speaking are requested but not required to state their names. completion of a speaker card will help ensure proper spelling of the speakers' names in the written record of the -- of the meet. place speaker cards to the right of the lectern. there is a speaker st.^pete at the front table. s.f. gov tv, please show the office of small business slide. >> 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 your small business in san francisco and the best place to get answer about doing business in san francisco. it should be your first stop when you have a question about what to do next. you can find us online or in person at city hall. all our services are free of charge.

the small business commission is the official public forum 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. please call item 1. >> item 1, call to order and roll call. [roll call vote] commission dooly is absent. commission huie is running late. [roll call] you have a quorum. >> thank you. next item, please. >> item 2, general public comment. allows member of the public to comment on matters that are within the small business commission's jurisdiction but not on today's calendar and to suggest new agenda items for the commission's future consideration. discussion item. i presentedd to on your binders a public comment that was received before the start of the

meeting. that would be applicable under general public comment. >> great. do we have to do anything to recognize that comment? >> nope >> okay. so are there any members of the public who wish to speak on any matter that is not on today's agenda? seeing none, comments closed. okay. please call item 3, 4 and 5 together. >> okay. item 3 board of supervisors file no. 200086, planning code zoning map, bayview industrial triangle cannabis restricted use district. ordinance in amending the planning code by amending the zoning map to change the use classification of certain parcels in the bayview industrial redevelopment project area from m1 light industrial and nc-3 moderate scale neighborhood commercial to pdr-1-g and to change the height and bulk classification of certain parcels in the project area from 40-x to 65-x,

affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act and making findings of consistency with the general plan, discussion and action item. item 4, board of supervisors file no. 200-0087, planning code, zoning map, bayview industrial triangle cannabis use restricted use district to create bayview industrial triangle reschool districted use district, discussion and action item. item 5, board of supervisors file no. 200144 police code ceasing acceptance of new applications cannabis retail permits. ordinance amending the code to provide that cannabis retail permit applications will not be accepted as of the effective date of this ordinance, and affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act. discussion and action item. >> i move these items be continued to the march 23

meeting at the request of the supervisor's office. >> i move. >> motion by commissioner adams to continue items 3, 4, and 5 to the march 24 meeting. seconded by commission zouzounis. roll call vote. [roll call vote] motion passes 5-0 with two absent and. item 6, presentation, san francisco metropolitan transit agency fiscal year 2021 and 2022 budget discussion item. the presenter is director jeffrey tumlin of the s fm ta. >> welcome, director. >> thank you. good evening, my name is jeffrey tumlin, i'm the director of transportation for the s fm ta

and we are here to present findings on our budget that will go into effect of july 1 this year. i have been at s.f.m.t.a. for just over two months and i'm wading deep into the data. a lot of the data are not very impressive. if you look at the high-level indicators of success, everything is going rather poorly. congestion is increasing significantly. greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector now account for about 50% of san francisco's total greenhouse gas emissions. fatalities and injuries going up again rather significantly, whereas mode for walking and biking and transit is declining. for many of the things we care most about, things are getting worse, and we understand the causes. one of the core causes for many of our transportation problems is our regional housing policies. san francisco and san mateo counties have addedded about

2,000 jobs every month since 2011 while add only 400 housing units. while we in the transportation world have to clean up the mess of failed housing policies where we force people to commute longer distances as opposed to allowing them to live near their work. at the same time we are also creating problems for the medical profession as a result of these transportation failures, adding to injuries and fatalities. we know that as people have shifted towards driving, not only have driving speeds declined, but the ability of our transportation system to move people is also in decline at the same time we are being asked to deliver more people, that all of this economic activity requires greater efficiency out of our transportation system and our system efficiency is declining. that said, when you look beyond

the macrolevel data and look at the work that the s.f.m.t.a. is actually doing, all of our projects, the things that we are actually investing in are having extraordinarily positive results. our muni investments in the muni forward program where we are making 100 small improvements to improve bus speed and reliability are significantly increasing travel time, reliability and more importantly ridership. ridership is up as much as 60% on lines like the five and five rapid. similarly where we are envicinitying in protected bikeways or other safety improvements, we are seeing huge improvements in bike ridership and very positive results in terms of safety. one of the things we discovered last week is one of the changes we made to the quick build component of market street is market street has the highest peak period bike and scooter

ridership of any corridor in north america. we understand that when we apply these solutions, when we focus on the movement of people rather than the movement of vehicles, and when we prioritize the most space-efficient modes of transportation, that our streets can move more people, that we can accommodate economic expansion while also improving quality of life. similarly when we prioritize those investments for the people who need them the most, the people with the fewest choices, we can reduce household expenditure and transportation, and we can expand job accessibility, training accessibility and other opportunities for the people with the fewest choices. we understand where the solutions lie. we have demonstrated success in implementing the solutions and unfortunately the thing we need most in order to continue this path is additional resources. and that's really a big part of our challenge. we also have challenges around

people trying to understand really the nature of the problem. here in san francisco, there's generally broad agreement on progressive goals. when it comes down to doing actual implementation, every bus stop is sacred, every parking space is sacred. as san franciscans, we love our community, and we are deeply resistant to any sign of change on our block. and so change is hard in a city like san francisco. we also have the same problems that many of your members are experiencing as small business owners, the challenges of trying to attract and retain staff as housing becomes far more expensive than it's ever been. we as an agency have about 1,000 vacancies in the s fm ta which negatively impacts our ability to deliver basic services to the public. we also operate in a very

complicated world where people, because they use the transportation system every day, think they understand how it works. people believe that adding another lane to a highway actually helps with congestion whereas the data is clear that adding highway lanes worsens congestion. similarly, people have a hard time understanding the complexity of the transit system and think what seem to be obvious solutions, in fact don't really work in practice. we also have a lot of common customer frustrations. everyone who experiences the transportation system every day has concerns about personal safety and security. our buses, are very, very crowded. and while we are getting significant improvement in the reliability and quality of service in our bus system, for those of you who take the subway every day, we've got some significant reliability problems as a result of deferred maintenance and aging infrastructure. all of which we're trying to solve for. and for many people, while they

want to be able to walk or bike or take transit, the fact is we've designed the city, and people have designed their lives such that the only reasonable choice is driving. for those people, the best way to make it possible for them to continue to drive when they need to drive is to make it more practical and more delightful for people like me to do something other than drive. so we know what we need to fix. we have a reasonably good financial basis where we're starting off from. but we also have a $66 million structural deficit, because that's how municipal governments are structured in california. our costs rise with the cost of delivering service. our expenses are driven entirely by staff, and it's critical for us to provide a basic living wage for staff. we don't pay our staff lavishly.

but we pay them enough in order to be able to attract people to the job and keep them committed. but the fact is the cost of living in the bay area is rising far faster than our wages are. in the meantime, our revenues are rising with inflation. so here we are, perhaps at the end of a peak boom cycle. and the gap between revenues and expenditures widens, leaving us with a structural deficit. i'm going to turn the presentation over to our chief financial officer,ley yo levee -- le o levinson who will talk about supporting the small business economy that is so essential for us to be able to get the revenue we need in order to run the system and make sure that the people of san francisco don't have to get in their cars and drive so far because the needs of daily life are available within their

neighborhood. leo, please. >> thank you, director. it's really been a delight since jeffrey came that we have a director who is not only understands the transportation system but also the financial challenges of operating within the constraints that we have. and so we have a big challenge here like every city department in these circumstances as jeffrey said. when we are putting together our next two-year budget, we are trying to look both at financial sustainability for the long-term and resilience in the face of potential downturns and hits in the economy and looking at what service is being demanded from us and are there ways that we can close that gap and go to the public and make a case that it's worth it to fund this transportation system to provide the kind of service that they should expect. as director mentioned, we have a structural deficit, we estimated

at $56 million as we were starting to put our budget together this year. that's the difference between the ongoing revenues that we have and the cost of providing the service we are providing now and looking forward, that was growing over $100 million as we looked forward. these are figures that we provided at our budget workshop with our own board, the mta board, in february. we've been working on these numbers since then. and we are going to be actually required to close that budget gap on march 17. we are going to our board with a balanced budget proposal, not only to see how we deal with that gap but also the demands for improved service that we've been given. director mentioned the revenues. this is a quick snapshot that the top line here, we are very fortunate as a transit agency, transportation agency, that we are both, we have combined running a transit system and the parking system for san francisco. we were formed by the merger of

the department of parking and traffic and the old muni. and we have a tremendous public support in san francisco that provides us with a portion of the general fund in order to make a really high-quality transportation system work. and the general fund has been our savior during these past years of the boom while our other revenues have been flat or declining. that's the main story of this particular slide is the top revenue is the combination of our parking and traffic fees, our parking meters, parking citations, the garage tax, parking tax, all of those have been flat to declining in recent years. this is something you'll see nationwide with parking is a trend that you can see. the second line, the blue line that's going up, that's our general fund transfer. and that's where we've been getting a share of the amazing economy that san francisco has enjoyed. this projection was made from the controller's office prior to this coronavirus. and what we are seeing.

