comments. >> thank you so much. i just want to thank you supervisor walton for bringing this forward. this is long needed, long delayed legislation that finally is coming forward and i couldn't be more excited about it. when we were going through the renovations and the conversions to the r.a.d. program, at holly court, in my district, the initial discussion with residents, there was so much fear that the moment they stepped out of their unit, so it could be rehabilitated, that they would never get back in. that fear was based on decades of displacement from san francisco. it was the rational and smart thing to fear. the city did a great job in trying to sway those fears and

promise that everybody would be able to come back to their units. promises have rung hollow in the past. it wasn't surprising to me that many residents didn't feel wonderful and really safe based on those promises. now it's going to be the law, the law of the city. that is what it should have always been and that's what it finally will be and i could not be more excited and more proud to be supporting and be a sponsor of this legislation. thank you so much supervisor walton for bringing it forward. if there are no more comments from my colleagues, we will open -- sorry mr. miller. >> i just wanted public comments for our residents. >> that was what i was about to say, we're going to open this item up for public comment. anyone who likes to speak, feel free to line up to this side of the room.

every speaker will have 2 minutes to speak. thank you very much. good morning. >> good morning supervisors. i didn't come here today to speak on this item, but now that i'm here, i i'm a resident from engleside and i want to know if this legislation has anything or mechanism that brings back the first gentrification of those from engleside. you speak of other areas, hunters point, visitation valley, army street, but you forget engleside, we don't have a bunch of projects, but we do have folks that are using section 8 vouchers, living in these places, these homes and they were gentry fit side first, when there wasn't enough money to allow us to stay in these

homes. i hope there is something that bring back focuses -- folks from the engleside area. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> hello commissioners. i have -- my name is ashley roads. the thing i wanted to say in regards to this great milestone that's being done for our people. i'm concerned about construction itself. when the construction aspect of this great plan comes to fruition, how are we going to be gaurng -- guaranteed that we can get jobs that will be a livable source by having a real job, a union job that can survive them? i think it's so very much

important to also look at the point that even some of these young brothers we're talking about, they had a job and opportunity to build their own houses, as well as live in them. it would be a great aspect for our city and for our people, especially in our communities. so whatever you do, that aspect of the process needs to be thoroughly investigated to make sure whatever contractors come out of there, whoever comes out there, that they have to identify what hiring young people in our community so they can have an opportunity. thank you. >> good morning everyone. i would like to say this is a long time coming. this is something really close to my heart. i am a resident of hunters view for the last 54 years. i have watched many people be pushed out and it is imperative

we have young people that are still sleeping on the streets, not just cars. they're sleeping at the park because they're afraid the police -- they don't have an address, they will be pushed outside. i want to commend everybody on the board and hope s.f. for pushing this to the forefront. i am honored to be a part of this and to be here to see it happen. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> before we continue too much further, i would ask that if anyone in the overflow room that would like to speak on item number 4 under public comment, if you would make your way to the community room. thank you very much. >> hello commissioners. i have the privilege of patrol hill public housing since 2001 and i have a non-profit in public housing as well. this is a long time coming.

my mom herself was pushed out where she had to move to chico years ago. she's back now living with my sister and she's 80 years old. my mom is. so i just look at our people that have been pushed out and have an opportunity to be able to come back, as well as us parents who still have their children living in their house. they finally can get out. i thank you very much. i am very serious because it's very hard. you want to stay in san francisco, but there's no place for them to move to because the rent is so incredibly high. looking at our young people that are living from place to place or couch surfing, and giving them an opportunity to grow up, not just grow up, but pull themselves up by their boot straps, looking at the construction part and really looking at getting our young people hired on in these jobs where they become successful, as well as having a career. we have some gentlemen that are in here now that they're able to

work in their own community. this has to be across the board in all communities of color and low income communities where people are able to work in their community, not just during construction, but after construction as well. some of the people should be managers of those buildings, and some of the people should be managers in the shops and i'm going to stop because i actually know when to. [laughter] >> how are you doing commissioners? i am a native of bay view, hunters point. i just want to say thank you. this is the first time i heard of this legislation. my heart is pounding because i'm excited and shamann walton, the supervisor, we have faith in you. i am glad that you and mayor london breed and the rest of your colleagues are looking to

