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 >> supervisor peskin: good afternoon. welcome to the land use meeting for september 30th.

i am aaron peskin. ms. major, any announcements? >> please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon will appear on the october 8 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. item number 1 is ordinance amending the planning code to designate 2031 bush street, aka kinmon gakuen building, as a landmark under article 10 and affirming appropriate findings. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, ms. major. before we introduce shannon ferguson from the planning department, i would like to be listed as cosponsor of this landmark designation. the case report was really a pleasure to read and very well

done. and very edifying and of course, speaks to terrible parts of our american history and san francisco history relative, not only to executive order 9066, but acts of local governments, including our school board in the day. it's almost the opposite of today's dynamics where we have a racist, xenophobic president and a very progressive school board. in those days, actually, teddy roosevelt i learned from the case report, was the one accusing, and correctly so, our school board of being in those days, xenophobic. and racist. the history of the building is amazing from 1926 and even on the site prior to 1926.

and i was also learned things about the japanese-american community in san francisco that i didn't know. always thinking that the japanese-american community was in japantown and the western addition, but did not realize that the district that i represent, chinatown, actually has a proud japanese-american history as does the district that supervisor haney represents in the south of market. so that was -- anyway, it was a great case report. i commend it to anyone. i want to thank former landmarks board member, former board of appeal member, and planning commission sue guya, who took the time to note a handful of very small typographical things that need to be fixed in the case report. he should know, because he

worked then and now in the company. thank you, for your very, very careful reading. i read the case report, but did not find those. so thank you, bill, if you're watching. and with that, i would like to ask ms. ferguson from the planning department to come up and present on item number 1. and we are joined by vice chair safai. >> good afternoon. i'm here today to present the historic preservation commission recommendation to designate 2031 bush street as article 10 landmark. the building is located on bush

street in the japantown and is known as the kinmon gakuen build. it was part of the civil rights project which was funded by an underrepresented community grant by the national park service. they unanimously recommended designation on april 3, 2019. constructed in 1926, the kinmon gakuen building represents only one of four purpose-built community facilities in japantown, whose construction was funded by and for the local american-japanese community. it was with the u.s. citizens of world war ii.

at the home of the booker t. washington community services center, from 1942 to 1952 which provided the african-american youth with educational and recreational facilities. the period of significance for the building is 1926 to 1952. and the designation includes both exterior and interior character-defining features. for over a century, the building has served as an important community anchor and gathering place. if designated, the building would be the first landmark in the city associated with san francisco's japanese-american community and the history of japantown in the western addition, which is one of three remaining japantowns in the country. the department has determined that it meets the requirements. the hpc and the planning

department recommend landmark designation. this concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer questions. >> supervisor peskin: seeing no questions from my colleagues, i do also want to thank him forgetting this on the work -- for getting this on the work program and this building be added to our list of landmark buildings in the city and county of san francisco. with that, i open up to public comment. commissioner? >> thank you very much, president peskin, supervisor safai, supervisor haney. thank you very much for talking about the history and the very short period of time about japantown's existence.

yes, it's south park in supervisor haney's district. yes, grand avenue between bush all the way up to california street in chinatown. and, yes, in the western addition, we used to call it the fillmore, ja japantown. from our perspective, kinmon gakuen was a place to hang out. you went to school all day and at 2:30 when you got out, mama said you have to go to the japanese school. so all of us had to go down there. it was okay because it ended 6:30 and then you went to the basement and judo. on the weekends, it was a movie theater. we used to call it -- sword fighting movies, friday, saturday, sunday. it was a social network of our community. also for myself when we talked about the days of infamy in the

exhibit, in washington at the smithsonian. when we first went there, the first sight was a replica of the kinmon gakuen, where the japanese-americans assembled. we ask for your approval and we appreciate it, but there are folks in the community now that try to deny that the concentration camps existed. there are challenges we even lived there. some of this is going to come to light, because we have a sign that is coming up and there are individuals fighting us with the semantic and the word concentration camps. >> keep going, you don't have to wrap up, if you want to keep talking. >> basically, what i was trying to say, folks think that