so of course we are going to be working very closely with the we city in updating these projections as we look at the economic impact. the next line down, the darker blue line, that's our passenger fares. and the decline there is a couple of different things. one is somewhat of an overall system decline in ridership or paid ridership. but we also during this time period, we did introduce a number of equity products to lower the cost of transit for our most vulnerable populations so during this time period we instituted a lifeline fare at half the monthly fare for low-income individuals and free for low-income youth during this time. so that is part of the revenue decline. and so more recently, it's been sort of flat, not as severe a decline, but that's something that we are actually doing a little better than transit agencies around the country, which have seen a more severe

decline as the other options have come up with the transportation network companies. and then the final one is the state operating grants where just recently, again, this helped us, there was a bump up in the last year's, so the passage of the statewide sb-1 that supported transit, but we don't expect the state funding to be continuing to go up in that regard. we also have tremendous capital needs in the agency. we estimate we have about $14 billion wort of assets to look not just at our transit system, our subway stations, also the parking meters, the traffic signals and our own facilities. and the capital funds that we expect to receive are also declining. we received quite a lot of federal support for the central subway extension that we're very excited about, and we are going to be continuing to work on. and that, however in the next period we don't expect that kind of influx of federal funds.

so we are aggressively looking for whatever funding sources we can get. we don't expect the same level of funds coming in in the next period that we enjoyed during the last five-year period. we also do an analysis like the city does of potential for an economic recession and what the impact would be on the s.f.m.t.a.'s revenues in particular. we looked at the last major downturn in 2008. and that was a four-year period to recover. and based on that, the equivalent would be about $160 million worth of lost revenues to make up for plus extra expenditures to keep the pension system whole. so we are looking overall at $200 million scenario recession. so we are trying to keep that in mind of trying to find adequate reserves without a worse shock to the system. this is probably more detail

than you want to see but this is what we presented our board in terms of the requests that were coming in for improved service. so in addition to the $66 million shortfall that we had to start with in our bumming process, we had -- in our budgeting process, we had a working group, a wonderful working group with the board of supervisors and our own board to brought in experts from around the country in transit to talk about what was needed to improve our service to the level that the public would expect. they have a lot of good recommendations, and basically we needed to fill the staffing holes that were described, improve some of our, we are working on improving our train control systems in order to make the subway more efficient and then basically we need more operators and more service to meet the growing needs of san francisco. the estimate just for the next two years was about another $70 million, another $90 million after that.

so we were scouring for what were our options in the budget in terms of increased revenue. and this one i want to mention, when we're looking, from our agency we really are mission-driven lens that we look. and so we aren't looking jus for how to raise revenues but how to improve the transportation system in a way that may also increase revenues. and so one of the items that's been sensitive in the past was the issue of increased hours on our parking meters. with the idea that it's targeted at areas where businesses actually were asking for more turnover, where the parking is congested because the hours of the businesses continue into the evening, and when our meters end at 6:00 p.m., customers can't come. similarly in neighborhoods on sundays where there's congestion for parking. and so we put forward a proposal

for a range of options looking at targeted corridors, and that's something that our board is considering now in our budget. we can only expect the revenue to be at the high end. this was a range that was done by our team from three to 28. but our commitment is to do it in a way with a lot of businesses as well as the faith community and to phase it in in a targeted and smart way so we expect the revenue to be lower than the higher end for that. we also looked at fares. there was -- we have an indexing policy to try to keep fares in line with the rising cost of living. so there's a default that fares would rise with a combination of the cost of liveing and our labor cost increases. our board also has the ability to revisit that and adjust it every time we go forward with a new budget. so just based on that indexing policy our topline cash fare which is currently at $3 would rise to 3.25.

there's a current leafiest cent discount if you pay by muni mobile on your single ride fare. and then we have passes, full fare passes around $81. it would rise to $85 under the indexing. so there were various options we wanted to put forward before our board. there's been a lot of public demand or really activism around the area of reducing fares and telling us about the impact that muni fares have on many of our customers. and so we did provide options of just pausing the cash fare at $3, reducing, trying to raise more revenue perhaps to pay for other equity options by reducing the discount for using clipper or muni mobile. there's been a lot of talk about expanding free fare programs to all children rather than low-income. and there is something else. currently there's a low-income

monthly pass. we've heard that many people can't come up with the $40 that's half the price of the full pass. and so options for people to pay the single ride with a discount discounted fare. i'm not sure how much you want to go into this with this body but this is what we presented our board. we have been building up funds to be able -- this is our fund balance history. we have a policy of a 10% of our operating budget reserve for economic downturns. and that's the gray line. that would be $120 million rising to $130 million in the next budget. for a couple reasons we've been building up cash in our funds. it's partly because of the tremendous economic success story of the city of san francisco in terms of the general fund revenues and usually it's been budgeted conservatively in the beginning of the year, and the end of the year they deliver a further amount that's added to our fund

balance because of the economic growth, and secondarily the vacancies we have. and that's not something we're proud of, that because we haven't been filling our vacancies, that's where the savings comes from. we need to use this fund balance strategically. so we had a policy, a potential ways of using it that we talked to our board that would include setting aside significant amounts for the contingencies that we see in front of us both on our capital projects and operating projects and then we do have something maybe of interest we have to replace our parking meters throughout the city because they operate on 2g cellular technologies for taking credit cards, and many of you know probably, 2g, we have been warned that it may stop being support and we have been warned that by the end of 2022, so we have to replace our parking meters. we are looking at our policies as to how many would be single meters which have different advantages in different places.

so that is something that we expect to do in the next very short time period. so the basic method here, the bottom line is we can't fund everything that we ask for. we started out with $66 million and there was a further $70 million and $90 million in requests to provide the services we would like to provide. with all our tweaking of the budget, there's some small things with fares and parking, there's areas where we have flexible funds that can be moved that are more sustainable that we can use, that can help close our basic service gap, but they don't provide the funds to fund the recommendations that we had. and this is not really a surprise. there have been different task forces in san francisco looking at the future of transportation. and identifying the need for additional funds to make this really the transportation system that we want. and so there was a task force,

that was a toxic force looking forward to 2045. a tax force looking forward to 2045. those are potential funding mechanisms. we are going to be working very hard during the next period to see what may be feasible, what the appetite is, the demand from the public, what makes the most sense, if people are willing to say yes. we want to earn their trust to say we know how to spend it that will make the difference in the lives of businesses and residents and tourists. some of the options, i actually already did have the proposition d, which will provide a modest amount of funding from the transportation network companies, uber and lyft. we estimate that will see maybe coming in lower than the estimate from the time it was passed but we were hoping around $15 million toward our operating budget and a further amount for safety projects. there was an attempt to pass a sales tax that got more than

two-thirds of the vote but it had two pieces to it, and it was confusing, and the second piece didn't. so that would have provided $100 million and it didn't pass. we'll be continuing to look at sales tax measures and that's been happening regionally. there's a number of sales tax measures being proposed. and there have been other proposals that we'll be looking at, of course congestion pricing is something that has been talked about as being studied and, again, has a transportation system benefit as well as a revenue benefit if we want to find any way to reduce congestion in the city. a community benefit district is something else, understudy which would provide for the maintenance of our tracks and overheadlines and traffic signals to keep them in good repair. and then we are scheduled to come before the voters with another general obligation bond which is very necessary for our facility upgrades so we have a

very necessary and exciting facility program. but we are one of the oldest transit programs in the country. we have bus yards over 100 years old. they are not capable of housing the fleet that we need and the type of electric buses and infrastructure. so we are looking at very exciting possibilities of rebuilding the facilities and perhaps with development on them. so you may have heard about or potrero yard which is being looked at to have over 500 units of housing. we are planning for the presidio yard. there's interesting ideas of what could be done with that space that could accommodate the bus yard and other development. that will be exciting in the future. we are looking for big ideas that are aligned with transportation goals that can make our budget both sustainable and resilient. and so we have a lot of outreach. this is part of our outreach plan. and many, many different types.

unfortunately our next open house that's scheduled there is being converted to a virtual open house in line with other efforts in the city for safety. that we hope to -- we'll have the first chance for our board to adopt our budget on april 7. we will have a second chanson april 21. chance on april 21. and that's our presentation. >> do we have any commissioner questions? >> i just want to say that was a great presentation. and one of the things i realize is you have probably the most challenging transportation network in the country, because you got buses. you have the f line, you have cable cars, you have the subways. i mean there's all these different transportations that you don't see in a lot of other cities. i want to comment, you know, i

was skeptical about the market street closure, and i do use the upline from the castro to downtown. and i will tell you that train moves faster once you past van ness now. and it's only a 20-minute ride which used to be a 40-minute ride. so that was a good move so thank you. >> any other commissioner questions? >> commissioner. >> my question was so all those big ideas around fare changes, where are you with them in terms of what levels you want to pull? >> so we are looking at several different options around fare changes. as mr. levinson stated, fares are an important part of our revenue. and our fares are scheduled to go up each year in alignment with our expenses in order to

avoid doing a major increase every couple of years. we are trying to do is to think through how do we get to the bottom line of what we need in order to run the service while adjusting all of our different fare categories in order to maximize the equity of the outcomes. so we're looking at the data of exactly who uses which fare categories and trying to minimize increases for people with the least amount of means and to make adjustments where people can most afford it and direct that revenue towards our equity surface. so we are going to be presenting our board next week with a variety of different options in order to help them help us think through those trade-offs. we are also working with community-based organizations to get their input on what are the

mechanisms that will have the least negative impact on the most vulnerable riders. >> one more question. i'm hearing both that it's a, you know, you kind of reached capacity in a lot of ways. there's a lot of people in the city using transportation. and at the same time tncs have taken a lot of people who would have taken public transportation and congesting the streets. can you tell me about kind of, is it that there's too many people using the public -- the infrastructure we have or is it the infrastructure or kind of where's the play between tnc regulation and our public transportation system? >> so a bunch of questions embedded there. so in san francisco, we don't have the authority to regulate uber or lyft. we are currently engaged with the california public utilities commission which does have that authority to see are there some carve-outs that we can have in