bring in african-american backs, but we have to keep in mind that we're coming back, but we don't need to be coming back. we need to be coming back and we need to be thriving like everybody else. we need to come back and we need to know what it's like to live amongst our asian community, our latino community, because we're diverse now in bay view. there's no use in bringing people back if we cannot get on the same accord right now and not only saying that our youth and everything. my children are all grown now. i have an 18-year-old and 27-year-old. my 27-year-old is paying over $1,000 to live in the t.l. with a 2-year-old. she's fighting raccoons. my grandson has to go through drugs and all that. we want you to see our people

out there that can't afford to live out here and they go shelter to shelter, and place to place and make sure you don't forget of those families and get them babies out of there. [applause] >> next speaker please. >> district 10, good morning. basically we feel that it's been due time that something like this gets brought before you because it's just like you know, we just feel that people that grew up and were raised and work in the community have a chance to own something and live in the community at the current rate. you get what i'm saying? basically that's it. >> thank you. >> thank you for hearing us. [applause]

>> good morning, my name is quanica and i'm the vice president of the public wide tenant association. i think it's imperative we make this prioritization for those families who have been pushed out and the families that have done their best to actually get educated, get work, and plan on staying in san francisco. being born and raised here, even with protections like these, it's still a struggle with the high cost of living, so being able to allow other opportunities, such as employment and seeking home ownership opportunities as well is very key. i want to thank you guys for finally getting this brought in front of the supervisors. >> hello and thank you supervisors for having us today. my name is sophia.

i am a first generation american. as the island of american was colonized, my family was pushed here to the west coast of the americas and we were placed in public housing. so my grandmother had, i think it was a four bedroom and each family stay in a room on top of each other. so it was kids upon kids in a room. so in north so this legislation, i'm very grateful for the investment to the vulnerable populations that have been pushed out and displaced and really isolated and alienated from each other, that a type of isolation and alienation doesn't give us the capacity to build culturally and grow together. so in gratitude and in support, thank you guys for pushing this along.

>> oh my god, i got back in town just in time. [laughter] >> no listen, seriously. i thought there were problems here with baltimore, it is ridiculous. so, i'm back here pleading and begging but also stating there must be an update to all these housing situations, all this legislation because it goes back to r.a.d., before it goes back to hope s.f. we've been promised, the housing authority promises year after year with the r.a.d. program first came together under the administration, and the other lee was involved. i was there. i sat down with naomi and gave her my recommendations.

my name wasn't mentioned, but that's okay. i got the documents. i got the receipts. so what i'm saying now, there must be an all hands on deck meeting about the r.a.d. program. the residents don't have a clue what's being done with public housing. they don't know that these developers are the ones who own these properties now, except for the ground. they don't know that they hired the non-profits to get rid of them and the people that look like me. they don't know that yet. they don't know that there are programs to keep you going on. they don't know that just because their family members have been arrested they're not going to be kicked out. these non-profits that will be coming into these communities owned by these developers. they ain't going to stand what

the housing authority did. ace is on the case with the housing authority. >> thank you. >> what use to be the housing authority. >> good morning, good afternoon. good morning, my supervisor ronen. i have to realize i don't live in district 10, although i work like a dog there. shamann walton is not our supervisor but we support him wholeheartedly and thank you to all of you for this legislation. my name is joyce armstrong and i'm the president of the public housing tenant association city wide. yes, sir, we do have public housing in westlake. we have what is called the scattered site that is public housing along with the section 8. at the housing authority, if you need to talk to me. >> please address to the committee. >> sorry.

