rightly or wrongly, we have even-aged monocultures and they're now in decline together. and also, as everything does, we do deal with a couple of specific deas disease or pathogs and the three largest species within our parkland urban canopy or monterey cypress, the pine are subject to a disease that we've been working with here, pine pitch canker and so that is something we're dealing with own ouonour pine trees and the ongog hazard assessments in litigation in that trees in public parks, we maintain them so that they present no hazard or mitigate the marylan public safety if wee tree or limb failures. so our strategies with these resources in tackling those

challenges, our overall goal, we're trying to move toward is be able to sustain a 15-year tree management cycle. we want to do tree management maintenance on each parked tree in maintained open space on a 15-year schedule. and we are attempting to do that through, basically, three strategy approaches here and we do have our day-to-day tree maintenance. our tree crews who do the day-to-day tree maintenance and our reactive resource to get out and take care of things in real-time, as tree issues occur. and we do tree assessments each year. we use a third-party contractor. hort-science is our city provider and contractor. we do usually six tree assessments on six -- we do six assessments on six park properties per year and from those assessments, we take the recommendations and they then compromise the work plan for

either tree crews or contract work to accomplish -- those maintenance actions on our park trees. and as nicholas pointed out, a very important point for us is that we are in a joint rfp with public works, bureau of urban forestry to acquire an urban forestry database. this is important for us right now. everything we've been doing to this point, we're basically managing it on paper. and for the data requirements that we want, we need a better data basis to capture and manage what we're doing so that we can track is plan our tree maintenance cycle and track and plan and document our reforestation efforts and that type of thing. we have high hope for a positive outcome through this rfp to be able to identify and then acquire an you're been forestry management database system.

largely our priorization process focuses on high use and adjacency to paths of travel and this is to make sure we are identifying and mitigating any hazards whether from limb failure, storm damage, tree failures and that type of thing and being able to manage from that perspective first and foremost. the tree seattle assessments i d contribute to that importantly because they help us to identify where the potential hazards may be. in this current fiscal year, rather than six tree assessments, we're conducting two because they're two large properties. we are completing a tree assessment on glenn canyon, glenn park and we have underway a tree assessment of stern grove, which is a large property with about 2500 trees that will

be assessed out there. when we get the findings and recommendations in, as i said, those will compromise the work plan for accomplishing the recommendations in the upcoming fiscal year. switching now to reforestation, we have a reforestation guideline populous policy document that will outline the guidelines we will be following now and in the future for our maintain parkland. within that guideline document and also, as our performance measure within our own strategic plan of the department, our goal is to plant two trees for every one tree that gets remove on parkland. and it's important to point out when that occurs, we choose the tree-planting sites and not necessarily where the one tree was removed.

we look to put the two trees in for the one tree that is coming out. necessarily, for example, if it was a large mature tree in a large mature stand of trees and that tree came out, there isn't enough sunlight over open space for a newly planted tree to thrive and grow into its full structure. so it's a commonly misperception, came out, that tree came out and you'll plant two trees right there. maybe, but not necessarily. and also, as mentioned by public works, we drive our schedule based on our staff's ability to sustain what we maintain as a four-year root establishment period for all new trees, where we have to do watering, perhaps a structural prune and that type of thing to help the tree establish its root system and then thrive for the duration of its life. and having said all of this, i want to point out that we do have constraints on canopy

expansion in park land. and it's driven by a couple of things. number one, we do want to preserve the native plant for communities that we find on our park land and preserve the remnant of the san francisco landscapes that are still in existence here around the city. and so that's always a consideration. very importantly, we have to accommodate multiple active park uses. what i mean by that is that, as i'm sure you know, we have a large number of athletic fields. we have concert meadows, picnic meadows and that type of thing and we would not necessarily start a large tree-planting effort in those because we have to maintain that open space available for a wide variety of park use. we try to keep our tree planting consistent with all of these various park designs and park uses, some of which do compete with each other.

so how are we doing our reforestation number for the past fiscal year? we planted 415 trees, we removed 252 trees and so we did not hit our two for one ratio this year. we hit a 1.7 but it continues to be our goal to meet and exceed that two for one ratio going forward. lastly, a few comments on climate resilience and biodiversity, we're mindful in rec and park about climate change impacts and ve vegetation adaptation which is pretty much for us an evolving science. you know, seeing what there is out there and seeing what works and also understanding that the climate itself is changing and, you know, looking around california, coastal california for what we should be planning for in the future.

and our strategies, as we undertake that, we focus exclusively on drought tolerant, mediterranean climate palate and we are predisposed to dangerous species, not exclusively but when we say native, it's not just the bay area but looking throughout california. as has been mentioned here, sann francisco has no native forest. it was beach scrub. we're happy to have a forest now but we're mindful of what that forest -- what climate that forest may have to grow into in the future. and maintaining an overall diversity of plantings. as i said, we have three main species for the large specie trees. we tried to keep it diversified and have a wide biodiversity in our parkland and with that, i would be open to your questions.