san francisco in order to be able to welcome private providers that provide a tremendous amount of convenience for the people who can afford them but to allow that to the extent that it upholds the public good, that whereby we have the tools to manage the public right of way for the greatest public good. so that is some work that we're doing. at the same time, we're also working in order to minimize the congestion impact on the highest capacity most efficient modes of transportation, which are basically the highest ridership muni lines. so as you can see, we have done a tremendous amount of work recently on market street that's paying huge dividends in terms of improved speed and reliability. as we shorten the muni trip, we can also reinvest the travel time savings in improved frequency of service, which also results then in improved capacity of service. so we are doing the same thing on third and fourth streets. we are looking very carefully at additional improvements to the

five, we are looking at changes to tar very well street, and we are about to roll out significant improvement on van ness next year, and we are getting started on geary right now. we are looking at the books and budget, assumes we have the money to do so. and again, that is providing dedicated lane from high-frequency routes that experience significant congestion, looking very carefully at signal timing to that a bus or train doesn't have to stop with 150 people on board in order to let three people in the back of an uber turn left in front of it. it's also looking at optimizing the placement of our bus and train stops in order to maximize ridership while being sensitive to vulnerable populations for whom walking an extra block is more difficult. so it's partly big moves but where we get the real benefit is from the thousand small moves

that we've demonstrated in the data on the entire muni forward program. >> thank you, director. >> commission zouzounis >> thank you for your present. i learned a lot. i have a question about the vacancies. are those in the rank-and-file like the mechanics and drivers or are those largely management? >> it's throughout the agency. we've prioritized in terms of staffing up, we've prioritized first and foremost staffing up our human resources department. the human resources department that i inherited was suffering. so we have a new director who is fantastic and we're working to make sure that she is adequately staffed in order to be able to staff up the service-critical departments. i have withheld hiring in my own team in order to prioritize our mission-critical workforce, particularly bus and train operators, mechanics and machinists, the people who really deliver the service to

the public. >> okay. i was just curious, because i remember the line being long for some of the trade-related positions. i'm curious if that was because of this. >> we are also concerned about succession planning in the skilled trades. when i go onto our shop floors, home to some of the most skilled people i've ever worked with, i'm sometimes the youngest person in the room. and we want to make sure that we are passing on that knowledge of this unique system to the next generations of skilled mechanics and machinists, which i would point out for those of you who are interested in new career lines, is a career that will last. even as technology changes, the need for skilled mechanics and machinists only increases, and there's skarsty in the marketplace increase -- scarcity in the marketplace increasing as

well. >> all the auto body shops, those are all going out of business soon because of properties being sold. and so i'm thinking all the time there's so much skilled labor here, and i hope that it's going to be transitioned somewhere else in the city. >> send them to the s.f.m.t.a. we provide very good benefits. >> commissioner ortiz >> thank you for your presentation. i don't know you yet. but seems like you know what it is on the ground level as a commuter. i get the good vibes. so i look forward to working more with you in the future. i do have two questions. i know you are doing something with the pdc, the burden that tncs have on our infrastructure. behind those specific carve-outs, how do you see to

mitigate the tremendous burden they have on our infrastructure? don't have to get into detail. >> ultimately what we really want is the tools to be able to manage the public right of way for the public good. so right now i charge $2.50 for somebody to get a one and a half square feet of space on a 38 geary bus. but if you're driving alone in a car, riding the back of an uber, well now i get a tiny percentage of your uber fare, but the basically if you take up 350 square feet of space, the public gets nothing from that. those financial incentives are reversed. the scarce resource that i have is a limited amount of street space. and we are no longer demolishing neighborhoods to widen roads. i need to manage my limited street width in order to serve the most people and the highest public good.

i'm in a rational system, we would think about managing the street system like you manage your businesses where you pay rent and you charge more for the more expensive goods and less for the cheaper goods. frankly, i think i should be charging $10 for somebody riding the back of an uber, and you should be paid $2.50 to take a 38 geary. we don't currently have the regulatory authority to manage our streets for the public good. >> and then my second question, regarding small businesses from an equity lens component like 24th street, visitacion valley, how do we fit in in that plan in your budget and the vision going forward and your mission >> so frankly, i think one of the most important transportation performance metrics should be retail sales per square foot particularly in our neighborhood commercial districts. and there's a couple reasons for that. one is in our neighborhood

commercial districts, most of them are overwhelmingly in local ownership. so even if that individual business isn't making as much money as a chain store some place else, all those profits are reinvested back into the community many times. and most of you are the most phenomenal entrepreneurial skilled training programs that exist. no one teaches people really how to run a business more than small business owners do, and particularly family-run small businesses. it's also important to me that from a transportation system perspective, that's the needs of daily life be available in every neighborhood within walking distance of all san franciscans. because otherwise it's a burden to the transportation system if i'm asking people to either get in their car to drive somewhere or order it online from amazon. both of those create big problems for the transportation system. so it is very much in my

interest as the transportation director to support small business success, particularly in our neighborhood commercial corridors. i mean, all neighborhood commercial corridors in san francisco are there because of the tight relationship between small businesses and transit. all of our commercial districts are on former streetcarlines. every single one of them. we grew together. and if we want the city to be economically sustainable and socially equitable at the same time, we need to continue that relationship and strengthen it. >> thank you. >> director, thank you very much for coming. it's enlightening and heartening, frankly, to have your perspective running m.t.a. we are very grateful to have you. i wanted to, you know, i was looking at your capital funds

expenditure. i know we've been moving more towards protected bike lanes. that's definitely a direction we want to move towards. how do you -- do you see that as competitive from a revenue standpoint, because it's a cost expenditure to generate these or do you see it as helpful because it removes cars and -- i guess where does that fall on the spectrum for you? and i'll give you a hint of where i'm headed with this is we hear a lot from small business owners and there's a lot of consternation and parking and bikes as you are all too familiar. >> yep. >> and i think one of the things that i'm particularly interested in is helping people sort of

find their ku m b y ya with this in understanding how these pieces go together and i think you can speak to that really well. >> we are interested in increasing the use of bikes and scooters and other forms of micromobility for people of all ages and abilities, in part because that mode of transportation offers a unique combination of user convenience and system efficiency for certain types of trips. so about more than half of our trips are basically three miles or less. particularly for us san franciscans. we make a lot of really short trips. and san franciscans who drive make a lot of really, really, really short driving trips. so in reasonable doubter to allow our streets -- in order to

allow our streets to move more people and expand the economy, particularly the local economy, if done right, increasing use of biking and scooterring can be super useful. that said, we recognize there's a tension between how we use space, so there's a tension between allocating dedicated space for people on bikes and scooters and dedicated protected space, which is necessary to actually attract people to those modes in any significant number, versus providing that space either for traffic lanes or for parking. and parking is particularly important for small businesses. we know that most small businesses in san francisco operate at a less than 10% margin. that is if -- >> [off mic] >> if our transportation -- >> [off mic] >> all right. i think the test was successful. [laughter] if our transportation system

changes, cut your business by 10% or more, not only does that mean you are going to be out of business but you are going to have lost your family's investment of capital for a long period of time. i mean, you really don't want to do that. so what we're interested in is how can we deliver more people to your business. cars don't shop. people shop. so how do we use that space to deliver more customers to your business. that means collecting data in a different way than perhaps we have in the past. it means looking very carefully at the sales tax return data. and we think likely. >> [off mic] >> that's the building's fire management system testing to make sure everything works. >> i'm glad it's working. i feel safer. so it means not only collecting the sales tax data to make sure

things are tracking but also likely purchasing credit card data so we can know in a quicker time horizon, whether our projects are having a positive -- net positive or net negative effect on small businesses and building trust in the community. for the most part what we'll be seeing is in most cases, the work that we're doing creates some benefits but in some cases it hasn't. that's another reason why a lot of the work that we're moving forward with is through what we call quick build, where we are not investing in concrete, we are investing in paint and little plastic posts and other stuff that can be quickly undone if the unique considerations of that commercial district or that particular project is not turning out as well as we'd expected, we can easily reverse those or make adjustments as we go along. >> do you have a sense -- so first of all, that's actually kind of exactly where i was headed, which is there's data that shows whether this is helping or not helping and how

quickly can we get to that data so local business owners can be assured that even if we put the wrong foot forward, we can quickly take it back and correct and do what's right for the community. so exploring that just a bit more is the -- do we have a sense overall how protected bike lanes are affecting local businesses? if you had to sort of generally say it's a net positive for local businesses or net negative, would you have a conclusion there? >> so i think it varies. so the protected bikeways tend to be a net positive to the extent that they're tied to the rest of the network and creating a significant increase in bike ridership. what we find with people on bikes and scooters is it's super easy for them to see into a

storefront and make spontaneous trips because they don't have to worry about parking assuming they tether their bike or scooter so something stationary. so that type of user tends to shop a lot more frequently and a lot more locally. where we are doing investments that aren't connected to the network, we see the response is less. which is why most of our investments in the protected bikeway network have been incremental and kind of starting around market street in the downtown and slowly spreading out. some of the investments that we're making now are trying to piece separate pieces of the network together in order to actually create that network effect that tends to result in a big unleashing of new people out on bikes and scooters. >> that makes perfect sense. quick little observation. the meter upgrade, the 2g in hindsight maybe wasn't

future-proofed enough. are you -- as you explore the next phase of whatever you choose, let's assume it's 5g and now five years from now we are looking at 10g and like wow, we are going to discontinue 5g, have you thought about how you might get more life span out of it the next time around? >> yes. the next thing we want to do is move increasingly to mobile payment. we really like mobile payment in part because it's easy but also because on mobile payment, it allows motorists to extend time on their meter to they don't have to guess how long they're going to stay and to be criminalized if they have a better experience at your store or restaurant than they were intending. we want people to stay longer and spend more money, and if you pay by mobile, the app will actually because you and ask you if you want more time. >> so an idea i had, and

somebody's probably mentioned this or thought of this before, but what's the harm in throwing it out? i'm imagining a business might want to pick up the tab. >> sure. >> for a customer or sort of pay, we got our meter while you are having your meal. are you guys think about that at all in terms of -- >> does park mobile allow for that? >> i don't know >> in other cities, that is part of the program with mobile parking payment apps. we can look into what it would take to have our provider offer that service of picking up the tab basically, validating parking automatically. yeah. >> and then a quick budget question. so you have i think it was like 170 in the reserve fund? is that right? i don't have it in front of me. >> we are looking to build a