a lot of people don't know that we have scattered sites. we have properties all over the city that don't fall directly in the name of a project, which i call developments or my home. i live there for the past 17 or 18 years. before that, i came at 1967 to have my first child at 18 and i've been working and supporting them ever since. i want to come along and support hope s.f. and the effort that the mayor and let this legislation go through. if you need me, you know where i am. just reach out. >> is there any other member of the public who wishes to speak on this idtem? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> supervisor walton. >> thank you chair ronen. i want to thank everybody for coming out and voicing how important this is to the community. i also hear the voices in terms

of the amount of work we still have left to do. this is one step in the right direction and we're going to continue to work hard, continue to push policy that will make our communities whole. with that said, i love to move item 4 forward with a positive recommendation to the full board. >> without objection, that motion passes. [gavel] [applause] >> thank you so much. >> thank you supervisors. >> thank you chair. >> thank you so much. >> mr. clerk, would you please read item number 5. >> item 5, the ordinance amending chapter 19b of the administrative code, governing the city's acquisition, retention, and use of surveillance technology to allow the acquisition and retention of

face recognition technology. >> anybody in the north light court, we do have open seats in the committee room. >> now please come forward. >> thank you chair ronen, committee members for hearing this item this morning. this item is a little piece of clean up legislation following legislation that we passed earlier this year at the board of supervisors to create surveillance use policies, for all surveillance used by city departments and relevant to the department. the amendment before you acknowledges the prospects that we have under taken since passing that legislation in the course of implementing this we learned that various city issued devices actually have -- excuse

me, the amendment today essentially provides that the city may retain that use that technology, provided they do not use the face recognition function. we see this consistent to the spirit of the regulation passed earlier. it maintains the ban on the use of face recognition technology and i think supervisor peskin in our office wants to work with the city to exercise our purchase power and try to find alternative devices without that embedded feature. for now, it's a stock feature that is impossible to remove, it's necessary to preserve the city's standing. >> great, any questions? thank you so much. we're going to open this item up for public comment. any member of the public wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> is there a motion? >> excuse me, there are a number of clerical amendments.

i apologize. they're throughout and clean up things to make sure what we're talking about here is city issued software or devices and essentially to provide that for these software and devices, they would be subject to the rest of the chapter. do i need to be more specific about that? okay. so we would request those amendments to be made. >> and you submitted that paperwork to the clerk? >> i did. well, here's for the clerk. i submitted copies to each of your staff. i do have one copy additionally here and the red line for the clerk. >> wonderful, that's what we needed. the red line. thank you very much. i'm happy to make a motion to adopt the amendment without objection, that motion passes. [gavel] >> i'll make a motion to move this item forward with positive

recommendation. without objection, that motion passes. thank you very much. mr. clerk can you please read item number 6. >> item number 6 is the ordinance amending the administrative, police, health, planning, business and tax regulations, and campaign and government codes to change the name of the office of cannabis to the office of cannabis regulation. >> thank you. >> good morning chair ronen, supervisors mar and walton. i'm the director of the office of cannabis. before i sfart my remarks about the cannabis clean up today, i want to make all aware of an amendment at the request of the

mra mayor's office to split the item. this will allow more time to discuss the proposed name change. it is my hope that we can move the rest of the items forward today. >> if you want to briefly go through the summary of the legislation. >> yeah, in my remarks i will go through all of it. do you want to address the split first or do you want me to read everything? >> go ahead and read everything. we'll decide whether or not to do that motion after public comment. >> all right, thank you. first i want to thank everyone for having the office of cannabis to this hearing. this is referred to as cannabis clean up legislation, not to be confused with cannabis 3.0, which is much anticipated this winter. the subject of today's hearing narrowly addresses some administrative technical changes that would clarify provision 16

of the police code and align this code with state legislation. my remarks will list the items introduced in my presentation. this ordinance which create as new cannabis business permit type for cannabis nursery, mirroring the license nursery code under state law. the state no longer allows applicants to apply for a cannabis business license as a member of -- to apply under this framework in order to conform a state law. if state law were to change on this topic, we would be happy to revisit this item. for existing operators, this ordinance would further clarify the processing order of permits as outlined in section 1606c of