japantown is a four-block area. but as you know it was extended to the fillmore area as well. it's important to us because again the painful relationship of what happened. it's interesting that only now in this time in the year of our lord, 2019, that we're talking about the first historical building preserved for the japanese-american community of san francisco. the gateway for japan in terms of this nation. thank you very much, supervisor. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, commissioner. it is amazing to me to hear that there are deniers of executive order 9066. there are many people alive who were gathered up by united states military troops and sent to the racetrack in san matteo county before they were put on rail cars and sent to a spot in the desert north of delta, utah, which is now a historic site. i attended the ribbon-cutting of

the museum in delta the summer before last. it is all there. it's documented by a photographer, dorthea lang. it is in the archives of the united states of america and it happened and it's shameful. >> can i ask through the chair, the commissioner a question? just for clarity, commissioner, just so we know, so we're ready for it. is it about the word concentration or people that are denying it even happened, or is it people concerned about this particular site being folded into the history or recognizing part of the history of japantown. just a little clarity on that. >> to be clear on it, it's one particular individual. i'm not going to say a group of individuals. that one individual might have folks that feel that way, but in terms of your remarks, it's all

of the above. denial of the concentration camp experience. for us, the darkest day in history. we have to look at the truth in the terms of our own well-being and historical basis, how then can we improve ourselves. for my mother and father, brother and sister, it was a concentration camp. that garden is what we called cottage row, but for years and years, because i live next to that, that park really didn't have any significance. today it's being dedicated. thursday at the park and recreation commission, that signage is going to be challenged. we hope that the park and recreation commission has approved that very word in terms of what is the truth for us in the community. so i hope i answered your question, supervisor, but, yes, it's really, really a terrible, angry thing to have that kind of

emergence of discrimination, racism in the city and county of san francisco at this time. i'm not surprised by the atmosphere that is among us to promote those kinds of ideas. but we in the japanese-american community, and the biggest appointment, we did not -- point, we did not do anything wrong. there was no due process, 120,000 japanese-americans on the west coast. >> supervisor safai: thank you, commissioner. >> supervisor peskin: subject of very famous supreme court decisions. >> supervisor safai: i was going to say, both supervisor haney and i were an event where the daughter of the landmark case was there. the daughter was there and she spoke extensively on that and what that meant. and reminding people that these were american citizens that were, in many cases, treated that way. and we always need to remember that. history is extremely important. i want to thank you for coming out and sharing that today.

thank supervisor brown for her support on this particular historical significant building. >> good afternoon, chair, supervisors. i'm one of the board members of kinmon gakuen. for the reason that children of japanese descent were discriminated in public schools, kinmon gakuen was founded in 1910. they rented a small house at 2301 bush street and operated there until 1921 when the new building was constructed at 2031 bush street. that is its current location. the school's operation, as mentioned, was interrupted by the war and due to the hysteria brought on by the war, the u.s. government seized the building and used it as a processing center for the hundreds of

japanese-american families that lived in japantown or san francisco before they were sent to the concentration camps. as supervisor peskin mentioned, it was used by the booker t. community center after the war. the building was returned to kinmon gakuen, and resumes operations, but found it challenging because most of the families did not return after being incarcerated. but they persevered. in the late 60s and 70s. japantown was hit with urban renewal, that forced removal of many residents. this made it very difficult for the school to operate, but the organization again% veered and in order to offset the operating costs, the auditorium was used as a movie theater for a short

period, until enrollment increased. the school is graced by visits from japan's royal families on three separate occasions. as a historic and cultural resources to foster the u.s. and japan relations. this is the reason we're asking you to approve the landmark designation. thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. just because i had a second to look it up on the internet, it's kind of interesting, if you think about our chief executive in the united states today, but it was actually george herbert walker bush who apologized 45 years later to the japanese and it was president ronald reagan who signed the reparations bill into law. with that, any other members of the public for item 1? seeing none, public comment is closed. i assume that you will update the case report with the things

