with supervisor haney's office. we're also joined by lari m -- larry marso, an opponent of the measure. we're going to start with some opening statements, and we'll begin with honey. >> thank you so much for having us today. i think that as a native san franciscan, someone who grew up here, and a small business owner, it's become very clear to me that san francisco has really failed at keep our city clean the clean. there is trash all over the streets, some streets are covered with feces, and sometimes you can't find a

bathroom when you need one. we've been working on how the city can better address this issu issue. what we found is the system that we have in place is broken. no matter how hard the workers at d.p.w. work, they're unable to get the streets clean because the system is ineffective. d.p.w. is too big, there isn't enough focus on the streets, and especially during the time of covid-19, sanitation's now more important than ever, so we are putting forward a new department of sanitation to effectively keep our streets clean, wash our sidewalks in our most busy corridors and also to establish commissions overboth d.p.w. and the department to ensure that both departments are accountable to the public. the commission will also set baseline standards for cleaning, something that really doesn't exist now under the

current system. >> thank you, honey. now, larry? >> hi. please vote no on proposition b, which takes a $400 million san francisco agency and needlessly cuts it in half and politicizes what remains. it's the case chaos and paralysis that will worsen the squalor on our streets. san francisco has the political will to clean the streets. the board of supervisors does not. proposition b creates two new bureaucracies and injects politics into the department of public works. this is a failed model of oversight. we have over 100 boards and commissions in san francisco

already. proposition b sets no clean streets standards. there's nothing in here that says we are going to deal with the needles, the syringes, the feces on the streets. it's not there. matt haney writes in his argument that they're in proposition b. there's nothing in proposition b that sets baseline standards. we need -- we need -- we need to address the fraud and waste in the department of public works. >> thank you, larry. that's 1.5 minutes, so we're going to go into questions now, and the first question will go to you, larry, and then honey, you'll have a chance to answer it. the question is the amendment would create a new department of sanitation and streets to

perform duties that's currently performed by the department of public works. if that's the proposition, what's the argument for creating a new department? >> the city controller says it's going to cost upwards of $6 million a year. that's over 50 million in ten years. that's a lot of money. but if you look at the paid arguments for proposition b, you see a long list of public sector labor unions. the seiu and the san francisco labor locals representing the trades that engage in cleaning our streets and maintaining some of our parks. they're talking about we need more resources, we need more resources. they believe that this new structure, which is going to

put the board of supervisors in the position of straiting political appointee -- placing political appointees into governing these agencies, they believe it will mean significantly higher spending. and nowhere do the proponents of proposition b stay straight to the san francisco people that this is a major spending increase. will it address any of the core issues of cleaning san francisco streets? not if it atdss drug addiction, homeless, and mental illness on our streets, the root of so much of our problem. >> thank you. the same question to you, honey. why create a new department? >> well, i would like to first address some factual inaccuracies in some of those statements.

one, the measure does require the department to set public standards for cleaning. we want to hold community outreach to set those standards. there is a metric to address that. also, i do want to correct that the controller report says -- the updated controller report says this will be closer to $2.6 milli 2.6 million in costs to create this new department. the reason we have to create this new department is the current department is broken. there is not enough oversight over cleaning and sanitation in the current system. it is less than a quarter of what d.p.w. does. d.p.w. is a department with 1600 employees, and like you said, a $400 million budget. less than a quarter is dedicated to cleaning. we feel like a metro city in san francisco where tourism is

its number one industry, we need to have a focus on cleaning with metrics that are created in a very transparent manner, a method for us to have feedback, and for the public to have feedback, and again, really providing some very close oversight and accountability for a department that, up until now, really hasn't had any. >> thank you, honey. our second question, and it'll start with you, honey, is again, about the cost. the office of the controller states that this amendment, in the report that i read, ranged from 2$2.5 to $6 million annually. honey corrected that it will be just over $2 million. do we think this is the right way to spend the extra money on sanitation or is there another way that is perhaps more beneficial? >> you know, $2.6 million is a very small -- it's less than a

percent -- or a fraction of a percent of the city's current budget. it's a small amount of revenue that the city would generate through improvement to its business districts. it has been very public how we've been criticized by -- all over the world, really, for our filthy streets. the travel industry has been impacted, our hotel industry has been impacted, so those are our biggest industries for our city. so for the city to spend $2 million on an issue that we haven't been able to fix in decades is nothing. i will note that the legislation actually also reduces duplication in terms of staffing by putting some of the staffing as shared with d.p.w.