the police code, for temporary permit holders and article xxxiii permit holders, m.c.d.s as priority group 4. in addition to further the goal of enhancing public health and safety, state in section 1601 of the san francisco police code, this ordinance would require cannabis distributors to notify the office within 48 hours of learning cannabis products in their possession failed testing standards. as this legal industry matures, enforcement will become a priority and more focused core function of the office of cannabis. this ordinance would further support and encourage the individuals who have elected to transition from the unregulated market to the regulated market by providing a tool to the office of cannabis to thoughtfully address violations associated with equity applicants that have pending permit applications with the

office. to conclude this presentation, i like to reiterate that this ordinance is being referred to as cannabis clean up legislation, different from cannabis 3.0, which will be a completely different conversation, including a whole host of exciting topics and is anticipated by stakeholders this winter. the purpose of bringing this cannabis clean up operation to you is to refine our regulations to reflect and align with the spirit and intent of our process here in san francisco. while today's presentation is more narrowly focused to the items before you today, i hope you will listen to the broader equity interest that may be shared by members of the community during public comment and i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you so much. >> great, thank you so much. any questions? nope? thank you. we're going to open this item up for public comment. anybody who would like to speak, please go ahead and come forward. you can line up to your right, my left.

good morning. >> all right. so good morning supervisors. i am speaking in front of you today, representing a diverse collective of cannabis business hopefuls, soon-to-be operators and allies to the equity group s.p.c. we convened a meeting this past saturday to discuss the clean up legislation brought forwath tod with over 25 black and brown cannabis stakeholders and few allies. at the end of the meeting, we asked ourselves a few questions. one of them is why is the city concerned with making minor changes when we have bigger problems? the office of cannabis community re-investment fund has not been funded yet. in order to benefit these minor changes, we need the funds to be funded. according to the re-investment

fund, the dollars should be used in order to address racial disproportionate arrests, generational poverty, community degradation, loss of education and employment opportunities, and burpdens from the failed wa on drugs. also workforce development, access to commercial real estate and access to investment financing. the access to commercial real estate and investment financing is crucial during this time period where we have our operators draining out their capit capital without being operational. we ask to have more support in getting money into the fund and we can set up our community for success. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning again supervisors.

i'm from the engleside community and our community has been left out of the equity justice when it comes to cannabis. i'm here today speaking in opposition of item 2 of the cannabis regulation, not allowing equity applicants to apply for a permit as a cooperative. forming a cooperative is the only way that the 200-plus equity applicants can own anything in this cannabis industry. they're all monopoetalized by the wealthy investors. 1.3 million was given to the community by the state, and it should not be siphoned off through administrative fees to the city and torattorneys. congress is going to have its first vote to remove cannabis from the controlled substance coming this month and descheduling cannabis as a

schedule one substance. i'm hoping that this ordinance that you guys are working on will allow cooperatives. thank you. >> hi, just the last note to anybody in the overflow room, there is seating in the committee room and we ask that anyone in the overflow room please come up to the committee room. thank you. >> good morning supervisors. thank you for having us. my name is braham goodwin. i'm one of the founders of the san francisco social club and the democratic club. we've been working to get access for people for medical cannabis and access in general. i just like to speak to something important, which is we worked with the office of

cannabis and they done a good job. the resources they have, relatively speaking, are limited. there's a queue of about 300 applicants. i would just mention to all three of you that a lot of jobs could get created that aren't getting created. a lot of revenue could come to the city that would help in some of these areas that are not available because of the lack of resources and importantly, there are many storefronts in many communities that live on hate, that could be used as businesses for cannabis and operations like that. i really urge you to look at this because i think the investment that you would make by expanding the resource of the office would come back big time and help you in a lot of these other areas, and lot of the

issues that people are talking about. thank you very much for your cooperation and for your look at this. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> my name is perry jones, i'm a san francisco native. first of all, i would you tell me like to give thanks to the office of cannabis for allowing the work they're doing and the community group in the audience that's been showing support towards the development of upcoming operators and entrepreneurs such as myself that have been impacted by the w.o.d., the war on drugs. mainly i hope that it doesn't be tok tokenizeked when it comes to those who live in this community, and business owners, being able to contribute to the committee and give back, and some of us who have been taken away from the community to have the opportunity to give back. having a collective with the