>> thank you so much. i just had a few questions. you mentioned there's currently a major tree assessment happening in glenn canyon and stern grove. >> yes. >> do you expect that to result in identification of a large number of trees in those two parks that would need to be removed? >> we know there will be some recommendations for removals and i am not anticipating large numbers. there's always removals -- the recommendations always encompass removals and side trimming and then monitoring and so those are the three things -- and depending on the tree stands, you know, the number of those vary. but from glenn park, in particular, we do not anticipate a large number of removals there and stern grove is too early in the assessment to know. >> great.

in following up on that, i had a question about -- thanks for presenting the reforestation numbers for fiscal year '18-'19 and good to see the 1.7 ratio, which is close to the goal. and what -- i was curious what the ratio has been over the last five years. >> it's hovered around there. we have hit 2.0 and down to 1.6 before and it hovers between 1.6 and two. >> thank you. >> any questions? we could move from the final presentations from john scarpula at the public utilities commission. >> good afternoon. i'm with the puc. it looks like the computer turned off and there it is.

got it. thanks, everybody. so john scarpula with puc and i'm joined by my colleague, sarah minnick, the manager and director of our green infrastructure program and she'll be talking, as well, today. so quickly, the puc properties within the city, where there's trees and lake merced area and it's managed via an mou by rec park but we work closely with them. the lumbar reservoir lands in district two and the oceanaci track making its way towards gullen park and sunset reservoir in d4 and twin digs reservoir

and sutro reservoir. most know where the first four are located and for the next four, just want to orient everybody. laguna honda is along the l laga reservoir and that's 28 acres and that's one of the bigger areas. also, sutra reservoir, across from the claretin elementary. and on the hill there, very close to number four which is between peaks and i wanted to orient folks because not everyone knows where they are. so it's a much smaller number of trees, 131,000 from rec park and we have approximately 4,000 trees that puc oversees. of those, about half of them are lake merced, which are maybe maintained by rec park. what are maintenance measures?

we do tree trimming and removal of dead trees and we remove trees and there was a hearing about it that present yi called last week or two weeks ago. we do also remove trees to ensure fire breaks between the homes and to ensure that we have state required fire protection. the other time that we remove trees, a lot of our tries, a lot of people don't know they're on our reservoirs which are earth and dams. the vision of safety, dsod, division is safety of dams is a state department and they will come in and ask us to remove trees on certain occasions. they've done so since 2017, when the oraville dam failed. they've become much more strict about removing trees and you cannot replant because of dam safety and reservoir safety. we plant a lot of ma native vegetation and work with neighbors to identify proper

ownership and recollect. responsibility. a lot of times the backyards go into reservoirs and there's to fences. we weren't to make sure it's clear we're taking care of trees versus someone else. this is an historic photo and peter touched on this earlier, is bringing back the native ecosystem and supporting the watersheds that are historic and native to san francisco. and we do that on our reservoir lands but why sarah minnick is here, the puc is taking it further and thinking how can we support the native ecosystem and biodiversity in the streets of san francisco, on private properties in san francisco, large development projects in san francisco with a stormwater lens but bring in other benefits such as greening and traffic calming. so sarah's group leads that effort. with that, i can answer

questions about the reservoir lands or pass it off to sarah and should can jump into the street work. >> thank you, john. >> we have to incident great and deliver stormwater to san francisco. we have ten gallons of rain that falls on our city every year and it falls on to impervious and pervious surfaces.