for the back end, which larry referred to earlier, and it also required city administrator to also provide that support. so the additional hiring is really minimal. there is some costs for the commissions, but again, the controller actually -- the f.b.i. and the scandal recommended that supervision be placed over d.p.w., so it is good governance. it'll put a commission over d.p.w., and it'll also put a commission over the department of sanitation and streets to oversee them. >> okay. larry, same question to you. >> since 2014, the portion of department of public works spending on cleaning our streets has doubled. if you look around you, do you see that our streets are cleaner? spending money is not the solution to cleaning our

streets when we have significant significant endemic root causes of drug abuse and mental illness on our streets. the department of public works, if it's split in half, it's going to generate more costs than simply what the controller has documented. there are duplications of band-end services -- back-end services. okay. but why are the biggest unions in san francisco pouring money into this measure? they're doing so because they're looking for higher pay and more hiring. >> sorry. i have to cut you off there as time is up for questions, but we're going to move into closing statements, and we will start with honey. >> thank you so much.

it's funny because i think larry and i agree that we've been pumping money into d.p.w., and things haven't gotten any better. in fact, things have gotten worse, and that is why we're establishing the department of sanitation and streets because the current system is broken. we're going to be providing accountability, setting baseline standards. i have to say the reason why so many labor unions are behind this is we figured out a solution that would work for everybody. it's not about raising salaries for anything like that. these are hard working san franciscans, people who really care about their city and want to be proud of their city and the work they do, and they know best how to address this problem because they're dealing with it every day. so we're proud to have worked with them, to provide this measure of accountability to provide safer, cleaner streets,

trash cans that will work, access to more rest rooms. more green infrastructure which has been sorely lacking. and, again, public accountability and a real focus on street cleaning. so i'm very proud of the measure, and i implore san franciscans, if you want to see our travel industry be reinvigorated, our children and familied supported by the picking up of needles and keeping our streets clean, then please vote yes on proposition b. >> thank you, honey. closing statements from larry, please. >> proposition b will politicize the department of public works. that's why i and a number of centrist politicians and organizations are opposed to proposition b, on the board of supervisors, supervisor sandra

fewer voted no, raff vel mandelman voted now, more man yee, voted no, catherine steph he knee voted no. the ed lee democratic club says no. the sfgop says no. you have people across the political spectrum who recognize that this is going to increase costs significantly while at the same time inducing chaos in public services, paralysis in the cleaning of our streets. uncertainty at a time that san francisco needs to be smart and focused in how it spends its money, how it raises its money, and to address the real causes of what we see going on in our streets. matt haney does not represent a common sense approach on

homelessness, drug abuse, or mental illness. i have tried to bring these solutions myself to a citizen ballot measure on the regulation of navigation centers. the entire ballot you're seeing was put together by the board of supervisors. no one could even collect signatures under shelter in place to propose alternative measures, as i tried to do. >> thank you, larry. thank you very much both for your comments and for your time. we hope that this discussion has been informative. for more information, please visit the san francisco elections website at sfelections.org. this year, every person in california will be mailed a ballot starting on october 5. you may drop off your vote by

mail ballot in person starting on october 5 in the city hall voting center located outside of bill graham city auditorium 8:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. you may drop off your ballot at your voting center for the two weekends before voting day, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. thank you. >> my name is colleen chan, and i'm running for district 1 supervisor. that's including the richmond neighborhood and golden gate park. i was a a first generation immigrant. i was horn in honeg kong and -

born in hong kong and i came here when i was 13 years old. san francisco has been a great home for me and my family. today, my partner, a firefighter, we are able to afford our home in the richmond, raising our child, a second greater, avenue lafayette elementary. i've spent the last five years in my life working in city government the, starting out at a legislative aide on the san francisco board of supervisors. also advocating for more than $500 million grants and funding to improve our park system at rec and park. last, but not least, but also at the city college of san francisco, champion free city college that is a higher education program froee for al

san franciscans. i'm proud of the things that i have accomplished, but also, at the same time i have seen the income divide significantly increase in san francisco, especially during this pandemic, it has disproportionately hurt something the working people in our communities. it's the reason why i'm running, that i want to bring my skills and experience to the table to help close that income divide gap and making sure that all working people can stay housed, stay healthy and safe in our beloved city. thank you. >> hi. i'm sherman dasilva. we have problems that we face daily when we walk out or door to shop, work, and enjoy the precious neighborhood we call home. on homelessness, it means no camping or sleeping on streets.