permitting, we all know that san francisco is expensive to live in and to start a business. when it comes to planning and commissioning, it seems that it's red lined. what it takes to get through a conditional hearing, it takes a lot. it makes us investable. who will want to invest when you have to wait a certain amount of time. just as the terms are permitable, i think it would be a good idea to have people in these groups to do business with each other and we nvr had a chance to do that. i think it would be a good thing and way for us to contribute back to our community. there is money that could be made, opportunities that could be made and also showing the different face of business when it comes to cannabis, which use to be a taboo. >> thank you, next speaker. >> hello again. even though everything has already been said, i would like

to say and let the record reflect and let the city know that i am also too impacted by the war on drugs being born and raised in bay view, hunters point but i'm not necessarily looking to be a dispensary. i'm not looking to be a cultivator, so i'm being left out of the movement because those are the only things lined up. i am an educator. i have spent 30 years of my life going to school trying to be an educator, an activist and voice for the community. the funds released could help me start the california let's talk cannabis movement. i didn't initiate that. that came out of california. that's the movement that california, the public health is using to get the conversations going so that we can educate the youth, so that our youth won't be thinking they can drive

around smoking weed. i don't need to be a dispenser, but i do need to benefit from the aftermath of the war on drugs. thank you. [applause] >> good morning, my name is rami. i am an equity applicant. the city's concern for this piece of clean up legislation is in vain until funds are dispersed from the community investment fund through the office of cannabis for the purposes of workforce development, commercial real estate, and investment funding. thank you. >> thank you. if there are any other members of the public that would like to speak, please line up so we can go one right after the other. thank you. next speaker. >> good morning supervisorser

terrance allen, served as your three year chair of the cannabis legalization task force. i've been taking time to build my own equity business in the castro. i come before you because there are three legs that you're hearing the community speak of. one is the need to release and invest in the equity programs that you all established so carefully. the second is one that i thought i would never stand in front of a public body and say, the need to begin the conversation about moving those that remain in the unregulated market into the regulated market. we have a very draconian policy that says if enforcement hears that you're in the unregulated market, then you're banned for 10 years. that draconian policy does not afford the opportunity of the cannabis, the office of cannabis to move people into the regulated market. we need to give them the power

of coercion, suggestion, and the beginnings of enforcement for that to happen because those who have been waiting in line for the regulated market are running out of resources to do that and those who maintain 1 foot in the unregulated market seem to have an unlimited amount of money due to black market sales. so, with those two things, i urge you to move this forward and the third, the office of cannabis was never designed to handle 300 permit applications. we have to give them immediate resources to get this project moving, whether a city department can give up those resources after they have them is a question for the future, but if we don't afford those resources now, this entire program continues to grind as opposed to ushering forward a new day for san francisco and their equity members. thank you very much. >> thank you, any other member of the public wish to speak?

seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> supervisor walton. >> thank you. first of all before i make a motion, i do want to say that i share the same concerns about not allowing cooperatives, but in this case we're bound by state law so we're making a change and hopefully that changes in the future. this is definitely administrative to being in line with state law. i do have a quick question. can i move to duplicate the file and amend a new file with the circulated amendment or do i have to do them one at a time? >> you can duplicate the file as a single supervisor, you don't need to make a motion to that. just say i like to duplicate the file and then you can amend either one or the other. >> i like to duplicate the file and amend the new file with circulated amendments that strike the reference to the name change in the new file.

>> thank you. >> oh, to amend. i wanted to make a couple comments. thank you. i, i just wanted to -- i do think we have to make these amendments in order to comply with state law. i wanted to echo a lot of the concerns i heard from the public, particularly the community re-investment fund, anxious to get that funded and distributed so that we can make equity real in this industry and right the wrongs of the failed drug war that has decimated so many communities. so i just, you know, i don't think we should stop these cosmetic -- well not cosmetic changes, but these changes to