$225 million to $135 million. >> how does that plug into the deficit? do you ever use that fund to address the deficit or just the reserve comes in over the top and addresses the deficit and you hang on to the reserve? >> yes, the total we have currently is about $175 million more than the reserve. the reserve we want to keep for a definite to fund approximately we hope it might be half of a recession scenario, and we'd still have to solve the other half. for the remainder of the fund balance, really with director's strong leadership in this area, to the degree if we use -- we probably will need to use some of that fund balance. and we historically have used some fund balance to budget our funds at the beginning of the year. it usually comes back to us by the end which we can't expect this time. but to the degree we use fund

balance for our operating costs, we are being very transparent that it could be a bridge, if we don't get another funding source to carry on after that period, it will require a significant cutbacks after that point. so we want to strategically use it as a bridge to a more sustainable budget in the future. and we will still tie our fund balance to part of our budget that could be flexed up or down if it were necessary, so we don't want to exceed the amount. so in other words not to use it for our labor operating costs and use it more towards necessary that if necessary we can slow down or postpone in the future. >> we are obviously sailing into the quite the black swan event here. how far are we into sort of evaluating what all this looks like? i know it's -- nobody has any real idea, but nonetheless, we have to plan for all the scenarios. >> yeah, we are really just ramping up now and want to sort

of up our level of sort of realtime monitoring as to what's going on in our system. so we are going to be monitoring our ridership and revenues on as realtime a basis as possible, looking at the trends, both recent trends and comparing it seasonally to the past year in order to be able to really report out on the significance of the impact. and then looking forward. and we'll be very tightly monitoring our budget as we go through our budget period, and we'll make course adjustments as we have to. >> i'm sure you'll -- whatever temporary measures have to be taken to make it more appealing to riders, users. it's looking like spacing is going to be an issue. and i read in the paper there was a significant drop in the bart usage. i think it was like 170,000 or something like that. so it was -- we are behind you,

and whatever we can do to help, let us know. thank you very much for taking the time to present. >> thank you. >> public comment >> sorry. do we have any public comment? one day we will. [laughter] >> [off mic] >> seeing no public comment, public comment closed. item 6 does not require an action. thank you, s.f.m.t.a. for presenting. we appreciated you guys coming very much. >> thank you >> next item, please. >> commissioners, before you is item 7, adams confirm they did watch the february meeting? >> yes >> thank you very much. item 7, presentation, summary discussion regarding the february 26, 2020 meeting on third party delivery platforms and virtual and ghost kitchens. discussion item. the presenter is dominy can -- a

donovan, senior policy analyst, office of small business and someone here also to provide you with some support. >> thank you. >> sf gov tv, i will have a powerpoint ready for you in less than a minute. >> how high do we think he's going to count to before he's done? [laughter] i think we are at 12 now. 13. >> one, two. [laughter] [fire system testing]

>> thank you. okay. great. thank you for having me. donovan with the office of small business. this powerpoint is arguably less pretty than the s.f.m.t.a., but bear with me. so today's presentation for you is a summary of our own discussion from february 26 where you all discussed virtual kitchen and third party delivery platforms. what i tried to do was draw conclusions based on that

discussion and summarize that in a memo that you have in your binders, and that's also posted publicly. the idea is that you can affirm that these conclusions are indeed yours and you would like them to be presented at the march 12 meeting that supervisor safai called on the same matter. effectively, there were two conclusions drawn at that meet. one being that virtual and ghost kitchens and brick and mortar kitchens should be regulated equitybly in order to preserve the vitality of our neighborhood commercial corridors. and second, that protections for brick and mortar businesses and how new technology such as delivery apps interact with them, should also be exploreed. your discussion was framed under five main issue areas which included health health and safed use, fair competition, economic

analysis as well as infrastructure. the additional comment that you had were that virtual ghost kitchens as well as third party delivery apps provide brick and mortar businesses with a unique opportunity to grow their brands and to operate in a more economical manner and that you also recognize that the third party delivery platforms can play an essential function in connecting restaurants to their customers. [please stand by]

. >> -- and that they should be commensurate with brick and mortar restaurants. there is not clear guidance at the moment for how consumers can be made of those same time health rating of from virtual kitchens from which they are

ordering. customers ordering from third-platforms do not have a good understanding of where their food is coming from or whether it's been reheated. additionally, when a product is collected by a delivery courier, there's no requirements that the food be maintained in a safe and healthy manner before it reaches the customer? any questions on this topic? great. in terms of land use policy, we drove to two conclusions, one being we thought that formula retail controls and how they interact with catering uses should be explored by the city, particularly where virtual kitchens appear to be able to open under being principally

permitted where restaurants are allowed to be opened. for background, as s.f. planning presented, they consider virtual and gross kitchens to be catering uses. however, we know that those -- that some virtual and gross kitchens have previously sought permitted under mobile restaurants and food facilities, and the department is currently reviewing those definitions. caterers are usually permitted in industrial areas of the restaurant. limited restaurants are usually permitted in neighborhood

commercial corridors. virtual and gross kitchens are considered to not exchange money for services on the property. if a fast-food change wanted to open up their own kitchen, they would be principally permit today do so as a catering use. >> dominica -- >> go ahead. >> for this particular section, i feel like there was -- there was some stronger feelings and less stronger feelings about whether or not formula retail should be allowed in catering uses. i think i was in the strong feeling that it shouldn't be. >> okay.

>> i guess my question is on process of this. are we going to go through each section and agree this is what was said, and if we go through as a body, then we question? >> yes. >> okay. then i'll hold my questions. >> okay. as more businesses open, congestion may thusly increase due to an increase in use of those delivery apps.

>> effectively, you're determining what. [inaudible] >> -- who's a virtual kitchen versus who's a brick and mortar, and effectively, they recommended the city come up with a way to make a better determination of who's who and study it for the impacts.

so effectively, your conclusion was that the city should formally support the food fair delivery act, which is at the state level, but also should explore local regulations that could ensure brick and mortar businesses have adequate protections in the third-party delivery space. what was not fully discussed at the meeting on february 25 was

legislation that's been proposed in various states and localities, including the fair food delivery act, which to be perfectly honest, i've not done a thorough analysis of. i'm hoping my counterpart can speak somewhat to it, but it was introduced recently, so give us a little space to better understand it. the state of rhode island has proposed legislation regarding disclosures and regulation. the state of new york has proposed legislation regarding health inspection grades. the city of new york has proposed the most robust package of legislative proposals relative to this space, six pieces of legislation in particular, which are outlined on this slide. again, i haven't had the time

or band width to fully understand each piece of legislation, but we have an idea of what they are generally proposing? you have that, i believe, in your binders, and if not, i will e-mail this out to you. and with that, i am happy to take questions at this time. >> commissioners, do we have any questions? okay. well, it was a super interesting hearing. ben, did you want to speak at all to -- has there been any development since the hearing in terms of how the planning department is looking at this?

>> sure. good morning, commissioners. ben van houten from the office of economic and workforce development. i agree this created a lot of interdepartmental dialogue. i won't speak for the folks at planning or d.p.h. other than to say we've had good follow up conversations with them, and i think we all have a more keen eye on this emerging set of models. based on that hearing and the discussion tonight and the memo and the recommendations you provide, i think that'll be really helpful in terms of approaching thursday's hearing, which, again -- this is all the beginning of this conversation if it ultimately all goes up into legislation, i'm sure this'll all be back before you in this conversation, and it'll

continue on. >> sure. appreciate the presentation and appreciate you being here tonight. i think -- oh, what? oh, there is? oh, sorry. do we have any public comment? yeah, i got it. seeing none, public comment closed. so my observation was, at the hearing, there didn't seem to be any dispute between the restaurants or us when we -- us, when we debated it, that there should be opt in or opt out. i think there was broad consensus, i think we all agreed on that one. that does not need further discussion. i think we all need on the health score, and i didn't hear any objections from the restaurant industry, either, and it doesn't seem like it's a big ask of the delivery

services. but that seems fairly nonconfrontational -- what's the -- >> controversial? >> yeah, that's what i meant to say. so the live issues, from my perspective -- commissioner yakutiel, you mentioned formula retail and how that plugs into it. and then, you know, i don't get the sense that the -- you know, there was a ton of debate about catering and limited restaurants other than there was a sense that the planning department should be aware of this and, you know, obviously, we don't want to have a lot of ghost kitchens suddenly clogging up commercial corridors and competing with brick and mortars on some sort of an unfair playing field. it sounds like they are going to take a look at it, but if

anybody feels like we should not take a look at it. >> yeah. i think there was a difference between limited kitchen, ghost kitche kitchen, and pop up kitchen. it does seem like the planning department was noting it was happening in certain cases and trying to clamp down on it. and i think if we're giving a recommendation to planning, it is thank you for doing that. please continue to do that because i don't think anyone had major issues with it happening, it was where it happening. >> right, and where it could potentially lead. >> right. >> as commissioner ortiz said, you know, sometimes our job is to make sure that a potential bad thing doesn't happen in the future because we didn't keep our eye on it. >> yeah. >> so on that point, i think --

dominica, thank you for writing that there. i think my point would be to specifically say that ghost and cloud and virtual kitchens should not be allowed to be zoned as limited restaurants. they should be zoned as catering, and they should not be allowed in our major corridors. >> i agree with that. >> it doesn't say that with as much teeth, but that's how i think it should be said about it. >> you know, the only thing i have is laurie from g.g.a. said these can sometimes fill spots that can be vacant, and she sort of outlined that that was a good -- or she recognized that that was potentially a good thing. i don't know if she was speaking against her interests.