that the commissioner has given us. and i would like to make a motion to send item 1 to the full board with positive recommendation. thank you, again. we will take that without objection. the next item. >> item 2 is ordinance amending the environment code to require commercial parking lots with more than 100 parking spaces to install electric vehicle charging equipment, amending the police code. >> supervisor peskin: i am a proud cosponsor of mayor breed's legislation before us which would require commercial parking lots and garages with more than 100 parking spaces with electric vehicle charging infrastructure. i will not regale you with why this is so important, but with

that, turn it over to charles sheahan from the department of environment. >> thank you. san francisco department of the environment. i'm going to walk you through a short presentation and then happy to take any questions after. can we have the slides, please? okay. electric vehicle charging and commercial parking facilities. this would amend the environment and police codes. the city has a goal of net zero emissions city-wide by 2050. we're on track, making progress, even though the population has grown 22% since 1990. our economy has expanded by 166% since 1990. emissions are down by 36%. so while that is good news, emissions are down, there are still emissions that are left. you see our emission pie chart. of course on the right, the biggest slice of the pie, almost

50% is transportation. transportation generates 46% of the city's emissions today. the largest generate other of emissions -- generator of emissions. let's dive deeper into the transportation part of the pie. you can see, we've analyzed offroad equipment, ships and boats, but the largest generator is the private cars and trucks that you see on the road today. what we're really talking about is tailpipe emissions. eliminating those tailpipes is going to improve the air we breathe locally and reducing emissions in the transportation sector, more than just a check box in the emission reduction schedule. we like to check the boxes, but it's about cleaning the air and making san francisco a more livable city all. you can see the need for that on the slide.

highest concentration of particulate matter is the corridors and those run through vulnerable communities. these communities are impacted by gasoline and diesel-powered cars and switching to clean electricity is going to improve the air around those corridors. we know what we need to do. it's the how that is a little more challenging. we need to mode shift and fuel switch. we need to reduce the number of vehicles operating on the roads. that meanings getting people on bikes, sidewalks, or in public transit. that is the core of the transit-first policy. it's designed to reduce congestion and emissions. today, we surface passed the -- surpassed the goal of 50%. we're shooting for 80. and while we're mode shifting and getting cars off the road, the cars still on the road, they

need to be electrified. we need to get them off gas and diesel and on to renewable electricity. i like to say that the program we enjoy today is more than just for your home, but for your vehicle and anything else that it can power. to that end, the mayor passed an authored an easy road map this year and it calls for goal of 100% electrification by 2040 and identifies specific actions, public awareness, incentives, charging infrastructure. the electric grid, medium and heavy duty vehicles and emerging mobility. i mentioned charging before, because one of the key barriers in the city, one of the key barriers to full electrification of our transportation system is access to charging. we live in a dense city. two-thirds of the residents live in multi-units dwellings. it's hard to install charging

infrastructure in those multiunit dwellings, as opposed to a single-family home. or you can just come home and trickle charge off the wall. that is very hard to do in multiunit family dwellings, especially the older ones. if we're go to facilitate, we need more charging and more confidence in the public charging network here in the city. we have been working on it. this is not our first ordinance related to the issue. we have the e.v. ready ordinance. it requires 100% of parking spaces and new construction to be e.v.-ready. that's been on the books for a couple of years now. we're taking care of new buildings being built. what we're focusing on is existing buildings. so here's the current charging network. 750 public charging ports throughout the city.

those e.v. registration numbers, 10,000, that's based on october 2018 figures. so when the figures come out october this year, we think the number will be closer to 20,000. maybe even 25,000, 30,000 registered e.v.s in the city. so people are adopting e.v.s, but based on the 18 numbers, we only have 27 public charging ports per registered e.v. even though this ordinance we're talking about today targets the private sector, we're already under way with an initiative in the public sector. public sector and private sector. so the city has opened up 38 public municipal-owned garages and invited e.v. developers to come in and develop charging stations. we've gotten proposals for every one of the 38, so we're working hard on the municipal and the public side.

what will this ordinance do? it's going to target commercial garages and parking lots with 100 or more park spaces, that's approximately 300 sites in the city. it's going to require level-2 charging stations at 10% of those parking spaces. or a functionally equivalent number of fast chargers. and the compliance date is january 1, 2023. it requires good faith analysis of technical feasibility and ties the permit process to the permits issued by sfpd for commercial parking facilities. >> hold on. can you go back? is this existing garages? all of the garages in the city with 100 or more parking spaces?