comply with state law, in order to get to the meaty work we need to do in order to have some reparations injustice in these communities, but i just wanted to make that comment that i'm anxious to get that work under way and it's a huge priority as well. with that, i will second the motion to amendment the duplicated file and without objection that motion passes, and then the original -- or that duplicated file is the one then that we will send to the full board and i'm happy to make a motion to send that with positive recommendation. without objection, that motion passes. [gavel] >> thank you very much. >> and the action on the original file? >> and the original file, if we could leave it in committee to the call of the chair, that would be great. >> that will be continued to the call of the chair. >> thank you, we are very encouraged by your remarks over the community re-investment fund

and funding it because i think it's very important and needed. >> thank you. so. -- so much. >> make sure i have this correct. the file has been duplicated. the original file has been continued to the call of the chair. the duplicated version has been amended, and referred as amended to the board. >> yes, that's right. >> thank you. >> thank you so much. and if you could please call item number 7. >> item number 7 is an ordinance amending the administrative code to affirm the county agricultural commissioner's authority under state law to certify and inspect farmers' markets and producers, and to enforce state law governing the direct marketing of agricultural products to consumers. >> thank you, claudia, the

director of the real estate division. before you is an ordinance amending the administrative code dealing with farmers markets, including the city owned and operated a main any flea and farmer's market. it's the longest operating farmer's market in california. most are operated by non-profits and receive public funds or private fundraisings efforts. the real estate division, which took over responsible from the parcel and the operations of the mark over a decade ago increased fees because they have not been increased for over a decade and cover expenses for the operation of the site and the markets because it runs as a deficit.

that would close the gap, but it wouldn't completely get rid of it. we did a survey of other markets in the area and for example, a heart of the city, which is in the u.n. plaza, a non-profitly run but received a lot of gifts and private funds charges $55 a stall per day. that's more than what we're proposing. we sent the proposed change in fees to the city attorney, who then under took and rewrote the entire sections because it hadn't been done in so long and there were things that needed to be cleaned up. it relasz places the agricultural commissioner. the agricultural commissioner is not a building or facility or land management person.

it doesn't have the resources to operate and manage the facility in the markets. the real estate division has been managing and operating the land for over a decade. it transfers responsibilities from the agricultural commissioner to the director of property to approve applications for permits to sell products at the city operated farmer's market. it allows the director of permits or suspensions there of. it allow it is director property to impose fees and to appoint and form an advisory committee for the alamani farmer's market and guidelines to rule the market. the heart of it is to increase the fees that an individual farmer and/or flea market vendor would pay.

currently it's $50 a day, just during the summer, we would like to raise it to $50 a day all year round. it wouldn't go down $10 during the winter months. if a farmer went everyday that the farmer's market is open and it's open every single day, every saturday of the year, they only closed once, that particularly farmer would pay an additional $240 a year in fees. the vendors, which are usually food trucks, would pay $85 a day, up from $60 a day, pretty much what they're having to pay in other markets. that's why we went to that. the fees for the flea market vendors would be $50 a day, which is just every sunday, up from $45. the revisions also increase the certification fees paid by the

markets themselves. so the markets have to be certified. we are a certified farmer's market. that certification is done by the agricultural commissioner under the department of public health. they are recommending that the farmer's markets with less than 16 vendors stay at $500. markets with 16 to 45 vendors go up to $1,000 per year from $500 and markets with over 45 vendors would be $1,500 a year, up from $500. the department of public health can wave the fee for city operated farmer's markets. we would ask them to allow us to wave our fee. it also authorizes the agricultural commissioner to charge $113 per hour for inspections unrelated to the issuance modification or renewal

of a farmer's market renewial certification. and also fining the illegal use of the premises. there have been car shops and others that go on to the property because it's a huge vacant space and actually set up businesses and try to run businesses on the market. we had to kick them out when there wasn't a law to do that, it was very difficult to have the police enforce it. we just asked them to do that. we're putting up gates, which we think will prevent anything from occurring in the illegal use of the site. the agricultural commissioner had to leave, he had another meeting. i'm here if you have any general questions. >> yes, i'm wondering what outreach you done to the farmers themselves. i know in the relative scheme of

things, not the hugest increase, but it could be substantial. >> so there wasn't any formal. we don't have that committee anymore. it was years ago, i think it was when it first came over to the real estate commission. we had a committee which consisted of the various people that the mayor chose and farmers and the manager. people left, other people didn't want to do anymore and it was no longer in existence. that's why we're putting it back in the code so we can have it under the direct property. both the manager on site and the manager, her supervisor walk the stalls every saturday, basically. so when we kind of did this, i think they did an informal test of it and they know who will be there during the winter and who isn't.

