that is the end of our agenda. madam clerk, any other further business before us today? >> clerk: that concludes our

business for today. >> president yee: okay, thank you. we are adjourned. (♪) >> i went through a lot of struggles in my life, and i am blessed to be part of this. i am familiar with what people are going through to relate and empathy and compassion to their

struggle so they can see i came out of the struggle, it gives them hope to come up and do something positive. ♪ ♪ i am a community ambassador. we work a lot with homeless, visitors, a lot of people in the

area. >> what i like doing is posting up at hotspots to let people see visibility. they ask you questions, ask you directions, they might have a question about what services are available. checking in, you guys. >> wellness check. we walk by to see any individual, you know may be sitting on the sidewalk, we make sure they are okay, alive. you never know. somebody might walk by and they are laying there for hours. you never know if they are alive. we let them know we are in the area and we are here to promote safety, and if they have somebody that is, you know, hanging around that they don't want to call the police on, they don't have to call the police. they can call us. we can direct them to the

services they might need. >> we do the three one one to keep the city neighborhoods clean. there are people dumping, waste on the ground and needles on the ground. it is unsafe for children and adults to commute through the streets. when we see them we take a picture dispatch to 311. they give us a tracking number and they come later on to pick it up. we take pride. when we come back later in the day and we see the loose trash or debris is picked up it makes you feel good about what you are doing. >> it makes you feel did about escorting kids and having them feel safe walking to the play area and back. the stuff we do as ambassadors makes us feel proud to help keep the city clean, helping the residents.

>> you can see the community ambassadors. i used to be on the streets. i didn't think i could become a community ambassador. it was too far out there for me to grab, you know. doing this job makes me feel good. because i came from where a lot of them are, homeless and on the street, i feel like i can give them hope because i was once there. i am not afraid to tell them i used to be here. i used to be like this, you know. i have compassion for people that are on the streets like the homeless and people that are caught up with their addiction because now, i feel like i can give them hope. it reminds you every day of where i used to be and where i am at now.

>> good afternoon, welcome to the first post recess meeting of the land use and transportation committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i am the chair, aaron peskin, joined by committee member to my left supervisor matt haney, our clerk is ms. erika major and msy announcements? >> yes, please make sure to silence all cellphones and electronic devices and copies of any documents to be included as part of a file should be submitted to a clerk. items will appear on the september 17th, board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor peskin: could you please read the first item. >> clerk: an ordinance amending the environment code to require all non residential buildings of 50,000 square feet or more to provide all on site electricity demands from 100% greenhouse gas free or renewable resources or

sources to authorization the director of the department of the environment to adopt the rules and regulations and affirming appropriate findings. >> supervisor peskin: on behalf of the department of the environment, mr. sheehan, the floor is yours. >> thank you, supervisors. charles she an, policy and public affairs manager for the san francisco department of the environment. momentarily i'm going to invite my colleague, barrie hooper to give you a short presentation about this ordinance. i do want to take some time and thank the sfpuc for their assistance as well as the mayor's office, it's been a collaborative effort to get to this point. it will be a partnership as well for implementation. and i do expect that mike and john will be joining us shortly from the sfpuc. so, without further adieu, i'm going to invite barrie hooper up here for the presentation. >> supervisor peskin: i would like to welcome committee member and vice-chair supervisor safai and better late than never,

john. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. my name is barrie hooper. i'm with the department of environment and i'll be talking today about the proposed renewable electricity requirements. for context, san francisco has full goals set by our board of supervisors for reducing greenhouse gas emissions through ultimately getting to zero emissions by 2050. of course, we've been making great progress cutting emissions 36% thus far compared to 1990 in the context of more than doubling the size of our economy and about a 20% growth in population. our remaining emissions today really boil down to the operation of our buildings, the production of waste, and transportation within the building sector, natural gas is the biggest source of emissions. if we lock at municipal buildings in particular, the

