>> commissioners. commissioner norton. >> thank you for the report. i am concerned that it just doesn't seem like we're making progress and in some ways going backwards maybe. i wonder -- i mean, if felt like a few years ago we were starting to make progress on chronic absenteeism. at least in the data you presented tonight, it seems like we've given that progress back. i'm wondering if you have any response to that. am i wrong in that impression? like what do we think the root cause is for not making progress on this issue? >> can i just suggest looking at

slide 6. locam i reading it correct it's gone down when you're comparing the '18, '19 to the fall of 2019? >> this is slide 6? yeah. sorry. yes. so what this is showing you is the yellow bar is what the '18, '19 school year chronic absenteeism rate and the blue bar is showing what it is in the fall. right? so our goal is to keep steady at the blue bar which would mean that at the end of this year, our chronic absenteeism rate would go down. >> okay. >> but if we have the jump that we've been seeing over the past three years, it will go up. >> okay. thank you. >> does that make sense? >> we need to -- it shows how it's gone up every year, that

slide. this is last year versus midyear and they are trying to maintain -- >> yeah. it's a little bit of apples and oranges. we're doing a fall to a year. but this is what we're saying is that this is -- we're seeing here is an opportunity we have to hopefully turn back that chronic absenteeism and then for your question, commissioner norton, the last three years of data, and i would have to dive back deeper to see if we were -- if it went down and then it's gone back up again. i'm not really sure over the last three years that hasn't been the trend. it's been increasing each year. >> deputy superintendent talked about the difference in the last couple years and the difference in this year in the approach to how we're looking at it. i don't know if you want to describe that again. >> so a couple things that are

different. one, the chair focus now and that the efforts -- i think there were -- i know there were a number of efforts including the attendance working group, things happening in service of addressing our attendance concerns, but they were happening in their silos and we weren't coming together and using information to learn and scale and improve our system. i would say --le with, we weren't doing it in a way that was coordinated and aligned. i would say the other thing, as we were working on the awareness piece, understanding the data and information we need and do site leaders and teachers need in order to act on their attendance data. what was the past was the data was lagging. it would give me 12 weeks. i saw my report and i saw that there were 8 days missed. now we're getting it every day. we can see it every day or in six-week spans. we know that 18 days is the day, the number for chronic absenteeism. that means in september, if i see that she's at two days or three days, i can have a conversation versus getting that data late and then trying to

react to it. so i think that there's another huge difference. another difference is that it's a number of folks who all touch schools and touch babies working together and progress monitoring and trying to figure out let's try this. this didn't work. the nudge letters would be another approach and the home visits, the early education would be something different as well. we're all in the room trying to figure it out and learning from it. this is aggregate, but learning from the schools where we have seen some changes and cohorts we've seen reductions and thinking about what's happening there and how do we scale it as well as figuring out the pattern. we know that one pattern is kindergarten is just -- we take a hit every year. so there's some schools who engaged their kindergarten families early and said attendance matters and here's why. and that was a strategy in response to that data in finding out that pattern. we know we have some babies who are doing a lot of transportation across the city to get to their school as well as some babies who don't have

anyone to take them to school. for example, as well as babies who are -- who have medical needs that the school needs to work with the family to dress to make sure they're able to get to school and be at school every day. i think a big part of the difference is that we, one, have this real time data but also that we're all looking at this data and using it and trying to learn from best practices and scale that across the system. >> what are we doing year to year? because the other issue -- there's some strategies you're talking about seeing the data in real time almost so that a kid hasn't missed 12 days before the teacher and the school is aware that there's some issues to work on with the family. but what about in the -- like the new year, if we have a kid that was chronically absent the year before, what are we doing to make sure that classroom teacher in their new classroom, that there's supports in place from day one if we know this kid

is at risk for being coul chrony absent. >> this is where the efforts came together, but what is happening with a number of lead teams and their school sites, again, we now have a number of reports. lead is with the sites and finding out what data do you need and how do you need it and rpa and data are creating ways that the sites can have that data quickly and various ways. one thing that the lead team has been doing with a number of sites is actually not just school wise data but student by student and looking at those babies and the attendance patterns not just for this year but previous years. we can name and know what families might need extra supports and interventions and addressing those needs. for next year, the hope and plan is that we, without stereotyping the babies and without stereotyping families but thinking where do we see patterns and how could we get ahead and offer support where we see that's been needed across a couple years but also prepare

school sites with strategies and interventions to poor families. >> do you still do the perfect attendance assemblies at baby elementary schools? >> yes. that will be one of those efforts to continue to promote positive attendance as a different strategy for those babies. that's still happening. >> okay. thanks. >> okay. vice president lopez. >> hi. thank you for your presentation and, you know, i've just been looking back at the work that has been requested from this resolution for years now and just given the stories that teachers today were sharing with us and what we keep hearing about, i feel like i want to know more about the work that we're doing outside of absenteeism and suspension. i know that's extremely

important, but once our students are in school, how are they being supported other than the restorative practices that a handful of our teachers are getting. like what other efforts are there and if you can share those. >> i just want to be clear i understand your question. what other efforts around teacher training or teacher support, teacher coaching? >> yes. >> so for the student family community support division, the work directly with teachers would be either alongside if there are social workers or such at the work site and the work they're doing there. to not sure if i can answer your question. i'm not 100% sure what you're looking for because the climate team, plc we've created is a system where we're working with

the climate team lead who brings the information back to the teachers, and we're not -- we're starting to collect that data on what type of trainings are happening as a result of that, but we don't really have that information. i'm not sure if i'm really answering your question. but i can -- if you could be specific, are you looking for what new teachers are getting? there's teacher trainings. the different type of trainings for teachers, that's not always happening. that's what we're trying to work with as we're working more collaboratively across the divisions of what would be offered. but there are not a lot of teacher specific trainings happening. >> so you -- you shared this earlier. you all have the message and understanding that there are a number of people who support our students and we all need to be on the same page. i want to know what those people know and understand outside of

restorative practices. do they know pbis or understand the discipline matrix? >> anyone who comes in contact with our students. >> thank you for clarifying. so there's a host of trainings that we do with social workers, with counselors, with nurses, and also with assistant principals and principals that wraps around positive behavior, different policies that we have around anti-bullying. it also offers restorative practices. we do culture humility and family partnership trainings. we wrap all of that around, at least in the support professionals that are within the division with counselors, we're meeting with them regularly and doing trainingmen. we're wrapping it around that way. we're looking at who we have the easiest access to because we have systems built. with counselors, we have monthly training so we can push into those and social workers have regular trainings and we can push into those and then we set

a number of trainings, all day trainings in the beginning of the year with -- we worked with lead, legal, and the division to also then offer trainings to principals specifically, to aps. we provide after school staff, those type of trainings, around restorative practices. we're wrapping it around wherever we have the opportunity and a system in place to provide the trainings. >> is that being tracked somewhere so you can share it with us? >> yeah. so in after school, the way we track it is do program walk-throughs twice a year so we can look at the schools, are the practices happening in that? so we can share that data with you. we have that for all of the after school programs. and then through this rp inventory, we've gone in to see what's happening around rp. for pbis, that is also with the tiered fidelity inventory. we have those three tools sort

of around family partnerships. we don't have anything looking at that. we can identify which schools have decided to implement the family partnership implementation process, which is sort of a pretty deep process that a school goes to and creates a family partnership team and they work together to assess and identify at that school what are the family partnership actions that we want to do to build our family partnership stronger in six best practice areas, which is equitable community, navigating sfusd, linking family partnerships to learning. so we know which schools are engaging with us in that process. we have that data. so we have different ways of measuring it and we can share that information with you. >> i want to add the one that was created by our professional growth and development team and collaboration with lead is a tool that allows us to know and

track what's going on in the district. we're honest that we're getting better at that of collecting data and both knowing what trainings are being offered by also when are they being offered and who is taking them. the tool, as it is currently, does all that. it tells us the pd, who took it, are there teachers or admin and a way to give sites information about pds coming. everyone is not using that tool yet. it's in pilot phase. i think the next time we're in front of you both for trainings around -- trainings in the district, we'll have them put in so we can track and answer those questions. >> thank you. and i have a two part question and then i'll pause. but if we know -- do we know why students aren't coming to school? is there any information that explains that?

and does that offer teachers or support or any adults working with students how to sort of combat that specific issue or need? >> the answer is sort of yes and no. i think that is what we were talking about. how do we set up a comprehensive system where -- there are many reasons why a student doesn't come to school. it could be on a basic level if the younger grades, oh, i didn't think it was that important that they missed 12 days of school. right? so that's one reason. if that's the reason, maybe the nudge letters can address that. it's a fairly simple one. it's more there is something happening in the home and i need more support for transportation or things like that. so we're trying to build a system from a public health model that we're looking at, what do we do on a prevention level or secondary level and what do we do app a tertiary

level because we want to build that system. and i think those were things that the deputy superintendent was also talking about in this better tracking. so if we're seeing that and we're able to say we sent a nudge letter and we're able to engage with that family, we may be able to find them that place. you are not going to be well served by primary prevention. we need to move you down to secondary and have a stop and have an sst. we need to understand and i think the piloting that eed is doing with the home visits, that's another way where it's a way we get in and find like what's your rooted cause we can talk about root cause but then every student may have their own root cause. >> i want to make a plug with that. i did my research in home visits and so i do that with all of my students every year. we know how important it is to build that connection and that relationship before even getting started. i'm so happy to hear this is happening at the early education sites. is it all the sites? piloting.

i'm happy it's happening early on so students and families can see that there's an interest and carrying. right? because it really does open up an honest conversation about their needs that they wouldn't have because we're not making this effort. right? and when we're in schools, the way the system is set up, it does not open up potential for honest relationships. so i feel like we should put all of our efforts in that. i want to hear how that's going throughout because this can offer an opportunity for us to connect with organization that's can offer support for transportation or can offer support for housing or whatever it is that the need is causing our students not to come to school. right? so i'll end with that. but i just -- i have to learn more. i'm so excited about that. >> commissioner lam. >> thank you for the update. i'm curious around following on commissioner lopez's question

around the tracking piece because i am also very intrigued and want to know and hungry as i think many of us are, for understanding what are some of the causes and how do we support our students and families more holistically because i think there are also opportunities not only in addition to our community organizations. there are city agencies that we need to also bring into this work on a regular basis, daily basis. if that's related to students in public housing, we can involve our city partners there. if it is going to be -- not to also focus in again on generational support of our families, siblings. right? so is there a way to trigger supports that education and first five can provide through our family resource centers? that's another opportunity that i want to learn more about

because this work -- i know at the district we've struggled and i'm glad to see that the teams have come together. a lot of work has come in. we're also feeling years behind. so i appreciate the leadership, but i think at the same time, when can we get more information and data? >> sure. and also, there are other things going on. we have a shared used database of programs that i think began piloting about a year ago, and it took a long time to figure out because of all of the ferpa and student confidentiality. it's amongst all our city partners so we're able as partners with the different city partners, hhs, dph, where a family may interact with the system and we've marked chronic absenteeism as one of the years where it flags. we get this list of students that then at the school site

level they know they are interfacing with other city agencies, and there's -- we have monthly meeting about that. we have weekly meetings with city partners. we're really trying to build our muscle to meet because at the end of the day, it takes a lot of time for us sitting together as we use technology to sort of help us create the list but then we have to have the systems within each of our agencies. so that is starting to happen, and i think that's part of -- i know what everyone is hungry for. we want to see the numbers change. it's not acceptable they haven't changed over this time. we decided that collectively we all have to just start working as hard as we can towards this. so we heard that message loud and clear. >> thank you. president sanchez has one follow-up. related to the restorative practices, how with reengaging with site leaders at the school sites to understand, you know, what the school climate team, how is the implementation, the feedback loop to that. >> so with the climate team

plcs, we've been really fortunate this year. we were able to -- we have multiple plcs. we designed it so that we tried to make it as easy for people to attend as possible. so we have west side teams and west side teams and people are coming together. at every meeting, we're looking for feedback on how is this helping you at your site. we do the iterative after every meeting and starting to collect the data to look at it and look at the experience and what happened. we also want to do data crunching of the schools that maybe went to all of the plcs. did we see any differences in the absenteeism rates or in the suspensions or other things? there are ways we're trying to bring data in to bring data out of that plan. so that's one way that we're doing it. as well, we have sort of a -- we're building our muscle again

to communicate with each other. i think there's been some really great systems that have been build that i've been excited to find. the deputy superintendent has a lot of great systems on how i can easily communicate to lead to be able to say, these things are happening. can you give me feedback on it? so i think just there's a lot of systems that we've been building to have that continual feedback loop so we can keep iterating and hear school site voices even if we're at the central office and can't get to every school every day. >> i think just to name, not only is it looking to the lens looking at referrals or suspensions, but what, you know, as a district we're facing on a daily basis is really that school climate culture. right? and the community building that is clear that needs to happen and very intentionally on a daily basis not only with students but adults and students as well on a daily basis. so just wanted to name that.