this is a map and all of the gray surfaces. it's 10% on public parcels and 35% in streets. typically all stormwater goes into our sewer system made up of treatment facilities, pipes, pump stations and storag storag, et cetera, which as you know are underground. in the past decade, puc started to integrate green infrastructure technologies into our stormwater management portfolio to try to have

interinterventions and as all oe speakers have mentioned trees manage stormwater and other interventions take it from other impervious surfaces and manage it on the surface of the landscape. there's traffic calming, urban habitat and even water supply diversification to san francisco. and the way that we do that is using three principal tools, through regulation incentives and capital projects. and because green infrastructure is relatively new, we've tried to tried to support all efforts with robust technical assistance and strategic partnerships. i'll go through a couple of examples. our main tool in the regulatory space is the stormwater management ordinance, which we

passed in 2010. so we've been lucky enough to leverage over $10 billion worth of vertical development that's gone on in san francisco since that time to integrate green infrastructure into those projects. so over 270 are completed and over 170 are in progress and all of our redevelopment areas are subject to the stormwater management ordinance. and we're getting a lot of beautiful green infrastructure out of that regulatory effort and in many cases spaces that get engineered out if they're optional but the ordinance has helped to keep the green spaces and manage stormwater at the same time. and in our redevelopment areas, which are largely in separate sewer areas, green infrastructure is the principal tool for treating storm water before it goes into receiving water bodies. and then we're using incentives to get people to build green infrastructure in their neighborhoods.

the stewardship program has been available since 2008, a partnership with the community challenge grant to do sidewalk landscaping which rainwater harvesting and green infrastructure. but we've recognised that a lot of that effort with the watershed stewardship grant was in the public realm and on schools leaving out a lot of those really large impervious surfaces that we need to capture stormwater off of. so we established this year the green infrastructure grant program in february to really try and scale up our efforts on impervious parcels. so we have 6.$4 million available to give away to grantees for green infrastructure. and so far, we have three in the queue. just a quick note that the far left and far right photos have accidentally been swapped. so those are mislabeled, for

but the ron i' reason i'm showig current conditions, they were just awarded and not under construction but you can see in three photos how impervious these sites are and how little access to nature or ecological function is available on a lot of the sites and so our hope is to get the win-win opportunities where the puc can leverage storm-water management and recipients of our grant funds can get the programming and investment that they need to have ecological function and opportunities for environmental education on site. and then the last way that we integrate green infrastructure into the landscape is by building it through capital projects. and our first effort to do that was to do one in each of our eight urban watersheds. we've completed six so far. and you can see some of the resulting photos here, some in

the streetscapes and some in partnership with rec park, managing stormwater in parks and this is a way to really bring ecological function back into what is a very dense and impervious city and to be able to have multiple plantings in the streetscape. to make sure this is of high quality over the years, we've created and launched a bunch of different technical assistance materials. they go from planning, designing construction through maintenance and inspection and some next steps for that are to have curriculum and workshops for them to dig deeper into the topics and we're looking for strategic partnerships where agencies can come together to manage stormwater and deliver multiple benefits. one example is on the octavia

boulevard where they could leverage impact fees but needed a partner to offer assistance and maintain that. so we're entering into an mou to do that. and then what we always are keeping our eye on from a participation inspecto perspectt are we getting? and this shows the stacked benefits of having those regulatory incentive-based and capital interventions in the landscape. so by 2032, wore looking to manage about half a billion of gallons of stormwater to keep it out of our sewer system and continue our efforts to a long-term goal of removing a billion gallons a year using green infrastructure and that would be about a tenth or 10% of all of the rain that falls on san francisco. and just as important as the

stormwater management, the whole point is to deliver multiple benefits to san francisco. in terms of the place making with a stormwater performance, we've done a lot of different modeling exercises and this just represents one scenario. so it's meant to be representative. and it shows that by leveraging this investment, we could have about 200 boxes of green streets, eight miles of daylighted creeks, 50 stormwater schools or parks and all of those, would, of course, be in concert posing what kind of programming and investments do you need and want to deliver and how can stormwater be a part of that? so we're eager to integrate stormwater into the benefits that other folks are looking for. so over the past decade, green infrastructure has come a long way but we have work to do to amplify and scale it up as we would like to see it city-wide. these are efforts we're looking

at moving into the next two years, stormwater credit trading which could amplify the regulatoriests we the design community and we're looking at joint capital project delivery with partners and we're going to be expanding our technical assistance portfolio, as well as working on integrated projects as the work on resilience really gets amplified across the city family. so with that, i would love to take any of your questions.