instead, we will use city-owned garages to provide a safe, clean, and private space where we can offer mental health and he diction offices. on crime and safety, we'll increase beat officers to deter theft and vandalism, but we will not defund, reduce or reappropriate the number of sworn officers. on pedestrian safety, we will install traffic lights on all major corridors. for accessibility, we'll have a neighborhood department to serve you. for infrastructure, we're going to set aside money every year to replace sidewalks, roads, and public buildings. on police accountability, we'll increase transparency and randomly review officer actions. we want to be independent. it means we will not accept money from unions,

corporations, or special interests. i've seen the decline of our neighborhood happening over time. refocusing these priorities will make our neighborhood cleaner, safer, and a more enjoyable place to work and live. i'm sherman da silva, and i'm looking forward to being your next richmond district supervisor. >> i'm a small business owner, with my wife, we operate a small business on gary boulevard, and we have been serving the community over a decade. i'm running because i'm deeply troubled by the current state of our district. we now have more homenessen campmented, closed businesses, and increased crime. the richmond district has been neglected by city hall for too long. it's time for new city leadership at city hall. it's time for a supervisor who will put the richmond first. i'm the only candidate with

extensive civil rights experience needed to effectively represent the richmond district. first, the richmond and san francisco more broadly must build more affordable housing. second, i will fight to expand healthy san francisco so that uninsured middle class residents will receive health care coverage. additionally, i am the only major candidate in this race to oppose any tax increases swoosh the covid-19 -- during the covid-19 pandemic. we should not kick people when we're down. let's first look at our current spending and fight government waste before we increase teaks. we net better environmentally friendly options to help getting citizens to and from the richmond. that's why i'm for bringing b.a.r.t. to the richmond. lastly, our current homeless policies have been ineffective.

i support caring for our homeless without turning our neighborhoods and our parks into homeless encampments. i believe my policies will help all residents and help put the richmond first. >> hi. my name is marlhausen, and i'm running for supervisor because for too long, politicians have allowed the problems in our neighborhood to worsen without taking action. we can't afford four more years of this. the devastating effect of the covid-19 pandemic has increased the need for new leadership at the board of supervisors. to make a significant impact on homelessness, we have to recognize the different needs of our unhoused population. there is no single simple solution.

we must prevent evictions by stabilizing tenants. we have to meet the immediate needs of our unhoused population by acquiring more safe sleeping places, shelters, and safe spaces. i have over 30 years experience in government, business, and community advocacy. two years ago, my sister and i opened our family business on balboa street, and now, like so many other small businesses, on you future is uncertain -- our future is uncertain. many owners are stalled or defeated but our bureaucracy before they even had a chance to begin. i will support policies and legislation that make it easier to run a neighborhood business

in san francisco. finally, we need to make our streets more friendly or residents and families. ill owe prioritizes more street cleanings in our business corridors. we must bring our neighborhood together to ensure that none of us is left behind in our recovery. >> hi. my name is veronica cinzano. for far too long, our government has been out of touch with the problems of so many san franciscans and struggling families. i'm a 30-year richmond district. i'm your neighbor to make sure you have a voice at city hall. you need someone who understands your struggles who represents, and not the same old politics.

i'm a working mom, and a small business owner. i'm working for all of san francisco, not just the privileged few. i'm running to offer concrete solutions. we have a 2 billion shortfall. make no mistake, we cannot tax our way out of this pandemic. my priorities, economic recovery for all. with historic unemployment and a pandemic with no end in sight, budget cuts cannot be made on the bams working family he ands -- backs of the working families and middle class. resilience, identify additional sources of revenue to fund city projects and reevaluate government spending carefully. calibrate budget cuts without hurting those who are already feeling the brund of income

inequality before the pandemic. as a community taxpayer advocate, if you're tired of politics as usual, then i'm your candidate. vote for veronica. i'm not backed by any political machine or special interests. whether you're a moderate, progressive, republican or independent, join us, and please stay healthy during these tough times. thank you. >> it is 1:00 p.m. and this is the regular meeting for the commission of