>> so i think there was earlier -- it was said that we will be in compliance, research based, positive supportive family based and strength based, you know, leadership rules that we can make throughout our schools. we brought up help san francisco. some of the things the schools are learning to do is reach out to hope sf and also work with road map to peace in support of latino families but also black to the future in support of families. one of the things they do is look at whatever is coming out during meetings and saying, is the issue housing? is it transportation is too much? does the family have three children and they are going to three different schools because they're at three different grade levels? so one of the things that i've seen based on those conversations is site leaders coming together and working together to support families in making sure they move from one school to the other or ho how to

provide support for children at different sites. one of the things i think has been great about that is we are also getting better in early education, you know, school sites as to how do we talk about focal students which commissioner lam asked about. one of the things is talking about what does it mean when a student is absent a certain time? one of the things we're asking site leaders to talk with after two absences, make sure that the teacher is calling family because this is about building that strong relationship. right? then after that, after the second absence, site leaders or the family support specialist are to reach out to the families to say what's happening? i think i have two stories to share and i love them because it tells the story of our families in the situations that they find themselves in. one of them happened many years ago, but it's about doing home visits. we noticed that a child was absent so many times and was healthy. she was around asthma. it wasn't until the team built a strong relationship that the family allowed them to visit

them that we saw they were living in an apartment, not even an apartment, in a basement room where it was moldy and the team advocate for the family to make changes with the landlord. the second part is about finding families where a family was taking three different students to three different sites, and so she had to take, for example, one child to an elementary school, wait for transportation to take them to a different school because they were receiving different services. then mom would take her visually impaired child to the school. so she was late to everything. so i think that -- building that relational trust with families is important. we have to take that step, and i think we're seeing some of those changes. that's part thanks to the work that our deputy chief of instruction and the team is doing and how we're learning in shifting mental models to make sure that we're not just judging

families who are absent but finding out and taking action and supporting them. >> commissioner cook. >> good evening, and thank you. i appreciate, you know, all of the new collaborative conversations around how to wrap arms around moving us in the right direction. i also appreciate the bringing on an outside intervention to see if that can help do what is this research based working other places. i appreciate district leadership being responsive to that. one of the things that -- one of the things that i'm having a hard time understanding when it comes to -- i learned a lot about this issue over the last few years and a lot of you helped me understand better the different interventions at sites and how that was connected to

what the principal was charged with, you know, on an annual basis and it sounds like over the last year or two, more principals hear this is a concern for the district, but what we grapple with is a lack of understanding and how it's -- how absenteeism is affecting people sort of like in a percentage way. how much of it is transportation versus these other things? there's a lot of things that exist. they often come up in this conversation like these things exist. they've existed for a long time. stories exist and these numbers are going in the wrong direction. so the reason why i'm having a hard time understanding why we don't know is because the student groups that are most affected aren't actually large student populations. african-american student population is getting smaller

and smaller. we don't know why they're not coming to school. so, i mean, i'm assuming -- maybe this is a false assumptios smaller and it should be easy to line it out. so you can tell me i'm wrong if that's the case. also, for our foster student population, how big -- do we know the student count on foster students in the district? >> i don't know off the top of my head, but you're right. it's fairly small. >> yeah. our asian student population is over 30% of the entire district, and they're under 5%, under 3% chronic absenteeism year by year. so we saw our last report, african-american student population continues to dwindle. we don't know why they're not coming.

but that's concerning that he can with not find that out. i know this team wants to find that out, but i'm confused on why we can't if the number is so small. the next presentation, it will be helpful to get a breakdown of the percentages of students that fit these different categories because i don't believe that transportation is a real issue. so if that's actually the case, then, you know, you should prove it to me because when we look at student attendance data on where african-american students are going, many of them are going to schools in the neighborhood they live at. so you know, help me debunk that. so for foster -- i can see with our foster student population a variety of issues coming up because there's so many issues

affecting our students that live in foster care. but because i don't know how big the count is, i don't know how hard that is to better understand. so, you know, i also appreciated hearing the target reduction and the level that we want to see chronic absenteeism drop, and that is something that sort of we can all get behind in the coming year. i'm assuming we know the sites most affected by the drop or that have the highest rate. we know that already. correct? >> you mean the highest rate of drop so far. >> the highest rate of absenteeism. >> we do know that. we know-it-all b know it all by. yeah. >> are principals or school staff at those sites -- i'm assuming they've been notified. they already know at some level.

are they getting -- what are they getting? how is that working with them, those sites? >> that's the awareness piece we were talking about. you don't just have chronic absenteeism statement period. let's look at your data. again, that on going data review. the lead sits with principles to start with. we have that focus as part of the goals or part of some of their school targets. so it's named in a way that is different than in previous years, but lead makes sure when they're having their check-ins with site leaders, which happens every four to six weeks, that they are not just talking about academic data or cultural and climate but they are taking time to look at the absenteeism data. i think you referenced it, focal students. so lee is leading our principals looking at those students. the conversation is ongoing in the way it wasn't before. they are sharing strategies

during the cohort meetings and in high school in particular, some focus plans around attendance that they are sharing across colleagues. when you gave that example of leads sitting with sites and going student by student to figure out what are the root causes, that's part of it. i will say that one of our learnings is that we haven't gotten down to the teacher level and hearing the concerns today, we want to be careful to imply we want to add anything to our teachers plate. what we know is the relationship that a teacher has with families and students is something that is hard to replace by any cbo or any partner or any of us. so we've been doing a lot of work to engage our site leaders and build strategies with the cultural climate team, with the ilts. et cetera. we know the important next step is to think about how -- i think commissioner lopez brought it up, but how do we get to that relational piece, being home visits or johnny missed school

for the last three days. what's going on? we haven't gotten there. we're trying to build the capacity of lead and site leaders. we have to figure out to to build the capacity of our teachers. it's just that relationship piece, that caring to ask and building that trust with the family -- the guardian will tell you what's really going on. >> yeah. that is another break down within the percentage of absenteeism that i would be interested in. it's one of those strands of student-teacher relationships, kids being on campus but not going to the class to the teacher they don't like or -- i don't like that teacher, you know, that sort of -- i know that exists. i don't know how much of a factor it is. i know it's real. i've seen it if high schools and middle schools especially.

so i'm eager to learn more about that. >> commissioner collins. >> hi. thank you so much for the comments already. i guess number one, i really want to appreciate that there's some specific like attempts to answer some questions that have been asked in the past, and i want to acknowledge this is kind of a new team. at the same time, i'm also -- this is six years of this resolution that it said it would be implemented. so it's frustrating to think my kids were 8 when we implemented this resolution and now they're in high school. so there's a lot of frustration, i think, with staff, students, and families, and the folks -- the board that implemented this is not the same board and the folks charged with implementing

it are not the same folks. but as far as families go and students go, this is like the same district. so i also want us to be real, that we're just not implementing this resolution. we're just not. i'm just going to say it. it's frustrating. so i'm glad that, you know, last year i asked, you know, how many people are being trained? i wanted numbers. then the response i got was we actually don't know because we haven't been tracking that. that's five years in. right? that's unacceptable. so i'm glad that we're finally tracking it. and so in a sense, what we have now is baseline data, which is good that we're tracking it and i'm glad that we're developing those systems. but i also want to acknowledge for the public that as a district, we haven't been doing -- i want us to be real. we have not been doing what we say we're doing especially in regards to this really important

resolution and in some cases when we have schools that blowup, what's frustrating is they're like restorative practices don't work. my answer is, we haven't been implementing it. there's no way we know it doesn't work or not. [ please

it would be great to also have numbers just so that we can get the scale, because in my mind, i know, e.l. is a larger group, pacific islander is a smaller number, but we see, obviously, certain groups are disproportionate, so that's an important view but also to have -- to answer commissioner cook's question, actually how many kids is that would be

helpful. i'm interested in getting information on how we are tracking kids that cut class, because i appreciate what commissioner cook said, in middle and high school you have kids that don't just go to one teacher's class, i've seen schools where kids cut class in the counseling office or the main office, like what? so how do we get data on that and i want to know what schools are doing with that data. when they see, like in first period is one thing, because sometimes kids come late, but if there's a consistent, with a lot of high schools, you have rolling blocks, and classes happen at different times. and if you are seeing patterns where there's one teacher where, like, kids are not going to class, i would like to know from deputy superintendent what are -- what types of conversations are our principals having at the schoolwide level

or how are we addressing those questions. i'm interested in knowing, when i'm looking at suspensions, i'm seeing a huge like the biggest one is foster youth in middle school. and i'm thinking at the high school level, if we have kids, we have a lot of alternative programs to support students that are not functioning, they are not being successful in traditional high schools. i'm not aware of any alternative programs that are, like, i don't know. and i'm wondering, it seems like foster youth, a lot of those students are maybe, i don't know if i'm making a connection but this is huge, right, right that i'm seeing. i mean, they stand out. i'm just wondering, middle school is where kids need even more support and wondering the kids that aren't getting

suspended are they then absent in high school? but that would be a good point of focus. so i would love to get information on that. and then as far as restorative practices, so it sounds to me like in the resolution, it says we are going a fully-implemented restorative practices, restorative practices is like 80% community building. that involves community circles. so i'm glad that you are now tracking that. but i'm wondering, you know, we still don't know what -- all teachers aren't trained -- i mean are all principals trained in restorative practices? are they? all administrators. if you are expecting teachers and counselors to do stuff, you should have those skills. are all principals and administrators trained in restorative practices?

>> i would say most likely not, and it would be probably some of the newer principals who haven't received the training yet. >> so it feels to me like if we don't have all administrators trained, we don't have an implemented system. and then second is counselors. so i'm assuming social workers are trained. >> counselors and social workers are trained. >> are all of them train? >> they probably haven't gone through the two-day training but they do get restorative practices on a annual basis through counselor institute, social worker institutes and monthly meetings. but we haven't set up a system where they are having a two-day training. >> so my question is is it optional? that's what the former directioner -- director used to do. he would say they were optional.

you are new, and i'm glad you are tightening things up, and i'm just wondering. it seems like all counselors should be trained in everything, right? because they can be that lever for making sure that it's happening at the site. >> so the trainings for counselors and social workers are not optional. we have monthly -- we have an institute every year that everybody needs to go to for counselors we break them up for middle and high school, we have three or four days in the beginning of the year. we have monthly meetings. so we have a professional development series throughout the year that are not mandatory. and there's a lot, like you said, there's a lot to try to fit in the time we have to -- because we also don't want to pull them away from sites for a long time, so we are fitting in as much as we can with the time we have, but everything for social workers and nurses and counselors is mandatory. >> okay. and is there any anyway feedback we are getting on the of can a

of that training? because -- the efficacy of that training? >> that's what we are trying to build out now. that was very clear that we have done some job, a better job of tracking who is training and making them more mandatory, but we have not done a good job about is the changing to a practice in the school site. now we have expanded it, so we are beginning that. >> okay. are we getting feedback from people in the training about how they feel about that? >> yes. >> is that something we can see as far as people think it's worthwhile or not worthwhile, it's helping them in their practice? >> yes. >> can you come back to us with reports on that? so we can see some kind of data on how people feel about the efficacy of the training? >> yes. and i think it would help, because it's a lot of data so to understand how expansive you

want it to be, how much time. >> i don't need details, i just -- we are spending, we are investing in training, if we are investing in training all the counselors, we should know if we are doing a good job of -- otherwise we should change the training, right? and, okay. so when we are asking folks to attend training, do we have climate teams at all the schools? >> i think we have climate at any points that are coming to the p.l.c. regularly at 80 of the schools but that doesn't mean there isn't a climate team. schools may call it a different team and be coming to the p.l.c.s or doing the work through another way. so i would say that, yes, all schools have climate teams, it's part of the contract, it's required to have. but they may call it their

instructional leadership team. they may have it by different names. we've dot 80 schools come -- got 8230 schools coming on a regular basis -- 80 schools coming on a regular basis. >> it sounds like you don't know for sure if they have climate teams at every school. what are the expectations? are there specific expectations and then we are going out and making sure that's happening or how do we make sure that we have, like, your definition of what a climate team is at every single school in the district? >> that is something that -- this is the first year we implemented the p.l.c. so that's something that we are working on. i mean, we are trying to work and get that data. there is an expectation in the contract that every school has a climate team. they may call it something else. we have offered this p.l.c. we were able to find money for extended hours for people to attend. so we are doing it in both fashions of tracking that

information and finding out. we know that every school has, and i think they call them by different names, instructional leadership teams or different, i know working with the different lead cohorts. so i would say every school has a team that is addressing student climate and culture. maybe not exclusively, but as part of just working with as an instructional leadership team. >> so i want to be clear. an instructional leadership team is not a school climate team, because an instructional leadership team doesn't include parents and doesn't include students and it doesn't include necessarily social workers. and so this says develop a school-based team to plan and guide implementation efforts and it also says that families should be involved in coming up with behavior plans and things like that. if the i.l.c. is coming up with a behavior plan and parents are not on the it then we are not

following the resolution. what is our expectation at the end of the year? when are we going to implement this and when are we going to tell schools this is a basic for any school. if i'm a principal i'm going to set up a climate team whether i have this resolution or not. so if we don't have a plan at every school, it shouldn't take a resolution for me to have something like that, like in place, and after six years of having a resolution, i think it's unacceptable for every school not to have it. and i would hope that by the end of the year, i know we have been waiting for -- i'm just going to say waiting for a change in leadership at sfcsd because i've asked as a parent, at the podium, in public comment, we've had coleman advocates say we are not implementing the resolution, we have had the apac and a lot of family groups, now i'm on the board, last year i asked staff these same questions, and i