>> could you comment on tree plantings and expanding? >> yes, i think what we've victim sdoneso far, especially n redevelopment, brand new streets with green infrastructure and trees, working with designers, they have typically interspersed rain gardens and trees separate from each other and we have had designs where trees are inside of green infrastructure facilities, as well. and as all of the speakers have mentioned, trees are great at managing stormwater. one difference in some of the technologies that i spoke about here and trees is that we are managing stormwater from large contributing you areas that flows into rain gardens or into rain water harvesting facilities and trees are managing water that is just falling on them. i think the integration is

figuring out design solutions as well as trees that are designed inside or outside of green infrastructure and that we still have work to do there. and we are piloting some different silva-cell designs on puc facilities right now with trees integrated into that, to see how that works and i think there are lots of opportunities.

>> i want to pull up a slide. if you look at the slide of the laguna honda reservoir which is similar to the areas we manage and peter referred to this, you can see there's a lot of vegetation in this photo and what you're not seeing are any trees. so a lot of reasons -- why we've been removing trees, we've been replanting with native vegetation and we feel better, supports the ecosystems of the areas where we had the reservoirs and better supports the biodiversity goals that our commission adopted through our commission and through the

board. so, yes, we do ge that issue cot we support water restoration and that's how i can answer it. >> thank you. >> i think we're ready for public comment. so i think we have about eight cards. if you would like to comment, each speaker will have two minutes and state your first name and last name and speak directly into the microphone. do you want me to call the names? you can line up here? those who have prepared written statements are encouraged to leave a copy with the clerk for inclusion in the original file. so come on up. do you want me to read the cards? >> go ahead. >> good afternoon, denise louie and thank you for taking up climate change. i urge you to ask to set aside money for open-space tree removal in management, especially while the economy is

good and when we have unexpected windfalls of money. and please set forth a policy of tree management and set aside funds for the same. so if you get 8 million for trees, 4 million or half of whatever you get should be dedicated for removal of dead, dying and unhealthy, open-space trees. calling mr. flanagan telling the commission about three years ago that significant percentages of trees atop mount davidson were unhealthy. yet the trees have largely not been addressed in spite of citizens advocating for management of publically-owned, unair gated trees and by the ways, we should consider trees on san francisco unified schools and city college and university land.

climate change has significantly impacted these tall-aging water leveling stance of tree. as you can see in my 2014 and 2019 photos of glenn canyon tree tops, these now drought stressed and browning trees are vulnerable to disease pathogens and beatles. a recent report on mount sutra are dying faster than they can remove them. i urge you to begin a thinning program immediately to reduce fuel for a wildfire and to give remaining trees for access. >> next speaker, please.

>> i'm dr. arion eroy. i'm here to argue for trees already residing in san francisco. they are a part of our community and they are our neighbors and they are silent soldiers working for us against catastrophic climate change. they make up a diverse community in our city's urban forest network. our largest urban forest is mount sutra forest which has a city and state parcel as a part unfortunate and at a time of a catastrophic climate change, ucsf is raising thousands of eucalyptus trees. they're healthy, mature and vitally alive. they are able to live to be 500 years old and they're mostly about 125 years old. what is their crime? they live on highly coveted land in a city where greed is the order of the day. the boards of regence in oakland

are populated by business owners. they're cutting down healthy trees to plant native shrubs and glasses which will never sequester large amounts of carbon dioxide. you cannot expect individuals to fight every developer, every institutional and environmental catastrophe and the 217 217 eirt cost a half million dollars was four and a half pages long giving the people six weeks to fight it. will you let developers and corporationses decide the fate of our community and lives?

(please stand by).

>> and, finally, let's update our code. >> and, finally, let's

update article 16. thank you. >> chairwoman: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, casey asbury with the demonstration gardens, and d-6 sustainable open space coalition. i want to thank the city agencies for their presentations and for all of their hard work. i want to -- i'm here to underline an issue of equity -- >> please direct your comments to the panel. >> sure. sorry. i just feel like i'm in a round room. we have -- as it has already established, we have tree emergency in san francisco, particularly in our downtown neighborhoods. i would recommend -- i'm here to recommend an

equitable approach to planting trees. we need city support for green, informal and interim spaces in our downtown neighborhoods. we need to expand our natural areas plan, to plant for diversity from throughout the metropolitan by a factor of five, to account for the vandalism and the difficulty that trees have in getting established downtown. we need to reexamine our criteria for removal of trees, to maintain as many existent ones as possible in our downtown neighborhoods. we need to support this canopy expansion by working with stewartship from within the communities. and the demonstration gardens is modeling that. i'm happy to provide more information, and i look forward to seeing what