>> i think that maybe speaks to a larger issue that we can delve into during our retreat. you know, there are a lot of businesses that are, you know, maybe not anybody's third choice, but, you know, maybe third, fourth, fifth choice in their neighborhood, and they're, you know, filling a vacant spot. and i'd like to get a sense of the commission's point of view in terms of how much weight does that hold, you know, the fact that they're filling a vacant spot? is that enough weight to say yes to maybe another non -- nonretail use, non -- you know, depending on each neighborhood, everybody has a different kind of feel. all of our corridors feel very

different to one another, and noncomplementary business. is that, like, okay because we're just, like, trying to fill spots right now. >> right. and to that spot, aunjon spoke quite eloquently to that spot referring to that model. we drove him to that model and aligned forces with businesses that practice that model, and now we're going to recommend pulling the rug out under that model. >> i think it's where the business is. i think in this specific instance i'm talking, like, more about the neighborhood commercial street, right? like -- >> yeah, but i think the businesses that he has, i think they're, like -- >> two block away. >> yeah, it's off of 24.

>> i think that if the spirit of some of these regulations could work. the problem, the way they stand, a small business could take two or three years going through conditional use. that's the real problem, because if conditional use would actually work, then poof, a couple months, the community has input, you can stay here, whatever the community wants. that's the spirit of conditional use. the problem is it's not working the way it should be working, and that's the problem, like you said. the problem is storefronts, neighborhood districts, they want them all filled. if that's what they want, that's what they want, but unfortunately, that's not going to happen in san francisco. >> yeah. >> i think this is a tough one in san francisco because i do

think we have an issue of vacancies in our commercial corridors, but the way i think about it is i do think that these businesses could, in the immediate or long-term, pose a threat to restaurant. i think in the short-term, we're squeezing restaurants, and this is an opportunity to generate more revenue. but this is a -- [inaudible] >> oh, my goodness. >> if these spaces are able to, in the medium and long-term, lower their prices and have their own kind of brands in there that are reducing time and costs for restaurants that are now in direct competition for businesses on the

corridors, it could have a direct impact on an industry that is already under threat. so when you and i think about this journey together that's happening on commercial co corridors, i think about the businesses that are already there that have helped the community. i don't think -- i think we can have an open mind. the issue is i actually see that this particular kind of business could hurt if it is -- hurt, if it is located on a commercial corridor, the brick and mortar locations on that corridor. we have concentrated neighborhood commercial corridors for a reason. >> i think, you know, we all

want to be very careful with the commercial corridors, and i think it's well said. i think it's a real concern. i -- i guess part of me is wondering whether this particular component is quite ripe for us putting our stamp on, you know, recommending a specific course of action. and by that i mean, so far, we have a sample size of one. we're seeing a possibility of a trend, a possibility of harm, but we don't have actual harm yet. and i'm a little concerned just lightly -- and i think reasonable minds can look at this two different ways. i'm just wondering if maybe the right time to sort of advocate sort of forcefully for an issue is when people are complaining

about it? or is it premature for us to get involved when g.g.a. says there isn't a problem right now? >> i think, with respect, that's why we're here, and we're trying to be proactive and not reactive. and i don't see a reason why we would not, having taken all this information and provide some clear prescriptions of what we think should and shouldn't happen. >> wouldn't it be easier to do it proactively, if there isn't anybody right now trying to get in the neighborhood corridors, to just say we don't want it there before we have a bunch of permits that go out, and then, we have to get them stuck in the c.u. process or whatever it is? >> right. now we have to -- remember, with the businesses that are there, they're giving them, like, a one-or-two-year extension, and it's a lot harder to undo something in the

community. >> oh, yeah. i think it's a very fair point. steph steven, i think you have a viewpoint on this. >> oh, yeah, i like what she's saying. i agree with that. >> okay. >> i think the catering, that's where we can be the most proactive. they're doing exactly what uber did, and after, it's too hard. >> yes, dominica. >> just one point of clarity, the one virtual and ghost kitchen that has been allowed in a neighborhood commercial corridor was allowed on permit because it was miscategorized, and i think that had been maybe lost in the conversation on the

26? and so corey, the planning administrator, explained it, that the concept would be catering uses, which are generally permitted in the industrial areas of the city and not on the commercial corridors save for -- i think it's the mission and c.t. >> so the instance that we're thinking of may in fact not actually be -- may not have passed muster to begin with, and so we're -- would ordinarily not be allowed to proceed under the status quo? >> correct. >> okay. that's helpful. >> but that's when they -- right now, their current model is they get a facility, and they cluster group, correct?

right? individuals, some proviivate, that's their model now. but if i wanted to bypass this, i didn't want to cluster this and have a single caterer use, that's how i would bypass them if i wanted to do that. >> i see ben walking up. >> this is one of the most complex pieces of it. my understanding it four facilities, if you don't allow a member of the public to walk up, and you're only doing delivering out of a kitchen, that is a catering use, and catering uses are not generally permitted in the neighborhood commercial corridor, so anybody that is doing that business should be under active neighborhood enforcement. so the point was to treat businesses the same way in the neighborhood commercial corridors. i think it was the discussion

that you had about directing planning to keep up the good work to make sure that folks aren't doing that. where the catering retail and formula uses intersect is in the more industrial areas where catering is permitted, formula retail are already permitted. to the extent that there are questions around this feels different than other catering -- other types of catering -- you know, when we think of catering, we often think of somebody catering an event or a wedding or that sort of thing. i think that moving forward, when we talk about where catering uses are permitted, these things -- these types of new types of models are permitted and thinking on an

individual district-by-district level, that seems certainly an area ripe for consideration moving forward. but i think in the future, making sure that businesses are consistently treated in the neighborhood commercial corridors to prevent any sort of unfair advantage. that seems like the most immediately attack there. >> so how hard would it be to say catering resources can't have formula retail in them. i'm sorry. i'm confused. those two things are both permitted in the same area, but this is one business that is a catering use but also has formula retail in it, so it's like a business within a business. isn't that different? >> well, i don't know that the planning department would take that same assessment that it's a formula retail. it has formula retail in it. if the facility is not

operating for public walk up, it's not public retail at all, so the argument around formula retail is different. it's the look and feel -- it doesn't really lend itself to a nonretail use. that being said, i think, certainly, when we talk about catering, different types of catering, in the neighborhood commercial corridors right now, a neighborhood restaurant can do some accessory catering as long as it doesn't do catering directly to consumers, so there's different ways to think about catering. so i'm just not sure -- again, i would defer to the planning department on this, but that's the argument on trying to use a formula retail sort of approach. >> we're talking about being equitable and protecting small businesses from competition.

what i think we're trying to get at is a mcdonalds shouldn't be able to open up in noe valley versus direct delivery. i don't know how we think you guys get there, but if that's what the commission believes, it should be clearly stated, that we don't believe that formula retail should be able to operated in catering areas where they're allowed. is that what's written here? >> effectively. >> i just want to make sure this has teeth. that's all. >> yeah. >> i know it's not making sure it's full molar, claw, but i

think it's important. >> i think the purpose of thursday's meeting is to layout what the issues are? i don't think that this document is intended to be in its final version? i think that that should be reserved for the march 23 meeting, where something more formal can perhaps be put into place after the discussion on -- on thursday? >> so -- yeah, i agree. let me just say -- and this, i think, encapsulates it. we know what catering is. you deliver to the bar mitzvah, you deliver to the wedding. retail is you walk up to the place. this is a gray zone between catering and retail. this is a customer where they're ordering from mcdonalds, and it's coming from mcdonalds, but it's coming out of this third area.