think at the end of the year, we have schools that are concerned about safety. as a parent, i showed up at the board, at the podium, and i said i want to be on my school's basically the climate team, and i was blocked as a parent. and i know at some schools they have really robust programs and at some schools they are just starting. and it's unacceptable. and so i guess i'm hoping that i can hear commitment from -- it's not just your job, it's your job to kind of figure out the plan, but it's also our job of the superintendent to say just do it and figure it out. and we are kind of doing it in the back end when we have a school that kind of blows up, and we have issues, we are going in and kind of doing triage because we are not doing the work on the front end. so what are your thoughts on expectations around is that an expectation, i guess,

superintendent, is that an expectation that every school has a climate team? >> that includes parents and includes students and includes community members. >> when we work on our agreement with our labor partners, instructional partners, we clearly state what those agreements are, so yes he that is an expectation -- yes, that is an expectation. >> is there a reason that is not happening at every school. >> you asked the question around are all administrators received training in professional development -- >> i'm saying if every school is expected to have a climate team and not every school has one, as dedefined by -- defined by what a climate team is, and it includes people who are working on school climate, which is not just teachers. so the school climate team, can

you explain, who is expected to be on the climate team? we have basic people who are required by the contract, and there's also our definition of who we think should be on there. >> sure. the best practices for a climate team are the people that you were mentioning. >> can you be specific? because i want -- >> students, families. yeah. >> okay. so what i'm hearing from her is that some folks are calling their climate team the i.l.t., and the i.l.t. is not a climate team. because it does not include parents, and it does not include students and community members, and that's what's in the resolution is that parents and community members are going to be involved in coming up with behavior plans and implementing school climate measures. so i want to know from you, is that an expectation for all schools that they have a fully-functioning climate team in place by the end of this year? >> that is an expectation of

this district that schools have a fully-functioning climate team, whether they are going to be able to put that in place by the end of this year, i do not know. >> is it an expectation that every school has a behavior plan? >> yes. >> okay. so then i guess my question is what happens, i'm hearing from some schools they are just coming up with it or maybe they have it, but then teachers say we are not implementing it. so that's kind of a management question and it's also how do we define what a functioning behavior plan is, right? because people can say they have one and they don't. but i guess how are we assessing what a functional or like a really robust and behavior plan is? that's not just like okay we came up with some bullets and turned it into the district. i don't want compliance, but how are we assessing whether schools have meaningful, robust behavior plans. >> i think by behavior plan you

mean the expectations. if then like we know all staff members know if a kid cusses, this is how we respond and these are things we send to the counseling office and these are things we call home. >> so that information is measured through the tiered fidelity inventory. though the district-wide matrix, the safe and supportive schoolmate risk does lay that out. so schools are building their plan off the district's safe and supportive schools matrix which has a structure of if this then that, and schools may also come up with maybe what their structure would be of if, then, there, what. you would go to the counselor, go to the wellness center or something. but the basic behavior plan that the resolution requires schools to build their plan off of is the matrix. >> so then i guess it's great that we have this great document

ask and i guess it's really concerning that teachers or parents feel their school doesn't have a plan. so then that gets into is it actually being shared with teachers and families and students so that they though this is the way we do things here -- they know this is the way we do things here. so is there a way for you to measure that. or deputy superintendent, how are we measuring? because if i go to a school and say do you know what the behavior is? and maybe that's not the specific language but people are like i don't know. that's kind of a problem. >> sure. and again, i think -- and we'll get you more of this data, and sort of explain what the tiered fidelity inventory is asking. those are a lot of the questions it's asking, do you have a plan, how is it communicated to families. there's a part of it where you ask students do you know what

the behavior expectations of your school are? i think now that i've been diving more deeply into the t.f.i., i think we have been doing parts of it but not all of it. and we were discussing today that we need to sit down and look at what are important standardized things that we all are going to say these are the things we want to look at and make sure if we are putting all this effort into getting people on-site to do a tiered fidelity inventory, are we standardized and saying these things, we'll measure these things in this implementation. so that's one of the things i'm realizing as i'm diving deeper into looking at the data and asking questions like what is this telling us that is actually happening at a school. that information should be coming out of the inventory which we administered at all the schools, so we can dive more deeply into that data with you to see. >> is there a way you can report to the board? like i said, it's very detailed.

>> yes >> so i would love to see is there a way, once you decide on those things that you can report out to schools and you could also report to us. >> yes. and i have to say one of the things i appreciate i'm hearing is we don't have to use the same presentation we have been using and we can think differently about the data we present to you. so a lot of the questions you are asking us, we are either going to assess do we have that data already, maybe we can collect it. i think collecting all this information, things that commissioner cook has said and all the different questions, it's making me realize that we are going to have to pause and think what are we presenting to you to have the conversations that you want to have, and what do we have that we can present to you, and what is there that we don't have yet. >> i would like to recognize ms. solomon. >> if we are going to talk about the contract, let's please be

accurate. what i am able to find about what is supposed to happen at schools is 21.2.4 in the teacher's contract, a school behavior team shall be established at each school site. such team shall include one or more teachers, a support member and paraprofessional, for example, a family liaison or elementary advise herb. the site administrator shall be responsible for the implementation and monitoring of the schoolwide plan that is based on procedures and norms as developed by the school behavior team and site administrator. so that is something in the contract. so in contract language, a lecture here, it says what it says. so if it's supposed to be a climate team, which isn't in the contract, but a school might call it an i.l.t., then it's not the same thing. it would say i.l.t. it's not in the contract. it's not in the contract. we wanted some of that in the

contract. we wanted professional development, restorative practices guaranteed for every teacher, and we didn't get it in the last contract. and maybe we'll get it in this contract. but when we hear things like we have to build the capacity of our teachers and we all have to be working on attendance, these are true, but what are you going to take off teachers' plates? you heard tonight what it is that teachers have to do and what they want to do. how are we going to build the capacity of teachers who are already working beyond their hours? how are we going to take things off their plate that aren't as important as this? it can't just be when counselors and social workers can be the levers. no, they can't. they have work to do with students. there's not time in the day unless we make this a priority. it's not going to happen. six years to the day since this was, as we've heard many times. today happens to be the exact date, february 25.

do we mean this or we don't? and it's great to have the tate. we need to be data driven. as people have said like former superintendent of california schools, you don't fatten the pig by measuring it more often. you do the work. and we don't have the tools to do this work. >> so i appreciate ms. solomon's comments. and i guess that's the piece that i consistently don't see is how we are going to implement the plan, and whatever that model is, it feels a lot like we are saying people can take the trainings and people can train other people, and i've just, like, i don't understand that how that's an actual implementation plan, because, you know, if you go to the

training, is it understood that you are going to train other people? are you getting paid to do those trainings? that's not a plan. and so i think we need -- it says we are supposed to have a plan that's going to be implemented, and i still don't have a plan for how all teachers are going to be trained, how we are going to have the climate teams. and then how are we going to involve families, and how are we sharing information back with families so they can be partners, because they want to help. there's all these systems we are coming up with, we have to have reporting that's allows families to see how we are doing with attendance, with our climate teams, and i don't know if there's any reporting we have oe accountable to the school communities where we say we have these measures. and finally with the p.d.i.s., just a personal thing, in middle school, i think it was fun for

kids in elementary school, there's a lot of fun activities and kids get tickets and things like that, but i think in middle school and high school, it's just i think we spend a lot of time, there's things like little tokens and stuff that my daughters were saying they would get a thing of slime that they were excited about at the little store for the tokens, but we need -- that isn't building relationships. that's sometimes get a ball or slime or something. i want us to be focusing on building relationships among students, and it says in here we are supposed to be talking about building community and implicit bias is happening with students. so i don't know. i'm hoping at the curriculum committee meeting, we are going to be talking about some of the administrative regulations on bullying and those specifically say we are doing some curriculum, which i don't think is happening, but i'm interested in seeing what we do, what we

don't do, what our plans are. we need to involve students and parents in building positive school culture. and i don't know what those systems are, and that would full into pbis as well, but i don't know specifically what those things are in our district or if it's just left up to schools to do it on their own. so i'm looking forward to seeing that report. thank you, president sanchez. >> any last comments? okay. i think my colleagues said enough and asked enough. thank you so much for the presentation. and thank you, president solomon, for clarifying the contract language. moving on. section j, discussion and vote on consent calendar items removed at a previous meet. there are none tonight. k, introduction of proposals and

assignment to committee. public and board comment on proposals. i see there's no public comment on the proposals. they are superintendent's proposal 202-25sp1, approval of the public education enrichment fund, expenditure plan for school year 2020-2021. and then board policy 5116.1, intradistrict safety transfer process. a motion and a second for the first reading resolution 202-25sp1 and board policy 5116.1, we need. >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. is there any public comment? no. okay. any board comments on these first readings? >> question. >> yeah.

commissioner lopez. >> just a quick clarification and maybe i'm just not understanding the numbers right. but why don't they match what -- the numbers that were given here here? i'm looking at the first page trying to get a grasp of the numbers. but in the projected revenue for 2021, why wouldn't it match the budget overview below it? >> vice president lopez, are you referring to the peef item? >> that's what we are talking about. >> i opened it up for questions or comments. i. >> i can also ask this offline. >> okay, why don't you do that.

unless i hear otherwise from legal counsel, i'm referring the policy to the rules committee and the resolution will be heard at the committee of the whole meeting on tuesday, march 3. so we will be having a whole meeting on that. section l, proposals for immediate action and suspension of rules. there are none tonight. m, board member reports. so report from recent committee meetings. mr. moliga is not here, so we will hold off, unless somebody else from that committee wants to report. >> i was there >> do you want to report? >> i'm on the committee. >> we were going to wait until commissioner moliga is back. >> okay >> board delegates to membership organizations.

any? no? all other reports by board members? okay. calendar of committee meetings. so standing ad hoc and joint committees of the board. business services wednesday march 4, 6:00 p.m., buildings grounds and services monday march 23 at 6:00 p.m., curriculum program monday march 9, 6:00 p.m., wait, did we move it to 5:00? curriculum from now on -- online it says 6:00. >> it's true. updated on the calendar that's external but maybe we didn't -- it's available on board docs. it says new time 5:00. >> and then rules policy march 2 at 5:00. ad hoc committee on personal matters and affordability wednesday march 11 at 6:00 p.m.

ad hoc committee on student assignment, monday march 16 at 6:00 p.m. joint city school district and city college select committee, friday, march 12, 10 a.m. that meeting is held in the city hall legislative chamber. section n, other informational items. posted in the agenda this item is the initial proposal from united administrators of san francisco to sfusd. section o, memorial adjournment, there is none tonight. okay. section p, closed session, the board will now go into closed session. thus i call a recess of the regular meeting. [please stand by] from the district for the remainder of the spring semester of 2020. can i have a second? >> yes. >> second. >> roll call.

>> thank you. [roll call vote] >> five ayes. >> i move approval of the expulsion of one high school student from the district for the remainder. can i have a second? >> second. >> roll call. [roll call vote] >> five ayes. >> vote on employment contracts for unrepresented chief executive employees. none tonight. three, report from closed session, in the matter of l.m.g. v. sfusd case number 2020-

2020-010917, the board by a vote of 6 ayes gives the authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated am. in the matter of m.d. v. sfusd case 2020-01642 the board by a vote of six ayes, one absent, gives authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount. the board by a vote of six ayes, one absent approved issues notice that four principals contracts may not be removed. the board by a vote of six ayes approved issuing notice that four assistant principals contracts may not be removed. the board by a vote of six ayes approved issues notice that six program administrators contracts may not be renewed. the board by a vote of six ayes one absent proved issuing notice that two supervisors contracts may not be renewed. the board by a vote of six ayes

one absent proved the contract for two directors contracts may not be renewed. the board by a vote of six ayes one absent, moliga, approved issues notice that three principals contracts will not be renewed. the board by a vote of five ayes one absent, moliga, one abstain, cook, approved issuing notice that one assistant principal's contract may not be renewed. the approved issues notice that four assistant principals contracts may not be removed. it's one of the longest readouts i have ever seen. the board by a vote of six ayes one absent, moliga, approved issuing notice that one program administrator contract may not be removed. the board by a vote of five ayes approved the contracts for one principal. the board by a vote of six ayes one absent approved the contracts for 50 principals. the board by a vote of six ayes one absent approved the contract for 21 program administrators.

the board by a vote of five ayes, one absent and one abstained cook approved contracts for two supervisors. the board by a vote of six ayes one an sent proved the contracts for 22 supervisors. approaches 1 a.m. this board meeting is adjourned. [please stand by]

>> this is a special meeting on wednesday, february 26, 2020 and et cetera called to order at 1:06 p.m. we thank sf gov tv. members, please take this opportunity to silence your phones. public comment during the meeting is generally limited to three minutes per speaker unless otherwise established by the presenting officer of the meeting. speakers are requested but not required to state their names. a speaker card will ensure the written record of the meeting. please place the speaker cards in basket. there is a sign-in sheet on the front tv, and please show the office.

>> welcome. it is our custom to begin and end each small business commission meeting with a reminder that the office of small business is the only place to start new business in san francisco and get the best answers. the office of small business should be your first stop when you have a question about what to do next. you can find us online or in person here at city hall. best of all, all of our services are free of charge. the small business commission is here to voice your opinions and concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of small businesses in san francisco. if you need assistance with small business matters start here at the office of small business. thank you. >> item one, called to order and role call. (role call).