this increased commitment to more trees is going to be. but i especially want to underline the need for the tenderloin and thelma, which really needs more trees because we have more people. >> the next speaker. >> hi, christopher curby, i'm a 33 year resident of san francisco, live in district 8 for a long time. i'm not going to go through a lot of what has been said about the benefits of trees, and all of that, not to minimize that, but i want to actually get down to the roots of some of the things that can actually be done. as mr. clipp said, there are any number of things that can be done. and what i would like to talk about is what i would like to see resulting from this hearing. i don't want it to be a hearing and then be tossed aside. i would actually like it to go forward with

specific recommendations that will ultimately go to the board for consideration. with respect to that, i was very excited to see that the board as a whole unanimously adopted the climate change declaration, and as a result of that, i think it was in july, that a report was put out. it talked about all sorts of climate change issues, but, unfortunately, there was one paragraph about urban canopy, and it really did not focus on carbon se sequestration that is linked to trees. and so i really would like -- wg about urban canopy hearing today, but i would like very much that these discussions be coordinate coordinated. [buzzer] >> one of the things i

would really like to do -- obviously, the big issue here is money. i think everyone has indicate that that there needs to be money. however, i, again, would like to get down to the -- some of the specifics. i would actually like to suggest that prior to any removal of a tree, that there is a full evaluation -- [buzzer] >> that was two minutes. >> next speaker. >> this is the overhead projector? thank you. >> while you're getting set up, a bit of housekeeping, with the return of chair mandelman is here, supe supervisor mar is here by action of the president.

>> good afternoon, supervisors, and clerk. my name is john goldsmith. i'm a 29year san francisco resident, living the majority of that in district 8. i am here representing the cathro community, and i am advocating for the preservation specifically of five florida palm trees and three western red bud trees located on the 2400 block of market street. these are already significant trees in a public right-of-way, but we are in the process of landmarking those trees. and i'll explain quickly. so there is a public right-of-way, and we are proposing for approval and would love a letter of recommendation or a memorandum of understanding with city

agencies to designate this public right-of-way to be known as lavender lane. it is that sidewalk in dark right there. currently the muni station will be getting an elevator, which is a great thing to increase a.d.a. access, but this open space here, those represent five palm trees. and then the garden is represented there. in march of 2018, working with property owners and renters adjoining this site, we submitted two applications, one for harvey's garden, and the second would be the nation's first lgbtq veterans grove. i have petitions with over 1300 wet signatures wanting to see this precious green belt preserved. this idea for the veterans grove has been approved

since 2012 -- [buzzer] >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is lance clarence. in order for the bureau of urban forestry to succeed in affectively growing and managing the forest, it will have to move away from this current anecdotal tree knowledge and begin using factual data. i began researching tree data when they began a city-wide ficus tree. i received one report prepared by a buff

preparer. buff has no choice but to rely on anecdotal data rather than hard data. every survey by an outside company was completed in 2017 at a cost of $25,000 to the taxpayers. the tree rated all trees from removal to routine prune, which is the best. the surveyed showed buff had downgraded 85% of city-wide ficus trees to priority removal. the every tree s.f. survey showed there are several tree types that more of a threat to public safety, acacia, pitasporum, and london plain. as far as i know, buff has not targeted these trees. unfortunately, buff has not made good use of the

ever tree survey, keeping it at arm's length. in an op-ed, muhammad nuru and carla short, mentioned the survey only in passing and not by name. hopefully in the next few years, buff will get an accurate tree monitoring system, and until then they will use anecdotal data, and as a result, urban canopy will suffer as a result. thank you. [buzzer] >> next speaker. >> hi, my name is diane sheretta, thank you. i have a personal story about a tree in my neighborhood. i've lived in the same neighborhood for 15 years on and off, and i walk up and down the street, and there is beautiful, large growth, mature growth trees. at present, one of the trees directly in front of our apartment is slated to be taken down. and i'm just here to say that that tree has been there for 15 years.