>> correct, existing. >> you say you tie it to the permitting process, most times they're already permitted, so how are you going to deal with the existing? >> they renew each year. they put in the paperwork, get approved. so there might be a tweak or two to make to the paperwork showing they're in compliance. >> supervisor safai: part of their annual renewal, we'll get them then? >> yes. >> supervisor safai: got it. thank you. >> okay. so there is also a waiver process. it focuses on three categories. one, is there sufficient electrical capacity? do they need to install a transformer, which is cost prohibitive and challenging. if so, that could generate a waiver. two, is there infeasible site conditions? do they need to raise the height

of the ceilings, regrade the pavement. again, that can be challenging and generate a waiver. three, was there a good faith effort put in with at least two e.v. charging providers that was then declined because there could be no agreement at minimal or no cost. an example. if there is an existing parking facility that is changing use and it's under way with the building and inspection team, going from a commercial parking facility to a commercial office building. or maybe the parking building is going to be demolished and in its place a residential building is going to be constructed, this is not an investment or attractive business case fort e.v. charging developers and parking facilities, so that could also generate a waiver. fairly simple. san francisco department of environment is going to administer the waiver process.

and of course we're always looking for compliance. that's where we'll work with the san francisco police department who can suspend or revoke operating permits if there is noncompliance and of course, we can administer fines for noncompliance as well. i showed you this before. this is the baseline. this is where we are today. and this is the possible impact and reach when you combine the municipal initiative with the potential for the ordinance. as you can see, there is lots of potential. it's a little more focused on the parts of the city with the most multifamily, multiunit dwellings. but it gives potential access to charging in other parts of the city as well. in addition to creating confidence with our charging network, we're also trying to bring e.v.s to those that aren't necessarily looking at buying an

e.v. or don't think they have the means to buy an e.v. for example, we want to create an ombudsman position, a one-stop shop, work with grid alternatives and state agencies that provide grants, rebates and incentives for lower income communities to help them offset the cost. we're going to work with city college like many cities do. there is the apprenticeship program with sfmta where students are trained for e.v. mechanics. we're looking for other criticla. we've been working with other cities around the region where the heavy duty trucks are going back and forth and working with bodies on grants, incentives and other initiatives to switch

heavy-duty vehicles to electric vehicles. with that, i will take any questions that you may have. >> supervisor peskin: so, obviously i'm a cosponsor of this, but i would like to make one, on the record, clarification, which i know my staff talked to the department of environment staff. which is given the phase-in period and given that there is actually thankfully less and less demand for parking, not to say that downtown is not congested, but we did hear from one garage owner who actually may be in the process of changing the use of a garage. and so what i wanted to do is be clear that it's our intent that amongst the considerations made by the director when exercising discretion to waive this requirement, that those kind of thoughts be inculcated in the

thinking and that the consideration on page 7 of the legislation regarding technical feasibility and the third regarding financial viability, be addressed appropriately and the regulations. and to that end, what i wanted to do was add a little bit of language that is not uncommon that would allow this board of supervisors to review the regulations and reject them for modify them by ordinance within a time frame of 60 days from when the director delivers those. and this is actually a template of what i might do in the ordinance. i want to put that on the record. is that your understanding, charles? >> yes, i've seen the proposed amendment and staff is comfortable with the language. >> supervisor peskin: good. the other question i had, was not just on the commercial side,