entirety of emissions from municipal buildings come from the combustion of natural gas directly or for the provision district c. and we're approaching that point in the private sector as well as we supply cleaner and cleaner electricity as a community to our commercial buildings, natural gas is not getting cleaner and so we're talking about today is really getting to the end point of eliminating those emissions ultimately from the electricity use in commercial buildings. this is not yet addressed the commissions from a gas side. and the context for this is our goal of getting to zero emissions city wide by 2050. also, ensuring that our newly constructed buildings have zero emissions no later than 2030. and while there's a lot of deck cal detaitechnical. we need to supply them with renewable electricity and the appliances need to use that

renewable electricity. they need to use electricity rather than gas. today we'll focus on the renewable electricity supply but i'd like to take a moment to talk about how we are addressing efficiency and the good news. in 2011, this body adopted an ordinance requiring commercial building owners to track and publicly disclose an annual basis, how much energy they use, and the ideas of the first step to improving efficiency would be measuring what we expect folks to manage. recently this year, this body also extended that requirement for benchmarking or tracking and disclosing energy use to large multi-family buildings of 52,000 square feet and larger. just taking a moment to look at the trends, we've seen since those ordinances were adopted, i'm sorry that for ledge ability but the story is positive here. over the seven year period depicted in all four of these graphs, gross energy consumption in the commercial sector is

scoudown11% and our economy hasn growing considerably. bottom-left yellow line depicts growth in total employment. more jobs in the city. our office value is depicted on the upper right graft so we're not trading the economy for healthy -- i'm sorry, the environment for healthy economy, we're getting both. and the bottom-right line, the purple represents the gross energy consumption of commercial buildings down about 11%. so today's ordinance is really proposing to build upon that platform so we're emphasizing efficiency through those existing requirements and i'm going to take you through this table for a moment. so each of the columns represents a subset of different requirements just a limited very straight forward requirement for multi family of only tracking energy use. for commercial buildings there's a differentiation between large and smaller building and we're asked to have more sophisticated

requirements for the largest buildings with you we require an energy audit so you would know how much energy you are using overtime and where is the opportunity for savings. and the idea is to connect the building overrer with rebates and financing. today's ordinance proposed ordinance, addresses renewable electricity just for the largest commercial buildings where we think it's very straight forward matter for them. and the proposal is very simple. it's to require that they purchase 100% renewable electricity on the basis that such renewable electricity is now available at a very competitive rate. it's available without requiring any technical changes to the building. this is really a change on the bill. you could obtain renewable electricity as well by installing on site generation facility but there's a straight forward way to get there without taking extra action. the proposal would effect 9% of

our total commercial buildings and this is looking just at buildings that are exclusively for commercial use and those 9% of our buildings in san francisco are consuming 73% of the electricity that's consumed by the commercial sector that totals around 150,000 tons of co2 emissions per year to provide them with electricity. what we're encouraging is a three-part phase in starting with the largest buildings which the greatest energy use and also the best resourced and they were a small number and phasing in with buildings of 500,000 fair and larger starting in 2022 stepping down to 2024 to buildings of 250,000 and larger and ultimately in 2030, stepping down to buildings of 50,000 squarely feet and larger and the 2030 is concurrent with our existing goal of ensuring that anyone has access to 200% renewable access by 2030 so the

difference is that's a goal and this is a proposed codification of mandatory transition to renewable electricity and the phase-in is developed directly from the recommendations of a partners at the sfpuc and clean power sf that this is the scale at which they would have time to develop and cause construction of the resources me' to provide the renewable electricity. >> i assume they were also in touch with beaumont building owners and building managers who are assume are representing most of those 63 buildings in the first? >> yes, we have presented to the beaumont energy committee. >> for our education, what's the breakdown between commercial and residential? i realize this is only for non residential but, relative to tons of co2 produced per year,