it's catering retail or retail catering. it's this third category, and i think that's where we are all sort of struggling is it does seem like a place that's ripe for inequitable distribution even just in terms of, you know, when i go on grubhub, it's pretty clear that some restaurants have paid more money or done a deal, but there's some reason why some restaurants always come up near the top. it's not a stretch to think that companies with better resources have more chances to exploit that, and it would be more challenging for new businesses to come up. i don't know how to sort of describe that to the planning department, if that's the issue, or -- but i agree with commissioner yakutiel, that however we describe that, it

needs to have some oomph behind it, that that's the concern. and, i mean, that's actually new information to me. i did not know that a major fast-food chain was the number one delivery option for those two services. so for me, even, like, right now, that changes the math a bit in terms of where i see the potential concern is because we definitely want to protect, you know, these unique mom and pop restaurants that are what makes -- it's why many people come here. so dominica, where -- are we making a motion -- >> we're not voting on anything today. >> can i do one more? i'm so sorry. on the city economyist piece, i

understand the desire to analyze the terms and kind of what the metrics are, but why wouldn't we -- if we're going to provide a recommendation to provide an economic analysis, dominica, help me understand, you said it in the way you described it, but you said, the way it's written, it's really about the metrics. can we ask the city economyist to do a more flushed out study how many people are dining out in our city, what apps are being used, what hours? i think, for me, the chicken-or-the-egg question -- we know restaurants are suffering for a lot of reasons. we heard them, but is part of the reason they're suffering is these apps are taking people out of their restaurants and they're eating in their homes or are these apps sort of

giving them a buoy? if that's something we could ask the city analyst, that would be extremely helpful. >> so the way that -- and i am not an economyist. but the way that it's explained to me is we collect sales tax information based on, like, hotel and restaurant sales and these entities are being classified as restaurants, and we can't breakdown those sales between brick and mortar restaurants versus on-line restaurants. so when you go to -- i think it's the open-book s.f. -- or it's under the controller's office, where you can analyze how much sales tax has been collected based on the category, you can't

definitively see a specific trend based on what you're describing? and so i think the idea is to ask the city controller, one, whether or not it's possible to even conduct such an analysis, and if it's not, how can we get there? >> i mean, do other people think that's a good use of time to try to understand that trend because i wouldn't want to waste -- we have a lot of terms of priorities in terms of questions we want answered. >> i think a big determinant of that is what director tumlin was speaking to, the fact that people are working eight hours a day far away, and then, they have to go back to their home. this is the nature of the beast of capitalism that we're in, is it's continually obstructing us from our social environments.

i feel that there could be so many factors, and that's what i know traditionally economyists fear, are those variables. so i feel like it would be worth it to have, like, a consultati consultation, like dominica said, that can give us the answers. >> right, but i don't think there are tools that can give us that information. you have to make it up. you have to figure out the sales tax information, and on that sales tax information, how you break that up? this is a new thing, so you have to go out and figure that out. >> i actually think some of that, like, data, we can find that on, like, private industry, like, not relying on, like, necessarily government data.

i know i found a lot of data on, like, kickstarter. they're so excited to get started, they're going to give you, like, all of this trending data. so maybe if we were able to do a little bit of research themselves on, like, trending data in the delivery app space, i think we would find that on our own in our own kind of, like, places because a lot of that data is available in our city. >> i like that. and i'll just, you know, kind of point out again, i went into that hearing not knowing anything about how the restaurant industry would look at -- look at it overall. i try to be really respectful of them because they're the industry most affected by any decisions or recommendations we might make, and i was really quite surprised to hear them say that this is not really -- you know, we don't look at this

as being an issue, and i kept waiting for other restaurants to step up and say no, it's a huge issue. it seems like to a t, and even when when i talked to other restaurant owners, these delivery apps help them stay in business. so i -- i would recommend that we look for that existing data before we start asking the city controller, who's probably going to be quite busy with more pressing issues. >> yeah. okay. cool. >> one thing that we didn't really talk about in the hearing that i'm kind of curious about is that we're talking about equity, like, equity between, like, small businesses and large businesses. and one of the big things we heard is restaurants are really burdened by permitted and all these different -- permits and all these different fees and things. but labor costs, like, labor

costs are really hurting all of our small businesses. and i look at some of the legislation that's been passed recently, like ab 5. how would that change the picture if, all of a sudden, uber eats had to wake up tomorrow and had 20,000 employees, versus where we're all struggling just to keep five to ten employees employed? so we're talking about a lot of little things, but, like, in this larger picture, how does it look a little bit different, whether it's more equitable to small businesses or not or whatever? like, i'd like to have some sort of understanding as to what the world looks like if all of a sudden these really large companies have to have formal employees that way that we're -- you know, right now, we're talking about taking care of people for basic things like sick leave. when people talk about mandated

sick leave, i'm wondering, is that going to be my responsibility also or is that going to be a government responsibility or whose responsibility? and so i think when we're talking about the restaurant issue, i would like to kind of just explore, i guess, like, what those types of opportunities could be in terms of actual enforcement of things that have already passed. >> i love that you bring that up 'cause that's really my biggest p biggest pet peeve. you know, we start a business, and of course we're going to be successful if we don't have to pay all those fees. amazon, uber. you know, in my neighborhood of color, we used to have gypsy

cabs, and then, in the 90s, we got persecuted. and then, later, all somebody has to do is put it on an app, and pay a fee, and it's cool. that's what you said, the whole formula conditional, they operate in that complexity, and that's how they make money. they can't operate like we operate, so that's what we have to do. >> so, i guess, two thoughts about that, right? in terms of the ghost kitchens we have the opportunity to tour one, and they do have employees, and they're employing -- at least the one that i toured had a lot of

employees, and they're well paid. in terms of the delivery services, i think ab 5 has now, you know, kind of addressed that. it remains to be seen whether it'll have a level playing field, but it is an attempt to address this issue that uber eats and other companies don't have to pay workers comp and sick leave because if you work for them long enough under ab 5, you have to be that person. with respect to what we have in front of us here, my question is, is this something that's not included on this summary memo, and if it's not, should

it be, and how should we characterize that? >> i think we want to do something to stop the bleeding right now. just like what got us here? all the crazy legislation and rules that our legislators passed. we've just got to stop the bleeding from our mom and pop restaurants. just put a little more -- that's what you were saying, commissioner. but this is great for me for now. >> okay. great. so whato's presenting this on e 12? >> regina is. >> okay. so i think we're going to strike the economic analysis part -- oh, no, just forget about it. we'll keep it the way it is. >> yeah. we agreed to do that on our own. >> no, i think we can consult with the controller instead of tell the controller. >> no, the way it's written is

fine. i wanted to add more and beef it up, but i think it's fine. >> commission recommends the controller determine what metrics -- >> that makes sense. it's just asking them to figure out how to study it. it's not asking them to study it. >> it's asking them to provide direction so we can all study it together. >> okay. i won't die on that hill. >> that seems good. >> all right. somebody want to make a motion? to direct the staff to present the document at the hearing on thursday, march 12. >> i make a motion to direct the staff to present the document at the hearing on march 12. >> seconded. >> motion by commissioner hui to support -- to direct staff to present the memo at the special hearing being held on

the same topic on march 12, seconded by commissioner yakutiel. roll call vote. [roll call] >> motion passes, 6-0, with one absent. >> okay. so that brings us to the topic of the day, possibly the big topic of our lives, coronavirus. it has been a -- already had a huge impact on many of our local businesses. we received statements at the start of the hearing already talking about the extraordinary impact that coronavirus is

having on businesses. we know from looking at what's happening in other countries that we are in a very challenging moment, and the next -- the next few weeks, the next few months are really going to be an extraordinary challenge for many of our businesses. and typically, in order to introduce an item, you have to introduce it far enough in advance that there's sufficient public notice. to overcome this public notice, we as a body have to make a determination that there is an emergency that represents a

public -- serious threat of public injury, and in this case, the public injury would be to the businesses that we're charged with representing. so i guess first, dominica, you didn't quite break this up into two, but when i was looking at it, we have to break this up into two. so first, we have to make a finding that this is an emergency that requires our action, and so i will make that motion that we make that finding. >> i second. >> okay. you have to do a roll call on that one. >> the motion that you make the finding -- the motion should be that you're adding an agenda item based on a finding. >> well, first, we have to find -- we have to have the finding, then i guess to make the agenda -- add the agenda item based on the finding. we have to do the finding

first. >> so then, there are three motions -- so then, there would be three actions. >> there would be a finding, and we add an agenda item, and we talk -- i think it's still just two. what's the third one? >> you're making a motion to establish a finding, but you're not saying that you're adding an agenda item based on that finding. >> oh, right. so then, i have to -- >> so if you say the commission finding that there's justification enough to add this agenda item to tonight's meeting. >> all right. >> i think that might cover it for you? >> oh, right, but what's missing here is there actually has to be a vote on the finding that's the emergency. >> mm-hmm. that's the motion, and then, i'll do a roll call vote. >> that's the motion. i don't see it in here. i move to add an item to --