and i don't know why it is slated to be taken down. but i it has never obscured anyone's need to walk up and down the street, even though the pavement is coming off around it. i wonder if there are any other pocket possibilities about how the sidewalk could be addressed to accommodate the tree's needs, as opposed to having the tree taken down? >> thank you. [please stand by]

with the existential crisis f climate change, why are we failing to expand our urban canopy in san francisco. we learn more about why that is

today. it's clear there's much more work to do. i'm committed committed with cis and advocates dedicated to this task. we need more money for trees. i think we all agree on that. and we need -- we also need to accurately account for their value, for their impacts on air quality, public health, greenhouse gas he reduction and public welfare. when they're removed, we need to understand and account for the real cost of that loss. and we need to act with the urgency that this demands. we've declared a state of emergency on climate change. we released a report that acknowledges that even if we were to meet all of our emission reduction targets, which still need to remove greenhouse gases from the air. and trees do this very cost effectively. we must start treating our shrinking urban canopy, like the emergency that it is. and take bold actions necessary to expand it. i think today's hearing --

through today's hearing we have a better understanding of what actions are. i look forward to working with all of you to get it done. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mar. thank you for calling for this hearing. i think -- and i do want to congratulate public works and the bureau of urban forestry for taking on this massive new project over the last few years. i think the city will be better -- is better for it. and we'll continue to be. but i think it highlights the need to work on some of the other aspects of our canopy. and i want to thank dan flanagan, almost from the minute i sat down in city hall, coming to talk to me about the need to identify additional financial resources, to make sure that not only are we able to maintain trees, but we can plant new ones. and, you know, i am glad that we were able to make a modest step in that direction, in this year's budget.

it was modest. it felt major, given the scale of our add back budget, $1 million was a significant commitment for the board of supervisors. clearly we need to find other places to look to plant and care for those new trees. i think -- i think there's also, you know, tree advocates have raised with me concerns about around, you know, sort of how the entirety of the city looks at -- looks at our tree canopy. yes, some of it is what is happening on the sidewalks. i regret hi to step out for -- not that i wasn't looking forward to the d.p.w. presentation. i actually really wanted to hear the rec and park and p.u.c. conversation, because i think going forward, we really need to look at what other part of the city, bureaucracy, are doing to take care of our trees. i think that's an area where folks, including supervisor mar, if you're interested in looking at that.

i certainly am. they do fact work temperature shouldn't be that it's taken five years to, you know, to get phase two. so i think we need to try and get phase two done. i think we need a framework within which folks from all of the departments, not just d.p.w. are prioritizing trees and prioritizing the growing and care of our canopies. i think there's a lot of interest in this on the board of supervisors. and i will continue partnering with supervisor mar and others to advance our trees needs, because they're also our needs. so is it your desire to have this heard and filed? >> yeah, filed. >> okay. i will move that we file this hearing. and we can take that without objection. [gavel] thanks, everyone, for coming out for this. and then, mr. clerk, are there any other items before us today? >> clerk: there is no further

business. >> then we are adjourned. thank you. [gavel] ♪

shop and dine on the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within neighborhood. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant. where will you shop and dine in the 49? san francisco owes the charm to the unique character of the neighborhood comer hall district. each corridor has its own personality. our neighborhoods are the engine of the city. >> you are putting money and support back to the community you live in and you are helping small businesses grow. >> it is more environmentally friendly. >> shopping local is very important. i have had relationships with my

local growers for 30 years. by shopping here and supporting us locally, you are also supporting the growers of the flowers, they are fresh and they have a price point that is not imported. it is really good for everybody. >> shopping locally is crucial. without that support, small business can't survive, and if we lose small business, that diversity goes away, and, you know, it would be a shame to see that become a thing of the past. >> it is important to dine and shop locally. it allows us to maintain traditions. it makes the neighborhood. >> i think san francisco should

shop local as much as they can. the retail marketplace is changes. we are trying to have people on the floor who can talk to you and help you with products you are interested in buying, and help you with exploration to try things you have never had before. >> the fish business, you think it is a piece of fish and fisherman. there are a lot of people working in the fish business, between wholesalers and fishermen and bait and tackle. at the retail end, we about a lot of people and it is good for everybody. >> shopping and dining locally is so important to the community because it brings a tighter fabric to the community and allows the business owners to thrive in the community. we see more small businesses

going away. we need to shop locally to keep the small business alive in san francisco. >> shop and dine in the 49 is a cool initiative. you can see the banners in the streets around town. it is great. anything that can showcase and legitimize small businesses is a wonderful thing. [roll call]hing.