>> you have a quorum. >> apparently, a computer went down and we didn't have sound. so i appreciate everyone being flexible. i want to thank everyone for the virtual kitchens known as government kitchens and i would like to thank all of you tuning in on sfgov tv. we know it's not easy take time away from your business to participate in opportunities like this but be assured your impact is counted. we also would like to thank the departments who took time out today to present to us. your time is valuable and we appreciate that you're here to help educate the commission and public on this emerging industry.

this is a topic that has been on our commission's mind for quite some time and we've heard many reports from the small business community regarding the opportunities that delivery platforms are providing small businesses. we've also heard from many about the challenges that they have posed. we hope that at the end of today's hearing, we'll know more about this emerging industry and we'll be able to offer thoughtful findings to the mayor and board of supervisors. before we begin, i would like to briefly explain some of the terminology that will likely be used throughout the hearings so the public can follow what we're talking about. as is often the case in emerging technologies, terminology changes. last night the commission secretary and i were having a debate about the techthonomy and this is what we settled on and this will be the definitions we're using so we're all talking about the same thing. when we say delivery apps, we're

referring to third-party deliver platforms like door dash, grub hub and uber eats and we'll be using ghost kitchens which some refer to as virtual kitchens, but for our purposes, we'll be calling them ghost kitchens today. ghost kitchens are food preparation facilities that are oriented towards delivery only on these delivery apps and otherwise not accessible to the public. ghost kitchens come in different voters, rick and mortar are in a permanent building and maybe in a warehouse or industrial district or might be in a papered over storefront in a commercial corridor. mobile ghost kitchens are in a food truck or some other temporary structure. invisible ghost kitchens are of unknown origin. when you visit the address listed, there's no discernible business listed there. i would like to highlight a few of the models wore hopin we're h

can refer to. it's businesses that host a number of ghost kitchen tenants in a facility. the operator may offer specialized services or shared equipment to make it easier for the ghost kitchens to get this to drivers. delivery hubs are places where food is stored until it is ready to be delivered. these can be lockers, trailers or even small storefronts themselves. i think it is safe to say that the commission has a lot of questions regarding ghost kitchens as well as community apps and we're looking forward to being educated by all of you and i think we're all in agreement, we're seeking a balanced discussion. we know that the relationship between the restaurant industry and ghost kitchens is complex and we respect that complexity. we know that there are different views on these services and business concepts and all we're hoping to do today is to learn from you so that we can provide

guidance to the board of supervisors and the mayor and that it be thoughtful and on strucktive guidance that ultimately helps to make the small business community in san francisco stronger. so with that, i would like to invite laurie thomas to present in her capacity as owner, general partner as rose's cafe and ceo of nice ventures. >> is this on? >> it is. >> so i basically wanted to read a statement that will take ten and a half minutes of my 14 that was allocated and i will set it up and hopefully, then, if you want copies, i'm happy to submit that into the record afterwords. you can interrupt me if you want, i'm fine with that. so good afternoon, my name a

laurie thomas and i'm to present as a restaurant owner of rose's cafe and they're both long-time restaurants, 13 and 25 years in san francisco, operating. i also represent the larger san francisco community of restaurants as the new acting director of the golden gate restaurant association and in the interest of time, we'll combine both things because i'm speaking with a restaurant hat in general. so thank you all for taking the time to hold this hearing so we can learn more about the growing industry and becoming more educated and to understand all of the different stakeholder perspectives, issues and concerns. just to set the playing field. our industry is large, pure the

bureau of labor statistics. many people are struggling with the online economy. we help provide unique experiences and one of the key reasons if you ask sf travel why tourists will fight for visiting san francisco is to go and sit and dine-in restaurants. so now we switch to a more negative set of news here. our brick and mortar industry, our restaurant industry in san francisco is in a serious state of decline from my perspective.

five supervisors sat in and helped to host this and 41 restaurants showed up, that we thought that the decline, the more closures versus openings and san francisco in 2018 were 9%. there's between 2,000 square feet and greater than 2,000 square feet. to give you numbers behind that, what are we talking about, 536 restaurants closed in san francisco, closed the health department permits and only 384 opened. another way look at this is if you compare the 2018 numbers and we have numbers going back five

years and we've asked them to go further and to expand to look at mobile trucks, but they're a little busy right now and so we have to give them time to produce the numbers. but if you look at it, 106 less restaurants opened and six more closed than they did in 2019 and 100 more closed and six less opened within excus. excuse me. what does that mean in terms of lost jobs. we don't have the job losses because the department of public health doesn't report but if we were estimate on the low side an average number of employees was, say, 20, you're looking at losing over 200 jobs. the higher side and say, 50, and i don't have the one to one numbers, that would have been close to 5,000 jobs restaurants would have accounted for. if you compare that to the earlier labor number for working-class jobs, that's close to 8% of the total working class jobs and we need to be paying

attention to this, ok? i know we have a 1.9% unemployment rate in the city but we need to look at the working class jobs. our restaurant members and myself are worried in 2020, and we'll see a greater number of closings that many do -- that due to many several factors we're aware of, the lack of working-class housing, the permitting process, the extreme homelessness on the trees streed the economic pressures many are facing from the ordinances passed from a policy perspective seven years ago but are coming home to roost. let's move into the delivery apps and ghost kitchen discussion. i want to thank you for calling this and i want to let you know that in the past week and a half, i've spent ten hours meeting with several delivery companies, meeting with many of our members and i also met with

one of the guys who is the gm of cloud kitchen and this is an informed commentary, ok? so i see that we have si circle stakeholders. we have the brick and mortar restaurants. there's uber eats, grub hub, postmates and a bunch more. i got three that i didn't return calls to this past week. there's the government kitchens and the virtual kitchens and these are the production and distribution facilities for this industry. there's the consumer or the customer and there's the residents, people like myself, you know, that live neighborhood corridors of people that use the roads and frequent the neighborhood and commercial corridors and the government entities with enforcement of rules and permits toen sure to e

public safety. let's go through five key issues and i can take any questions. the first issue -- i think where we're coming from an a restaurant and where i'm representing my restaurant, members and community, is the prospective of why are we seeing this new industry emerging and i think from talking to a bunch of people and myself included, it's coming because brick and mortar restaurants -- and these are fall service restaurants, for the most part. they're not the fast casual and they're not -- they include but less of the super high-end, you know, thousand dollars for two for dinner. it's the core of the restaurants, like my two restaurants. it's just becoming less and less sustainable from a numerical perspective to make the businesses run and you guys have heard these numbers but i'll repeat them for the record. these costs, that's one component of it, include labor and permit fees and taxes and also the time it takes to open a

restaurant have significantly increased. dine-in restaurants have seen the payrolls jump by 52%. not the minimum. everything has gone up. revenues have essentially stayed flat and maybe gone up, maybe 3% a year, maybe not. and we've seen the healthcare costs during that same seven-year time frame and i personally can show you numbers, have gone up 37% and small businesses take the brunt of that. i see my husband who is a teacher for 15 years and kelpers has a hell of a lot more negotiating power and so we take the brunt of the cost increase. then you guys know the permit fees, the time it takes to address any issues to fix the facilities, even if it's an exist improvement. i heard a horror story the other day about somebody had to make a change and how long it took. i'm encouraged by the new legislation peskin put forth to

give him additional use time and thank you. i'm excited to see that. let's move on. what else is changing? obviously consumer behaviour. we can't ignore that, right? new buying behaviour, myself included, sometimes, not to want to go to a restaurant and eat but to order in and we have to be aware of that. that won't change. so why are restaurants, including myself, and i've used caviar for a couple of years at rose's cafe. why would we move to delivery services? to capture incremental revenue and to offset some of the costs that are fixed costs that keep going up or labor costs which are not fixed but variable, technically, but they keep going up. so we have to find more revenue. and also, we have some customers who want to purchase that way from us, to be honest with you. and then we want, you know, to

continue to try to function so we do this and most restaurants that i talked to, i talked to several, they've had positive experiences. i've read the paperwork, and they do it to increase revenue. many folks are doing a large percentage of their business through delivery. we're not, but we're limiting the time and we're limiting six items on the menu because we're concerned -- i don't have chinese or indian or some sort of food that travels women. my food, a pizza cooked at rose's cafe tastes horrible by the time it gets to noey valley. so personally, we use caviar, we pay 25% to them and we limit the menu. we can start and stop the service on demand. it's a positive thing for us and there's an ipad, the bartender can stop it so it doesn't affect normal diners in the restaurant. we feel the fee but it's a business decision that i as a business owner made and i want

to have the ability to make contracts with people if i feel that makes sense for me and this one did. now there's some other issues we want to address and i don't want to say bad behaviour. some people said predatory behaviour but there's been issues you have all seen in the press lately that delivers without consent and you guys have seven that. i'm sure you're all aware of the state bill put forth, the delivery act that's interested in getting consumer data as a secondary note. as a restaurant operator and ed of the ggra, i strongly believe that listing restaurants without their consent has to stop, ok? and i will mention postmates and tell you the experience and then i'll give them -- and they're here today -- some positive feedback, too. we had an issue about a month ago, getting a lot of postmate orders at rose's cafe.

these poor couriers were showing up with orders we couldn't make. they weren't on the menu because the menu had been pulled from a year ago and we change the menu daily. it's a small place. the team would get upset, causing a conflict and it was not good. it was difficult for me to figure out how to get postmates to stop that, but i was recently introduced to the vp at public affairs in the room today. we discussed this and he said, i can understand it's a problem and gave me a url that in two minutes i could ask them to remove the name and they did. because i'm not a merchant, i didn't have any way to know what that url was. there has to be a remove me button or something on a consumer site that means that a business can go to and say, i don't want this, right? so they're working on that. i think if we can educate why

that's a problem, obviously people on site don't pay the fee, the 25%. so some might like that, but ones that don't want it, we want it to be off of that and we had an exclusive agreement with caviar and that was another reason. let's talk about the other issue. i've heard a lot about, peeping saying this is a usery fee, which is too much. they shouldn't take that. the fees, i believe, range from 15% if a consumer picks up an order up through 30% for the normal delivery model. as i mentioned mine is 25% because i have an exclusive agreement. so here is where i think many business owners feel about this, as long they're not hidden fees or bit and switch fees that could take advantage of somebody less sophisticated, then i think fees are up to a contract that a business owner should have the right to make assuming they're getting, you know, something in exchange for providing that service. but the other thing i think

would be great to make and had a meeting with uber eats yesterday and what they do, i think, is great, it only takes 24 hours, they told me for a restaurant to be removed from a platform. so many of us will sign a contract and we're locked in for 12 months, say, with the cleaning company. they're not doing that. they're saying, if you want out, we let you out. that's something very helpful we try to ask for, somebody tried something, it doesn't work and there's an easy and non-penalized outclause in the contract. next issue is consumer safety and public health and i think this is really key. i met with the cloud kitchen guys, as well, this past week. and reinforced and told me that all of the facilities are permitted. they follow the health department rules, pull the right permits. if we don't have the right zoning and permits, we have to create them as a company. that the health department goes and inspects them.

it has to happen for these facilities just like restaurants. we need food handler considerates. we need food manager permits on site at all of the facilities for each of the different kitchens. and so we need to make sure that's enforced because we don't want anybody to get sick. the fourth issue, again, along the same line, we have the correct permits and follow the zoning rules. i think one issue that we want to talk about, reggie that and i talked about this and if a kitchen goes into a corridor, pulling that level of permit to do a virtual kitchen, they haven't activated the storefront. so that's the cons. the pro is, that was and empty

pace anspace and now we say, she let offices in there? i don't know. zoning isn't my thing but those are things to have a conversation about. mta is taking a look at this. we have to address congestion, double parking for the pick-ups by the restaurants and by the kitchens. i saw this in some of the paperwork, we need to be careful not to turn yellow zones into areas where noncommercial vehicles can park because i don't know how you regulate that, even if it's a couple of minutes and somebody pulls in. we'll have fights over those yellow zones. for restaurants, yellow zones are important.