>> yes. that language is pulled directly from the charter. >> all right. when i was looking at the charter, it looked like two separate things, but if you're saying -- i defer to your expertise. >> great. >> then i make a motion to urge the city and county of san francisco to declare a state of emergency on the impact of coronavir coronavirus or covid-19 on small businesses. [roll call] >> motion passes, 6-0, with one absent. >> so we're going to -- so the city -- so we took the roll call. do we have a discussion now or do we do public comment before

the discussion? >> you can discuss, take public comment, discuss again. >> okay. got it. so we'll do a discussion. so my thoughts on this are our leaders, the supervisors, the mayor are facing unbelievable challenges in how to navigate this, and i simply want to give them our strong support and to urge them to move as expeditiously as possible because i think that the health of our small businesses is not just an economic issue. the sma if the small businesses start to go out of businesses, then the workers lose their jobs, and they can't afford their health care, and then, the situation escalates and becomes

even more dire. i think a lot of times, tough challenging issues can be politicized, and i want them to know we're here for the supes, we're here for the mayor and for the community that we exist in. that's my thoughts on this, and i welcome any of your thought or questions on this. >> i agree. >> i've definitely been hearing different types of impact. i think the city can play a role in terms of supporting the l.b.e.s that they work with, local business enterprises that

are in contract with the city for multiple things, and the city is starting to cancel all of these events, caterings and not giving proper notice, like, day of notice, so i think that the city, yeah, should be giving small businesses notice, and that could be a form of mitigation, for example, that we're presenting today. i think the police department should be aware that many small businesses already can't afford to have less closing time because there's been less people coming into the businesses, and there's security issues arising from that. those are just issues that i think the city could play a role in. >> any other commissioner comments? >> when i was trying to give some thoughts around, like, this whole thing because it's

such a huge -- it is such a huge impact for all of us right now, i was reading something -- i think it was, like, three babes bake shop and how their catering business has been hard hit with the loss of orders, and i was -- you know, and it -- it kind of goes back into what we were just talking about in terms of, like, the restaurant industry and things like that. and, you know, a lot of our small businesses are finding ways to really take advantage of the technology sector that we have here, and now that's really been floating a lot of our small businesses. and it's, like, as much as i -- you know, i think we as a city have this, like, tension between the technology -- between, like, the technology sector and our small businesses, but i think many of our small businesses have come to rely on that, right? we're looking at the statement

from andy town in front of us, and i think that's something that we need to kind of think a little bit more about in terms of, like, you know, diversity, like, in our city. our city has really become very reliant on one type of workforce and one time of economic pillar, right? like, that's kind of the anchor to san francisco and the bay area is technology, and a whole sector of people can really go and work from home, behind their computers, and there's a whole sector of people who, like, can't. they have to be there, and i think in the news, this has been highlighted, the inequities. but i think as the commission, i would hope that as we talk more about equity, that this is -- this is another example of kind of maybe why diversity and all these other things can -- can really -- i don't know -- will become more

important, i think. >> i'm really frustrated because i'm not a public health professional, nor do i presume to be, and i know that the people that are making decisions that are affecting small businesses are weighing all sides. and at the same time, you said that there are a cascade of effects when you basically shutdown chunks of the economy. this is, of course, we're talking about it in our city, but italy has shutdown the entire city, closed it down. what's frustrating is i don't understand this virus. my best friend is an e.r. doctor, and i'm talking to her, and she said it's serious. but when you're talking about shutting down businesses and all these layoffs, it's

consequential to people. i'm very worried that in the -- in an effort to slow down the transmission of a virus you know very little about, we are throwing tens of thousands of peoples' lives into melee. and i don't -- that is just a frustration. i'm not saying that anything should necessarily change or be done about it. i think in 72 hours, i lost $15,000 worth of bookings, and i've been talking to a lot of small businesses owners, trying to get our finger on the pulse. i think we're trying to be strong for our communities and our employees, people especially on this commission. but in local communities, we are -- in many ways, we're

holding people up, and it has been hard to stay upbeat and positive and excited when i know that this is possibly just the beginning. but that is what i am doing. the other thing i'll say is, just to put it out there, what -- how this is potentially affecting the large businesses in our city, maybe even more than the small businesses in some ways. you think about the moscone center, the pier buildings, some of these buildings that have massive, massive rents. cancelling some of these events in a peak season could be a devastating event for some of these businesses. so while we represent the small businesses, the level of worry and acti

and anxiety, to me, surpasses us and kind of the large businesses that anchor our city. i'll just say i'm glad we're doing this, and i support it, and thank you, commissioner laguana and dominica for bringing this up. >> let me just say on a personal level, we had 30 or 40 rentals on south by southwest. our business helps artists go on the road and play shows, so it's going to be increasingly difficult for people to have public gatherings. that is an extinction event for us. maybe i'll have to resign. i might not have a business in a month or two, so -- but nonetheless, it's simply an extraordinarily challenging event that none of us have any

context or ability to sort of assess. there is no plan for this. we've never had anything like it in our lives, and i feel really strongly that this is the time to stand with our government and with our leaders and support them. not out of blind loyalty because we really are in this all together, and the only way we're going to get out is all together, and we need to support each other as a body, as citizens, and as members of the city and as members of this country and as members of this planet and help each other get through this -- this time. it's going to be hard. it's going to be really rough, but we've got to be there for each other. so, you know, part of my

motivation here is letting our government, letting our leaders know that we're standing with them, even as we're asking them to stand with us, and i just wanted to -- i just think it's so central to what our responsibility is under the charter to standup and speak for all business. i can't imagine a moment within our lifetime, and that's including 9-11, where everything seemed more on the edge, and so yeah, that's how i feel about it. >> public comment? >> do we -- thank you. do we have any public comment that wish to speak on this? >> good evening, commissioners.

i'm amelia lindy. thank you for all you do to help small business, and thank you for this really important topic. i wasn't sure if this would be covered, but i think it's top of mind for all of us. i'm the small business manager for the san francisco chamber of commerce, and i'm here tonight to try and bring up this topic, because just as you all are facing, the questions are coming in, what if somebody gets sick at my office, and i have 50 other employees? how are we going to make it through the next through months with practically no payroll? how am i going to make payroll? we live in this beautiful city that brings people together for meetings, celebrations, and forums for new ideas. normally, when we make it a situation where people are going to start limiting their gatherings, we're going to see

a huge impact across san francisco. so i'm here because i'm concerned for small businesses. we are currently in an almost unprecedented situation. we need to ensure that our businesses have not only the resources, but they will surely need to remain viable during this challenge, but also the information and tools that they need to support public health. we can all agree that there were -- there are challenges to running a small business in san francisco, even before coronavirus, and we all know there will be challenging to running a small business in san francisco after coronavirus, but what we have to urge our leaders to do is to ensure that we will have the same small businesses that we know and love now here also when coronavirus is gone, so we have to think of anything. provide some relief to policies or restrictions that could help. maybe some relief on business fees, tax extensions, something to get a break, maybe even

direct financial support, whan when this is all over, we have to help our small businesses recover. we can't make coronavirus go away tomorrow, but the one thing the city could do is alleviating uncertainty. thank you so much of for bringing up -- so much for bringing up this really important topic. >> commissioners, do we have a motion to approve a resolution to support small businesses and work together to support the city? >> so moved. >> second. >> motion to approve a resolution to support small businesses. on that motion -- [roll call] >> motion passes 6-0 with one absent. >> thank you.

next item, please. >> item 8, commissioners' report. allows president, vice president, and commissioners to report on recent small business activities and make announcements that are of interest to the small business community. >> do we have any members of the public that wish to speak on this? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have any commissioner reports? >> oh, yeah. >> commissioner zouzounis? >> we are -- our body wrote a resolution a little while back regarding the mandated cans and bottle collections that are coming from cal-recycle that is a state entity, and san francisco has defaulted on, so the burden is falling on small merchants. the media is going to be picking this up at one point

soon. i think we need to on circle b to this as a commission because not only is it the pilot program -- so the context real quick, for those of you that are not aware, we wrote a resolution to kind of expedite this process of alleviating this burden on small businesses and allowing san francisco to adopt a more flexible recycling program for people looking to redeem c.r.v. value, and this was then created as a state initiative to allow san francisco to take some of this revenue that bigger companies like safeway and such, who are paying the in lieu fees instead of collecting the cans and battles. so there's now basically a fund that san francisco has access to, and a pilot program is to be set up to allow mobile

recycling or a different type of collection. this has now been stalemated, and we need to check in on it. in the meantime, merchants that were now previously exempt are now getting letters from the state, saying that exemption is revoked, and small businesses are also receiving, like, $30,000 or plus in delinquent services for the state, because you get fined each day if you don't collect these cans and bottles. even if you do, the state doesn't believe you, and so it's a huge, huge issue that needs to be revisited, and i think the state isn't moving as fast as they should. i've been hearing both reports from media asking and merchants, showing they're

revoked. so that's my reported on that. >> okay. commissioner huie? >> i wanted to report that i attended the san francisco small merchants alliance meeting. it was a really great meeting. i really liked the fact that they invited the chief connectist to talk about business tax -- economyist to talk about business tax. sounds like that particular body wants to ask if small businesses can just be exempt from business taxes 'cause it's just not a large enough revenue source to really make a real impact? instead of, like, just tweaking the numbers, just getting rid of it altogether, like, seemed

to be their ask. so i heard a little bit about what the commission does, and that was another meeting where, you know, i think sharing what the commission does simply was, like, enough and just kind of getting them know, like, we're here. and they really wanted to just revoice, too, that, you know, they have a very unique set of goals, and they are a unique organization, and that, you know, i am happy to talk to them, you know, more, so i was really grateful for that. >> awesome. i'm so glad you went. commissioner yakutiel. >> two. i ran for the board of the valencia commercial corridor businesses, and i won. i just wanted to publicly thank

commissioner huie for having brunch at manny's this weekend and coming in as i dealt with lots of orders and cappuccinos, so i wanted to thank you for bringing your family to have brunch at my spa. thank you. >> thank you. anybody else? do we have any members of the public who wish to speak on commissioner reports? seeing none, comment closed. next item. >> item 9, new business. allows commissioners to introduce new agenda items for future consideration. discussion item. >> commissioner yakutiel? >> so i had names of three businesses that were on my phone. two are social home and kitchen in either the richmond or

sunset, and then, this place called odd dog in the frog. it's a bar that's -- >> mad dog in the fog? >> mad dog in the fog, and i think it's been here for a really long time. those are the businesses that are closing that i would like to adjourn in honor of if possible. >> i would agree. i'd like to add one special group to that, which is i would also like to close in honor of all the medical workers who are assisting coronavirus victims and will be assisting coronavirus victims, especially locally and, you know, now with the ship docking in oakland, i think that, well, a special shoutout for them. i would also say, under new business, that at our next session, it is likely that we

will have legislation from the board to consider. i believe that they're crafting and drafting mitigation -- coronavirus mitigation. we may also consider the chamber of commerce has drafted a letter on behalf of the many business groups. we may choose to make some recommendation to the board based on that letter based on whatever legislation winds up being crafted. i just wanted to give you a heads up that that is likely to be coming up at the next meeting. okay. anybody else? okay. do we have any public comment on new business? seeing none, public comment closed. >> sfgovtv. please show the office of small

business slide. >> 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 your new business in san francisco, and the best place to get answers to your questions about doing business in san francisco. the office of small business should be your first stop when you have a question about what to do next. you can find us on-line or some person here at city hall. best of all, all of our services are free of charge. the small business commission ask the official public forum to state your concerns about the small business policy in san francisco. if you have questions that need to be answered, start here at the office of small business. >> item 10, adjournment, action item. >> so moved. >> second. >> meeting is adjourned at 7:41 p.m.