what is the difference between the commercial sector and the residential sector? >> commercial is awe heavy emphasis on this use and natural gas so this measure would have a greater effect on the economic sector and the opposite on residential and our stock is larger in total floor area so the relative i am i would be happy to get back to you but it's equivalent and a key question and bold move to mandatory 100% and what's the cost impact for those effected. so the good news is, since the clean power sf introduced the super green product a couple years ago, the incremental cost compared from pg&e has declined about 75% so in other words, there's a price difference around two cents per kilowatt an

hour and so the numbers you see here reflect will disclosure that they prepare in partnership with pg&e comparing the three ghg free products available in san francisco today. and, it's the cheapest option and in both clean power sf super green and pg&e solar choice offer highly competitive well under 5% incremental cost for electricity. so we look where the buildings are located that are effected by this policy. the buildings of 500,000 square feet are concentrated in the central business district. as we move down to buildings of 250,000 square feet and larger there's still a concentration downtown but they're more spread out. as we zoom out to 50,000 square feet in larger it's a common

size that is found downtown but it's widely distributed around the city. rules in implementing this ordinance, a department environment will be responsible for notifying building owners of their obligation and we do that by communicating about this requirement in the context of our existing communications about the efficiency ordinance that i mentioned earlier that require benchmarking and i will collaborate with the public utilities commission on outreach. the puc, their role is to provide the power and to collaborate with us on a note indication and report back to you with the compliance with the ordinance. just to pause for a moment, a key question i think would be what is greenhouse gas or noble electricity and that is a subject of an amendment that we'll hear a little bit of detail about in a moment but at a high level, it boils down to resources that qualify understate law as contribute to go renewable portfolio standard

and that does include hetchy power. >> on behalf of the san francisco public utilities commission the floor is yours, thank you, mr. hooper. >> i think charles sheehan, if you don't mind. >> thank you, barrie, thank you supervisors, charles sheehan. earlier the clerk has left you a slightly revised version of this ordinance with the couple of amendments and i just wanted to walk you through them and i don't think they're substantive. they're mainly about tightening language and bringing us more in alignment with the state's definition of renewable energy. you've got copies and i highlighted the amended section in yellow. the first amendment just make sure we pay our greenhouse gas free with renewable energy resources together because that

is what we are referring to later and that's what these large buildings will be able to buy. and then what we refer to later, is a series of state codes to make sure that one, we're in alignment with our the state of california defines renewable energy and two, we're also in alignment with how the state of california deals with hetch hetchy power and our ability to satisfy our obligations with hetch hetchy power so we're just making it clear to these large commercial buildings that you can buy hetch hetchy power, that's permissable, and of course you can buy all the other renewables listed in state code. that's pretty much it for the amendment. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, charles. anything you want to add on behalf of the public utilities commission as opposed to the california public utilities commission? >> good afternoon. michael hymns, director of clean power sf. i don't have anything substantive to add other than we

worked closely with the department of the environment and support the amendment. >> supervisor peskin: excellent. are there members of the public who would like to testify on item number 1, please come forward. >> sounds like a pretty good idea. but i think the best thing for you to do in order to get a true and correct measurement on how much electricity and money that you are saving is to put these sole ar panels directly on top of the roof of these skyscrapers that you targeting that are not residential districts. you need to put these solar panels on the buildings in question and subtract the difference on the amount of electricity being paid in order to keep the building running. any difference, other than what they're saying by using your basic means that are ineffective right now, then go to hetchy is use this energy that you are referring to. it's not actually reusable if you generate enough electricity

from the solar panels on top of the roof and have a power pack located somewhere in the building itself to distribute the electricity in order to kept lights and air-conditioning and heat on in the building that's in question you can cut all those unnecessary transactions that you talking about. more over, as far as residential, i'm sorry that you said it wasn't residential but i saw a residential family unit up there listed in your demonstrations, also, when the smaller units that same technique should be applied as well. i'm hearing about you want to buy the electric power lines from pg&e. if you buy property from pg&e, which is obsolete, i believe that you are setting yourself up for failure. pg&e has got obsolete equipment, they're familiar with it and if you have a power failure and you are not up to speed how to control that equipment you have to go back to pg&e again and ask