but the residential side. we're developing and in some cases have developed very large residential complexes that have garages over 100 -- i can think of at least one in my district and there is parkmore and one in supervisor yee's district. is there any movement afoot to expand to residential as well? >> the e.v. readiness would cover some of those properties that you mentioned that are in the planning or entitlement or yet to be built phase. so when they're built, they will be e.v. ready. that will take care of all new buildings going forward. the existing multifamily unit dwellings, that's still a challenge. we started with the e.v. readiness ordinance. we're now working on this initiative for private sector garages. we've done the same for our municipal garages. so that is a bit of the next frontier. it's something we've been

looking at, but it's challenging from a infrastructure and cost perspective, but it's still something we're working on. because the need for charging as we transition the entire fleet is going to continue to grow. we're on step 2 or 3 here and there is a few more after that. >> supervisor peskin: i look forward to having those conversations with you and your office going forward. any questions, supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: yes, thank you. first of all, i would like to be added as a cosponsor. i think this is an important piece of legislation. i know that we -- i don't know if you said this -- a letter from the building owners and managers appreciating the hard work that was done in support of this piece of legislation. i think it's always great when the affected stakeholders have had the opportunity to weigh in and be part of the process. even if they don't -- and then in the end come to the conclusion that they are suppor supportive of the legislation as

drafted. i just wanted to say that for the record. i know chair peskin and supervisor haney got that letter today. that's good. thank you to the department of environment stakeholders and others that were part of that conversation along with the mayor and supervisor peskin and mandelman. the other question i had, the question i had is, in terms of the pricing. that's one of the things that wasn't discussed today, that encourages or discourages people from using the stations outside of their homes, right? because some people have solar-powered at their house, or access to different rates based on what has been negotiated as part of a larger package. but has there been thought or conversation put into the pricing to encourage people to utilize these charging stations and parking garages?

>> sure. so i believe both -- >> the prices can vary. i reason i know this, i have an electric car. >> right. so for electricity rates, i'll start there. there a couple of costs that go into charging your electric car. for rates, i believe pg&e and clean power sf have demand response rates to take advantage. >> you're couraged to -- when we drafted the ordinance, we wanted to make sure it wasn't one provider, but two providers, e.v. station charging providers. so not only is the parking facility able to compete in the private sector, but also they can make sure that what is installed is going to be cost

effective for the customers that are coming in to use the parking facility. i don't know how much the rates for electricity differ between like e.v. go or charge point. do -- they do have different rates. >> they do. so my question would be, if the city has gotten into the business of delivering energy -- i know they're not a vendor, but has there been conversation about the city having ownership over some of the stations since they have their own rates and structures and that might be a way to keep the cost down and encourage people to utilize the stations. >> i would mostly defer to my colleagues on that issue, but i do have history and experience. i think through 2013, maybe 2015, charging at city-owned garages was free. it was a cost effective way to get things going. i think that has lapsed. but especially with some of the developments that may happen on grid ownership here in the city.

that might open up unique opportunities for not only city-owned grid, but city-owned charging stations and rates for the charging stations. but i'm getting a little farther into the territory -- >> i get it. and again, i'm adding my name. i think this is a good piece of legislation, but sometimes we create policies and then we fall back less on implementation. and if people are not finding that this is cost effective, then only people that can afford that additional cost will take advantage of it on that level. and so i just -- i would like to see more thought put into actually the cost of utilizing it. because we can expand these to as many garages as possible, but if only people with the extra disposable income that can use it. and they will sit there empty or not utilized. >> that makes sense, supervisor, i'm going to take note of that,

on the cost for charging. one of the things, when we think about making sure everyone has access. one of the things in the e.v. road map is the ability to educate and make aware to everyone, even those who don't think they have means, there are rebates and incentives by state agencies and entities for low-income residents, that can significantly reduce the cost of purchase. it's not exactly the charging up paradigm, but we're looking at reducing the cost of purchasing. >> supervisor safai: the other thing i would say as a person with one of these cars and drives it to the stations. they're not always very user friendly. if you're not a member, you have to sit there and call a 1-800 number and you're looking for, this is 327 at this address. they're like, i can't find it.