the fifth issue to think about, obviously, is the global level but in the san francisco level is our environment and does locating a virtual kitchen throughout the city actually help to reduce travel and congestion or, you know, does it make it worse? is it shortening the distance and those types of things? so there is that and the other thing is that the ghost kitchen models are the shared commisary are positive because we can't go through raising the money and going through the permit proce

process. you think of the kitchens in commercial areas might make sense to me if i could find the staff to staff them. that's a positive thing. so to wrap it up, there's a lot to consider but i understand this a lot more than i did. so thanks for calling this. i never would have sat through all of the these meetings. i think we can add values to the members and the community as a whole and that's it. thank you. >> thank you. thank you, laurie. that was a wonderfully comprehensive overview of everything that's considered here. if you could stay up for just a second. commissioners, do you have any questions for laurie? >> are we asking them now? >> after each presentation, we'll have a couple of minutes if you want to ask some questions. >> i just have a chicken and egg

questions. and i think i'm the only small business operator that has a restaurant within the space so this is something i've thought a lot about. you mentioned very well all of f the things that made it harder on the revenue side. i wonder if you think, also, the kind of very short-term increase in the trends that people have in terms of how they eat, having food delivered to them, have been a large stressor and i'm trying to figure out, is part of the squeeze that so many people are using these apps? >> yes. >> so now you're using the apps to get more revenue because of the squeeze? >> i'm not sure what drives the behaviour, but we know for sure that the millennials -- and i do it, too, right? i order uber eats when i'm exhausted. ok, i'll pay the fee and do it. >> so it's not just the

millennials. i'm 53. i think i'm a baby-boomer. but i think it's hard to tell, but i think that behaviour is here and i think as business owners we should be careful what we ask for because, you know, while we might stand here and say, you know, that's 30% too high, i don't want you to come back in two years and tell me, you know, you can't price your hamburger at $25 because that's too much. but i need that to survive, but that's not fair for everybody. so i think it's a very tricky thing and what i encourage we do is do what i did and get educated and certainly address some of the zoning and permit issues. let's make this a level, fair, safe, playing field and let's educate our partners on the delivery side. i commend everyone taking time to meet with us and listen to us and to tell us stuff and take some feedback and so that's great. we need to do more of that and we've hit, like, maybe three of

them, but i think we need the dialogue and then we become educated. i don't want to have a knee-jerk reaction because something things these are bad tech companies or something. so that's my two cents. >> so one thing i just kind of wanted to zero in on here, you mentioned that -- we talked -- you discussed ghost kitchens and commercial corridors -- >> the virtual kitchens are in the corridors. >> so for our purposes today, we've co combined those terms. >> i would separate them. >> ok, well, then, maybe you should clarify that. >> so my understanding, and somebody else can speak to me. cloud kitchen is the one i haven't spoken with anybody other than that. my understanding is that is a large commercial -- it's located by sixth and ryan. it's a large, more commercial

style. i think of it more as an apartment model. >> sorry, i'm going to interject quickly. so the complexes of multiple ghost kitchens, and for this meeting, we're referring that as a complex. that would be cloud kitchen -- >> like an apartment kitchen? >> yes. just so keep everybody on the same page. whereas a ghost kitchen is a facility that creates food for delivery only. >> it doesn't have a storefront. >> i've read about restaurants that have a ghost kitchen arm to facilitate delivery, but, basically, it is -- if the food is made in a place where the general public cannot walk in and buy the food right there on

the premises, then we're calling that a ghost kitchen, for the purposes of this discussion. and so, the question, i guess, i was driving at, is we have heard of ghost kitchens opening in or near commercial corridors. >> correct. and as you outlined, there's kind of two sides to that. >> yeah. >> one is that from the perspective of activating a commercial corridor and increasing the amount of foot traffic, having a business is not accessin accessible to the d not as desirable as a business that is accessible to the public. on the other hand, if you have a vacant storefront not used at all, certainly having something is better than having nothing there. so the question is, you know, where do we draw the line and i just -- where i wanted to come in over the top and say, i hope we can all agree and recognise

that restaurants play a role in our communities that are above and beyond just the employees they hire and the tax revenue they generate. they have externalities that extend beyond the businesses yourselitself to have communitie we can see our neighbors and visit with friends and we can visit with people. so there is something -- it's not a purely economic decision, at least from my perspective.

>> neighborhood corridors are complicated and i don't know the answer, but thank you. >> commissioner ortiz. >> thank you. that was great and i know you being involved that we'll get knowledge. i grew up in a restaurant, my mom had a restaurant on 24t 24th and i'm an advocate for brick and mortar restaurants. it's a golden cage. you're the accountant, cook, dishwasher, everything. based on the limited research that you've had currently, do you feel that these ghosts of virtual kitchens currently the way policy is in the city has an

unfair advantage against brick and mortars? >> well, i mean, i don't -- what do you mean, unfair advantage? >> you talked about a level playing field. >> oh, yeah. if, for example, they don't have to go through the same permit process that a brick and mortar business would have to, then we need to take a look at that. we need to loosen it up on the brick and mortar side or tighten down on the other side. there's two ways to fix stuff. so that would be my thing. mineif we all have to jump throa ton of hoops to get something done in a brick and mortar restaurant, then everything else should need to go through that, because presumably, there's policy reason we're doing that. so we would ask, what's the policy reason. in the case of food-borne diseases, i hold a food and manager safety permit. i sat through the class and i passed on the first test. there's a lot of really comly

complicated stuff about how stuff can sit out and the times are for food-borne illnesses. we want to make sure the food is safe and if we jump through those hoops, everything else should jump through those hoop. that's where i'm coming from. >> from and optics, the delivery services, who do you think they partner most with in the city, regarding, like, tiers of restaurants? and i'm talking about, maybe, the cafes. >> i think certain types of foods that travel better, maybe more ethnic foods, would be more obvious for delivery services, right? for example, if you order a pizza at rose's cafe, down on union and striner -- and i won't do it. i won't order and have them send it to the valley because it's inedible in 30 minutes.

it tasted like cardboard after 30 minutes. will i order the roast chicken? sure, that can carry 30 minutes. so restaurants like mine have a limited rest. italian food, some people do it well and doesn't do it well. ethnic food, thai food, korean food, anything that has sauces and stuff lends itself more to delivery. you're looking at more fast casual, doing it more than fine dining, i would say probably, maybe, that's possible. but i haven't seen the split of -- i think that's something you could ask the delivery apps. they'll have the data. >> thank you, laurie. >> ok, we're just -- i'll remind the commissioners that we're short on time and we have a lot of folks to get through and i know i'm the worst of all of us. so this is a reminder to myself. can we have the ceo and founder of dosa by dosa.

>> thank you. >> thank you for coming. >> good afternoon. i'm the ceo of and founder of dosa. please bear with me. i'll give you some background so it will help you understand. i grew up in bombay, india, moved to the sf in 1989, about 30 years ago, lived in six different neighborhoods across the city. i've worked in tech industry for 16 areas. i opened my first location in 2005. my second location was on filmore street in 2008 and i chose to open a restaurant as a fast, casual concept and i opened commissary. i was in the golden gate association with laurie and

legislation kept coming in, which drove a lot of the decisions i made six, seven years ago. please bear with me,fy seem long-winded here. i'm raising two daughters here who attend school here. i consider myself fairly liberal. please allow me to provide background for small businesses because i think it drives some of the decisions hopefully you guys will make. as you know, small businesses are struggling in san francisco and closing down at an alarming rate. i closed the valencia the end of last year. they include high commercial rents, labor shortages, inadequate transport transportat to work and the economic pressures for venture capital food tech company, approaching

workers that lead to shortages. pressure due to the proliferation of online delivery services and as much as we love san francisco, and we still believe it's the premiere in west coast, it is not longer the subcultural and culinary influence in the bay area. however, the primary reason small businesses are failing, i believe, is the high cost of labor. please allow me to explain. our staff in san francisco, many whom are students and artists are in three primary areas, healthcare, housing and education. so with the business model for small businesses is entired to carry that. i believe these are necessary and excellent for our staff and places an unsustainable burden on the restaurants . these are issues that cannot be solved by minimum wage because if we increase the minimum wage

to $35 an hour, san francisco would be a unaffordable to them. we believe the city of san francisco, a budget of 2.12 billion, and the federal government, a budget of 4.4 trillion need to take financial responsibility for the services listed above and not place the entire burden for these services on neighborhood businesses. restaurants do not have the powerful lobbies or the luxury or operating at a loss, as do many tech companies that are financed for growth. in conjunction with the recalledly rising costs of doing business in sanfrancisco, which is higher than the restaurants and other bay area cities or even new york city, we have to compete on price.

these well-intentioned laws that were in place many, many years ago can have devastating conventions in the londevastati. it is my responsibility to look around the corner. as a result, you know, i realize small businesses can no longer afford to be sustainable in san francisco. it is impossible for me to open restaurants or small businesses in san francisco. we are accustomed to taking risks but now the risk has become insurmountable. for a few years now, i have said toman who will listen that san francisco, a city that i still love very much, will start to lose to local businesses and define the fabric of each neighborhood. it is not surprising that as the business climate fully changes, these neighborhoods are becoming ghost kitchens. this is the new reality of

business in san francisco. we believe kitchens must be well run but are the future of small businesses. i do not believe by chasing them out, other small businesses will take their place. we have seen storefronts everywhere that will get vacant in the coming years. i'm not required to invest capital of the highest labor cost in the u.s. and any regulations you create, must be sensible and fair or the city will be left without too many options for the residents. i believe the ghost kitchens and delivery services need sensible regulation to make them safe for the public. but well-intentioned laws can be devastating in the long term. just to give you background about what i've done so far. i've opened a commissary and partnered with virtual kitchens and they burying the capital arr

costs and i have been moving into the retail world to supply whole foods and i've gone through detailed health audits. we follow all of the health laws and the health ordinances, not just for, like, restaurants but retail stores. we deliver in the refrigerated trucks. i think people do use the word ghost kitchens interchangeably and i think there are different business models within that and the cloud kitchen's business model, i still have a core amount of capital, use my own labor and pay a significant amount of money for the consolidation of delivery of services, which is one of the services they provide the reason i should partner with a company with virtual kitchens is because they took on the entire burden. they are venture capital funded and how that model expands is up to them.

what i'm doing, i provide them with the food, i'm providing them with the license and capability of using my brand in a way that works well for us. and we do have very limited menu with them, a menu that works within our cost structure and they are planning to expand to 15 different cities across the bay area. that is the business model that makes sens sense because as laue said, it's extremely risky for me to now open another restaurant in sanfrancisco and i feel like many seasoned entrepreneurs are feeling the same way. so that's my story and if you have any questions, i'd be glad to answer them. >> i'm sure we will. thank you. any commission questions?

>> just so you're aware, enjan has a hard stop at 2:10. >> i am. thank you for coming and you have a really important perspective in terms of how we look at this. you know, obviously we see the articles in the paper and you know, in my industry, which is car rental, you always see the people complaining and you never see the people that are making it work or actually excited or happy because that's just not the culture. people tend to complain more. you've. a brick and mortar restaurant operator and a ghost/virtual kitchen operator and you have a clear and good understanding of the dynamics that might choose

one versus the other. >> and the tech industry, too. >> is the tech industry, too. i can speak for most of us in san francisco, where we have a complicated relationship with tech. i think we all recognise it's created extraordinary opportunity and enormous wealth and also created a lot of inequities which government has tried to address and in the result of addressing it has created collateral damage. and collateral damage has often been small business and restaurants and that's one of the things that we're obviously keenly did interested in trying to protect. i guess my first question is, so you operate at dosa. i had a nonreligious experience there. >> thank you. >> i still think about it sometimes.

[ laughter ] >> so you talked about the city's budget, which is large. of course, a lot of it is nondinondiscret irkionary. >> in a sentence or two, what do you think the city could do to make it easier for brick and mortar restaurants? >> the three issues that i talked about which is housing, education and healthcare, i don't think these can be solved at a microlevel by the small businesses and these are laws that apply to private law

practises that make about 500, $600 an hour and they apply to tech companies that have global businesses that are based out of here. those laws cannot apply to small businesses. i mean, there are a lot of legislation everywhere at the state level, federal level, city level that have exceptions. and i think if you want to have neighborhood restaurants, we have people that don't make the same amount of money. the margins are very different that apply to both types of businesses where you have a high margin in the businesses.

you're asking a small business that doesn't have powerful lobby to some complex issue. it's at the federal and state level and don't pass the buck down to us. we don't have the powerful. that's the point. >> this commission, i believe, whole heartedly, endorses that perspective and one of the things we're agitating for is to make it easier on the smaller businesses. >> the millennials, there's certain consumer habits you can't change. they want the highest quality,

the chiefest and they want it now and that won't change. plus, the millennials dating is changing. people prefer more of a casual motto. these are changing and we can't fight that. but what is real, companies that came in and they were funded to over a billion dollars and came into the city and they took over our restaurant workers and massive capitalist was poured into that and many have failed and they wreaked havoc. >> there's a clip about that, never underestimate. with respect to ghost kitchens and virtual kitchens and i might be asking somebody that has a

biased or slanted perspective, but nonetheless, i'll ask it, do you think they are a net positive for the restaurant industry? it's another way for brick and mortars to survive? or do you think it's a negative in the current iteration and there needs to be additional guidance to maybe change that bottom line to a positive number? >> so from my perspective, at least and someone who has been doing this for awhile, i did not want to take on the risk of opening another restaurant. i didn't make any sense to me. i didn't want to take on the burden of trying to open restaurants in different cities because the labor shortages and challenges are very high. so the way i modeled it and my relationship with virtual kitchens, you guys take on all of the risk. you build these ghost kitchens, wherever they are and you pay for the delivery service.

i wanted to license some of my recipes to they can make it myself. it's licensing fees and it's purely profit for me and i sort of mitigate any of my risk. these companies are not brand builders, not designed to build local restaurants and i don't expect virtual kitchens to make south indian foods. they need to go to people like laurie and myself and use the expertise in the culinary areas and mitigate the risks we have. we lose the neighborhoods, which is something that we actually, you know, inevitable. and so, based on the laws that we currently have, a fundamental change and i can't make those changes, but i fell like this was something bound to happen and something i felt five or

significance years ago when i opened the commissary which was a huge risk for me. i had to raise money and it took me a listening time to sort it out. cloud kitchens actually expect us to put in the capital and labor and i'm not willing to do that based on the numbers i've worked out. >> so putting on my -- i'll get to you in one second, putting on my don't hate the player, hate the game hat, the question i'm asking is, i understand why you made the economic decisions. they make absolute perfect sense from an economic perspective.

obviously, from a policy perspective, we're trying to protect these brick and mortars and i think my gut is to not try and further regulate, make it harder for a ghost or virtual kitchen but rather to make it easier for brick and mortar. [cheers and applause] >> and i'm not trying to influence any of the other folks on here, but that's just my particular perspective on this. with that being said, do you have any sort of creeping sense in your gut that, you know, the business that you're building is in some ways exacerbating the issue and it's becoming a bit of a vicious cycle? >> no, because i don't think the relationship i have with virtual kitchens is the issue. i think the issue is the legislation that came in four or five years ago with the permitting fees.

the difficult it is to actually sort of allow small businesses to open. when insay this, unless you change that, you can't go off of the virtual kitchen or solve a symptom of an issue that was created five or six years ago. you are solving the symptom but you want to solve the issue if you want brick and mortar services. regulating virtual kitchens will not help virtua brick and morta. i won't open a restaurant in a city if it's difficult for me to get a permit or if the city can't manage what's happening in the corridors, in the sense of everything else and i don't have to go into it explicitly. so i think solve the issues that are being created over here, i think the city needs better leadership. i think the state needs better leadership. going after virtual kitchens will not solve the problem. even if you go off of that and

you don't allow virtual kitchens in the major corridors, who will open a business over there? some of the storefronts have been vacant three or four years. (please stand by).