shop and dine on the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within neighborhood. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant. where will you shop and dine in the 49? san francisco owes the charm to the unique character of the neighborhood comer hall district. each corridor has its own

personality. our neighborhoods are the engine of the city. >> you are putting money and support back to the community you live in and you are helping small businesses grow. >> it is more environmentally friendly. >> shopping local is very important. i have had relationships with my local growers for 30 years. by shopping here and supporting us locally, you are also supporting the growers of the flowers, they are fresh and they have a price point that is not imported. it is really good for everybody. >> shopping locally is crucial. without that support, small business can't survive, and if

we lose small business, that diversity goes away, and, you know, it would be a shame to see that become a thing of the past. >> it is important to dine and shop locally. it allows us to maintain traditions. it makes the neighborhood. >> i think san francisco should shop local as much as they can. the retail marketplace is changes. we are trying to have people on the floor who can talk to you and help you with products you are interested in buying, and help you with exploration to try things you have never had before. >> the fish business, you think it is a piece of fish and fisherman. there are a lot of people working in the fish business, between wholesalers and

fishermen and bait and tackle. at the retail end, we about a lot of people and it is good for everybody. >> shopping and dining locally is so important to the community because it brings a tighter fabric to the community and allows the business owners to thrive in the community. we see more small businesses going away. we need to shop locally to keep the small business alive in san francisco. >> shop and dine in the 49 is a cool initiative. you can see the banners in the streets around town. it is great. anything that can showcase and legitimize small businesses is a wonderful thing.streets.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> i wanted to wish you a best wishes and congratulations the community has shifted a lot of when i was growing up in the 60s and 50's a good portion of chicano-american chinese-american lived in north beach a nob hill community. >> as part the immigrant family is some of the recreation centers are making people have the ability to get together and meet 0 other people if communities in the 60s a 70s and 80s and 90s saw a move to the richmond the

sunset district and more recently out to the excelsior the avenue community as well as the ensuring u bayview so chinese family living all over the city and when he grape it was in this area. >> we're united. >> and growing up in the area that was a big part of the my leave you know playing basketball and mycy took band lessons and grew up.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> allergies welcome to the community fair it kicks off three weeks of celebrations for the year and let's keep everybody safe and celebrate the biggest parade outside of china on february 11th go best wishes and congratulations and 3, 2, 1 happy enough is enough. >> i grew up volley ball education and in media professional contrary as an educator he work with all skids whether or not caucasian hispanic and i african-american cumber a lot of arrest binge kids my philosophy to work with all kids but being here and griping in the chinese

community being a chinese-american is important going to american school during the day but went to chinese school that is community is important working with all the kids and having them exposed to all culture it is important to me. >> it is a mask evening. >> i'd like to thank you a you all to celebrate an installation of the days here in the asian art museum. >> one time has become so many things in the past two centuries because of the different did i licks the immigration officer didn't understand it became no standard chinese marine or cantonese sproupgs it became so many different sounds

this is convenient for the immigration officer this okay your family name so this tells the generations of immigrants where they come from and also many stories behind it too. >> and what a better way to celebrate the enough is enough nuru with the light nothing is more important at an the hope the energy we. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> relative to the current administration it is, it is touching very worrisome for our immigrant frames you know and some of the stability in the country and i know how this new

president is doing you know immigration as well as immigrants (fireworks) later than you think new year the largest holiday no asia and china those of us when my grandparents came over in the 19 hundreds and celebrated in the united states chinese nuru is traditional with a lot of meani meaning. >> good afternoon my name is carmen chu assessor-recorder i want to wish everything a happy new year thank you for joining us i want to say.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i'm proud to be a native san franciscan i grew up in the chinatown, north beach community port commission important to come back and work with those that live in the community that i grew up in and that that very, very important to give back to continue to work with the community and hope e help those who may not be as capable in under serving come back and give

[♪] >> i am the supervisor of district one. i am sandra lee fewer. [♪] >> i moved to the richmond district in 1950 mine. i was two years old. i moved from chinatown and we were one of the first asian families to move out here. [♪] >> when my mother decided to buy

that house, nobody knew where it was. it seems so far away. for a long time, we were the only chinese family there but we started to see the areas of growth to serve a larger chinese population. the stress was storage of the birthplace of that. my father would have to go to chinatown for dim sum and i remember one day he came home and said, there is one here now. it just started to grow very organically. it is the same thing with the russian population, which is another very large ethnic group in the richmond district. as russia started to move in, we saw more russian stores. so parts of the richmond is very concentrated with the russian community and immigrant russian community, and also a chinese immigrant community. [♪] >> i think as living here in the richmond, we really appreciate the fact that we are surrounded three natural barriers. they are beautiful barriers. the presidio which gives us so

many trails to walk through, ocean beach, for families to just go to the beach and be in the pacific ocean. we also also have a national park service. we boarded the golden gate national recreation area so there is a lot of activity to do in the summer time you see people with bonfires. but really families enjoying the beach and the pacific ocean during the rest of the time of year. [♪] >> and golden gate park where we have so many of our treasures here. we have the tea garden, the museum and the academy of sciences. not to mention the wonderful playgrounds that we have here in richmond. this is why i say the richmond is a great place for families. the theatre is a treasure in our neighborhood. it has been around for a very long time. is one of our two neighborhood theatres that we have here.

i moved here when i was 1959 when i was two years old. we would always go here. i love these neighborhood theatres. it is one of the places that has not only a landmark in the richmond district, but also in san francisco. small theatres showing one or two films. a unique -- they are unique also to the neighborhood and san francisco. >> where we are today is the heart of the richmond district. with what is unique is that it is also small businesses. there is a different retail here it is mom and pop opening up businesses. and providing for the neighborhood. this is what we love about the streets. the cora door starts on clement street and goes all the way down to the end of clement where you will see small businesses even

towards 32nd. at the core of it is right here between here and 20 -- tenth avenue. when we see this variety of stores offered here, it is very unique then of the -- any other part of san francisco. there is traditional irish music which you don't get hardly anywhere in san francisco. some places have this long legacy of serving ice cream and being a hangout for families to have a sunday afternoon ice cream. and then also, we see grocery stores. and also these restaurants that are just new here, but also thriving. [♪] >> we are seeing restaurants being switched over by hand, new owners, but what we are seeing is a vibrancy of clement street still being recaptured within new businesses that are coming in. that is a really great thing to see. i don't know when i started to

shop here, but it was probably a very, very long time ago. i like to cook a lot but i like to cook chinese food. the market is the place i like to come to once a year. once i like about the market as it is very affordable. it has fresh produce and fresh meat. also, seafood. but they also offer a large selection of condiments and sauces and noodles. a variety of rice that they have is tremendous. i don't thank you can find a variety like that anywhere else. >> hi. i am kevin wong. i am the manager. in 1989 we move from chinatown to richmond district. we have opened for a bit, over 29 years. we carry products from thailand, japan, indonesia, vietnam, singapore and india. we try to keep everything fresh daily.

so a customer can get the best out a bit. >> normally during crab season in november, this is the first place i hit. because they have really just really fresh crab. this is something my family really likes for me to make. also, from my traditional chinese food, i love to make a kale soup. they cut it to the size they really want. i am probably here once a week. i'm very familiar with the aisles and they know everyone who is a cashier -- cashier here i know when people come into a market such as this, it looks like an asian supermarkets, which it is and sometimes it can be intimidating. we don't speak the language and many of the labels are in chinese, you may not know what to buy or if it is the proper ingredients for the recipe are trying to make. i do see a lot of people here with a recipe card or sometimes with a magazine and they are looking for specific items. the staff here is very helpful.

i speak very little chinese here myself. thinks that i'm not sure about, i asked the clerk his and i say is this what i need? is this what i should be making? and they actually really helped me. they will bring me to the aisle and say this is battery. they are very knowledgeable. very friendly. i think they are here to serve not only the asian community but to serve all communities in the richmond district and in san francisco. [♪] >> what is wonderful about living here is that even though our july is a very foggy and overcast, best neighborhood, the sleepy part outside on the west side is so rich with history, but also with all the amenities that are offered. [♪]

>> thursday, march 5, 2020. i would like to remind members of the public to silence your mobile devices that may sound off. when speaking before the commission, state your name for the record. i would like to take roll call at this time. [roll call] commission richards has -- first under your, on your agenda, is consideration of i'ms proposed for continuance. item 1, case 2019-001455cua, 1750 wawona street, conditional use authorization proposed for