i don't know how to turn it on. so if you're trying to go into the shopping center and you're sitting there an additional 20 minutes. why do i want to spend 20 minutes trying to get into the charging station when i'll just drive it upstairs? so it's not necessarily user friendly. i appreciate that you're trying to get two vendors, but i think the conversation in terms of the contract when you do provide it in a city-owned lot and you're signing those contracts, it should also be about usability. >> i agree. >> supervisor safai: we should make it more user friendly. easy if you could just run your credit card, boom, it's done fast. but sit there and make a phone call and search for the number, it's not really user friendly. i get it. it's new technology. just beginning. the last few years there has been more of explosion and availability of electric cars, but i don't want to see us pat

ourselves on the back because we have 5,000 charging stations but no one is using them. >> the scenario you just described is what i experienced when i became a new e.v. owner and i went to charge up. >> 20-minute long conversation. >> there were several phone conversations. i was in the rush, panicked. i had no electricity in my new e.v. that's one of the things we're trying to address in the e.v. road map, education and awareness. i think you're exactly right. i know that from personal experience. >> supervisor safai: one last thing. the only one that i know of in -- again this is about garages -- but the only street-charging spot i know of is next the sfpuc. is that discussed in this legislation? thought of? because another way also to expand peoples' opportunity is not just in garages, but you can add parking spots to the

conversation. >> sure, so it's not discussed in the legislation. i know the sfmta is conducting a curbside use assessment and that is going to be due later this year. but that is their jurisdiction. so i defer to them on their study and what they're looking at for charging on the curb and what else they want to do for the curb and they're going to report back later after that assessment is done on that topic. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. i see a number of members of the public. and commissioner here. we will open up for public comment. please come up. >> i believe it is good policy. one key thing i want to hammer home is question of equity,

which supervisor safai talked on all three points. equity in terms of cost, in terms of usage and finally, geography, because the map is beneficial to the northeast section of san francisco. hopefully, we'll be able to build out e.v. infrastructure to support the west side, meaning the richmond district and sunset or low density. and the cars have created a car-driven culture, so hopefully curbside charging can address this. for bright line itself, we've worked in bayview hunters, so seeing the lack of charging infrastructure there is disheartening in us to try to promote electric vehicles. hopefully, we can make it accessible for all. >> supervisor peskin: any other members of the public? seeing none, we'll close public comment. and colleagues, we have the

aforementioned amendment before us which i've introduced and would make a motion to include. can we do that without objection? so that objection we will take that amendment. and send the item as amended with recommendation to the full board of supervisors. and that concludes our meeting. we are adjourned.

>> in november of 2016, california voters passed proposition 64. the adult use of marijuana act. san franciscans overwhelmingly approved it by nearly 75%. and the law went into effect in january of 2018. [♪] >> under california's new law, adults age 21 and over can legally possess up to 1 ounce of cannabis and grow up to six plants at home. adults in california can legally give up to 1 ounce to other adults. >> in the state of california, we passed a law that said adult consumption is legal. if you are an adult and in

possession of certain amounts, you will no longer be tried. you will not be arrested or prosecuted for that. that is changing the landscape dramatically. [♪] >> to legalization of cannabis could bring tremendous economic and social benefits to cities like san francisco. >> this industry is projected to reach $22 billion by the year 2020. and that is just a few years away. >> it can be a huge legal industry in california. i think very shortly, the actual growing of marijuana may become the biggest cash crop in the state and so you want that to be a legal tax paying cash crop, all the way down the line to a sales tax on the retail level. >> the california medical industry is a 3 billion-dollar industry last year. anticipating that multiplier as