>> there is one in the marina. >> can people walk into that or is it closed to the public? >> it is delivery only. >> so i couldn't. the space which is a block from my house is where you sellout of so people cannot walk into it. >> how many people so the employees are not bees of yours, they are employees of the company? >> not bees of mine. >> you provide guidance and recipes. >> i provide food and review how it is packaged and delivered. >> you are making the food. >> i make the food in san francisco. i built it when i had to mitigate labor cost. i supply food. i had the commissary.

>> how often are you delivering this amount of food to four locations. >> on a daily basis. >> in the morning before they open they are kept hot or cold in the establishment? >> we actually deliver to almost like 50 stores around the city besides the kitchens. we make them in warehouses, put them in refrigerated trucks and they are delivered and heated up there. >> is that full-time staff? >> they are my full-time staff. >> how many of them do you have doing delivery? >> how many. >> doing delivery from the commissary. >> two or three. >> is there a quality check when they are delivered? >> we have been audited by whole

foods an and amazon. >> the food from the virtual kitchen to the consumer is it using plastic or is there anything that is using nonsingle use? >> they don't use plastic. they use recyclable containers. >> do you have control over that or do they decide in. >> we have a sain it. i strongly feel you should have someone from these companies talk to you. >> we tried. >> you tried. i would be glad to connect you with the c.e.o. of virtual kitchens. i did actually. i was concerned about the way it was represented. we don't use plastic. well, i will take that back. we use containers that were in

recyclable containers. >> two quick questions. do you get the customer information of the folks buying your product from the virtual kitchen? >> i do not. >> do you get feedback from those that get it from the diamond street that purchased your amazing food. are you receiving that feedback directly? >> we have asked for that feedback and right now they don't have a formal feedback mechanism like yelp. they are working on that. >> if someone ate something and it made them sick they can't tell you directly that it happened? >> they probably tell the customer. so they are designing a way to provide feedback. if someone gets sick absolutely. >> that feedback does not exist

currently. >> it does exist. it is not as formal as it needs to be. this is a relatively new company. it is anecdotal rather than a star system. >> thank you very much. appreciate it. >> i know you have got to pick up your kids. super-quick question. unrelated to ghost kitchens. with respect to the third-party delivery apps, do you have a position on whether it should be opt-in or opt out? >> it definitely should be opt-in. no question. no one should be posting feed without agreement of the restaurant. it is a process. a lot of restaurants in san francisco change menus weekly. it has to be opt-in. no question. i want to mention the person i am working with, the c.e.o. of virtual kitchens. i would be happy to have him

come and talk to you guys. >> were they invited? >> they were not invited. he is conscientious how he interacts with neighborhoods. from my perspective, i want my brand to be represented well. i have been doing this health standards and we have massive audit trailings of what we do. we do logs when we load the truck and off-load it. we provide a lot more paperwork than any other restaurant in san francisco. there needs to be regulation around healthcare. those are obvious. i think if we want the restaurants, i don't think going after virtual kitchens is the way to do it. >> commissioner huie.

>> in terms of what people want now in their restaurant experience kind of made me think about something i have been giving thought to as to what do our neighborhoods do really well? what are they going to look like in the next two to five years? given the current landscape, what you have said in terms of if we regulate hard on the ghost kitchens, we are not going to see the neighborhood problem solved. do you have a sense of whether the restaurant community or the tech community, who is really imagining what the neighborhoods are going to look like? does anybody have a good sense of what that is going to be? >> i think for me i had lived in the city for 15 years. i opened it with the perspective

this is what i think the city needs. there was no indian food that i was looking for, not the indian food experience i was looking for. a lot of the neighborhoods need to be driven by individual entrepreneurs to come up with their own ideas. we can think on macro level but no one can create what laura has done or the other people have done. we have to allow these individual entrepreneurs to do what they want to do and get out of the way as far as laws. that is my point. going after the virtual kitchen is going after the symptom right now. in my mind, we can't stop delivery. we want to make sure the delivery companies are following health standards. they deliver hot food without

putting it in hot bags and so on. i think if we want to have restaurants and brick and mortar places in small businesses we need a business plan that is amenable to them. it is liberal. someone who is, you know, i feel like this is something that needs to happen. what it looks like, i don't know. it is not going to be defined by a macro level. it is going to be defined by individuals who open interesting retail doors that is what defines the neighborhoods in san francisco for many years. you say i have never seen a store like this before. that is not a planning commission or tech company doing that. that is individuals coming in to take the risk. what happened in san francisco is the city has made the risk so difficult and so insurmountable it is people that don't want to

do it. thecisiothe seasoned entreprenet want to do it. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for coming. i know you have to pick up your daughter. thank you for coming. >> department of public health. can you step up, please. >> we don't have your name on the agenda. let us know who you are. >> good afternoon, commissioners and director. i am patrick, assistant director at the environmental health branch. it is a regulatory branch for the health department. we enforce over 40 health code himself. environmental health codes also enforces the health code article 8 which is what we regulate the food industry with, which is why

we are invited here today. our piece of the discussion this afternoon has to do with health and preventing food-borne illnesses as they pertain to these business models we are talking about. as you are aware, san francisco is a hotbed of innovation. we have constantly been working with business owners proposing to do something completely new. we have seen robot vending machines, pop-up restaurants, cottage food establishments to name a few. the latest wave is what we are talking about this afternoon, the ghost or virtual kitchen concept. is this has required us to be age gill. the health -- agile. these happen faster than we are able to change the health code to keep up with it. we are constantly meeting with

entrepreneurs or business owners proposing something new and making the existing health code work for that until we are able to update or make changes to it. i have with me this afternoon two food program managers. they are going to provide an overview of these merging business models and the health department's role in regulating those. please come up now. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am mary, one of the managers in food safety. our distant director mentioned the ghost and virtual kitchens fall under our regulatory purview. several of the models mentioned today have health permits to

operate. for example, the cloud kitchen model which was mentioned. we recently did introduce a new code to article 8 of the san francisco health code which is a shared kitchen complex that was to address this new emerging type of food model. it means a food facility that provides services and restrooms to food preparation and establishments for the purpose of disposal and storage. the complex itself has to have a health permit to operate. that is because they may be providing shared refrigeration, cold holding, rest rooms, garbage services. the complex has a health permit to operate. they did have to undergo plan check with our department and

other agencies in the city. in addition what is called in the model is the tenants. at one of these cloud kitchen models they have 23 licensed and permitted tenants operating out of individual kitchens which are within that complex. one of the other models that was mentioned today, too, and i am not sure if this exactly fits. you mentioned a delivery hub. there is a virtual kitchen in the valley area just permitted in our department. that did go through plan review to ensure they met all structural and equipment requirements based on the california retail food code. they went through plan check and have recently been permitted.

apply my understanding is that they partner with locally permitted food facilities and they receive food at this location. this food is typically pre-cooked and pre-packaged, immediately goes to refridgation and the food is reheated when they get the online order for it on the app. they basically do use online platforms partnering with many different permitted food facilities. we are working with these trends as were mentioned. there is a lot of innovation. we have been working with several new ghost and virtual kitchens to address these upcoming needs. if you have any questions. >> sure. commissioners any questions? >> yes, i have a question.

thank you. i appreciate your patience, also, this new developing industry. we are reactive in government agencies. i had a particular question. there is a mobile setup in the mission behind the theater with six restaurants. is that permitted with the dph currently? >> yes, it is permitted and inspector can speak to that. that is within his program. it is a considered a mobile food facility, and it does have a health permit to operate. >> does that facility have to move or could be permanently affixed without moving from the parking location? >> as the mobile food facility it is required to go to the commissary for cleaning purposes

and exchange of wastewater, yes, it does have to move. it is considered mobile. >> i have a couple questions. with respect to a mobile food facility versus any of the, for example, restaurant or takeout establishment. are the health requirements the same? >> that's correct. they have to comply with the requirements so that would cover any type of food handling. >> is the code sort of dependent on what kind of food they are making? one can imagine different criteria for sushi versus french fries, for example. >> that is something we look at

during our plan check phase when the facility is first built out. we look at their menu to ensure they have the equipment mess for that particular business model and the type of food they are serving. >> at least from the department of health perspective there is no material difference between food made in a mobile truck or bus or restaurant. >> the standards would be the same. >> commissioner artez. >> two quick questions. who verifies these mobile facilities are actually moving and not staying stationary permanently. >> the health department. >> about the scorecard given to regular brick and mortar restaurants, how do virtual or ghost kitchens let consumers

know the score? >> we are moving to a placarding system. for either mobile or brick and mortar they would be required to post in a location within the food facility that patrons can see. >> in the patrons don't have access because it is a ghost kitchen. it only lives online. >> part of our inspection process when we do the reports. it will state that it was what the placarding condition was. pass or condition pass would most likely be available online for us. if you are at a location where people would not be able to walk in. >> my question or recommendation is like a brick and mortar would have to post in a conspicuous location. is there future legislation they

have to post on the website where the consumer shops? >> currently there is not anything for on the website. it would be on the health department's website. if someone wanted to look up that information they would access it from our website. >> if the brick abmortar post their score they would be fined? >> yes, there is a requirement to post it. >> commissioner huie. >> for the time it is stored there is department of health oversight. is there oversight or rules or anything in terms how the food is delivered, how the food is

kept warm or cool? who is watching the food between the kitchen to the consumer? >> if it is being delivered from a kitchen to one of the virtual locations, then part of our process would be to require standard operating procedures for the delivery from that regulated kitchen to the other regulated kitchen. >> what about from the kitchen or i guess i am not sure. >> currently the california retail food code does not address regulation of delivery. >> they don't have any sort of relationship with the -- relationship with the department of health relationship between the delivery app and department of health? >> currently, no. our relationship is with the

actual brick and mortar food facility. >> let me follow up on that. in your experience as food inspector, is there, you know, let's take sushi. is there a moment in time where a particularly long delivery process, half an hour, an hour on a warm day, could put consumers at risk? >> typically there is something that is called time as a public health control. that is a time period basically four hours where if something can be held at that temperature for less than four hours, then it would not fall into the normal temperature regulations. as long as the item can be delivered quickly as you mentioned within one hour, the concern or the risk would not be

as high. >> okay. thank you. >> a follow-up. have you seen from the delivery app some sort of internal regulatory like standards for themselves. have they published we will deliver this type of food within a certain timeframe. we refrigerate our food this way. we make sure our drivers clean their cars. i think we have read about the germs in private vehicles. is there any sort of self-regulation you have seen on the parts of the delivery companies? >> i believe some of those companies have their own internal standards and written procedures. however, again, that is not regulated by the health department or required from the california retail food code. >> thank you. >> you are welcome.