not all the vendors sell during the winter because they don't sell winter crops. they get other vendors that come in to do it. they didn't seem to be bothered and half of them felt they were paying that any way. they didn't know they were being charged less during the winter months. they didn't think it would be a very large issue. >> supervisor walton. >> thank you, just along those lines, why the additional 244 vendors that are there more frequent? it seems that you said vendors who are there more frequently -- >> well, that's just if a farmer went every saturday, the whole year round, that would be the additional cost. most of them don't go all year round. you have summer ones and winter ones. >> got it. >> thank you very much. really appreciate it. thank you. we will open this item up for public comment. feel free to come forward if you

like to speak. good morning, or good afternoon, i keep saying that. >> good afternoon, my name is ashley. i'm speaking on behalf of what this lady is just talking about. i lived -- my family lived at 376 bradford street since 1962. i was born -- i was raised right there at the alamani's farmers market. i feel this is overblown as far as the outrageous changes in the prices and the opportunities for people to have an opportunity to make some money down there or be involved in it. it looks kind of like shedding people, shedding vendors out and other vendors come in. i don't really know. i do believe that to do this, they do need some type of committee, some type of

investigation to find out the difference in what is going and what's not happening there because it is something that really worked for the people that are there, all the people that come there on saturday is awesome. so, i don't know how the vendors -- i don't really know. i just happen to be here to hear this, but i live right there. i know about performance market. she also spoke about the sunday where they do the flea market there and -- my time is up, but a lot needs to be done in regards to the clean up, in regards to the stuff that's around there on sunday, if you would come by and see how that is. a lot more needs to be done and i don't know where, but i'll see what's going on. thank you. >> thank you so much. any other member of the public wishing to speak? seeing none, public comment is

closed. [gavel] >> i'm going to comment because i'm the supervisor of the area where the farmer's market is. in my conversations with folks at the markets, they seen increases for some time. i think it will be okay and it's not going to dissuade people from selling at the market. i would also -- sorry, we're not allowed to have a conversation. i'm happy to talk to you after the committee meeting is over, but i also just wanted to let you know that this is a site in the district that i had my eye on forever. it's both an incredible blessing for the neighborhoods on the two days that it's operating and can cause some issues on the five days that it's empty. we are looking into the possibility of what we can do to

activate that site all the time without ever disrupting the market because it's such a historic and plays an important role in the neighborhood. to be continued, if you have a couple minutes to stay after. this is the last item. i would love to chat with you about it. moving forward on this item, i'm happy to make a motion to send this forward with positive recommendation and it looks like there's no objection. without objection, that motion passes. mr. clerk are there any other items on the agenda to? >> that completes the agenda for today. >> then the meeting is adjourned. thank you. [♪]

november 20, 2019 meeting of thn francisco board of appeals. rick swig will be presiding ton. he is joined by commissioner la, commissioner honda, commissionea and commissioner tanner. he will provide the board with e this evening. i'm julie, the board's executiv. we will be joined by representae city department that has cases e board. scott sanchez from the plannings sitting in front. he also representing the planni. we have joseph duffy representie department of building inspecti. we have leah from san franciscos and i believe debra will be pren francisco public works bureau, d mapping. the board requests that you turr

silence your phones and other ec devices. please carry on conversations i. the rules of presentation as fo. appellants, permit holders and s are given seven minutes to prese and three minutes for he re but. rebuttal. members not affiliated with thee three minutes to address the boo rebuttal. they are given three minutes an. to assist the board you are askt required to submit a speaker cas card to board staff when you coo speak. speaker cards are available on e of the podium. please note that the board reset to not call an item after 10 p. given the size of the calendar,c comment will be limited to two e