20, 30, 50 times in the consumer marketplace once adult use is really in place, you could go ahead and apply that multiplier to revenue. it will be huge. >> when that underground economy becomes part of the regular tax paying employment economy of the bay area, it not only has a direct impact, that money has a ripple impact through the economy as well. >> it is not just about retail. it is not just about the sensor. is about manufacturing pick a lot of innovative manufacturing is happening here in san francisco in addition to other parts of the state as well as the cultivation. we should be encouraging that. >> there is a vast array of jobs that are going to be available in the newly regulated cannabis industry. you can start at the top tier which a scientist working in testing labs. scientists working at extraction companies. and you work towards

agricultural jobs. you have ones that will require less education and you look towards cannabis retail and see traditional retail jobs and you see general management jobs. those things that are similar to working at a bar restaurant or working at a retail store. >> we are offering, essentially, high paid manufacturing jobs. typical starting wage of 18-$20 an hour, almost no barrier to entry, you do not need an education. >> that means that people who do not have college educations, working-class people, will have an opportunity to have a job at cultivating cannabis plants. there's a whole wide array of job opportunities from the seedling to the sale of the cannabis. [♪] >> last year, they said 26 million people came to san francisco. >> the tourism industry continues to be very robust here and the city and county of san francisco is about a billion-dollar industry. >> if we use a conservative

cannabis user adoption rate to 15% that means 4 million tourists want that means 4 million tourists want to purchase cannabis. and we need to be ready for th them. >> in 2015, as adult use legalization efforts gained momentum in california, the supervisors created the san francisco cannabis state legalization task force. this task force offered to research and advice to the supervisors, the mayor and other city departments. >> we knew that adult use legalization was coming to the ballot and stat that would bring with it a number of decisions that the city would have to make about zoning and regulation and so forth. and i decided at that time, at a know it was a great, that rather than have a fire drill after the ballot measure passes, as suspected it would, we should plan an event. so i authored a task force to spend a year studying it and we

made it a broad-based task force. >> we prepared ourselves by developing a health impact assessment and partnered that with key stakeholder discussions with washington, oregon, colorado, to really learn lessons from their experience rolling out both adult and medicinal cannabis. >> within days of the passing of the proposition, ed lee called on agencies to act decisively. >> he issued an executive order asking the department of public health, along with planning and other city departments to think through an internal working group around what we needed to do to consider writing this law. >> we collectively, i would say that was representatives from g.s.a., as well as the mayor's office, met with a lot of departments to talk through what prop 64 and the implementation of prop 64 it meant to them. >> the mayor proposed an office of cannabis, a one-stop shop for

permits allowing operators to grow and sell cannabis. >> he wanted a smart structure. he wanted a regulatory structure that ensured that kids didn't have access and community's were safe and that consumers were safe. and he wanted to ensure, more importantly, it was a regulatory structure that encouraged diversity and inclusivity. >> this is an office that will be solely charged with a duty of wanting not only the policies that we create, implementing and enforcing them, but also executing the licenses that are needed. we're talking about 20 different licenses that will put us into compliance with what is happening on the state level. >> this is a highly, highly regulated industry now, at this point. we have anywhere from 7-10 departments that will be working with these industry participants as they go through the permitting process. that is a lot of work at a loss

of coordination. we are creating a permitting process that is smart and is digital. it is much easier for the user and for community input, and is less mired in bureaucracy. >> for the first time ever in san francisco history, standalone licenses are available for all aspects of the nonretail side of the cannabis industry. now, a cultivator can go in to the department of building inspection and to the department of health and say, with this first registered and temporary license, and then what will eventually be a permanent license, this is the project, this is what i am going to do. >> very rarely in city government do we interact with industries that are asking to be regulated. these guys want to be regulated. they want to be compliant. they want to work with the city. that is rare. >> san francisco has created a

temporary licensing process so that the pre-existing operators here in san francisco can apply for a temporary state licensed. >> we have taken teams of up to 12 inspectors to inspect the facility twice a day. we have been doing that with the department of building inspection and the department of public health. and the fire department. >> it is really important for the industry to know that we are treating them like industry. like manufacturing. like coworkers pick so that is the way we are approaching this from a health and safety and a consumer protection network. this is just the way practice happens with restaurants or manufacturing facilities. >> because there are so many pieces of industry that people haven't even thought about. there are different permits for each piece. you have to set up a permitting system for growing, for manufacturing, for testing. for delivery. for retail.