>> any other questions? let me just doublecheck to make sure we covered. >> hong from dph in case there are other specific questions. >> we have talked about the delivery hubs, ghost kitchens, obviously, this is a rapidly changing environment. are there other emerging services you guys have your eyes on we haven't addressed or covered here? >> not that i am aware of, no. >> with respect to the mobile food facilities, commissioner ortiz was driving at this. the understanding is the food preparation vehicle has to move to the commissary for deep

cleaning every three days or 72 hours? >> it depends on thetic facility. some facilities are allowed to have a support unit that can come to that actual location and henry move wastewater or provide fresh water. >> there is not an actual requirement the vehicle itself? >> vehicles are required to report for deep cleaning, yes, they are. >> how is vehicle defined? like a trailer on like wood blocks. is that considered a vehicle? >> it should be mobile. if it was a trailer that was on blocks, it would have to meet the requirements for brick and mortar. >> if somebody put up a storage container it would have to meet

the same requirements. >> as brick and mortar. >> commissioner ortiz. hong. how many current permits for mobile ghost kitchens exist in the city and what are in the pipeline and where is the biggest concentration. >> good afternoon, commissione commissioners. i have context for the exact topic you are talking about. in regards for the ghost kitchens or mobile ghost kitchens, i would say from the perspective of the health department, we treat them like a mobile food facility, but you are right. you pointed out one think about the context of the food. it is true we don't

differentiate between the type of food only that it is safe. it is lost in clarity is you asked when can a mobile food be stationary versus taken back to the commissary. >> nine times out of ten they have to be taken back nightly. exception when they are serviced by the mobile preparation of service. it is not easy threshold to make. currently the ghost kitchen, eight in the city and i am not aware of more in the pipeline. they have to downgrade what they are permitted to do. they are like a restaurant on wheels. they have to entertain a mobile sport unit to support them they have to give up a lot of al allowances because they are

permitted as a kitchen on wheels. we would handcuff them in a lot of ways. there wouldn't be any slicing and chops, no thawing, cooling, no re-heating of hazardous food and no washing of food. it is suggested that some of these mobile food facilities are thinking about becoming stationary they have to meet that. i will say that the mobile prep unit is not a small endeavor. you have that fully permitted with the ability to service the water needs as well. in one person is the case we are referring to. eight of them owned in the city. if we felt one -- i am sorry i

lost track of the questions. >> out of the eight mobile ghost kitchens, what is the concentration, which neighborhood or corridor? >> i would have to look at it. >> chair affection question for the record. you would say traditional mobile food like a taco truck are on the same playing field as the ghost kitchens currently. yes. >> do you have any questions? >> thank you very much for coming. one last question. if somebody violates a permit, what are the next steps? do they just get a warning or shut down? talk to us about the continuum

between being warned and taken off the map. >> i will say they are treated like anyone else a ghost kitchen or brick and mortar. one question from your hypothetical wha what is the intensity of the example. mysel.you are right we want to k with small business. there is there is a progressive enforcement action to go through. in a generic sense first violations would be written and we would come back in the hopes they would have corrected that. we would suspend the permit on that day. that is far and few in between.

we have good restaurants. we have been commissioners here today. that does happen. to take after they would be written up for violation depending on the severity of the violation and historical context of the file, this is the same situation six months ago we may go to hearing. if it is first time give them a week. at that hearing process there are options for us. we can require food safety training class or require those who have not renewed food certificate to take it. we want the three chefs in the back to have it. we might interject a bilingual class in spanish or chinese, there are other resources when we can't address a language we

can't teach it in russian. >> that is fantastic. if a food preparation facility does have a violation outside of the placard system that we are moving towards, is there any other notice to consumers or customers about any current or unmitigated violations? the most powerful is a placard. if the doors are closed, no one can go in. if the doors are open and i speak for everyone at the health department. we hold our standards to the same. there is a distinction between green and yellow. they are working on things we pointed out. they corrected them. we haven't closed to the public

for business. green things are going good at least at the snapshot in time when the health department was there. >> thank you for coming. we learned a lot from that. can we have sf planning step up, please. >> good afternoon. corn retee with the -- corey tee. we appreciate being invited today. objective overview how these facilities are viewed in the planning code. unlike some that use the planning code this is straightforward in the sense that anytime of commercial kitchen, whether it is a large one or down to your small mom and pop catering business with a band. all of that falls under

nonretail use. it is not open to the public. there were no retail sales there. indicatorring uses are permitted without conditional usen most of the commercial use districts are pdr. 32, downtown, market street, going motor from there as well. mixed use are soma going in to parts of mission, dogpatch. our pdr districts are generally bayview up through central waterfront and do parts of the mission. >> they are generally prohibited in the neighborhood commercial districts. they are smaller scale in the

neighborhood. or union street or clement. thousands in the neighborhoods, the uses permitted on the ground floor are to be neighborhoods serving. catering uses are generally not permitted in those district. in 2018 the board of supervisors passed legislation to allow existing restaurants to have second or third-party food companies or other restaurants use their restaurant kitchens as a separate commissary in a limited way. they could not do deliveries out of that. if one of you had a restaurant and i wanted to use your kitchen on the weekend goes to keep my

meals. i could do that but i couldn't do direct delivery there as well. if someone want goes to create a catering use in the city, it is the same as any other building permit process. sometimes there are additional requirements like conditional use authorization approved by the planning commission. generally, they are a conditional use. if you want to start a katetering use in the city it is a building permit. are the restaurants retail uses. that is land uses for retail are open to the public. they are regulated differently in the planning code.

to that issue it was raised earlier about several years ago when we had male purchase and delivery services. they had taken restaurant spaces and converted them into the commercial districts. that was an enforcement challenge. those aren't usually permitting where you have a neighborhood commercial district with a restaurant space that is a caping use. there would be a code issue there. there was a question about the policy question. do we want to be more flexible? that is appropriate conversation to have. now the uses are not per splitted in commercial districts. another key between brick and

mortar and catering use. use it is subject to retail controls or chain alcohols. it is not a retail use at all. it is not female to casetering for some company that is a formula retail use, there has been conversation about the mobile ghost kitchen. that is interesting. we had eight of those last summer that came to the planning department to our counter and obtained temporary use for mobile food facilities. we did get a couple complaints about these. we looked into it and determined these had gone through the temporary use requirement like they should have but they weren't open to public.

they were ghost and only doing delivery. we reached out to clarify the situation and looked at the language in the planning code for mobile food facilities. we realized it wasn't as clear as it could be. it didn't explicitly state it was a retail facility open to the public. however, in my position as zoning administrator i looked at the totality and the language and it seemeds clear that was the intend to have these mobile food facilities be retail facilities to provide restaurant type services. we issued a issued the facilits to be open for the public and have the food for sale.

two of those went away. there are six now with one year temporary use authorization. those expire in august or september of 2020. then they won't be able to renew for a. authorization for a mobile food facility because that is there. my understanding it is their intent to move forward to establish those spaces as catering uses. you wouldn't be able to get the temporary use at this point going forward. i want to clarify our controls are different than if the department of public health. we regulate use. public health regulates the operators and specific types of operators. where we may have one permit to

change the land use to catering and that goes into effect, that is the land use unless something happens in the future. you can have operators turn over. when that happens public health sends health referral. we refer to make sure that use is permitted. they can't have this food service. we send that back to public health. we still have that role in the new system. we don't regulate the operators only the land use. that is a straightforward way to look at these types of kitchens. it is a large category for catering. maybe large to small mom and pops and everything in between. i am happy to answer any questions. >> we definitely will have some. thank you. commissioner ortiz. >> thank you for that. a couple questions. i want to get straight.

catering use does not trigger retail? >> correct. it is not retail use. it is nonretail use. not open to the public. you can't go there and order a sandwich and get a sandwich. there is no retail transaction at that space. it is closed off interior function. it is not retail use underlying. for formula retail controls within our retail uses there are only certain lists of retail uses within the larger umbrella subject to retail controls not listed there. >> i wanted to say it on the record. they don't have to go to formula retail. >> second question. is stationary or mobile ghost kitchens are they like retail and brick and mortar, ada, do they trigger the same things when they build out? >> they trigger whatever is

required are permitting. if you are coming in for ghost kitchen catering it is going to go through the permitting for catering use. that may be different that what is required for a restaurant. in our neighborhood commercial districts sometimes new restaurants or bars and those types of uses require neighborhood notification. catering use in those districts is not permitted. not apples to apples. when it goes to c2 or c-3 downtown it is not required notification. they are not required to note fiin those areas. they are not the same use. they are different uses. it is hard to make that direct comparison. >> last question. just for a sense of if i was small business would it be easier for catering use or

retail use? which has the most requirements? >> i think generally speaking retail is very broad. if you are a restaurant you have a lot to think about because you are open to the public. do you have a back patio without door activity area with noise to affect neighbors. they are different be uses with different purposes. sometimes in a mixed use district in soma and other places it may require neighborhood notification. when the notice goes out there is a new catering business in a warehouse, that doesn't generate the same interest as new restaurant does. >> catering use is typically easier in the city? >> it is hard to label it exactly, but generally speaking it is not requiring notice as often as a restaurant would. >> thank you. >> commissioner.

>> i have a lot of questions. if burger king wanted to open up a spot in the virtual kitchen at 24th and diamond which our friend has a location. it wouldn't trigger formula retail, burger king could deliver out of that location? >> if burger king or any other formula retail use uses a commissary that is not a retail use and would not trigger formula retail controls. >> okay. i do know there was a ghost kitchen located in a neighborhood commercial district that wanted to be formulated as a limited restaurant. can that be classified as nonretail sales and service? >> that is a retail use. if you have a restaurant use limited or full restaurant and

you convert without permits to commissary, that by itself is an issue. at minimum you need the permit to change the use. from the neighborhood commercial districts generally speaking i didn't look at everyone. we have many. i looked at a bunch of them and they are generally not permitted. if you have converted the restaurant in a commercial district to catering, that is not permitted. where it gets a little confusing. if you have a restaurant you can have your kitchen be used by one or two other food companies as a commissary kitchen but you can't do direct delivery from there. >> i will get technical. in certain neighborhood corridors there are specific controls what you can and can't do.

on valencia second stories cannot sell food and beverages. caters is not allowed but are there specific codes when catering? can they operate on second floors and exits to the alleyways behind the streets, side streets, loading zones? >> not that i am aware of, especially on the ground floor. if you are a stand alone catering use it is not permitted in neighborhood commercial district. >> my last piece is about how the planning department and i know we have a new director, how you think about what percentage of a neighborhood commercial district is considered open to the public and what is not open to the public? there are things acknowledged to be open to the public. walgreens, then there are things

closed to the public. office spaces, co-working spaces to pay a membership. only if you have tha that do you come in. a dentist, chiropractor, something like that. how does the planning department when fi it looks at the neighborhood commercial district what do they consider on the streetscape if it is open or not. >> they inform the planning code. distinction open to public versus not. what does that mean? reservation only open to the public? dentist you can walk in and make a restervation. you are going to be appointment only. >> that specific issue open to the public versus not and appropriate concentration to my knowledge that is not addressed in the general plan and not

taken up by the planning commission. the general plan takes up concentration of uses like food and beverage but not being open to the public. as you mentioned neighborhood commercial districts vary. some you might be the lowest level, not intense. if you are nc-1 no matter where you are on the city. valencia has its own set of rules and polk street has its own rules. there are patterns on what is permitted and what is not. some districts don't like to permit professional services on the ground floor because they may not be as active. they may pro provide services on the district by district level.

there is not any guidance in the general plan or any policy at the planning commission that looks at open or not open to the public distinction. >> this body voted to recommend the board of supervisors go ahead with naming many new districts in the city 30 or something like that. you could see more commercial districts with special zoning controls to prevent this. this is my last question. i promise you. it is about and i don't know how much you can opine on this. we talked about having a level playing field. we own a restaurant and looking to increase revenue and there are certain things about neighborhoods and competition to think about. do you think that it is the right policy that these kinds of

facilities should not be located in neighborhood commercial districts. if yes, where do you think in the city these kinds of retail or nonretail establishments should be located to ensure the best city we can have? >> my answer may disappoint you. i think the policy question around these types of using is an important position to have. i am not here prepared to have that discussion for the planning department about future policy. i am here to chat about how we regulate them now. there is a lot of discussion that needs to be had. are they different? where should they be permitted? that is a discussion that started. it is not really a policy where the planning department has put a lot of effort into yet or has any position that we could speed to. >> thank you.

>> couple questions. quite a few questions. strap in. we always under sell with just a couple questions. i guess my first question is. does the planning code -- i am curious about what makes catering nonretail. one can imagine a catering company that serves bar mi parts which is our traditional thinking what a catering company is versus one serving to the public. it seems like from the public perspective it is retail. how do you guys square that? >> i think this is a challenge as we move into more digital and

cloud-based models. land use regulations as they say we look at how is the land being used? what is happening on that property? in this case for maybe a commissary kitchen working as a ghost kitchen and people are online making orders to that facility, into the cloud it goes to them then deliveries go from there. on that property it is not a retail function. there is no retail transaction happening on the property. it is not open to the public. you can't walk in and conduct a direct point of sale transaction. that is how we define retail in the code right now. whether or not would there need policy decisions to look at how retail is evolving and craft our

land use regulations to fit that better? i know that we have proposed in the budget for the next year a certain amount of staffing to look specifically at retail and changing retail sector next year and do more analysis. there is work to be done there. under the current code that i ts ththethe real distinction. >> one of the things i have come to appreciate about planning. obviously, we hear so many complaints about planning. is the role that it plays in making the city healthy? for instance one of the things that is difficult to change a land use that is for grocery to a non-grocery use because every neighborhood needs a place to be able to buy food and that sort of thing.

it does seen there is a role for a general plan to play in ensuring the health and vibrancy of businesses and communities. with that said, does the general plan have any sort of guidelines or restrictions in terms of the number of catering establishments that can exist within a given geographic zone? >> as you can imagine until a few weeks ago, i don't know that catering policy was really high on the list in the city over the years. i can't say with certainty, but i would venture a guess the word catering may not be mentioned in the general plan. it is a higher level policy document. that is my guess. i would say, no, we don't have a catering concentration policy in the general plan.