them what they do when they had this type of problem on their hands. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. any other members that would like to testify on item number 1? seeing none. public comment is closed. is there a motion to adopt the non substantive amendments that are before us as described by mr. sheehan? motion made by supervisor haney and we'll take that without objection. and for this item, to the full board with positive recommendation. i note that supervisor safai is a co-sponsor and i would like to be add as a co-sponsor as would supervisor haney and we'll forward it with recommendation without objection. madam clerk, read the next item. >> clerk: item number 2 is the ordinance amending the planning code to allow temporary long-term parking of an overnight camping and vehicles and auxillary leases. 2340 san joe hey avenue block

number 6973 lot number 39 and affirming appropriate findings. >> supervisor peskin: supervisor satisfy safai. >> superivsor safai: i'm going to make opening remarks and we're going to ask dillon from department of homeless housing to give a brief presentation. i don't know if you need to go through the entire thing but we can roughly set the tone. many of you have known, seen and anyone that spends time in the bay area has seen a large increase of people, particularly the most visibly living in rvs from palo alto to the east bay. you've seen a major increase in individuals living in rvs and vans and cars. this is not new to san francisco but it's taken on a different shape over the last two years in particular. i was out on christmas day, almost two years ago with my

daughter, ready to teach her ride a bike and out of the blue we saw a significant number of rvs next to the park. i called the department, called the local police chief and started to see major increase of the calls we received from neighbors because not only were we seeing an increase in the number of trash on the ground because people don't really have a place to put their trash but also there was conflict with neighbors over parking. we took the approach from the general perspective of quality of life at first and we hit a brick wall. they made the decision that they were no longer going to approve putting up a no overnight camping signs. they challenged this body to come up with a policy that would have impact city wide.

myself, supervisor brown buckled down and talked to the mayor about this and talked to the department about this and i think there was some initial resistance because there's an over all plan and most visible, let's say the most visible failings of our housing policy and our housing crisis are most notably individuals living on the streets, often in tents and often under bridges and freeways and places that are very visible. we talked about essentially putting together a policy and looking at policies not just in the bay area but all over california and in the united states where people were dealing with very similar issues. we came up with the idea of calling our policy a vehicle triage lot where we can provide

some temporary, safe environment for individuals when they've been assessed to be appropriate for this environment and can put them in an environment where there can be access to bathrooms, access to cleaning, access to social services and on a very temporary basis not more than an extended period of time. this is not a permanent fix. this is more about transitioning them from their existing vehicles into more permanent housing and accessing a more prominent housing option. this spring, our point in time count affirmed what we had seen and we started to see. the city had about a 13 to 15% increase in homelessness city wide. and almost 70% of that increase was individuals living in vehicles. so, we knew we were on the right track and so this is to the credit of working with

individuals from the coalition on homelessness and advocates from those working with the homeless community department of homelessness supportive housing and then the second piece was, actually we passed legislation, we had about a million dollars allocated for this program and we then, the second step was finding a place to implement this policy. we talked to the executive director from mission housing development corporation. i think he will speak today, sam moss. we talked to a host of neighborhood leaders. we talked to the mayor's office of housing. and we looked at this particular spot right near the balboa bart station and we thought it met all the parameters that we had set. easy access to public transportation, provided enough space where we can have enough vehicles that would benefit from a pile at program and this will particular site in about a

year's time will be built into 100% affordable housing so it allowed us the opportunity to use this as a pilot program to see what works and improve upon that. mission housing, along with the mayor's office of housing and the department of homelessness supportive housing and many of our neighborhood leaders and stakeholders came forward and embraced this plan. we've had two large community meetings and a host of other small, focused meetings and i have to say i'm very proud of the response that it received. there was some skepticism without people understanding the full parameters of the program. there was a significant amount of people feeling proud and wanting to step up and realizing that these individuals that are living in their vehicles are currently neighborhood residents. they're our neighbors and away wanted to try and put forward a positive step. what's in front of us today, colleagues, is the ability to