you have to make sure that there is an appropriate health code. certainly the regulation of alcohol in terms of restaurants and retail it's probably a model for how this industry will be regulated as well, both on sale and consumption. >> it is completely uncharted territory. there is a blessing and a curse with that. it is exciting because we are on a new frontier, but it is very nerve-racking because there's a lot at stake. and quite frankly, being san francisco, being the state of california, people are looking to us. >> we hope that cannabis does become more of an accepted part of society in the same way that alcohol is, the same way coffee is. >> it is a very innovative fear, particularly around manufacturing. san francisco could be an epicenter. >> san francisco can be a leader here. a global leader in the cannabis movement and set a bar just to

other communities and cities and states and this nation how it is done. [♪]

>> i'm warren corn field and we are doing a series called stay safe, we are going to talk about staying in your home after an earthquake and taking care of your pet's needs. ♪ >> here we are at the spur urban ken center and we are in this little house that was built to show what it is like in san francisco after an earthquake. we are very pleased to have with us today, pat brown from

the department of animal care and control and her friend oreo. >> hi. >> lauren. >> could you tell us what it would take after an earthquake or some other emergency when you are in your home and maybe no power or water for a little while. what it would take for you and oreo to be comfortable and safe at home. >> just as you would prepare for your own needs should an earthquake or a disaster event occur, you need to prepare for your pets. and i have brought with me today, some of the things that i have put in my disaster kit to prepare for my animal's needs to make sure that i am ready should something happen and i need to shelter at home. >> what are some of the things that people should have in their home after an earthquake or other emergency to help take care of their tasks and take care of themselves. >> i took the liberty of bringing you some examples.

it includes a first aid kit for your pet and you can also use it for yourself and extra meds for your pets. and water container that will not tip over. we have got both food, wet food and dry food for your pet. and disposable food container. and water, and your vet records. in addition, we have a collar and some toys. >> yeah. to keep oreo busy. >> he needs toys and this is san francisco being a fruity city and come on oreo. this is your dinner, it is patte style chicken dinner with our foody seen here. >> what they say now is that you should have at least a gallon of water and i think that a gallon of water is small amount, i think that maybe more like two gallons of water would be good for you and your pet.

>> does the city of animal control or any other agency help you with your pet after an emergency. >> there is a coalition of ngos, non-governmental organizations led by the department of animal care and control to do disaster planning for pets and that includes the san francisco spca. the paws group, the vet sos, pets unlimited. and we all have gotten together and have been getting together for over four or five years now to talk about how we can educate the public about being prepared for a disaster as it involves your pets. >> a lot of services. i understand that if you have to leave your home, we are encouraging people to take their pets with them. >> absolutely. we think that that is a lesson that we concerned from karina, if you are being evacuated you should take your pet with you.

i have a carrier, and you need to have a carrier that you can fit your pet in comfortably and you need to take your pet with you when you were evacuated. >> i am going to thank you very much for joining us and bringing oreo today. and i am go >> there are kids and families ever were. it is really an extraordinary playground. it has got a little something for everyone. it is aesthetically billion. it is completely accessible. you can see how excited people are for this playground. it is very special. >> on opening day in the brand- new helen diller playground at north park, children can be

seen swinging, gliding, swinging, exploring, digging, hanging, jumping, and even making drumming sounds. this major renovation was possible with the generous donation of more than $1.5 million from the mercer fund in honor of san francisco bay area philanthropist helen diller. together with the clean and safe neighborhood parks fund and the city's general fund. >> 4. 3. 2. 1. [applause] >> the playground is broken into three general areas. one for the preschool set, another for older children, and a sand area designed for kids of all ages. unlike the old playground, the new one is accessible to people with disabilities. this brand-new playground has several unique and exciting features. two slides, including one 45- foot super slide with an elevation change of nearly 30 feet.

climbing ropes and walls, including one made of granite. 88 suspension bridge. recycling, traditional swing, plus a therapeutics win for children with disabilities, and even a sand garden with chines and drums. >> it is a visionary $3.5 million world class playground in the heart of san francisco. this is just really a big, community win and a celebration for us all. >> to learn more about the helen diller playground in dolores park, go to sfrecpark.org.