>> do you have a sense of what the intent and purpose was to restrict restaurants and commercial corridors from being ability to deliver? >> for the accessory? >> some of the exact issues came up. when that legislation was formed there were people who needed the space or they needed it to help the business stay alive and the flip the existing restaurants. the margins are thin. if they could lease out the kitchen a few days an week, that is extra revenue for them. there is a desire from the board of supervisors to see what they could do to make that happen, they didn't want the restaurant kitchen that became a delivery commissary kitchen and you live next to joey's cafe and next week is 20 delivery vehicles

every hour, i don't know what happened. nisian are for mary's. they wanted to focus on operators needing extra revenue and there was demand to use kitchens when they with not using them and demand for more commissary space in the city. >> it is like we have restricted them from doing that specifically. we seem to have wound out at the same outcome. when i walk to the chinese restaurant around the block from my house on the sunny side, they have designated half the restaurant to be seating for the delivery drivers. there will sometimes be 20 or more delivery drivers than restaurant attendees. they have worked out an elaborate system to make sure each driver gets their order,

but i think it sort of. we have wound up there but now instead of the restaurant benefiting from creating the delivery service, it is a third-party. if that is good or bad i don't know. it is funny that it makes you think of life finds away, you know, where there is demand they find a way to fill that demand. >> just to be clear. the legislation in 2018 tint change the ability of the existing restaurant to do their own delivery or use services. it only restricted second be and third-party from coming in to use the kitchen and doing direct delivery from that location. that the an important distinction. >> talk about invisible ghost.

ghost ghosts. it has come to my attention some of the services will list addresses where there is no actual business of any kind. it is to create the illusion of proximity to the folks ordering online. from a planning land-use perspective, is there any sort of concern here? just kind of looking at this from the 60,000 square foot blue. what is the purpose of planning? to ensure the health and vibrancy of our community. is there a planning interest in making sure that when people go online. i will order from the place down

the street. it is them versus a real legitimate brick and mortar restaurant or ghost kitchen, is there a planning interest in looking at that? is that in any way something that would be enforced from the planning code? >> i don't know that issue has come up in the planning department to date. if that is happening, i think reasonable people can agree that is not a good thing in general. i don't see how that would fall under the purr view of of the planning department and code. it has to do with more better business practices and less with how the property is being used. >> it is definitely not a line drive down planning. i totally get that. >> i don't say we don't care what happened.

it sounds awful and needs addressed. i don't think it is within our purview. >> you have a property that is under your purview that is being advertised with services for something that doesn't exist at that property. >> we may grant change of use for someone to be an attorney's office and they may be a fraud and not have a law degree. you know, it is not what we are regulating at the operator level since we are regulated land use itself. >> talk about the difference between getting a catering permit versus a take-out establishment permit. >> to change the use of a property, it is the same process for all uses. building permit. we don't have a zoning

compliance permit or any permit we issue specifically aside from hey few minor distinctions like temporary authorization. we piggyback on the building permit. to be the permit she used to make sure the planning code is implementing correctly in terms of the dotings or land use perspective. if you have an existing use to change to one of those two uses, it is a building permit. the code may treat catering different than takeout. you may get a different pass for the building permit. in terms of permitting itself, it is the same. >> there is not a material level at your level. i understand at the district level there may become plexty.

in the planning level catering versus take-out establishment. >> it is hard to speak to directly because there are places where caters is permitted and somewhere it is not and some requires neighborhood notification. you could say the same about takeout facilities. it may depend on the specific site and use. i will try to pin you down a hair. to let you off the hook i will ask your personal opinion. i can't do that. why are you shaking your head do i am going to wade into dangerous territory for a good benign purpose.

>> do we know how much public comment is submitted already? >> five. >> thank you for checking on that. you know. we often hear from small businesses frustrated by complexities of planning code. at the same time as i mentioned before i can see sort of the benefits of having a general plan and planning code. do you have a personal opinion as to where we are as a city? not just your department but -- i am asking you because you are better situated than most of us to have an informed opinion about this. do you have an opinion about where we are at a city with the planning level decisions, where we are in just terms of the

complexity and that complexity's impact on the health of smaller businesses that are less likely to have the resources to navigate that complexity? >> i think personally and professionally i don't think they are different. i can't say where we are on the spectrum. i think you want to make sure you are meeting policy goals without over burdening the business community. over the last six or seven years, the direction has been from both actions taken and policy level actions. things have moved to making things less complex. in 2013 we took 13 different

restaurant definitions and consolidated down to three. there was reference to legislation supervisor peskin introduce the. it is my understanding it is similar to the policy the planning commission adopted in 2015. we have been doing that already since 2015. i could real off the ways at the department level and planning code we are moving nor to simplify things. it is benefit to us and making it easy to implement as well. does that mean there haven't been complications that created complexity? of course. there is always that balance. it is always a struggle. where we land on that changes over time and changes case-by-case in terms of policy we are dealing with.

on the hole in the los angeles six to seven years there are positive actions taken towards streamlined and less complicated with small businesses. i don't see anything stopping that trend from moving in that direction. >> i appreciate that perspective of positive improvements made over time. i think we can only see where we are at and we love to complain. it is hard to loo look in the pt to see the progress. any other commissioner comments? thank you so much for coming. we appreciate it. before public comment, i wanted to let our commissioners know that the office of economic work

force development and s.f.m.t.a. are here in the room and available for questions. i will start just because i know you guys have to take a minute to formulate your questions. s.f.m.t.a. >> i actually think staff just left. >> we missed the window. >> unless they are just right on you side. >> some of the folks in the public own small businesses. >> hopefully the departments will stay so you can ask final questions. >> we have to give priority to the department first. is oewd here or they have left? >> oewd is here. >> does anybody have any questions for oewd? i think you are off the hook. thanks for sticking around.

okay. we can move to public comment, is that right? okay. >> okay. three minutes? >> yes. members of the public three minutes. i have speaker card and i will call in the order i received them. bryan tub lynn, meyer, tim, sam,nate with american grilled cheese kitchen. >> hello. good afternoon, thank you for holding this hearing and for giving me a chance to speak to you. i am bryan tub lynn. i own cataba at 16th and mission. we have been open for business two and a half years. prior to that i got the start

working out of a shared commissary kitchen by doing catering to farmers market. the coulthe concept of renting t kitchens is not new. i was sharing a kitchen as a white guy with asian neighbor running a business. he was selling escluscivil to offices. he still does really well. the other was an immigrant from france and two latino brothers and sisters that saved up money. what i want to address is that there is a reason why the restaurant businesses are reaching for revenue in the form of delivery and sales and dabbling in the kitchen space. the fundamental economics of the

business. largely due to policies well meaning, but small businesses are asked to bear the burden, the city, state, federal government could and should be doing more because we don't have the power to lobby on our own. we are asked to add here to the policies the big tech companies are when it comes to the policies. we don't have the same margins. i recommend you address why brick and mortar businesses are going out of business first as opposed to delivery app and commercial commissary relighted businesses. they should follow the same rooms. they shouldn't be given an

unfair advantage. if they let that happen, i am not going to say i know it is nor the greater good. we use all delivery platforms. i don't know where it is going to land. to help our businesses stay in business first and don't hinder us by advocating for policy that has detrimental effects by being harsh on the revenue streams we are going after. >> thank you. next speaker. i am with the delivery app. i want to agree with the point you made that is restaurants and the streetscapes are important. i think a talk is what makes the city vibrant. i want to explain numbers as to why platforms like ours are

helping growth but might have the challenge of partners with us and then nonlisted restaurants aphow we can rectify that. >> in san francisco in 2019 we helped facilitate the sale of $39 million worth of goods. the way post mates started in 2011 was an anywhere product. you could send a courier to the local hardware store to the pharmacy. the way the industry changed overtime is that more and more people rely on it for food delivery. what changed in our product is a model where you send the courier anywhere providing incremental sales for businesses not seeing that delivery before. you could not get robitusen delivered. now with partnerships they

create choice when you have them. for us you can have a white glove service, data dashboard and analitieand animaland and a. and several things in between. in the city of san francisco, nearly 85% of our volume today comes from the partner relationships. these are accident to business contracts -- business-to-business contracts we maintain with the merchant. we switched from anywhere to this. there are nonpartners listed. would out a doubt we want to be a helpful voice to rectify that. that starts with empowerment and education. there are eight steps. it is important that we have this dialogue with restaurants and merchants.

we can tell them what the offices are. they can negotiate on terms that are fair with them. that happens business-to-business, not necessarily in city hall. second give them tools to remove themselves. they will be able to hi hit thee wedge it. third in terms of safety hot and cold bags. we would love to have the conversation with the city. fourth. plastics in the city of san francisco we default from any plastics on the platform. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> everybody only gets three

minutes. i am taking a little credit for being called. i was the one who raised hell on twitter when i found out it was my restaurant that was listed on post mates and door dash and all of them when we don't do delivery. it was our business decision not to do delivery, and i do not appreciate being dragged into doing business with the companies we have no business with. also, just to address some of the things that vicker raised about how easy it is for them for restaurants like mine to get off their platform. i don't know what your

experience is. it is not true. it shouldn't be on us to figure out these people who drag our names along with their business model and for us to say, hey, i don't want to be on. i have a lot of twitter followers that is from when i used to work in tech and wrote about food online. when i raised my voice on twitter it was picked up by all kinds of people because i have the voice. most restaurant owners don't. what do they do? they have no recourse. we have had issues with post mates. they show up to pick up food because they took order from our customers online. they come to the restaurant and say we have this order. we don't do takeout. your customers order them. if you don't fulfill the order they will be mad at you.

i will testify to this in court. this happens. we are not making this up. it is sluggish behavior. you want to do this with us. your customers are going to be mad at you. when we don't fulfill the order they go home and leave in a huff. before i run out of my clock one thing to bring up no one else brought up before is trademark issues. they are violating our trademarks. they are using the names i have built, reputations i have built and by listing my name and my business and my mission and my awards on their website it looks like they are there which they are not. that is the part that somebody needs to look at it. they shouldn't be allowed to do this.

>> thank you. thank you for coming. we can't ask public speakers questions. next speaker, please. >> i am sam. i want to comment on two things. dph talked about delivery not covered in the california retail food code. that is not true if we deliver food we would be subject to regulation. it is what we talked about time, temperature and food handlers. there is a clear mark where there is a public safety maps and something that is not a level playing field for us. vicker mentioned temperature bags. one issue we belt with with

another carrier, not post mates. after we had told them we didn't want to be on their site. they said there is a delay when you tell us and come down. we recommend you fill the orders because your customers may be upset. they directed the drivers not to come with bags because it has their trademarks on it so we wouldn't know that is what it was for, which we thought was predatory. there is a lot of discussion of the micro economic impacts. there is a big you are issue here. this is a new industry coming in with a ton of capital. it is disruptive but the hallmark to the bubble. it is something new. the way the delivery apps work, it should be that one emerges.

in the interim they are cutting into a lot of middle income jobs. if your market is to replace is sales from servers you ar you ae replacing well paid workers with drivers who are not bees and have to purchase their own cars and safety equipment and are paid less. grubb hub recommends not to tip at the restaurant, if they do that it would either mean they have to mark up the food higher or the drivers themselves would have to pay. for the drivers that do tip for restaurant service because someone still on the restaurant end, someone is handling that. the drivers are covering that. that is important and not addressed. when this double crashes there

will be fewer working class people because they will have been driven out already. altogether i think it is important these services exist. i am not saying regulate them to death or anything. they should be on a level playing field with us. that is my time. >> i did not hear my name called. i am terrance allen from the castro. 47-year-old cafe. i have had to recently close. after 47 years. the financial model no longer makes sense. we can go to details that is

not why i am here. it is complicated. three minutes would be an injustice. two things. one is bullying. when saudi arabia gives $60 million to come in and take over the restaurant industry, grab the market share. guess who sures? the existing restaurant industry. they have done the planning and they have millions and i have thousands to do the same thing. is that a level playing field? i would proffer that it is not. it doesn't mean everybody is a bully and every action is a bully. we were on every single platform. the most difficult thing to do was when we decided and discovered how much money we lost on every item of food we delivered, we could not turn those damn things off.

they sent orders for months. they were bullying to get us to stay because guess what? they don't exist without us until they replace us. if that is the direction that we are headed then we have to realize that we are investing through our process, through our social process, through government regulatory and bureaucracy, we are investing in the dye vice of small business -- in the device of the small business community. when i had to layoff a latino mother working there for 22 years, that hurt. that hurt. in a way i don't think the $60 million from saudi arabia money is going to improve the community. we have a social opportunity.

where does delivery fit? do we have a role in regulating work environments to support the social outcomes such as cafeteria kitchen and tech designed specifically to keep employees from going out into the local community and shopping at stores and restaurants? do we have that social responsibility in government. i have more to say at another time. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. i am nate. i am a dual role in the community. owner of the american grilled cheese kitchen. if you have been to the giants game you have been to the restaurant. my girlfriend and my wife built

ourselves. we couldn't get through the construction permits in 2009 with our own money. that was difficult. i am speaking without regina in the office of small business i wouldn't be here. she coached us to get through the process. we opened two additional locations in san francisco. after life changes the last couple years i decided to sell two locations. we are down to did original in soma. this is the mission beach, south beach mission bay. we are the last remaining restaurant on second street. guess who signed a 10 year lease? this idiot. i said it on monday. they said they would never invest a dime in the city. the small business commission needs to dig deep. i agree with everything said. beware of anecdotal stuf