amend the planning code to allow for this particular lot, the up are yard to be zoned and used for overnight sleeping and storage and we'll have a whole host of facilities on that site. i'm sure there's some other individuals that need to thank and recognize and i will do that after i speak. staffer monica along with my entire team, along with all the other individuals in the neighborhood, the new mission terrace improvement association and their leadership and membership, along with organizations, the police captain, the urban all of the individuals that will be involved in ensuring that this is a successful pilot and we're very happy along with public works and others that move quickly so hopefully we'll pass this today and it will go to the full board tomorrow as a committee report for first

reading, second reading we'll do the following week and then we'll ask the mayor to sign it and this should be open for business hopefully by november 1st. i'll ask dillon to come up and give a presentation on what we're going to propose at the site. and then if there's any questions from committee members, we'll open it up for public comment. >> sure. good afternoon. very happy to be here. first of all, i just want to say i'm dillon schneider, manager of policy and development affairs for the department of homelessness and supportive housing. we're grateful for the leadership of supervisor satisfy eye and his staff for getting this he project off the ground as well as the leadership of supervisor brown and supervisor safai. you got the challenges we're facing and i'm going to jump into details about the proposed site. so the proposed site will be

managed by a trusted provider who will provide 24/7 security and site management. those utilizing the site will be restricted to clients that are already engage with hshs vehicle encampment resolution team which is an arm of the homeless outreach team and this will create a safe place to store vehicles and as an incentive to engage with our homelessness response system. this site will allow a small number of individuals adults to remain on site if they continue to engage with services. families of children will be highly encouraged to utilize temporary shelter. we will provide clients support in getting their vehicles legalized, operable and unencumbered by fines and of course the site like all of our temporary shelters will abide by a good neighborhood policy and we will also provide the public a 24/7 phone number that they may call with concerns.

going into design of this site. supervisor safai spoke to the timeline. it will be fairly quick. we'll begin construction in october. the site is planned to open in november and we will run for right about a year. again, do you to the limited duration of the site we'll keep costs low, utilizing quick 'em employment. no permanent utility infrastructure. we'll work within the existing great of the site. we won't touch rail tracks or stoppers which is that lovely picture to the right there and we'll be using all temporary facilities. so the location is 2340 san jose avenue. we'll have a 33 parking spots. three are designated for staff use and the rest will be a mix of standard a.d.a. and van or

r.v. parking. we'll be keeping the existing gate that exists around the site. we'll be adding new secured vehicle and pedestrian gates as well as we'll be adding the tennis screening to the existing chain-link fence to provide privacy. we will be bringing in an office trailer for our 24/7 staff to use. and we will be providing access to toilets, sanitation stations and a shade canopy. again, we'll only be using temporary fences or barricades and those will be used on the internal site to block off those train stoppers and the rocky sloped area. and we will also be extending the pedestrian path to make it level all the way from internal of the site out to the pedestrian exist. finally, we're very excited to bring in solar powered lighting and a solar power generator. as of right now, the solar power

generator, as you can see, will be next to the office trailer and rest rooms and right now we have identified two sites that will be for lighting and powered by solar power. happy to take any questions. > >> supervisor peskin: any questions for staff? seeing none. i think this is going to receive our enthusiastic support and i want to thank supervisor safai and the support of homelessness and housing for their work and most particularly the community for being supportive. are there any members of the that would like to testify on this. come forward. let's start with planning. diego, why don't you come on up. >> i'll make this quick. deagdeago owe sanchez. i heard this ordinance on augus. it's very well received. and the planning commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the ordinance with

modification. the one modification was to make the ordinance useable for other sites given that the proposed planning department approval in this ordinance only for one site which is at the 2340 san jose avenue site. that concludes my comments here for questions. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> two points that might be hard for you to understand. her demonstration alone is a technique you should use on each and every commercial building that is in question as far as generating their own electricity. that demonstration pertains to solar power and the power pack generator that is storing electricity in order to power that location that is in question with item number 2 is the same technique that you should be using on item number 1. is that clear? you see how that works. instead of going through that money-making time-consuming and wasting the time and money

procedure that you have been imposing and causing all the confusion with pg&e. the technique she used is the technique you should be using on item number 1. you talking about affordable housing i've come here several times and demonstrated two twin towers of apartment building complex that's is charging $56 million per 144 apartment units and another unit of 86 units of three-storeys that is charging $57 million for 84 apartment unit building complex. i've demonstrated where you can put both of those buildings together side by side and make a 27-storey building and by the same response, have 2,077 apartment units for the homeless people. you keep talking about affordable housing and you know

god damn well when it comes to affordable housing you set the lowest income bracket higher than the people you claim to help. you build a brand new god damn building and the people in that parking lot living in those vans and the rest of the well over 8,000 people that are homeless out in the god damn streets can't even afford it. why do you keep doing the same dumb thing over and over again. >> supervisor peskin: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for having me here today to speak for the vehicle triage center. as supervisor safai pointed out, this site controlled by mission housing along with our partner related california. we will be building 100% family-affordable housing about 137 units. and we couldn't agree more that the best use of the year before we actually break ground is to provide a place for our

unhoused. one thing that i do want to point out just in case it helps, mission housing the developer of 1950 mission street which is where we had the first navigation center and something that i think has actually been a really great thing and spread out throughout the city so i have heard rumblings from its own people that they are worried that the vehicle triage center will hold up the development of the affordable housing and that is absolutely not the case. mission housing has direct experience within the last year of moving a navigation center from one place to another in concert with the department of homelessness. i'd like to rest your mind at ease on that and say that mission housing is absolutely in favor of this. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors, corey smith on behalf of the san francisco housing action coalition also in support. this got mentioned this is a pilot project and if it's successful we think there are

other opportunities around the city where we can continue to try this and its rate after every element tempt and it's not a perfect solution and it's not going to solve anything but it will help people and i know that the folks that are going to get in there are really excited about it. thank you for your efforts to everybody involved. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. seeing no other members of the public, public comment is closed. supervisor safai. >> supervisor haney: thank you. i just had a question about families and i know it says families with children will be highly encouraged to utilize temporary shelter. can you talk about what exactly that means in terms of highly encouraged. how is that going to be approached? >> sure, definitely. so thank you for that question. what we mean by families of children we'll be highly encourage to use temporary shelter that if we have a family with children living in their

vehicle and are not willing to leave that vehicle at the site, we will get them in a safer environment. if they need to stay with their vehicle we'll make sure they have the option and it's other single adults as well. >> so, there would potentially be families who are in their cars on site n. >> there's a potential for that but that's why we're going to work with families to encourage them to take the offer of temporary shelter because we think that would be a safer option. >> thank you. >> let me just add on to that. we had a series of meetings with stakeholders and advocacy groups and others and so i think the approach was, we know already that they've already gone out and done an assessment.

i think there was one instance and the instance that we use and i didn't say this in my opening remarks was on dewolf street we had about seven r.v.s on that street. one of those was a family. someone with children. the idea being that if there was a situation that was offered to them that they chose not to keep and they didn't want to we will allow for families to live in their vehicle on the site and it's not the first choice and what we're going to promote but the other thing is because we're starting out with this in our district, we ask that there would be a priority for those living in their vehicles from district 11 first, and so if we

look at over all consensus, 500 vehicles identified in the back of last year and we know that number has gotten larger and a lot of them are in district 7 and we also talked about the shared responsibility of dealing with homeless crisis city wide and i know you spent a lot of time talking about that and i know that there's been some further conversations. i know that supervisor peskin now is about to open up supervisor wall top is opening up a navigation center. we felt like this was the

appropriate response based on the crisis we see most visibly so we put ourselves in this circumstance where we say we're ready to do this. this is never been done in san francisco before. this is been talked about for over a decade. again, we see this as a small step but an important step. i just want to end with thanking supervisor brown. she pushed me and challenged me. i thank mayor breed for believing in this and stepping forward and allocating the money and also my colleagues, all of you, in the budget process we added an additional $200,000. we believe that this will for one year, given the circumstances, and the condition of the site, the capital improvements will be half a million to $700,000 and that's what we're looking at when we do these under most circumstances. the reason is solar and we're not running any infrastructure and there's not any water or running electricity, we're being creative so i want to thank public works and their team for

going above and beyond. we want it to be livable and feel safe. i was in santa barbara a month ago, they had one smack dab in the middle of state street. they had one of these lots. it's a new reality. i think and i believe that the conversation is going to be forwarded. we have to think about being as creative as we can. we have 600 of individuals living in their cars. obviously we can't have them just living on the streets without any access to water or showers or trash. we might have to begin to think creatively about not just these vehicle triage lots but a more permanent space that is in the best interest of everyone in the city and the neighbors and so on. that's it. i don't have anything else to add. other than i appreciate your guys support and encouragement and i know that every district

in the city has to find a way to step up and do their share. >> supervisor peskin: without objection, welford thi we will s with recommendation as a committee report where it will be heard tomorrow september 10t. without objection. with recommendations. madam clerk, could you please call item number 3. >> clerk: item number 3 the planning code to enable the use of development projects sites during the project of approval and entitlement process to authorize certain activities and development project site as temperatures use is up to 36 months subject to extension and affirming appropriate findings. >> thank you. we heard this on july 8th and continued it to a date certain namely today, i understand from the mayor's office that they would like us to continue it pending some amendments so, if there is any public comment on this item, please come forward

for item number three. which we intend to continue. >> go ahead, sir. >> you working on that continuance, i want you to keep in mind and i want to know how come my demonstrations pertaining to your own rules and regulations are not being followed by your own administration. you keep talking about development. i showed you your rules and regularizations that says 15% of all new brand new apartment building complexes being built in san francisco out of the mayor's office in-housing is supposed to be 15% for verily and low income bracket single-people and family people. you keep campaigning and talking about and acting like you want to help the same people that are homeless by spending $400 million a year on homeless programs. you build a navigation center and you admit a navigation

center is not the solution to the problem. it's not a solution why are you doing it? if $400 million a year you spend it on homeless programs it's not a solution to the homeless problem, why are you doing it? you've been doing it for the past well over seven generations. when you get new supervisors, you pick up where the old supervisors left off. after each administration the homeless population doesn't decrease it increases. you got over 8,000 homeless people. it turns out it's plus 17% more than that and it's homeless in san francisco. you've got 28,400 people that's homeless in the over all city. it's disgusting. and a real frustrating about it for you guys to sit there and not follow my demonstrations. why is that? how are you going to provide permanent housing when you keep doing the same repeated mistake

over and over and over again? homeless people don't need no god damn homeless programs. they need permanent housing just like you do. >> next speaker, please. >> >> we have seen a great increase on spending and housing and one of the major problems is supply and demand on housing. housing is almost highly regular gategateregulated in the industd allowing people to park where they want to park is the best way. squatters have a lot of empty buildings here you can just turn it over to private sector and let them handle the situation. we keep just wanting the -- we need to stop encouraging people

bringing life in the world when they have no intention of supporting it. quite frankly, this urban squatting would be good enough and people supplying climate and et cetera, it would be done by the cause and effect of basically the private sector and it would be more likely to get more people off the streets in adequate housing. people who don't work don't pay. other people have to go to 40 hours a week to get and it's just and they're having to pay for someone else's housing and it is just going on and on and on and on and it just keeps going more money and more people need housing. you decrease wealth and poverty itself. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: seeing no other members of the public for this item, public comment is closed. and without objection we'll continue this item to the call of the chair. we are adjourned.

>> please rides -- please rise for the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] >> should i